Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Attitudes toward the elderly : the relationship between self-ratings and ratings assigned to an elderly… Kozak, John François 1979

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1980_A8 K69.pdf [ 7.48MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094901.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094901-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094901-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094901-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094901-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094901-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094901-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094901-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094901.ris

Full Text

ATTITUDES TOWARD THE ELDERLY: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-RATINGS AND RATINGS ASSIGNED TO AN ELDERLY WOMAN by JOHN FRANCIS KOZAK B.A., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1975 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 UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA November 1979 Q) John" Francis Kozak-, -1979 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Brit ish Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of Psychology The University of Brit ish Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date November 22, 1979 i i . Abstract The purpose of t h i s study was to examine the r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e l f - r a t i n g s and ratings assigned to an e l d e r l y woman 65 years of age and older. Ninety-one males and one hundred and forty-nine females responded to a t e s t battery that consisted of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Test (MBTI), Signori's 69 Bipolar Adjective Scales (69AS) and modified, seven point L i k e r t versions of the Eysenck Personality Inven-tor y (EPI), Wilson's Conservatism Scale (C), and Rotter's I n t e r n a l -External Locus of Control (LoC). Subjects completed the t e s t battery under two conditions, one as the items r e l a t e d to themselves and the other, excluding the MBTI, as they f e l t the items would be responded to by an e l d e r l y woman. Both the order of the items i n each t e s t and the order of each t e s t i n the battery were completely randomized f o r every subject. Analysis of the male data ind i c a t e d that there was a highly s i g n i f i c a n t , p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two types of ratings f o r the variables of locus of control and the 69AS, whereas the female data revealed high s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s f o r the va r i a b l e of extraversion-introversion (EPI), neuroticism (EPI), locus of cont r o l and the 69AS. Discriminant functions on the eight Jungian types revealed that only the extraverted-introverted types were c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h -able from t h e i r s e l f - r a t i n g s on the various personality measures i n the battery. An examination of the discriminant c o e f f i c i e n t s revealed that the 69AS contributed the most i n c l a s s i f y i n g subjects i n t o t h e i r respective types. Both the l i m i t a t i o n s and implications of the findings were discussed. i i i . Table of Contents Page Abstract i i Table of Contents i i i L i s t of Tables i v Acknowledgments v i I. Introduction 1 Jung 9 Research hypothesis 14 I I . Method 15 Subjects 15 Materials 15 Procedure 18 Scoring of materials 19 I I I . Results . . . 21 Hypothesis I 23 Males 23 Females 30 Hypothesis II 3? IV. Interpretation and Discussion 61 V. Conclusion & Summary 71 Reference Notes 74-References 75 Appendix A: A t t r i b u t i o n Theories 86 Appendix B: Jungian Type Theory 98 Appendix C: Eysenck Personality Inventory 108 Appendix D: Wilson's Conservatism Inventory I l l Appendix E: Signori's Bipolar Adjective Scales 115 Appendix F: Rotter's Intern-External Locus of Control . . . . 118 Appendix G: Test Materials 122 i v . L i s t of Tables Page Table 1 Ethnic background of subjects by sex . 16 Table 2 Means and standard deviations by Sex 23 Table 3 Correlations between males s e l f - r a t i n g s and ratings provided f o r the e l d e r l y woman on pers o n a l i t y t e s t s 24 Table 4 Dependent t - t e s t s between mean s e l f - r a t i n g s and ratings assigned to the e l d e r l y woman by males 27 Table 5 Correlations between females s e l f - r a t i n g s and ratings provided f o r the e l d e r l y woman on perso n a l i t y t e s t s 31 Table 6 Dependent t - t e s t s between mean s e l f - r a t i n g s and ratings assigned to the e l d e r l y woman by females 35 Table 7 D i s t r i b u t i o n of Jungian (MBTl) Types by sex . . . . 39 Table 8 Comparison of mean ratings by males according to Jungian (MBTI) Type 40 Table 9 Comparison of mean ratings by females 'according to Jungian (MBTl) Type 41 Table 10 C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of males by Jungian (MBTl) Type according to s e l f - r a t i n g s 43 Table 11 C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of females by Jungian (MBTl) Type according to s e l f - r a t i n g s 44 Table 12 Discriminant function c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r s e l f - r a t i n g s by male Jungian (MBTl) Types . . . . 45 Table 13 Discriminant function c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r ratings assigned to the e l d e r l y woman by male Jungian (MBTl) Types 49 Table 14 Discriminant function c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r s e l f - r a t i n g s by females Jungian (MBTl) Types . . . 53 V. Page Table 15 Di s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r f o r r a t i n g s assigned t o the e l d e r l y woman by female Jungian (MBTI) Types 57 v i . Acknowledgments I wish to express my sincerest and deepest gratitude to Dr. E.I. Signori f o r h i s guidance and patience i n not only a s s i s t i n g me throughout the various stages of t h i s t h e s i s but also f o r advice when I needed i t . I would l i k e to thank Dr. R. Lakowski f o r many valuable i n s i g h t s he has given me, DcJ.S. Wiggins f o r being on the thesis committee, and Dr. S. Butt-Finn f o r k i n d l y accepting the tortuous task of evaluating both the proposal and introduction to the t h e s i s . I would also l i k e to thank Frank Flynn f o r u n r a v e l l i n g the randomization programme and Ruth A l l a n f o r her g r e a t l y admired typing s k i l l s . L a s t l y , but immeasurably not the l e a s t , I would e s p e c i a l l y l i k e to thank Marsha and Klaus Schroeder f o r not only being kind enough to a s s i s t me i n the preparation of the test b a t t e r i e s and i n the c o l l e c t i o n of data, hut also f o r providing many a good time. 1. I. Introduction The study of human behaviour through c o g n i t i v e - a t t i t u d i n a l and behavioural c r i t e r i a have long been prominent i n personality research. Individuals have been characterized according to t h e i r physical type (Hippocrates, 460-370 B.C.; Rostan, 1824; Kretschmer, 1926; Sheldon, 194-0), t h e i r responses to a set number of questionnaire items ( C a t t e l l , 1950; Eysenck, 1953; Jackson, 1971) or according to interpretations of t h e i r overt and/or covert behaviour within a wide variety of situations (Freud, 1940; Snygg and Coombs, 1949; Dollard and M i l l e r , 1950). Of pa r t i c u l a r interest i s the emphasis seen during the l a s t two decades on the processes involved i n the perception and a t t r i b u t i o n of actions and dispositions to others (Goffman, 1961, 1963; Bern, 1970; Hamilton, 1979). Having stemmed from the early theoretical speculations of researchers such as A l l p o r t (1950, I960, 1966) K e l l y (1955) and Kelley (1967), the study of personality has moved recently into methodological and stru c t u r a l investigations such as that of the circumplex model (Wiggins, 1975, 1979). Despite such advances personality research has generally been negligent i n adopting experimental paradigms whereby the personality characteristics of the observer or his group can be examined i n r e l a t i o n to his or t h e i r attitudes. Carlson (1971) pointed out that a recent trend within, personality research has been to ignore the personality characteristics of the in d i v d i u a l while concentrating on variables that are extraeneous to him. The same lament could be uttered of stereo-type research on attitudes expressed by one group to another. Heider (1958) proposed that an individual's behaviour was dependent upon how he perceived the covert d i s p o s i t i o n a l q u a l i t i e s of another. S i m i l a r l y , as pointed out e a r l i e r , theorists such as Snygg and Coombs (194-9), K e l l y (1955), and Coombs and Richards (1976) have equally noted that one's perception of individuals or events was dependent upon how the i n d i v i d u a l construed the events within his own personal 'frame of reference'. Though such theorists and others as Jung (1974) have defended the importance of the i n d i v i d u a l , research i n person perception ( a t t r i b u t i o n ) has t r a d i t i o n a l l y adopted a sociological perspective whereby the characteristics of the individual's external world were deemed to be more psychologically s i g n i f i c a n t than that of the individual himself. B r i e f l y , research on person perception has centered around a few s p e c i f i c variables, which, according to Tagiuri (1969), were; (l ) . t h e characteristics or state of the observed person, (2) the concomi-tants of, these ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s , (3) the d i s t a l cues or manifestations of the characteristics of the observed person available to the perceiver, (4) proximal cues of manifestations of the observed person u t i l i z e d by the perceiver, (5) the cognitive process that u t i l i z e s the proximal cues, and (6) the perception or judgment by a perceiver of some character i s t i c s of the observed person. Though the l a s t two variables tend to enter the domain of personality, research as that exemplified by Hayden and Mischel (1976), Akamatsu and Thelen (1977), and Wegner (1977) have predominantly focused upon the f i r s t four variables outlined by Tagiuri. When research has centered around the topic of a t t r i b u t i o n and personality, i t invariably has dealt with fragmented features of personality syndromes such as authoritarianism (Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson and Sanford, 1950; Kirscht and Dillehay, 1967) and 'moderator variables' as self-concept (Leonard, 1975), neuroticism (Snyder and Monson 1975), and locus of control ('Gilmor, 1978). 3. One area that has p a r t i c u l a r l y been dominated hy the emphasis on the a t t r i b u t i o n process without regard to ±he_characteristics.of the group pro y i ding the responses,, i s that of ageing. Relying mostly on_ypunger subjects ( B r i t t o n and B r i t t o n , 1969; Thomas and Yamamoto, 1975), gerontological research has focused upon how the s o c i a l perception of the elderly might be influenced -. by ethnic status (Simos, 1970; Crouch, 1972), r a c i a l group (Jackson, 1971; Wylie, 1971) and l e v e l of education (Thorson, Whatley and Hancock, 1975; Weinberger and Milham, 1975), with the results generally indicating that the t r a i t s ascribed to the elderly were more negative than those given to a younger age group irrespective of the above demographic variables. Though some research has been conducted on the personality characteristics of the aged them-selves (Reichard, Livson and Peterson, 1962; Neugarten, Moore and Lowe, 1968; Neugarten and Gutmann, 1968; Costa and McCrae, 1976), research as to the personality characteristics of the group, describing 'the elderly i s nonexistent; therefore ignoring the p o s s i b i l i t y that the t r a i t s being assigned to such a stimulus group may have resulted from the personality type of the observer .or the group he/she belongs to. Theories of ageing, because of t h e i r heavy influence on variables outside of the i n d i v i d u a l , have mostly adopted a gross demographic or soci o l o g i c a l perspective. Thus the major theories as Disengagement Theory (Cumming and Henry, 1961), Modernization Theory (Cowgill, 1972) and Modernity (Bengston, Dowd, Smith and Inkeles, 1975) a l l perceive the s o c i a l function and perception of the elderly as re s u l t i n g from the conditions of forced retirement and degree of i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n within a s p e c i f i c country. Recently such general theoretical speculations have been demonstrated, to be highly unreliable (Tallmer, 1967; Press and McKool, 1972; Kozak and.Signori, 1976), though the c r i t i c i s m s themselves A. have ignored the problem of to what degree, i f any, do the personality characteristics of the observer influence the a t t r i b u t i o n a l process i t s e l f . Research that has been done i n personality per se has approached the problem by assessing how.the elderly may be described through either Jungian theory or Erikson's psychosexual stage of i n t e g r i t y versus despair (Peck, 1956; Neugarten, 1968; Costa and McCrae, 1976). Despite the richness of dynamic theories, gerontological research u t i l i z i n g these theo r e t i c a l perspectives has. .done so i n a myopic manner by concentrating solely upon minutiae of the theory such as introversion without, as previously mentioned, any reference to the t o t a l personality style of the introverted person.as would be hypothesized by Jung. From Carlson and Levy's (1973) examination of the relationship between Jungian typology and s o c i a l perception, and Costa and McCrae's (1976) study on the reinterpretation of Cattell'.s 16PF findings on the elderly i n Jungian.terms, i t appears that Jung's typology, with respect to the four functions of thinking, feeling,• sensing, and i n t u i t i n g -along with the two attitudes of introversion and extraversion, would provide an investigator with a-.rich conceptual framework from which one might examine the question of how personality dispositions may influence or determine how an in d i v i d u a l or group (eg. Jungian type) perceives and ascribes t r a i t s to others. The present study was an attempt to investigate the problem of whether self-ratings were related to the ratings assigned to an elderly woman, and what role Jung's dimensions of extraversion-introversion, sensing-intuition, thinkking-feeling, and judging-perceiving played i n either determining or influencing the type of ratings made toward the s e l f and the elderly woman. Drawing on the e a r l i e r work of Ge s t a l t i s t s such as Lewin (1936), Snygg and Coombs (1949) hypothesized that an indivdiual's awareness of events and others was e n t i r e l y dependent upon that person's d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of his phenomenal f i e l d . The phenomenal f i e l d , according to Snygg and Coombs, " i s simply the universe of naive experience i n which the ind i v i d u a l l i v e s , the everyday sit u a t i o n of s e l f and surroundings which each person takes to be r e a l i t y " (1949, p. 15). As such, the phenomenal f i e l d i s highly unique f o r each person and, more importantly, a l l forms of behaviour are determined and predicted e n t i r e l y from the individual's perception of events and objects within his frame of reference. Within the highly unique cosmology of perceptions known as the phenomenal f i e l d , Snygg and Coombs introduced the concept of the pheno-menal s e l f : a product of the organism's early d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n s . O r i g i n a l l y , Snygg and Coombs stated, the f i e l d consisted of amorphous stimuli which the infant crudely perceived as his environment (e.g., mother). Gradually the infant differentiates his. f i e l d into two causal perceptions - those events directly, .attributable to him (the s e l f ) and those attributable to his environment (the n o t - s e l f ) : a developmental theme not uncommon i n psychological l i t e r a t u r e (Rogers, 1951; Piaget, 1954). The sensed difference between the s e l f and not-self was viewed by Snygg and Coombs as a major d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n that permitted the organism to detect differences i n experiences. This need of the organism to d i f f e r e n t i a t e s i m i l i a r i t i e s and/or differences between perceptions was viewed as the motivating force operant i n human behaviour, which may have inspired Kelly's (1955)'dichotomy corollary. Snygg and Coombs hypothesized that through d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n the amorphic, i n f a n t i l e perception of the f i e l d was reorganized, as stated e a r l i e r , into the two regions referred to as s e l f and not-self. Through continual interaction with his environment, the organism undergoes a psychological 6. metamorphosis whereby concepts of se l f and not-self within the f i e l d are reorganized, creating new frameworks or schemata that conform to the organism's new perception of his phenomenal f i e l d . Thus the main role of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n i s to permit either the accommodation and assimilation of existing schemata or the creation of e n t i r e l y new ones dependent upon the d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of information by the i n d i v i d u a l : a Piagetian concept more recently applied to a t t r i b u t i o n theory by Bern and Funder (1978). With the restructuring of the organism's personal frame of reference (.the' 'schemata' of the s e l f and n o t - s e l f ) , a process referred to by various theories as maturation, individuation or s e l f -a c tualization, the person's a b i l i t y to categorize and predict becomes more refined and accurate, vis-a-vis r e a l i t y . I f the a b i l i t y to discrim-inate v i s u a l s t i m u l i increases with age (Hochberg, 1971), and i f accuracy i n r e l a t i o n to perceiving s o c i a l s t i m u l i is. based upon some Bayesian pr o b a b i l i t y of consensus (Fishhein and Ajzen, 1975) then research such as that by Kirby and Gardner (1973), who demonstrated that as children became older t h e i r stereotypes "became more consensual, less evaluative, and more sim i l a r to" those held by adults.(p. 127), tends to support the previous statement. Thus through one's own personal frame of reference one i s hypothe-t i c a l l y able to categorize s t i m u l i into an anthology of meaningful laws and c o r o l l a r i e s , enabling one' to i n f e r causal relationships between events (.both involving people and objects) and consequences. This a b i l i t y to predict through i n f e r r i n g some causal state on the basis of previous information ( i n t e r n a l frame of reference) has more recently been referred to as a t t r i b u t i o n theory. For Heider (1958) attributions were the result of some physiological-perceptual process that enabled the observer to understand and, to some 7. degree, control h i s environment. By e s t a b l i s h i n g the perceived r e l a t i o n -ships between an outcome and the d i s p o s i t i o n s of an actor, the observer was assumed to be able.to assign c a u s a l i t y to the outcome i t s e l f as e i t h e r being i n t e r n a l (due to some d i s p o s i t i o n of the actor) or external (luck, chance)... P r i o r to i n f e r r i n g c a u s a l i t y Heider stated that respon-s i b i l i t y f o r the outcome had to be ascertained, the perception of which was dependent upon the degree of a s s o c i a t i o n and; knowledge that the actor was believed to possess about the outcome. This degree of perceived r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , r e f e r r e d to as personal and impersonal c a u s a l i t y i n a more g l o b a l approach, appeared to be one of the more important factors i n determining the type of a t t r i b u t i o n made. S i m i l a r l y , Jones and Davis (1965). interpreted the a t t r i b u t i o n process as the r e s u l t of the perceived intentions (Heider's r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ) of the actor, h i s a b i l i t i e s and/or d i s p o i t i o n s , the causal r e l a t i o n s h i p between these v a r i a b l e s , and the r o l e played by the environment upon each of the above features. Whether or not such complex cognitive mechanisms involving, cost benefit analysis, (hedonic relevance), p r o b a b i l i t y estimation, and the a b i l i t y to categorize and-recall events c o r r e c t l y occurs i n the highly r a t i o n a l i s t i c manner as proposed by both Heider and Jones and Davis i s debatable. Apart from having an a f f e c t on the type of causal a t t r i b u t i o n s made toward others, as postulated by Heider (1958), Jones and Davis (1965) and K e l l e y (196?J, Hamilton (1979) also proposed that a t t r i b u t i o n s influenced the processing of information i t s e l f . Hamilton characterized information processing into the stages of encoding,' i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , retention, the r e t r i e v a l of subsequently obtained information about members of stereotyped groups, and the perceiver's causal a t t r i b u t i o n s regarding 8. the target person's behaviour. Of these stages Hamilton f e l t that the encoding stage was the most important as i t of a l l the stages promised to reveal what features of a stimulus was important for the a t t r i b u t i o n process; and, therefore, would enable one to understand the other stages -probably through some form of path analysis. Found within the encoding process i s what Cantor and Mischel (1977.) referred to as prototypes. Prototypes, according to these authors, represent dispositions made of certain personality types as extraversion and introversion. These prototypes are assumed to be schematically based conceptualizations (Hamilton's schema based expectancies) s i m i l a r to stereotypes of ethnic groups, and, as such, bias the perception held of some target group. A more in-depth treatment of various a t t r i b u t i o n theories can be found i n Appendix A. Recent research by Cantor and Mischel (1977), Markus (1977), and Rogers, Kuiper and Kirker (1977) have indicated the importance of self-reference (self-prototype) i n a t t r i b u t i o n theory. Their results suggest that the image a subject has of himself affects cognitive processes such as the encoding of information from memory tasks. Moreover despite the approaches of Heider, Jones and Davis, and Hamilton, i t would appear that the attribution'process i s not an entity i n i t s e l f but a develop-mental one which involves at f i r s t naive, crude d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n s of one's environment, leading to more highly complex ones as was hypothe-sized by Snygg and. Coombs. I t would therefore appear that a personality theory which not"only possessed the perceptual dynamics si m i l a r to those proposed by the above a t t r i b u t i o n theorists hut which also focused on how such mechanisms were dependent upon either the personality characteristics .(self-prototype) of the perceiver himself or the group 9. he represents would, i t appears, avail one with an excellent opportunity to examine the question of whether or not self-ratings were related to the ratings assigned to another. It would therefore appear that Jung's bipolar'dimensions of extraversion-introversion, thinking-feeling, sensing-intuition and judging-perceiving might provide a theore-t i c a l framework ( i . e . , a prototype of the group doing the ratings) for approximating an. answer to the above question. 1. Jung Jung's model of personality i s a richly dynamic postulation of the interaction,between polar opposites and the social environment. Focusing upon his typology, Jung believed that an individual's personality consisted of differentiated attitudes and functions which affected the manner i n which an individual perceived, interpreted, and reacted to both external and , internal stimulation. The two attitudes of extra-version and introversion and the four functions of thinking, feeling, sensing, and intuition interact to produce eight personality types, each of which, have a unique way of interpreting and dealing with the internal and external environment. These eight personality types can in turn be further differentiated into sixteen personality types, depending upon the degree of influence of the auxiliary functions of judging and percepting. For a more in-depth discussion of Jungian theory see Appendix B. Based upon the description of the dynamics involved i n the theory, i t would appear that Jung's typologies and the hypothesized dynamics believed to be involved i n the attribution process are similar. Both approaches assume that the perception of events or people i s dependent 10. upon a d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n o f s t i m u l i r e l e v a n t t o the p e r c e i v e r . S i m i l a r l y , h o t h b e l i e v e t h a t the processes o f p e r c e p t i o n , encoding , s t o r a g e , and the r e t r i e v a l o f i n f o r m a t i o n necessary f o r the type of a t t r i b u t i o n made i s dependent upon s p e c i f i c s t i m u l i present t o the i n d i v i d u a l . Where the two approaches d i f f e r i s i n t h e i r o r i e n t a t i o n as t o the causes o f a t t r i b u t i o n s . The v a r i o u s a t t r i b u t i o n t h e o r i e s covered ' p r e v i o u s l y i n t h i s d i s c u s s i o n have a l l emphasized mechanisms e x t e r n a l t o the i n d i v i d u a l o r group. Thus v a r i a b l e s such as s t i m u l u s s a l i e n c y ( e . g . , ingroup membership) and schematic r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f c o g n i t i v e s t r u c t u r e s such as memory and consensus are e x p l a i n e d as r a t i o n a l f u n c t i o n s dependent s o l e l y upon the p e r c e p t i o n o f e x t e r n a l environmenta l cues. I n o p p o s i t i o n t o t h i s r a t h e r dogmatic approach i s Jung who assumes t h a t how a person p e r c e i v e s , i n t e r p r e t s , and responds t o events, o r o b j e c t s i s the r e s u l t o f t h a t p e r s o n ' s p e r s o n a l i t y t y p e . I t s h o u l d be noted t h a t by p e r s o n a l i t y type Jung d i d not mean some p s y c h i c s t r u c t u r e t h a t was formed i n e a r l y c h i l d h o o d but a form o f p e r c e i v i n g . a n d i n t e r p r e t i n g t h a t evo lved from the i n t e r a c t i o n between the environment, h e r e d i t y , p a s t l e a r n i n g e x p e r i e n c e s , , and d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n s (schemata) made o f events and o b j e c t s . I n essence then Jung i s p o s t u l a t i n g the e x i s t e n c e of p e r s o n a l i t y p r o t o t y p e s t h a t d i f f e r w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s of and d e a l i n g s w i t h i n t e r n a l and e x t e r n a l cues. I f J u n g ' s assumption on the e x i s t e n c e o f p e r s o n a l i t y types i s c o r r e c t ' t h e n b e h a v i o u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s , b o t h o v e r t and c o v e r t , between the p o s s i b l e p o l a r o p p o s i t e s s h o u l d be demonstrated e x p e r i m e n t a l l y ; and, as these d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n s themselves r e f l e c t d i f f e r e n c e s i n how an i n d i v i d u a l a t tends t o and i n t e r p r e t s events and o b j e c t s around h i m , so must the v a r i o u s p e r s o n a l i t y types a f f e c t the manner i n which people 11. are l a b e l l e d In terms of their.perceived personality characteristics. The f i r s t serious attempt to objectively measure Jung's personality types was by Gray and Wheelwright (1945) who constructed scale items which they f e l t would d i f f e r e n t i a t e individuals according to Jung's two attitudes and four functions. Repeated attempts by Gray (1947* 1949) to improve the v a l i d i t y and consistancy of the scale were disappointing, as was evident by the poor r e l i a b i l i t y scores obtained i n a study with the Gray-Wheelwright Psychological Type Questionnaire by Strieker and Ross (1962). A second and more successful attempt at constructing a personality inventory which would assess the i n d i v i d u a l along Jungian dimensions was that by Myers (1962a). The instrument, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Test (MBTl) consists of 166 items that force the subject to choose between two 'preferences'. . Based upon the assumption that preferences r e f l e c t the influence from the interplay of the two attitudes and four functions, the MBTl attempts to ascertain the personality type of an i n d i v i d u a l on the basis of his choice between pairs of preference items. A r e l a t i v e high degree of construct v a l i d i t y for the MBTl has been reported by Myers (1962a) on the basis of i t s correlation with academic and occupa-t i o n a l ' choice, interest and attitude inventories, and achievement i n academic and vocational settings. Moreover, Myers (1962b) i n performing a regression analysis of various dependent variables (I.Q., vocabulary, and personality measures) against the four polar dimensions of extraversion-introversion, thinking-feeling, sensing-Intuition, and judging-percepting reported "U" and "V" shaped regressions, indicating the dichotomous nature of the types as would by hypothesized by Jung. In an extensive study with the MBTl, Strieker and Ross (1962) 1 2 . correlated items from the MBTI with the e a r l i e r Gray-Wheelwright Psycho-l o g i c a l Type Questionnaire. Results of t h e i r analysis revealed r e l a t i v e l y high correlations between the.type dimensions of extraversion-introversion, sensing-intuition, and thinking-feeling. Moreover, correlations between scores on the MBTI and Strong Vocational Interest Blank have indicated that occupational types and personality types as revealed through prefer-ences were r e l a t i v e l y strong (Strieker and Ross, 1962). More recent support f o r the MBTI comes from Buhmeyer and Johnson (1977) who reported that the MBTI differentiated physicians into extraverted, sensing and thinking types with judgment as the a u x i l i a r y function (ESTJ), thus agreeing with the e a r l i e r results of Myers and Davis (1964-). Though the early research by Strieker and Ross (1962, 1963) tended to he favourable toward the MBTI, excluding the disturbing finding that, the psychometrically plagued.Gray-Wheelwright correlated highly with the MBTI, subsequent research by Strieker and Ross (1964) concluded that there'was l i t t l e experimental support (e.g., the lack of a predicted bimodal d i s t r i b u t i o n , moderate s t a b i l i t y ) f o r "any of the structural properties attributed to the typology" (p. 62). Despite the above, further support for the MBTI comes from Gorlow, Simonson, and" Krauss (1966) who demonstrated that.self-reports through Q sorts based upon propositions from'Jung's description of the types ordered themselves into f i v e of the eight possible types i d e n t i f i e d by Jung. S i m i l a r l y , B a l l (1967) stated that the MBTI dimensions were useful i n examining differences on variables such as perceptual and cognitive s t y l e , response s t y l e s , and personality, and whereas Cook (1976) reported that the descriptions provided by the MBTI were s i g n i f i c a n t l y preferred over randomly constructed ones. Moreover, Steele and K e l l y 13. (1976) reported that the extraversion-introversion scale on the MBTl and Eysenck Personality Questionnaire correlated .74, indicating the presence of convergent v a l i d i t y . Though research on Jungian types and variables such as occupational choice (e.g., Buhmeyer and Johnson, 1977) have been r e l a t i v e l y f r u i t f u l i n i ndicating the presence of differences among types, v i r t u a l l y no research exists on the question of whether personality types affect the perception, that i s , the l a b e l l i n g of others. From a review of the l i t e r a t u r e only one a r t i c l e , that of Carlson and Levy (1973), has attempted to answer the above. Following the assumption that different personality types w i l l perceive situations d i f f e r e n t l y , Carlson and Levy reported that " i n t u i t i v e perceptive (NP) types were s i g n i f i c a n t l y more accurate i n interpreting emotional expressions than were sensing (SJ) types; women were s i g n i f i -cantly more accurate than men" (1973, p. 569). This finding was i n agreement with Jung's typology wherein NP types were viewed as being open i n t h e i r interpretations of others; and, therefore, more accurate i n t h e i r assessment of events than SJ types who stress concreteness and closure. Moreover,.significant differences were obtained between both female introverted thinking and extraverted fe e l i n g types on memory tasks, with the former being more superior' on the Digit Span Task and " i n using memorial, processes with objective, impersonal material" whereas the l a t t e r were "more accurate i n the recognition of f a c i a l expressions" (Carlson and Levy, p. 556-567). Despite the r e l a t i v e l y small subject population u t i l i z e d i n the experiment, the' Carlson and Levy study suggests that personality types as hypothesized by Jung demonstrate differences i n the cognitive processes of memory, perception, 14. and s o c i a l judgment. I t i s the purpose of t h i s study to f u r t h e r explore the p o s s i b i l i t y of the r e l a t i o n between s e l f - r a t i n g s and the ratings assigned to another. Research hypothesis The purpose of t h i s study was twofold. F i r s t , the main hypothesis of the study was that a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p existed between s e l f -ratings and ratings assigned to an e l d e r l y female 65 years of age and older. I t was further proposed that the polar opposites found i n Jung's typology, as measured by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Test, would permit an inves-t i g a t i o n of whether per s o n a l i t y prototypes ( s e l f - r a t i n g s on the Jungian t e s t ) would be d i f f e r e n t i a t e d by various tests used i n the study. I I . Method Subjects Subjects i n the experiment•were 95 males and 150 females who volunteered to participate. The subjects were both students from the University of B r i t i s h Columbia and non^students who had heard of the experiment and wished to participate. E a r l i e r research by Signori, Butt and Kozak (1979) had indicated that people 40 years of age and older rated the elderly d i f f e r e n t l y (more p o s i t i v e l y ) from individuals who were under 40 years of age. Because of t h i s , four males and one female over 40 years of age i n the present study were excluded from the f i n a l analysis; therefore resulting i n a subject population consisting of 91 males (mean age of 20.08 years) and 149 females (mean, age of 19.40 ;years). A breakdown according to the ethnic composition of the subjects, provided i n Table 1, indicated that both sexes were roughly equivalent as to t h e i r reported c u l t u r a l origins. Materials The hypotheses were tested through the administration of a test battery (Appendix G) that consisted of Form F of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Test (MBTI), a revised seven point Likert scale of Eysenck's Personality Inventory (EPI) (Appendix c), a modified seven point L i k e r t scale of Wilson's Conservatism Scale (C) (Appendix D), a 46-item, seven point l i k e r t scale version of Rotter's Internal-External Locus of Control (LoC) (Appendix E), and Signori's 69 seven point, Bipolar Adjective Scales (69AS) (Appendix F,). Each of the Li k e r t scales ranged from a rating of 1 (strong agreement) to 7 (strong disagreement). Table 1 Ethnic Background of Subjects by Sex : North B r i t i s h East American Is l e s Asian European Jewish Indian A f r i c a n Unknown Sex 2. 1 2. 1 2. 1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 Male (N = 91) 25 27 23 25 18 20 15 16 5 5 1 1 0 0 4 4 Female (N = 149) 51 34 , 40 27 15 10 16 11 9 6 4 3 1 1 13 9 17. The revised version of the Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI) was administered to provide a second measure of extraversion-introversion, the f i r s t being that of the MBTl. The rationale behind this was that since each subject had to repeat the battery twice under different instructions, once to rate himself and a second time to assign ratings to an elderly female, i t was f e l t that the MBTl would have been too d i f f i c u l t to do under the latter condition. Since a measure of extra-version-introversion was necessary for the elderly woman, i t was decided to have the MBTl completed only i n reference to the self while the EPI was to be done under both conditions. Jung (i960) contended that one becomes more introspective with age, a process which was defined as the propensity to equally evaluate ideas and feelings. As such a process appears to suggest a reliance upon a set of personal internal values, i t was decided to include Rotter's Internal-External Locus of Control (LoC) to examine whether an elderly woman i s characterized as being more internally controlled than the group rating her.br whether....selfrratings..are^related_.to. the:.ratingsjassigned her. Similarly, as research had indicated that the elderly were viewed as being more conservative than younger age groups (eg., Cowgill, 1972), the Wilson Conservatism (C) Scale was added to the test battery i n order to investigate whether an elderly woman i s characterized as being more conservative than the -g-soup rating her. pr^iSrbothj.s elf-ratings .-and -ratings of the elderly woman are similar. Furthermore, Signori's 69 Bipolar Scales (69AS) was included as i t had been found useful i n differentiating attitudes held about social groups such as women, B.C.„Native Indians, and other disadvantaged groups (Butt and Signori, 1.976). 1:0. Procedure Each subject completed the t e s t battery under two t e s t i n g conditions. In the f i r s t condition, subjects- were requested to complete the battery by answering the items i n r e l a t i o n to themselves, i . e . , the subjects responded to the items on the basis of how the items r e f l e c t e d some state-ment of t h e i r own b e l i e f s or perceived personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The same subjects, during the second condition, were then required to repeat the e n t i r e battery - excluding the MBTl - with the i n s t r u c t i o n s that they were to respond to each item i n a way they believed that an e l d e r l y female^ 65 years of age or older might. The order of each t e s t condition was randomized f o r every subject. Moreover, the order of both the tests within each condition and the order i n which every item appeared i n each t e s t were randomized to reduce possible item p o s i t i o n b i a s . O r i g i n a l l y , subjects were required to complete the t e s t battery i n a room with the experimenter. A f t e r 30 males were tested i n the above manner, the method of data c o l l e c t i o n was a l t e r e d as the previous one was found to be too time consuming f o r both the experimenter and subject. Under the new method the experimenter approached a number of psychology undergraduate courses and asked f o r volunteers to p a r t i c i p a t e i n an experiment on persona l i t y . Subjects were t o l d that the experiment was an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between per s o n a l i t y and perceived preferences of others. Those who agreed to p a r t i c i p a t e were i n s t r u c t e d both v e r b a l l y and i n wr i t i n g as follows: "The following are a series of items designed to determine your opinions or preferences over a wide v a r i e t y of to p i c s . A f t e r reading the i n s t r u c t i o n s found at the top of various pages, please answer each item as quickly as possible as i t i s only your f i r s t impressions that are of importance. Be sure to read the i n s t r u c t i o n s that p e r t a i n to each set of items as you come to them. Work alone on the following items i n the order they appear, and t r y to do so i n a place where 19. there i s the least amount of di s t r a c t i o n . As your answers are e n t i r e l y anonymous, you w i l l use your subject number, found at the top l e f t corner of the next page, i n order to f i n d out your results. Thank you." Subjects who returned completed test batteries were briefed about the experiment and received t h e i r test scores with an interpretation of the results. Scoring of materials (a) MBTI. Continuous scores were computed f o r each subject on the Jungian dimensions of extraversion-introversion ( E l ) , sensing-i n t u i t i o n (SN), thinking-feeling (TF), and judging-perceiving (JP). In addition, type scores were obtained from the continuous scores for each subject. Thus the responses to the MBTI provided four continuous scores on the dimensions of EI, SN, TF and JP as well as four type scores (eg., that the subject was an extraverted type rather than an introverted type). (b) EPI. Four sets of scores were computed from the EPI. F i r s t , subjects were scored f o r t h e i r self-ratings on both extraversion-introversion (EIS) and neuroticism (ANS). S i m i l a r l y , the items were scored for the ratings the subjects gave an elderly woman on the dimensions of extraversion-introversion (EIO) and neuroticism (ANO). The extraversion-introversion scores ranged from 1 (high extraversion) to 49 (high introversion) whereas the neuroticism scores ranged from 1 (low anxiety) to 70 (high anxiety). (c) Wilson's (c) Scale. Each subject provided 2 scores that f e l l on a liberal-conservative dimension, one a s e l f - r a t i n g (CS_) and the other a rating provided for the elderly woman (C£). Scores on the C Scale ranged from 0 (high l i b e r a l score) to 100 (high conservative score). 20. (d) Rotter's Internal-External Locus of Control (LoC) Scale. Ratings provided for each internally and externally scored item were added according to their direction of agreement, therefore providing a total score for both internality and externality. The external total score was then subtracted from the internal total score, giving an overall external-internal score that ranged from -26 (high externality) to +26 (high internality). In this way each subject provided two scores, the self-rating (LoG-IS) and the rating provided for the elderly woman (LoC-IO). (e) Signori's 69 Bipolar Adjective Scales (69AS). Five scales were constructed from the factor loadings obtained from a factor analysis of 716 subject's ratings of the elderly on the 69 adjective bipolar scales (69AS) (Signori, Butt and Kozak, 1978). These factor scales were: l ) integrity, 2) fortitude, 3) social appeal, 4) dependableness, and 5) open-mindedness (liberalism-conservatism). The 5 factor scales were used to score the self-ratings and ratings assigned to the elderly woman on the 69 adjective bipolar scales (69AS). Thus each subject provided the following 10 scores:' l ) integrity, self-rating (69AS1), 2) integrity, rating provided the elderly woman (69A01), 3) fortitude, self-rating (69AS2), 4) fortitude, rating provided the elderly woman (69A02), 5) social appeal, self-rating (69AS3), 6) social appeal, rating provided the elderly woman (69A03), 7) dependableness, self-rating (69AS4), 8) dependableness, rating provided the elderly woman (69A04), 9) open-mindedness, self-rating (69AS5), and 10) open-mindedness, rating provided the elderly woman (69A05). Possible scores on each of the 5 scales ranged from a low of 5 to a high of 35. i 21. I I I . Results 2 A Hotelling's T on the self-ratings between 30 males who completed the battery i n a room and 30 randomly selected males who completed i t elsewhere revealed no s i g n i f i c a n t mean differences (F (13, 46) = 1 .54, p > .05) as did the mean differences between the ratings assigned to the elderly woman (F (9, 50) = 0.58, p > .05). On the basis of these two findings i t was decided to include the former 30 subjects i n the f i n a l analysis. Sex differences i n samples 2 Mean differences computed from a Hotelling's T between males and females on self-ratings (F (13, 226) = 2 .93, p ^ .001) and ratings assigned to the elderly woman (F (9, 230) = 2.70, p < .01) were s i g n i f i -cant, indicating that both males and females had to be analyzed separately. On s e l f - r a t i n g s , males and females differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y on the Jungian (continuous) dimensions of extraversion-introversion, EI, ( t = 2.61, df = 238, p I .005), .and thinking-feeling, TF, ( t = -2.98, df = 238, p < .003), with males scoring higher on the dimensions of introversion and thinking than females. In addition, females rated themselves as more conservative than males on Wilson's Conservatism Scale, CS, ( t = -2.90, df = 238, p <• .004). Of the ratings assigned to the elderly woman, males and females differed on both Eysenck's extraversion-introversion dimension, EIO, ( t = 2.85, df = 238, p 4 .005), and on the i n t e g r i t y scale, 69A01, (t = 3-01, df = 238, p 4 .003) - with males scoring higher than females on both dimensions. I t should he noted that only those differences s i g n i f i c a n t at either the .01 l e v e l or better were reported. This was done to reduce the p o s s i b i l i t y of Type I errors. Table 2 provides the means and standard deviations for both self-ratings and ratings given to the elderly woman by males and females. 22. Table 2 Means and standard deviations by sex Males Females Overall Means S.D. Means S.D. Means S.D. Test EI 102.68 26.06 93.74 25.63 98.21 25.85 SN 100.47 24 .84 103.09 21.40 101.78 23.12 TF 107.02 . 20.11 114.64 18.75 110 .83 19 .43 JP 97.81 26.56 102.20 22.70 100.01 24.63 EIS 21.11 5.72 20.47 7 . 3 8 20.79 6.55 - MS 27.71 9.69 30,67 10.52 29.19 10.11 EIO 28 .23 5.97 25.71 7.04 26.97 6.51 ANO 33.46 9.12 3 3 . 4 5 9.04 33.46 9.08 CS 39.11 10.65 4 3 . 3 2 11.07 41.22 10.86 CO 74.47 13 .38 71.64 11.79 73.06 12.59 LoC-IS 3.02 6.67 1 . 13 6.42 2.08 6.55 LoC-IO 0.04 6.68 - 0.13 5.94 - 0.05 6.31 69AS1 12.92 4.69 11.91 3 . 4 1 12.42 4.05 69AS2 17.77 3.12 17.64 2.17 17.71 2.65 69AS3 26.46 4.05 27.21 3.00 26 .84 3.53 69AS4 26.91 3.99 27.20 3.22 27.06 3.61 69AS5 23.41 3.50 23.29 3.07 23-35 3.29 69A01 12.55 4.86 10.89 3.64 11.72 4.25 69A02 20.15 2.81 20 .23 2.76 20.19 2.79 69A03 25.32 4.47 25.93 3 . 4 4 25.63 3.96 69A04 26.00 4.53 26.64 3.69 26 .32 4.11 69A05 23.17 3.69 23.36 3.28 23.27 3.49 2 3 . Hypothesis I  Males Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were computed between male self-ratings and the ratings given the elderly woman on each personality measure, the results of which are found on Table 3 . The obtained correlations generally supported the hypothesis that self-ratings were related to-the ratings assigned to an elderly woman. Out of 10 possible pairs of correlations between s e l f and elderly female ratings (eg. MBTl extraversion-introversion dimension EI vs. Eysenck's extraversion-introversion dimension on the elderly woman EI0), f i v e pairs were s i g n i f i c a n t at either the .01 or .001 l e v e l of significance. These were: 1) locus, of control s e l f - r a t i n g , LoC-IS, vs. locus of control rating given the elderly woman, LoC-IO, (r = 0.32, p 4 . .001), 2 ) i n t e g r i t y s e l f - r a t i n g , 69AS1, vs. i n t e g r i t y rating given the elderly woman, 69A01, ( r = 0.5-4, p 4 .001), 3 ) s e l f - r a t i n g on fo r t i t u d e , 69AS2, vs. rating assigned to the elderly woman on f o r t i t u d e , 69A02, ( r = 0.26, p < .007), 4 ) social, appeal s e l f - r a t i n g , 69AS3, vs. s o c i a l appeal ratin g assigned to the elderly woman, 69A03, ( r = 0.59, p 4. .001), and 5) dependableness s e l f - r a t i n g s , 69AS4, vs. dependableness rating given the elderly woman, 69A04, (r = 0.27, p < .006). To understand the nature of the relationship between the above correlations, dependent t-tests were computed from the mean ratings given both the se l f and the elderly woman and the results are found on Table 4-. The results from both the correl a t i o n a l analysis and the dependent t-tests indicated that on the dimensions of internal-external locus of control, i n t e g r i t y , f o r t i t u d e , s o c i a l appeal, and dependableness, both the self-ratings of the males were highly related to the ratings they assigned to the elderly woman. Males rated both themselves and the elderly woman as being more i n t e r n a l l y controlled, Table 3 Correlations between male s e l f - r a t i n g and ratings provided for the elderly woman on personality tests EI SN TF JP EIS ANS EIO ANO CS CO Loe-is EI -1.00 SN -0.16 1.00 TE -0.03 0.25 1.00 JP -0.12 0.42-i- -.19* 1.00 EIS . 0 .46^ -0.05 0.11 -0.18* 1.00 ANS 0.24* -0.09 0.16 0.04 0.16 1.00 -EIO 0 . 2 3 * -0.03 0.18* 0.03 0.24* 0.02 1.00 ANO 0.00 0.05 0.18* 0.11 -0.08 0.13 0.12 1.00 CS -0.01 -0.27** 0.14 50.23* 0.11 0.03 -Q.12 -0.07 1.00 CO 0.11 -0.09 0.02 -0.00 0.11 0.15 0.20* 0.29** 0.12 1.00 LoC-IS -0.03 0.06 -0 .13 0.09 -0.17* -0.33 -0.20* Q0.13 0.02 -0.03 1.00 LoC-IO -0.12 0.04 -0.03 0.02 -0.11 -0.19* -0.07 -0.27** 0.15 -0.11 0.32-!-* p < .05 ** p <i .01 J- p < . 001 to Table 3 (cont'd.) Correlations between male self-ratings and ratings provided  for the elderly woman on personality tests 69AS1 69AS2 69AS3 69AS4 69AS5 69A01 69A02 69A03 69A04 69A05 EI 0.08 0.04 -0.06 0.06 0.04 -0.04 0.12 0.02 0.05 0.05 SN -0.13 -0.17 " 0.10 0.08 -0.01 -0.20* -0.26** 0.16 0.16 0.12 TF -0 .14 -0.14 0.20* 0.06 0.02 -0.29** -0.14 0 . 2 3 * 0 . 2 3 * 0.25** .' JP -0.02 -0 . 0 3 -0.06 -0 . 0 3 0.11 -0.04 -0.16 -0.02 0.04 0.07 EIS -0.19* -0.09 0.16 0 . 3 0 0.17 -0.19* -0.06 0.21* 0.10 0.19* ANS 0.00 0.09 -0.08 0.06 0.19* 0.08 -0.11 -0 . 0 3 -0.07 -0.01 EIO -0.21* -0.16 0 . 0 3 0.01 -0.02 -0.13 -0.15 0.08 0.25** 0.04 ANO -0.05 0.06 -0.01 -0 . 0 3 0.12 0.00 -0.12 -0.06 -0 . 0 3 -0.01 CS -0.05 0.02 0.15 0.05 -0.02 -0 . 0 3 0.01 0.08 0.07 -0 . 0 3 CO -0.22* -0.08 0.21* 0.07 0.22* -0.19* -0.25** 0.16 0.19* ' 0.06 LoC-IS 0 . 0 3 -0.08 0.06 0 . 0 3 0.06 -0.07 0.04 0.10 0.18* 0.04 LoC-IO 0.17 0.18* 0 . 0 3 -0.09 -0.10 0.02 0.02 0.C9 0 . 2 3 * 0.12 * p 4. .05 ** p 4 .01 J- p 4 .001 Table 3 (cont'd.) C o r r e l a t i o n s between male s e l f - r a t i n g s and r a t i n g s provided  f o r the e l d e r l y woman on p e r s o n a l i t y t e s t s 69AS1 69AS2 69AS3 69AS4 69AS5 69A01 69A02 69A03 69A04 69AS1 1.00 69AS2 0.65J- 1.00 69AS3 - 0 . 6 U -0.531 1.00 69AS4 -0.591 -0.371 0.511 1.00 69AS5 - 0 . 4 4 1 -0.22* 0.59 1 0.461 1.00 69A01 0 . 5 4 1 0.511 -0.501 -0.30** -0.20* 1.00 69A02 0.391 0.26** -0.30** -0.22* -0.371 0.28** 1.00 69A03 -0.501 -0.421 0.591 0.421 0.31** -0.781 -0.26** 1.00 69A04 - 0 . 3 8 1 -0.35-"- 0.471 0.27** 0.22* -0.761 -0.30** 0.781 1.00 69A05 -0.33 1 -0.35J- 0.31** 0.22* 0.14 -0.651 -0.25** 0.681 0.671 1.00 * p < .05 ** p < .01 1 p < .001 IV) Table 4 Dependent t - t e s t s between mean s e l f - r a t i n g s  and r a t i n g s assigned to the e l d e r l y woman  by males V a r i a b l e s t - v a l u e DF P r o b a b i l i t y EIS vs.- -EIO - 9.41 90 0.000 - .ANS v.s.. ..ANO - 4-41 90 0.000 CS vs. CO -21.02 90 0.000 LoC-IS vs. LoC-IO 3.66 90 0.000 69AS1 vs. 69A01 0.78 90 0.440 69AS2 vs. 69A02 - 6.28 90 0.000 69AS3 vs. 69A03 2.81 90 0.006 69A34 vs. 69A04 1.68 90 0.097 69AS5 vs. 69A05 0.49 90 0.626 28. with the males s i g n i f i c a n t l y more i n t e r n a l l y controlled than the elderly woman ( t = 3.66, df = 90, p < .0001). On the scale dimension of i n t e g r i t y , males rated both themselves and the elderly woman equally toward the low end of the scale ( t = 0.78, df = 90, p > .05) whereas the elderly woman was rated as being higher on fortitude than the males ( t = -6.28, df = 90, p 4, .0001). S i m i l a r l y , males rated themselves higher on the scale dimension of s o c i a l appeal ( t = 2.81, df = 90, p 4 .006) than the elderly woman but equally on the scale dimension of dependableness ( t = 1.68, df = 90, p > .05). No sig n i f i c a n t correla-tions at the .01 l e v e l of significance or better were found between self-ratings given the elderly woman on the MBTl and EPI dimension of extraversion-introversion, and on the dimensions of neuroticism and conservatism. Dependent t-tests on these variables revealed that the elderly woman was s i g n i f i c a n t l y rated as being more introverted on the EPI dimension of extraversion-introversion ( t = -9.4-1, df = 90, p < .0001), as having more anxiety ( t = -4-.4-1, df = 90, p < .0001), and as being more conservative ( t = -21.02, df = 90, p < .0001) than the males. Because these l a s t three variables of extraversion-introversion (EPI), neuroticism, and conservatism did not correlate s i g n i f i c a n t l y with the simil a r s e l f - r a t i n g s , the results from the dependent t-tests suggest that these three dimensions form some sa l i e n t , d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g character-i s t i c s of an elderly woman. The Jungian continuous measure of sensing-intuition SN was negatively correlated with the fortitude r a t i n g , 69A02, assigned to the elderly woman ( r = -0.26, p 4 .007) and the conservatism s e l f - r a t i n g , CS, (r = -0.27, p C .006) whereas i t (SN) was p o s i t i v e l y correlated with the Jungian dimension of judging-perceiving, JP, ( r = 0.4-2, p <.00l). Thus i f he rated himself as being an i n t u i t i v e rather than sensing type, 29. the rater also saw himself as being l i b e r a l and perceptive. Moreover, the high i n t u i t i v e also saw the elderly woman as scoring lower on the scale dimension of fortitude. The only s i g n i f i c a n t correlations found i n the EPI, apart from that mentioned e a r l i e r , was that between the male ratings assigned to the elderly woman (EPI) on extraversion-introversion, EIO, and depend-ableness, 69A04-, ( r = 0.25, p C .009) and between her ratings on neuroticism, ANO, and internal-external locus of control, LoC-IO, (r = 0.27, p < .006). Thus males rated an elderly woman high on introversion as being highly dependable and those with high anxiety as being i n t e r n a l l y controlled. In addition, the conservative rating provided the elderly woman, C0_, correlated s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n a negative direction with her fortitude r a t i n g , 69A02, ( r = -0.25, p I. .009) and i n a positive direction with her neuroticism rating, ANO, ( r = 0.29, p 4. .003); and, therefore, a highly conservative elderly woman was seen as being highly anxious but low on fortitude. With respect to the 5 scale dimensions, Table 3 indicates that 39 out of 4-5 possible correlations between and within both self-ratings and ratings assigned, the elderly woman were s i g n i f i c a n t at either the .01 or .001 l e v e l of significance. Of the s e l f - r a t i n g s , I n t e g r i t y (69AS1) and fortitude (69AS2) were s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated i n a negative direction with s o c i a l appeal (69AS3), dependableness (69AS4-), and open-mindedness (69AS5) - except between fortitude and open-mindedness -whereas they correlated p o s i t i v e l y with one another. Moreover, s o c i a l appeal (69AS3), dependability (69AS4), and open-mindedness (69AS5) a l l correlated s i g n i f i c a n t l y with each other. A simi l a r trend was ' evidenteamong the intercorrelations of the ratings assigned to the elderly woman. With respect to the correlations between self-ratings 3 0 . and ratings assigned to an elderly woman, i n t e g r i t y (69AS1) and fortitude (69AS2) were generally negatively correlated with s o c i a l appeal (69A03) dependahleness (69A04) and open-mindedness (69A05) whereas the s e l f -ratings on s o c i a l appeal (69AS3), dependahleness (69AS4), and open-mindedness (69AS5) were posively correlated with t h e i r counterparts for the elderly woman (69A03, 69A04, and 69A05). Thus regardless of self- r a t i n g s or ratings assigned to the elderly woman hy males, i n d i v i -duals who saw themselves or the e l d e r l y woman high on i n t e g r i t y and fortitude rated themselves and her as being low on s o c i a l appeal, dependahleness, and open-mindedness; Females As with the males, Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were computed for female self-ratings and the ratings they assigned to the elderly woman, the analyses of which are recorded on Table 5. Six of the possible 10 pairs of correlations between s e l f and elderly woman ratings were found to be s i g n i f i c a n t , these were; 1) extraversion-introversion (EPI) s e l f - r a t i n g , EIS, vs. extraversion-introversion (EPI) r a t i n g assigned to.the e l d e r l y woman, EIO, ( r = 0.3-4, p 4 .001), 2) neuroticism s e l f - r a t i n g , ANS, vs. neuroticism rating assigned to the elderly woman, ANO, ( r = 0.41, p <1 .001), 3 ) internal-external locus of control s e l f - r a t i n g , LoC-IS, vs. internal-external locus of control rating assigned to the elderly woman, LoC-IO ( r = 0.28, p 2. .001), 4) i n t e g r i t y s e l f - r a t i n g , 69AS1, vs. i n t e g r i t y r a t i n g assigned to the elderly woman, 69A01, ( r = 0 . 2 3 , p 2.,003), 5) s o c i a l appeal s e l f -r a t i n g , 69AS3, vs. s o c i a l appeal rating assigned to the elderly woman, 69A03, ( r = 0 . 3 1 , p £ .001), and 6) dependahleness s e l f - r a t i n g , 69AS4, vs. the dependahleness rating given the elderly woman, 69A04, ( r = 0.20, p < .008). Thus, as with the males, the self-ratings of the females were highly related to the ratings they assigned the elderly woman. Table 5 Correlations between female self-ratings and ratings provided  for the elderly woman on personality tests EI SN TF JP EIS ANS EIO ANO CS CO LoC-IS LoC-IO EI • 1.00 SN -0.07- 1.00 TF -0.09 0.17* 1.00 JP -0.19* 0.35^ 0.08 1.00 EIS 0.52-L -0.02 -0.09 -0 . 2 3 * * 1.00 ANS 0.20** -0.00 0.03 -0.05 0 .31- 1 1.00 EIO 0.11 -0.10 0.06 -0.10 0.341 0.22** 1.00 ANO - o . i r -0.06 -0.06 -0.10 0.05 0.41-1 0.311 1.00 CS 0.08 -0.33± 0.10 -0.18* 0.04 0.00 -0.01 -0.05 1.00 CO 0 . 0 3 -0.08 0.11 -0.11 0 . 0 3 0.10 0 . 2 3 * * 0.22** 0.13 1. 00 LoC-IS -0.15* 0.03 -0.08 -0.08 -0.28-!- -0.36-i -0 . 2 3 * * -0.12 -0.07 -0. 10 LoC-IO -0.18* -0.04 0.03 -0.08 -0.06 -0.18* -0 . 2 3 * * -0.32-!- 0.07 -0. 07 1.00 0.28J- i . o o * p 4 .05 ** p <f ,01 J- p < .001 Table -5 (cont'd. ) Correlations between female self-ratings and ratings provided for the elderly woman on personality tests 69AS1 69AS2 69AS3 69AS4 69AS5 69A01 69A02 69A03 69A04 69A05 EI 0 . 13 0.12 . -0.02 0.00 -0.15* 0.01 0.09 -0.02 0.03 0.13 SN 0.11 0.09 0.00 0.01 -0.04 0.00 0.03 0.07 0.00 -0.04 TF 0.00 0.04 0.09 0.04 -0.00 -0.03 -0.09 0.08 0.00 -0.07 JP -0.01 0.08 -0.07 -0.01 0.09 0.08 -0.08 -0.02 0.07 -0.04 EIS 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.01 -0 .13 -0.06~ 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.06 ANS 0.11 0.01 -0.06 -0.12 -0.14* -0.04 0.14* -0.08 0.11 0.12 EIO 0.01 0.09 -0.02 0.06 -0.05 0.01 0.02 -0.08 0.04 -0.03 MO 0.10 0.06 -0.12 -0.18* -0.08 0.09 0.13 -0.20** -0.04 -0.06 CS 0.03 -0.05 0.05 0.02 -0.01 r-0.05 0.02 0.10 -0.05 -0.02 CO 0.12 0.08 -0.11 -0.15* -0.20** 0.01 -0.12 0.09 0.07 -0.05 LoC-IS -0.05 0.04 0.02 0.07 -0.04 0.07 -0.01 0.00 -0.14* -0.17 LoC-IO -0.08 -0.01 0.05 0.11 0.10 -0.06 -0.21** 0.13 -0.02 -0.13 * p < .05 ** p 4 .01 i p < .001 Table 5 (cont'd.) Correlations between female self-ratings and ratings provided for the elderly woman on personality tests 69AS1 69AS2 69AS3 69AS4 69AS5 69A01 69A02 69A03 69A04 69AS1 1.00 69AS2 0.21** 1.00 ' 69AS3 -0.4-81 -0.24** 1.00 69AS4 -0.561 -0.11 0.461 1.00 69AS5 -0.501 -0.23** 0.431 0.431 1.00 69A01 0.23** 0.17* -0.19** -0.17* -0.17* 1.00 69A02 0.03 0.18* -0.11 -0.05 -0.05 0.07 1.00 6 9 A 0 3 -0.17* -0.10 0.311 0.291 0.21** -0.531 -0.341 1.00 69A04- -0.08 -0.07 0.15* 0.20** 0 .13 -0.621 -0.17* 0.501 1.00 69A05 -0.11 -0.02 0.10 0.16* 0.15* -0.511 -0.11 0.501 0.491 * p < .05 ** p < .01 1 p < .001 Vo vo 34.. Dependent t-tests (Table 6) on the above variables indicated that females saw themselves as more extraverted ( t = -7.72, df = 148, p .001), less anxious (t = -3-18, df = 148, p c .002), and higher on i n t e g r i t y ( t = 2 .84, df = 148, p <" .0050 and s o c i a l appeal ( t = 4.11, df = 148, p 4 .0001) than the elderly woman. No mean differences were found between the self-ratings and the ratings assigned the elderly woman on the dimensions of internal-external locus of control (LoC) and dependableness. Though no s i g n i f i c a n t correlations were found between the personality ratings of the females and the elderly woman on the dimensions of fo r t i t u d e , open-mindedness and conservatism, dependent t-tests on these dimensions indicated that the elderly woman was seen as being higher on fo r t i t u d e , 69AS2 vs. 69A02, ( t = -9.91, df = 148, p 4.0001) and conservatism, CS vs. CO, ( t = -22.88, df = 148, p < .0001) whereas no difference was found on the scale dimension of open-mindedness, 69AS5 vs. 69A05 ( t = 0.22, df = 148, p > .0,5). The MBTl dimension of extraversion-introversion, EI, was s i g n i f i -cantly correlated with the neuroticism s e l f - r a t i n g , ANS, ( r = 0.20, p 4.008) whereas the dimension of sensing-intuition, SN, was correlated i n a s i g n i f i c a n t , positive direction with judging-perceiving, -JP, (r = 0.35, p < .001) and i n a s i g n i f i c a n t negative direction with s e l f -rating on conservatism, CS, ( r = -0 .33, p < .001). Thus a female who saw herself as highly introverted also tended to see herself as being highly anxious. In addition, i f she rated herself as being highly i n t u i t i v e , she also viewed herself as being perceptive and l i b e r a l minded. Moreover i t was found that the MBTl dimension of judging-perceiving, JP, was negatively correlated with the s e l f - r a t i n g on the EPI dimension of extraversion-introversion, EIS, ( r = -0.23, p ^ .002); Table 6 Dependent t-tests between mean self-ratings  and ratings assigned to the elderly woman  by females Variables t-value DF Probability EIS vs. EIO - 7.72 148 0.000 ANS vs. ANO - 3.18 148 0.002 CS vs. CO -22.88 148 0.000 LoC-IS vs. LoC-IO 2.07 148 0.040 69AS1 vs. 69A01 2.84 148 0.005 69AS2 vs. 69A02 - 9.91 148 0.000 69AS3 vs. 69A03 4.11 148 0.000 69AS4 vs. 69A04 1.53 148 0.129 69AS5 vs. 69A05 - 0.22 148 0.829 3 6 . thus i n d i c a t i n g that among females a high score on perceiving (P) tended to go with extraversion (E) on the EPI. With respect to the EPI, the extraversion-introversion r a t i n g assigned the e l d e r l y woman, EIO, correlated p o s i t i v e l y with both the neuroticism s e l f - r a t i n g , ANS, ( r = 0 . 2 2 , p 4 . 0 0 3 ) and the neuroticism r a t i n g assigned to the e l d e r l y woman, ANO, ( r = 0 . 3 1 , p 4 . 0 0 1 ) whereas i t (EIO) correlated negatively with the s e l f - r a t i n g on in t e r n a l - e x t e r n a l locus of co n t r o l , LoC-IS, ( r = - 0 . 2 3 , p 4 . 0 0 3 ) and the r a t i n g given the e l d e r l y woman on the same dimension of i n t e r n a l i t y - e x t e r n a l i t y , LoC-IO, (r. = - 0 . 2 3 , p 4 . 0 0 3 ) . Moreover, the r a t i n g .assigned the e l d e r l y woman on extraversion-introversion on the EPI, EIO, corre l a t e d p o s i t i v e l y with her r a t i n g onr.conservatism, CO, ( r = 0 . 2 3 , p 4 . 0 0 3 ) . S i m i l a r l y the s e l f - r a t i n g on the EPI dimension of extraversion-introversion, EIS, correl a t e d p o s i t i v e l y with the neuroticism s e l f - r a t i n g , ANS, ( r = 0.31> P 4 . 0 0 1 ) and negatively with the s e l f - r a t i n g on in t e r n a l - e x t e r n a l locus of cont r o l , LoC-IS, ( r = -0.28, p 4 . 0 0 1 ) . These r e s u l t s suggest that when scored as an i n t r o v e r t , the e l d e r l y woman i s seen as being highly anxious, exte r n a l l y c o n t r o l l e d , and conservative. Furthermore, the e l d e r l y woman's score on extraversion-introversion was r e l a t e d to high s e l f - r a t i n g s on anxiety and ext e r n a l i t y . These trends were also evident i n the female's s e l f - r a t i n g s on extraversion-introversion where a high i n t r o v e r s i o n score tended to be accompanied with a high anxiety and high e x t e r n a l i t y score. Neuroticism s e l f - r a t i n g , ANS, was found to correlate negatively with the s e l f - r a t i n g on in t e r n a l - e x t e r n a l locus of control, LoC-IS, ( r = - 0 . 3 6 , p 4 . 0 0 1 ) as did the neuroticism r a t i n g given the e l d e r l y ^ woman, ANO, and her r a t i n g on i n t e r n a l external locus of cont r o l , 37, LoC-IO, ( r = -0.23, p t .002). Thus regardless of r a t i n g t a r g e t , high a n x i e t y tended to go w i t h e x t e r n a l i t y - a f i n d i n g corroborated by the above mentioned c o r r e l a t i o n s on e x t r a v e r s i o n - i n t r o v e r s i o n . Of the conservatism c o r r e l a t i o n s not yet discussed, the conservatism r a t i n g assigned the e l d e r l y woman, CO, c o r r e l a t e d n e g a t i v e l y w i t h the s e l f -r a t i n g of the female on open-mindedness, 69AS5, ( r = -0.20, p 4 . .007). Moreover the r a t i n g assigned the e l d e r l y woman on i n t e r n a l - e x t e r n a l locus of c o n t r o l , LoC-10, c o r r e l a t e d n e g a t i v e l y w i t h her r a t i n g on f o r t i t u d e , 69A02, ( r = -0.21, p I .001), thus i n d i c a t i n g t h a t when rat e d as being e x t e r n a l l y c o n t r o l l e d the o l d woman was a l s o seen as low on f o r t i t u d e . With respect t o the 5 f a c t o r s c a l e s , the s e l f - r a t i n g s of i n t e g r i t y (69AS1) and f o r t i t u d e (69AS2) c o r r e l a t e d n e g a t i v e l y w i t h s o c i a l appeal (69AS3) dependahleness (69AS4) and open-mindedness (69AS5) whereas the l a t t e r three c o r r e l a t e d p o s i t i v e l y w i t h each other. A s i m i l a r t r e n d was found w i t h i n the r a t i n g s provided the e l d e r l y woman and between the s e l f - r a t i n g s and r a t i n g s assigned to her - though i t should be noted that the tr e n d was not strong i n that only 25 of the 4-5 p o s s i b l e c o r r e l a t i o n s between and w i t h i n the measures found on Table 6 were s i g n i f i c a n t at e i t h e r the .01 or .001 l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e . Nevertheless both the above f i n d i n g s w i t h the 5 f a c t o r s c a l e s and those obtained from the males appear to suggest t h a t , regardless of r a t i n g t a r g e t s , males and females who saw e i t h e r themselves or the e l d e r l y woman as s c o r i n g high on i n t e g r i t y and f o r t i t u d e r a t e d themselves and the e l d e r l y woman - though not always s i g n i f i c a n t l y - as low on s o c i a l appeal, dependahleness, and open-mindedness. Hypothesis I I Frequencies were c a l c u l a t e d f o r Jungian (MBTI) type scores 38. according to whether or not the subject was extraverted (E) or intr o v e r t e d ( I ) , sensing (S) or i n t u i t i v e (N), thinking (T) or f e e l i n g (F), and judging ( j ) or perceiving (P). Each subject belonged to e i t h e r end of each of the 4 type dimensions; and, therefore, provided 4 scores -the frequencies f o r which are found on Table 7. Corrected Chi-Square values were determined f o r each Jungian polar type against sex of r a t e r . The only dimensions found to be of lower s i g n i f i c a n c e than the previously stated c r i t e r i o n of .01 were- extraversion, E, and in t r o v e r s i o n , I_, (•x2 = 3.95, p < .05) and thinking, T, and f e e l i n g , F, ( -£ 2 = 5.30, p (, .02), with more females being extraverted and f e e l i n g types than males. 2 H o t e l l i n g T 's were then computed f o r males (Table 8) and females (Table 9) on t h e i r s e l f - r a t i n g s and ratings they assigned to the e l d e r l y woman according to Jungian (MBTl) polar type - the r e s u l t s of which w i l l be.discussed l a t e r . To examine whether the 4 polar types could be d i f f e r e n t i a t e d by the various ratings obtained from the p e r s o n a l i t y measures, multiple l i n e a r discriminant functions. (Rao, 1973) were computed f o r both males and females separately according to the dependent v a r i a b l e s of Jungian type and independent variables of s e l f - r a t i n g s and ratings assigned to. the e l d e r l y woman. This r e s u l t e d i n a t o t a l of 16 discriminant analyses being computed, one f o r each target r a t i n g f o r each Jungian (MBTl) polar dimension. The discriminant function c o e f f i c i e n t s obtained from each of the' above discriminant analyses were tested f o r equality of the covariance matrices, the r e s u l t s of which were nons i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l ; and, therefore, i n d i c a t e d that the data samples f o r each of the analyses did not v i o l a t e the multivariate assumptions of independence and normality. The discriminant function c o e f f i c i e n t s were then used to determine whether or not the subjects could be Table 7 D i s t r i b u t i o n of Jungian (MBTl) Type by sex Type Sex . Male (N = 91) Female (N = 149) Extraverted n %_ 4-6 51 96 64-Introverted 45 50 53 ' 36 Type Sex Male (N = 91) Female (N - 149) Sensing n %_ 42 46 65 44 I n t u i t i v e n %_ 49 54 84 56 Type Sex Male (N = 91) Female (N = 149) Thinking 32 35 31 21 Feeling n %_ 59 65 118 79 Type Sex Male (N = 91) Female (N = 149) Judging n 54 59 69 46 Perceiving n %_ 37 41 80 54 40. Table 8 Comparison of mean ratings by males  according to Jungian (MBTI) Type Self-ratings Jungian Type Extraverted vs. Introverted Sensing vs. In t u i t i v e Thinking vs. Feeling Judging vs. Perceiving 1 value 36.66 14.44 9.19 DF 9,81 9,81 9,81 15.63 9,81 F value Probability 3.71 0.0006 1.46 0.93 1.58 0.1771 0.5049 0.1349 Rating of Elderly Woman Jungian Type Extraverted vs. Introverted Sensing vs. I n t u i t i v e Thinking vs. Feeling Judging vs. Perceiving T value 7.17 6.75 17.22; DF 9,81 9,81 9,81 •7.83 9,81 F value 0.73 0.68 1.74 0.79 Probability 0.6843 0.7227 0.0929 0.6251 Table 9 Comparison of mean ratings by females  according to Jungian (MBTI) Type a . S e l f - r a t i n g Jungian Type Extraverted vs. Introverted Sensing vs. In t u i t i v e Thinking vs. Feeling Judging vs. Perceiving T value 46.74 19.89 5.61 5.91 DF 9,139 9,139 9,139 9,139 F value Probability 4.91 0.0000 2.09 0.59 0.62 0.0343 0.8038 0.7778 Rating of Elderly Woman Jungian Type Extraverted vs. Introverted Sensing vs. In t u i t i v e Thinking vs. Feeling Judging vs. Perceiving T value 13.22 5.30 6.15 16.22 DF 9,139 9,139 9,139 9,139 F value 1.39 0.56 0.65 0.70 Probability 0.1985 0.8300 0.7557 0.0935 42. c l a s s i f i e d by the various independent measures into t h e i r correct Jungian (MBTI) types. Tables 10 and 11 provide the percent of correct and incorrect c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s by Jungian type for both males and females respectively. As i s evident from Tables 10 and 11, the only Jungian (MBTI) dimension i n which subjects were correctly c l a s s i f i e d well above a base rate of 50% was that of extraversion and introversion. This was only true f o r varaibles based on self-ratings and not for those upon which ratings were assigned to the elderly woman. This finding i s supported 2 by the Hotelling's T between the self-ratings and ratings assigned to the elderly woman according to polar type by males (Table 8) and females (Table 9). The only Jungian type which indicated a si g n i f i c a n t difference at the .01 l e v e l according to self-ratings was that of extraversion and introversion for males (F (9, 81) = 3-71, p 4. .001) and females (F (9, 139) = 4.91, p ,^ .0001). No signficant differences were found on sim i l a r polar types among the ratings given the elderly woman, nor on any other polar type for either self-ratings or ratings assigned the elderly woman; therefore indicating a high degree of ra t i n g overlap on these nonsignficant dimensions. This rating overlap, i n turn, resulted i n the poor c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the subjects into t h e i r various Jungian (MBTI) polar types. As stated previously, the Jungian extraverted and introverted types were the only salient 'personality prototypes' for di f f e r e n t i a t i n g individuals on the basis o f . t h e i r s e l f - r a t i n g s . Tables 12 to 15 provide the discriminant function coefficients for both male and female Jungian (MBTI) types according to t h e i r s e l f - r a t i n g s and the ratings they assigned to an elderly woman. A consistent trend found i n these tables i s that the 5 factor scales (69AS), regardless of rating target, contributed the most to the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the subjects into t h e i r correct Jungian type. 43. Table 10 C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of males by Jungian (MBTI) Type, according to s e l f - r a t i n g s Jungian Type E I S N T F J P ai correct 78 76 64 65 59 66 63 70 % wrong 22 24 36 35 41 34 37 30 C l a s s i f i c a t i o n r o f males by Jungian ( [MBTI) Type according to ratings assigned to the e l d e r l y woman Jungian Type E I S N T F J P % correct 67 56 64 63 63 69 63 65 % wrong 33 44 36 37 37 31 37 35 44. Table 11 C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of females by Jungian (MBTl) Type according to s e l f - r a t i n g s Jungian Type _E I _S N _T F _ J P, 79 72 58 73 65 64 61 55 21 28 42 27 35 36 39 45 % correct % wrong C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of females by Jungian (MBTl) Type according  to ratings assigned to the e l d e r l y woman Jungian Type correct % wrong E I S N T F J P 63 64 55 58 61 59 62 70 37 36 45 42 39 41 38 30 Table 12 Discriminant function coefficients for s e l f -ratings by male Jungian (MBTl) Type Jungian Type Variables Extraverted Introverted EIS ' 0.298 0.517 ANS 0.244 0.332 CS 0.145 0.099 LoC-IS 0.126 0.193 69AS1 2 . 2 3 7 2.324 69AS2 2.712 2.697 69AS3 2.829 2.909 69AS4 2.177 2.119 69AS5 0.472 0.380 Table 12 (cont'd. ) Discriminant function coefficeints for s e l f -ratings by male Jungian (MBTl) Typ e Jungian Type-Variables Sensing I n t u i t i v e EIS 0.128 0.166 ANS 0.267 0.244 CS 0.269 0.224 LoC-IS 0.015 0.051 69AS1 2.347 2.289 69AS2 3."037 2.902 69AS3 2.879 2.846 69AS4 2.268 2.239 69AS5 0.718 0.629 Table 12 (cont'd. ) Discriminant function co e f f i c i e n t s for s e l f - ratings by male Jungian (MBTI) Type Jungian Type Variables Thinking Feeling EIS 0.195 0.236 ANS 0.194 0.226 CS 0.160 0.162 LoC-IS 0.109 0.097 69AS1 2.217 2.197 69AS2 2.723 2.713 69AS3 2.699 2.878 69AS4 2.240 2.165 69AS5 0.594 0.437 Table 12 (cont'd.) Discriminant function coefficeints for s e l f -ratings by male Jungian (MBTl) Type Jungian Type Variables Judging Perceiving EIS 0.286 0.225 ANS 0.168 0.208 CS 0.190 0.164 LoC-IS 0.049 0.096 69AS1 2.305 2.216 69AS2 2.704 2.716 69AS3 2.904 2.813 69AS4 2.932 2.207 69AS5 0.315 0.486 Table 13 Discriminant function c o e f f i e n t s f o r ratings assigned  to the e l d e r l y woman by male'Jungian (MBTI) Type Jungian Type Variables Extraverted Introverted EIO 0.662 0.741 ANO 0.294 0.293 CO 0.516 0.529 LoC-IO -0.593 -0.614 69A01 5.299 5.347 69A02 4.164 4.213 69A03 2.664 2.633 69A04 2.307 2.489 69A05 2.765 2.893 Table 13. (cont'd. ) Discriminant function- coeffients f o r ratings assigned to the elderly woman by male Jungian (MBTl) Type Jungian Type Variables Sensing . In t u i t i v e EIO 0.578 0.583 ANO 0.272 0.282 CO 0.539 0.523 LoC-IO -0.625 -0.601 69A01 5.555 5.420 69A02 4.385 4.265 69A03 2.818 2.764 69A04 2.582 2.557 69A05 2.679 2.659 Table 13 (cont *d. ) Discriminant function coefficients for ratings assigned to the elderly woman by male Jungian (MBTl) Type Jungian Type -Variables Thinking Feeling EIO 0.424 0.503 ANO 0.209 0.249 CO 0 .544 0.524 LoC-IO -0.712 -0.645 69A01 5.743 5.508 69A02 4.327 4.225 69A03 2.746 2.722 69A04 2.738 2.636 69A05 2.749 2.695 Table 13 (cont'd.) Discriminant function c o e f f i c i e n t s for ratings assigned  to the elderly woman by male Jungian (MBTI) Types Jungian Type Variables Judging Perceiving EIO 0.575 0.588 ANO 0.246 0.289 CO 0.517 0.504 LoC-IO -0.605 -0.573 69A01 5.263 5.251 69A02 4.257 4.127 69A03 2.808 2.706 69A04 2.489 2.522 69A05 2.609 2.632 Table 1-4 Discriminant function c o e f f i e n t s f o r s e l f - r a t i n g s  by female Jungian (MBTI) Types Jungian Type Variables Extraverted . Introverted EIS 0.346 0.505 ANS 0.-48-4 0.475 CS 0.290 0.295 LoC-IS 0.269 0.274 69AS1 4.74-4 4.752 69AS2 5.009 5.121 69AS3 3.441 3.426 69AS4 3.087 3.173 69AS5 3.321 3 . 3 1 1 Table 14 (cont'd. ) Discriminant function coe f f i c i e n t s for self-ratings by female Jungian (MBTI) Types Jungian Type Variables Sensing I n t u i t i v e EIS 0.173 0.178 ANS 0.420 0.423 CS 0.294 0.232 LoC-IS 0.258 0.308 '69AS1 4.721 4.824 69AS2 4.884 4.909 69AS3 3.457 3.448 69AS4 2.982 3.064 69AS5 3.326 3.355 Table 14 (cont'd. ) Discriminant function c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r s e l f - r a t i n g s  by female Jungian (MBTP) Types Jungian Type Variables Thinking Feeling EIS 0.236 0.176 ANS 0.419 0.420 CS 0.286 0.285 LoC-IS 0.284 0.266 69AS1 4.778 4.738 69AS2 4.806 4.885 69AS3 3.394 3.454 69AS4 3.024 2.995 69AS5 3.420 3.334 Table 14- (cont' d. ) Discriminant function coefficients for self-ratings  by female Jungian'(MBTl) Types Jungian Type Variables Judging Perceiving EIS 0.192' 0.159 ANS 0.-428 0.413 CS 0.292 0.279 LoC-IS 0.278 0.255 69AS1 4-. 731 4.740 '69AS2 4.885 4.890 69AS3 3.463 3.451 69AS4- 2.980 3.004 69AS5 3.304 3.352 . Table 15 Discriminant- function coefficients for ratings assigned  to the elderly woman by female Jungian (MBTI) Types Jungian Type Variables Extraverted Introverted EIO 0.4-62 0.499 ANO 0.366 0 .309 CO 0.420 0.425 LoC-IO 1.011 0.951 69A01 5.436 5.453 69A02 5.234 5.225 69A03 3.786 3.709 69A04 3 . 002 3.026 69A05 2.463 2.560 Table 15 (cont'd. ) Discriminant function c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r ratings assigned  to the e l d e r l y woman by female. Jungian (MBTI) Types Jungian Type Variables .Sensing I n t u i t i v e EIO 0.478 0.464 ANO 0.358 0 . 3 3 6 CO 0.421 0.423 LoC-IO 1.003 0.979 69A01 5.429 5.458 69A02 5.214 5.260 69A03 3.734 3.813 69A04 3.033 2,970 69A05 2.489 2.492 Table 15 (cont 1d. ) Discriminant function coefficients f o r ratings assigned  to the elderly woman by female Jungian (MBTl) Types Jungian Type Variables Thinking Feeling EIO 0 .443 0.468 ANO 0 . 3 8 1 0.355 CO 0.396 0.418 LoC-IO 1.022 0.998 69A01 5.495 5 .449 69A02 5.282 5 .239 69A03 3.730 3.759 69A04 3.029 3.012 69A05 2.628 2.512 Table 15 (cont'd.) Discriminant function' coefficients for ratings assigned  to the elderly woman by female Jungian (MBTI) Types Jungian Type Variables Judging Perceiving EIO 0.509 0.473 ANO 0.352 0.349 CO 0.446 0.422 LoC-IO: 1.039 0.995 69A01 5.359 5.439 69A02 5.294 5 .233 69A03 3.645 3.762 69A04 2.923 3.007 69A05 2.680 2.495 61. IV. Interp r e t a t i o n and Discussion Correlations f o r both males and females on t h e i r s e l f - r a t i n g s and the r a t i n g s they assigned to an e l d e r l y woman 65 years of age and older tended.to support the hypothesis that s e l f - r a t i n g s r e l a t e to the ratings assigned to another. Both males and females rated themselves and the 'elderly woman' as i n t e r n a l l y c o n t r o l l e d and high on the polar dimensions of i n t e g r i t y , s o c i a l appeal, and dependableness. Dependent t - t e s t s revealed that although females rated themselves and the e l d e r l y woman equally as i n t e r n a l l y (LoC) co n t r o l l e d , males rated the e l d e r l y woman le s s i n t e r n a l than themselves. Moreover, both males and females rated themselves and the e l d e r l y woman as 'dependable' but saw themselves as having more ' s o c i a l appeal' than the e l d e r l y woman. On the dimension of ' i n t e g r i t y ' , males rated themselves equally with the e l d e r l y woman whereas females saw themselves as scoring higher on t h i s dimension than the e l d e r l y woman. Unlike the females, the c o r r e l a t i o n between male s e l f - r a t i n g s and the ratings they assigned to an e l d e r l y woman on the dimension of 'fortitude' was s i g n i f i c a n t , with the e l d e r l y woman being rated higher on f o r t i t u d e . Though the female ratings did not y i e l d a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n , a dependent t - t e s t on t h i s dimension did in d i c a t e that females also rated the e l d e r l y woman as scoring higher, on f o r t i t u d e than themselves. Unlike the males, a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n was found between the females s e l f - r a t i n g s and the ratings they assigned to the e l d e r l y woman on extraversion-introversion (EPI) and neuroticism. Dependent t - t e s t s revealed that the e l d e r l y woman was- rated as more intr o v e r t e d and as having more anxiety than the female r a t e r . Though, as stated above, these two dimensions provided no s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r the male 62. ratings, dependent t-tests on the self-ratings hy males and the ratings that they assigned the elderly woman were s i g n i f i c a n t and i n agreement with the female data, i . e . , males believed that the elderly woman would score as more introverted and anxious on the EPI than themselves. This l a t t e r finding with introversion takes on greater importance i n l i g h t of the findings that: ( l ) males rated the elderly woman^more introverted than did the females, and (2) the dependent t-tests between the s e l f - r a t i n g s of males and females on the EPI dimension of extraversion-introversion indicated that males rated themselves less introverted than did the females. What these findings appear to indicate are that there may be sex differences involved i n the perception of the elderly woman, perception i n terms of the subjects' ratings of the elderly woman. Moreover, a s i m i l a r trend was found on the EPI dimension of neuroticism, with females rati n g themselves and the elderly woman high on neuroticism -the elderly woman even more so - whereas males rated themselves lower on neuroticism than they rated the elderly woman but not s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower than the females' s e l f - r a t i n g s : i t should be noted that q u a l i t a t i v e terms such as 'more', 'high' or 'lower' refer to the subject's score on a continuum that ranges from a low to a high amount of the variable being considered'. These differences, at least for the self-ratings of males and females on the EPI dimensions of extraversion-introversion and neuroticism were supported by Eysenck and Eysenck (196-4) i n standard-i z i n g the EPI. Both the phenomenological and Jungian approaches assume that our perception and prediction of the behaviour or personality of others i s based on our a b i l i t y to discover s t a b i l i t y i n others' - as was hypothe-sized by a t t r i b u t i o n theorists: Heider, Kelley, Jones and Davis, and Hamilton. What t h i s implies i s that attributions are based upon the 63. b e l i e f that expectancy, and therefore prediction, i s affected by the perceived s t a b i l i t y of causal'factors'. This assumption'is supported by the research'of' Weiner, Niereriberg and Goldstein (1976) who demonstrated that "the s t a b i l i t y of causal attributions . . . was related'to expectancy of success and expectancy s h i f t s " (p. 64-65). Thus with respect to the present problem, the ratings assigned to the elderly woman were generally based upon'those characteristics which the raters assume might be part of themselves, i . e . , the raters assume that the t r a i t s of i n t e r n a l i t y (LoC), s o c i a l appeal, and dependability'are both stable and represent discernable characteristics' of both themselves' arid the elderly woman. I f the above assumption i s correct, the results from the present study raises several problems. F i r s t , i f self-ratings play an important role i n the ratings made of others then why were- the correlations between the self-ratings and'ratings assigned'to the elderly woman on the dimensions of conservatism and' open-mindedness nonsignificant f o r both males and females? Although males and females believed that the elderly woman would rate herself as more conservative then themselves, and that females saw themselves as more'conservative than did the males, ho s i g n i f i c a n t correlations were found, as mentioned above,'between the self-ratings and ratings provided the elderly * woman. No s i g n i f i c a n t differences, either i n terms of correlations or dependent"t-tests, were found for the dimension of open-mindedness. One possible explanation of the above dilemma might be provided by Orpen's research.on prejudice. Orpen (1971) and" Orpen and Rodenwoldt (1973) i n t h e i r investigation of the role personality played i n prejudice reported that attitudes which were c u l t u r a l l y supported were not affected by personality. Thus Orpen's findings that South Africans held authori-ta r i a n b e l i e f s regardless of t h e i r conservatism scores were interpreted 64. as r e s u l t i n g from the strong influence of c u l t u r a l l y sanctioned norms. With'respect to the dimension, of-conservatism, Wilson (1973) reported that females scored higher'on conservatism than did males and that the score was higher (became more conservative) the older the i n d i v i d u a l was. This age difference was found to e x i s t ' f o r both males and females. As these two findings of Wilson were reflected In the present study, the i n s i g n i f i c a n t correlation between self-ratings and ratings provided the elderly woman on the dimension of conservatism may have been due to the fact that t h i s dimension i s a c u l t u r a l l y accepted one for categorizing an e l d e r l y person. Thus despite t h e i r personality, both males and females refl e c t e d a "kernel" of truth (McTiernan, 1977), i . e . , t h e i r conservative ratings reflected the s o c i a l l y accepted perception'of themselves and the elderly woman. Moreover, regardless of the target being rated ( i . e . , s e l f and elderly woman), males and females believed that the elderly woman would view herself as more neurotic than themselves. The position taken here i s that because the b e l i e f that an elderly person i s highly anxious appears to be s o c i a l l y accepted (eg., Moberg, 1969), no si g n i f i c a n t correlation was found on t h i s dimension between'the self-ratings and ratings assigned to the elderly woman by both males and females. This i s supported "by.Table .2 which demonstrates that there was a lower amount, of variance i n the range of ratings assigned to the elderly woman on the dimension of neuroticism than for the ratings the subjects gave themselves (variance i s obtained hy squaring the standard deviation). This interplay between self-ratings (possibly personality) and c u l t u r a l l y held b e l i e f s may also explain the observed positive relationship between'extraversion-introversion (EPI and MBTI) and neuroticism. As was stated e a r l i e r , a si g n i f i c a n t positive correlation was found 65. between.the self-ratings and ratings assigned.to the elderly woman on the dimensions of extraversion-introversion and neuroticism for "both males and females, i'.e.',' self-ratings" on extraversion-introversion and neuroticism' were p o s i t i v e l y -correlated as "were the ratings on these dimensions for the elderly woman;'therefore suggesting that high anxiety corresponds with introversion and low anxiety with extraversion. One possible t h e o r e t i c a l explanation of t h i s finding, as mentioned e a r l i e r , i s that i t might r e f l e c t some previously held b e l i e f on the relationship expected to exist between the dimensions of extraversion-introversion and neuroticism; and, therefore, i s not a l l together influenced by s e l f -ratings as such. Furthermore, again regardless of the target being rated, fortitude and i n t e g r i t y were seen as correlating p o s i t i v e l y with one another but negatively with s o c i a l appeal, dependability, and open-mindedness, which also correlated p o s i t i v e l y with each other. One possible interpretation of the above global labels and the t r a i t s they encompass i s that an i n d i v i d u a l seen as being high on fortitude and i n t e g r i t y i s viewed as constituting a s e l f - d i r e c t e d person. Thus such an i n d i v i d u a l might be viewed as a non-conformist, and, as such, might be seen as low on s o c i a l appeal and'open-mindedness since he would be resistant to change due to the manipulations ( s o c i a l conformity) of others. In turn, the combination of such labels (low s o c i a l appeal and low open-mindedness) might suggest a personality structure i n which there i s also low dependability. S t a t i s t i c a l l y , the positive correlations between fortitude and integrity'and t h e i r negative correlations with s o c i a l appeal, dependahleness, and open-mindedness suggests the possible presence of a second st r a t a , two factor structure i n the ratings on the 5 factor f i r s t strata scales derived from Signori's 69 Bipolar Adjective Scales. 66. Unfortunately the above assumption regarding the possible effect of self-ratings and pre-established c u l t u r a l l y accepted b e l i e f s on the ratings" made of*others i s possibly tautological. The explanation presented might be untestable i n that i t defines a l l f a i l u r e i n establishing a relationship" between self-ratings and the ratings "assigned to another as evidence for the existence of some c u l t u r a l l y held b e l i e f of that person being rated," and the f a i l u r e of the l a t t e r as proof f o r the effect of sel f - r a t i n g s on the ratings assigned to some target group. I f these two processes of self-evaluation and c u l t u r a l l y accepted b e l i e f s are the underlying mechanisms operating i n the a t t r i b u t i o n process i t s e l f there then arises the troublesome question of why only 4- to 35% of the variance was'accounted f o r from the ratings assigned to' the rater and the elderly woman. There appears to be three possible explanations f o r the low variance. F i r s t , the variance may have been reduced by having the subjects complete the test battery i n uncontrolled situations of t h e i r own choice. This explanation would appear to be an unl i k e l y one for an analysis on the mean differences between the ratings ( s e l f and those assigned to the elderly woman) of males who completed the test battery i n a controlled tes t i n g ' s i t u a t i o n and those who did not were found to be nonsignificant. A second possible explanation f o r the loss of variance i s that the tests themselves are.not true measures of t h e i r hypothesized dimensions. A l l of"the t e s t s , except for the MBTl and Signori's 69 Adjective Scales, assume unidimensionality. Research contradicts t h i s assumption. Wilson's Conservatism Scale (Robertson and Cochrane, 1973), the Eysenck Personality Inventory (Carrigan, I960; Howarth, 1976; Guilford, 1977) and Rotter's Internal-External Locus of Control.(Collins, 1974; Schlegel and Crawford, 1976) have a l l been demonstrated to be non-unidimensional. Thus, f o r 67. example, Rotter's scale has been said to contain at least a four'factor structure'rather than just' one Internal-external dimension. Such findings have led Rotter (1975.) to state that there may be at least two external types, the 'defensive' type and the 'passive' type, and that the general-izations made of an external and i n t e r n a l i n d i v i d u a l have been based upon subjective-speculations rather than rigorous experimentation. Thus with respect to the'present study, variance may have been reduced because the" items within the various tests measured different dimensions i n each subject. . Furthermore the e a r l i e r statement of Rotter's on the operational l i b e r t i e s taken-with the d e f i n i t i o n of an i n t e r n a l and external type may explain'why, no s i g n i f i c a n t correlation was found between externality and extraversion as was assumed to exist by the present experimenter. This contention was supported by M o r e l l i , Krotihgef and Moore (1979) who reported that extraversion did not correlate with externality. Eysenck's assumption regarding the unidimensionality of extraversion-introversion has been questioned by researchers as Carrigan (i960). After an investigation of the theoretical influence of extraversion on various tests such - as the Guilford-Zimmerman Temperment Survey, Ca t t e l l ' s 16 PF, and the EPI, Carrigan reported that Eysenck was incorrect i n assuming that extraversion-introversion'was unidimensional. In response to c r i t i c i s m s such as Howarth's (1976) on the assumed unidimen-s i o n a l i t y of'the EPI's factor of extraversion-introversion, Eysenck (1977) contends that although his E (extraversion-introversion) factor appeared to consist of two'other dimensions, which he labelled as ' s o c i a b i l i t y ' and 'impulsiveness'', i t (E) nevertheless was uni dimensional as i t was a second order'factor; and, as such, consisted of a"complex unity of the s i g n i f i c a n t correlations between the f i r s t order'factors of R ( r e s t r a i n t vs. rhythmia) and S ( s o c i a b i l i t y ) (Guilford, 1977). Guilford (1977), 68. i n a re-examination of f a c t o r i a l s o l u t i o n s "provided by Eysenck on the EPI r e p o r t e d t h a t the f a c t o r s S and R were independent' ( n o n e o r r e l a t e d ) ; t h e r e f o r e i n d i c a t i n g t h a t E was not a second'order f a c t o r and, as such, was not unidimensional. The the l a c k of u h i d i m e n s i o n a l i t y i n the EPI may e x p l a i n the low c o r r e l a t i o n s obtained i n the present study between the EPI and MBTI on the dimension of e x t r a v e r s i o n - i n t r o v e r s i o n . (.4-6 f o r males and .52 f o r females as compared to S t e e l e a n d ' K e l l y ' s , 1976, c o r r e l a t i o n of .74-); and, t h e r e f o r e , possibly'explain'why the male'scored more i n t r o v e r t e d than the female on the MBTI's dimension o f ' e x t r a v e r s i o n - i n t r o v e r s i o n y e t lower on the same dimension of the EPI'. I t should be noted t h a t one p o s s i b l e reason f o r the. l a r g e d i f f e r e n c e i n ' t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s between the present study and t h a t of S t e e l e and K e l l y (1976) i s t h a t the present study, used a r e v i s e d ' v e r s i o n , of "the EPI (Appendix C) whereas S t e e l e and K e l l y used the standard f u l l form. Thus, the low amount of variance accounted f o r i n the study may have been due t o the' f a c t t h a t . s u b j e c t s responded to s i m i l a r items d i f f e r -e n t l y because the items themselves measured d i f f e r e n t f e a t u r e s of a non-unidimensional concept. Although t h i s may be t r u e of most of the t e s t s used i n t h i s study, the excuse of non-unidimensionality may not be used i n e x p l a i n i n g the low variance obtained by the e x t r a v e r s i o n -i n t r o v e r s i o n items of the EPI. The e x t r a v e r s i o n - i n t r o v e r s i o n dimension of the' EPI -consisted of seven items t h a t were e x t r a c t e d from one general f a c t o r of e x t r a v e r s i o n ( V e l i c e r and Stevenson, 1978); t h e r e f o r e making the EPI' dimension o f e x t r a v e r s i o n - i n t r o v e r s i o n unidimensional i n a f a c t o r i a l sense. This then begs the question of"whether other t e s t s such as C a t t e l l ' s (1965) second order Questionnaire f a c t o r of E x v i a -I n v i a may not'provide" a b e t t e r (more r e l i a b l e a n d ' v a l i d ) measure of 69. extraversion-introversion. What, i s in d i c a t e d hy a l l ' o f the foregoing i s the need f o r item analyses to he conducted on the various t e s t s i n an attempt to improve them f a c t o r i a l l y . A t h i r d p o s s i b l e explanation f o r the low variance is ' a t h e o r e t i c a l one. It Is doubtful whether any per s o n a l i t y t h e o r i s t today would adhere to a dogmatic b e l i e f that a l l behaviour was the r e s u l t of only one f a c t o r such as i n s t i n c t u a l energy. A more conservative approach would be to assume that'behaviour was the r e s u l t " o f an i n t e r a c t i o n between many variables i n v o l v i n g c o n s t i t u t i o n a l type, "social environment, and past experience. With respect to the present study, only one'of these variables was examined. Though s e l f - r a t i n g s do'appear to play a r o l e i n the ratings given the e l d e r l y woman, they'do not by themselves account f o r a l l the variance.. The s o c i a l l y accepted b e l i e f s held about the target group or person, the s i t u a t i o n or context to which the Items being rated r e f e r , etc., must also be taken into account. In regards t o the assumption that the Jungian typologies, as provided by the MBTI, would provide a t h e o r e t i c a l framework from which one might examine t h e i r influence i n the a t t r i b u t i o n process, the findings were paradoxical. From the discriminant functions conducted on the s e l f -ratings and ratings assigned to the e l d e r l y woman, i t would appear that the extraverted-introverted type was the only important dimension f o r d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g subjects. Although the above r e s u l t s would appear to indi c a t e that Jung's (MBTI) types f a i l t o provide a working'theoretical framework ' forA'-exami'ning' the'role of pe r s o n a l i t y type" i n the a t t r i b u t i o n process,' 'the"' observed 'overlap between the various ratings f o r the Jungian (MBTI)'types''suggest otherwise. Because of the great overlap between t h e ' r a t i n g s ' ( s e l f and e l d e r l y woman) f o r the s e n s i n g - i n t u i t l v e , thinking-f e e l i n g , and judging-perceiving types, subjects could not be d i f f e r e n t i a t e d 70. 2 by t h e i r ratings - as was revealed by the H o t e l l i n g T 's on these var i a b l e s . An examination of the d i s t r i b u t i o n s of the continuous scores f o r the four dimensions ind i c a t e d a d i s t i n c t lack of bimodality, except f o r the dimension of extraversion-introversion which approximated a bimodal d i s t r i b u t i o n . What the absence of bimodality suggests i s that the sample population was biased on the dimensions of s e n s i n g - i n t u i t i o n , t h i n k i n g - f e e l i n g , and judging-perceiving; thus p o s s i b l y explaining why the discriminant function analyses were unable to c o r r e c t l y c l a s s i f y subjects into t h e i r respective types. The i m p l i c a t i o n of t h i s f i n d i n g i s that further research as to the a p p l i c a b i l i t y of the MBTl dimensions, i n reference to the present study, necessitates the establishment of pure f a c t o r dimensions of the MBTl i n the f i r s t instance. 71. V. Conclusion and Summary The r e s u l t s of the study ind i c a t e that the ratings assigned to the e l d e r l y woman appear to he dependent upon both the s e l f - r a t i n g s of the r a t e r s and t h e i r s o c i a l l y held b e l i e f s about the e l d e r l y woman. Self- e v a l u a t i o n appears, at l e a s t i n the present study, to be important f o r the dimensions of locus of co n t r o l , i n t e g r i t y , s o c i a l appeal, and dependableness whereas the ratings f o r the dimensions of conservatism, extraversion-introversion and neuroticism might be influenced by pre - e x i s t i n g held b e l i e f s about the e l d e r l y woman. The Jungian types as measured by the MBTl did not o f f e r a c l e a r d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of the subjects by eit h e r t h e i r s e l f - r a t i n g s - except f o r the extraverted and introverted types - nor by the ratings they assigned to the e l d e r l y woman. This f i n d i n g i n i t s e l f should not discourage further research with the MBTl f o r the disappointing performance of the MBTl i n the present study might have been due to the lack of c l e a r -cut types i n the sample population. Thus f u r t h e r research i s required i n examining the fac t o r structure of the MBTl. By i n v e s t i g a t i n g the responses of l a r g e r populations of 4-50 males and 4-50 females to the MBTl through techniques such as f a c t o r analysis and multiple regression, one might be able to derive f a c t o r i a l l y pure types; and, therefore, p o s s i b l y improve the p r e d i c t i o n rate of the MBTl f o r s e l f - r a t i n g s and ratings assigned to older persons. Moreover, s i m i l a r analyses need to be conducted f o r other t e s t s such as the EPI and Wilson's Conservatism Scale. In conducting research on the present t o p i c , two variables not yet discussed need to be investigated. F i r s t , the favourable r e s u l t s obtained i n terms of the p o s i t i v e descriptions assigned to the s e l f and the e l d e r l y woman may have been influenced by s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y . 72. The extent to which s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y affects the ratings assigned to an elderly woman may not be as large as one might anticipate. Recent research (ivester and King, 1977;. Signori, Butt and Kozak, 1977, 1978, 1979) tends to corroborate the present finding that the elderly person is_ viewed i n a more positive manner than previously believed. Moreover, as noted by Schneider (1973), one should be cautioned i n removing s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y when studying variables such as b e l i e f s and attitudes f o r i t ( s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y ) possibly r e f l e c t s some true c u l t u r a l norm with respect to the problem being studied. Thus removal of a l l s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y from a scale may result i n removing the o r i g i n a l purpose of the study. The second problem that needs to be investigated i s the necessity of at least more than one reference group. Although i n the present study the ratings were interpreted as belonging either to the rater or the elderly woman, i t can not d e f i n i t e l y be taken that the e l d e r l y woman was characterized as more conservative or as lower on s o c i a l appeal. In order to make such a comparison there must be at least two reference targets other than the s e l f . Thus further research on the problem of se l f - r a t i n g s and ratings assigned to an elderly person would require a second target, preferably an elderly man rather than a young woman. Moreover, the sex and age of the target might also be varied i n order to examine what affects they have on the ratings assigned to them. By examining, for example, the self-ratings of 4-50 males and 4-50 females on the various tests used i n the present study and t h e i r ratings of various target groups, one might be better able to understand the relationship between the underlying structures of these two variables; and therefore, possibly enable one to predict the scores of one from the 73. other. P r i o r to conducting fur t h e r discriminant analyses on the MBTl f o r examining the percent of c o r r e c t - i n c o r r e c t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of subjects by polar types, one should probably f i r s t ensure balanced sample popula-ti o n s according to type and, i n addition, standardize the t e s t v a r i a b l e s , f o r such a procedure may increase the p r o b a b i l i t y of correct c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . Standardization of the variables may explain why the discriminant c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the 5 f a c t o r scales from Signori's 69 Bipolar Adjective Scales contributed the most to the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the subjects into t h e i r correct types. I t should be remembered that the 5 scales i n question were derived from the f a c t o r loadings obtained from a p r i n c i p a l component analysis on ratings assigned to an e l d e r l y person of Signori's Bipolar Adjective Scales. In sum, s e l f - r a t i n g s do appear to play a r o l e i n 'influencing' the type of ratings one would give another person or group - though the extent of that r e l a t i o n s h i p appears to be r e s t r i c t e d to those dimensions not already, influenced by previously accepted s o c i a l b e l i e f s of that person or group. Moreover, Jung's typologies as measured by the MBTl, with the presence of known definable types i n the sample population, may s t i l l provide a workable framework f o r examining t h e i r r o l e i n the a t t r i b u t i o n process. 74. Reference Notes B a l l , E.D. A factor analytic investigation of the personality typology of C.G. Jung. Ph.D. Dissertation. Pennsylvania State University, 1967. Cook, D.A. Is Jung's typology true? A theoretical and experimental study of some assumptions i m p l i c i t i n a theory of personality types.. Ph.,D. Dissertation, Duke university, 1970. Kozak, J.F. and Signori, E.I. Cross-cultural observations on aging. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association on Gerontology, Nov. 11-13, 1976, Vancouver, B.C. McTiernan, T.J. A conceptual and empirical study of issues i n stereotype research: Some re f l e c t i o n s on the d e f i n i t i o n and measurement of stereotypes, and an experiment on r e c i p r o c i t y and stereotype forma-t i o n . Master thesis, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1977. Signori, E.I. and Kozak, J.F. Study of attitudes of the elderly toward aging and the aged. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association on Gerontology, Nov. 11-13* 1976, Vancouver, B.C. Signori, E.I., Butt, D.S., and Kozak, J.F. Attitudes toward the aged. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association on Gerontology, Oct. 13-16, 1977, Montreal, Quebec. Signori, E.I., Butt, D.S., and Kozak, J.F. Attitudes toward the elde r l y , 1979, Unpublished manuscript. Signori, E.I., Butt, D.S., Kozak, J.F., and Schroeder, M.L. Attitudes toward the elderly: The effect of sex and age on ratings. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association on Gerontology, Nov. 1-4, 1979, Halifax, Nova Scotia. Wiggins, J.S. A psychological taxonomy of t r a i t descriptive terms: I. The interpersonal doman. Paper presented at the meeting of the Society of Multivariate Experimental Psychology, Glenden Beach, Oregon, Nov. 1975. 75. References Adorno, T.W., Frenlrel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D.J., and Sanford, R.N. The authoritarian personality. New York: W.W. Norton and Co., Inc., 1950. Akamatsu, T.J. and Thelen, M.H. Observer states and t r a i t s and the imitative process: A test of a new formulation. Journal of  Research i n Personality, 1977, 11 (2), 165-179. A l l p o r t , G.W. Personality and s o c i a l encounter. Boston: Beacon, I960. A l l p o r t , G.W. Traits r e v i s i t e d . American Psychologist, 1966, 21, 1-10. Baron, R.M., Cowan, G., Ganz, R.L., and McDonald, M. Interaction of locus of control and type performance feedback: Considerations of external v a l i d i t y . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 30, 285-292. Bengston, V.L., Dowd, J . J . , Smith, D.H., and Inkeles, A.A. Modernization, modernity, and perceptions of aging: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Gerontology, 1975, 30, 688-695. Berwick, K. The "senior c i t i z e n " i n America:. A study i n unplanned obsolescence. The Gerontologist, 1967, 7 ( 4 ) , 257-260. Bern, D.J. B e l i e f s , attitudes, and human a f f a i r s . Belmont: Wadsworth Pub:.. Co., Inc., 1970. Bern, D.J. and Funder, D.C. Predicting more of the people more of the time: Assessing the personality of situations. Psychological  Review, 1978, 85_ (6), 485-501. Bri t t o n , J.0. and B r i t t o n , J.H. Discrimination and perception of age and aging by elementary school children. Proceedings, 77th Annual Convention, APA, 1969, 715-716. Buhmeyer, K.J. and Johnson, A.H. Personality p r o f i l e s of physician extenders. Psychological Reports, 1977, 40, 655-662. Butt, D.S. and Signori, E.I. Social images of disadvantaged groups. Social Behavior and Personality, 1976, 4 (2), 145-151. Cantor, N. and Mischel, W. Traits as prototypes: Effects on recognition memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1977, 3 4 ( l ) , Carlson, R. Where i s the person i n personality research? Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1971, 75, 203-219. 76. Carlson, R. and Levy, N. Studies of Jungian typology: 1. Memory, so c i a l perception, and s o c i a l action. Journal of Personality, 1973, 41, 559-576. Carrigan, P.M. Extraversion and introversion as a dimension of person-a l i t y : A reappraisal. Psychological B u l l e t i n , I960, 57 (5), 329-360. C a t t e l l , R.B. Personality: A systematic, t h e o r e t i c a l , and factual  study. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1950. C a t t e l l , R.B. The s c i e n t i f i c analysis of personality. Harmondsworth: Penguin Press, 1965. C o l l i n s , B.E., Martin, J.C, Ashmore, R.D., and Ross, L. Some dimensions of the internal-external metaphor i n theories of personality. Journal of Personality, 1973, 41 (4), 471-492. C o l l i n s , B.E. Four components of the Rotter Internal-External scale: B e l i e f i n a d i f f i c u l t world, a just world, a predictable world, and a p o l i t i c a l l y responsive world. Journal of Personality and  Social Psychology, 1974, 29 ( 3 ) , 381-391. Coombs, A. and Richards, A.C. Perceptual psychology: A humanistic approach to the study of persons. New York: Harper and Row, 1976. Costa, P.T.Jr. and McCrae, R.R. Age differences i n personality structure: A cluster.analytic approach. Journal of Gerontology, 1976, 31 (5), 564-570. Cowgill, D.O. Aging i n American society. In: D.W. Cowgill and L.D. Holmes (eds.), Aging and Modernization. New York: Meredith Corpor-ation, 1972, Chap. 16, 243-261. Crouch, B.M. Age and i n s t i t u t i o n a l support: Perceptions of older Mexican Americans. Journal of Gerontology, 1972, 27 (4), 524-529. Cumming, E. and Henry, W.E. Growing old. New York: Basic Books, 1961. Dollard, J. and M i l l e r , N.E. Personality and psychotherapy. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1950. Eysenck, H.J. The structure of human personality. New York: Wiley, 1953-Eysenck, J.H. and Eysenck, S.B.G. Manual of the Eysenck Personality  Inventory. London: University of London Press Ltd., 1964. Eysenck, H.J. Eysenck on extraversion. New York: Wiley, 1973. 77. Eysenck, H.J. Personality and factor analysis: A reply to Guilford. Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1977 , 84, 405-411. Farley, F.H. and Farley, S.V. Impulsiveness, s o c i a b i l i t y , and the preference for varied experience. Perception and Motor S k i l l s , 1970, 31, 47-50. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. B e l i e f , attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. London:- .Addison--Wesley, Bub. Co., 1975. Freud, S. An outline of psychoanalysis. In: Standard edition, Vol. 2 3 . London: Hogarth Press, 1964. ( F i r s t German edition, 1940. ) Frieze, I. and Weiner, B. Cue u t i l i z a t i o n and a t t r i b u t i o n a l judgments for success and f a i l u r e . Journal of Personality, 1971, 39, 591-605. Gardner, R.C, Kirby, D.M., and Finley, J.C. Ethnic stereotypes: The significance of consensus. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 1973, 5 (1), 4-12. Gibson, H.B. Relations between performance on the advanced matrices and the EPI i n high int e l l i g e n c e subjects. B r i t i s h Journal of  Social and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1975, 14, 363-369. Gibson, H.B. and Corcoran, M.E. Personality and d i f f e r e n t i a l suscepti-b i l i t y to hypnosis: Further r e p l i c a t i o n and sex differences. B r i t i s h Journal of Psychology, 1975, 66 (4), 513-520. Gilmor, T.M. and Minton, H.L. Internal versus external a t t r i b u t i o n of task performance as a function of locus of control, i n i t i a l confidence and success-failure outcome. Journal of Personality, 1974, 42, 159-173. Gilmor, T.M. Locus of control as a mediator of adaptive behaviour i n children and adolescents. Canadian Psychological Review, 1978, 1 9 ( 1 ) , 1-26. Goffman, E. Asylums: Essays on the s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n of mental patients  and other inmates. New'-York r Doubleday. and Company'," "Inc.-,-. 1.96.1. '.' . Goffman, E. Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled i d e n t i t y . New lersey,:7,.'PrehtiGe-Hall, Inc. '. 1.963"=.• - J,.A-.:--.y, .-.9c". Gorlow, L.,. Simonson, N.R., and Krauss, H. An empirical investigation of the Jungian Typology. B r i t i s h Journal of Social and C l i n i c a l  Psychology, 1966, 3, 108-117! Gray, H. and Wheelwright, J.B. Jung's psychological types including the four functions. Journal of General Psychology, 1945, 33, 265-284. 78. Gray, H. Jung's psychological types: Meaning and consistency of the questionnaire. Journal of General Psychology, 194-7, 37, 177-186. Gray, H. Jung's psychological types: Ambiguous scores and t h e i r i n t e r -pretation. Journal of General Psychology, 1949, 40, 63-88. Guilford, J.P. W i l l the r e a l factor of extraversion-introversion please stand up? A reply to Eysenck. Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1977, 84 (3), 412-416. Hamilton, D.L. A cognitive-attributional analysis of stereotyping. To appear i n L...Berkowitz. (ed. ). Advances i n experimental s o c i a l  psychology, Vol. 12. New York: Academic Press, 1979. Hastorf, A.H., Schneider, D.J., and Polefka, J. Person perception. London: Addison-Wesley-Pub. Co., Inc., 1970. Hayden, T. and Mischel, W. Maintaining t r a i t consistency i n the reso-l u t i o n of behavioural inconsistency: The wolf i n sheep's clothing? Journal of Personality, 1976, 44, 109-132. Heider, F. The psychology of interpersonal r e l a t i o n s . New York: Wiley, 1958. Hippocrates. In: H a l l , CS. and Lindzey, G. (eds.), Theories of personality, 1970, Second edition. New York:-.. John.^Wiley^and,Sons, Chapter 9, 338-379. Hochberg, J. Perception. I I . Space and movement. In: J.W. Kling-and L:A.£,-Rig.g_gv (eds. ), Woodworth and Schlosberg's Experimental  Psychology. Third edition, NewtYork: ?iHolt$mBimehaaivtr.ana .Winston, 1971, Chapter 1 3 , 475-550. Howarth, E.A. A psychometric investigation of Eysenck's Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 1976, £0, 173-185. Ivester, C and King, K. Attitudes of adolescents toward the aged. The Gerontologist, 1977, 17 ( l ) , 85-89. Jackson, D.N. The dynamics of structured personality t e s t s : 1971. Psychological Review, 1971, 78 (3), 229-248. Jackson, J.J. Sex and s o c i a l class variations i n Black aged parent-adult c h i l d relationships. Aging and Human Development, 1971, 2, 96-107. Jacobi, J. The psychology of CG. Jung. London:-, T a l e .University ^ e s s , 1973. Joe, V.C. Review of the internal-external control construct as a personality variable.' Psychological Reports, 1971, 28, 619-640. 7 9 . Jones, E.E. and Davis, K.E. From acts to d i s p o s i t i o n s : The a t t r i b u t i o n process i n person perception. In: L. Berkowitz (ed. ), Advances i n experimental s o c i a l psychology, Vol. 2. New York: Academic Press, 196T Jung, C.G. Aion: Researches into the phenomenology of the s e l f . Translated by R.F.C. H u l l . Bollingen Se r i e s , Princeton, Vol. 9, Part I I , 1959. Jung, C.G. The structure and dynamics of the psyche. Translated by R.F.C. H u l l , L'endon:.' - Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd., I960, Chapter VI, 387-403. Jung, C.G. Psychological types. . Bollingen Se r i e s , New Jersey: Princeton Uni v e r s i t y Press, Second P r i n t i n g , 1974. Kelley, H.H. A t t r i b u t i o n theory i n s o c i a l psychology. In: D. Levine (ed. ), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. L i n c o l n : U n i v e r s i t y of Nebraska Press, 1967, 192-238. Ke l l y , G.A. The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton, 1955, V. I. Kinder, D.R. P o l i t i c a l person perception: The asymmetrical influence of sentiment and choice on perceptions of p r e s i d e n t i a l candidates. Journal of Personality and S o c i a l Psychology, 1978, 36 (8), 859-871. ' K i r s c h t , J.P. and K i l l e h a y , R.C. Dimensions of authoritarianism: A review of theory and research. Un i v e r s i t y of Kentucky Press, 196T Kish, G.B. Stimulus-seeking and conservatism. In: G.D. Wilson (ed.) The psychology of conservatism. London: Academic Press, 1973, Chapter 1 3 , 197-207. Kretschmer, E. Physique and character. New York: Harcourt, 1925. In: C S . H a l l and G. Lindzey (eds.), Theories of per s o n a l i t y , 1970, Second e d i t i o n , New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Chapter 9, 338-379. Krovetz, M.L. Explaining success or f a i l u r e as a function of one's locus of control. Journal of Personality, 1974, 42, 175-189. Lefcourt, H.M. Locus of co n t r o l : Current trends i n theory and research. H i l l s d a l e , New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 1976. Leonard, R.L. Self-concept and a t t r a c t i o n f o r s i m i l a r and d i s s i m i l a r others. Journal of Personality and S o c i a l Psychology, 1975, 31 (5), 926-929. 80. Levenson, H. Activism and powerful others: Distinctions within the concept of internal-external control. Journal of Personality- Assessment, 1974, 38, 377-383. Lewin, K. Principles of topological psychology. New York: McGraw-H i l l , 1936. In: C.S. H a l l and G. Lindzey (eds.), Theories of  personality. New York: Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1970. Chapter o~. Lewin's f i e l d theory, 209-257. Loo, R. F i e l d dependence and the Eysenck Personality Inventory. Perceptual and Motor S k i l l s , 1976, 43, 614. MacRae, K.D. and Power, R.P. An analysis of the items of the Eysenck Personality Inventory. B r i t i s h Journal of Psychology, 1975, 66 ( 4 ) , 501-512. McArthur, L.A. The how aid what of why: Some determinants and conse-quences of causal a t t r i b u t i o n . Journal of Personality and Social  Psychology, 1972, 22, 171-193-Markus, H. Self-schemata and processing information about the s e l f . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1977, 35_ (2), 63-78. Milgram, S. Obedience to authority: An experimental view. New York: Harper and Row, Pub., 1974. Moberg, R.G. The attitudes of ministers toward old people. Dissertation Abstracts, 1969, 30, 2619. M o r e l l i , G., Krotinger, H., and Moore, S. Neuroticism and Levenson's Locus of Control Scale. Psychological Reports, 1979, 44, 153-154. ~ Myers, I.B. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: Manual. 1962, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey. Myers, I.B. Inferences as to the dichotomous nature of Jung's types, from the shape of regressions of dependent variables upon Myers-Briggs Type Indicator scores. American Psychologist, 1962(b), 17, 364 (abstract). . Myers, I.B. and Davis, J.A. Relation of medical students' psychological type to t h e i r specialties twelve years l a t e r . In: K.J. Buhmeyer and A.H. Johnson, Personality p r o f i l e s of physician extenders. Psychological Reports, 1977, 40, 655-662. Neugarten, B.L. Adult personality: Toward a psychology of the l i f e cycle. In: B.L. Neugarten (ed.), Middle age and aging: A reader i n s o c i a l psychology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1968, 1 3 7 - 1 4 7 . " 81. Neugarten, B.L. and Gutmann, D.L. Age-sex roles and personality i n middle age: A thematic apperception study.- In: B.L. Neugarten (ed. ), Middle age and aging: A reader i n s o c i a l psychology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968, 58-71. Neugarten, B.L., Moore, J.W. and Lowe, J.C- Age norms, age constraints and adult s o c i a l i z a t i o n . In: B.L. Neugarten (ed. ), Middle age  and aging. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968, 22-28. Orpen, C. Authoritarianism and r a c i a l attitudes among English-speaking South Africans.- Journal of Psychology, 1971, 84, 301-302. Orpen, C. and Rodenwoldt, E. The Wilson-Patterson Conservatism Scale i n a conservative culture. B r i t i s h Journal of Social and C l i n i c a l  Psychology, 1973, 12, 94-95. Peck, R.C. Psychological developments i n the second half of l i f e . A.P.A., 1956. In: B.L. Neugarten, (ed.), Middle age and aging. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968, Chapter 9, 88-92. Phares, E.J. Expectancy changes i n s k i l l and chance situations. Journal of. Abnormal and So c i a l Psychology, 1957, 5 4 , 3 3 9 - 3 4 2 . Phares, E.J. Locus of control i n personality. Morristown, New Jersey: General Learning Press, 1976. Phares, E.J. and Lamiell, J.T. Personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 1977, 28, 113-140. Piaget, J. The construction of r e a l i t y i n the, c h i l d . New York.-: -• BaM'antiheflBboks:, 1954. Press, I. and McKool, J.R. Social structure and status of the aged: Toward some v a l i d cross-cultural generalizations. Aging and Human  Development, 1972, 3 (4), 297-306. Rao, CR. Linear s t a t i s t i c a l inference and i t s applications. Second edi t i o n , New-York: Wiley, 1973, 574-582. Reichard, S., Livson, F., and Peterson, P.G. Aging and personality:  A study of eighty-seven older men. NewnYSrk.:0 John- Wiley, 1962. Robertson, A. and Cochrane, R. The Wilson-Patterson Conservatism Scale: A reappraisal. B r i t i s h Journal of Social and C l i n i c a l  Psychology, 1973, 12, 428-430. Rogers, CR. Client-centered therapy: i t s current practice, implications,  and theory. Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n , 1951. Rogers, T.B., Kuiper, N.A., and Kirker, W.S. Self-reference and the encoding of personal information. Journal of Personality and  Social Psychology, 1977, 35_ (9), 677-688. ! 82. Rokeach, M. The open and closed mind. New York: Basic Books, I960. Rostan, L. Cours elementaire d'hygiene. i n : c.S. H a l l and G. Lindzey (eds. ),.Theories"of p'ersonality^ai970, Second edition, New York: • John Wiley and Sons-, ^ knc*y Chapter 9, 338-379. ' - ". Rotter, J.B. Generalized expectancies for i n t e r n a l versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 1966, 80, (whole No. 609), 1-28. Rotter, J.B. Some' problems and misconceptions related to the construct of i n t e r n a l vs. external control of reinforcement. Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1975, £3, 56-67. Salas, R.G. and Richardson, J.F. Some Australian data on Forms A and B of the EPI. Australian Journal of Psychology, 1968, 20, 11-13. Schachter, S. and Singer, J.E. Cognitive, s o c i a l and physiological determinants of emotional state. Psychological Review, 1962, 69, 379-399. Scharf, S. and Newman, A. Actor-observer differences i n perceived locus of control. Psychological Reports, 1976, 38, 420-422. Schlegel, R.P. and Crawford, C.A. Multidimensionality of i n t e r n a l -external locus of control: Some.additional data bearing on the v a l i d i t y of se l f - c o n t r o l as a t h i r d dimension. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 1976, 8.(4), 375-387. Schlegel, R.P. and Crawford, C.A. Multidimensional locus of control and drug use among high school students. Canadian Journal of  Behavioural Science, 1978, 10 (2), 141-151. Schneider, J.F. The conservatism scale: Independent of SD? B r i t i s h  Journal of Social and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1973, 12, 90-91. Schneider, J . , Kohler, A., and Wachter,- H. Conservatism and cognitive complexity. Psychological Reports, 1979, 44, 981-982. Schneider, J. and Minkmar, H. Dentsche neukonstruktion einer konserva-tismusskala. Diagnostica, 1972, 18, 37-48. In: J.^.Schneider, A\-Kohlerand J."' Wachtker.d Conservatism and cognitive complexity. Psychological Reports, 1979, 44, 981-982. Shaver, K.G. An introduction to a t t r i b u t i o n processes. CambridgePub. Winthrop Rub. Inc., 1975. Shaw, M.E. and Sulzer, J.L. An empirical test of Heider's levels i n att r i b u t i o n of re s p o n s i b i l i t y . Journal of Abnormal and Social  Psychology, 1964, 69, 39-46. 83. Sheldon, W.H. The v a r i e t i e s of human physique: An introduction to constitutional psychology. In: CS. H a l l and G. Lindzey (eds.), Theories of personality, 1970. Second edition, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Chapter 9, 338-279. Sherman, N.C, Gold, J.A., and Sherman, M.F. A t t r i b u t i o n theory and evaluations of older men among college students t h e i r parents, and grandparents. Personality and Social Psychology B u l l e t i n , 1978, 4 ( 3 ) , 440-442. Signori, E.I., Sampson, D.L.G., and Rempel, H. Tr a i t labels for rati n g s o c i a l l y disadvantaged groups on employment. Psychological  Reports, 1968, £3, 160-162. Signori, E.I. and Butt, S.D. Ratings of the s o c i a l images of disadvan-taged groups by males and females. Psychological Reports, 1972, 30, 575-580. Signori, E.I., Butt, D.S., and Kozak, J.F. Dimensions i n attitudes towards the aged. Canadian Counselor, 1979, In press. Signori, E.I. and Kozak, J.F. The needs of the elderly. The B r i t i s h  Columbia Medical Journal, 1979, 21 (3), 94-96. » Simos, B.G. Relations of adults with aging parents. The Gerontologist, 1970, 10 (2), 135-139. Skinner, B.F. Science and human behavior. New York: Macmillan, 1953. Snyder, M. and Monson, T.C Persons, situations, and the control of s o c i a l behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 32, 637-644.. Snygg, D. and Coombs, A.W. Individual behavior: A new frame of r e f e r - ence for psychology. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1949. S r u l l , T.K. and Karabenick, S.A. Effects of personality-situation locus of control congruence. Journal of Personality and Social  Psychology, 1975, 32, 617-628. 8 4 . Steele, R.S. and K e l l y , T.J. Eysenck personality questionnaire and Jungian Myers-Briggs Type Indicator correlation of extraversion-introversion. Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1976, 44 (4), 690-691. Stern, G.S. and Manifold, B. Internal.locus of control as a value. Journal of Research i n Personality, 1977, 11, 237-242. Strieker, L.J. and Ross, J. A description and evaluation of the Myers- Briggs Type Indicator. Research B u l l e t i n 62-6. Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service, 1962. (a) Strieker, L.J. and.Ross, J. Intercorrelations and r e l i a b i l i t y of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Scales. Psychological Reports, 1963, 12, 287-293. Strieker, L.J. and Ross, J. An assessment of some str u c t u r a l properties of the Jungian personality typology. Journal of Abnormal and  S o c i a l Psychology, 1964, 68 ( l ) , 62-71. Sulzer, J.L.. and Burglass, R.K. Responsibility a t t r i b u t i o n , empathy and punltiveness. Journal of Personality, 1968, 36, 272-282. Tagiuri, R. Person perception. In: G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (eds.), The handbook of s o c i a l psychology. Second Edition, Volume Three: The i n d i v i d u a l i n a s o c i a l context. London: -Addison-Wesley Pub9-69, Co-,^1969, 395-449. Tallmer, M. S o c i a l , economic and health factors i n disengagement i n the aging. Dissertation Abstracts, 1967, 28 (6-B), 2614-2615. Taylor, S.E., Fiske, S.T., Close, M., Anderson, C , and Ruderman, A.J. Solo status as a psychological variable: The power of being d i s t i n c -t i v e . 1977.'- In: Hamilton, D.L., A cognitive-attributional analysis of stereotyping. To appear. i n .L; Ber.kowitz(-e".d.;) Advances i n experimental  s o c i a l psychology, Vol. 12. New York: Academic Press, 1979. Thomas, E.C. and Yamamoto, K. Attitudes toward age:. An exploration i n school-age children. International Journal of Aging and Human  Development, 1975, 6 (2), 117-129. Thorsen, J.A., Whatby, L., and Hancock, K. Attitudes toward the aged as a function of age and education. The Gerontologist, 1974, 14, 316-318. . Ve l i c e r , W.'F. and Stevenson, J.F. The r e l a t i o n between item format and the structure of the Eysenck Personality. Inventory. Applied  Psychological Measurement, 1978, 2 (2), 293-304. Vine, I. Stereotypes i n the judgement of personality from handwriting. B r i t i s h Journal of Social and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1974, 13 ( l ) , 61-64. ' ~ 85. Wegner, D.M. A t t r i b u t e g e n e r a l i t y : The development and a r t i c u l a t i o n of a t t r i b u t e s i n person perception. Journal of Research i n  Personality, 1977, 11 (3), 329-339. • Weinberger, L.E. and Millham, J. A multi-dimensional, multiple method analysis of a t t i t u d e s toward the e l d e r l y . Journal of Gerontology, 1975, 30 (3), 343-348. Weiner, B., Nierenberg, R., and Goldstein, M. S o c i a l learning (locus of control) versus a t t r i b u t i o n a l (causal s t a b i l i t y ) i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of expectancy of success. Journal of Personality, 1976, 44 ( l ) , 52-68. Wells, G.L. and Harvey, J.H. Naive a t t r i b u t o r s ' a t t r i b u t i o n s and p r e d i c t i o n s : What i s informative and when i s an e f f e c t an effect? Journal of Personality and S o c i a l Psychology, 1978, 36 (5), 483-490. Wiggins, J.S. A psychological taxonomy of t r a i t - d e s c r i p t i v e terms: The interpersonal domain. Journal of Personality and S o c i a l  Psychology, 1979, 37 (3), 395-412. Wilson, G.D. and Patterson, J.R. A new measure of conservatism. B r i t i s h Journal of S o c i a l and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1968, 7, 264-269. Wilson, G.D. (ed.). The psychology of conservatism. London: Academic Press, 1973. Wilson, G.D. and L i l l i e , F.J. S o c i a l a t t i t u d e s of humanists and S a l v a t i o n i s t s . In: G.D. Wilson, (ed.), The psychology of conser- vatism. London: Academic Press, 1973, Chapter 5, 71-92. Woodburn, L. and Bekker, D. D i f f e r e n t i a l l y r e l a t i n g f a c t ors of locus of control to a behavioral c r i t e r i o n . Psychological Reports, 1975, 36, 119-124. Wylie, F. Attitudes toward aging and the aged among Black Americans: Some h i s t o r i c a l perspectives. Aging and Human Development, 1971, 2, 66-70. Appendix A A t t r i b u t i o n Theories 87. 1. Heider's balance theory As with Snygg and Coombs (1949), Heider (1958) attempted to explain s o c i a l phenomenology through the i n t e r n a l framework of the ind i v i d u a l . Heider assumed that: ( l ) insight into human behaviour was en t i r e l y dependent upon a knowledge of the common language people used i n describing how they both perceived and interpreted events within t h e i r s o c i a l environment, (2) the prime motivating force was prediction and control over one's environment and that success was e n t i r e l y dependent upon one's a b i l i t y to predict, and (3) the underlying process i n the perception and prediction of the physical environment was simi l a r to that of perceiving and predicting the behaviour of others. Relying upon the physiological-perceptual laws' of perceptual constancy and invariance, which account for the perceived constancy of objects during conditions of variance i n both the size of the objects and t h e i r distance from the r e t i n a , Heider proposed that s i m i l a r laws existed i n person', perception - with an important difference. Unlike the case of perceptual constancy of physical objects i n the r e t i n a , where the 'schematic shape' of an object remains the same under a wide variety of environmental conditions, behaviour i s only p r o b a b i l i s t i c a l l y related to perceived causal events such as personality. Taking t h i s into consideration, Heider stated that individuals perceived s t a b i l i t y by i n f e r r i n g the dispositions and motives that they believed operated within a person. This 'perceived s t a b i l i t y ' was based, according to Heider, on some inherent a b i l i t y of the in d i v d i u a l to establish relationships that would permit him to i n f e r causality between dispositions and behaviour 88. despite v a r i a b i l i t y i n environmental conditions - a:process sim i l a r to Snygg and Coombs' process of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . The examination of the conditions that effect the process of i n f e r r i n g causality i s central to Heider's theory. In order to i n f e r causality, Heider noted, the i n d i v i d u a l must discriminate between the outcome and the intentions of the actor. An 'action outcome' or effect was interpreted as being the function of environmental force plus personal force, which i n i t s e l f was the product between the perceived a b i l i t y of the actor and the e f f o r t he exerts (Heider, 1958, p. 82): thus the law may be expressed as; E ( f f o r t ) = P(erson) x Environment). In attempting to establish the above law, the i n d i v i d u a l must f i r s t i n f e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the r e s u l t of the act. Unlike the rather general understanding of the mechanism of s o c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y presented by theorists as Milgram (197-4), Heider i d e n t i f i e d f i v e l e v e ls of causal a t t r i b u t i o n i n reference to r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , which were; ( l ) association (where the actor i s viewed as being responsible for effects that are perceived to be associated with him), (2) commission (the actor i s responsible only when the outcome i s seen as being the direct results of his behaviour), (3) foreseeability (where the actor i s perceived as being able to anticipate the effect although he may not have intended i t ) , (<4) intent!onality (where the effect was both intended and foreseeable), and (5) i n t e n t i o n a l i t y with j u s t i f i c a t i o n (where the effect i s seen as being outside the personal control of the actor and, therefore, makes him less responsible for the e f f e c t s ) . In general, Heider believed that the a t t r i b u t i o n of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y varied with the r e l a t i v e contributions of the above f i v e factors. Research on the attribution.of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y toward an actor has confirmed the complexities involved i n the process (Shaw and Sulzer, 1965; Sulzer and 89. Burglass, 1968) but has -not as yet been able to e s t a b l i s h the basic dynamic schema of Heider's c e n t r a l concept of 'perceived (person) s t a b i l i t y ' . I m p l i c i t i n Heider's discussion on the types of perceived responsi-b i l i t y i s the assumption that the perception of c a u s a l i t y can be e i t h e r personal or impersonal. Personal c a u s a l i t y r e f e r s to s i t u a t i o n s where the e f f e c t was the intended r e s u l t of the actor's behaviour ( i n t e n t i o n a l -i t y ) , whereas impersonal c a u s a l i t y r e f e r s to those e f f e c t s caused by others and not intended by the actor ( f o r e s e e a b i l i t y ) . Although i t may be claimed that Heider's approach i n examining the process of causal a t t r i b u t i o n was overly t h e o r e t i c a l , and therefore rather general, he did i n d i c a t e nevertheless that i n t e r n a l a t t r i b u t i o n s i n v o l v i n g d i s p o s i -tions and t r a i t s were made only when the e f f e c t was perceived as being intended (personal c a u s a l i t y ) . Centering around t h i s assumption, Jones and Davis (1965) formulated the next theory to be examined. 2. Jones and Davis' theory of correspondent inference Agreeing with Heider, Jones and Davis believed that a t t r i b u t i o n s of d i s p o s i t i o n s toward an actor were dependent upon the perception of both the actions of the actor and the e f f e c t s of such actions. As a t t r i b u t i o n r e l i e d upon the perception of the i n t e n t i o n of the act committed by the actor, Jones and Davis centered t h e i r analysis of the process around f a c t o r s that they f e l t might influence such perceptions. The f i r s t f a c t o r i s o l a t e d by the authors was the assumption of knowledge. D i r e c t l y r e f l e c t i n g Heider's concept of f o r e s e e a b i l i t y , knowledge r e f e r r e d to the perception made of the actor that he had some p r i o r knowledge of the e f f e c t regardless of h i s r o l e i n producing i t . Thus i f the actor was perceived as being an accomplice to the knowledge of some impending 90. e f f e c t , even though he did not intend to have the effect occur, the actor would nevertheless be attributed as being responsible for the occurrence of the effect. The second factor believed to effect the a t t r i b u t i o n process i s the a b i l i t y of the actor himself. I f an effect was seen as not r e s u l t i n g from the perceived a b i l i t y of the actor, the consequences of the effect would be attributed to luck or chance rather than to some di s p o s i t i o n a l quality or p o t e n t i a l i t y of the actor. Therefore for intention to be perceived i n the Jones and Davis model, the actor must have been seen as having p r i o r knowledge as to the effects of his actions and must be seen as being capable of producing the effects. In the case where the above two assumptions e x i s t , Jones and Davis proposed that the next stage i n the inference process depended solely upon the a b i l i t y of the observer to estimate what were the effects that an actor intended to create. In addition the observer was seen as being responsible for examining the conditions under which intentions were employed to i n f e r the d i s p o i t i o n a l q u a l i t i e s of the actor, a process equivalent to Snygg and Coombs' concept of i n f e r r i n g causality from one's highly d i f f e r e n t i a t e d i n t e r n a l frame of reference. Jones and Davis reported that the conditions which effected the inference process centered around the concept of correspondence. The term correspondence was used to describe the degree to which " ( l ) a given intention can describe the action", "(2) a given d i s p o s i t i o n a l property can account for the intention", and "(3) by implication, a given di s p o s i t i o n a l property can describe the action." (Hastorf, Schneider and Polefka, 1970, p. 68). Thus correspondent inference i s highly causal i n that the act, i t s ef f e c t , and the intention for committing the act are c l e a r l y observable and predictable (e.g., complimenting 91. a person i n order to obtain acceptance). Because the relationships between a l l the hypothesized factors of a t t r i b u t i o n theory (description, prediction and causality) may be found i n the above statement, Jones and Davis proposed a function whereby correspondence varied inversely with the s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y and the number of uncommon effects of the behaviour, and d i r e c t l y with the hedonic relevance and inferred personalism of the behaviour and i t s effects. By s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y Jones and Davis referred to the degree to which an effect was viewed as being common, i . e . , common i n terms of the frequency i n which an effect was repeated because of the favourableness of the action. As such, a high degree of s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y i t s e l f provides l i t t l e or no information about the uniqueness of a person or group i n that i t forces one to conform to commit the act. S i m i l a r l y , hedonic relevance referred to the extent to which one's actions were either rewarding or costly to the perceiver ( i f costly, the less the chance that some in t e r n a l a t t r i b u t i o n would be made) whereas personalism referred to the effect that the personality of the perceiver had on the actor's intention to produce some behaviour. 3. Kelley's a t t r i b u t i o n theory The t h i r d and probably most i n f l u e n t i a l of the a t t r i b u t i o n theories i s that of H. Kelley (1967). Kelley saw the process of causal a t t r i b u t i o n as being guided by the two major pr i n c i p l e s of covariation and multiple plausible causes. Heider, as i t was seen, thought that the observer attributed causality f o r an event or effect on the basis of the conditions that were found to vary as the event occurred and not when the conditions remained the same p r i o r to and following the occurence of the event. I t was t h i s r e l a t i o n between effect and variance i n conditions which 92. Kelley c a l l e d the p r i n c i p l e of covariation. According to Kelley, the pr i n c i p l e of covariation explained how attributions were made about the s e l f while one's 'mood' or 'emotions' changed (e.g., Schachter and Singer, 1962) and also how attributions were made of others. Kelley argued that the process of a t t r i b u t i o n could be concept-ualized i n terms of a three dimensional model. The f i r s t dimension, the e n t i t i e s dimension, consists of stimuli impinging upon the observer at any given time. The second dimension, referred to as the persona dimension constituted the observer himself along with others present i n his environment. The f i n a l dimension, time/modality, refers to the temporal context i n which the a t t r i b u t i o n was made. Thus with respect to his f i r s t p r i n c i p l e , Kelley proposed that attributions were developed by the observer using the principle of covariation along the dimensions of e n t i t i t e s , persona, and time/modality. Kelley's second p r i n c i p l e of multiple plausible causes effected the a t t r i b u t i o n given for a part i c u l a r form of behaviour at some s p e c i f i c time i n that i f there were a great number of reasons why a certain type of behaviour occurred then the less certain would be the a t t r i b u t i o n , i . e . , the cause of the behaviour would be d i f f i c u l t to discern;, and, therefore, hampering the observer's a b i l i t y to predict. As with Jones and Davis, Kelley was concerned with attributions that were made toward an actor (internal) rather than attributions inferred from other factors (external) such as luck or chance. Unlike external a t t r i b u t i o n s , three assumptions are necessary f o r i n t e r n a l attributions to be made. F i r s t , the actor's behaviour must be consistent across different conditions. Secondly i t must be consistent across time. And, t h i r d , the behaviour of the actor must he different from that of other actors (Jones and Davis' concept of s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y ) . 93. These three factors referred to as a t t r i b u t i o n a l v a l i d i t y were i d e n t i f i e d by Kelley (1967) as consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus. By consistency Kelley meant the "extent to which the actor's behaviour was consistent over time and situations" even though his mode of i n t e r -action varies (Kelley, 1967, p. 197); and, therefore, the more consistent an actor's behaviour the more l i k e l y that the a t t r i b u t i o n given to him would be i n t e r n a l . Support for the above predicted effects of consis-tency has been provided by Frieze and Weiner (1971) and McArthur (1972). Distinctiveness i s the degree to which an actor's behaviour i s different f o r different objects. Thus the lower the distinctiveness toward a number of different objects, the more probable i t i s that an i n t e r n a l a t t r i b u t i o n w i l l be made toward ah actor. The t h i r d factor i n a t t r i b u -t i o n a l v a l i d i t y , consensus, refers to the degree to which "attributes of external o r i g i n are experienced the same way by a l l observers." (Kelley, p. 197). As with Jones and Davis' concept of s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y , the lower the consensus the more l i k e l y an i n t e r n a l a t t r i b u t i o n would be made as the act would be perceived as being unique to the actor himself and not due to some inherent feature of the stimulus demanding the occurrence of that p a r t i c u l a r response. Thus for Kelley, as with Heider and Jones and Davis, the a t t r i b u t i o n response may f i r s t be di f f e r e n t i a t e d into those that are i n t e r n a l and those which are external. Both Kelley and Jones and Davis view i n t e r n a l attributes as being the most important i n terms of t h e i r function for s o c i a l perception, and, on the basis of t h i s assumption, both partitioned the environmental portion of Heider's person-environment dichotomy into the more refined categoreis as Jones and Davis' concepts of corres-pondence, s o c i a l d e i s r a b i l i t y and hedonic relevance and Kelley's 94. consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus. Unlike Jones and Davis, Kelley also attempted to explain the role of attributions i n self-perception, which involves the problem of subjective v o l i t i o n (choosing), the problem of erroneous and biased attr i b u t i o n s , and attributions based on unknown or incomplete information. I t should be noted that the cognitive mechanisms discussed by a l l of the above three theorists generally center upon processes outside the i n d i v i d u a l (e.g., s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y , consistency). The following approach was an attempt to examine the at t r i b u t i o n process as i t functioned within the i n d i v i d u a l . 4-. Hamilton's cognitive-attributional analysis of stereotyping Hamilton stated that the perceived underlying mechanisms and dimensions of the stereotyping and a t t r i b u t i o n process were dependent upon the theorist's own theoretical frame of reference. F i r s t , according to the the o r i s t , the process could be viewed as the resul t of i n t e r n a l psychodynamic mechanisms, such as Freud's projection, and, as such, a l l stereotypes and attributions made to some in d i v i d u a l or group would r e f l e c t certain psychological states of the perceiver (e.g., Adorno's examination of the authoritarian personality). I f he adopts a sociological perspective, the theoreist might argue that our perceptions and lab e l l i n g s of others are c u l t u r a l l y learned. Such an assumption would necessitate the argument for u n i v e r s a l i t y of structure, i . e . , the type of descriptors used should be s i m i l a r cross-culturally but the potency (strength) and/or valence (positive-negative dimension) may d i f f e r , as suggested by the research of Triandis and V a s s i l i o u (1967). A t h i r d approach, cognitive, i s the one Hamilton chose as an explanation of the stereotyping-attribution process. According to Hamilton, attributions made of some group (stereotypes) 95. have been t r a d i t i o n a l l y seen as either i n t e r n a l , which refers to "explanations of behaviour i n terms of the actor's dispositions, a b i l i t i e s , and motivational states" (Hamilton, 1979, p. l ) or external - the s i t u a t i o n a l explanations of behaviour. Adopting a s i m i l a r perspective with respect to effects, Hamilton proposed that the a t t r i b u t i o n process could be differentiated into cognitive biases resulting i n stereotypic conceptions and biases resulting from stereotypic conceptions. a) cognitive biases r e s u l t i n g i n stereotypic conceptions As has been evident from the previous theories, di s p o s i t i o n a l inferences' are made on the basis of the uniqueness of an actor's behaviour, both i n terms of character and v i o l a t i o n of some soc i e t a l norms, and whether the act i s relevant or salient to the perceiver. Thus the a t t r i b u t i o n process i s one where the observer differentiates st i m u l i Into what Hamilton referred to as equivalence classes. Though he stated that the categorization process was functional i n nature and attempted to l i s t the various features of i t , Hamilton did not indicate how the process operated - a gap which probably could be f i l l e d through Kelly's emphasis on'-the dichotomy corollary. With respect to the categorization process, Hamilton indicated that one of the most important features operating i n i t was how i t permitted the observer to attenuate to differences between ingroup and outgroup members. Based on a ' l i k e attracts l i k e ' p r i n c i p l e , research on the categorization process has generally indicated that individual's tend to favour t h e i r own ingroup by a t t r i b u t i n g more positive attributes to them even i f information about the group i s erroneous (e.g., Taylor, Fiske, Close, Anderson and Ruderman, 1977; Signori and Kozak, 1978). This biased perception i n turn assumes that the observer focuses 96. upon certain features of a stimulus. This, according to Hamilton, i s due to the observer being " d i f f e r e n t i a l l y attentive to salient or d i s t i n c t i v e s t i m u l i " (1979, p. 6); therefore enabling him to distinguish one stimulus from another, suggesting a mechanism sim i l a r to that found i n Kelly's dichotomy corollary. Moreover, Hamilton stated that t h i s d i f f e r e n t i a l attention to stimul i affected s o c i a l perception through the formation of i l l u s o r y correlations. Hamilton defined i l l u s o r y correlations as indicants of the perceived relationship between group membership and some attri b u t e . Because t h e i r function i s to permit the inference of causality, i l l u s o r y correlations demand a highly organized, dynamic interplay between cognitive mechanisms involving the heightened vigilance of the "instances of co-occurrence" between the above two variables, short and long term storage of the information, selective r e c a l l , and "accurate judgment as to the resulting degree of association" (Hamilton, 1979, p. 8). Though research has tended to support the notion that people use base-rate information i n making predictions and attributions of some group (e.g., Wells and Harvey, 1978), the question of whether such complex cognitive mechanisms exist i n the stereotypy and a t t r i b u t i o n process has yet to be substantiated experimentally. b) cognitive biases resulting from stereotypic conceptions Hamilton stated that since an a t t r i b u t i o n or stereotype affects how one perceives a person or s o c i a l group (e.g., Sherman, Gold and Sherman, 1978) then i t would follow that the attribute or stereotype i n turn would influence the causal a t t r i b u t i o n made of the behaviour of that person or group. Therefore the type of a t t r i b u t i o n made would be dependent upon the type of information available to the perceiver. As noted by Heider and Jones and Davis, the attributions made of some 97. person or group would i n turn be maintained and/or governed through "subjective confirmation" of the expectancies - called schema based expectancies by Hamilton - of the stereotypes thought to be t y p i c a l of the person or group i n question. Thus i f the behaviour of some person was perceived as t y p i c a l of him and/or of the group he represented, the results of his action would be attributed to some in t e r n a l state ( a b i l i t y or e f f o r t ) as i t (the perceived behaviour) agreed with the schema based expectancy of that person. Conversely, i f the perceived behaviour did not agree with what was expected then the results of the action would be attributed to external causes such as luck or chance. This notion of a schema based expectancy has tentatively been supported by Kinder (1978) who showed that people constructed images of p o l i t i c a l leaders which i n turn reinforced and maintained previous b e l i e f s they held of the leaders. In the realm of gerontological l i t e r a t u r e i t has long been demonstrated that i f the elderly transgressed some previously held b e l i e f of what they 'should be l i k e ' or how they 'should act' then the more l i k e l y they would be attributed i n a negative manner (e.g., Berwick, 1967; Sherman, Gold and Sherman, 1978). Appendix B Jungian Type Theory 99. Jung believed that a l l forms of experience from conscious acts to the unconscious symbols found i n dreams were caused by the unique dynamics of the i n d i v i d u a l ' s personality type. As with Freud, Jung assumed that within each i n d i v i d u a l there existed an unspecified amount of psychic energy, r e f e r r e d to as the l i b i d o , whose function was dependent upon the p r i n c i p l e of opposites. Psychic l i f e i n the Jungian model i s viewed as being guided by what Jacobi (1973) c a l l e d "necessary opposition". B a s i c a l l y , Jung f e l t that a l l forms of energy, be i t p h y s i c a l or p s y c h i c a l , existed upon the tensions created by the organism's need to f i n d an equilibrium (the p r i n c i p l e of entropy) between polar opposites. This basic motivational assumption i s the p r i n c i p l e upon which Jungian typology i s based. In addition, as the p r i n c i p l e of opposites influences the p e r s o n a l i t y typology of the person i t also influences both his perceptions of himself and others within h i s environment, a perception which i n turn a f f e c t s h i s behaviour. According to Jung, p e r s o n a l i t y - one's cognitive (conscious and unconscious) and behavioural existence - i s dependent upon the two general attitudes of extraversion and i n t r o v e r s i o n , and the four functions of thinking, f e e l i n g , sensation, and i n t u i t i o n . In the course of normal development each of the two attitudes and the four functions may become equally d i f f e r e n t i a t e d - Jung's concept of the i n d i v i d u a t i o n process -though the attainment of such a stage, i s r a r e l y accomplished, and then only during the l a t t e r stages of l i f e . In the 'average' case Jung f e l t that only one of the attitudes and functions underwent a higher degree of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n than i t s polar opposite, and distinguished such a function by r e f e r r i n g to i t as the superior function. It should be 100. p o i n t e d out t h a t hy s u p e r i o r Jung d i d not mean t h a t the f u n c t i o n was q u a l i t a t i v e l y b e t t e r t h a n i t s o p p o s i t e but t h a t i t was the dominant f u n c t i o n , t h a t i s , the most p r e f e r r e d one; and, t h e r e f o r e , was found i n the conscious u n l i k e the i n f e r i o r f u n c t i o n which e x i s t e d i n the u n c o n s c i o u s . The q u a l i t y o f the i n d i v i d u a l ' s l i f e was thus determined by the i n t e r a c t i o n between h i s consc ious (dominant a t t i t u d e and f u n c t i o n ) and unconscious ( i n f e r i o r a t t i t u d e and f u n c t i o n ) . I n a d d i t i o n t o the s u p e r i o r and i n f e r i o r f u n c t i o n s , Jung proposed t h a t a second f u n c t i o n , the a u x i l i a r y f u n c t i o n , arose by becoming more d i f f e r e n t i a t e d than i t s p o l a r o p p o s i t e but not t o the degree t h a t the s u p e r i o r f u n c t i o n was b e l i e v e d t o b e . I t was the purpose of the a u x i l i a r y f u n c t i o n t o compliment the s u p e r i o r f u n c t i o n , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t i t ( t h e a u x i l i a r y f u n c t i o n ) was not the p o l a r o p p o s i t e o f the s u p e r i o r f u n c t i o n , and, i n a d d i t i o n , was thought t o i n h a b i t the nebulous r e g i o n known as the p r e c o n s c i o u s . As the a t t i t u d e s and f u n c t i o n s were p e r c e i v e d t o l i e on a consciousness-unconsciousness continuum, Jung f e l t t h a t a l l forms o f behav iour were the r e s u l t , o f the i n t e r a c t i o n between the p o l a r ends o f the continuum. Thus Jung f e l t t h a t the conscious w a s ; "an apparatus f o r a d a p t a t i o n and o r i e n t a t i o n , and c o n s i s t e d o f a number of d i f f e r e n t p s y c h i c f u n c t i o n s " ( J u n g , 1973, p . 518). S i m i l a r l y - , as s t a t e d e a r l i e r , the unconscious was the dynamic r e g i o n dominated by the underdeveloped, p o o r l y d i f f e r e n -t i a t e d . i n f e r i o r f u n c t i o n s , w h i c h , i n t u r n , were a f f e c t e d by the p e r s o n a l unconscious (memories) and c o l l e c t i v e unconscious ( a r c h e t y p e s ) . Once such a dichotomy between a s u p e r i o r and i n f e r i o r f u n c t i o n , a long w i t h i t s a u x i l i a r y f u n c t i o n and p r e f e r r e d a t t i t u d e i s e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h i n the psyche, a p e r s o n a l i t y type i s s a i d t o e x i s t . 101. Attitudes 1 Drawing s i m i l a r i t i e s to Wundt's concept of apperception, Jung proposed that an attitude was the state of expectation of the psyche to act or react i n some s p e c i f i c manner to a s p e c i f i c stimulus and that "active apperception" was impossible without the existence of an attitude. Thus "the whole psychology of an i n d i v i d u a l even i n i t s most fundamental features i s i n accordance with his attitude" (Jung, p. -416). This suggests that the manner i n which one perceives events, i n t e r n a l or external, and acts or reacts to them i s based upon some type of expectancy based dynamic which i n turn i s dependent upon the attitude dominant within the i n d i v i d u a l - a theoretical precursor to Cantor and Mischel's (1977) prototype. The dominant or habitual attitude i s i t s e l f the result of a l l the variables that may influence the functioning of the psyche, such as heredity, environmental influences, and experiences gained through the process of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . For Jung the two major psychic attitudes of extraversion and introversion determined the direction to which psychic energy was to be focused. Extraversion was viewed as an outward movement of the l i b i d o . I f the extraverted attitude became habitual, the i n d i v i d u a l would be characterized by the movement of energy out to objects i n his immediate environment. In t h i s respect a l l of the extraverted person's actions and reasons for his actions are readily observable and understandable. The danger of the extraverted' type i s that a l l psychic energy i s expended upon objects external to the i n d i v i d u a l , revealing a lack of understanding of himself (the unconscious i s dominated by a poorly differentiated introverted attitude). Conversely, the introverted attitude i s character-ized by the inward movement of energy from objects i n the external 102. environment to the subjective s e l f . If the attitu d e i s dominant, the int r o v e r t e d type c o n t i n u a l l y assesses the underlying meaning of the various events and objects that are either immediate or: removed from h i s present environment. As such the abstract reasoning processes t y p i c a l of the i n t r o v e r t make i t more d i f f i c u l t to examine how he i n t e r p r e t s h i s percep-tions of s t i m u l i from h i s environment, unlike the almost d i r e c t S-R r e l a t i o n s h i p found i n the extravert. Maladjustment may occur i n the int r o v e r t e d type i f he bases h i s perceptions and thoughts e n t i r e l y on i n t e r n a l abstractions that have no f a c t u a l grounding with actual events - as i n the case of schizophrenia. Functions Functions i n the Jungian model represent the L i b i d o . B a s i c a l l y they are the hypothesized forms of "psychic a c t i v i t y that remain the same i n p r i n c i p l e under varying conditions" (Jung, p. 436). Jung f e l t that as with a t t i t u d e s , functions consisted of a c o n s t e l l a t i o n of subjec-t i v e contents and, therefore, could be viewed as a t t i t u d e s , i . e . , the attitudes of thinking, f e e l i n g , sensation, and i n t u i t i o n . Once having proposed such a s i m i l a r i t y , i t would follow that these attitu d e functions effected both the manner i n which one perceived and interpreted events and people; therefore i n f l u e n c i n g the resultant behaviour. The four functions were categorized by Jung as being r a t i o n a l (thinking and f e e l i n g ) and i r r a t i o n a l (sensation and i n t u i t i o n ) . By r a t i o n a l Jung meant those functions which were i n harmony with reason, that i s , were based upon f a c t alone. Conversely, an i r r a t i o n a l function was not "contrary to reason but something beyond i t " (Jung, p. 454). Such functions were not hindered by the s o c r a t i c q u a l i t i e s of events but were the creation of the synthesis between the f a c t u a l features of the event and the abstraction of i t . 103. The thinking function i s an apperceptive q u a l i t y responsible f o r bringing "the contents of i d e a t i o n i n t o conceptual connection with one another" (Jung, p. .4-81). Divided i n t o the subdivisions of active ( w i l l ) and passive ( i n t u i t i o n ) , the thinking type attempts to understand himself and h i s environment i n a r a t i o n a l i s t i c manner - as i n the s i t u a t i o n were an act i o n i s judged as e i t h e r r i g h t or wrong. The f e e l i n g  function, the polar opposite of the thinking function, i s governed by empathy; and, therefore, i s evaluative i n nature (the goodness or badness of some a c t ) . In essence the f e e l i n g function provides one with the subjective experience of a l l forms of pleasure or displeasure. As both the thinking and f e e l i n g functions are concerned with the judg-mental process, they, as mentioned e a r l i e r , are r e f e r r e d to as the r a t i o n a l functions. The two i r r a t i o n a l functions of sensation and i n t u i t i o n are perceptive i n nature. The sensation function was viewed by Jung as being one of the basic psychological functions as i t mediated the percep-t i o n of p h y s i c a l s t i m u l i . Acting as the psychological counterpart of associative-neural transmitters, the sensation function served to transmit i n t e r n a l and external s t i m u l i to the cortex: thus functioning under a r e a l i t y p r i n c i p l e s i m i l a r to that found i n Freud's ego. The polar opposite of sensation, i n t u i t i o n , was the perception of only i n t e r n a l s t i m u l i through the mediation of unconscious processes. I n t u i t i o n i s an " i n s t i n c t i v e apprehension" which i s neither "sense perception, nor f e e l i n g , nor i n t e l l e c t u a l inference, although i t may also appear i n these forms" (Jung, p. 4-53). Furthermore, i t can be viewed as concrete (concerned with the a c t u a l i t y of events-or things) or abstract (concerned with the idea or p r i n c i p l e behind some event or thing). 104. Both the attitudes and functions within Jung's model i n t e r a c t to produce eight p e r s o n a l i t y types, each determined by how he perceives and i n t e r p r e t s i n t e r n a l and external s t i m u l i . The extraverted thinking type i s the s o c r a t i c p e r s o n a l i t y i n that such an i n d i v i d u a l prefers to deal with the external environment i n a r a t i o n a l i s t i c , i n t e l l e c t u a l manner. He i s described as being concerned only with objective data which w i l l permit him to define objective r e a l i t y into an i n t e l l e c t u a l formula, one which not only defines the p r i n c i p l e s that guide his behav-iour but also the behaviour of others. Although he i s productive, the extraverted thinker i s also autocratic i n that deviations from his expected schematic conceptualizations of the perceived environment are treated as imperfections, accidents, or pathological states. Intolerant of the unpredictable, a lack of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of the f e e l i n g function by t h i s type can r e s u l t i n the r i g i d and c o n s t r i c t e d behaviour reminiscent of a highly dogmatic, conservative person. The i n t r o v e r t e d thinking type u t i l i z e s the thinking function to analyze the environment, not to dominate i t as with the extraverted thinker. Thus the d i r e c t i o n a l flow.of energy with the introverted thinker i s inward whereas i t i s outward f o r the extraverted thinker. The perceptions of the introverted thinker are not based upon the actual stimulus i t s e l f but upon the abstractions or p r i n c i p l e s underlying i t . Thus unlike the extraverted thinker, the major function of the introverted thinking type i s to organize ideas and f a c t s - not s i t u a t i o n s or people. I f the thinking function becomes overly d i f f e r e n t i a t e d the i n d i v i d u a l may become abstract to the point where his thinking i s done i n a vacuum with no i n t e r a c t i o n with hi s external environment. The extraverted f e e l i n g type i s oriented outward towards people. He i s characterized as being sympathetic and understanding, and tends to 105. i d e a l i z e both people and causes. Being conscientious he i s annoyed by i n d i f f e r e n c e and t a c t f u l n e s s . Though he i s generally able to express h i s f e e l i n g s with a r e l a t i v e high degree of accuracy, an over d i f f e r e n -t i a t i o n of t h i s judging function may cause him to make unwarranted assumptions i f someone does not s a t i s f y t h i s types expectations. The in t r o v e r t e d f e e l i n g type, as with the extraverted type, has a great deal of sympathy and understanding f o r people and causes. Unlike the extraverted type, the in t r o v e r t e d f e e l i n g type i s concerned only with a small number of people or events i n terms of t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p to him. Moreover, though he may f e e l strongly about a person or issue, h i s f e e l i n g s are generally withheld, creating an image of emotional control or aloofness. A lack of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of the perception function by t h i s type may lead to f e e l i n g s of i s o l a t i o n or inadequacy because of h i s i n a b i l i t y to perceive events c o r r e c t l y , i . e . , f a c t u a l l y . / The extraverted sensing type i s a r e a l i s t who conforms and accepts the fa c t s as he perceives them. Because of h i s i n a b i l i t y to deal with t h e o r e t i c a l models, t h i s type i s more prone to look f o r a s o l u t i o n rather than develop one himself. This makes him more susceptible to current or faddish s o c i a l trends, g i v i n g the impression of i n s t a b i l i t y and shallowness. S i m i l a r l y the in t r o v e r t e d sensing' type i s adept at absorbing and handling f a c t u a l information, but unlike the extraverted type he i s extremely methodical i n h i s approach to solving the task at hand. Moreover, despite h i s apparent v i s u a l calm, the introverted sensing type deals with f a c t s from an intensely personal perspective. Because of t h i s he may become l o s t i n h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of f a c t s to the point where he may appear i n e f f e c t i v e and u n i n t e l l i g i b l e . The extraverted i n t u i t i v e type brings both imagination and i n i t i a t i v e i n dealing with p r a c t i c a l problems. Being perceptive he t r i e s to understand 106. the actions of people rather than judging them. Though he i s highly-enthusiastic, a poorly d i f f e r e n t i a t e d judging function may cause him to become e a s i l y discouraged with long tasks; thus making him appear to be unstable ( f i c k l e ) and undependable. Equally, the,introverted i n t u i t i v e type has great innovative s k i l l s but only i n dealing with p r i n c i p l e s or ideas. He r e l i e s h e avily upon h i s own i n s i g h t as to the perceived r e l a t i o n s h i p s and meanings which he believes underlie the p r i n c i p l e or ideas. Such independence from his environment may permit him to function as a researcher but may also cause him to experience great d i f f i c u l t y i n dealing with others. In a d d i t i o n to the function types of thinking, f e e l i n g , sensation, and i n t u i t i o n , the a u x i l i a r y functions of judging and perceiving, as was seen above, also play a major r o l e i n i n f l u e n c i n g the p e r s o n a l i t y s t y l e of an i n d i v i d u a l . Thus a highly d i f f e r e n t i a t e d judging function causes the i n d i v i d u a l to become overly obsessed with whether an act was c l i n i c a l l y correct or wrong i n terms of some t h e o r e t i c a l schemata developed by the perceiver. S i m i l a r l y a highly d i f f e r e n t i a t e d percepting function hinders the i n d i v i d u a l i n making objective judgments as to the merit of some object or event, and, instead, causes him to focus upon the subjective worth (good or bad) of an object or event i n s p i t e of the actual "insignificance of the stimulus to the task or s i t u a t i o n under examination. Summarizing, Jung's model of p e r s o n a l i t y i s a r i c h l y dynamic postu-l a t i o n of the i n t e r a c t i o n between polar opposites and the s o c i a l environment. Focusing upon h i s typology, Jung believed that an i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r s o n a l i t y consisted of d i f f e r e n t i a t e d attitudes and functions which af f e c t e d the manner i n which an i n d i v i d u a l perceived, interpreted, and reacted to both external and i n t e r n a l stimulation. The two attitudes and four functions i n t e r a c t to produce eight p e r s o n a l i t y types, each of which have a unique way of i n t e r p r e t i n g and dealing with the i n t e r n a l and external environment. These eight personality types can i n turn he further d i f f e r e n t i a t e d i n t o sixteen functions of judging and percepting. Based upon the d e s c r i p t i o n of the dynamics involved i n the theory, i t would appear that Jung's typologies and the hypothesized dynamics believed to be involved i n the a t t r i b u t i o n process are s i m i l a r . Both approaches assume that the perception of events or people i s dependent upon a d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of s t i m u l i relevant to the perceiver. S i m i l a r l y , both believe that the processes of perception, encoding, storage, and the r e t r i e v a l of information necessary f o r the type of a t t r i b u t i o n made i s dependent upon s p e c i f i c s t i m u l i present to the i n d i v i d u a l . • Where the two approaches d i f f e r i s i n t h e i r o r i e n t a t i o n as to the causes of a t t r i b u t i o n s . The various a t t r i b u t i o n theories covered previously i n t h i s discussion have a l l emphasized mechanisms external to the i n d i v i d u a l . Appendix C Eysenck P e r s o n a l i t y Inventory 109. The Eysenck Personality Inventory (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1964) assesses an i n d i v i d u a l along the two personality dimensions of extraversion-introversion and neuroticism, as w e l l as on a l i e scale. Extraversion and introversion, according to Eysenck, are genotypic expressions of a general l e v e l of c o r t i c a l arousal. Because of t h e i r lack of 'sensation seeking' behaviour, Eysenck postulated that introverts had a r e l a t i v e l y high l e v e l of c o r t i c a l arousal; and, therefore, did not have to seek additional stimulation. Conversely, extraverts have a low l e v e l of c o r t i c a l arousal and must seek a c t i v i t i e s to raise t h i s l e v e l . S i m i l a r l y neuro-t i c i s m was viewed by Eysenck and a heightened state of arousal, and, as such, was hypothesized by Eysenck to be orthogonal (independent) to extraversion. Both Eysenck and Eysenck (1964) and MacRae and Power (1975) have indicated that the Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI) had a r e l a t i v e l y high degree of i n t e r n a l r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y . Moreover, high s i g n i f i c a n t correlations for the EPI has been reported by Moore (1974) with self-ratings on extraversion-introversion and neuroti-cism, therefore further lending support to the v a l i d i t y of the EPI. Though Eysenck has argued the independence of the EPI from Jung, Steele and K e l l y (1976) have reported a correlation of .74 between Eysenck's extraversion-introversion dimension with that of the MBTl. Research with the EPI has been conducted on anxiety (Salas and Richardson, 1968), impulsivity (Farley and Farley, 1970), sensation seeking (1970), handwriting (Vine, 1974), hypnosis (Gibson and Corcoran, 1975), intelligence (Gibson, 1975), f i e l d dependence (Loo, 1976), and locus of control ( M o r e l l i , Krotinger and Moore, 1979). Despite the vast amount of research generated by the EPI, the question of whether one's personality as measured by the EPI affects the ratings given to another on the same test has not been examined. Moreover, recent studies by Carrigan (i960), Howarth (1976) and Guilford (1977) have questioned the unidimensionality of Eysenck's extraversion-introversion dimension. The present study used a modified version of the EPI. Velicer and Stevenson (1978) performed a p r i n c i p a l components analysis on a 7 point l i k e r t version of the 57 items found i n the EPI. The results of the analysis revealed a s i x component solution, which were interpreted as; ( l ) general anxiety, (2) s o c i a l extraversion, (3) compulsivity, { A ) impulse control, (5) health concerns, and (6) a f f i l i a t i v e concern. For the present study, a l l seven of Eysenck's extraversion items loading on the s o c i a l extraversion component and 10 of the neuroticism items loading on general anxiety were adapted to a 7 point l i k e r t scale format, and administered to subjects as part of the test battery. Appendix D Wilson's Conservatism Scale 112. In response to c r i t i c i s m s of acquiesence, item ambiguity, and uni-dimensionality of scoring, Wilson and Patterson (1968) developed a 50 item conservatism scale i n an attempt to avoid the above problems found i n various conservatism t e s t s such as the F Test (Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswick, Levinson and Sanford, 1950) and Rokeach's (i960) Dogmatism Scale. Wilson and Patterson generated 130 items that they f e l t were 'ef f e c t i v e discriminators' of t r a i t s thought to e x i s t i n an extremely conservative person, which were; ( l ) r e l i g i o u s fundamentalism, (2) right-wing p o l i t i c a l o r i e n t a t i o n , (3) i n s i s t e n c e on s t r i c t r u l e s and punishments, (4) intolerance of minority groups, (5) preference for conventional a r t , cl o t h i n g and i n s t i t u t i o n s , (6) anti-hedonistic outlook, and (7) s u p e r s t i t i o u s resistance to science. Item analyses on these 130 items res u l t e d i n the 50 items presently found i n Wilson's Conservatism (C) Scale, h a l f of which are scored negatively while the other p o s i t i v e l y i n the d i r e c t i o n of conservatism. This b i - d i r e c t i o n a l i t y of scoring, according to Wilson (1973), controls f o r response-category b i a s . The items i n the C Scale consist of 'brief l a b e l s or catch-phrases' (eg., j a z z , s t r a i g h t j a c k e t s ) rather than statements generally found i n t e s t s as. the F Test. The C Scale i s self-administered, with subjects providing e i t h e r a yes, no, or uncertain response to each item. Standardization of the C Scale with p r o f e s s i o n a l , s k i l l e d and u n s k i l l e d populations revealed a s l i g h t difference between the conservative scores of males and females, with females scoring higher than males (Wilson and Patterson, 1968). Moreover Wilson and Patterson reported a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n with age, an increase i n the scores with an increase i n age: thus i n d i c a t i n g the need f o r age standardized scores when making 113. comparisons across different age groups. Because the present study-u t i l i z e d the ratings given to the s e l f and the elderly yroman hy a single rater, i t was not necessary to standardize the scores provided for the elderly woman. The s i g n i f i c a n t correlation found between the C Scale and age revealed that the mean conservatism score increased with age, with females scoring consistantly higher than males. Depending on the degree of v a r i a b i l i t y evident i n the subject sample, correlation c o e f f i -cients between age and conservatism have been reported from .23 to .61 (Wilson and Patterson, 1968). Alpha and s p l i t - h a l f c o e f f i c i e n t s for the C Scale have ranged from .83 to .94-, indicating a high degree of r e l i a b i l i t y even among different cultures (Orpen and Rodenwoldt, 1973; Wilson, 1973). Construct v a l i d i t y for the scale has been investigated on an a p r i o r i basis with s o c i a l groups such as the John Birch Society and Baptist clergy (Wilson and Patterson, 1968; Wilson and L i l l i e , 1972) and against other measures of conservatism (Schneider and Minkmar, 1972), indicating that the C Scale did measure some construct which dealt with the concept of conservatism. Though Wilson (1973) contended that the C Scale was free of the problems found to plague other conservatism tests such as the F Test, recent research has indicated that the C Scale i s effected by s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y (Schneider, 1973). Furthermore, Wilson's early t h e o r e t i c a l contention, on the unidimensionality of conservatism has been questioned by Robertson and Cochrane (1973) who obtained a four factor solution from a p r i n c i p a l component analysis of responses to the C Scale. Though Wilson (1973) has himself reported a 15 p r i n c i p a l component solution, he argued that because the values of the latent roots between the f i r s t and second factors indicated a "natural break" from 9.33 for the f i r s t factor to 3.25 for the second, and because "the item-whole correlations 114. were nearly a l l p ositive and . . . i d e n t i c a l to the lodaings of the f i r s t p r i n c i p a l component" that, therefore, the C Scale was unidimensional but probably consisted of several "sub-scales" of conservatism (p. 58). Because of the recency of the scale, l i t t l e research outside of the standardizing and va l i d a t i o n of the C Scale has been conducted. Kish (1973), on examining the r e l a t i o n between stimulus seekers and conserva-tism, reported that "individuals low on the tendency to seek varied stimulation tend to be high on conservatism and vice versa" (p. 205); therefore confirming the b e l i e f that highly conservative persons tend to be defensive when faced with new experiences (Adorno et a l . , 1950). Schneider, Kohler and Wachter (1979) reported that no s i g n i f i c a n t corre-l a t i o n was found between cognitive complexity and conservatism scores obtained from the C Scale, disputing the notion that highly conservative individuals are less complex i n t h e i r cognitive processes than non-conservatives. Apart from t h i s , no research has been conducted on the problem of how the personality s t y l e , here being conservatism, of the rater affects how he might rate some target group along the same direction. Appendix E Signori's Bipolar Adjective Scales 116. The 69 Bipolar Adjective Scales (69AS) were a revised version of an e a r l i e r test that was constructed from 881 b e l i e f s and attitudes found to be prevalent i n research on prejudice (Signori, Sampson and Rempel, 1968). These b e l i e f s and attitudes were i n turn c l a s s i f i e d under the 12 t r a i t categories of: ( l ) appearance, (2) economic evaluation, (3) emotional t r a i t s , (4) manner, (5) mental a b i l i t y , (6) motivational t r a i t s , (7) performance, (8) physical a b i l i t i e s , (9) r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y , (10) s o c i a l relationships, ( l l ) tempermental t r a i t s , and (12) u n c l a s s i f i e d b e l i e f s and attitudes, from which 67, 7 point bipolar adjective scales were constructed. Early research have indicated that the 67 Bipolar Adjective Scales were useful and f l e x i b l e enough for determining the underlying stereotypic dimensions held about s o c i a l l y disadvantaged groups such as women and Blacks (Signori and Butt, 1972; Butt and Signori, 1976). The present scale (69AS) was a revised version of the 67AS, which included both those t r a i t s that the elderly were found to describe t h e i r own age cohorts (Signori and Kozak, 1976) and those t r a i t s found to load s i g n i f i c a n t l y upon C a t t e l l ' s 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire (Signori, Butt and Kozak, 1977). This new scale, the 69AS, has recently been applied to an examination of the attitudes held about the elderly by t h e i r own age cohorts and hy younger age groups (Signori, Butt and Kozak, 1979). Various factor analytic studies with the 69AS (Signori, Butt and Kozak, 1977, 1978, 1979) on the ratings made of the elderly have revealed a 5 factor attitude structure that has been interpreted as: ( l ) i n t e g r i t y , (2) f o r t i t u d e , (3) s o c i a l appeal, (4) dependahleness, and (5) open-mindedness. Sign i f i c a n t differences on these dimensions have only been 117. found on an age basis, with people over 4-0 rating the elderly more p o s i t i v e l y than people under 40 (Signori, Butt and Kozak, 1979). More recently, the 69AS has been used to investigate the possible affect that sex of the target group might have on the ratings given to the eld e r l y (Signori, Butt, Kozak and Schroeder, 1979). 1 1 8 . Appendix F Rotter's Internal-External Locus of Control Scale 119. Rotter (1966) speculated that one of the more tangible motivating features of an Individual was that person's expectancy of his b e l i e f with regard to a perceived locus of control. Assuming that the psychological variable of control existed upon a unidimensional continuum, Rotter theorized the existence of an i n t e r n a l l y controlled i n d i v i d u a l at one end of the continuum and an externally controlled i n d i v i d u a l at the other. Internally controlled individuals perceive a l l reinforcement as resulting from t h e i r own actions or personality characteristics whereas the extern-a l l y controlled perceive reinforcement as the function of external variables such as luck or si g n i f i c a n t others. Thus i n t e r n a l l y and externally controlled individuals both r e l y upon t h e i r perceived expectancies of some event, but d i f f e r on t h e i r perception as to the cause of the event. The Locus of Control (LoC) Scale, developed from Phares' (1957) scale measuring in t e r n a l and external attitudes, consists of 29 forced choice items which r e f l e c t either an 'internally' or 'externally' held b e l i e f . Scores are computed from the subject's choices to the scale items. Internal consistency for the LoC has been reported from .65 to .79, indicating some degree of s t a b i l i t y (Rotter, 1966). Furthermore, te s t -retest r e l i a b i l i t i e s have been reported to range from .4-9 to .83 (Rotter, 1966). Previous research has indicated that perceived differences along the internal-external locus of control continuum results i n r e l a t i v e l y predictable differences on tests of c r e a t i v i t y , interpersonal r e l a t i o n s , information processing etc. (Joe, 1971; Lefcourt, 1976; Phares, 1976; Gilmor, 1978). Research appears to suggest that internals more than externals tend to attribute success to t h e i r own a b i l i t y and f a i l u r e to luck (Krovetz, 1974-; Gilmor and Minton, 1974), cheat i n situations requiring s k i l l rather than luck ( S r u l l and Karabenick, 1975) and perform 120. better when they discover f o r themselves the reason(s) f o r t h e i r action(s) (Baron, Cowan, Ganz and McDonald, 1974-). Moreover, actors i n some event perceive themselves as more i n t e r n a l l y c o n t r o l l e d than do observers (Scharf and Newman, 1976). Correlations with other p e r s o n a l i t y dimensions have indicated, f o r example, that extraverts, as measured by the Eysenck Pers o n a l i t y Inventory, are not e x t e r n a l l y c o n t r o l l e d ( C o l l i n s , Martin, Ashmore and Ross, 1973; M o r e l l i , Krotinger and Moore, 1979) and that an e x t e r n a l l y c ontrolled person scores higher on neuroticism and psycho-t i c i s m on C a t t e l l ' s 16PF than does an i n t e r n a l l y c o n t r o l l e d one (Jacobs, 1976). With respect to the present study, only one study appeared to attempt to examine the p e r s o n a l i t y of the r a t e r i n r e l a t i o n to the ratings he gives another. Stem and Manifold (1977) exposed i n t e r n a l l y and externally c o n t r o l l e d subjects to the LoC scores of non-existent students. The subjects were then required to rate both themselves and the 'other' student on an evaluative questionnaire. Stern and Manifold reported that "higher p o s i t i v e evaluations were a t t r i b u t e d to another person to the extent the other person possessed a b e l i e f i n i n t e r n a l c o n t r o l " and "higher negative evaluations were a t t r i b u t e d to others who possessed a b e l i e f i n external c o n t r o l " (1977, p. 24-0-24-1). Unfortunately no examination was undertaken as to the possible r e l a t i o n s h i p between the r a t e r ' s score on the LoC and the score he might have assigned to the 'other' person. Stern and Manifold (1977) also reported that t h e i r subjects evaluated " l e v e l s of i n t e r n a l i t y " ^ s i m i l a r l y whereas they evaluated " l e v e l s of exter-n a l i t y " d i f f e r e n t l y (p. 241). This f i n d i n g h i g h l i g h t s one of the more debatable features of the LoC, namely, the question of the unidimension-a l i t y of the scale. Researchers such as C o l l i n s (1974), Woodburn and Bekker (1975), Schwebel (1976), Schlegel and Crawford (1976) and Zuckerman and Gerbasi (1977) have rather decisively indicated that the LoC Scale i s not unidimensional but instead i s dependent upon the interaction of several variables such as a b e l i e f i n a just world, a nonrational world, a predictable world, and i n personal control. Though i n t e r n a l i t y appears to be unidimensional, externality has been reported to consist of a 'defensive' and 'passive' type (Rotter, 1975), or a 'defensive' and 'congruent' type (Hochreich, 1975). Discontent with the LoC has led to the development of multidimensional measurements of i n t e r n a l i t y - e x t e r n a l i t y such as Levinson's (1974). In the present study, s i x of the 29 forced choice items from Rotter's (1966) scale were removed and subjects were required to respond to each of the remaining 23 items on a 7 point l i k e r t scale. The s i x items that were removed were f i l l e r items which are not used i n determining the subject's score on the scale. Appendix G Test Materials 1 2 3 . The order of appearance f o r the tes t s within the hattery are as follows: ( l ) Eysenck Personality Inventory - s e l f - r a t i n g ( 2 ) Eysenck Personality Inventory - r a t i n g assigned to the e l d e r l y woman ( 3 ) Wilson's Conservatism Scale - s e l f - r a t i n g (4) Wilson's Conservatism Scale - r a t i n g s assigned to the e l d e r l y woman (5) Rotter's Internal-External Locus of Control - s e l f - r a t i n g (6) Rotter's Internal-External Locus of Control - r a t i n g assigned to the e l d e r l y woman (7) Signori's 69 Bipolar Adjective Scales - s e l f - r a t i n g (8) Signori's 69 Bipolar Adjective Scales - ratings assigned to the e l d e r l y woman (9) Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Test 560 1 1 2 4 . INSTRUCTIONS: THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS ARE DESIGNED TO ASSESS YOUR FEELINGS TOWARD A NUMBER OF ITEMS THAT RELATE TO YOUR SELF-PERCEPTION, ANSWER EACH QUESTION BY CIRCLING THE DEGREE TO WHICH YOU EITHER AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE QUESTION ON THE SCALE PROVIDED 8EL0W * THUS IF YOU STRONGLY AGREE WITH THE QUESTION CIRCLE THE 1, WHEREAS IF YOU STRONGLY DISAGREE THEN CIRCLE THE 7.. YOU SHOULD CIRCLE THE 4 ONLY WHEN YOU ARE UNDECIDED ABOUT THE QUESTION. PLEASE ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS CAREFULLY BUT DO NOT SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON ANY ONE QUESTION. BE SURE TO PROVIDE AN ANSWER FOR EVERY QUESTION. AS THESE QUESTIONS REFLECT PERSONAL BELIEFS THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG WAY TO ANSWER• STRONGLY AGREE SLIGHTLY UNDECIDED SLIGHTLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE DO OTHER PEOPLE THINK OF YOU AS BEING VERY LIVELY? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO YOU DAYDREAM A LOT? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ARE YOU EASILY HURT WHEN PEOPLE FIND FAULT WITH YOU OR YOUR WORK? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO YOU FIND IT HARD TO REALLY ENJOY YOURSELF AT A LIVELY PARTY? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO YOU SUFFER FROM SLEEPLESSNESS? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO YOU OFTEN NEED UNDERSTANDING FRIENDS TO CHEER YOU UP? 560 1 125. CAN YOU USUALLY LET YOURSELF GO AND ENJOY YOURSELF A LOT AT A LIVELY PARTY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CAN YOU EASILY GET SOME LIFE INTO A RATHER DULL PARTY? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO YOU LIKE GOING OUT A LOT? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 00 YOU WORRY ABOUT AUFUL THINGS THAT MIGHT HAPPEN? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 00 YOU HAVE MANY NIGHTMARES? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ARE YOUR FEELINGS RATHER EASILY HURT? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ARE YOU OFTEN TROUBLED WITH FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 GENERALLY 00 YOU PREFER READING TO MEETING PEOPLE? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ARE YOU OFTEN TROUBLED ABOUT FEELINGS OF GUILT? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ARE YOU MOSTLY QUIET WHEN YOU ARE WITH OLDER PEOPLE? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 00 YOU OFTEN WORRY ABOUT THINGS YOU SHOULO NOT HAVE DONE OR SAID? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 2 126. INSTRUCTIONS: THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS ARE DESIGNED TO ASSESS YOUR FEELINGS TOWARD A NUMBER OF ITEMS THAT RELATE TO SELF-PERCEPTION. ANSWER EACH QUESTION BY CIRCLING THE DEGREE TO WHICH YOU BELIEVE AN ELDERLY FEMALE 65 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER WOULD EITHER AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE QUESTION ON THE SCALE PROVIDED BELOW. THUS IF YOU BELIEVE THAT AN ELDERLY FEMALE 65 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER WOULD STRONGLY AGREE WITH THE QUESTION CIRCLE THE It WHEREAS YOU WOULD CIRCLE THE 7 IF YOU FELT THAT SHE WOULD STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH IT. YOU SHOULD CIRCLE THE 4 ONLY WHEN YOU ARE UNDECIDED ABOUT THE QUESTION. PLEASE ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS CAREFULLY BUT DO NOT SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON ANY ONE QUES-TION. BE SURE TO PROVIDE AN ANSWER FOR EVERY QUESTION* AS THESE QUES-TIONS REFLECT PERSONAL BELIEFS THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG WAY TO ANSWER. STRONGLY AGREE SLIGHTLY UNDECIDED SLIGHTLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE DO YOU WORRY ABOUT AWFUL THINGS THAT MIGHT HAPPEN? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ARE YOUR FEELINGS RATHER EASILY. HURT? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO OTHER PEOPLE THINK OF YOU AS BEING VERY LIVELY? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO YOU LIKE GOING OUT A LOT? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ARE YOU MOSTLY QUIET WHEN YOU ARE WITH OLDER PEOPLE? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO YOU SUFFER FROM SLEEPLESSNESS? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 2 1 2 7 > ARE YOU EASILY HURT WHEN PEOPLE FIND FAULT WITH YOU OR YOUR WORK? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CAN YOU EASILY GET SOME LIFE INTO A RATHER DULL PARTY? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 GENERALLY DO YOU PREFER READING TO MEETING PEOPLE? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ARE YOU OFTEN TROUBLED WITH FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO YOU OFTEN WORRY ABOUT THINGS YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE DONE OR SAID? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO YOU FIND IT HARD TO REALLY ENJOY YOURSELF AT A LIVELY PARTY? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 00 YOU OFTEN NEED UNDERSTANDING FRIENDS TO CHEER YOU UP? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CAN YOU USUALLY LET YOURSELF GO AND ENJOY YOURSELF A LOT AT A LIVELY PARTY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO YOU HAVE MANY NIGHTMARES? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO YOU DAYDREAM A LOT? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ARE YOU OFTEN TROUBLED ABOUT FEELINGS OF GUILT? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 3 128. INSTRUCTIONS: WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING DO YOU FAVOUR OR BELIEVE IN? ANSWER EACH ITEM 8Y CIRCLING THE DEGREE TO WHICH YOU EITHER AGREE OR DISAGREE W I T H THE QUESTION ON THE SCALE PROVIDED BELOW. THUS IF YOU STRONGLY AGREE WITH THE ITE H YOU WOULD CIRCLE THE 1, WHEREAS YOU WOULD CIRCLE THE 7 If YOU STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH IT. YOU SHOULD CIRCLE THE 4 ONLY WHEN YOU ARE UNDECIDED ABOUT THE ITEM. PLEASE ANSWER THESE ITEMS CAREFULLY BUT DO NOT SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON ANY ONE ITEM. BE SURE TO PROVIDE AN ANSWER FOR EVERY ITEM. AS THESE ITEMS REFLECT PERSONAL BE-LIEFS THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG WAY TO ANSWER. STRONGLY AGREE SLIGHTLY UNDECIDED SLIGHTLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE SELF-DEN IA L 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 HOROSCOPES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PATRIOTISM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LEGALIZED ABORTION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CENSORSHIP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 APARTHEID 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DIVINE LAW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DISARMAMENT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 JAZZ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MIXED MARRIAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 3 129. STRIPTEASE SHOWS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 COUSIN MARRIAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PYJAMA PARTIES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 COMPUTER MUSIC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ROYALTY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BIRCHING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TEENAGE DRIVERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SOCIALISM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DEATH PENALTY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WHITE LIES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MORAL TRAINING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 STRICT RULES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EVOLUTION THEORY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SUICIDE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MODERN ART 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CHAPERONES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CHASTITY I 2 3 4 5 6 7 SABBATH OBSERVANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SCHOOL UNIFORMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WHITE SUPERIORITY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 3 130. ST RAIT JACKETS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 COLOURED IMMIGRATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CO-EDUCATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LICENSING LAWS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 HIPPIES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BIBLE TRUTH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CASUAL LIVING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LEARNING LATIN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CONVENTIONAL CLOTHING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WORKING MOTHERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EMPIRE-BUILDING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WOMEN JUDGES I 2 3 4 5 6 7 FLUORIDATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BIRTH CONTROL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 OIVORCE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 INBORN CONSCIENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MILITARY DRILL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CHURCH AUTHORITY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NUDIST CAMPS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 STUDENT PRANKS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 4 1 3 1 . INSTRUCTIONS: WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING DO YOU BELIEVE THAT AN ELDERLY FEMALE 65 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER WOULD FAVOUR OR BELIEVE IN? AMSWER EACH QUESTION BY CIRCLING THE DEGREE TO WHICH YOU BELIEVE AN ELDERLY FEMALE WOULD EITHER AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE ITEM ON THE SCALE PRO-VIDEO BE LOW. THUS IF YOU BELIEVE THAT SHE WOULD STRONGLY AGREE WITH IT THEN CIRCLE THE I, WHEREAS YOU WOULD CIRCLE THE 7 IF YOU FELT THAT SHE WOULD STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH IT. YOU SHOULD CIRCLE THE 4 ONLY WHEN YOU ARE UNDECIDED ABOUT THE ITEM. PLEASE ANSWER THESE ITEMS CAREFULLY BUT DO NOT SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON ANY ONE ITEM. AS THESE ITEMS REFLECT PERSONAL BELIEFS THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG WAY TO ANSWER. STRONGLY AGREE SLIGHTLY UNDECIDED SLIGHTLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 JAZZ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SELF-DENIAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WORKING MOTHERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PYJ AM A PARTIES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 HIPPIES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 FLUORIDATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LEGALIZED ABORTION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DIVORCE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DEATH PENALTY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SOCIALISM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 4 1 3 2 m CHASTITY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 STRIPTEASE SHOWS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BIBLE TRUTH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 APARTHEID 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ROYALTY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 COUSIN MARRIAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MIXED MARRIAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WHITE LIES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DIVINE LAW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LICENSING LAWS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NUDIST CAMPS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SUICIDE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EMPIRE-BUILDING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 STRICT RULES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MODERN ART 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 COLOURED IMMIGRATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CONVENTIONAL CLOTHING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CHAP ERONE S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MILITARY DRILL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SABBATH OBSERVANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 4 133. HOROSCOPES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CASUAL LIVING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SCHOOL UNI FORMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CENSORSHIP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CO-EDUCATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BIRCHING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EVOLUTION THEORY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BIRTH CONTROL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LEARNING LATIN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CHURCH AUTHORITY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 INBORN CONSCIENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TEENAGE DRIVERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WHITE SUPERIORITY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WOMEN JUDGES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 STRAITJACKETS 1 2 3 4 5. 6 7 STUDENT PRANKS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PATRIOTI SM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DISARMAMENT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MORAL TRAINING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 COMPUTER MUSIC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 5 134. INSTRUCTIONS: THIS IS A QUESTIONNAIRE TO FIND OUT HOW AN INDIVIDUAL FEELS A80UT A WIDE VARIETY OF TOPICS. AFTER READING EACH STATEMENT, CIRCLE THE DEGREE TO WHICH YOU EITHER AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE STATEMENT ON THE SCALE PROVIDED BELOW. THUS IF YOU STRONGLY AGREE WITH THE STATEMENT YOU WOULD CIRCLE THE 1, WHEREAS YOU WOULD CIRCLE THE 7 IF YOU STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH IT. YOU SHOULD CIRCLE THE 4 ONLY WHEN YOU ARE UNDECIOED ABOUT THE STATEMENT. PLEASE ANSWER THESE STATEMENTS CAREFULLY BUT DO NOT SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON ANY ONE STATEMENT. BE SURE TO PROVIDE AN ANSWER FOR EVERY STATEMENT. AS THESE STATEMENTS REFLECT PERSONAL BELIEFS THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG WAY TO ANSWER. STRONGLY AGREE SLIGHTLY UNDECIDED SLIGHTLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 THERE WILL ALWAYS BE WARS, NO MATTER HOW HARD PEOPLE TRY TO PREVENT THEM. AS FAR AS WORLD AFFAIRS ARE CONCERNED,MOST OF US ARE THE VICTIMS OF FORCES WE NEITHER UNDERSTAND, NOR CONTROL. IN THE LONG RUN PEOPLE GET THE RESPECT THEY DESERVE IN THIS WORLD. THE IDEA THAT TEACHERS ARE UNFAIR TO STUDENTS IS NONSENSE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE LONG RUN THE PEOPLE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR BAD GOVERNMENT ON A NATIONAL AS WELL AS ON A LOCAL LEVEL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MANY TIMES I FEEL THAT I HAVE LITTLE INFLUENCE OVER THE THINGS THAT HAPPEN TO ME. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 5 135. WHEN I MAKE PLANS, I AM ALMOST CERTAIN THAT I CAN MAKE THEM WORK THERE'S NOT MUCH USE IN TRYING TOO HARD TO PLEASE PEOPLE, IF THEY LIKE YOU, THEY LIKE YOU. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BY TAKING AN ACTIVE PART IN POLITICAL AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS THE PEOPLE CAN CONTROL WORLD EVENTS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PEOPLE ARE LONELY BECAUSE THEY DON'T TRY TO BE FRIENDLY. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I HAVE OFTEN FOUND THAT WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN WILL HAPPEN. WITHOUT THE RIGHT BREAKS ONE CANNOT BE AN EFFECTIVE LEADER THE AVERAGE CITIZEN CAN HAVE AN INFLUENCE IN GOVERNMENT DECISIONS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 MOST PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE THE EXTENT WHICH THEIR LIVES ARE CONTROLLED BY ACCIDENTAL HAPPENINGS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SOMETIMES I FEEL THAT I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH CONTROL OVER THE DIRECTION MY LIFE IS TAKING. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NO MATTER HOW HARD YCU TRY SOME PEOPLE JUST DON'T LIKE YOU. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MOST MISFORTUNES ARE THE RESULT OF THE LACK OF ABILITY, IGNORANCE, LAZINESS OR ALL THREE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 THERE IS REALLY NO SUCH THING AS "LUCK". 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MANY TIMES WE MIGHT JUST AS WELL DECIDE WHAT TO DO 8Y FLIPPING A COIN. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TRUSTING TO FATE HAS NEVER TURNED OUT AS WELL FOR ME AS MAKING A DECISION TO TAKE A DEFINITE COURSE OF ACTION. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 THERE IS A DIRECT CONNECTION BETWEEN HOW HARD I STUDY AND THE GRADES I GET. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CAPABLE PEOPLE WHO FAIL TO BECOME LEADERS HAVE NOT TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THEIR OPPORTUNITIES, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 ONE OF THE MAJOR REASONS WHY WE HAVE WARS IS 8ECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T TAKE ENOUGH INTEREST IN POLITICS. IT IS NOT ALWAYS WISE TO PLAN TOO FAR AHEAD BECAUSE MANY THINGS TURN OUT TO BE A MATTER OF GOOD OR BAD FORTUNE ANYHOW. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BECOMING A SUCCESS IS A MATTER OF HARD WORK, LUCK HAS LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. GETTING PEOPLE TO DO THE RIGHT THINGS DEPENDS UPON ABILITY, LUCK HAS LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. MANY OF THE UNHAPPY THINGS IN PEOPLE'S LIVES ARE PARTLY DUE TO BAD LUCK. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PEOPLE'S MISFORTUNES RESULT FROM THE MISTAKES THEY MAKE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 THIS WORLD IS RUN BY THE FEW PEOPLE IN POWER, AND THERE IS NOT MUCH THE LITTLE GUY CAN DO ABOUT IT. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WHAT HAPPENS TO ME IS MY OWN DOING 560 IN MY CASE GETTING WHAT I WANT HAS LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO WITH LUCK. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WITH ENOUGH EFFORT WE CAN WIPE OUT POLITICAL CORRUPTION. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE CASE OF THE WELL PREPARED STUDENT THERE IS RARELY IF EVER SUCH A THING AS AN UNFAIR TEST. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IT IS HARD TO KNOW WHETHER OR NOT A PERSON REALLY LIKES YOU. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MOST OF THE TIME I CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHY POLITICIANS BEHAVE THE WAY THEY DO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MANY TIMES EXAM QUESTIONS TEND TO BE SO UNRELATED TO COURSE WORK THAT STUDYING IS REALLY USELESS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE L ONG RUN THE BAD THINGS THAT HAPPEN TO US ARE BALANCED BY THE GOOD ONES. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MOST STUDENTS DON'T REALIZE THE EXTENT TO WHICH THEIR GRADES ARE INFLUENCED BY ACCIDENTAL HAPPENINGS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 5 1 3 9 . IT IS DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO HAVE MUCH CONTROL OVER THE THINGS POLITICIANS DO IN OFFICE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SOMETIMES I CAN'T UNDERSTAND HOW TEACHERS ARRIVE AT THE GRADES THEY GIVE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 GETTING A GOOD JOB DEPENDS MAINLY ON BEING IN THE RIGHT PLACE AT THE RIGHT TIME. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO BELIEVE THAT CHANCE OR LUCK PLAYS AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN MY LIFE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PEOPLE WHO CAN'T GET OTHERS TO LIKE THEM DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW TO GET ALONG WITH OTHERS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 HOW MANY FRIENDS YOU HAVE DEPENDS UPON HOW NICE A PERSON YOU ARE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WHO GETS TO BE THE BOSS OFTEN DEPENDS ON WHO WAS LUCKY ENOUGH TO BE IN THE RIGHT PLACE FIRST. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNFORTUNATELY, AN INDIVIDUAL'S WORTH OFTEN PASSES UNRECOGNIZED NO MATTER HOW HARD HE TRIES. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 6 140. INSTRUCTIONS: THIS IS A QUESTIONNAIRE TO FIND OUT HOW AN INDIVIDUAL FEELS ABOUT A WIDE VARIETY OF TOPICS. AFTER READING EACH STATEMENT, CIRCLE THE DEGREE TO WHICH YOU BELIEVE AN ELDERLY FEMALE 65 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER WOULD EITHER AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE STATEMENT ON THE SCALE PROVIDED BELOW. THUS IF YOU BELIEVE THAT AN ELDERLY FEMALE 65 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER WOULD STRONGLY AGREE WITH THE STATEMENT THEN CIRCLE THE 1, WHEREAS YOU WOULD CIRCLE THE 7 IF YOU FELT THAT SHE WOULD STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH IT. YOU SHOULD CIRCLE THE 4 ONLY WHEN YOU ARE UNDECIDED ABOUT THE STATEMENT. PLEASE ANSWER THESE STATEMENTS CAREFULLY BUT DO NOT SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON ANY ONE STATEMENT. BE SURE TO PROVIDE AN ANSWER FOR £ VERY STATEMENT. AS THESE STATEMENTS REFLECT PERSONAL BELIEFS THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG WAY TO ANSWER. STRONGLY AGREE SLIGHTLY UNDECIDED SLIGHTLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE i 2 3 4 5 6 7 THERE'S NOT MUCH USE IN TRYING TOO HARD TO PLEASE PEOPLE, IF THEY LIKE YOU, THEY LIKE YOU. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IT IS DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO HAVE MUCH CONTROL OVER THE THINGS POLITICIANS DO IN OFFICE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE LONG RUN PEOPLE GET THE RESPECT THEY DESERVE IN THIS WORLD. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WHEN I MAKE PLANS, I AM ALMOST CERTAIN THAT I CAN MAKE THEM WORK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE CASE OF THE WELL PREPARED STUDENT THERE IS RARELY IF EVER SUCH A THING AS AN UNFAIR TEST.' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 THERE WILL ALWAYS BE WARS, NO MATTER HOW HARD PEOPLE TRY TO PREVENT THEM. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 6 1 4 1 > MANY TIMES EXAM QUESTIONS TEND TO BE SO UNRELATED TO COURSE WORK THAT STUDYING IS REALLY USELESS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MANY OF THE UNHAPPY THINGS IN PEOPLE'S LIVES ARE PARTLY DUE TO BAD LUCK. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TRUSTING TO FATE HAS NEVER TURNED OUT AS WELL FOR ME AS MAKING A DECISION TO TAKE A DEFINITE COURSE OF ACTION. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 GETTING A GOOD JOB DEPENDS MAINLY ON BEING IN THE RIGHT PLACE AT THE R IGHT T IME . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MANY TIMES WE MIGHT JUST AS WELL DECIDE WHAT TO DO BY FLIPPING A COIN. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I HAVE OFTEN FOUND THAT WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN WILL HAPPEN. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WITH ENOUGH EFFORT WE CAN WIPE OUT POLITICAL CORRUPTION. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 THIS WORLD IS RUN BY THE FEW PEOPLE IN POWER, AND THERE IS 0 NOT MUCH THE LITTLE GUY CAN DO ABOUT IT. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 6 142. IN THE LONG RUN THE BAD THINGS THAT HAPPEN TO US ARE BALANCED BY THE GOOD ONES. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU TRY SOME PEOPLE JUST DON'T LIKE YOU. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 GETTING PEOPLE TO DO THE RIGHT THINGS DEPENDS UPON ABILITY, LUCK HAS LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MOST PEOPLE OON'T REALIZE THE EXTENT WHICH THEIR LIVES ARE CONTROLLED BY ACCIDENTAL HAPPENINGS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MOST OF THE TIME I CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHY POLITICIANS BEHAVE THE WAY THEY DO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 THERE IS A DIRECT CONNECTION BETWEEN HOW HARD I STUDY ANO THE GRADES I GET. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SOMETIMES I CAN'T UNDERSTAND HOW TEACHERS ARRIVE AT THE GRADES THEY GIVE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MOST MISFORTUNES ARE THE RESULT OF THE LACK OF ABILITY, IGNORANCE, LAZINESS OR ALL THREE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 6 143. PEOPLE ARE LONELY BECAUSE THEY DON'T TRY TO BE FRIENDLY. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SOMETIMES I FEEL THAT I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH CONTROL OVER THE DIRECTION MY LIFE IS TAKING. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 AS FAR AS WORLD AFFAIRS ARE CONCERNED,MOST OF US ARE THE VICTIMS OF FORCES WE NEITHER UNDERSTAND, NOR CONTROL. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WITHOUT THE RIGHT BREAKS ONE CANNOT BE AN EFFECTIVE LEADER. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 THE IDEA THAT TEACHERS ARE UNFAIR TO STUDENTS IS NONSENSE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN MY CASE GETTING WHAT I WANT HAS LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO WITH LUCK. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WHAT HAPPENS TO ME IS MY OWN DOING. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PEOPLE'S MISFORTUNES RESULT FROM THE MISTAKES THEY MAKE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 5 6 0 6 U A . THE AVERAGE CITIZEN CAN HAVE AN INFLUENCE IN GOVERNMENT DECISIONS. 1 2 3 4 5 . 6 7 MOST STUDENTS DON'T REALIZE THE EXTENT TO WHICH THEIR GRADES ARE INFLUENCED BY ACCIDENTAL HAPPENINGS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNFORTUNATELY, AN INDIVIDUAL'S WORTH OFTEN PASSES UNRECOGNIZED NO MATTER HOW HARD HE TRIES. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO BELIEVE THAT CHANCE OR LUCK PLAYS AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN MY LIFE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BECOMING A SUCCESS IS A MATTER OF HARD WORK, LUCK HAS LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 HOW MANY FRIENDS YOU HAVE DEPENDS UPON HOW NICE A PERSON YOU ARE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MANY TIMES I FEEL THAT I HAVE LITTLE INFLUENCE OVER THE THINGS THAT HAPPEN TO ME. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BY TAKING AN ACTIVE PART IN POLITICAL AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS THE PEOPLE CAN CONTROL WORLD EVENTS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 560 6 145. IN THE LONG RUN THE PEOPLE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR BAO GOVERNMENT ON A NATIONAL AS WELL AS ON A LOCAL LEVEL. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IT IS NOT ALWAYS WISE TO PLAN TOO FAR AHEAD BECAUSE MANY THINGS TURN OUT TO BE A MATTER OF GOOD OR SAD FORTUNE ANYHOW. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ONE OF THE MAJOR REASONS WHY WE HAVE WARS IS BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T TAKE ENOUGH INTEREST IN POLITICS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WHO GETS TO BE THE BOSS OFTEN DEPENDS ON WHO WAS LUCKY ENOUGH TO BE IN THE RIGHT PLACE FIRST. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IT IS HARD TO KNOW WHETHER OR NOT A PERSON REALLY LIKES YOU. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PEOPLE WHO CAN'T GET OTHERS TO LIKE THEM DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW TO GET ALONG WITH OTHERS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 THERE IS REALLY NO SUCH THING AS "LUCK". 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CAPABLE PEOPLE WHO FAIL TO BECOME LEADERS HAVE NOT TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THEIR OPPORTUNITIES. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 5 6 0 7 1*6. INSTRUCTIONS: CIRCLE THE POSITION IN EACH SCALE THAT MOST CLEARLY 3EPR ESENTS WHAT YOU 8ELIEVE ABOUT YOURSELF. IF YOU CANNOT DECIDE CIRCLE A NEUTRAL POINT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SCALE. 1= AGREEMENT WITH DISCRIPTORS ON THE LEFT, 1= AGREEMENT WITH D1SCRIPTORS ON THE RIGHT. AS YGUR RESPONSES ARE BASED UPON PERSONAL BELIEFS THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG WAY TO ANSWER. TRUTHFUL, HONOURABLE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LYING, DECEITFUL MEDIOCRE, LOW-8ROWED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IDEALISTIC, HIGH-MINDED KIND, GENTLE I 2 3 4 5 6 7 MEAN, HARD 10SSIPY, MOUTHY I 2 3 4 5 6 7 RETICENT, DISCREET MODESTY, HUMILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 VANITY, CONCEIT HEALTHY, STRONG 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNHEALTHY, WE4 K DETERMINED, AMBITIOUS 1 ? 3 4 5 6 7 AIMLESS, PURPOSELESS 'POSSESSES CI GN ITY , SELF-RESPECT I 2 3 4 5 6 7 LACKING DIGNITY, SELF-R INTELLIGENT, BRIGHT i 2 3 4 5 6 7 DUMB, STUPID WISY, I CUD I 2 3 4 5 6 7 QUIET, PLACID CAREFUL , CAUTI GUS I 2 3 4 5 6 7 CARELESS, HEEDLESS OVER-BEARING, DOMINANT I 2 3 4 5 6 7 SUBSERVIENT, SUBMISSIVE FRIGID, UNDERSEXED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PROMISCUOUS, OVE^-SEXEO IRRITATING, ANNOYING i 2 3 4 5 6 7 CHARMING, PLEASING CHEERFUL, OPTIMISTIC I 2 3 4 5 6 7 CYNICAL, PESSIMISTIC UNICONF IDEMT, UNRELfANT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CONFIDENT, RELIANT FRAGRANT, AROMATIC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 STINKY, SMELLY SUBJECTIVE, PERSONAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 OBJECTIVE, IMPARTIAL rDUACATEO, LEARNED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ILLITERATE, UNSCHOOLED WE AK , DELICATE ARTLESS, DEFICIENT WORRIED, INSECURE DISGUSTING, DISAPPOINTING •JELL-MANNERED, LOVELY PEOPLE TOUGH-MINDED, SELF-REL TAN T DISHONEST, UMTRLSTWCRTHY FLEXIBLE, PERSUASIRLE DEPENDENT, HELPLESS UNAPPR ECI ATIVE, INSENSITIVE UNCO-OPERATIVE, UNHELPFUL SELFISH, SELF-CENTERED UNRELIABLE, IRRESPONSIBLE CONTROLLED, DISCIPLINED JNHABITUAT ED, UNADDICTED CONSERVATIVE, TRADITIONAL CREATIVE, IMAGINATIVE INTOLERANT, IMPATIENT OIRTY, SLOPPY ENERGETIC, ACTIVE SUSPICIOUS, UN TRUSTING SERENE, RELAXED SACRIFICING, GIVING INCOMPETENT, OUACKY QUITTING, FICKLE 560 7 1 4 7 . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 STRONG, VIGOROUS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TALENTED, GIFTED 1 I 3 4 5 6 7 UNWORR I ED, SECURE I 2 3 4 5 6 7 DELIGHTFUL, EXOUI SI TE I 2 3 4 5 6 7 BAD-MANNERED, BOORISH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TENDER-MINDED, OVER-PROTEC 1 1 3 4 5 6 7 HONEST, TRUSTWORTHY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 RIGID, STUBBORN I 2 3 4 5 6 7 INDEPENDENT, SELF-SUFF1CIF L 2 3 4 5 6 7 APPRECIATIVE, SENSITIVE I 2 3 4 5 6 7 CO-OPERATIVE, HELPFULL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 GENEROUS, ALTRUISTIC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 RELIABLE, RESPONSIBLE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IMPULSIVE, UNDISCIPLINED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 HABITUATED, ADDICTED I 2 3 4 5 6 7 LIBERAL, RADICAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNORIGINAL, UNIMAGINATIVE I ? 3 * 5 6 7 PATIENT, TOLERANT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CLEAN, WELL-GROOMED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LETHARGIC, PASSIVE I 2 3 4 5 6 7 TRUSTING, ADAPTABLE I 2 3 4 5 6 7 FRUSTRATED, TENSE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 GREEDY, GRASPING I 2 3 4 5 6 7 COMPETENT, PROFESSIONAL I 2 3 4 5 6 7 ENDURANCE, PERSISTENCE 560 7 148. OBTUSE t BLINC HARMLESS, WHOLE DISORDERLY, INEFFICIENT COWARDLY, FAIMT-HEARTEO MATURE, ADJUSTED UNSTABLE , UNBALANCED LONELY, WITHDRAWN UCH, INFLUENTIAL AGREEABLE, UNDERSTANDING SANE, SENSIBLE PRANK, FORTHRIGHT ORGANIZED, CO-CPDINATEO ENTHUSIAST IC , ZESTFUL HUMOROUS, WITTY TRAINED, SKILLED CONS CIFNCEL ESS, UNSCRUPULOUS CHEAPENS, CORRUPTS LAZY, UNPRODUCTIVE SOCIABLE, FRIENDLY OVER-INDULGENT, INTEMPERATE TIMID, SHY DRAGGING, BOASTFUL CONTENTED, HAPPY ASSERTIVE, AGGRESSIVE UNIVERSAL, 8R0ACMINOED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 INSIGHTFUL , INTUI TI VE 1 Z 3 4 5 6 7 DANGEROUS, DETRIMENTAL 1 z 3 4 5 6 7 METHODICAL, EFFICIENT I ? 3 4 5 6 7 COURAGEOUS, BRAVE 1 z 3 4 5 6 7 IMMATURE, MALADJUSTED 1 l 3 4 5 6 7 STABLE, WELL-BALANCED 1 z 3 4 5 6 7 INVOLVED, PARTICIPATING I 2 3 4 5 6 7 POOR, POWERLESS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DISAGREEABLE, ARGUMENT AT 11 L 2 3 4 5 6 7 FOOLISH, SILLY I 2 3 4 5 6 7 SHREW), CALCULATING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DISORGANIZED UNC-1-ORDI NA T; I 2 3 4 5 6 7 DESPAIRING, HOPELESS i 2 3 4 5 6 7 DULL, MONOTONOUS I I 3 4 5 6 7 UNTRAINED, UNSKILLED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CONSCIENTIOUS, SCRUPULOUS i 2 3 4 5 6 7 ENHANCES, ADVANCES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 INDUSTRIOUS, PRODUCTIVE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNSOCIABLE, ISOLATED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 RESTRAINED, TEMPERATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 VENTURESOME, UNINHIBITED I 2 3 4 5 6 7 SELF-DEPRECIATING, MODEST 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DISSATISFIED, UNHAPPY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNASSERTIVE, UNAGGRESSIVE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CLANNISH, NARROW-MI NOED 560 8 U 9 . INSTRUCTIONSJ CIRCLE THE POSITION IN EACH SCALE THAT MOST CLEARLY REPRESENTS WHAT YOU BELIEVE ABOUT AN ELDERLY FEMALE 65 YEARS OF 4GE OR 3LOER. IF YOU CANNOT DECIDE CIRCLE A NEUTRAL POINT IN THE MIDDLE OF F HE SCALE. 1= AGREEMENT WITH D I SCR I "TOR S ON THE LEFT,7= AGREEMENT 1^TH DISCRIPTORS ON THE RIGHT. AS YOUR RESPONSES ARE BASED UPON PERSONAL BELIEFS THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG WAY TO ANSWER. FRAGRANT, AROMATIC I 2 3 4 5 6 7 STINKY, SMELLY WORRIED, INSECURE I 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNWORRI ED, SECURE CONSCIENCELESS, UNSCRUPULOUS I 2 3 4 5 6 7 CONSCIENTIOUS, SCRUPULOU. DETERMINED, AMBITIOUS I 2 3 4 5 6 7 AIMLESS, PURPOSELESS UNRELIABLE, IRRESPONSIBLE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 RELIABLE, RESPONSIBLE TRUTHFUL, HONOURABLE I 2 3 4 5 6 7 LYING, OECFITFUL WEAK, DELICATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 STRONG, VIGOROUS UNSTABLE, UNBALANCED I 2 3 4 5 6 7 STABLE, WELL-3ALANCED CONTROLLED, DISCIPLINED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IMPULSIVE, UNDISCIPLINED ENTHUSIASTIC, ZEST FUL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DESPAIRING, HOPELESS HUMOROUS, WITTY I 2 3 4 5 6 7 DULL, MONOTONOUS HEALTHY, STRONG 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNHEALTHY, WEAK 3VER-INDULGE NT, INTEMPERATE I 2 3 4 5 6 7 RESTRAINED, TEMPERATE LONELY, WITHDRAWN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 INVOLVED, PARTICIPATING LAZY, UNPRODUCTIVE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 INDUSTRIOUS, PRODUCTIVE SOCIABLE, FRIENDLY I 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNSOCIABLE, ISOLATED INTELLIGENT, BRIGHT I 2 3 4 5 6 7 DUMB, STUPID TIMID, SHY I 2 3 4 5 6 7 VENTURESOME, UNINHIBITED UNAPPRECI ATIVE, INSENSITIVE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 APPRECIATIVE, SENSITIVE 560 8 150. MODESTY, HUMILITY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SUBJECTIVE, PERSONAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IRRITATING, ANNOYING 1 1 3 4 5 6 7 KIND, GENTLE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 COWARDLY, FAINT-HEARTED I 2 3 4 5 6 7 JNHABITU AT ED, UNADDICT ED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 JNCONF I DENT , J W A I AM I 2 3 4 5 6 7 OVER-BEARING, DOMINANT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 GOSSIPY, MCUTHY I 2 3 4 5 6 7 ARTLESS, DEFICIENT I 2 3 4 5 6 7 JI SHGNEST, UNTRUSTWORTHY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 AGREEABLE, UNDERSTANDING I 2 3 4 5 6 7 3ICH, INFLUENTIAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SUSPICIOUS, UN TR USTi NG 1 ) 3 4 5 6 7 BRAGGING, BOASTFUL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4EDIOCRE, LOW-BROWED I 2 3 4 5 6 7 CAREFUL, CAUTIOUS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SANE, SENSIBLE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EOUACATED, LEARNED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ASSERTIVE, AGGRESSIVE I 2 3 4 5 6 7 ENERGETIC, ACTIVE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MATURE, ADJUSTED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 POSSESSES DIGNITY, SELF-RESPECT I 2 3 4 5 6 7 SELFISH, SELF-CENTER ED L 2 3 4 5 6 7 CREATIVE, IMAGINATIVE I 2 3 4 5 6 7 VANITY, CONCEIT OBJECTIVE, IMPARTIAL CHARMING, PLEASING MEAN, HARD COURAGEOUS, BRAVE HABITUATED, ADDICTED CONFIDENT, RELIANT SUBSERVIENT, SUBMISSIVE RETICENT, DISCREET TALENTED, GIFTED HONEST, TRUSTWORTHY DISAGREEABLE, ARGUMENT AT I VE POOR, POWERLESS TRUSTING, ADAPTABLE SELF-DEPRECIATING, MODEST IDEALISTIC, HIGH-MINDED CARELESS, HEEDLESS FOOLISH, SILLY ILLITERATE, UNSCHOOLED UNASSERTIVE, UNAGGRESSIVE LETHARGIC, PASSIVE IMMATURE, MALADJUSTED LACKING DIGNITY, S ELF-R ES PEC GENEROUS, ALTRUI STIC UNORIGINAL, UNIMAGINATIVE 560 8 151. )U ITT ING, FICKLF MOISY, LOUD CHEAPENS, CORRUPTS FLEXIBLE, PcRSUASIBLE FRIGID, UN DER S EXEQ SACRIFICING, GIVING WELL-MANNERED, LOVELY PEOPL TOUGH-MI NOEC, SELF-RELIANT CONSERVATIVE, TRADITIONAL UNCO-OPERATIVE, UNHELPFUL HARMLESS, WHOLESOME ORGANIZED, CO-ORDINATED DISORDERLY, INEFFICIENT INCOMPETENT, QUACK Y UNIVERSAL, BROADMINDED INTOLERANT, IMPATIENT OBTUSE, BLIND SERENE, RELAXED DEPENDENT, HELPLESS CHEERFUL, OPTIMISTIC CONTENTED, HAPPY DISGUSTING, DISAPPOINTING TRAINED, SKILLED DIRTY, SLOPPY FRANK, FORTHRIGHT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ENDURANCE, PERSISTENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 QUIET, PLACID 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ENHANCES, ADVANCES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 RIGIO, STUSR3RN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PROMISCUOUS, OVER-SEX ED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 GREEDY, GRASPING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BAD-MANNERED, BOORISH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TENDER-MINDED, OVER-PROTECT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LIBERAL, RADICAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CO-OPERATIVE, HE LPF ULL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DANGEROUS, DETRIMENTAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DISORGANIZED UNCO-QROINA TED 1 2 3 * 5 6 7 METHODICAL, EFFICIENT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 COMPETENT, PROFESSIONAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CLANNISH, NARROW-MINDED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PATIENT, TOLERANT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 INSIGHTFUL, INTUITIVE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 FRUSTRATED, TfNSE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 INDEPENDENT, SELF-SUFFI C IE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CYNICAL, PESSIMISTIC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DISSATISFIED, UNHAPPY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DELIGHTFUL, EXQUISITE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNTRAINED, UNSKILLED W 3 4 5 6 7 CLEAN, WELL-GROOMED 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SHREWD, CALCULATING 152. Unlike the preceding tests which may he found i n open journal a r t i c l e s and books, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Test i s copyrighted and may he obtained by writing to Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey, United States of America. 

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:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094901/manifest

Comment

Related Items