UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The attitudes of counsellors towards their client : does foreign accent make a difference? Alexander, Linda Jean 1987

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1987_A8 A43.pdf [ 6.6MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054231.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054231-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054231-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054231-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054231-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054231-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054231-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054231-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054231.ris

Full Text

THE ATTITUDES OF COUNSELLORS TOWARDS THEIR CLIENT DOES FOREIGN ACCENT MAKE A DIFFERENCE? by LINDA JEAN ALEXANDER B.A., The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1982 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA MAY 1987 © Linda Jean Alexander, 1987 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 COO 10 S - g U l i kJcV x^SHC^Ql^OG/ The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 DE-6(3/81) i i ABSTRACT T h i s r e s e a r c h addressed the nature of mainstream c o u n s e l l o r s ' a t t i t u d e s towards t h e i r c u l t u r a l l y d i f f e r e n t c l i e n t s . T h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r conducted two separate s t u d i e s i n which a l l of the s u b j e c t s were students i n the Department of C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology at The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. The c o u n s e l l o r s in the f i r s t study were i n the f i r s t year of the c o u n s e l l i n g program (novice) while those in the second study were i n t h e i r f i n a l year (mature). The r e s e a r c h design was an experimental p o s t - t e s t only c o n t r o l group. C o u n s e l l o r s ' a t t i t u d e s towards t h e i r c u l t u r a l l y d i f f e r e n t c l i e n t s were i n v e s t i g a t e d by p r e s e n t i n g a c l i e n t who had a f o r e i g n accent. In each study one group was exposed to a non-accented c l i e n t i n a c o u n s e l l i n g s i t u a t i o n and the other group was exposed to a f o r e i g n - a c c e n t e d c l i e n t . A matched-guise videotape of a c l i e n t p r e s e n t i n g a c o u n s e l l i n g problem was shown to the two groups of c o u n s e l l o r s i n each study. Each c o u n s e l l o r i n the c o n t r o l group viewed a non-accented c l i e n t and each c o u n s e l l o r i n the experimental group viewed the same c l i e n t but with a f o r e i g n accent. To measure . the a t t i t u d e s of c o u n s e l l o r s towards t h e i r c l i e n t s , a Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l A t t i t u d e S c a l e was c o n s t r u c t e d u t i l i z i n g 50 b i p o l a r a d j e c t i v e s . In a d d i t i o n , the c o u n s e l l o r s responded to a w r i t t e n Interview Q u e s t i o n n a i r e designed to i n v e s t i g a t e what may i n f l u e n c e the a t t i t u d e s of the c o u n s e l l o r s , such as: s i m i l a r i t y of b e l i e f s ; p e r c e p t i o n of the c l i e n t ' s m o t i v a t i o n and an awareness of c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s . In both s t u d i e s a l l c o u n s e l l o r s r a t e d the c l i e n t i n the accented and non-accented s i t u a t i o n s with an o v e r a l l p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e on the Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l S c a l e . However, the c o u n s e l l o r s exposed to the accented c l i e n t , i n Study One responded with a more p o s i t i v e i n t e n s i t y of a t t i t u d e than the c o u n s e l l o r s who viewed the non-accented c l i e n t (p^.001). The c o u n s e l l o r s i n the second study d i d not d i f f e r i n t h e i r a t t i t u d e s towards the accented or non-accented c l i e n t (p>.05). In response to the Interview Q u e s t i o n n a i r e , the nov i c e , beginner c o u n s e l l o r s i n Study One g e n e r a l l y r e a c t e d to the c l i e n t on a more personal l e v e l with the mainstream c o u n s e l l o r s i n the accented s i t u a t i o n r e p o r t i n g more a f f i n i t y towards the c l i e n t . Those more mature c o u n s e l l o r s in Study Two were l e s s i n v o l v e d and attended to the e x t e r n a l i n f l u e n c e s on the c l i e n t (accented or n o t ) . Recommendations f o r fut u r e c o u n s e l l i n g r e s e a r c h are suggested i n the areas of the a t t i t u d e s of c o u s e l l o r s towards t h e i r accented c l i e n t s ; s i m i l a r i t y of experience as a v a r i a b l e which i n f l u e n c e s the c r o s s - c u l t u r a l c o u n s e l l i n g process; and the u t i l i z a t i o n of the matched-guise videotape in t r a i n i n g and e d u c a t i o n . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES v i i i LIST OF FIGURES ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS X CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1 BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM 1 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY 5 COUNSELLING: DEFINITION, NATURE AND GOALS 5 THE CULTURALLY DIFFERENT CLIENT 7 D e f i n i t i o n of Terms 7 Western Values Which Impact the C o u n s e l l i n g Interview 12 THE MAINSTREAM COUNSELLOR AND THE COUNSELLING RELATIONSHIP 13 LANGUAGE: THE KEY VARIABLE IN THE COUNSELLING RELATIONSHIP 16 SUMMARY 17 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 19 INTRODUCTION 19 ATTRIBUTION THEORY 19 ATTITUDE AND LANGUAGE ATTITUDE THEORY 23 ATTITUDE AND EMOTION 27 LANGUAGE AND COMMUNICATION 28 LANGUAGE AND PERSONALITY 30 DIALECT, RACE AND ACCENT 31 SUMMARY 41 V CHAPTER THREE: INSTRUMENTATION AND APPARATUS 42 ATTITUDE MEASUREMENT: The Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l 42 R e l i a b i l i t y 44 V a l i d i t y 45 A t t i t u d e and the P r e d i c t i o n of Behaviour 46 Scale C o n s t r u c t i o n 47 INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE 50 DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 51 APPARATUS: The Matched Guise Videotapes 52 CHAPTER FOUR: METHODOLOGY 58 INTRODUCTION 58 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 59 DESIGN 59 PILOT STUDY 60 POPULATION AND SAMPLE 60 SAMPLE: SELECTION AND RANDOM ASSIGNMENT 62 STUDY ONE 62 Sample C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : Study One 64 STUDY TWO 64 Sample C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : Study Two 65 APPARATUS 66 M o d i f i e d Matched-Guise Videotape: Study One 66 M o d i f i e d Matched-Guise Videotape: Study Two 68 PROCEDURE 69 Study One and Study Two 69 INSTRUMENTATION 71 v i HYPOTHESIS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 7 3 Hypothesis 73 S t a t i s t i c a l A n a l y s i s .. 73 VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY: THE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL . 74 Interview Q u e s t i o n n a i r e A n a l y s i s 75 SUMMARY 7 5 CHAPTER FIVE: RESULTS 77 INTRODUCTION 77 HYPOTHESIS 78 General A t t i t u d e Towards C l i e n t 79 SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL: C l i e n t C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 82 EVIDENCE CONCERNING THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS: Interview Q u e s t i o n n a i r e 86 D i f f e r e n c e i n A t t i t u d e s 89 C o u n s e l l o r ' s A f f i n i t y Towards the C l i e n t 93 C l i e n t M o t i v a t i o n 94 SUMMARY 95 CHAPTER SIX: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ... 97 SUMMARY OF THE PROBLEM 97 METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS 98 INSTRUMENTATION 100 CONCLUSIONS 101 Major Hypothesis: r e s t a t e d 102 STUDY ONE: General A t t i t u d e Towards the C l i e n t 102 Research Questions: Study One 104 v i i D i f f e r e n c e i n A t t i t u d e 105 C o u n s e l l o r ' s A f f i n i t y Towards t h e C l i e n t 106 C l i e n t M o t i v a t i o n 107 The C l i e n t ' s E t h n i c i t y 107 STUDY TWO: G e n e r a l A t t i t u d e Towards t h e C l i e n t 108 Mo d e r a t e V e r s u s S t r o n g e r A c c e n t e d C l i e n t s 109 Sample C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 109 R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n s : S t u d y Two 111 D i f f e r e n c e i n A t t i t u d e 111 C o u n s e l l o r ' s A f f i n i t y Towards t h e C l i e n t 112 C l i e n t M o t i v a t i o n 112 The C l i e n t ' s E t h n i c i t y 113 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNSELLING RESEARCH 114 REFERENCES 117 APPENDIX A: C o n s e n t Form 134 APPENDIX B: P r e p a r e d S c r i p t 136 APPENDIX C: S e m a n t i c D i f f e r e n t i a l A t t i t u d e S c a l e 142 APPENDIX D: I n t e r v i e w Q u e s t i o n n a i r e 146 APPENDIX E: Demographic I n f o r m a t i o n 148 v i i i L I S T OF TABLES Table Page 1.1 Percentage of P o p u l a t i o n i n Canada by E t h n i c O r i g i n 2 4.1 Sample C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r Both Studi e s 66 4.2 Hoyt's R e l i a b i l i t y Estimates f o r the Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l 75 5.1 Mean A t t i t u d e Scores f o r Pure Mainstream C o u n s e l l o r s from the 50-Item Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l 81 5.2 Mean A t t i t u d e Scores f o r the C u l t u r a l l y S e n s i t i v e C o u n s e l l o r from the 50-Item Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l 81 5.3 Summary of t - t e s t s f o r D i f f e r e n c e s i n the A t t i t u d e Scale Items (Mainstream) f o r C l i e n t C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 83 5.4 Mean Ratings f o r the Dimensions: E v a l u a t i o n , Potency and A c t i v i t y f o r Mainstream C o u n s e l l o r s 87 5.5 Percentage of Subjec t s Who Attended to the Experimental C o n d i t i o n and C l i e n t E t h n i c i t y 88 5.6 Study One: T r a i t s Used to Describe C l i e n t C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 91 5.7 Study Two: T r a i t s Used to Des c r i b e C l i e n t C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 92 5.8 Study One: C o u n s e l l o r ' s A f f i n i t y Towards the C l i e n t 93 5.9 Study Two: C o u n s e l l o r ' s A f f i n i t y Towards the C l i e n t 94 5.10 C o u n s e l l o r P e r c e p t i o n of C l i e n t M o t i v a t i o n 95 i x LIST OF FIGURES F i g u r e Page 5.1 T o t a l I n d i v i d u a l A t t i t u d e Scores f o r Mainstream C o u n s e l l o r s 80 X ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would l i k e to express my appreciat ion to those people who p a r t i c i p a t e d in my research. I thank my Committee Chairman, Dr. Marv Westwood, for his he lp fu l advice and for remaining a constant source of encouragement throughout th i s pro jec t . I would also l i k e to acknowledge Dr. Doug Willms for his chal lenging analys i s of my data and invaluable guidance. I thank Dr. B i l l Borgen for h i s enthusiast ic comments and suggestions during the i n i t i a l stages of th i s research. Diane P o l l a r d ' s assistance enabled me to have access to the students during c la s s time. I appreciate her, as we l l , for her warmth and her generous support during th i s pro jec t . I thank my co l legue , Susan Rungta, for her fr iendship and sense of humour. Working with her has been a h ighl ight of t h i s t h e s i s . My t y p i s t s , Barbara Underwood and Bruce M c G i l l i v r a y , were most understanding and pat i ent . Bruce continued to be ava i l ab l e at a moment's notice and I am indebted to him for the q u a l i t y of the f i n a l manuscript. I a lso extend my apprec iat ion to Frank Ho, who was instrumental in producing the computerized s t a t i s t i c a l analys i s of my data . F i n a l l y , I would l i k e to thank my family: my mother for her dependable ass istance at home; my daughter, Zoe, for understanding and accepting my absences; and my husband, Richard, for his unfa l t er ing encouragement and confidence in me. Each one adapted the ir schedules to accommodate mine and I am e terna l ly g r a t e f u l . 1 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION This chapter addresses the background to the issue of counse l lors ' a t t i tudes towards the ir c u l t u r a l l y d i f f erent c l i e n t s . The Western-value-based counsel l ing model is discussed in r e l a t i o n to b a r r i e r s which may emerge in a c r o s s - c u l t u r a l s e t t ing . D i f f i c u l t i e s which the c u l t u r a l l y d i f f erent c l i e n t may experience in counse l l ing are also presented. A discuss ion of the counsel l ing re la t i onsh ip from the counse l lors ' perspective completes th i s chapter. . . . people cannot act or interact at a l l in any meaningful way except through the medium of cul ture . . . [we are part of one] . . . i n t e r r e l a t e d system. (Hal l 1982, p. 188) BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM A 1981 census in metro Toronto indicates that of the 2,137,395 inhabitants , 41% were born outside of Canada (Mayer 1984). Canadian f igures of percentages of population by ethnic o r i g i n , published in 1961 and 1981, suggest that there has been not only an increase in the number of immigrants but a lso an expansion of c u l t u r a l heterogeneity (see Table 1.1). 2 Table 1.1: Percentage of Population in Canada by Ethnic Or ig in 1961 population=(est) 12,000,000 1981population=24,083,500 E t h n i c O r i g i n E t h n i c O r i g i n B r i t i s h 43.8 B r i t i s h 40.2 French 30.4 French 26.7 German 10.3 German 4.7 Dutch i I t a l i a n 3.1 Scandinavian 12.3 Ukrainian 2.2 Other European-Other 4.2 Other 23.0 This sh i f t is par t ly due to a change in e a r l i e r establ ished immigration p o l i c i e s . Porter (1973) states that previous p o l i c i e s preferred Northern Europeans because they were considered more l i k e l y to ass imi late and make good Canadians. As p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l condit ions a l t e r throughout the world, immigration and refugee p o l i c i e s react , to accomodate those af fected, by continuing to encourage foreign migration to Canada. In add i t i on , mul t i cu l tura l i sm (the co-existence of ethnic groups who maintain the ir own ethnic ident i ty ) i s encouraged. It i s supported by the government on the premise that a l l Canadians w i l l benefit from th i s approach to c u l t u r a l p l u r a l i t y (Berry, K a l i n and Taylor 1976). With th i s increase in c u l t u r a l v a r i a t i o n mainstream Canadians experience more contact with other ethnic groups (Westwood & Borgen 1986). W.E. Lambert (1970) has invest igated the fundamental a t t i tudes of Canadians towards immigrants. He reports that , 3 although Canadians "take pride in re jec t ing the melting pot approach to immigration" (Lambert 1970 p. 304), they have several important concerns. The higher socio-economic status subjects in his study were "benevolent" and more "friendly" than lower income earners, who, in turn , f e l t "anxious, threatened and suspicious" of the immigrant p a r t i c u l a r l y in r e l a t i o n to work and family . Lambert a t t r ibuted these di f ferences to the socio-economic s i tua t ion of each group. Power and pos i t ion in the community is synonomous with higher income and status . These Canadians, therefore , are able to regulate contact with the immigrant and contro l any negative at t i tudes or poss ible fee l ings of threat . On the other hand, the lower wage earner is protect ive of the family as well as being in d i r e c t competition for jobs. These Canadians, Lambert s tates , view the immigrant as "potential intruders into the ongoing s o c i a l system" (p. 305) consequently assigning negative a t t r i b u t e s , while f inding "it d i f f i c u l t to ra i se the ir s ights from competition to char i ty" (p. 306). A s imi lar s i tua t ion ex i s t s in the United States where 40% of the t o t a l population have family who were born in foreign countries (Bar-Lewaw 1986). Of p a r t i c u l a r interest i s the current e f fort to maintain Engl i sh as the dominant language spoken. H i s t o r i c a l l y , minimally populated ethnic groups were absorbed in the 'melting p o t . ' However, the ir population has increased over the years for numerous reasons such as, a change in the immigration and refugee p o l i c i e s and the i l l e g a l entry of many groups. In p a r t i c u l a r , the 4 Spanish-speaking cul ture numbered, in 1950, 4 m i l l i o n of a t o t a l 150 m i l l i o n Americans while in 1984, of 225 m i l l i o n , 17.5 m i l l i o n were Hispanics plus estimates of 3 - 12 mi l ion i l l e g a l s (Bar-Lewaw 1986). Some c i t i e s in F l o r i d a u t i l i z e Spanish as the f i r s t language and Engl i sh as the second. In Canada, the status of nat ional b i l i n g u a l i s m is an ongoing and unresolved issue. S . I . Hayakawa (Farquharson 1986) contends that the "b i l ingua l and b i c u l t u r a l soc ie t i e s that exis t in Canada, Belgium, South A f r i c a and S r i Lanka are proven recipes for disasters" (p. B1). Of primary importance to advocates of a monolingual society in the United States i s the fear of loss of a l i n g u i s t i c unity of E n g l i s h . This a t t i t u d e , cautions Bar-Lewaw (1986), could escalate into a c lash re su l t ing in segregation with language as i t s cause. Soc ie ta l change, of th i s nature, influences how the average North American feels about foreign speakers of E n g l i s h . Recently, foreign graduate teaching ass i s tants (TA) in American u n i v e r s i t i e s have become the objects of c r i t i c i s m by the students they are teaching. Many students fee l they are u n f a i r l y s truggl ing to comprehend course content and the accent of the TA (Schwartz, Gibbs, D i e t z , Ke l ly and Himmelsback 1985). As our exposure to and contact with the e t h n i c a l l y d i f f erent ind iv idua l increases, so does our need for understanding the react ions to the di f ferences that we see or hear. The di f ferences between e t h n i c a l l y d i s s i m i l a r people are emphasized by c u l t u r a l factors such as skin co lour , 5 dress, gestures, language and accent, some or none of which the other may be aware (Westwood & Borgen 1986). With 50% of minority c l i e n t s not continuing counse l l ing af ter the i n i t i a l interview (Sue 1981a), the inf luencing var iables are of paramount concern to the counse l l ing profess ion . PURPOSE OF THE STUDY It i s within th i s s o c i a l context that various profess ionals , in p a r t i c u l a r counse l lors , provide serv ices . In order to determine the influence of language on a counsel l ing s i t u a t i o n , counsel lor a t t i tude towards an accented c l i e n t was inves t igated . COUNSELLING: D E F I N I T I O N , NATURE, GOALS The process of counse l l ing and the c u l t u r a l l y d i f f erent c l i e n t require some d e f i n i t i o n . By d e f i n i t i o n , counse l l ing i s a r e l a t i o n s h i p which i s character ized by warmth, understanding, permissiveness and acceptance (Pietrofesa , Splete , Hoffman and Pinto 1978). E s s e n t i a l l y the counsel l ing process includes increasing c l i e n t self-awareness, dec i s ion -making s k i l l s and problem-solving (Egan 1982; Pietrofesa et al. 1978). It i s a mutual endeavour which has a foundation of respect for the i n d i v i d u a l , while encouraging the c l i e n t to grow emotionally, i n t e l l e c t u a l l y and behavioural ly . It is a shared learning experience between counsel lor and c l i e n t . Pietrofesa et al . (1978) out l ine the long range c l i e n t goals as s e l f - e x p l o r a t i o n , self-understanding and act ion or 6 behaviour change. The t h e r a p e u t i c process goals are d e s c r i b e d i n terms of reaching the c l i e n t g o a l s . S e l f -e x p l o r a t i o n i s f a c i l i t a t e d by the w i l l i n g n e s s to s e l f - d i s c l o s e , and to explore behaviours and f e e l i n g s . S e l f -understanding i s a t t a i n e d by being a b l e to i n t e g r a t e i n f o r m a t i o n about the s e l f with the acknowledgement that f o r p e r s o n a l growth to occur, change must take p l a c e . Behaviour change i s achieved through l e a r n i n g decision-making s k i l l s and problem r e s o l u t i o n , i n e f f e c t , empowering the c l i e n t . Summarized, c o u n s e l l i n g i s p s y c h o l o g i c a l i n i t s foundation with the u l t i m a t e goal of h e l p i n g the c l i e n t a d j u s t , change or cope with t h e i r environment (Vontress 1976). Inherent to the c o u n s e l l i n g i d e a l presented above, Pedersen (1977) and Copeland (1983) summarize f i v e c u l t u r e -bound v a l u e s . These val u e s are h e l d by the dominant white c u l t u r e who make up the m a j o r i t y of c o u n s e l l o r s . F i r s t , i s the n o t i o n of a c t i v i s m : a c t i v i t y i s the modus operandi of decision-making and p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g . The second value i s one which c a l l s f o r an e g a l i t a r i a n and i n f o r m a l s o c i a l system. Achievement i s the t h i r d and most important m o t i v a t i o n f o r a c t i o n . A f o u r t h value p e r c e i v e s the world as an "object to be e x p l o i t e d and developed f o r the m a t e r i a l b e n e f i t of man" and i n c l u d e s an o p t i m i s t i c outlook f o r the f u t u r e . The f i n a l western culture-bound value focuses on the i n d i v i d u a l whose r i g h t s and s e l f - i d e n t i t y , which u l t i m a t e l y r e s u l t i n autonomy and achievement, are of utmost importance. 7 THE CULTURALLY DIFFERENT CLIENT D e f i n i t i o n of Terms Before proceeding fur ther , some terms warrant d e f i n i t i o n . Culture i s defined to include commonly learned and shared experiences such as values, ancestry or language ( e . g . , hab i t , dress, accent) which are handed on from one generation to the next and maintained by a p a r t i c u l a r un i f i ed group of people (Copeland 1983; Gudykunst & Kim 1984; Rohner 1984; T r i a n d i s & Lambert 1980). Culture also has the "capacity for both g r a t i f y i n g and f r u s t r a t i n g human needs" (Spiro 1972, p. 100). An ethnic group i s a category of people who are s o c i a l l y or psycholog ica l ly s i m i l a r and share a common cu l ture (Aboud & Skerry 1984). Race is general ly accepted to indicate v i s i b l e di f ferences in skin pigmentation or b i o l o g i c a l s i m i l a r i t i e s (Gudykunst & Kim 1984). A group of people i s defined as 'minor i ty ' when the dominant group s ingles them out, because of phys ica l or c u l t u r a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and they become the object of d i scr iminat ion (Atkinson & Wampold 1981). E t h n i c i t y is the degree to which an i n d i v i d u a l sees himself or herse l f belonging to a d i s t i n c t ethnic group. Their s o c i a l i d e n t i t y , within th i s group, i s developed as a resul t of external influences which emphasized the di f ferences between one group and another (Gumperz & Cook-Gumperz 1982). The term c r o s s - c u l t u r a l is used by anthropologists to mean the comparisons of cu l tures 8 (Gudykunst & Kim 1984) pr imar i ly in the areas of h i s t o r i c a l context, interpersonal contact or p o l i t i c a l organization and mutual n o n i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y of language (Tr iandis & Lambert 1980). In counse l l ing , the terms c r o s s - c u l t u r a l , interethnic and i n t e r c u l t u r a l appear to be synonymous. For the purposes of th i s research those concepts are used interchangeably. Therefore, c r o s s - c u l t u r a l , interethnic or i n t e r c u l t u r a l counse l l ing is not only concerned with comparisons across cul tures but also with i s o l a t i n g and understanding the d i f f erences . Broadly defined, c r o s s - c u l t u r a l counse l l ing is a profess ional r e la t i onsh ip which includes two or more ind iv idua l s who are c u l t u r a l l y d i f f erent (Christensen 1985; Sundberg 1981) in terms of culture-bound values (Wrenn 1962), b e l i e f s , norms, l i f e s ty le (Sue 1981b; Sundberg 1981) and methods of communication (Sue 1981b), such as accent. The previous descr ipt ion of counse l l ing and the i n t r i n s i c western culture-bound values i s by i t s very nature l imi t ed to being successful with c l i e n t and counsel lors who are highly verba l , emotionally l i b e r a l (Sue & Sue 1977), e g a l i t a r i a n - t h i n k i n g , involved, outwardly f r i e n d l y , i n t e r n a l l y motivated (Sue 1978; Young & Marks 1985), introspect ive and process, rather than, goal oriented (Sue & Sue 1977). The general ly accepted view is that the bulk of the minority c l i e n t s in need do not seek counse l l ing . Coupled with the fact that , of those who do seek help 50% terminate after one interview, i t is not surpr i s ing that counsel lors may unconsciously minimize ethnic di f ferences in 9 counsel l ing (Carney & Kahn 1984). This model of counse l l ing and the c l i n i c a l expectations of the counsel lor are c u l t u r a l l y biased in favour of the North American white dominant populat ion. It does not take into considerat ion the var ie ty of world views, values, b e l i e f s , trends and s ty les of expression that members of other cul tures may cher i sh . Many researchers have addressed the issue of a culture-bound counsel l ing model but some experts suggest that in order to d i s t i n g u i s h d i f ferences , s i m i l a r i t i e s must be f i r s t understood (Jahoda 1980). Developing th i s notion fur ther , T r i a n d i s and Lambert (1980) express that "culture shapes the aspects of psychological functioning" (p. 4) and when the di f ferences are ignored " . . . people from d i f f erent cul tures have d i f f i c u l t i e s communicating and r e l a t i n g to each other" (p. 5) . They continue to suggest that , in order to understand s immi lar i t i e s and d i f ferences , i t i s c r u c i a l to view the i n d i v i d u a l in a c u l t u r a l context, taking into considerat ion the phys ica l environment, means of supporting l i f e , s o c i o c u l t u r a l inf luences , i n d i v i d u a l id iocyncras ies and patterns of s o c i a l behaviour. When encountering a counsel lor from the dominant white populat ion, in the i n i t i a l interview, the c u l t u r a l l y d i f f erent c l i e n t may experience some form of cu l ture shock, which Lundstedt (1963) states i s character ized by confusion, emotional and i n t e l l e c t u a l withdrawl, v u l n e r a b i l i t y , fee l ings of i s o l a t i o n and s tres s . Considering the counsel lor i s working from a North American culture-bound model of 10 counse l l ing , i t is not surpr i s ing that the symptoms manifested may be assessed as psychological d i s t r e s s , mistaking the "communication pattern for the person" (Alexander, Workneh, Kle in & M i l l e r 1976, p. 82). The c u l t u r a l l y d i f f erent c l i e n t i s operating from d i f f erent frames of reference in several important areas which d i r e c t l y c o n f l i c t with the North American culture-bound approach to counse l l ing described e a r l i e r in th i s chapter. The c u l t u r a l l y , e t h n i c a l l y or r a c i a l l y d i f f erent c l i e n t , in addi t ion to values, may also be d i f f erent because of lower socio-economic s tatus . Whether they a t t r i b u t e the causes of the i r economic problems to be from an in terna l or external focus of c o n t r o l , i t may influence the ir a t t i tude towards s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e in counse l l ing (Gibbs 1985). Cultures a lso d i f f e r in what they expect from the counse l l ing experience (McDermott & Stadler 1985; Neimeyer & Gonzales 1983) which can af fect rapport , empathy and c l i e n t growth and change (Pedersen 1977). P a d i l l a , Ruiz and Alvarez (1975) suggest that lower status c l i e n t s prefer adv ice -g iv ing from a counsel lor as a more p r a c t i c a l so lut ion to the ir ' s o c i a l ' problems than contemplating t h e i r psychological s e l f . In a d d i t i o n , Blacks and other minor i t i es present d i f f erent cogni t ive s ty les (Copeland 1983), personal i ty s tructures , and ways of coping and responding which are in react ion to l i v i n g in a society as members of c u l t u r a l l y d i s t i n c t groups (Block 1981). In a psych ia tr i c s e t t i n g , researchers reported that foreign students seek medical help f i r s t and psychological 11 assistance as a las t resort (Alexander et al . 1976). Many agree that , other than v i s i b l e d i f ferences , an outstanding di f ference is language: s t y l e , d i a l e c t , accent (Pedersen 1977; Westwood & Borgen 1986). Research in the area of c l i e n t - c o u n s e l l o r c u l t u r a l s i m i l a r i t i e s and e f fec t ive counse l l ing has been c o n f l i c t i n g (Atkinson 1983; Sundberg 1981). Some report that the Black c l i e n t s prefer to work with Black counsel lors (Block 1981; T e r r e l l & T e r r e l l 1984) e s p e c i a l l y in terms of mutual trust and continuation of therapy (Hector & Fray 1985). Others have also found that c l i e n t commitment to counse l l ing is longer when counsel lors and c l i e n t s are r a c i a l l y s imi lar (Mendelsohn & Ge l l er 1963). In a d d i t i o n , some report that counse l lors , whose c l i e n t s have greater c u l t u r a l sex role d i f f erences , experience d i f f i c u l t y expressing empathy, respect and general helping behaviours than those counsel lors who share a s imi lar c u l t u r a l background with the ir c l i e n t (Pedersen, H o l w i l l & Shapiro 1978). However, Neimeyer and Gonzales (1983) propose that non-white c l i e n t s experience less general contentment with the counse l l ing experience regardless of counsel lor race and that no di f ferences were found in counse l l ing effect iveness between Black and White counse l lors . In a d d i t i o n , both White and Black c l i e n t s understood the c o l l o q u i a l language of White and Black counsel lors equal ly as well suggesting c l i e n t - c o u n s e l l o r r a c i a l s i m i l a r i t i e s may not be important (Bryson & Cody 1973). Atkinson, Ponce and 12 Martinez (1984) conclude that Mexican-American c l i e n t s viewed Mexican-American and White counsel lors as equal in re la t ion to c r e d i b i l i t y and at tract iveness (counse l lor 's wi l l ingness to he lp) . They also suggest that di f ferences were only evident i f a t t i tude (point of view), not e t h n i c i t y , c o n f l i c t e d with the ir own. A l so , Kadushin (1972) found that the race of the soc ia l worker was not as important to the c l i e n t as the c l i n i c a l r e la t ionsh ip and the worker's wi l l ingness to help the c l i e n t . In fac t , counsel lors who were perceived as sens i t ive to the c l i e n t ' s c u l t u r a l background have been found to surpass c u l t u r a l di f ferences in a s imi lar way that they surpass socio-economic status , gender, and educational d i f ferences (Atkinson 1983; Pomales, Cla iborn & Lafromboise 1986). W e s t e r n V a l u e s W h i c h I m p a c t t h e C o u n s e l l i n g I n t e r v i e w The e t h n i c a l l y d i s s i m i l a r par t i c ipant in counse l l ing d i f f e r s considerably in terms of the f ive culture-bound values held by the dominant populat ion. Pedersen (1977) and Copeland (1983) describe the contrasts . F i r s t l y , not a l l cu l tures operate in an act ive way concerning decision-making and problem-solving, in fact pass iv i ty or simply "being" is valued. Secondly, the e g a l i t a r i a n value c o n f l i c t s with one of inequa l i ty , formality and assigned ro l e s . The t h i r d value of achievement as a motivation is not as important as heritage or preservation of the family unit in some c u l t u r e s . The fourth value views the world not as an object to be 13 conquered, but something with which to l i v e in harmony and be mastered by. This value is complimented with a f a t a l i s t i c outlook for the future . The la s t Western value concerns the emphasis on the ind iv idua l and autonomy, which is contradictory to many other cul tures which bel ieve in the t o t a l i t y of the group experience. This group experience guarantees a c u l t u r a l ident i ty and depends on external rather than in terna l sources for purpose and d i r e c t i o n of meaning in l i f e . . . . i f viewed only in the context of . . . u n i v e r s a l i t y , a person loses i n d i v i d u a l i t y . . . i f [only] in the context of i n d i v i d u a l i t y , the person loses a sense of connectedness with humanity; i f viewed only in the context of group membership, an ind iv idua l i s stereotyped. (Larson 1982, p. 844). THE MAINSTREAM COUNSELLOR AND THE COUNSELLING RELATIONSHIP Communication d i f f i c u l t i e s in interethnic encounters centre on the di f ferences in language and c u l t u r a l knowledge (Gumperz 1982; Jupp, Roberts & Cook-Gumperz 1982). There are several b a r r i e r s which Barna (1970) c i t e s as a f f ec t ing the i n t e r c u l t u r a l counse l l ing process: language d i f ferences , non-verbal behaviour, sterotypes and a high l e v e l of anxiety experienced in an interethnic context . In a d d i t i o n , both c l i e n t and counsel lor undergo cu l ture shock as each experiences confusion, uncertainty about the expectations of each other, doubt regarding what to do with the 'strange cues' they are receiving and not to mention d i rec t 14 involvement in a r e l a t i o n s h i p with someone from another •world . ' The counse l lor ' s c u l t u r a l a t t i tudes , biases and stereotypes can i n h i b i t the counse l l ing process by: blocking and reducing empathy, ignoring important h i s t o r i c a l information about the c l i e n t , unconsciously approaching taboo subjects and misunderstanding the c l i e n t ' s language (Vontress 1969). Alexander et al. (1976) comment that therapis ts have an inherent bias that the "common ground of s i m i l a r i t y . . . is the only path to understanding." These researchers fee l that th i s i s a misconception and c u l t u r a l d i f ferences must be addressed or the c l i e n t may experience, in therapy, the same misunderstanding he or she experiences in the dominant soc ie ty ' s c u l t u r e . At the opposite end of the continuum, the White counsel lor may make several ' e r r o r s ' when encountering a r a c i a l l y d i f f erent c l i e n t . F i r s t , the White majority counsel lor experiences the " i l l u s i o n of colour blindness" (Block 1981; Larson 1982) minimizing c u l t u r a l and r a c i a l d i f ferences (Carney & Kahn 1984). They a lso make an assumption, e spec ia l ly where Black Americans are concerned, that a l l of a Black's person's problems stem from being Black in a White dominated society (Block 1981). The White counse l lor , fee l ing g u i l t y (Kadushin 1972) about the c u l t u r a l l y underpr iv i l eged , attempts to make amends by making therapy as e f f o r t l e s s as poss ible for the c l i e n t (Block 1981; Cooper 1973). Specia l compensations are made and as a resu l t 15 progress in therapy is slow. Vontress (in Block 1981) has termed th i s as the "great white father syndrome" in counse l l ing , where the counsel lor feels they are omnipotent and mean nothing but good for and w i l l take care of the c l i e n t . These ' e r r o r s ' cloud the c l i e n t ' s des i res , feel ings and behaviours while a c t u a l l y i n h i b i t i n g e f fec t ive counse l l ing . The "white g u i l t " or "countertransference phenomenon," when working with minority cu l tures , function to inappropriate ly consol idate c l i n i c a l and p o l i t i c a l issues which u l t imate ly deprives the c l i e n t of the po tent ia l for growth and change (Cooper 1973). An overemphasis on the r a c i a l or c u l t u r a l aspects of the c l i e n t may d i s t o r t rea l psychologica l problems (Cooper 1973; Kadushin 1972; Kagan 1964). C u l t u r a l encapsulation is a concept which may be used to describe the counsel lor who works with c l i e n t s from c u l t u r a l l y d i s s i m i l a r backgrounds and refuses to adapt the i r counse l l ing s ty le or approach to take c u l t u r a l influences into account (Pedersen 1977). As a protect ion against ambiguity in l i f e , people "surround themselves with a cocoon of pretend r e a l i t y " (Wren 1962, p. 446) based on experiences within t h e i r own c u l t u r e . Other cul tures are not general ly recognized as ' r e a l ' and are regarded only in terms of how they re la te to themselves (Pedersen 1977). Kagan (1964) proposes three dimensions to the c u l t u r a l l y encapsulated counse l lor . F i r s t i s the tendency to stereotype e t h n i c a l l y d i f f erent c l i e n t s . The second dimension concerns the 1 6 stereotypic assumptions which are not based on fac t . When these assumptions are chal lenged, the counsel lor becomes defensive, exh ib i t ing a need for se l f -preservat ion (Pedersen 1977). F i n a l l y , both Kagan and Pedersen suggest that the counsel lor by t r a i n i n g i s technique-oriented and that serves to perpetuate the c u l t u r a l encapsulat ion. L a n g u a g e : The Key V a r i a b l e i n t h e C o u n s e l l i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p As mentioned prev ious ly , an outstanding and immediately noticeable c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the c u l t u r a l l y d i s s i m i l a r c l i e n t i s language. The research in counse l l ing and c l i e n t foreign accent i s v i r t u a l l y non-existent . Most of the invest igat ions have focused on Black Engl i sh and accented speech and reactions to these by the general populat ion. These studies w i l l be discussed at length in Chapter Two. Most c r o s s - c u l t u r a l counse l l ing research has reviewed the problem of r a c i a l d i f ferences between white, middle-c lass Engl i sh speaking counsel lors and Black or Hispanic c l i e n t s (Atkinson 1983; Sundberg 1981). It i s curious that accented speech has been ignored in counse l l ing and yet language is important in a communicative r e l a t i o n s h i p . Sundberg (1981) has c a l l e d for a look beyond the v i s i b l e d i f f erences , between c l i e n t and counse l lor , to invest igate c l i e n t ' s d i a l e c t , s tat ing that the s ty le of language used is of utmost importance in the counsel l ing r e l a t i o n s h i p (Sundberg 1976). Language is e spec ia l ly important when the culture-bound counsel l ing model encourages a favourable bias towards the highly verbal 1 7 c l i e n t . Counsel l ing is a "process of in terac t ion and communication . . . " and on the basis of language alone, the c l i e n t may be viewed as " . . . uncooperative, s u l l e n , negative, non-verbal or repressed" (Sue & Sue 1977, p. 422). Leong (1986), in an extensive review of the counse l l ing research with Asian-Americans, states that the major b a r r i e r to e f f ec t ive counse l l ing is language and a lack of understanding, by the counse l lor , of broken, accented E n g l i s h . He suggests that the use of d i a l e c t s or non-standard Engl i sh in terrupts the flow of conversation and resu l t s in the counsel lor forming a negative a t t i t u d e . Leong's review was, however, of a v i s i b l y d i f f erent c u l t u r e . It i s the interest of th i s researcher to invest igate the role of accented E n g l i s h , without the var iable of race, on the a t t i tudes of counse l lors . The main research question posed then, i s t h i s : Is there a di f ference in a t t i tude between mainstream counsel lors towards the ir c l i e n t s who have no accent and those whose c l i e n t s speak with a foreign accent? SUMMARY By way of summarizing th i s chapter, an i l l u s t r a t i o n of an interethnic meeting, from the counse l lor ' s perspective i s presented (developed from Christensen: 1985). The counse l lor , a white middle-c lass female, welcomes her c l i e n t , no t i c ing the way he looks. She responds to herse l f noting that he looks ' d i f f e r e n t ' and wonders i f he were born here, or i f he were an immigrant or fore igner . She remembers her unemployed cousin's comment that " a l l the foreigners are taking the jobs." She sympathizes with her cousin but 18 wonders i f a l l the people from poorer c o u n t r i e s should have an equal o p p o r t u n i t y to seek a "b e t t e r l i f e i n Canada." She begins to f e e l s o r r y f o r her c l i e n t and angry at her c o u s i n and g u i l t y she has "so much." The c o u n s e l l o r decides her c l i e n t needs to know that not a l l of the p o p u l a t i o n wants immigrants to f e e l unaccepted. The c o u n s e l l o r d e c i d e s she w i l l bend over backwards t o ensure her c l i e n t i s t r e a t e d e q u a l l y and f a i r l y as she "goes easy on him." She makes an assumption that l i f e was probably very d i f f i c u l t i n the ' o l d country' and he d i d n ' t have enough money to f i n i s h high s c h o o l . She i s j a r r e d back t o the c o u n s e l l i n g s e t t i n g as she hears an accented " h e l l o " and f e e l s anxious wondering i f she w i l l be able t o, not only communicate e f f e c t i v e l y , but understand him. 19 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW I n t r o d u c t i o n To understand the context i n which the re s e a r c h q u e s t i o n i s posed in Chapter One, some key areas need to be examined. T h i s chapter reviews theory and r e s e a r c h areas c e n t r a l to the re s e a r c h q u e s t i o n of c o u n s e l l o r a t t i t u d e towards t h e i r accented c l i e n t . O u t l i n e d i n t h i s s e c t i o n are A t t r i b u t i o n Theory and A t t i t u d e and Language A t t i t u d e Theory. In a d d i t i o n , the r o l e of a t t i t u d e and emotion are b r i e f l y p resented. Language and communication are d i s c u s s e d as an i n t r o d u c t i o n to the research reviewed on d i a l e c t , race and accent which u l t i m a t e l y i n f l u e n c e the mainstream c o u n s e l l o r ' s a t t i t u d e towards t h e i r m i n o r i t y c l i e n t . ATTRIBUTION THEORY An overview of A t t r i b u t i o n Theory cannot be ignored and i s given as an i n t r o d u c t i o n to the measurement of c o u n s e l l o r a t t i t u d e , upon which t h i s r e s e a r c h i s based. A t t r i b u t i o n theory s t a t e s that people a s s i g n c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s to others as e x p l a n a t i o n s f o r t h e i r behaviour. Through t h i s assignment process, an attempt i s made to determine the causes of another's behaviour and to 20 understand the i r t r a i t s and motives. The behaviour i s f i r s t observed, then an inference about the possession of cer ta in t r a i t s , motives, and intentions i s drawn. Inferences are made based on the i n d i v i d u a l ' s l i f e experiences, world views, b e l i e f s , values, a t t i tudes , and from any other ex i s t ing information observed. A t t r i b u t i o n s offer a foundation for explaining the cause of and for pred ic t ing behaviour. The ind iv idua l a t t r ibute s the causes of behaviour as e i ther external or i n t e r n a l , focusing on three d i f f erent factors while making a d e c i s i o n . Kel ley and Michela (1980) describes these factors as: a) consensus: do others react s i m i l a r l y in the same s i tuat ion? b) consistency: does the ind iv idua l react s i m i l a r l y in the same s i tuat ion? c) d i s t i n c t i v e n e s s : does the i n d i v i d u a l react in the same way to d i f f erent s t imul i? K e l l y and Michela continue to suggest that people a t t r i b u t e in terna l causes ( ind iv idua l t r a i t s and motives) i f there i s low consensus/high consistency/low d i s t i n c t i v e n e s s . External causes (other source) are a t t r ibuted i f there ex i s t s a high consensus/high consistency/high d i s t inc t iveness r e l a t i o n s h i p . Based on t h i s premise, people are able to give meaning and understanding to present events and in a d d i t i o n , are able to predic t future behaviour when s imi lar circumstances and condit ions e x i s t . 21 Success in forming accurate a t t r i b u t i o n s i s , in part , due to close observation of act ions which produce what Jones and Davis (1965) term "noncommon ef fects ." The tendency, when th i s effect i s present, i s to focus on the unusual patterns of behaviour which are not fami l iar or encouraged by a given cu l ture or soc ie ty . With th i s view in mind, accent could be designated as a noncommon e f fec t , given that i t i s an unusual behaviour when compared to mainstream Standard E n g l i s h , in Canada. In a m u l t i c u l t u r a l soc ie ty , such as Canada, the inhabitants are increas ingly encountering members of ethnic groups with which they are not a f f i l i a t e d . They are cont inua l ly placed in s i tuat ions which demand a l t e r a t i o n s to the i r previously held knowledge of what i s o c c u r r i n g . The impression of another person i s influenced by these preconceived notions, which are based on values , s o c i a l contexts, cu l ture and emotional factors (Forgas 1985). To understand the f luc tuat ion of events, people make causal a t t r i b u t i o n s to explain the behaviour, motives and t r a i t s of others (Taj fe l 1969). These a t r ibut ions when made in an interethnic context, are the resu l t of three cognit ive processes, out l ined by T a j f e l (1969). The f i r s t process i s a categor izat ion of the other person, which e l i c i t s stereotypes. Although stereotypes have achieved the d i s t i n c t i o n of being 'bad' they serve an important function necessary for "thinking and communication" (Gudykunst & Kim 1984, p. 27). These stereotypes introduce "s impl i c i ty and 22 order where there is complexity and nearly random v a r i a t i o n " (Gudykunst & Kim 1984, p. 82). They also ass i s t the ind iv idua l in sort ing and remembering d e t a i l s when he or she i s confronted with an excess of information (McCauley, S i t z & Segal 1980). Stereotypes ass i s t in coping with the "fuzzy differences" between groups but i n t e r e s t i n g l y , even when the categor izat ion process i s erroneous, people manage to f i t the general context of the s i tuat ion into the stereotype. Stereotyping inter feres with the conversion of information received (Wampold, Casas & Atkinson 1981) as the e t h n i c a l l y d i f f erent person i s viewed as a "deviant" from the dominant cul ture rather than a "legitimate member" of another (Pedersen 1977). There is an "emotional investment" in maintaining the d i f ferences between groups. Lopez and Cheek (1977) suggest part of that investment includes reducing and c o n t r o l l i n g the expression of anxiety . The second cogni t ive process T a j f e l describes in making causal a t t r i b u t i o n s i s the as s imi la t ion of s o c i a l information about the at t i tudes of other groups. People learn the evaluations and preferences of the "other group" compared to the ir own. T a j f e l suggests that people balance between i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with t h e i r own cu l ture and acquir ing a knowledge of ethnic di f ferences and in terpre t ing how these re late to the ir p a r t i c u l a r soc ie ty . The f i n a l cogni t ive process helps people cope with the everchanging s i tuat ions to explain the e t h n i c a l l y d i f f erent person's behaviour. T a j f e l concludes that the purpose behind our search for coherence i s 23 two-fold: a desire for consistency in coping s k i l l s and the maintenance of c u l t u r a l ident i ty and self- image. In a c r o s s - c u l t u r a l counse l l ing s i t u a t i o n , where most often the counsel lor is from the mainstream, dominant c u l t u r e , a t t r ib u t ion s are p a r t i c u l a r l y important. The a t t r i b u t e s the counsel lor appl ies to the c u l t u r a l l y d i f f erent c l i e n t influence the effect iveness of the counse l l ing process (Young & Marks 1985). Of s ign i f i cance here, i s the fact that , in the i n i t i a l interview where f i r s t impressions are formed, the counsel lor i s using the a t t r i b u t i o n s to interpret and give meaning to the c l i e n t ' s problem. When communicating with strangers, people often explain the ir behaviour in terms of c u l t u r a l or ethnic stereotyping (Gudykunst & Kim 1984). C l e a r l y , i f the profess ional counsel lor i s presented with an accented c l i e n t and makes a t t r i b u t i o n s based on c u l t u r a l stereotypes, the counse l l ing r e l a t i o n s h i p could be f r u s t r a t i n g and inef fec tua l for both. To research the effect of the c l i e n t ' s accent, the counse l lor ' s a t t i tude towards that c l i e n t is invest igated. ATTITUDE AND LANGUAGE ATTITUDE THEORY General ly speaking At t i tude and Language Att i tude Theory contain the same components and thus are reviewed in th i s thes is as one theory. The manner in which people communicate and the effect i t has on the receiver of the message influences the cycle of the communication process (Ryan, Carranza and Moffie 1977). 24 Part of that process i s the impression of the speaker which the l i s t e n e r i s making. As the receiver of the message is evaluating the communication an at t i tude towards the sender is e i ther formed or e l i c i t e d from previously held a t t i t u d e s . This a t t i tude is based on previous experiences under s imi lar circumstances and equips the l i s t e n e r with a too l for i n t e r p r e t i n g , understanding and pred ic t ing the behaviour of the speaker. Due to the fact that a t t i tude is covert and therefore d i r e c t l y unobservable (Shaw & Wright 1967), the theor i s t s task of o f fer ing a g lobal d e f i n i t i o n of th i s construct has been d i f f i c u l t . There i s , however, general agreement regarding i t s main c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (Ageheyisi & Fishman 1970; Davidson & Thomson 1980; Wil l iams 1974; L a l l j e e , Brown & Ginsburg 1984; Lemon 1973; Osgood, Suci & Tannenbaum 1975; Shaw & Wright 1967; Sheri f & Sheri f 1970). E s s e n t i a l l y , a t t i tudes are learned from previous s o c i a l in teract ions and are s p e c i f i c in reference to the context in which they are learned. Once a t t i tudes are formed, they are stable and enduring and the re la t i onsh ip between person and object has an a f f e c t i v e , evaluative aspect to i t (favourable — infavourable; pos i t i ve — negat ive) . At t i tudes are a lso i n t e r r e l a t e d , inasmuch as possessing s imi lar s o c i a l referents or evaluations (Shaw & Wright 1967). There are two d i s t i n c t theories regarding the nature of a t t i tudes . The behaviourist view proposes that a t t i tudes are d i r e c t l y observable behaviours which manifest themselves in 25 the "responses ind iv idua l s make to s o c i a l s i tuat ions" . . . they are s ingle "behavioural response" units (Fasold 1984). The a l t ernate , mental ist view, represents the one held by most researchers, inc luding the author of th i s thes i s . Expanding on the d e f i n i t i o n in the preceding paragraph, a t t i tudes are described as the "intervening var iab le between the stimulus and the response to i t" (Fasold 1984). Ref lec t ing the mentalist viewpoint, a t t i tude is comprised of three components: a) a f f e c t i v e : which represents the emotional, pos i t ive and negative, therefore ealuat ive fee l ings towards the object; b) cogn i t ive : which i s the way the i n d i v i d u a l conceptualizes the object; c) behaviour: which is the consequence of the a f f ec t ive and cogni t ive components and resu l t s in the actual behaviour in response to the object . (Ageheyisi & Fishman 1970; Edwards 1982; Lemon 1973; Shaw & Wright 1967). Shaw and Wright (1967) narrow the concept further in l ine with that of Osgood, Suci and Tannenbaum (1975), by ident i fy ing a s ingle component, which s i m p l i f i e s a t t i tude as an a f f e c t i v e , evaluat ive react ion , based on cognit ive processes, and i s the antecedent of behaviour. Att i tudes are considered to be within the realm of personal i ty and i t i s e s sent ia l to d i s t i n g u i s h i t from other contructs which occas ional ly overlap and have been subst i tuted as meaning the same thing (Shaw & Wright 1967). 26 a) b e l i e f : represents a perceived connection between an object and i t s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (Davidson & Thomson 1980; Shaw & Wright 1967) b) value; degree of worth assigned to an object (Lemon 1973; Shaw & Wright 1967; Wren 1962) c) opinion; conscious, s p e c i f i c verbal ized responses of an a t t i tude (Lemon 1973; Shaw & Wright 1967) d) habi t ; strong tendency to act but does not contain a f f ec t ive or evaluative component (Shaw & Wright 1967) e) t r a i t ; stable and consistent way of responding which d is t inguishes one ind iv idua l from the next but i s nonspecif ic and general (Shaw & Wright 1967). Nigel Lemon (1973) has out l ined four functions of a t t i tudes which are considered to generally represent the view held by the majority of t h e o r i s t s . Summarizing these categor ies , as fol lows, a t t i tudes provide: a) a u t i l i t a r i a n adaptive funct ion: s o c i a l adjustment which f a c i l i t a t e s r e l a t i o n s h i p s , p o s i t i v e a t t i tude f u l f i l l s the i n d i v i d u a l ' s need while a negative one frus trates or blocks f u l f i l l m e n t ( e . g . , holding cer ta in at t i tudes f a c i l i t a t e s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with cer ta in groups). b) an ego-defensive or ex terna l i za t ion funct ion: a t t i tudes , serving th i s funct ion , are in response to inner c o n f l i c t s , based on motivation ( e . g . , the need for achievement). c) a value expressive funct ion: includes a basic assumption that the i n d i v i d u a l has a need to express the s e l f ; th i s function is the q u a l i t y of the expressiveness of an ind iv idua l a t t i tude which in effect asserts own ident i ty re su l t ing in s a t i s f a c t i o n and perpetuation of the a t t i t u d e . 27 d) a knowledge function and appraisa l of object: in order to understand the world, the i n d i v i d u a l needs frames of reference or standards; a t t i tudes helps define that . The la s t suggested function of a t t i tude is e spec ia l ly relevant to an interethnic exchange. When confronted with someone who speaks accented E n g l i s h , in order to give meaning and understanding in an ind iv idua l c u l t u r a l context, a judgment process occurs (Williams 1976). The reperto ire of a t t i tudes i s tapped and a stereotype is released. The stereotype balances the perceived c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s towards the object and the f i n a l evaluat ion . The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s perceived may include a s o c i a l comparison- of s imi lar or d i s s i m i l a r t r a i t s ( S t i f f 1986). When involved in an encounter with someone who speaks with an accent, an obvious di f ference in perceived c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i s the way language is spoken. In fact , people are more aware of the way they are responding when communicating with someone who is e t h n i c a l l y d i f f erent than i f the person were s imi lar (Gudykunst & Kim 1984). ATTITUDE AND EMOTION It i s suggested that many people experience some discomfort when involved in interethnic communication (Gumperz 1982; Gumperz & Cook-Gumperz 1982). In a counsel l ing s i t u a t i o n , the emotional state of counsel lors influences the counsel l ing process and effect iveness (Schauer, Seymour & Green 1985). In a recent study Rungta 28 (1987) suggests that upon hearing a foreign accented c l i e n t the counsel lor might be more anxious than i f the c l i e n t were non-accented. Some authors have concluded that emotion is a precursor to thought and act ion (Izard 1979) and several bel ieve that during the a f fec t ive s tate , an ind iv idua l is goal -or iented (Sebastian, Ryan, Keogh & Schmidt 1980; Shaw & Wright 1967) and that i f those goals are blocked, the f r u s t r a t i o n and anxiety, which may resul t are manifested in the form of a negative evaluation of the speaker (Gumperz 1982; Sebastian, Ryan, Keogh & Schmidt 1980; Shaw & Wright 1967) . Language is used to 'woo' others , to seduce them, to impress them and to help them . . . language is the primary instrument of interpersonal progress. (Berger & Bradac 1982, p. 75) LANGUAGE AND COMMUNICATION A person's s o c i a l ident i ty and ethnic group membership is recognized through language (Bourhis, G i l e s & Lambert 1975; Chaika 1982; Clement 1980; Fraser 1973; Gumperz & Cook-Gumperz 1982; Honey, 1984; Jupp, Roberts & Cook-Gumperz 1982; K a l i n and Rayko 1980; Katz and Braly 1949; McKirnan & Hamayan 1980; McKirnan, Smith & Hamayan 1983; Palmer 1973; Ryan 1973; Taylor 1980). One study has shown that medical doctors use the i r pa t i ent ' s accent to ident i fy socio-economic status , assess l i n g u i s t i c s k i l l s and communication a b i l i t y , per sona l i ty , behaviour, l eve l of emotionality and i t a lso influences diagnost ic decis ions (F ie ld ing & Evered 1980). 29 Several studies have shown that l i s t e n e r s also use speech cues to evaluate the persona l i ty , education and in te l l i gence of the speaker (Jupp, Roberts & Cook-Gumperz 1982; Scheflen 1979; Will iams 1976). These evaluations and assignments of the speaker to a stereotyped ethnic group f a c i l i t a t e s the maintenance of previously held a t t i t u d e s . Language i s fundamental to s o c i a l behaviour. People are able to d i s t i n g u i s h one group from another by ascr ib ing cer ta in c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which, i f negative, resul t in d i scr iminat ion and prejudice (Lambert 1980; McKirnan & Hamayan 1980). Language is maintained in a l l aspects of soc iety: law, r e l i g i o n , government, education, family , e tc . (Chaika 1982). L i s teners hear language in "terms of patterns" (of sounds) with which they are already familar and unconsciously conform to language rules they have learned (Chaika 1982). In interethnic communication, where at least one of the par t i c ipant s does not conform to the same language ru l e s , v a r i a t i o n s in patterns of speaking affect the l i s t e n e r s at t i tudes (Williams 1976) and may resul t in the assigning of negative a t t r ibutes (Chaika 1982; McKirnan, Smith & Hamayan 1983). Jupp, Roberts and Cook-Gumperz (1982) state that labe l ing ind iv idua l s with negative c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s "f irmly places the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for any breakdown . . . in communications, on the minority group" (p. 242). These researchers and others (McKirnan, Smith & Hamayan 1983) conclude that d i scr iminat ion and prejudice i s more l i n g u i s t i c a l l y , than r a c i a l l y , based and that i t may i n h i b i t 30 or f a c i l i t a t e s o c i a l distance. To i l l u s t r a t e how language influences our s o c i a l in teract ions Howard Gi l e s (Giles & Powesland 1975) from his research in B r i t a i n , has shown that , despite the s t a b i l i t y of adult speech c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , people accommodate the ir speech s ty le (regional or standard received pronounciation) with the purpose in mind of increasing or reducing s o c i a l d is tance . As an i l l u s t r a t i o n , he suggests the reader imagine the var ie ty of ways in which a un ivers i ty professor in his o f f i ce would speak to a jan i tor i f he were: a) alone; b) with a peer col league; c) with a senior administrat ion member; with an undergraduate student; or e) with another maintenance man. In fact , when attempting to l ink at t i tudes with the pred ic t ion of how someone w i l l behave, i t i s general ly assumed that behaviour is mediated by the at t i tudes which are he ld . LANGUAGE AND PERSONALITY The research i s scant in the area of counsel lor a t t i tudes towards foreign accented c l i e n t s . The studies that fol low, in th i s review, involve subjects selected from the general populat ion. In r e i t e r a t i n g that our c u l t u r a l a f f i l i a t i o n i s exposed by the way we speak a language and that i t i s a precursor to stereotyping ethnic group a f f i l i a t i o n (Chaika 1982; Cooper & Fishman 1974; Fasold 1984), many researchers have attempted to i so la te the stereotypic personal i ty c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s s o l i c i t e d by verbal language cues. Scherer (1972) and 31 e a r l i e r invest igators have stressed the importance of th i s research s tat ing that unless the s o c i a l aspects of speech are i so la ted from the personal i ty aspects, there may be mutual l i s tener-speaker misunderstanding and the respondent may make incorrect judgments (Al lport & C a n t r i l 1934; Sapir 1927). In A l l p o r t and C a n t r i l ' s (1934) pioneer radio s tudies , several important d iscoveries were made. F i r s t l y , voice does release correct information concerning "inner and outer" personal i ty c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . They also found that there is a c e r t a i n uniformity of opinion regarding the personal i ty of radio speakers, even i f i t is inaccurate . In a d d i t i o n , there appears to be some preconception of voice type matched to personal i ty features ( i . e . , stereotyped a t t i t u d e s ) . F i n a l l y , inner personal i ty t r a i t s seem to be rated more cons i s tent ly and c o r r e c t l y than outer, phys ica l t r a i t s (as an indicator of p e r s o n a l i t y ) . These f indings have become part of a foundation of considerations when researching the judgments of personal i ty (att i tudes) from voice , which are discussed in the next sec t ion . They s p e l l i t v - i - n - c - i and pronounce i t vinchy; foreigners always s p e l l better than they pronounce. (Mark Twain: Innocents Abroad) DIALECT, RACE AND ACCENT The review of the l i t e r a t u r e at th i s point has demonstrated that i n d i v i d u a l s , in i n t e r c u l t u r a l dialogue, 32 possess preconceptions and biases about the c u l t u r a l l y d i f f erent speaker's communication s k i l l s (Westwood & Borgen 1986). These s k i l l s include aspects of language such as rules and pro f i c i ency , as well as var iab les which might influence the process of mutual understanding such as d ia l ec t and accent. E f f ec t i ve communication d i s in tegrates when the message received i s garbled by an accent or d i a l e c t with which the l i s t ener i s unfami l iar . Understanding is impaired, confusion is establ ished and to make sense of the experience the l i s t e n e r reacts with a negative a t t i t u d e . The importance of research in th i s area, e s p e c i a l l y counse l l ing , cannot be over-emphasized. P a r t i c u l a r l y in Canada, where the foreign speaking immigrant may shed part of the ir cu l ture through the process of a s s i m i l a t i o n , while learning to communicate with the 'dominant language,' the new Canadian w i l l undoubtedly speak with an accent (Ryan, Carranza & Moffie 1977). The manner in which the respondent evaluates the speaker may depend in par t , how c u l t u r a l l y s imi lar to the l i s t e n e r , the speaker is perceived to be. Those who are viewed as outwardly s imi lar are evaluated in a more p o s i t i v e way (McKirnan et a l . 1983), while those who 'sound d i f f e r e n t ' are treated in a skept i ca l way (Jupp, Roberts & Cook-Gumperz 1982) and assumed to be unfr iendly (Fraser 1973). This is p a r t l y due to the fact that speech sty les which wander from the standard form of pronounciation are t y p i c a l l y viewed as less des irable (Edwards 1982). In add i t i on , s o c i a l biases which occur in response to hearing nonstandard speech, 33 include lack of cooperation, r e s t r i c t i v e employment and educational opportunit ies (Edwards 1982; Gi l e s & Powesland 1975). In the i r review a r t i c l e , Brown, Strong and Rencher (1975) describe Wallace Lambert's landmark studies , conducted in Montreal in the la te 1950s and ear ly 1960s. These reviewers describe the matched guise technique, which Lambert and his colleagues o r i g i n a t e d . The b i l i n g u a l subjects , in Lambert's s tudies , l i s t ened to audiotaped passages read by the same f luent b i l i n g u a l (French-English) speaker, f i r s t in one language, then in the next. The purpose of matching the "guise" was to measure the influence of speech and to ensure the subjects were responding to language alone when asked to evaluate the personal i ty c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the speakers. They measured d i r e c t i o n and intens i ty of a t t i tude with a semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l instrument composed of b ipolar (pos i t ive and negative) adjec t ives . Lambert and his researchers found that English-Canadian subjects rated the Engl ish-speaking guise as more i n t e l l i g e n t , t a l l e r , be t t er - look ing , more dependable, kinder, more ambitious and having more character than the French-speaking guise. S i m i l a r l y , the French Canadian subjects rated the French-speaking guise as kinder and more r e l i g i o u s than the E n g l i s h -speaking guise but, rated the Engl i sh guise as more i n t e l l i g e n t , dependable, l ikeable and as having more character than the French guise. The French Canadians' evaluations of the French guise was lower than the Engl i sh 34 Canadians' ra t ing of the same. This was interpreted by Lambert, Hodgson, Gardner and Fillenbaum (1960) to be a "minority group reac t ion ," which is character ized by devaluing the i r own ethnic group. Most accent a t t i tude studies in the United States have concentrated on the ef fects of spoken Black Engl i sh versus White E n g l i s h . T y p i c a l l y , the design involves using an audiotaped matched guise technique. Most often the resu l t s indicate that Black and White l i s t e n e r s rate the White standard guise as being more competent and i n t e l l i g e n t (Bishop 1979; Buck 1968; Tucker & Lambert 1969). Tucker and Lambert (1969) while inves t igat ing reactions to various regional d i a l e c t s in the United States , found that network t e l e v i s i o n broadcasters who spoke a ' reg ionless ' more standard speech were rated more favourably, while M i s s i s s i p p i speakers were rated least favourable. E l l e n Bouchard Ryan and associates have conducted a number of studies inves t igat ing the l i s t e n e r ' s evaluative reactions to Spanish accented American-Engl ish. Ryan (1973, p. 60) demonstrated that Spanish-speaking Mexican Americans "suffer a l i ena t ion and d i scr iminat ion because of the ir accented speech and experience negative bias in the ir pursuit of educational and occupational success." S i m i l a r l y , Alberto Rey (1977) reports that heavi ly accented Cuban speakers were rated least employable, by actual employers, for a l l job categories when compared to mi ld ly accented White and medium accented Black-American Engl i sh speakers. It was found in 35 one study that degree of accent influenced the evaluation of the speakers. The stronger Spanish-accented Eng l i sh is more negatively stereotyped than standard Engl i sh and mild Spanish-accented Engl i sh (Ryan, Carranza & Moffie 1977). This was a lso found by Brennan and Brennan (1981), e spec ia l ly on the dimension of group s o l i d a r i t y . In another study, Sebastian, Ryan, Keogh and Schmidt (1980) induced negative af fect arousal in judges, by introducing a noise or no noise interference s i t u a t i o n , on audiotaped Spanish-accented Eng l i sh and standard Engl i sh guises . The Spanish-accented guise was rated as having "lower i n t e l l i g e n c e , less trustworthy, less success fu l , lower s tatus , and s o c i a l c l a s s , less s imi lar in a t t i tudes ; less des ireable as partners . . . and less fr i endly" (p. 203). These invest igators explain the re su l t s may be due, in par t , to the assoc iat ion of negative af fect arousal with the accented speaker, r e su l t ing in the unfavourable eva luat ion . In a re lated study with Mexican-American b i l i n g u a l adolescents, Carranza and Ryan (1975) found that some "accent loyal ty" was present when the Spanish language was rated higher for use at home than Eng l i sh which was preferred in school . Carranza and Ryan describe the two d i f f erent contexts of language use as: s tatus , which means s i tuat ions involv ing high cul ture (dominant), the influence and upward mobi l i ty associated with standard speech and s o l i d a r i t y , which involves f r i endsh ip , intimacy and membership with the lower status ethnic group. 36 As previous ly mentioned, the way a person speaks indicates the i r ethnic o r i g i n and s o c i a l status to the l i s t e n e r . For the speaker, d i a l e c t and accent have a "motivational component" inasmuch as dec lar ing membership to the s o c i a l group to which they desire to belong (Brown, Strong & Rencher 1975). In some b i l i n g u a l or m u l t i l i n g u a l countr ies , such as Peru and India , often fluency in both languages means opportunity. An i n d i v i d u a l learns to communicate in the more pres t ig ious language in order to reach the des ired goals of education, employment, or simply progressing from r u r a l to urban dwel l ing , which may f a c i l i t a t e a better l i f e s t y l e (Apte 1970; Wolck 1973). Although Edward T. H a l l (1976) states that "90% of communication i s nonverbal and large ly unconscious" and i t i s " . . . important to develop an awareness of . . . the conscious . . . element of speech." This author suggests that people pay more at tent ion to what i s said and interpret i t more read i ly because of the comparative a c c e s s i b i l i t y of the spoken word. During t h i s process of l i n g u i s t i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , the l i s t e n e r pays at tent ion to and makes judgments about speech rate , h e s i t a t i o n , grammatical aspects, and pronounciation while comparing the speaker as u l t imate ly s imi lar or d i f f erent to themselves (Palmer 1973). Howard G i l e s (1970) suggests that hearing accents not only e l i c i t s p inpoint ing speaker status and personal i ty c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s but, in a d d i t i o n , a) the l i s t e n e r experiences an aesthet ic dimension of pleasantness or unpleasantness; 37 b) a communicative comfort or discomfort l e v e l i n v e r b a l i n t e r a c t i o n ; and c) r a t e s the amount of p r e s t i g e value inherent in the accent. In a review a r t i c l e , G i l e s and Powesland (1975) s t a t e d that h i s t o r i c a l l y people, i n B r i t a i n , who were i n t e r e s t e d i n r i s i n g above t h e i r s o c i a l c l a s s would a l t e r t h e i r accent to be more in l i n e with the standard way of speaking; "pronounciation became, t h e r e f o r e , a marker of p o s i t i o n i n s o c i e t y " (p. 26). The standard, or r e c e i v e d p r o n o u n c i a t i o n (RP), c e r t a i n f o r e i g n a c cents, and S c o t t i s h and I r i s h a c c ents, were c o n s i d e r e d f i r s t c l a s s , while the B r i t i s h r e g i o n a l accents which were rated second and t h i r d were the accents from l a r g e i n d u s t r i a l towns. Within B r i t a i n r e g i o n a l accents which d e v i a t e d the l e a s t from the standard propnounciation were c o n s i d e r e d more p r e s t i g i o u s and more favou r a b l e than broader a c c e n t s . G i l e s and Powesland continue to summarize that although there doesn't appear to be any ' c o r r e c t ' way of speaking in the United S t a t e s , accent p r e s t i g e may be ranked a c c o r d i n g to e t h n i c m i n o r i t i e s such as Black and Mexican-American. They conclude t h e i r review by s t a t i n g t h a t , i n Canada, French Canadians regard t h e i r own speech as s o c i a l y l e s s d e s i r a b l e than European French, but on the other hand, are r e l u c t a n t to accept i t i s b e t t e r than French Canadian. G i l e s and h i s c o l l e a g u e s have conducted e x t e n s i v e res e a r c h in B r i t a i n i n v e s t i g a t i n g e v a l u a t i v e r e a c t i o n s to accented speakers. In a study to determine i f l i s t e n e r s c o u l d p e r c e i v e d i f f e r e n c e s between m i l d or broad accent and 38 how these d i s t i n c t i o n s would be rated, G i l e s (1972a) found that l i s t e n e r s were able to d i s t i n g u i s h between mild and broad regional accents. A l l subjects , even those from the same region, rated the aes thet ic , comfort and prest ige values of the broader accent less favourable than the milder vers ion . G i l e s (1972b) reported that RP speakers were stereotyped as having more i n t e l l i g e n c e and sel f -confidence (competence) but less personal i n t e g r i t y and kind-heartedness or humour ( soc ia l a t tract iveness) when compared to non-standard accents. The resu l t s of two studies on persuasiveness and accented speech (Giles 1973a; G i l e s & Powesland 1975) indicated that the qua l i ty of the argument presented was evaluated by a l l l i s t e n e r s more p o s i t i v e l y when spoken by an RP speaker than speakers with regional accents. However, where actual a t t i tude change towards the topic was involved, l i s t e n e r s were more eas i l y persuaded by someone with whom they f e l t was more c u l t u r a l l y s imi lar to themselves (accent l o y a l t y ) . G i l e s , Baker & F i e l d i n g (1975) c r i t i c i z e the use of vocal s t imulat ion only in research, arguing that i t may be too a r t i f i c i a l and l i m i t i n g . In the ir 1975 study, these invest igators used a matched guise technique in which the speaker was face-to-face with the l i s t e n e r . They attempted to determine actual stereotyped a t t i t u d i n a l behaviour towards the speaker by using the respondents' written communication length as an ind icat ion of that behaviour. Their f indings were consistent with most previous research: the RP speaker 39 was rated more i n t e l l i g e n t and subjects wrote more ( ind ica t ing a desire to interact ) about the RP speaker than the regional accented speaker. In re lated B r i t i s h s tudies , accent l o y a l t y was reported between London and Yorkshire accents (Strongman & Woosley 1967) and, although both Scot t i sh and Engl i sh regional accented l i s t e n e r s rated the Scot t i sh accent lower on many prest ige sca les , the l i s t e n e r s were l o y a l to the i r region with regards to_ s o c i a l a t tract iveness (Cheyne 1970). In Canada, Wallace Lambert's matched guise technique continues to be used to invest igate l i s t e n e r at t i tudes towards accents . In a study comparing Jewish accented Engl i sh and standard Canadian E n g l i s h , A n i s f e l d , Bogo and Lambert (1962) reported that Gent i l e l i s t e n e r s rated the accented guise lower on a l l t r a i t s while the Jewish l i s t e n e r s rated the accented guise as more humourous, enter ta in ing , and k ind . They were a lso able to indenti fy the accent as e t h n i c a l l y Jewish more often than the Gent i l e s . Once again, accent l o y a l t y on dimensions of s o c i a l a t tract iveness and group s o l i d a r i t y appears to be present. In a d d i t i o n , to the above, fami l iar s i tuat ions in Canada, United States and B r i t a i n , i s the circumstance where a nat ional of a country encounters someone with a foreign accent. Although the s i tuat ions where the dominant Engl i sh speaking person hears a French Canadian, Spanish or regional accent require some adjustment and f i l t e r i n g of information, these s i tua t ions are the norm in these countries and 40 therefore more fami l iar than when a foreign accent is encountered. Therefore i t i s no surprise that the studies reported here indicate an unequivocal negative bias towards foreign accented speakers on several c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . For example, B r i t i s h e r s i t was reported, viewed minority speakers of Engl i sh as i n e f f i c i e n t workers who make excuses about t h e i r work performance and speak incorrect Eng l i sh (Mishra 1982). When considered for job s u i t a b i l i t y , d i scr iminat ion was shown to favour Engl i sh Canadians over foreign accented speakers and that the foreign accented job candidates were su i table for only the lower status jobs (Kal in & Rayko 1978; K a l i n & Rayko 1980; K a l i n , Rayko & Love 1980). American l i s t e n e r s rated foreign accented speakers ( I t a l i a n , Eastern European and Norwegian) lower than American Eng l i sh accented speakers on a l l dimensions of s o c i o - i n t e l l e c t u a l status , aesthet ic q u a l i t y and dynamism (Mulac, Hanley & Prigge 1974). In a re lated study, Palmer (1973) reported that as soon as the foreign speaker of Eng l i sh deviates from the accepted standard, phonological ly or grammatically, they are negatively evaluated. Frederick Wil l iams (1973, p. 126) supports th i s notion by s tat ing that "people employ stereotyped sets of a t t i tudes as anchor points for the ir evaluations of whatever i s presented to them as a sample of a person's speech." E s s e n t i a l l y people respond in an o v e r a l l way rather than taking the i n d i v i d u a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s into cons iderat ion . 41 SUMMARY C l e a r l y , the review of l i t e r a t u r e on language, communication, a t t i t u d e and accent r e v e a l s that upon hearing v e r b a l communication which d e v i a t e s from the standard p r o n o u n c i a t i o n , a negative s t e r e o t y p e i s e l i c i t e d from the l i s t e n e r s a t t i t u d e r e p e r t o i r e . The l i s t e n e r develops an impression of the speaker as he or she a t t r i b u t e s v a r i o u s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s based on the e l i c i t e d s t e r e o t y p i c a l a t t i t u d e . The purpose of t h i s s t ereotype i s a "short cut to understanding o t h e r s , r e l i e d upon dis p r o v e n , but sometimes y i e l d i n g to subsequent inf o r m a t i o n ..." ( D e l i a 1972, p. 286) such as p e r c e i v e d s i m i l a r b e l i e f s , a t t i t u d e s , values and s t a t u s . From a c o u n s e l l i n g p e r s p e c t i v e , as o u t l i n e d i n Chapter One, t h i s type of negative a t t i t u d e can be d e t r i m e n t a l to the t h e r a p e u t i c p r o c e s s . The r e s e a r c h undertaken here i n v e s t i g a t e s the a t t i t u d e s of c o u n s e l l o r s towards t h e i r accented c l i e n t . I t i s a n t i c i p a t e d that the r e s u l t s w i l l enhance the e x i s t i n g r e s e a r c h , i n s p i r e f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n and o f f e r some e x p l a n a t i o n as to why people react with negative a t t i t u d e s towards the c u l t u r a l l y d i f f e r e n t i n d i v i d u a l . 42 CHAPTER THREE INSTRUMENTATION AND APPARATUS ATTITUDE MEASUREMENT: The S e m a n t i c D i f f e r e n t i a l I t i s g e n e r a l l y accepted that a t t i t u d e s are lea r n e d and are r e l a t i v e l y enduring p r e d i s p o s i t o n s to r e a c t i n an e v a l u a t i v e manner. Most who c o n s i d e r a t t i t u d e a " l a t e n t p s y c h o l o g i c a l v a r i a b l e " ( A g h e y i s i & Fishman 1970) suggest i t s s t r u c t u r e has three components: c o g n i t i v e ( b e l i e f s about), a f f e c t i v e ( f e e l i n g s about), and b e h a v i o u r a l ( a c t i o n s towards the a t t i t u d e o b j e c t ) . As such, a t t i t u d e s may be d e s c r i b e d as "tendencies of approach or avoidance" or as "f a v o u r a b l e or unfavourable" r e a c t i o n s (Osgood, Suci and Tannenbaum 1970). A t t i t u d e s may not only have a d i r e c t i o n of e v a l u a t i o n ( p o s i t i v e or negative) but a l s o an i n t e n s i t y of f e e l i n g , which o r i g i n a t e s from a n e u t r a l zone on a b i p o l a r continuum of a f f e c t . T h i s n o t i o n of an e x t e n s i o n which i s composed of a p o i n t of o r i g i n , with both d i r e c t i o n and i n t e n s i t y , enables the re s e a r c h e r to q u a n t i f y the a f f e c t i v e measurement of a t t i t u d e s (Osgood et a l . 1970). A l s o p e r t i n a n t to s c a l e c o n s t r u c t i o n are the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which make up the a f f e c t i v e nature of a t t i t u d e measurement. These i n c l u d e the extrem i t y of favourable and unfavourable, the i n t e n s i t y of the f e e l i n g of 43 the respondent and the degree to which the respondent feels involved ( i . e . , object relevance) with the a t t i tude object (Lemon 1973; Shaw & Wright 1967). The semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l adequately measures the d i r e c t i o n and in tens i ty of a t t i t u d e . With the added f l e x i b i l i t y of se lec t ing adject ives sui table to the p a r t i c u l a r needs of a study, th i s instrument becomes relevant to most study p a r t i c i p a n t s . This technique for the measurement of a t t i tude was chosen due to i t s extensive use and development in c r o s s - c u l t u r a l research. This research presented concepts which resul ted in adject ive p a i r s that appear to have u n i v e r s a l i t y of meaning across cu l tures (Tanaka, Oyama & Osgood 1969). Repeatedly, three dimensions of meaning emerged: evaluation (good or bad), potency (powerful or powerless) and a c t i v i t y (fast or slow) (Kumata & Schramm 1969; Lemon 1973; Osgood 1969). In a d d i t i o n , when compared to more t r a d i t i o n a l a t t i tude scales of measurement the evaluative component appears to corre la te more highly than the potency or a c t i v i t y dimension (Lemon 1973; Osgood et al . 1970). However, several researchers (Heise 1970; Lemon 1973; Osgood et al. 1970) caution that a l l of the dimensions (EPA) should be taken into considerat ion when analyzing the at t i tude towards the object . Therefore a l l of the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l dimensions ( i . e . , the composite test mean score) of EPA were considered to represent the counsel lors ' a t t i t u d e s . 44 There are several advantages in using the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l over other standardized instruments. The b ipolar adject ives are "simple and economical" and can be used with adul t s , ch i ldren or people from other cul tures (Heise 1970). In a d d i t i o n , the experimenter i s able to construct the scale se lec t ing adject ives which are su i table and relevant to a p a r t i c u l a r research and i t s populat ion. F i n a l l y , the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l may be disguised in i t s purpose. This i s e s sent ia l when measuring at t i tudes such as in the present study inves t igat ing counsel lor at t i tudes towards foreign accented c l i e n t s . In reviewing other at t i tude quest ionnaires , tes t ing for prejudice and b ias , th is researcher found for the most par t , what was ava i lab le referred to a t t i tudes towards Jews, Blacks and Russians though such d i r e c t questions as, "Would you l i v e next door to one?" or "Would you l e t your daughter marry one?" This invest igator considered th i s method of measurement not relevant to the counse l l ing population e spec ia l ly in terms of the ir a t t i tudes towards the foreign accented c l i e n t . R e l i a b i l i t y Test -re tes t r e l i a b i l i t y studies for random error have been extensively conducted by Osgood and his researchers (1970). They have reported high coe f f i c i en t s ranging from .87 to .93. The semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l i s considered to be a stable and r e l i a b l e instrument even when the sample s ize i s small (Heise 1970). Tests for i n t e r n a l consistency of the 45 subscales of eva luat ion , potency and a c t i v i t y appear to be less rigorous although Lemon (1973) suggests they are s t i l l acceptable, report ing s p l i t - h a l f r e l i a b i l i t i e s from .70 to .76 for evaluat ion , .56 to .75 for potency and from .58 to .66 for a c t i v i t y . V a l i d i t y When measuring a t t i tudes , Osgood et al. (1970) state that the evaluative dimension of the scale has "reasonable face v a l i d i t y . " In addit ion they report that when th i s dimension was compared with the more t r a d i t i o n a l Thurstone and Guttman-type sca les , i t corre la ted highly as a mesure of a t t i t u d e , .74 - .82, respect ive ly (Shaw & Wright 1967). Osgood et al. (1970) concluded that "in essence, whatever the Thurstone and Guttman scales measure, the evaluative factor measures as well" (p. 230). Lemon (1973, p. 109) concurs with th i s assert ion s tat ing that based upon thorough t e s t i n g , the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l "sat i s f ies the c r i t e r i a of a r e l i a b l e and v a l i d instrument" in measuring a t t i t u d e . He adds, however, that in attempting to test the pred ic t ive and concurrent v a l i d i t y , the sometimes low c o r r e l a t i o n s between the sematic d i f f e r e n t i a l and t r a d i t i o n a l scales could be due to e i t h e r ' s relevance of the at t i tude object to the respondents. Lemon cautions that even though he regards the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l as a r e l i a b l e and v a l i d instrument, i t i s operating within the boundaries of a s ingle evaluative 46 component, and should be used in conjunction with at least one other instrument in order to tap the "complex and mult i - faceted" concept of a t t i t u d e . A t t i t u d e a n d t h e P r e d i c t i o n o f B e h a v i o u r Depending upon the s i tua t ion and outside inf luences , a person may not behave according to what they are ac tua l ly f e e l i n g . It is a d i f f i c u l t task therefore to infer behaviour s t r i c t l y from a se l f - repor t measure (Fasold 1984) even though some suggest that most peoples' react ions correspond to the ir a t t i t u d i n a l d i spos i t i on (Baron & Byrne 1977). Several researchers state that a t t i tudes should not be viewed as causes or predictors of behaviour but as "communicative acts" which imply the evaluations ( L a l l j e e , Brown and Ginsburg 1984). Others consider that the s ingle function of the measurement i s to measure a t t i tudes towards objects and i t n a t u r a l l y follows that inferences regarding behaviour towards that same object w i l l be made (Lemon 1973). Osgood and his col leagues (1970) state that a t t i tudes contr ibute to understanding the m e a n i n g of the a t t i tude object to a person and that th is contr ibut ion is l i m i t e d in the accurate pred ic t ion of behaviour. They describe a t t i tude as the dominant "part of the intervening state which mediates between s i tuat ions and behaviour" (Osgood et al . 1970, p. 233). Wiggins and Fishbein (1969) recommends prudence in suggesting a causal r e l a t i o n s h i p between a t t i tude and behaviour, cautioning that "behaviour toward a given object 47 i s a function of many v a r i a b l e s , of which at t i tude . . . i s only one" (p. 100). S c a l e C o n s t r u c t i o n Based on a review of the language and at t i tude studies using the audiotaped matched guise technique and semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l instrument, f i f t y b ipolar adject ive pa irs were selected for th i s research inves t igat ing counsel lor a t t i tudes towards accented c l i e n t s . When the sample s ize in research i s too small to provide an accurate factor analys is of the data, Heise (1970) recommends choosing the adject ives from published factor ana ly t i c work s tat ing the pa irs selected would be representative of each of the EPA dimensions. This was the case in the present i n v e s t i g a t i o n . E s s e n t i a l l y the evaluative dimension r e f l e c t s the persons "good-bad or pleasant-unpleasant react ion to the stimulus"; the potency dimension represents a judgement of the "strength of the stimulus" while the a c t i v i t y dimension indicates the "perceived dynamic q u a l i t i e s " of the speaker (Shuy & Will iams 1973). Based on guidel ines establ ished by Osgood and his colleagues the scales were constructed with a higher loading (28 items) on the evaluat ive component general ly because i t i s considered most representative of the a f f ec t i ve c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a t t i tude (Fasold 1984; Heise 1970; Lemon 1973; Osgood et al . 1970; Shaw & Wright 1967). The other factors of potency (11 items) and a c t i v i t y (11 items) were included to a) obscure the intent of the 48 instrument and b) to complete the information regarding the counse l lor ' s o v e r a l l a t t i tudes . Depending on the focus of the study some factor analyses have produced adject ive c lus ters often p a r a l l e l i n g but sometimes d i f ferent from the EPA composition. In Canada, Lambert (1967) found that b i l i n g u a l (French-English) l i s t e n e r s rated audiotaped b i l i n g u a l speakers on three d i s t i n c t personal i ty categories: competence ( in t e l l i gence ; se l f -conf idence) , personal i n t e g r i t y ( r e l i a b i l i t y , kindness) and s o c i a l a t tract iveness ( s o c i a b i l i t y ; sense of humor; be t t er - l ook ing ) . Using the same matched guise design and personal i ty categories , G i l e s (1971), in B r i t a i n , had l i s t e n e r s rate speakers of regional d i a l e c t s and standard pronounciat ion. He reported that regional accented l i s t e n e r s demonstrated "accent l o y a l i t y " in the s o c i a l a t tract iveness and personal i n t e g r i t y categories but rated "standard pronounciation speakers as more competent. Carranza and Ryan (1975) and Brennan and Brennan (1981), in the ir work with Spanish-Americans in addit ion to EPA, refer to more c u l t u r e -spec i f i c dynamics, such as status-seeking (educated-uneducated; i n t e l l i g e n t - i g n o r a n t ; successful -unsuccessful ; wealthy-poor) and s o l i d a r i t y - s t r e s s i n g ( f r i e n d l y - u n f r i e n d l y ; good-bad; k i n d - c r u e l ; trustworthy-untrustworthy). Brown, Strong and Rencher (1975) described the ir categories of b ipo lar pa irs in terms of speaker benevolence (kindness, tolerance) and competence (strength, confidence) which are s imi lar to evaluation and potency. Zahn and Hopper (1985), 49 conducting research on language a t t i tudes , developed the Speech Evaluat ion Instrument. This contained a three factor model of speaker evaluat ion: super ior i ty ( i n t e l l e c t , competence, soc ia l s tatus , speaking competency), a t tract iveness ( soc ia l a t trac t iveness , s o l i d a r i t y , trustworthiness , benevolence) and dynamism (speaker's s o c i a l power, a c t i v i t y l eve l and se l f -presenta t ion) . For the present research, the f i n a l 50-item scale constructed was composed of adject ives chosen from previous factor a n a l y t i c studies which produced categories t y p i c a l of the EPA dimensions. Most c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were selected from a pool of adject ives which were the product of Osgood and his col leagues' thesaurus research (Osgood, Suci and Tannenbaum 1975). Other adject ives were chosen from studies c i t e d e a r l i e r which had invest igated at t i tudes towards c u l t u r a l l y d i f ferent or accented speakers. The concept chosen for the counsel lors in th i s research was the "Evaluation of the C l i e n t ' s C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . " The study p a r t i c i p a n t s were asked to put an X on each scale of b ipolar adject ives to indicate both the d i r e c t i o n (pos i t ive -negative) and intens i ty (neutral to extreme) of the ir fee l ing towards the c l i e n t they had just viewed on videotape. The bipolar adject ives were placed at each end of a b ipolar continuum ind ica t ing extreme opposites of a p a r t i c u l a r c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c . To prevent response bias or order ef fects the sequence and p o l a r i t y of the scales was randomized throughout. For the purposes of numerical ana lys i s , each 50 adject ive pa ir was assigned the numerical value from one for pos i t ive evaluation to seven for negative evaluation (four representing the neutral p o i n t ) . In construct ing the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l Heise (1970) ascerta ins "actual q u a l i f i e r s " such as "very," "quite" and "s l ight ly" af fect the way in which study par t i c ipant s rate the a t t i tude object . He considers these q u a l i f i e r s enable the subjects to make f iner d i scr iminat ions in the ir responses than i f there were no gu ide l ines . Below is a representation of the q u a l i f i e r s used for th is research. neutral or very quite only not at only quite very c lose ly c lo se ly s l i g h t l y a l l s l i g h t l y c lo se ly c lo se ly re lated re la ted re la ted re lated re la ted re la ted re lated good : : : —: : : : bad See Appendix C for the complete ins truc t ions and accompanying Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l administered to the par t i c ipant s in both s tudies . INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE A post hoc interview questionnaire was designed to e l i c i t counse l lors ' unbiased and genuine reactions to the c l i e n t . The questions re f lec ted general a t t i t u d i n a l d i spos i t i ons towards the c u l t u r a l l y d i f f erent i n d i v i d u a l some of which were not completely covered in the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l and others which were designed to support i t . 51 These d i spos i t ions included the counse l lors ' perceived s i m i l a r i t y or d i s s i m i l a r i t y between them and the c l i e n t ( a f f i 1 1 i a t i o n ) , a wi l l ingness to engage in and enjoyment of future p a r t i c i p a t i o n with the c l i e n t (involvement); counse l lors ' awareness of c u l t u r a l d i f ferences between them and the c l i e n t ( c u l t u r a l influences on the counsel l ing process); and the counse l lors ' perception of the c l i e n t ' s motivation to help himself or herse l f ( c l i n i c a l judgement). In a d d i t i o n , an open-ended "other comments" questions was included. DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION In order to obtain a representative sample of mainstream counse l lors , study p a r t i c i p a n t s were not included in the analys i s who were considered " c u l t u r a l l y s ens i t i ve ." The demographic data provided the c r i t e r i a for the d e f i n i t i o n of the "mainstream counsel lor" in the domain of f a m i l i a l c u l t u r a l inf luences . Such questions asked the b ir thplace of both mother and father and the i r age on a r r i v a l in Canada, i f a p p l i c a b l e . Evidence supports the notion that i f immigrating before 18 years of age, ind iv idua l s general ly lose the ir foreign accent and e f f e c t i v e l y adopt the cu l ture of the host country, but beyond that age, the immigrants' cu l ture remains a dominant influence over h i s or her l i f e (Se l iger , Krashin and Ladefoged 1975). In add i t i on , the counse l lor ' s b ir thplace was quer ied . The goal of the demographic sheet was to gather enough 52 information about the subjects to determine whether they f i t the c r i t e r i a establ ished to be considered as "pure" mainstream counse l lors . APPARATUS: The Matched Guise Videotapes In i t s purest form, the matched-guise technique requires the same perfec t ly b i l i n g u a l person to read exactly the same passage in one language, then the other. It i s considered that th i s method of research " e l i c i t s responses which expose the l i s t e n e r s more pr ivate reactions" (Lambert, Frankel and Tucker 1966) and sterotyped at t i tudes (Tucker & Lambert 1969) towards the speaker. In essence, l i s t e n e r s are react ing to only the voice c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and speech s ty les of the audiotaped speaker who sounds s imi lar or d i f f erent to them. In order for th i s study's par t i c ipant s to experience as close to a real counse l l ing s i tuat ion as poss ib le , a videotape of a c l i e n t presenting a problem was more relevant than an audiotape of the same. A rea l c l i e n t , as the st imulus, was avoided because of experimental contro l problems which might have ar isen regarding the i n d i v i d u a l ' s appearance, behaviour, fatigue and i n s t a b i l i t y of presentation from one subject to the next. Related l i t e r a t u r e suggests that the matched-guise, in i t s attempts to e l i c i t react ions only to speech by c o n t r o l l i n g content, may inadvertantly e l i c i t l i s t e n e r s ' react ions to reading s ty le (Fasold 1984; G i l e s & Bourhis 1973; Lee 1971). To standardize the presentation used in 53 th i s research, i t was necessary to hold the content constant. Ryan (1973) contends that reading a prepared s c r i p t is e s sent ia l to contro l for var ia t ions in syntax, vocabulary and grammar. Brown et al . (1975) add that "holding content constant" puts the emphasis on quat i fy ing the l i s t e n e r s ' react ions , which are pecu l iar to the vocal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the speaker. Others support th i s not ion, e spec ia l l y in research which invest igates react ions to accented speakers, simply because deviat ions from the standard grammatical speech may encourage responses to that and not to accent (Giles & Bourhis 1973). Therefore, the actor accompanied his content-relevant monologue with su i table f a c i a l expressions and appropriate phonological c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . In e f f ec t , he attempted to mimic spontaneous, natural speech. Before proceeding further , accent, d i a l e c t and foreign accents need to be defined so i t i s c lear to the reader exactly what the counsel lors heard. There does not appear to be a d e f i n i t e global d e f i n i t i o n of accent. Often d i a l e c t and accent are used interchangeably. It is e s sent ia l to c l a r i f y these two terms and la t er present a working d e f i n i t i o n of accent for th i s study. E s s e n t i a l l y , for native speakers of E n g l i s h , accents are considered to be "patterns of pronounciation" which include the usage of p a r t i c u l a r vowels or consonant sounds, rhythmic, intonat ional and prosodic features (Wells 1982) plus c e r t a i n phonological , phonetic (Giles and Bourhis 1973), syntact ic and l e x i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of speech (Berger 1968; Wells 1982). Accents 54 are "deviations from the expected or fami l iar" (Berger 1968) standard pronounciation (Bezooijen and Hout 1985; Gi l e s 1970). Accent has also been described by J . C . Wells (1982, p. 1) as "character i s t i c of an i n d i v i d u a l be l inging to some geographic region or s o c i a l c lass . . . i t may be t y p i c a l of the speaker's sex, age group or l eve l of education." Black E n g l i s h , in the United States , has been invest igated in terms of how i t is d i f f erent from the standard pronounciation with r e l a t i o n to p i t c h , rhythm and intonation (Hansell and A j i r o t u t u 1982). Dia lect has been defined as prepresenting part of the speaker's "learned c u l t u r a l pattern" (Brown et al . 1975) r e f l e c t i n g var ia t ions in vocabulary, syntax, phonology which are t y p i c a l of c e r t a i n ethnic or minority groups within the larger community (Berger and Bradac 1982; Berger 1968; Chaika 1982; Danesi 1985). Genera l ly , d i a l e c t i s a v a r i a t i o n of the standard or reveived pronounciation occurring at "most l i n g u i s t i c levels" (Giles 1970; Gi l e s and Bourhis 1973). A foreign accent i s general ly considered to be the resu l t of the s i tua t ion where speakers from a d i f f erent e thno l ingu i s t i c background attempt to speak the dominant language (Danesi 1985). It i s the product of interference from the speaker ' s native language (Rey 1977) e spec ia l l y in terms of phonological (Ryan 1973; Chaika 1982; Kess 1976; G i l e s and Bourhis 1973), phonetic (Wells 1982), s y n t a c t i c a l and l e x i c a l ( K e s s 1976) features of speech. In a d d i t i o n , foreign accented i n d i v i d u a l s ' speech r e f l e c t s d i f ferences , 55 from the standard, i n pro s o d i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s such as, melody, tempo, rhythm and pause (Mulac, Hanley and Prigge 1 974) . T h e r e f o r e , f o r the purpose of t h i s r e s e a r c h a r e f i n e d o p e r a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n of f o r e i g n accent i s taken to i n c l u d e both p h o n o l o g i c a l (pronounciation) and Prosodic v a r i a t i o n in speech which are t y p i c a l l y found i n non-native speakers of E n g l i s h . Prosodic v a r i a t i o n i n c l u d e s i n t o n a t i o n , changes i n volume, s t r e s s ( p i t c h , loudness, d u r a t i o n ) , vowel l e n g t h , p h r a s i n g , pausing, a c c e l e r a t i o n and d e c e l e r a t i o n and o v e r a l l s h i f t s in speech r e g i s t e r (Gumperz 1982). In composing t h i s accent and manner of p r e s e n t a t i o n , s e v e r a l language v a r i a b l e s were c o n s i d e r e d important as they e l i c i t a t t r i b u t i o n s which are e v a l u a t i v e i n a s o c i a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l sense. Berger and Bradac (1982) o u t l i n e three areas of concern. F i r s t l y , the semantic and s y n t a c t i c components of language, which i n c l u d e words which are f a m i l i a r and not taboo; the words used which r e f l e c t the immediacy and i n t e n s i t y of the speaker's f e e l i n g s ; the l e v e l of vocabulary usuage; use and the use of good or bad grammar. In order to c o n t r o l f o r these language v a r i a b l e s , content was c o n t r o l l e d as the a c t o r spoke i n a manner u t i l i z i n g words which: were common and not c o l l o q u i a l i n nature; expressed a p p r o p r i a t e r a t h e r than d y s f u n c t i o n a l d i s t u r b e d words of emotion; had an average r a t h e r than advanced or impoverished vocabulary; and used c o r r e c t grammar. P a r a l i n g u i s t i c and p h o n o l o g i c a l f e a t u r e s , which Berger and Bradac suggest e l i c i t 56 sterotypes or psychological ca tegor iza t ions , are p i t c h , in tonat ion , volume, rate of speech and phonetic v a r i a t i o n . To contro l for these language v a r i a b l e s , the actor mimicked the non-accented standard speech with the only v a r i a t i o n being an Eastern European accent. When viewed, the p a r a l i n g u i s t i c and phonological var iables were r e l a t i v e l y equal on both tapes, as was the case with the semantic and syntact ic features of language. Both the accented and non-accented videotapes in each study matched. In order to accomplish t h i s , each of the fourteen segments of the c l i e n t presenting h is problem was recorded separately: the non-accented vers ion , then the accented. Later the segments were s p l i t and edited into two separate, fourteen segment videotapes: one accented and non-accented. The videotapes were reviewed and the accents were rated as authentic while the content, speech s t y l e , speech c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , emotionality and non-verbal behavior were judged as e s sen t ia l l y the same for each tape (accented and non-accented) within each study. The tapes in the f i r s t study were 26 minutes long. This included a b r i e f two minute demonstration, given by th i s researcher, of what to expect and what the par t i c ipant s were expected to do. In a d d i t i o n , the actual response time of 30 seconds was edited on to the videotapes to i l l u s t r a t e how much time the subject had to make a counsel l ing response. This i s discussed in d e t a i l in the following chapter. The t o t a l videotape running time for the second study was 20 minutes with the same format as in 57 Study One. The next chapter p r e s e n t s the methodology and procedures designed f o r t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n of c o u n s e l l o r a t t i t u d e s towards t h e i r accented c l i e n t . 58 CHAPTER FOUR METHODOLOGY INTRODUCTION This research invest igated the at t i tudes of dominant-cul ture counsel lors towards a foreign-accented c l i e n t . The review of l i t e r a t u r e (Chapter Two) suggested that majority ind iv idua l s a t t r i b u t e stereotypic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s when they hear an accented speaker. These stereotypes can prolong a negative a t t i tude towards the foreign accented i n d i v i d u a l . To invest igate the di f ference between majority counsel lor a t t i tudes towards the accented or non-accented c l i e n t , th i s researcher designed then conducted two studies in the department of Counsel l ing Psychology at The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, during March and A p r i l , 1986. The resu l t s of the f i r s t study were contrary to the l i t e r a t u r e reported, which revealed that people have negative a t t i tudes towards the c u l t u r a l l y d i f f erent i n d i v i d u a l . This inves t iga tor , therefore , conducted a second study to confirm or deny the resul t s of the f i r s t . This chapter describes the research quest ions, the design, the p i l o t study, the population and the sample, the apparatus and procedures, the instrumentation, the hypotheses, and the s t a t i s t i c a l analyses for each of the two 59 separate i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . In a d d i t i o n , the p r o d u c t i o n of the 'matched-guise' videotapes of the c l i e n t p r e s e n t i n g h i s c o u n s e l l i n g problem i s i n c l u d e d i n the Apparatus and Procedures s e c t i o n . For a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of the r a t i o n a l e and development of the instruments used, the reader i s r e f e r r e d to Chapter Three. RESEARCH QUESTIONS Both s t u d i e s address four r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s : a) Is there a d i f f e r e n c e i n a t t i t u d e between mainstream c o u n s e l l o r s towards t h e i r c l i e n t s who have no accent and those whose c l i e n t s speak with a f o r e i g n accent? b) Do c o u n s e l l o r s d i f f e r i n t h e i r e x p r e s s i o n of a f f i n i t y towards the accented or non-accented c l i e n t ? c) Do c o u n s e l l o r s with accented versus non-accented c l i e n t s d i f f e r i n t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n of the c l i e n t ' s m o t i v a t i o n to h e l p him or h e r s e l f ? d) Do the c o u n s e l l o r s , i n the accented c l i e n t s i t u a t i o n , comment on c u l t u r e as p o s s i b l y i n f l u e n c i n g the c o u n s e l l i n g process? DESIGN The r e s e a r c h design was an experimental, p o s t - t e s t only c o n t r o l group with matching f o r c e r t a i n v a r i a b l e s ( d i s c u s s e d l a t e r ) . For each study, t h i s w r i t e r i n v e s t i g a t e d the resear c h q u e s t i o n s by comparing two groups of c o u n s e l l i n g psychology students. S e p a r a t e l y , each member of the f i r s t group viewed a videotape of a non-accented c l i e n t p r e s e n t i n g 6 0 a c o u n s e l l i n g problem. Conversely, each s u b j e c t in the second group viewed a videotape of the same c l i e n t speaking with a f o r e i g n accent. The p r i n c i p a l q u e s t i o n of the mainstream c o u n s e l l o r ' s a t t i t u d e was measured by a Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l A t t i t u d e S c a l e , developed by t h i s r e s e a r c h e r . An Interview Q u e s t i o n n a i r e addressed the remaining three r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s . PILOT STUDY To t e s t the experimental procedure and relevance of the measures employed, a p i l o t study was run with s i x s u b j e c t s from an undergraduate c o u n s e l l i n g psychology course who had vol u n t e e r e d to p a r t i c i p a t e . Based on t h e i r comments, adjustments were made to v e r b a l and w r i t t e n i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r the videotape p r e s e n t a t i o n and semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l , e s p e c t i v e l y . A l t e r a t i o n s were made to some q u e s t i o n n a i r e items i n order to make them c l e a r e r to understand. POPULATION AND SAMPLE The p o p u l a t i o n under i n v e s t i g a t i o n was that of c o u n s e l l o r s from the dominant mainstream c u l t u r e . An o p e r a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n of the mainstream c o u n s e l l o r i s one who i s d e s c r i b e d as from the m a j o r i t y c u l t u r e , r a c i a l l y , e t h n i c a l l y and l i n g u i s t i c a l l y . B a s i c a l l y , t h i s c h a r a c t e r i z e s someone who i s Caucasian, speaks E n g l i s h with an accent indigenous to North America ( p r i n c i p a l l y Canadian), and who 61 had parents who spoke with speech s t y l e s t y p i c a l of North America. T h i s set of d e f i n i n g c r i t e r i a was e s t a b l i s h e d to pro v i d e a l i n k between the p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s reviewed i n the l i t e r a t u r e , which i n v e s t i g a t e d the a t t i t u d e s of the mainstream p o p u l a t i o n at l a r g e , and the c o u n s e l l i n g p o p u l a t i o n . These s t r i c t g u i d e l i n e s f o r sub j e c t i n c l u s i o n were e s t a b l i s h e d to ensure that the samples i n t h i s r e s e a r c h would be r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the general p o p u l a t i o n of mainstream c o u n s e l l o r s . For the f i r s t study, t h i s author drew the s u b j e c t s from the p o p u l a t i o n of c o u n s e l l i n g psychology students who were i n the f i r s t year of the Master's l e v e l progam. A l l of these s u b j e c t s met the p r e r e q u i s i t e admission requirement of three years p r e v i o u s experience i n c o u n s e l l i n g - r e l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s . A l l were c u r r e n t l y e n r o l l e d i n a theory and e x p e r i e n t i a l l y -based c o u n s e l l o r s k i l l s t r a i n i n g course (CNPS 578). B r i e f l y d e s c r i b e d , t h i s course i s designed to present a t h e o r e t i c a l base f o r s k i l l s a c q u i s i t i o n . The students l e a r n the p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n of these s k i l l s as p a r t of t h e i r t r a i n i n g r e q u i r e s that they experience being both a c l i e n t and c o u n s e l l o r with t h e i r f e l l o w classmates. T h e i r s e s s i o n s , which are audio and videotaped, are reviewed both p r i v a t e l y and i n the classroom s i t u a t i o n . Therefore t h i s group of students at t h i s p o i n t i n t h e i r t r a i n i n g , i n a d d i t i o n to l e a r n i n g c o u n s e l l i n g techniques, i s f a m i l i a r and r e l a t i v e l y comfortable with being audiotaped and viewing videotapes of c l i e n t s . 62 This researcher conducted the inves t igat ion during second term (March, 1986), in order to ensure the samples would be comparatively homogeneous regarding s k i l l s a c q u i s i t i o n , competence, and comfort l e v e l . For the second study, th i s invest igator drew the subjects from a pool of counse l l ing psychology students who had completed the ir second year and a l l coursework required in the program. They were, then, at a considerably higher and more mature l eve l of s k i l l s a c q u i s i t i o n , competence and comfort l e v e l . E s s e n t i a l l y , the samples d i f f e r e d in three ways: method of subject s e l e c t i o n , l e v e l of c o u n s e l l o r - i n -t r a i n i n g education and c l i n i c a l experience. In addi t ion the matched-guise video, of a c l i e n t with an accent, was re-recorded for the second study with a stronger, more pronounced accent than the f i r s t . Due to the major di f ferences between the two samples in each study, g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of the resu l t s to the counse l l ing profess ion at large , may be l i m i t e d . This is addressed la ter in the f i n a l chapter of the thes i s . SAMPLE: SELECTION AND RANDOM ASSIGNMENT STUDY ONE Of the 40 students enro l l ed in f ive sections of the counsel lor s k i l l s t r a i n i n g course, 30 p a r t i c i p a t e d . Two weeks p r i o r to the research, the course ins tructors c a l l e d for volunteers to p a r t i c i p a t e in a study during c lass time 63 and without c r e d i t . The purpose of the study, they were t o l d , was to norm t y p i c a l c o u n s e l l o r reponses i n a t r a i n i n g s i t u a t i o n . The f o l l o w i n g week the i n s t r u c t o r s reminded the students of the forthcoming a c t i v i t y . Two weeks l a t e r t h i s r e searcher entered the c l a s s and d e s c r i b e d the study, s t a t i n g t h a t p a r t i c i p a n t s would be viewing, alone i n a c l o s e d , unmonitored room, a 26 minute video of a c l i e n t p r e s e n t i n g a c o u n s e l l i n g problem; that they would be asked to make c o u n s e l l i n g responses which they f e l t a p p r o p r i a t e ; and that these r e a c t i o n s would be audioptaped f o r the purpose of norming t y p i c a l c o u n s e l l o r responses. As the c l a s s had been informed the week before, those who i n d i c a t e d they d i d not wish to p a r t i c i p a t e were f r e e to do an a l t e r n a t e n o n - c r e d i t assignment, v o l u n t e e r s who signed a consent form (see Appendix A) took part i n the study. The c l a s s members were randomly assigned to e i t h e r an experimental or c o n t r o l group, then the s u b j e c t s were matched a c r o s s each group fo r sex, l e v e l of s k i l l , p r e vious f o r m a l i z e d c r o s s - c u l t u r a l t r a i n i n g , e t h n i c i t y , and accent. The c l a s s i n s t r u c t o r s , who performed the assignment and matching, were not aware of which group would view the accented tape. Of the 30 p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the study, the c l a s s i n s t r u c t o r switched only one subject from the i n i t i a l random assignment. 64 Sample C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : Study One The sample comprised 14 c o u n s e l l o r s (7 male and 7 female) i n the "non-accented" group and 16 c o u n s e l l o r s (4 male and 12 female) i n the "accented" group. S i x s u b j e c t s i n the non-accented group who were e i t h e r accented, a member of a v i s i b l e m i n o r i t y , or who had one or both parents who were accented and t h e r e f o r e " c u l t u r a l l y s e n s i t i v e , " d i d not f i t the c r i t e r i a e s t a b l i s h e d as "mainstream c o u n s e l l o r . " T h e i r data were not i n c l u d e d i n the major f i n d i n g s of t h i s r e s e a r c h . Two s u b j e c t s i n the accented group, who f e l l i n t o the category of c u l t u r a l l y s e n s i t i v e , were a l s o excluded from the major a n a l y s i s . As a r e s u l t , 8 c o u n s e l l o r s (3 male and 5 female), ranging from 25 to 41 years of age (mean = 32.50 y e a r s ) , represented the "pure" mainstream c o u n s e l l o r s i n the non-accented s i t u a t i o n . Fourteen c o u n s e l l o r s (4 male and 10 female), ranging from 24 to 45 years of age (mean = 33.15 y e a r s ) , represented the pure mainstream c o u n s e l l o r s i n the accented s i t u a t i o n . The major a n a l y s i s of the study i n c l u d e d the data from these two groups. STUDY TWO Thi s res e a r c h e r c o n t a c t e d c o u n s e l l i n g students who had completed t h e i r second year i n the program, a l l r e q u i r e d coursework and practicum e x p e r i e n c e s . The telephone 65 s o l i c i t a t i o n was random and from a published department telephone l i s t . In add i t i on , a notice was placed on the department b u l l e t i n .board requesting p a r t i c i p a t i o n , and ins tructors made s imi lar announcements to c lasses in sess ion. The telephone c a l l , which included a b r i e f standardized descr ipt ion of the research pro jec t , was the only contact the subjects had with the researcher pr ior to p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Eighty-three percent (28) of those who had agreed to take part , p a r t i c i p a t e d . This invest igator randomly assigned the counsel lors to e i ther the non-accented or accented group, then matched the subjects across the two groups for sex, e t h n i c i t y and previous exposure to a formalized c r o s s - c u l t u r a l counse l l ing course. Information regarding counsel lor s k i l l was not access ib le and therefore the subjects were not matched on th i s v a r i a b l e . Two subjects were moved from the accented to the non-accented group. Sample C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : Study Two In the second study the sample consis ted of 12 counsel lors (3 male and 9 female) in the "non-accented" group and 17 counsel lors (5 male and 12 female) in the "accented" group. Five from the non-accented group and seven from the accented group did not f i t the d e f i n i t i o n of "pure" mainstream counse l lor , out l ined above in Study One, and the i r data were not included in the major a n a l y s i s . In a d d i t i o n , one par t i c ipant d id not f i l l out the a t t i tude quest ionnaire c o r r e c t l y and th i s researcher el iminated that counsel lor from a l l a n a l y s i s . 66 The f i n a l sample in the second study, therefore , comprised 6 subjects (1 male and 5 female) from 26 to 45 years of age (mean = 36.30 years) in the non-accented group, while 9 subjects (4 male and 5 female) from 29 to 49 years of age (mean = 38.00 years) made up the accented group. Table 4.1 i l l u s t r a t e s the sample c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s representing the "pure" mainstream counsel lor population invest igated in the two studies . Table 4.1: Sample C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s for Both Studies Study One Study Two C h a r a c t e r i s t i c Non-Accented Accented Non-Accented Accented M:F r a t i o 3:5 4:10 1 :5 4:5 Mean age 32.50 33.15 36.30 38.00 APPARATUS M o d i f i e d Matched-Guise Videotape: Study One This researcher h ired a male profess ional actor to portray the c l i e n t . His character was moderately depressed, in h is m i d - t h i r t i e s , married, with teenaged ch i ldren and unemployed. The actor developed the 14-segment s cr ip t which was relevant to h i s own personal experience (see Appendix B) . He was not f luent ly b i l i n g u a l but had previously studied Eastern European languages. 67 The c l i e n t faced the camera and h i s head and shoulders were v i s i b l e to the c o u n s e l l o r s . He wore a c o n s e r v a t i v e s h i r t and c a s u a l j a c k e t , p r e s e n t i n g the image of an "average" Canadian. In the f i r s t study, two videotapes were made with e x a c t l y the same d i a l o g u e , one without an accent and the other with a moderately strong E a s t e r n European accent. To present an a u t h e n t i c f o r e i g n accent, the a c t o r had l i s t e n e d to an audiotape of a man speaking with a strong Eastern European accent. As intended, there was no d i f f i c u l t y i n understanding the content of the a c t o r ' s subsequent recorded speech. In keeping with the o p e r a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n of f o r e i g n accented speech, p r o s o d i c v a r i a t i o n s ( i n t o n a t i o n , volume, s t r e s s ) and p h o n o l o g i c a l f e a t u r e s (pronounciation) were exaggerated on the accented tape. General c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which are t y p i c a l of language, such as semantics and syntax, were h e l d constant to ensure that the only d i f f e r e n c e between the recorded speech was the accent. For example, on the non-accented videotape, the a c t o r spoke in a c l i p p e d manner with equal s t r e s s on each s y l l a b l e . He elongated some vowels only when he wished to make a p o i n t . For the accented videotape, the a c t o r s l u r r e d h i s words, with l e s s p r o n o u n c i a t i o n of each s y l l a b l e . He elongated vowels more o f t e n than i n the non-accented guise but with i n c o n s i s t e n t emphasis. Below i s an excerpt with elongated, drawn-out vowels u n d e r l i n e d . 68 Example: n o n - a c c e n t e d s p e e c h : . . . things aren' t so great r ight now. My l i f e , my family , everything seems to be f a l l i n g apart . . . a c c e n t e d s p e e c h : . . . things aren' t so great r ight now. My l i f e , my family , everything seems to be f a l l i n g apart . . . This invest igator attempted to contro l for the performer's change in emotional i ty , non-verbal behaviour, p i t c h , intonation and s tress , which may have a l t ered from recording 20 minutes of accented to 20 minutes of non-accented speech. To contro l for t h i s , the actor recorded each segment twice: once the non-accented, then immediately a f t e r , the accented guise . The tapes were la ter edited into two separate and complete c l i e n t presentat ions: one accented, one non-accented. Each edited version was 26 minutes long which included a two-minute demonstration. In an e f for t to present cont inu i ty and relevance in a simulated c l i e n t - c o u n s e l l o r encounter, each of the fourteen statements depict ing the c l i e n t ' s problem picked-up where the previous statement had ended. M o d i f i e d M a t c h e d - G u i s e V i d e o t a p e : S t u d y Two The accented and non-accented c l i e n t was videotaped in exactly the same manner as in the f i r s t study. The only di f ference was that the actor a l t ered h is accent from a moderate, i n t e l l i g i b l e Eastern European one to a stronger (stress and pronounciat ion) , less understandable one. In 69 a d d i t i o n , the actor reduced the in tens i ty of emotion which resul ted in a faster paced de l ivery of the s c r i p t . The running time in each of the two f in i shed tapes, in the second study, was 20 minutes in t o t a l . For both s tudies , the subjects were asked to make counse l l ing responses at cer ta in i n t e r v a l s . These i n t e r v a l s , edited onto the videotapes, were s igna l l ed by a low p i t c h beep at the beginning of t h i r t y seconds and a s l i g h t l y higher p i t c h beep which indicated the end of t h i r t y seconds. To simulate the presence of the c l i e n t , the ac tor ' s image (the same one for each in terva l ) was edited to appear on the screen rather than having the p a r t i c i p a n t s respond to a black t e l e v i s i o n monitor. An a d d i t i o n a l s ignal to a l e r t the subjects to the end of 30 seconds included the c l i e n t image (presenting problem) fading down to the c l i e n t i n t e r v a l (30 second response time) and fading up to the c l i e n t p icking up where he had l e f t off in the previous segment. PROCEDURE Study One and Study Two I n d i v i d u a l l y , each subject was taken by th i s invest igator into a small counse l l ing room in the Education C l i n i c at U . B . C . This room was set up with a video t e l e v i s i o n playback and tape recorder. To ensure the anonymity of the p a r t i c i p a n t s ' measurement scores, th i s researcher asked each counsel lor to pick a random number from 70 a hat which was then recorded on each of the instruments. Then th i s writer t o l d each person he or she would be watching a 26 minute videotape of a c l i e n t presenting a problem in an i n i t i a l interview and at the beginning of the video was a demonstration of what to expect. Each par t i c ipant received the fol lowing set of standardized ins truc t ions : You w i l l be viewing a videotape of a c l i e n t presenting a problem in the i n i t i a l interview. There are fourteen segments which are s igna l l ed by a beep at the beginning and a beep at the end of t h i r t y seconds. During t h i s time, you are asked to make a counsel l ing response. What I want you to be aware of i s that I have attempted to simulate a real c l i e n t presenting a problem. With t h i s in mind I would l i k e you to respond to the c l i e n t as you would i f th i s s i tua t ion were r e a l . The subjects were reminded the responses would be audiotaped. This invest igator presented the two minute video demonstration (the writer was the c l i e n t ) of two segments of a counse l l ing problem. The demonstration i l l u s t r a t e d the sequence of events with beeps, the c l i e n t image and an example of the length of 30 seconds. After the introduct ion and explanation, th i s researcher encouraged questions regarding the procedure to fol low. No one had d i f f i c u l t y with the demonstration or understanding what they were expected to do. This invest igator started the videotape and tape recorder, i n s t r u c t i n g the subject not to stop e i ther of the machines u n t i l f in i shed and not to say anything about the experience after he or she l e f t the counsel l ing room. When f in i shed , each person was to ld to report to the te s t ing room to complete the quest ionnaires . 71 Once in the tes t ing room, another researcher met the subjects and instructed them that there were four pen and paper forms to respond to and that i t would require approximately f i f teen minutes of the ir time. They were reminded not to talk in the room or discuss the experience with anyone. This s t i p u l a t i o n ensured a conf ident ia l and unique experience for each p a r t i c i p a n t . As part of a concurrent study (Rungta 1987), the other researcher f i r s t administered Spie lberger ' s S t a t e - T r a i t Anxiety Inventory, then the C l i e n t Evaluat ion Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l (Appendix C ) , then the Interview Questionnaire (Appendix D) . A Demographic Information sheet (Appendix E) was the la s t form to be f i l l e d out. The other invest igator gave standardized ins truct ions for each instrument and paid care fu l a t tent ion to make c e r t a i n a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s understood what they were to do. Upon completion of the measures, the researcher thanked each person for the ir p a r t i c i p a t i o n and presented each one with a se lec t ion of gourmet cookies and sweets. INSTRUMENTATION This writer measured the p r i n c i p a l question of counsel lor a t t i tude with a semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l sca le , constructed in accordance with Osgood's guidel ines (Osgood, Suc i , and Tannenbaum, 1975). E s s e n t i a l l y , th i s instrument taps the a f fec t ive component of a t t i tude by asking the respondents to make evaluat ive judgements about a "concept" 72 (the a t t i tude objec t ) . They rate the a t t i tude object by ind ica t ing the d i r e c t i o n and in tens i ty of t h e i r fee l ing on a pos i t ive-negat ive continuum of "concept relevant" b ipo lar adjec t ives . For the purpose of s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s , th i s researcher constructed the 7-point b ipolar adject ive scale with the pos i t i ve end of the continuum assigned a value of one and the negative end assigned seven. The point of o r i g i n represented a value of four. The minimum (most pos i t ive ) o v e r a l l score on the 50-item scale was 50X1=50, with the maximum (most negative) score being 50X7=350. The point of o r i g i n or neutral pos i t ion had a value of 50X4=200. The 28-item Evaluat ive (E) dimension ranged from 28 (most pos i t ive ) to 196 (most negative) with 112 as the (neutral) midpoint. A c t i v i t y (A) and Potency (P), each consisted of 11 items and ranged from 11 (most pos i t ive ) to 77 (most negative) with 44 as the (neutral) midpoint. The remaining research questions concerning the counse l lor ' s perception of c l i e n t motivat ion, the counse l lor ' s f ee l ing of a f f i l i a t i o n with the c l i e n t and the counse l lor ' s expressed awareness of c u l t u r a l influences on the counse l l ing process were invest igated by the Interview Quest ionnaire. 73 HYPOTHESIS AND S T A T I S T I C A L ANALYSIS H y p o t h e s i s There are no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s , i n a t t i t u d e towards the c l i e n t , between c o u n s e l l o r s , who viewed a videotape of a non-accented, Standard E n g l i s h speaking c l i e n t and c o u n s e l l o r s who viewed a videotape of an E a s t e r n European accented c l i e n t . S t a t i s t i c a l A n a l y s i s In each study, to t e s t - f o r between-group (non-accented vs. accented) d i f f e r e n c e s i n mainstream c o u n s e l l o r a t t i t u d e s towards c l i e n t s , t h i s r e s e a r c h e r conducted a t - t e s t of the group mean semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l scores (50 item s ) . In a d d i t i o n , t h i s w r i t e r s u b j e c t e d the mean scores of each b i p o l a r a d j e c t i v e p a i r s to a t - t e s t to e s t a b l i s h which d e s c r i p t o r s were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , and thereby o f f e r f u r t h e r i n s i g h t i n t o between-group d i f f e r e n c e s . T h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n a l s o examined between group d i f f e r e n c e s f o r each study by u t i l i z i n g a t - t e s t of the means fo r the t o t a l group scores on the E v a l u a t i o n ( E ) , Potency (P) and A c t i v i t y (A) dimensions of the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l . The o b j e c t i v e was to i n v e s t i g a t e the s t r e n g t h and relevance of the E v a l u a t i o n dimension as a " t r u e " i n d i c a t o r of the c o u n s e l l o r ' s a t t i t u d e . Because of experimental c o n t r o l i s s u e s such as the method of sample s e l e c t i o n , l e v e l of p a r t i c i p a n t education 74 and s k i l l , and the stronger-accented videotape in Study Two, the second study was not a true r e p l i c a t i o n of the f i r s t . Therefore, the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l data from the two studies were not combined for the the main a n a l y s i s . V A L I D I T Y AND R E L I A B I L I T Y : THE SEMANTIC DIFF E R E N T I A L This writer found, in a review of re lated l i t e r a t u r e , that the task of e s tab l i sh ing the v a l i d i t y of any a t t i tude scale i s a chal lenging one. For the most par t , pred ic t ive and construct v a l i d i t y have been touched upon, but not emphasized, in a t t i tude research. This may be p a r t i a l l y due to the experimenter's p a r t i c u l a r research objec t ives . However, Shaw and Wright (1967) report , in the i r c r i t i q u e of a t t i tude measurement, that v a l i d a t i o n of the scales i s predominently in the form of content and concurrent v a l i d i t y . An item a n a l y s i s , to determine the in terna l consistency of the constructed semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l scale for a l l counsel lor subjects (n=58), produced a r e l i a b i l i t y estimate of 0.92 for the composite t e s t . The r e l i a b i l i t y of each subscale (EPA) was estimated for these counsel lors and the estimates resulted in E=0.88, P=0.73 and A=0.73. In a d d i t i o n , th i s invest igator conducted an item analys i s for the mainstream counsel lors (n=37) and s imi lar estimates of r e l i a b i l i t y were found. Table 4.2 describes the analys i s in greater d e t a i l . 75 Table 4.2: Hoyt's R e l i a b i l i t y Estimates for the Semantic Di f ferent i a l Semantic Tota l Sample Mainstream Sample D i f f e r e n t i a l (n=58) (n=37) Dimension Evaluat ion (28 0.88 0.87 items) Potency (11 items) 0.73 0.73 A c t i v i t y (11 items) 0.73 0.73 Composite At t i tude 0.92* 0.92* Scale (50 items) Cronbach's alpha 0.81 0.81 I n t e r v i e w Q u e s t i o n n a i r e A n a l y s i s To address the research questions regarding the counse l lor ' s perception of c l i e n t motivat ion, the counse l lor ' s expressed a f f i l i a t i o n to the c l i e n t , and the counse l lor ' s awareness of c u l t u r a l influences on the counse l l ing process, th i s writer examined the questionnaire data for recurrent themes or content. Frequency counts and the assignment of p o s i t i v e , negative and neutral values to statements or ideas quant i f i ed th i s data. For example, motivation was scored yes(+) or no( - ) . SUMMARY This chapter has described the method of inves t igat ing the general research question of mainstream counse l lors ' a t t i tudes towards foreign accented c l i e n t s . This researcher 76 conducted two studies at the Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia during March and A p r i l 1986. The t o t a l f i n a l representative sample of mainstream counsel lors consisted of 37 counsel l ing psychology students. Their p a r t i c i p a t i o n in th i s research involved viewing videotapes of a c l i e n t who presented a counse l l ing problem and making counse l l ing responses during designated appropriate pauses in the presentat ion. One group saw a foreign-accented c l i e n t while the other group viewed a non-accented c l i e n t . After viewing and making counsel l ing responses, which were audiotaped, the par t i c ipant s (unknowingly) indicated the ir a t t i tude towards the c l i e n t by responding to a Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l At t i tude Scale and an Interview Questionnaire. This author conducted several s t a t i s t i c a l analyses on both instruments and the ir resul t s are reported in the next chapter. 77 CHAPTER FIVE RESULTS INTRODUCTION T h i s chapter presents the s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s es of the data c o l l e c t e d from the two s t u d i e s . The f i n d i n g s p e r t i n a n t to the h y p othesis are r e p o r t e d f i r s t , f o l l o w e d by the a n a l y s es r e l e v a n t to each of the r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s . A b r i e f summary completes t h i s c h a p t e r . P r i m a r i l y , the two s t u d i e s i n v e s t i g a t e d the d i f f e r e n c e s between the a t t i t u d e s of mainstream c o n s e l l o r s towards c l i e n t s who spoke accented or non-accented E n g l i s h . The g e n e r a l consensus i s that a t t i t u d e s are composed of a f f e c t i v e ( e v a l u a t i o n ) , c o g n i t i v e (knowledge), and b e h a v i o u r a l (overt a c t i o n ) components (Agehey i s i and Fishman 1970). In a t t i t u d i n a l s t u d i e s , the a f f e c t i v e component i s most o f t e n measured with the f e e l i n g towards the a t t i t u d e o b j e c t r e p r e s e n t i n g an e v a l u a t i v e judgement ( p o s i t i v e - n e g a t i v e ) . The instrument designed to measure the e v a l u a t i v e judgement i n t h i s r e s e a r c h was a semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l composed of 50 b i p o l a r a d j e c t i v e s . These b i p o l a r a d j e c t i v e s r e l a t e d to the c l i e n t s ' p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The response to the " p o l a r terms" i n d i c a t e d the d i r e c t i o n of the a t t i t u d e ( p o s i t i v e or negative) while the i n t e n s i t y of the 78 respondents' a t t i t u d e s was measured by the d i s t a n c e from the po i n t of o r i g i n ( n e u t r a l zone). The degree of i n t e n s i t y was q u a l i f i e d by the d e s c r i p t o r s : , "only," " q u i t e " and "very c l o s e l y r e l a t e d . " The equal l o a d i n g of the s c a l e s was 1 ( p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e ) to 7 (negative a t t i t u d e ) with 4 re p r e s e n t i n g the " n e u t r a l " or "not at a l l r e l a t e d " p o i n t of o r i g i n . The E v a l u a t i v e dimension (E), s a i d to best measure the a f f e c t i v e component of a t t i t u d e , c o n s i s t e d of 28 a d j e c t i v e p a i r s , while Potency (P) and A c t i v i t y (A), which were i n c l u d e d to enhance the o v e r a l l p i c t u r e of a t t i t u d e , comprised 11 p a i r s each. As the second study was not a true r e p l i c a t i o n of the f i r s t , the r e s u l t s of the analyses are rep o r t e d s e p a r a t e l y . A l l s u b j e c t s r e p o r t e d i n the analyses represent the 'pure' mainstream c o u n s e l l o r p o p u l a t i o n unless otherwise s p e c i f i e d . For c l e a r e r p r e s e n t a t i o n of data, the groups are s y m b o l i c a l l y represented as f o l l o w s : STUDY 1 GROUP I (NA,) = non-accented c l i e n t GROUP II (A,) = m i l d l y accented c l i e n t STUDY 2 GROUP III (NA 2) = non-accented c l i e n t GROUP IV (A 2) = stronger accented c l i e n t HYPOTHESIS There are no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s , i n a t t i t u d e towards the c l i e n t , between c o u n s e l l o r s who viewed a videotape of a non-accented, standard E n g l i s h speaking c l i e n t and c o u n s e l l o r s who viewed a videotape of an accented E a s t e r n European speaking c l i e n t . 79 This researcher tested the hypothesis by measuring the counse l lors ' a t t i tude towards the ir c l i e n t with a Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l Att i tude Scale and an Interview Questionnaire. General A t t i t u d e Towards C l i e n t Study One Group I (NA,) who viewed the non-accented c l i e n t , (n=8) had a Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l At t i tude mean score of 190.75. The scores ranged from 175 to 205 with a standard deviation of 10.63. Group II ( A , ) , who viewed the moderately accented c l i e n t (n=14) had a mean at t i tude score of 158.07 while the scores ranged from 121 to 200 with a standard deviat ion of 22.70. The dif ference between the mean scores for the two groups was 32.68, or about 1.7 times the standard dev ia t ion . This dif ference was s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t at the 99 percent confidence l e v e l (t(19.5)=4.58, p<.00l) . Study Two Group III (NA 2) who viewed the non-accented c l i e n t (n=6) had a mean at t i tude score of 163.17. The scores ranged from 107 to 205 with a standard deviat ion for the group, of 37.19. Group IV ( A 2 ) , who viewed the stronger accented c l i e n t , had a mean of 163.11 while the scores ranged from 110 to 209 with a standard deviat ion of 32.34. The di f ferences between the mean at t i tude scores for these two groups of counsel lors was 0.06, or approximately 0.002 times the pooled standard dev ia t ion . This d i f ference was not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t (p=.998). Figure 5.1 graphs th i s information for both studies while Table 5.1 presents the s t a t i s t i c a l r e s u l t s . 80 Study One t(19.5)=4.58 P<.001 Study Two t ( 1 3 . 0) = 0.0031 p>.05 Group I Group II (NA,) (A,) Group III Group IV (NA 2) (A 2 ) 1Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l Composite Score Figure 5.1: Total Indiv idual At t i tude Scores for Mainstream Counsellors 81 T a b l e 5.1: Mean A t t i t u d e S c o r e s f o r P u r e M a i n s t r e a m C o u n s e l l o r s f r o m t h e 5 0 - I t e m S e m a n t i c D i f f e r e n t i a l S t u d y One 1 S t u d y Two 2 N o n a c c e n t e d A c c e n t e d N o n a c c e n t e d A c c e n t e d (n = 8) (n=14) (n = 6) (n=9) Min/Max 175-205 121-200 107-205 1 1 0-209 S c o r e Mean 190.75 158.07 163.17 163.11 S t d Dev 1 0.63 22.70 37. 19 32.34 1 t ( 1 9 . 5 ) = 4 . 5 8 0 , p < . 0 0 l 2 t ( 1 3 . 0 ) = 0 . 0 0 3 , p>.05 T a b l e 5.2: Mean A t t i t u d e S c o r e s f o r t h e C u l t u r a l l y S e n s i t i v e C o u n s e l l o r f r o m t h e 5 0 - I t e m S e m a n t i c D i f f e r e n t i a l S t u d y One 1 S t u d y Two 2 N o n a c c e n t e d A c c e n t e d N o n a c c e n t e d A c c e n t e d (n=6) (n=2) (n=5) (n=8) Mean 187.17 139.50 175.40 177.38 S t d Dev 1 1 .55 30.41 25.96 35.48 1 t ( 6 . 0 ) = 3 . 5 8 , p<.05 2 t ( 1 1 . 0 ) = - 0 . 1 1 , p>.05 82 Of supplemental i n t e r e s t , at th i s po int , are the resu l t s of the s t a t i s t i c a l analyses done on the " c u l t u r a l l y sensi t ive" counsel lors who were not included in the major analyses. This researcher conducted t - t e s t s of the mean scores on the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l to test for di f ferences in the a t t i tude between the two groups, in each study. The resu l t s were s l i g h t l y more extreme, but p a r a l l e l e d those of the mainstream counse l lors , in both s tudies . These resu l t s did not change the f indings of the centra l analyses and Table 5.2 summarizes th i s information. Caution must be used when in terpre t ing the " c u l t u r a l l y sensi t ive" resu l t s due to the small sample s izes as the di f ferences may be due to chance. SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL: C l i e n t C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s To test for the s t a t i s t i c a l s ign i f i cance of di f ferences between groups, in the adject ive p a i r s , th i s invest igator performed a t - tes t of the mean scores of each scale item for each study. Alpha was set at .05 and only those adject ive pa irs which produced th i s s ign i f i cance are reported here. They are presented according to the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l dimensions of Evaluation (E) , A c t i v i t y (A), and Potency (P). Table 5.3 presents the complete l i s t of b ipo lar adject ives constructed for use in th i s inves t igat ion of counsel lor a t t i tude towards the ir c l i e n t . This table also presents the resu l t s of the t - t e s t for s i g n i f i c a n t d i f ferences in the adject ive pa irs between the groups. T a b l e 5 . 3 : Summary o f t - t e s t s f o r D i f f e r e n c e s In t h e A t t i t u d e S c a l e Items ( M a i n s t r e a m ) f o r C l i e n t C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s T r a l t S t u d y • n e S t u d y Two Mean t Mean t G r o u p I G r o u p II G r o u p I I I G r o u p IV NA 1 (n. =8) Ai (n=14) NA' (n=6) A> (n=9) EVALUATIVE DIMENSION t r u s t w o r t h y - u n f a 1 t h f u l 2 .75 2 . 0 0 2 .75 1 . 5 0 1 . 5 0 0 .42 o p t i m i s t i c - p e s s i m i s t i c 6 . 0 0 4 .57 2 . 4 9 * 6 .OO 4 .33 0 . 10 c o m p e t e n t - 1 n c o m p e t e n t 3 .88 2 .71 2 . 15* 3 . 33 2 . 78 0 .63 I n t e l 1 1 g e n t - u n 1 n t e l 1 1 g e n t 3 . 13 2 .57 1 .47 2 . 17 2 .44 -o .72 k 1 n d - c r u e l 2 .38 1 .86 1 .32 2 .OO 1 .56 0 . 75 a l t r u l s t i c - e g o t l s t l c 3 .85 3 . 5 0 0 .71 3 . 5 0 4 . 22 - 0 .68 g r a c e f u l - a c k w a r d 4 .88 4 .29 1 .09 4 .83 4 .44 0 .51 s e n s 1 1 1 v e - 1 n s e n s 1 1 1 v e 1 .88 1 .86 0 .08 1 .83 1 . 8 9 -o . 12 f r i e n d l y - u n f r i e n d l y 2 .75 2 .36 1 .03 2 . 17 2 . 22 - 0 . 13 h a p p y - s a d 6 . 75 6 .07 2 . 17* 6 .83 6 .OO 1 . 77 s o c i a b l e - u n s o c i a b l e 3 .38 2 .93 1 . 17 3 . 17 2 .67 0 .99 h o n e s t - d 1 s h o n e s t 2 .88 1 .86 2 . 3 8 * 1 . 5 0 1 .89 - 0 .83 s u c c e s s f u l - u n s u c c e s s f u l 5. .25 4. .00 2 . S O * 4 . 0 0 3 .89 0 . 1 1 s 1 n c e r e - 1 n s i n c e r e 2 .50 1 , .36 2 . 5 8 * 1 .83 1 .33 1 . 15 g r a t e f u l - u n g r a t e f u l 3. .25 3. ,43 - 0 .34 3 . 17 2 .44 1 , .49 c a p a b l e - 1 n c a p a b l e 3. .50 2. 36 2 .51* 2 . 17 1 .89 o .79 c l e a n - d 1 r t y 2. 38 1 . ,64 1 .47 1 .83 2 .OO - 0 26 u n s e l f 1 s h - s e l f i s h 3. ,50 2. 43 1 .99 3 . 17 1 , .89 1. ,61 p o l 1 t e - r u d e 2. .25 1 . 86 0, .76 1 . .83 2. . 1 1 - 0 . 49 r e f 1 n e d - v u l g a r 3. ,25 2. 71 1 , .20 2 . 17 3. . 1 1 - 2 . 07 i n t e r e s t 1 n g - b o r 1 n g 3. 00 2. 71 0, .49 2. .83 2. 89 - 0 . 07 e d u c a t e d - u n e d u c a t e d 3. 0 0 3. 35 - 0 , .78 2 .83 4. 22 - 1 . 43 c o o p e r a t 1 v e - u n c o o p e r a t 1 v e 2. 25 2. 71 -1. .05 1 . 83 2. 22 - O . 76 k n o w 1 e g e a b 1 e - 1 g n o r a n t 3. 50 2. 57 3. .56* 3. . 0 0 3. 1 1 - 0 . 14 c a r e f u l - s l o p p y 3. 63 2. 57 2. ,72** 2. . 33 2. 56 - 0 . 31 p 1 e a s i n g - d 1 s p 1 e a s 1 n g 3. 0 0 2. 71 0 . ,63 2. 67 3. OO -o. 58 c o m f o r t a b l e - u n c o m f o r t a b l e 5. 38 4 . 71 1 . 07 5. . 16 5. 1 1 0 . 06 s k i 1 l e d - u n s k l 1 l e d 3. 38 3 . 14 0 . 40 2. 33 4 . 0 0 - 2 . 47* o p t l m l s t l c - p e s s l m l s t l c 6. 0 0 4. 57 2. 4 9 * 6. 0 0 4 . 33 0 . 10 * p < . 0 5 * * p < . 0 1 T a b l e 5 . 3 c o n t i n u e d S t u d y One S t u d y Two T r a i t Mean t Mean Group I G r o u p II G r o u p I I I G r o u p IV NA 1 (n=8) A . (n=14) NA" (n=6) A , (n=9) ACTIVITY DIMENSION e x p r e s s 1 v e - u n e x p r e s s 1 v e 1 .86 1 .50 1 . .50 1 .67 1 .33 1 . . 25 e n e r g e t i c - l e t h a r g i c 4 .50 3 .93 0 . .95 4 . 0 0 3 .78 0 . , 22 1 n v o l v e d - w 1 t h d r a w n 3 .25 2 .93 0 . ,54 3. .67 3 . 1 1 0 . 52 c o n t r o l 1 e d - e m o t 1 o n a l 6 . 0 0 5 .64 0 . 88 5, CO 5 .56 -o. 61 1 n d u s t r l o u s - 1 a z y 3. .25 1 .93 4 . 1 9 * * * 2 , CO 2 . 33 - 0 . 57 a c t i v e - p a s s i v e 4 .88 2 .71 3. . 9 8 * * * 3, .67 3 .56 o. , 1 1 a d a p t i v e - r i g i d 4, .25 3 .29 1 . 46 3, .50 4 . 0 0 - 0 . ,52 mot 1 v a t e d - u n m o t 1 v a t e d 3 . 13 2 .57 0 . 95 2, . 17 3 . 1 1 - 1 . ,24 c a l m - e x c 1 t a b l e 4. .63 5, CO - 0 . ,65 4 , . 17 5 .89 - 2 . 6 5 * q u i c k - s l o w 4. .50 4. .07 1. ,20 3. .50 4 . 0 0 - 0 . 77 p e a c e f u 1 - h o s t 11e 4 .00 3. .99 0 . 10 3. ,50 4 , . 0 0 - 0 . 82 POTENCY DIMENSION l e a d e r - f o l l o w e r 5 .25 3 .86 2 . 0 5 * i 4 .50 3 .89 0 . ,55 s t r o n g - w e a k 3 .63 2 ,79 1 . .98 3 .67 3 .22 0 . 43 d o m 1 n a n t - s u b m 1 s s 1 v e 4 .75 3 .64 2 . 2 5 * 4 . 17 3 .56 0 . 69 m a s c u l 1 n e - f e m l n l n e 4 . 13 2 .64 3. . 3 4 * * 2 .83 2 .33 0 . 89 t o u g h - f r a g l 1 e 4, .50 3, .43 1 , .34 5 . 17 4, .22 0 . 89 d e e p - s h a l l o w 2. .88 2. .21 1 , .99 3, . 0 0 2, .67 0 . 49 h u m o u r o u s - s e r 1 o u s 5, .25 4, .71 0 . .76 4, .83 4 .67 O. 19 p r e d s e - v a g u e 4 , .38 3. . 14 2. .37* 3 .50 3. .33 O. 19 a g g r e s s 1 v e - d e f e n s 1ve 4. .63 4. . 14 1 . 32 4 .50 4 , OO 0 . 82 c o n f 1 d e n t - u n s u r e 5, .88 5, .50 0 . 88 5, .33 5, ,56 - 0 . 26 s e l f - u n a l I k e - s e l f - a l I k e 3 .75 3. 64 0 . ,20 2 .83 3. 44 - 0 . 75 * p < . 0 5 * * p < . 0 1 * * * p < . 0 0 1 I 85 Study One These b ipo lar adject ives were s i g n i f i c a n t at p^0.05. The more conservative pa irs (p<.01) are designated with an a s t e r i s k . E A P *opt imis t i c -pes s imis t i c * industrous- lazy leader-fol lower competent-incompetent *act ive-pass ive dominant-submissive happy-sad *masculine-feminine honest-dishonest precise-vague successful-unsuccessful s incere - ins incere capable-incapable knowledgeable-ignorant carefu l - s loppy When compared to Group I (NA,) , Group II (A,) responded with more o v e r a l l pos i t ive in tens i ty on a l l but four of the scale items. The di f ferences between NA1 and A, on these scale items were not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t and may have been due to chance. Study Two Two b ipo lar adject ive pa ir s produced p^.05 s ign i f i cance : s k i l l e d - u n s k i l l e d (E) and calm-excitable (A). The Group IV (A 2 ) item scores, in both cases, had less p o s i t i v e in tens i ty than those of Group III (NA 2 ) . Although these were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , the resul t s may again be due to chance. Group IV (A 2 ) scored in the pos i t ive d i r e c t i o n of a t t i tude towards the c l i e n t but responded with less pos i t ive in tens i ty on 24 items (48%) than Group III (NA 2 ) . Even though only two were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t (p<.05), the 86 c o n s i d e r a b l y h i g h e r number o f t r a i t s r a t e d w i t h l e s s p o s i t i v e i n t e n s i t y c a n n o t be assumed t o be due t o c h a n c e a s i n S t u d y One. T a b l e 5.4 p r e s e n t s t h e means and s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s f o r e a c h d i m e n s i o n (EAP) w i t h t h e t - t e s t f o r b e t w e e n - g r o u p d i f f e r e n c e s a l s o r e p o r t e d . EVIDENCE CONCERNING THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS: I n t e r v i e w Q u e s t i o n n a i r e The q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n s t r u c t e d f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f p r o v i d i n g i n s i g h t i n t o t h e r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s p r o v e d i n a d e q u a t e and d i f f i c u l t t o s c o r e . The v a r i e t y o f r e s p o n s e s and s m a l l s a m p l e s i z e s i n e a c h g r o u p p r o d u c e d a c o m p l e x s e t o f d a t a . On t h e s u r f a c e , h o w e v e r , t h e r e a p p e a r s t o be a m a j o r d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e c l i n i c a l a p p r o a c h t o w a r d t h e a c c e n t e d c l i e n t b e t w e e n t h e two s t u d i e s . The b e g i n n i n g a n d l e s s e x p e r i e n c e d c o u n s e l l o r s t e n d e d t o r e s p o n d on a p e r s o n a l , i n t e r n a l l y f o c u s e d l e v e l w h i l e t h e more e x p e r i e n c e d c o u n s e l l o r s i n t h e s e c o n d s t u d y r e a c t e d i n a more d i s t a n t a n d removed manner. T h e s e f i n d i n g s a r e d i s c u s s e d f u r t h e r i n C h a p t e r V I . The f o l l o w i n g d a t a f r o m t h e I n t e r v i e w Q u e s t i o n n a i r e a r e p r e s e n t e d a s t h e y r e l a t e t o e a c h r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n . E s s e n t i a l l y , t h e r e was no d i f f e r e n c e b e t ween t h e g r o u p s i n t h e i r r e s p o n s e s t o w h e t h e r t h e y e n j o y e d w o r k i n g w i t h t h e c l i e n t . T h i s was t r u e i n b o t h s t u d i e s . O n l y one s u b j e c t (NA,) r e p o r t e d he ( o r s h e ) w o u l d r e f e r t h e c l i e n t t o a n o t h e r c o u n s e l l o r . 87 T a b l e 5.4: Mean R a t i n g s f o r t h e D i m e n s i o n s : E v a l u a t i o n , P o t e n c y a n d A c t i v i t y f o r M a i n s t r e a m C o u n s e l l o r s S t u d y One S t u d y Two N o n a c c e n t e d A c c e n t e d N o n a c c e n t e d A c c e n t e d EVALUATION (28 i t e m s ) Mean of I t e m 3.48 2.89 2.93 2.91 Mean 97.50 80.86 82.00 81 .55 S t d Dev 9.29 1 2.72 22.39 14.50 T - t e s t t ( 2 0 . 0 ) = 3 . 23, p < . 0 l t ( 1 3 . 0 ) = 0 . 047, p>.05 POTENCY (1 1 i t e m s ) Mean o f I t e m 4.45 3.61 4.03 3.72 Mean 49.00 39.71 44.33 40.89 S t d Dev 5.90 6.45 10.17 8.48 T - t e s t t ( 2 0 . 0 ) = 3 . 34, p<.0l t ( 1 3 . 0 ) = 0 . 71 , p>.05 A C T I V I T Y (11 i t e m s ) Mean o f I t e m 4.02 3.41 3.35 3.70 Mean 44.25 37.50 36.83 40.67 S t d Dev 4.64 5.96 5.78 1 1 .96 T - t e s t t ( 2 0 . 0 ) = 2 . 78, p<.0l t ( l 3 . 0 ) = - 0 .72, p>.05 88 In response to the question asking for "addit ional comments," 12 of the 22 subjects (55%) in Study One remarked on the a r t i f i c i a l i t y of the experimental s i tua t ion and 12 of the 15 subjects (80%) in Study Two mentioned i t . Table 5.5 indicates the percentage of - counsel lors in both studies (accented s i tuat ion) who commented on c u l t u r e . In add i t i on , i t a lso presents the percentage of counsel lors who attended to a r t i f i c i a l i t y . It appears that the di f ference between the number of counsel lors who attended to the a r t i f i c i a l condit ion in the accented and nonaccented s i tua t ions , in both studies i s s i g n i f i c a n t . However, when s t a t i s t i c a l l y tested i t was not s i g n i f i c a n t at p<.05 (x 2 (1df)=1.35). Table 5.5: Percentage of Subjects Who Attended to the Experimental Condit ion and C l i e n t E t h n i c i t y Study One Study Two Nature of Comment Nonaccented Accented Nonaccented Accented A r t i f i c -i a l i t y 62 42 83 67 Culture n/a 43 n/a 78 Of the par t i c ipant s in Study One who viewed the accented video, 43% of Group II (A t ) mentioned cul ture as an important var iab le to consider in the counse l l ing process, while 78% of Group IV (A 2 ) described i t s relevance. Again when tested no 89 s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e was found at p<.05 ( x 2 ( 1 d f ) = 2 . 7 0 ) . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note, however, that Rungta ( 1 9 8 7 ) r e p o r t e d that when those mainstream and c u l t u r a l l y s e n s i t i v e c o u n s e l l o r s who mentioned c u l t u r e were i n c l u d e d i n the a n a l y s i s s i g n i f i c a n c e reached p< . 0 2 . It i s p o s s i b l e the n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t r e s u l t s found i n t h i s a n a l y s i s , were due to the r e l a t i v e l y small "pure" mainstream sample s i z e s i n each group. D i f f e r e n c e i n A t t i t u d e s In response to the questi o n asking c o u n s e l l o r s to d e s c r i b e outstanding c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , the general c a t e g o r i e s which emerged were: p e r s o n a l i n t e g r i t y , a t t r a c t i v e n e s s , e m o t i o n a l i t y , sense of power, co o p e r a t i v e n e s s , and fa m i l y i n f l u e n c e s . These were r a t e d p o s i t i v e l y or n e g a t i v e l y , then t a l l i e d f o r each group. Some respondents made combined p o s i t i v e , negative and n e u t r a l statements. Although t h i s i n c r e a s e d the complexity of the analyses and the subsequent i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , a l l combinations were t a l l i e d because they represented the c o u n s e l l o r s ' a t t i t u d e . In Study One, Group I (NA,) s u b j e c t s responded with 9 p o s i t i v e , 2 n e u t r a l ( f a m i l y i n f l u e n c e s ) and 11 negative statements while Group II (A,) responded with 11 p o s i t i v e , no n e u t r a l and 9 negative d e s c r i p t i o n s . In Study Two Group III (NA 2) scored 3 p o s i t i v e , no n e u t r a l and 13 negative while Group IV (A 2) made 6 p o s i t i v e , 4 n e u t r a l and 10 negative statements. The c a t e g o r i e s were d i f f i c u l t to 90 q u a n t i f y as they were not c l o s e l y a l i g n e d with the EPA dimensions on the Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l . Table 5.6 (Study One) and Table 5.7 (Study Two) summarize t h i s data. The o r i g i n a l i n t e n t i o n of t h i s r e s e a r c h was to compare the s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l a d j e c t i v e p a i r s with the c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d e s c r i b e d i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . Judging from the v a r i e t y of responses generated by the " c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c " q u e s t i o n i t was apparent the b i p o l a r a d j e c t i v e s were w e l l d i s g u i s e d i n t h e i r purpose. They had e i t h e r no i n f l u e n c e on the respondents' r e a c t i o n to the q u e s t i o n n a i r e item or c o n v e r s e l y were not adequately complex as d e s c r i p t o r s f o r t h i s c o u n s e l l i n g p o p u l a t i o n . As a r e s u l t , a s t a t i s t i c a l comparison between the c o n s t r u c t e d Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l A t t i t u d e Scale and t h i s item on the Interview Q u e s t i o n n a i r e was not p o s s i b l e . Table 5.6: Study One: T r a i t s Used to Describe Cl i ent Character i s t i c s P o s i t i v e T r a i t s Example Frequency Group I Group II (NA,) (A,) Personal Integr i ty Honesty; s i n c e r i t y ; warmth; pride 4 8 Attract iveness Powerful eye contact; f a c i a l expressions; engrossed by h is speech; neat appearance 5 3 N e u t r a l T r a i t s Family Influences Family c loser 2 n i l N e g a t i v e T r a i t s Emotional i ty Severely depressed; intense emotion & 9 2 d i s p a i r ; c r y i n g ; d i s t r e s s ; s u i c i d a l Sense of Power Lack of c o n t r o l ; 2 3 unable to recognize own resources; lack of se l f -conf idence; need for external approval Cooperativeness H o s t i l i t y ; stubborn; n i l 4 annoyance 92 Table 5.7: Study Two: T r a i t s Used C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s to Describe C l i e n t P o s i t i v e T r a i t s Example Frequency Group III Group IV (NA 2) (A 2 ) Personal Integr i ty Honesty; Pr ide; strong sense of personal r e s p o n s i b i l i t y 1 4 Optimism (general) F a i t h ; a b i l i t y to see pos i t ive s ide; Sense of humour 2 1 N e u t r a l T r a i t s Optimism re Family Influence Powerful connection with family; love for family n i l 4 N e g a t i v e T r a i t s Attrac t iveness Overweight; blobby 2 n i l Emotional i ty Sadness; despondency 3 n i l Sense of Power Self blaming; out of c o n t r o l ; 8 8 hopelessness; se l f blaming; f a i l u r e ; hopelessness; v i c t im; poor me Cooperativeness D i f f i c u l t to ask for outside help; r i g i d n i l 2 93 C o u n s e l l o r ' s A f f i n i t y T o w a r d s t h e C l i e n t In Study One, general ly most counsel lors i d e n t i f i e d with the c l i e n t in having experienced unemployment, depression, loss of c o n t r o l , and f r u s t r a t i o n . However, Group II (A,) described the ir i d e n t i f i c a t i o n on a more personal l e v e l . In Study Two, those in Group IV (A 2 ) i d e n t i f i e d more with the c l i e n t ' s depression and loss of contro l than with unemployment while the responses of Group III (NA 2) were a l l d i f f e r e n t . See Tables 5.8 (Study One) and 5.9 (Study Two) for a summary of th i s information. Table 5.8: Study One: Counse l lor ' s A f f i n i t y Towards the C l i e n t Nonaccented 1 Accented 2 Category E x t e r n a l ( E ) / Frequency E x t e r n a l / Frequency of Internal(I ) Internal I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Influences (+/-) (+/- rat ing) Pos i t ive family support E+ 2 E+ 2 Unemployment E - 2 E - 5 Depression, loss of contro l I - 5 I - 5 Anger, f r u s t r a t i o n n i l n i l I - 5 Optimism n i l n i l 1 + 1 1Group I (NA,): one subject reported no i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with c l i e n t 2Group II ( A , ) : no subjects reported any c u l t u r a l , ethnic or be l i e f s i m i l a r i t y with c l i e n t 94 Table 5.9: Study Two: C o u n s e l l o r ' s A f f i n i t y Towards the C l i e n t Nonaccented 1 A c c e n t e d 2 Category E x t e r n a l ( E ) / Frequency E x t e r n a l / Frequency of I n t e r n a l ( I ) I n t e r n a l Ident i f i c a t ion I n f l u e n c e s (+/-) (+/- r a t i n g ) Family pressures E- 1 E- 1 Unemployment E- 2 E- 3 Depression, l o s s of c o n t r o l I - 1 I - 7 Anger, f r u s t r a t ion I - 1 n i l n i l 'Group III (NA 2 ): two s u b j e c t s r e p o r t e d no i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with c l i e n t 2Group I V (A 2) : one sub j e c t r e p o r t e d : no i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with c l i e n t C l i e n t M o t i v a t i o n In both s t u d i e s a l l of the c o u n s e l l o r s f e l t that the c l i e n t was motivated to h e l p h i m s e l f and Table 5.10 prese n t s t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n . Those who made a c o n d i t i o n a l response i n Study One (NA,=1, A,=3) focused on treatment s t r a t e g i e s which would a i d the c l i e n t to r e g a i n h i s sense of s e l f - w o r t h ( i n t e r n a l i n f l u e n c e s ) . In Study Two the c o n d i t i o n a l responses again emphasized treatment s t r a t e g i e s but of immediate concern were concrete p r a c t i c a l s o l u t i o n s such as j o b - f i n d i n g s k i l l s . 95 Table 5.10: Counsellor Perception of C l i en t Motivation Study One Study Two Nonaccented Accented Nonaccented Accented Yes Yes+Cond, Yes Yes+Cond Yes Yes+Cond Yes Yes+Cond 6 1 1 1 3 4 2 7 2 1Yes + Condit ion: Group I (NA,) : theme: overcome fee l ing of hopelessness Group II (A,) : needs to work through gr ie f and resentment, regain c o n t r o l , get emotions out Group III (NA 2 ) : needs concrete plans; p r a c t i c a l so lut ions Group IV (A 2 ) : needs s k i l l s development; group experience re f inding job SUMMARY In the f i r s t study, th i s researcher found a s i g n i f i c a n t di f ference in a t t i tude between the mainstream counsel lors who were in the non-accented c l i e n t s i tua t ion and those who were presented with the accented c l i e n t . Group II (A,) counsel lors who viewed the mi ld ly accented c l i e n t rated him with more pos i t ive in tens i ty on the Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l At t i tude Scale than those in Group I (NA,) who viewed the non-accented c l i e n t (p<.00l). O v e r a l l , the i r combined responses re f l ec ted a pos i t ive a t t i tude towards the c l i e n t . The counsel lors exposed to the accented c l i e n t s i tua t ion rated a l l but 4% of the c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s with more pos i t i ve in tens i ty of a t t i t u d e . In the second study, t h i s researcher found no s i g n i f i c a n t di f ference in a t t i tude between the two groups 96 (NA 2 and A 2) of mainstream c o u n s e l l o r s (p>.05). Again, a l l respondents e v a l u a t e d the c l i e n t (non-accented and stronger accent) with a favourable a t t i t u d e . However, the c o u n s e l l o r s exposed to the accented c l i e n t (A 2 group) r a t e d the c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s with l e s s p o s i t i v e i n t e n s i t y than d i d Group III ( N A 2 ) t on 48% of the s c a l e items. In r e a c t i o n to the q u e s t i o n n a i r e , the c o u n s e l l o r s in Study One g e n e r a l l y responded i n a p e r s o n a l i z e d manner while those i n Study Two d e s c r i b e d the c l i e n t with l e s s p e r s o n a l involvement on t h e i r p a r t . A l l but one s u b j e c t i n both s t u d i e s wanted to continue to work with the c l i e n t and a l l of the c o u n s e l l o r s f e l t the c l i e n t was motivated to help h i m s e l f . The main d i f f e r e n c e i n responses to the Interview Q u e s t i o n n a i r e was not s i g n i f i c a n t between the two groups (nonaccented versus accented) but more between the two s t u d i e s : beginner c o u n s e l l o r s with a m i l d accented c l i e n t compared to more experienced c o u n s e l l o r s with a stronger accented c l i e n t . The d i f f e r e n c e appeared to be h i g h l i g h t e d by an emphasis on i n t e r n a l (novice c o u n s e l l o r s ) versus e x t e r n a l (mature c o u n s e l l o r s ) i n f l u e n c e s . The f i n d i n g s from the s t a t i s t i c a l treatment of the data are i n t e r p r e t e d i n the next chapter. 97 CHAPTER SIX SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter presents a summary of the rat iona le for conducting th i s research inves t igat ing counsellors* a t t i tudes towards accented c l i e n t s . In add i t i on , the methodology and i t s l i m i t a t i o n s for both studies are discussed. In separate sections the resu l t s of each study are interpreted in r e l a t i o n to the hypothesis and research quest ions. Recommendations for future research in the f i e l d of counse l l ing conclude th i s chapter. SUMMARY OF THE PROBLEM The l i t e r a t u r e review in Chapters 1 and 2 reveals that the fundamental a t t i tudes of mainstream Canadians towards the ir ethnic counterparts i s influenced by the ir d i f ferences in cu l ture and language. Although the exact number in Canada has not been reported, i t i s assumed that the majority of counsel lors belong to the dominant cul ture group. Sue (1981) states that over 50% of minority c l i e n t s become discouraged and discontinue counse l l ing af ter one session with a mainstream counse l lor . The question of c u l t u r a l and language d i f ferences , therefore , becomes increas ing ly important. Vontress (1969) states that the counse l lors ' c u l t u r a l biases and stereotypes negatively influence the counse l l ing 98 process p a r t i c u l a r l y by b l o c k i n g empathy. Most re s e a r c h e r s c a l l f o r c o u n s e l l o r s to address c u l t u r a l and language d i f f e r e n c e s to prevent the same misunderstanding i n therapy the e t h n i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t c l i e n t a l r e a d y experiences i n the dominant c u l t u r e ' s s o c i e t y (Alexander, Workneh and M i l l e r 1976). Language i s the key v a r i a b l e i n the c o u n s e l l i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p . I t s importance i s emphasized i n the c r o s s - c u l t u r a l c o u n s e l l i n g s i t u a t i o n . T h i s r e s e a r c h attempted to go beyond the obvious v i s i b l e r a c i a l d i f f e r e n c e s between the c o u n s e l l o r and h i s or her c l i e n t and sought to i n v e s t i g a t e the a t t i t u d e s of mainstream c o u n s e l l o r s towards t h e i r f o r e i g n accented c l i e n t . METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS Design To i n v e s t i g a t e the a t t i t u d e s of c o u n s e l l o r s towards t h e i r f o r e i g n accented c l i e n t s , a p o s t - t e s t only c o n t r o l group design was chosen. T h i s design was chosen f o r p r a c t i c a l reasons. Simply, the r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample of c o u n s e l l i n g psychology students was not a v a i l a b l e f o r a pre and p o s t - t e s t s i t u a t i o n . Two separate s t u d i e s were conducted. For both s t u d i e s , h a l f of the c o u n s e l l o r s viewed a videotape of a non-accented c l i e n t p r e s e n t i n g a 14-segment c o u n s e l l i n g problem. The other h a l f of the c o u n s e l l o r s viewed the same c l i e n t d e l i v e r i n g the same s c r i p t , but speaking with a Middle 99 European accent, which was stronger in the second study. The c o u n s e l l o r s were asked to make c o u n s e l l i n g responses at d e s i g n a t e d pauses. They had been t o l d the purpose of the r e s e a r c h was to norm t y p i c a l c o u n s e l l o r responses. A f t e r viewing and responding to the videotape of the c l i e n t , each c o u n s e l l o r judged the c l i e n t ' s p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s on a 50-item Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l A t t i t u d e Scale c o n s t r u c t e d f o r t h i s r e s e a r c h . In a d d i t i o n , they responded to an Interview Q u e s t i o n n a i r e which was d i r e c t e d at v a r i a b l e s which might i n f l u e n c e t h e i r a t t i t u d e towards the accented c l i e n t . Sample C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Two major d i f f e r e n c e s between the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the p a r t i c i p a n t s and the accent of the c l i e n t , i n each study, were c o n s i d e r e d l i m i t a t i o n s of t h i s r e s e a r c h i n terms of data a n a l y s i s . The f i r s t l i m i t a t i o n concerns the method of s e l e c t i o n , l e v e l of education and experience. Because the p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the f i r s t study v o l u n t e e r e d , took part d u r i n g c l a s s time and were novice c o u n s e l l o r s , t h e i r data c o u l d not be compared to the more experienced c o u n s e l l o r s i n the second study who were co n t a c t e d by phone and p a r t i c i p a t e d on t h e i r own time. The other l i m i t a t i o n i s that the s u b j e c t s i n the second study were exposed to a c l i e n t with a s t r o n g e r , l e s s i n t e l l i g i b l e accent. Another sample c h a r a c t e r i s t i c which i n f l u e n c e d the data a n a l y s i s i n v o l v e s the samples' homogeneity. In both s t u d i e s , to p r o v i d e a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample of "pure" mainstream 100 c o u n s e l l o r s , a number of s u b j e c t s were e l i m i n a t e d because of t h e i r ' c u l t u r a l s e n s i t i v i t y . ' In the f i r s t study 26% of the s u b j e c t s were c o n s i d e r e d c u l t u r a l l y s e n s i t i v e and t h e r e f o r e not i n c l u d e d i n the major a n a l y s i s and 41% were excluded from the second study f o r the same reason. Because such a l a r g e r a t i o i n both groups were c u l t u r a l l y s e n s i t i v e one cannot h e l p but wonder i f , i n Canada at l e a s t , the predominance of the white mainstream c o u n s e l l o r i s d i m i n i s h i n g . In f a c t , f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h might do w e l l to i n c l u d e a l l s u b j e c t s (with c u l t u r a l v a r i a b l e s known) in the major a n a l y s i s r e p o r t i n g t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s , i f any, as a n c i l l i a r y f i n d i n g s . As the sample s i z e s were c o n s i d e r a b l y reduced i n t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n , any f i n d i n g s regarding the c u l t u r a l l y s e n s i t i v e group were not i n t e r p r e t e d i n t h i s c hapter. The reader i s r e f e r r e d to Table 5.2 and page 82 f o r a summary of the a n a l y s i s f o r t h i s group. INSTRUMENTATION The semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l (SD) developed by t h i s author to measure c o u n s e l l o r s ' a t t i t u d e s towards t h e i r f o r e i g n - a c c e n t e d c l i e n t proved to be a r e l i a b l e and v a l i d instrument. The s e l e c t i o n of b i p o l a r a d j e c t i v e s was based on language a t t i t u d e s t u d i e s which had used the matched-guise audiotape and the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l . In a d d i t i o n , a number of a d j e c t i v e p a i r s were s e l e c t e d from a p o o l of a d j e c t i v e s based on Osgood's (1975) "landmark" Thesaurus Study. 101 The t - t e s t of between-group d i f f e r e n c e s f o r scores on each of the a d j e c t i v e p a i r s produced some s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s . However, when the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l a d j e c t i v e s were compared to the d e s c r i p t i v e a d j e c t i v e s found in the Interview Q u e s t i o n n a i r e , there was l i t t l e s i m i l a r i t y in c a t e g o r i e s . These d i f f e r e n c e s are a l l u d e d to with the p o s s i b i l i t y i n mind that the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l b i p o l a r a d j e c t i v e s may not have been c l i n i c a l l y o r i e n t e d enough for t h i s c o u n s e l l i n g p o p u l a t i o n . The r e s t r i c t i o n of the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of these f i n d i n g s emerges when t h i s instrument i s used because, although i t has a s t a n d a r d i z e d c o n t r u c t i o n technique, the b i p o l a r a d j e c t i v e s may be i n c o n s i s t e n t from one study to the next. The Interview Q u e s t i o n n a i r e and Demographic Information sheet were adequate i n t h e i r purpose. However, i n d e s i g n i n g the instruments there was a concern regarding being "too d i r e c t " and " g i v i n g i t a l l away." In r e t r o s p e c t , t h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r f e e l s that perhaps f u t u r e r e s e a r c h might do w e l l to c u r t a i l ambiguity and get more to the p o i n t . CONCLUSIONS For each study the e x p l a n a t i o n of the f i n d i n g s i s d i s c u s s e d i n terms of the mainstream c o u n s e l l o r ' s general a t t i t u d e towards the accented c l i e n t . The r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s are i n t e r p r e t e d as v a r i a b l e s which might i n f l u e n c e the c o u n s e l l o r ' s a t t i t u d e . 1 0 2 Major Hypothesis: restated T h e r e a r e no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d s t h e c l i e n t , b e t ween c o u n s e l l o r s who v i e w e d a v i d e o t a p e o f n o n - a c c e n t e d , S t a n d a r d E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g c l i e n t , a n d c o u n s e l l o r s who v i e w e d a v i d e o t a p e o f an E a s t e r n - E u r o p e a n a c c e n t e d c l i e n t . STUDY ONE (NA, vs A , : Novice Counsellors) G e n e r a l A t t i t u d e T o wards t h e C l i e n t I n t h e f i r s t s t u d y t h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s t h e c l i e n t b e t w e e n t h o s e m a i n s t r e a m c o u n s e l l o r s who v i e w e d t h e n o n - a c c e n t e d (NA,) c l i e n t v i d e o t a p e a n d t h o s e who v i e w e d t h e f o r e i g n - a c c e n t e d (A,) c l i e n t . The A, g r o u p r a t e d t h e c l i e n t w i t h more p o s i t i v e i n t e n s i t y on t h e S e m a n t i c D i f f e r e n t i a l A t t i t u d e S c a l e (SD) t h a n t h e NA, g r o u p . The n u l l h y p o t h e s i s was r e j e c t e d a t t h e P < . 0 0 1 l e v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e . The c o u n s e l l o r s ' o v e r a l l a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s t h e c l i e n t , a c c e n t e d o r n o t , was i n t h e p o s i t i v e d i r e c t i o n on t h e b i p o l a r c o n t i n u u m o f a t t i t u d e . The s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t h i s s t u d y t h e n , was t h e l e v e l o f p o s i t i v e i n t e n s i t y w i t h t h e A, g r o u p r a t i n g a l l b u t 4% of t h e c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s more p o s i t i v e l y t h a n t h e NA, g r o u p . 1 03 The l i t e r a t u r e r e v i e w r e v e a l e d t h a t p e o p l e h o l d s t e r e o t y p e s , b i a s e s o r p r e j u d i c e s a b o u t i n d i v i d u a l s who a r e e t h n i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t t o t h e m s e l v e s . T h e s e s t e r e o t y p e s f u n c t i o n t o a s s i s t i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g and i n t e r p r e t i n g b e h a v i o u r a n d t h e y f o r m t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d s m i n o r i t i e s . T h e s e a t t i t u d e s become s t a b l e and r e l a t i v e l y e n d u r i n g a n d m e d i a t e o r a r e a p a r t o f b e h a v i o u r . L a n g u a g e i s e s s e n t i a l i n t h e c o u n s e l l i n g p r o c e s s . I t i s a l s o a c l u e t o a c l i e n t ' s c u l t u r a l a f f i l i a t i o n w h i c h i n t u r n i s a s i g n a l t o t h e c o u n s e l l o r t o e l i c i t a s t e r e o t y p i c a l a t t i t u d e . I n t h i s f i r s t s t u d y , t o e x p l a i n t h e s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s t h e a c c e n t e d c l i e n t , m e a s u r e d by t h e s e m a n t i c d i f f e r e n t i a l , s e v e r a l p o s s i b i l i t i e s e x i s t . 1 . I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t t h i s n o v i c e g r o u p o f c o u n s e l l o r s were aware o f t h e i r b i a s e d a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d s m i n o r i t y c l i e n t s a n d o v e r - c o m p e n s a t e d by r a t i n g t h i s a c c e n t e d c l i e n t i n an e x t r e m e l y f a v o u r a b l e way. 2. T a k e n one s t e p f u r t h e r , t h e s e c o u s e l l o r s , a w a r e o f b i a s e s t o w a r d s m i n o r i t y g r o u p s t h a t have v i s i b l e d i f f e r e n c e s , may h a v e h a d t o a d j u s t t h e i r p r e - e s t a b l i s h e d n e g a t i v e a t t i t u d e s o r f o r m new o n e s t o u n d e r s t a n d and e x p l a i n t h e b e h a v i o u r o f someone, who l o o k e d t h e same a s , b u t s p o k e d i f f e r e n t l y f r o m t h e m s e l v e s . 3. A t h i r d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e more p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e of t h e c o u n s e l l o r s i n S t u d y One may be t h a t a s t h e y v i e w t h e m s e l v e s i n a h e l p i n g r o l e t h e y may a t t e m p t t o k e e p 104 negative a t t i tudes in abeyance in order to be e f fec t ive counse l lors . 4. A fourth p o s s i b i l i t y may involve the notion of the "Great White Father" syndrome (Vontress 1969). The novice counsel lors may have f e l t they were from the p r i v i l e g e d group of the dominant cu l ture and may have wanted to stress the ir t o t a l l y "unconditional pos i t ive regard" for th i s c l i e n t . 5. A f i f t h explanation of the f indings may suggest these counsel lors f e l t the s o c i a l pressure to respond in a des ireable way, thus rat ing the c l i e n t more favourably. 6. It may also be simply a function of the perception of d i f ferences in that the novice counsel lors paid more at tent ion to the dialogue. Research Questions: Study One The Interview Questionnaire was designed to provide answers to the research quest ions. The f i r s t question p a r a l l e l s the major hypothesis of no di f ferences regarding the mainstream counse l lors ' a t t i tude towards the ir c l i e n t . The remaining research questions provide ins ight into the var iab les which may or may not influence the counse l lor ' s a t t i tude towards the c l i e n t . Interpretat ion of the questionnaire f indings in Study One is discussed in terms of d i f ferences between mainstream counsel lors in the accented versus the non-accented s i t u a t i o n . 1 05 A) D i f f e r e n c e in A t t i t u d e Is there a d i f f e r e n c e i n the a t t i t u d e between mainstream c o u n s e l l o r s towards t h e i r c l i e n t s who have no accent and those c o u n s e l l o r s whose c l i e n t s speak with a f o r e i g n accent? The novice c o u n s e l l o r s ' response to the q u e s t i o n n a i r e item a s k i n g them to d e s c r i b e o u t s t a n d i n g c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s produced s e v e r a l c a t e g o r i e s : p e r s o n a l i n t e g r i t y , a t t r a c t i v e n e s s , e m o t i o n a l i t y , sense of power, coo p e r a t i v e n e s s and f a m i l y i n f l u e n c e s . Compared to the Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l s c o r e s , i t was s u r p r i s i n g to f i n d that f o r both c o u n s e l l o r groups i n the f i r s t study, p o s i t i v e , negative and n e u t r a l statements were d i s t r i b u t e d f a i r l y e q u a l l y . D i f f e r e n c e s i n the number of f a v o u r a b l e versus unfavourable responses made between the two c o u n s e l l o r groups i n Study One showed up i n the f o l l o w i n g c a t e g o r i e s : 'personal i n t e g r i t y ' (NA,=4 vs A,,=8); e m o t i o n a l i t y (NA,=9 vs A,=2) and sense of power and c o o p e r a t i v e n e s s (NA,=2 vs A,=7). A major theme which emerged from the q u e s t i o n n a i r e e x p l a i n i n g these r e s u l t s appears to be that the novice c o u n s e l l o r s , exposed to the accented s i t u a t i o n appear to have attended to the c l i e n t on a more i n t e r n a l l y focused l e v e l . They emphasized h i s s t r e n g t h of c h a r a c t e r while downplaying h i s obvious d i s t r e s s . I t appears as though they viewed the c l i e n t as a v i c t i m of "the system." 106 B) C o u n s e l l o r ' s A f f i n i t y T o w a r d s t h e C l i e n t Do c o u n s e l l o r s d i f f e r i n t h e i r e x p r e s s i o n o f a f f i n i t y t o w a r d s t h e a c c e n t e d o r n o n - a c c e n t e d c l i e n t ? G e n e r a l l y , most o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s i n t h e f i r s t s t u d y i d e n t i f i e d w i t h h a v i n g e x p e r i e n c e d u n e m p l o y m e n t , d e p r e s s i o n , l o s s o f c o n t r o l a n d f r u s t r a t i o n . H owever, t h o s e c o u n s e l l o r s i n t h e a c c e n t e d s i t u a t i o n i d e n t i f i e d w i t h t h e c l i e n t on a more p e r s o n a l , i n t e r n a l l y f o c u s e d l e v e l . S e v e r a l r e a s o n s a p p e a r t o e x i s t : 1. A p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h i s r e a c t i o n by t h e n o v i c e c o u n s e l l o r s i n t h e a c c e n t e d s i t u a t i o n may be due t o a f e e l i n g o f e m o t i o n a l c l o s e n e s s . A l t h o u g h t h e y d i d n o t a t t e n d t o t h e c l i e n t ' s e m o t i o n a l i t y a s much a s t h e n o n a c c e n t e d g r o u p ( e v i d e n c e d i n t h e f i r s t r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n ) t h e i r a n s w e r s were more p e r s o n a l . 2. A s e c o n d e x p l a n a t i o n c h a l l e n g e s t h e n o t i o n t h a t s i m i l a r i t y o f b e l i e f s a n d v a l u e s e x p l a i n s p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e s . I t i s s u g g e s t e d t h a t s o m e t h i n g more b a s i c i s i n f l u e n c i n g a t t i t u d e and t h a t i s , t h a t s i m i l a r i t y o f e x p e r i e n c e (unemployment a n d d e p r e s s i o n ) c u t s t h r o u g h any c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s w h i c h may be e v i d e n t . 3. I n a d d i t i o n , o n c e t h e s i m i l a r i t y o f e x p e r i e n c e was a c k n o w l e d g e d by t h e s e S t u d y One c o u n s e l l o r s , t h e "unknown c l i e n t " became f a m i l i a r . T h i s f a m i l i a r i t y may h ave r e d u c e d t h e c o u n s e l l o r ' s f e e l i n g s o f u n c e r t a i n t y a b o u t t h e c l i e n t ' s b e h a v i o u r t h e r e b y g e n e r a t i n g a more 107 f a v o u r a b l e a t t i t u d e a n d p o s s i b l y p a y i n g l e s s a t t e n t i o n t o t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n a c c e n t . 4. A f i n a l comment i s o f f e r e d t o e x p l a i n t h e n o v i c e c o u n s e l l o r s ' f o c u s on t h e e m o t i o n a l s t a t e o f t h e c l i e n t . T h i s may h a v e been a p r o d u c t o f t h e i r l e v e l o f f o r m a l i z e d t r a i n i n g where t h e y h a v e been e x p o s e d t o a c o u n s e l l i n g m o d e l o f h e l p i n g w h i c h e m p h a s i z e s e m o t i o n a l e x p r e s s i o n . C) C l i e n t M o t i v a t i o n Do c o u n s e l l o r s w i t h a c c e n t e d v e r s u s n o n - a c c e n t e d c l i e n t s d i f f e r i n t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e c l i e n t ' s m o t i v a t i o n t o h e l p h i m o r h e r s e l f ? I n S t u d y One, t h e r e were no d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e two g r o u p s , i n t h a t a l l s u b j e c t s f e l t t h e c l i e n t was m o t i v a t e d t o h e l p h i m s e l f . The t h r e e c o u n s e l l o r s i n G r o u p I I (A,) who made a c o n d i t i o n a l r e s p o n s e f o c u s e d on t h e a c c e n t e d c l i e n t r e g a i n i n g h i s s e n s e o f s e l f - w o r t h ( i n t e r n a l i n f l u e n c e s ) . T h i s may be e x p l a i n e d a s f o l l o w s : T h e s e n o v i c e c o u n s e l l o r s may f e e l t h e y h a v e s o m e t h i n g a t s t a k e ( s u c c e s s o r f a i l u r e o f t h e c o u n s e l l i n g p r o c e s s ) a n d want t o e n s u r e t h e y p e r c e i v e t h e c l i e n t a s m o t i v a t e d w h i c h , i n t u r n , a l l o w s them t o v i e w t h e c l i e n t more p o s i t i v e l y . D) The C l i e n t ' s E t h n i c i t y Do c o u n s e l l o r s i n t h e a c c e n t e d c l i e n t s i t u a t i o n comment on c u l t u r e a s p o s s i b l y i n f l u e n c i n g t h e c o u n s e l l i n g p r o c e s s ? F o r t y - t h r e e p e r c e n t o f t h e c o u n s e l l o r s i n t h e a c c e n t e d s i t u a t i o n i n t h e f i r s t s t u d y i d e n t i f i e d c u l t u r e a s a v a r i a b l e 108 which might influence the counse l l ing process. When compared to comments regarding the a r t i f i c i a l i t y of the study ( i . e . , videotaped c l i e n t ) i t was found that 42% in Group II (A,) mentioned i t (only 20% of them commented on both cu l ture and a r t i f i c i a l i t y ) while 62% in Group I (NA,) remarked on the study's a r t i f i c i a l i t y . A possible explanation may be that the counse l lors , in Study One, attending to cu l ture were more involved with the c l i e n t and ignored the contr ived nature of the counse l l ing sess ion. This involvement might explain the ir i n t e r n a l l y focused responses on the questionnaire and t h e i r more p o s i t i v e a t t i tude than was the case with the NA, group. STUDY TWO (NA 2 vs A 2: Mature C o u n s e l l o r s ) General At t i tude Towards the C l i en t Unlike Study One, the second study revealed no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f ference in a t t i tude towards the accented c l i e n t between the two groups of mature counsel lors (NA2 vs A 2 ) and the n u l l hypothesis was re ta ined . It is curious that the standard dev ia t ions , in the Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l At t i tude Scale , were considerably diverse for both s tudies . Study One Study Two nonaccented=10.63 nonaccented=37.19 accented =22.70 accented =32.34 None of the groups (NA,, A, N A 2 , or A 2 ) are comparable and t h i s d i v e r s i t y may have been a function of the small sample s izes used to represent the "pure" mainstream counse l lor . 109 In Study Two, the c o u n s e l l o r s ' o v e r a l l a t t i t u d e towards the c l i e n t , accented or not, was on the p o s i t i v e s i d e of the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l s c a l e . Because the f i n d i n g s were of no s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e they are i n t e r p r e t e d i n r e l a t i o n to the design d i f f e r e n c e s between Study One and Study Two ( i . e . , method of sample s e l e c t i o n , l e v e l of c o u n s e l l o r experience and education and i n t e n s i t y of a c c e n t ) . The small sample s i z e s may a l s o account f o r the f i n d i n g of no d i f f e r e n c e i n the second study, thus the r e s u l t s must be i n t e r p r e t e d c a u t i o u s l y . These d i f f e r e n c e s are examined more c l o s e l y i n the f o l l o w i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . Moderate versus Stronger Accented C l i e n t s It i s p o s s i b l e i n the f i r s t study, the novice respondents were r e a c t i n g f a v o u r a b l y to an accent which was moderate and more understandable than in the second study. However, the group mean Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l A t t i t u d e scores were s i m i l a r f o r Study One: Group II (A 1)=158.07 and Study Two: Group IV (A 2)=163.11. While the major d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t e d between Study One: Group I (NA,)=190.75 and Study Two: Group III (NA 2) = 1 6 3 .17, these may be e x p l a i n e d by a d d r e s s i n g the d i f f e r e n c e s i n sample c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Sample C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s In the f i r s t study the novice c o u n s e l l o r s were i n the f i r s t year of the Master's program and c u r r e n t l y e n r o l l e d i n a c o u n s e l l o r s k i l l s t r a i n i n g c ourse. In the second study, 1 10 however, the mature c o u n s e l l o r s had completed t h e i r second year and a l l coursework r e q u i r e d . They had achieved a c o n s i d e r a b l y higher l e v e l of s k i l l s a c q u i s i t i o n , c l i n i c a l e xperience and c o n f i d e n c e as a c o u n s e l l o r . S e v e r a l p o s s i b i l i t i e s e x i s t r e g a r d i n g the d i f f e r e n c e s between the novice and mature c o u n s e l l o r s ' a t t i t u d e s (Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l mean scores) towards the non-accented c l i e n t . 1. Study One (NA,) c o u n s e l l o r s might have been f e e l i n g inadequate i n d e a l i n g with the emotional c l i e n t presented on the videotape and t r a n s f e r r e d that to the c l i e n t i n the form of a l e s s p o s i t i v e e v a l u a t i o n . 2. Sixty-two percent of the Study One c o u n s e l l o r s i n the nonaccented s i t u a t i o n commented on the a r t i f i c i a l i t y of the s e t t i n g , while 83% of the Study Two c o u n s e l l o r s (NA 2) in the same s i t u a t i o n mentioned i t . T h i s was c o n s i d e r a b l y higher i n both non-accented groups (compared to the accented s i t u a t i o n s ) . I t i s p o s s i b l e the a r t i f i c i a l environment was d i s t r a c t i n g to the Group I (NA,) novice c o u n s e l l o r s and they were not as able to u t i l i z e t h e i r s k i l l s which r e s u l t e d again in a t r a n s f e r e n c e of a negative a t t i t u d e towards the c l i e n t . Group III (NA 2), however, commented more o f t e n on the a r t i f i c i a l nature of the experiment but were more p o s i t i v e i n t h e i r Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l e v a l u a t i o n of the c l i e n t . T h i s d i f f e r e n c e may be r e l a t e d to t h e i r higher l e v e l of e d u c a t i o n a l and c l i n i c a l e x perience. A l s o they . 1 1 1 may h a v e f e l t d i s t r a c t e d more by t h e c o n t r i v e d s e t t i n g b u t more c o n f i d e n t r e g a r d i n g t h e i r s k i l l s a n d t h e r e f o r e d i d n o t t r a n s f e r a ny n e g a t i v e a t t i t u d e t o t h e c l i e n t . 3. The n o v i c e (NA,) c o u n s e l l o r s may have f e l t p o w e r l e s s a n d l e s s c o n f i d e n t i n a n o n - i n t e r a c t i o n a l s i t u a t i o n w h i c h r e s u l t e d i n a l e s s p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s t h e c l i e n t . Research Questions: Study Two The m a j o r d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n a l l o f t h e m a i n s t r e a m c o u n s e l l o r s i n t h e two s t u d i e s was t h e mood i n w h i c h t h e y r e s p o n d e d t o t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e i t e m s . C o u n s e l l o r s i n t h e f i r s t s t u d y g e n e r a l l y r e s p o n d e d i n a warm, g e n u i n e way c o n c e n t r a t i n g on t h e c l i e n t ' s d e l i c a t e e m o t i o n a l s t a t e . I n t h e s e c o n d s t u d y , h o w e v e r , t h e c o u n s e l l o r s were more c o n f r o n t a t i v e a n d t a s k - o r i e n t e d i n t h e i r r e s p o n s e s . A) D i f f e r e n c e i n A t t i t u d e The m a t u r e c o u n s e l l o r s i n t h e s e c o n d s t u d y a p p e a r e d l e s s i n v o l v e d w i t h t h e c l i e n t ' s e m o t i o n a l c r i s i s a n d more w i t h t h e t a s k o f e m p o w e r i n g h i m . T h i s was e v i d e n t i n t h e c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c c a t e g o r y o f " s e n s e o f power." B o t h a c c e n t e d a n d n o n a c c e n t e d g r o u p s o f m a t u r e c o u n s e l l o r s a p p e a r e d t o s u g g e s t t h i s was t h e most i m p o r t a n t n e g a t i v e t r a i t t h a t n e e d e d work (NA 2=8 and A 2 =8) . A p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h i s f i n d i n g i s t h a t t h e s e more e x p e r i e n c e d c o u n s e l l o r s f e l t c o n f i d e n t i n t h e i r t r a i n i n g t o go b e y o n d t h e empathy s t a g e o f s k i l l s t o t h e more p r a c t i c a l t a s k o r i e n t e d s t a g e o f t h e 1 1 2 h e l p i n g p r o c e s s . In a d d i t i o n , they d i d not view the c l i e n t as a " v i c t i m " but more as someone who has to take r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r change and they were c o n f i d e n t enough to say t h a t . B) C o u n s e l l o r ' s A f f i n i t y Towards the C l i e n t Within the second study Group III (NA 2) mature c o u n s e l l o r s i d e n t i f i e d both with unemployment and depression while Group IV (A 2) mature c o u n s e l l o r s i d e n t i f i e d more with the d e p r e s s i o n . T h i s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with a s i m i l a r i t y of experience and r e s u l t i n g p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e , yet minimal p e r s o n a l involvement by these c o u n s e l l o r s , may again be e x p l a i n e d i n terms of t h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l and c l i n i c a l e xperience. They may have f e l t t h a t although they shared a s i m i l a r e xperience, they d i d not need to r e l i v e i t with the c l i e n t to be e f f e c t i v e c o u n s e l l o r s . A l s o , they may have f e l t more comfortable and c o n f i d e n t with t h e i r r o l e than the novice, i n t e r n a l l y - f o c u s e d c o u n s e l l o r s i n the f i r s t study. C) C l i e n t M o t i v a t i o n A l l c o u n s e l l o r s i n Study Two viewed the c l i e n t as motivated to h e l p h i m s e l f . The emphasis of t h e i r c o n d i t i o n a l responses was on implementing "plans of a c t i o n " such as j o b - f i n d i n g s k i l l s . The e x t e r n a l focus expressed by these mature c o u n s e l l o r s may have been a product of the confidence experienced with t h e i r s k i l l s and techniques. They were more d i r e c t i n suggestions f o r treatment than the novice c o u n s e l l o r s i n Study One. 1 1 3 D) The C l i e n t ' s E t h n i c i t y Seventy-eight percent of the mature c o u n s e l l o r s i n the accented s i t u a t i o n commented on c u l t u r e as a v a r i a b l e i n the c o u n s e l l i n g process. The d i f f e r e n c e between those who mentioned i t i n the accented s i t u a t i o n in Study One and those who mentioned i t i n the same s i t u a t i o n i n Study Two (43% vs 78%) may most l i k e l y be e x p l a i n e d by the stronger accent i n Study Two. It was heavier and l e s s i n t e l l i g i b l e than i n the f i r s t study and t h e r e f o r e unavoidable. A second e x p l a n a t i o n may be that the novice c o u n s e l l o r s i n Study One i d e n t i f i e d c u l t u r e l e s s because they were more i n v o l v e d on a p e r s o n a l l e v e l . They may have d i s c o u n t e d c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s (accent) f e e l i n g that s i m i l a r i t y of experience was more important to the c o u n s e l l i n g p r o c e s s . In summary, the d i f f e r e n c e s between the two s t u d i e s , i n terms of general f i n d i n g s , may have been due to the c o u n s e l l o r s ' l e v e l of c l i n i c a l experience ( i . e . , practicum placements). For example, in the f i r s t year of the C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology Program, beginner c o u n s e l l o r s p r a c t i c e t h e i r s k i l l s i n a u n i v e r s i t y run c l i n i c which i s s u p e r v i s e d by a f a c u l t y member. The other c o u n s e l l o r s are f e l l o w students and the c l i e n t s are s e l f - r e f e r r a l s or agency r e f e r r e d . In most cases the c o u n s e l l i n g s e s s i o n s are videotaped and then reviewed by the f a c u l t y s u p e r v i s o r and f e l l o w students. In the second year of the program, the mature c o u n s e l l o r s having completed t h e i r c l i n i c a l experience i n the 1 1 4 f i r s t year, are pl a c e d i n a practicum with an agency or o r g a n i z a t i o n where they are su p e r v i s e d by a p r o f e s s i o n a l c o u n s e l l o r . The s u p e r v i s i o n and review of t h e i r c o u n s e l l i n g i n t e r v i e w s takes place w i t h i n the agency. The mature c o u n s e l l o r s ' confidence develops r a p i d l y as they adapt and cope with "working" i n the " r e a l world." RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNSELLING RESEARCH Based on the r e s u l t s of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n , some recommendations are made f o r both c o u n s e l l i n g r e s e a r c h and education and t r a i n i n g . Foremost, these two s t u d i e s have connected the c r o s s - c u l t u r a l c o u n s e l l i n g f i e l d of resea r c h with that of language a t t i t u d e s . Language i s the primary component of the c o u n s e l l i n g process and i t s importance i s emphasized when c o u n s e l l o r - c l i e n t c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t . Research needs to be continued i n the area of c o u n s e l l o r a t t i t u d e s towards the accented c l i e n t , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n m u l t i - c u l t u r a l s e t t i n g s such as Canada. Future r e s e a r c h c o u l d i n v e s t i g a t e the i n f l u e n c e of both f o r e i g n and r e g i o n a l accents on c o u n s e l l o r a t t i t u d e , as the a t t i t u d e of the c o u n s e l l o r i n the i n i t i a l phases of the in t e r v i e w i s p i v o t a l to the subsequent c o u n s e l l i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p . I t i s a l s o recommended that r e s e a r c h be conducted to e s t a b l i s h a Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l pool of c a t e g o r i e s f o r p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s r e l e v a n t to the f i e l d of c r o s s - c u l t u r a l c o u n s e l l i n g and language a t t i t u d e s . Some of 1 15 those items may be s e l e c t e d from the p e r s o n a l i t y c a t e g o r i e s which emerged from the Interview Q u e s t i o n n a i r e . T h i s pool of r e l e v a n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s might present a more s t a n d a r d i z e d instrument and would enable the resear c h e r to g e n e r a l i z e h i s or her f i n d i n g s more r e a d i l y . A l s o , i t i s suggested that the Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l be admi n i s t e r e d with at l e a s t one other measurement which might i n c l u d e measures of s o c i a l d i s t a n c e , b e l i e f s i m i l a r i t y or v a l u e s . Based on the r e s u l t s of these s t u d i e s , the area of s i m i l a r l i t y of experience not b e l i e f s warrants f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h . I t may be that s i m i l a r i t y of experience i s more r e a d i l y a c c e s s i b l e i n f o r m a t i o n to the c o u n s e l l o r and that i t i n f l u e n c e s the c o u n s e l l o r ' s a t t i t u d e and the c o u n s e l l i n g process more than accent. The f i n a l two recommendations concern the education and t r a i n i n g of c o u n s e l l o r s , immigration workers, s o c i a l workers, employers and any other t r a i n e d p r o f e s s i o n a l s working i n a job where i n t e r p e r s o n a l communication i s e s s e n t i a l . F i r s t , the matched-guise videotape c o u l d be u t i l i z e d i n a t r a i n i n g s i t u a t i o n to i n c r e a s e c u l t u r a l s e n s i t i v i t y . I t c o u l d be used in a campaign f o r p u b l i c awareness of p r e j u d i c e towards the c u l t u r a l l y d i f f e r e n t simply by a s k i n g the viewer: "How do you f e e l about that person?" Based on the major f i n d i n g s of t h i s r e s e a r c h , that c o u n s e l l o r s have a g e n e r a l l y more p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e towards the accented c l i e n t , f u t u r e i n v e s t i g a t i o n s should c o n s i d e r whether these a t t i t u d e s are s i m i l a r o u t s i d e t h e i r 1 1 6 profess ional world or whether s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y i s an inf luence . In addit ion to further experimental studies being done, i t i s recommended that survey research also be conducted to gather information regarding the ethnic composition of the Canadian counsel l ing profess ion . Because many of the subjects in th i s study were el iminated as " c u l t u r a l l y sensi t ive" the notion of the "pure mainstream" counsel lor needs to be addressed. Although th i s study is narrow in i t s focus on counse l lor ' s a t t i tudes towards foreign accented c l i e n t s , the f ind ings , e spec ia l ly in Study One, challenge commonly held a t t i t u d i n a l expectations among profess ionals and the previous ly c i t e d research on v i s i b l e d i f f erences . Since no other study has examined accent in counse l l ing in th i s manner i t is hoped th i s research can be r e p l i c a t e d with some refinements such as: larger sample s i z e , more homogeneous respondents and exposing subjects to both accented and non-accented s i t u a t i o n s . As the technology of communication advances so does our contact with people from other cul tures personal ly and profes s iona l ly as counse l lors . Now more than ever, research needs to expand and invest igate the challenge that cu l ture represents to the counse l l ing process. As H a l l (1982:188) reminds us " . . . people cannot . . . interact . . . in any meaningful way except through the medium of cu l ture . . . [we are part of one] . . . i n t e r r e l a t e d system." 1 17 REFERENCES Aboud, F . E . & Skerry, S.A. (1984). The development of a t t i tudes : a c r i t i c a l review. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 75(1), 3~34. Ageheyis i , R. & Fishman, J . A . (1970). Language at t i tude studies: a br ie f summary of methodological approaches. Anthropological Linguistics, 12(5), 137-157. Alexander, A . A . , Workneh, F . , K l e i n , M . H . , & M i l l e r , M.H. (1976). Psychotherapy and the foreign student. In P. Pedersen, W . J . Lonner and J . G . Draguns (eds . ) , Counselling across cultures (pp 82-89). Honolulu, Hawaii: Univers i ty Press of Hawaii. A l l a n , J . A . B . & Nairne, J . E . (1981). Rac ia l prejudice in the classroom: a developmental counse l l ing approach. Canadian Counsellor, 75(4), 162-168. A l l p o r t , G.W. & C a n t r i l , H. (1934). Judging personal i ty from vo ice . Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 37-53. A n i s f e l d , M . , Bogo, N . , & Lambert, W.E. (1962). Evaluat ional reactions to accented Engl i sh speech. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65(4), 223-231. Apte, M. (1970). Some s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c aspects of i n t e r l i n g u a l communication in India . Anthropological Linguistics, 12(3), 63-82. Atkinson, D.R. (1983). Ethnic s i m i l a r i t y in counsel l ing psychology: a review of research. The Counselling Psychologist, 11(3), 79-92. Atkinson, D . R . , Ponce, F . Q . , & Martinez, F . M . (1984). Ef fec t s of e thnic , sex, and at t i tude s i m i l a r i t y on counsel l ing c r e d i b i l i t y . Journal of Counselling Psychology, . 5 7 ( 4 ) , 588-590. Atkinson, D.R. & Wampold, B. (1981). Aff irmat ive act ion e f for t s of counsel lor education programs. Counsellor Education and Supervision, 20(4), 262-272. 118 Bar-Lewaw, I . (1986). Language uni ty: a hot potato in United States . The Globe and Mail, Tuesday, September 9, p. A7. Barna, L . M . (1970). Stumbling blocks in interpersonal , i n t e r c u l t u r a l communication. In D. Hoopes (ed . ) , Readings in intercultural communication, volume 1. Pit t sburgh: Univers i ty of Pit tsburgh I n t e r c u l t u r a l Communication Network of the Regional Council for Internat ional Education. Baron, R .A . & Byrne, D. (1977). Social psychology: understanding human interaction. Toronto: A l l y n and Bacon. Berger, C .R. & Bradac, J . L . (1982). Language and social knowledge: uncertainty in interpersonal relations. London: Edward Arnold Publ i sher . Berger, M.D. (1968). Accent, pattern and d i a l e c t in North American E n g l i s h . Word, 24, 55-61. Berry, J . W . , K a l i n , R . , & T a y l o r , D.M. (1976). Mul t i cul t ur al i sm and ehtnic attitudes in Canada. Ottawa: M i n i s t r y of Supply and Services , October. Bezooijen, R. van & Hout, R. van. (1985). Accentedness rat ings and phonological var iab les as measures of v a r i a t i o n in pronounciat ion. Language and Speech, 28(2), 129-142. Bishop, G.D. (1979). Perceived s i m i l a r i t y in i n t e r r a c i a l a t t i tudes and behaviors: the ef fects of be l i e f and d i a l e c t s t y l e . Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 9(b), 446-465. Block, C . B . (1981). Black Americans and the c r o s s - c u l t u r a l counse l l ing and psychotherapy experience. In A . J . Marse l la and P . B . Pedersen ( e d s . ) . , Cross-cultural counselling and psychotherapy (pp. 177-194). New York: Pergamon Press. Borg, W.R. & G a l l , M.D. (1983). Educational research. New York: Longman, Inc. Bourhis , R . Y . , G i l e s , H . , & Lambert, W.E. (1975). S o c i a l consequences of accomodating one's s ty le of speech: a cross nat ional i n v e s t i g a t i o n . International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 6, 55-71. 119 Brennan, E . M . & Brennan, J . S . (1981). Accent sca l ing and language a t t i tudes : react ions to Mexican American Engl i sh in speech. Language and Speech, 24{3), 207-221. Br in ton , J . E . (1969). Deriv ing an a t t i tude scale from semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l data . In J . G . Snider & C E . Osgood (eds . ) , Semantic differential techniques. Chicago. B . L . , Strong, W . J . , & Rencher, A . C . (1975). Acoustic determinants of perceptions of personal i ty from speech. International Journal of the Soci ol ogy of Language, 6, 11-32. E . D . & Sechrest, L . (1980). Experiments in c r o s s - c u l t u r a l research. In H . C . T r i a n d i s and J.W. Berry (eds . ) , Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: methodology. Boston: A l l y n and Bacon. S. & Cody, J . (1973). Relat ionship of race and l eve l of understanding between counsel lor and c l i e n t . Journal of Counselling Psychology, 20(6), 495-498. Buck, J . (1968). The e f fects of Negro and White d i a l e c t i c a l var ia t ions upon at t i tudes of col lege Students. Speech Monographs, 35(1), 181-186. Burhans J r . , D . T . (1973). The experimental study of interpersonal t r u s t . I . Western Speech, Winter, 2-12. Carney, C . G . & Kahn, R .B . (1984). Bui ld ing competencies for e f fec t ive c r o s s - c u l t u r a l counse l l ing : a developmental view. The Counselling Psychologist, 12(1), 111-119. Carranza, M.A. & Ryan, E . B . (1975). Evaluat ive reactions of b i l i n g u a l Anglo and Mexican American adolescents toward speakers of Engl i sh and Spanish. International Journal of Soci ology of Language, 6, 83-104. Chaika, E . (1982). Language: the social mirror. London: Newbury House Publ i sh ing . Cheyne, W.N. (1970). Sterotyped reactions to speakers with Scot t i sh and Engl i sh regional accents . British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 9, 11-19. Brown, Brown, Bryson, 120 Christensen, C P . (1984). Ef fects of c r o s s - c u l t u r a l t r a i n i n g on helper response. Counsellor Education and Supervi si on, 23(4), 311-320. Christensen, C P . (1985). A perceptual approach to c r o s s - c u l t u r a l counse l l ing . Canadian Counsellor, 9(2), 6 3 - 8 1 . C l a i b o r n , C D . & Dowd, E . T . (1985). A t t i t u d i n a l in terpretat ions in counse l l ing: content versus discrepancy. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 32(2), 188-196. Clement, R. (1980). E t h n i c i t y , contact , and communicative competence in a second language. In H. G i l e s , W.P. Robinson, & P.M. Smith (eds . ) , Language: social psychological perspectives (pp. 147-154). Oxford: Pergamon Press. Cooper, R . L . & Fishman, J . A . (1974). The study of language a t t i t u d e s . International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 3, 5—19. Cooper, S. (1973). A look at the ef fect of racism on c l i n i c a l work. Social Casework, 54, 76~84. Copeland, E . J . (1983). C r o s s - c u l t u r a l counse l l ing and psychotherapy: a h i s t o r i c a l perspect ive , impl icat ions for research and t r a i n i n g . Personnel and Guidance Journal, 62, 10-15. Danesi, M. (1985). A glossary of l e c t a l terms for the descr ipt ion of language v a r i a t i o n . Language Problems and Language Planning, 9(2), 115-121. Davidson, A .R . & Thomson, E . (1980). C r o s s - c u l t u r a l studies of a t t i tudes and b e l i e f s . In H . C T r i a n d i s and R. B r i s l i n (eds . ) , Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: social psychology. Toronto: A l l y n and Bacon, Inc. Dawis, R . V . (1978). A paradigm and model for the c r o s s - c u l t u r a l study of counse l l ing . Personnel and Guidance Journal, A p r i l , 463-466. D e l i a , J . G . (1972). D ia lec t s and the ef fects of stereotypes on interpersonal a t t r a c t i o n and cogni t ive processes in impression formation. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 58(3), 285-297. 121 Edwards, J . R . (1982). Language a t t i tudes and the ir impl icat ions among Engl i sh speakers. In E . B . Ryan and H. G i l e s (eds . ) , Attitudes towards language v ar i at i on: social and applied contexts (pp. 20-33). London: Edward Arnold . Egan, G. (1982). The skilled helper. Monterey, C a l i f o r n i a : Brooks Cole Publ i sh ing . Farquharson, D. (1986). Former Canadian urges Engl i sh for C a l i f o r n i a . The Vancouver Sun, Monday November 3, p. B-1 . Faso ld , R. (1984). The soci al i ngui st i cs of Oxford: B a s i l Blackwell Publ i sher . society. Fibush, E . & Turnquest, B. (1970). A black and white approach to the problem of racism. Social Casework, 51, 459-466. F i e l d i n g , G. & Evered, C. (1980). The influence of pat ients ' speech upon doctors: the diagnost ic interview. In R.N. S t . C l a i r and H. G i l e s (eds . ) , The social and psychological contexts of language (pp. 51-72). H i l l s i d e , N . J . : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publ i shers . F l e t cher , J . (1972). Semantic communication research 269-275. d i f f e r e n t i a l Western type scales in Speech, F a l l , Forgas, Fraser Furuto, J . P . (1985). Person prototypes and c u l t u r a l sa l i ence: the role of cognit ive and c u l t u r a l factors in impression formation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 3-17. B. (1973). Some 'unexpected' react ions to various American-English d i a l e c t s . In R .N. Shuy and R.W. Fasold (eds . ) , Language attitudes: current trends and prospects (pp. 28-35). Washington, D . C : Georgetown Univers i ty Press . S .B . (1981). The effects and cognitive treatment on ethnic minority groups. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Brigham Young C i t y , Utah. of affective treatment attitude change toward Unpublished Doctoral U n i v e r s i t y , Sa l t Lake Gibbs, J . T . (1985). class-bound? 426-435. Can we continue to be c o l o r - b l i n d and The Counselling Psychologist, 13(3), 122 G i l e s , H. (1970). Evaluat ive react ions to accents. Educational Review, 22(3), 211-227. G i l e s , H. (1971). Patterns of evaluation to R . P . , South Welsh and Somerset accented speech. British Journal of Social Cl i ni cal Ps ychol ogy, 10, 280-281. G i l e s , H. (1972a). The effect of stimulus mildness-broadness in the evaluation of accents. Language and Speech, 15(1), 262-269. G i l e s , H. (1972b). Evaluation of personal i ty content from accented speech as a function of l i s t e n e r ' s s o c i a l a t t i t u d e s . Perceptual and Motor Skills, 34, 168-170. G i l e s , H. (1973a). Communication effect iveness as a function of accented speech. Speech Monographs, 40, 330-331. G i l e s , H. (1973b). Accent mobi l i ty : a model and some data. Anthropological Linguistics, 15(2), 87-105. G i l e s , H . , Baker, S . , & F i e l d i n g , G. (1975). Communication length as a behavioral index of accent pre judice . International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 6, 73-81. G i l e s , H. & Bourhis , R .Y . (1973). The forum: d ia l ec t perception r e v i s i t e d . Quarterly Journal of Speech, 59(3), 337-342. G i l e s , H. & Powesland, P . F . (1975). Speech Style and Social Evaluation. London: Academic Press . G i l e s , H . , Robinson, W.P . , & Smith, P.M. (1980). Language: social psychological perspectives. Oxford: Pergamon Press . G i l e s , H . , Wilson, P . , & Conway, A. (1981). Accent and l e x i c a l d i v e r s i t y as determinants of impression formation and perceived employment s u i t a b i l i t y . Language Sciences, 5(1), 91-103. Glass , G. & Stanley, J . C . (1970). Statistical methods in education and psychology. Englewood C l i f f s , N . J . : P r e n t i c e - H a l l Inc. Gudykunst, W.B. (1979). The effects of an i n t e r c u l t u r a l communication workshop on c r o s s - c u l t u r a l a t t i tudes and i n t e r a c t i o n . Communication Education, 28, 179-187. 1 23 Gudykunst, W.B. & Kim, Y . Y . (1984). Communicating with strangers: an approach to inl ercul t ura I communication. Don M i l l s , Ontario: Addison-Wesley Publ ishing Co. Gumperz, J . J . (1982). Discourse strategies. New York: Cambridge Univers i ty Press . Gumperz, J . J . & Cook-Gumperz, J . (1982). Introduct ion: language and the communication of s o c i a l i d e n t i t y . In J . J . Gumperz (ed . ) , Language and Social Identity. London: Cambridge Univers i ty Press. H a l l , E . T . (1982). The hidden di mens i on. Garden C i t y , New York: Doubleday & Co. Hanse l l , M. & A j i r o t u t u , C B . (1982). Negotiating in terpretat ions in interethnic se t t ings . In J . J . Gumperz (ed. ) , Language and Social Identity. London: Cambridge Univers i ty Press. Hector, M.A. & Fray, J . S . ( 1 985). The counselling process, client expect at i ons, and cultural influences. A review paper presented at the 1985 Internat ional Roundtable for the Advancement of Counsel l ing (IRTAC) Conference, Utrecht , Netherlands. Heise , D.R. (1970). The semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l and at t i tude research. In G. Summers (ed), Attitude measurement. Chicago: Rand McNally & Co. Honey, J . (1984). Accents at work. Personnel Management , January, 18-21. Hopkins, K .D . & Stanley, J . C (1981). Educational and psychological measurement and evaluation. Englewoods C l i f f s , N . J . : P r e n t i c e - H a l l Inc. Ibraham, F . A . & Arredondo, P .M. (1986). E t h i c a l standards for c r o s s - c u l t u r a l counsel ing: counselor preparat ion, prac t i ce assessment and research. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 349-352. Insko, C . A . (1967). Theories of attitude change. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts . Izard , C E . (1979). Facial expr es s i on, emotion & motivation: nonverbal behavior. New York: Academic Press . 124 Jahoda, G. (1980). Theore t i ca l and systematic approaches in c r o s s - c u l t u r a l psychology. In H . C . Tr iand i s and W.E. Lambert (eds . ) , Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: perspectives. Boston: A l l y n and Bacon. Jones, E . E . & Davis , K . E . (1965). From acts to d i s p o s i t i o n s : the a t t r i b u t i o n process in person percept ion. In L . Berkowitz (ed . ) , Advances in experimental social psychology, Volume 2. New York: Academic Press . Jupp, T . C . , Roberts, C. & Cook-Gumperz, J . (1982). Language and disadvantage: the hidden process in language and s o c i a l i d e n t i t y . In J . J . Gumperz (ed . ) , Language and Social Identity (pp. 232-256). London: Cambridge Univers i ty Press. Kadushin, A. (1972). The r a c i a l factor in the interview. Social Work, 17(3), 88-99. Kagan, N. (1964). Three dimensions of counselor encapsulation. Journal of counseling Psychology, 77(4), 361-365. K a l i n , R. & Rayko, D .S . (1978). Discr iminat ion in evaluative judgements against foreign-accented job candidates. Psychoiogical Reports, 43, 1203-1209. K a l i n , R. & Rayko, D .S . (1980). The s o c i a l s ign i f i cance of speech in the job interview. In R.N. S t . C l a i r and H. G i l e s (eds . ) , The social and psychological contexts of language. H i l l s i d e , N . J . : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publ i shers . K a l i n , R . , Rayko, D.S . & Love, N. (1980). The perception and evaluation of job candidates with four d i f f erent ethnic accents. In H. G i l e s , W.P. Robinson, & P.M. Smith (eds . ) , Language: social psychological perspectives. Oxford: Pergamon Press, pp. 197-202. Katz , D. & Bra ly , K.W. (1949). Verbal stereotypes and r a c i a l prejudice . In T . M . Newcomb and E . Hartley (eds . ) , Readings in Social Psychology. New York: Henry Holt & Co. K e l l e y , H . H . & Michela , J . L . (1980). A t t r i b u t i o n theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology, Volume 31 . Kess, J . F . (1976). Psychol i ngui sti cs: introductory perspectives. New York: Academic Press . 1 25 Rumata, H. & Schramm, W. (1969). A p i l o t study of c r o s s - c u l t u r a l meaning in semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l techniques. In J . G . Snider & C E . Osgood (eds.) , Semant i c differential technique, (pp. 273-282). Chicago: Aldine Publ ishing Co. L a l l j e e , M . , Brown, L . B . , & Ginsburg, G . P . (1984). At t i tudes : d i spos i ton , behaviour, or evaluation? British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 223-244. Lambert, W.E. (1967). A s o c i a l psychology of b i l i n g u a l i s m . Journal of Social Issues, 23, 91-109. Lambert, W.E. (1970). What are they l i k e , these Canadians? A S o c i a l psychological ana lys i s . The Canadian Psychologist, 77(4), 303-333. Lambert, W.E. (1980). The s o c i a l psychology of language: a perspective for the 1980s. In H. G i l e s , W.P. Robinson and P.M. Smith (eds . ) , Language: social psychological perspectives. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Lambert, W . E . , Franke l , H. & Tucker, G.R. (1966). Judging personal i ty through speech: a French-Canadian example. Journal of Communication, 76(4). Lambert, W . E . , Hodgson, R . C , Gardner, R . C , & Fil lenbaum, S. (1960). Eva luat iona l reactions to spoken languages. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 60, 44-51. Larson, P . C (1982). Counseling spec ia l populat ions. Professional Psychology, 73(6), 843-858. Lee, R.R. (1971). Dia lec t perception: a c r i t i c a l review and re -eva luat ion . Quarterly Journal of Speech, 57(4), 410-417. Lemon, N. (1973). Attitudes and their measurement. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Leong, F . T . L . (1986). Counseling and psychotherapy with Asian-Americans: review of the l i t e r a t u r e . Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33(2), 196-206. Locke, D.W. (1969). Racism encountered in counsel ing. Counselor Education and Supervision, 9(4), 56-60. Lopez, R . E . & Cheek, D. (1977). The prevention of i n s t i t u t i o n a l racism: t ra in ing counseling psychologists as agents for change. The Counseling Psychologist, 7(2), 64-69. 1 26 Lundstedt, S. (1963). An introduct ion to some evolving problems in c r o s s - c u l t u r a l research. Journal of Social Issues, 19(3), 1-9. Margol i s , R . L . & Rungta, S .A. (1986). Tra in ing counselors for work with spec ia l populat ions: a second look. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 642-644. Markel , N . N . , E i s l e r , R . M . , & Reese, H.W. (1967). Judging personal i ty from d i a l e c t . Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 6, 33-35. Mayer, A . J . (1984). The c i t y of immigrants. Quest Magazine, March, 31-41. McCauley, C , S i t z , C . L . , & Segal , M. (1980). Stereotyping: from prejudice to p r e d i c t i o n . Psychological Bulletin, 87, 195-208. McDavis, R . J . & Parker, M. (1977). A course on counseling ethnic m i n o r i t i e s : a model. Counselor Education and Supervision, 17, 146-149. McDermott, D. & Stadler , H.A. (1985). Attitudes of counseling students in the United States towards minority clients. Paper presented at the Internat ional Roundtable for the Advancement of Counsel ing, Utrecht , The Netherlands, July 15, 1985. McFadden, J . , Sweeney, T . J . , Brooks, D . , Brown, A . , Quinn, J . R . , & Wilson, T. (1979). Assoc iat ion for Counselor Education and Supervision (ACES) pos i t ion paper on non-white concerns. Counselor Education and Supervision, 7S(4), 244-250. McKirnan, D . J . & Hamayan, . E . V . (1980) Language norms and perceptions of e t h n o - l i n g u i s t i c group d i v e r s i t y . In H. G i l e s , W.P. Robinson, and P.M. Smith (eds . ) , Language: social psychological perspectives. Oxford: Pergamon Press . McKirnan, D . J . , Smith, C . E . , & Hamayan, E . V . (1983) A s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c approach to the b e l i e f s i m i l a r i t y model of r a c i a l a t t i t u d e . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 434-447. Mendelsohn, G .A . and G e l l e r , M.H. (1963). Ef fec t s of counse lor -c l i ent s i m i l a r i t y on the outcome of counsel ing. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 10(1), 71-77. 1 27 M e r l u z z i , B .H. & M e r l u z z i , T . V . (1978). Influence of c l i e n t race on counselor's assessment of case mater ia l s . Journal of Counseling Psychology, 25(5), 399-404. Mishra, A. (1982). Discovering connections. In J . J . Gumperz (ed. ) , Language and social identity. London: Cambridge Univers i ty Press . Mulac, A. (1975). Evaluation of the Speech Dia lec t A t t i t u d i n a l Scale . Speech Monographs, 42(2), 184-189. Mulac, A . , Hanley, T . D . , & Prigge, D.Y. (1974). Ef fec t s of phonological . speech foreignness upon three dimensions of a t t i tudes of selected American l i s t e n e r s . Quarterly Journal of Speech, 60(4), 411-420. Neimeyer, G . J . & Fukuyama, M. (1984). Explor ing the content and structure of c r o s s - c u l t u r a l a t t i t u d e s . Counselor Education & Supervision, 23, 214-224. Neimeyer, G . J . & Gonzales, M. (1983). Durat ion, s a t i s f a c t i o n and perceived ef fect iveness of c r o s s - c u l t u r a l counsel ing. Jounral of Counseling Psychology, 30C\), 91-95. Osgood, C E . (1969). Semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l technique in the comparative study of cu l tures . In J . G . Snider and C E . Osgood (eds . ) , Semantic differential t echni ques, (pp. 303-332). Chicago: Aldine Publ ishing Co. Osgood, C E . & Suc i , G . J . (1955). Factor analys i s of meaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50(5), 325-338. Osgood, C . E . , S u c i , G . J . , & Tannenbaum, P . H . (1970). Att i tude measurement. In G . F . Summers (ed), Attitude measurement, (pp. 227-234). Chicago: Rand McNally & Co. Osgood, C . E . , Suc i , G . J . , & Tannenbaum, P . H . (1975). The measurement of meaning. Chicago: Univers i ty of I l l i n o i s Press . P a d i l l a , A . M . , Ruiz , R . A . , & Alvarez , R. (1975). Community mental health services for Spanish-speaking/surnamed populat ion. American Psychologist, 30, 892-905. 128 Palmer, L . (1973). A prel iminary report on a study of the l i n g u i s t i c corre la tes of raters ' subjective judgements of non-native Engl i sh speech. In R.W. Shuy and R.W. Fasold (eds . ) , Language attitudes: current trends and prospects. Washington, D . C : Georgetown Univers i ty Press . Pedersen, P .B . (1977). The t r i a d model of c r o s s - c u l t u r a l counselor t r a i n i n g . Personnel and Guidance Journal, October, 94-100. Pederson, P .B . (1976). The f i e l d of i n t e r c u l t u r a l counsel ing. In P. Pedersen, W.J . Lonner and V . G . Draguns (eds . ) , Counseling across cultures (pp. 17-41). Honolulu: Univers i ty Press of Hawaii . Pedersen, P . B . , H o l w i l l , C . F . , & Shapiro, J . (1978). A c r o s s - c u l t u r a l t r a i n i n g procedure for c lasses in counselor education. Counselor Education and Supervision, 77(3), 233-237. P ie tro fesa , J . , Splete , H . H . , Hoffman, A . , & Pinto , D.V. (1978). Counselling: theory, research and practice. Chicago: Rand McNally College Publ ishing Co. Pomales, J . , C l a i b o r n , C D . , La fromboise, T . D . (1986). Ef fects of black students' r a c i a l ident i ty on perceptions of white counselors varying in c u l t u r a l s e n s i t i v i t y . Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33(1), 57-61. Porter , J . (1973). The vertical mosaic. Toronto: Univers i ty of Toronto Press . Prothro, E . T . & K e e l i n , J . D . (1969). Stereotypes and semantic space. In J . G . Snider and C E . Osgood (eds . ) , Semantic differential technique. Chicago: Aldine Publ ishing Co. R a i s l e r , I . (1976). D i f f e r e n t i a l response to the same message de l ivered by native and foreign speakers. Foreign Language Annals, 9(3), 256-259. Rey, A. (1977). Accent and employabi l i ty: language a t t i t u d e s . Language Sciences, 47, 7-12. Rohner. (1984). Conception of c u l t u r e . Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 15(2), 111-139. Roscoe, J . T . (1975). Fundamental research statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: H o l t , Rinehart & Winston, Inc. 129 Rungta, S. (1987). Counselling clients with foreign accents: a comparison of counsellor anxiety with the accented and non-accented client. Unpublished Master's thes i s , The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver. Ryan, E . B . (1973). Subjective reactions toward accented speech in language a t t i t u d e s . In R.W. Shuy and R.W. Fasold (eds . ) , Language attitudes: current trends and prospects. Washington, D . C : Georgetown Univers i ty Press. Ryan, E . B . , Carranza, M . A . , & Moff ie , R.W. (1977). Reactions towards varying degrees of accentedness in the speech of Spanish-Engl ish b i l i n g u a l s . Language & Speech, 20{\), 267-273. St . C l a i r , R .N. & G i l e s , H. ( eds . ) . (1980). The social and psychological contexts of language. H i l l s i d e , N . J . : Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc iates , Publ i shers . Sap ir , E . (1927). Speech as a personal i ty t r a i t . American Journal of Sociology, 32, 892-905. SAS Ins t i tu te Inc. (1985). SAS® user's guide: statistics, version 5 edition. Cary, N . C . : SAS Ins t i tu te Inc. Schauer, A . H . , Seymour, W.R. , & Geen, R . G . (1985). Ef fects of observation and evaluation on anxiety in beginning counse l lors : a s o c i a l f a c i l i t a t i o n a n a l y s i s . Journal of Counselling and Development, 63, 279-285. Scheflen, A . E . (1979). On communicational processes. In Nonverbal behavior. New York: Academic Press. Scherer, K. (1972). Judging personal i ty from voice: a c r o s s - c u l t u r a l approach to an o ld issue in interpersonal percept ion. Journal of Personality, 40, 191-210. Schwartz, J . , Gibbs, L . , D i e t z , K. , K e l l y , T . , Himmelsbach, E . , & Bock, P. (1985). L e t ' s ta lk i t over: foreign T A ' s , U .S . students f ight cul ture shock. Newsweek on Campus, December, 43-44. Sebastian, R . J . , Ryan, E . B . , Keogh, T . F . , & Schmidt, A . C (1980). The effects of negative a f fec t arousal on react ions to speakers. In H. G i l e s , W.P. Robinson, and P.M. Smith (eds . ) , Language: social psychological perspectives. Oxford: Pergamon Press. 130 S e l i g e r , H.W., Krashen, S . D . , & Ladefoged, P. (1975). Maturational constra ints in the a c q u i s i t i o n of second language accent. Language Sciences, 36, 20-22. Shaw, M . E . & Wright, J . M . (1967). Scales measurement of Attitudes. San McGraw-Hill Book Co. for the Franc i sco: Sher i f , M. & Sher i f , C W . (1970). At t i tude as the i n d i v i d u a l ' s own categories: the s o c i a l judgement-involvement approach to at t i tude and at t i tude change. In G. Summers (ed . ) , Attitude measurement. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co. Shuy, R. & Fasold , R. (eds . ) . (1973). Language attitudes: current trends and prospects. Washington, D . C : Georgetown Univers i ty Press . Shuy, R. & Wil l iams, F . selected Engl i sh R. Fasold (eds.) and prospects. Univers i ty Press (1973). Stereotyped a t t i tudes of d i a l e c t committee. In R. Shuy and , Language attitudes: current trends Washington, D . C : Georgetown Snider, J . G . (1969). P r o f i l e s of sme stereotypes held by ninth-grade p u p i l s . In J . G . Snider and C E . Osgood (eds . ) , Semantic differential technique. Chicago: Aldine Publ ishing Co. Spatz, C. & Johnson, J . O . of distributions. Publ i sh ing . (1984). Basic statistics: tales Monterey, C a l i f o r n i a : Brooks-Cole Sp iro , M. (1972). Cognition in cu l ture -and-persona l i ty . In J . P . Spradley (ed . ) , Culture and cognition: rules, maps, plans. San Francisco: Chandler Publ i sh ing . S t i f f , J . B . (1986). Cognit ive processing of persuasive message cues: a meta-analytic review of the effects of supporting information on a t t i t u d e s . Communication Monographs, 53(1), 75-89. Street , R . L . J r . (1985). Part ic ipant-observer di f ferences in speech evaluat ion . Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 4(2), 125-130. Street , R . L . J r . & Hopper, R. (1982). A model of speech s ty le evaluat ion. In E . B . Ryan and H. G i l e s (eds . ) , Attitudes toward language variation: social and applied contexts. London: Edward Arnold . 131 Strongman, K . T . & Woosley, J . (1967). Stereotyped reactions to regional accents. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 6, 164-167. Suc i , G. (1969). A comparison of semantic s tructures in American Southwest cul ture groups. In J . G . Snider & C E . Osgood (eds . ) , Semantic differential techniques. Chicago: Aldine Publ ishing Co. Sue, D.W. (1978). E l iminat ing c u l t u r a l oppression in counsel ing: toward a general theory. Journal of Counseli ng Psychol ogy, 25(5), 419-428. Sue, D.W. (1981a). Counseling the culturally different: theory and practice. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Sue, D.W. (1981b). Cross-cultural counseling. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Sue, D.W. & Sue, D. (1977) B a r r i e r s to e f fec t ive c r o s s - c u l t u r a l counsel ing. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 24(5), 420-429. Summers, G. (ed). (1970). Attitude measurement. Chicago: Rand McNally & Co. Sundberg, N.D. (1976). Toward research evaluating i n t e r c u l t u r a l counsel ing. In P. Pedersen, W.J . Lonner and J . G . Draguns (eds . ) , Counseling across cultures. Honolulu: Univers i ty Press of Hawaii . Sundberg, N.D. (1981). C r o s s - c u l t u r a l counseling and psychotherapy: a research overview. In A . J . Marse l la and P . B . Pedersen (eds . ) , Cross-cultural counseling and Psychotherapy. New York: Pergamon Press . T a j f e l , H. (1969). Cognit ive aspects of prejudice . Journal of Social Issues, 25(4), 79~97. Tanaka, Y. , Oyama, T . , & Osgood, C E . (1969). A c r o s s - c u l t u r a l and cross-concept study of the general i ty of semantic space. In J . G . Snider & C E . Osgood (eds . ) , Semantic differential techniques. Chicago: Aldine Publ ishing Co. Tannenbaum, P . H . (1969). I n i t i a l a t t i tude toward source and concept as factors in a t t i tude change through communication. In J . G . Snider & C E . Osgood (eds . ) , Semant i c differential techniques. Chicago: Aldine Publ ishing Co. 132 Tay lor , D.M. (1980). E t h n i c i t y and language: a s o c i a l psychological perspect ive . In H. G i l e s , W.P. Robinson, & P.M. Smith (eds . ) , Language: social ps ychol ogi cal perspectives. Oxford: Pergamon Press. T e r r e l l , F . & T e r r e l l , S. (1984). Race of counselor, c l i e n t , sex, c u l t u r a l mistrust l e v e l , and premature termination from counseling among Black c l i e n t s . Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31(3), 371-375. T r i a n d i s , H . C . & Lambert, W.E. (eds . ) . (1980). Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: perspectives. Toronto: A l l y n & Bacon, Inc. Tucker, G.R. & Lambert, W.E. (1969). White and Negro l i s t e n e r s ' reactions to various American-English d i a l e c t s . Social Forces, 47, 463-468. Vontress, C . E . (1969). C u l t u r a l barr i er s in the counseling r e l a t i o n s h i p . Personnel and Guidance Journal, 48, 11-17. Vontress, C . E . (1971). Rac ia l d i f ferences : impediments to rapport . Journal of Counseling Psychology, 18(1), 7-13. Vontress, C . E . (1976). R a c i a l and ethnic barr i er s in counsel ing. In P. Pedersen, W.J . Lonner, and J.G.Draguns (eds . ) , Counseling across cultures. Honolulu: Univers i ty Press of Hawaii . Wampold, B . R . , Casas, J . M . , & Atkinson, D.R. (1981). Ethnic bias in counsel ing: an information processing approach. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28(6), 498-503. Wells , J . C . (1982). Accents of English I: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge Univers i ty Press . Westwood, M . J . (1983). C r o s s - c u l t u r a l counse l l ing : some spec ia l problems and recommendations for the Canadian counse l lor . Canadian Counsellor, 17(2), 62-66. Westwood, M . J . & Borgen, B. (1986). A culturally embedded model for effective i nt e r cul t ur al communication. Manuscript submitted for p u b l i c a t i o n . Westwood, M . J . & Vargo, J.W. (1985). Counsel l ing double-minority status c l i e n t s . In M.R. Samuda and A. Wolfgang (eds . ) , Intercultural counseling and assessment: global perspectives. New York: C . J . Hogrefe. 1 33 Wiggins, N. & F i shbe in , M. (1969). Dimensions of semantic space: a problem of ind iv idua l d i f f erences . In J . G . Snider and C E . Osgood (eds . ) , Semantic differential technique. Chicago: Aldine Publ i shing Co. Wil l iams, F . (1973). Some research notes on d ia l ec t a t t i tudes and stereotypes. In R.N. Shuy and R.W. Fasold (eds . ) , Language attitudes: current trends and prospects. Washington, D . C : Georgetown Univers i ty Press . Wi l l iams , F . (1974). The i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c a t t i t u d e s . International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 3, 21-31. Wi l l iams , F . (1976). of teachers Publ i sh ing . Expi or ations Rowley, of linguistic attitudes Mass.: Newbury House Wintrob, R.M. (1976). Psychotherapy in i n t e r c u l t u r a l perspect ive: some personal r e f l e c t i o n s . In P. Pedersen, W . J . Lonner and J . G . Dragons (eds . ) , Counseling across cultures. Honolulu: Univers i ty Press of Hawaii. Wolck, W. (1973). At t i tudes towards Spanish and Quechuc in b i l i n g u a l Peru. In R.W. Shuy and R.W. Fasold (eds . ) , Language attitudes: current trends and pr os peel s . Washington, D . C : Georgetown Univers i ty Press . Wrenn, C G . (1962). The c u l t u r a l l y encapsulated counselor. Harvard Educational Review, 52(4), 444-449. Young, R .A. & Marks, S . E . (1985). Under s t andi ng at t r i but i o nal processes in cr os s- cul t ur a I counselling. Manuscript submitted for p u b l i c a t i o n . Zahn, C. & Hopper, R. (1985). Measuring language a t t i tudes : the speech evaluat ion instrument. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 4(2), 113-123. APPENDIX A CONSENT FORM 135 CONSENT FORM T i t l e : Counsellor Responses to C l i e n t s in a Tra in ing S i t u a t i o n . Researcher: Linda Alexander I v o l u n t a r i l y agree to p a r t i c i p a t e in th i s research project which w i l l take 35 minutes of my time. I understand that the aim of th i s study is to invest igate counse l lors ' t y p i c a l responses to c l i e n t s in a t r a i n i n g s i t u a t i o n . I am aware that the study is being conducted to p a r t i a l l y f u l f i l l the requirements for a Master's Degree at the Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia. I further understand they my involvement in th i s project requires that I complete a form requesting cer ta in demographic information, as well as answering questions which deal with the experience. In addi t ion I am aware that my responses to the simulated c l i e n t interview w i l l be audiotaped. I have been assured that the information c o l l e c t e d from th i s study w i l l remain condf ident ia l and not be used for evaluat ive purposes. I understand that on completion of the pro jec t , the audiotape w i l l be destroyed and the remaining data remain anonymous. I am aware that I may withdraw my consent and discontinue my p a r t i c i p a t i o n at any time without inf luencing my c lass standing in any way. I am aware that the ins tructors of the course at no time, present or future , w i l l be made aware of my performance. I have read the contents of th i s Consent Form and understand my p a r t i c i p a t i o n in th i s p r o j e c t . For my part I agree to uphold the ethic of c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y and not discuss th i s project u n t i l I have been advised i t has been completed. I acknowledge receipt of th i s Consent Form. Date Signature 1 36 APPENDIX B PREPARED SCRIPT THE CLIENT'S PRESENTATION OF HIS PROBLEM PREPARED SCRIPT Segment 1 I don't know i f you can help me. A f r i e n d of mine s a i d you c o u l d ... I don't know. I f e e l awkward and s i l l y coming here. But I f e l t t h a t I had to do something before i t ' s too l a t e . Things aren't so great r i g h t now. My l i f e , my f a m i l y , e v e r y t h i n g seems to be f a l l i n g apart ... I f e e l so h e l p l e s s ... I don't seem to be a b l e to do anything to stop i t from happening. I'm not a drunk. I don't do any drugs. I t ' s j u s t t h a t I can't seem to do anything r i g h t anymore. Ever s i n c e I l o s t my job. Segment 2 ... Well ... I've been out of work now f o r almost two years ... 22 months tomorrow. I've looked everywhere f o r a job but f o r some reason nobody wants to h i r e me. I t r y to t h i n k of why I can't get work. I t ' s almost as though t h e r e ' s someone ... someone's making sure I don't get a job. I am not s t u p i d . I've done a l l kinds of work. I've worked at a l l kinds of j o b s . I've got experience i n almost e v e r y t h i n g . Why ... i s what I don't understand ... Why i s t h i s happening to me? Segment 3 ... My f r i e n d t o l d me that I looked depressed ... that I shouldn't do anything f o o l i s h . Of course I am depressed ... who wouldn't be ... but s u i c i d e has never entered my mind. I c o u l d never do anything l i k e t h a t . I have never been a coward and I am determined to see t h i s t h i n g r i g h t through to the end. Besides my f a m i l y needs me, I c o u l d never desert them.... 1 38 Segment 4 Things used to be so good f o r us. The wife and I we used to plan f o r the f u t u r e . We scrimped ... put money i n t o savings p l a n s . The c h i l d r e n ' s c o l l e g e money has been spent ... I f e l t l i k e a t h i e f t a k i n g i t . But what c o u l d I do, the b i l l s had to be p a i d . I d i d n ' t want to l o s e the house. Segment 5 We s t a r t e d s e l l i n g t h i n g s ... s t a r t e d out with a garage s a l e s e l l i n g items we d i d n ' t want ... j u s t s e l l i n g items that we had to s e l l . I t ' s funny though ... I had a ... I used to have a stamp c o l l e c t i o n that I thought was worth thousands ... When I took i t in to s e l l i t the man laughed at me and s a i d f i f t y d o l l a r s tops. Can you beat that? Segment 6 My f a m i l y ' s very s u p p o r t i v e of me but there are some things that they j u s t don't understand. Number one i s money. They a l l know how to spend i t ... no that i s n ' t f a i r ... i t i s n ' t t r u e . I t ' s me. I get so f r u s t r a t e d I want to blame someone ... I should have seen i t coming, I have no one to blame but my s e l f . I get so angry. .. 139 Segment 7 I thought that being out of work was j u s t a temporary t h i n g so I borrowed a couple of d o l l a r s here and th e r e . Now I don't have the courage to face them u n t i l I can pay them back. I owe everybody i t seems. I t r i e d to work some of i t o f f . But i t seems everybody's h u r t i n g they j u s t want the money. I won't take c h a r i t y , not as long as I can work t h a t ' s why ... t h a t ' s why I am here. I need h e l p ... I need to get c o n t r o l of myself. Segment 8 I am so b i t t e r I'm angry at my pre v i o u s employer f o r l e t t i n g me go and I'm mad at the government f o r caus i n g me to lo s e my job, and most of a l l I'm mad at myself f o r a l l o w i n g t h i s t h i n g to happen to me. Segment 9 One good t h i n g that has come out of a l l of t h i s i s that we are much c l o s e r f a m i l y . I t was decided that h i d i n g the problems from the kids wasn't a good id e a . The other day the k i d s and I walked down to the freeway with some garbage bags. . We c o l l e c t e d beer b o t t l e s and pop b o t t l e s and whatever e l s e we co u l d f i n d t h a t would b r i n g i n some money. My youngest found a stone ginger beer b o t t l e . My wife got so e x c i t e d about i t , she c o l l e c t s b o t t l e s . I t was n i c e to see her laughing f o r a change. 1 40 Segment 10 I t ' s d i f f i c u l t to think p o s i t i v e a f t e r so many disappointments. In f a c t , I have the f e e l i n g that I am doing something that d e l i b e r a t e l y prevents me from g e t t i n g the job. I f there was something to h e l p me r e l a x . I don't mean drugs, I j u s t want to f e e l good about myself. Segment 11 The other day I found that somebody had l e f t a box of g r o c e r i e s on the porch. I suppose the neighbours meant w e l l . I t was bound to get around. But i t made me f e e l t e r r i b l e . I a p p r e c i a t e t h e i r g e n e r o s i t y but i t made me f e e l angry to know that they know that I am not ab l e to provide f o r my f a m i l y . Segment 12 I t wasn't very long ago that I f e l t that those people on w e l f a r e were j u s t t a k i n g advantage of the system. I was so wrong. I can imagine how hard i t must have been f o r them when I don't even have the courage t o go myself. Segment 13 My youngest son ref u s e d to go to school today. I t seems a l l of h i s f r i e n d s have Chex. That i s some kind of a running shoe that c o s t s e i g h t y d o l l a r s a p a i r . None of the kids go t o p a r t i e s , they can't a f f o r d a show. They f i g h t among themselves, s t a r t screaming at each other and that i n tu r n s t a r t s a chain r e a c t i o n . P r e t t y soon the wife and I get i n there screaming too. We have a very tough time and I am not p a i n t i n g the p i c t u r e with a black brush ... i t r e a l l y i s t h i s desperate.... 141 Segment 14 Yet s t i l l out of our d i f f i c u l t y has come a great r a l l y i n g and cr a z y kind of humour that has at times made the most impossible ... bearable. Without t h i s c r a z y , happy f a m i l y of mine I don't t h i n k I c o u l d have made i t t h i s f a r . APPENDIX C SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL ATTITUDE SCALE 1 4 3 EVALUATION OF CLIENT CHARACTERISTICS DIRECTIONS I n r e s p o n s e t o t h e c l i e n t y o u h a v e j u s t s e e n , mark e a c h p a i r o f o p p o s i t e a d j e c t i v e s a s a s e p a r a t e a n d i n d e p e n d e n t j u d g m e n t , on t h e b a s i s o f what t h e y mean t o y o u . Work q u i c k l y , i t i s y o u r f i r s t a n d i m m e d i a t e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t i s most i m p o r t a n t . The f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e s show how t o r a t e t h e pa i r s: n e u t r a l o r v e r y q u i t e o n l y n o t a t o n l y q u i t e v e r y c l o s e l y c l o s e l y s l i g h t l y a l l s l i g h t l y c l o s e l y c l o s e l y r e l a t e d r e l a t e d r e l a t e d r e l a t e d r e l a t e d r e l a t e d r e l a t e d 1. I f y o u f e e l t h a t t h e c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c i s v e r y  c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o one end o f t h e s c a l e , y o u s h o u l d p l a c e y o u r c h e c k a s f o l l o w s : X f a i r : : : : : : u n f a i r OR X f a i r : : : : : : u n f a i r 2. I f y o u f e e l t h a t t h e c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c i s q u i t e  c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o one end o r t h e o t h e r o f t h e s c a l e ( b u t n o t e x t r e m e l y ) , y o u s h o u l d p l a c e y o u r c h e c k a s f o l l o w s : X f a i r : : : : : : u n f a i r OR X f a i r : : : : : : u n f a i r 3 . I f t h e c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c seems o n l y s l i g h t l y r e l a t e d t o one s i d e a s o p p o s e d t o t h e o t h e r s i d e ( b u t I s n o t r e a l l y n e u t r a l ) , t h e n y o u s h o u l d c h e c k a s f o l l o w s : X f a i r : : : : : : u n f a i r OR X f a i r : : : : : : u n f a i r 4. I f y o u c o n s i d e r t h e c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c t o be n e u t r a l on t h e s c a l e , e q u a l l y a s s o c i a t e d , o r i f t h e s c a l e i s c o m p l e t e l y i r r e l e v a n t , t h e n y o u s h o u l d p l a c e y o u r c h e c k i n t h e m i d d l e : X f a i r : : : : .: : u n f a i r Now, p l e a s e r a t e e a c h p a i r o f o p p o s i t e a d j e c t i v e s a s t h e y b e s t d e s c r i b e , i n y o u r own o p i n i o n , t h e c l i e n t y o u h a v e j u s t s e e n . Once a g a i n , p l e a s e work q u i c k l y , i t i s y o u r f i r s t a n d i m m e d i a t e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t i s most i m p o r t a n t . CLIEHT CHARACTERISTICS 144 v e r y q u i t e o n l y n e u t r a l or on l y q u i t e v ery c l o s e l y c l o s e l y s l i g n t l y not i t i l l a l l g n t l y c l o s e l y c l o s e l y r e l a t e d r e l a t e d r e l a t e d r e l a t e d r e l a t e d r e l a t e d r e l a t e d e x p r e s s i v e f o l l o w e r t r u s t w o r t h y p e s s i m i s t i c competent l e t h a r g i c u n i n t e l l i g e n t i n v o l v e d weak kin d emotional dominant feminine e g o t i s t i c g r a c e f u l i n s e n s i t i v e i n d u s t r i o u s u n f r i e n d l y happy f r a g i l e s h a l l o w humourous u n s o c i a b l e a c t i v e a d a p t i v e •-inexpressive leader u n f a i t h f u l o p t i m i s t i c incompetent e n e r g e t i c i n t e l l i g e n t withdrawn s t r o n g c r u e l c o n t r o l l e d submissive masculine a l t r u i s t i c awkward s e n s i t i v e l a z y f r i e n d l y sad tough deep s e r i o u s s o c i a b l e p a s s i v e r i g i d 145 vary quit* only neutral or only cloeely cloaely silently not at all illgncly related related relacad related related vague : : j-dishonest : : s u c c e s s f u l : : motivated : : s i n c e r e : : de f e n s i v e : : g r a t e f u l : : in c a p a b l e : : unsure : : c l e a n : : . s e l f i s h : : p o l i t e : : vul g a r : i n t e r e s t i n g : : uneducated : : coo p e r a t i v e : : ignoran t : : : c a r e f u l : : ; d i s p l e a s i n g : : ; calm : : slow : comfortable : : u n s k i l l e d : : pe a c e f u l : : s e l f - a l i k e : : quite very cloeely cloaaly relaced relacad '•. p r e c i s e — •'. honest — : u n s u c c e s s f u l , unmotivated ' i n s i n c e r e '• a g g r e s s i v e -•' u n g r a t e f u l * capable •'—- c o n f i d e n t :. d i r t y •'. u n s e l f i s h : rude — •'. r e f i n e d '• b o r i n g — educated —:- uncooperative •'- knowledgeable • slop p y - : p l e a s i n g - : e x c i t a b l e .; q u i c k - : — - uncomfortable '• s k i l l e d -: h o s t i l e : s e l f - u n a l i k e APPENDIX D INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE 147 INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE 1. O t h e r t h a n t h e c l i e n t ' s p r e s e n t i n g p r o b l e m , what o t h e r c l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s s t o o d o u t f o r y o u t h e m o s t ? 2. D i d y o u i d e n t i f y w i t h t h i s c l i e n t i n any way? P l e a s e e x p l a i n . 3. How m o t i v a t e d do y o u t h i n k t h i s c l i e n t w i l l be i n t r y i n g t o h e l p h i m s e l f ? 4. Would y o u e n j o y w o r k i n g w i t h t h i s c l i e n t ? n o t a t a l l somewhat m o d e r a t e l y c o n s i d e r a b l y a g r e a t d e a l 5. I f y o u were g i v e n a c h o i c e , w o u l d y o u c o n t i n u e t o s e e t h i s c l i e n t i n c o u n s e l l i n g o r w o u l d y o u r e f e r t o a n o t h e r c o u n s e l l o r ? 6. Do y o u h a v e any o t h e r comments r e g a r d i n g t h i s p a r t i c u l a r c o u n s e l l i n g e x p e r i e n c e ? APPENDIX E DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 149 DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION Age: S e x : M F P l a c e o f B i r t h : B i r t h p l a c e o f P a r e n t s : Mother Father * I f other than Canada, age when s/he emigrated U p b r i n g i n g : Rural Urban C u l t u r a l / E t h n i c a f f i l i a t i o n A r e a o f C o n c e n t r a t i o n ( C N P S ) : Family Adolescent C o l l e g e & Adult Elementary Women Other C l i n i c a l E x p e r i e n c e Number of Years: S e t t i n g & C l i e n t P o p u l a t i o n : 

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.831.1-0054231/manifest

Comment

Related Items