UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Adult children of alcoholics : an integrated model of behavior roles Schneider, John Donald Jr. 1989

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1989_A8 S37.pdf [ 13.04MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054183.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054183-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054183-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054183-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054183-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054183-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054183-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054183-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054183.ris

Full Text

A D U L T C H I L D R E N OF ALCOHOLICS: AN INTEGRATED M O D E L OF BEHAVIOR ROLES  By J O H N D O N A L D SCHNEIDER, JR. B.S., Kearney State College, 1978  A T H E S I S S U B M I T T E D IN P A R T I A L F U L F I L L M E N T O F THE REQUIREMENTS FOR T H E DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS  in THE F A C U L T Y OF G R A D U A T E STUDIES (Department of Counselling Psychology)  We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F BRITISH C O L U M B I A March 1989 (c) John Donald Schneider, Jr., 1989  In  presenting  this thesis in partial fulfilment  of the  requirements for an advanced  degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department  or  by his  or her  representatives.  It is  understood  that  copying or  publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  Department of  Counselling Psychology  The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date  DE-6(3/81)  March 1989  ii  ABSTRACT  Five models of behavior roles (Black, 1981; Booz-Allen & Hamilton, 1974; Deutsch, 1983; Kritzberg, 1985; Wegscheider, 1981) consisting of 20 roles and 220 attributes were identified in the theoretical and clinical literature dealing with children of alcoholics. A n integrated model of six behavior roles and 68 attributes of adult children of alcoholics was developed and presented for verification to 45 clinicians working with adults who grew up in a home with at least one alcoholic parent. The clinicians utilized a categorization methodology to sort the attributes into categories based on their experiences of the behaviors of adult children of alcoholics. The sorting data was analyzed by latent partition analysis and the results were used to revise and refine the integrated model. The final model consists of five behavior roles and 48 attributes; three of the roles, Invisible Child, Black Sheep, and Jester, closely resemble roles from the original models while two roles, Caretaker and Super Achiever appear for the first time. The development of an empirically derived model provides clarification of the similarities and differences of the five models of behavior roles of children of alcoholics identified in the literature.  iii  TABLE OF CONTENTS  ABSTRACT  ii  LIST O F T A B L E S LIST O F F I G U R E S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS C H A P T E R I: I N T R O D U C T I O N A N D R A T I O N A L E  vii viii ix 1  Background of the Problem  1  Statement of the Problem  6  Definition of Terms  ,....7  Research Questions  8  Justification of the Study  8  C H A P T E R II: R E V I E W O F R E L A T E D L I T E R A T U R E Alcoholism and the Family  11 11  Problems and Risks Associated with Living in an Alcoholic Environment  14  Adult Children of Alcoholics  18  Roles  20  Models of Behavior Roles of Children of Alcoholics  25  Summary  30  C H A P T E R III: M E T H O D O L O G Y  32  Design of the Study  32  Development of the Integrated Model  33  Explication of the Attributes  33  Formation of Integrated Model  34  Selection of Attributes to be Used for Verification of the Model  35  iv  Verification of the Integrated Model Categorization methodology  35 35  Latent partition analysis  38  Population  40  Task administration  40  C H A P T E R IV: R E S U L T S  43  Characteristics of the Sample  43  Results from Latent Partition Analysis  44  Number of Manifest Categories  44  Number of Latent Categories  44  Joint Proportion Matrix  47  Phi Matrix (5 Category Model/68 Content Units)  48  Content units with strong primary loadings  48  Content units with moderate primary loadings  51  Content units with weak primary loadings  51  Omega Matrix Analysis of the Final Model (5 Categories/48 Content Units)  51 52  Phi Matrix  54  Omega Matrix  54  Titles and Descriptions of Latent Categories  57  Caretaker  58  Super Achiever  58  Black Sheep  58  Invisible Child  59  Jester  59  Revision of the Integrated Model  59  V  C H A P T E R V: DISCUSSION Summarj' of Results  63 63  Research questions  63  First steps of test construction  64  Limitations of the Study  65  Conclusions  67  Future Research  68  REFERENCES  71  Appendix A: Attributes of Black's Behavior Roles  77  Appendix B: Attributes of Booz-AUen & Hamilton's Behavior Roles  82  Appendix C: Attributes of Deutsch's Behavior Roles  87  Appendix D: Attributes of Kritzberg's Behavior Roles  91  Appendix E : Attributes of Wegscheider's Behavior Roles  93  Appendix F : Evaluation of Attributes for Inclusion in the Integrated Model  100  Appendix G: Cluster of Attributes (68) of Integrated Model with A Priori Classifications  108  Appendix H : Final Cluster of Attributes (48) of the Integrated Model  112  Appendix I: S-Matrix (9 Category/68 Content Units)  116  Appendix J : Phi Matrices (68 Content Units)  126  Appendix K: Phi Matrix (5 Category/63 Content Units)  138  Appendix L : Phi Matrix (5 Category/51 Content Units)  140  Appendix M : Phi Matrix (5 Category/48 Content Units)  142  Appendix N : Omega Matrices (68 Content Units)  144  Appendix O: Omega Matrices (5 Categories/63 & 51 Content Units)  147  Appendix P: Instructions to Subjects  150  vi  Appendix Q: Letter to Subjects (Authors of Models)  154  Appendix R: Letter to Subjects (Members of Canadian Association for Children of Alcoholics)  156  vii  LIST OF T A B L E S  Table 1. Five Models of Child Behavior Roles Table 2. Family Characteristics  3 15  Table 3. Integrated Model of Behavior Roles of Children of Alcoholics  36  Table 4. Sample Source  41  Table 5. Percentage of Returns of the Sample  43  Table 6. Description of the Respondents  44  Table 7. Latent Structure as a Function of the Number of Categories  48  Table 8. Phi Matrix (5 Categories/68 Content Units).  49  Table 9. Omega Matrix (5 Categories/68 Content Units)  52  Table 10. Phi Matrix (5 Categories/48 Content Units)  55  Table 11. Omega Matrix (5 Categories/48 Content Units)  57  Table 12. Revised Integrated Model of Behavior Roles  62  viii  LIST O F FIGURES  Figure 1. Frequency Distribution for Each Number of Manifest Categories Figure 2. Eigenvalues of Model Containing 68 Content Units  45 46  ix  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  I would like to express my thanks and appreciation to the members of my committee, Dr. J . Friesen, Dr. T. Rogers, and Dr. R. Tolsma for their encouragement, challenge, and direction during the process of writing this thesis. In particular I would like to thank John Friesen for introducing me to systems theory and the role of the family in one's developmental journey. And thanks to Todd Rogers for enkindling in me an excitement for statistics and research methodology and providing me the freedom to be responsible for my own learning. I would like to thank in a particular way my companion and wife Lucia Hogeveen for her continual support and understanding during the time of my graduate studies. I also want to acknowledge the friendship and encouragement of my good friend and professional colleague Dr. Ray Douziech. Finally, thanks to my Dad and Mom who have been inspirations for me with their courage and example as we continue the journey with each other through the experiences of our own changing role relationships.  1  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND RATIONALE  BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM  The National Association for Children of Alcoholics was formed in 1983 in the United States with a little over twenty members. Today the National Association has over 7000 members. A Canadian Association was formed in 1986 to support and serve as a resource for children of alcoholics of all ages and for those in a position to help them. Prior to 1983 children of alcoholics were the "forgotten children" (Cork, 1969). Estimates place the children of alcoholics population in North America at more than 28 million; of these, approximately 6 million are children living at home (Ackerman, 1987a; Black, 1981; BoozAllen and Hamilton, 1974; Gravitz and Bowden, 1987; Werner, 1986). Alcoholism has long been known as a family problem (Cotton, 1979). Clinical research in the 1950's recorded the devastating impact of alcoholism on the families of alcoholics (Bailey, 1961; Ewing, Long, and Wenzel, 1961; Gliedman, 1957; Gliedman, Rosenthal, Frank, and Nash, 1956; Jackson, 1954; Kaufman, 1984; Newall, 1950; Macdonald, 1958; Steinglass, 1976). In the 1960's, research began pointing to the family system as playing a major role in the formation and maintenance of alcoholism in a member of the family (Jackson and Kogan, 1963; Kaufman, 1984; Kogan and Jackson, 1965; Moos, Bromet, Tsu, and Moos, 1979; Pixley and Steifel, 1963; Steinglass,  1976;  Winokur and Clayton, 1968). The 1970's focused on the critical ingredient of family involvement for successful treatment outcomes with the alcoholic (Cadogan, 1973; Corder, Corder, and Laidlow, 1972; Davis, Berenson, Steinglass, and Davis, 1974; Edwards, Harvey, and Whitehead, 1973; Kaufman, 1984; Meeks and Kelley, 1970; Sands and Hanson, 1971; Steinglass, 1976). The alcoholic family is seen as a system that organizes itself around the problems associated with alcoholism (Brown, 1985; Kaufman, 1984;  2 Steinglass, 1980; Steinglass, Bennet, Wolin, & Reiss, 1987). However research has been unable to define a model of the typical alcoholic family (Kaufman, 1984; Orford, 1975; Steinglass, 1980; Steinglass et al., 1987). Only recently have the effects of familial alcoholism on children begun to be addressed in a manner consonant with a problem of such large dimensions (Ackerman, 1986). Treatment and intervention programs are changing their emphasis from the individual alcoholic to the family of the alcoholic. Many consider the most serious consequence of alcoholism to be the detrimental effect it has on the children of families involved (Callan and Jackson, 1986; El-Guebaly and Offord, 1979; Haberman, 1966; Kammeier, 1971). Several studies have investigated children of alcoholics as the casualties of living in a family with an alcoholic (Barnes, Benson, and Wilsnack, 1979; Werner, 1986). Few studies have looked at children of alcoholics who seem to be coping with the situation. In fact those who have adjusted to life in an alcoholic family without suffering undue personal consequences could be in the majority (Black, Bucky, and WilderPadilla, 1986). Several authors have developed models of behavioral roles children assume as a means of coping with the crises and tensions of living in an alcoholic environment (Black, 1981; Booz-Allen and Hamilton, 1974; Brenner, 1984; Deutsch, 1983; Kritzberg, 1985; Lawson, Peterson, and Lawson, 1983; Nardi, 1981; Seixas and Youcha, 1985; Wegscheider, 1981). These models are summarized in Table 1. Booz-Allen and Hamilton (1974) suggested a model of behavior roles or coping mechanisms based on their interviews with 50 children from alcoholic families in Pennsylvania in an exploratory study for the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. The "Perfect Child" and "Super-Coper" are mirror images of goodness. They never do anything wrong and are involved helping others. The child who uses "Fight" is defiant and rebellious and often engages in socially unacceptable behavior. The child who employs the fourth mechanism, "Flight," utilizes several forms of escape to cope with their  3 living situation. According to Booz-Allen and Hamilton (1974) children in the same famity can develop either similar or quite different forms of coping with the same experiences. The particular coping mechanism chosen by the child is dependent on their unique personality and perceptions.  Table 1 Models of Behavior Roles of Children of Alcoholics  Booz-Allen and Hamilton  Black  Wegscheider  Super-Coper  Responsible One  Family Hero  Perfect Child  Placater  Scapegoat  Fight  Acting Out Child  Mascot  Flight  Adjuster  Lost Child  Deutsch  Kritzberg  Hero  Hero  Manager Scapegoat  Scapegoat Clown Lost One Placator  Black (1981) offered a second model of behavior roles, she based her model on her clinical impressions with young children from alcoholic families:  4  Children growing up in alcoholic homes seldom learn the combinations of roles which mold healthy personalities. Instead, they become locked into roles based on their perception of what they need to do to survive and to bring some stability to their lives, (page 14) The "Responsible One," usually the oldest or an only child, assumes a great deal of responsibility for self and others in the family. The "Adjuster" follows directions and adjusts to the situation. They feel they do not have any choices in life. The "Placater" is the family comforter. They are often sensitive children who are rewarded for helping others but at the expense of not having their own needs met. The "Acting Out Child" is characterized by delinquency and other forms of socially unacceptable behavior. Wegscheider (1981) suggested a third model of behavior roles based on birth order rather than personality factors. Each role has its own set of characteristics and carries a particular risk for personality development and psychopathology.  According to  Wegscheider, children choose a defense and use the role to hide their feelings in hopes of obtaining some kind of reward from a system that does not have much to offer. The oldest child is the "Family Hero." Characterized by over-achievement, the hero, provides self worth for the family. The second born responds with socially unacceptable behavior and takes the focus off the family by acting out. This role of "Scapegoat" is characterized by delinquency and early involvement with the use and abuse of drugs and alcohol. Later born children are either the "Lost Child" or the "Mascot." The lost child withdraws from the family and helps by not being a problem. The lost child often feels lonely, hurt, and inadequate. The mascot distracts the family with clowning or annoying behavior. Wegscheider (1981) states that all members of a family have a role and every role is played by someone. The roles can be flexible with one person having more than one role in a small family and more than one person per role in a larger family. A n only child takes on aspects of all the roles.  5  Deutsch (1983) suggested a model consisting of three roles: "Hero, Manager, and Scapegoat." The hero is an exemplary child who has managed to turn adversity into strength. The child who becomes the family manager is responsible for the family's affairs but at the expense of their own needs. The scapegoat is the rebel, getting into trouble to distract the family from their problems with the alcoholic. Based on his clinical impressions Kritzberg (1985) proposed a fifth model containing five roles. The "Hero" is the achiever in the family, trying in work or in school to make the family look good. The "Scapegoat" is often getting into trouble. Tension is lessened in the family by the diversions created by the "Clown." The peace-maker role in the family belongs to the "Placator." The "Lost One" helps the family by their nonpresence. The behavior roles or coping mechanisms serve to provide children in troubled situations some sense of control and self-worth. Some of the behaviors also provide the children with personal rewards as they are praised for their accomplishments and appreciated for their help. While most of the roles have characteristics of value, they also have inherent dangers. One danger with playing a role is that the longer a person plays a role the more accustomed to the behaviors of the role the person becomes; they can become addicted to the role and unable to be flexible in different situations (Black, 1981). Another danger is that while the role may provide the child with some sense of personal gain or reward they pay the price of not having their own needs met (Lawson et al., 1983). The addiction to the role leads them to carry their surviving or coping behaviors with them when they leave the family (Ackerman, 1987b; Black, 1981; Booz-Allen and Hamilton, 1974; Brown, 1985; Cermak and Brown, 1982; Deutsch, 1983; Kritzberg, 1985; Wegscheider,1981).  "If  children do not resolve the problems created by parental alcoholism, they will carry them the rest of their lives" (Booz-Allen & Hamilton, 1974, p. 73). Roles that enabled them to survive while living as children in an alcoholic family become a source of unhealthy  6  extremes in adulthood (Black, 1981; Lawson et al., 1983). Problems are also created for the children if the alcoholic achieves sobriety without the children or family receiving treatment. The children will continue to experience problems when only the alcoholic parent is treated (Black, 1981; Booz-Allen & Hamilton, 1974; Cork, 1969: Deutsch, 1982; Lawson et al., 1983).  STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM  The theoretical and clinical literature dealing with children of alcoholics identifies five models of children's behavior roles. The five models (Black, 1981; Booz-Allen and Hamilton, 1974; Deutsch, 1983; Kritzberg, 1985; Wegscheider, 1981) contain overlapping constructs and are seen as closely related. The roles, containing both functional and dysfunctional behaviors, are defined as behaviors children assume to cope with the crises and tensions of living in an alcoholic family. The literature indicates children of alcoholics tend to carry the characteristics of their behavior roles into adulthood (Ackerman, 1987b; Black, 1981; Brown, 1985; Cermak and Brown, 1982; Wegscheider, 1981). The models of behavior roles are widely used, sometimes interchangeably, in selfhelp support groups for adult children of alcoholics. The behavior roles are also used by clinicians in the counselling process with children of alcoholics of all ages. The primary objective of this study is to develop an integrated model of behavior roles of adult children of alcoholics which can be verified by clinicians working with adult children of alcoholics. The models developed by Black (1981) and Wegscheider (1981) appear more often in the literature; however, there is no indication that one model is considered superior to the other four models. A logical process led to the decision to develop an integrated model which would make use of the overlapping constructs as well as retain the constructs unique to each model.  7  DEFINITION O F TERMS  Alcoholic A n alcoholic as determined by the Goodwin criteria for drinking categories (Goodwin et al. (1974) is (1) a person who, for at least one year, drank daily and had six or more drinks at least 2 or 3 times a month; or drank 6 or more drinks at least once a week for more than 1 year, but reported no problems and (2) must have had alcohol problems in at least 3 of the following 4 groups: Group 1: Social disapproval of drinking by friends, parents; marital problem from drinking Group 2: Job trouble from drinking, traffic arrests from drinking, other police trouble from drinking Group 3: Frequent blackouts, tremor, withdrawal, convulsions, delirium tremens Group 4: Loss of control, morning drinking  Alcoholic family A family with alcohol as an inseparable component of family life. Alcohol has become the central organizing principle around which the family is structured (Steinglass et al., 1987), "Alcoholic families must contend with a condition that (1) is chronic; (2) entails the use of a psychobiologically active drug; (3) is cyclical in nature; (4) produces predictable behavioral responses; and (5) has a definable course of development" (p. 10).  Children of alcoholics Children who are "living or have lived with an alcoholic parent(s).  8  Adult children of alcoholics Adults who grew up in a family where one or both parents were alcoholic.  Roles A role is an expected and repetitive set of behaviors taken on by an individual in a social context.  RESEARCH QUESTIONS  1.  What are the attributes of each of the roles in the five models of behavior roles of children of alcoholics identified in Table 1?  2.  What are the roles of an integrated model of the behavior roles of adult children of alcoholics?  3.  Can clinicians working with adult children of alcoholics verify the integrated model?  4.  Can the authors of the five models verify the integrated model?  JUSTIFICATION O F T H E STUDY  The five models of behavior roles of children of alcoholics (Black, 1981; Booz-Allen and Hamilton, 1974; Deutsch, 1983; Kritzberg, 1985; Wegscheider, 1981) have yet to be empirically tested (Brenner, 1984; Clair and Genest, 1987). Four of the models (Black, 1981; Deutsch, 1983; Kritzberg, 1985; Wegscheider, 1981) are based on the clinical impressions of the authors and the fifth model (Booz-Allen and Hamilton, 1974) is based on interviews with 50 subjects in Pennsylvania, over 50% of whom responded to a newspaper advertisement for volunteers. In a 1988 article, Eisler, Dare, and Szmuckler,  9 warn about the dangers of "clinical" research falling into the trap of creating untestable hypotheses. What is unscientific about clinical data is not that they are subjective or idiosyncratic, but rather, that it is often unclear what, if anything, would count as evidence against them. The flexibility of the clinician's observational framework can allow the process of hypothesis making and information gathering to become an enclosed self-justifying system which cannot be refuted, (pp. 56-57) There are in excess of 28 million children of alcoholics in North America. The models of child behavior roles are built on the premise that children with alcoholic parents take on or are forced to take on different roles to maintain the stability of the family. While benefiting the family in the short term, the behavior roles cause serious difficulties for the individuals in the long term. The child behavior roles are an important component of the family system and could provide clarification of the family's role in perpetuating dysfunctional behavior (Brown, 1985; Jacob and Seilhamer, 1987). "Furthermore, the child's future psychosocial and alcohol abuse status is theoretically and empirically linked to contemporary patterns of family life - a relationship of particular importance given the high risk nature of alcoholics' offspring" (Jacob and Seilhamer, 1987, p. 569). The development of an integrated model, verified by clinicians working with adult children of alcoholics and the authors of the original five models, could serve as the basis for development of a measurement instrument to be used for further empirical verification of the child behavior roles. While the primary goal of this study concerns empirical verification of the child behavior roles, the study also contains clinical implications, These descriptions have been extremely valuable for adult children of alcoholics in two ways: they serve as powerful windows for seeing the underlying realities of living in an alcoholic home, and they help adult children of alcoholics to accurately connect their childhood experiences with what they are like as adults. (Cermak, 1988, p. 66)  10  The results of the proposed study could help clarify some of the differences among adult children of alcoholics. Such information, while contributing to the knowledge and understanding of what it means to be the child of an alcoholic, would also be valuable in the development of prevention and intervention programs for a population in need of help. As the roles are seen as applying to all families (Cermak, 1988; Hartman and Laird, 1983; Steinglass et al., 1987; Thornton and Nardi, 1975), the results could contribute to our understanding of family dynamics and interactions which extend beyond alcoholic families.  11  C H A P T E R II REVIEW OF R E L A T E D L I T E R A T U R E  ALCOHOLISM AND THE FAMILY  The research data (Ackerman, 1986; Kaufman, 1984; Steinglass, 1980; Steinglass et al., 1987) support the conclusion that a typical family pattern of alcoholism has yet to be found as families with an alcoholic member organize their interactions around alcohol in different ways. Kaufman and Pattison (1981) have constructed a typology of four types of alcoholic family systems: functional, neurotic enmeshed, disintegrated, and absent.  The families in  the functional family system appear to function well. They manage to get along with a minimum of conflict as they are able to isolate the alcoholic behavior. They are open to external change and are motivated to retain and rehabilitate the alcoholic member. The neurotic enmeshed family system's drinking behavior interrupts the day to day life of the family causing roles to shift and demanding adaptation by family members. Frequently characterized by high levels of conflict, stress in any one member is likely to affect the entire family. The neurotic enmeshed family system is the characteristic family system represented in the literature (Kaufman, 1984). In the disintegrated family system the drinking behavior has led to a progressive deterioration of what once was a reasonably functional family. The family and the alcoholic member are totally alienated. The fourth system, the absent family system, is characterized by loss of family of origin early in the drinking career of the alcoholic. The alcoholic is often younger, unmarried, and lacking in social skills due to the consequences of the early onset of serious drinking and alcoholism. Steinglass and his associates (Steinglass et al., 1987) describe the family's organization around alcohol using a developmental model.  12  The family is presumed to have a life cycle or life history that can be divided into a series of recognizable stages, each stage in turn associated with a series of developmental tasks,  (p. 212)  Growth and development of the family is accomplished by moving through a series of phases or stages, each with its own set of tasks. Successful completion of the tasks at an earlier stage provides the family with the resources to deal with the tasks of later stages. The early-phase (Steinglass et al., 1987) is the time for establishing boundaries and forming an identity for the new family. It is a time of newness and excitement as individuals from two different families of origin come together and begin to establish shared rules and belief systems. A basic tension with early phase families is balancing the need to form an independent family and yet remain connected to their families of origin. Alcohol is a question during the early phase; is the new family going to confront alcohol or accommodate to it? The struggles that go on in early-phase families around alcohol often have well antedated the actual formation of the new family. Many children growing up in alcoholic families come to their own marriages with firm ideas about whether or not alcoholism will be tolerated in them. A major factor in mate selection may well be whether or not there is evidence of alcoholism in the intended spouse (alcoholism here may mean either active drinking on the spouse's part or a history of alcoholism in the spouse's family of origin). On the other hand, many children of alcoholics seem totally obtuse regarding early signs of alcoholism in an intended spouse.  (Steinglass et al., 1987, p. 88)  The middle phase (Steinglass et al., 1987), a time of commitment and stability, is characteristically the longest phase and consists of three features.  First, it is the time the  family makes a commitment to a purpose or sense of direction as a family. The exploration of the early phase is replaced by organizational behavior which provides for  13  regularity of family life. The second feature is the establishment of rules for family roles and relationships. Consistency here does not necessarily mean rigidity. The family may decide that flexible role performance regarding work, child rearing, responsibility for social relationships, and so forth, is preferable to stereotyped and inflexible role assignments.  But the key, once again, is that a commitment has been made; the  family has made a choice. (Steinglass et al., 1987, p. 89) And the third feature is the emergence of regulatory behaviors. Daily routines, special events, and the family's method of problem solving are the regulatory behaviors which support and maintain the family's choices and commitments. Alcohol impacts the middle phase family by invading the regulatory behaviors. For example, alcohol becomes a part of the family's short term problem solving. If the family accommodates the alcohol, the middle phase can become developmentally more rigid. As a result any issues of individual development tend to be stifled or ignored. Thus for each type of regulatory behavior, invasion by alcohol takes a somewhat different form. But in each case, the regulatory behavior has been modified. And the direction of this modification is one that makes it more, rather than less, likely that alcoholism will continue to thrive. Hence the family system has been modified in a direction supportive of chronic alcoholism, and is now a system organized to maintain the constancy of its internal environment in the face of what was previously a destabilizing force-chronic alcoholism, (p. 73) During the late phase (Steinglass et al., 1987) the family shifts its focus from the present to the future. The late phase is the time for clarification and legacy. The family focus is on the future as they decide what is important for them as a family, what is the essence of their family and what do they want to pass on to the next generation. The family must also deal with the additions and losses of family members: grandparents dying, boy-friends, girl-friends, marriages. The tendency of the family is to fight against  14  any change, to preserve life as it is which, in turn, can lead to the family remaining stuck in the mid phase. But the family can also adapt to the changes and continue development. The goal of the late phase is to gather together the essence of who they are as family and transmit that essence to the next generation. It is a matter of taking their family legacy and putting it into a time capsule so their family identity will be preserved for future generations. Alcoholic families must ask themselves if their alcoholic identity will be a part of their legacy. Will it be put into their time capsule? Confronting the alcohol question in the late phase with its accompanying additions and losses of family members carries a greater impact than in the middle phase. There is increased pressure for the family to make a decision; will the alcoholism be carried into future generations?  P R O B L E M S A N D RISKS A S S O C I A T E D W I T H L I V I N G IN A N A L C O H O L I C E N V I R O N M E N T  Everyone who interacts with an alcoholic is affected in some way. The significant cost of alcoholism is its detrimental effect on the children of involved families as the nonalcoholic members often suffer more psychological and behavioral impact than the alcoholic (Steinglass et al., 1987). As shown in Table 2 families with an alcoholic member show more dysfunction and harmful interpersonal behavior than nonalcoholic families (Cermak and Brown, 1982; El-Guebaly, 1983; El-Guebaly and Offord, 1977, 1979; Elkin, 1984; Haberman, 1966; Jacob and Leonard, 1986; Kaufman, 1984; Moos and Billings, 1982). The family life of a child with one or both parents an alcoholic is characterized by being inconsistent, chaotic, unpredictable, and arbitrary (Gravitz and Bowden, 1987). As the alcoholism progresses the alcoholic becomes increasingly wrapped up in their addiction. Often the nonalcoholic parent becomes more and more preoccupied with the behavior of  Table 2 Characteristics of Healthy Families  Disruptions Caused by Parental A l c o h o l i s m  Safety Family provides children with whatever is needed for their physical and emotional safety  Emotional unavailability of parent Loss of control in a parent Failure to protect children from hazards Direct physical abuse  Open Communication Free communication with all members of family; direct, clear, and open with congruent messages  Secrets kept to keep the peace Facade of normality maintained Feelings hidden Children made into confidants  Self-Care Positive value is placed on individuals actively taking good care of themselves  "Scarcity" economy Alcoholic's needs come first Feeling responsible for other people's problems  Individualized Roles Filled according to unique strengths and needs of child; flexible  Family's needs dictate roles Roles become rigid, especially during times of stress  Continuity Provided by special events and rituals of family  Chaos Arbitrariness Dissolution of the family  Respect for Privacy Each member is a separate individual, clear boundaries between members  Parents become intrusive Secrets confused with privacy No respect for individual differences  Focused Attention Schedule Child-centered  Determined by the alcoholism, not the child's needs  Emotional Quality Full range of emotions available and modelled by parents  Restricted range of emotions available Alcohol-affected emotions never reach resolution (Cermak, 1988, p. 57)  16  their alcoholic partner (Black, 1981; Brown, 1985; Clinebell, 1968; Hecht, 1973). Morehouse and Richards (1983) suggest that important parent functions-providing role stability, environmental consistency, dependability, and emotional availability-are subject to impairment in both the alcoholic and nonalcoholic parent. The child's responses to the impaired parental functions could include over dependence, clinging, exaggeration, lying, stealing, manipulation, demanding, selfish, withdrawing, and/or fantasizing (Morehouse and Richards, 1983). Cork (1969) suggests while parents in alcoholic families are able to provide for the physical needs of their children, the children's emotional needs are not met. Cotton (1979) concluded, in a study of 6251 alcoholics, that alcoholic parents produce alcoholic children. The conclusions are supported by Valiant (1983) who found 2025% of the sons of alcoholics in North America and Western Europe became alcoholic, while 5-10% of daughters became alcoholic. Black (1986) suggests the rate may be as high as 60%. Goodwin (1985) found in a study of twins that alcoholism runs in families even when the children of alcoholic parents are raised by nonalcoholic adoptive parents. According to Goodwin (1985) only 1/2 of the alcoholics he studied had a history of alcoholism in their families. There is an ongoing debate in the literature over the source of alcoholism, particularly between genetic versus environmental influences (El-Guebaly and Offord, 1979). Cloninger, Bohman, and Sigvardson (1981) concluded The susceptibility to alcoholism is neither entirely genetic nor entirely environmental, nor simply the sum of separate genetic and environmental contributions. Rather, specific combinations of predisposing genetic factors and environmental stress appear to interact before alcoholism develops in most persons, (p. 861). Gravitz and Bowden (1987), based on their clinical experience, suggest children of alcoholics are at a high risk for marrying someone who is or who will become an alcoholic; not just once but sometimes repeating the alcoholic marriage cycle three or four times.  17  Werner (1986) found boys and children of alcoholic mothers to be a more vulnerable group than girls and children of alcoholic fathers. The results suggest that sex of child and sex of alcoholic parent are important intervening variables in determining the effect of alcoholism on a child (Ackerman, 1987b; Werner, 1986). Several studies have added to the list of problems confronting children of alcoholics. These problems include: low self-esteem, learning disabilities, anxiety, delinquency, suicide, excessive feelings of responsibility (Cutter and Cutter, 1987; El-Guebaly and Offord, 1977, 1979; Gravitz and Bowden, 1987), poor school performance (Haberman, 1966; Gabrielli and Mednick, 1983; Robins, West, Ratcliff, and Herjanic, 1978), and neuropsychological deficits (Tarter, Hegedus, Goldstein, Shelly, and Alterman, 1984). Difficulties with interpersonal relationships are also seen as a result of living in an alcoholic family environment (Chafetz, Blane, and Hill, 1971; Kammeier, 1971; Morehouse and Richards, 1983). According to Cermak and Brown (1982) adults from alcoholic families experience difficulty in their relationships with control, trust, acknowledging personal needs, and identifying and expressing feelings. Keltner, Mclntyre, and Gee (1986) found that in a sample of 90 adult children of alcoholics, first boms possess a greater resiliency to the stress and tension of living with an alcoholic parent, while last boms are more susceptible to dependency and alcoholism. They indicate that there is a need for further investigation into the effects of birth order on children of alcoholics. Researchers have found there are certain moderator variables which contribute to an individual being less vulnerable to the impact of a parent's alcoholism. Werner (1986), in a longitudinal study of 49 subjects followed from birth to age 18, found To the extent that the boys and girls in this study were able to elicit predominantly positive responses from their caregiving environment, they were found to be stressresistant despite parental alcoholism and chronic poverty, (p. 39).  18  Other moderator variables include sex of child, sex of alcoholic parent, severity of family crisis, self-esteem, age of child at onset of alcoholism, resiliency to stress, cultural considerations, and degree of alcoholism experienced (Ackerman, 1987b; El-Guebaly, 1983; Werner, 1986). Black (1983), Booz-Allen and Hamilton (1974), Deutsch (1983), Kritzberg (1985), and Wegscheider (1981) suggest children of alcoholics adopt certain behavior roles as a means of coping with their alcoholic environment.  A D U L T CHILDREN O F ALCOHOLICS  In the past five years, adult children of alcoholics have become an identified group requiring specialized treatment (Cermak and Brown, 1982). However, only 5-10% of adult children of alcoholics are seen in any form of treatment (Brown, 1985). For some adult children of alcoholics, the uncertainty which was a factor in shaping their lives as children extends its influence into their adult lives. Many adult children of alcoholics do not realize the extent the alcoholic environment has influenced their lives until they are helped to see how this occurred (Woititz, 1986), "For them, there exists no clear perspective of realitj', no clear role model, no pattern of appropriate behavior, and no consistent basis for developing self-esteem or respect for others" (p. 175). Based on her clinical impressions, Woititz (1983) lists 13 statements or perceptions of adult children of alcoholics. These include adult children of alcoholics: 1. Guess at what normal is. 2. Have difficulty following a project through from beginning to end. 3. Lie when it would be just as easy to tell the truth. 4. Judge themselves without mercy. 5. Have difficulty having fun. 6. Take themselves very seriously.  19  7. Have difficulty with intimate relationships. 8. Overreact to changes over which they have no control. 9. Constantly seek approval and affirmation. 10. Feel they are different from other people. 11. Are either super responsible or super irresponsible. 12. Are extremely loyal, even in the face of evidence that the loyalty is undeserved. 13. Are impulsive, (p. 4-5) Woititz (1983) suggests her perceptions are general and are not necessarily true for every adult child of an alcoholic. The perceptions are used as part of the program of adult children of alcoholic support groups. According to the Adult Children of Alcoholics of Greater Vancouver brochure (1987), one could be led to believe the perceptions are held to be true for all adult children of alcoholics: 1. We guess at what normal behavior is. 2. We have difficulty following a project through from beginning to end. 3. We lie when it would be just as easy to tell the truth. 4. We judge ourselves without mercy. 5. We have difficulty having fun. 6. We take ourselves very seriously. 7. We have difficulty with intimate relationships. 8. We overreact to changes over which we have no control. 9. We constantly seek approval and affirmation. 10. We feel we are different from other people. 11. We are either super responsible or super irresponsible. 12. We are extremely loyal, even in the face of evidence that the loyalty is undeserved. 13. We are impulsive, (p. 10)  20 Ackerman (1987b) labeled Woititz's statements personality characteristics in a national study of adult children of alcoholics in the United States. The study compared adult children of alcoholics and adult children of non-alcoholic parents on the personality characteristics of adult children of alcoholics. Adult children of alcoholics scored higher on every characteristic though levels of significance were not reported. Ackerman (1987b) also discovered variability among children of alcoholics and suggested that their scores were influenced by several moderator variables. Included among the moderator variables were sex of child, age of child at onset of alcoholism in the parent, self-esteem of child, sex of alcoholic parent, degree and kind of alcoholism experienced, child's resiliency to stress, and cultural considerations. In a similar vein, Brown (1987) contends the field has spent too much time trying to investigate the similarities among children of alcoholics and needs now to shift and explore the differences or variability among them.  ROLES  Formal roles, such as mother, father, wife, husband, son, daughter, stepmother, uncle, grandmother and, grandfather, are built into the structure of a family (Hartman and Laird, 1983). Several aspects of the formal roles need to be considered in assessing a family's role structure: role congruity, role continuity, role ambiguity, role complementarity, role competence, and role flexibility. Role congruity: Are the family's role prescriptions for a person congruent with the picture of the role held by the person themselves? Role continuity: Do preceding roles prepare a person for successive roles? Role ambiguity: Are there problems created by lack of clarity of expectations concerning the prescriptions for a particular role? Role complementarity: Do reciprocal roles fit with each other? Are they in harmonious balance?  21  Role competence: Have people had the opportunity to master social role behaviors? Role flexibility: How flexible are the roles? Can role responsibility be shifted? Can family members assume roles normally carried by another? "The family with a rigidly fixed role structure will have less ability to adapt or to change" (Hartman and Laird, 1983, p. 292). Members of a family also have informal roles which are important for the ongoing maintenance and function of the family system.  The same issues for assessing the quality  of the formal roles apply to the informal. In a healthy family, the child's unique strengths and needs are considered before ascribing roles (Cermak, 1988). The parents are responsible for establishing boundaries and maintaining clarity among the various family roles. For example, the parents would be responsible for discipline of the children in a family with clear boundaries. If the boundar3' was not maintained one could have a situation of a child acting like a parent as they discipline their siblings. The informal roles become patterned ways of interacting and are often passed on intergenerationally (Hartman and Laird, 1983; Steinglass et al., 1987; Thornton and Nardi, 1975). A natural part of growing up occurs when the children push the boundaries established by the parents. The boundaries and role expectations of a healthy family are flexible and open to change as children grow and develop. Confusion results when parents are not able to establish boundaries and maintain role clarity. The consequences for the child are to postpone or abandon childhood as they devote all of their energy to surviving the family situation (Brown, 1985, 1987; Cermak, 1988). Thornton and Nardi (1975) lay out a four stage developmental model of role acquisition which emphasizes the interactions between individuals and roles. A t each stage of the model there is an interplay between individuals and role expectations. The expectations come from society in general, from the family, from others occupying the same role, from those who may benefit from the role, and from the individuals themselves.  22 The anticipatory stage is the initial stage of role acquisition. The individual begins to adopt the values of the role or position they are about to assume or would like to assume. The individual formulates their own idea of what the role will be like as they hear expectations from general sources. The individual's experience of the role may be quite different than the individual's anticipation as idealized expectations tend to be emphasized in the anticipatory stage. The formal stage is entered as the person takes on the new role and can begin to view it from the inside. There are usually expectations regarding behavior and abilities and the individual generally responds by conforming. The individual's attitudes regarding the role and expectations are not important in the formal stage. The individual is in the process of getting used to a new role and adjusts by meeting the requirements rather than modifying the role to fit themselves. The individual's personal expectations become important during the informal stage. The informal features are usually not part of the system.  The shift is from one of "must"  to one of "may." The informal stage allows the individual to begin to mold the role to fit self. There is more flexibility within roles at this stage. The roles become modified according to an individual's unique personality during the fourth or personal stage. The individual style is largely accepted by others. The individual's now responds to expectations by modifying the role rather than conforming to it as they did in earlier stages. According to Thornton and Nardi (1975) an individual's role performance is generally more effective in the later stages, with completion of the personal stage a requirement to be truly effective. It is not really until the formal and informal expectations have been encountered that the final processes of adjustment begin. It is then that individuals, now familiar with new positions and their requirements, modify and mold roles around  23  personality characteristics and the demands of other roles and achieve some balance among conflicting expectations.  (Thornton and Nardi, 1975, p. 882)  The individual derives satisfaction from the role when they have been able to modify the role to fit their unique personality; which is possible only in the personal stage. Problems in social and psychological adjustment surface when there is an incongruence between self and role (Thornton and Nardi, 1975). Such incongruence also leads to a perfunctory style of role performance. Alcoholic families experience difficulties with role behavior. As the parents become more and more concerned about alcohol and its effects on their interactions they become less involved with parenting (Black, 1981; Booz-Allen and Hamilton, 1974; Brown, 1985; Cermak, 1988; Clinebell, 1968; Hecht, 1973). Children in alcoholic families must deal with confusing and inconsistent expectations.  There is confusion and uncertainty as to the  parents' role, there is confusion with their own changing roles, and there is confusion with the role reversal which occurs when a child has to care for a helpless parent (Cermak, 1988; Clinebell, 1968; Nardi, 1981; Lawson, Peterson, and Lawson, 1983). "Children in the alcoholic family system are forced to play roles and meet parental needs that children in other families do not" (Hecht, 1973, p. 1767). Each person in the family has a set of duties and rights she or he is expected to enact on the basis of her or his position in the system.  Although generally set,  these roles are often altered as definitions of the situation change during family interactions. The introduction of alcoholism usually acts as one major cause in modifying the traditional role definitions of a family system.  (Nardi, 1981, p. 239)  There are certain demands or rules that confront children in alcoholic families.  They are expected to keep alcoholism in the family secret and to deny there are any problems in the family (Black, 1981; Brenner, 1984; Brown and Beletis, 1986). They learn their own feelings are not important and those feelings are therefore not  24  acknowledged or expressed. And they are expected to take responsibility for their alcoholic parents, which can mean taking the blame for their parent's drinking. Children of alcoholic parents adopt new roles or strategies to cope with the stress of the alcoholic family's demands and rules (Nardi, 1981). These particular coping roles are found in all families from time to time as they deal with stress. However, in the alcoholic family they become rigid as the roles emerge to meet the family's needs (Cermak, 1988; Steinglass et al., 1987). The alcoholic family, especially when confronted with stress, is too insecure and fragile to permit flexibility (Deutsch, 1983). The roles serve the purpose of providing some stability to the family system (Kritzberg, 1985). Brenner (1984) states that stress is a part of our everj' day reality and must be dealt with by all families. Usually, children are not conscious of their particular manner of reacting to stress. They simply react with a strategy which will enable them to go on with their lives (Brenner, 1984). The coping strategies these children develop become habitual over time. Brenner (1984) outlines several strategies commonly used by children to cope with stress. She describes four categories of evasive actions: denial, regression, withdrawal, and impulsive acting out. Five of the ways children accept and face stress include altruism, humor, suppression, anticipation, and sublimation. She warns there is a chance that even children willing to accept and face stress will not always be successful: No matter how adept children become at coping with stress, it is never possible for them to be completely successful; to avoid all negative consequences; and to be able to take everything that comes. Children cannot cope on a daily basis without help and support from at least one caring adult, (p. 8)  25 MODELS OF BEHAVIOR ROLES O F CHILDREN O F ALCOHOLICS  Children of alcohlics assume certain behavioral roles as a means of coping with the stress and crises of living in an alcoholic environment (Black, 1981; Booz-Allen and Hamilton, 1974; Deutsch, 1983; Kritzberg, 1985; Wegscheider, 1981). Booz-Allen and Hamilton (1974) suggest a model of behavior roles or coping mechanisms based on their interviews with 50 children from alcoholic families in Pennsylvania in an exploratory study for the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. They found, not unexpectedly, that each child develops their own approach or strategy in response to emotional neglect and family conflict characteristic of alcoholic families. Emotional neglect and family conflict are the most frequently experienced problems for children of alcoholic parents (Booz-Allen and Hamilton, 1974). The behavior roles are adopted as a necessary means of survival. Each child in the family develops their own approach or strategy. Some children are able to not only survive, they manage to succeed. However, there are also those who are unable to cope and "they may survive but in such a damaged, brutalized state, that they are rarely able to become more than victims" (Booz-Allen and Hamilton, 1974, p. 42). Booz-Allen and Hamilton offer four behavior roles in their model. The perfect child and super-coper are mirror images of goodness. They never do anything wrong and are involved helping others. The child who uses fight is defiant and rebellious; often engaged in socially unacceptable behavior. Fight is a potentially dangerous coping behavior because it may escalate conflict with the child's parents or other authorities. Fight is usually combined with other roles. The child involved with the fourth mechanism, flight, utilizes several forms of escape to cope with their living situation. They may withdraw from the family physically, mentally, or emotionally. According to Booz-Allen and Hamilton (1974) children in the same family can develop either similar or quite different forms of coping with the same experiences.  The  26  particular coping mechanism chosen by the child is dependent on their unique personality and perceptions. Wegscheider (1981) suggests a model of behavior roles based on birth order rather than personality factors. Each role has its own set of characteristics and carries a particular risk for personality development and psychopathology.  According to  Wegscheider, children choose a defense and use the role to hide their feelings in hopes of obtaining some kind of reward from a system that does not have much to offer. The oldest child is the family hero. Characterized by over-achievement, the hero, provides self worth for the family. The second born responds with socially unacceptable behavior and takes the focus off the family by acting out. The role of scapegoat is characterized by delinquency and early involvement with the use and abuse of drugs and alcohol. Later born children are either the lost child or the mascot. The lost child withdraws from the family and helps by not being a problem. The lost child often feels lonely, hurt, and inadequate. The mascot distracts the family with clowning or annoying behavior. The roles can be flexible with one person having more than one role in a small family and more than one person per role in a larger family. A n only child takes on aspects of all the roles. Wegscheider (1981) states that all members of a family have a role and every role is played by someone. Once in a role the demands of the role trap the individual and the person slowly becomes the role. Based on her clinical impressions with young children from alcoholic families Black (1981) offers a third model of behavior roles: Children growing up in alcoholic homes seldom learn the combinations of roles which mold healthy personalities. Instead, they become locked into roles based on their perception of what they need to do to survive and to bring some stability to their lives, (p. 14) The responsible one, usually the oldest child or an only child, assumes a great deal of responsibility for self and others in the family. Children who assume the role of  27 responsible one provide stability not only for themselves but for the rest of their family as well. They often step in and do what has to be done in order to provide some consistency for the family. The parents appreciate the responsible, adult-like child who enables the alcoholic to worry more about their drinking and allows the non-alcoholic spouse more time to care for the alcoholic (Black, 1981). Responsible ones learn to rely only on themselves. They are often good organizers and leaders. They like to be in positions of control. Adjusters feel they do not have any choices in life. They find it easier to not draw attention to themselves so they follow along and adjust to whatever the situation demands. They feel they can manage in any situation but they stay away from leadership positions as they do not like to be put in charge. The children who use the adjuster role seem detached from their family. The placater is the family comforter. They are often sensitive children who are rewarded for helping others but at the expense of not having their own needs met. They try to mend the fears, the sadness, the problems of the family. Placaters spend a great deal of time pleasing others, they like to make other people feel good. They carry responsibility for others' emotional needs. The acting out child disrupts their own lives and the lives of their family with negative or socially unacceptable behavior. The disruptions serve to distract the family from their problems with alcohol. The acting out child is the assumed stereotype of a child of alcoholic parents (Black, 1981). According to Black (1981) there is not a definite pattern to the roles, they are the result of the evolution of the family system. Whatever the role or roles a child takes on, these children will suffer gaps in growth and development as a result. Deutsch (1983) maintains that, except for the cases where there is actual physical or sexual abuse or neglect, the real damage to children of alcoholic parents comes from the children's interpretation of the events in their families:  28  Children interpret these experiences, construct images of self, family, and world, and act upon those images.  They simply adapt to survive, to get at least minimal  needs met. Most often, they form narrow and rigid role structures, patterns of behavior consistent with their unconscious and unarticulated view of who they are, what they must do to contribute to the family, and win the family's love and protection in return, (p. 4) Deutsch (1983) suggests a model consisting of three roles: hero, manager, and scapegoat. The hero is an exemplary child who has managed to turn adversitj into r  strength. The child who becomes the family manager is responsible for the family's affairs but, at the expense of their own needs. The scapegoat is the rebel; getting into trouble to distract the family from their problems with the alcoholic. Kritzberg (1985) contends children take on various roles to survive the rules of the alcoholic family: denial, silence, rigidity, and isolation. The roles serve the purpose of establishing some stability in a chaotic system.  The roles also direct attention to the  family member playing the roles distracting the family momentarily from the sometimes bizarre behavior of the alcoholic family. As the alcoholism progresses the rules and roles become more and more fixed and rigid. The assignment of the roles is dependent on the needs of the family. The roles often become blended with various people playing various roles at different times. Kritzberg's model (1985), based on his clinical impressions, consists of five roles: hero, scapegoat, lost one, clown, and placator. The hero is the achiever in the family, trying in work or in school to make the family look good. The scapegoat is often getting into trouble. The lost one helps by their non-presence; they are not a visible part of the family. Tension is lessened in the family by the diversions created by the clown. The peace-maker role in the family belongs to the placator. According to Kritzberg the roles are not limited to those in his model; families may create different roles in order to meet their particular demands.  29  The behavior roles or coping mechanisms serve to provide children in troubled situations some sense of control and self-worth. Some of the behaviors also provide the children with personal rewards. They are praised for their accomplishments, they are appreciated for their help, and they may acquire skills which will be useful in later work or personal situations (Brenner, 1984; Nardi, 1981). While most of the roles have characteristics of value, they also have inherent dangers. One danger is that the longer a person assumes a role the more accustomed to the behaviors the person becomes; they can become addicted to the role and unable to be flexible in different situations (Black, 1981). Another danger is that while the role may provide the child with some sense of personal gain or reward, they pay the price of not having their own needs met (Lawson, Peterson, & Lawson, 1983). The addiction to the role leads them to carry their surviving or coping behaviors with them when the3' leave the family (Brown, 1985; Brown and Beletis, 1986; Cermak, 1988; Cermak and Brown, 1982; Hecht, 1973). "If children do not resolve the problems created by parental alcoholism, they will carry them the rest of their lives" (Booz-Allen & Hamilton, 1974, p. 73). Roles that enabled them to survive while living as children in an alcoholic family become a source of unhealthy extremes in adulthood (Black, 1981; Lawson et al., 1983). Problems are also created for the children if the alcoholic achieves sobriety without the children or family receiving treatment. The children will continue to experience problems when only the alcoholic parent is treated (Black, 1981; Booz-Allen & Hamilton, 1974; Cork, 1969: Deutsch, 1983; Lawson et al., 1983). The literature is replete with examples of the problems and consequences of growing up in an alcoholic family. According to Brown (1985), We are beginning to comprehend the consequences of the adaptations and defenses developed by children that allow them to survive an unpredictable and often chaotic childhood. These strategies for survival have a significant negative impact for later life. (p. 241)  30  SUMMARY  Alcohol is the central organizing principle in the alcoholic family environment. As a result all members suffer the consequences of one member's alcoholism. The most serious repercussions result from the destructive interaction patterns of the family system as family members reorganize to see reality through an alcoholic perspective.  Steinglass  and his associates (Steinglass et al., 1987) offer a developmental model of alcoholism which suggests that family patterns of behavior can be identified according to the stage of alcoholism or the stage of family development. Much of the children of alcoholics research has investigated the detrimental effect alcoholism has on the children of alcoholic families. Childhood in an alcoholic family is characterized by chaos and unpredictability. Children take on behavior roles in an attempt to maintain some stability for the family and cope with the tension and crises. As a result of the roles many children manage to survive their childhood by taking on parental responsibilities. All families have formal and informal role structures which help define their relationships with each other. Healthy families possess flexible roles which arise from an individual's needs and abilities. The family is able to be creative with its response when confronted with stress or crisis. Alcoholic families are characterized by rigid role structures where the roles rise from the needs of the family. The roles may help the alcoholic family in the short term, but according to Thornton and Nardi (1975) the individual will be affected in the long term. The role will not be a source of meaning if the individual is not able to mold the role to suit their unique personalities and needs. And there also exists more of a chance of a perfunctory style of performance when a rigid family role structure is trapped at the formal stage of acquisition. Five different models of behavior roles of children of alcoholics were identified in the literature. The five models (Black, 1981; Booz-Allen & Hamilton, 1974; Deutsch, 1983;  31 Kritzberg, 1985; Wegscheider, 1981) contain overlapping constructs and are seen as closely related.. The roles, containing both functional and dysfunctional behaviors, are defined as behaviors children assume to cope with the crises and tensions of living in an alcoholic environment. They serve to provide chilren in troubled situations some sense of control and self-worth. The models are widely used, sometimes interchangeably, by clinicians working with children of alcohlics of all ages and by self-help support groups for adult children of alcoholics. According to Clair and Genest (1987) the models have yet to be empirically tested. For children of alcoholics the problems do not stop when they leave home or the drinking ceases. It is very difficult for them to separate from their families; to leave is synonymous with giving up hope or abandoning the family or being abandoned. Children of alcoholics tend to stay emotionally attached to their families of origin as a means of maintaining an important role in the family. The enduring attachment is also seen as a means of maintaining the denial of being an alcoholic family. For all, to separate [to leave behind the behavioral roles of childhood] becomes a major barrier to forming healthy, primary attachments to their own families and causes great difficulty with intimate involvement in all other significant relationships.  (Brown, 1985, p. 253)  Many of the results attributed to children of alcoholics are derived from studies with small samples, studies using children of alcoholics who have other identified problems needing institutional help, and from clinical impressions. There is evidence in the literature that seems to indicate that, whatever the particular problems, children of alcoholics will carry those issues into their adulthood. There are more than 28 million children of alcoholics suffering a myriad of problems due to living with alcoholism. The literature is calling upon researchers to invest their time and energy designing valid studies to help unravel the complexities of alcohol and the family.  32  C H A P T E R III METHODOLOGY  DESIGN O F T H E STUDY  Five models of behavior roles of children of alcohlics were identified in the literature. The five models (Black, 1981; Booz-Allen and Hamilton, 1974; Deutsch, 1983; Kritzberg, 1985: Wegscheider, 1981) contain overlapping consrtucts and are seen as closely related. The primary objective of the present study was to develop and verify an integrated model of behavior roles of adult children of alcoholics. Such a model would serve as the basis for the construction of a measurement instrument to be used for further empirical verification of the behavior roles. While the actual instrument construction was beyond the scope of this study, the first three steps of Crocker and Algina's (1986) process of test construction listed below were chosen as an appropriate design for developing and verifying the integrated model of behavior roles, 1. Identify the primary purpose(s) for which the test scores will be used 2. Identify behaviors that represent the construct or define the domain 3. Prepare a set of test specifications, delineating the proportion of items that should focus on each type of behavior identified in step 2 4. Construct an initial pool of items 5. Have items reviewed (and revise as necessary) 6. Hold prelimina^ item tryouts (and revise as necessary) 7. Field-test the items on a large sample representative of the examinee population for whom the test is intended 8. Determine statistical properties of item scores and, when appropriate, eliminate items that do not meet preestablished criteria  33  9. Design and conduct reliability and validity studies for the final form of the test 10. Develop guidelines for administration, scoring, and interpretation of the test scores (e.g., prepare norm tables, suggest recommended cutting scores or standards for performance, etc.) (p. 66) In Crocker and Algina's list of test construction steps, steps 1-3 relate to the development of test specifications or, in the case of this study, a specification, in model form, of that which is to be measured. The remaining 7 steps, 4-10, the instrument construction phase, would be the object of a second study The method insures the future study will be able to build on the results of the present study. The primary purpose (step 1) of constructing a measurement instrument of the behavior roles is for research. A measurement instrument would be a contribution to the research efforts of a relatively new field and would enable further empirical verification fo the behavior roles. Potential clinical applications, a secondary purpose of constructing a measurement instrument, could lead to new and more effective programs of intervention and prevention with both children and adults who have experienced living with an alcoholic parent. The behaviors representing the construct of the roles (step 2) were identified by the development of the integrated model of behavior roles of adult children of alcoholics. The verification of the integrated model using categorization methodology and latent partition analysis produced an initial set of items (step 3) that focused on each of the behavior roles identified in step 2.  DEVELOPMENT OF T H E INTEGRATED MODEL  Explication of the Attributes Five models of behavior roles of children of alcoholics (Black, 1981; Booz-Allen and  34  Hamilton, 1974; Deutsch, 1983; Kritzberg, 1985; Wegscheider,1981) were identified in the literature. The attributes for each role of the five models, summarized earlier in Table 1, were explicated from the literature utilizing a three step process. First, attributes were assembled from the author's descriptions of their roles; second, other literature references of the five models were examined and attributes extracted according to each role of the particular model referenced; and third, the list of attributes within a particular role were examined and duplicate entries removed. The 220 attributes explicated from the literature are shown in Appendixes A - E .  Formation of the Integrated Model The five models of behavior roles of children of alcoholics (Black, 1981; Booz-Allen and Hamilton, 1974; Deutsch, 1983; Kritzberg, 1985; Wegscheider,1981) contain overlapping constructs and are seen as closely related. The literature did not indicate that any one of the five models is considered superior to the other four. As a result the researcher decided to develop an integrated model which would make use of the overlapping constructs as well as retain the constructs unique to each model. The researcher conducted the integration procedure. The attributes for each of the 20 roles from the five models were put on a form, one role per form, with the role identity coded by number. The 20 forms were shuffled to guarantee a random order of the forms. The researcher then sorted the 20 forms according to similarities of attributes using the following procedure: 1. Take a quick look through the forms to become acquainted with the variety of roles to be sorted. 2. Beginning with the first form, think of what kind of role the attributes refer to with respect to behavior roles of children of alcoholics. 3. Take the next form and think of what role the attributes are characteristic of. If you think it should be grouped with the first then put the two together.  35  Otherwise, begin a second group by placing the new form apart from the first one. If you have doubt as to its similarity keep it separate. 4. Continue by picking up one form at a time and thinking what behavior role the attributes are characteristic of; then either put it in one of the groups already in front of you or start a new group. 5. When you are finished with all the forms, go through your groups and review each group with concern for whether the attributes in it are characteristic of the same behavior role. There can be as few as one form in a group or as many as you wish. 6. Record the form numbers according to the groups. The results of the sorting procedure, shown in Table 3, were designated the integrated model of behavior roles of children of alcoholics. The names for the integrated model reflect the nature of their roles and were developed by the researcher using logical analysis of the attributes within each role. The names are different than those used by the models in the literature to designate that the integrated model is a new and different model.  Selection of Attributes to be Used for Verification of the Model Attributes were selected according to their uniqueness, their ability to reference only one role of the integrated model, and their ability to reference adult behaviors. Appendix F contains the evaluation of the attributes and Appendix G contains the cluster of attributes selected for the verification of the integrated model.  Verification of the Integrated Model Categorization methodology.  The model was verified using categorization  methodology to collect the responses of subjects. The agreement among the responses was analyzed using latent partition analysis. The methodology has been successfully used to  36  Table 3 Integrated Model of Behavior Roles of Children of Alcoholics  Family Director  Premier Child  Black/Responsible One  Booz-Allen & Hamilton/Perfect Child  Booz-Allen & Hamilton/Super Coper  Deutsch/Hero  Deutsch/Manager  Kritzberg/Hero Wegscheider/Family Hero  Black Sheep  Invisible Child  Black/Acting Out Child  Booz-Allen & Hamilton/Flight  Booz-Allen & Hamilton/Fight  Kritzberg/Lost One  Deutsch/Scapegoat  Wegscheider/Lost Child  Kritzberg/Scapegoat Wegscheider/Scapegoat  Jester  Harmonizer  Kritzberg/Clown  Black/Adjuster  Wegscheider/Mascot  Black/Placater Kritzberg/Placator  examine similarities among teachers' categorizations of statements describing teachinglearning behavior and of facilitating student learning in the classroom (Miller, D. M . , Wiley, D. E . , Wolfe, R. G . , and Conry, R. F . , cited in Kuijt, 1978). Evans (1970) reports on studies examining judgmental classification of semantic differential scales and classification by university students of a selection of student behaviors. Kuijt (1978) used  37  categorization methodology to examine definitions in use by practitioners in the field of Transactional Analysis. The methodology was also used with graduate students in Counselling Psychology to examine the change processes involved in emotionally focused couples therapy (Greenberg, James, and Conry, 1988; James, 1985). Categorization methodology employs a free sort (F-sort) procedure for data collection. The F-Sort is a technique for observing and recording categorical judgements manifested when subjects perform a series of sorting manipulations of a given set of stimuli (Miller et al., cited in Kuijt, 1978). One method of categorization methodology makes use of a blind decision rule regarding the number of categories (Evans, 1970). There are no restrictions placed on the number of categories or the number of units in each category. Sorters are free to create and define their own sets of categories, guided only by the sorting cues given them. Evans (1970) discusses a second method which makes use of theoretical considerations to make an a priori decision on the number of categories. It is also possible to request a different number of categories during the latent partition analysis (described below). Subjects were asked to sort the stimuli into categories according to similarities which they perceived among the attributes. The subjects were then asked to label their categories reflecting the criteria the3' used in grouping the attributes. The criteria used by the subjects to group the attributes is important in the analysis and will be incorporated in making any necessary revisions to the integrated model. The sorting cue in this study was: "Put together those attributes which you think are characteristic of the same behavior role of adult children of alcoholics. If two attributes cannot be grouped together or you doubt their similarity, keep them separate. If an attribute seems to belong to more than one role or it is impossible to decide on a role for that attribute, place it in a reject category." The subjects were asked to explain their rationale for grouping particular attributes together. The subjects will also be asked to  38 explain why they placed any attributes in the reject category. A copy of the instructions provided for the respondents is contained in Appendix P.  Latent partition analysis. Latent partition analysis is designed to study the relationships between two or more categorizations of the same set of items (Wiley, 1967). According to the model there is a latent partition which underlies the set of manifest partitions. "The items are assumed to be assigned to manifest categories according to independent, discrete probability distributions" (Wiley, 1967, p. 183). The latent partition analysis of sorting behavior produces three matrices; the Smatrix, the Phi-matrix, and the Omega-matrix. The S-matrix (the joint proportion matrix) has as many rows and columns as there are content units. A n entry in an S-matrix corresponds to a pair of content units, and is the proportion of sorters in whose manifest categories those two content units were combined. The S-matrix is symmetric with its diagonal entries equal to 1.0 and represents a reduction of the data of the sorting experiment. The Phi-matrix or latent categories has as many rows as there are content units and as many columns as there are latent categories.  Miller et al. (cited in Kuijt 1978)  describes the latent categories: If there were two manifest categorizations of a set of content units, then one might consider looking at the refinement categorization defined by them - that is, at the intersections of the categories of two sets. If there are five content units: A  B  O  D  E  and the two categorizations are:  1.  (AB)  2.  (ABC)  (CDE) .  (DE)  then the refinement categorization is: (AB)  (C)  (DE)  39  The refinement categories consist of the content units that both sorters found similar. In L P A terminology, the refinement categories are called latent categories. The latent categorization is sufficient to explain each of the manifest categories in the sense that each manifest category is either a latent category or a union of latent categories. The content unit discriminations between the latent categories include all discriminations between content units in both manifest categorizations (p. 45). The entries in the Phi-matrix, called loadings, have been designated by Miller et al. (cited in Kuijt, 1978) as strong (.90 + ), moderate (.60 - .89), or weak (.30 - .59). Loadings greater than one and less than zero are indications of closeness of fit of the model. As a theoretical optimum, the row would have a 1 in the column corresponding to that latent category and O's in the other columns. According to Miller et al. (cited in Kuijt, 1978): a. Estimates from .50 to 1.50 should be considered as '1' signifying membership in the corresponding categories. b. Estimates from .20 to .50 should be considered ambiguous: therefore, tentative membership should be signified by the highest entry within this range in the row. c. Estimates below .20 should be considered as '0' signifying that the content unit is a non-member of the corresponding latent categories (p. 46). The third matrix, the Omega-matrix or confusion matrix is the probability of latent categorization combination. Kuijt (1978) describes the Omega-matrix: The Omega matrix has as many rows and columns as there are latent categories. A number in Omega corresponds to a pair of latent categories and is the probability, averaged over sorters, of the latent categories being merged in manifest partitions. More exactly, it is the probability that any particular pair of content units from each latent category will have been put in the same manifest category. A diagonal entry of Omega refers to a single latent category and is the  40  probability that a given pair of items from the latent category will be put together. When that probability is high, the descriptors and their latent category may be considered cohesive, (p. 47)  . Population. The population of interest in the study was all therapists, counsellors, and psychologists in Canada and the United States working with adults who grew up in a family where one or both parents were alcoholics. The sample consisted of members from four groups of therapists working with adult children of alcoholics; members of the Canadian Association for Children of Alcoholics (CACOA), participants in a professional training conference in Seattle Washington for counsellors and therapists working with children of alcoholics (ACOA), counsellors with the British Columbia Alcohol and Drug programs who were participants in a famify therapy training program conducted by the Western Family Learning Institute (ADP), and the authors of the five models identified in the literature. Packets were sent to 116 counsellors and therapists described in Table 4.  Task administration. The sorting procedures followed for the F-sort were those outlined by Millar et al. (cited in Kuijt, 1978). The descriptors were systematically changed to reflect the same person and tense to control for methods variance due to the writing style of the different authors. The descriptors were assigned a random number generated by a table of random digits (Glass and Hopkins, 1984), printed on 3.5" x 4.25" cards and assembled into decks. Each deck was pseudo-randomly ordered by cutting into thirds three times, shuffling twice, and cutting into thirds two more times. This insured the descriptors were presented to each sorter in a different order. A pilot study was conducted with six graduate students in counselling psychology to test the F-sort procedures. As the students experienced no difficulty in following the written instructions, sorters in the sample were presented with similar instructions specifying the task objectives and the sequence of tasks to follow in sorting the descriptors.  41  Table 4 Sample Source  PROV/STATE ALB BC MAN NB ONT PQ CA CO MA ND OR SD TX WA TOTAL  CACOA 4 2 1 1 23 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34  ACOA CONF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 1 4 0 0 28 38  ADP 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40  AUTHORS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 4  TOTAL 4 42 1 1 23 3 1 5 1 1 4 1 1 28 116  The instructions, a copy of which is presented in Appendix P, emphasize the sorting cue, time required, nature of the descriptors, and the nature of the categories as implied by the sorting cue. Sorters may form as few as three categories or as many as seven categories and they may put any number of descriptors into a category. Any descriptor that can't be placed in only one category is to be placed in a reject category. The sorters were asked to describe their categories to help the researcher describe, interpret, and name the latent categories identified by the analysis of the sorting procedure. Latent Partition Analysis, designed to study the relationships between two or more categorizations of the same set of items, was used to analyze the sorters' categorizations. The random numbers from each attribute were entered on the data record form according to the respondent's categorization. The random numbers were converted to the attribute numbers (1-68) and were then ready to be transferred to a fortran coding form to facilitate computer entry of the data. Each respondent was assigned one line of a fortran coding form; columns 1-10 contained demographic information and columns 11-78 represented the  42  68 attributes used in the categorization task. The attibutes were designated on the fortran coding form by a number ranging from 1-8, the number corresponding to the number of the category or role in which the respondent had sorted that particular attribute. The reject category was designated as #8.  The data entries were checked for accuracy by a  colleauge of the researcher on four occassions: (1) after entry of the random numbers on the data record form, (2) after conversion of the random numbers to the attribute numbers, (3) after entry on the fortran coding form, and (4) after the data had been entered into a computer file. The categorization data was then analyzed using latent partition analysis contained in the University of Alberta (Division of Educational Research Services) computer program S C A L 0 6 by the University of British Columbia mainframe computer, a Michigan Terminal System (MTS), running on a Amdahl 5860 computer.  43  C H A P T E R IV RESULTS  CHARACTERISTICS O F T H E S A M P L E  Responses were obtained from 50 members of the sample (total = 116); of these 45 returned sorted decks of descriptors. The return rate and percent of useable responses for the sample is summarized in Table 5. Five people returned their packages without completing the sorting task. Two of the authors of the five models reported they were too busy to take the time to participate in the study; two respondents felt they did not have the expertise or experience to be able to participate; and one respondent expressed reservations concerning the rigidity of the study's design.  Table 5 Percentage of Returns of the Sample  S O U R C E C A C O A A C O A  C O N F  A D P A U T H O R S T O T A L  S E N T  R E T U R N E D  %  U S E A B L E  %  %  TOTA:  34  18  52.9  15  44.1  33.3  38  10  26.3  10  26.3  22.2  40  20  50.0  20  50.0  44.4  4  2  50.0  0  116  50  43.1  45  38.8  99.9  Respondents were asked to identify their years of experience in counselling, their highest degree, and specialized training in children of alcoholics. Degrees were categorized as No Degree, Two Year Degree (including Associate of Arts, Diplomas, and Certified  44  Addiction Counsellors), Bachelor's Degree (including B.A., B.S., B.Ed., and B.S.W.), Master's Degrees (including M . A . , M . E d . , M.S.W., R.S.W., M . S c , and M.N.), and Doctoral Degrees (including Ph.D., and Ed.D.). These data are summarized in Table 6.  Table 6 Description of the Respondents  EDUCATION  #  No Degree  5  11  2yr Degree  4  9  Bachelor's  12  Master's  EXPERIENCE  #  %  1-5 Years  15  33  6-10 Years  14  31  27  11-15 Years  11  25  21  45  16+ Years  5  45  3  6  45  100  45  100  Doctorate Total  %  Total  RESULTS F R O M L A T E N T PARTITION ANALYSIS  Number of Manifest Categories The F-sort by the 45 sorters produced manifest categories, shown in Figure 1, ranging from two to seven. The mode of the manifest categories was four, the median 4.47, and the mean 4.69.  Number of Latent Categories Eight separate computer runs were performed on the 45 sets of manifest categories containing 68 content units using the University of Alberta (Division of Educational Research Services) computer program S C A L 0 6 . A different number of latent categories  45 Figure 1 Frequency Distribution for Each Number of Manifest Categories  Number of Sorters  3  4  5  6  7  Number of manifest categories  was requested on each run in order to establish the optimal number of latent categories. The first run requested the number of categories equal to the number of latent roots equal to or greater than 1.0 (Wiley, 1967). This produced a latent partition analysis of nine categories. The corresponding Phi-matrix was examined to check the contents of the latent categories. The examination revealed various anomolies; several content units had substantial secondary loadings on two and three categories, three units loaded substantially on four and five categories, and three categories seemed to be artificially divided as they contained content units that theoretically should go together. The latent roots (eigenvalues), shown in Figure 2, were then plotted and examined.  Figure 2 E i g e n v a l u e s of Model C o n t a i n i n g 68 Content U n i t s eigenvalue  Eigenvalues 13.978 12.053 8.361 3.394 2.596 2.223 1.543 1.102 1.003 0.907 0.930 0.789 0.763 .574 .661 .639 .535 .551 .507 . 478 .446 .440 . 416 0.396 0.374  \  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  Ordinal  numfier or l a t e n t  root  47  The scree test indicates that 4 categories could be considered the best fit of the data (Cattell, 1966; Kuijt, 1978; James, 1985). However, there remains some argument in the literature as to the appropriate manner in which the number of latent categories is to be estimated. Different numbers of latent categories produce models which differ in their ability to fit the data both mathematically and substantively Miller et al. (cited in Kuijt, 1978). Therefore, ad hoc reasoning is used in combination with the Phi-matrix and the Omega-matrix to determine the optimal number of latent categories.  Ad hoc reasoning  consisted of looking at the size of the categories relative to the number of descriptors taken from the various roles of the integrated model, the coherence of the categories as representing behavior roles of adult children of alcoholics, and the redistribution of the descriptors as the number of latent categories was changed. The number of categories was specified on subsequent computer runs beginning with eight categories and proceeding to two categories.  As the number of latent categories  requested decreased the descriptors collapsed into different categories as shown in Table 7. The first model that was interpretable as behavior roles occurred at L = 6 . The L = 6 model produced six categories recognizable as behavior roles although one category contained four descriptors which were found most often in the sorter's reject category. The descriptors in the sixth category were considered to be members of a reject category and not an example of a separate identifiable behavior role. The model produced by L = 5 contained five coherent categories representative of the integrated model of behavior roles of children of alcoholics. The descriptors from the Jester role joined with the Caretaker role at L = 4 to make up a new category, which lacked coherence as a behavior role. The model produced by L = 5 was considered the best solution.  Joint Proportion Matrix The joint proportion matrix (S-matrix), a 68 by 68 table is presented in Appendix I.  48  Table 7 Latent Structure as a Function of the Number of Categories  Number of Latent Categories 9  8  IC  IC  BS  BS  BS J  7  6  4  5  3  2 •  IC  IC  IC  IC  IC  BS  BS  BS  BS  BS  BS/J  BS/J/IC  J  J  J  J  C  C  C  C  C  C/J  C/SA  C/SA  Rej  Rej  Rej  Rej  SA  SA  SA  SA  SA  SA  SA  SA  C  SA  Key: IC = Invisible Child, BS = Black Sheep, J=Jester, C = Caretaker, SA = Super Achiever, Rej = Reject Category  Phi Matrix (5 Category Model/68 Content Units) Primary loadings of content units have been designated by Miller et al. (cited in Kuijt, 1978) as strong (.90 + ), moderate (.60 - .89), or weak (.30 - .59).  The Phi Matrix  for the 5 category/68 content units model, shown in Table 8, contains 43 units with strong loadings, 15 moderate, and 10 with weak loadings on their primary categories.  Content units with strong primary loadings. Four of the 43 attributes with strong primary loadings have substantial (greater than .20) secondary loadings. Family counts on  49  Table 8 Phi Matrix (5 Categories/68 Content Units)  #  Stimulus  1  2  3  4  5  0.501 0.549 0.577 0.579 0.649 0.700 0.834 0.870 0.876 0.885 0.961 0.987 1.137 1.143 1.153 1.195 1.258 1.400  -0.096 -0.142 -0.114 0.556 0.492 0.423 0.373 -0.198 0.187 -0.331 -0.179 0.273 0.072 0.035 0.081 -0.270 -0.181 -0.272  0.054 0.037 0.123 -0.052 -0.034 -0.052 -0.059 -0.009 0.095 0.463 0.116 -0.069 -0.068 -0.074 -0.066 -0.010 -0.031 -0.088  0.218 -0.048 -0.063 -0.013 0.024 0.030 -0.016 -0.078 -0.017 -0.022 0.005 -0.009 -0.007 0.013 -0.008 -0.068 0.018 0.010  0.273 0.419 0.411 -0.065 -0.111 -0.063 -0.097 0.464 -0.073 0.043 0.041 -0.152 -0.154 -0.139 -0.128 0.154 -0.115 -0.076  0.417 0.238 0.383 0.418 0.257 -0.043 -0.198 0.225 -0.088 0.109 -0.022 0.063 -0.210 -0.044 -0.110 -0.081 -0.019 -0.225 -0.180 -0.190  0.510 0.551 0.569 0.694 0.715 0.828 0.853 0.890 0.916 0.923 0.986 1.005 1.030 1.037 1.407 1.087 1.093 1.168 1.198 1.217  0.007 0.069 0.086 -0.009 -0.028 0.122 0.036 -0.040 0.067 -0.018 0.008 -0.007 0.079 -0.003 -0.023 0.002 -0.033 0.006 -0.020 -0.020  0.039 0.067 0.025 -0.020 -0.011 0.033 0.081 0.001 0.060 0.017 -0.041 -0.006 -0.010 -0.025 -0.020 -0.030 -0.003 -0.028 -0.012 -0.011  -0.016 0.114 0.013 -0.047 0.039 0.073 0.159 -0.091 0.059 -0.012 0.092 -0.071 0.081 -0.006 0.082 0.022 -0.059 0.090 -0.006 -0.021  CARETAKER 35. 40. 41. 4. 20. 7. 10. 46. 43. 42. 33. 13. 17. 5. 19. 37. 38. 36.  Manipulates others Flexible Adapts to situations Takes charge Motivated family look ok Provides structure Manages family affairs Tries reduce conflict Maintains order Fears rocking boat Discounts own needs Family counts on them Praise for caring Feels responsible Acts as family savior Smooths over conflict Willing to lend ear Survival equals giving  SUPER ACHIEVER 30. 28. 6. 11. 1. 18. 14. 8. 26. 2. 9. 24. 29. 3. 15. 25. 12. 23. 27. 21.  Mirror of goodness Unable to relax Takes life seriously Have to be good Oldest or only child Trouble feeling good Does well athletically Remains responsible Never do enough Often assumes leadership Appears to function well Appears exemplary Success/no satisfaction Does well scholastically Leader among peers Appears perfect Provide worth by success Achieves success in work Sue to stop par drink Super achiever (tries)  50  INVISIBLE CHILD 22. Feels they don't fit 50. Avoids alcoholic 48. Lives in fantasy 54. Disassociates 55. Non-presence 45. Avoids other people 51. Withdraws into self 44. Keeps to self (loner) 52. Lost in the shuffle 49. Keeps a low profile 47. Withdraws 53. Escapes by hiding  0.161 -0.073 0.085 -0.045 0.055 0.022 -0.036 -0.064 -0.028 -0.004 -0.037 -0.088  -0.035 0.102 -0.047 0.006 -0.033 -0.016 0.031 0.021 0.005 -0.010 0.006 0.028  0.500 0.625 0.925 0.926 0.942 1.021 1.069 1.106 1.123 1.130 1.137 1.150  0.369 0.290 -0.030 0.145 0.022 -0.032 -0.032 -0.034 -0.054 -0.057 -0.055 -0.059  0.105 -0.061 0.021 -0.069 0.047 0.020 -0.015 -0.039 -0.019 -0.039 -0.047 -0.034  BLACK SHEEP 59. Often lack skills 58. Problems interacting 56. Often lack education 64. Potentially dangerous 57. Unable to control anger 61. Acts phys aggressive 63. Family blames them 16. Acts verbal aggressive 60. Rebels 67. Fam says person is bad 62. Acts out 68. Often getting in trouble 65. Causes trouble 66. Acts defiant / hostile  0.026 0.065 0.075 0.055 0.099 0.030 -0.060 -0.009 -0.055 -0.049 -0.038 -0.038 -0.004 -0.004  -0.015 -0.038 -0.036 -0.023 -0.046 0.010 0.020 -0.001 0.023 0.011 -0.000 -0.000 -0.020 -0.020  0.198 0.121 -0.033 0.044 0.045 -0.045 -0.031 -0.032 -0.035 -0.038 -0.041 -0.041 -0.043 -0.043  0.569 0.789 0.814 0.843 0.920 1.019 1.042 1.055 1.086 1.087 1.107 1.107 1.110 1.110  0.225 0.125 0.205 0.085 0.059 -0.032 -0.034 0.009 -0.060 -0.055 -0.064 -0.064 -0.053 -0.053  JESTER 39. Takes in stride 32. Clowning or annoying 34. Tries to be cute 31. Tries to be funny  0.428 -0.180 -0.064 -0.022  -0.010 0.059 0.022 0.008  0.053 -0.012 -0.025 -0.047  -0.069 0.061 -0.049 -0.057  0.467 1.116 1.126 1.159  51  them to take over when others flounder (#13) and survival equals giving to others (time, energy, empathy) (#36) from the Caretaker; and, repeated career successes rarely bring satisfaction (#29) and achieves success in work (#23) from the Super Achiever all load significantly on a secondary category.  Content units with moderate primary loadings. Ten of the 15 attributes with moderate primary loadings, motivated to have the family look good (#20), provides structure for the family (#7), manages the family's affairs (#10), and fries to reduce the conflict in the family (#46) from Caretaker; they have to be good (#11), oldest or only child (#1), and remains exceptionally responsible (#8) from Super Achiever; avoids alcoholic by not being at home (#50) from Invisible Child, and they often lack education (#56) from Black Sheep have substantial secondary loadings. One, fears rocking the boat (#42) from Caretaker, has substantial secondary loadings in two additional categories.  Content units with weak primary loadings. A l l 10 of the attributes with weak primary loadings possessed substantial secondary loadings. These content units include flexible (#40), adapts to a variety of situations (#41), and takes charge (#4) from Caretaker; appears as a mirror of goodness (#30), unable to relax (#28), and takes life seriously (difficulty having fun) (#6) from Super Achiever; feels they do not fit (misfit) (#22) from Invisible Child; they often lack learned skills (#59) from Black Sheep, and takes whatever occurs in stride (#39) from Jester. One content unit, manipulates others (#35) from Caretaker, had two substantial secondary loadings.  Omega Matrix The diagonal of the Omega matrix, shown in Table 9, represents the cohesiveness of the latent categories.  Category 1 is the least cohesive with a probability of .52 that its  items will have been sorted together.  Category 4 is the most cohesive with a probability of  52  Table 9 Omega Matrix (5 Categories/68 Content Units) Probability of Latent Category Combination  1  2  3  4  1 Caretaker  0.52  2 Super Achiever  0.42  0.73  3 Invisible Child  0.08  0.03  0.73  4 Black Sheep  0.04  0.03  0.08  0.80  5 Jester  0.10  0.04  0.16  0.10  .80 that its items will have been sorted together. The off-diagonal entries represent the probability that items from two different categories will be sorted together. Categories 1 and 2 can be seen to have a strong tendency to merge as there exists the probability of .42 that items from category 1 and category 2 will be sorted together.  A N A L Y S I S O F T H E F I N A L M O D E L (5 C A T E G O R I E S / 4 8 C O N T E N T UNITS)  Different combinations of the content units were experimented with in an attempt to arrive at a model which would consist of only those content units with a primary loading. The number of latent categories requested was set at five for the experimental runs. First, five descriptors were removed, fears rocking the boat (#42) which had significant secondary loadings on two additional categories; and manipulates others (#35), takes whatever occurs in stride (#39), flexible (#40), and adapts to a variety of situations  53 (#41), the members of the sixth category when L = 6. They were the content units most frequently placed in a reject category by the sorters due to their inability to sort them into only one category. Second, twelve descriptors were removed due to their weak or moderate primary loading and their substantial secondary loading of more than .20. Descriptors removed include takes charge (#4), motivated to have the family look good (#20), appears as a mirror of goodness (#30), takes life seriously (difficulty having fun) (#6), they have to be good (goodness has a compulsive quality) (#11), feels they do not fit (misfit) (#22), avoids  alcoholic  by not being at home (#50), provides structure for the family (#7), manages the family  affairs  (#10), oldest or only child (#1), unable to relax (#28), and tries to reduce the conflict in the  family (#46). The composition of the categories did not change as the descriptors were removed. The Omega Matrix values, presented in Appendix N and Appendix O, did change as the categories were becoming less ambiguous. Three descriptors with secondary loadings, remains exceptionally responsible (#8), does whatever is necessary to maintain order (#43), and the family counts on them to take over  when others flounder (#13), were experimented with in all possible combinations but eventually were eliminated as their secondary loadings remained substantial. Does whatever is necessary to maintain order (#43) acquired its secondary loading on category 2 when n = 51. Prior to that point it did not have a substantial secondary loading. One other descriptor, does well athletically (#14), began at n = 68 without a substantial secondary loading but obtained a secondary loading of -.230 on category 1 at n = 63. When the number of descriptors was further reduced to 51 the secondary loading on category 1 became -.153 and was no longer considered substantial. The secondary loadings on five descriptors changed from greater than .20 to less than .20 as the number of content units decreased from 68 to 48. They often lack  education  (#56) decreased from .205 to .110 at n = 63. After twelve more descriptors were removed  54  (n=51) repeated career successes rarely bring satisfaction (#29) changed from -.204 on categor}' 1 to -.113; achieves success in work (#23)decreased from -.222 on category 1 to .127. After the remaining three descriptors were removed (n = 48) the secondary loading of survival equals giving to others (time, energy, empathy) (#36) changed from -.307 to -.151 on category 2 and they often lack learned skills (#59) secondary loading on category 3 changed from.207 to .197.  Phi Matrix The five category model consisting of 48 content units, shown in Table 10, presents a model of 38 strong, 9 moderate, and one weak descriptor with no significant secondary loadings. Category 1, the Caretaker role, contains 7 items; category 2, the Super Achiever role, and category 3, the Black Sheep role, each contain 14 items; category 4, the Invisible Child role, contains 10 items; and category 5, the Jester role, contains 3 items.  Omega Matrix The Omega Matrix, presented in Table 11, indicates that the Caretaker category with a probability of .64 is the least cohesive of the five categories and Black Sheep and Jester with a probability of .82 are the most cohesive. The Caretaker and Super Achiever with a joint probability of .393 are most often confused with sorters placing items from the two latent categories in their same manifest categories. The two categories appear for the first time as two separate categories. As the descriptors making up the two categories are often considered to be taken from synonymous roles in the literature it follows that the two categories could be confused. The integrated model represents the first attempt known to the researcher to classify the descriptors of the hero and responsible roles into two distinct categories. Four of the five categories improved their probability of cohesion and the fifth category, Super Achiever, remained the same as the content units were reduced from 68  55 Table 10 Phi Matrix (5 Categories/48 Content Units)  #  1  2  3  4  5  CARETAKER 33. Discounts own needs 19. Acts as family savior 24. Smooths over conflict 17. Praise for caring 5. Feels responsible 38. Willing to lend ear 36. Survival equals giving  0.775 0.910 0.935 0.994 0.946 1.116 1.203  -0.061 0.194 -0.097 0.172 0.138 -0.068 -0.151  0.017 -0.023 -0.051 -0.022 -0.001 0.019 0.009  0.134 -0.023 0.037 -0.029 -0.037 0.008 -0.038  0.025 0.002 0.139 -0.028 -0.036 -0.059 -0.014  SUPER ACHIEVER 18. Trouble feeling good 14. Does well athletically 26. Never do enough 2. Often assumes leadership 24. Appears exemplary 9. Appears to function well 3. Does well scholastically 29. Success/no satisfaction 15. Leader among peers 12. Provide worth by success 25. Appears perfect 23. Success in work 27. Sue to stop par drink 21. Super achiever (tries)  0.015 -0.097 -0.014 0.119 0.105 0.014 0.063 -0.094 -0.026 0.078 -0.016 -0.098 -0.037 -0.055  0.813 0.817 0.887 0.912 0.958 0.959 0.979 0.990 1.014 1.083 1.048 1.119 1.125 1.143  0.042 0.106 0.068 0.014 -0.015 -0.032 -0.022 0.003 -0.008 -0.009 -0.023 -0.017 -0.015 -0.015  0.107 0.029 0.060 -0.020 -0.010 0.011 -0.002 0.064 -0.027 -0.037 -0.001 -0.003 -0.030 -0.032  0.016 0.019 0.008 -0.007 -0.024 0.058 -0.020 0.007 0.008 -0.034 -0.008 0.029 -0.004 -0.017  BLACK SHEEP 59. Often lack skills 58. Problems interacting 56. Often lack education 64. Potentially dangerous 57. Unable to control anger 61. Acts phys aggressive 63. Family blames them 16. Acts verb aggressive 60. Rebels 67. Fam says person is bad 62. Acts out 68. Often getting in trouble 65. Causes trouble 66. Acts defiant / hostile  0.043 0.054 0.073 0.048 0.082 0.008 -0.041 -0.011 -0.040 -0.035 -0.028 -0.028 -0.003 -0.003  -0.008 -0.027 -0.023 -0.007 -0.025 0.027 0.012 0.004 0.016 0.006 -0.004 -0.004 -0.017 -0.017  0.581 0.791 0.825 0.850 0.919 1.011 1.027 1.046 1.068 1.071 1.091 1.091 1.097 1.097  0.197 0.121 -0.015 0.054 0.054 -0.035 -0.026 -0.022 -0.032 -0.031 -0.033 -0.033 -0.033 -0.033  0.125 0.063 0.102 0.024 0.025 -0.030 -0.008 0.007 -0.027 -0.025 -0.030 -0.030 -0.031 -0.031  Stimulus  56  INVISIBLE CHILD 54. 48. 55. 45. 51. 44. 52. 49. 47. 53.  Disassociates Lives in fantasy Non-presence Avoids other people Withdraws into self Keeps to self (loner) Lost in the shuffle Keeps a low profile Withdraws Escapes by hiding  -0.027 0.086 0.030 0.004 0.012 -0.045 -0.000 0.001 -0.015 -0.050  0.002 -0.044 -0.018 -0.004 0.010 0.016 -0.001 -0.006 -0.000 0.015  0.158 -0.017 0.048 -0.011 -0.015 -0.022 -0.039 -0.045 -0.043 -0.042  0.877 0.892 0.912 0.981 1.023 1.059 1.073 1.081 1.085 1.100  -0.067 -0.067 0.013 0.006 -0.011 -0.003 0.006 -0.004 -0.012 -0.013  -0.078 0.006 0.040  0.022 -0.003 -0.013  0.074 -0.034 -0.052  0.009 0.003 -0.020  0.985 0.992 1.079  JESTER 32. Clowning or annoying 34. Tries to be cute 31. Tries to be funny  57  Table 11 Omega Matrix (5 Categories/48 Content Units) Probability of Latent Category Combination  1  2  3  4  1 Caretaker  0.64  2 Super Achiever  0.39  0.73  3 Black Sheep  0.02  0.02  0.82  4 Invisible Child  0.05  0.03  0.07  0.79  5 Jester  0.07  0.03  0.17  0.08  to 48. Seven of the ten off-diagonal entries were lowered, one remained the same, and two increased slightly.  Titles and Descriptions of Latent Categories New titles were developed for the integrated model (see Table 3). As the integrated model is seen to be a meta-model incorporating concepts from five different models it is important that the titles for the roles be ones that will not confuse people with the original models of behavior roles of children of alcoholics. The sorters were asked to provide names for their roles and a brief rationale for how they sorted the descriptors. Traditional roles from existing models were used by 26 subjects or 58%; 15 of those 26 or 58% used Wegscheider's role titles, the other 11 or 42% used role titles from more than one of the existing models. Two new titles, Caretaker and Super Achiever, appeared in 12 sorters' descriptions of their categories. The two new titles were used to replace two titles of the proposed integrated model; Caretaker replaced Family Director and Super Achiever replaced Premier Child.  58  Caretaker. The Caretaker role consists of seven descriptors with loadings ranging from .775 to 1.203 on the Phi matrix. Four items, discounts own needs, believe they do not deserve to have their needs met (#33), smooths over conflicts (#37), always willing to lend an ear and to serve as a mediator in stressful situations (#38), and survival equals giving (#23) are from Black's Placater role. Sometimes acts as family savior (guardian or caretaker) (#19) is from Booz-Allen and Hamilton's Super-Coper, receives praise for taking care of others (#17) is from Wegscheider's Family Hero, and feels responsible for everyone (#5) is from Black's Family Hero.  Super Achiever. Fourteen descriptors make up the Super Achiever role. Their loadings range from .813 to 1.143. Six descriptors, have trouble feeling good (#18), if in university/college does well athletically (#14), does well scholastically (#3), appears to function unusually well (#9), leader among their peers (#15), and provides self-worth for the family by their successes (#12) are from Wegscheider's Family Hero. Deutsch's Hero role contributes six items, convinced that however much they may be accomplishing it is seldom, if ever, enough (#16), appears exemplary (#24), repeated career successes rarely bring satisfaction (#29), appears perfectionistic (#25), tries to stop parents drinking by achieving success (#27), and tries to be a super achiever (#21). Often assumes leadership roles (#2) is from Black's Responsible One and achieves success in work (#23) is from Kritzberg's Hero role.  Black Sheep. The Black Sheep role contains 14 descriptors with loadings ranging from .581 for they often lack learned skills (#59) to 1.097 for cause trouble (troublemaker) (#65) and acts defiant or hostile (#66). The Black Sheep is the only category with contributions from each of the five original models. Black's Acting Out Child contributed four descriptors, they often lack learned skills (#59), they often lack education (#56), difficulty interacting with others in acceptable ways (#58), and they experience inability to control anger (#57). Four items, potentially dangerous (#64), acts physically aggressive (#61), acts  59  verbally aggressive (#16), and rebels (#60) are from Booz-Allen and Hamilton's Fight role. Deutsch's scapegoat role contributed family blames them for most of family problems and mishaps (#63) and family believes the person is bad (#67). Kritzberg's Scapegoat contributed often getting in trouble (#68) and from Wegscheider's Scapegoat came cause trouble (troublemaker) (#65) and acts defiant or hostile (#66).  Invisible Child. The invisible child role contains 10 descriptors from three of the models. The loadings range from .877 for emotionally escapes by disassociating from the family (#54) from Booz-Allen and Hamilton's Flight to 1.100 for escapes by hiding (#53) also from Booz-Allen and Hamilton's Flight. Booz-Allen and Hamilton also contributed emotionally escapes by withdrawing into self (#51). Kritzberg's Lost One contributed draws attention by non-presence (#55). Six descriptors, often builds and lives in a fantasy world (#48), avoids other people (#45), keeps to self (loner) (#44), easily lost in the shuffle (#52), keeps a low profile (#49), and withdraws (always in the background) (#47), from Wegscheider's Lost Child make up the rest of the category.  Jester. The Jester role is the smallest category with just three descriptors. Uses clowning or annoying behavior to attract attention (#32) from Wegscheider's Mascot and a loading of .995, tries to be cute (#34) and tries to be funny (#31) from Kritzberg's Clown.  REVISION O F T H E I N T E G R A T E D M O D E L  The attributes of the hero/responsible roles were considered to be the same role prior to the development and verification of the integrated model. Deutsch with his Hero and Manager roles was the only exception. However, the two attributes from Deutsch's Manager selected by the researcher for inclusion in the integrated model are not found in  60  the final model. The attributes, remains exceptionally responsible (#8) and manages the family's affairs (#10), were designated ambiguous descriptors by the sorters as they had substantial loadings on both Caretaker and Super Achiever. The sorters categorizations agreed with the researcher's integrated model that the hero/responsible attributes constitute two distinct roles. The fact that the Caretaker and Super Achiever were the categories most likely to be confused is an indication that this separation of the attributes into two roles is not yet well developed. A majority of the subjects sorted the items into two categories but there is still a tendency to go with the traditional single category. The Harmonizer role did not show up as a distinct role in the latent partition analysis. Descriptors from Black's Adjuster and Placater and from Kritzberg's Placator made up the Harmonizer role in the proposed integrated model. The descriptors from Black's Adjuster were removed from the final model due to their ambiguity as they had substantial secondary loadings. The three attributes, flexible (#40), adapts to a variety of situations (#41), and takes whatever occurs in stride (#39), were rejected by the sorters as items which were uncharacteristic of adult children of alcoholics. The items formed a coherent category when the number of latent categories was greater than five. However, they were in a category together based on the number of sorters who had rejected them as items. Sorters were instructed to reject items if the items appeared to be similar to more than one role or if it was impossible to decide on a role for the item. In explaining their rationale for rejecting the Adjuster items sorters gave comments such as, "ACOA's not flexible," "not characteristic of my clients," "nobodj' in this family takes things in stride." The four attributes from Black's Placater role, part of the Harmonizer role, are found in the Caretaker role of the verified model. The Placater is seen by Black (1981) as a distinct role; however, the researcher placed both Black's Placater and Adjuster in the same role of the proposed integrated model while the sorters rejected the Adjuster and placed the Placater items in the Caretaker role. Only three of the 45 sorters used Placater as the name of one of their categories.  One of the three sorters put three of the five  61  Placater items in their Placater category; one placed four of the five Placater items, two of the Adjuster items, and two of the Black Sheep items in their Placater category, and the third sorter who designated one category as Placater placed four of the five Adjuster items in the category. The same sorter placed four of the five Placater items into a category designated as "resolves conflict" along with three items from the Caretaker role. Thus even among the three sorters who used the category of Placater there was little agreement as to the similarity of their items. The subjects, sorting bj' similarities, perceived the Placater items, discounts own needs, believe they do not deserve to have their own needs met (#33), smooths over conflicts (#37), always willing to lend an ear and serve as a mediator in stressful situations (#38), and survival equals giving to others (time, energy, empathy) (#36), similar enough to the other Caretaker items that they were included with the Caretaker role. The remaining Harmonizer item, Kritzberg's tries to reduce the .conflict in the family (#46), was eliminated from the final model because of a substantial secondary loading. Only two of the final 48 descriptors changed roles due to the results of the latent partition analysis. Often assumes leadership roles (#2) has shifted from the Caretaker role (Family Director) in the proposed integrated model to the Super Achiever role (Premier Child) in the revised integrated model. And receives praise for taking care of others (#17) has moved from the Super Achiever role to the Caretaker role.  62  Table 12 Revised Integrated Model of Behavior Roles of Children of Alcoholics  Caretaker  Super Achiever  Black/Responsible One (1)  Black/Responsible One (1)  Black/Placater (4)  Deutsch/Hero (6)  Booz-Allen & Hamilton/  Kritzberg/Hero (1)  Super Coper (1)  Wegscheider/Family Hero (6)  Wegscheider/Family Hero (1)  Black Sheep  Invisible Child  Black/Acting Out Child (4)  Booz-Allen & Hamilton/Flight (3)  Booz-Allen & Hamilton/Fight (5)  Kritzberg/Lost One (1)  Deutsch/Scapegoat (2)  Wegscheider/Lost Child (6)  Kritzberg/Scapegoat (1) Wegscheider/Scapegoat  (2)  Jester Kritzberg/Clown (2) Wegscheider/Mascot (1)  Numbers in parentheses represent number of attributes from original model contained in the role of the integrated model.  63  CHAPTER V DISCUSSION  SUMMARY OF RESULTS  Research Questions 1. What are the attributes of each of the roles in the five models of behavior roles of children of alcoholics identified in the literature? The attributes of the five models were explicated from the literature and appear in Appendices A - E . The five models are made up of 20 roles containing a total of 220 attributes. The attributes were evaluated by the researcher according to uniqueness, ability to reference only one role of a model, and ability to reference adult behaviors. This evaluation (see Appendix F) reduced the list to 68 attributes.  2. What are the roles of an integrated model of behavior roles of adult children of alcoholics? A categorization process was used by the researcher to sort the behavior roles according to the similarities of their attributes. The roles of the proposed integrated model consist of Family Director, Premier Child, Invisible Child, Black Sheep, Jester, and Harmonizer.  3. Can clinicians working with adult children of alcoholics verify the integrated model? The 68 descriptors of the integrated model were presented to a population of 116 clinicians in Canada and the United States. Responses were obtained from 50 members; of  64  this number, 45 were sorted according to the instructions of the categorization methodology. The 45 clinicians who were the subjects of the study used a free sort procedure (Fsort) to categorize the 68 attributes from the integrated model. Latent partition analysis was used to analyze the 45 sets of descriptors and produced a model consisting of five categories as representing the best solution of the data. The categories correspond to five of the six roles of the integrated model of behavior roles of children of alcoholics. The integrated model was structurally revised in accord with the data from the latent partition analysis. One role, Harmonizer, was removed and titles of two of the five roles were changed. The integrated model as verified by the clinicians consists of five roles, Caretaker, Super Achiever, Invisible Child, Black Sheep, and Jester. The five category model was further analyzed in an attempt to obtain items which would substantially load on only one category. The further analysis produced a model consisting of 48 content units with only substantial primary loadings.  4. Can the authors of the five models verify the integrated model? The authors of the five models of behavior roles of children of alcoholics identified in the literature did not complete the sorting task. Only two of the authors, C. Black (personal communication, August 15, 1988) and S. Wegscheider (personal communication, August 23, 1988) responded to the request to be a part of the study. They both expressed their interest in the study and asked to be informed of the results. However, they also indicated they were too busy to take time to complete the sorting task.  First Steps of Test Construction The researcher has identified research as the primary purpose of constructing a measurement instrument of the behavior roles. A measurement instrument would be a contribution to the research efforts of a relatively new field and would enable further  65  empirical verification of the behavior roles. Potential clinical applications, a secondary purpose of constructing a measurement instrument, could lead to new and more effective programs of intervention and prevention with both children and adults who have experienced living with an alcoholic parent. The behavior roles identified in the integrated model and subsequently revised after the analysis of the verification process denote the domain of the behavior roles of adult children of alcoholics. The five category integrated model, consisting of 48 descriptors, represents the initial stage of preparing a set of test specifications for constructing an instrument for the integrated model. To complete the initial phase of Crocker and Algina's (1986) test construction outline new items need to be developed for the Caretaker and Jester roles in order that each role contain a full complement of between eight and 10 attributes. Such item development was beyond the scope of the present study.  LIMITATIONS O F T H E STUDY  Four of the five models of behavior roles identified in the literature were developed in the context of their authors' clinical experience.  The subjects in this study, clinicians  working with adults who had grown up in an alcoholic family, were asked to reflect on their clinical experience in completing the sorting task. Thus the integrated model was verified in a similar environmental context to the one used in the development of the original models. However, a limitation of the present study lies in the inability to equate the clinical experiences and personal expertise of the authors and the subjects. The failure to have any of the authors of the original models complete the sorting task constitutes a weakness the design of the study tried to control. Another limitation of the study lies with the self selection of the subjects. The subjects were volunteers from a larger population of clinicians working with adults from  66  alcoholic families. While four groups were identified as pools of potential subjects the claim cannot be made that the subjects in this study are representative of the population of the clinicians working with adult children of alcoholics. It would be interesting to know how the subjects self-selected to participate in this study. A n important question which this study is unable to answer is how do the subjects who participated in this study differ from those who decided not to participate? The generalizability of the behavior roles is restricted to those adults from alcoholic families who are seen in therapy. The results cannot be attributed with any certainty to those adults who are in a position where they seem to be managing life and are not in need of the specialized help provided by counselling or therapy. Are these behaviors then truly reflective of the range of behaviors adults exhibit as a result of organizing their childhood and adolescent years around family alcoholism? Perhaps there exits functional alcoholic families who do not organize around alcohol; what might their behaviors look like? There remains some controversy as to whether or not someone can emerge from an alcoholic family unscathed (Ackerman, 1987b; Black, 1981, Black et al., 1986; Brown, 1988; Cermak & Brown, 1982). Brown (1988) is convinced it is a matter of time or of breaking the defence of denial, Adult children of alcoholics still bound by denial may be experiencing a wide range of recognized problems or they may be unaware of any difficulties at all. The latter are not likely to break denial or seek treatment until they do experience problems. Both groups, however, are bound by the central organizing principle of alcohol and the need for denial. They will be guided by patterns of behavior and relationship established and modeled in their first families, (p. 219)  67  CONCLUSIONS  The primary purpose of this study was to develop an integrated model of the behavior roles of children of alcoholics which could be verified by clinicians working with adults who had grown up in an alcoholic family. Latent Partition Analysis has substantiated the existence of an integrated model consisting of five behavior roles and 48 attributes. The results provide initial empirical verification of the integrated model and the validity of the behavior roles. Three of the behavior roles from the integrated model, Invisible Child, Black Sheep, and Jester, are very similar to roles found in the early models proposed by Black (1981), Booz-Allen and Hamilton (1974), Deutsch (1983), Kritzberg (1985), and Wegscheider (1981). Two roles, Caretaker and Super Achiever, appear for the first time in the integrated model and the verification of their presence by the sorters represents a significant contribution of the integrated model. Caretaker. The responsible role often taking care of siblings and sometimes even the parents. Caretakers do not like conflict and will discount their own needs for the sake of helping the familj\ They feel responsible and giving to others is their way of coping. Super achiever. A n exemplary child characterized by over-achievement.  The  successes of the super achiever provide self worth for the family. They hope their successes will stop the parent's drinking; when the drinking does not stop thej' feel they haven't done enough. They are found in leadership roles and are usually successful in whatever they attempt. Invisible child. They cope by avoiding the alcoholic and often the family. A n invisible child keeps a low profile, withdraws, and sometimes creates and lives in a fantasy world. Black sheep. The rebel acts out and is often getting in trouble as a means of distracting the family from the problems caused by alcohol. They experience problems  68  interacting with people in acceptable ways as they are often verbally and physically aggressive. They are frequently blamed for the family's problems. As a result of their hostile or defiant behavior they tend to lack education and learned skills. Jester. The family clown or mascot who uses humor or annoying behavior to ease tensions in the family. The study provides clarification of the similarities and differences of the models of behavior roles identified in the literature. Rather than adding to the confusion by contributing yet another new conceptual level model, the present study provides a metamodel by synthesizing the roles and descriptors already developed in those earlier models and integrating them into an empirically derived model. C. Black (personal communication, June 11, 1988) emphasized how important it is for researchers to go beyond what she and the others have been able to do at the model development level. The present study goes beyond the conceptual and developmental level of the earlier models by providing empirical verification of an integrated model. A n important contribution as no reports of previous empirical studies involving the models of behavior roles were found in the literature.  FUTURE RESEARCH  Future research of children of alcoholics needs to include adults who are not in therapy or support groups. Both social role theory and family systems theory, reviewed earlier, point to the interactional and interpersonal dynamics as contributing to the formation and maintenance of the various behavior roles. A research method which could capture those dynamics would be valuable in contributing to our understanding of how people organize their lives around alcohol.  69  In summary, the results of the present study represent a good first effort in the process of empirically validating the existence of behavior roles among children of alcoholics. The items from the integrated model can now serve as prototypes for the development of the full complement of attributes needed for the construction of a measurement instrument. The instrument construction, the subject of a succeeding study, would contribute further to the empirical verification and the understanding of the behavior roles of children of alcoholics. A n instrument would be able to distinguish differences among children of alcoholics by providing an unique profile of an individual's behavior role(s). The theory underpinning the formation of the behavior roles by individuals and families has yet to be firmly established, These classifications according to role remain extremely useful in providing a general description and thus a framework for beginning exploration of one's childhood adaptations to parental alcoholism. However, many A C O A ' s have been disappointed that these classifications do not also provide the prescription for change. These frameworks do not provide a dynamic theory of development that will enable clinicians to determine individual differences and tailor long-term psychodynamic treatment accordingly. (Brown, 1988, p. 20) Theory needs to be integrated from individual, family (systems), and social role perspectives to explain the formation of the behavior roles in children as they try to cope with the stresses and tensions of living in an alcoholic family. Brown (1988) provides an example by integrating cognitive, social learning, attachment, and system theories into a developmental framework as a means of understanding the individual differences among children of alcoholics. Brown's (1988) model includes the family or environmental system and the individual development which takes place in that system and the interaction between the two,  70 Attachment - early and ongoing - is based on denial of perception which results in denial of affect which together result in developmental arrests or difficulties. The core beliefs and patterns of behavior formed to sustain attachment and denial within the family then structure subsequent development of the self including cognitive, affective, and social development, (p. 5) The research efforts in the field of children of alcoholics has so far focused on their similarities (Brown, 1988). Descriptions of roles, common personalty characteristics, common problems, shared experiences have helped establish an identity for this relatively new population. The search now is to begin to discover the significant differences among children of alcoholics and to examine the factors which distinguish one from another. The challenge is to develop research and treatment approaches which appreciate the unique differences of each individual and each family and can then contribute to understanding and ultimately to intervention and prevention programs for the more than 28 million sons and daughters of alcoholics in North America.  71  REFERENCES  Ackerman, R. J . (Ed.). (1986). Growing in the shadow: Children of alcoholics. Pompano Beach, F L : Health Communications, Inc. Ackerman, R. J . (1987a). A new perspective on adult children of alcoholics. E A P Digest, January/February, 25-29. Ackerman, R. J . (1987b). Same house different home: Why adult children of alcoholics are not all the same. Pampano Beach, F l : Health Communications, Inc. Bailey, M . B. (1961). Alcoholism and marriage: a review of research and professional literature. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 22(1), 81-97. Barnes, J . L . , Benson, C. S., & Wilsnack, S. C. (1979). Psychological characteristics of women with alcoholic fathers. Currents in Alcoholism, 6, 209-222. Black, C. (1981) It will never happen to me. Denver: M . A . C. Black, C. (1986). Children of alcoholics. In R. J . Ackerman (Ed.), Growing in the shadow: Children of alcoholics (pp. 105-111). Pompano Beach, F L : Health Communications, Inc. Black, C , Bucky, S.F., & Wilder-Padilla, S. (1986). The interpersonal and emotional consequences of being an adult child of an alcoholic. The International Journal of the Addictions, 21(2), 213-231. Booz-Allen, & Hamilton. (1974). A n assessment of the needs and resources for children of alcoholic parents. (Report No. 75/13). Washington, D. C : National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Brenner, A . (1984). Helping children cope with stress. Lexington, M A : Lexington Books. Brown, S. (1985). Treating the alcoholic: A developmental model of recovery. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Brown, S. (1987, August). Theory and practice: Integrating systems and developmental theories plus elements of assessments. Paper presented at Adult Children of Alcoholics Conference, Seattle, W A . Brown, S. (1988). Treating adult children of alcoholics: A developmental perspective. New York: John Wile}' & Sons. Brown, S. & Beletis, S. (1986). The development of family transference in groups for the adult children of alcoholics. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 36(1), 97-114. Cadogan, D. A . (1973). Marital group therapy in the treatment of alcoholism. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcoholism, 34(4), 1187-1194. Callan, V . J . & Jackson, D. (1986). Children of alcoholic fathers and recovered alcoholic fathers: Personal and family functioning. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 47(2), 180-182.  72  Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1(2), 245-276. Cermak, T. L . (1988). A time to heal: The road to recovery for adult children of alcoholics. Los Angeles: Jeremy P. Tarcher, Inc. Cermak, T. L . & Brown, S. (1982). Interactional group therapy with the adult children of alcoholics. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 32(3), 375-389. Chafetz, M . E . , Blanc, H . T . , & Hill, M . J . (1971). Children of alcoholics: Observations in a child guidance clinic. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 32, 687-698. Clair, D. & Genest, M . (1987). Variables associated with the adjustment of offspring of alcoholic fathers. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 48(4), 345-355. Clinebell, N . J . (1968). Pastoral counselling of the alcoholic and his family. In R. Catanzaro (Ed.), Alcoholism: The total treatment approach (pp. 189-207). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher. Cloninger, R., Bohman, M . , & Sigvardson, S. (1981). Inheritance of alcohol abuse: Crossfostering analysis of adopted men. Archives of General Psychiatry, 38(10), 861868. Corder, B. F . , Corder, R. F . , & Laidlow, N . D. (1972). A n intensive treatment program for alcoholics and their wives. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 33(4), 1144-1146. Cork, R. M . (1969). The forgotten children: A study of children with alcoholic parents. Toronto: Addiction Research Foundation. Cotton, N . S. (1979). The familial incidence of alcoholism: A review. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 40(1), 89-116. Crocker, L . & Algina, J . (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Cutter, C. G . & Cutter, H . S. G . (1987). Experience and change in al-anon family groups: Adult children of alcoholics. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 48(1), 29-32. Davis, D . I., Berenson, D . , Steinglass, P., & Davis, S. (1974). The adaptive consequences of drinking. Psychiatry, 37, 209-215. Deutsch, C . (1983). Children of alcoholics: Understanding and helping. Hollywood, F L : Health Communications, Inc. Edwards, P., Harvey, C , & Whitehead, P. C. (1973). Wives of alcoholics: a critical review and analysis. Quarterly Journal of Studies of Alcohol, 34(1), 112-132. Eisler, I., Dare, C , & Szmukler, G . I. (1988). What's happened to family interaction research? A n historical account and a family systems viewpoint. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 14(1), 45-65. El-Guebaly, N . (1983). The offspring of alcoholics: Outcome predictors. In M . Frank (Ed.), Children of Exceptional Parents (pp. 3-11). New York: Haworth Press.  73  El-Guebaly, N . & Offord, D. R. (1977). The offspring of alcoholics: A critical review. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 134(4), 357-365. El-Guebaly, N . & Offord, D. R. (1979). On being the offspring of an alcoholic: A n update. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 3(2), 148-157. Elkin, M . (1984). Families under the influence: Changing alcoholic patterns. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Ewing, J . A . , Long, V . , & Wenzel, G . G . (1961). Concurrent group psychotherapy of alcoholic patients and their wives. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 11, 329-338. Filstead, W. J . , Anderson, C , & McElfresh, O. (1980). A n examination of male and female alcoholics' perceptions of their present and ideal family environments. Currents in Alcoholism, 6, 435-445. Gabrielli, W. F . & Mednick, S. A . (1983). Intellectual performance in children of alcoholics. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 171(7), 444-447. Glass, G. V . & Hopkins, K . D . (1984). Statistical methods in education and psychology (2nd edition). Englewood Cliffs, N J : Prentice-Hall, Inc. Gliedman, L . H . (1957). Concurrent and combined group treatment of chronic alcoholics and their wives. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy. 7, 414-424. Gliedman, L . H . , Rosenthal, D., Frank, J . D . , & Nash, H . T. (1956). Group therapy of alcoholics with concurrent group meetings of their wives. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 17(4), 655-670. Goodwin, D. W. (1985). Alcoholism and genetics: The sins of the fathers. Archives of General Psychiatry, 42(2), 171-174. Goodwin, D. W . , Schlusinger, F . , Moller, N . , Hermansen, L . , Winokur, G . , & Guze, S. B. (1974). Drinking problems in adopted and nonadopted sons of alcoholics. Archives of General Psychiatry, 31(8), 164-169. Gravitz, H . L . & Bowden, J . D. (1987). Recovery: A guide for adult children of alcoholics. New York: Simon & Shuster, Inc. Greater Vancouver Adult Children of Alcoholics. (1987). Adult children of alcoholics: A C O A . Surrey, BC: A B C Pressworks. Greenberg, L . S., James, P. S., & Conry, R. F . (1988). Perceived change processes in emotionally focused couples therapy. Journal of Family Psychology, 2(1), 5-23. Haberman, P. W. (1966). Childhood symptoms in children of alcoholics and comparison group parents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 28, 152-154. Hartman, A . & Laird, J . (1983). Family-centered social work practice. New York: The Free Press. Hecht, M . (1973). Children of alcoholics are children at risk. American Journal of Nursing, 73(10), 1764-1767.  74  Jacob, T. & Leonard, K . (1986). Psychosocial functioning in children of alcoholic fathers, depressed fathers, and control fathers. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 47(5), 373380. Jacob, T. & Seilhamer, R. A . (1987). Alcoholism and family interaction. In T. Jacob (Ed.), Family interaction and pathology: Theories, methods, and findings (pp. 535580). New York: Plenum Press. Jackson, J . K . (1954). The adjustment of the family to the crises of alcoholism. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 15(4), 562-586. Jackson, J . K . & Kogan, K . L . (1963). The search for solutions: help-seeking patterns of families of active and inactive alcoholics. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 24(3), 449-472. James, P. S. (1985). Perceived change processes in an affective systemic couples therapy. Unpublished master's thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. Kammeier, M . L . (1971). Adolescents from families with and without alcohol problems. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 32, 364-372. Kaufman, E . (1984). Family system variables in alcoholism. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 8(1), 4-8. Kaufman, E . & Pattison, E . M . (1981). Differential methods of family therapy in the treatment of alcoholism. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 42, 951-971. Keltner, N . L . , Mclntyre, C. W., & Gee, R. (1986). Birth order effects in secondgeneration alcoholics. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 47(6), 495-497. Kogan, K . L . & Jackson, J . K . (1965). Stress, personality, and emotional disturbance in wives of alcoholics. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 26(3), 486-495. Kritzberg, W. (1985). The adult children of alcoholics syndrome: From discovery to recovery. Pompano Beach, F L : Health Communications, Inc. Kuijt, J . D. (1978). Transactional analysis ego states: Subdivisions and definitions determined by latent partition analysis. Unpublished master's thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. Lawson, G . , Peterson J . S., & Lawson, A . (1983). Alcoholism and the family: A guide to treatment and prevention. Rockville, M D : Aspen Systems Corporation. Macdonald, D. E . (1958). Group psychotherapy with wives of alcoholics. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol. 19(1), 125-132. Meeks, D. E . & Kelley, C. (1970). Family therapy with the families of recovering alcoholics. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, ^1(3), 399-413. Moos, R. H . & Billings, A . G. (1982). Children of alcoholics during the recovery process: Alcoholic and matched control families. Addictive Behaviors, 7, 155-163. Moos, R. H . , Bromet, E . , Tsu, V . , & Moos, B. (1979). Family characteristics and the outcome of treatment for alcoholism. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 40(1), 78-88.  75  Morehouse , E . R. & Richards, T . (1983). A n examination of dysfunctional latency age children of alcoholic parents and problems in intervention. In M . Frank (Ed.), Children of Exceptional Parents (pp. 21-33). New York: Haworth Press. Nardi, P. M . (1981). Children of alcoholics: A role-theoretical perspective. The Journal of Social Psychology, 115, 237-245. Newall, N . (1950). Alcoholism and the father-image. Alcohol, 11(1), 92-96.  Quarterly Journal of Studies on  Orford, J . (1975). Alcoholism and marriage: the argument against specialism. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 36(4), 1537-1563. Pixley, J . M . & Steifel, J . R. (1963). Group therapy designed to meet the needs of the alcoholic's wife. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 24(3), 304-314. Robins, L . N . , West, P. A . , Ratcliff, K . S., & Herjanic, B. M . (1978). Father's alcoholism and children's outcomes. Currents in Alcoholism, 6, 313-327. Sands, P. M . & Hanson, P. G . (1971). Psychotherapeutic groups for alcoholics and relatives in an outpatient setting. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy,21, 23-33. Seixas, J . S. & Youcha, G . (1985). Children of alcoholism: A survivor's manual. New York: Harper and Row. Steinglass, P. (1976). Experimenting with family treatment approaches to alcoholism, 1950-1975: A review. Family Process, 15, 97-123. Steinglass, P. (1980). A life history model of the alcoholic family. Family Process, 19(3), 211-226. Steinglass, P., Bennet, L . A . , Wolin, S. J . , & Reiss, D. (1987). The alcoholic family. New York: Basic Books. Tarter, R. E . , Hegedus, A . M . , Goldstein, G . , Shelly, C , & Alterman, A . I. (1984). Adolescent sons of alcoholics: Neuropsychological and personality characteristics. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 8(2), 216-222. Thornton, R. & Nardi, P. M . (1975). The dynamics of role acquisition. American Journal of Sociology, 80(4), 870-885. Valiant, G . E . (1983). The natural history of alcoholism. Cambridge, M A : Harvard University Press. Wegscheider, S. (1981). Another chance: Hope and health for the alcoholic family. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books, Inc. Werner, E . E . (1986). Resilient offspring of alcoholics: A longitudinal study from birth to age 18. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 47(1), 34-40. Winokur, G . & Clayton, P. J . (1968). Comparison of male and female alcoholics. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 29(4), 885-891.  Woititz, J . G . (1983). Adult children of alcoholics. Communications, Inc.  Hollywood, F L : Health  APPENDIX A: ATTRIBUTES OF BLACK'S BEHAVIOR ROLES  78  Black's Responsible One  Oldest or only child Takes charge Often assumes leadership roles Feel responsible for everyone Learned early to set realistic goals and as young adult has realized a number of accomplishments (sooner than most) So busy being young adults, there was not time left to be children Don't know how to relax Take life seriously, difficulty having fun Rigid, inflexible Confidence in ability to achieve a great deal Black/white approach No sense of equal relationships Will align themselves with people who allow them to continue to be rigid, serious, and unfeeling, or, They separate themselves from others completely and continue to pursue very isolated lifestyles They provide structure for the family They become angry at themselves if they cannot control Their self-reliance leads to loneliness They often marry alcoholics Often excels in school Learns to manipulate others to get done what is necessary  79 Black's Placater  Warm, sensitive, caring, listening Busy taking care of everyone else's emotional needs Grows up taking care of others (personally and occupationally) Discount own needs, believe they do not deserve to have their own needs met Survival equals giving to others (time, energy, empathy) Smooths over conflicts Always willing to lend an ear and to serve as a mediator in stressful situations Very sociable As adults often experience depression As adults feel lonely, apart As adults often in relationships with takers and those who refuse to take responsibility for themselves As adults spouse and children placated while personal feelings are pushed into the background As adults when their family grows up and children leave home, or if the marriage fails, alcohol may be chosen to fill the void  Black's Acting Out Child  Difficulty feeling good about themselves Difficulty expressing their own needs or having their needs met Difficulty interacting with others in acceptable ways Usually gravitate toward others with similar personality traits Socially isolated Sometimes institutionalized Begin using/abusing alcohol/drugs at early age Anger As adults often lack education As adults often lack learned skills As adults experience inability to control anger As adults often have illegitimate children or youthful marriages  81  Black's Adjuster  Flexible Spontaneous Adjust, able to adapt to a variety of situations Follows directions well Avoid positions where they need to take control Take whatever occurs in stride Perceive selves as having no alternatives Never learned that choices were available to them Depressed Isolated Lonely Fears rocking the boat Will do whatever is necessary to maintain order Learn to subjugate their needs to those of their parents As adults they often do not have a sense of direction As adults they often do not have a sense of taking responsibility for the direction they would like their lives to take As adults they often experience relationship problems as they have difficulty developing trust  82 APPENDIX B: ATTRIBUTES OF BOOZ-ALLEN AND HAMILTON'S BEHAVIOR ROLES  Booz-Allen and Hamilton's Super Coper  Mirror image of goodness Active Does everything right; usually for other people, not necessarily for self Sometimes family saviour (oldest child may become family's guardian and caretaker Has friends who won't believe them when they say they can't handle something May be used in combination with flight Often parentified children Feel responsible for the other family members  84 Booz-Allen and Hamilton's Perfect Child  Mirror image of goodness Never does anything wrong (just doesn't do anything) Never gives anyone any trouble Minds parents Rarely aggressive or defiant Good to excellent in school Fades into the woodwork to be brought out on ceremonial occasions (to be shown off as examples to others) May be used in combination with flight  Booz-Allen and Hamilton's Fight  Involves rebellion Physical and verbal aggression Defensiveness Acting out Socially unacceptable behaviour Sometimes end up in court or are placed out of the family Exclusively used by few children Usually used in combination with other methods of escape Potentially danger*  86  Booz-Allen and Hamilton's Flight  Most common Child avoids alcoholic by not being at home Child escapes by hiding Child escapes by running away Child escapes by being heavily involved in other activities (school/clubs/church/friends) Child escapes by going to college/marriage/employment Emotional escape by withdrawing into self Emotional escape by disassociating from the familyMay find comfort in religion May deaden their emotions; become cold and hard High academic achievement  APPENDIX C: ATTRIBUTES OF DEUTSCH'S BEHAVIOR ROLES  88 Deutsch's Hero  Super-achiever Always striving to please Appears exemplary Perfectionistic Unable to relax Convinced that however much they may be accomplishing it is seldom, if ever, enough Repeated career successes rarely bring satisfaction Achievement is look at as a means of stopping the parent's drinking As adults do not sense their own entitlement As adults do not sense the license to feel and show anger  89 Deutsch's Manager  Skip their childhood Cut off their emotions Manage their family's affairs As adults they remain exceptionally responsible As adults appear aloof and rather jojdess As adults always need to be in control As adults often unaware of the source of their depression They are most likety to create situations in which thej' can continue to play the role (usually by marrying an alcoholic)  90 Deutsch's Scapegoat  "Born to lose" attitude Retaliate Seek both attention and revenge through adventures with the dangerous and destructive Family believes the child is bad Child blamed for family's problems  APPENDIX D: ATTRIBUTES OF KRITZBERG'S BEHAVIOR ROLES  Kritzberg's Hero  Motivated to have the family look good Achieves success in school or work  Kritzberg's Scapegoat  Often getting into trouble  Kritzberg's Lost One  Hides out Tries not to make waves Draws attention by non-presence  Kritzberg's Clown  Funny Tries to be cute  Kritzberg's Placator  Tries to reduce conflict in the family Smooths things over  APPENDIX E: ATTRIBUTES OF WEGSCHEIDER'S BEHAVIOR ROLES  94  Wegscheider's Family Hero  Oldest child Most likely to pursue natural abilities energetically Ever in danger of overextending self Physically: prone to stomach ulcers, migraines, heart attacks/strokes Type A workaholics Characteristic feelings: inadequacy and guilt; nothing the)' ever do is good enough to make things right with the family Anger (buried where it further feeds their guilt) Popular and admired yet lonely So intent on achieving; not enough time for relationships Overriding compulsion to pursue a goal that is forever out of reach Goodness has a compulsive quality; they have to be good Does everything right Appears to function unusually well As adults enter caretaking professions As adults Find it particularly hard to set and maintain suitable limits for their children Their successes provide self-worth for the family The child on whom the family counts to take over when others flounder Successful both at home and at school Does well scholastically and often athletically Receives praise for taking care of others Helps the teacher at school Leader among their peers As adults they do well no matter what career choice and often rise rapidly  95  As adults have trouble feeling good about themselves no matter how successful they become 111 at ease, even frightened, when not in control Their children who emulate them and fail are prone to alcoholism  Wegscheider's Scapegoat  Determined by position outside of family Often the second child Reliance on peers Acting out, nearly always involved in some kind of unsanctioned behavior Troublemaker or misfit Rationalization Irresponsibility Giving up easily Defiance, hostility Withdrawal Sulleness Involved with sexual activity at a young age hoping to find love and intimacy Child most likely to kill self (either accidently or on purpose) Appears to be consumed by anger Characteristic feeling is hurt Abuses alcohol and drugs Grow up to be a new generation of dependents Blamed for all family mishaps Feel abandoned May begin early in life to run around with gangs As a teenager may run against the law  97 Wegscheider's Mascot  Usually a latecomer; often the youngest child Characteristic emotion is fear Clowning or annoying behavior to attract attention; serves to bring relief to the family (distraction and avoidance) Security comes from being in control (even if only for a short time) Physically: wiry; tense, tight muscles; tend to be smaller than siblings; stress related physical illnesses; hyperkinetic Emotionally: feel inadequate, unimportant, guilty, lonely (may be more intense because child is younger) Lonely even when center of attention Manipulator Limit their choices May escape into "delusions" Psychiatric illnesses and suicide are ways they use to get out of it all Immaturity Apparent fragility Overdressing Super-sexiness Other bids to attract attention Eventually may use tranquilizers to calm down  98  Wegscheider's Lost Child  Loneliness is the characteristic feeling Loner Withdraw (always in the background) Isolated "Forgotten child" Blame selves for not fitting into the family Often build and live in a fantasy world Little experience in either expressing their own feelings or handling the expressions of others Relationship difficulties (few friends) Avoids trouble (offers relief b}' not being a problem) Physical symptoms: allergy and asthma, accidents, eating, bed wetters Sadness Confusion Fear Feel they have no choice High value on possessions and pleasures Low profile Independence Problems with sexual identity Overindulgence "Quiet One" The "Angel" Feels hopeless and unimportant Easily lost in the shuffle  •  Personality isflatand joyless Never speaks up; has no opinions  100  APPENDIX F: EVALUATION OF ATTRIBUTES FOR INCLUSION IN THE INTEGRATED MODEL  101  Evaluation Key: #=attribute kept for integrated model RW = attribute edited or rewritten M = attribute references more than one role D = attribute is a duplicate C = attribute references a child behavior  ATTRIBUTE  EVALUATION Black's Responsible One  Oldest or only child Takes charge Often assumes leadership roles Feel responsible for everyone Learned early to set realistic goals and as young adult has realized a number of accomplishments (sooner than most) So busy being young adults, there was not time left to be children Don't know how to relax Take life seriously, difficulty having fun Rigid, inflexible Confidence in ability to achieve a great deal Black/white approach No sense of equal relationships Will align themselves with people who allow them to continue to be rigid, serious, and unfeeling, or, They separate themselves from others completely and continue to pursue very isolated lifestyles They provide structure for the family They become angry at themselves if they cannot control Their self-reliance leads to loneliness They often marry alcoholics Often excels in school Learns to manipulate others to get done what is necessary  #1 #4 #2 #5 RW  M C M #6 M M M M M M #7 RW M M M C D  Black's Placater Warm, sensitive, caring, listening Busy taking care of everyone else's emotional needs Grows up taking care of others (personally and occupationally) Discount own needs, believe they do not deserve to have their own needs met Survival equals giving to others (time, energy, empathy) Smooths over conflicts Always willing to lend an ear and to serve as a mediator in stressful situations Very sociable As adults often experience depression  M M M #33 RW #36 #37 #38 M M  102  As adults feel lonely, apart As adults often in relationships with takers and those who refuse to take responsibility for themselves As adults spouse and children placated while personal feelings are pushed into the background As adults when their family grows up and children leave home, or if the marriage fails, alcohol may be chosen to fill the void  M M M  M  Black's Acting Out Child Difficulty feeling good about themselves Difficulty expressing their own needs or having their needs met Difficulty interacting with others in acceptable ways Usually gravitate toward others with similar personality traits Socially isolated Sometimes institutionalized Begin using/abusing alcohol/drugs at early age Anger As adults often lack education As adults often lack learned skills As adults experience inability to control anger As adults often have illegitimate children or youthful marriages  M M #58 M M M M D #56 RW #59 RW #57 RW M  Black's Adjuster Flexible Spontaneous Adjust, able to adapt to a variety of situations Follows directions well Avoid positions where they need to take control Take whatever occurs in stride Perceive selves as having no alternatives Never learned that choices were available to them Depressed Isolated Lonely Fears rocking the boat Will do whatever is necessary to maintain order Learn to subjugate their needs to those of their parents As adults they often do not have a sense of direction As adults they often do not have a sense of taking responsibility for the direction they would like their lives to take As adults they often experience relationship problems as they have difficulty developing trust  #40 M #41 RW M M #39 RW M M M M M #42 #43 RW M M  M M  103  Booz-Allen and Hamilton's Super Coper Mirror image of goodness Active Does everything right; usually for other people, not necessarily for self Sometimes family saviour (oldest child may become family's guardian and caretaker Has friends who won't believe them when they say they can't handle something May be used in combination with flight Often parentified children Feel responsible for the other family members  D M D #19 RW M M C D  Booz-Allen and Hamilton's Perfect Child Mirror image of goodness Never does anything wrong (just doesn't do anything) Never gives anyone any trouble Minds parents Rarely aggressive or defiant Good to excellent in school Fades into the woodwork to be brought out on ceremonial occasions (to be shown off as examples to others) May be used in combination with flight  #30 RW M M M M D M M  Booz-Allen and Hamilton's Fight Involves rebellion Physical and verbal aggression Defensiveness Acting out Socially unacceptable behaviour Sometimes end up in court or are placed out of the family Exclusively used by few children Usually used in combination with other methods of escape Potentially dangerous  #60 RW #61/16 RW M D #62 RW M M M #64  Booz-Allen and Hamilton's Flight Most common Child avoids alcoholic by not being at home Child escapes by hiding Child escapes by running away Child escapes by being heavily involved in other activities (school/clubs/church/friends) Child escapes by going to college/marriage/employment Emotional escape by withdrawing into self Emotional escape by disassociating from the family May find comfort in religion May deaden their emotions; become cold and hard High academic achievement  M #50 RW #53 RW M M M #51 #54 M M D  104  Deutsch's Hero Super-achiever Always striving to please Appears exemplary Perfectionistic Unable to relax Convinced that however much the)' may be accomplishing it is seldom, if ever, enough Repeated career successes rarely bring satisfaction Achievement is look at as a means of stopping the parent's drinking As adults do not sense their own entitlement As adults do not sense the license to feel and show anger  #21 RW M #24 #25 RW #28 #26 #29 #27 M M  Deutsch's Manager Skip their childhood Cut off their emotions Manage their family's affairs As adults they remain exceptionally responsible As adults appear aloof and rather joyless As adults always need to be in control As adults often unaware of the source of their depression They are most likely to create situations in which thej' can continue to play the role (usually by marrying an alcoholic)  M M #10 RW #8 RW D M M  M  Deutsch's Scapegoat "Born to lose" attitude Retaliate Seek both attention and revenge through adventures with the dangerous and destructive Family believes the child is bad Child blamed for family's problems  M M D #67 RW #63 R W  Kritzberg's Hero Motivated to have the family look good Achieves success in school or work  #20 #23 RW  Kritzberg's Scapegoat Often getting into trouble  #68 Kritzberg's Lost One  Hides out Tries not to make waves Draws attention by non-presence  D M #55  105  Kritzberg's Clown Funny Tries to be cute  #31 RW #34 Kritzberg's Placator  Tries to reduce conflict in the family Smooths things over  #46 D  Wegscheider's Family Hero Oldest child Most likely to pursue natural abilities energetically Ever in danger of overextending self Physically: prone to stomach ulcers, migraines, heart attacks/strokes Type A workaholics Characteristic feelings: inadequacy and guilt; nothing they ever do is good enough to make things right with the family Anger (buried where it further feeds their guilt) Popular and admired yet lonely So intent on achieving; not enough time for relationships Overriding compulsion to pursue a goal that is forever out of reach Goodness has a compulsive quality; they have to be good Does everything right Appears to function unusually well As adults enter caretaking professions As adults find it particularly hard to set and maintain suitable limits for their children Their successes provide self-worth for the family The child on whom the family counts to take over when others flounder Successful both at home and at school Does well scholastically and often athletically ,. / Receives praise for taking care of others Helps the teacher at school Leader among their peers As adults they do well no matter what career choice and often rise rapidly As adults have trouble feeling good about themselves no matter how successful they become 111 at ease, even frightened, when not in control Their children who emulate them and fail are prone to alcoholism  D M M M M  M M M M M #11 RW D #9 M M #12 RW #13 RW C #3/14 RW #17 C #15 M #18 RW M M  106  Wegscheider's Scapegoat Determined by position outside of family Often the second child Reliance on peers Acting out, nearly always involved in some kind of unsanctioned behavior Troublemaker or misfit Rationalization Irresponsibility Giving up easily Defiance, hostility Withdrawal Sulleness Involved with sexual activity at a young age hoping to find love and intimacy Child most likely to kill self (either accidently or on purpose) Appears to be consumed b3' anger Characteristic feeling is hurt Abuses alcohol and drugs Grow up to be a new generation of dependents Blamed for all family mishaps Feel abandoned May begin early in life to run around with gangs As a teenager may run against the law  M M M D #65/22 RW M M M #66 R W D M M M M M M M D D M D  Wegscheider's Mascot Usually a latecomer; often the youngest child Characteristic emotion is fear Clowning or annoying behavior to attract attention; serves to bring relief to the family (distraction and avoidance) Security comes from being in control (even if only for a short time) Physically: wiry; tense, tight muscles; tend to be smaller than siblings; stress related physical illnesses; hyperkinetic Emotionally: feel inadequate, unimportant, guilty, lonely (may be more intense because child is younger) Lonely even when center of attention Manipulator Limit their choices May escape into "delusions" Psychiatric illnesses and suicide are ways they use to get out of it all Immaturity Apparent fragility Overdressing Super-sexiness Other bids to attract attention Eventually may use tranquilizers to calm down  M M  #32 R W M  M M M #35 R W M D M M M M M M M  107  Wegscheider's Lost Child Loneliness is the characteristic feeling Loner Withdraw (always in the background) Isolated "Forgotten child" Blame selves for not fitting into the family Often build and live in a fantasy world Little experience in either expressing their own feelings or handling the expressions of others Relationship difficulties (few friends) Avoids trouble (offers relief by not being a problem) Physical symptoms: allergy and asthma, accidents, eating, bed wetters Sadness Confusion Fear Feel they have no choice High value on possessions and pleasures Low profile Independence Problems with sexual identit}' Overindulgence "Quiet One" The "Angel" Feels hopeless and unimportant Easily lost in the shuffle Personality is flat and joyless Never speaks up; has no opinions  D #44 #47 RW #45 RW D M #48 RW M M D M M M M M M #49 RW M M M M M M #52 M M  108 APPENDIX G: CLUSTER OF ATTRIBUTES (68) OF INTEGRATED MODEL WITH A PRIORI CLASSIFICATIONS  109  F A M I L Y DIRECTOR 1.  Oldest or only child  2  Often assumes leadership roles  4.  Takes charge  5.  Feels responsible for everyone  6.  Takes life seriously (difficulty having fun)  7.  Provides structure for the family  8.  Remains exceptionally responsible  10.  Manages the family's affairs  19.  Sometimes acts as family savior (guardian or caretaker)  PREMIER C H I L D 3.  If in university/college does well scholastically  9.  Appears to function unusually well  11.  They have to be good (goodness has a compulsive quality)  12.  Provides self-worth for the family by their successes  13.  The family counts on them to take over when others flounder  14.  Does well athletically  15.  Leader among their peers  17.  Receives praise for taking care of others  18.  Have trouble feeling good about themselves no matter how successful they become  20.  Motivated to have the famity look good  21.  Tries to be a super-achiever  23.  Achieves success work  24.  Appears exemplary  25.  Appears perfectionistic  110  26.  Convinced that however much they may be accomplishing it is seldom, if ever, enough  27.  Tries to stop the parent's drinking by achieving success  28.  Unable to relax  29.  Repeated career successes rarely bring satisfaction  30.  Appears as a mirror image of goodness  JESTER 31.  Tries to be funny  32.  Uses clowning or annoying behavior to attract attention  34.  Tries to be cute  35.  Manipulates others  HARMONIZER 33.  Discounts own needs, believe they do not deserve to have their own needs met  36.  Survival equals giving to others (time, energy, empathy)  37.  Smooths over conflicts  38.  Always willing to lend an ear and to serve as a mediator in stressful situations  39.  Takes whatever occurs in stride  40.  Flexible  41.  Adapts to a variety of situations  42.  Fears rocking the boat  43.  Does whatever is necessary to maintain order  46.  Tries to reduce the conflict in the family  INVISIBLE C H I L D 44.  Keeps to self (loner)  Ill  45.  Avoids other people  47.  Withdraws (always in the background)  48.  Often builds and lives in a fantasy world  49.  Keeps a low profile  50.  Avoids alcoholic by not being at home  51.  Emotionally escapes by withdrawing into self  52.  Easily lost in the shuffle  53.  Escapes by hiding  54.  Emotionally escapes by disassociating from the family  55.  Draws attention by non-presence  BLACK SHEEP 16.  Acts verbally aggressive  22.  Feels they do not fit (misfit)  56.  They often lack education  57.  They experience inability to control anger  58.  Difficulty interacting with others in acceptable ways  59.  They often lack learned skills  60.  Rebels  61.  Acts physically aggressive  62.  Acts out (nearly always involved in some kind of socially unacceptable behavior)  63.  Family blames them for most of family problems and mishaps  64.  Potentially dangerous  65.  Cause trouble (troublemaker)  66.  Acts defiant/hostile  67.  Family believes the person is bad  68.  Often getting into trouble  112  A P P E N D I X H: F I N A L C L U S T E R O F A T T R I B U T E S (48) O F T H E I N T E G R A T E D MODEL  113  CARETAKER 5.  Feels responsible for everyone  17.  Receives praise for taking care of others  19.  Sometimes acts as family savior (guardian or caretaker)  33.  Discounts own needs, believe they do not deserve to have their own needs met  36.  Survival equals giving to others (time, energy, empathy)  38.  Always willing to lend an ear and to serve as a mediator in stressful situations  SUPER ACHIEVER 2  Often assumes leadership roles  3.  If in university/college does well scholastically  9.  Appears to function unusually well  12.  Provides self-worth for the family by their successes  14.  Does well athletically  15.  Leader among their peers  18.  Have trouble feeling good about themselves no matter how successful they become  21.  Tries to be a super-achiever  23.  Achieves success work  24.  Appears exemplary  25.  Appears perfectionistic  26.  Convinced that however much they may be accomplishing it is seldom, if ever, enough  27.  Tries to stop the parent's drinking by achieving success  29.  Repeated career successes rarely bring satisfaction  JESTER 31.  Tries to be funny  114  32.  Uses clowning or annoying behavior to attract attention  34.  Tries to be cute  INVISIBLE C H I L D 44.  Keeps to self (loner)  45.  Avoids other people  47.  Withdraws (always in the background)  48.  Often builds and lives in a fantasy world  49.  Keeps a low profile  51.  Emotionally escapes by withdrawing into self  52.  Easily lost in the shuffle  53.  Escapes by hiding  54.  Emotionally escapes by disassociating from the family  55.  Draws attention by non-presence  BLACK SHEEP 16.  Acts verbally aggressive  56.  They often lack education  57.  They experience inability to control anger  58.  Difficulty interacting with others in acceptable ways  59.  They often lack learned skills  60.  Rebels  61.  Acts physically aggressive  62.  Acts out (nearly always involved in some kind of socially unacceptable behavior)  63.  Family blames them for most of family problems and mishaps  64.  Potentially dangerous  115  65.  Cause trouble (troublemaker)  66.  Acts defiant/hostile  67.  Family believes the person is bad  68.  Often getting into trouble  APPENDIX I: S-MATRIX (9 CATEGORY/68 CONTENT UNITS)  JOINT PROPORTION ' S ' MATRIX  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 14 15 IB 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 26 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38  t  2  3  4  5  1 .000 0 644 0 689 0 578 0 533 0 533 0 533 0 600 0 622 0 533 0 644 0 68'J 0 5/8 0 533 0 600 0 0 0 556 0 467 0 578 0 622 0 609 0 069 0 522 n 644 0 600 0 556 0 689 0 489 0 533 0 511 0 089 0 0 0 .289 0 .044 0 .200 0 .422 0 . 333 0 444  0 644 1 .000 0 667 0 778 0 578 0 533 0 644 0 7 11 0 667 0 644 0 6C2 0 800 0 600 0 511 0 800 0 044 0 511 0 578 0 533 0 733 0. 800 0. 1 1 1 0 756 0 766 0. 711 0. 578 0 778 0 533 0 644 0 489 0 067 0 0 0 311 0 022 0 178 0 .400 0 . 333 0 . 400  0.689 0 667 1.000 0.66 7 0 444 0.533 0.533 0.733 0 733 0 622 0 667 0 844 0 600 0 622 0.711 0 0 0.600 0.533 0.533 0.600 0 844 0.022 0 800 0 756 0/78 0 600 0 844 0 489 0.622 0 600 0 0 0 00.244 0 044 0.133 0.444 0.209 0 422  0.578 0 778 0.66 7 1.000 0.667 0 556 0.667 0 711 0 667 0.800 0 622 0 7 11 0.689 0.422 0 667 0 022 0 622 0.467 0.644 0 667 0.667 0.044 0.600 0.689 0 667 0.444 0.644 0.489 0.467 0.5 11 0 067 0 0 0.356 0 044 0.222 0.533 0 444 0 444  0. 533 0. 5/8 0 444 0 667 I. 000 0. 511 0. 600 O. 600 0. 511 0 66/ 0 511 0 656 0. 689 0. 267 0. 511 0. 022 O 689 0. 400 0. 7 1 1 0. 600 0. 489 0. 069 0. 467 0. 533 0. 444 0. 400 0. 467 0. 467 0. 400 0 489 0 067 0 0 0 533 0. 022 0. 333 0. 711 0. 578 0 644  6  7  8  9  0 .533 0 .533 0 .533 0 .556 0 511 1, 000 0 .600 0 644 0 556 0 533 0 578 0 .556 0 .533 0 .467 0 .556 0 067 0 .444 0 .600 0 511 0. 533 0 .600 0 200 0 .556 0 5/8 0..644 0 578 0. 556 0 .644 0 .556 0 .444 0 0 0 0 0 .533 0 022 0 .267 0 .400 0 289 0..467  0 533 0 .644 0 533 0 667 0 .600 0 600 1 000 0 609 0 .533 0 822 0 600 0 600 0 756 0. 400 0 556 0 .044 0 622 0 .467 0 .689 0..689 0. 600 0 111 0 .600 0 .644 0..600 0 556 0..600 0..444 0 533 0 444 0 .067 0 044 0 400 0 044 0 .244 0 511 0 444 0 511  0 .600 0 711 0 733 0 .711 0 600 0 644 0 689 1 000 0 .800 0 7 11 0 689 0 667 0. 7 11 0. 489 0 .778 0 .022 0 .600 0 489 0. 622 0 711 0..822 0 022 0 733 0 BOO 0 . 756 0 556 0 822 0 . 489 0 .578 0 600 0 022 0 .0 0 2ft'J 0 0 0. 178 0 444 0 333 0 489  0 .622 0 667 0. 733 0 667 0. 511 a 556 0 533 0. 800 000 0. 556 0. 711 0 822 0 .600 0 556 0 733 0. 022 0 489 0 .511 0. 46/ 0..578 0. 778 0. 044 0. 733 0. 800 0. 733 0. 578 0. 756 0. 444 0..600 0. 556 0. 089 0 067 0. 244 0 067 0. 178 0. 311 0. 356 0. 3/8  i  10 0 .533 0 .644 0 622 0 .800 0 .66/ 0 533 0 .822 0 .711 0 .556 1 .000 0 .644 0 .622 0 .800 0 . 356 0 .556 0 0 0 .733 0 . 467 0 . 900 0 .711 0 622 0. 067 0 578 0. 667 0 644 0 511 0. 622 0 . 467 0 467 0 .556 0 .089 0 022 0 . 3E6 0 .089 0 . 244 0 .622 0 467 a 489  ruroror\jroro — — — — — — IjlftU J ro •• • ID CD N 01 u\ ft  o o c o o o o o o o o o o o  — o o o o o o o o o o  o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r o O O f t — rororo X* rUOOrMCDOl Ol A CD O) CO UJ A O U  - J OftCJ> — Ofto"i ft N ro Oi - O A — coO-»* — roOiroft 050ft »j--OftO>ft C D N O > - O A ^ I D O D » M N M » -  A  ro  ~-4 ru U3 •"J  (O  ft  «o  IDUJ>  Qro  OOOOOOOOOOOOO — OOOOOOOOODO ^cccoO<o^LriuicnocDcncnO'^cncDCi)0)c7iiTi^cccDcn  o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO rorururoAr\jrjcox>tuA .** rj ro ro roiunjfUAMMiOAiu* * ru ru ro  OOOOOOOOOOOO — COOOOOOOOOOO  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r o O O f t O r o — ro  GcomoifuuiOiMN OCClvinjuj^'UCO  W — O  w —  Oi Ul  O  O  O"-»0)OO  — —  U I W C S C D O O N O W I O O O O S 9  OOOOOOOOOOO — OOOOOOOOOOOOO tJICJiO — C D f t U J f t L o - u < O u o i * u u i A iftftruften m in — — — ro ro —fttJi - ^ O ' C r u m u i a O c n c n r M M ^ w — ^ — roru_*kCJ>- O O - O M O l O I I O O ^ ^ I V I V ' U l  OOOOOOOOOO—OOOOOOOOOOOOOO ^ClCOOCOO^ftWftOOC^CJtCDUIW^^t^tJiyiCrj»»iCOCr) wCDOcnO^CD'vjcnroO^uiroNtjiuvtiiin^cn^QO W>CO^OlSOCONruOCOlON(BCI)WCDCnO)><'gwOO  T  o o o o o o o o o o o — O O O r o O O t n — ro — ro -wwrcoi ru o in O — ro ru r\j M — o O Ci O  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOwOO0>rorororu ft ro w ru ro u r o A r u u i i u ci o n; O ft ro ^ 1*0 ro ro ro <^ I U * r o w >u O U D *•  tfi  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOaOOOOOOOOOOOftOOWwroro — o> * » ro »\> cr> ro Oi ro ft & w D O in «, * M * ro M * j ro ^ ry * ft w D O C)  OOOOOOOOO—OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOu>DOCOGOO — O O O O O O O O O O O O O ro un ro ft cn O ro ro ro roftcn ro ro ft ro a> ro ft *»J O ro — ro ro ro ft ro ro ft  OOOOOOOOOOOO OOOO—OOOO——ro ro — CD — <j\ ro ro — (O — a> -  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO • — O O O — O O — Oro — Oftw u> ro ro •• U I O i D i r - O f t —ftCD — u"u(B • cnio-^tocs **•«- — x j f t — ftio — to ro (D  OOOOOOOO — OCCOOOOOOOOOOOOO ftt^ftOiJicnDLjCOftu'^cna^ftocnftcncncntTitjf puicooiuicnOjiO oiui-^OftLoCDOroftCDroO — <J*I I C J I I O N U I N O O I Q ~hjcr>CDOftujicoroft(Oroo — cn  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOwOOCnrorororu roroftftftrorocnro^hcncncnro rorocnftroro'^rororororoOro roroftftftroro^iroftw'^'^ro njro^ftroroCorororororoOro  OOOOOOO— OOOOODOODOOOOOOOO cncjio — O f t f t O t w O i T i f t f t m c T i f t v i f t f t c n f t f t u ^ L r f t -JO)roCDONOOO*^CBttNUCD^-UJ^OONUCBM  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r o O O t J i — — — ro ft o ro ro ro ro ft ro ro Cn u) cn UJ O ft -»J ro ro ro ro ft ro ro - J u cn a> u O  OOOOOO—OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO (^CJ1ftOC>^^OftC&OftLijCDiyi01CSftCr>0>(Jt*^CDa>C71l7l ujyicoCDcn — O O O CD — oiciftOcnroco — —ftU J ui ~^ UlDIOOCO^OOO CO — - w t t f t O ~ » J r o t O — —ftU) W CD  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r o O O i T i — — — ro  OOOOO — OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOO LT1 CD ai — • O — c n c i f t ^ r o u j - CDNjoi*jcnm(j)cncTi>JCT) O — *»4 — CD LO O O o ui ro O — N - J J> co ro w - O — CD — ID W O N Q ui ro  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O u a O O C n r o r o — ro ro ro ft r o r o f t f t r o r o - ^ f t r o c D f t r o t J i r o ro ro ft roroftftrurgasftrotfiftrocnro  26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 • 4 1 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 5 1 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 622 0 711 0 489 0 578 0 756 0 06 7 0 0 0 378 0 06 7 0 156 0 489 0 . 444 0 489 0 200 0 111 0 178 0 244 0 622 0 044 0 067 0 356 0 022 0 067 0 044 0 022 0 044 0 022 0 022 0 0 0 06 7 0 022 0 .044 0 022 0 0 0 0 0 022 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 \ 12  0 . 689 0 800 0 844 0 667 0 489 0 600 0 .600 0 822 0 778 0 622 0 Ml 0 .911  .578 911 .467 644 678 .022 0 267 .0 133 .422 .311 467 . 178 111 156 . 133 .489 .0 0 244 0 .0 0 .087 022 .0 .0 .0 0 0 .022 0 .0 .022 067 .0 .0 .022 .0 .0 0 .0  23  22  '  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 . 489 0 . 622 0 . 400 0 444 0 . 600 0 . 0B9 0 . 022 0 . 422 0 . 067 0 . 178 0 . 622 0 . 511 0 689 0 . 222 0 . 156 0 178 0 . 289 0 644 0 . 022 0 022 0 422 0 022 0 . 044 0 . 044 0 044 0 . 022 0 022 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 022 0 0 0 022 0 .0 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 022 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 0 0. 0  .089 111 .022 044 089 200 111 .022 .044 .067 .06 7 .044  0 . 622 0 . 756 0 . 800 0 600 0 . 467 0 . 556 0. 600 0 . 733 0 733 0 . 578 0 . 644 0 . BOO  0 . 489 0 644 0 444 0 556 0 .422 0 044 0 .044 0 178 0 044 0 178 0 267 0 178 0 289 0 244 0 267 0 .244 0 111 0 267 0 .022 0 111 0 222 0 044 0 022 0 044 0 133 0 .022 0 .044 0 .022 0 .067 0 06 7 0 200 0 133 0 133 0 133 0 089 0 III 0 067 0 067 0 200 0 089 0 089 0 067 0 . 06 7  578 800 489 644 489 044 U22 244 022 178 333 26 7 378 289 222 244 133 422 0 0 222  a  0 0 067 022 0 0 022 0 022 022 022 044 0 06 7 0 0 044 0 0 0 0  644 756 756 6B9 533 578 644 800 BOO 667 600 844  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 .067 0 0 0 111 0 0 0 044 0 . 156 0 .244 0 022 0 . 156 0 .244 0 .022 0 .0 0 022 0 044 0 044 0 044 0 .067 0 0 0 .044 0 .044 0 022 0 .022 0 044 0 .022 0 .244 0 044 0 022 0 022 0 178 0 .089 0 .711 0 .800 0 689 0 . 489 0 889 0 933 0 911 0 844 0 . . 758 0 .933 0 .933 0 889 0 . .911 26  25  24 0 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  600 7 1 1 778 667 444 644 600 756 733 644 778 778  0 556 0 . 578 0 . .600 0 444 0 . 400 0 . 578 0 . 656 0 . 556 0 . 578 0 . 511 0 622 0 . 578  0 .400 0 . 556 0 . 378 0 . 358 0 .533 0 .067 0 .0 0 .444 0 .067 0 222 0 .733 0 .533 0 .711 0 .200 0 . 178 0 .222 0 356 0 . 578 0 .022 0 .044 0 . 444 0 022 0 .044 0 044 0 044 0 .022 0 022 0 0 0 0 0 .044 0 022 0 .022 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 022 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0. 0  689 778 B44 644 467 556 600 822 756 622 711 911  0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 0 0. 0 0. 0.  0 .444 0 556 0 . 444 0 . 378 0 .511 0 .089 0 .022 0 444 0 .089 0 .200 0 .689 0 .533 0 .689 0 .222 0 .222 0 .244 0 .333 0 .600 0 022 0 .067 0 .422 0 022 0 .044 0 044 0 .044 0 .022 0 .022 0 .0 0 .0 0 .067 0 .022 0 .044 0 022 0 .022 0 . .0 0 0 0 .0 0 .0 0 . 022 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 . .0  489 533 489 489 467 644 444 489 444 467 4B9 4U7  0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0 0. 0. 0. 0.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  . 467 689 467 .611 .511 089 .022 . 333 .044 . 178 .556 .444 .600 . 156 . 133 .200 .311 .578 .044 .044 .311 044 .044 044 067 .0 .022 .0 .0 044 .022 .022 .044 ,022 .044 067 .022 022 022 .022 022 022 022  30  29  28  27 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0 0 0 0. 0. 0. 0.  0 .867 0 578 0 568 0 . 800 0 378 0 .044 0 .022 0 . 400 0 .06 7 0 . 200 0 .289 0 . 289 0 311 0 . 133 0 . 133 0 . 156 0 . 200 0 . 489 0 089 0 067 0 267 0 089 0 . 156 0 089 0 . 156 0 . 156 0 111 0 111 0 089 0 089 0 067 0 089 0 089 0 111 0 044 0 044 0 044 0 . 067 0 067 0 044 0 044 0 067 0 044  533 644 622 467 400 556 533 578 600 467 578 644  0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.  511 489 600 511 489 444 444 600 556 556 756 578  13 14 15 16 1? 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 4 I 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 SO 51 52 53 54 55 56 67 68 69 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  31  822 622 BOO 022 533 600 556 7 1 1 000 044 844 867 844 644 933 5 1 1 7 1 1 600 022 0 222 022 11 1 378 289 422 178 1 1 1 156 133 444 0 0 178 0 0 0 06 7 022 0 0 0 0 0 022 0 0 022 044 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  32  067 111 067 356 067 178 089 1 1 1 b44 000 044 044 067 156 044 178 133 089 111 178 244 11 1 26 7 06 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 158 200 222 289 178 444 422 133 422 378 444 356 422 422 400 422 400 356 400 511 444 356 333 333 31 1 333 333 333 333 333  558 644 eon 0 489 622 489 578 844 044 000 756 BOO 689 867 489 756 533 067 044 244 022 111 356 267 378 222 178 222 133 467 022 022 200 022 o. 0 0 022 0 067 0 022 0 044 0 022 0 022 0 022 0 044 0 044 0 022 0 044 0 0 0 022 0 0 0 0 0 044 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 0  33  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  34  689 511 689 022 556 556 556 667 867 044 756 000 BOO 600 BOO 511 622 689 022 0 244 022 133 422 333 444 178 1 1 1 156 156 511 022 022 222 022 0 022 089 044 022 022 022 022 0 022 0 0 022 044 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  a  0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  a  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  35  600 511 733 0 489 667 533 578 844 067 800 800 000 689 844 511 733 578 022 0 289 022 133 356 356 378 244 156 222 133 533 022 022 222 022 022 022 022 044 022 022 0 022 0 022 0 022 0 022 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  36  489 489 578 067 400 867 444 467 644 156 689 600 669 000 644 533 844 400 022 022 333 067 200 289 289 333 133 133 156 1 1 1 511 067 044 244 044 089 067 0B9 1 1 1 067 067 044 067 089 1 1 1 III 1 1 1 067 044 06 7 0S9 089 08 7 06 7 089 06 7  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  37  622 644 800 0 556 578 656 689 933 044 867 800 844 644 000 467 733 578 044 022 222 0 111 400 311 422 178 1 1 1 156 111 467 0 0 178 0 0 0 067 022 022 0 0 0 022 044 0 022 022 022 0 0 022 0 0 0 0  0 0 0  a  400 444 489 1 1 1 378 556 444 467 511 178 489 511 511 533 467 000 558 422 067 067 311 133 333 378 267 333 200 222 244 267 444 044 156 222 067 089 067 133 133 067 044 067 133 156 133 156 1 1 1 067  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l 1 1 v 0 067 0 067 0 1 1 1 0 067 0 087 0 067 0 067  38  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  39  444 556 644 0 356 800 378 511 7 11 133 756 622 733 844 733 556 000 422 022 022 289 022 133 311 311 333 156 156 156 133 489 067 067 222 067 089 067 089 089 06 7 044 044 067 067 067 044 067 0 044 0 044 044 0 0 022 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  40  600 422 489 044 533 378 511 5 1 1 600 089 533 6B9 578 400 578 422 422 000 089 022 289 089 178 533 333 422 156 156 178 267 467 044 067 289 044 089 044 022 067 067 044 022 06 7 089 1 1 1 06 7 089 044 067 044 044 067 044 044 044 044  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO — OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODOOOOO . COOOOOO — O O O O — — — roOruOrottOCDOOOOaOCOO — OOOOO — vsjtn>MO)&c7ics70io>wCio^cnis^ui-. OAWDCODOioa)iuaii<.ruiufvOiMrjDiE*[7i(ji<v&a)roQCi>or\ )cr<ODOOOCOOOQOOOOO Cc[&DC)SA^(0NN%w^OftNlDMCI)-O&fUlDONID^OK)IUNANIUIU^wruSI0^^OI**IDIUvlQIQru^ -cvnj -v0j1 -Jcn. IDa> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO — OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ruroruruOOO — O — OOOuiOOOO — — -—%O — OUOOOOOOOOOOOO oiruAQDOia' —<D(CD ururuO^OOirupoCiwrj •* -frooOOOOOruOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO rroo rroo £ »>ruroA^ruro rorua J> -^roj*.-sjiD--*to —CD<c——co10CDtoas— D a>u>oiu — CD wniiuOAONroruNiuM A. » CD < v -< j* OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO—OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOO — — C — — — — — — — — ru — U J — — .*-**u)rv)r\)(ji^^r\jOOOOf\jr\ji^r\ji^fur\jru w — to — •—wCDt—JUJ'V-—t-juj — ArouiO>>iiiN«>>iiQOAicioiD>>rowiO*A*iuu<>OAiuftairusDOiAicOyuDiA_iD (X  —  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO— — . — — ru — OOOOOO — Ow — OOO —OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCDCOOOOOOOOOOOOO — — O — OMOOCDOOO - OOOOO — OOOOO ooooooooooooooo Ni^uOuiwCJicicicncc — C*M-0)*CDiju'^rgjicntoOC30ffiCDr\)w cn ru ro—roru*. —(iOruj^cDCTiCJiuiroJ^oi o r— CDGDuOyro^^N^ic«sia uftiDuOia>roi}>^rtiO(DONiorgw vi^rviro >«''>wOiruAv tccn c»n rg o»^ro^roro&&b rj<> M  oooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo r0o1roCDLO UJ — — CO —— — —— O OCD w -— DufurowMrorouiOroro^ro - —3iuO)NONuiui-Ouu<*0)'^00'UA^NNuuiftSN»0)uiuuiN w i — ro — — — ro — — rurororu- — — — — r\j — — ffi0 1 — ru Jk ru — iO —— —— UJUJ —— ^J o IDCD — w UJ — (D ffl <0 ro ruu 1w 0 -CD —— luAru^OroNrooauui - O UJ UJ — •»«* — DQOro*(B(BCt7uiOiftCDa»NwrowCsO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO — CCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO CC--000000000*OOtffcwrxjWNmOuO^OOWuuAf\JUi.uOui^OiryNOufoaiJ»fcfflu*Ci^NaiAAA a b^A^ftroan)-OwU^CDNC — - cn — siOV[nutfiO)si^oDwruu/OiroroDro-><v«>D>>uiJkOiv Ns » -— —— ro ru AAkiMkro^N N.NiDu'aOffi9roo)NO)0)iaewiuu^ivroiDW>«A-0-w*ON J>  D  U  D  ^  N  D  I  O  M  O  W  -  M  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO DOOOOOCCOOC-OT'COffiftwwuoiooiw-J«-^wuryurowuw-WAUi^wD'\)-ciuAJkuJw*roL rjrorurucji^cprocn^cDLricD' vcricnoruuj — ——jkOO>rouio>urow^cn — DUiuiDj^a&uiCPui cn-- — — &'A'uuu cni)iui'>DvACDuu r o r o r o N N A ^ U N A i o o i i i 9 r o N N O N w M ~ A O ^ r o o i N w r o w ^ N M i c t n w ^ ^ i c ^ w u ) w >^a-«*«jO)w«ioa)i>ioww 1  ,  a  OOOOODOOOOOOOQOOOOOOO — OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 3 0"OOOOOOOOCO^OO^<>uwro09i^rviOuiOO^uu^y^jky_i\oicnu^Oy^n^A^u&^ivO)«J>J>4\ o:n~oicnj>ikas^'>oiJ>OAroC i&iriw<vOA'>JArow &royyroyNAsj ru O CD — — rvvjCEOCncncoNicn — rji A. & ro C A Ni<CM%NiajkN^ftA^»o^ivNArji-'i>>o*(D^row •^NuwroutBACB-'rgOto^^roaiictDviDioaiD'NAftroO^ f  M  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO — OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO —CPO0O OOOOOOOro —— O— - ru — ru — — ro — — ro — ru — — — ro — r\jOi\jroru — rororururofu 1— tri ui— —— tsoo^DAtsa^ — w^oorvuroro cp O — Aros^NO()i()iONUAMro()iN^rouiOikBi>NNOrooiOrocDai&OOnj uiDNcnoi«oici04kU&ip(C^ND^-uo&-ftroaADOO)c^ori]y*arucDDa UJ  Ji.  O>^J  coooooooooooooooooo — —O — — — OOOOOOOro— —ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo O — rosOtDtowrow — ru — — — ro — »^O —— —ujruuJ^J>ruCJ>[ji ro — — ro —— —— Ot^^wOroOO** ru ru — — •NJ —LOCA-coo LTii^— ro — ujtnuj— —-C —— to CD 01 in UJ — cr)cncnroC7)0>cnc& - <% N oi N o—cooi• ——CD —— cnuiai Dro-— — rouj Dj>ro*^cn — — cnmuoorooocpoo CD  Zl  UJ — N N C S M N ' M U U ' -  A  O  N  B  O  *  -  — (D  ID  60 6 1 62 63 64 65 66 67 68  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  133 111 133 133 156 133 133 133 133  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0  222 200 222 244 200 222 222 222 222  244 200 200 222 200 333 222 176 178 222 178 166 17B 244 244 044 222 158 244 200 156 222 222 156 222 156 156 244 156 178 156 133 333 133 267 333 333 358 7 1 1 778 000 333 178 1 1 1 178 3 1 1  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0  0 067 0 0 133 022 022 0 0  133 178 089 200 333 311 222 156 178 244 244 133 289 111 133 06 7 356 200 333 311 133 289 133 158 133 11 1 1 1 1 267 133 267 1 11 067 422 089 267 400 422 444 3 1 1 267 333 000 400 400 444 333  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  •  0 1 0 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  133 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 133  4B9 511 444 667 644 489 622 533 578 689 622 489 644 267 422 0 578 489  eau  578 444 178 467 511 533 511 467 444 489 467 089 0 444 044 311 511 600 467 178 178 178 400 000 133 156 467  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  200 244 200 200 244 222 222 200 200  0 022 022 0 0 044 022 0 044 022 044 0 022 022 0 044 022 089 022 044 0 444 022 022 022 067 0 044 007 044 06 7 089 1 1 1 089 089 0 06 7 022 067 044 1 1 1 400 133 000 86 7 069  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 022 0 0 044 022 022 0 0  06 7 0 044 022 0 11 1 022 0 044 044 067 0 022 1 1 1 0 044 044 067 06 7 044 0 422 022 022 022 044 0 156 06 7 06 7 044 089 133 1 1 1 133 022 067 044 1 1 1 1 1 1 178 444 156 867 000 1 1 1  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 022 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  47  46  45  44  43  42  4 1  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 3 1 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 4 1 42 43 44 45 46  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  289 267 200 333 444 244 378 267 289 378 356 244 422 222 222 022 444 267 422 311 178 133 200" 222 222 244 178 222 222 289 400 311 333 378 222 467 622 400 289 289 311 333 467 089 1 1 1 000  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  a 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 044 0 0 06 7 022 022 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 044 0 0 111 022 022 0 0  044 022 022 044 06 7 1 1 1 022 022 067 022 067 0 044 022 0 044 044 158 044 044  a  378 0 0 022 089 0 089 089 089 133 B89 222 1 1 1 089 044 156 067 044 067 1 1 1 400 178 a 778 0 689 0 156  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 044 0 0 133 022 022 0 0  50  49  48  0 022 022 022 022 067 022 0 044 022 022 0 022 044 0 022 022 089 022 044 0 422 022 022 022 044 0 067 067 044 067 089 1 1 1 067 089 022 089 044 089 067 133 422 133 91 1 822 067  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 022 022 022 022 067 044 0 044 044 044 0 044 044 0 022 044 089 044 044 0 444 022 022 022 06 7 0 067 067 044 067 089 133 089 1 1 1 022 089 044 009 06 7 133 422 156 933 844 0B9  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  089 1 1 1 044 044 067 067 06 7 022 022 044 022 067 044 133 067 244 044 156 044 06 7 067 356 067 089 022 089 06 7 133 089 022 067 1 1 1 133 067 133 044 04 4 044 044 022 044 200 067 489 444 044  47 46 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 56 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  133 111 133 044 178 156 156 166 222 . 133 067 133 156 0 044 0 0 11 1 022 022 0 0  a  9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  422 400 422 200 400 444 422 333 400 067 156 1 1 1 133 0 089 0 0 1 11 022 022 0 0  0 0 044 0 022 178 022 044 044 022 044 022 022 022 022 044 022 156 022 0 022 422 022 044 044 1 1 1 022 133 089 06 7 067 089 178  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  133 178 156 06 7 089 133 1 1 1 089 156 0 06 7 044 022 0 044 0 0 044 0 0 0 0  0 022 022 022 022 089 022 0 044 022 022 0 022 044 0 022 022 1 11 022 022 0 422 044 022 022 067 022 067 06 7 06 7 089 1 1 1 133  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  911 778 933 489 822 B89 91 1 689 756 022 06 7 133 178 044 022 044 044 044 044 044 044 044  0 0 022 0 0 067 0 0 044 0 022 0 0 022 0 022 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 400 022 022 022 067 0 044 044.. 044 06 7 009 1 1 1  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  822 689 844 444 756 800 822 667 800 089 111 178 222 022 044 022 022 1 11 022 022 022 022  0 022 0 022 0 089 0 022 0 0 0 0 0 067 022 17B 0 089 0 0 0 422 022 022 0 044 0 06 7 044 022 044 067 1 1 1  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  067 156 089 044 06 7 06 7 067 044 133 089 06 7 089 067 022 044 022 022 067 022 022 022 022  067 022 044 022 0 156 022 022 022 044 06 7 0 022 067 0 089 044 089 06 7 044 0 400 022 022 022 067 0 133 007 06 7 06 7 089 178  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  000 756 978 556 844 956 956 733 733 0 067 111 200 022 0 022 022 067 022 022 022 022  089 044 022 022 044 111 06 7 0 0 022 022 0 0 200 022 711 022 06 7 022 022 0 356 044 0 0 089 022 156 06 7 089 178 267 1 1 1  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  756 000 733 400 800 733 778 622 622 0 089 156 178 044 022 044 022 089 044 044 044 044  022 0 022 0 022 111 067 022 0 022 044 022 022 133 022 800 022 089 044 022 022 400 044 022 022 1 11 044 133 06 7 111 156 244 089  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0  0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  978 733 000 533 822 956 933 711 756 0 067 111 200 022 0 022 022 067 022 022 022 022  067 044 0 0 044 156 06 7 022 0 0 022 0 0 133 022 689 0 0B9 022 044 0 511 022 0 0 1 11 0 156 044 067 178 222 1 1 1  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  556 400 533 000 489 533 533 578 400 200 244 267 244 311 222 289 311 244 289 289 289 289  60  59  58  57  56  55  54  53  52  51 1 2 3 4 5 8 7  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  067 022 0 0 044 1 1 1 044 0 0 0 0 0 0 133 044 489 0 111 022 022 0 444 044 0 022 11 1 022 11 1 06 7 089 178 26 7 133  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  022 044 0 0 0 0 022 0 0 0 0 022 0 089 0 889 0 044 0 044 022 356 0 022 0 06 7 022 06 7 0 044 133 222 0  124  vftic\iw^w-fy(\/(\jtDNr>.(DNKQr>»iBMeil(0(D(Oeo t? fUftjW f W — rocoMin<ocOulO«Ocoft»rneOLr)u"lirift-  no fl O  •-MOOooooooooQooonooo-oiOMO'roaTioxaaoiDai 00000000000000000000000000-00000000  »N 3i DN (NO(f\u i<samnoN3iifol n" rf ti ij N o 3( \f jj [NoOo as .]aOvvwNf u( \oi oo oOof foliaown oO<f *0v' Co iDaai i(iOnOa ij ao i)aoiiaoji OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO—OOOOOOOOO — *ma>©'-tO'"'^io^ o n(\iftj[Ma30m<DTa3tM(\ ' oi cy w — p«.oi i- - to CO ft.—co—— m —— nj10 fuNro•cn— — ru o o o o —— — «Q v— m —Q — t\i--'-ro(\nO(DOiiiioiOioio<ON'^«)(fl 000000000000000010000 83 01 v w e n c n - f N aj w CUID o -* r  000000000000000000000000-0000000000  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  'OOO — OO — OOOOCM O O n i « * N O i D i f l N N NOO ' O 0(0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o a o o o o — o o o o o a fto o Oo Oa LT»o *-  ooooooooooooooocooooo OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  —  r»» CO CO »>• r» O — — Ajft.tOcO<"tft« OJCRO) O T AJ «(00«"t\JO»fsOICj)OI»*-»"" ' « CO rgn-00""""OOOOCOOO^COO""0' >iOaU3U3iOiOiD'*' • (0 to • CB cn  >  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO— OOOOOOOOOOOO  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  r^rnrvjf*.f«-tcirnrv)OcotoO™<^<OOcotOtO' nriftjaioiflncgOUiirO^MrjiflQN^ir)'  M ng » 0) m ^ r\i ro ^> co fl •» ro OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOiOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  r,  l  0--W(MO-00-0000 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO — OOOOOOOOOOOOO  AJ  AJ • vw--iflria]cDiDvnfij-KN«NO' ^v — — lonoici^vwry — ajoncoo* ^ - ro r ro •v fy ro ro nroroQujisios'vcoioiOio fQ"000"-u— — 1M« - WOJ A OoO ^uTlAJLQroAJ — OJCUftJ — — — — CO — —o o-V— OlO<flO 'iflMflNNNO' nrofooui^tfiNTiPUiunn o o— o —ooaoaooAJor-oooa •» —  M  AJ  «J  K  r  oooaoooooaoooooooooa — oooooooooooooo  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  ft« ft-—tOO— M OM CO M ( ArjvAJf\J toMAfJoAM tOCO ft. lO Vn«01MDfO ffl(fl IP fO-NMOBJ^WO)tDC«3U3 - — CJUJlflNWmcDUlO^lfl J AJ AJ -  ooaooac-f'oiifioiji^tinricDoiONNOo-Mooooooooo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 — OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  ro ro co ro ro ro AJ OOOOaQC-f-OiDoa^CiinaDOOiNrsOa-rgOOOOOOOOO  ro ro oi ro ro OJ ro  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO — OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  fu ft. — ro — ^ ro OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOiOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  ia-w(ocQiD(flr^Offlfo^(flworocDa v co n* «mr>«t\iftjrororo«iro(\4roro O — OOOOO — vooi*' o a i f f l 0 3 « O f f l f f l ' * » Q " ~ roOQQOGOOOO 00000000000000000-00000000000000000  C Oitoft.toft.(flr- rofytoN.ro<\»•--ft. m ^ •«» tft. cO o ft» ^ <c ai to n o ooooooooooooo—ocnoooc OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  NmvciKfflKifl^r'CiO^iD^iori'afDriio^O'^Wfti [OCQ^Qiflaia^^MaiOfO^nui'^'ffOuiri^iroiD—t\ji\i  ,  p  ,  AJ AJ  CO  ^  AJ  • fflcBO^roi*i^Lntoft«eocnC  0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 044 21 0 333 0 . 333 0 .311 0 333 0 . 333 0 333 22 .044 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 .0 022 23 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 .0 24 0 044 0 0 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 .022 25 0 . 0 6 7 0 .007 0 . 0 8 9 0 . 0 8 9 0 .06 7 0 044 26 0 .0 0 .0 0 .022 0 .0 0 0 27 0 022 0 067 0 .067 0 .06 7 0 111 0 06 7 0 111 28 0 .0 0 0 .044 .044 0 0 0 0 0 .044 29 0 .044 0 .044 0 044 0 067 0 044 0 067 30 0 . 133 0 . 133 0 156 0 133 0 . 133 0 111 31 0 . 222 0 .222 0 .244 0 .200 0 222 0 . 200 32 0 . 0 2 2 0 .022 0 133 0 0 .0 06 7 0 0 33 0 . 133 0 . 133 0 133 0 . 133 0 133 34 0 . 133 0 .222 0 .222 • 0 244 0 .200 0 200 0 244 35 0 .022 0 .022 0 0 0 .044 0 0 0 .022 36 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 37 0 022 0 .022 0 .022 0 .0 0 .067 0 .0 0 044 36 0 022 0 .022 0 .0 0 111 0 0 0 044 39 0 .022 0 .022 0 133 0 .0 0 0 0 .044 40 0 .022 0 .022 0 .0 0 III 0 .0 0 044 41 0 022 0 III 0 .022 0 .0 0 0 0 089 42 0 0 0 0 044 0 .0 0 0 0 044 0 43 0 044 0 044 0 044 0 044 0 044 0 022 44 0 .022 0 022 0 022 0 111 0 022 0 044 45 0 022 0 022 0 .022 0 067 0 022 0 044 46 0 022 0 .022 0 06 7 0 022 0 022 0 0 47 0 044 0 044 0 0B9 0 .022 0 044 0 .022 48 0 022 0 . 022 0 06 7 0 022 0 022 0 0 49 0 2B9 0 289 0 289 0 244 0 .311 0 222 50 0 .022 0 022 0 089 0 022 0 .022 0 022 51 0 022 0 . .022 089 0 0 0 022 0 0 022 52 0 022 0 . 022 0 06 7 0 022 0 022 53 0 0 0 156 0 . 158 0 244 0 156 • 0 178 0 178 54 0 .067 0 067 0 133 06 7 0 089 0 0 111 55 0 . .711 0 7 11 0 689 0 667 0 689 56 0 689 0 . 800 0 . .800 0 778 0 778 0 7 11 57 0 756 0 . 711 0 . 7 11 0 622 0 622 0 689 0 644 58 0 489 0 489 0 489 0 556 0 489 0 444 59 0 .956 0 956 0 933 0 978 0 689 0 66 7 60 . 0 8B9 0 . 889 0 844 0 733 0 867 61 1 000 0 978 0 978 0 933 0 . 7 11 0 867 1 000 62 0 . 911 0 911 1 000 0 . 644 0 933 0 844 63 0 0 . 733 000 733 0 711 0 644 1. 0 733 64 1 000 1. 0 0 0 0 . 733 0 978 0 911 65 0 889 1. 0 0 0 1 000 0 733 0 978 0 911 66 0 689 0 . 956 0 . 956 0 . 689 0 978 0 844 67 e 956 0 . 978 0 . 978 1. 0 0 0 0 933 0 . 711 68 0 .867 TOLERANCE S P E C I F I C A T I O N S NOT MET IN 100 ITERATIONS FOR FACTOR 14, COSINE = 10IEHANCE SPEC1FICA1I0IIS NOI MET IN 100 I1ERA1I0NS FOR FACIOH 2 1 , COSINE =  0 .0 0 .333 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .089 0 .0 0 .067 0 022 0 044 0 . 133 0 .222 0 .0 0 . 133 0 .200 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 044 0 .022 0 .022 0 022 0 .044 0 022 0 .289 0 .022 0 022 0 .022 0 156 0 067 0 .689 0 756 0 667 0 489 0 956 0 . 844 0 978 0 956 0 689 0 956 0 . 956 1. 000 0 . 978 0.99988794 0.99995017  0 .0 0 .333 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 .06 7 0 .0 0 .067 0 .0 0 044 0 . 133 0 .222 0 .0 0 133 0 .200 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 044 0 022 0 022 0 022 0 044 0 022 0 289 0 022 0 022 0 022 0 156 0 , 067 0 689 0 778 0 689 0 489 0 978 0 867 1 000 0 933 0 711 0 978 0 978 0 978 1. 000  t-O  APPENDIX J: PHI MATRICES (68 CONTENT UNITS)  PHI  MATRIX  ) - 0 . 057 - 0 . 067 - 0 . 093 0 . . 123 - 0 . .049 0 .. 0 4 2 0 . 039 - 0 .048 - 0 . ,051 - 0 . .029 0 . ,007  0 -0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0  3 .037 .036 .027 . 128 .017 .012 .051 .008 .022 .03 1 .072  t1 0 .044 0 080 0 .029 - 0 .049 0 .. 0 5 3 - 0 . 130 - 0 . .086 0 .040 0 .098 0 .. 0 1 9 - 0 . .111  5 0 .050 0 . 290 0 . 1 19 - 0 .072 0 . 302 0 . 229 - 0 .047 - 0 . 165 - 0 . 120 - 0 . 141 - 0 , . 170  -0 0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0  7 6 0 .035 .051 - 0 .057 .063 - 0 .061 .066 0 . 168 .066 - 0 . 103 .001 0 .067 .049 - 0 .016 .015 - 0 .007 .030 .011 . - 0 .032 - 0 .042 .001 .017 ..-0 .001  0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0  8 . 227 . 123 .075 .021 . 178 .143 .006 .073 .030 .044 .058  -0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0  9 .017 .002 .077 .051 .003 .017 .010 .018 .009 . 002 .004  .021 .010 .409 .002 .047 .078 .031  0 ,. 5 5 5 0 , 556 0 . , 567 0 . 837 0 ,. 9 5 0 1 , 185 1 .,2 5 0  -0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 0  .281 . 424 . 246 .233 .269 .026 . 160  0 , . 183 0 .220 0 .. 0 7 2 0 .. 2 8 8 0 .010 - 0 .07 1 - 0 . . 328  -0 0 0 -0 0 0 0  0 0 0 -0 0 -0 0  0 .215 . 175 0 . 36 1 .078 . 155 . 0 . 0 3 7 - 0 .218 .113 0 .292 .213 - 0 . 103 .007 - 0 .051 .029  0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 -0  . 130 . 207 . 101 .013 .293 .069 .057  0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0  . 364 .058 .033 .017 . 1 14 .043 . 108  .025 .042 .030 .009 .001 .025 .056 .042 .029 .001 .031 .025 .015 .017  0 . , 394 0 . . 172 0 . , 491 - 0 . , 105 - 0 . , 105 - 0 . 285 - 0 . , 109 0. O i l 0 . 036 - 0 . 051 0 . 178 0 . 056 - 0 . 005 0 . 103  0 .468 0 .561 0 .595 0 .600 0 .657 0 . 706 0 . 708 0 .774 0 . 787 0 . 840 0 . 998 1 .015 1 .021 1 .068  0 . 109 0 . . 116 - 0 . ,097 0 . . 169 0 . .606 0 . 316 0 .. 2 5 3 0 . , 268 - 0 . . 393 - 0 . ,111 - 0 . 203 0 ., 0 7 9 - 0 . 043 - 0 . , 198  - 0 . 137 0 .233 0 . 166 - 0 . . 204 0 ,075 0 ., 0 4 5 - 0 . .218 - 0 ..075 0 .. 4 3 8 - 0 . .015 - 0 . 010 - 0 .017 - 0 . .011 - 0 ..020  0 .053 - 0 .131 - 0 .055 0 091 - 0 . .037 - 0 . .026 0 .097 0 .037 - 0 . 153 - 0 . .006 - 0 . .007 0 .014 0 .002 0 .006  0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 0 -0 0 0 0  .029 .014 .04 1 .012 .021 .005 .074 .003 .001 .025 .003 .000 .007 .020  1 0 .611 0 .871 0 .885 0 .894 0 .955 0 .995 1 .098 1 . 102 1 .117 1 . 128 1 . 139  50. 55. 54. 48. 45. 51 . 52. 44 . 49. 47 . 53.  STIMULUS 1 -DELTA* * 2 0 . 378 AVOIDS ALCOHOLIC NON-PRESENCE 0 . 678 DISASSOCIATES 0 . .654 L I V E S IN FANTASY 0 .. 6 5 5 AVOIDS OTHER PEOPLE 0 . 775 WITHDRAWS INTO S E L F 0 . 830 0 . 914 LOST IN SHUFFLE KEEPS TO SELF/LONER 0 . 893 KEEPS A LOW P R O F I L E 0 . 931 WITHDRAWS 0 . 938 ESCAPES BY HIDING 0 . ,956  46 . 33. 42. 17 . 37 . 36 . 38.  TRIES REDUCE CONFLIC DISCOUNTS OWN NEEDS FEARS ROCKING BOAT P R A I S E FOR CARING SMOOTHS OVER CONFLIC SURVIVAL=GIVING WILLING TO LEND EAR  0 . , 492 0 ., 4 7 5 0 ., 4 6 5 0 , 763 0 . 670 0 ., 7 7 9 0 . 761  0 0 0 -0 0 -0 -0  11 . 1. 30. 25. 8. 15. 9. 24 . 14 . 23 . 3. 12. 21 . 27 .  HAVE TO BE GOOD OLDEST OR ONLY CHILD MIRROR OF GOODNESS APPEARS PERFECT REMAINS RESPONSIBLE LEADER AMONG PEERS APPEARS TO FUNCTION APPEARS EXEMPLARY DOES WELL ATHLETICAL SUCCESS IN WORK OOES WELL SCHOLAST PROVIDE WORTH BY SUC SUPERACHI E V E R ( T R I E S ) SUC TO STOP PARDRINK  0 . 701 0 . 575 0 . ,509 0 ., 8 0 1 0 . 809 0 . 743 0 . 718 0 . ,806 0 . 525 0 . 815 0 . 793 0 . 903 0 . 925 0 . 918  0 -0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0  . 330 . 385 . 175 .042 .624 .143 . 138  0 . 201 - 0 . 107 0 .031 0 .016 - 0 . 101 - 0 . 108 0 . 378 0 .. 0 8 6 - 0 . 023 - 0 . 172 0 .070 0 . 192 0 .067 0 , . 108 - 0 . .059 . - 0 .010 0 . 106 0 . . 163 0 . 266 0 .. 0 7 9 - 0 .020 0 .023 - 0 . 139 - 0 .033 0 .040 - 0 . .032 0 .050 - 0 . .04 1  2  20. 19. 13. 2.. 5. 43. 7 . 4. 10.  MOTIVATED FAM LOOKOK ACTS AS FAM SAVIOR FAM COUNTS ON THEM OFTEN ASSUMES LEADER F E E L S RESPONSIBLE MAINTAINS ORDER PROVIDES STRUCTURE TAKES CHARGE MANAGES FAM AFFAIRS  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  .680 . 766 .815 .741 .699 .664 .692 . 768 .824  0 .010 - 0 .023 0 .010 - 0 .005 - 0 .073 0 .097 - 0 .049 - 0 .006 - 0 .010  0 .211 0 .551 0 . 464 - 0 . 321 0 .477 0 . 145 - 0 . 1 16 - 0 . 286 - 0 . 100  0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0  28 . 22. 35. 6. 64 . 58. 57 . 59 . 56 .  UNABLE TO RELAX F E E L S THEY DONT F I T MANIPULATES OTHERS TAKES L I F E SERIOUSLY P O T E N T I A L - DANGEROUS PROBLEMS INTERACTING UNABLE CONTROL ANGER OFTEN LACK S K I L L S OFTEN LACK EDUCATION  0 . 496 0 . . 428 0 .. 302 0 . 645 0 . 658 0 . 625 0 . 774 0 . 498 0 . 7 12  - 0 .056 0 . 382 - 0 . .055 - 0 . ,057 - 0 . 042 0 . 017 - 0 . 044 0 . 058 - 0 . 154  - 0 . 140 - 0 , .071 - 0 . .006 - 0 . 103 0 . 032 - 0 . 028 0 . 20 1 0 . 058 0 . 066  - 0 .007 - 0 .217 - 0 . 308 0 . .009 0 . 038 - 0 . 095 0 . 04 1 0 . 028 0 . 044  0 .466 0 . .171 0 ., 4 6 0 0 . .548 - 0 . 091 0 . 029 - 0 . 235 - 0 . 199 - 0 . 152  39. 41 . 40.  TAKES IN STRIDE 0 .659 ADAPTS TO SITUATIONS 0 . 7 7 9 FLEXIBLE 0 . 750  0 .004 0 .040 - 0 .06 1  - 0 . 103 0 .091 0 .062  0 .071 0 .003 - 0 .044  0 . 112 - 0 .050 - 0 .057  29. 26. 18.  REPEATED SUC NO SATS 0 . 8 2 6 NEVER DO ENOUGH 0 .840 TROUBLE F E E L I N G GOOD 0 . 8 3 9  -0 .009 - 0 .034 0 .003  0 .007 - 0 .010 - 0 .050  0 .288 0 .035 - 0 . . 133  61 . 16 . 65. 66 . 63. 60. 67 . 62. 68 .  ACTS PHYS AGGRESSIVE ACTS VERB AGGRESSIVE CAUSES TROUBLE ACTS DEFIANT/HOSTILE FAM BLAMES THEM REBELS FAM SAYS PERSON BAD ACTS OUT OFTEN IN TROUBLE  0 .822 0 .889 0 . .976 0 . 976 0 . 881 0 . 950 0 . 953 0 . 984 0 . 984  - 0 .046 - 0 .036 - 0 , ,010 - 0 . ,0 10 0. O i l 0 . 018 0 . 009 0 . 010 0 . 010  - 0 .095 - 0 . .076 0 . ,016 0 . 016 - 0 . 006 - 0 . 008 0. 005 0 . 000 0 . 000  32. 34 . 31 .  CLOWNING OR ANNOYING 0 . 806 TRIES TO BE CUTE 0 . 804 T R I E S TO BE FUNNY 0 . 937  0 . 01 1 - 0 . 007 - 0 . 00 1  - 0 . 082 - 0 . 042 0 . 018  .312 .012 . 160 .4 39 . 183 .400 .098 . 127 .080  0 .659 0 .718 0 .737 0 .738 0 . 782 0 .989 1 . 153 1 .267 1 . 375  0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0  .036 .022 . 164 .005 . 150 .204 .056 .088 .079  0 .621 0 . 644 0 . 682 0 . 7 13 0 . B45 0 . 877 0. 9 1 1 1 .093 1 . 105  -0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 0 -0  .094 .083 . 124 .062 .090 .026 .006 .094 .038  -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0  .131 . 157 . 157 .080 .005 . 350 .067 . 158 . 120  -0 -0 0 0 -0 0 -0 0 0  .002 .024 .076 .022 .080  .oes  .008 .042 .026  0 .001 - 0 .006 0 .014 - 0 .005 - 0 .047 - 0 .010 - 0 .012 - 0 .011 0 .022  0 .012 0 .. 0 6 2 0 . . 138 0 . 064 0 . 018 - 0 . 022 - 0 . 101 - 0 . 026 0 . 006  0 . 377 0 .130 0 ,. 0 5 5 •o . 345 - 0 . 077 0 . 012 - 0 . 022 - 0 . 030 - 0 . 090  - 0 . 283 - 0 . ,024 - 0 . . 174 - 0 . 369 0 . 273 0 . 207 0 . 298 - 0 . 09G 0. 1 1 1  0 .006 - 0 .006 0 .114 - 0 . . 1 10 - 0 007 0 . 034 0 . 007 0 . 087 0 . 068  - 0 .117 0 .013 0 .069  0 .995 1 .046 1 .048  - 0 .094 -0 .030 - 0 .006  0 .056 - 0 .011 - 0 ,.029  0 .055 - 0 . 040 - 0 .043  - 0 .239 - 0 .04 1 0 .. 0 4 2  - 0 .042 - 0 ..015 0 .. 0 0 6  - 0 .008 - 0 .070 - 0 . .056  0 .981 1 . 102 1.. 189  0 .. 0 0 6 0 . 045 0 . 008  - 0 .014 - 0 .011 - 0 .013  - 0 .009 - 0 . .006 - 0 000 - 0 . 000 - 0 . 021 0 . 031 - 0 . 023 - 0 . 001 - 0 . 001  0 . 172 0 . 102 0. 003 0 . 003 - 0 . 002 0. O i l - 0 . 004 0 . 017 0 . 017  0 . . 347 0 . 379 0 . 106 0 . 106 - 0 . 030 - 0 . 035 - 0 . 046 - 0 . 024 - 0 . 024  0 .029 0 .,008 0 . 013 0 . 013 - 0 . 005 ' 0 . 002 - 0 . 002 - 0 . 000 - 0 . 000  0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.  691 704 901 901 917 958 964 97 1 971  - 0 .034 0 .. 0 0 4 - 0 .023 - 0 023 0 . 006 - 0 . 008 - 0 . 009 - 0 . 013 - 0 . 013  0 . 060 - 0 . 036 0 . 012  - 0 . 058 0 . 029 0 . 009  0 . 107 0 . 070 - 0 . 064  - 0 . 008 • - 0 . 034 - 0 . 016 0 . 022 - 0 . 017 . - 0 . 029  0 . 019 - 0 . 059 0 . 004  0 . 979 0 . 996 1. 08 1  - 0 .077 - 0 . .062 - 0 . .004 - 0 . 004 0 . 078 0 . 004 0 . 075 0 . 020 0 . 020  CO  PHI  MATRIX  1 0 .489 0 .. 583 0 .698 0 .7 17 0 . 726 0 . . 797 0 .842 0 .889 0 .926 1 .060 1 .099 1 .14 1 1 . 143 1 . 147 1 . 161 1 .281  7 6 0 .035 .089 0 . 105 .038 0 .020 . 105 0 .054 .034: - 0 . 1 19 . 174 0 . 1 16 . 192 .091 - 0 .214 0 .094 .084 0 . 127 .055 0 .096 . 128 .247 ' 0 .241 - 0 .058 .099 - 0 .112 .096 - 0 .007 .085 .084 - 0 .007 - 0 . 1 15 .047  8 0 .025 - 0 .006 - 0 . .001 - 0 .009 - 0 .038 0 . 354 - 0 .064 0 .023 - 0 .009 0 .010 0 , 106 - 0 . .051 - 0 . .112 - 0 .025 - 0 . 011 - 0 .052  0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  .041 .042 .052 . 158 .094 .062 .026 .006 .025 .043 .013  -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0  .053 .056 .062 .060 .006 .043 .009 .032 .016 .001 .023  0 . 234 - 0 . 1 18 0 .080 • 0 .014 - 0 . 178 - 0 .151 - 0 .013 0 .078 0 .038 0 .047 0 .053  - 0 . .016 - 0 .002 - 0 ..075 0 .050 0 .002 - 0 .018 0 .010 0 .019 0 . 0 10 - 0 .001 - 0 .003  -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 -0  - 0 .081 .147 .018 0 .022 . 378 0 .085 . 136 0 .028 .072 0 . 181 .065 0 . , 102 0 .,089 . 244 .094 0 .177 - 0 .042 . 142 .016 - 0 .06 1 .061 , 0 .045 - 0 .023 .008 .015 - 0 .022 - 0 .027 . 163  -0 -0 0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 0  0 .034 0. 012 - 0 , .010 - 0 ..001 - 0 . .002 0 .075 0 ., 0 2 6 - 0 . .001 - 0 , .020 0 .003 - 0 .004 0 .018 0 .007 0 .000  3 .480 .539 .499 . 247 . 329 . 344 . 482 . 320 .17 1 .313 . 429 .046 .095 .209 . 134 . 162  1 - 0 . . 100 - 0 . 194 - 0 .003 - 0 ..055 0 .200 - 0 .288 0 . . 380 - 0 . 192 - 0 . 263 - 0 . 187 - 0 .500 0 . 109 0 .233 0 .001 - 0 .003 0 .. 2 2 4  0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0  0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0  .058 .001 .053 . 178 .048 .029 .022 .022 .008 .040 .04 1  0 .038 0 .267 0 . . 105 - 0 .059 0 .287 0 .. 2 2 9 - 0 .035 - 0 . . 168 - 0 .131 - 0 .14 1 - 0 . 156  0 .550 0 .628 0 /7 18 0 . 739 0 . 753 0 .865 0 .896 0 .911 0 .912 0 .923 1 .004 1 .093 1 . 106 1 . 128  0 .. 2 1 8 0 .. 2 4 0 - 0 211 - 0 .082 0 .. 4 7 5 - 0 . . 222 0 ., 0 0 8 0 .. 0 0 6 0. 022 - 0 .079 0 .. 0 4 0 0 .029 0 .011 0 .004  50. 55. 54 . 48 . 45. 51 . 52. 44 . 49 . 47 . 53.  AVOIDS ALCOHOLIC NON-PRESENCE DISASSOCIATES L I V E S IN FANTASY AVOIDS OTHER PEOPLE WITHDRAWS INTO S E L F LOST IN S H U F F L E K E E P S TO S E L F / L O N E R K E E P S A LOW P R O F I L E WITHDRAWS E S C A P E S BY HIDING  0 . . 378 0 , .676 0 .. 6 5 3 0 .653 0 . .774 0 .. 8 2 8 0 ,, 9 1 3 0 .. 8 9 3 0 ,. 9 3 0 0 .938 0 . .954  - 0 .032 - 0 . .006 - 0 .085 0 . 126 - 0 .010 - 0 .039 - 0 .016 - 0 .020 0 .023 - 0 .017 - 0 .075  0 .611 0 .870 0 .883 0 .887 0 .953 0 .990 1 .092 1 .098 1 .114 1 . 124 1 . 132  30. 1. 25. 2. 14 . 9. 23. 15. 8. 24 . 3. 27 . 21 . 12.  MIRROR OF GOODNESS OLDEST OR ONLY CHILD APPEARS P E R F E C T OFTEN ASSUMES LEADER DOES WELL ATHLETICAL APPEARS TO FUNCTION SUCCESS IN WORK LEADER AMONG PEERS REMAINS R E S P O N S I B L E APPEARS EXEMPLARY DOES WELL SCHOLAST SUC TO STOP PARDRINK SUPERACHIEVER(TRIES) PROVIDE WORTH BY SUC  0 . 487 0 , .574 0 . , 802 0 ,. 7 1 2 0 .. 5 1 0 0 .. 7 1 8 0 .. 8 0 9 0 ,. 7 3 8 0 . . 799 0 , ,807 0 , , 77 1 0 . .897 0 . .9 18 0 .. 9 0 0  0 .438 0 .231 - 0 , .057 0 .135 - 0 . 320 - 0 .008 - 0 , .221 - 0 . 165 0 .264 0 . 136 - 0 .039 - 0 . . 125 - 0 . 133 0 .027  0 .020 - 0 .044 0 .009 0 .005 - 0 .033 0 .056 - 0 .001 - 0 .019 0 .007 0 .. 0 4 2 0 .024 0 .011 0 .013 0 .023  i  -0 0 -0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 0  0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 -0  11. 4 . 20. 7. 42. 46. 33. 10. 43. 13. 37 . 5. 38. 17. 19. 36 .  0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  . 166 .059 .111 . 144 .014 . 186 . 360 .025 . 392 . 150 .212 .029 . 136 .257 . 148 .171  2 .017 .005 .011 .037 . 399 .011 .004 .000 . 100 .007 .027 .074 .051 .015 .026 .095  STIMULUS 1-DELTA* *2 0 ,, 6 9 0 HAVE TO BE GOOD 0 . .677 TAKES CHARGE MOTIVATED FAM LOOKOK d . ,676 0 . .629 PROVIDES STRUCTURE 0 . ,462 F E A R S ROCKING BOAT T R I E S REDUCE CONFLIC 0 . ,486 0 . ,477 DISCOUNTS OWN NEEDS 0 . ,7 36 MANAGES FAM A F F A I R S 0 ., 6 3 3 MAINTAINS ORDER 0 . ,817 FAM COUNTS ON THEM SMOOTHS OVER CONFLIC 0 . . 6 2 0 0 ., 6 9 5 F E E L S RESPONSIBLE 0 ., 6 5 5 WILLING TO LEND EAR 0 , .751 P R A I S E FOR CARING 0 .. 7 6 8 ACTS AS FAM SAVIOR 0 .. 7 1 8 SURVIVAL=GIVING  .088 . 143 .097 .065 . 187 . 103 .022 .008 .009 .04 1 .036 .023 .013 .002  X  II CO  i-o to  28. 22. 35. 6. 64. 58. 57. 59. 56.  UNABLE TO RELAX F E E L S THEY DONT F I T MANIPULATES OTHERS TAKES L I F E SERIOUSLY P O T E N T I A L - DANGEROUS PROBLEMS INTERACTING UNABLE CONTROL ANGER OFTEN LACK S K I L L S OFTEN LACK EDUCATION  29 . 26. 18.  . 191 .07 1 . 364 .289 .031 .005 .059 .072 .035  - 0 .046 0 . 385 - 0 .046 - 0 .046 - 0 .041 0 .020 - 0 .047 0 .057 - 0 . 154  0 . 158 - 0 . 167 - 0 . 189 0 . 197 0 .025 - 0 .079 - 0 .040 -0 .015 0 .015  REPEATED SUC NO SATS 0 . 8 0 8 0 . ,837 NEVER DO ENOUGH TROUBLE F E E L I N G GOOD 0 . , 8 4 5  - 0 . 192 - 0 , .042 - a .010  - 0 .012 - 0 .036 0 .003  0 . 246 0 .020 - 0 . 140  - 0 .018 - 0 .023 - 0 ..023  39. 40. 41 .  0 ., 6 5 0 TAKES IN STRIDE 0 . 751 FLEXIBLE ADAPTS TO SITUATIONS 0 . 783  - 0 .064 0 . .008 0 . 041  0 .007 - 0 . ,061 0 . .039  0 . 137 - 0 .058 - 0 . .011  - 0 . 129 0 . 068 0. O i l  61 . 16. 65". 63. 60. 67 . 62. 68.  ACTS PHYS AGGRESSIVE ACTS VERB AGGRESSIVE CAUSES TROUBLE ACTS DEFIANT/HOSTILE FAM BLAMES THEM REBELS FAM SAYS PERSON BAD ACTS OUT OFTEN IN TROUBLE  0. -0. 0. 0. -0. -0. -0. 0. 0.  -0. -0. -0. -0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.  042 033 010 010 Oil 018 008 010 010  0 . 056 0 . ,036 - 0 . 006 - 0 . ,006 - 0 . 031 0 . 030 - 0 . 036 • 0 . 004 - 0 . 004  0. 0. 0. 0. -0. -0. -0. -0. -0.  32. 34 . 31 .  CLOWNING OR ANNOYING 0 . 807 TRIES TO BE CUTE 0 . 803 T R I E S TO BE FUNNY 0 . 938  0 . 012 - 0 . 006 - 0 . 002  0 . 058 - 0 . 030 0 . 007  0 . 108 0 . 061 - 0 . 056  66.  0 .478 0 .422 0 . 280 0 .620 0 .659 0 .623 0 .77 1 0 . 502 0 .716  0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.  819 888 976 976 881 950 953 984 984  0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0  015 015 013 013 014 Oil 003 005 005  - 0 . 124 - 0 . 004 0 . 045  0 .531 0 .602 0 .605 0 .608 0 .848 0 .852 0 .934 1 . 104 1 . 1 14  324 362 111 11 1 025 029 039 019 019  0 0 0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0  . 426 . 160 . 103 . 400 .075 .031 .039 .031 .090  -0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0  .007 .049 . 1 19 .045 .016 .030 .091 .027 .004  -0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 -0 0  . 249 .015 . 145 . 330 .257 . 205 . 269 . 126 .084  0 .008 - 0 . .061 0 ., 0 5 3  - 0 .012 0 .. 0 4 5 0 ., 0 1 8  - 0 ..080 - 0 . 005 - 0 . 031  0 . 992 • 1 0. 6 3 1 . 066  0 . 066 - 0 . 030 - 0 . 010  -0. -0. -0. -0. 0. -0. 0. 0. 0.  0. 0. 0. 0. -0. 0. 0. 0. 0.  0 .951 1 . 102 1 .,2 1 0  060 049 008 008 074 002 070 015 015  - 0 . 033 0 . 029 - 0 . 033  019 001 017 017 001 005 003 003 003  0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.  704 7 14 906 906 924 966 971 978 978  - 0 . 008 0 . 018 - 0 . 018 ' - 0 . 0 5 5 0 . 003 - 0 . 016  0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0  .005 .007 . 1 10 . 108 .010 .031 .002 .082 .062  - 0 .012 - 0 ,,010 012  :°  0 . 057 - 0 . ,042 - 0 . 039 -0. 0. •0. -0. 0. -0. -0. -0. -0.  033 004 022 022 008 007 008 Oil 0)1  0 . 964 0 . 980 1. 0 6 5  CO  o  PHI  MATRIX  1 0 .341 0 482 0 582 0 692 0 707 0 . 709 0 . 785 0 813 0 884 0 909 1 .056 1 .075 1 . 122 1 . 122 1 136 1 . 150 1 .259  35 . 11 . 4 . 20. 7. 42. 46 . 33. 10. 43. 13. 37 . 5. 38. 17 . 19. 36. 6. 28. 29. 26. 18.  TAKES L I F E SERIOUSLY UNABLE TO RELAX REPEATED SUC NO SATS NEVER DO ENOUGH TROUBLE F E E L I N G GOOD  0 0 0 0 0  600 465 793 811 807  0 0 -0 -0 -0  .262 167 .206 .059 .030  0 0 1 1 1  661 663 067 221 330  -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  22. 50. 48. 54 . 55. 45. 51 . 44 . 52 . 49. 47 . 53.  F E E L S THEY DONT F I T AVOIDS ALCOHOLIC L I V E S IN FANTASY DISASSOCIATES NON-PRESENCE AVOIDS OTHER PEOPLE WITHDRAWS INTO S E L F KEEPS TO SELF/LONER LOST IN SHUFFLE KEEPS A LOW P R O F I L E WITHORAWS ESCAPES BY HIDING  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  410 377 651 654 67 1 764 825 889 9 13 928 936 950  0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0  053 .032 . 122 .086 .013 015 .046 .015 .015 026 012 07 1  0 0 0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  338 028 154 050 030 Oil 145 070 046 077 102 075  0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1  0 0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0  7  6  5  4  3  STIMULUS 1-DELTA**2 0 263 MANIPULATES OTHERS 0 690 HAVE TO BE GOOD 0 676 TAKES CHARGE MOTIVATED FAM LOOKOK 0 674 0 629 PROVIDES STRUCTURE 0 463 FEARS ROCKING BOAT T R I E S REDUCE CONFLIC 0 463 DISCOUNTS OWN NEEDS 0 476 MANAGES FAM A F F A I R S 0 735 0 616 MAINTAINS ORDER 0 818 FAM COUNTS ON THEM SMOOTHS OVER CONFLIC 0 559 0 693 F E E L S RESPONSIBLE W I L L I N G TO LEND EAR 0 650 0 748 P R A I S E FOR CARING 0 768 ACTS AS FAM SAVIOR 0 7 10 SURVIVAL=GIV1NG  291 179 1 16 105 158 073 104 533 07 1 363 208 058 088 071 267 147 109  -0 0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  006 010 007 017 043 422 018 026 Oil 075 001 019 065 031 007 021 076  -0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 -0  270 466 539 466 240 345 267 520 330 113 319 302 068 132 188 119 196  0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 0  264 124 004 096 059 234 1 15 170 133 157 171 113 076 177 066 075 124  0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0  210 020 010 043 029 073 032 002 04 1 013 067 009 027 018 007 021  0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 ^0 -0  106 026 005 003 008 039 364 065 025 001 0 1 1 1 18 053 1 17 028 013 056  002 010 028 055 017  0 0 0 0 -0  082 061 245 041 103  0 0 -0 -0 -0  190 108 055 149 146  -0 0 -0 -0 -0  009 034 073 018 056  -0 0 -0 -0 -0  114 001 005 001 001  431 621 900 909 910 999 031 108 1 15 129 138 145  -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 0  242 064 156 042 044 006 067 052 029 032 064 068  0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  167 081 101 078 125 073 005 089 024 058 044 023  0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  356 293 040 155 027 025 039 026 046 048 044 050  -0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 0  010 014 053 076 005 003 021 022 Oil 013 002 00 1  02.3  3 ?d i—i ps u II  0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  30. 1. 14 . 2. 25. 23. 8. 9. 15. 24 . 3. 27 . 21 . 12.  MinnOR OF GOODNESS OLDEST OR ONLY CHILD DOES WELL ATHLETICAL OFTEN ASSUMES LEADER APPEARS PERFECT SUCCESS IN WORK REMAINS RESPONSIBLE APPEARS TO FUNCTION LEADER AMONG PEERS APPEARS EXEMPLARY DOES WELL SCHOLAST SUC TO STOP PARDRINK SUPERACHIEVER(TRIES) PROVIDE WORTH BY SUC  39 . 41 . 40.  0 606 TAKES IN STRIDE ADAPTS TO SITUATIONS 0 749 0 727 FLEXIBLE  59. 5B. 56. 64 . 57 . 61 . 63. 16. 67 . 60. 62. 68. 65 . 66 . 32. 34 . 31 .  '  OFTEN LACK S K I L L S PROBLEMS INTERACTING OFTEN LACK EDUCATION P O T E N T I A L - DANGEROUS UNABLE CONTROL ANGER ACTS PHYS AGGRESSIVE FAM BLAMES THEM ACTS VERB AGGRESSIVE FAM SAYS PERSON BAD REBELS ACTS OUT OFTEN IN TROUBLE CAUSES TROUBLE ACTS DEFIANT/HOSTILE  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  474 565 494 71 1 790 809 796 7 14 7 39 807 769 895 917 896  412 591 635 626 725 82 1 859 890 927 929 963 963 966 966  CLOWNING OR ANNOYING 0 804 0 802 T R I E S TO BE CUTE 0 940 T R I E S TO BE FUNNY  0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 0  429 222 327 132 057 224 263 004 165 137 039 125 132 029  - 0 053 0 043 0 007 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 0 0 0  092 014 054 046 039 012 009 018 002 005 01 1 Oil 016 016  - 0 124 - 0 006 0 046  -0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 0 0 -0  072 120 237 140 368 293 126 014 1 17 019 035 044 046 156  0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0  044 022 004 001 Oil 001 017 042 018 042 034 019 020 032  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1  475 546 631 7 12 7 16 845 850 854 861 881 937 023 039 058  - 0 180 - 0 088 - 0 044  - 0 012 0 030 - 0 069  0 163 0 004 - 0 049  0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  .270 24 1 187 1 16 182 062 034 041 048 123 103 103 087 087  - 0 013 0 054 - 0 055  . 139 073 079 010 Oil 039 017 027 022 010 018 018 028 028  0 019 - 0 003 - 0 007  174 184 139 085 157 045 027 021 027 086 053 053 029 029  0 044 - 0 037 0 019  -0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0  008 102 325 011 023 100 Oil 063 205 068 085 005 000 006  1 021 1 136 1 150 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  217 126 237 178 079 023 108 010 11 1 100 103 103 052 052  0 015 - 0 003 - 0 027  0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 0  060 000 091 028 035 022 031 017 001 016 002 Oil 012 034  - 0 039 - 0 043 - 0 032 0 . 566 0 . 787 0 .821 0 852 0 921 1 037 1 056 1 .072 1 101 1 107 1 127 1 127 1 129 1 129 0 086 - 0 033 - 0 039  0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 0 0 -0  028 007 010 001 005 026 024 078 002 001 008 015 004 005  0 067 - 0 0 30 - 0 034 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0  .069 024 051 017 006 031 017 005 002 002 003 003 016 016  0 973 0 990 1 079  CO  133 PHI MATRIX: L = 6 4. 42. 7. 20. 33 . 46 . 43. 10. 37 . 13. 5. 38 . 17 . 19 . 36.  STIMULUS 1-DELTA'*2 T A K E S CHARGE 0 663 F E A R S R O C K I N G BOAT 0 462 PROVIDES STRUCTURE 0 627 M O T I V A T E D F A M LOOKOK 0 6 6 8 D I S C O U N T S OWN NEEDS 0 406 T R I E S REDUCE C O N F L I C 0 458 M A I N T A I N S ORDER 0 579 MANAGES F A M A F F A I R S 0 735 SMOOTHS OVER C O N F L I C 0 5 5 7 F A M COUNTS ON THEM 0 812 FEELS RESPONSIBLE 0 688 W I L L I N G TO L E N D EAR 0 651 P R A I S E FOR C A R I N G 0 737 ACTS AS F A M S A V I O R 0 767 SURVIVAL=GIVING 0 712  30 . 28. 6. 11. 1. 18 . 8. 2. 14 . 26 . 24 . 9 . 3. 29 . 12. 15. 25 . 23 . 27 . 2 1.  MIRROR OF GOODNESS U N A B L E TO R E L A X TAKES L I F E SERIOUSLY HAVE TO B E GOOD O L D E S T OR ONLY C H I L D T R O U B L E F E E L I N G GOOD REMAINS RESPONSIBLE OFTEN ASSUMES LEADER DOES WELL A T H L E T I C A L NEVER DO ENOUGH APPEARS EXEMPLARY A P P E A R S TO F U N C T I O N DOES WELL S C H O L A S T R E P E A T E D SUC NO S A T S P R O V I D E WORTH BY SUC L E A O E R AMONG P E E R S APPEARS PERFECT S U C C E S S I N WORK SUC TO STOP P A R D R I N K SUPERACHI E V E R ( T R I E S )  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  466 415 556 690 565 508 769 71 1 495 574 793 700 744 642 851 729 792 812 879 901  22. 50 . 54 . 55. 48 . 45 . 51 . 44 . 52. 49 . 47 . 53.  F E E L S THEY DONT F I T AVOIDS ALCOHOLIC DISASSOCIATES NON- PRESENCE L I V E S IN FANTASY A V O I D S OTHER P E O P L E WITHDRAWS I N T O S E L F K E E P S TO S E L F / L O N E R LOST I N S H U F F L E K E E P S A LOW P R O F I L E WITHDRAWS E S C A P E S BY H I D I N G  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  396 377 649 671 645 763 824 887 91 1 925 930 945  35 . 39 . 41. 40 .  M A N I P U L A T E S OTHERS TAKES IN S T R I D E A D A P T S TO S I T U A T I O N S FLEXIBLE  0 252 0 526 0 688 0 682  59 . 58 . 56 . 64 . 57 . 6 1 . 63 . 16 . 60. 67 . 62. 68 . 65 . 66 .  OFTEN LACK S K I L L S . PROBLEMS I N T E R A C T I N G O F T E N LACK E D U C A T I O N POTENTIALDANGEROUS U N A B L E CONTROL ANGER ACTS- P H Y S A G G R E S S I V E FAM B L A M E S THEM ACTS VERB A G G R E S S I V E REBELS F A M S A Y S P E R S O N BAD A C T S OUT O F T E N IN T R O U B L E . CAUSES TR0U8LE ACTS DEFIANT/HOSTILE  32. 34 . 31 .  CLOWNING OR T R I E S TO BE T R I E S TO BE  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  407 585 635 627 72 1 819 859 889 925 927 96 1 961 964 964  ANNOYING 0 8 0 4 CUTE 0 801 FUNNY 0 940  .  J  1 0 596 0 677 0 696 0 706 0 734 0 758 0 865 0 893 1 048 1 072 1 099 1 107 1 147 1 153 1 244  0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0  514 324 380 433 170 222 135 301 301 182 023 206 004 007 310  -0 0 -0 -0 0 0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  3 034 444 033 004 096 004 120 022 001 022 047 0 30 031 031 075  -0 0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 0  064 292 040 154 337 175 057 170 170 232 033 194 123 102 141  -0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 0  012 01 1 034 027 015' 058 009 010 052 002 022 027 002 001 022  -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  004 040 008 003 063 360 002 025 1 17 012 053 1 17 027 012 057  0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  441 118 209 480 223 083 293 140 332 105 164 019 008 241 073 151 062 221 095 102  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  476 573 600 648 708 843 855 906 911 927 969 972 027 054 065 .067 084 180 182 .201  0 0 0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  023 046 052 014 033 105 025 015 007 053 009 010 006 057 021 045 006 009 016 016  -0 0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0  062 240 321 126 080 122 1 14 026 314 088 156 016 012 129 125 145 028 078 085 092  0 0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  042 070 025 019 012 032 003 014 077 058 01 1 044 031 014 008 026 035 034 019 018  0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 •0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0  028 001 113 026 006 004 023 001 012 004 002 077 008 008 005 003 005 024 0 14 004  0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0  014 031 084 023 105 021 061 008 012 031 004 064  -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0  002 093 019 .016 .061 006 .039 .005 .000 .023 .004 .023  0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1  0 -0 0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  258 089 054 130 060 065 033 1 19 047 087 082 057  0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  378 292 146 026 025 029 031 032 052 055 054 058  -0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 0  012 014 076 006 053 003 021 023 011 013 002 001  0 .299 - 0 .046 0 031 - 0 011  -0 0 -0 -0  .068 .096 .006 .030  0 -0 0 -0  .027 .048 .006 .089  0 0 1 1  358 940 096 . 132  0 231 - 0 073 - 0 070 -0 055  0 0 -0 -0  . 103 067 .028 034  124 043 081 065 016 015 002 016 009 010 023 023 024 024  0 -0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  028 010 006 010 027 012 005 001 005 005 017 017 029 029  0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  165 098 065 018 030 049 021 034 024 027 029 029 037 037  0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0. -0 -0 -0 -0 -0. -0.  29 1 195 293 212 134 005 124 004 139 130 135. 135 077 077  0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0.  066 023 04g 018 008 031 017 005 003 002 002 002 015 0,15  -0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0  - 0 122 - 0 011 0 050  0 046 0 003 - 0 019  469 626 .907 9 19 .928 .004 .054 . 1 10 . 118 . 130 . 136 1 . 144  0 016 0 005 - 0 011  tI  0 008 0 013 - 0 039  6  5  0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1. 1. 1 1.  580 801 828 854 932 028 052 065 095 097 117 1 17 120 120  0 084 - 0 . 028 - 0 04 1  0 967 0 983 1 072  PHI MATRIX: L = 5 35. 40. 41 . 4. 20. 7. 10. 46 . 43 . 42. 33 . 13. 17 . 5. 19 . 37 . 38 . 36 .  STIMULUS 1-DELTA**2 MANIPULATES OTHERS 0 . 239 FLEXIBLE 0 . 246 ADAPTS TO SITUATIONS 0 . 289 TAKES CHARGE 0 . 658 MOTIVATED FAM LOOKOK 0 . 648 PROVIDES STRUCTURE 0 . 622 MANAGES FAM AFFAIRS 0 . 702 TRIES REDUCE CONFLIC 0 . 459 MAINTAINS ORDER 0 . 567 FEARS ROCKING BOAT 0 . 456 DISCOUNTS OWN NEEDS 0 . 390 FAM COUNTS ON THEM 0 . 757 PRAISE FOR CARING 0 . 708 FEELS RESPONSIBLE 0 . 678 ACTS AS FAM SAVIOR 0 . 740 SMOOTHS OVER CONFLIC 0 . 559 WILLING TO LEND EAR 0 . 653 SURVIVAL=GIVING 0 . 716  30. 28. 6. 11 . 1. 18 . 14 . 8. 26 . 2. 9. 24 . 29. 3. 15 . 25. 12. 23. 27 . 21 .  MIRROR OF GOODNESS UNABLE TO RELAX TAKES L I F E SERIOUSLY HAVE TO BE GOOD OLDEST OR ONLY CHILD TROUBLE FEELING GOOD DOES WELL ATHLETICAL REMAINS RESPONSIBLE NEVER DO ENOUGH OFTEN ASSUMES LEADER APPEARS TO FUNCTION APPEARS EXEMPLARY REPEATED SUC NO SATS DOES WELL SCHOLAST LEADER AMONG PEERS APPEARS PERFECT PROVIDE WORTH BY SUC SUCCESS IN WORK SUC TO STOP PARORINK SUPERACHI EVER(TRIES)  0. 461  399 513 678 564 500 442 766 568 711 700 787 628 745 715 790 849 806 880 901  0. 0. 0. 0. -0. -0. 0. -0. 0. -0. 0. -0. -0. -0. -0. -0. -0. -0. -0.  238 383 4 18 257 043 198 225 088 109 022 063 210 044 1 10 081 019 225 180 190  0 . 551 0 . 569 0 . 694 0 . 715 0 . 828 0 . 853 0 . .890 0 . .916 0 . 923 0. 986 1. 005 1. 030 1..037 1. 047 1..087 1. 093 1. 168 1. 198 1.,217  22. 50 . 48 . 54 . 55 . 45 . . 51 . 44 . 52. 49 . 47 . 53.  FEELS THEY DONT FIT AVOIDS ALCOHOLIC LIVES IN FANTASY DISASSOCIATES NON-PRESENCE AVOIDS OTHER PEOPLE WITHDRAWS INTO SELF KEEPS TO SELF/LONER LOST IN SHUFFLE KEEPS A LOW PROFILE WITHORAWS ESCAPES BY HIDING  0 . 380 0 . 374 0 . 637 0 . 649 0 . 669 0 . 764 0 . 824 0 . 875 0 . 907 0 . 917 0 . 924 0 . 942  0. -0. 0. -0. 0. 0. -0. -0. -0. -0. -0. -0.  161 073 085 045 055 022 036 064 028 004 037 088  - 0 . .035 0 . , 102 - 0 . 047 0 . 006 - 0 . .033 - 0 , ,016 0, ,031 0 . ,021 0. ,005 - 0 . ,010 0 . ,006 0. .028  59 . 58 . 56 . 64 . 57 . 61 . 63. 16 . 60. 67 . 62. 68. 65. 66 .  OFTEN LACK S K I L L S PROBLEMS INTERACTING OFTEN LACK EDUCATION POTENTIAL- DANGEROUS UNABLE CONTROL ANGER ACTS PHYS AGGRESSIVE FAM BLAMES THEM ACTS VERB AGGRESSIVE REBELS FAM SAYS PERSON BAO ACTS OUT OFTEN IN TROUBLE CAUSES TROUBLE ACTS DEFIANT/HOSTILE  0 . 388 0 . 575 0 .611 0 .6 10 0 .716 0 .819 0 . 854 0 . 889 0 .9 19 0 . 922 0 .955 0 .955 0 .963 0 .963  0 . 026 0 . 065 0 .075 0 .055 0 .099 0 .030 - 0 .060 - 0 .009 - 0 .055 - 0 .049 - 0 .038 - 0 .038 - 0 .004 - 0 .004  - 0 . .015 - 0 . .038 - 0 .036 - 0 .023 - 0 .046 0 .010 0 .020 -0 .001 0 .023 0 .011 - 0 .000 - 0 .000 - 0 .020 - 0 .020  0 . . 198 0 . .121 - 0 .033 0 .044 0 .045 - 0 .045 - 0 .031 - 0 .032 - 0 .035 - 0 .038 - 0 .041 - 0 .041 - 0 .043 - 0 .043  39 . 32 . 34 . 31 .  TAKES IN CLOWNING TRIES TO TRIES TO  0 .256 0 .699 0 .683 0 . 727  0 .428 - 0 . 180 -0 .064 -0 .022  - 0 .010 0 .059 0 .022 0 .008  0 -0 -0 -0  STRIDE OR ANNOYING BE CUTE BE FUNNY  0. 0. 0. 0. 0.  0. 0. 0.  0. 0. 0. 0. 0.  0.  0. 0. 0. 0. 0.  1 2 0 . 50 1 - 0 . 096 0 . 549 - 0 . 142 0 . 577 - 0 . 114 0 . 579 0 . 556 0 . 649 0 . 492 0 . 700 0 . 423 0 . 834 0 . 373 0 . 870 - 0 . 198 0 . 876 0 . 187 0 . 885 - 0 . 331 0 . 961 - 0 . 179 0 . 987 0 . 273 1. 137 0 . 072 1. 143 0 . 035 1. 153 0 . 081 1. 195 - 0 . 270 1. 285 - 0 . 181 1. 400 -0. 272  0. 417  '  0. .510  3 0 . 054 0 . 037 0 . 123 - 0 . 052 - 0 . 034 - 0 . 052 - 0 . 059 - 0 . 009 0 . 095 0 . 463 0 . 116 - 0 . 069 - 0 . 068 - 0 . 074 - 0 . 066 - 0 . 010 - 0 . 031 - 0 . 088 '  4 0 . 218 - 0 . 048 - 0 . 063 - 0 . 013 0 . 024 0 . 030 - 0 . 016 - 0 . 078 - 0 . 017 - 0 . 022 0 . 005 - 0 . 009 - 0 . 007 0 . 013 - 0 . 008 - 0 . 068 0 . 018 0. 010  5 0 . 273 0 . 4 19 0 . 41 1 - 0 . 065 -0. 1 1 1 - 0 . 063 - 0 . 097 0 . 464 - 0 . 073 0 . 043 0 . 04 1 - 0 . 152 - 0 . 154 - 0 . 139 - 0 . 128 0 . 154 - 0 . 115 - 0 . 076  0. 007  0. 039 0. 067  - 0 . 016 0 . 114 0 . 013 - 0 . 047 0 . 039 0 . 073 0 . 159 - 0 . 09 1 0 . 059 - 0 . 012 0 . 092 - 0 . 071 0 . 081 - 0 . .006 0 . 082 0 . 022 - 0 . 059 0 . 090 - 0 . 006 - 0 . .021  0. 0. -0. -0. 0.  069 086 009 028 122 0. .036 - 0 . .040 0 . ,067 - 0 . 018 0. 008 -0. 007 0. 079 -0. ,003 -0. ,023 0 . 002 - 0 . 033 0 . ,006 - 0 . ,020 - 0 . .020  025 020 011 033 0. .081 0 . 001 0 . .060 0. ,017 - 0 . 041 -0. 006 - 0 . ,010 - 0 . .025 - 0 . ,020 - 0 . .030 - 0 . ,003 - 0 . ,028 - 0 . ,012 •0..011 0. -0. -0. 0.  0 . 105 0. ,500 0 . . 369 0 . ,625 0 . .290 - 0 . 06 1 0 . 925 • - 0,030 . . 0 . 02 1' 0 . ,926 0. . 145 - 0 . 069 0 . .942 0. .022 0 ..047 1..021 - 0 . .032 0. .020 1..069 - 0 . .032 - 0 . .015 1.. 106 - 0 . .034 - 0 . 039 1..123 - 0 .054 - 0 . 019 1.. 130 -0, .057 - 0 . 039 1., 137 - 0 . .055 - 0 . 047 1,. 150 - 0 . .059 - 0 . 034  .053 .012 .025 .047  0. . 569 0 . 789 0 .814 0 . 843 0 .920 1 .019 1 .042 1 .055 1 .086 1 .087 1 . 107 1 . 107 1 . 1 10 T . 1 10 -0 0 -0 -0  .069 .061 .049 .057  0. .225 0 . 125 0 . 205 0 .085 0 .059 - 0 .032 - 0 .034 0 .009 -0 .060 - 0 .055 - 0 .064 - 0 .064 -0 .053 - 0 .053 0 . 467 1 . 1 16 1 . 126 1 . 159  135  PHI MATRIX: L = 4  28 . 30. 6. 4. 1 . 11 . 14 . 18 . 26 . 2. 8. 9. 29. 15. 3. 24. 25. 23. 12 . 27 . 21 .  STIMULUS 1-DELTA"2 UNABLE TO RELAX 0 393 MIRROR OF GOODNESS 0 46 1 TAKES L I F E SERIOUSLY 0 5 14 TAKES CHARGE 0 652 OLDEST OR ONLY CHILD 0 562 HAVE TO BE GOOD 0 678 OOES WELL ATHLETICAL 0 407 TROUBLE FEELING GOOD 0 488 NEVER DO ENOUGH 0 555 OFTEN ASSUMES LEADER 0 710 REMAINS RESPONSIBLE 0 767 APPEARS TO FUNCTION 0 683 REPEATED SUC NO SATS 0 604 LEADER AMONG PEERS 0 694 DOES WELL SCHOLAST 0 741 APPEARS EXEMPLARY 0 790 APPEARS PERFECT 0 780 SUCCESS IN WORK 0 776 PROVIDE WORTH BY SUC 0 850 SUC TO STOP PARDRINK 0 87 1 SUPERACHIEVERt TRIES) 0 895  22 . 50 . 54. 48. 55 . 45. 51 . 44 . 52. 49 . 47 . 53.  FEELS THEY DONT FIT AVOIDS ALCOHOLIC DISASSOCIATES L I V E S IN FANTASY NON-PRESENCE AVOIDS OTHER PEOPLE WITHOHAWS INTO SELF KEEPS TO SELF/LONER LOST IN SHUFFLE KEEPS A LOW PROFILE WITHDRAWS ESCAPES BY HIDING  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  380 372 645 637 669 764 824 874 907 915 922 942  32. 20 . 34 . 7 . 31 . 35. 10. 39 . 43 . 13 . 40. 41 . 42 . 33. 17. 5. 19 . 38 . 46 . 37 . 36 .  CLOWNING OR ANNOYING MOTIVATED FAM LOOKOK TRIES TO BE CUTE PROVIDES STRUCTURE TRIES TO BE FUNNY MANIPULATES OTHERS MANAGES FAM AFFAIRS TAKES IN STRIDE MAINTAINS OROER FAM COUNTS ON THEM FLEXIBLE ADAPTS TO SITUATIONS FEARS ROCKING BOAT DISCOUNTS OWN NEEDS PRAISE FOR CARING FEELS RESPONSIBLE ACTS AS FAM SAVIOR WILLING TO LEND EAR TRIES REDUCE CONFLIC SMOOTHS OVER CONFLIC SURVIVAL=GIVING  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  59 . 58 . 56 . 64 . 57 . 61 . 63. 16 . 60. 67 . 62. 68 . 65 . 66.  OFTEN LACK S K I L L S PROBLEMS INTERACTING OFTEN LACK EDUCATION POTENTIAL - DANGEROUS UNABLE CONTROL ANGER ACTS PHYS AGGRESSIVE FAM BLAMES THEM ACTS VERB AGGRESSIVE REBELS FAM SAYS PERSON BAD ACTS OUT OFTEN IN TR0U8LE CAUSES TROUBLE ACTS DEFIANT/HOSTILE  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1  1  503 534 566 609 693 721 735 759 846 900 909 909 933 960 993 999 025 063 071 137 160  0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0  07 1 001 079 063 027 014 052 131 077 014 041 021 094 009 006 003 013 024 025 006 006  0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0  061 117 024 046 048 024 029 028 008 003 019 030  0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  493 619 916 917 934 013 062 099 115 120 128 143  155 634 14 1 6 13 155 234 682 204 547 7 14 222 267 448 384 650 625 688 591 428 560 655  -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0  300 572 322 490 336 150 469 151 282 409 254 222 252 109 231 187 232 017 276 213 104  0 -0 0 -0 0 0 -0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  049 049 035 067 017 051 078 060 072 094 038 122 436 091 098 105 096 066 009 034 123  377 576 607 612 7 16 814 850 888 9 12 9 15 946 946 955 955  - 0 094 - 0 073 - 0 too - 0 045 - 0 052 0 032 0 038 0 004 0 050 0 .038 0 031 0 031 0 .010 0 .010  0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  201 1 18 031 04 1 040 052 036 036 041 043 047 047 .050 050  i  tI  331 408 411 539 283 382 09 1 001 059 083 142 026 169 069 074 016 088 186 094 221 244  0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0  0 -0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  261 120 082 120 114 059 030 081 026 015 057 100  0 0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  399 291 138 029 030 030 035 041 058 066 065 065  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  551 574 667 671 721 737 779 815 855 893 917 940 979 050 050 074 088 246 253 373 392  0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  290 012 180 001 178 264 057 010 058 067 017 001 046 019 073 050 069 047 015 080 052  0 201 0 161 0,232 0 1 19 0 142 - 0 006 - 0 107 - 0 017 - 0 122 -0 1 1 1 - 0 106 - 0 106 - 0 .060 - 0 .060  093 031 023 038 003 035 133 06 1 088 024 014 010 026 013 013 010 010 01 1 000 007 006  0 633 0 84 1 0 882 0 889 0 961 1 047 1 074 1 095 1 114 1 115 1 . 134 1 134 1 . 138 1 . 138  136  PHI MATRIX: L = 3  35. 40 . 39 . 41 . 46 . 33. 37 . 14. 28 . 36 . 38. 18 . 30. 43. 26. 6. 5. 29 . 17. 1. 19 . 7. 20. 15 . 9. 4. 10. 13. 3. 23. 2. 11 . 25 . 24 . 8. 27 . 21 . 12.  STIMULUS 1-DELTA '2 MANIPULATES OTHERS 0 . 160 FLEXIBLE 0 . 090 TAKES IN STRIDE 0 . 111 ADAPTS TO SITUATIONS 0 . 138 TRIES REDUCE CONFLIC 0 . 189 DISCOUNTS OWN NEEDS 0 . 245 SMOOTHS OVER CONFLIC 0 . 289 DOES WELL ATHLETICAL 0 . 363 UNABLE TO RELAX 0 . 395 SURVIVAL=GIVING 0 . 394 WILLING TO LEND EAR 0 . 402 TROUBLE FEELING GOOD 0 . 452 MIRROR OF GOODNESS 0 462 MAINTAINS ORDER 0 . 500 NEVER 00 ENOUGH 0 . 504 TAKES L I F E SERIOUSLY 0 . 516 FEELS RESPONSIBLE 0 . 515 REPEATED SUC NO SATS 0 . 522 PRAISE FOR CARING 0 . 552 OLDEST OR ONLY CHILD 0 . 560 ACTS AS FAM SAVIOR 0 . 582 PROVIDES STRUCTURE 0 . 601 MOTIVATED FAM LOOKOK 0 . 632 LEADER AMONG PEERS 0 632 APPEARS TO FUNCTION 0 . 641 0 653 TAKES CHARGE MANAGES FAM AFFAIRS 0 657 FAM COUNTS ON THEM 0 668 DOES WELL SCHOLAST 0 673 SUCCESS IN WORK 0 674 OFTEN ASSUMES LEADER 0 678 HAVE TO BE GOOO 0 679 APPEARS PERFECT 0 705 APPEARS EXEMPLARY 0 732 REMAINS RESPONSIBLE 0 742 SUC TO STOP PARDRINK 0 750 SUPERACHIEVERlTRIES) 0 764 PROVIDE WORTH BY SUC 0 769  22 . 42 . 50. 54. 48 . 55 . 45 . 51 . 44 . 52. 49 . 47 . 53.  FEELS THEY DONT FIT FEARS ROCKING BOAT AVOIDS ALCOHOLIC DISASSOCIATES LIVES IN FANTASY NOtf- PRESENCE AVOIDS OTHER PEOPLE WITHDRAWS INTO.SELF KEEPS TO SELF/LONER LOST IN SHUFFLE KEEPS A LOW PROFILE WITHORAWS ESCAPES BY HIDING  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  34 . 31 . 32. 59 . 58. 56 . 64 . 57 . 61 . 63 . 16 . 60 . 67 . 62 . 68 . 65. 66.  TRIES TO 8E CUTE TRIES TO BE FUNNY CLOWNING OR ANNOYING .OFTEN LACK S K I L L S PROBLEMS INTERACTING OFTEN LACK EDUCATION POTENTIAL- DANGEROUS UNABLE CONTROL ANGER ACTS PHYS AGGRESSIVE FAM BLAMES THEM ACTS VERB AGGRESSIVE REBELS FAM SAYS PERSON BAO ACTS OUT OFTEN IN TR0U8LE CAUSES TROUBLE ACTS DEFIANT/HOSTILE  0 056 0 057 0 095 0 374 0 574 0 600 0 .611 0 .7 16 0 .813 0 .845 0 . 887 0 .906 0 .910 0 .941 0 .94 1 0 .953 0 .953  1  378 316 356 632 637 670 76 1 813 858 896 906 908 922  1 0 . 340 0 . 343 0 . 394 0 . 397 0 . 552 0 . 607 0 710 0 . 806 0 . 831 0 . 853 0 856 0 . 900 0 924 0 937 0 960 0 . 964 0 . 981 0 . 985 1 .016 1 026 1 043 1 060 1 088 1 091 1 098 1 108 1 111 1 120 1 126 1 127 1 128 1 129 1 152 •1 174 1 182 1 189 1 200 1 204 0 0 0 -0 • 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  098 368 037 053 006 001 013 013 051 037 035 047 064  0 088 0 1 10 0 031 0 024 0 021 0 .042 0 .026 0 .034 0 .030 - 0 .034 - 0 .011 - 0 .030 - 0 .037 - 0 .041 - 0 .04 1 - 0 .034 - 0 .034  2 0 . 144 0 . 157 0 . 163 0 . 247 0 . 145 0 219 0 . 128 - 0 . 001 0 . 081 0 . 031 0 069 0 . 092 0 013 0 155 0 022 0 095 - 0 002 0 022 - 0 . 000 - 0 040 0 006 - 0 027 - 0 023 - 0 077 - 0 031 - 0 045 - 0 025 - 0 025 - 0 063 - 0 061 - 0 061 - 0 018 - 0 059 - 0 067 - 0 084 - 0 100 - 0 104 - 0 103 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  558 584 638 965 996013 090 127 160 186 193 195 205  0 131 0 119 0 132 0 241 0 147 - 0 004 0 .057 0 .059 - 0 .061 - 0 .055 - 0 .044 - 0 .064 - 0 .064 - 0 .067 - 0 .067 - 0 .064 - 0 .064  3 0 301 0 060 0 047 0 041 0 042 0 025 - 0 019 0 112 0 094 0 007 0 004 0 042 0 034 - 0 032 0 065 0 025 - 0 011 - 0 004 - 0 036 - 0 009 - 0 031 0 016 - 0 004 - 0 014 - 0 033 - 0 032 - 0 038 - 0 042 - 0 04 1 - 0 023 0 004 - 0 038 - 0 040 - 0 036 - 0 031 - 0 030 - 0 033 - 0 031 0 -0 0 0 •0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  415 002 284 131 030 031 034 044 052 067 075 076 078  0 216 0 .216 0 . 323 0 .654 0 . 863 0 .910 0 .910 0 .985 1 .065 1 .088 1 .113 1 . 127 1 . 130 1 . 149 1 . 149 1 . 156 1 . 156  137  PHI MATRIX: L = 2  40 . 39 . 41 . 42. 46. 33. 37 . 14 . 28. 36 . 38. 18 . 30. 43. 26 . 6. 5. 29 . 17 . 1. 19. 7 . 15. 20. 9. 4. 10. 13. 3. 23. 2. 11 . 25 . 24 . 8. 27 . 21 . 12. 31 . 34 . 48 . 47 . 49 . 53 . 35. 52. 45 . 51 . 44 . 32. 55. 54. 50 . 22 . 59 . 56 . 58. 64 . 57 . 61 . 63 . 16 . 60 . 67 . 62. 68 . 65 . 66 .  STIMULUS 1-DELTA''2 FLEXIBLE 0 . 083 TAKES IN STRIDE 0 . 103 AOAPTS TO SITUATIONS 0 . 1 14 FEARS ROCKING BOAT 0 . 141 TRIES REDUCE CONFLIC 0 . 184 DISCOUNTS OWN NEEDS 0 . 227 SMOOTHS OVER CONFLIC 0 . 284 DOES WELL ATHLETICAL 0 . 360 UNABLE TO RELAX 0 . 395 SURVIVAL=GIVING 0 . 394 WILLING TO LEND EAR 0 . 402 TROUBLE FEELING GOOD 0 . 452 MIRROR OF GOODNESS 0 . 461 MAINTAINS ORDER 0 . 492 NEVER DO ENOUGH 0 . 503 TAKES L I F E SERIOUSLY 0 . 515 0 . 513 FEELS RESPONSIBLE REPEATED SUC NO SATS 0 . 522 PRAISE FOR CARING 0 . 55 1 OLDEST OR ONLY CHILD 0 . 556 ACTS AS FAM SAVIOR 0 . 581 PROVIDES STRUCTURE 0 . 597 LEADER AMONG PEERS 0 . 623 MOTIVATED FAM LOOKOK 0 . 629 APPEARS TO FUNCTION 0 . 638 TAKES'CHARGE 0 . 648 MANAGES FAM AFFAIRS 0 . 655 FAM COUNTS ON THEM 0 . 665 DOES WELL SCHOLAST 0 . 666 SUCCESS IN WORK 0 . 668 OFTEN ASSUMES LEADER 0 . 670 HAVE TO BE GOOD 0 . 677 APPEARS PERFECT 0 . 699 APPEARS EXEMPLARY 0 . 725 REM4INS RESPONSIBLE 0 . 732 SUC TO STOP PARDRINK 0 . 738 SUPERACHIEVERf TRIES) 0 . 750 PROVIDE WORTH BY SUC 0 . 755 TRIES TO BE FUNNY TRIES TO BE CUTE L I V E S IN FANTASY WITHORAWS KEEPS A LOW PROFILE ESCAPES BY HIDING MANIPULATES OTHERS LOST IN SHUFFLE AVOIDS OTHER PEOPLE WITHORAWS INTO SELF KEEPS TO SELF/LONER CLOWNING OR ANNOYING NON- PRESENCE DISASSOCIATES AVOIDS ALCOHOLIC FEELS THEY DONT FIT OFTEN LACK S K I L L S - OFTEN LACK EDUCATION PROBLEMS INTERACTING POTENTIAL- DANGEROUS UNABLE CONTROL ANGER ACTS PHYS AGGRESSIVE FAM BLAMES THEM ACTS VERB AGGRESSIVE REBELS FAM SAYS PERSON BAO ACTS OUT OFTEN IN TR0U8LE CAUSES TROUBLE ACTS DEFIANT/HOSTILE  0 . 056 0 . 055 0 . .086 0 . .092 0 . .093 0 ..090 0. . 161 0. .095 0. .098 0. .099 0. .096 0 .096 0 .117 0 . 158 0 . 192 0 .281 0. . 379 0 .556 0 .572 0 . 586 0 . 684 0 . 722 0 . 754 0 . 797 0 . 803 0 .807 0 .834 0 .834 0 . 846 0 .846  1 0 . 372 0 . 426 0 . 439 0 . 451 0 . 586 0 . .652 0 . 748 0 . 828 0 . .865 0 . .884 0 . 891 0 . 938 0 . 953 0 . 987 0 . 990 .1. 005 1. 01 1 1. 018 1. 048 1. 052 • 1..077 1.,089 1..114 1., 1 19 1..128 1.,137 1.. 143 1., 152 1., 153 1., 154 1., 155 1., 162 1., 181 1.,203 1., 208 1..213 1,,224 1,.228  2 0 . 139 0 . . 125 0 . . 156 0. .252 0 . ,111 0. , 124 0 . .030 0 . , 125 0 . .14 1 0. ,017 0 . ,029 0 . .083 0 . ,039 0 . .025 0 . 079 0 . .065 - 0 . ,021 - 0 . .003 - 0 . .050 - 0 . .036 - 0 . .042 - 0 . .001 - 0 . ,060 - 0 . .023 - 0 . .062 - 0 , ,067 - 0 . .065 - 0 , .069 - 0 , .086 - 0 , ,063 - 0 . .031 - 0 , .062 - 0 . .083 •0,.082 - 0 . .084 - 0 . .090 - 0 .095 - 0 .092  0. . 123 0. . 102 0,. 132 0. . 104 0 . 115 • 0 .088 0 . 361 0 .113 0 . 124 0 . 129 0 .095 0 .041 0 . 126 0 .065 0 .112 0 . 162 0 .039 0 .020 0 .018 0 .011 0 .018 - 0 .002 - 0 .069 - 0 .044 - 0 .066 - 0 .074 - 0 .079 - 0 .079 - 0 .071 - 0 .071  0 . 308 0 .313 0 . 389 0 .413 0 .413 0 .415 0 .417 0 .419 0 .421 0 . 424 0 .427 0 . 440 0 .465 0 . 560 0 .609 0 . 731 0 .878 1 .067 1 .082 1 .096 1 . 184 1 .218 1 .247 1 .282 1 .288 1 .291 1 .312 1 .312 1 .321 1 .321  APPENDIX K: PHI MATRIX (5 CATEGORY/63 CONTENT UNITS)  139  PHI MATRIX: L = 5 1 2 0 .560 0 .534 0 .626 0 . 464 0 .679 0 .391 0 .823 0 .319 0 .825 - 0 . 224 0 .829 0 . 157 0 .846 - 0 . 166 0 .981 0 . 201 1 .087 - - 0 .014 1 .095 0 .012 1 . 104 - 0 .295 1 . 120 0 .015 1 . 164 - 0 . 195 1.295 - 0 . 307  4. 20. 7. 10. 4 1. 38. 33. 13. 5. 17. 36 . 19. 37. 35.  STIMULUS 1-1DELTA* *2 0 .660 TAKES CHARGE MOTIVATED FAM L00K0K 0 . 6 5 2 PROVIDES STRUCTURE 0 .629 MANAGES FAM A F F A I R S 0 . 7 1 8 TRIES REDUCE CONFLIC 0 . 455 MAINTAINS ORDER 0 . 573 DISCOUNTS OWN NEEDS 0 . 356 FAM COUNTS ON THEM 0 . 783 0 .691 FEELS RESPONSIBLE P R A I S E FOR CARING 0 . 728 SMOOTHS OVER CONFLIC 0 . 5 4 4 ACTS AS FAM SAVIOR 0 . 765 WILLING TO LEND EAR 0 . 6 3 1 SURVIVAL=GIVING 0 .707  30. 28 . 6. 11 . 1. 18. 8. 14. 26. 2. 24. 9. 3. 29. 15. 12. 25. 23. 27 . 21 .  MIRROR OF GOODNESS UNABLE TO RELAX TAKES L I F E SERIOUSLY HAVE TO BE GOOD OLDEST OR ONLY CHILD TROUBLE F E E L I N G GOOD REMAINS R E S P O N S I B L E DOES WELL ATHLETICAL NEVER DO ENOUGH OFTEN ASSUMES LEADER APPEARS EXEMPLARY APPEARS TO FUNCTION DOES WELL SCHOLAST REPEATED SUC NO SATS LEADER AMONG PEERS PROVIDE WORTH BY SUC APPEARS PERFECT SUCCESS IN WORK SUC TO STOP PARDRINK SUPERACHIEVER(TRIES)  0 .463 0 .391 0 .508 0 .682 0 . 562 0 .. 5 0 3 0 . 763 0 .447 0 .569 0 .711 0 . 782 0 , . 700 0 . 743 0 .. 6 3 3 0 .720 0 ,. 8 4 4 0 . . 791 0 .. 8 1 0 0 , , 877 0 .. 9 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  22. 45. 49 . 43. 50. 40. 46 . 39. 47 . 44. 42. 48.  F E E L S THEY DONT F I T AVOIDS ALCOHOLIC DISASSOCIATES L I V E S IN FANTASY NON-PRESENCE AVOIDS OTHER PEOPLE WITHDRAWS INTO S E L F KEEPS TO SELF/LONER LOST IN SHUFFLE KEEPS A LOW P R O F I L E WITHDRAWS ESCAPES BY H I D I N G  0 , . 369 0 . . 375 0 ..651 0 .. 6 4 3 0 .. 6 6 5 0 . . 760 0 .. 8 2 6 0 ..877 0 . 906 0 . 919 0 ., 9 2 5 0 . 941  0 . 1 19 - 0 ..042 - 0 .045 0 . 102 0 .042 0 .014 - 0 .026 - 0 .033 - 0 .013 0 .. 0 1 8 - 0 . .016 - 0 . ,067  - 0 .012 0 .085 0 .008 - 0 .068 - 0 .026 - 0 .010 0 .027 0 .001 - 0 . .004 - 0 .028 - 0 . .009 0 ..018  32. 34 . 31 .  CLOWNING OR ANNOYING 0 . 799 0 . 801 TRIES TO BE CUTE TRIES TO BE FUNNY 0 . 920  - 0 . . 1 16 - 0 . 004 0 ..038  0 . ,049 0 . 005 - 0 . ,014  54 . 53. 51 . 59. 52. 56 . 58. 16. 55. 62. 57. 63. 60. 61 .  OFTEN LACK S K I L L S PROBLEMS INTERACTING OFTEN LACK EDUCATION P O T E N T I A L - DANGEROUS UNABLE CONTROL ANGER ACTS PHYS AGGRESSIVE FAM BLAMES THEM ACTS VERB AGGRESSIVE REBELS FAM SAYS PERSON BAD ACTS OUT OFTEN IN TROUBLE CAUSES TROUBLE ACTS D E F I A N T / H O S T I L E  - 0 . 000 0 . 044 0 .. 0 4 2 0 ., 0 2 2 0 . 067 0 . ,011 - 0 . ,039 - 0 . 017 - 0 . ,035 - 0 . 028 - 0 . 018 - 0 . 018 0 . 003 0 . 003  0 . 011 - 0 . 022 - 0 . ,009 0 .,002 - 0 . 027 0 .,022 0 . 007 0 . 006 0 . 009 - 0 . 003 - 0 . 015 - 0 . 015 - 0 . 027 - 0 . 027  0 . 374 0 . 570 0 .,597 0 . 608 0 . 712 0 . 820 0 . 851 0 . 890 0 . 915 0 . 919 0 . 952 0 . 952 0 . 962 0 . 962  . 395 . 181 .307 .417 .244 .049 .228 .230 .075 . 103 .080 .024 .032 .204 .131 .002 .078 .222 . 155 .172  0 .504 0 .592 0 .612 0 .674 0 . 720 0 .857 0 .885 0 .917 0 .935 0 .937 1 .004 1.011 1 .051 1 .067 1.096 1 . 101 1 . 1 14 1 .210 1 .217 1 .242  -0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0  3 .038 .025 .032 .038 .033 . 116 . 148 .045 .041 .039 .033 .035 .007 .042  -0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0  4 .030 .033 .022 .020 . 401 .011 .010 .04 1 .061 .057 . 148 .039 .081 .034  5 - 0 .017 0 .014 0 .027 -0 .025 - 0 .056 - 0 .022 0 .. 0 2 6 - 0 .021 0 .009 - 0 .013 - 0 .050 - 0 .012 0 .030 0 .020  0 0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  .013 .076 .095 .005 .020 .117 .042 .031 .061 .023 .017 .001 .011 .068 .031 .044 .008 .008 .036 .038  0 .017 0 .052 - 0 .045 0 .004 0 .018 0 .039 - 0 .054 0 .049 0 .029 - 0 .009 - 0 .033 0 .067 - 0 .017 0 .034 0 .017 - 0 .033 - 0 .002 0 .042 - 0 .002 - 0 ..015  0 .035 0 .079 0 .040 - 0 .029 - 0 .008 0 .035 - 0 .009 0 .098 0 .060 0 .013 - 0 .019 - 0 .042 - 0 .029 - 0 .007 - 0 .013 - 0 .014 - 0 . .031 - 0 .026 - 0 . .021 - 0 . .021  0 .506 0 .616 0 .917 0 . 920 0 .938 1,. 0 1 3 1 .060 1 .093 1,. 1 1 1 1.. 1 19 1.. 125 1.. 136  0 .041 - 0 . .033 - 0 .. 0 7 2 0 .. 0 4 9 0 .018 0 ,, 0 1 0 - 0 . .012 - 0 . .004 0 . .001 - 0 . 009 - 0 , .018 - 0 . .014  0 . . 387 0 . . 284 0 .. 148 - 0 . .033 0 .,031 - 0 . .028 - 0 . 032 - 0 . .042 - 0 . 057 - 0 . 062 - 0 . 061 - 0 . 063  0 ..009 - 0 . 001 - o . 024  0 .. 9 9 2 1:. 013 1..086  0 . 077 - 0 . 036 - 0 . 050  0 . 207 0 . 128 - 0 . ,020 0 . 049 0 . 049 - 0 ., 0 4 8 - 0 . 036 - 0 . 034 - 0 . 04 1 - 0 . 043 - 0 . 046 - 0 . 046 - 0 . 046 - 0 . 046  0 . 130 0 . 068 0 . . 1 10 0 . 028 0 . 027 - 0 . 031 - 0 . 009 0 . 005 - 0 . 028 - 0 . 026 - 0 . 031 - 0 . 031 - 0 . 033 - 0 . 033  0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1.  591 806 838 862 933 025 042 062 084 086 106 106 113 113  APPENDIX L: PHI MATRIX (5 CATEGORY/51 CONTENT UNITS)  141  PHI  MATRIX:  L =  1 0 . 703 0 . 794 . 0 .863 0.. 9 8 3 0 .991 0 .993 0 .994 1 . 121 1 . 193  5  28 . 23. 7. 26 . 1 1 . 13 . 3. 27 . 25 .  STIMULUS 1-1DELTA * * 2 MAINTAINS ORDER 0.. 5 3 0 DISCOUNTS OWN NEEDS 0 .371 FAM COUNTS ON THEM 0 . 752 SMOOTHS OVER C O N F L I C 0. .539 P R A I S E FOR CARING 0 ., 728 ACTS AS FAM SAVIOR 0 . . 741 F E E L S RESPONSIBLE 0. .699 W I L L I N G TO LEND EAR 0. . 703 SURVIVAL=GIVING 0. .739  12 . 8. 4. 18. 1 . 16 . 5. 2. 20. 9. 17 . 6. 15. 19 . 14 .  TROUBLE F E E L I N G GOOD DOES WELL A T H L E T I C A L REMAINS R E S P O N S I B L E NEVER DO ENOUGH OFTEN ASSUMES LEADER APPEARS EXEMPLARY APPEARS TO FUNCTION DOES WELL SCHOLAST REPEATED SUC NO SATS LEADER AMONG PEERS APPEARS P E R F E C T PROVIDE WORTH BY SUC S U C C E S S IN WORK SUC TO STOP PARDRINK SUPERACHIEVERf TRIES)  0. . 497 0. .440 0, . 754 0 . . 567 0 ,697 0 . . 763 0 . 703 0 . . 743 0, .639 0. . 731 0. . 785 0, .859 0, .826 0. .889 0 . .902  37 . 32. 38 . 30. 34 . 29 . 35. 33. 31 . 36 .  DISASSOCIATES L I V E S IN FANTASY NON- PRESENCE AVOIDS OTHER P E O P L E WITHDRAWS INTO S E L F K E E P S TO S E L F / L O N E R LOST IN S H U F F L E K E E P S A LOW P R O F I L E WITHDRAWS E S C A P E S BY H I D I N G  0 . .637 0 . .647 0 . 67 1 0 . . 763 0 . . 825 0 . ,882 0 . ,908 0 . ,919 0. .924 0 . ,947  -0 .034 0, . 0 9 3 0 .030 0..006 -0 . 0 0 5 -0 .040 -0 . 0 0 5 0 .009 -0 .0 15 - 0 . .056  0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0  .006 .054 .021 .009 .017 .012 .003 .015 .004 .016  42 . 41 . 39 . 47 . 40. 44 . 46 . 10 . 43. 50. 45 . 51 . 48 . 49 .  OFTEN LACK S K I L L S PROBLEMS I N T E R A C T I N G OFTEN LACK EDUCATION P O T E N T I A L - DANGEROUS UNABLE CONTROL ANGER ACTS PHYS A G G R E S S I V E FAM BLAMES THEM ACTS VERB A G G R E S S I V E REBELS FAM SAYS PERSON BAD ACTS OUT OFTEN IN TROUBLE CAUSES TROUBLE ACTS D E F I A N T / H O S T I L E  0 . 367 0 . 559 0 . ,594 0 . ,609 0 . ,712 0 . ,822 0 . 853 0 . 892 0 . 915 0 . 921 0 . 955 0 . 955 0 . 965 0 . 965  0. .022 0. . 0 4 5 0, ,051 0, ,037 0, ,076 0, .011 - 0 ,.035 - 0 ,,013 - 0 . 034 - 0 . 028 - 0 . 020 -0 . 020 0 . 00 1 0 . 001  -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0  .002 .025 .017 .002 .026 .027 .010 .006 .014 .003 .008 .008 .019 .019  22. 24. 21 .  CLOWNING OR T R I E S TO BE T R I E S TO BE  -0 . 084 0 . 008 0 . 049  0 .031 -0 . 0 0 3 -0 .017  ANNOYING 0 . 816 CUTE 0 . 794 FUNNY 0 . 934  '  0 .009 -0 . 153 0 .231 -0 .011 0 .113 0 .111 0..027 0 .038 -0 . 1 1 3 -0 . 0 5 9 -0 . 0 2 0 0 .060 -0 . 127 -0 .066 - 0 , .086  0 -0 0 -0 0 0 0 -0 -0  2 . 245 . 107 . 290 . 164 . 1 10 .118 .078 .116 . 196  0 .801 0 .841 0 .867 0 .874 0 .906 0 .953 0 .960 0 .985 0 .990 1.033 1 .047 1.048 1 .131 1 . 140 1 . 159  0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0  3 .119 . 133 .039 .035 .035 .031 .042 .003 .04 1  -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0  0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  . 109 .031 .032 .06 1 .021 .013 .010 .004 .066 .028 .002 .039 .003 .031 .034  0 .884 0 .898 0 .918 0 .988 1 .029 1 .066 1 .080 1 .088 1 .092 1 . 107 0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  .201 . 125 .011 .058 .057 .032 .023 .018 .029 .028 .029 .029 .030 .030  0 .010 0 .003 - 0 . .020  1 1 .017 .022 .024 .045 .0 16 .018 .005 .026 .016  -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  5 .005 .028 .008 . 140 .029 .002 .038 .055 .009  0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  .041 . 104 .006 .067 .014 .015 .033 .022 .001 .008 .024 .009 .019 .016 .016  0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0  .021 .026 .040 .011 .005 .024 .057 .016 .012 .011 .006 .032 .034 .001 .013  0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  . 16 1 .013 .05 1 .007 .012 .019 .035 .04 1 .039 .039  -0 0 0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0  .066 .044 .013 .006 .009 .004 .007 .004 .012 .013  0 .581 0 . 79 1 0 .824 0 .850 0 .919 1 .011 1 .026 1 .046 1 .067 1 .070 1..09 1 1 .09 1 1..097 1..097 0 ..073 - 0 . .034 - 0 . 052  0 . 128 0 .064 0 . 106 0 .025 0 .026 -0 .031 -0 . 0 0 9 0 .00 7 -0 .028 -0 .026 -0 .031 -0 .031 -0 .032 - 0 . .032 0 . 985 0 .992 1 .077  APPENDIX M: PHI MATRIX (5 CATEGORY/48 CONTENT UNITS)  143  PHI MATRIX: L = 5  1 0. . 7 7 5 0. . 9 1 0 0. , 9 3 5 0 . ,944 0. .946 1 , .1 16 1 ,. 203  2 .06 1 . 194 .097 . 172 . 138 .068 .151  0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 0  3 .017 .023 .051 .022 .001 .019 .009  0 -0 0 -0 -0 0 -0  4 . 134 .023 .037 .029 .037 .008 .038  5 0 .025 0 .002 0.. 139 -0 .028 -0 .036 -0 .059 -0 .014  0 .813 0 .817 0 .887 0 .912 0 .958 0 .959 0 .979 0 .990 1 .014 1 .038 1.048 1 . 1 19 1 . 125 1 . 143  0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  .042 . 106 .068 .014 .015 .032 .022 .003 .008 .009 .023 .017 .015 .015  0 0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  . 107 .029 .060 .020 .010 .011 .002 .064 .027 .037 .001 .003 .030 .032  0 .016 0..019 0 .008 -0 .007 -0 .024 0 .058 -0 . 0 2 0 0 .007 0 .008 -0 .034 -0 .008 0 .029 -0 .004 -0 .017  0 .581 0 . 791 0 .825 0 .850 0 .919 1 .011 1 .027 1 .046 1 .068 1 .07 1 1 .091 1 .09 1 1 .097 1 .097  0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  . 197 . 121 .015 .054 .054 .035 .026 .022 .032 .03 1 .033 .033 .033 .033  0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  . 125 .063 . 102 .024 .025 .030 .008 .007 .027 .025 .030 .030 .031 .031  . 158 .017 .048 .011 .015 .022 .039 .045 .043 .042  0 .877 0 .892 0 .912 0 .981 1 .023 1 .059 1 .073 1 .081 1 .085 1 . 100  -0 0 0 0 -0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0  .06 7 .045 .013 .006 .011 .003 .006 .004 .012 .013  0 .074 -0 . 0 3 4 -0,052.  0 .009 0 .003 -0 . 0 2 0  21 . 1 1 . 24 . 9. 3. 25. 23.  STIMULUS 1-1D E L T A ' * 2 DISCOUNTS OWN NEEDS 0 . 380 A C T S AS FAM SAVIOR 0. . 694 SMOOTHS OVER C O N F L I C 0 ..531 P R A I S E FOR CARING 0 . .714 0. .684 F E E L S RESPONSIBLE W I L L I N G TO LEND EAR 0. . 738 SURVIVAL=GIVING 0 . , 796  10. 6. 16. 1 . 14 . 4 . 2. 18 . 7 . 5. 15. 13. 17. 12.  TROUBLE F E E L I N G GOOD DOES WELL A T H L E T I C A L NEVER DO ENOUGH OFTEN ASSUMES LEADER APPEARS EXEMPLARY APPEARS TO F U N C T I O N DOES WELL SCHOLAST R E P E A T E D SUC NO S A T S LEADER AMONG PEERS PROVIDE WORTH BY SUC APPEARS P E R F E C T S U C C E S S IN WORK SUC TO STOP PARDRINK SUPERACHIEVER(TRIES)  0 . . 509 0 . .445 0 .. 5 7 5 0 . .698 0 . . 751 0 .. 6 8 5 0 . . 746 0 . .652 0 . . 726 0 . , 848 0 . . 784 0 . .831 0. .886 0 .. 9 0 0  0 ,015 - 0 . ,097 - 0 . ,014 0 . ,119 0, . 105 0. ,014 0. , 0 6 3 - 0 . ,094 -0 ,026 0. ,078 - 0 . ,016 - 0 . ,098 - 0 . .037 - 0 .. 0 5 5  39. 38. 36. 44 . 37 . 41 . 43. 8. 40. 47 . 42. 48 . 45. 46 .  OFTEN LACK S K I L L S PROBLEMS I N T E R A C T I N G O F T E N LACK EDUCATION P O T E N T I A L - OANGEROUS UNABLE CONTROL ANGER ACTS PHYS A G G R E S S I V E FAM BLAMES THEM ACTS VERB A G G R E S S I V E REBELS FAM SAYS PERSON BAD ACTS OUT OFTEN IN TROUBLE C A U S E S TROUBLE ACTS D E F I A N T / H O S T I L E  0 . . 367 0 . . 559 0 . . 595 0 . .609 0 . .7 12 0 ..822 0 . . 853 0 . . 892 0 . .916 0 . .921 0 .955 0 ..955 0 . 965 0, . 9 6 5  0. . 0 4 3 0 .054 0 .073 0 .048 0. ,082 0 .008 -0 .04 1 - 0 . .011 - 0 ..040 -0 . 0 3 5 -0 .028 -0 ,028 - 0 ., 0 0 3 - 0 ,.003  -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0  .008 .027 .023 .007 .025 .027 .012 .004 .016 .006 .004 .004 .017 .017  34. 29. 35. 27 . 31 . 26 . 32. 30. 28. 33.  DISASSOCIATES L I V E S IN FANTASY NON-PRESENCE AVOIDS OTHER P E O P L E WITHDRAWS INTO S E L F K E E P S TO S E L F / L O N E R LOST IN S H U F F L E K E E P S A LOW P R O F I L E WITHDRAWS E S C A P E S BY H I D I N G  0 . .638 0 . .646 0 . ,671 0 . . 762 0 . ,827 0 . .883 0 . 908 0 . .9 19 0 . 924 0 . .947  - 0 . .027 0. .086 0. . 0 3 0 0. ,004 0. ,012 - 0 ., 0 4 5 - 0 .. 0 0 0 0, .001 - 0 .,015 - 0 .,050  0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 0  .002 .044 .018 .004 .010 .016 .001 .006 .000 .015  20. 22 . 19.  CLOWNING OR ANNOYING 0 . 816 0 . , 794 T R I E S TO BE CUTE 0 . 935 T R I E S TO BE FUNNY  - 0 . ,078 0 . ,006 0 ., 0 4 0  0 .022 -0 . 0 0 3 -0 . 0 1 3  -0 0 -0 0 0 -0 -0  0 -0 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0  0 . 985 0 . 992 1 .079  APPENDIX N: OMEGA MATRICES (68 CONTENT UNITS)  145  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  1 .78 .08 .004 .05 .15 .12 .10 .04 .08  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  1 .58 .07 .48 .09 .38 .24 .003 .09  2 .64 .39 .51 .11 .26 .33 -.003 .11  2 .78 .01 .15 .10 .12 .04 .08  3  4  .91 .60 .09 .18 .59 -.02 .02  .65 .10 .21 .47 -.01 .08  3 .85 .07 .58 .17 -.002 .02  5  6  7  8  9  .49 .16 .15 .55 .15  .69 .19 .001 .17  .72 .01 .06  .08 .17  .82  4  5  6  7  8  .51 .14 .16 .57 .15  .72 .18 .02 .06  .68 .001 .16  1.05 .17  .84  1 2 3 4 5 6 7  1 .59 .36 .07 .50 .24 .03 .09  2  3  4  5  6  7  .59 .11 .54 .20 .10 .07  .75 .003 .13 .08 .08  .92 .18 .01 .02  .60 .08 .16  .78 .16  .82  1 2 3 4 5 6  1 .61 .46 .07 .22 .03 .09  2  3  4  5  6  .72 .04 .16 .04 .03  .74 .14 .08 .08  .58 .09 .16  .79 .16  .83  1 2 3 4 5  1 .52 .42 .04 .08 .10  2  3  4  5  .73 .03 .03 .04  .80 .08 .16  .73 .10  .56  146  1 2 3 4  1 .80 .02 .37 .02  1 2 3  1 .54 .05 .03  1 2  1 .50 .04  3  4  .74 .08 .08  .40 .05  .75  2  3  .65 .08  .72  2  2 .49  147 A P P E N D I X O: O M E G A M A T R I C E S (5 CATEGORIES/63 & 51 C O N T E N T UNITS)  148  OMEGA MATRIX (63 CONTENT UNITS)  1 2 3 4 5  1 .61 .46 .06 .09 .03  2  3  4  5  .70 .04 .03 .03  .74 .09 .08  .79 .17  .79  O M E G A M A T R I X (51 C O N T E N T UNITS)  1 .64 .43 .05 .02 .07  2  3  4  5  .73 .03 .02 .03  .78 .06 .08  .82 .17  .82  APPENDIX P: INSTRUCTIONS TO SUBJECTS  151  B E H A V I O R ROLES OF A D U L T C H I L D R E N OF A L C O H O L I C S A research project at the University of British Columbia Department of Counselling Psychology John Schneider, Investigator (604-228-4870) John Friesen, Ph.D., Supervisor (604-228-5259) A.  E X P L A N A T I O N OF THE  PROJECT:  The primary purpose of this research project is to examine the behavior roles of adults who grew up in families where at least one parent was an alcoholic. Several models are identified in the theoretical and clinical literature dealing with children of alcoholics. This study is building on those models by beginning a process of empirical verification of the behavior roles. As you complete the sorting process, you are asked to keep in mind adults who are children of alcoholics as they presented themselves at the beginning of therapy or counselling. Your participation will require approximately 30 minutes to complete a sorting process. Please do not put your name on any of the cards to insure the confidentiality of your responses. Participation in this project is entirely voluntary and you may withdraw or refuse to participate at any time. Completion of the sorting process will be understood to mean that you have given your consent to participate in the project.  B.  I N S T R U C T I O N S FOR SORTING A T T R I B U T E S I N T O B E H A V I O R R O L E C A T E G O R I E S OF A D U L T C H I L D R E N OF A L C O H O L I C S : P L E A S E CARRY OUT TIME. 1.  THE  F O L L O W I N G DIRECTIONS ONE  STEP AT  A  Check to see that your deck contains all the components shown in Diagram 1. , Blank Yellow Cards  Blue Attribute Cards  White ID Form  Diagram 1 Arrangement of the deck before sorting  2.  Fill in the information requested on the white ID form.  3.  Set aside the white ID form and the yellow cards. You won't need them until later.  152  4.  Take a quick look through the blue cards to become acquainted with the variety of attributes to be sorted.  5.  Put together those attributes which you think are characteristic of the same behavior role of alcoholic offspring. Beginning with the first card, think of what behavior role the attribute is characteristic of. When you have decided, place the card down in front of you.  6.  Take the next card and think of what behavior role the attribute is characteristic of. If you think it should be grouped with the first then put the two together. Otherwise, begin a second group by placing the new card apart from the first one. If you have doubt about its similarity keep it separate. If an attribute belongs to more than one role or it is impossible to decide on a role for that attribute, place it in a reject pile.  7.  Continue by picking up one card at a time and thinking what behavior role the attribute is characteristic of; then either put it in one of the groups already in front of you or start a new group. You may have as few as three groups or as many as seven groups plus a reject pile.  8.  When you are finished with all the cards, go through your groups and review each group with concern for whether the attributes in it are characteristic of the same behavior role. There can be as few as one attribute in a category or as many as you wish.  9.  Take the yellow cards: place one card on the top of each group of attributes. Write a brief explanation of the rationale you used to group the particular attributes in that group. State why you placed any attributes in the reject pile.  10.  Pick up the groups of cards and put them together, keeping the piles separated by the placement of the yellow card on top of each group. Place the extra yellow cards at the bottom of the deck. The arrangement of the groups of the cards is given in Diagram 2. Be sure to include your white ID form.  11.  Put the cards and ID form in the small envelope and then into the enclosed addressed and stamped envelope to return your sorted deck.  Thank you for your willingness to contribute to the ongoing development and understanding of the behavior roles of adult children of alcoholics.  Extra Yellow Cards  Blue Attribute Cards  /  Yellow Card With Explanation of Reject Category  /  /  /  Blue Attribute Cards  /  /  /  Yellow Card With Explanation of Category  / /  Blue Attribute Cards  Yellow Card With Explanation of Category  White ID Form  Diagram 2 Arrangement of the deck after sorting  APPENDIX Q: LETTER TO SUBJECTS (AUTHORS OF MODELS)  155  UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH C O L U M B I A F A C U L T Y OF EDUCATION D E P A R T M E N T OF COUNSELLING P S Y C H O L O G Y 5780 TORONTO ROAD VANCOUVER, B.C. C A N A D A V6T-1L2 August 9, 1988  Dear ... A research project at the University of British Columbia is investigating the behavior roles of children raised in alcoholic families. The purpose of this research project is to develop an integrated model of child behavior roles of alcoholic offspring. It is my hope to use the integrated model as a basis for constructing a measurement instrument of child behavior roles. A measurement instrument would enable an empirical verification of the child behavior roles and would add to our knowledge and understanding of the particular strategies children use to cope with living in an alcoholic environment. Your work in the area of children and alcoholism is documented in the literature. Your model of behavior roles for children of alcoholic parents was one of the five models chosen to be integrated. I would like to ask for your participation in the project by completing a sorting task requiring approximately 30 minutes of your time. Participation in this project is entirely voluntary and you may withdraw or refuse to participate at any time. The task involves sorting attributes extracted from the roles of the models of child behavior roles chosen to be integrated (Booz-Allen and Hamilton, Black, Deutsch, Kritzberg, and Wegscheider-Cruze). The results of the sorting procedure will provide a verification of an integrated model I have developed. I trust that you will find the task interesting to you personally and that the results of this project will lead to further clarification of the models of child behavior roles. Thank you for your help. Sincerely,  John Schneider  156  APPENDIX R: LETTER TO SUBJECTS (MEMBERS OF CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR CHILDREN OF ALCOHOLICS  157  UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA F A C U L T Y OF E D U C A T I O N D E P A R T M E N T OF C O U N S E L L I N G P S Y C H O L O G Y 5780 TORONTO R O A D VANCOUVER, B.C. C A N A D A V6T-1L2 August 9, 1988  Dear C A C O A Colleague, A research project at the University of British Columbia is investigating the behavior roles of children raised in alcoholic families. The purpose of this research project is to develop an integrated model of child behavior roles of alcoholic offspring. It is my hope to use the integrated model as a basis for constructing a measurement instrument of child behavior roles. A measurement instrument would enable an empirical verification of the child behavior roles and would add to our knowledge and understanding of the particular strategies children use to cope with living in an alcoholic environment. I am writing to you as a fellow member of the Canadian Association for Children of Alcoholics and as a clinician working with this population. Your name has been selected as a member of the study's sample. I would like to ask for your volunteer participation in the project. You can participate by completing a sorting task requiring approximately 30 minutes of your time. Participation in this project is entirely voluntary and you may withdraw or refuse to participate at any time. The task involves sorting attributes extracted from the roles of the models of child behavior roles chosen to be integrated (Booz-Allen and Hamilton, Black, Deutsch, Kritzberg, and Wegscheider-Cruze). The results of the sorting procedure will provide a verification of an integrated model I have developed. I trust that you will find the task interesting to you personally and that the results of this project will lead to further clarification of the models of child behavior roles. It would be most helpful if you could return your completed deck within one week; use the enclosed addressed and stamped envelope. Thank you for your help. Sincerely,  John Schneider  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054183/manifest

Comment

Related Items