UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Personality and value characteristics of volunteers and professionals at three different social service… Merritt, Nancy Gail 1977

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1977_A8 M44.pdf [ 3.66MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094329.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094329-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094329-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094329-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094329-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094329-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094329-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094329-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094329.ris

Full Text

PERSONALITY AND VALUE CHARACTERISTICS OF VOLUNTEERS AND PROFESSIONALS AT THREE DIFFERENT SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES by NANCY GAIL MERRITT B.Sc., Dalhousie University, 1974 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Psychology) We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard The Uni v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia June 1977 0 Nancy G a i l M e r r i t t , 1977. In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co lumb ia , I ag ree that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s tudy . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . It i s u n d e r s t o o d that c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i thout my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department o f The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co lumbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date WS6s ATI i ABSTRACT The Personality Research Form-E (Jackson, 1974), the Value Survey (Rokeach, 1967) and the Personal Description Questionnaire (Wiggins, 1976) were administered to 79 volunteers and 32 professionals from three social service agencies., These agencies included Alternatives Drug Abuse Program, a program for the rehabilitation of ex-drug addicts, the Crisis Centre which operated telephone hotlines for individuals experiencing emotional distress, and the St. John Ambulance Brigade which provided emergency help to physical c r i s i s situations. These agencies differed in terms of their service roles which were described as "emotional noncrisis", "emotional c r i s i s " and "physical c r i s i s " , respectively. A comparison of the three volunteer groups revealed a significant relationship between agency role and the personality, characteristics of i t s volunteers. The Alternatives volunteers held self-enhancement values more highly than the St. John group who, in turn, regarded traditional values as more important. The Alternatives group also scored significantly higher on the dimensions of Autonomy, Sentience, and Understanding and lower on Nurturance and Succorance than the St. John group. On a l l of the dependent measures the scores of the Crisis Centre or "emotional c r i s i s " group f e l l between those of the other two groups — the "emotional noncrisis" and the "physical c r i s i s " groups. Comparing a l l volunteers with a l l professionals revealed differences related to their respective status levels. The differences, wherein i i the professionals were found to be significantly more dominant, extro-verted, exhibitionistic and achievement-oriented, were discussed in terms of the different levels of responsibility assumed by the two groups. A f i n a l comparison involved determining how closely the volunteers and professionals from the same agency resembled each other. The results of this investigation revealed that the volunteers were closer, in terms of values and personality, to professionals at their own agencies than to volunteers from other agencies. The implications of these findings towards the development of effective selection, place-ment and evaluation techniques for volunteers at different agencies were discussed. TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract L i s t of Tables L i s t of Figures Acknowledgements Introduction Method Subjects Test Materials Procedure Results Discussion and Conclusion . Reference Notes References LIST OF TABLES xv Page Table 1. Personality Realms (i.e., Dimensions) Identified by Reddy and Smith (1972) 12 Table 2. The 22 PRF Dimensions Classified According to Higher-Order Factors 25 Table 3. Rokeach's Value Survey - Form D 30 Table 4. Higher-Order Factors Associated with the Items of Rokeach's Value Survey 36 Table 5. A Breakdown of Subjects According to Agency and Status 45 Table 6. A Comparison of the Volunteer Groups on Selected Demographic Variables 46 Table 7. Mean Educational Levels of the Volunteer Groups 47 Table 8. A Breakdown on Marital Status of the Volunteer Groups 48 Table 9. Mean Service Lengths of Participant Groups 49 Table 10. A Comparison of Volunteers and Professionals on Selected Demographic Variables 50 Table 11. Variable Groupings for Manovas 54 Table 12. Results of Manovas Performed in the Comparison of the Volunteer Groups 55 Table 13. Significant Scheffe Tests in the Comparison of the Volunteer Groups 56 Table 14. Hotelling T 2 Tests Performed in the Comparison of the Volunteers and Professionals 58 Table 15. Significant _t-Tests i n the Comparison of Volunteers and Professionals 59 Table 16. Results of Manovas Performed i n the Comparison of the Six Groups 60 LIST OF TABLES (continued) Page Table 17. S i g n i f i c a n t Scheffe Tests i n the Comparison of the Six Groups 61 Table 18. Results of Two-Way (Agency x Status) Anovas i n the Comparison of the Six Groups 63 Table 19. Correlations of S i g n i f i c a n t Demographic Variables with S i g n i f i c a n t Dependent Variables for the Volunteer Sample 65 Table 20. The Relationship of M a r i t a l Status to PRF Autonomy Scale Score for the Volunteer Sample 66 v i LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. The Dimensions of Leary's (1957) Inter-personal Circumplex and Wiggins' (1976) Interpersonal Circumplex 40 v i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would l i k e to express my sincere appreciation to the members of my th e s i s committee: Dr. Park Davidson (Advisor), Dr. Lynn Alden and Dr. Jerry Wiggins. The suggestions, constructive c r i t i c i s m and encouragement each of them gave me during t h i s period were invaluable — each discussion with a committee member was t r u l y stimulating, i n -creasing my i n t e r e s t i n psychological research, i n general, and i n t h i s t o p i c , i n p a r t i c u l a r . I am also indebted to my loving husband, David Michel, who has warmly supported me as I have worked on my thesis during the f i r s t two months of our marriage. 1 INTRODUCTION The Canadian Council on S o c i a l Development recently conducted a study e n t i t l e d "Voluntary Support for Nongovernmental S o c i a l Service Agencies" (Carter, 1975). The f i r s t part of the study involved a survey of 1119 persons selected randomly from within the major economic regions of Canada which were represented proportionately according to population s i z e . A survey of the attitudes of 172 s o c i a l service agencies, with respect to t h e i r u t i l i z a t i o n of volunteers, followed. Results of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n revealed that, at the time of the study (1974-5), approximately 25% of the Canadian population over 14 years of age were currently involved i n voluntary work i n the s o c i a l service realm i n conjunction with s o c i a l service agencies. An a d d i t i o n a l 25% of the n a t i o n a l sample were involved i n other kinds of volunteer ac-t i v i t y i ncluding f i n a n c i a l support to nongovernmental agencies, " g i f t s of s e l f " (e.g., blood donations), c i v i c and p o l i t i c a l endeavours, and management and board work. Moreover, 27.5% of these i n d i v i d u a l s not involved i n a n y t y p e of volunteer .behaviour reported that they would become involved i n s o c i a l service volunteer work i f asked. This "non-involved" group indicated that "lack of awareness" of need and/or service opportunities was t h e i r primary reason for not being involved. Further study of the s o c i a l service volunteers revealed that t h i s segment included s u b s t a n t i a l proportions of both male and female volunteers (44.5% and 55.5%, respectively), s i g n i f i c a n t percentage-wise representation by a l l age groups from 14 years to retirement age, and people representing a cross section of economic and educational back-2 grounds. Information derived from the agencies showed that the volun-teers i n d i v i d u a l l y contributed an average of 2-5 hours/week i n one or more of a wide range of service a c t i v i t i e s , i n most cases composed a larger corps than the paid s t a f f at the agencies, and were described by most agencies as i n t e g r a l to t h e i r functioning. A wealth of addi-t i o n a l information was obtained as a r e s u l t of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n , the report of which included the conclusion that the volunteer and p o t e n t i a l -volunteer sectors constituted an "untapped p o t e n t i a l " i n Canadian society. This report included suggestions for governmental involvement i n supporting and organizing t h i s valuable human resource along with a commendation to the government for i t s reawakened i n t e r e s t i n "the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of c i t i z e n s to be involved i n solving t h e i r own s o c i a l problems at a va r i e t y of l e v e l s . " This d e t a i l e d study by the Canadian government i s one of many conducted i n North America within the l a s t 15 years, a period charac-t e r i z e d by increased voluntary a c t i v i t y on the part of a widening segment of society as well as professional recognition that volunteers may be e f f e c t i v e i n a v a r i e t y of diverse and n o n t r a d i t i o n a l r o l e s . Many of these studies have involved examining the per s o n a l i t y charac-t e r i s t i c s of volunteers. A comprehensive d e s c r i p t i o n of the persona-l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , values and attitudes of volunteers has been the int e n t i o n of some researchers ( c f . , Adler & Graubert, 1975; Hersch, Kulik & Scheibe, 1969; Horn, 1973; Knapp & Holzberg, 1964). Interest i n the motivation of volunteers, r e a l i z i n g that the area of voluntary s o c i a l service provides an opportunity f o r the study of a l t r u i s t i c behaviour, has characterized other studies ( c f . , Gelineau & Kantor, 3 1964; Howarth, 1976; Smith & Nelson, 1975). Attempts at devising e f f e c t i v e s e l e c t i o n and screening procedures for volunteers f o r various voluntary p o s i t i o n s have motivated other studies i n t h i s area (cf., Jamison & Johnson, 1975) as have e f f o r t s to develop su i t a b l e t r a i n i n g programmes for volunteers ( c f . , Gray, Nida & Coonfield, 1976). Some researchers have studied the re l a t i o n s h i p s of c e r t a i n personality variables of volunteers to degree of successfulness i n various p o s i -tions ( c f . , Ansel, 1972; Mullins, 1973; Tapp, Slaikeu & Tulk i n , 1974). The expression of c e r t a i n personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s under d i f f e r e n t working conditions (e.g., d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of supervision) has also been assessed ( c f . , Karlsruher, 1976). Investigators have assessed personality changes r e s u l t i n g from volunteer t r a i n i n g (cf., Doyle, Foreman & Wales, 1977; Sakowitz & Hirschman, 1975) and also personality changes associated with long-term volunteer involvement ( c f . , Andrews, Wormith, Kennedy & Daigle-Zinn, 1977; Holzberg & Gewirtz, 1963; Holzberg, Gewirtz & Ebner, 1964). A v a r i e t y of techniques have been u t i l i z e d i n the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the personality and value c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of volunteers. Some studies have used well-known personality t e s t s comprised of a number of d i f f e r e n t dimensions such as the C a l i f o r n i a Personality Inventory (cf., Hersch et a l . , 1969) or C a t t e l l ' s 16 Personality Factor Scale (cf., Smith & Nelson, 1975). Structured t e s t s designed to measure only one dimension such as the Marlowe-Crowne S o c i a l D e s i r a b i l i t y Scale have also been included i n some ba t t e r i e s ( c f . , Hersch et a l . , 1969). Gelineau and Kantor (1964), among others, have u t i l i z e d p r o j e c t i v e techniques i n describing the p e r s o n a l i t i e s of volunteers. In assessing 4 the extent of f a c i l i t a t i v e q u a l i t i e s such as warmth, genuineness, and empathy expressed by volunteers working on telephone c r i s i s l i n e s , Gray et a l . , (1976) employed t h e i r Empathic L i s t e n i n g Test, a multiple choice test completed by the testee upon hearing segments of taped c a l l s . Other researchers of telephone c r i s i s volunteers have rated c a l l s by volunteers using the Truax and Carkhuff scales of f a c i l i t a t i v e con-d i t i o n s ( c f . , Knickerbocker, 1972; Tapp et a l . , 1974). Some i n v e s t i -gators have developed t h e i r own questionnaires of a t t i t u d e s , behaviour and other personal information ( c f . , Holzberg & Gewirtz, 1963; Holzberg et a l . , 1967; Mullins, 1973). F i n a l l y , Adler and Graubert (1975) employed a manual figure-placement task i n determining the s o c i a l distances volunteers perceived between themselves and several s o c i a l l y -relevant stimulus items. It was the i n t e n t i o n of the present study to determine which, of a wide range of values and personality v a r i a b l e s , were rel a t e d to voluntary p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n d i f f e r e n t types of s o c i a l service. Stan-dardized written tests which include several personality and value dimensions were employed. Five major studies have been performed i n the past where researchers surveyed a group of personality v a r i a b l e s by means of structured paper and p e n c i l tests i n associating p a r t i c u -l a r factors with volunteer a c t i v i t y . Knapp and Holzberg (196 4) studied 85 male college students who v i s i t e d chronic mental patients on a weekly basis, comparing t h e i r scores on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS), Allport-Vernon-Lindzey Study of Values (AVLS), Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) and the Terman 5 Concept Mastery Test (TCMT) to those of a group of nonvolunteer stu-dents selected randomly from the same classes from which the volun-teers came. No differences between the groups were found on the MMPI nor on the TCMT or SAT, both of which assess i n t e l l e c t u a l a b i l i t y . On the EPPS the volunteers scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on Need In t r a -ception and s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower on Need Change. On the AVLS volunteers ranked economic values s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower and r e l i g i o u s and s o c i a l l y -oriented values s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than nonvolunteers. The authors concluded that t h e i r findings refuted any theory of unstable or morbid personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s motivating volunteer p a r t i c i p a t i o n with mental patients but rather indicated that the volunteers were, ... more i d e a l i s t i c i n temper, more capable of generosity, l e s s concerned with personal gain, and more responsive to r e l i g i o u s values than the non-volunteers, (p. 85) Hersch et a l . (1969) compared male and female student volunteers with nonvolunteers s i m i l a r with respect to several important demographic variables including age, expected year of graduation, family income and r e l i g i o u s o r i e n t a t i o n etc. These volunteers worked f u l l - t i m e , over the course of a summer, with chronic mental patients. Research i n s t r u -ments included the C a l i f o r n i a Personality Inventory (CPI), the Ad-j e c t i v e Check L i s t (ACL), the Internal-External Scale (I-E Scale), the Marlowe- Crowne S o c i a l D e s i r a b i l i t y Scale (MC-SDS), the Strong Vocational Interest Blank (SVIB) and a biographical questionnaire designed to e l i c i t i n t e r e s t s and a t t i t u d e s . The findings revealed that although some differences between volunteers and nonvolunteers were present for both male and female subjects, other volunteer-non-6 volunteer differences were true for only one sex. For example, on the CPI, male volunteers scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower than c o n t r o l males on scales of S o c i a b i l i t y and Self-Acceptance and s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on the Femininity scale. These differences did not e x i s t for female volunteers. Only female volunteers scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on scales of I n t e l l e c t u a l E f f i c i e n c y , Psychological-Mindedness and Tolerance. Both male and female volunteers were higher on these dimensions: Achievement v i a Independence, F l e x i b i l i t y , Good Impression and S e l f -Control. On the ACL male volunteers surpassed nonvolunteers on Abasement while female volunteers scored higher than female c o n t r o l subjects on Self-Control and Achievement and lower on Heterosexuality and Succorance. No differencesbetween volunteers and nonvolunteers were found on the I-E Scale nor on the MC-SDS. Vocational i n t e r e s t s of both male and female volunteers revealed a greater propensity t o -wards careers i n the independent professions, i n s o c i a l service and i n areas r e l y i n g upon l i t e r a l or a r t i s t i c s k i l l s . Volunteers were s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s interested i n careers i n business, entrepreneurial and nonprofessional areas. On the biographical questionnaire volun-teers were found to be more interested i n mental health f i e l d s and to be more l i k e l y to be majoring i n psychology and re l a t e d f i e l d s than nonvolunteers. In addition, volunteers were more l i k e l y to have been involved i n other types of volunteer a c t i v i t y including c o l l e g e - r e l a t e d e x t r a c u r r i c u l a r a c t i v i t i e s . At the end of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n the authors concluded that t h e i r volunteer group tended to be, "... mature and c o n t r o l l e d , oriented toward independent achievement, and s e n s i t i v e to people and human problems." 7 Horn (1973) compared three matched groups of persons who d i f f e r e d with respect to t h e i r involvement i n voluntary s o c i a l service. The groups included a "high r i s k " group comprised of volunteers who dealt with persons experiencing emotional or s i t u a t i o n a l stress, a "low r i s k " group defined as including volunteers working with i n d i v i d u a l s who were emotionally stable, and a nonvolunteer c o n t r o l group. Horn u t i l i z e d the Tennessee Self Concept Scale (TSCS) as a measure of general personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , the Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation-Behavior (FIRO-B), and h i s own concept domain questionnaire designed to e l i c i t value and motivational responses. Horn discovered that the three groups could not be d i f f e r e n t i a t e d i n terms of self-concept or psychopathological c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Other r e s u l t s revealed that the volunteers displayed l e s s v a r i a b i l i t y and c o n f l i c t i n t h e i r p e r s o n a l i t i e s than nonvolunteers and that they ex-pressed a greater a f f i n i t y f o r close interpersonal r e l a t i o n s and held community-centered values more highly. The "high r i s k " volunteers d i f f e r e d from the "low r i s k " volunteers i n possessing more s e l f - a c t u -a l i z i n g values and a greater degree of personality i n t e g r a t i o n . Smith and Nelson (1975) compared Big Brother volunteers with non-volunteers on C a t t e l l ' s 16 Personality Factor Scale (16 PF) i n attemp-ti n g to i d e n t i f y personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s associated with helping behaviour. In comparing the large groups (n experimental =571 and n control = 699) the volunteers were found to score s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on the Outgoing, Happy-Go-Lucky,. Venturesome and Superego d i -mensions and lower on the scales l a b e l l e d Shrewd, L i b e r a l and S e l f -S u f f i c i e n t . Further analysis involved d i v i d i n g the subjects by age 8 into groups composed of people older than or equal to 41 years of age, or under 40 years of age. The investigators subsequently discovered that superego strength, venturesomeness and shrewdness were related to volunteering for subjects in the "41 or older" age group only, and that liberalism and volunteering were correlated only for those persons in the "under 41" age range. It was also discovered that for subjects under 41 years of age, the volunteers were significantly less imagina-tive. Smith and Nelson have l e f t their readers with a description of volunteers as, ... outgoing, warm hearted, ... easygoing ... happy-go-lucky ... enthusiastic ... socially bold ... unin-hibited ... spontaneous ... unsophisticated (and) natural ... (tending to) look for social contacts and find them rewarding ... group-dependent ... actively seeking social approval and the admiration of other people ... conservative, respecting of established ideas and ... disinterested in rigorous analytical thought. (pp. 308-309) Howarth (1976) studied 374 female volunteers representing a wide variety of organizations in the province of Alberta and compared them to norms for both female students and female adults which he had a l -ready established for his multidimensional personality scale. S i g n i f i -cant differences between the volunteer group and one or both of the normative groups were found on 4 of the 10 scales. Volunteers scored higher on the Superego scale, the Persistence scale and the Trust-versus-Suspicion scale than either normative group. In addition, they displayed less anxiety than the student normative group. Howarth cautioned his readers that the volunteer group was significantly d i f -ferent on some demographic variables from either control group. The mean age of the volunteers group was 37 years whereas those of the 9 normative adult and students groups were 27 years and 21.5 years, res-pectively. Furthermore, i t should also be noted that the student control group would l i k e l y have possessed greater homogeneity than either of the other two groups as a result of their common vocation ( a l l were students), similar educational level, and relatively confined age range. The volunteer group, on the other hand, included subjects from 21 to 60 years of age. Howarth extended his s t a t i s t i c a l analysis by dividing the volunteers into four groups according to age and then performing more comparisons. Howarth found that among volunteer groups the Anxiety dimension decreased and the Superego and Trust-versus Suspicion dimensions increased with age. Nevertheless, the differences between the student control group and a volunteer group aged 21-30 years were in the same directions as previously found when the whole volunteer group was considered. On the basis of his findings Howarth described the volunteer as, ... one who has a well-developed social conscience and concern for the welfare of others, who is rela-tively low in anxiety (neurosis) manifestations ... who is trusting and persistent. (p. 857). The individual design characteristics of the five studies described can be evaluated favourably. Four of the studies have included widely-researched test instruments and the f i f t h study (Howarth, 1976) uti l i z e d a relatively new. 10-dimensional personality test developed by the researcher himself. Some of the studies were fortunate in securing very large groups (e.g., Howarth, 1976 used 370 volunteers and Smith & Nelson, 1975, had 571 volunteers in their experimental group), thereby maximizing the probability of differentiating the experimental and 10 con t r o l groups on the scales employed. The group sizes of the other three studies (Hersch et a l . , 1969; Horn, 1973; Knapp & Holzberg, 1964), though s i g n i f i c a n t l y smaller, were also of s u f f i c i e n t magnitudes to allow r e l i a b l e s t a t i s t i c a l techniques to be employed i n t h e i r analyses. In Horn's (1973) study the co n t r o l and two experimental groups were matched on a l l important demographic v a r i a b l e s . S i m i l a r l y , both Hersch et a l . (1969) and Knapp & Holzberg (1964) investigated the s i m i l a r i t y between volunteer and nonvolunteer groups with respect to variables which could p o t e n t i a l l y be confounding, but both found no s i g n i f i c a n t differences between t h e i r experimental and co n t r o l groups on these v a r i a b l e s . Smith and Nelson (1975) did not report a comparison on demographic va r i a b l e s between t h e i r volunteer group and c o n t r o l group., the l a t t e r which consisted of a p r o b a b i l i t y sample of male residents of V i r g i n i a . F i n a l l y , Howarth (1976) had large differences i n h i s group si z e s . There was a l i m i t a t i o n i n the s t a t i s t i c a l procedure used i n each of these studies i n that the authors neglected to take advantage of a multivariate procedure for c o n t r o l l i n g experiment-wise error rate i n the event of a large number of dependent v a r i a b l e s . In each of these studies, separate fr- tests were performed for each dependent v a r i a b l e r e s u l t i n g i n high p r o b a b i l i t i e s of alpha errors contaminating t h e i r r e s u l t s . For example, i n Knapp and Holzberg's (1964) study which i n -cluded 35 dependent va r i a b l e s , the p r o b a b i l i t y of having made an alpha error i n the analysis was .83. The p r o b a b i l i t y of two alpha errors was .70. of three alpha errors was .58, and so on. In each of these studies, there was a p r o b a b i l i t y of at least .40 that one or more 11 v a r i a b l e i d e n t i f i e d as s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t between groups was t h e r e s u l t o f a s t a t i s t i c a l e r r o r . I n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y , a more a p p r o p -r i a t e sequence o f s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s w h i c h was recommended by Hummel and S l i g o (1971) was f o l l o w e d . T h i s p r o c e d u r e , e f f e c t i v e i n m a i n t a i n i n g a r e l a t i v e l y l ow experiment-wise e r r o r r a t e w i t h o u t b e i n g e x t r e m e l y c o n s e r v a t i v e , w i l l be f u r t h e r e l a b o r a t e d i n t h e R e s u l t s s e c t i o n of t h i s p aper. Reddy and S m i t h ( 1 9 7 2 ) , h a v i n g r e v i e w e d t h e l i t e r a t u r e on t h e measurement o f p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s , have i d e n t i f i e d " n i n e commonly found r e a l m s o r c l u s t e r s o f r e l a t e d k i n d s o f p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s . " The d e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e s e d i m e n s i o n s a r e found i n T a b l e 1. The r e s u l t s o f t h e f i v e s t u d i e s p r e s e n t e d above w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n terms of t h e s e d i m e n s i o n s i n an e f f o r t t o i d e n t i f y 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 w h i c h may be r e l a t e d t o b e i n g i n v o l v e d as a s o c i a l s e r v i c e v o l u n t e e r i n g e n e r a l . Reddy and S m i t h ' s f i r s t d i m e n s i o n , m e a s u r i n g " e x t r a v e r s i o n , s o c i a b i l i t y , a f f i l i a t i o n , s o c i a l l y d e s i r a b l e r e s p o n s e t e n d e n c i e s , e t c . v e r s u s i n t r o v e r s i o n , d i s t r u s t , i n t e r p e r s o n a l c y n i c i s m , e t c . " i s one f r e q u e n t l y r e f e r r e d t o i n d e s c r i p t i o n s o f v o l u n t e e r s . W i t h f e m a l e s u b j e c t s b o t h Howarth (1976) and H e r s c h e t a l . (1969) f o u n d no d i f -f e r e n c e between v o l u n t e e r s and n o n v o l u n t e e r s on S o c i a b i l i t y . C o n f l i c -t i n g r e s u l t s f o r male s u b j e c t s have been d i s c o v e r e d , however. A l -though S m i t h and N e l s o n (1975) f o u n d male v o l u n t e e r s t o be more Out-g o i n g t h a n n o n v o l u n t e e r s , Knapp and H o l z b e r g (1964) f o u n d no d i f f e r e n c e on A f f i l i a t i o n and H e r s c h e t a l . (1969) f o u n d male v o l u n t e e r s t o s c o r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y l o w e r t h a n t h e male c o n t r o l group on S o c i a b i l i t y . 12 Table 1 Personality Realms ( i . e . , Dimensions) I d e n t i f i e d by Reddy and Smith (1972) 1. Extraversion, s o c i a b i l i t y , f r i e n d l i n e s s , a f f i l i a t i o n , motivation, s o c i a l confidence, s o c i a l l y desirable response tendencies, etc. versus in t r o v e r s i o n , interpersonal cynicism, d i s t r u s t etc. 2. Ego-strength, adjustment, s a t i s f a c t i o n , self-confidence, optimism, p o s i t i v e self-image, impulse c o n t r o l , etc. versus anxiety neuro-tic i s m , pessimism, emotionality, etc. 3. Assertiveness, aggressiveness, dominance, personal autonomy, etc. versus submissiveness, shyness, dependence, conformity, acquies-cence, etc. 4. Achievement motivation, e f f i c a c y , competence, c r e a t i v i t y , depen-d a b i l i t y , perseverance, etc. versus fatalism, a l i e n a t i o n , power-lessness, apathy, etc. 5. F l e x i b i l i t y , a d a p t a b i l i t y , readiness to change, etc. versus r i g i d i t y , authoritarianism, need for consistency, compulsiveness. 6. Empathy and r e l a t i o n a l closeness versus lack of empathy and i n t e r -personal exclusion. 7. Morality and super-ego strength versus lack of interpersonal and group o r i e n t a t i o n and concern. 8. High energy l e v e l s , a c t i v i t y and a c t i v a t i o n rates versus low energy l e v e l s and a c t i v i t y and a c t i v a t i o n rates. 9. Planning and future time perspective versus lack of emphasis on planning and present o r i e n t a t i o n . Note. From "Personality and capacity determinants of i n d i v i d u a l par-t i c i p a t i o n i n organized voluntary ac t i o n " by R.D. Reddy and D.H. Smith. In D.H. Smith, R.D. Reddy & Baldwin (Eds.), Voluntary Action Research. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1972, p. 279. 13 Furthermore, using both male and female subjects Horn (1973) found volunteers to have a greater " a f f i n i t y f o r close r e l a t i o n s h i p s " . Thus, on the basis of these studies i t appeared that female volun-teers were about as equally sociable as t h e i r nonvolunteer counter-parts and that no conclusive statements concerning male volunteers could be made. Concerning the t h i r d dimension of "assertiveness, dominance, personal autonomy etc. versus submissiveness, dependence, conformity, etc.", Smith and Nelson (1975) have described male volunteers as having a low need f o r autonomy "or independence and, instead, tending towards conservatism and dependence upon others f o r s o c i a l approval. In contrast, other researchers found no difference between male volun-teers and nonvolunteers on Autonomy (Knapp and Holzberg, 1964) or Dominance (Hersch et a l . , 1969; Knapp and Holzberg, 1964; Smith and Nelson, 1975). Hersch et a l . (1969) did f i n d that male volunteers scored higher on Abasement; Knapp and Holzberg (1964), however, found no difference on t h i s dimension between male volunteers and nonvolun-teers. No difference between female volunteers and control subjects was found on Dominance (Hersch et a l . , 1969) nor on Ascendence (Howarth, 1976). Hersch et a l . (1969) did f i n d that female volunteers were r e l a t i v e l y more Independent and lower on Succorance than a con t r o l group. Thus, with respect to t h i s dimension, no conclusive statements concerning c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of s o c i a l service volunteers can be made. Although none of these studies included a d i r e c t measure of empathy, i n summarizing t h e i r r e s u l t s many of these researchers have referred to Reddy and Smith's s i x t h dimension — "empathy and r e l a -14 t i o n a l closeness versus lack of empathy and interpersonal exclusion". Hersch et a l . (1969) described t h e i r volunteer group as " s e n s i t i v e to people and human problems" and Knapp and Holzberg (1964) referred to "impulses of human generosity and altruism" i n volunteers. In addi-t i o n , as already mentioned, Horn (1973) has described volunteers as possessing a "greater a f f i n i t y f o r close interpersonal r e l a t i o n s h i p s " . These descriptions are consistent i n suggesting that t h i s may be a dimension on which volunteers and nonvolunteers are s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . The other researchers, Howarth (1976) and Smith and Nelson (1975), neglected to discuss t h i s factor i n t h e i r reports. A r e l a t e d dimension which appears seventh i n Reddy and Smith's c l a s s i f i c a t i o n scheme i s that of "morality and super-ego strength versus lack of interpersonal and group o r i e n t a t i o n and concern". This factor has been discussed i n a l l of these studies. In discussing h i s r e s u l t s Howarth (1976) described the volunteer as possessing a "well-developed s o c i a l conscience, and concern f o r the welfare of others". Howarth found h i s female volunteers scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on the Super-ego dimension, described as an i n d i c a t o r of "conscientiousness", than nonvolunteers. With male subjects, Smith and Nelson (1975) ob-tained i d e n t i c a l r e s u l t s f o r both volunteer and nonvolunteer p a r t i -cipants 41 years and older. In the two studies i n which values of volunteers and nonvolunteers were compared (Knapp and Holzberg, 1964; Horn, 1973) volunteers were found to hold higher s o c i a l and community-centered values. Knapp and Holzberg (1964) also found that volunteers ranked economic values s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower and r e l i g i o u s values s i g -n i f i c a n t l y higher than nonvolunteers. The "social-mindedness" of 15 volunteers is further supported by Hersch et a l : 's (1969) discovery that male and female volunteers more frequently participated in other types of extracurricular voluntary activities (e.g., participation in campus organizations and clubs, etc.) than members of the control group. Furthermore, the career interests of volunteers compared to nonvolunteers reflected a greater interest in various social service positions. This is one dimension which seems to have been described similarly by a l l of these researchers. The second dimension of "ego-strength, adjustment, optimism, positive self-image, etc. versus anxiety, neuroticism, pessimism, emotionality, etc." is one which has been included throughout the literature on the personality characteristics of volunteers. Howarth (1976) has discussed the prevalence of Maslow-type assumptions in the literature where volunteers have often been described as "mature, evolved, s e l f - f u l f i l l e d , individual" persons. For both his 'low risk' and'high risk' volunteers Horn (1973) found significantly "less con-f l i c t and va r i a b i l i t y in their personality characteristics" than the nonvolunteers. In addition the 'high risk' group displayed greater personality integration and more self-actualizing values than the other two groups. Unlike Horn (1973), Smith and Nelson (1975) found no differences on the dimensions of Ego Strength or Frustration be-tween volunteers and nonvolunteers. Nevertheless, Smith and Nelson have made the suggestion that individuals become involved in voluntary social service in an effort to " f u l f i l l ... esteem and self-actualizing needs (the highest levels of Marlow's need hierarchy)", thus inferring that volunteers are operating at a relatively high level of self-16 a c t u a l i z a t i o n . Both Knapp and Holzberg (1964) and Horn (1973) described volunteers as being r e l a t i v e l y stable i n comparison with nonvolunteers. Hersch et a l . (1969), a d d i t i o n a l l y , described volunteers as "mature" as compared to nonvolunteers. Although Howarth (1976') found volun-teers to score s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower on Anxiety, Smith and Nelson (1975) found no differences between volunteers and c o n t r o l subjects on the Apprehensive dimension. Hersch et a l . (1969) found volunteers to score s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on Self-Control than the control group. Smith and Nelson (1975) found no difference i n Self-Concept — t h i s f i n d i n g was r e p l i c a t e d i n Horn's (1973) study. Hersch et a l . (1969), on the contrary, found t h e i r volunteers to be r e l a t i v e l y low i n Self-Acceptance when compared with nonvolunteers. Thus the postulation that volunteers are more actualized and secure i n d i v i d u a l s has not been held up i n a l l of these studies, although many findings have suggested a tendency i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n . Reddy and Smith's f i f t h dimension of " f l e x i b i l i t y , a d a p t a b i l i t y , etc. versus r i g i d i t y , authoritarianism, need for consistency, compul-siveness" has not been examined too thoroughly i n the f i v e studies under discussion. Hersch et a l . (1969) included a F l e x i b i l i t y scale i n t h e i r i n v e s t i g a t i o n and found that both male and female volunteers scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than control subjects on t h i s dimension. These researchers also found that female volunteers surpassed non-volunteers on a Tolerance dimension. Smith and Nelson (1975) found male volunteers to be more Happy-Go-Lucky than nonvolunteers, suggesting les s need for r i g i d i t y , although he also found volunteers to be s i g -n i f i c a n t l y l e s s L i b e r a l , suggesting that they were les s 'ready to 17 change' than nonvolunteers. Reddy and Smith's fourth dimension i s that of "achievement moti-vation, competence, c r e a t i v i t y , perseverance, etc. versus a l i e n a t i o n , powerlessness, apathy, etc." Although Knapp and Holzberg (1964) with male subjects found no difference on Achievement, Hersch et a l . (1969) found that both male and female volunteers scored higher on an Achieve-ment v i a Independence dimension. Hersch et a l described volunteers as having a greater need for creative achievement. These researchers also found that female but not male volunteers demonstrated greater I n t e l l e c t u a l E f f i c i e n c y that control subjects. Howarth (1976), i n addition, found that female subjects were s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on Persistence than the normative groups to which they were compared. In contrast to Hersch et a l . ' s (1969) findings are those of Smith and Nelson (1975) who observed that male volunteer subjects under 41 years of age were l e s s imaginative than nonvolunteers of the same age. Smith and Nelson (1975) proceeded to describe volunteers as r e l a t i v e l y "simple" and "unsophisticated" i n d i v i d u a l s . Such c o n f l i c t i n g r e s u l t s c e r t a i n l y suggest that d i f f e r e n t kinds of s o c i a l service volunteers possess very divergent c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n t h i s area. The f i n a l two dimensions included by Reddy and Smith i n t h e i r framework have hardly been mentioned i n these studies. One dimension, "planning and future time perspective versus lack of emphasis on planning and present o r i e n t a t i o n " has not been re f e r r e d to at a l l . The other dimension, "high energy l e v e l , a c t i v i t y and a c t i v a t i o n rates versus low energy l e v e l , a c t i v i t y and a c t i v a t i o n rates" has been con-sidered only i n the study of Howarth. Although he did not compare his 18 groups on t h i s v a r i a b l e , he raised the p o s s i b i l i t y that volunteers are people who possess "a high general a c t i v i t y d r i v e " and therefore f i n d voluntary service r e i n f o r c i n g because i t expands energy, decreasing t h i s drive. It i s not s u r p r i s i n g that c o n f l i c t i n g r e s u l t s with respect to describing volunteers occurred within t h i s group of studies. One obvious contributing source to the discrepancy i n the findings was the difference i n personal demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s among the d i f f e r e n t volunteer groups employed. Some studies included only male or female volunteers; others studied both male and female volunteers. Members of the volunteer groups were far more homogeneous with respect to the important variables of age and educational background etc. i n some studies than i n others. For example, Knapp and Holzberg (1964) studied college students whereas the volunteers i n Howarth's (1976) study ranged i n age from 21 to 60 years. The c o n t r o l groups employed i n each of the f i v e studies were also very d i f f e r e n t from one another; nevertheless, except i n one case (Howarth, 1976) they appear to have been well-selected i n terms of t h e i r c a p a c i t i e s to match t h e i r respective volunteer groups on important demographic v a r i a b l e s . Thus the contribution of differences among the control groups toward the o v e r a l l differences i n r e s u l t s would have been minimal. A more powerful source contributing to these differences may have been the differences i n the instruments employed. In d i f f e r e n t instruments a p a r t i c u l a r dimension (e.g., S o c i a b i l i t y ) may have been conceptualized i n s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t ways; such differences would l i k e l y increase where r e s u l t s on seemingly synonymous dimensions (e.g., S o c i a b i l i t y , Outgoing, Extroversion, A f f i l i a t i o n ) were compared. 19 In addition, the power of one test i n assessing a p a r t i c u l a r t r a i t may not have been equalled by the power with which another t e s t could discriminate the presence or absence of that t r a i t . F i n a l l y , a large part of the v a r i a b i l i t y i n r e s u l t s between these studies was l i k e l y a t t r i b u t a b l e to the differences between the volunteer groups r e l a t e d to the d i f f e r e n t kinds of work they o r i g i n a l l y volunteered f o r and remained involved i n . Horn (1973) r e f e r r e d to such di f f e r e n c e s : ...there may be p r e r e q u i s i t e personality charac-t e r i s t i c s that influence the i n d i v i d u a l i n h i s decision to volunteer or not and which influence the volunteer i n h i s choice of assignment/, (p. 1726) In the present study both the volunteer and p r o f e s s i o n a l workers from three d i f f e r e n t agencies were studied i n terms of a wide range of personality and value c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The agencies represented i n t h i s study included A l t e r n a t i v e s Drug Abuse Program, Vancouver area C r i s i s Centres and Vancouver areaSt. John Ambulance Brigades. Although these agencies were a l l involved i n s o c i a l service r o l e s the nature of t h e i r work varied greatly. A l t e r n a t i v e s volunteers served as companions over r e l a t i v e l y long time periods to ex-drug addicts who were t r y i n g to reintegrate into society's mainstream. These volunteers were thus l a b e l l e d as working i n an "emotional n o n c r i s i s " r o l e . The C r i s i s Centre volunteers worked on telephone hot l i n e s , counseling c a l l e r s concerning t h e i r emotional problems, and were therefore described as being involved i n an "emotional c r i s i s " r o l e . F i n a l l y , the St. John volunteers provided energency help i n p h y s i c a l c r i s i s s i t u a t i o n s and were thus l a b e l l e d as "physical c r i s i s " workers. The professionals of each agency were involved i n a c t i v i t i e s s i m i l a r to those performed by t h e i r volunteers, often at a more administrative, organizational 20 or i n s t r u c t i o n a l l e v e l . The three volunteer groups were compared on an array of personality variables f o r the purpose of i d e n t i f y i n g differences e x i s t i n g among volunteers involved i n d i f f e r e n t kinds of s o c i a l service. In the past volunteer groups have been studied i n comparison with nonvolunteer.; control groups i n attempts to discover differences between those who volunteer for service and those who don't. Many of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s assigned to volunteers i n some studies have been refuted when other studies obtained contradictory r e s u l t s . The present study, where three d i f f e r e n t volunteer groups were compared on the same instruments under s i m i l a r t e s t i n g conditions, enables one to i d e n t i f y which charac-t e r i s t i c s vary with volunteer r o l e and are thus more de s c r i p t i v e of some types of volunteers than of others. A knowledge of the kinds of differences e x i s t i n g between various volunteer groups and a demonstra-t i o n that p a r t i c u l a r instruments could e f f e c t i v e l y discriminate d i f -ferent groups could help determine the d i r e c t i o n of further attempts to develop e f f e c t i v e volunteer placement procedures by suggesting procedures based upon the completion of r e l a t i v e l y short, s t r a i g h t -forward and e a s i l y administered personality t e s t s . Some of the larger Canadian c i t i e s , Vancouver included, have volunteer bureaus whose function i t i s to process applicants f o r volunteer positions and then assign them to agencies. The development of an e f f e c t i v e and objec-t i v e means for making decisions concerning volunteer placement may prove useful to such agencies. F i n a l l y , r e s u l t s showing important personality and value differences between d i f f e r e n t volunteer groups could provide d i r e c t i o n to those interested i n determining the 21 relationships between various personality traits and success as a volunteer in different kinds of service. The study included a comparison of a l l volunteers with a l l pro-fessionals. A comparison of volunteer and professional workers in social service areas has not previously been reported. Such a com-parison would be informative in describing differences in personality of different status workers. In recent years, the advantages and disadvantages of training volunteers to serve as paraprofessionals and of assigning volunteers to new roles often involving increased responsibility, have been repeatedly discussed. Personality and value differences identified in this study could add valuable information to this discussion." Another important comparison performed as part of this study involved comparing the personality and value characteristics of volun-teers with the professionals from their own agencies as well as with the volunteers from other agencies to determine the extent to which the volunteers and professionals at any agency were similar. Such in -formation could prove valuable in the development of screening tests for volunteers as well as in planning future studies on volunteer effectiveness. Perhaps the results of this study would indicate that an investigation of the relationship between success in the volunteer role and congruence with the agency's professionals in terms of per-sonality and values would be worthwhile. Finding that the volunteers were homogeneous as a group and not similar to their respective pro-fessional counterparts could be an important factor in planning new areas of service for volunteers within these agencies. Finally, i f 22 the volunteers and professionals within agencies were found to be similar with respect to various personality characteristics i t would be advisable to investigate this relationship more thoroughly. It would be important to know whether the volunteers were attracted to particular agencies because they shared similarities in personality and values with the professionals there or whether their values and personality characteristics were influenced as a result of the volun-teer experience i t s e l f or as a result of an ongoing association with the professionals at that agency. It was decided that the most valuable information would be ob-tained i f the subjects in this study were compared in terms of a wide range of important personality variables, their respective value orien-tations and their interpersonal behaviour orientations. The three instruments employed in this study were selected as a result of their superior theoretical and substantial qualities in comparison with other tests in the area. (These qualities w i l l be described in greater de-t a i l later.) Other advantages of the tests ut i l i z e d were that they were objective, straightforward and relatively easy to complete. The battery included Jackson's (1974) Personality Research Form-E (PRF) which measures a wide range of well-established and interpretable personality dimen-sions. Rokeach's (1967) Value Survey (VS) which requires the systema-t i c ordering of two sets of values found to be most prominent in North American culture, was also used. Both the PRF and VS have been util i z e d in numerous studies and normative data on several populations is available for each of these tests (cf., Ahmed, Fry & Jackson, 1972, where the PRF was employed and Feather, 1970, where the VS was ut i l i z e d ) . 23 F i n a l l y , as a measure of interpersonal behaviour a r e l a t i v e l y new instrument, the Personal Description Questionnaire (PDQ) developed by Wiggins (1976) was employed. This instrument contains a number of t h e o r e t i c a l l y meaningful dimensions which are bip o l a r and can be factored to form a two-dimensional circumplex which possesses superior empirical q u a l i t i e s . In terms of i t s construction, the PRF i s the product of a unique approach to test development. Jackson (1974) has described i t s con-s t r u c t i o n : The expectation which guided t h i s program of te s t construction was that by a c a r e f u l a p p l i c a t i o n of c e r t a i n modern p r i n c i p l e s of personality and of test theory, more rigorous and more v a l i d assessment of important personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s could be attained. (p. 4) In constructing the PRF Jackson combined elements of three d i s t i n c t , formerly mutually exclusive approaches to test construction: the r a -t i o n a l , empirical and f a c t o r - a n a l y t i c a l approaches. He employed a c a r e f u l l y planned "sequential approach" which permitted him to attend to the issues of substantive v a l i d i t y , construct v a l i d i t y , homogeneity, g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y , r e l i a b i l i t y and external v a l i d i t y of a number of scales throughout t h e i r development. He eliminated extraneous sources of variance by reducing the influence of s t y l i s t i c elements such as s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y and acquiescence and by developing b i p o l a r scales which contained an equal number of positively-and negatively-keyed itmes which were, i n turn, characterized by c l a r i t y , freedom from am-bi g u i t y and possessing moderate endorsement frequencies. As part of the PRF Jackson also included two v a l i d i t y scales to i d e n t i f y instances 24 of pseudorandom responding and responding according to a s o c i a l l y desirable response set. A de t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of the elaborate and commendable approach u t i l i z e d by Jackson i s a v a i l a b l e i n Jackson (1970) or i n the Personality Research Form Manual (Jackson, 1974). Jackson derived h i s i n d i v i d u a l PRF scales on the basis of Murray' (1938) taxonomy of personality v a r i a b l e s which Jackson has described as, "... covering broadly, i f not exhaustively, the spectrum of per-s o n a l i t y needs, states and d i s p o s i t i o n s Jackson selected those variables which he judged as most important i n representing many types of human behaviour. He combined, revised and redefined these v a r i a b l e to obtain a set of mutually exclusive dimensions for which both poles could be defined. The resultant 22 dimensions could, based on the r e s u l t s of factor a n a l y t i c studies (cf., Jackson, 1974; Jackson & Guthrie, 1968; Siess & Jackson, 1970) as well as t h e o r e t i c a l considera tions (Jackson, 1974), be combined into 7 higher-order f a c t o r s . (Jackson has cautioned that these groupings are not, s t r i c t l y speaking s p e c i f i c f a c t o rs but are based p a r t l y upon conceptual considerations.) The 22 dimensions are categorized into these higher-order factors i n Table 2. Jackson (1974) has stated that the multitrait-multimethod system proposed by Campbell and Fiske (1959) has been employed i n v a l i d a t i o n studies on the PRF. In a study described by Jackson (p. 24), judges rated subjects using a 9-point scale on adjectives describing various personality t r a i t s included i n the PRF. In addition, the subjects rated themselves on the T r a i t Rating Form (devised by Jackson f o r t h i s purpose) which contained a l i s t of adjectives which they were to 25 Table 2 The 22 PRF Dimensions C l a s s i f i e d According to Higher-Order Factors Factors Dimensions 1. Measures of Impulse Expression and Control 2. Measures of Orientation toward Work and Play 3. Measures of Orientation toward D i r e c t i o n from Other People 4. Measures of I n t e l l e c t u a l and Aesthetic Orientations Impulsivity Change Achievement Endurance versus Harmavoidance Order Cognitive Structure versus Play Succorance versus Autonomy Understanding versus Sentience Measures of Degree of Ascendancy Measures of Degree and Quality of Interpersonal Orientation Dominance versus Abasement A f f i l i a t i o n versus Nurturance E x h i b i t i o n S o c i a l Recog-n i t i o n Aggression Defendence 7. Measures of Test-taking Attitudes and V a l i d i t y D e s i r a b i l i t y Infrequency Note: From Personality Research Form Manual by D.N. Jackson. Goshen, New York: Research Psychologists Press, Inc., p. 5. 26 designate as being d e s c r i p t i v e or nondescriptive of themselves. F i n a l l y , the subjects completed the PRF. This study was performed on two d i f f e r e n t samples and over both samples the c o r r e l a t i o n between the judges behaviour ratings and the PRF scale scores was .47, and between the s e l f - r a t i n g s and PRF scale scores was .55. These r e s u l t s were consistent with those found by Jackson and Guthrie (1968) who used a s i m i l a r procedure with another student sample and by Kuszsyn (1968) who compared 10 PRF scale scores with behaviour ratings completed by s i g n i f i c a n t others. On the basis of these r e s u l t s Jackson has concluded that, Considering the many d i f f i c u l t i e s i n defining s u i t a b l e c r i t e r i a , these v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s appear to be encouraging indeed .... These values ... exceed those t y p i c a l l y reported for personality inventories by a comfortable margin and at t e s t to the value of the strategy of scale construction employed i n the PRF. (p. 24) Although these r e s u l t s appear s t r i k i n g , Wiggins (1972) has pointed out that there may have been a "serious shortcoming" i n the method by which they were obtained. Jackson f a i l e d to report i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s among the t r a i t s measured by a l l three methods and also the c o r r e l a -tions between s e l f - and peer-ratings, as required i n Campbell and Fiske's multitrait-multimethod procedure. Without t h i s information method variance could not be f u l l y accounted f o r and thus these re-s u l t s must be interpreted cautiously. In t h i s study Form E of the PRF was used. Several c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h i s form made i t p a r t i c u l a r l y s u i t a b l e f o r t h i s study. Unlike e a r l i e r forms, Form E was designed s p e c i f i c a l l y for use with a wide v a r i e t y of populations and care was taken to compose items that would 27 be understood r e a d i l y by persons of average i n t e l l i g e n c e . Form E included 22 - 16 item scales so i t measured more dimensions than Form A or B (which consisted of 16 - 20 item scales) and was le s s c o s t l y with respect to time than Form AA or BB (consisting of 22 - 20 item scales ). In constructing the PRF-E the goal of enhancing scale pro-p e r t i e s of convergent and discriminant v a l i d i t i e s , even beyond those found i n e a r l i e r forms, was set. Items for PRF-E were selected from the pool of items produced i n the sequential strategy described e a r l i e r . In s e l e c t i n g items for Form E a "minimum redundancy" approach outlined i n N e i l l and Jackson (1976) was u t i l i z e d . This approach included both s t a t i s t i c a l and r a t i o n a l considerations i n determining which items should become a part of a personality questionnaire whose scales were designed to possess, ... optimal r e l i a b i l i t y i n r e l a t i o n to t h e i r length, minimal mutual redundancy ... and items combining content saturation, freedom from i r r e l e v a n t variance, lack of ambiguity, r e a d a b i l i t y and conciseness, (p. 40) Evidence that t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y was retained even though scale length was decreased was discovered by Jackson (1974, pp. 40-41). Over 2000 m i l i t a r y e n l i s t e d personnel completed the PRF-E and f o r t h i s sample, which was s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from that on which the test was standardized, le s s than 2% of the items were correlated more highly with inappropriate scales than with t h e i r own. A f a c t o r analysis of PRF-E by Nesselroade and Balko (1974) reviewed eight factors which bore a close resemblance to those i d e n t i f i e d by Siess and Jackson (1976) using an e a r l i e r form of the PRF. Other sources of v a l i d a t i o n for the PRF-E include s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s between i t s scales and 28 t h e o r e t i c a l l y - r e l a t e d scales from other t e s t s . For example, s u b s t a n t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s were found between PRF-E dimensions and rela t e d career i n t e r e s t s on the Jackson Vocational Interest Survey, between PRF-E scales and scales included on the Bentler Psychological Inventory, and between PRF-E scores and scores from the Bentler Interactive Psycho-l o g i c a l Inventory (BIPI), the l a t t e r test being completed by acquain-tances of the subjects. For example, i n the l a s t study c o r r e l a t i o n s of .67, .52 and .43 were obtained between BIPI Extraversion and PRF-E Ex h i b i t i o n scales, BIPI Orderliness and PRF-E Order scales, and BIPI Int e l l i g e n c e and PRF-E Understanding scales, r e s p e c t i v e l y . F i n a l l y , Jackson (1974, p. 44) has reported a study recently performed to i n -vestigate the e f f e c t s of dissimulation on scale scores. Results of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n suggested that the PRF-E was not susceptible to faking. This f a c t was of importance i n the present study where volun-teer and pro f e s s i o n a l groups may have consciously or inadvertently attempted to create favourable impressions re l a t e d to t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r r o l e s . Rokeach (1973) has i d e n t i f i e d values as the fundamental and stable elements which influence a l l types of i n t e r - and intrapersonal behaviour. He has defined a value as, ... an enduring b e l i e f that a s p e c i f i c mode of conduct or end-state of existence i s personally or s o c i a l l y preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or end-state of existence. (p. 5). According to Rokeach, values are to be d i f f e r e n t i a t e d from a t t i t u d e s and i n t e r e s t s which he described as being more s p e c i f i c a l l y directed towards and/or focused upon one object or event. Values, on the 29 other hand, are transcendental in nature, guiding attitudes, actions, comparisons and judgements across specific objects and situations; they are oriented toward more ultimate goals rather than immediate goals. Values also differ from traits which Rokeach conceptualizes as unchangeable, and from social norms which are described as more specific to situations. Rather, a value i s a type of belief and like other beliefs, has affective, behavioural and cognitive components. According to Rokeach, values are relatively enduring but can change gradually over time. They are formulated over the course of one's lifetime, being influenced by societal, cultural and personal variables. In turn, values permeate a l l forms and expressions of behaviour. Values are organized into relatively stable value systems, described as hierarchical arrangements of values along a continuum of relative importance. Rokeach maintains that there are two types of values and thus two separate value systems — one based upon terminal values, defined as "idealized end-states" (e.g., A Sense of Accomplishment, A World at Peace), and one based on instrumental values which are actually "idealized modes of conduct" (e.g., Ambitious, Tender-Hearted). Table 3 l i s t s the values Rokeach has included in his terminal value category along with those he has assigned to the instrumental value category. Rokeach has pointed out that these values can be classified in alternate ways. Values can be either intrapersonal (e.g., Inner Harmony, Self Control) or interpersonal (e.g., Honest, A World at Peace) in nature. Some can be described as 'adjustment-oriented' (e.g., Obedient, Helpful), others as 'achievement-oriented' (e.g., 30 Table 3 Rokeach's Value Survey - Form D Terminal Values Instrumental Values A Comfortable L i f e Ambitious (a prosperous l i f e ) (hard-working, aspiring) An E x c i t i n g L i f e Broadminded (a stimulating, a c t i v e l i f e ) (open-minded) A Sense of Accomplishment Capable ( l a s t i n g contribution) (competent, e f f e c t i v e ) A World at Peace Cheerful (free of war and c o n f l i c t ) (lighthearted, j o y f u l ) A World of Beauty Clean (beauty of nature and the arts) (neat, tidy) Equality Courageous (brotherhood, equal opportunity) (standing up f o r your b e l i e f s ) Family Security Forgiving (taking care of loved ones) ( w i l l i n g to pardon others) Freedom Helpful (independence, free choice) (working f o r the welfare of others) Happiness Honest (contentedness) (sincere, t r u t h f u l ) Inner Harmony Imaginative (freedom from inner c o n f l i c t ) (daring, creative) Mature Love Independent (sexual and s p i r i t u a l intimacy) ( s e l f - r e l i a n t , s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t ) National Security I n t e l l e c t u a l (protection from attack) ( i n t e l l i g e n t , r e f l e c t i v e ) Pleasure L o g i c a l (an enjoyable l e i s u r e l y l i f e ) (consistent, r a t i o n a l ) Salvation Loving (saved, ete r n a l l i f e ) ( a ffectionate, tender) Self-Respect Obedient (self-esteem) ( d u t i f u l , r e spectful) S o c i a l Recognition P o l i t e (respect, admiration) (courteous, well-mannered) True Friendship Responsible (close companionship) (dependable, r e l i a b l e ) Wisdom Self - C o n t r o l l e d (a mature understanding of l i f e ) (restrained, s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e d ) Note: From Value Survey by M. Rokeach. Sunnyvale, C a l i f o r n i a : Halgren Tests, 1967. 31 A Sense of Accomplishment, Wisdom), some as ' s e l f - a c t u a l i z i n g ' values (e.g., Inner Harmony) and s t i l l others as 'ego-defensive' values (e.g., Self-Respect). Rokeach has discussed the advantage of describing values according to t h e i r adjustive, ego-defensive or s e l f - a c t u a l i z i n g components, To the extent that a person's value system r e f l e c t s a d i f f e r e n t i a l preoccupation with values that are adjustive, ego-defensive and s e l f - a c t u a l i z i n g , we may say he i s operating at lower or higher l e v e l s . (p. 17) Rokeach, i n h i s Value Survey, has attempted to develop an i n s t r u -ment capable of providing v a l i d information on the i n d i v i d u a l value systems possessed by persons of a wide range of ages, educational backgrounds and r a c i a l o r i g i n s , etc. His t e s t i s a c t u a l l y a structured p r o j e c t i v e test i n which the subject i s asked to reorder a l i s t of values, i n i t i a l l y presented i n alphabetical order, according to t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l r e l a t i v e importances to himself. The Value Survey includes two separate l i s t s , one containing 18 terminal values and the other consisting of 18 instrumental values. Rokeach imposed a c e i l i n g of 18 items on each l i s t , b e l i e v i n g that more than that number would make the task burdensome yet i f less than 18 values were included some im-portant values would be l e f t out. Rokeach derived the items for the terminal value l i s t by i n i t i a l l y accumulating a pool of values obtained from many sources including the l i t e r a t u r e , h i s own value system, the values of a group of 30 psychology graduate students, and those e l i c i t e d from 100 adult residents i n the American c i t y of Lansing. This large pool was condensed by excluding values conceptually or e m p i r i c a l l y synonymous with other values, those 32 evaluated as "too s p e c i f i c " and those which did not a c t u a l l y denote end-states of existence. In developing h i s instrumental value l i s t Rokeach began with Anderson's (1968) l i s t of 555 personality t r a i t words which had previously been derived from A l l p o r t and Odbert's (1936) l i s t of 18,000 t r a i t names. He subsequently followed an e d i t i n g and r e v i s i o n procedure s i m i l a r to that employed with h i s l i s t of t e r -minal values. Rokeach has stated that both of h i s 18-item l i s t s are "reasonably comprehensive", including the most important values found not only i n North American culture but i n other cultures as well. The two forms of the Value Survey popular today are Form D and Form E. They are conceptually i d e n t i c a l i n task although the pro-cedure by which the ordering task i s performed d i f f e r s . With Form E the.subject writes a number beside each i n d i v i d u a l value i n d i c a t i n g i t s r e l a t i v e importance within his own framework. On Form D values are printed on i n d i v i d u a l gummed lab e l s which are reordered by placing each l a b e l i n one of 18 numbered posit i o n s which are arranged v e r t i -c a l l y on one side of the page. The testee i s free to rearrange these la b e l s u n t i l he believes that they are t r u l y d e s c r i p t i v e of h i s per-sonal value system. Form D, as compared to Form E, i s i n t r i n s i c a l l y more i n t e r e s t i n g . In addition, with t h i s form i t i s easier f or the p a r t i c i p a n t to see the order i n which he has placed the items. Studies by Rokeach (1973, p. 34) have revealed that t h i s form has the highest completion rate and also the highest r e l i a b i l i t y over time of any form. It was as a r e s u l t of these considerations that Form D was chosen as the instrument to be administered i n the present study. Test-retest r e l i a b i l i t y has been observed to vary as a function 33 of other factors i n addition to test form. As would be expected, r e l i a b i l i t y decreases gradually as the i n t e r - t e s t i n t e r v a l increases. Studies with college students revealed a terminal value scale r e -l i a b i l i t y of .78 and an instrumental value scale r e l i a b i l i t y of .72 over a 3-week period. Increasing the t e s t - r e t e s t span to 14-16 months resulted i n decreases i n these r e l i a b i l i t i e s to the s t i l l respectable l e v e l s of .69 and .61, respectively. Other personal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of subjects including sex, age, l i b e r a l i s m and i n t e l l e c t u a l a b i l i t y have been shown to have s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s with the r e l i a b i l i t y of t h i s instrument (Rokeach, 1973, pp. 34-36). Other factors which a f f e c t the r e l i a b i l i t y of the Value Survey are properties of the scales themselves. For example, values i n i t i a l l y ranked among eit h e r the most or l e a s t impor-tant are le s s l i k e l y to change over time than those f i r s t assigned to more moderate po s i t i o n s . In addition, instrumental scale r e l i a b i l i t y has been shown to have a small yet s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n with terminal scale r e l i a b i l i t y , although terminal values as a whole are more stable than instrumental values. F i n a l l y , the r e l i a b i l i t i e s of i n d i v i d u a l items vary. Over a 3-7 week i n t e r v a l terminal value r e l i a b i l i t i e s were found to range from .51 (A Sense of Accomplishment) to .88 (Salvation) and instrumental value r e l i a b i l i t i e s from .45 (Responsible) to .70 (Ambitious). Referring to these Value Scale item r e l i a b i l i t i e s which have been found by others i n addition to himself, Rokeach has said, ...they are on the whole rather respectable i n s i z e , considering the fa c t that they were a l l obtained with single-item t e s t s that are one word or at most one phrase long. L i k e r t scales for each of the 36 values composed of, say, 10 items each would probably be no more r e l i a b l e than the present single-item scales, (p. 39) 34 Rokeach has pointed out that the rank-ordering of values is ip-sative in nature — the placement of the 18th value is predetermined by the position assigned to the other 17 items. However, this need not limit the s t a t i s t i c a l procedures employed in analyzing the data for, according to Rokeach, ... with 18 values, the extent to which this inde-pendence assumption is violated i s relatively small, the average intercorrelation being only -.06 .... This amount of ipsativity can be tolerated. (p. 43) Nevertheless, in the present study when Hotelling T 2 analyses were per-formed on each of the two value scales, only 17 of the 18 values in each scale was included. The excluded value for each scale was the one shown to possess the least v a r i a b i l i t y across groups. Correlations between pairs of values contained in the Value Survey were found for a sample of over 1400 adult Americans (Rokeach, 1973, p. 43). The correlations ranged from -.32 (A Comfortable Life-and-Wisdom) to .35 (A Comfortable Life-and-Pleasure) for terminal values, and from -.32 (Clean-and-Logical) to .29 (Obedient-and-Polite) for instrumental value pairs. These findings would be expected by chance from ipsative data. The low degree of correlation among variables can be attributed partly to the fact that in choosing these items an attempt to select independent and non-overlapping values was made. Although no such effort was made between individual instrumental and terminal values i t was also found that not one correlation between items of different scales exceeded .31 (found for Mature Love-and-Loving) and most of these inter-scale correlations were nonsignificant. The average inter-scale correlation was .01.. Rokeach has concluded 35 on the basis of these findings that, ... the 36 values of the Value Survey are for the most part n e g l i g i b l y correlated with one another i n the adult American population, despite the fa c t that 306 of the 630 c o r r e l a t i o n s are not altogether independent of one another because they are i p s a t i v e i n nature. (p. 43) A d d i t i o n a l support f o r t h i s statement came when Rokeach divided the t o t a l sample into subjects based on age, sex and race, etc. and r e -peated the c o r r e l a t i o n a l a n a l y s i s , again f i n d i n g that the ranking of any one value was e s s e n t i a l l y independent of the ranking of any other value. This very low degree of i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n would suggest that these values couldn't be categorized into a smaller number of higher order f a c t o r s . However, seven bi p o l a r factors have been i d e n t i f i e d through the procedure of varimax r o t a t i o n . The f a c t o r s , which together account for only 41% of the variance are shown i n Table 4. Other s t a t i s t i c a l properties of the Value Survey have been ex-amined. K e l l y , Silverman and Cochrane (1972) studied the s u s c e p t i b i l i t y of t h i s instrument to bias r e s u l t i n g from responding i n a s o c i a l l y desirable manner. Their i n t e r e s t i n g study revealed that the Value Survey was v i r t u a l l y immune to t h i s ..type of contamination. Cochrane and Rokeach (1970) investigated the e f f e c t of the order i n which the i n d i v i d u a l items were i n i t i a l l y presented (alphabetically) upon value assignment. I n i t i a l l y they found a s i g n i f i c a n t order e f f e c t f or i n -strumental values ( i . e . , values which came near the beginning of the alp h a b e t i c a l l i s t i n g tended to be ranked as more important than other values), but not for terminal values. Further probing into t h i s issue revealed, however, that those values which were near the top of the a l p h a b e t i c a l l i s t i n g of the instrumental values were i n fa c t of 36 Table 4 Higher-Order Factors Associated with the Items of Rokeach's Value Survey Factors Related Items Immediate versus Delayed G r a t i f i c a t i o n Competence versus Religious Morality S e l f - C o n s t r i c t i o n versus Self-Expansion A Comfortable L i f e versus Pleasure Clean An E x c i t i n g L i f e L o g i c a l versus Imaginative I n t e l l e c t u a l Independent Obedient versus P o l i t e S e l f - C o n t r o l l e d Honest Wisdom Inner Harmony Lo g i c a l S e l f - C o n t r o l l e d Forgiving Salvation Helpful Clean Broadminded Capable S o c i a l versus Personal Orientation A World at Peace National Security Equality Freedom . versus True Friendship Self-Respect S o c i a l versus Family Security Respect versus Love Inner versus Outer Directed A World of Beauty versus Equality H e l p f u l Imaginative S o c i a l Recognition versus Self-Respect P o l i t e versus Family Security Ambitious Responsible Capable Mature Love Loving Courageous Independent Each item associated with a factor has a c o r r e l a t i o n of at le a s t .30 with that f a c t o r . Note: From The Nature of Human Values by M. Rokeach. New York: The Free Press, 1973. 37 greater importance to some groups than values which came l a t e r i n the alphabetical ordering. When the main e f f e c t of r e l a t i v e importance of i n d i v i d u a l values was controlled f o r , no other order e f f e c t remained. Since i t s development the Value Survey has been used extensively. Differences between groups defined by age, s o c i a l o r i g i n , p o l i t i c a l ideology, r e l i g i o u s o r i e n t a t i o n and socioeconomic status, etc. have been examined. The relationships of many d i f f e r e n t personality factors (e.g., neuroticism, dogmatism, etc.) to value o r i e n t a t i o n have been studied. Value correlates of various a t t i t u d e s (e.g., o r i e n t a t i o n toward the poor, att i t u d e s toward communism), and of d i f f e r e n t behaviours (e.g., p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c i v i l r i g h t s movements, involvement i n a l t e r n a t i v e l i f e s t y l e s , etc.) have also been investigated. Some researchers have studied changes i n values which accompany changes i n behaviour and att i t u d e s over time or as a r e s u l t of c e r t a i n experiences (e.g., ex-posure to information of possible contradictions within one's b e l i e f system) (Rokeach, 1973, pp. 57-319). The combined fac t s that the Value Survey i s s e n s i t i v e to differences and changes as described above and that i t has been shown to possess s a t i s f a c t o r y r e l i a b i l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a t t e s t to i t s usefulness as an instrument f o r measuring values. Furthermore, a study by Homant (1969) i n which he measured the semantic meaning of each of the values using Osgood's semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l technique and then correlated these indices with the rank orderings obtained on the Value Survey, has r e -vealed that t h i s r e l a t i v e l y simple ranking procedure y i e l d s e s s e n t i a l l y the same information as obtained with the more complex semantic d i f -f e r e n t i a l technique. Rokeach has pointed out, i n addition, that these 38 findings imply that the Value Survey items measure the same kind of meaning as that involved i n the more complicated evaluative task de-veloped by Osgood. Rokeach has described an a d d i t i o n a l source of support for the concurrent v a l i d i t y for the Value Survey. He compared Value Survey Forms A and B, both of which contain only 12 values. The forms are i d e n t i c a l except that Form B includes a d e f i n i t i v e phrase beside each value. He found that the r e l i a b i l i t i e s of the correspon-ding values i n both forms were equivalent — the i n c l u s i o n of an explanatory statement for each item did not enhance the r e l i a b i l i t y of the test (Rokeach, 1973, p. 50). This fi n d i n g suggests that the semantic meanings of the i n d i v i d u a l items are indeed the same for d i f f e r e n t people. Nevertheless, Rokeach has noted that i t i s the psychological meaning, which must be i n f e r r e d by the way i n which par-t i c u l a r values are r e l a t e d to other values i n a person's value system, rather than the semantic meaning of values which i s of primary impor-tance i n studying an i n d i v i d u a l ' s value system. Studying completed forms of the Value Survey gives information concerning the psychological meanings of the i n d i v i d u a l items to those tested. Wiggin's (Note 1) Personal Description Questionnaire (PDQ) r e -presents the f i r s t development i n h i s attempt to create a taxonomy comprised of s t r u c t u r a l models which categorizes the l e x i c o n of words used to describe people. The PDQ was developed to deal with those words r e l a t e d to "the realm of things that people do to each other ... interpersonal exchanges based on love and status". Other realms con-ceptualized by Wiggins included those of temperament (e.g., dominance, kindness), character (e.g., honesty, m o r a l i t y ) , material t r a i t s (e.g., 39 materialism, philantropism), a t t i t u d e s (e.g., prejudice, s p i r i t u a l i s m ) , and s o c i a l r o l e s (e.g., motherly, clownish). Wiggins has adopted Guilford's (1959) d e f i n i t i o n of a t r a i t as "any distinguishable, r e l a t i v e l y enduring way i n which one i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r s from others". In i n v e s t i g a t i n g the domain of t r a i t s , Wiggins began with Goldberg's (1974) taxonomy of 1710 "normative operating c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s " which were, i n f a c t , t r a i t d e s c r i p t i v e adjectives. Goldberg's l i s t was derived from a larger taxonomy of 3584 terms com-p i l e d by Norman (1967) who had, i n turn, u t i l i z e d the taxonomy of 4504 "stable b i o p h y s i c a l t r a i t s " compiled by A l l p o r t and Odbert (1936). At each step i n the process by which t h i s longer l i s t was reduced, the goal of developing a taxonomy which remained comprehensive but was non-redundant and included relevant items was followed. Wiggin's i n i t i a l step i n h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n process was to assign each of Goldberg's 1710 adjectives to one of s i x a p r i o r i categories he had already conceptualized. He defined the interpersonal realm as consisting of adjectives which could each be described as, ... a judgement that an i n d i v i d u a l may be more or l e s s characterized as performing a c l a s s of actions that have r e l a t i v e l y c l e a r - c u t , n o n - t r i v i a l s o c i a l conse-quences. The adjectives which were thereby assigned to the interpersonal cate-gory were further c l a s s i f i e d according to the dimensions included i n Leary's (1957) c i r c u m p l i c i a l model of interpersonal behaviour (see Figure 1). On the basis of both t h e o r e t i c a l considerations and past research Wiggins decided upon a c i r c u m p l i c i a l model for h i s research on interpersonal t r a i t s . Leary's system was chosen mainly because i t Dominant Arrogant NARCICISM Calc u l a t i n g EXPLOITATION Cold PUNISHMENT Quarrelsome HOSTILITY Aloof REBELLION Introverted DISTRUST SUCCESS Ambitious GENEROSITY Extraverted TENDERNESS Gregarious LOVE Agreeable COLLABORATION Warm TRUST Ingenious Lazy MASOCHISM — " CONFORMITY Unassuming WEAKNESS Submissive Figure 1. The Dimensions of Leary's (1957) Interpersonal Circumplex (in upper case) and Wiggin's (1976) Interpersonal Circumplex ( in lower case). 41 was more thoroughly described i n the l i t e r a t u r e than any other system of i t s kind. S p e c i f i c d e f i n i t i o n s of Leary's dimensions ( i . e . , vec-tors) are found i n the Interpersonal Check L i s t (Laforge & Suczek, 1955) which was based on t h i s system. Leary's circumplex includes 16 dimensions that can be combined to form 8 bipolar dimensions. This b i p o l a r i t y has been questioned, however, both i n s u b s t a n t i a l grounds (some of the dimensions are not i n t u i t i v e l y bipolar) and empirical grounds (they have not been shown em p i r i c a l l y to be b i p o l a r ) . Despite t h i s shortcoming and other empirical weaknesses which have been revealed, Wiggins stated that the advantages of employing a developed model when s t a r t i n g research i n t h i s area outweighed the disadvantages inherent i n using a nonperfect model. Rather than " s t a r t i n g from scratch" he was able to plan h i s strategy upon considering the strengths and weak-nesses of a current model. The procedure Wiggins employed i n developing a circumplex with the properties of thorough representation of the realm of interpersonal t r a i t s , s a t i s f a c t o r y g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of each dimension, t h e o r e t i c a l soundness and optimal empirical c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s was an elaborate one which involved both r a t i o n a l and empirical techniques. Data obtained by Goldberg where u n i v e r s i t y students rated themselves on a l l 1710 adjectives using a 9-point L i k e r t scale, was employed by Wiggins i n te s t i n g h i s model as he continued to revise i t . Throughout t h i s pro-cess both the d i r e c t i o n and nature of refinement was determined by modifying weaknesses i n the model which appeared at d i f f e r e n t points i n i t s creation. The dimensions of Wiggins' circumplex are also shown i n Figure 1. 42 His circumplex contains 16 dimensions which can be reduced by combining adjacent dimensions to obtain 8 dimensions or vectors. I t i s r e a d i l y observed that although Leary's system provided a framework for beginning t h i s research, Wiggins' circumplex i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from Leary's. Wiggins' dimensions are both t h e o r e t i c a l l y and e m p i r i c a l l y b i p o l a r . Factor analysis of both Goldberg's sample and a student sample tested by Wiggins has confirmed Wiggins' conclusion that the circumplex structure of t h i s model i s "both clear and well-balanced." The resultant questionnaire, the PDQ, includes 128 adjectives which combine to describe 16 dimensions (8 items/dimension) or 8 dimen-sions (16 items/dimension). The subject i s required to i n d i c a t e , using a 9-point scale, how well each of these adjectives describes himself. In order to derive the c i r c u m p l i c i a l patterning for an i n d i v i d u a l or group, scores for each dimension are found and these dimensions are then p l o t t e d according to t h e i r loadings on the two main factors i d e n t i f i e d by means of factor analysis. In addition to the two samples which have already been mentioned (Goldberg's University of Oregon sample and Wiggins' Un i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia sample), the PDQ has been administered to other Canadian groups as w e l l as to an A u s t r a l i a n student sample. A study c o r r e l a t i n g scores on the PDQ scales with scores on r e l a t e d scales from other inventories has recently been performed (Note 2). Findings of t h i s study should be important i n assessing the concurrent v a l i d i t y possessed by the PDQ i n r e l a t i o n to other inventories. F i n a l l y , the PDQ has been u t i l i z e d i n a recent study by Wiggins and Holzmuller (Note 3) where the interpersonal behavioural correlates of psychological 43 androgyny (as defined by Bem, 1974) were investigated. In t h i s study various groups of both sexes representing d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of androgyny were compared i n terms of t h e i r PDQ.scores. The PDQ proved e f f e c t i v e i n d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g these groups on many dimensions, and quite elaborate descriptions of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s possessed by the i n d i v i d u a l groups i n r e l a t i o n to the t o t a l sample were obtained. Even though . normative data a v a i l a b l e f o r the PDQ was l i m i t e d , both i t s t h e o r e t i c a l and em-p i r i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s as well as the fa c t that i t has been shown to be s e n s i t i v e to differences among groups defined with respect to various independent v a r i a b l e s suggested that i t would be su i t a b l e to use i n the present study where a comparison of interpersonal behavioural orientations between groups was of importance. 44 METHOD Subjects A t o t a l of 111 subjects were included i n t h i s study — 79 volun-teers and 32 professionals from three d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l service agencies i n greater Vancouver. A breakdown of the t o t a l number of subjects by agency and status appears i n Table 5. At each of these agencies the study was p u b l i c i z e d and the administration of each agency encouraged i t s p r o f e s s i o n a l and volunteer workers to take part i n i t . I t i s estimated that between 20-50% of the volunteers and 70-90% of the pro-f e s s i o n a l s from each agency were involved i n t h i s study. Demographic information was c o l l e c t e d from a l l subjects. Analysis of t h i s data revealed that the three volunteer groups d i f f e r e d s i g -n i f i c a n t l y on the v a r i a b l e s of m a r i t a l status, education and length of service. They were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t i n terms of age, number of dependent c h i l d r e n or composition with respect to sex (male and female subejcts were combined i n groups i n t h i s study). Tables 6, 7, 8 and 9 describe the demographic differences among volunteer groups i n greater d e t a i l . A s i m i l a r comparison was made between the t o t a l group of volunteers and the t o t a l group of professionals. No difference between these groups were found for age, education, number of dependent c h i l d r e n , sex, or m a r i t a l status. Table 10 shows the d e t a i l s of t h i s comparison. Test Materials A battery of three tests was administered to each subject. These 45 Table 5 A Breakdown of Subjects According to Agency and Status Agency 3 St. John Status A l t e r n a t i v e s C r i s i s Center Ambulance T o t a l Volunteer 26 Prof e s s i o n a l 10 Tota l ' 36 18 35 79 10 12 32 28 47 111 Although j>s were s o l i c i t e d from two C r i s i s Centers (Vancouver C r i s i s Center and Richmond C r i s i s Center) and from two St. John Ambulance Brigades (Vancouver and New Westminster groups), the organization and a c t i v i t i e s of the two branches were e s s e n t i a l l y i d e n t i c a l within agencies. On the assumption that workers i n s i s t e r branches of the same agencies were performing the same jobs under s i m i l a r conditions, no analysis of differences between workers at d i f f e r e n t locations of the same agencies were performed. 46 Table 6 A Comparison of the Volunteer Groups on Selected Demographic Variables St a t i s t i c a l Homogeneity of Groups Significance Variable Test for that Variable Level Age Extended Median Test - >.05 Education Anova yes <.01** No. of Dependent Children Anova yes >.05 Sex Chi Square - >.05 Marital Status Chi Square - <.05* p_ < .05 p < .01 47 T a b l e 7 Mean E d u c a t i o n a l L e v e l s o f t h e V o l u n t e e r Groups Agency E d u c a t i o n a l L e v e l A t t a i n e d A l t e r n a t i v e s v o l u n t e e r s C r i s i s C e n t e r v o l u n t e e r s S t . John Ambulance v o l u n t e e r s Two y e a r s p o s t - s e c o n d a r y Two y e a r s p o s t - s e c o n d a r y H i g h S c h o o l c o m p l e t e d 48 Table 8 Breakdown on M a r i t a l Status f or the Volunteer Groups M a r i t a l Status A l t e r n a t i v e s Agency C r i s i s Centre St. John Ambulance Single Married Separated Divorced 58% 31% 8% 3% 21% 54% 11% 14% 49% 47% 2% 2% 49 Table 9 Mean Service Lengths of P a r t i c i p a n t Groups Agency St. John Mean Service Status A l t e r n a t i v e s C r i s i s Center Ambulance Length Volunteer 0-0.5 years Professional 0.5-1.0. years 1.0-1.5 years 8.5-9.0 years 4.0-4.5 years 1.0-1.5 years 5.0-5.5 years 2.5-3.0 years 50 Table 10 A Comparison of Volunteers and Professionals on Selected Demographic Variables Variable S t a t i s t i c a l Homegeneity of Groups Si g n i f i c a n c e Test f o r that Variable Level Age Median Test Education Anova No. of Dependent Children Anova Sex Chi Square M a r i t a l Status Chi Square yes yes > .05 > .05 > .05 > .05 > .05 51 tests included the PRF-E, the VS and the PDQ. The order of these three tests was randomized across subjects. Procedure It was intended to t e s t a l l volunteers i n groups at t h e i r r e s -pective agencies. However, an i n s u f f i c i e n t number of subjects was obtained when t h i s s t i p u l a t i o n was made, so those who had been unable to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the group t e s t i n g s i t u a t i o n were l a t e r allowed to complete the battery i n t h e i r own homes. Subjects who performed these tests at home were given the same set of i n s t r u c t i o n s as those tested i n groups at the agencies. They were required to complete the tests i n the order given and a l l at one time, i n a quiet place that was free from d i s t r a c t i o n . In the end, of a l l volunteers who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h i s study, 19% from A l t e r n a t i v e s , 44% from the C r i s i s Centers and 14% from St. John Ambulance completed t h e i r tests at home. The p r o f e s s i o n a l s t a f f at A l t e r n a t i v e s and the C r i s i s Centre performed the tests at t h e i r own desks, at times when they were able to comply with the pro-cedural i n s t r u c t i o n s . The St. John professionals were tested i n a group. A l l subjects involved i n t h i s study were asked not to discuss any part of the test battery with anyone else u n t i l t e s t i n g at t h e i r agency was f i n i s h e d . 52 RESULTS Three questions were asked i n t h i s study: 1. What are the s i m i l a r i t i e s and differences between volunteers at the d i f f e r e n t agencies; 2. What are the general s i m i l a r i t i e s and differences between volunteer and pr o f e s s i o n a l workers at these agencies; and 3. Are volunteers more s i m i l a r to professionals at t h e i r own agencies than to other volunteers? In order to co n t r o l an extremely high experiment-wise error rate which would e x i s t i f i n d i v i d u a l anovas or t^-tests were performed for each of the 66 dependent v a r i a b l e s , dependent v a r i a b l e s were grouped so that a much smaller number of manova or H o t e l l i n g T 2 tests were completed. The procedure recommended by Hummel and Sligo (1971) was followed so that an o v e r a l l manova or H o t e l l i n g T 2 .test was performed, followed by anovas or t - t e s t s on i n d i v i d u a l items i f the o v e r a l l test proved to be s i g n i f i c a n t . (For the comparison of two groups H o t e l l i n g T^  and _t-tests were used; when three or more groups were compared, manovas and anovas were used.) Furthermore, for v a r i a b l e s which yielded s i g n i f i c a n t anovas, i n d i v i d u a l comparisons between p a i r s of a l l groups involved followed. Due to the large number of dependent va r i a b l e s the Scheffe test was used for paired comparisons. The 22 PRF dimensions and the 36 Value Scale items were divided into groups composed of a smaller number of f a c t o r s , f o r some compari-sons. These v a r i a b l e groups, which have been l a b e l l e d as PRF #1, 53 PRF. #2, PRF #3, VS1 #1, VS1 #2, VS2 #1 and VS2 #2, a r e shown i n T a b l e 11-T e s t s o f homogeneity were p e r f o r m e d a t a l l l e v e l s o f t h e a n a l y s e s . Where groups were found n o t t o be homogeneous t h e s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s o f t h e v a r i a b l e ( s ) i n v o l v e d was t e r m i n a t e d . F o r example, i f on a p a r -t i c u l a r manova t h e groups were n o t homogeneous, even a s e e m i n g l y h i g h s i g n i f i c a n t l e v e l would have t o be i g n o r e d . Anovas, manovas, _ t - t e s t s and K o t e l l i n g T_ a n a l y s e s c o u l d o n l y be i n t e r p r e t e d where t h e c o m p a r i -son groups were homogeneous w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e v a r i a b l e s under c o n s i -d e r a t i o n . F o r some com p a r i s o n s an a t t e m p t towards making t h e groups homogeneous, by d e c r e a s i n g t h e age range o f s u b j e c t s i n c l u d e d , was made. The r e s u l t s o f s u c h e f f o r t s have been p r e s e n t e d . T a b l e 12 p r o v i d e s a d e s c r i p t i o n o f a l l manovas p e r f o r m e d i n com-p a r i n g t h e t h r e e groups o f v o l u n t e e r s . Anovas on i n d i v i d u a l d i m e n s i o n s i n c l u d e d i n s i g n i f i c a n t manovas were s u b s e q u e n t l y c o m p l e t e d . T a b l e 13 i n c l u d e s t h e f i n d i n g s o f p a i r e d c o m p a r i s o n t e s t s p e r f o r m e d on v a r i a b l e s f o r w h i c h s i g n i f i c a n t anovas were f o u n d . Upon e x a m i n i n g t h e s e r e s u l t s i t i s a p p a r e n t t h a t t h e most extreme d i f f e r e n c e s among t h e t h r e e groups were between t h e A l t e r n a t i v e s and S t . John v o l u n t e e r g r o u p s . On many o f t h e d i m e n s i o n s f o r w h i c h anovas were s i g n i f i c a n t t h e C r i s i s C e n t e r group's s c o r e s were i n between t h o s e o f t h e A l t e r n a t i v e s v o l u n t e e r s and t h e S t . John v o l u n t e e r s . On t h e PRF, t h e A l t e r n a t i v e s v o l u n t e e r s s c o r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r t h a n t h e S t . John v o l u n t e e r s on Autonomy, S e n t i e n c e and U n d e r s t a n d i n g . Mean s c a l e d s c o r e s o f t h e S t . John v o l u n t e e r s s u r p a s s e d t h o s e of t h e A l t e r n a t i v e s v o l u n t e e r s on t h e d i -mensions o f S u c c o r a n c e and N u r t u r a n c e . The C r i s i s C e n t e r v o l u n t e e r s 5 4 Table 11 Variable Groupings for Manovas PRF #1 Achievement Change Cognitive Structure .Endurance Harmavoidance Impulsivity Order Play PRF #2 Abasement Autonomy Dominance Sentience Succorance Understanding PRF #3 A f f i l i a t i o n Aggression Defendence E x h i b i t i o n Nurturance S o c i a l Recognition Infrequency S o c i a l D e s i r a b i l i t y VS1 #1 VS1 #2 A Comfortable L i f e An E x c i t i n g L i f e Happiness Inner Harmony Pleasure Salvation S o c i a l Recognition Wisdom A Sense of Accomplishment A World at Peace A World of Beauty Equality Family Security Freedom National Security Self-Respect True Friendship VS2 #1 VS2 #2 Clean Courageous Forgiving Helpful Imaginative Independent I n t e l l e c t u a l L o g i c a l Loving Ambitious Broadminded Capable Cheerful Honest Obedient P o l i t e Responsible Se l f - C o n t r o l l e d PDQ - 8 Dominant - Ambitious Arrogant - Ca l c u l a t i n g Cold - Quarrelsome Aloof - Introverted Lazy - Submissive Unassuming - Ingenious Warm - Agreeable Gregarious - Introverted 55 Table 12 Results of Manovas Performed i n the Comparison of the Volunteer Groups Homogeneity Significance Manova of- Groups Level PRF #1 no PRF #2 yes <.01** PRF #3 yes <.01** VS1 #1 yes .01** VS1 #2 yes <.01** VS2 #1 yes .05* VS2 #1 (17-50 yrs) yes >.05 VS2 #2 no -VS2 #2 (17-50 yrs) yes <.05* PDQ - 8 yes >.05 £ < .05 ** < £ - .01 56 Table 13 S i g n i f i c a n t Scheffe Tests i n the Comparison of the Volunteer Groups Anova Manova Variable Si g n i f i c a n c e Level Results of Scheffe Tests PRF #2 Autonomy <.01** A l t . > St. John Sentience <.01** A l t . > St. John Succorance <.05* St. John > A l t . Understanding .01** A l t . > St. John-PRF #3 Nurturance <.01** C.C. & St. John > VS1 #1 Inner Harmony .01** A l t . > St. John 3 VS1 #2 Family Security <.01** C.C. & St. John > VS2 #1 Clean <.05* St. John > A l t . H elpful <.05* St. John > A l t . Imaginative <.01** A l t . > St. John Independent <.01** A l t . > St. John I n t e l l e c t u a l <.05* A l t . > St. John a i . e . , The Al t e r n a t i v e s volunteers valued Inner Harmony more highly than did the St. John volunteers. £ < .05 57 also were s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on the Nurturance dimension when com-pared to the Alt e r n a t i v e s group. On the Value Survey, the Al t e r n a t i v e s volunteers ranked Inner Harmony and being Imaginative, Independent and I n t e l l e c t u a l as s i g n i f i c a n t l y more important than the St. John volunteers did. The St. John volunteers ranked Clean and Helpful as more important than did the A l t e r n a t i v e volunteers. Both the C r i s i s Center and St. John volunteers valued Family Security highly i n comparison with the A l -ternatives volunteers. F i n a l l y , when a manova including the VS2 #2 variables was performed on a r e s t r i c t e d group of subjects, those 17 to 50 years of age, no differ e n c e was found between groups for any of these v a r i a b l e s . Table 14 reveals the r e s u l t s of H o t e l l i n g T_ tests performed i n comparing volunteer and pr o f e s s i o n a l workers and Table 15 shows the findings of _t-tests performed on the va r i a b l e s included i n the two Ho t e l l i n g T_ comparisons which were s i g n i f i c a n t . The findings i n d i -cated that the professionals scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on the PRF dimensions of Achievement, Dominance and E x h i b i t i o n and the PDQ dimen-sions of Dominant-Ambitious and Gregarious-Extraverted than did the volunteers." Volunteers, on the other hand, surpassed professionals on the Lazy-Submissive scale of the PDQ. Two d i f f e r e n t s t a t i s t i c a l procedures were employed i n determining how c l o s e l y the volunteers and professionals from the same agency resembled each other. F i r s t l y , manovas were performed i n comparing a l l s i x groupsj ( i . e . , a volunteer and pro f e s s i o n a l group from each agency). Table 16 describes the r e s u l t s of these manovas and Table 17 58 Table 14 H o t e l l l n g T 2 Tests Performed i n the Comparison of Volunteers and Professionals H o t e l l i n g T" Test Homogeneity of Groups Sig n i f i c a n c e Level PRF (22 dimensions) VS1 (17 i t e m s ) 3 VS2 (17 i t e m s ) 3 PDQ - 8 .01** >.05 >.05 <.05* a F o r H o t e l l i n g T 2 Tests on both VS1 and VS2 only 17 of the 18 values were included. The item excluded, on each scale, was the one on which the two groups were l e a s t d i f f e r e n t . * Z < -05 £ < .01 59 Table 15 S i g n i f i c a n t _t-Tests i n the Comparison of Volunteers and Professionals H o t e l l i n g T^  Test Variable Significance Level Results PRF Achievement (22 dimensions) Dominance E x h i b i t i o n PDQ - 8 Dominant-Ambitious La zy-Submis s ive Gregarious-Extraverted <.05* <.05* .01** .01** .01** .01** pros > vols pros > vols pros > v o l s pros > vols vols > pros pros > vols The professionals scored higher than the volunteers on Achievement. p_ < .05 £•='.01 60 Table 16 Results of Manovas Performed i n the Comparison of the Six Groups Homogeneity Sign i f i c a n c e Manova of Groups Level PRF #1 no — PRF #1 (17-50 years) no -PRF #1 (17-55 years) no -PRF #2 yes <.01* PRF #3 yes <.01* PRF #3 (17-50 years) no -PRF #3 (17-55 years) no -VS1 #1 no -VS1 #1 (17-55 years) no -VS1 #2 no -VS1 #2 (17-55 years) yes >.05 VS2 #1 yes >.05 VS2 #1 (17-57 years) yes >.05 VS2 #2 yes <.01* VS2 #2 (17-57 years) yes <.01* PDQ - 8 no -PDQ - 8(17-55 years) no -* _p_ < .01 Table 17 Significant Scheffe Tests in the Comparison of the Six Groups Anova Manova Variable Significance Level Results of Scheffe Tests PRF #2 Abasement <.01* St. John vols & pros > Alt. pros Autonomy <.01* Alt. vols > St. John vols Sentience -.01* Alt. vols > St. John vols VS1 #2 (17-50 yrs) Family Security <.01* C.C. Si & St. John vols > Alt. vols VS2 #2 Polite <.01* St. John vols > Alt. vols & pros i.e., The Crisis Center and St. John volunteers valued Family Security more highly than did the Alternatives volunteers, when only those persons 17-50 years of age were compared. £ < .01 62 the anovas and individual comparison tests which followed significant manovas. Upon viewing Table 17, i t i s d i f f i c u l t to ascertain whether the differences between groups are mainly related to the variables of status level or agency a f f i l i a t i o n . However, i t can be observed that of the 11 significant anovas, 10 involve distinct differences between one or more St. John groups and one or more Alternatives groups. It may be that the va r i a b i l i t y among a l l six groups is primarily accounted for by differences between these two agencies. Another way of determining whether a subject's personality traits and values were represented more accurately by the agency or the status group to which he belonged involved performing two-way anovas on variables for which the overall manovas were significant. Table 18 shows the results when 3x2 (agency x status) anovas were completed. This table shows that there was a significant status effect for only three variables — Dominance, Exhibition and Nurturance — while a significant agency effect existed for nine variables — Abasement, Autonomy, Sentience, Succorance, Understanding, Nurturance, Social Recognition, Ambitious and Responsible. In addition, for three of these variables — Abasement, Social Recognition and Self-Controlled — there was a significant agency x status interaction. Upon analyzing this data i t became apparent that although a participant's personality and value characteristics were a function of both his status and the agency to which he belonged, his characteristics more closely resem-bled those of his agency than those related to his status level. A correlational analysis was also completed in the comparison of the three volunteer groups. For each of the two demographic Table 18 Results of.Two-Way (Agency x Status) Anovas i n the Comparison of the Six Groups S i g n i f i c a n t S i g n i f i c a n t S i g n i f i c a n t Manova Variable Homogeneity Status Level Agency E f f e c t Status x Agency E f f e c t PRF #2 Abasement yes Autonomy Y e s Dominance Y e s Sentience yes Succorance yes Understanding yes PRF #3 A f f i l i a t i o n yes Aggression yes Defendence no Ex h i b i t i o n yes Nurturance yes S o c i a l Recognition yes Infrequency yes S o c i a l D e s i r a b i l i t y yes VS2 #2 Ambitious yes Broadminded yes Capable yes Cheerful yes Honest yes Obedient no P o l i t e no Responsible yes Se l f - C o n t r o l l e d yes no <.01** .01** no <.01** no <. 05* no no no .01** no no .01** no no <.05* no no no no no no no <. 05* no no .05* <.01** no no .05* <.05* no no no no no no no .01** no no no no no no no no no no no no no ' no <.05* no no no <.05* * p_ < .05 **£ < . 01 64 variables on which these groups differed significantly (i.e. education and marital status), correlations with each of the dependent variables were computed. Table 19 presents the results of this analysis which revealed that the PRF dimension of Autonomy was significantly cor-related with marital status and also that the dimensions of Autonomy, Sentience and Understanding were correlated significantly with educa-tion. Table 20 provides more detailed information concerning the relationship between marital status and Autonomy. 65 Table 19 Correlations of S i g n i f i c a n t Demographic Variables with S i g n i f i c a n t Dependent Variables for the Volunteer Sample Co r r e l a t i o n with C o r r e l a t i o n with Dependent Variable M a r i t a l Status Education PRF Autonomy .40* .32* Nurturance .06 -.18 Sentience .17 .41* Succorance .26 -.10 Understanding .21 .43* VS1 Family Security .25 .08 Inner Harmony .14 -.12 VS2 Clean .19 .06 Helpful .15 .02 Imaginative . 15 -.08 Independent .06 .02 I n t e l l e c t u a l .11 .02 £ < .05 Table 20 The Relationship of Marital Status to PRF Autonomy Scale Score for the Volunteer Sample M a r i t a l Status Mean Autonomy Score Married (n=29) 6.0 Single (n=39) 9.1 Separated (n=3) 10.0 Divorced (n=3) 9.0 67 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION The intent of this study was to examine the personality charac-te r i s t i c s and values of different kinds of volunteer and professional workers involved in social service areas. Because this investigation was concerned with comparing and describing these groups as they existed, controlling for various demographic factors such as age by matching subjects across groups or by limiting the study to persons fa l l i n g within a confined age range would have veen antithetical to this study. Nevertheless, the importance of comparing these groups ad hoc with respect to important nonexperimental variables i s obvious i f one is to suggest that differences found can be attributed with confidence to the differences in agency or status between groups under comparison. No differences were found when the volunteers and professionals were compared on the demographic characteristics measured. The three volunteer groups did, however, differ with respect to some demographic factors. The St. John Ambulance volunteers had received significantly less formal education than the other two volunteer groups. In addition, 31% of the Alternatives volunteers were married whereas 47% of the St. John Ambulance volunteers and 54% of the Crisis Centre volunteers were married. A correlational analysis revealed that education was posi-tively correlated with the PRF scales of Autonomy, Sentience and Understanding, while marital status was correlated only with the Autonomy scale. Further analysis of the relationship between marital status and Autonomy revealed that married as opposed to single, separated 68 or divorced persons scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower on t h i s scale. When the three volunteer groups were compared differences were found on both the PRF and the Value Survey. The s i g n i f i c a n t d i f -ferences existed between the A l t e r n a t i v e s and St. John Ambulance groups with the mean scores for the C r i s i s Center volunteer group l y i n g between more extreme values found for the other two groups, i n most cases. The A l t e r n a t i v e s and St. John volunteers d i f f e r e d s i g n i -f i c a n t l y on twelve experimental v a r i a b l e s whereas the C r i s i s Centre group d i f f e r e d from the A l t e r n a t i v e s group on only two v a r i a b l e s and did not d i f f e r at a l l from the St. John group. These r e s u l t s suggest that the C r i s i s Centre volunteers, described as "emotional c r i s i s " workers are, i n f a c t , approximately midway between the A l t e r n a t i v e s group ("emotional n o n c r i s i s " workers) and the St. John group ("physical c r i s i s " workers) with respect to value o r i e n t a t i o n and personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Such findings support the contention of a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between the service .characteristics of an agency and the personality and value c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of i t s volunteers. On the Value Survey the A l t e r n a t i v e s volunteers valued Inner Harmony and being Imaginative, Independent and I n t e l l e c t u a l more highly than did the St. John volunteers who ranked Family Security and being Clean arid Helpful as more important. This d i f f e r e n c e i n value o r i e n t a t i o n suggests a d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n r e l a t e d to an i d e a l i s t i c o r i e n t a t i o n toward self-enhancement on the part of the A l t e r n a t i v e s volunteers and an emphasis upon more t r a d i t i o n a l and more external values by the St. John group. This difference cannot be accounted for by differences i n any demographic factor between groups — these 69 values are not rela t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y to the variables of education and mar i t a l status. Therefore, t h i s d i s s i m i l a r i t y i n values can be con-sidered as a fundamental difference between the volunteers working at each of these agencies. This type of information could be u t i l i z e d i n the development of screening procedures for each of these agencies, and possibly i n studies of volunteer effectiveness as we l l . It i s i n t e r e s t i n g to examine the values of the A l t e r n a t i v e s group i n l i g h t of t h e i r volunteer r o l e whereby they are required to e s t a b l i s h meaningful helping r e l a t i o n s h i p s with t h e i r c l i e n t s , ex-drug addicts. In the l a s t decade the use of drugs has been described as a means of developing c r e a t i v i t y , s e l f - d i s c o v e r y and self-enhancement, and of discovering meaning independent of that derived through material success. These values, popularized by the hippie culture and drug users i n general i n the l a t e 60's and early 70's are highly s i m i l a r to .those i d e n t i f i e d by the A l t e r n a t i v e s volunteers. This suggests that the Al t e r n a t i v e s volunteers, as a group, i d e n t i f y with the values which presumably characterize t h e i r c l i e n t e l e . The St. John Ambulance Brigade has been i n existence for many years and i t s organizational system and reward system have retained the structure which characterized t h i s agency sho r t l y a f t e r i t s i n -ception. I t i s not su r p r i s i n g that these volunteers ( i n comparison with those from Alternatives) are conservative i n nature. Their r e l a -t i v e l y high valuing of the construct of being Helpful and low importance placed upon being Imaginative, Independent and I n t e l l e c t u a l are con-gruent with the postulation that the St. John volunteers derive a greater sense of s a t i s f a c t i o n from providing assistance which has 70 visible consequences to a relatively high number of people under the specific direction of superior personnel than would the Alternatives volunteers. Compared to that of guiding an individual toward greater involvement in the mainstream of society, the tasks which the St. John volunteers are required to perform are relatively well-defined and straightforward. To work effectively the St. John volunteers must rely on a thorough knowledge of the range of treatments for various physical injuries and emergencies whereas the Alternatives volunteer must try to understand the deeper psychological needs of his client and creatively plan to meet these needs. As previously stated, the St. John volunteer group was less educated than the Alternatives volunteer group and included a higher percentage of married individuals. Considering that the PRF dimension of Autonomy was positively correlated with education and was found to be higher for nonmarried individuals i t was not surprising that the Alternatives volunteers scored significantly higher than the St. John volunteers on this dimension. Similarly, the finding that the Alternatives group surpassed the St. John group on the dimensions of Sentience and Understanding which were both correlated positively with level of education, was not unexpected. However, although the relative effects of these demographic variables as well as the experimental variable of agency upon these differences cannot be assessed, both these differences on demographic and dependent variables provide valuable information in comparing these two groups. Furthermore, differences found on Autonomy and Understanding concur with value differences found between these groups where the Alternatives volunteers 71 valued being Independent and being I n t e l l e c t u a l s i g n i f i c a n t l y more highly than did the St. John volunteers. In addition, a higher score on Sentience would be expected of the Al t e r n a t i v e s group which seemed to hold values r e l a t e d to self-enhancement and self-awareness more highly. S e n s i t i v i t y toward one's sensuous contact with the environment would appear to be a component of self-awareness. The A l t e r n a t i v e s volunteer group was found to value Family Security s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s than did the C r i s i s Center or St. John volunteer groups. Although Family Security would be expected to be more important to married people, and Al t e r n a t i v e s had a s i g n i f i c a n t l y smaller percentage component of married persons, the differ e n c e found f o r the v a r i a b l e of Family Security cannot be f u l l y accounted f o r i n t h i s way, because the c o r r e l a t i o n of m a r i t a l status and Family Security was not s i g n i f i c a n t (see Table 19). Their r e l a t i v e l y low valuing of Family Security i s congruent with the high valuing of being Independent, high score on Autonomy, and low score on Succorance found f o r the Alt e r n a t i v e s volunteers i n comparison with the St. John volunteers. It i s possible that the Al t e r n a t i v e s volunteers because of t h e i r low Nurturance score value highly the independence of t h e i r c l i e n t e l e . This f i n d i n g i s somewhat su r p r i s i n g because the A l t e r n a t i v e s r o l e of befriending another i n d i v i d u a l requires a more lengthy involvement on an emotional l e v e l than does either of the other two volunteer groups under study. Because the nature of t h e i r involvement with c l i e n t s was so d i f -ferent f o r volunteers from each of the represented agencies, i t was expected that differences i n interpersonal o r i e n t a t i o n , as measured 72 using Wiggins' Interpersonal Circumplex, would be found. However, i t appears that these three groups are a c t u a l l y quite s i m i l a r i n terms of t h e i r interpersonal o r i e n t a t i o n s , f o r the manova which i n -cluded the eight PDQ dimensions was not s i g n i f i c a n t . In addition, of a l l interpersonal type PRF dimensions for which i n d i v i d u a l anovas were performed i n comparing these three volunteer groups, only two of the nine were s i g n i f i c a n t . These groups d i f f e r e d i n terms of Nurturance and Succorance, but not on the dimensions of Abasement, A f f i l i a t i o n , Aggression, Defendence, Dominance or S o c i a l Recognition. The s i m i l a r i t y of some of the l a t e r PRF dimensions to those from the PDQ (e.g., Dominant-Ambitious, Extraverted-Gregarious and Ingenious-Unassuming, etc.) suggests that the absence of s i g n i f i c a n t r e s u l t s i s not a function of the discriminatory a b i l i t y of the PDQ, but rather a t t e s t s to the f a c t that these three groups are indeed s i m i l a r i n terms of interpersonal o r i e n t a t i o n . It should be noted that the response rates of both volunteers and professionals varied across agencies. This v a r i a b i l i t y i n par-t i c i p a t i o n , which ranged from 20-50% for the volunteers and 70-90% for the professionals from any agency, could not be experimentally c o n t r o l l e d . Thus the groups were composed of s e l f - s e l e c t e d subjects — those volunteers and professionals who agreed to p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h i s study upon t h e i r agency's recommendation. In analyzing and i n t e r -preting the r e s u l t s of t h i s study i t has been assumed that the par-t i c i p a n t s from each agency accurately represented t h e i r respective groups. Unfortunately, t h i s assumption could not be tested e m p i r i c a l l y . Another difference among the groups was r e l a t e d to the difference i n 73 length of service of both professionals and volunteers across agencies. This difference i s l a r g e l y due to the fact that these agencies have been operating for varying lengths of time. At the time of the study, the A l t e r n a t i v e s program had been operating for less than a year, whereas the St. John Ambulance Brigade had existed for many years. Nevertheless, a requirement of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s study was that the subject had worked with the agency f o r at l e a s t three months. Although the suggestion that personality and value changes may r e s u l t as a function of length of service cannot be refuted, t h i s point was not too relevant to the p^ssent study where the emphasis was upon des-c r i b i n g the various volunteer and p r o f e s s i o n a l groups as they then existed. The comparison of volunteers and professionals revealed that these groups d i f f e r e d with respect to only a few PRF and PDQ dimensions. Professionals were found to score s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on the PRF dimensions of Achievement, Dominance and E x h i b i t i o n . S i m i l a r i l y , the professionals obtained higher scores on the PDQ dimensions l a b e l l e d Dominant-Ambitious and Gregarious-Extroverted and a s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower score on the Lazy-Submissive dimension of the PDQ. In Wiggins' Inter-personal Circumplex the Lazy-Submissive dimension l i e s d i r e c t l y across : from the Dominant-Ambitious dimension and differences on both these dimensions emphasize the d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of these two status groups on a dimension comprised of two b i p o l a r f a c t o r s , Dominant-Submissive and Ambitious-Lazy. In addition, the f a c t that the dimensions found to be s i g n i f i c a n t on each of these tests are highly s i m i l a r supports conclusions based upon t h i s volunteer-professional comparison. 74 The r e s u l t a n t d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l i s t h a t o f a c h i e v e -m e n t - o r i e n t e d , h a r d - w o r k i n g , dominant, e x t r o v e r t e d and e x h i b i t i o n i s t i c i n c o m p a r i s o n w i t h t h e v o l u n t e e r . I n each o f t h e t h e t h r e e a g e n c i e s s t u d i e d t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l s a r e i n v o l v e d i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n , o r l e a d e r -s h i p o f t h e i r v o l u n t e e r s as p a r t of t h e i r d u t i e s . T h e r e f o r e , a r e l a -t i v e l y h i g h l e v e l o f Dominance wou l d seem a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e i r r o l e , as m i ght h i g h e r l e v e l s o f E x t r o v e r s i o n and E x h i b i t i o n . The p r o f e s s i o n a l s as a group a l s o appear t o be more a c h i e v e m e n t - o r i e n t e d and a m b i t i o u s t h a n t h e v o l u n t e e r group, who u n l i k e t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l c o u n t e r p a r t s a r e n o t s p e c i a l l y e d u c a t e d n o r remunerated f o r t h e i r work a t t h e agency. The o b s e r v e d d i f f e r e n c e s c o u l d be due, i n p a r t , t o t h e c i r -cumstances under w h i c h t h e s e t e s t s were a d m i n i s t e r e d . F o r example, one c o u l d s u g g e s t t h a t t h e v o l u n t e e r s may have appeared more a m b i t i o u s i f t e s t e d a t t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e l o c a t i o n s of employment, o r t h a t t h e p r o -f e s s i o n a l s may have d e s c r i b e d t h e m s e l v e s as l e s s e x t r o v e r t e d had t h e y been t e s t e d i n l e s s f a m i l i a r s u r r o u n d i n g s , e t c . D a t a a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e PRF s u g g e s t t h a t r e s u l t s based upon t h a t i n s t r u m e n t a r e e s s e n t i a l l y u n a f f e c t e d by s u c h f a c t o r s . A s t u d y where c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s c o m p l e t e d t h e PRF on two o c c a s i o n s , once i n c l a s s and t h e n a week l a t e r i n t h e i r own homes, r e v e a l e d a mean r e l i a b i l i t y f o r t h e PRF c o n t e n t s c a l e s o f .80 ( B e n t l e r , 1964). (Form AA r a t h e r t h a n Form E was used i n t h a t s t u d y ; however, J a c k s o n , 1964, p. 40-41, has c o n f i r m e d t h a t t h e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y o f e a r l i e r forms was r e t a i n e d i n Form E.) I n a d d i t i o n , t h e r e i s e m p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e PRF i s n o t s u s c e p t i b l e t o f a k i n g o r r o l e - p l a y i n g ( J a c k s o n , 1974,. p. 4 4 ) , so any e f f o r t on t h e p a r t o f t h e s u b j e c t s t o r e p r e s e n t t h e i r agency o r group f a v o u r a b l y need n o t be 75 of concern. Unfortunately, r e l i a b i l i t y data on the PDQ i s not yet a v a i l a b l e . Because the findings on t h i s instrument support and are supported by s i m i l a r findings on the PRF, however, i t can be assumed that the differences found i n the volunteer-professional comparison are v a l i d . In assessing the degree of s i m i l a r i t y between volunteers and pro-f e s s i o n a l s at the same agency i n comparison with the s i m i l a r i t y between same status groups across agencies, manovas including combinations of dependent variables were performed across s i x groups — the three volunteer and the three p r o f e s s i o n a l groups. Those variables included i n s i g n i f i c a n t manovas were then subjected to both one-way and two-way analyses of variance procedures. The one-way procedure revealed s i g n i f i c a n t differences among the s i x groups on f i v e dependent measures and further revealed that these differences were a l l a function of a difference i n agency rather than status. Four of these s i g n i f i c a n t differences involved only one or more Al t e r n a t i v e s group versus one or more St. John group, while the f i f t h involved the A l t e r n a t i v e s volun-teer group versus the C r i s i s Centre and St. John volunteer groups. The two-way analyses of variance revealed s i g n i f i c a n t agency e f f e c t s for nine v a r i a b l e s , s i g n i f i c a n t status e f f e c t s f o r three v a r i a b l e s and a s i g n i f i c a n t agency x status i n t e r a c t i o n for three v a r i a b l e s . Be-cause only three of the eight manovas performed across groups were s i g -n i f i c a n t , only a l i m i t e d percentage of the t o t a l array of dependent variables included i n the study were i n d i v i d u a l l y studied i n comparing the six groups. Therefore, i t would not be meaningful to discuss the kinds of v a r i a b l e s which most e f f e c t i v e l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d the workers 76 a t d i f f e r e n t a g e n c i e s . N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e f i n d i n g t h a t v o l u n t e e r s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y more s i m i l a r t o t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l s a t t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e a g e n c i e s t h a n t o o t h e r k i n d s o f v o l u n t e e r s c o u l d be o f i m p o r t a n c e t o p e r s o n s i n t e r e s t e d i n d e v e l o p i n g more e f f e c t i v e a d v e r t i s i n g , s c r e e n i n g , s e l e c t i o n and e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s f o r v o l u n t e e r s . I t i s o b v i o u s t h a t a n e c e s s a r y f i r s t s t e p i n f o l l o w i n g t h i s l i n e o f r e s e a r c h w o u l d be t o d e t e r m i n e whether t h i s s i m i l a r i t y i n v a l u e s and 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 e x i s t s a t t h e t i m e a t w h i c h t h e v o l u n t e e r a p p l i e s t o an agency, whether i t i s p r e s e n t i n v o l u n t e e r s who a c t u a l l y b e g i n t o work a t an agency o r whether i t e v o l v e s o v e r t i m e , as a r e s u l t o f v o l u n t e e r e x p e r i e n c e a t t h a t agency. 77 REFERENCE NOTES 1. Wiggins, J.S. Interim a c t i v i t y report: taxonomy of p e r s o n a l i t y  t r a i t d e s c r i p t i v e terms. 1. The interpersonal domain. Unpub-l i s h e d research report, 1976. Obtained from Department of Psychology, University of B r i t i s h Columbia. 2. Wiggins, J.S. Personal communication, June, 1976. 3. Wiggins, J.S. & Holzmuller, A. Psychological androgyny and i n t e r - personal behavior. Unpublished manuscript, 1976. 78 REFERENCES Adler, L.L. & Graubert, J.G. Projected s o c i a l distances from mental patient related items by male and female volunteers and nonvolun-teers. Psychologist Reports, 1975, _37, 515-521. Ahmed, S.A., Fry, J.M. & Jackson, D.N. Personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and socioeconomic v a r i a b l e s . Canadian Journal of Behavioural  Science, 1972, 4-, 172-180. A l l p o r t , G.W. & Odbert, H.S. Trait-names: A psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs, 1936, 47(1, Whole No. 211). Andrews, D.A., Wormith, J.S., Kennedy, D.J. & Daigle-Zinn, W.J. The a t t i t u d i n a l e f f e c t s of structured discussions and r e c r e a t i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n between .young criminal offenders and undergraduate volunteers. Journal of Community Psychology, 1977, 5_, 63-71. Ansel, E.L. Correlates of volunteer performance i n a suicide preven-t i o n / c r i s i s i n t ervention service. Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r -t a t i o n , University of F l o r i d a , 1972. Reported i n D i s s e r t a t i o n  Abstracts International, 1973, _34, 1-B. Bem, S.L. The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of  Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1974, 42, 155-162. Bentler, P.M. Response v a r i a b i l i t y : Fact or a r t i f a c t ? Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Stanford University, 1964. Reported i n D.N. Jackson (Ed.), Personality Research Form Manual. New York: Research Psychologists Press, Inc., 1974, pp. 20-21. Campbell, D.T. & Fiske, D.W. Convergent and discriminant v a l i d a t i o n by the multi-trait-multi-method matrix. Psychological B u l l e t i n , 79 1959, 56, 81-105. Carter, N. Volunteers: The untapped p o t e n t i a l . Ottawa, Ontario: The Canadian Council on S o c i a l Development, 1975. Cochrane, R. & Rokeach, M. Rokeach's Value Survey: a methodological note. Journal of Experimental Research i n Personality, 1970, 4_, 159-161. Doyle, W.W., Foreman, M.E. & Wales, E. E f f e c t s of supervision i n the t r a i n i n g of nonprofessional c r i s i s - i n t e r v e n t i o n counselors. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1977, 24.(1), 72-78. Feather, N.T. Educational choice and student a t t i t u d e s i n r e l a t i o n to terminal and instrumental values. A u s t r a l i a n Journal of Psychology, 1970, 22, 127-144. Gelineau, V.A. & Kantor, D. P r o - s o c i a l commitment among college students. Journal of S o c i a l Issues, 1964, 2(), 112-130. Goldberg, L.R. Toward a taxonomy for personality t r a i t terms. Eugene, Oregon: Oregon Research I n s t i t u t e , 1974. Gray, B., Nida, R.A. & Coonfield, T.J. Empathic l i s t e n i n g t e s t : an instrument for the s e l e c t i o n and t r a i n i n g of telephone c r i s i s workers. Journal of Community Psychology, 1976, k_, 199-205. Hersch, P.D., Kulik, J.A. & Scheibe, D.E. Personal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of college volunteers i n mental h o s p i t a l s . Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1969, 33(1), 30-34. Holzberg, J.D. & Gewirtz, H. A method of a l t e r i n g a t t i t u d e s toward mental i l l n e s s . P s y c h i a t r i c Quarterly, 1963, 37. Holzberg, J . , Gewirtz, H. & Ebner, E. Changes i n moral judgement and self-acceptance as a function of companionship with h o s p i t a l i z e d 80 mental patients. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1964, 28, 299-303. Homant, R. Semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l ratings and rank-ordering of values. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1969, 29_, 885-889. Horn, J.C. Personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of d i r e c t service volunteers. Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n . Reported i n D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts International, 1973, 34_(4-B), 1726. Howarth, E. Personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of volunteers. Psychological Reports, 1976, _38, 855-858. Hummel, T.J. and S l i g o , J.R. Empirical comparison of univariate and multivariate analysis of variance procedures. Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1971, 76(1). 49-57. Jackson, D.N. A sequential system f or personality scale development. In Current topics i n c l i n c i a l and community psychology, Vol. 2. New York: Academic Press Inc., 1970, 61-96. Jackson, D.N. PRF - Form E. New York: Research Psychologists Press, Inc., 1974. Jackson, D.N. Personality Research Form Manual. Goshen, New York: Research Psychologists Press Inc., 1974. Jackson, D.N. & Guthrie, G.M. A multi-trait-multi-method evaluation of the PRF. Proceedings of the 76th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 1968, 177-178. Jamison, R. & Johnson, J.E. Empathy and therapeutic o r i e n t a t i o n i n paid and volunteer c r i s i s phone workers, professional therapists and undergraduate college students. Journal of Community Psychology, 1975, ^ ( 3 ) , 268-274. 81 Karlsruher, A.E. The influence of supervision and f a c i l i t a t i v e condi-tions on the psychotherapeutic effectiveness of nonprofessional and professional therapists. American Journal of Community  Psychology, 1976, 4^2). Ke l l y , K., Silverman, B.I. & Cochrane, K. S o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y and the Rokeach Value Survey. Journal of Experimental Research i n  Personality, 1972. Knapp, R.H. & Holzberg, J.D. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of college students volunteering f o r service to mental patients. Journal of Con- s u l t i n g Psychology, 1964, 28(1), 82-85. Knickerbocker, D.A. Lay volunteer and p r o f e s s i o n a l trainee therapeutic functioning and outcomes i n a suicide and c r i s i s i ntervention service. Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , University of F l o r i d a . Reported i n D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts International, 1972. Kuszsyn, I. A comparison of judgemental methods with endorsements i n the assessment of personality t r a i t s . Journal of Applied  Psychology, 1968, 52, 227-233. Laforge, R. & Suczek, R.G. The interpersonal dimension of personality. 111. An interpersonal c h e c k l i s t . Journal of Personality, 1955, 25, 94-112. Leary.,. T. Interpersonal diagnosis of personality. New York: Ronald Press, 1957. Mullins, R.J. Evaluation and p r e d i c t i o n of success of volunteer counselors. Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Oklahoma. Reported i n D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts International, 1973. 82 Murray, H.A. Explorations i n personality. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1938. N e i l l , J.A. & Jackson, D.N. Minimum redundancy item analysis. Educa- t i o n a l and Psychological Measurement, 1976. Nesselroade & Balko. Unpublished study reported i n Personality Research  Form Manual by D.N. Jackson, Goshen, New York: Research Psycho-l o g i s t s Press Inc., 1970, p. 41. Norman, W.T. 2800 personality t r a i t d e scriptors: normative operating c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s for a u n i v e r s i t y population. Ann Arbor: Un i v e r s i t y of Michigan, Department of Psychology, 1967. Reddy, R.D. & Smith, R.D\ Personality and capacity determinants of i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n organized voluntary action. In D.H. Smith, R.D. Reddy & Baldwin (Eds.), Voluntary a c t i o n research. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1972, pp. 277-298. Rokeach, M. Value survey. Sunnyvale, C a l i f o r n i a : Halgren Tests, 1967. Rokeach, M. The nature of human values. New York: The Free Press, 1973. Sakowitz, M.L. & Hirschman, R. S e l f - i d e a l congruency and therapeutic s k i l l development i n nonpaid paraprofessionals. Journal of Community Psychology, 1975, 2(3), 275-279. Siegel, S. Nonparametric s t a t i s t i c s for the behavioral sciences. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1956. Seiss, T.F. & Jackson, D.N. Vocational i n t e r e s t s and personality: An empirical int e g r a t i o n . Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1970, 27-35. 83 Smith, B.M. & Nelson, L.D. P e r s o n a l i t y c o r r e l a t e s of h e l p i n g behavior. P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reports, 1975, 37., 307-310. Tapp, J.T., S l a i k e u , K.A. & T u l k i n , S.R. Toward an e v a l u a t i o n of telephone counseling: process and t e c h n i c a l v a r i a b l e s i n f l u e n c i n g 'shows' and 'no shows' f o r a c l i n i c r e f e r r a l . American J o u r n a l of Community Psychology, 1974, _2(4), 357-364. Wiggins, J.S. Test review f o r the Seventh Mental Measurements Yearbook: The PRF. In O.K. Buros (Ed.), The seventh mental measurements yearbook, Volume 1. New J e r s e y : The Gryphon P r e s s , 1972, pp. 301-303. Wiggins, J.S. Personal D e s c r i p t i o n Questionnaire. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1976. 

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.831.1-0094329/manifest

Comment

Related Items