Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Study of student attitude toward two contrasting physics laboratory designs. Page, Gordon G. 1968

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1968_A8 P34.pdf [ 21.05MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0104487.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0104487-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0104487-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0104487-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0104487-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0104487-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0104487-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0104487-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0104487.ris

Full Text

STUDY OF STUDENT A T T I T U D E  TOWARD. TWO  P H Y S I C S LABORATORY  CONTRASTING  DESIGNS  by GORDON G . P A G E B.Sc.,  A  THESIS THE  University  of Victoria,  1964  S U B M I T T E D I N P A R T I A L F U L F I L M E N T OF REQUIREMENTS MASTER  in  F O R T H E D E G R E E OF OF A R T S  the Department of EDUCATION  Wo  accept  the  this  required  THE  thesis  as conforming  to  standard  U N I V E R S I T Y OF B R I T I S H September,  1968  COLUMBIA  In p r e s e n t i n g  this  thesis in p a r t i a l  f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements f o r  an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree the  L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y  a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and  I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s .  be granted by  thesis for financial  written  permission.  gain s h a l l  Department of The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Vancouver 8, Canada  Columbia  thesis  Department or  It i s understood t h a t c o p y i n g or  of t h i s  Study.  c o p y i n g of t h i s  the Head of my  that  publication  not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t  my  ABSTRACT A study o f the a t t i t u d e s o f students toward l a b o r a t o r y programs was  h y p o t h e s i z e d to be one  physics  method  o f d e t e r m i n i n g the r e l a t i v e p r o b a b i l i t y w i t h which these l a b o r a t o r y programs c o u l d succeed i n f u l f i l l i n g two objectives:  primary  (1) p r o v i d i n g a knowledge o f some b a s i c  concepts and  e x p e r i m a n t a l techniques i n p h y s i c s ,  (2) d e v e l o p i n g  and  a h i g h degree o f i n t e r e s t i n p h y s i c s .  T h i s s u p p o s i t i o n was  based upon the p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n  between a t t i t u d e toward a l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n and achievement and  i n t e r e s t i n the s i t u a t i o n , r e p o r t e d  have been found i n p r e v i o u s and  studies  investigating attitudes  t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p to learning.. -To measure "the a t t i t u d e s of students toward  physics  laboratory,  an a t t i t u d e s c a l e was  sound methods of s c a l e c o n s t r u c t i o n .  Studies were completed  t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h achievement i n the i n t e r e s t in physics.  not o n l y supported the h y p o t h e s i s t h a t the  was  studies  predicted  a l s o f u r n i s h e d evidence that  the s c a l e possessed c o n s t r u c t The  and  laboratory  The r e s u l t s of these  r e l a t i o n s h i p d i d e x i s t , but  the  developed through  . i n v e s t i g a t i n g a t t i t u d e s as measured by t h i s s c a l e  and  to  validity.  f u n c t i o n of the a t t i t u d e s c a l e i n t h i s  to determine which of two  physics  110  study  laboratory  programs at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia was  more  f a v o r a b l y r a t e d by "students.  One  program was  upon t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y design w h i l e the other was  patterned  ( c o n t r o l program),  based upon r e c e n t trends i n  l a b o r a t o r y p h i l o s o p h y and design  (experimental program).  Students worked i n these programs f o r t h r e e months. The a t t i t u d e s c a l e was  administered b e f o r e  these programs commenced, and at t h e i r  completion.  The r e s u l t s o f these a d m i n i s t r a t i o n s d i s c l o s e d t h a t the e x p e r i m e n t a l program was  r a t e d by students to be  s i g n i f i c a n t l y more f a v o r a b l e than the c o n t r o l program, which i n view o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p found to e x i s t between a t t i t u d e as measured by the a t t i t u d e s c a l e , achievement i n the l a b o r a t o r y and suggested  interest  t h a t the-experimental program was  and in physics, more capable  ' o f " p r o v i d i n g a knowledge o f some b a s i c concepts experimental techniques  and  i n p h y s i c s , as w e l l as d e v e l o p i n g  a h i g h e r degree of i n t e r e s t  in physics.  TABLE  OF CONTENTS Page  ABSTRACT  •  LIST  OF T A B L E S  LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS  . .... .. . .  Chapter I. INTRODUCTION  v i  x i  1  Importance o f t h e Study . .. . Statement o f t h e Problem A t t i t u d e s and L e a r n i n g D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms Used The P l a n o f T h i s R e p o r t A SURVEY OF THE L I T E R A T U R E MEASUREMENT OF A T T I T U D E S  1 2 3 5 8  ON T H E 11  Overview o f A t t i t u d e Measurement ••• T e c h n i q u e s . General Description o f Scaling Techniques L i k e r t ' s M e t h o d o f Summated R a t i n g s . . . . . Thurstone's Method of. E q u a l - A p p e a r i n g Intervals Guttman's Technique o f Scalogram Analysis The S c a l e - D i s c r i m i n a t i o n T e c h n i q u e Summary III.  i  ix  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS  II.  i  DEVELOPMENT OF AN A T T I T U D E THE P H Y S I C S LABORATORY  SCALE  14 17 20 33 38 44  TOWARDS  C o l l e c t i o n o f t h e A t t i t u d e S t a t e m e n t s •• . J u d g i n g t h e 120 S t a t e m e n t s S c a l e - V a l u e s a n d I n t e r q u a r t i l e R a n g e ... The P i l o t S t u d y D i s c r i m i n a t i n g Power o f t h e S t a t e m e n t s . S e l e c t i o n o f Statements f o r t h e F i n a l Scale . ... The F i n a l S c a l e R e l i a b i l i t y o f the Scale V a l i d i t y o f the Scale Summary  iv  11  51 51 52 55 58 62 64 66 69 70 77  TABLE  OF CONTENTS  ~  Continued  Chapter IV. THE D E S I G N OF THE A T T ITUD IN AL  STUDY  79  The P r o g r a m s P r e s e n t e d t o t h e E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l Groups Characteristics o f the Experimental Program Application o f the Scale .. . The C o l l e c t i o n and Treatement o f the Data V.  79 82 84 84  A N A L Y S I S OF T H E DATA  ..  General A t t i t u d i n a l Differences o f the C o n t r o l a n d E x p e r i m e n t a l G r o u p s ....... Attitudinal Differences o f the Control and E x p e r i m e n t a l Groups on t h e I n d i v i d u a l A t t i t u d e S t a t e m e n t s ....... VI.  SUMMARY  AND C O N C L U S I O N S  ....  ..  Restatement o f t h e Problem Summary o f R e s u l t s Conclusions Discussion Recommendations  ,.  BIBLIOGRAPHY  ......  THE PILOT  C.  A N A L Y S I S O F S T A T E M E N T S FOR T H E I R D I S C R I M I N A T I N G POWER THE STATEMENTS JUDGED  E.  THE, F I N A L  F.  D A T A R E Q U I R E D FOR T H E R E L I A B I L I T Y THE F I N A L A T T I T U D E S C A L E -  H.  94 94 94 97 98 99  126  D.  G.  90  106  STUDY  ATTITUDE  90  101  APPENDIX A. A N A L Y S I S OF T H E O R I G I N A L 120 A T T I T U D E STATEMENTS B.  90  138  FOR T H E I R V A L I D I T Y  SCALE  DATA REQUIRED I N THE V A L I D I T Y THE F I N A L A T T I T U D E S C A L E  151  ...  155  STUDY ON 159  S T U D I E S ON  T H E DATA USED I N T H E A N A L Y S I S OF T H E A T T I T U D I N A L STUDY . . ...  v  ...  186  201  LIST OF TABLES Table 1.  2.  Page The C o r n e l l Technique A p p l i e d t o a Four Statement Scale Responded t o by 20 Subjects  .  35  The D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Responses to an A t t i t u d e Statement f o r the Top 100 Scores and Lowest 100 Scores from a Sample o f 380 ..  40.  3.  Dichotomized Response  40  4.  A s p e c t s o f L a b o r a t o r y Covered by A t t i t u d e Statements .... .  5.  Categories  The Response D i s t r i b u t i o n o f 80 Judges toward the 120 A t t i t u d e Statements, and the S c a l e - V a l u e and I n t e r q u a r t i l e Range o f Each Statement .. .  117  The Scores o f the Physics 120 Students Who P a r t i c i p a t e d i n the P i l o t Study, Accompanied by the S t a t i s t i c s Required i n the C a l c u l a t i o n o f a S p l i t - H a l f C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t U s i n g the - Guttman formula  132  The Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Response t o Each o f the 68 Statements on the L i k e r t Scale by the Low S c o r i n g and High S c o r i n g Groups o f Students  144  Dichotomized Response D i s t r i b u t i o n o f the High S c o r i n g and Low S c o r i n g Groups on the L i k e r t Scale  148  Phi C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the 68 Statements on the L i k e r t Scale  150  The S c a l e - V a l u e s , Q-Values, and Phi C o e f f i c i e n t s o f the 26 Statements on the F i n a l A t t i t u d e Scale  158  The A t t i t u d e Scores o f the E x p e r i m e n t a l Group i n December t h a t Were Required i n the C a l c u l a t i o n o f Guttman's I n t e r n a l C o n s i s t e n c y R e l i a b i l i t y C o e f f i c i e n t ......  160  :  6.  7.  8.  9. 10.  11.  52  vi  LIST  12.  13.  14.  15.  16.  17.  18.  19.  20.  21.  22.  The  The  The  OF  TABLES  —  Continued  A t t i t u d e Scores o f the C o n t r o l Group i n December t h a t Were R e q u i r e d i n t h e C a l c u l a t i o n o f Guttman's I n t e r n a l Consistency R e l i a b i l i t y Coefficient  166  A t t i t u d e Scores o f the E x p e r i m e n t a l G r o u p i n M a r c h t h a t Were R e q u i r e d i n the C a l c u l a t i o n o f Guttman's I n t e r n a l Consistency R e l i a b i l i t y Coefficient  172  A t t i t u d e Scores o f the C o n t r o l Group i n M a r c h t h a t Were R e q u i r e d i n t h e C a l c u l a t i o n o f Guttman's I n t e r n a l C o n s i s t e n c y R e l i a b i l i t y C o e f f i c i e n t .......  178  S t a t i s t i c s Required f o r the C a l c u l a t i o n o f a Guttman I n t e r n a l C o n s i s t e n c y Reliability Coefficient  184  A t t i t u d e Scores and D e r i v e d Data Pertaining t o S t u d e n t s Who E l e c t e d No P h y s i c s Courses i n T h e i r Second Year  186  A t t i t u d e Scores and D e r i v e d Data Pertaining t o S t u d e n t s Who E l e c t e d Pure P h y s i c s Courses i n T h e i r Second Year  187  A t t i t u d e Scores and D e r i v e d Data Pertaining t o S t u d e n t s Who Elected Applied Physics Courses i n T h e i r Second Year  188  Students' A t t i t u d e Scores on the A t t i t u d e Scale and the A t t i t u d e Scores G i v e n Them b y T h e i r T e a c h i n g A s s i s t a n t s . . . . . . . . .  191  The  Data U t i l i z e d i n the V a l i d i t y Study R e l a t i n g Student A t t i t u d e and Achievement  Correlation Coefficients Denoting R e l a t i o n s h i p between A t t i t u d e s Achievement The  the and  F i n a l A t t i t u d e Score f o r Each Student i n t h e C o n t r o l Group, t o g e t h e r w i t h Those F a c t o r s upon which T h i s Score May D e p e n d  v i i  196  76  ...  202  LIST  23.  The  OF  TABLES  Analysis of  25.  Mean A t t i t u d e  Scores  26.  The  Distribution  The  Continued  F i n a l A t t i t u d e Score f o r Each Student i n the E x p e r i m e n t a l Group, t o g e t h e r w i t h Those F a c t o r s upon which T h i s Score May Depend  24.  27.  —  Covariance  Frequency  Table  211 91 91  of  Response  to  Each Statement by the C o n t r o l and E x p e r i m e n t a l Groups on the Initial A p p l i c a t i o n o f the A t t i t u d e Scale  220  Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Response t o Each Statement by the C o n t r o l and E x p e r i m e n t a l Groups on the F i n a l A p p l i c a t i o n o f the A t t i t u d e S c a l e .........  222  v i i i  LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS  Figure 1.  2.  3.  Page An  Example o f an O v e r l a y Employed t o O b t a i n the S c a l e and Q Value o f a Statement  The Graph Q Value  Employed t o O b t a i n o f a Statement  t h e S c a l e and 57  T h e Q - V a l u e s o f t h e 120 O r i g i n a l as a F u n c t i o n o f S c a l e - V a l u e Calculation  5.  The D i s c r i m i n a t i n g Power o f t h e L e a s t Ambiguous Statements as a F u n c t i o n o f Scale-Value  7.  8.  9.  10.  11.  12.  of the R e l i a b i l i t y  Statements  4.  6.  56  60  Coefficient  ..  137  65  The S i g n i f i c a n c e o f D i f f e r e n c e s E x i s t i n g i n t h e Mean A t t i t u d e S c o r e s t o w a r d t h e P h y s i c s 110 L a b o r a t o r y o f P a s t P h y s i c s 110 S t u d e n t s E l e c t i n g A p p l i e d P h y s i c s , Pure Physics, or No P h y s i c s i n T h e i r S e c o n d . Y e a r . . . . . . . . . . .  189  The Form Given t o t h e T e a c h i n g Assistants A s k i n g Them t o J u d g e T h e i r S t u d e n t s ' A t t i t u d e s toward t h e L a b o r a t o r y  190  The C o r r e l a t i o n o f S t u d e n t s ' A t t i t u d e Scores on t h e A t t i t u d e S c a l e w i t h t h e A t t i t u d e S c o r e s G i v e n Them b y T h e i r T e a c h i n g Assistants  195  The Card Employed t o O b t a i n I n f o r m a t i o n Required i n the Analysis of Covariance  ....  86  T h e R e s p o n s e D i s t r i b u t i o n t o S t a t e m e n t . 14 by t h e E x p e r i m e n t a l Group on t h e I n i t i a l A p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e A t t i t u d e S c a l e .........  224  The Response D i s t r i b u t i o n t o Statement b y . t h e C o n t r o l Group on t h e I n i t i a l Application o f the Attitude Scale  225  14  T h e R e s p o n s e D i s t r i b u t i o n t o S t a t e m e n t 14 by t h e E x p e r i m e n t a l Group on t h e F i n a l A p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e A t t i t u d e S c a l e .........  ix  226  LIST OF 13.  ILLUSTRATIONS—Continued  The Response D i s t r i b u t i o n to Statement 14 by the C o n t r o l Group on the F i n a l A p p l i c a t i o n of the A t t i t u d e Scale  x  227  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS  The w r i t e r wishes t o express h i s a p p r e c i a t i o n t o Dr. G.H. Cannon f o r h i s and  encouragement throughout t h i s  sincere advice  study.  G r a t e f u l acknowledgment i s a l s o made t o Dr.  J.W. B i c h a r d ,  Dr. T.D.M. McKie, and Mrs. J . E .  Woodrow f o r t h e i r h e l p f u l  xi  suggestions.  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.  Importance o f the Study  In many u n i v e r s i t i e s i n r e c e n t years  t h e r e has  developed an i n t e n s i f i e d e f f o r t t o i n c r e a s e the r e l a t i v e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f the i n t r o d u c t o r y p h y s i c s  laboratory.  T h i s e f f o r t has been l e d by the American A s s o c i a t i o n o f P h y s i c s Teachers and i t s Commission on C o l l e g e under the sponsorship  o f t h e N a t i o n a l Science  As a r e s u l t , many d i f f e r e n t l a b o r a t o r y  Physics,  Foundation.'*'  instructional  methods and programs have been suggested, b u t t h e i r relative overall efficacy r e p o r t s o f t h e i r success  i s d i f f i c u l t ' t o gauge because a r e seldom based on c l e a r l y  s t a t e d o b j e c t i v e s ' o r supported by t h e r e s u l t s o f r e l i a b l e measurements on student  achievement.  One b e h a v i o r a l o b j e c t i v e o f an i n t r o d u c t o r y physics  l a b o r a t o r y i s to develop or f o s t e r , through  the methods and m a t e r i a l s presented,  a good a t t i t u d e  2 toward p h y s i c s .  Research has suggested t h a t s u c c e s s f u l  f u l f i l l m e n t of this objective w i l l o f two d e s i r e d outcomes:  enhance the p r o b a b i l i t y  (1) p r o v i d i n g a knowledge o f  some b a s i c concepts and experimental p h y s i c s , and (2) d e v e l o p i n g  techniques i n  a h i g h degree o f i n t e r e s t  i n p h y s i c s , and consequently producing 1  a desire for a  2  continued  study of p h y s i c s .  success o f the  Hence, an  introductory physics  these outcomes may  be p r o v i d e d  i n d i c a t i o n of  laboratory  in  the  fulfilling  by a measurement o f  student  a t t i t u d e toward t h i s l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n . In view of t h i s s t a t e d importance o f the a t t i t u d e o f the  l e a r n e r toward t h i s l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n , i t appears  worthwhile f o r l a b o r a t o r y d e s i g n e r s  to endeavour to  develop or adopt l a b o r a t o r y methods and m a t e r i a l s , the r e a l m of cognative a favorable  e f f e c t i v e n e s s , which b e s t  a t t i t u d e i n the student.  c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the p r e s e n t of physics  i n t e r e s t i n the redevelopment  l a b o r a t o r i e s , i n which the U n i v e r s i t y o f availability  instrument capable o f s c a l i n g or comparing  a t t i t u d e s of students toward the new would be  outcomes  evaluating  to which the l a b o r a t o r y d e s i g n e r s  succeeded i n d e v e l o p i n g (1) and  programs capable o f  Statement of the  fulfilling  Problem  the purpose of t h i s study  the d i f f e r e n c e i n the g e n e r a l  (1) to i n v e s t i g a t e  a t t i t u d e o f students toward  the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia's P h y s i c s c r e a t e d by three months of study patterned and  have  (2). 2.  It was  the  programs developed  a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n toward  the extent  foster  Furthermore, i n  B r i t i s h Columbia i s p a r t i c i p a t i n g , the of an  within  110  laboratory  upon two  fr-equently u t i l i z e d approaches i n l a b o r a t o r y  contrasting  design,  the f i r s t  o f these b e i n g based upon the t r a d i t i o n a l  philosophy  and  design  philosophy;  and  the  second upon r e c e n t  trends  in  laboratory  (2) to determine the r e a c t i o n of  students toward those s p e c i f i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of l a b o r a t o r y which can be designer;  and  laboratory  c o n t r o l l e d by  the  the  laboratory  (3) to develop a r e l i a b l e and v a l i d  attitude  s c a l e t h a t w i l l accommodate the s p e c i f i c purposes of and  this  similar studies. More g e n e r a l l y ,  from the s t u d e n t s '  t h i s study p r o v i d e d  a comparison,  p o i n t of view, o f the v a l u e  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t r a d i t i o n a l and modern  of  the  laboratory  philosophy. 3.  A t t i t u d e s and  The v a l u e of t h i s and  Learning  similar investigations  has  been in- p a r t based upon the r e l a t i o n s h i p presumed to e x i s t between student achievement i n a l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n and a t t i t u d e toward the s i t u a t i o n .  A study o f the  f u r n i s h e d some evidence s u p p o r t i n g  his  literature  the e x i s t e n c e  of  this  relationship. Numerous g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s e x i s t i n both r e p o r t s and  general  t e x t s which s t r e s s the paramount e f f e c t  t h a t a t t i t u d e s have on b e h a v i o r . surveying  research  the r e s e a r c h  For example, Mead, a f t e r  on a t t i t u d e s , s t a t e d :  Perhaps no a c q u i r e d motives i n f l u e n c e more b e h a v i o r more s t r o n g l y than our a t t i t u d e s . That makes them b a s i c a l l y " a n d g e n e r a l l y of maximum importance.  -  4  More s p e c i f i c a l l y  i n r e l a t i o n to learning,  CE.  Skinner a s s e r t e d : One's a t t i t u d e toward the work which he i s about t o undertake w i l l determine h i s p r o g r e s s . I f he d i s l i k e s what he i s about to do, h i s r a t e of p r o g r e s s w i l l be slow. When one l i k e s the work he i s i n t e r e s t e d , g i v e s u n d i v i d e d a t t e n t i o n , and makes b e t t e r progress.5 Skinner's c l a i m appears  almost obvious.  But s t u d i e s  t h a t r e l a t e a t t i t u d e s and achievement have not p r o v i d e d evidence o f t h i s c a u s e - e f f e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p .  What these  s t u d i e s have p r o v i d e d i s evidence of a s i g n i f i c a n t  positive  c o r r e l a t i o n e x i s t i n g between a student's p e r c e p t i o n of or a t t i t u d e toward a s u b j e c t or s u b j e c t s and h i s achievement i n t h a t s u b j e c t or s u b j e c t s .  The c a u s e - e f f e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p  mentioned i s o n l y one of s e v e r a l p l a u s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n s f o r the e x i s t e n c e of a p o s i t i v e  correlation.  - Examples of s t u d i e s r e l a t i n g a t t i t u d e and  achievement  are Peskin's study w i t h seventh grade a r i t h m e t i c and geometry students , Hungerman's study w i t h s i x t h grade 7  8  9  mathematics students , and A u s t i n ' s , B r o d i e ' s , and Malpass's ^ 1  separate s t u d i e s r e l a t i n g g e n e r a l s c h o l a s t i c  success to g e n e r a l a t t i t u d e toward schools As a consequence of the experimental  evidence  a v a i l a b l e , the p o s i t i o n has been taken t h a t students  who  are s a t i s f i e d w i t h a l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n and h o l d a f a v o u r a b l e a t t i t u d e toward i t g e n e r a l l y outperform d i s s a t i s f i e d However, i t must be a p p r e c i a t e d t h a t a p e r f e c t  students.  correlation  5  between a t t i t u d e  (based upon the students'  perception  of the l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n as b e i n g worthwhile and meaningful) and  achievement cannot be a n t i c i p a t e d , because other  o f the l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n (degree o f o r g a n i z a t i o n i n s t r u c t i o n s Which i d e n t i f y what i s t o be learned, equally,  aspects.  of materials, etc.) a r e  i f n o t more important."'"''' Furthermore, i t seemed l e g i t i m a t e t o ask whether  i t was c o r r e c t a t a l l t o speak o f "one" a t t i t u d e toward a l e a r n i n g ' s i t u a t i o n , when i t was r e a s o n a b l e t o expect t h a t the student might have d i f f e r e n t a t t i t u d e s toward each o f the dozens o f p r o p e r t i e s presented by a s i t u a t i o n . Newcomb s t u d i e d t h i s t o p i c and concluded t h a t t h a t we form a meaningful g e n e r a l i z e d  " i t i s likely  a t t i t u d e about any  o b j e c t , however complex, t h a t we r e c o g n i z e  as some k i n d  12 o f whole o r u n i t " .  On these grounds the a t t i t u d e s o f  students toward the s p e c i f i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the l a b o r a t o r y were c o n s i d e r e d  t o u n i t e , forming a g e n e r a l  a t t i t u d e toward i t . 4. 4.1  .  D e f i n i t i o n s o f Terms Used  Attitude For the purposes o f t h i s study a working d e f i n i t i o n  of the nebulous term a t t i t u d e was r e q u i r e d . a s s o c i a t e d f o r many y e a r s w i t h r e s e a r c h provided  a compact, s e m i - q u a n t i t a t i v e  Thurstone,  in attitude scaling,  d e s c r i p t i o n o f an  6  attitude, defining a f f e c t associated "psychological  i t as  "the degree of p o s i t i v e or n e g a t i v e  w i t h some p s y c h o l o g i c a l  o b j e c t " r e f e r r i n g to any  object",  symbol, phrase,  slogan, person, i n s t i t u t i o n , . i d e a l or i d e a toward which people can d i f f e r w i t h r e s p e c t affect.  to p o s i t i v e or n e g a t i v e  1 3  More s p e c i f i c to t h i s study, the students was the  operationally defined  s e r i e s o f statements on  the purpose of the  to compare the  contrasting  the  as t h e i r response to  the a t t i t u d e s c a l e .  s c a l e was  students toward two  a t t i t u d e of  Since ;  attitudes  programs, these statements  were chosen to p e r t a i n to those c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the t h a t d i s t i n g u i s h the included  discussion  instructions  two  approaches.  r e p o r t i n g procedures, e t c .  b r i e f , or s t e p by There were a l s o  of a g e n e r a l n a t u r e r e g a r d i n g laboratory. by  the  Hence the  a synthesis  statements  student as  4.2  the defined  of h i s p e r c e p t i o n s  of the v i r t u e of those c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the r e f e r r e d t o by  equipment,  step),  the o v e r a l l v a l u e of  a t t i t u d e of the  a t t i t u d e s c a l e was  lab  These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  o f theory, l e v e l of d i f f i c u l t y ,  (open ended and  of  laboratory  the a t t i t u d e statements.  Physics Webster's D i c t i o n a r y  t h a t d e a l s w i t h matter and  defines  physics  energy and  i n the f i e l d s of mechanics, a c o u s t i c s ,  their  as  "a  science  interactions  o p t i c s , heat>  7  e l e c t r i c i t y , magnetism, r a d i a t i o n / atomic s t r u c t u r e , nuclear  phenomena", where i n t h i s study the term  w i l l be  taken to mean "a p r o c e s s o f i n q u i r y " .  and  "science"  14  4.3  C o n v e n t i o n a l Laboratory The  term  "conventional  as meaning the l a b o r a t o r y  l a b o r a t o r y " s h a l l be  s i t u a t i o n i n which the  i s given d e t a i l e d i n s t r u c t i o n s regarding  interpreted  student  the c h o i c e  and  s e t t i n g up of apparatus, the experimental procedure, t a k i n g o f data, 4.4  and  the p r e s e n t a t i o n  of r e s u l t s .  Free Laboratory In extreme c o n t r a s t t o the  laboratory, the  the  the term  laboratory  given  "term  conventional"  " f r e e l a b o r a t o r y " s h a l l r e f e r to  s i t u a t i o n i n which the students are  i n s t r u c t i o n s nor  are expected to e x p l o r e  assigned  experiments, but  subjects  of t h e i r own  neither  rather  choosing  by methods t h a t they themselves have d i s c o v e r e d  or  invented,  u s i n g apparatus t h a t they have designed, b u i l t ,  or  assembled  from a v a i l a b l e instruments and Recently,  parts.  the major trend  in laboratory  design  15 has been toward the f r e e l a b o r a t o r y . the p r a c t i c a l r e s t r i c t i o n s and  imposed by  l a c k of l a b o r a t o r y f a c i l i t i e s ,  But because of l a r g e enrollments  f a c u l t y time,  and  f i n a n c e s , most i n s t i t u t i o n s are s t r i v i n g to e f f e c t a compromise, unique to t h e i r s i t u a t i o n , between the f r e e and  conventional  design.  contrasting  8  5. Prior scale,  The Plan o f t h i s  Report  t o commencing the development o f the a t t i t u d e  i t was necessary  t o survey the l i t e r a t u r e on  s c a l e s t o weigh the advantages and disadvantages methods a v a i l a b l e , situation.  and study t h e i r  adaptability  attitude  o f the to this  To a p p r e c i a t e the d e c i s i o n s u n d e r l y i n g the  d e s i g n chosen, a summary o f t h i s survey on a t t i t u d e techniques w i l l be given i n Chapter  II.  The t h i r d  w i l l d i s c u s s the development o f the a t t i t u d e  scaling chapter  s c a l e toward  the p h y s i c s l a b o r a t o r y , Chapter. IV w i l l present the d e s i g n of the a t t i t u d i n a l study, statement study, of t h i s  Chapter  V w i l l provide a  and a n a l y s i s o f the r e s u l t s  and Chapter study.  o f the a t t i t u d i n a l  VI w i l l present the summary and c o n c l u s i o n s  9  Footnote References —  Chapter I  "Report o f the Denver Conference on C u r r i c u l a f o r Undergraduate Majors i n P h y s i c s , " American J o u r n a l o f P h y s i c s , XXX (March, 1962), 152. 2  Leo Nedelsky, " I n t r o d u c t o r y P h y s i c s L a b o r a t o r y , " American J o u r n a l o f P h y s i c s , XXVI (February, 1958), 52. ^C.E. Bensen, " A t t i t u d e o f the Learner, " American E d u c a t i o n a l D i g e s t , XLV (March, 1926) , 229-301, as c i t e d by C D . Skinner, Readings i n E d u c a t i o n a l Psychology (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1926), p. 386; L. Lafave, "Habit or A t t i t u d e as the C e n t r a l Tree i n E d u c a t i o n a l Theory," E d u c a t i o n a l Theory, V I I I (July, 1958), 172-8. 4 A.R. Mead, "Research about A t t i t u d e s , " J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l Research, XLVIII.(November, 1954), 233. 5  C E . Skinner, Readings m E d u c a t i o n a l Psychology (New York:- D. Appleton and Company, 1926) p. 386. 6  Anne S. Peskin, "Teacher Understanding and A t t i t u d e and Student Achievement and A t t i t u d e i n Seventh Grade Mathematics" (unpublished Ph.D. t h e s i s , New York U n i v e r s i t y , 1964), p. 95. 7 . A.D. Hungerman, " A t t i t u d e and Achievement o f S i x t h Grade P u p i l s i n C o n v e n t i o n a l and Contemporary Mathematics Programs," A r i t h m e t i c Teacher, XIV (January, 1967), 30-9. 8 H.R. A u s t i n , "Cross V a l i d a t i o n o f an A t t i t u d e S c a l e f o r t h e I d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f High and Low Academic A c h i e v e r s , " J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l Research, L V I I I (May, 1965), 428. 9 . T.A. Brodie, " A t t i t u d e toward School and Academic Achievement," P e r s o n n e l and Guidance J o u r n a l , X L I I I (December, 1964), 375-8. ^ L . F . Malpass, "Some R e l a t i o n s h i p s Between Student's P e r c e p t i o n o f School and t h e i r Achievement," J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l Psychology, XLIV (December, 1953), 475. "'"'''A.R. Townsend and P.J. Burke, L e a r n i n g f o r Teachers (New York: The M a c m i l l i a n Company, 1962), p. 119; I. S a r n o f f and D. Katz, "The M o t i v a t i o n a l B a s i s o f A t t i t u d i n a l Change, " J o u r n a l o f Abnormal and S o c i a l Psychology, XLIX (January, 1954), 115-24.  10  Footnote R e f e r e n c e s — 12  Chapter I —  Cont'd  T.M. Newcomb, R.H. Turner and P.E. Converse, S o c i a l Psychology (Toronto: H o l t , Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965), p. 53. • 13 . L.L. Thurstone, "Comment," American J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l o q y , L I I (January, 1946) , 39. 14 "Physics, " Webster's T h i r d New I n t e r n a t i o n a l D i c t i o n a r y , p. 1707. S p r i n g f i e l d , Massachusetts: G and C M e r r i a n Co., 1966. 15 Howard L a s t e r , "A Step Away from the Conventional Laboratory i n I n t r o d u c t o r y P h y s i c s , " American J o u r n a l o f P h y s i c s , XXVII (March, 1959), 166-9; Leo Nedelsky, " I n t r o d u c t o r y P h y s i c s L a b o r a t o r y , " American J o u r n a l o f P h y s i c s , XXVI (February, 1958), 51-9. 16 "Laboratory I n s t r u c t i o n " i n General C o l l e g e P h y s i c s , " American J o u r n a l o f P h y s i c s , XXV (October, 1957), 436-9; H.V. Neher, "The Role 6 f Experimental Work, " American J o u r n a l o f P h y s i c s , XXX (March, 1962),.186-90.  CHAPTER I I A SURVEY OF THE LITERATURE ON THE MEASUREMENT OF ATTITUDES 1.  Overview o f A t t i t u d e Measurement Techniques  P r i o r to the appearance o f the s u p p o r t i n g  research  a v a i l a b l e today on the importance o f a t t i t u d e s , there were many i n v e s t i g a t o r s i n the e a r l y t w e n t i e t h  c e n t u r y who  d i s p l a y e d i n t e n s e i n t e r e s t i n a t t i t u d e measurement.  Out  o f t h i s i n t e r e s t arose many methods o f a t t i t u d e measurement, some o f which have become c l a s s i c s and a r e s t i l l  extensively  used i n o p i n i o n and a t t i t u d e r e s e a r c h . 1.1  The S i n g l e Q u e s t i o n The most p r i m i t i v e and obvious manner o f  determining  a t t i t u d e was t o ask a s u b j e c t a s i n g l e q u e s t i o n and e l i c i t his opinion.  The l o g i c b e h i n d the use o f o v e r t o p i n i o n t o .  measure a t t i t u d e i s based on the p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n t h a t e x i s t s between what people s a y on a s u b j e c t and what they w i l l do about i t . is,  o f course,  Edwards p o i n t e d o u t t h a t the c o r r e l a t i o n  n o t p e r f e c t , and perhaps n o t even h i g h ,  both o p i n i o n s and a c t i o n s a r e m u l t i p l y determined."'"  since  This  technique has been g i v e n thorough c o n s i d e r a t i o n by Remmers and has been found t o c o n t a i n many hazards and shortcomings..... Among these a r e the r e l u c t a n c e o f many i n d i v i d u a l s t o give p u b l i c e x p r e s s i o n o f t h e i r f e e l i n g s o r a t t i t u d e s due t o f e l t o r a c t u a l pressures  toward conformity,  11  and the f a c t  12  t h a t some i n d i v i d u a l s may  not be aware o f t h e i r . . .  toward a g i v e n p s y c h o l o g i c a l o b j e c t . 1.2  feelings  2  Summated Q u e s t i o n n a i r e A more e l a b o r a t e scheme and n a t u r a l e x t e n s i o n o f  the s i n g l e q u e s t i o n technique  i s a combination  of questions 3  on the same t o p i c to form a summated q u e s t i o n n a i r e . r e p l i c a t i o n adds r e l i a b i l i t y t h i s technique has  Since  obvious  advantages oyer the s i n g l e q u e s t i o n . 1.3  S c a l i n g Techniques The  f i r s t f o r m a l attempts t o measure a t t i t u d e s by  use o f s c a l i n g techniques appeared i n the l a t e twenties.  The e a r l y techniques  nineteen  t h a t are s t i l l most  -  commonly used i n a t t i t u d e s c a l i n g are the method o f 4 equal-appearing  i n t e r v a l s which was  i n t r o d u c e d by  and the L i k e r t ' s method o f summated r a t i n g s .  5  Thurstone,  Through the  years a m u l t i t u d e o f minor and major v a r i a t i o n s have e v o l v e d from these b a s i c t e c h n i q u e s . More r e c e n t developments i n the t h e o r y and of  a t t i t u d e s c a l e s , by Guttman, have c e n t r e d around the  concept o f u n i d i m e n s i o n a l i t y , a s c a l e b e i n g i f the score, d e r i v e d i s a measure o f one  6  one  factor.  The  by McNemar, who of  techniques  statements  counted  unidimensional  f a c t o r and  only  d e s i r a b i l i t y o f such a s c a l e i s d i s c u s s e d ,  concluded  t h a t the c r i t e r i a  i n both Thurstone  on to separate two  f o r the  selection  and L i k e r t s c a l e s cannot be  o r more f a c t o r s which belong to  13  an a t t i t u d e a r e a t h a t has been too b r o a d l y 1.4  defined.  I n d i r e c t Methods o f A t t i t u d e Measurement The p r e c e d i n g methods measure a t t i t u d e s  i n the sense t h a t the purpose o f r e q u e s t i n g i s u s u a l l y obvious t o the s u b j e c t .  There a l s o e x i s t s  i n d i v i d u a l i s presented with a r e l a t i v e l y  stimulus  directly  a response  techniques which measure a t t i t u d e s i n d i r e c t l y . the  7  Here unstructured  o r s i t u a t i o n i n which the r e a l purpose o f the  measurement, t h a t o f d e t e r m i n i n g h i s a t t i t u d e , i s n o t apparent t o him. discusses  Among these techniques, Remmers  the f o l l o w i n g :  Word a s s o c i a t i o n , a method  which u t i l i z e s the s u b j e c t s '  response t o a s e l e c t e d  o f key words o r phrases; v i s u a l stimulus,  list  which, as the  term i m p l i e s , used p i c t u r e s o r diagrams to secure emotionally  toned responses from a s u b j e c t ;  expressive  movement, a technique i n which a t t i t u d e s are r e v e a l e d from o v e r t b e h a v i o r o f the s u b j e c t ;  intragroup  attitude  measurement, concerned w i t h measuring a t t i t u d e s by r e q u i r i n g the i n d i v i d u a l t o choose w i t h i n h i s f u n c t i o n i n g s o c i a l groups e i t h e r d e s i r a b l e or u n d e s i r a b l e t h a t group w i t h r e s p e c t  members o f  to c e r t a i n c r i t e r i a ; and r a t i n g  s c a l e s , where a person i s asked t o r a t e the a t t r i b u t e s , traits,  o r b e h a v i o r o f persons t h a t he knows, w h i l e a t  the same time r e v e a l i n g many o f h i s own a t t i t u d e s i n h i s 8  ratings.  14  I t i s apparent from the overview o f a t t i t u d e measures p r e s e n t e d t h a t i t would be u n r e a l i s t i c t o attempt t o d e s c r i b e  a l l these t e c h n i q u e s .  Since one  purpose o f t h i s study i s t o develop an a t t i t u d e s c a l e , t h e remainder o f t h i s c h a p t e r i s devoted t o an examination o f s c a l i n g techniques,  w i t h p a r t i c u l a r emphasis on the  Thurstone and L i k e r t techniques,  which have s u r v i v e d much  c r i t i c i s m , and s t i l l a c t as the b a s i s f o r many o f today's commonly a p p l i e d t e c h n i q u e s .  Guttman's s c a l e a n a l y s i s  w i l l a l s o be i n v e s t i g a t e d as a p o s s i b l e c o n t r i b u t o r t o t h e study. 2. 2.1  General D e s c r i p t i o n o f - S c a l i n g Techniques  C r i t e r i a t o Consider i n C o n s t r u c t i n g The  Statements  f i r s t s t e p i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n of.an a t t i t u d e  s c a l e i s t o o b t a i n items t h a t r e l a t e t o the u n i v e r s e o f interest or psychological object.  These items are known  as a t t i t u d e statements.. As a source o f statements Edwards recommended t h a t the examiner have i n d i v i d u a l s w r i t e a s h o r t d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e i r f e e l i n g s about the p s y c h o l o g i c a l object.  Statements can then be developed which express  some k i n d o f o p i n i o n about the a t t i t u d e o b j e c t under study. A summary o f the l i t e r a t u r e on a t t i t u d e statements by Edwards i n d i c a t e s t h a t a person d e v e l o p i n g s t r i v e f o r simple,  a scale  should  s h o r t , unambiguous statements t h a t a r e  r e l e v a n t , not f a c t u a l , r e f e r to the present,  and a r e u n l i k e l y  15  to be endorsed by everyone.  The statements s h o u l d not  c o n t a i n double n e g a t i v e s o r u n i v e r s a l s such as  "all,  always, none o r never".  just,  Words such as "only,  and merely" s h o u l d be used w i t h care and moderation. F i n a l l y the statements s h o u l d attempt to c o v e r the e n t i r e 9 attitude  continuum. Once a s e t o f a t t i t u d e statements has been c o l l e c t e d ,  t h e r e are two g e n e r a l methods used to develop an a t t i t u d e scale.  The f i r s t o f these methods u t i l i z e s a j u d g i n g  group. 2.2  The Use o f a Judging Group The j u d g i n g group i s not asked t o respond t o the  statements i n terms o f t h e i r own agreement o r disagreement w i t h them, b u t r a t h e r t o r a t e the degree o f f a v o r a b l e n e s s o r u n f a v o r a b l e n e s s e x p r e s s e d hy each statement.  These  judgments are used as a b a s i s f o r d e t e r m i n i n g s c a l e - v a l u e s o f the statements upon a p s y c h o l o g i c a l continuum  ( j u s t as  the o r d e r i n g o f o b j e c t s i n terms o f t h e i r measured weights i s s a i d to be on a p h y s i c a l continuum,  the o r d e r i n g o f  objects, upon the b a s i s o f judgments i s s a i d to be on a p s y c h o l o g i c a l continuum).  In the case o f a t t i t u d e ,  the  p s y c h o l o g i c a l continuum extends from most u n f a v o r a b l e to most f a v o r a b l e , the u n i t s o f the continuum b e i n g chosen f o r t h e i r convenience and s u i t a b i l i t y by the s c a l e d e s i g n e r . Once the s c a l e - v a l u e s o f the statements are known,  1  16  s u b j e c t s can be asked t o express t h e i r own  agreement o r  disagreement w i t h the i n d i v i d u a l statements.  Attitude  s c o r e s f o r these s u b j e c t s can then be o b t a i n e d from the s c a l e - v a l u e s o f the statements  endorsed.  Three methods o f c o n s t r u c t i n g a t t i t u d e s c a l e s i n t h i s manner are o u t l i n e d by Edwards.  These are the methods  o f s u c c e s s i v e i n t e r v a l s , the method o f p a i r e d  comparisons,  and the method o f e q u a l - a p p e a r i n g i n t e r v a l s .  They d i f f e r  o n l y i n the manner i n which the judgments and  scale-values  o f the statements are o b t a i n e d . ^  The method o f e q u a l -  a p p e a r i n g i n t e r v a l s , a l t h o u g h extremely demanding o f the respondent, i s the most s t r a i g h t forward technique and thus the most u t i l i z e d .  I t w i l l be the o n l y method o f  i t s k i n d c o n s i d e r e d i n t h i s survey. 2.3  The D i r e c t Response Technique The second g e n e r a l method used t o develop an  a t t i t u d e s c a l e i s based upon d i r e c t responses o f and  "agree"  " d i s a g r e e " w i t h the a t t i t u d e statements by s u b j e c t s 12  from the p o p u l a t i o n o f i n t e r e s t .  Such a method does  not r e q u i r e p r i o r knowledge o f the s c a l e - v a l u e s o f the statements i n any e x a c t sense, thus a j u d g i n g group i s not n e c e s s a r y .  The response methods f o r c o n s t r u c t i n g  a t t i t u d e s c a l e s i n c l u d e Guttman's s c a l e a n a l y s i s , a 13 technique which  Suchman d i s c u s s e d a t l e n g t h  Likert~ method o f summated r a t i n g s .  , and the  :  17  Guttman's the  most  scale  difficult  to  a n a l y s i s technique  employ,  since  is  there  perhaps  i s no  truly  14 effective  way  of  selecting  good  on  the  i n v e s t i g a t o r ' s wisdom  to  the  selection  extensive and  from  research this  and  classical  intervals,  statements. carried  out  There on  method  of  has  Guttman's  counterpart,  s t i l l  summated the  commonly  used.  a t t e n t i o n , are  even  the  combined,  consideration.  method  Edwards  ratings  method  draw c o n s i d e r a b l e be  experience  in  depends regard  been techniques,  research  Likert's its  and  Much  s t e m s much c r i t i c i s m (to be 15 16 notably by F e s t i n g e r , Edwards , 17 18 19 Kilpatrick , Loevinger , and Smith.  discussed), Edwards  of  items.  of  of  like  equal-appearing  Since  both  often  compared,  summated  supplies  is,  a  techniques  ratings  complete  and  may  merits  description  20 of  this  technique.  3.  3.1  Likert's  Construction First,  statements object be  or  ambiguous, are  the  with  are  of  Summated  a l l methods,  a  relating  collected.  to  large  number  the  attitude  These  items  e d i t e d by  the  i n v e s t i g a t o r to  irrelevant,  and  otherwise  then  drawn up  Ratings  Scale  propositions  i n question  carefully  items  as  of  Method  i n the  form  faulty of  a  of  should  eliminate items.  The  questionnaire  18  o r a t t i t u d e t e s t , each item b e i n g g i v e n m u l t i p l e categories. undecided,  (For example:  " s t r o n g l y agree,  disagree, s t r o n g l y disagree".)  response  agree,  The  statements  s h o u l d be so c o n s t r u c t e d t h a t f o r about h a l f o f them an "agree" response  r e p r e s e n t s a f a v o r a b l e a t t i t u d e toward  the a t t i t u d e o b j e c t i n q u e s t i o n , and f o r the o t h e r h a l f a  " d i s a g r e e " response  represents a favorable a t t i t u d e .  The experimental  instrument  i s then  to a r e a s o n a b l y l a r g e group o f s u b j e c t s who  administered  (100 or more)  are r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the p o p u l a t i o n to which the  f i n a l s c a l e w i l l be a d m i n i s t e r e d . i n d i c a t e t h e i r own  They are asked  a t t i t u d e s by c h e c k i n g the  t o each item which most c l o s e l y expresses on t h a t item.  The  to  response  their  feeling'  q u e s t i o n n a i r e s are then s c o r e d f o r  each s u b j e c t by a s s i g n i n g a r b i t r a r y weights o f 1, 2, 4, and  3,  5 (or 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4) to the f i v e c a t e g o r i e s  o f each item i n such a way  t h a t the h i g h e s t weight i s  always a s s i g n e d to the response end o f the a t t i t u d e continuum  t h a t tends toward  one  (say the u n f a v o r a b l e  w h i l e the lowest weight i s always a s s i g n e d to the  end), response  c a t e g o r i e s which tends toward the o p p o s i t e end.  A subject's  score i s the sum  responses  o f the weights a s s i g n e d to the  which he made. The  items are then a n a l y z e d f o r t h e i r d i s c r i m i n a t i n g  power w i t h r e s p e c t to the measurement o f the a t t i t u d e i n q u e s t i o n , by any one  of s e v e r a l i t e m - a n a l y s i s  procedures  19  a v a i l a b l e . . Perhaps the s i m p l e s t index t o p and bottom 1 0 p e r c e n t  i s t o take the c  (or 2 7 o r any o t h e r  o f the s u b j e c t s on the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t o t a l  percent) scores,  and c a l c u l a t e the mean o f the responses to each f o r each o f these  groups s e p a r a t e l y .  item  Those items are  the most d i s c r i m i n a t i n g which show the g r e a t e s t  discrepancy  i n the mean response between the h i g h and low groups.  If  more s e n s i t i v e i n d i c e s o f item d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power are wanted, the p h i c o e f f i c i e n t ,  or item-test c o r r e l a t i o n  procedures may be e m p l o y e d . ^ •  . The f i n a l a t t i t u d e s c a l e i s then c o n s t r u c t e d by  choosing  those  2 0 t o 2 5 items from the t o t a l l i s t which  show the g r e a t e s t d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . with, the same f i v e and 3.2  scored  These items are used  "agree - d i s a g r e e " response c a t e g o r i e s ,  i n - t h e same p r e v i o u s l y d i s c u s s e d manner.  The Acceptance o f L i k e r t ' s Technicrue Farnsworth a s s e r t e d t h a t i n h i s experience the  L i k e r t technique popular  o f a t t i t u d e s c a l i n g had become more  than t h e o l d e r Thurstone method, due m a i n l y t o  the g r e a t e r work o u t l a y i n h e r e n t i n the Thurstone prejudging researchers  procedure.  He had d i s c o v e r e d t h a t many  f e l t the time demanded by t h i s  procedure was more than they c o u l d a f f o r d . 3.3  judging 22  C r i t i c i s m o f ' L i k e r t ' s Technicrue Farnsworth a l s o p o i n t e d o u t t h a t there are many  20  researchers of  who  a r e somewhat  prejudging, that  the  Thurstone  loathe to lose  i s , of assembling  method  alone  gives.  23  the o p p o r t u n i t y  item weights, I n Remmers  which  words,  1  ... t h e T h u r s t o n e s c a l i n g p r o c e d u r e s g i v e absolute meaning t o s c a l e u n i t s , and t h e r e f o r e to an i n d i v i d u a l s c o r e a c h i e v e d on an a t t i t u d e i n s t r u m e n t c o n s t r u c t e d b y t h e s e p r o c e d u r e s . No such s i t u a t i o n e x i s t s with the L i k e r t technique. In the l a t t e r case, an i n d i v i d u a l ' s score can o n l y be i n t e r p r e t e d b y r e f e r e n c e t o s e t s o f norms f o r d e f i n e d p o p u l a t i o n s , s i n c e t h e u n i t s o f t h e s c a l e a r e n o t " r a t i o n a l " i n the sense, of having been defined (psychologically) as. equal and e q u a l l y spaced along the a t t i t u d e continuum.24 The more  significance  apparent  techniques, this  following  but  i s s t i l l  experimental  4.  attitude  the L i k e r t  4.1  Technique  necessary  the main  Method  at this  point  r e a s o n why  the  of Equal-Appearing  i n that  f o r Judging similar  to c o l l e c t  Thurstone's that Thurstone  i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n  technique  method  In manner  noted  of  become.  o f  scales.  Thurstone  than  quotation w i l l  the d i s c u s s i o n  employed  Thurstone's The  this  i t s h o u l d be  quotation outlines  technique  of  a  i s slightly a  judgment  Intervals  more  complex  group i s  involved.  Statements to the L i k e r t  list  method,  o f statements,  i t i s  following  first  the  25 same The to  criteria statements  a  slip,  and  as  summarized  by  Edwards  a r e mimeographed a  set of slips  on  (section  small slips,  i s given to each  2.1). one  statement  subject.  21  The size  subject  lettered To  subjects from the  is also from A  who  are  Church" are  2.  3.  4.  5. 6.  7.  8.  to  illustrate  Thurstone's  1.  given  to  11  "Scale referred  slips  of  the  same  K.  the  act  master  instructions  as  the  judges,  given the  these  instructions  f o r Measuring A t t i t u d e  toward  to.  T h e 130 s l i p s c o n t a i n s t a t e m e n t s regarding the value of the church. These have been made b y v a r i o u s p e r s o n s , s t u d e n t s , and others. As a f i r s t s t e p i n the making o f a s c a l e t h a t may b e u s e d i n a t e s t o f o p i n i o n s r e l a t i n g to the church and r e l i g i o n we w a n t a number o f p e r s o n s t o s o r t t h e s e 130 s l i p s i n t o e l e v e n p i l e s . You a r e g i v e n e l e v e n s l i p s w i t h letters o n t h e m , A , B, C, D, E , F, G, H, I , J , K. Please arrange these b e f o r e you i n r e g u l a r order. On s l i p A p u t t h o s e statements which you b e l i e v e express the h i g h e s t a p p r e c i a t i o n o f the value o f the church. On s l i p F p u t t h o s e e x p r e s s i n g a n e u t r a l position. On s l i p K p u t t h o s e slips which express the s t r o n g e s t d e p r e c i a t i o n of the church. On t h e r e s t o f t h e slips arrange statements i n accordance with the degree o f a p p r e c i a t i o n or d e p r e c i a t i o n e x p r e s s e d i n them.' T h i s means t h a t when y o u a r e t h r o u g h sorting you w i l l have e l e v e n p i l e s arranged i n o r d e r o f v a l u e - e s t i m a t e f r o m . A , t h e h i g h e s t , t o K, the lowest. . Do n o t t r y t o g e t t h e same n u m b e r i n e a c h pile. They are not e v e n l y d i s t r i b u t e d . The numbers o f t h e s l i p s a r e c o d e numbers a n d h a v e n o t h i n g t o do w i t h t h e a r r a n g e m e n t in piles. You w i l l f i n d i t e a s i e r t o s o r t them i f you l o o k o v e r a number o f t h e s l i p s c h o s e n a t ; random, b e f o r e you b e g i n t o s o r t . I t w i l l p r o b a b l y take you about f o r t y - f i v e minutes to sort them. ° 2  22  4.2  C r i t i c i s m s o f the Judging  Technique  T h i s technique o f j u d g i n g was a t t a c k e d immediately. Thurstone had assumed t h a t t h e s c a l e - v a l u e s found would be independent o f the a t t i t u d e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the judges who 27 r a t e s t h e statements , b u t many s c e p t i c s , l a t e r t o i n c l u d e 28 Edwards and Kenney  , p o i n t e d out t h a t t h i s was perhaps  u n j u s t i f i e d assumption.  To t e s t Thurstone's h y p o t h e s i s ,  P i n t n e r and F o r l a n o gave the Thule and Thurstone "Scale f o r the Measurement o f P a t r i o t i s m " t o four hundred and eleven students i n s e v e r a l c l a s s e s o f e d u c a t i o n a l psychology.  The s u b j e c t s marked the items a c c o r d i n g t o  the standard d i r e c t i o n s .  Upon completion, t h e i n s t r u c t o r  e x p l a i n e d b r i e f l y t o the students the method o f c o n s t r u c t i n g such s c a l e s , and asked them t o a c t as judges and s o r t the statements i n t o 11 c a t e g o r i e s , marking each w i t h a l e t t e r from A t o K, from v e r y much t o v e r y l i t t l e  patriotism.  P i n t n e r and F o r l a n o f e l t t h a t the f a c t t h a t the j u d g i n g f o l l o w e d immediately a f t e r the s u b j e c t had r e g i s t e r e d h i s own i n d i v i d u a l a t t i t u d e i n r e g a r d t o each item would presumably  allow f o r the greatest  "halo" i n f l u e n c e o f  the i n d i v i d u a l a t t i t u d e upon the item judgment. The t o t a l group was d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e groups on the b a s i s o f the a t t i t u d e s c a l e , an upper  27%, a middle  46%, and a lower group o f 27%. P i n t n e r and F o r l a n o r e p o r t e d When the r a n k i n g s o f items by t h e t h r e e groups were c o r r e l a t e d , the c o r r e l a t i o n s were .994 between lower and middle, .983 between middle  23  and upper. A l s o there was v e r y l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e i n the s c a l e - v a l u e s a s s i g n e d by any one o f the groups, and the s c a l e - v a l u e s d e r i v e d by Thule and Thurstone.29 Ferguson found s i m i l a r r e s u l t s , and Hinckley.^  Hinckley's  more e l a b o r a t e  so d i d  study c o n s i s t e d  o f the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a s c a l e measuring a t t i t u d e toward the Negro.  He  found the c o r r e l a t i o n o f the  scale-values  o f the judges p r e j u d i c e d a g a i n s t the Negro w i t h  those o f  31 the judges i n f a v o r of the Negro was  0.98.  These f i n d i n g s which i n d i c a t e t h a t the a t t i t u d e s and o p i n i o n s  o f the judges have v i r t u a l l y no e f f e c t  the placement o f items are i n sharp c o n f l i c t w i t h  on  the  r e s u l t s o f s t u d i e s i n the f i e l d s o f p e r c e p t i o n and  judgment.  These s t u d i e s i n d i c a t e t h a t judgments a r e g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e d by m o t i v a t i o n a l and a t t i t u d i n a l f a c t o r s o p e r a t i v e a t  the  32 time. This discrepancy  prompted S h e r i f a n d  Hovland to  doubt the v a l i d i t y of the r e s u l t s o f the P i n t n e r Forlano,  Ferguson, and H i n c k l e y  studies.  and  Upon i n v e s t i g a t i o n  o f these works, they f e l t t h a t these previous  studies  failed  i n t h a t they d i d not employ samples w i t h a s u f f i c i e n t l y wide range o f a t t i t u d e s to- r e p r e s e n t adequately the i n v o l v e d i n d i v i d u a l s who displacements and and  strongly  would be most l i k e l y to show the  d i s t o r t i o n s found i n the f i e l d o f  perception  judgment. To t e s t t h i s h y p o t h e s i s ,  S h e r i f and Hovland used  24  Hinckley's  original  instructions secure at  and  procedures.  s u b j e c t s who  hand.  Their  predictions  of  statements,  were  findings judgment  and  duplicated  T h e y made e v e r y  deeply were  involved  effort  with  definitely  his  the  i n line  to  issue with  the  theory.  ... i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h s t r o n g a t t i t u d e s tended to see i s s u e s i n "black and white", and • d i s p l a c e d n e u t r a l statements to the extremes. The number o f s t a t e m e n t s a s s i g n e d t o t h e v a r i o u s c a t e g o r i e s by "average" i n d i v i d u a l s w e r e f o u n d much more uniform.33 This was  not  expected  an  attitude  as  a  was  behavior  scale  mild  toward  t o be  enthusiasm, were  such  As Fehrer  a  and  judgment  only a  second  one  and the  Hovland's development  non-controversial range  of  between few  study  attitude  topic present  indifference  exceptions  i n  of  and  persons  against i t . criticism  Farnsworth,  of  a  The  largely  with  strongly  i n Sherif  adversely affect  physics laboratory. anticipated  who  to  found  of  the  i n separate  attitude  statement  judging  sti:.dies,  technique found  i s dependent  that  upon  the  34 remaining  items  drawback,  Fehrer c o n s t r u c t e d three s c a l e s - f r o m items  Thurstone  and  Scale  B  from  equal  10  (where  corresponds  to  1,  items  with  .  To  illustrate  "Scale of A t t i t u d e  to  contained  0  scale.  Peterson's  C c o n t a i n e d an  valued 0,  i n the  number  3  A  Scale M to  10,  toward  Thurstone's  scale-value  etc.).  values  of  this  and  of War".  items  corresponds  to  (militaristic) scale  P  (pacifistic),  25  items w i t h v a l u e s 0 t o 7.  Each s c a l e was r a t e d by a  d i f f e r e n t group o f 100 equated f o r age and sex. F e h r e r found the median s c a l e - v a l u e s o f the items common t o s e v e r a l s c a l e s t o d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h • content.  F o r example, i n s c a l e M the common items were  r a t e d on the average more p a c i f i s t i c than the same items were r a t e d on the s c a l e s C and P.  In g e n e r a l , the n e u t r a l  o r extreme items had the same v a l u e s on a l l t h r e e s c a l e s , and i t was the moderately p a c i f i s t i c items on s c a l e M, and the  moderately m i l i t a r i s t i c items on s c a l e P whose s c a l e 35  v a l u e s changed. T h i s c r i t i c i s m can o f course be kept minimal i f items a r e chosen such t h a t t h e r e a r e as many a p p r e c i a t i o n items as t h e r e a r e d e p r e c i a t i o n items f o r the judges t o rate. One l a s t c r i t i c i s m o f Thurstone's j u d g i n g technique, i n v e s t i g a t e d by Farnsworth, may change w i t h time.  suggested t h a t the s c a l e - v a l u e s  Farnsworth, u t i l i z i n g the same s c a l e  as Fehrer, found t h a t o n l y two items had changed s c a l e - v a l u e s i g n i f i c a n t l y over a p e r i o d o f e i g h t y e a r s .  He f e l t  that  t h i s minor change i n the s c a l e - v a l u e s on such a c o n t r o v e r s i a l s u b j e c t as war was n o t s e r i o u s , s i n c e the c o r r e l a t i o n between 36 the  s c a l e - v a l u e s was 0.97. At  face v a l u e , t h i s was c o n s i d e r e d a minor and  perhaps u n j u s t c r i t i c i s m ,  s i n c e a t t i t u d e s toward  controversial  26  t o p i c s do change w i t h time, and consequently changes i n s c a l e - v a l u e s should n e c e s s a r i l y be expected. 4.3  Development and Format o f t h e F i n a l Thurstone S c a l e To complete the d e s c r i p t i o n o f Thurstone's technique  of the  a t t i t u d e s c a l e c o n s t r u c t i o n , r e f e r e n c e i s again made to development  o f Thurstone's s c a l e f o r measuring  toward t h e church. completed,  attitude  When the j u d g i n g o f the statements was  the r e t u r n s were t a b u l a t e d , showing  f o r each  item the frequency o f response i n each p i l e or category, and t h e cumulative frequency o f these responses.  From  t h i s cumulative frequency the s c a l e - v a l u e , taken as the median response, and Q-value,  a measure o f ambiguity, were  determined g r a p h i c a l l y , both v a l u e s b e i n g read t o one decimal point.  Thurstone reasoned t h a t the Q-value  p r o v i d e d an o b j e c t i v e measure o f an ambiguous statement, s i n c e such a statement w i l l be g i v e n s c a l e - v a l u e s over a 37 wider range and the Q-value w i l l be c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y h i g h . From t h e o r i g i n a l l i s t a final list  o f 130 statements o f o p i n i o n s ,  o f 45 was s e l e c t e d .  The s e l e c t i o n was made  w i t h c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f the c r i t e r i o n o f ambiguity and the scale-values.  The statements were so s e l e c t e d t h a t they  c o n s t i t u t e a more or l e s s u n i f o r m l y graduated s e r i e s o f scale-values.  These  statements were then arranged i n  random order, n o t i n the order o f t h e i r T h i s was done t o encourage  scale-values.  the s u b j e c t s t o read a l l o f  27  the  statements.  hundred  The f i n a l  l i s t was  then g i v e n t o s e v e r a l  s u b j e c t s , a s k i n g them to endorse those statements  t h a t express t h e i r own  sentiment.  The s c a l e was  scored  by d e t e r m i n i n g the mean s c a l e - v a l u e s o f a l l the o p i n i o n s 38 t h a t any i n d i v i d u a l s u b j e c t endorses. At  t h i s stage another c r i t e r i o n d e s c r i b e d by  Thurstone, the " c r i t e r i o n of i r r e l e v a n c e " , was i n a d d i t i o n t o Q-value as a b a s i s f o r r e j e c t i n g  employed statements.  T h i s c r i t e r i o n e s s e n t i a l l y demands t h a t the g r e a t e s t p r o b a b i l i t y o f endorsement o f statements should be  associated  w i t h those respondents whose a t t i t u d e score on the p s y c h o l o g i c a l continuum  i s equal to the s c a l e v a l u e o f  39 the statement. Edwards r e p o r t e d t h a t t h i s c r i t e r i o n • however, has not been used e x t e n s i v e l y i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h 40 the  method o f e q u a l - a p p e a r i n g i n t e r v a l s . I t should be noted t h a t although Thurstone  chose  45 statements f o r the f i n a l s c a l e , the number of statements s e l e c t e d was  at h i s d i s c r e t i o n .  From the p o i n t of view of  time taken t o a d m i n i s t e r the s c a l e , have been convenient.  fewer statements would  But fewer statements would a l s o  have t h e o r e t i c a l l y decreased the r e l i a b i l i t y of the s c a l e . 4.4  C r i t i c i s m o f the F i n a l S c a l e Dunlap  and K r o l l i n v e s t i g a t e d two aspects o f the  format and s c o r i n g o f the f i n a l first  list  of statements.  They  s t u d i e d the e f f e c t o f a r r a n g i n g the statements i n  28  order o f s c a l e - v a l u e on mean response, v a r i a b i l i t y o f response, and r e l i a b i l i t y o f scores, c o n c l u d i n g  that  t h e r e i s evidence t h a t a r r a n g i n g the statements on an a t t i t u d e s c a l e i n order o f s c a l e - v a l u e n e i t h e r e f f e c t s the mean, the standard d e v i a t i o n , or the r e l i a b i l i t y . Since s c o r i n g i s m a t e r i a l l y f a c i l i t a t e d by s e r i a l arrangement, the statements should be arranged i n s e r i a l o r d e r . ! 4  But  G u i l f o r d p o i n t e d out t h a t s e r i a l order might  encourage response b i a s e s , and response b i a s e s c o n t r i b u t e to r e l i a b i l i t y w h i l e  at the same time d e t r a c t i n g from  42 validity.  Thus he would r e j e c t the Dunlap and K r o l l 43  suggestion. Secondly, Dunlap and K r o l l mean response, v a r i a b i l i t y ,  s t u d i e d the e f f e c t on  and r e l i a b i l i t y o f l i m i t i n g  an i n d i v i d u a l ' s responses t o those t h r e e which b e s t represent h i s a t t i t u d e . particular scale  Here they found t h a t f o r t h e i r  (concerning war),  the v a r i a b i l i t y o f scores  i n c r e a s e d , and the r e l i a b i l i t y  o f t h e s c a l e was s l i g h t l y reduced. " i n view o f the savings  the mean was depressed,  Dunlap and K r o l l  felt  i n s c o r i n g time, and the s l i g h t  l o s s o f r e l i a b i l i t y , t h i s method deserves f a v o r a b l e 44 c o n s i d e r a t i o n and f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n " .  Guilford  e x p l a i n e d t h e g r e a t e r v a r i a b i l i t y o f response by n o t i n g t h a t those  s u b j e c t s who mark more statements tend t o r e g r e s s  to t h e n e u t r a l v a l u e .  He f e l t i t was b e s t t h e r e f o r e t o  l i m i t a s u b j e c t to marking three or f i v e  statements.  He  f e l t t h a t when the s u b j e c t has t o l i m i t h i s c h o i c e s he  29  w i l l p r o b a b l y c o n c e n t r a t e marks n e a r e s t h i s 4.5  R e l i a b i l i t y of Thurstone's Ferguson  reliabilities a l l over  average.  Scales  r e p o r t e d t h a t Thurstone  claimed  o f s c a l e s c o n s t r u c t e d under h i s e d i t o r s h i p  .8, most b e i n g over  secured r e l i a b i l i t i e s  .9.  But Ferguson  r a n g i n g from  .52  himself  to .80 f o r the  20 46  item forms and f r o m . 6 8 to .89 f o r the 40 item  forms.  L i k e r t , Roslow, and Murphy r e p o r t e d r e l i a b i l i t i e s from for  .42 t o .84  f o r 20 item forms,  forms of 40 items.  reported similar  and from  .59 t o  .91.  Nystrom, B o l t o n , and S t o u f f e r 47  results.  Edwards and Kenney,upon comparing the of  ranging  reliability  the Thurstone method and the L i k e r t method,  concluded  that .. .. t h e r e i s no longer any reason t o doubt t h a t the s c a l e s c o n s t r u c t e d by the method o f summated r a t i n g s and c o n t a i n i n g fewer items . w i l l y e i l d r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s as h i g h as or h i g h e r than those o b t a i n e d w i t h s c a l e s construe-ed by the Thurstone method.48 T h i s c o n c l u s i o n appears the  t o be common  throughout  literature. Edwards and Kenney a l s o d i d a study comparing the  r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d by the L i k e r t and Thurstone methods, found t h a t even though the L i k e r t s c a l e was  and  marginally  more r e l i a b l e than the Thurstone,  the c o r r e l a t i o n between  the r e s u l t s of the two  0.92,  s c a l e s was  which they  felt  e s t a b l i s h e d the f a c t t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e to c o n s t r u c t  30  s c a l e s by the two methods which w i l l y i e l d  comparable  49 results. 4.6  Innovations Upon Thurstone's O r i g i n a l As p r e v i o u s l y mentioned,  Technique  t h e r e have been many  i n n o v a t i o n s suggested c o n c e r n i n g the Thurstone technique. Perhaps the most r a d i c a l , y e t s u c c e s s f u l change was by Seashore and Hevner.  They suggested a method of r a t i n g  the statements on a n i n e - p o i n t s c a l e which the l e f t - h a n d margin  i s p r i n t e d on  f o r each item, r a t h e r than the standard  method o f s o r t i n g items p r i n t e d on separate s l i p s eleven p i l e s .  proposed  into  They found t h e i r r a t i n g method saves from  50 t o 87 p e r c e n t o f the time on the v a r i o u s p r o c e s s e s i n v o l v e d i n making a t t i t u d e s c a l e s by Thurstone's method, t a k i n g an amount o f time comparable  to that required i n  the c o n s t r u c t i o n of L i k e r t s c a l e . ^ 5  -  Seashore and Hevner had 75 s u b j e c t s judge  statements  by the c l a s s i c a l Thurstone technique, and 75 d i f f e r e n t s u b j e c t s judge the same statements u s i n g t h e i r technique. They concluded, The s u b j e c t s f i n d the t a s k e a s i e r and more p l e a s a n t , and the r e s u l t s , when the two groups o f s e v e n t y - f i v e s u b j e c t s were compared show n e g l i g i b l e d i f f e r e n c e i n the median o f the . s c a l e - v a l u e o f the items, and i n the d i f f e r e n c e s or spread o f o p i n i o n (Q-value) i n r e g a r d t o them. .Edwards and Kenney used the Seashore Hevner method t o o b t a i n judgments o f 129 statements o r i g i n a l l y s c a l e d by Thurstone and Chave f i f t e e n y e a r s e a r l i e r .  They found t h a t  31  the  scale-values  of  statements  correlated  .95  with  those  52 of:Thurstone It Kenney  significant  obtained this  correlation  Uhrbrock  of  279  and  Rosander.  statements  correlation  from  between  two  as  of  high  groups  .99  by  two  each 4.7  of  Thurstone's  Ferguson's a  groups  with  50  relatively  have been  obtained judges  obtained 55  .99.  as  judges,  o b t a i n e d by  results  of  72  and  judgments each.  as  The  independently  Rosander  few  found  reported  obtained  15  judges  in  Scales  statement  requirement  be  for scale-values  independently group. Validity  was  Edwards  using only  scale-values  judges  as  that  Uhrbrock  two  the  groups  correlations  obvious  by  r e l i a b l e s c a l e s can 53 of judges. Similar 54  groups  the  to note  that  by  from  Chave.  i s also  indicating small  and  that  to mention"  "validity appears  seems  t o be  too  held  by  57 many p e o p l e . have  It i s disturbing  displayed  their  o n l y minor  course  of  consideration  a  sufficient  scale  position.  criterion  methods  of  of  Thurstone's  construction  which  the  most to  scale this  designers  aspect  of  research. Validation  the  that  of  number  by of  Secondly,  retaining judges  the 58  irrelevancy.  validating  scales  scales  items  of  only those  allocate must  These are  i s attempted  to  meet,  the  in  items same  i f applied,  internal consistency  course  inadequate,  since  32  although they may aid. i n d e v e l o p i n g a r e l i a b l e reliability for  i s a necessary but not s u f f i c i e n t  scale, condition  validity. The t h i r d way i n which these s c a l e s a r e v a l i d a t e d  i s by g i v i n g them to c r i t e r i o n groups.  Ferguson r e p o r t e d  t h a t although d a t a a r e meagre on t h i s p o i n t , those which have been p u b l i s h e d i n d i c a t e t h a t Thurstone's  scales  59 d i f f e r e n t i a t e c r i t e r i o n groups f a i r l y w e l l .  For example,  S t o u f f e r f i n d s a v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t o f .81 f o r the Smith s c a l e toward to  p r o h i b i t i o n when scores on i t are compared 60  r a t i n g s based upon case h i s t o r y methods. Experimenters o t h e r than Thurstone or h i s students  have v a l i d a t e d t h e i r  s c a l e s o n l y by some c r i t e r i o n o f  i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y , or have used Thurstone's a criterion.  s c a l e s as  T h i s l a t t e r method was used by . L i k e r t i n  the development o f h i s technique f o r the measurement o f attitudes. 4.8  Summary From a survey o f the l i t e r a t u r e on t h e Thurstone  method o f e q u a l - a p p e a r i n g i n t e r v a l s , one must conclude it  i s an accepted and o f t e n u t i l i z e d technique.  that  Although i t  has shown t o be m a r g i n a l l y l e s s r e l i a b l e than t h e method o f summated r a t i n g s , weights  i t c l a i m s the advantage o f g i v i n g item  and a b s o l u t e meaning t o s c a l e u n i t s .  33  5.  Guttman's Technique  of Scaloqram  Analysis  The Guttman technique o f d e v e l o p i n g a t t i t u d e  scales,  as p r e v i o u s l y mentioned, i s somewhat more complex than the 62 two c l a s s i c a l methods i n v e s t i g a t e d .  Due t o l a c k o f  u n i v e r s a l acceptance and a p p l i c a t i o n , t h i s technique, f o r the purposes o f t h i s study, m e r i t e d o n l y a s u p e r f i c i a l investigation. 5.1  A Unidimensional Scale The most d i f f i c u l t  aspect o f the Guttman technique.  i s t o c o n s t r u c t a s e t o f statements which form a unidimensional scale.  Edwards r e p o r t e d t h a t Guttman  first  proposed t h a t t h i s should be done by i n t u i t i o n and experience.  I f a s e t o f statements forms a u n i d i m e n s i o n a l  s c a l e , then a person w i t h a more f a v o r a b l e score than another person must be a t l e a s t as f a v o r a b l e i n h i s response 63  to  every statement  i n the s e t as the other person.  This  suggests t h a t i d e a l l y i t should be p o s s i b l e t o reproduce from t h e i r t o t a l s c o r e s alone the responses o f i n d i v i d u a l s to 5.2  the v a r i o u s statements. The C o r n e l l  Technique  There e x i s t s s e v e r a l means o f d e t e r m i n i n g whether a scale i s unidimensional.  The method most o f t e n d e s c r i b e d  64  i s the C o r n e l l Technique.  A d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h i s technique  w i l l b r i n g i n t o c o n t e x t s e v e r a l important scalogram terms.  analysis  Edwards d e s c r i b e d t h i s technique w e l l by use o f a  34  simple example.^  5  Edwards f i r s t c o n s i d e r e d the s i m p l e s t  situation  i n which each statement s e l e c t e d has o n l y 2 response c a t e g o r i e s , agree and d i s a g r e e , which are a s s i g n e d item weights o f 0 and 1. to  The weight 1 w i l l  always be a s s i g n e d  the response c a t e g o r y t h a t i n d i c a t e s the more f a v o r a b l e  attitude.  These statements are g i v e n t o 100 or more  s u b j e c t s who are asked t o respond t o the statements i n terms o f t h e i r own agreement or disagreement. for  A score  each s u b j e c t i s o b t a i n e d by summing the Item weights,  and the papers are then ranked i n order o f s c o r e s from h i g h to low. A t a b l e s i m i l a r t o Table 1 i s then prepared.  For  s i m p l i c i t y o n l y 4 statements are c o n s i d e r e d . As p r e v i o u s l y mentioned, reproducibility to  i n the case o f p e r f e c t  i t i s p o s s i b l e t o reproduce the response  the i n d i v i d u a l statements from knowledge o f t o t a l  scores.  Examination o f Table 1 i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h i s cannot be accomplished w i t h the r e s u l t s d i s p l a y e d . r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y cannot be r e a l i s t i c a l l y  Since p e r f e c t expected, i t i s  d e s i r a b l e t o know the degree o f r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y p r e s e n t . T h i s i s accomplished by e s t a b l i s h i n g c u t t i n g p o i n t s f o r the  r e s p o n s e . c a t e g o r i e s o f each statement.  These  points  mark the p l a c e i n the rank order o f s u b j e c t s where the most common response s h i f t s from one category t o the other„ C l a r k and K r i e d t d e s c r i b e d the d i f f i c u l t i e s  involved i n  35  TABLE THE CORNELL  TECHNIQUE  1  APPLIED  R E S P O N D E D TO BY  TO A FOUR 20  STATEMENT  SCALE  SUBJECTS  STATEMENTS 1  SUBJECTS 1  2 0  4  3  1  0  1  X  2  X  3  x  X  4  X  X  5  X  X  6  X  7  0  1  0  X  X  4  X  X  3  X  X  3  X  X  3  X  X  3  X  X  X  3  X  X  X  X  3  8  X  X  X  X  3  9  X  X  X  X  2  X  X  2  X  X  X  2  X  X  X.  2  X  X  2  X  2  X  X  10  a  X  12 /  X  14  X  15  X  16  x  17  X  X  11  13  X  1  SCORES  X X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X  18  X  X  19  X  X  X  20  X  X  X  X X  X  1 1  X  1  X  1  X  1  X  0  f  12  8  6  14  8  12  16  4  £f=80  e  1  1  3  1  2  2  2  0  £e=12  a  The h o r i z o n t a l l i n e s for the statements.  are  the possible  cutting  points  36 establishing  the  cutting points.  Guttman o f f e r e d  r u l e s .to be used i n l o c a t i n g c u t t i n g p o i n t s . cutting point and  s h o u l d be  second, no  non-error  located  two  First,  the  so as t o minimize e r r o r ,  c a t e g o r y should have more e r r o r  (responses f a l l i n g o u t s i d e the  i n i t than  c a t e g o r y i n which  they t h e o r e t i c a l l y b e l o n g f o r p e r f e c t r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y  are  • en  counted as c  error).  In T a b l e 1,  horizontal  the  cutting points  l i n e s i n the body of the  are  i n d i c a t e d by  table.  The  r e c o r d e d a t the bottom of the t a b l e .  For  c a t e g o r y 1 of the  responses  below the  t h i r d statement, two  cutting point  above i t , t h e r e f o r e r e c o r d e d i n row The  and  12 e r r o r s .  then expressed as a p r o p o r t i o n r e s p o n s e s and  fell  of the  are  summed, which i n The  12 e r r o r s  end  The  of these o p e r a t i o n s , c a l l e d  c o e f f i c i e n t of r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y , was  are  t o t a l number of  t h i s v a l u e i s subtractec". from u n i t y .  number found a t the  fall  table.  f o r each category are  t h i s case g i v e s a t o t a l of  1  example, f o r  e r r o r s which  "e" at the bottom of the  errors  errors are  they should t h e o r e t i c a l l y  c o n s t i t u t i n g two  the  c o n s i d e r e d by  the  Guttman  t o i n d i c a t e the p e r c e n t accuracy w i t h which responses to  the  6 v a r i o u s statements can be In the  reproduced from the  example, the = 1.00  t o t a l scores.  c o e f f i c i e n t of r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y  - 12/80  =  .85  S i m i l a r methods of working out  the  r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y f o r 3 response c a t e g o r i e s  c o e f f i c i e n t of are d e s c r i b e d  by  37  Edwards.  I f more than 3 response c a t e g o r i e s are used,  he noted t h a t i t i s u s u a l l y n e c e s s a r y t o group  response  c a t e g o r i e s or even dichotomize the response c a t e g o r i e s t o o b t a i n a s a t i s f a c t o r y c o e f f i c i e n t of r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y . 5.3  Modal C a t e g o r i e s and Minimum M a r g i n a l R e p r o d u c i b i l i t y Edwards r e p o r t e d t h a t Guttman f e l t a c o e f f i c i e n t  o f r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y o f .90 was  n e c e s s a r y to c o n s t i t u t e  evidence t h a t but a s i n g l e dominant v a r i a b l e was  involved  70 i n the statements.  But Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k p o i n t e d  out t h a t t h i s i s perhaps a n e c e s s a r y but not a s u f f i c i e n t c o n d i t i o n , s i n c e the mean v a l u e o f the modal c a t e g o r i e s (that response category c o n t a i n i n g the g r e a t e s t p r o p o r t i o n of responses)  i s the minimum v a l u e of the c o e f f i c i e n t of  r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y , and f o r dichotomized response c a t e g o r i e s t h i s mean v a l u e i s always g r e a t e r than or equal t o  .50.  Thus i t might be p o s s i b l e t o have a s e t of ten statements, each w i t h two  c a t e g o r i e s o f response, and each w i t h a very  high, modal frequency, and these statements would have to 71 y i e l d a very high c o e f f i c i e n t of r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y . The minimum v a l u e o f the c o e f f i c i e n t of r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y found by e v a l u a t i n g the mean v a l u e o f the modal c a t e g o r i e s i n d i c a t e s the "minimal m a r g i n a l r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y " p r e s e n t f o r a s e t of 72 statements. I t i s not the i n t e n t o f t h i s study to attempt complete  a n a l y s i s o f Guttman's t e c h n i q u e s .  The b a s i c  a  38  concepts o f un i d dimensionality, m a r g i n a l r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y , and have been i n t r o d u c e d  and  c u t t i n g p o i n t , minimal c o e f f i c i e n t of r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y  illustrated,  and  can now  be  applied  w i t h u n d e r s t a n d i n g to a s c a l i n g technique d e v i s e d by  Edwards  and  and  K i l p a t r i c k which i n c o r p o r a t e s b o t h the Thurstone  L i k e r t techniques to produce a s c a l e which has been shown to d i s p l a y unidimensionality  and  a r e l a t i v e l y high  reliability  . . 73 coefficient. 6.  The  Scale-Discrimination  Technique  Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k c a l l e d t h e i r technique " S c a l e - D i s c r i m i n a t i o n method of a t t i t u d e s c a l e I t i s based on  the  construction".  i n v e s t i g a t i o n s which showed t h a t the c u t t i n g  p o i n t of an item  i s r e l a t e d to the Thurstone  o f the  t h a t the r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y of the item i s  item, and  scale-value  74  r e l a t e d to the d i s c r i m i n a t o r y power o f the 6.1  S e l e c t i o n o f Items The  new.  item.  procedures i n v o l v e d  First,  i n t h i s technique are  a l a r g e number o f statements about the a t t i t u d e  o b j e c t are judged i n the u s u a l Thurstone manner. scale-value  not  and  The  median  the Q-value o f each statement are then  determined by g r a p h i c a l methods.  Those statements whose  Q-values f a l l  i n . t h e top 50% o f the Q-value range are  r e j e c t e d , and  the remaining items are prepared i n the  form  of a L i k e r t s c a l e , each item p r e s e n t i n g m u l t i p l e response categories.  (Without e x p l a n a t i o n  Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k  39  chose to use  six categories:  agree, m i l d l y d i s a g r e e , Subjects  disagree,  strongly  are i n s t r u c t e d to check the  L i k e r t fashion,  disagree).  items i n the normal  and w i t h item weights o f 0 to 5  i n the a p p r o p r i a t e The  s t r o n g l y agree, agree, m i l d l y  manner, t o t a l scores  d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power o f each item  are  assigned  obtained.  i s then c a l c u l a t e d .  Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k used the p h i c o e f f i c i e n t  (primarily  because o f i t s s i m p l i c i t y ) to determine the d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power by r e d u c i n g  the s i x response c a t e g o r i e s to two  by  75 combining the o r i g i n a l The  categories.  technique of combining response c a t e g o r i e s  determine the p h i c o e f f i c i e n t h y p o t h e t i c a l example The  (Table  r u l e followed  i s b e s t d e s c r i b e d by  to  a  2).  i n combining c a t e g o r i e s  i s to  d i c h o t o m i z e so as to minimize the t o t a l of the number of subjects  i n the  of subjects  low group above"the l i n e and  i n the h i g h group below the  Obviously, categories the  2 and  l i n e and  line.  i n Table 2, a l i n e between response 3 gives 8 + 5  + 3 of the low group above  2 + 2 + 1 of the h i g h group below the  g i v i n g a t o t a l of 21 s u b j e c t s . o t h e r response c a t e g o r i e s , a t o t a l l a r g e r than 21. the  the number  on  p r e v i o u s l y weighed 5, 4, p r e v i o u s l y weighed 2,  A l i n e drawn between  3,  1, 0,  any  i n s p e c t i o n , i s found t o g i v e  Therefore,  s c o r i n g weights would be  line,  f o r t h i s statement,  1 f o r response  categories  arid 0 f o r response as i n Table  3.  categories  40  TABLE 2 THE DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES TO AN ATTITUDE STATEMENT FOR THE TOP 100 SCORES (HIGH GROUP) AND LOWEST 100 SCORES (LOW GROUP) FROM A SAMPLE OF 380.  RESPONSE CATEGORY  LOW GROUP  HIGH GROUP  S t r o n g l y Agree  (5)  3  38  Agree  (4)  5  42  M i l d l y Agree  (3)  8  15  M i l d l y Disagree  (2)  26  2  Disagree  (1)  36  2  Strongly Disagree  (0)  22  1  TABLE 3 DICHOTOMIZED RESPONSE CATEGORIES  RESPONSE CATEGORY  LOW GROUP  HIGH GROUP  1  16 (a)  95 (b)  0  84 (c)  5 (d)  Phi C o e f f i c i e n t r  "be - ad J(a - b) (b - d) (a - c) (c - d)  =  =  (95) (84) - (16) (5) (89)  j (111) (100) (100) .79  41  T a b l e s prepared by Jurgensen  enable one t o o b t a i n  p h i c o e f f i c i e n t s very q u i c k l y and c o n v e n i e n t l y without 76 detailed  calculation. Once t h e p h i c o e f f i c i e n t s a r e known, the items  are p l o t t e d i n a b i v a r i a t e ' d i s t r i b u t i o n w i t h the p h i . c o e f f i c i e n t on the Y a x i s and the Thurstone s c a l e - v a l u e s on t h e X a x i s .  T h i s enables i n s p e c t i o n o f the statements  a v a i l a b l e i n terms o f t h e i r d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power and scale-values.  Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k suggested  selecting  f o u r items w i t h t h e h i g h e s t p h i c o e f f i c i e n t from each h a l f scale interval  ( i n t h e i r example, they chose a 9 - u n i t  i n t e r v a l Thurstone continuum),  where four items e x i s t i n  these i n t e r v a l s . These items can then be a s s i g n e d to two forms A and B by equating items as t o Thurstone s c a l e - v a l u e s , 77 Q-values,  and p h i c o e f f i c i e n t s .  Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k used t h i s technique t o develop an a t t i t u d e s c a l e toward  Science.  They found t h e i r item  c r i t e r i a e l i m i n a t e d the n e u t r a l items on the a t t i t u d e continuum.  T h e i r f i n a l s c a l e c o n s i s t e d o f a t o t a l o f 28  items on 2 forms, A arid B.  For A and B r e s p e c t i v e l y , the  mean s c a l e - v a l u e s were 3.85 and 3.91, and the mean  Q-values  were .90 and .92.  from .58  For A, p h i c o e f f i c i e n t s ranged  t o .78, w i t h a median v a l u e o f .65; from  f o r form B they ranged 78 .58 t o .76 w i t h a median v a l u e o f .66.  6.2  R e l i a b i l i t y and R e p r o d u c i b i l i t y o f t h e S c a l e The t o t a l t e s t , when scored by t h e L i k e r t  technique  42  had by  a  reliability  the  coefficient  Spearman-Brown  between  the  Both  that  A  of  and  were  Advantages  of  the  synthesizes  the  methods  which  methods  which  provides and  the  the  not  item  present  selection  the  the  fact  that  of  a  and  high  Kilpatrick  to  of  suggest  that  Technique  technique  selection  i n any For  one  of  least  alone  does  method  procedure  i t p r o v i d e s an which  by  certain  scale  discriminating not  do,  cannot  i t  do,  lies  objective  are  '  these  example,- the  Likert  items  essentially  presented  I t possesses  Guttman  set of  had  marginal  coefficients  procedure  over  B  .81  respectively.  e l i m i n a t e s the  Thurstone  i n the  and  of  79  Guttman.  technique  i t s advantages  the  of  scale-values which  essentially for  of  considered separately.  discrimination items  Edwards  discrimination  and  are  87.2%  estimated  correlation  Scale-Discrimination  scale  advantages  the  a minimum  present.  the  Likert,  thus  T h i s was  Forms A  sufficiently  Thus  Thurstone,  B.  and  values  u n i d i m e n s i o n a l i t y was  6.3  and  .89.  from  B had  .57,  the  reproducibility  A  87.5%  of  forms  reproducibility contended  formula  half-tests  reproducibilities  of  then  basis  tested  for  scalability.  6.4  Scoring by Edwards  by  the  Likert  the and  Method  of  Kilpatrick  technique  Scale  Products  assumably  because  i t has  scored their proven  more  scale  reliable  43  than the Thurstone  technique when c o n s i d e r i n g the same  number o f items.  Research by Eysenck and Crown has  suggested t h a t the use o f a combined T h u r s t o n e - L i k e r t method o f s c o r i n g might s t i l l r e l i a b i l i t y o f the s c a l e . have the Thurstone  f u r t h e r i n c r e a s e the  Since Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k  scale-values a t their disposal,  could e a s i l y apply t h i s  they  technique.  Eysenck and Crown developed a s c a l e i n the u s u a l Thurstone manner, c o n c e r n i n g a n t i - S e m i t i s m . c o n s i s t e d o f 24 items.  Their scale  Bu u s i n g 3 s i m i l a r samples of  200 u n i v e r s i t y students, the s c a l e was s c o r e d f i r s t by . the Thurstone reliability  technique, y i e l d i n g a c o r r e c t e d s p l i t - h a l f  c o e f f i c i e n t o f .83, then by the L i k e r t technique,  yielding a corrected split-half r e l i a b i l i t y .90, and f i n a l l y  coefficient of  by a method o f "Scale Products" which  gave a s p l i t - h a l f r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t o f .94. The s c a l e products method c o n s i s t e d o f s i m p l y m u l t i p l y i n g , for  each item, the L i k e r t weight by the Thurstone  position.  Thus the s c a l e product technique takes  scale into  account both the s c a l e p o s i t i o n o f each item and the degree of  i n t e n s i t y w i t h which each item i s accepted o r r e j e c t e d .  Eysenck and Crown concluded t h a t , f o r t h e i r s c a l e ,  this  method o f s c o r i n g was s u p e r i o r w i t h r e s p e c t to s p l i t - h a l f reliability.  8 0  44  7.  Surnmary  I t becomes obvious as one  reads through  the  l i t e r a t u r e on the t o p i c of a t t i t u d e measurement t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s c a l i n g techniques f a r too numerous to d i s c u s s i n t h i s s h o r t survey.  T h i s paper presents o n l y  the most w i d e l y u t i l i z e d techniques, b u t does so i n s u f f i c i e n t d e t a i l to serve as a b l u e p r i n t  f o r developing  a s c a l e , u t i l i z i n g one o f the techniques d e s c r i b e d . Basically,  the purpose o f t h i s chapter was  to  a s c e r t a i n whether o r not s u i t a b l e group techniques were a v a i l a b l e which were capable o f r e l i a b l y determining a t t i t u d e d i s t r i b u t i o n , w i t h o u t unreasonable time.  expense o f  I t has c e r t a i n l y b e e n ' e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t numerous  techniques are a v a i l a b l e , and can be s u c c e s s f u l l y Whether the demand on time to develop a s c a l e  applied.  i s considered  reasonable must be d e a l t w i t h i n the l i g h t o f knowledge to be gained from a p p l i c a t i o n o f the  scale.  45  Footnote References —  Chapter I I  "**A.L. Edwards, Techniques of A t t i t u d e Scale C o n s t r u c t i o n (New York: A p p l e t o n - C e n t u r y - C r o f t s , Inc., 1957), p. 3. . 2 H.H. Remmers, I n t r o d u c t i o n t o O p i n i o n and A t t i t u d e Measurement (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1954), pp. 138-61. lbid.,  3  pp. 162-93.  4 L.L. Thurstone and E . J . Chave, The Measurement o f A t t i t u d e (Chicago: The U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago Press, 1929), pp. 1-96." 5  L.W. Ferguson, "A Study o f the L i k e r t Technique of A t t i t u d e S c a l e C o n s t r u c t i o n , " J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l Psychology, X I I I (February, 1941), 51-7.  6 S.A. S t o u f f e r , L. Guttman, E.A. Suchman, P.F. L a z a r s f e l d , L.A. Star, and J.A. Clausen, Studies i n S o c i a l Psychology i n World War I I : Measurement and P r e d i c t i o n , IV ( P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1950) , p. 9. 7 . Q. McNemar, " O p i n i o n - A t t i t u d e Methodology," P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , X L I I I (July, 1946),  1 0  298-312.  Remmers, pp. 197-242. 9 Edwards, pp. 13-4. S t o u f f e r , PP. 185-6.  i:L  Edwards, pp. 19-148.  12 J.P. G u i l f o r d , Psychometric Methods (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co:, Inc., 1954), pp. 459-62. 1 3  S t o u f f e r , pp. 5-595.  14 A.L. Edwards and F.P. K i l p a t r i c k , "A Technique f o r the C o n s t r u c t i o n o f A t t i t u d e S c a l e s , " J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d Psychology, XXXII (August, 1948), 375-6. 15 L. F e s t m g e r , "The Treatment o f Q u a l i t a t i v e Data by S c a l e A n a l y s i s , " P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , X L I V (March, 1947), 149-61.  46 Footnote References —  Chapter I I - Cont'd  16 A.L. Edwards, "On Guttman's Scale A n a l y s i s , " E d u c a t i o n a l and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, V I I (Autumn, 1948) , 313-8. 17 Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k , 375-6. 18 J . Loevinger, "The Technique o f Homogeneous T e s t s Compared w i t h Some Aspects o f Scale A n a l y s i s and F a c t o r A n a l y s i s , " P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , XLV (November, 1948), 507-29. 19 R.G. Smith Jr.,"Randomness and E r r o r i n Reproductable S c a l e s , " Education and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, XI (Winter, 1951), 587-96. 20 Edwards, Techniques o f A t t i t u d e Scale C o n s t r u c t i o n , pp. 149-70. 21 • J.P. G u i l f o r d , Fundamental S t a t i s t i c s i n Psychology and Education (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 19651 pp. 233-8, 501-2. 22 P.R. Farnsworth, "Further Data on the O b t a i n i n g of Thurstone S c a l e V a l u e s , " J o u r n a l o f Psychology, XIX (January, 1945), 69. Ibid. 24 Remitters, p. 95. 25 Edwards, Techniques o f A t t i t u d e S c a l e pp.  Construction,  13-4. 26 Thurstone and Chave, p. 31. 27  L.L. Thurstone, " A t t i t u d e s Can Be Measured, "• American J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l o g y , XXXIII (January, 1928), 548. 28 A.L. Edwards and K.C. Kenney, "A Comparison of t h e Thurstone and L i k e r t Techniques o f A t t i t u d e S c a l e C o n s t r u c t i o n , " J o u r n a l of A p p l i e d Psychology, XXX (February, 1946), 75. 29 R. P i n t n e r and G. F o r l a n o , "The I n f l u e n c e o f A t t i t u d e upon S c a l i n g o f A t t i t u d e Items," J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l Psychology, V I I I (February, 1937), 39-45.  47 Footnote R e f e r e n c e s — Chapter I I - Cont'd ^L.W. Ferguson, "The I n f l u e n c e o f I n d i v i d u a l A t t i t u d e s on C o n s t r u c t i o n o f an A t t i t u d e S c a l e , " J o u r n a l of S o c i a l Psychology,VI (February, 1935), 115-7; and E.D- H i n c k l e y , "The I n f l u e n c e of I n d i v i d u a l Opinion on C o n s t r u c t i o n of an A t t i t u d e S c a l e , " J o u n r a l o f S o c i a l Psychology, I I I (August, 1932), 283-96.. 3<  ""-Hinckley,  3  292  32 C.I. Hovland and M. S h e r i f , "Judgmental Phenomena and S c a l e s o f A t t i t u d e Measurement: Item Displacement on Thurstone S c a l e s , " J o u r n a l o f Abnormal and S o c i a l Psychology, X L V I l (October, 1952), 822-32. 3 3  Ibid.,  832.  34 E l i z a b e t h Fehrer, " S h i f t s i n the S c a l e Values of A t t i t u d e Statements as a F u n c t i o n o f the Composition of the S c a l e , " J o u r n a l o f Experimental Psychology, XLIV (August, 1952), 179-88; and P.R. Farnsworth, " S h i f t s i n the Values o f Opinion Items, " J o u r n a l o f Psychology, XVI (July, 1943), 125-8. 3 5  Fehrer,  179-88.  36 Farnsworth, J o u r n a l o f Psychology, XVI, 37 ..Thurstone and Chave, p. 32. . 3  ^ I b i d . , pp.  127.  63-5.  39 I b i d . , pp. 45-56. 40 Edwards, Techniques o f A t t i t u d e S c a l e C o n s t r u c t i o n , 98-101. 41 J.W. Dunlop and A. K r o l l , "Observations on the Methodology i n A t t i t u d e Scales, " J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l Psychology, X (November, 1939), 486-7. 42 G u i l f o r d , Psychometric Methods, p. 459. 43 Dunlop and K r o l l , 486-7. pp.  44  ^ I b i d . , 487. 45 Guilford,  Psychometric Methods, p.  459.  48  Footnote References —  Chapter I I - Cont'd  46 L.W. Ferguson, "Requirements o f an Adequate A t t i t u d e Scale, " P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , XXXVI (October, 1939), 670. 47 R. L i k e r t , S. Raslow, and G. Murphy, "A Simple and R e l i a b l e Method o f S c o r i n g the Thurstone A t t i t u d e S c a l e s , " J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l Psychology, V (May, 1934), 228-38; G.H. Nystrom, "The Measurement o f F i l i p i n o A t t i t u d e s toward America by the use o f the Thurstone Technique, " J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l Psychology IV (May, 1933),249-52; E.B. B o l t o n , " E f f e c t o f Knowledge upon A t t i t u d e s toward the Negro, " J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l Psychology,. VI (February, 1935), 68-90? and S.A. S t o u f f e r , "An Experimental Comparison o f S t a t i s t i c a l and Case H i s t o r y Methods o f A t t i t u d e Research" (unpublished Ph.D. t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago, 1930), as c i t e d i n Ferguson, P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , XXXVI, 670. 48 Edwards and Kenney, 82.. 49 I b i d . , 83. R . H . Seashore and K.A.. Hevner, "A Time-Saving Device f o r the C o n s t r u c t i o n o f A t t i t u d e Scales, " J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l Psychology, IV (August, 1933), 366-72. 50  5 1  Ibid.,  52 5 3  72.  ' Edwards and Kenney,  80.  Ibid.  54 A.C. Rosander, "The Spearman-Brown Formula i n A t t i t u d e Scale C o n s t r u c t i o n , " J o u r n a l of Experimental Psychology, XIX (August, 1936), 486-95; and R.S. Uhrbrock, " A t t i t u d e s o f 4430 Employees, " J o u r n a l of S o c i a l Psychology, V (August, 1934), 365-77. 55 Uhrbrock, 367. 56 Rosander, 495. 57 Ferguson, P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , XXVI, 5 9 I.b.i d,. Ibid. T  669.  49  Footnote References —  Chapter I I - Cont'd  ^ ^ S t o u f f e r (unpublished Ph.D. t h e s i s ) , as c i t e d i n Ferguson, P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , XXVI, 669. 61 Ferguson, P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , XXVI, 670. 62 L o u i s Guttman, "A B a s i s f o r Scaling Q u a l i t a t i v e Data," American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, IX (1944), 139-50. 63 Edwards, Techniques o f A t t i t u d e S c a l e C o n s t r u c t i o n , pp. 172-6. 64 L o u i s Guttman, "The C o r n e l l Technique f o r S c a l e and I n t e n s i t y A n a l y s i s , " E d u c a t i o n a l and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, V I I (Summer, 1947), 247-80. 65 Edwards, Techniques o f A t t i t u d e S c a l e C o n s t r u c t i o n , pp. 178-84. 66 K.E. C l a r k and P.H. K r i e d t , "An A p p l i c a t i o n o f Guttman's New S c a l i n g Technique t o an A t t i t u d e Q u e s t i o n n a i r e E d u c a t i o n a l and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, V I I I (Summer, 1948), 215-23. 67 Guttman, E d u c a t i o n a l and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, V I I , 258-61. 6 8  Ibid.,  249-50.  69 Edwards, Techniques o f A t t i t u d e S c a l e C o n s t r u c t i o n , pp. 188-91. 70 I b i d . , p. 191. 71 Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k , 380-2. 72 Edwards, Techniques o f A t t i t u d e Scale C o n s t r u c t i o n , p. 192. 73 Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k , 374-84. 74 I b i d . , 376. 7 5  lbid.,  379.  76 C E . Jurgensen, "Tables f o r Determining P h i C o e f f i c i e n t s , " Psychometrica, XI (March, 1947), 17-29. 77 Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k , 380.  50  Footnote References -- Chapter I I - Cont'd Ibid. 7 9  Ibid.,  380-1.  80 H.J. Eysench and S. Crown, "An E x p e r i m e n t a l Study i n Opinion - A t t i t u d e Methodology," I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l o f Opinion and A t t i t u d e Research, I I I (1949), 47-86.  CHAPTER I I I DEVELOPMENT OF AN ATTITUDE SCALE TOWARDS THE The  PHYSICS LABORATORY  " S c a l e - D i s c r i m i n a t i o n " method o f a t t i t u d e s c a l e  c o n s t r u c t i o n was  chosen, upon the b a s i s of the r e s u l t s of  the Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k study r e p o r t e d  i n Chapter I I ,  s e c t i o n s 6.2  for t h i s  The  and  6.3,  as most a p p r o p r i a t e  procedures employed t o c o n s t r u c t  this scale  the o u t l i n e presented i n Chapter I I , s e c t i o n 1.  study.  followed  6.  C o l l e c t i o n of the A t t i t u d e Statements  In the development o f an a t t i t u d e s c a l e by Scale-Discrimination  technique i t was  the  f i r s t necessary to  develop a l a r g e number o f statements o f o p i n i o n r e l a t i n g the a t t i t u d e o b j e c t , In order h e l d by  i n t h i s case a p h y s i c s  the students,  a two  hour seminar session, was  120  the pros and  they saw  them.  provided  the foundation  The  concerning  Construction  authentically organized  d u r i n g which students then e n r o l l e d i n  the newly developed P h y s i c s course d i s c u s s e d  to  laboratory.  to have the statements express o p i n i o n s  i n December, 1966,  opinion  1  opinions  l e c t u r e and  laboratory  cons o f the l a b o r a t o r y expressed by the  upon which 120  as  students  statements o f  the l a b o r a t o r y were developed.  of the statements was  suggestions summarized by Edwards  i n accordance w i t h (Chapter I I , s e c t i o n  the 2.1).  2  52  The  statements  laboratory, and  of the  with  negative  neutral  attempted  to relate  a balance  attitudes,  statements  favorableness  o f statements  as Table  always  seemed  Topic  of  LABORATORY  COVERED  was n e c e s s a r y  to  t h e i r degree  Thurstone's  Judging  t o possess  Presumably  a slight  degree  and a r e e n t e r e d i n  4  STATEMENTS  t o have  17 4 4 2 1 2 5 3 4 4 5 3  17 3 3 1 3 6 6 3 4 4 6 4  ;'• 4  4  t h e 120  the set of original  it  illustrates.  positive  Number o f S t a t e m e n t s Positive Negative  General Attitude Understanding Interest Challenge C a l c u l a t i o n s and Formulae Level of Difficulty Time Equipment Instructor Reference Material Instructions (Written) Marking O v e r l a p Between L a b o r a t o r y and L e c t u r e s  Once  reflecting  BY A T T I T U D E  Statement  2.  of the  i n the table.  TABLE  OF  4  or unfavorableness,  a p p r o p r i a t e column  ASPECTS  to a l l aspects  a group  statements  judging  was  contrived,  o f s u b j e c t s judge  of favorableness or  original  Statements  them  unfavorableness.  technique  was  not  applied.  as  53  Instead the time s a v i n g i n n o v a t i o n developed by and Hevner  (Chapter I I , s e c t i o n 4.6) was adopted  Seashore i n which  the items were judged on a n i n e p o i n t s c a l e l e t t e r e d to  "I".  3  "A" .  The most f a v o r a b l e r a t i n g a judge c o u l d g i v e  a statement was  "A", and the most u n f a v o r a b l e was " I " .  S c a l e v a l u e "E" r a t e d the item as n e u t r a l . The 120 statements, w i t h i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r j u d g i n g , were presented t o 200 judges i n the P h y s i c s 120 c l a s s i n January, 1967.  The 120 statements together w i t h the i n s t r u c t i o n s  g i v e n a r e i n Appendix t o complete  A.  t h e i r task.  The judges were a l l o t t e d  Such a time l i m i t was u n d e s i r a b l e ,  but i t was a product of the c i r c u m s t a n c e s . minutes  20 minutes  In t h i s 20  107 o f the 200 judges were a b l e t o complete  e v a l u a t i o n o f each statement.  These  107 completed  their papers  were then examined t o e l i m i n a t e those papers f o r which the judges e i t h e r misunderstood the t a s k r e q u i r e d or lacked sincerity  i n completing the form.  T h i s examination  r e f e r r i n g t o 3 items t h a t expressed s t r o n g l y  involved  favorable  o p i n i o n s , and 4 items t h a t expressed s t r o n g l y u n f a v o r a b l e opinions.  I f unexpected,  c o n t r a d i c t o r y judgments were  found f o r any o f these statements, then the e n t i r e  paper  was i n s p e c t e d t o determine the e x t e n t o f f u r t h e r judgments c o n t r a r y t o what would be expected.  Twenty papers were  e l i m i n a t e d by t h i s technique, and f o r ease o f computation, 80 out o f the remaining 87 a c c e p t a b l e papers were chosen  54  to  a c t as a b a s i s f o r d e t e r m i n i n g the s c a l e - v a l u e o f  each  statement. Since the more c o n s c i e n t i o u s judge would  inevidably  take longer to complete h i s task, d i s r e g a r d i n g the incomplete papers may  have meant. omitting, the most v a l i d  judgments.  As a check on the v a l i d i t y o f the judgements o f the 80 completed papers chosen,  a comparison  of responses between  these papers and the 93 incomplete papers was made on 3 randomly  s e l e c t e d statements  by both groups. of  (numbers 29, 34, 47)  To the f i r s t d e c i m a l p l a c e , b o t h  responses y i e l d e d the same s c a l e - v a l u e and  completed  groups  interquartile  range f o r a given statements, an i n d i c a t i o n t h a t both s e t s of  judgments were e q u a l l y Finally,  valid.  the response o f each o f the 80  judges to each statement was  chosen  recorded, and the r e s u l t s  were t a b u l a t e d as i n Table 5, Appendix  A.  The f i r s t  row  c o r r e s p o n d i n g to each item i n d i c a t e s the frequency o f response f o r each s c a l e v a l u e , w h i l e the second row i s the  cumulative frequency or response.  Consistent with  the  p h i l o s o p h y behind t h i s technique f o r d e v e l o p i n g an  a t t i t u d e s c a l e , the response c a t e g o r i e s were then g i v e n e q u a l l y spaced n u m e r i c a l v a l u e s . rating  "A" was  The most f a v o r a b l e  g i v e n the v a l u e "1",  and so on, g i v i n g  " I " the v a l u e 9.  "B" the v a l u e  "2",  55  3. The  S c a l e - V a l u e s and  s c a l e - v a l u e s and i n t e r q u a r t i l e range  each statement  are a l s o l i s t e d  found g r a p h i c a l l y .  the o r d i n a t e .  statement  i n Table 5.  S c a l e - v a l u e s 1.00  as the a b s c i s s a of the graph, was  I n t e r q u a r t i l e Range  to 9.00  were taken  a separate sheet of graph paper  Rather than r e q u i r e  f o r each statement,  appropriately labelled,  the graphs were p l o t t e d on t r a c i n g paper •one p i e c e of graph paper,  frequency  then p l o t t e d f o r each  u s i n g the d a t a i n Table 5.  p i e c e o f graph paper was  They were  and the cumulative  A graph was  (Cj). f o r  one  and  l a i d over  then  this  as F i g u r e 1 and F i g u r e 2.  illustrate. The s c a l e - v a l u e c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o the median of  the judges to an item, t h a t i s , corresponding to a  cumulative frequency o f 40 was of  response  the item  taken as the s c a l e - v a l u e  ( s c a l e - v a l u e s were "read to two p l a c e s o f decimal,  the second p l a c e b e i n g merely  an approximation).  This  s c a l e - v a l u e r e p r e s e n t s the degree of ::avorableness or u n f a v o r a b l e n e s s o f o p i n i o n expressed by the The Q-value was  statement.  found by t a k i n g the d i f f e r e n c e  i n the s c a l e - v a l u e s between the cumulative f r e q u e n c i e s 20 and 60.,  The Q-value p r o v i d e s an o b j e c t i v e measure o f  an ambiguous statement,  s i n c e an ambiguous statement  be g i v e n s c a l e - v a l u e s over a wider range, w i l l be c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y h i g h .  The  will  and the Q-value  interquartile deviation  en  Fig.  1.  An Example o f an O v e r l a y Employed t o Obtain the S c a l e and Q' Value of a Statement.  80  .60 u c & 0)  40  3  e  " 20  0 1  2  3  4  5  6  S c a l e Value  Fig.  2.  The Graph Employed t o Obtain the S c a l e and Q Value of a Statement.  7  8  58  has  been  denoted  interquartile The scale  deviation  last  Before  a  work  March,  on t h i s  welcome toward of  check  toward  problem  controversial the  l a b was  and  mild  In  phase,  of that  120 c l a s s  concept  by scaling  techniques.  a laboratory than  of attitude  was  thought  t h e measurement  attitudes,  since  the range  This  limited  range  affect  the r e l i a b i l i t y  measurement  such  toward  pacificism,  one e x p e c t s t o f i n d  maintaining  a strong  therefore,  as w e l l  position  either  a scale  openly toward  indifference  would  clearly produced.  on t h e more  t h e Negro,  many  a s many n e u t r a l  applying  t o be a more  of the scale  of opinion  as a t t i t u d e  Measurement  of opinion  enthusiasm.  a  measurement  o f more  between  question,  with  study provided  largely  questions  arose  Study  t o be  contrast,  half Q-value.  an o p p o r t u n i t y  expected  adversely  attitude  the lowest  t o do a p i l o t  on t h e e n t i r e  a laboratory  difficult  o f an  power  have  The P i l o t  opportunity  attitude  Q.  scale.  4. The  the semi-  technique i sthe  1967, t o p r e s e n t t h e P h y s i c s  preliminary  by  i n the development  statements which  started  i t from  denoted  of the discriminating  the original  in  stage  usually  by the Scale-Discrimination  determination of  b y Q' t o d i s t i n g u i s h  open  or  toward  p e r s o n s who a r e f o r or against the  persons.  t o a group  In essense  similar  to the  59  1967-68 P h y s i c s was  expected  110  to provide  magnitude would the  final  the  less  to  i t s ease  reliable  a  4.1  the  graduated  lower  so  series  s c a l e - v a l u e as  items  Figure  3  met  items  the  were  scarcity their  the  study  whose  success  with  this  was  produced  technique  has  proven  technique of  this  to  scale  f o r the  select  constituted  had  the  (Chapter was  the  a b s c i s s a and  Pilot  a more at  or  the  the  concessions selected.  of neutral  Q-values  criteria  s c a l e - v a l u e , and Thus  are  Figure items,  low  i t was  given  each 3  and  of  also  could to  the  a  final  comparative  items  high.  not  subjectively  when  illustrates  nearly a l l excessively  Q-value.  uniform  necessary  where n e u t r a l  ordinate  of scale-values  Q-value  criterion  aid  graph  their  of  uniformly  To  as  context  the  time  Q-value  the  of  same  a  t o be  2  less  on  distribution  the  for  pictured  the  that  Scale  Q-values.  This permitted examined  coefficients.'  statements  lowest were  II, expected  future r e l i a b i l i t y  statements  simultaneously.  balance  main  scale  s c a l e - v a l u e s , and  illustrates  distribution be  of  a pilot  Statements made  which  with  the  of  for  they  of  operation,  of  Since  Likert  was  this  3).  scoring,  bound  that  statements  (Figure  i n the  coefficient  possibility  application  attempt  scale  of  the  Selection  An  select  the  manner.  than  4.5),  provide  pilot  utilized  a reliability  suggest  Thurstone  section  t o be  scale.  For in  class  exist  Thurstone,  4  '  X  X  XX  X  * X X  X  X  X X XX  X X  xx xxx  X —  X  X  X  X" XX X  XX X X  XX  X  X  *  XXX X  XX  X  X  X—  :—«x  Value  Statements  X X XXX  X XX  X  X  o  8  5  T h e Q* V a l u e s o f t h e 120 Original Function of Scale Value.  XX XX XX*X  X  Scale  3.  X  X  X X X XX x  4  Fig.  X XX X  If  *  X  x  as  a  61  Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k , both  and Eysenck and Crown have  found  these r e s u l t s t o be g e n e r a l f e a t u r e s o f t h e j u d g i n g  technique. 4.2  5  The P i l o t  Scale  F o r t y items were s e l e c t e d f o r the p i l o t s c a l e .  To  determine the r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h i s s c a l e by a s p l i t - h a l f technique  the 40 items were d i v i d e d , on the b a s i s o f  scale-value,  i n t o two forms, A and B.  Form A had a mean  s c a l e - v a l u e o f 4.94 and Form B a mean s c a l e - v a l u e o f 4.99. Form A and Form B, together w i t h  instructions for  s c o r i n g the s c a l e , were given t o a l l 180 P h y s i c s 120 students  as i n Appendix B.  The score f o r a student on each  form was determined by adding  the s c a l e - v a l u e s o f t h e items  endorsed, and then d i v i d i n g this.sum by t h e number o f statements endorsed. Appendix B.  These s c o r e s a r e l i s t e d  i n Table 6,  A s p l i t - h a l f c o e f f i c i e n t o f r e l i a b i l i t y was  c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g the scores on Form A and Form B a v a i l a b l e for  each student.  This r e l i a b i l i t y  u s i n g the Guttman formula, which compared extremely other s c a l e s developed Therefore, of  c o e f f i c i e n t was found,  t o be .912 (Figure 4, Appendix B),  f a v o r a b l y w i t h the r e l i a b i l i t y o f  by any s c a l i n g  technique.  on a p r e l i m i n a r y b a s i s , the concept  a t t i t u d e measurement toward a l a b o r a t o r y by a s c a l i n g  technique  appeared h i g h l y f e a s i b l e .  62  5.  D i s c r i m i n a t i n g Power o f the Statements  " Following  the p i l o t  study, the development  a t t i t u d e s c a l e by the S c a l e - D i s c r i m i n a t i o n continued.  Approximately h a l f  o f the  technique  (68) o f the o r i g i n a l  120 statements were chosen, on the b a s i s o f low Q-value, as p o s s i b l e c o n t r i b u t o r s t o the f i n a l s c a l e .  These  statements were then s t u d i e d f o r t h e i r a b i l i t y t o d i s c r i m i n a t e between students o f good and poor a t t i t u d e toward the laboratory.  The statements chosen  t h a t appeared on t h e p i l o t  i n c l u d e d the 40 statements  s c a l e , s i n c e both s e t s o f statements  were s e l e c t e d u s i n g the same c r i t e r i a . The 68 statements were prepared i n the form of a Likert scale 470 P h y s i c s  (Appendix C), and the s c a l e was completed by 110 students i n A p r i l ,  1967.  Rejecting  response  forms f o r which f o u r or more statements lacked response, and those f o r which t h e r e e x i s t e d doubt concerning s i n c e r i t y , as i n d i c a t e d by overuse o f one or two response or c o n t r a d i c t o r y responses were examined), seventy-eight  categories  (statements. 7, 12, 43, and 60  411 papers remained.  Two hundred and  of the 4 l l were then randomly  s e l e c t e d as  the b a s i s o f the a n a l y s i s . The responses "of these 278 s u b j e c t s were  scored  i n the normal L i k e r t f a s h i o n , w i t h weights o f 0 through 5 b e i n g a s s i g n e d t o the s i x response c a t e g o r i e s .  The  weights were a s s i g n e d so t h a t the s m a l l e s t weight  was  63  always given to t h a t response category t h a t the most f a v o r a b l e a t t i t u d e . " s t r o n g l y agree" through  That  indicated  i s , the response c a t e g o r i e s  " s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e " were weighed  0 t o 5 r e s p e c t i v e l y f o r statements whose Thurstone s c a l e - v a l u e was  between 1.00  and 5.00,  s c a l e - v a l u e s 5.01  and 5 to 0 f o r statements  to 9.00.  A t o t a l score was  f o r each s u b j e c t by adding the item weights to the responses g i v e n each statement. was of  not responded  to, i t was  with  obtained  corresponding  If a  statement  a s s i g n e d an item weight  3. The papers were then arranged i n order of t o t a l -  score, and the bottom 75 papers  (27%) were s e l e c t e d .  group ranged ranged  (low group) and top  (high group)  The scores i n the  low  from 61 to 125, w h i l e those i n the h i g h group  from 178 to 287.  For each group s e p a r a t e l y , a  frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n of response to each statement t a b u l a t e d as i n Table 7, Appendix C, and these c a t e g o r i e s were then dichotomized  was  response  (Table 8, Appendix C) ,  f o l l o w i n g Edwards' and K i l p a t r i c k ' s c r i t e r i a  (Chapter I I ,  6 s e c t i o n 6.1).  : Because some s u b j e c t s d i d not  to a l l statements,  respond  the frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n i n Table 7  and Table 8 do not always add up t° 75. A l l p e r t i n e n t d a t a was p a i r s of v a r i a b l e s  now  r e p r e s e n t e d by  two  (Table 8), one p a i r b e i n g the dichotomized  response d i s t r i b u t i o n of students i n the low s c o r i n g  group,  64  the other b e i n g the dichotomized response d i s t r i b u t i o n o f " students i n t h e h i g h s c o r i n g group. the p h i c o e f f i c i e n t ,  Due t o i t s s i m p l i c i t y ,  a c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t between  two p a i r s o f v a r i a b l e s , was employed t o p r o v i d e a measure of  the d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power o f each statement.  of  t h e p h i c o e f f i c i e n t s were found i n a manner  to  the example given i n Chapter  listed  The v a l u e s analogous  I I , s e c t i o n 6.1, and are '  i n Table 9, Appendix C. 6.  S e l e c t i o n o f Statements  f o r the F i n a l S c a l e  With t h e p h i c o e f f i c i e n t s now known, the statements were r e p r e s e n t e d on a new graph w i t h Thurstone s c a l e - v a l u e as a b s c i s s a and p h i c o e f f i c i e n t a s - o r d i n a t e (Figure 5 ) . An attempt was made t o s e l e c t ,  f o r the f i n a l s c a l e ,  those  statements w i t h a p h i c o e f f i c i e n t g r e a t e r than .50 which were as e q u a l l y spaced as p o s s i b l e a c r o s s the continuum of  scale-values.  I f two statements h e l d s i m i l a r s c a l e - v a l u e s  and p h i c o e f f i c i e n t s ,  t h a t aspect o f the l a b o r a t o r y t o which  the statement p e r t a i n e d was used as a c r i t e r i a  of s e l e c t i o n .  An attempt was made t o r e p r e s e n t a l l a s p e c t s o f the l a b o r a t o r y t h a t c o u l d t h e o r e t i c a l l y be c o n t r o l l e d by t h e l a b o r a t o r y d e s i g n e r , and omit those over which the d e s i g n e r had l i t t l e or  no c o n t r o l  (i.e.;  instructors).  From t h e 68 statements, for  the f i n a l scale.  35 were s e l e c t e d as candidates  E i g h t o f these statements had p h i  c o e f f i c i e n t s o f l e s s than .50, b u t were s e l e c t e d  because  they r e l a t e d t o important a s p e c t s o f t h e l a b o r a t o r y .  1.0  0. 8  t  *  0.6  *  x X  X  x X  x  X  *x X  <x  0.4 X  0.2  X  X  -*-x-  0  2  3  4  5  6  S c a l e Value F i g . 5,  The D i s c r i m i n a t i n g Power o f the Least. Ambiguous Statements as a F u n c t i o n of Scale Value.  8  66  The 35 statements, t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e i r Q-values  and p h i c o e f f i c i e n t s  (Appendix D),were d i s t r i b u t e d  to 3 members o f t h e F a c u l t y o f Education Dr. Dennison,  (Dr. Cannon,  and Dr. McPherson) and one member o f t h e  P h y s i c s Department the statements  scale-values,  (Dr. Bichard) who agreed t o e v a l u a t e  i n terms o f t h e i r v a l i d i t y as c o n t r i b u t o r s  to the o b j e c t i v e s o f the s c a l e  (Chapter I, s e c t i o n 4.1),  and i n terms o f t h e i r c l a r i t y and l a c k o f ambiguity.  The  o b s e r v a t i o n s o f t h i s competent j u d g i n g group y i e l d e d 9 statements which were q u e s t i o n a b l e and thus r e j e c t e d . 7.  The F i n a l S c a l e  The 26 remaining statements were arranged i n rank order o f t h e i r Thurstone s c a l e - v a l u e s , favorable.  from most t o l e a s t  A l t e r n a t e statements were then separated, forming  2 groups, one o f which c o n s t i t u t e d the odd numbered of t h e f i n a l s c a l e , and the other which formed numbered statements.  statements  the even  T h i s arrangement accommodated t h e  c a l c u l a t i o n o f an odd-even r e l i a b i l i t y  coefficient.  Minor  v a r i a t i o n s i n the s e p a r a t i o n technique were made t o produce two groups o f statements t h a t were as c l o s e l y e q u i v a l e n t i n t h e mean and range o f s c a l e - v a l u e , Q-value,  and p h i  c o e f f i c i e n t as p o s s i b l e . . The o r d e r o f s e l e c t i o n o f statements from w i t h i n b o t h groups  f o r the f i n a l s c a l e  (Appendix E) was random,  so t h a t t h e items would n o t appear  i n the order o f t h e i r  67  s c a l e - v a l u e s , and hence n o t encourage response b i a s e s which may d e t r a c t from the v a l i d i t y o f t h e s c a l e . For the  the odd and even numbered groups  respectively,  mean s c a l e - v a l u e s o f the 13 statements were 4.68 and  4.60,  and the mean Q-values were 0.60 and 0.66.  The p h i  c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the statements i n the odd group  ranged  from 0.36 t o 0.81, w i t h a median v a l u e o f 0.58.  For the  even group, to  t h e range o f p h i ' c o e f f i c i e n t s was from 0.47  0.84, w i t h a median v a l u e o f 0.62.  The s c a l e - v a l u e s ,  Q-values, and p h i c o e f f i c i e n t s o f t h e 26 statements are d i s p l a y e d i n T a b l e 10, Appendix E. 7.1  S c o r i n g o f the F i n a l S c a l e The f i n a l s c a l e was scored by both the normal  L i k e r t technique and by the s c a l e products technique proposed by Eysenck and Crown  (Chapter I I , s e c t i o n 6.4).  I f the  s c a l e p r o d u c t s s c o r i n g technique d i d n o t y i e l d a h i g h e r reliability  f o r t h e s c a l e than t h a t produced by the L i k e r t  s c o r i n g technique, then i t was t o be r e j e c t e d the  s i m p l e r L i k e r t technique. Consequently,  two  i n favor of  f o r each a t t i t u d e s c a l e  completed,  s e t s o f d a t a were d e r i v e d , one s e t f o r each  technique.  scoring  The elements o f each s e t c o n s i s t e d o f t h e  average s c o r e on the 13 odd numbered statements, the average score on the 13 even numbered statements, and the average score f o r t h e e n t i r e 26 statements.  Each s e t o f s c o r e s  68 constituted  the raw  d a t a necessary f o r the  o f an odd-even r e l i a b i l i t y thus p e r m i t t i n g two  c o e f f i c i e n t f o r the  methods of s c o r i n g ,  Applications For  validity  performed on  a t t i t u d i n a l study.  During the  the  same l a b o r a t o r y  program.  f i r s t or  initial  Upon completion of t h e i r  second or. f i n a l  the  scale  scale  application the  experimental  These groups were assigned  T h i s a p p l i c a t i o n of the  110  was  second term  students were separated i n t o an  programs.  At  T h i s a p p l i c a t i o n of the  programs i n March, students were again given the  to as the  the  attitude scale  At the b e g i n n i n g of the  c o n t r o l group.  scale.  i t is  the b a s i c d e s i g n of  i s h e n c e f o r t h r e f e r r e d to as the  laboratory  and  IV.  p r e s e n t e d to these students.  and  attitude scale,  of t h i s program i n December the  P h y s i c s 110  the r e l i a b i l i t y  1967-68 pre-Christmas term a l l P h y s i c s  s t u d e n t s completed the  scale.  students.  A d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of t h i s design  i s presented i n Chapter  o f the  these  of the F i n a l S c a l e  the purposes o f r e p o r t i n g  studies  of  for t h i s p a r t i c u l a r scale with  n e c e s s a r y to b r i e f l y d e s c r i b e  end  scale,  a comparison of the r e l i a b i l i t y  t h i s p a r t i c u l a r sample o,f P h y s i c s 110 7.2  calculation  contrasting respective attitude  i s henceforth referred  a p p l i c a t i o n of the  scale.  69  8.  R e l i a b i l i t y o f the Scale  • The r e l i a b i l i t y  o f t h e . s c a l e was r e p o r t e d as an  i n t e r n a l consistency c o e f f i c i e n t /  the c o e f f i c i e n t being  c a l c u l a t e d by the Guttman formula. p r e f e r e n c e over the combination  T h i s formula was given  o f the Pearson  product  moment c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t and the Spearman Brown formula i n order t o remove the requirement and even groups o f statements  t h a t the odd  d i s p l a y the same v a r i a n c e  i n t h e i r t o t a l scores f o r any group o f s u b j e c t s . The a t t i t u d e s c a l e was p r e s e n t e d on two o c c a s i o n s to  the c o n t r o l and experimental groups,  of  d a t a e x i s t e d f o r each s c o r i n g technique from which a  reliability of The  hence f o u r s e t s  c o e f f i c i e n t c o u l d be c a l c u l a t e d .  d a t a are l i s t e d  i n Tables 11, 12, 13, and 14, Appendix F.  sample v a r i a n c e s o f the elements i n each s e t o f data,  t o g e t h e r w i t h the c a l c u l a t e d r e l i a b i l i t y found  = 2 (1 - S  2 0  + S  4S  2 formula above, S  Q  2 , S  fi  v a r i a n c e s o f the a v e r a g e e n t i r e 26 statements  sum  )  t  In the Guttman  2 and S  t  a r e r e s p e c t i v e l y the sample  s c o r e s on the 13 odd, 13 even, and  about t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e mean v a l u e s  a g i v e n sample o f s t u d e n t s . 2 o f f s e t the f a c t t h a t S o f t h e average  2 e  z  are d i s p l a y e d i n Table 15, Appendix F.  to  coefficients,  from r  for  These s e t s  t  The f a c t o r 4 i s n e c e s s a r y  i s n o t t h e v a r i a n c e o f the  scores on the odd and even numbered  70  statements, but r a t h e r i s the v a r i a n c e o f the mean of these two  scores.  The  reliability  c o e f f i c i e n t s d i s p l a y e d i n Table  i l l u s t r a t e t h a t e i t h e r method o f s c o r i n g y i e l d s very r e s u l t s , but  the simpler  15  reliable  L i k e r t technique produces the  same or m a r g i n a l l y b e t t e r c o e f f i c i e n t s .  For t h i s reason  the scores d e r i v e d through the L i k e r t s c o r i n g technique were used i n the main study. A complete d e s c r i p t i o n of r e l i a b i l i t y  should  i n c l u d e a c o e f f i c i e n t o f s t a b i l i t y f o r the s c a l e . s c a l e c o u l d have been administered students  as there, was  a p p l i c a t i o n of  T h i s would have been i d e a l experimental no  I t was  the main study, may  scale. for  not c a r r i e d  g e n e r a l l y f e l t t h a t another a p p l i c a t i o n of  the s c a l e , added t o the two  a p p l i c a t i o n s a l r e a d y needed  p l a c e a s t r a i n on both the good  assumed t o e x i s t between the students  interviewer,  design,  exposure to the l a b o r a t o r y d u r i n g t h a t time.  T h i s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f the s c a l e was  rapport  110  immediately f o l l o w i n g the Christmas break, which  the s c a l e .  for  The  to a group o f P h y s i c s  would have been s i x weeks a f t e r the f i r s t  out.  also  and  the i n t e r e s t o f the student  Hence, i n f o r m a t i o n  and  the  toward  about the s c a l e was  the  sacrificed  the sake o f the v a l i d i t y o f the main study. 9.  V a l i d i t y of the  Scale  Evidence of the c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y o f the  scale  71  was  gathered by u t i l i z i n g four g e n e r a l approaches:  statements on the s c a l e were examined by a competent o f judges,  (1) the. group  (2) the a t t i t u d e s o f t h r e e groups were compared,  which, on a p r i o r i grounds, should d i f f e r ,  (3) a comparison  was made w i t h another measure o f a t t i t u d e , and  (4) the  accuracy o f p r e d i c t i o n o f b e h a v i o r based upon the measurement o f the a t t i t u d e s by the s c a l e was In the two  studied.  l a t t e r approaches, the c r i t e r i a used  were c o n s i d e r e d weak, e i t h e r i n terms o f t h e i r  relevance  as c r i t e r i a or i n terms o f t h e i r r e l i a b i l i t y .  But these  s t u d i e s were completed upon the b e l i e f t h a t any o f v a l i d i t y was  s u p e r i o r t o no  The f i r s t  indication  indication.  approach has been d i s c u s s e d p r e v i o u s l y  and w i l l be g i v e n no f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n .  However, the  l a t t e r t h r e e approaches w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n d e t a i l . 9.1  V a l i d i t y Study U t i l i z i n g C r i t e r i o n The  Groups  second approach a t e s t a b l i s h i n g  validity  i n v o l v e d m a i l i n g c o p i e s o f the s c a l e , t o g e t h e r w i t h stamped, s e l f - a d d r e s s e d , r e t u r n envelopes to 200 randomly .students who  selected  had taken P h y s i c s 110 i n the year 1966-67.  Responses were r e c e i v e d from 122 of these s t u d e n t s . responses were d i v i d e d s t u d e n t s who  enrolled  t h e i r second year physics  These  i n t o 3 c a t e g o r i e s r e p r e s e n t i n g those i n pure p h y s i c s  (38 students) i n  (1967-68), those who went i n t o a p p l i e d  (36 s t u d e n t s ) , and those who  e l e c t e d no p h y s i c s  72  courses  (48 s t u d e n t s ) .  who continued  I t was a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t those  i n p h y s i c s would have h e l d a b e t t e r a t t i t u d e  toward t h e l a b o r a t o r y than those who e l e c t e d courses.  students  no.physics  The " t " s t a t i s t i c was employed t o compare the  mean a t t i t u d e s c o r e s o f students e l e c t i n g pure p h y s i c s or a p p l i e d p h y s i c s w i t h those e l e c t i n g no p h y s i c s The  a t t i t u d e scores f o r the t h r e e groups o f students  and d e r i v e d d a t a n e c e s s a r y s t a t i s t i c a r e presented The  courses.  f o r c a l c u l a t i o n o f the " t "  i n Tables  16, 17,and 18, Appendix G.  c a l c a u l a t i o n o f the " t " values  i s displayed  i n F i g u r e 6, Appendix G. The mean scores o f students e l e c t i n g no. p h y s i c s , pure p h y s i c s , and a p p l i e d p h y s i c s were r e s p e c t i v e l y 2.9999, 2.8005, and 2.7050, where a lower score i n d i c a t e s a more favorable attitude.  The c a l c u l a t i o n s i n F i g u r e 6 i l l u s t r a t e  t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e between the mean scores o f the no p h y s i c s and a p p l i e d p h y s i c s group i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .005  l e v e l , w h i l e the d i f f e r e n c e i n tru* mean scores between  the no p h y s i c s and pure p h y s i c s groups i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t the  .05 l e v e l .  These r e s u l t s a r e commensurate w i t h  and hence p r o v i d e evidence  expectations,  s u p p o r t i n g the c o n t e n t i o n t h a t t h e  s c a l e i s measuring what i t p u r p o r t s t o measure. 9.2  Student A t t i t u d e as I n t e r p r e t e d by t h e Teaching A s s i s t a n t s The  t h i r d approach a t e s t a b l i s h i n g v a l i d i t y  involved  a comparison o f the a t t i t u d e score o f a student on t h e  73  a t t i t u d e s c a l e , and  an a t t i t u d e score o f the same student  as g i v e n by h i s t e a c h i n g a s s i s t a n t i n the l a b o r a t o r y . In March, 1968,  a l l t e a c h i n g a s s i s t a n t s were given  the form d i s p l a y e d i n F i g u r e 7, Appendix G,  asking them  to judge t h e i r s t u d e n t s ' a t t i t u d e toward the l a b o r a t o r y . Twenty-two t e a c h i n g a s s i s t a n t s completed t h i s task  and  o f these, the responses o f seventeen o f the more c o n s c i e n t i o u s t e a c h i n g a s s i s t a n t s p r o v i d e d judgments upon 25 7 students. These s c o r e s , as g i v e n by the t e a c h i n g a s s i s t a n t s , were then c o r r e l a t e d w i t h the s t u d e n t s ' scores on the f i n a l a p p l i c a t i o n (March, 1968) are l i s t e d  of the a t t i t u d e s c a l e .  Both s e t s of  i n Table 19, Appendix G," and  the  scores  calculation  o f a Pearson product moment c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t i s illustrated  i n F i g u r e 8, Appendix G-  The  coefficient  o f .03 o b t a i n e d  i n d i c a t e d t h a t no r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t e d  between the two  s e t s of data.  T h i s r e s u l t p r o v i d e d no o f the s c a l e .  support  f o r the  A p o s s i b l e , , and very probable  f o r t h i s apparent l a c k o f agreement may o f the c r i t e r i o n measure. evaluations concerning  validity,  explanation  be the  unreliability  Seventeen people making s u b j e c t i v e  students  about whom they know very  l i t t l e p r o v i d e s a weak c r i t e r i o n measure. 9.3  A t t i t u d e s and  Achievement  Inasmuch as. the l i t e r a t u r e on the t o p i c of a t t i t u d e s and  l e a r n i n g has  established that a relationship  exists  74  between t h e s e two concepts, a p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n was . expected t o e x i s t between the s t u d e n t s ' a t t i t u d e s the l a b o r a t o r y and t h e i r  l a b o r a t o r y marks.  toward  To t e s t  this  h y p o t h e s i s a c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t was c a l c u l a t e d between the a t t i t u d e s c o r e s on the f i n a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f the a t t i t u d e s c a l e , and the sum o f the marks achieved on t h e second terms l a b o r a t o r y experiments.  The f i n a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f  the a t t i t u d e s c a l e measured the a t t i t u d e s o f s t u d e n t s toward  these experiments o n l y . However, these l a b o r a t o r y grades were u n f o r t u n a t e l y  b e l i e v e d t o be q u i t e u n r e l i a b l e , by  s i n c e they were a s s i g n e d  26 t e a c h i n g a s s i s t a n t s whose marking  greatly.  Consequently,  techniques v a r i e d  c o r r e l a t i o n s were a l s o d e s i r a b l e  between the f i n a l a t t i t u d e s c o r e s and the f i n a l exam mark, the t o t a l  l a b mark from both terms,  the t o t a l course mark  and a composite mark p r i o r t o the f i n a l exam d e r i v e d from the s t u d e n t s ' l a b mark, weekly assignments, and Christmas exam. r e l e v e n t because  mid-term t e s t s ,  Although these s c o r e s were l e s s  they were n o t d e r i v e d from the experiments  to, which the f i n a l a t t i t u d e s c o r e s r e f e r r e d ,  they were  c o n s i d e r e d t o be more r e l i a b l e e s t i m a t e s o f  achievement,  e i t h e r because of  they were a composite  o f a g r e a t e r number  i n d i v i d u a l e v a l u a t i o n s , as i n t h e case o f t h e t o t a l  l a b o r a t o r y mark, the f i n a l  course mark, and the composite  mark p r i o r ,to t h e f i n a l exam, or because,  as i n the case.  75  of the f i n a l exam, the score was o b t a i n e d through standardized The  procedure. f i n a l a t t i t u d e scores, together w i t h the f i v e  marks w i t h which these scores were c o r r e l a t e d i n Table 20.  are d i s p l a y e d  Only the scores o f the experimental  were employed f o r t h i s study. the t e a c h i n g a s s i s t a n t s  given f o r scoring  group  The i n s t r u c t i o n s given t o  f o r scoring  second term's experiments,  experiments,  a more  the experimental  group's  i n comparison t o the i n s t r u c t i o n s  the c o n t r o l group's second term's  were more d e t a i l e d and e x p l i c i t ,  and hence  the r e s u l t s were c o n s i d e r e d more r e l i a b l e . The r e s u l t s o f the c o r r e l a t i o n s , as observed i n Table 21, i n d i c a t e t h a t a d e f i n i t e r e l a t i o n s h i p  existed  between the a t t i t u d e scores,, and the l a b mark i n the second term, the t o t a l l a b mark, and the f i n a l exam mark. respective  The  c o r r e l a t i o n s o f .3791 and .2213 between a t t i t u d e  s c o r e s and the l a b mark i n the second term and the t o t a l l a b mark a r e h i g h l y of confidence.  s i g n i f i c a n t a t the one percent l e v e l  The c o r r e l a t i o n o f .1667 between the  a t t i t u d e scores and the f i n a l exam.mark i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t the f i v e p e r c e n t l e v e l o f c o n f i d e n c e . These r e s u l t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y the most s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n e x i s t i n g between a t t i t u d e scores and the l a b mark i n the second term, p r o v i d e f u r t h e r the v a l i d i t y o f the s c a l e .  evidence  supporting  76  TABLE CORRELATION  21  C O E F F I C I E N T S DENOTING ATTITUDES  AND  Correlation  THE  RELATIONSHIP  ACHIEVEMENT  Coefficients  3  Final Lab  Mark  —  Second  Lab  Mark  —  Total  Final  Exam  Final  Course  Course  Term  Attitude Score ** -.3791 -.2213  Mark  Mark  ** *  -.1667  Mark Prior  BETWEEN  to Final  -.1342  Exam  -.0924  A l l c o e f f i c i e n t s are negative because a score indicates a favorable attitude.  n  =  200,  low  i s significant when r = .181  at  .01  is significant w h e n r = .138  at  .05  *  attitude  77  10.  This attitude was  scale  shown t o  coefficient scale having  to  to  The  toward  of  .942  importance the  of  students  of  upon  the  being  the  and  t h e i r achievement  was  also  postulated  by  the  scale  of  physics.  investigating  The  results  hence  validity  the  relationships  do  110  students,  attitude  the  of  scale  program  to  rested  the group  as  supporting but  upon  attitude  desire  to  validity  not  also  and  only  the  A  in the  study  Physics  110  meaningful. the  the  measured by  laboratory.  the  this  the  e x i s t between  r e l a t i o n s h i p s were  exist.  of  each  in  most worthwhile  student's  scale  scale  reliability  applications  e x i s t between  the  directions, of  in  to  the  The  two  laboratory  and  these  internal  information  r e l a t i o n s h i p presumed toward  of  laboratory.  laboratory  this  development  members.  of  as  Physics  Physics  which  the  average  200  function  perceived  of  an  of  of  determine  the  based  groups  i n excess  students  described  possess  two  The was  chapter  Summary  presence attitudes  the  scale  relationship as  measured  continue  his  study  studies the  predicted  construct  hypothesis  that  these  78  Footnote References —  Chapter I I I  ^A.L. Edwards and F.P. K i l p a t r i c k , "A Technique f o r the Construction of A t t i t u d e Scales," J o u r n a l of A p p l i e d Psychology, XXXII (August, 1948), 374-84. 2 A.L. Edwards, Techniques o f A t t i t u d e S c a l e C o n s t r u c t i o n (New York: A p p l e t o n - C e n t u r y - C r o f t s , Inc., 1957), pp. 13-4. 3 R.H. Seashore and K.A. Hevner, "A Time-Saving Device f o r the C o n s t r u c t i o n o f A t t i t u d e S c a l e s , " J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l Psychology, IV (August, 1933) , 366-72. 4  A.L. Edwards and K.C. Kenney, "A Comparison o f the Thurstone and L i k e r t Techniques of A t t i t u d e S c a l e C o n s t r u c t i o n , " J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d Psychology, XXX (February, 1946),82. L . L . Thurstone and E . J . Chave, The Measurement o f A t t i t u d e (Chicago: The U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago Press, 1929), pp. 1-96; Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k , 378; and H.J. Eysenck and S. Crown, "An E x p e r i m e n t a l Study i n O p i n i o n A t t i t u d e Methodology," I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l o f Opinion and A t t i t u d e Research, I I I (1949), 77. 5  6 Edwards and K i l p a t r i c k , 379. 7 Eysenck and Crown, 47-86.  CHAPTER  THE  1.  DESIGN  OF  The Programs  instruction laboratory design  based  programs  an  classified a three  a  this  this  term  i n instructional term,  i t i s most  and second  term  l a b o r a t o r y program,  "strictly  hour  period  The equipment,  use o f formula,  explicit.  The o b j e c t was  previously  to verify  introduced  Manual,  can were  p e r i o d on a l t e r n a t e weeks. they  were  expected  to leaving the laboratory.  given  from the  Students  and an accompanying write-up,  instructions  taken  110 L a b o r a t o r y  conventional".  laboratory hour  Term  o f s i x d i s c r e t e experiments  student,  two modes o f l a b o r a t o r y  change  First  of the Physics  as  i n prior  total  with  the f i r s t  Program.—  three  experiment  handed  Groups  a t the end o f the f i r s t  pre-Christmas  1966-67 e d i t i o n  During  Since  to consider  Laboratory  given  presented  Experimental  separately.  The  be  Control  to the  STUDY  o n two c o n t r a s t i n g p h i l o s o p h i e s i n  design.  was made  convenient  1.1  were  THE A T T I T U D I N A L  Presented  and Students  IV  i n this  which  o f the experiment, o r demonstrate i n the lecture. 79  t o be completed  manner. regarding  etc.,  were  as given  some  was  Students  i n the experiment  taking o f data,  t o complete  to the  fact  o r law  Reports  o f the  80  experiment  were t o be w r i t t e n i n the t r a d i t i o n a l manner,  u s i n g the c o n v e n t i o n a l headings  o f o b j e c t , theory,, method,  data, c a l c u l a t i o n s , c o n c l u s i o n s , and sources o f e r r o r . F o l l o w i n g an i n t r o d u c t o r y e x e r c i s e on measuring instruments,  s i g n i f i c a n t f i g u r e s , and e r r o r s , the t o p i c s  c o n s i d e r e d i n t h e experiments gas, F l e t c h e r ' s T r o l l e y  were Boyle's Law f o r an i d e a l  (Newton's Second Law), the p e r i o d  o f o s c i l l a t i o n o f a simple pendulum, the v e l o c i t y o f s t a n d i n g waves i n a s t r i n g , and the moment o f i n e r t i a of a d i s c .  The e n t i r e p o p u l a t i o n o f students i n t h i s  s t u d y completed .1.2  "  these  The E x p e r i m e n t a l  experiments. and C o n t r o l Groups  Two d i s t i n c t i v e programs, h e n c e f o r t h r e f e r r e d t o as the c o n t r o l program and e x p e r i m e n t a l program, were p r e s e n t e d in  t h e second  term.  Since s t u d e n t s were g i v e n a l a b o r a t o r y  p e r i o d on a l t e r n a t e weeks o n l y , i t was p o s s i b l e to p r e s e n t the c o n t r o l program on one s e t o f a l t e r n a t e weeks, and the e x p e r i m e n t a l program on the i n t e r v e n i n g weeks.  In t h i s  manner the c o n t r o l and e x p e r i m e n t a l groups were d e f i n e d . The assignment o f the 1000 P h y s i c s 110 students t o a p a r t i c u l a r s e t o f a l t e r n a t e weeks was based upon the f i r s t i n i t i a l o f t h e i r l a s t name (A-L i n the experimental M-Z i n t h e c o n t r o l group).  group,  T h i s assignment was made i n  September, 1967, a t the g e n e r a l r e g i s t r a t i o n s e s s i o n o f a l l u n i v e r s i t y students.  As a r e s u l t o f t h i s  impartial  81  selection  technique,  equivalent  i n those  programs which  may  these  groups were  attributes effect  considered to  external to  their  attitude  the  be  laboratory  toward  the  laboratory. Scheduling an  alternate  the  control  w e e k b a s i s was  and  particularly  the  laboratory teaching assistants  and  consequently  had  the  same  eliminated effects  1.3  the  Laboratory  experiments,  Program  were the  1.3.2 students  prepared  Second  the  the  members the  of  design  experiments  the  Physics the  ray  of  the  presented  for incorporation  Laboratory  Manual.  from  a  group  variable  the  the  first  again  The  The topics  whose  control of  presented  the with  term's l a b o r a t o r y  taken  from  the  topics  1966-67'  considered  magnetism,  the  spectrometer,  (2 e x p e r i m e n t s ) ,  and  radioactivity.  Experimental set of  into  Although  week,  arrangement  group were  Manual.  oscilloscope  because  Term  potentiometer,  Program was  of  were  110  control  C o n t r o l Group.  the  Ohm's Law, cathode  of  This  every  on  gauge.  apart  The of  to  —  and  considering a  named b e c a u s e ,  continuation of  edition  of  difficult  Program  so  program.  experimental  necessity of  w o u l d be  g r o u p was  the  programs  convenient,  instructed  teaching assistants.  1.3.1  a  both  experimental  experiments  the  the  Group.  1968-69  topics  of  This  recently  Physics the  group  110  experiments  82  were s i m i l a r t o those o u t l i n e d the main d i f f e r e n c e s o f s t r e s s and between the was  i n the  methodology.  f r e e and  two  programs l a y i n the  conventional laboratory  free laboratory  staff  S i n c e t h i s was a d o p t i o n i n the  s t u d e n t s to some o f the  (Chapter I, s e c t i o n 4.4),  p a r t o f the  the  within laboratory  program proposed f o r  i n r e l a t i o n to t h e i r a t t i t u d e  c o n v e n t i o n a l program t h a t was  characteristics of '  the  its toward  o f importance.  completeness, a more d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of  2.1  but  n e x t u n i v e r s i t y c a l e n d a r year, i t was  characteristics,  2.  spirit  available.  a t t i t u d e o f s t u d e n t s toward t h i s program and  the  areas  approaches,  a framework w h i c h p l a c e d r e a s o n a b l e demands on f a c i l i t i e s and  group,  T h i s program, a compromise  i n t e n d e d t o expose the  o f the  f o r the c o n t r o l  For  the  t h i s e x p e r i m e n t a l program w i l l be  given.  ''  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the  Experimental Program  S c h e d u l i n g o f Experiments S t u d e n t s were p r e s e n t e d w i t h o n l y three experiments  (Ohm's Law, This  The  Cathode Ray  Oscilloscope,  p e r m i t t e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y one  Each e x p e r i m e n t c o n s i s t e d which as a u n i t r e q u i r e d complete as  Radioactivity).  month f o r each experiment.  of a s e r i e s of r e l a t e d  studies  a t l e a s t twice as.much time to  d i d an experiment i n the  r e t a i n some ease i n a d m i n i s t e r i n g a l l o t t e d two  and  the  c o n t r o l program.  To  l a b , s t u d e n t s were  r e g u l a r l y scheduled laboratory  periods  on  83  a l t e r n a t e weeks f o r each  experiment.  • On the b a s i s o f one scheduled l a b o r a t o r y p e r i o d e v e r y two weeks, l a b o r a t o r y time c o u l d be scheduled f o r all  s t u d e n t s i n such a manner t h a t o n l y s i x o f the t e n  a v a i l a b l e mornings o r a f t e r n o o n s were u t i l i z e d .  To  accommodate those students who d e s i r e d a d d i t i o n a l  time  f o r a more f r e e and perhaps more s o p h i s t i c a t e d study i n the areas under i n v e s t i g a t i o n , o p t i o n a l l a b time was made a v a i l a b l e by opening  the l a b o r a t o r y on three o f the f o u r  remaining mornings o r a f t e r n o o n s . 2.2  Laboratory  Reports  Students were n o t p r e s e n t e d w i t h a r i g i d o u t l i n e t o f o l l o w i n w r i t i n g up t h e i r r e p o r t .  formal  Instead,  they were g i v e n the f o l l o w i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s . You. a r e t o c o n s i d e r your book as an experimental r e c o r d book c o n t a i n i n g a statement o f the t i t l e , o b j e c t , and date o f the experiment (recorded each time you add new d a t a ) , p l u s c l e a r c i r c u i t diagrams where a p p l i c a b l e , a l l r e l e v a n t data ( n e a t l y t a b u l a t e d and/or p l o t t e d where p o s s i b l e ) , and c a l c u l a t i o n s . •There s h o u l d be some comments on the r e s u l t s , t h e i r : accuracy, and the e s t i m a t e d e r r o r s . Do not waste time c o p y i n g o u t g i v e n i n s t r u c t i o n s and theory, but when you are r e q u i r e d to i n i t i a t e your own method o f a c h i e v i n g a r e s u l t , you s h o u l d o u t l i n e what you d i d and why you d i d i t i n the manner chosen. Students are p e r m i t t e d t o w r i t e t h e i r l a b r e p o r t s o u t s i d e o f the l a b o r a t o r y .  T h i s procedure  a l l o w e d the student  more time f o r e x p e r i m e n t a l a c t i v i t i e s i n the l a b o r a t o r y , p r o v i d e d a g r e a t e r o p p o r t u n i t y f o r a n a l y s i s o f data, and such a p r a c t i c e accommodated.the p r o p o s a l o f f r e e l a b time.  84  2.3  . Instructions 'The  students were g i v e n as few s p e c i f i c  instructions  as p o s s i b l e , so t h a t they would have t o employ t h e i r i m a g i n a t i o n and i n g e n u i t y .  That i s , where p r a c t i c a l ,  the students were handed the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f d e c i d i n g which t h e o r y was  r e l e v a n t , what data were r e q u i r e d , and  which methods would b e s t p r o v i d e t h a t d a t a .  3.  A p p l i c a t i o n o f the Scale  The p o p u l a t i o n o f students completed  the a t t i t u d e  s c a l e a t the end o f both the f i r s t and second l a b o r a t o r y program. to  The  terms'  f i r s t a p p l i c a t i o n was  necessary  d e t e c t any i n i t i a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n a t t i t u d e between the  c o n t r o l and e x p e r i m e n t a l groups b e f o r e they became a c q u a i n t e d w i t h the second term's l a b o r a t o r y program.. The was  purpose o f the second a p p l i c a t i o n of the  to d e t e c t any d i f f e r e n c e s i n a t t i t u d e between the  and e x p e r i m e n t a l groups a f t e r they had completed c o n t r a s t i n g e x p e r i m e n t a l programs.  On t h i s  the  scale control two  application,  students were i n s t r u c t e d to respond to the statements  with  s p e c i f i c r e f e r e n c e t o the second term's l a b o r a t o r y program only. 4.  The  C o l l e c t i o n and Treatment o f the Data  Rather than c o n s i d e r the two  samples from  the  p o p u l a t i o n o f P h y s i c s 110 students as b e i n g random, the  85  groups were s t u d i e d f o r t h e i r e q u i v a l e n c e by  gathering,  for  each student,  data upon which h i s a t t i t u d e may  The  i n f l u e n c e o f the s e t s o f data o b t a i n e d on the  a t t i t u d e s c o r e was  depend. final  margined out by t r e a t i n g each f a c t o r  as an independent v a r i a b l e i n an a n a l y s i s o f c o v a r i a n c e , the dependent v a r i a b l e b e i n g the f i n a l a t t i t u d e s c o r e . 4.1  The  Independent V a r i a b l e s I n f o r m a t i o n was  of  c o l l e c t e d on those  the s t u d e n t which may  the experimental  (Covariates) characteristics  have a f f e c t e d h i s a t t i t u d e toward  o r c o n t r o l l a b o r a t o r y program.  e i g h t independent v a r i a b l e s were d e f i n e d . v e r b a l , q u a n t i t a t i v e , and  As a r e s u l t ,  These were the  t o t a l s c o r e s on the School  C o l l e g e A b i l i t y T e s t s , the a t t i t u d e score on the  initial  a p p l i c a t i o n o f the s c a l e , the mark i n the l a s t h i g h physics, course  taken,  and  school  the h i g h s c h o o l g r a d u a t i n g average,  the number o f h i g h s c h o o l p h y s i c s courses  taken,  and  the  number o f l a b o r a t o r y courses e l e c t e d c o n c u r r e n t l y w i t h Physics  110. The  School and  C o l l e g e A b i l i t y T e s t s ' scores were  o b t a i n e d from the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia c o u n s e l l i n g o f f i c e , and the remaining first  Physics 110  F i g u r e 9 was 4.2  i n f o r m a t i o n was  c o l l e c t e d a t the  l e c t u r e i n September, 1967.  developed  The  card i n  f o r t h i s purpose.  R e s t r i c t i o n s Imposed by Incomplete Data To adopt the a n a l y s i s o f c o v a r i a n c e  technique i t  86  Fig.  9 . — T h e Card Employed to Obtain I n f o r m a t i o n Required  i n the A n a l y s i s o f Covariance.  PHYSICS 110 LABORATORY REG. NO.  NAME Surname  Verbal Quant. Total  Graduating Average  School Last Attended Math and.Science courses completed i n Secondary'School ( C i r c l e a p p r o p r i a t e No. and i n d i c a t e f i n a l mark) COURSES  S.C.A.T.  Given Names  Laboratory Science Courses taken t h i s year.  RESPECTIVE MARKS  Physics  91, 11, 12  . -Chemistry  91, 11, 12  INTENDED PHYSICS PROGRAM  Biology  91, 11, 12 91, 11, 12  Major i n Physics (Accompanying Major)  Q  Math  Honors i n Physics (Accompanying Honor)  Q  Physics 110 Only  D  OTHER ( i n d i c a t e where taken)  Undecided  CD  87  was  necessary  consisting eight  those  students  group  It  became  of  these  a n d 370  students,  t h a t some  and  College A b i l i t y  the  first  Physics  complete 23  Y  110  the f i n a l  control  attitude on  scale,  the i n i t i a l  display  and  and quantitative  Ability  Tests,  physics  course, h i s high  laboratory and  application  t h e mark  school  groups.  the f i n a l Xg  collected  o f the attitude  graduating  school  scale,  concurrently with a t the time  and high  physics  average,  22  f o r the  are respectively  of high  at  d i d not  application  i n h i s last  scale.  each  School  In these  obtained  taken  group.  Tables  on the School  110 mark  o f the  students  scores  t h e number  sciences  h i s Physics  on  application  i n the  the card i n  of the scale.  the data  through  verbal,  taken,  t o complete  many o f t h e s e  score  students  the i n f o r m a t i o n on  and experimental  i s the student's  353  Using  and others were n o t present  application H  weeks  o f the scale.  had not w r i t t e n the  lecture  Furthermore,  i n Appendix  original  Tests,  o f the  consisted of  i n the experimental  on tabulating  student,  score), and the  set of alternate  initially  students  on each  The members  originally  application  t h e r e were  apparent,  F i g u r e .9.  groups  the i n i t i a l  (final  described.  i n the appropriate  criterion  control  s e t o f data  variable  variables  and experimental  who. c o m p l e t e d  and  a complete  o f the dependent  independent  control  this  to have  tables  o f the h i s score h i s total, College school courses  t h e number Physics  of writing  the  of  110, final  88  The graduating  high  school  average  i n Tables  the  f o l l o w i n g manner:  1,  B  (72%,-  85%)  p h y s i c s mark  A  the  value  (57%  -  64%)  the  value  4,  D  (40%  -  49%)  the  value  6.  Physics  analysis  of  described  209  i n the  for  which  subjects  4.3  the  a  constituted  upon which  A reaction  and  complete  to  second of  the  toward  for  a  statement, of the  the  single  response  the  the  value value  value of  5,  these  validity  remained  groups  was  of  3, and  tables,  the study  the  by  available.  histograms  with  control  and  of  the  which  utilized. displaying  of  and  These  experimental  was  two  individual  constructed.  distribution  and  study  tabulating,  was  201  respectively  covariance  this  i n the  frequency  were  the  was  run.  Statements  aspects  by  statement  two  response  analysis  specific  accomplished  71%)  in a  final•control  students  T h i s was  separately,  the  data  function of  elicited  -  in  included i n  there  experimental  Individual  as  coded  column  not  used  school  given  56%)  final  numbers,  set of  the  designs,  (65%  was  was  were was  (50% -  The  high  III.  original  control  C+  C-  but  23  100%)  2,  i n March,  covariance,  Responses  groups  mark  i n Chapter  Of  groups  110  and  (86% -  C  the  22  and  One the  to  compare  experimental  laboratory  attitude  f o r each each  statements.  group  response  Then, these  for  category  each  distributions  histogram  control  the  was  group  based  for  that  upon  89  statement, v/hile the o t h e r was c o n s t r u c t e d from the response d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the e x p e r i m e n t a l group. comparison o f these histograms y i e l d e d ,  A  i n a qualitative  manner, the i n f o r m a t i o n r e q u i r e d c o n c e r n i n g the p a r t i c u l a r a s p e c t o f t h e l a b o r a t o r y , t o which t h a t statement  pertained.  These h i s t o g r a m s were c o n s t r u c t e d f o r both the i n i t i a l and f i n a l a p p l i c a t i o n s o f the s c a l e .  I t was  a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t t h e c o n t r o l and e x p e r i m e n t a l groups would d i s p l a y t h e same response d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r each statement on the i n i t i a l a p p l i c a t i o n , completed t h e same program.  since both  groups  Consequently, any  d i f f e r e n c e s between the histograms o f the two groups found i n the second a p p l i c a t i o n c o u l d be a t t r i b u t e d t o the  d i f f e r e n t treatments g i v e n the groups.  4.4  L i m i t a t i o n s ^ o f the Data The g r o u p i n g o f students upon the b a s i s o f the  first in  i n i t i a l of their  the r e s u l t s which  l a s t name may i n t r o d u c e a b i a s  i s not accounted f o r by the c o v a r i a n c e  techniqueFurthermore,  s i n c e the e x p e r i m e n t a l group  will  know t h a t they a r e i n v o l v e d i n a new and d i f f e r e n t program, t h e r e i s a p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t the r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d may i n p a r t be a r e f l e c t i o n o f the "Hawthorne E f f e c t " .  CHAPTER V ANALYSIS OF THE DATA The purpose o f t h i s chapter i s t o study the r e s u l t s of  the a n a l y s i s o f c o v a r i a n c e , and a l s o t o i n v e s t i g a t e  the d i f f e r e n c e s i n responses  as g i v e n by t h e experimental  group and c o n t r o l group to each i n d i v i d u a l  attitude  statement. 1.  General A t t i t u d i n a l D i f f e r e n c e s o f the C o n t r o l and Experimental Groups The r e s u l t s o f t h e a n a l y s i s o f c o v a r i a n c e , as  seen  i n Table 24, i l l u s t r a t e  that the d i f f e r e n c e i n the  mean a t t i t u d e scores o f t h e experimental group and c o n t r o l group was s t a t i s t i c a l l y  significant.  An F v a l u e o f 42.272  w i t h 1 and 400 degrees o f freedom i s w e l l beyond the one t e n t h o f one p e r c e n t l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e .  The a d j u s t e d  mean a t t i t u d e scores i n Table 25 r e v e a l t h a t the experimental group h e l d the lower mean score, and hence d i s p l a y e d the more f a v o r a b l e a t t i t u d e . 2.  A t t i t u d i n a l D i f f e r e n c e s o f the C o n t r o l and Experimental Groups on the I n d i v i d u a l A t t i t u d e  Statements  A separate h i s t o g r a m d i s p l a y i n g t h e response d i s t r i b u t i o n of each group t o each statement was c o n s t r u c t e d f o r both a p p l i c a t i o n s o f the s c a l e . 90  Tables 26 and 27  91  TABLE 24 ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE TABLE Source o f Variance  Total  (adj.)  Between Groups Within Groups  Degrees o f Freedom  (adj.) (adj.)  401  Sum o f Squares  Mean Square  F  102.1303  1  9.7616  9.7616  400  92.3687  0.2309  42.272 (p <- .001)  TABLE 25 MEAN ATTITUDE SCORES Treatment .  Treatment Mean Not.Adjusted Adjusted a  Experimental  2.4343  2.4618  Control  2.8019  2.7733  The low score denotes the more f a v o u r a b l e attitude.  92  i n Appendix H r e s p e c t i v e l y d i s p l a y on t h e i n i t i a l for  the response d i s t r i b u t i o n s  and f i n a l a p p l i c a t i o n s .  statement number  Using the d a t a  14, F i g u r e s 10, 11, 12, and 13 i n  Appendix H p r o v i d e an example of the four histograms p l o t t e d for  a g i v e n statement. An examination of the histograms based upon the  responses o f the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups on the first  a p p l i c a t i o n of the s c a l e r e v e a l e d t h a t on 17 statements  the response d i s t r i b u t i o n s were the same f o r both groups, w h i l e on 9 statements  (numbers 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 23, 25,  and 26) the responses o f the e x p e r i m e n t a l group were m a r g i n a l l y more f a v o r a b l e than those of the c o n t r o l  group.  These d i f f e r e n c e s were not a t t r i b u t a b l e t o any treatment g i v e n t h e groups,  s i n c e both groups completed the same  program under the same i n s t r u c t o r s . An examination of the histograms based upon the responses of the c o n t r o l and experimental groups on the second a p p l i c a t i o n y i e l d e d  two q u a l i t a t i v e o b s e r v a t i o n s :  (1) the responses t o each statement by the experimental group were more f a v o r a b l e than those given by the c o n t r o l group, w i t h the e x c e p t i o n o f statements 13 and 21, f o r which the response d i s t r i b u t i o n s were s i m i l a r were on the i n i t i a l  (as they  a p p l i c a t i o n ) ; and (2) the degree t o  which the more f a v o r a b l e responses of the experimental group  surpassed those of the c o n t r o l group on the second  93  application  o f the s c a l e exceeded the degree o f any d i f f e r e n c e s  e x i s t i n g i n the i n i t i a l a p p l i c a t i o n , w i t h the e x c e p t i o n o f statements  5, 13, 21, 25, and 26, where the d i f f e r e n c e s ,  i f they e x i s t e d , were t h e same. In summary t h e r e f o r e ,  the responses o b t a i n e d on the  two a p p l i c a t i o n s o f the a t t i t u d e s c a l e suggested  t h a t the  experimental program was p e r c e i v e d by students t o be as good as or s u p e r i o r o f the l a b o r a t o r y  t o the c o n t r o l program i n a l l aspects  alluded  t o by the a t t i t u d e  The aspects r e f e r r e d t o were understanding of d i f f i c u l t y ,  clarity  individual initiative, on  time.  statements.  promoted,  level  of instructions, opportunity f o r g e n e r a t i o n o f i n t e r e s t , and demands  CHAPTER VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 1. The  Restatement o f the Problem  purpose o f t h i s study was (1) t o compare the  a t t i t u d e s o f students physics and  toward two c o n t r a s t i n g i n t r o d u c t o r y '  l a b o r a t o r y designs,  and (2) t o develop a r e l i a b l e  v a l i d a t t i t u d e s c a l e capable o f measuring these  attitudes.  Knowledge o f these a t t i t u d e s was  considered  important i n view o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p s hypothesized e x i s t between a t t i t u d e toward the p h y s i c s  to  l a b o r a t o r y and  achievement i n i t , and a t t i t u d e toward the l a b o r a t o r y and the l i k e l i h o o d o f a continued  study.in  physics.  A t t i t u d e toward the l a b o r a t o r y was d e f i n e d as the student's  perception  o f the value and meaningf'ulness o f  the l a b o r a t o r y , as developed through t h e i r  perceptions  of i t s s p e c i f i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s as measured by the a t t i t u d e scale. 2. 2.1  The A t t i t u d e  Summary o f R e s u l t s  Scale  An a t t i t u d e s c a l e toward the p h y s i c s was c o n s t r u c t e d  laboratory  u s i n g the S c a l e - D i s c r i m i n a t i o n  technique.  It c o n s i s t s o f 26 a t t i t u d e statements whose average s c a l e v a l u e on a n i n e p o i n t Thurstone continuum 94  (scale-values  95 1 t o 9) i s 4.64, i s 0.63.  and whose mean s e m i - i n t e r q u a r t i l e range  The p h i c o e f f i c i e n t s ,  employed as a measure of  the d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power o f each statement, 0.36  t o 0.84,  w i t h a median v a l u e o f  range from  0.60.  The r e l i a b i l i t y of the s c a l e , r e p o r t e d as a Guttman i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y c o e f f i c i e n t , was was  the average  0.942.  o f f o u r c o e f f i c i e n t s secured through  a p p l i c a t i o n s of the s c a l e to the c o n t r o l and groups o f P h y s i c s 110 of  experimental  200 members.  pursued  utilizing who  two  students, each c o n t a i n i n g i n excess  Evidence t h a t the s c a l e possessed was  This c o e f f i c i e n t  i n t h r e e separate approaches.  construct v a l i d i t y The f i r s t  c r i t e r i o n groups o f p a s t P h y s i c s 110  e l e c t e d pure,  approach,  students  a p p l i e d , or no p h y s i c s courses i n t h e i r  second year, e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e between the mean a t t i t u d e scores of the a p p l i e d p h y s i c s group and p h y s i c s group toward the P h y s i c s 110 at  l a b o r a t o r y was  significant  the one p e r c e n t l e v e l , w h i l e the d i f f e r e n c e between  the s c o r e s on the pure and no p h y s i c s groups was at  the f i v e percent In  significant  level.  the second v a l i d i t y  study, the l a b o r a t o r y achievement  s c o r e s o f students were c o r r e l a t e d w i t h t h e i r  attitude  scores.  obtained  was  no  The c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t of .3791  w e l l beyond the one percent l e v e l of  significance.  The t h i r d approach at e s t a b l i s h i n g evidence of c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y c o r r e l a t e d the a t t i t u d e scores o f students  96 w i t h e s t i m a t e s o f student a t t i t u d e p r o v i d e d by the t e a c h i n g a s s i s t a n t s i n the l a b o r a t o r y . was  not found.  A significant  The u n r e l i a b i l i t y o f the t e a c h i n g a s s i s t a n t s '  e s t i m a t e o f a s t u d e n t ' s a t t i t u d e was f o r the apparent 2.2  correlation  considered responsible  l a c k o f agreement.  A t t i t u d i n a l D i f f e r e n c e s Possessed by the Experimental and C o n t r o l Groups o  2.2.1  General A t t i t u d i n a l Difference.  The  technique  employed t o d e t e c t a g e n e r a l a t t i t u d i n a l d i f f e r e n c e between the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l group was covariance.  The r e s u l t i n g F r a t i o or 42.272 w i t h 1 and  degrees o f freedom which was .001  level,  an a n a l y s i s of 400  h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t at the  and the r e s p e c t i v e a d j u s t e d mean s c o r e s o f  2.3618 and 2. 77.33 f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups i n d i c a t e d t h a t students viewed  the experimental program  as s u p e r i o r t o the c o n t r o l program. 2.2.2  Specific A t t i t u d i n a l Differences.  The  histograms drawn from the response d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f the c o n t r o l and e x p e r i m e n t a l groups to each statement  disclosed  . t h a t students found the experimental program as good as o r s u p e r i o r t o the c o n t r o l program i n a l l aspects o f the l a b o r a t o r y programs r e f e r r e d to by the a t t i t u d e  statements.  97  3. 3.1  Conclusions  Development o f an A t t i t u d e S c a l e An a t t i t u d e s c a l e was d e v e l o p e d ,  s c a l i n g s t u d e n t s ' a t t i t u d e s toward  capable o f o b j e c t i v e l y  a physics laboratory.  T h i s c o n c l u s i o n was b a s e d upon t h e sound methods o f s c a l e construction u t i l i z e d of r e l i a b i l i t y  (Chapter  I I I ) , the high c o e f f i c i e n t  o b t a i n e d f o r t h e s c a l e (Chapter  I I I , section 8),  . and t h e s u c c e s s i n e s t a b l i s h i n g some m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f validity  (Chapter  „  I I I , section 9).  The f i n d i n g s o f t h e v a l i d i t y  s t u d i e s supported n o t  o n l y the construct v a l i d i t y o f the scale, but also the t h e o r y c o n c e r n i n g t h e n a t u r e o f a t t i t u d e s as measured by t h e s c a l e and t h e i r c o r r e l a t e s i n a c t u a l b e h a v i o r . 3.2  The A t t i t u d i n a l  Study  A review of the data obtained i n the a t t i t u d i n a l s t u d y l e a d t o t h e f o r m u l a t i o n o f some t e n t a t i v e but s u g g e s t i v e conslusions.  These c o n c l u s i o n s a r e c o n t i n g e n t upon t h e  s c a l e ' s v a l i d i t y as an a t t i t u d e m e a s u r i n g d e v i c e . 3.2.1  Immediate C o n c l u s i o n s .  As an i n t e g r a l u n i t ,  t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l program, i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e c o n t r o l program, was p e r c e i v e d by s t u d e n t s as h a v i n g been more w o r t h w h i l e and m e a n i n g f u l  (Chapter V, s e c t i o n 1 ) . Furthermore,  the  i n d i v i d u a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l program were p e r c e i v e d by s t u d e n t s as h a v i n g had as much o r more  98  m e r i t than those o f t h e c o n t r o l group  (Chapter V, s e c t i o n 2 ) ,  in  these  so f a r as student responses  were measured by the a t t i t u d e 3.2.2 validity  toward scale.  General Conclusions.  studies,  characteristics  The r e s u l t s o f the  i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the r e s u l t s o f the  a t t i t u d i n a l study  imply t h a t the e x p e r i m e n t a l program should  be more conducive  i n promoting  b e t t e r achievement i n the  l a b o r a t o r y , and a l s o more l i k e l y t o produce  a desire for  a c o n t i n u e d study i n p h y s i c s . 4. A comparison  Discussion  . -  o f the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the e x p e r i m e n t a l  and c o n t r o l l a b o r a t o r y programs, i n view o f the c o n c l u s i o n s s t a t e d i n s e c t i o n 3.2.1, y i e l d e d some i n t e r e s t i n g o b s e r v a t i o n s and i n f e r e n c e s . I n c o n t r a s t t o the c o n t r o l program, the e x p e r i m e n t a l program demanded more time, the t o p i c s were s t u d i e d i n g r e a t e r depth,  and the i n s t r u c t i o n s g i v e n were l e s s e x p l i c i t . " "  However, an examination  o f the responses  t o the i n d i v i d u a l  statements on t h e a t t i t u d e s c a l e determined e x p e r i m e n t a l group r a t e d  -• —  t h a t the  (1) t h e i n s t r u c t i o n s i n t h e i r  l a b o r a t o r y as b e i n g l e s s c o n f u s i n g (statements 5, 6, and 12), (2) the l e v e l o f d i f f i c u l t y as b e i n g lower and more a p p r o p r i a t e (statements 2, 10, 17, and 24), and (3) the time r e q u i r e d as b e i n g more commensurate w i t h the b e n e f i t d e r i v e d  (statements  99  9 and  19).  These responses'were c o n s i d e r e d to be  partially  the r e s u l t o f student p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n more worthwhile meaningful experiences which were conducive  and  to the development  o f d e s i r a b l e a t t i t u d e s , and were a l s o c o n s i d e r e d to r e f l e c t t h e g r e a t e r freedoms and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s given i n the l e s s s t r u c t u r e d experimental t h i s program was  more demanding.  students  program, even though  These freedoms and  r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s r e q u i r e d the a p p l i c a t i o n of more imagination and  i n g e n u i t y , and p r o v i d e d the o p p o r t u n i t y f o r g r e a t e r  involvement  i n the a c t i v i t i e s r e q u i r e d to meet the  o b j e c t i v e s of the l a b o r a t o r y program as seen by the A study o f the.responses r e v e a l e d t h a t the experimental c o n t r o l program, was  program, i n r e l a t i o n to the  p e r c e i v e d by  students  more o p p o r t u n i t y f o r i n d i v i d u a l I n i t i a t i v e ,  difficulty,  (4) having  students.  t o a l l the a t t i t u d e statements  mere e f f e c t i v e i n promoting understanding,  more i n t e r e s t ,  immediate  as:  (1) b e i n g  (2) p r o v i d i n g (3)  generating  a more a p p r o p r i a t e l e v e l of  (5) p r o v i d i n g c l e a r e r i n s t r u c t i o n s ,  and  demanding an amount of time more commensurate w i t h  (6) the  benefit derived. 5. 5.1  Achievement i n the  Recommendations Laboratory  Since the v a l u e of t h i s study  i n p a r t depends upon  the r e l a t i o n s h i p between a t t i t u d e toward the l a b o r a t o r y  100  as determined by the a t t i t u d e s c a l e and achievement i n the l a b o r a t o r y , a more r e l i a b l e and v a l i d measurement o f achievement i s r e q u i r e d to determine t o what extent r e l a t i o n s h i p does e x i s t .  this  T h i s c o u l d perhaps be o b t a i n e d  through the development o f a w r i t t e n and p r a c t i c a l exam whose q u e s t i o n s  are constructed  i n view o f the o b j e c t i v e s  o f the l a b o r a t o r y program, w i t h the a s s i s t a n c e o f Bloom's Taxonomy. 5.2  Future The  Studies a t t i t u d e s c a l e developed c o u l d be e q u a l l y  v a l i d and a p p l i c a b l e t o the other l e v e l s of i n s t r u c t i o n s ranging  from j u n i o r secondary  to u n i v e r s i t y , i f i t was u t i l i z e d the one r e p o r t e d . a p p l i c a t i o n of t h i s  laboratory sciences at school  i n a manner s i m i l a r t o  The o n l y m o d i f i c a t i o n r e q u i r e d f o r the s c a l e t o l a b o r a t o r y s c i e n c e s other  p h y s i c s would be the replacement o f the work  "physics",  which appears i n some statements on the s c a l e , w i t h the name o f the a p p r o p r i a t e  science.  than  101  BIBLIOGRAPHY A u s t i n , H.R. "Gross V a l i d a t i o n o f an A t t i t u d e S c a l e f o r the I d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f High and Low Academic A c h i e v e r s " , J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l Research, L V I I I (May, 1965), 426-8. Bensen, C E . " A t t i t u d e o f the Learner", American E d u c a t i o n a l D i g e s t , XLV (March, 1926), 229-301. as c i t e d by Skinner, C D . Readings i n E d u c a t i o n a l Psychology. New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1926. B o l t o n , E.B. " E f f e c t o f Knowledge upon A t t i t u d e s toward the Negro", J o u r n a l of S o c i a l Psychology, VI (February, 1935), 68-90. B r o d i e , T.A. " A t t i t u d e toward School and Academic Achievement", Personnel and Guidance J o u r n a l , X L I I I (December, 1964), 375-8. C l a r k , K.E. and K r i e d t , P.H. "An A p p l i c a t i o n of Guttman's New S c a l i n g Technique to an A t t i t u d e Q u e s t i o n n a i r e " , E d u c a t i o n a l and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, V I I I (Summer, 1948), 215-23. Dunlop, J.W. and K r o l l , A. "Observations on the Methodology i n A t t i t u d e S c a l e s " , J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l Psychology, X (November, 1939), 475-87. Edwards, A»L. "On Guttman's Scale A n a l y s i s " , E d u c a t i o n a l and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, V I I (Autumn, 1948), 313-8. New  . Techniques o f A t t i t u d e S c a l e C o n s t r u c t i o n . York: A p p l e t o n - C e n t u r y - C r o f t s , Inc., 1957.  Edwards, A.L. and Kenney, K.C "A Comparison of the Thurstone and L i k e r t Techniques o f A t t i t u d e Scale C o n s t r u c t i o n " , J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d Psychology, XXX (February, 1946), 72-83. Edwards, A.L. and K i l p a t r i c k , F.P. "A Technique f o r the Construction of A t t i t u d e Scales", Journal of Applied Psychology, XXXII (August, 1948), 374-84. Eysenck, H.J. and Crown, S. "An Experimental Study i n O p i n i o n - A t t i t u d e Methodology", I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l o f Opinion and A t t i t u d e Research, I I I (1949), 47-86.  102  Farnsworth, P.R. "Further Data on the O b t a i n i n g of Thurstone S c a l e Values", J o u r n a l of Psychology, XIX (January, 1945), 69-73. . " S h i f t s i n the Values of Opinion Items", J o u r n a l o f Psychology, XVI (July, 1943), 125-8. Fehrer, E l i z a b e t h . . " S h i f t s i n the Scale Values o f . A t t i t u d e Statements as a F u n c t i o n of the Composition o f the S c a l e " , J o u r n a l of Experimental'Psychology, XLIV (August, 1952), 179-88. Ferguson, L. W. "The I n f l u e n c e o f I n d i v i d u a l A t t i t u d e s on C o n s t r u c t i o n o f an A t t i t u d e S c a l e " , J o u r n a l of S o c i a l Psychology, VI (February, 1935), 115-7. _  _. "Requirements o f an Adequate A t t i t u d e Scale", P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , XXXVI (October, 1939), 665-73. . "A Study of the L i k e r t Technique of A t t i t u d e S c a l e C o n s t r u c t i o n " , J o u r n a l of S o c i a l Psychology, . X I I I (February, 1941), 51-7.  F e s t i n g e r , , L. "The Treatment of Q u a l i t a t i v e Data by S c a l e A n a l y s i s " , P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , XLIV (March, 1947), 149-61. G u i l f o r d , J.P. Education.  Fundamental S t a t i s t i c s i n Psychology and New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1965.  __. Psychometric Methods. Book Co., 1954.  New  York: McGraw-Hill  Guttman, L o u i s . "A B a s i s f o r S c a l i n g Q u a l i t a t i v e Data", Americar. S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, IX (1944), 139-50. "  "The C o r n e l l Technique f o r Scale and I n t e n s i t y A n a l y s i s " , E d u c a t i o n a l and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, V I I (Summer, 1947), 247-80.  H i n c k l e y , E.D. "The I n f l u e n c e of I n d i v i d u a l Opinion on C o n s t r u c t i o n of an A t t i t u d e S c a l e " , J o u r n a l of S o c i a l Psychology, I I I (August, 1932), 283-96. Hovland, C.I. and S h e r i f , M. "Judgmental Phenomena and S c a l e s o f A t t i t u d e Measurement: Item Displacement oh'Thurstone S c a l e s " , J o u r n a l of Abnormal and S o c i a l . Psychology, XLVII (October, 1952), 822-32.  103  Hungerman, A»D. " A t t i t u d e and Achievement of S i x t h Grade P u p i l s i n C o n v e n t i o n a l and Contemporary Mathematics Programs", A r i t h m e t i c Teacher, XIV (January, 1967), 30-9. Jurgensen, C E . "Tables f o r Determining P h i C o e f f i c i e n t s " , Psychometrica, XI (March, 1947), 17-29. "Laboratory I n s t r u c t i o n i n General C o l l e g e P h y s i c s " , American J o u r n a l o f P h y s i c s , XXV (October, 1957), 436-9. L a f a r e , L. "Habit or A t t i t u d e as the C e n t r a l Tree i n E d u c a t i o n a l Theory", E d u c a t i o n a l Theory, V I I I (July, 1958) , 172-8. L a s t e r , Howard. "A Step Away from the Conventional L a b o r a t o r y i n I n t r o d u c t o r y P h y s i c s " , Amerlean J o u r n a l o f P h y s i c s , XXVII (March, 1959), 166-9. L i k e r t , R., Raslow, S., and Murphy, G. "A Simple and • R e l i a b l e Method of S c o r i n g the Thurstone A t t i t u d e S c a l e s " , J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l Psychology, V (May, 1934), 228-38. Loevinger, J . "The Technique of Homogeneous Tests Compared w i t h Some Aspects of Scale A n a l y s i s and F a c t o r A n a l y s i s P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , XLV (November, 1948), 507-29, McNemar, Q. " O p i n i o n - A t t i t u d e Methodology", P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , X L I I I (July, 1946), 289-374. Malpass, L.F. "Some R e l a t i o n s h i p s Between Student's . P e r c e p t i o n o f School and t h e i r Achievement", J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l Psychology, XLIV (December, 1953), 475-82. Mead, A.R. "Research about A t t i t u d e s " , J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l Research, XLVIII (November, 1954), 233-4. Nedelsky, Leo. " I n t r o d u c t o r y P h y s i c s Laboratory", American J o u r n a l of P h y s i c s , XXVI (February, 1958), 51-9. , Neher, H.V. "The Role of Experimental Work", American J o u r n a l o f P h y s i c s , XXX (March, 1962), 186-90. Newcomb, T.M., Turner, R.H., and Converse, P.E. Social Psychology. Toronto: H o l t , Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1965.  104  Nystrom, G.H. "The Measurement of F i l i p i n o A t t i t u d e s toward America by the Use of the Thurstone Technique", J o u r n a l of S o c i a l Psychology, IV (May, 1933), 249-52. Peskin, Anne S. "Teacher Understanding and A t t i t u d e and Student Achievement and A t t i t u d e i n Seventh Grade Mathematics". Unpublished Ph.D. t h e s i s , New York U n i v e r s i t y , 1964. P i n t n e r , R., and F o r l a n o , G. "The I n f l u e n c e o f A t t i t u d e upon S c a l i n g o f A t t i t u d e Items", J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l Psychology, V I I I (February, 1937), 39-45. Remmers, H.H. I n t r o d u c t i o n to Opinion and A t t i t u d e Measurement. New York: Harper and B r o t h e r s , 1954. "Report o f the Denver Conference on C u r r i c u l a f o r Undergraduate Majors i n P h y s i c s " , American J o u r n a l o f P h y s i c s , XXX (March, 1962), 152-62. Rosander, A . C "The Spearman-Brown Formula in. A t t i t u d e S c a l e C o n s t r u c t i o n " , J o u r n a l of Experimental Psychology, XIX (August, 1936), 486-95. S a r n o f f , I., and Katz, D. "The M o t i v a t i o n a l B a s i s of A t t i t u d i n a l Change", J o u r n a l of Abnormal and S o c i a l Psychology, XLIX (January, 1954), 115-24. Seashore, R.H., and Hevner, K.A. "A Time-Saving Device f o r the C o n s t r u c t i o n of A t t i t u d e Scales",: J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l Psychology, IV (August, 1933), 366-72. Skinner, C E . Readings i n E d u c a t i o n a l Psychology. New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1926. Smith, R.G. J r . "Randomness and E r r o r i n Reproductable S c a l e s " , E d u c a t i o n and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, XI (Winter, 1951), 587-96. S t o u f f e r , S.A. "An E x p e r i m e n t a l Comparison of S t a t i s t i c a l and Case H i s t o r y Methods of A t t i t u d e Research". Unpublished Ph.D. t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago, 1930, as c i t e d i n Ferguson, L.W. "Requirements o f an Adequate A t t i t u d e S c a l e " , P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , XXXVI (October, 1939), 665-73. S t o u f f e r , S.A., Guttman, L., Suchman, E.A. , L a z a r s f e l d , P.F Star, L.A., and Clausen, J.A. Studies i n S o c i a l Psychology i n World War I I : Measurement and P r e d i c t i o n IV. P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1950.  105  Thurstone, L.L. " A t t i t u d e s can be Measured", American J o u r n a l o f S o c i o l o g y , XXXIII (January, 1928), 529-54. . "Comment", American J o u r n a l o f S o c i o l o g y, L I I (January, 1946), 39-50. Thurstone, L.L., and Chave, E . J . The Measurement o f Attitude. Chicago: The U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1929. Townsend, A.R.•, and Burke, P.J. L e a r n i n g f o r Teachers. New York: The M a c M i l l i a n Co., 1962. Uhrbrock, R.S. " A t t i t u d e s o f 4430 Employees", J o u r n a l of S o c i a l Psychology, V (August, 1934), 365-77. Webster's T h i r d New I n t e r n a t i o n a l D i c t i o n a r y . Springfield, Massachusetts: G and C M e r r i o n Co., 1966.  APPENDIX A ANALYSIS OF.THE ORIGINAL 120 ATTITUDE  STATEMENTS  107  THE FORM OF THE ORIGINAL ATTITUDE STATEMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR JUDGING THE STATEMENTS AS PRESENTED TO THE JUDGES  Name ( i f you wish) Explanation  • and I n s t r u c t i o n s  1.  The f o l l o w i n g statements express v a r i o u s o p i n i o n s about the P h y s i c s 120 l a b o r a t o r y . Some o f them w i l l be used i n making a s c a l e t o measure the a t t i t u d e o f students toward the l a b o r a t o r y .  2.  As a f i r s t step i n making t h i s s c a l e , i t i s n e c e s s a r y t h a t a number o f persons r a t e these statements by a s s i g n i n g them t o n i n e d i f f e r e n t c l a s s e s .  3.  These c l a s s e s w i l l be c a l l e d A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I, and you w i l l f i n d these l e t t e r s d i r e c t l y . t o t h e l e f t o f each, statement. I f you f i n d a statement which you b e l i e v e expresses the h i g h e s t a p p r e c i a t i o n o f the l a b o r a t o r y , c i r c l e the l e t t e r A. For a statement which seems n e u t r a l c i r c l e E, w h i l e f o r those statements which express s t r o n g e s t d e p r e c i a t i o n o f the l a b o r a t o r y , c i r c l e _I. Other degrees o f a p p r e c i a t i o n or d e p r e c i a t i o n may be i n d i c a t e d by c i r c l i n g one of the other p o s s i b l e l e t t e r s to represent intermediate r a t i n g s .  4.  Note: (a)  You w i l l f i n d i t e a s i e r t o r a t e the statements i f you f i r s t read a few statements chosen a t random b e f o r e you begin t o r a t e .  (b)  Do n o t attempt t o g e t the same number o f statements under each r a t i n g , as t h e statements are n o t evenly d i s t r i b u t e d .  (c)  Your own o p i n i o n s about the l a b o r a t o r y a r e n o t asked f o r , and should n o t enter i n t o your r a t i n g s o f the statements g i v e n .  (d)  It w i l l p r o b a b l y take you about f o r t y (40) minutes to r a t e the statements.  108  ABCDEFGHI  1.  I have found no v a l u e  i n the l a b o r a t o r y .  ABCDEFGHI  2.  In most i n s t a n c e s I f e e l the l a b s a i d me i n my understanding o f p h y s i c s .  ABCDEFGHI  3.  Some experiments a r e a l l r i g h t , b u t most have no v a l u e .  ABCDEFGHI  4.  I f i n d the l a b o r a t o r y i n s t r u c t o r g i v e s me a l l the a i d I r e q u i r e .  ABCDEFGHI  5.  I have t r o u b l e w i t h experiments because t h e i r t h e o r e t i c a l basis, i s i n s u f f i c i e n t l y d i s c u s s e d in lectures.  ABCDEFGHI  6.  I f e e l our l a b o r a t o r y i s as good a way as any to l e a r n p h y s i c s .  ABCDEFGHI  7.  Even though- I o b t a i n a p a s s i n g mark on most experiments, I r e a l l y don't understand them.  ABCDEFGHI  8.  I f i n d I u s u a l l y " h a v e ample time i n the l a b o r a t o r y t o complete the r e q u i r e d (B) experiments.  ABCDEFGHI  9.  I do not r e g a r d bur l a b o r a t o r y as e s s e n t i a l to o b t a i n i n g a t r u e understanding o f p h y s i c s .  ABCDEFGHI  10.  I f e e l my i n s t r u c t o r i s i n c a p a b l e o f g i v i n g a s s i s t a n c e when r e q u i r e d .  ABCDEFGHI  11.  To me the l a b o r a t o r y i s more or l e s s b o r i n g .  ABCDEFGHI  12.  I l i k e the s t r e s s the l a b g i v e s t o the proper use o f instruments.  ABCDEFGHI  13.  I f e e l the mark I r e c e i v e f o r an experiment as a r u l e r e f l e c t s my a c t u a l understanding of the experiment.  ABCDEFGHI  14.  My experience i s t h a t the experiments a r e h o p e l e s s l y above my comprehension l e v e l .  ABCDEFGHI  15.  I t h i n k our l a b r a i s e s t h i s course t o a h i g h e r standard than i t c o u l d achieve without it.  ABCDEFGHI  16.  I f e e l the l a b o r a t o r y i s an adherent o f t r u e p h y s i c s because i t s t r e s s e s understanding.  109  ABCDEFGHI  17.  Experiments would, be more e f f e c t i v e i f there was n o t such a s t r e s s on c a l c u l a t i o n s .  ABCDEFGHI  18.  I enjoy the l a b o r a t o r y , but see no need f o r it.  ABCDEFGHI  19.  I am g l a d l a b o r a t o r y marks count as o n l y o n e - t h i r d o f the f i n a l grade because I f i n d the experiments d i f f i c u l t .  ABCDEFGHI  20.  I f e e l the l a c k o f common ground between l e c t u r e s and labs leads t o n o t h i n g b u t c o n f u s i o n and hours o f unrewarding work.  ABCDEFGHI  21.  I f i n d i t d i s t u r b i n g t h a t our experiments r e q u i r e us t o use formulae whose b a s i s or d e r i v a t i o n we do not y e t know.  ABCDEFGHI  22.  I b e l i e v e the l a b o r a t o r y s u c c e s s f u l i n promoting u n d e r s t a n d i n g .  ABCDEFGHI  23.  I f e e l our experiments tend to skim t o p i c s too s h a l l o w l y .  ABCDEFGHI  24.  I hate the l a b o r a t o r y .  ABCDEFGHI  25.  The l a b o r a t o r y ' s each o t h e r .  ABCDEFGHI  26.  The l a b o r a t o r y ' s custom o f g i v i n g e x t r a marks f o r o p t i o n a l (C) experiments p r o v i d e s me w i t h added i n c e n t i v e .  ABCDEFGHI  27.  O c c a s i o n a l l y I f e e l I have t r u l y b e n e f i t t e d from an experiment, b u t i n most i n s t a n c e s I doubt i t .  ABCDEFGHI  28.  I. f i n d our l a b o r a t o r y most e f f i c i e n t i n • d e v e l o p i n g an understanding o f p h y s i c s .  good and bad p o i n t s b a l a n c e  ABCDEFGHI "29.  I b e l i e v e the l a b o r a t o r y has value i n t h a t i t s t i m u l a t e s my i n t e r e s t i n p h y s i c s .  ABCDEFGHI  30.  Quite o f t e n I b e l i e v e the l a b o r a t o r y i s a f r u i t l e s s chore.  ABCDEFGHI  31,  I r e g a r d the l a b o r a t o r y i n s t r u c t o r as f u l l y competent.  110  ABCDEFGHI  32.  I t h i n k t h e r e are too many students i n the l a b o r a t o r y .  ABCDEFGHI  33.  Some experiments a r e too b r i e f l y  ABCDEFGHI  34.  The l a b o r a t o r y to me i s synonymous w i t h frustration.  ABCDEFGHI  35.  I f e e l the l a b o r a t o r y p r o v i d e s a very s t i m u l a t i n g and w e l l presented o p p o r t u n i t y to l e a r n .  ABCDEFGHI  36.  The l a b o r a t o r y succeeds i n p r o v i d i n g an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the a p p l i c a t i o n o f modern instruments.  ABCDEFGHI  37.  I f e e l t h a t the t h e o r e t i c a l b a s i s o f experiments i s d i s c u s s e d s u f f i c i e n t l y i n lectures.  ABCDEFGHI  38.  Quite o f t e n I f i n d I do n o t have s u f f i c i e n t time i n t h e l a b o r a t o r y t o complete the r e q u i r e d (B) experiments.  ABCDEFGHI  39.  I b e l i e v e our experiments are mere r e c i p e s to f o l l o w r a t h e r than t r u e i n v e s t i g a t i o n s .  ABCDEFGHI  40.  I f e e l the laboratory learning physics.  ABCDEFGHI  41.  Our l a b o r a t o r y i s s u p e r i o r because i t does not waste time simply j u s t i f y i n g m a t e r i a l covered i n l e c t u r e s .  ABCDEFGHI  42.  I f i n d t h a t the i n s t r u c t o r ' s time i s i n such demand t h a t I cannot o b t a i n adequate assistance.  ABCDEFGHI  43.  T h i s l a b o r a t o r y has k i l l e d any d e s i r e I might have had t o take f u t u r e p h y s i c s laboratories.  explained.  i s essential for  ABCDEFGHI ,44.  I f i n d t h e experiments an organized s i t u a t i o n i n which I can l e a r n on my own.  ABCDEFGHI  The l a b o r a t o r y o u t l i n e seems to e x p l a i n any ideas p r e v i o u s l y f o r e i g n t o me.  45.  Ill  ABCDEFGHI  46.  I find the laboratory's instruments has g r e a t l y s t a n d i n g o f them.  s t r e s s on u s e o f a d v a n c e d my u n d e r -  ABCDEFGHI  47.  I f e e l much t i m e i s w a s t e d b e c a u s e t h e i n s t r u c t o r s do n o t p r o v i d e enough a i d .  ABCDEFGHI  48.  Through lack o f understanding, I b e l i e v e most t h i n g s I do a r e by t r i a l and e r r o r .  ABCDEFGHI  49.  I f i n d t h e marks I o b t a i n appear t o be b a s e d on u n d e r s t a n d i n g d i s p l a y e d , rather than p e r f e c t numerical r e s u l t s .  ABCDEFGHI  50.  My at  ABCDEFGHI  51.  Due t o l a c k o f l a b o r a t o r y t i m e , I f i n d I am s e l d o m a b l e t o a t t e m p t a n o p t i o n a l (C) e x p e r i m e n t .  ABCDEFGHI  52.  I sometimes f i n d equipment so complex I d o n o t u n d e r s t a n d w h a t I am t r y i n g t o accomplish.  ABCDEFGHI  53.  I f e e l t h e l a c k o f common g r o u n d b e t w e e n l a b o r a t o r y and l e c t u r e s i s an e f f i c i e n t way t o l e a r n more p h y s i c s .  ABCDEFGHI  54.  Many c a l c u l a t i o n s h a v e l i t t l e s i g n i f i c a n c e t o me s i n c e I do" n o t u n d e r s t a n d t h e b a s i s upon which t h e formulae were d e r i v e d .  ABCDEFGHI  55.  I regard the laboratory beneficial activity.  ABCDEFGHI  56.  I l i k e the laboratory because i t o f f e r s . opportunity for individual initiative.  ABCDEFGHI  57.  A l t h o u g h I c o n c e d e t h e l a b o r a t o r y may. serve a u s e f u l purpose, I hate i t .  ABCDEFGHI  58.  The awarding (C) s e c t i o n s  ABCDEFGHI  59.  The amount o f t i m e demanded b y t h e l a b o r a t o r y i s j u s t i f i e d by t h e tremendous b e n e f i t I r e c e i v e from i t .  experience i s that the experiments the r i g h t level of d i f f i c u l t y .  a s an  o f e x t r a marks i s unfair.  are  extremely  for optional  112  ABCDEFGHI  60.  I f i n d i t a p l e a s u r e t o work w i t h f i n e equipment.  such  ABCDEFGHI  61.  I t h i n k the course would be improved i f the l a b o r a t o r y were scrapped.  ABCDEFGHI 62.  I f e e l we a r e presented w i t h apparatus too f a r beyond our present l e v e l o f understanding.  ABCDEFGHI  63.  Some experiments a r e good, but i n o t h e r s I see no v a l u e .  ABCDEFGHI  64.  A few experiments have d o u b t f u l value, but most a r e e x c e l l e n t .  ABCDEFGHI  65.  I f i n d t h a t most experiments are too d i f f i c u l t f o r me.  ABCDEFGHI  66.  I have found the l a b o r a t o r y p r e s e n t s me w i t h a reasonable c h a l l e n g e .  ABCDEFGHI  67.  I f e e l my l a b i n s t r u c t o r i s incompetent.  ABCDEFGHI  68.  I have found t h a t any r e f e r e n c e m a t e r i a l I r e q u i r e i s always r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e .  ABCDEFGHI  69.  I f i n d I seldom understand how t o use the equipment without the a i d o f the i n s t r u c t o r .  ABCDEFGHI  70.  I f e e l the experiments may be p r o v i d i n g worthwhile experiences b u t they do n o t i n t e r e s t me.  ABCDEFGHI  71.  I b e l i e v e t h a t the i n s t r u c t i o n s p r o v i d e d e x p l a i n the experiments i n s u f f i c i e n t detail.  ABCDEFGHI  72.  Our l a b o r a t o r y f a i l s i n t h a t i t does n o t r e l a t e to l e c t u r e m a t e r i a l .  ABCDEFGHI  73.  I r e g a r d t h e - l a b o r a t o r y as e s s e n t i a l , b u t I am d i s a p p o i n t e d i n ours.. .  ABCDEFGHI  74.  My l a b o r a t o r y i n s t r u c t o r appears able to g i v e good e x p l a n a t i o n s when I r e q u i r e them.  ABCDEFGHI  75.  I f e e l the need f o r a l a b o r a t o r y program, and am p l e a s e d w i t h ours.  :  113  ABCDEFGHI  76.  I l e a r n much from the experiments, but I f e e l they do not h e l p some people.  ABCDEFGHI  77.  The l a b t o me i s p r i m a r i l y a waste o f time.  ABCDEFGHI  78.  The experiments i n g e n e r a l a r e q u i t e easy.  ABCDEFGHI  79.  I l i k e our l a b o r a t o r y because the experiments demand we t h i n k , r a t h e r than p r o v i d i n g us w i t h a s t e p by s t e p procedures.  ABCDEFGHI  80.  Reference m a t e r i a l I have o b t a i n e d i s v e r y r e a d a b l e and a great a i d .  ABCDEFGHI  81.  The i n s t r u c t o r seems t o have s u f f i c i e n t time t o h e l p everyone.  ABCDEFGHI  82.  I have found t h i s l a b o r a t o r y the most i n t e r e s t i n g aspect o f any.of my courses.  ABCDEFGHI  83.  I u s u a l l y f i n d i t n e c e s s a r y to j u s t my way through experiments.  ABCDEFGHI  84.  I f i n d the experiments assume we know more than we a c t u a l l y do.  ABCDEFGHI  85.  The l a b o r a t o r y c e r t a i n l y s t i m u l a t e s an interest i n physics.  ABCDEFGHI  86.  I t h i n k our i n s t r u c t o r l o o k s mainly f o r c o r r e c t n u m e r i c a l r e s u l t s when marking.  ABCDEFGHI  87.  I t h i n k the l a b o r a t o r y i s a h i n d r a n c e to t r u e p h y s i c s because one s t i l l must "cook results".  ABCDEFGHI  88.  I l i k e the experiments because the i n s t r u c t i o n s are g e n e r a l enough t o p r o v i d e an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r us to d i s p l a y our own i n i t i a t i v e .  ABCDEFGHI  89.  Through l a c k o f guidance I f i n d most t h i n g s I do a r e by t r i a l and e r r o r .  ABCDEFGHI  90.  C o n s i d e r i n g the time demanded by the l a b o r a t o r y , I f e e l the l a b o r a t o r y mark does n o t count enough toward the f i n a l grade.  fumble  114  ABCDEFGHI  91.  I f i n d no p a r t i c u l a r l i k e or d i s l i k e the l a b o r a t o r y .  toward  ABCDEFGHI  92.  I a c t u a l l y b e l i e v e the experiments have taught me some b a s i c ideas o f p h y s i c s f a r b e t t e r than books c o u l d .  ABCDEFGHI  93.  Almost without e x c e p t i o n I f i n d I am a b l e to o b t a i n r e f e r e n c e s on ideas which I am not f a m i l i a r w i t h .  ABCDEFGHI  94.  I r e g a r d the l a b o r a t o r y as a f u t i l e , time-wasting a c t i v i t y , and as such i t should be d e l e t e d from the course.  ABCDEFGHI  95.  To adequately w r i t e up a r e p o r t , I f i n d the time given us o u t s i d e the l a b o r a t o r y i s not s u f f i c i e n t .  ABCDEFGHI  96.  I b e l i e v e our l a b o r a t o r y i s a powerful agency f o r p r e s e n t i n g an u n d i s t o r t e d p i c t u r e of what p h y s i c s t r u l y i s .  ABCDEFGHI  97.  I enjoy the experiments because they are f a i r l y easy.  ABCDEFGHI  98.  I f e e l our experiments attempt t o cover too many ideas i n t o o s h o r t a time.  ABCDEFGHI  99.  I , l i k e the s t r e s s our experiments p l a c e on the importance o f " e r r o r s .  ABCDEFGHI  100. I t h i n k t o o much time i s demanded by the l a b o r a t o r y f o r the b e n e f i t t h a t i s b e i n g derived.  _  ABCDEFGHI  101. I can seldom get any a i d from the l a b o r a t o r y instructor.  ABCDEFGHI  102. With r e a s o n a b l e e f f e c t , I r e g a r d the ideas presented i n the l a b o r a t o r y w e l l w i t h i n my reach.  ABCDEFGHI  103. I f e e l the l a b o r a t o r y would be more v a l u a b l e i f i t demonstrated ideas presented i n the lectures.  ABCDEFGHI  104. I f i n d the l a b o r a t o r y does f a r more f o r p r o j e c t i n g knowledge o f p h y s i c s than l e c t u r e s .  1.15  ABCDEFGHI  105. I f i n d I can seldom o b t a i n references.  ABCDEFGHI  106. The experiments t o me are merely a demonstration o f something I a l r e a d y know.  ABCDEFGHI  107. Without the a i d o f the i n s t r u c t o r I would be unable t o s e t up most c i r c u i t s .  ABCDEFGHI  108. I f i n d working i n the l a b o r a t o r y both i n s p i r i n g and enjoyable.  ABCDEFGHI  109. T h i s l a b o r a t o r y has k i l l e d my i n t e r e s t i n . physics.  ABCDEFGHI  110. Reference books I manage t o o b t a i n are, as a r u l e , unreadable a t my l e v e l , and o f l i t t l e use.  ABCDEFGHI  111. I t h i n k o f the l a b o r a t o r y as a n e c e s s a r y evil.  ABCDEFGHI  112. I f i n d the time a l l o t t e d t o prepare a w r i t e - u p f o r handing i n i s ample.  ABCDEFGHI  113. I t h i n k our l a b i s a v a l u a b l e e d u c a t i o n a l experience, even though p h y s i c s i s not my major i n t e r e s t .  ABCDEFGHI  114. I, f i n d the i n s t r u c t i o n s i n the- l a b o r a t o r y manual c o n f u s i n g .  ABCDEFGHI  115. I f e e l the experiments are j u s t i f i e d i n having us use formulae t h a t we c o u l d not derive.  ABCDEFGHI  116. I b e l i e v e i t makes l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e whether or not l e c t u r e s and l a b o r a t o r i e s are baised on common i d e a s .  ABCDEFGHI  117. My experience i s t h a t the l a b o r a t o r y i s a hopeless turmoil of confusion.  ABCDEFGHI  118. I b e l i e v e some experiments attempt to cover a t o p i c t o o deeply at t h i s l e v e l .  ABCDEFGHI  119. I f i n d many problems I have are answered by r e f e r r i n g to the r e f e r e n c e books found i n the l a b o r a t o r y .  outside  116  ABCDEFGHI  120. I f e e l the l a b o r a t o r y would be more e f f e c t i v e i f I had more time t o work on one s e t o f experiments.  117  TABLE 5 THE RESPONSE DISTRIBUTION OF 80 JUDGES TOWARD THE 120 ATTITUDE STATEMENTS, AND THE SCALE VALUE AND INTERQUARTILE RANGE OF EACH STATEMENT.  Scale Value  Statement No.  QValue  Response  a  Categories  A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  1  7.78  1.1  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  1 1  10 11  37 48  32 80  2  2.13  1. 2  7 7  29 36  37 73  6 79  1 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  3  6.50  1.6  0 0  1 1  1 . 3 2 5  9 14  10 24  34 58  16 74  6 80  4  2.46  2.8  7 7  27 34  15 49  8 57  11 68  4 72  5 77  3 80  0 80  5  4. 28  3.6  8 8  10 18  12 30  7 37  15 52  10 62  11 73  5 78  2 80  6  3.85  2.5  1 1  17 18  14 31  12 43  26 69  5 74  2. 3 79 76  1 80  7  5.43 '  2.4  1 1  9 10  1 . 5 11 16  15 31  21 52  12 64  14 78  2 80  8  2.31  2.4  15 15  22 37  11 48  16 64  9 73  4 77  1 78  1 79  1 80  9  6.90  1.4  1 1  0 1  0 1  0 1  6 7  9 16  27 43  27 70  10 80  10  7.10  1.7  1 1  2 3  5 8  2 10  2 12  7 19  19 38  29 67  13 80  7.04  I-  0 0  1 1  0 1  0 1  2 3  13 16  23 39  23 62  18 80  12  2.48  2.1  7 7  23 30  23 53  11 64  11 75  2 77  3 80  0 80  0 80  13  2.85  3.1  9 9  19 28  13 41  6 47  18 65  7 72  4 76  3 79  1 80  11  7  -  118  TABLE 5 — C o n t i n u e d  Statement No.  Response »Categories  Scale Value  Value  A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  . I  14  6.79  2.1  1 1  0 1  2 3  4 7  7 14  12 26  18 44  26 70  10 80  15  2.05  1.4  10 10  30 40  29 69  6 75  5 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  16  1.83  1. 8  12 12  33 45  14 59  12 71  6 77  2 79  1 80  0 80  0 80  17  5.81  1.7  0 0  0 0  6 6  7 13  7 20  26 46  20 66  8 74  6 80  18  6.15  2.6  0 0  0 0  0 0  7 7  21 28  10 38  16 54  13 67  13 80  19  5. 70  1.8  0 0  1 1  4 5  3 8  13 21  28 49  17 66  10 76  4 80  20  6.84  1.8  0 0  3 3  5 8  2 10  2 12  10 22  23 45  26 71  9 80  21  5.12  4. 0  8 8  8 16  8 24  8 32  7 39  12 51  17 68  7 75  5 80  22  2.67  1.7  5 5  19 24  35 59  13 72  5 77  0 77  1 78  2 80  0 80  23  5.47  2.1  4 4  4 8  6 14  5 19  9 28  29 57  20 77  3 80  0 80  24  8.32  0.8  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  1 1  2 3  19 22  58 80  25  4.47  0.9  0 0  4 4  9 13  7 20  43 63  7 70  9 79  1 80  0 80  26  2.51  2.1  11 11  21 32  20 52  17 69  3 72  2 74  4 78  1 79  1 80  27  5.32  2.4  0 0  3 3  5 8  12 20  13 33  25 58  19 77  3 80  0 80  Q'-  119 TABLE 5 — C o n t i n u e d  Scale Value  QValue  28  2.14  29  Statement No.  Response! C a t e g o r i e s A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  1.5  7 7  31 38  26 64  10 74  2 76  1 77  2 79  0 79  1 80  2.00  1.3  7 7  33 40  29 69  6 75  4 79  1 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  30  7.09  1.5  0 0  1 .1  0 1  2 3  2 5  8 13  26 39  27 66  14 80  31  1.92  1.5  6 6  38 44  18 62  10 72  4 76  0 76  2 78  1 79  1 80  32  5.70  1-9  0 0  0 0  1 1  5 6  21 27  19 46  22 68  7 75  5 80  33  5.44  2.5  2 2  9 11  4 15  7 22  7 29  27 56  22 78  2 80  0 80  7.34  1. 2  0 0  0 0  0 0  3 3  1 4  3 7  20 27  39 66  14 80  35  1.87  1.6  19 19  26 45  23 68  7 75  5 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  36  2. 34  1.2  4 4  25 29  36 65  9 74  3 77  1 78  0 78  2 80  0 80  37  2. 96  2. 2  1 1  10 11  32 43  14 57  7 64  4 68  7 75  2 77  3 80  38  6.00  1.6  0 0  0 0  2 2  2 4  9 13  28 41  23 64  14 78  2 80  39  6.51  1.6  1 1  1 2  2 4  '2 6  2 8  18 26  29 55  20 75  5 80  40  ,1.70  1.3  17 17  34 51  23 74  4 78  1 79  0 79  1 80  0 80  0 80  41  2.21  1.9  12 12  25 37  22 59  7 66  5 71  0 71  7 78  2 80  0 80  42  5.88  1.9  1 1  0 1  4 5  6 11  11 22  20 44  23 67  11 78  2 80  34 -  •  120 TABLE 5 — C o n t i n u e d Statement So.  Scale Value  QValue  43  8.19  44  Response C a t e g o r i e s C D E F G  A  B  1.2  0 0  0 0  0 0  1 1  0 1  2 3  2.17  1.4  4 4  33 37  25 62  9 71  5 76  45  2.42  1.3  2 2  24 26  33 59  14 73  46  2.16  1. 2  3 3  32 35  35 70  47  6.42  1.4  0 0  0 0  .48  6.45  1.7  0 0  49  2.79  2.0  50  2.72  51  H  I  8 11  25 36  44 80  0 76  3 79  1 80  0 80  1 74  4 78  1 79  1 80  0 80  5 75  3 78  0 78  2 80  0 80  0 80  3 3  3 6  5 11  14 25  35 60  17 77  3 80  1 1  2 3  3 6  6 12  15 27  30 57  17 74  6 80  3 3  15 18  29 47  12 59  12 71  4 75  2 77  3 .. 0 80 80  1.8  3 3  23 26  21 47  21 68  9 77  3 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  5.67  1.9  0 0  1" 1  2 3  5 8  17 25  26 51  16 67  11 78  2 80  52  6.38  2.0  1 1  2 3  5 8  3 11  7 18  13 31  26 57  18 75  5 80  53  2.74  2.3  2 2  17 19  25 44  14 58  8 66  3 69  5 74  6 80  0 80  54  6.38  1.4  0 0  2 2  5 7  2 9  5 14  13 27  36 63  11 74  6 80  55  , 1.27  1.1  30 30  39 69  10 79  1 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  56  1.65  1.2  15 15  50 55  19 74  3 77  1 78  1 79  1 80  0 80  0 80  57  7.50  2.0  0 0  1 1  2 3  2 5  9 14  4 18  10 28  26 54  26 80.  .  121  TABLE 5 — C o n t i n u e d Statement No.  Scale Value  QValue  58  6.88  59  Response  Categories  A,  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  1.4  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  3 3  12 15  28 43  29 72  8 80  1.44  1.7  29 29  26 55  14 69  6 75  2 77  0 77  3 80  0 80  0 80  60  1.92  1.4  9 9  36 45  19 64  11 75  4 79  1 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  61  8.15  1.1  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  1 1  1 . 2  5 7  26 33  47 80  62  6.57  1.2  0 0  1 1  3 4  3 7  2 9  10 19  38 57  17 74  6 80  63  5.40  1.8  1 1  1 2  2 4  5 9  23 32  22 54  19 73  7 80  0 80  64  2.52  1.5  5 5  20 25  30 55  21 76  4 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  65  6.14  1.5  0 0  0 0  1 1  2 3  10 13  23 36  29 65  14 79  1 80  66  2.57  1.0  2 2  14 16  42 58  18 76  4 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  67  7.16  1.5  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  4 4  7 11  24 35  29 64  16 80  •-  68  2.69  1.6  4 4  14 18  33 51  12 63  13 76  2 78  2 80  0 80  0 80  69  6.06  1.8  0 0  1 1  3 4  7 11  12 23  16 39  33 72  7 79  1 80  70  ,5.88  2.1  0 0  0 0  2 2  9 11  14 25  18 43  26 69  8 77  3 80  71  2.83  1.2  1 1  7 8  40 48  22 70  6 76  1 77  2 79  1 80  0 80  72  6.19  1.4  1 1  0 1  1 2  4 6  3 9  25 36  29 65  12 77  3 80  122 TABLE 5 — C o n t i n u e d -  Statement No.  Scale Value  QValue  73  6.30  74  Response: C a t e g o r i e s A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  1.8  0 0  0 0  2 2  5 7  10 17  14 31  30 61  16 77  3 80  2.46  1.2  5 5  18 23  37 60  14 74  4 78  2 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  75  1.83  1.3  7 7  40 47  23 70  7 77  3 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  76  3.36  1.9  1 1  9 10  23 33  21 54  19 73  5 78  1 79  1 80  0 80  77  7.54  1.1  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  1 1  1 2  17 19  38 57  23 80  .78  3. 95  2. 2  2 2  9 11  13 24  18 42  19 61  12 73  6 79  1 80  0 80  79  1.81  1.3  15 15  33 48  25 73  4 77  2 79  0 79  1 80  0 80  0 80  80  2.15  1.3  8 8  28 36  32 68  5 73  7 . 0 80 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  81  2.46  1.5  5 5  22 27  30 57  17 74  6 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  82  1.19  1.2  35 35  30 65  10 75  3 78  2 80  0 • 0 80 80  0 80  0 80  83  6.54  1.4  0 0  0 0  1 1  1 2  2 4  18 22  33 55  19 74  6 80  84  5.93  1.5  0 0  2 2  4 6  2 8  8 16  25 41  28 69  9 78  2 80  85  . 2.21  1.1  5 5  27 32  39 71  7 78  2 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  86  6.00  1.6  0 0  0 0  6 6  2 8  11 19  21 40  28 68  11 79  1 80  6.82  1.4  0 0  0 0  0 0  2 2  3 5  9 14  33 47  23 70  10 80  87  .  123  TABLE 5 — C o n t i n u e d Statement Jo.  Scale Value  tfValue A  B  Response C a t e g o r i e s C D E F G  H  I  88  2.05  1.4  10 10  29 39  31 70  6 76  1 77  3 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  89  6.52  1.0  0 0  1 1  2 3  1 4  2 6  13 19  42 61  14 75  5 80  90  5.34  2.8  1 1  8 9  9 18  4 22  14 36  16 52  21 73  5 78  2 80  91  4.57  0.7  0 0  0 0  0 0  4 4  66 70  6 76  4 80  0 80  0 80  92  1.96  1.4  12 12  30 42  27 69  8 77  3 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  93  2. 72  1.9  3 3  22 25  22 47  18 65  8 73  2 75  3 78  2 80  0 80  94  8.30  0.9  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  4 4  18 22  58 80  95  6. 20  1.8  1 1  1 2  8 10  2 12  7 19  16 35  27 62  16 78  2 80  96  1.65  1.6  21 21  31 52  14 66  10 76  3 79  1 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  97  3.62  2.1  •0 0  5 5  19 24  27 51  10 61  12 73  5 78  1 79  1 80  98  5.80  1.3  0 0  2 2  2 4  3 7  9 16  30 46  31 77  3 80  0 80  99  2.67  1. 2  1 1  13 14  40 54  16 70  9 79  1 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  1.1  0 0  0 0  1 1  2 3  2 5  27 32  42 74  4 78  2 80  100  ,  6.17  101  6.67  1.4  0 0  0 0  0 0  2 2  5 7  15 22  31 53  22 75  5 80  102  2.52  1.0  2 2  18 20  40 60  12 72  7 79  1 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  124  TABLE 5 — C o n t i n u e d Statement No...  Scale Value  QValue  103  5.13  104  Response C a t e g o r i e s A  B  C  D  E  F  2.5  5 5  3 8  8 16  12 28  10 38  26 64  13 . 3 80 77  0 80  2.14  1.3  5 5  31 36  30 66  7 73  3 76  2 78  1 79  1 80  0 80  105  5. 95  1.4  0 0  0 0  0 0  4 4  8 12  30 42  28 70  5 75  5 80  106  6.27  1.7  0 0  0 0  3 3  2 5  12 17  16 33  31 64  12 76  4 80  107  6. 23  1.8  0 0  1 1  4 5  6 11  7 18  15 33  30 63  15 78  2 80  108  1.55  1.1 - 20 20  38 58  17 75  4 79  0 79  0 79  1 80  0 80  0 80  109  8.18  1.0  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  1 1  4 5  27 32  48 80  110  6. 82  1.6  0 0  1 1  1 2  0 2  5 7  15 22  23 45  30 75  5 80  Ill  6.86  2.1  1 1  0 1  0 1  3 4  8 12  13 25  17 42  26 68  12 80  112  3. 24  1.6  2 2  10 12  23 35  26 61  14 75  4 79  0 79  1 80  0 80  113  2.39  1.2  7 7  19 26  37 63  14 77  3 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  0 80  114  6.11  1.4  0 0  0 0  1 1  1 2  6 8  29 37  29 66  13 79  1 80  115  - 3.42  1. 7  0 0  6 6  20 26  32 58  5 63  6 69  5 74  3 77  3 80  116  4.01  1.4  0 0  0 0  11 11  19 30  34 64  8 72  6 78  2 80  0 80  -  G  H  • I  125 TABLE  Statement No.  d-  5—Continued Response C a t e g o r i e s  Scale Value  Value  A  B  C  D  E  F  117  7.67  1.5  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  118  6.05  1.4  0 0  0 0  3 3  6 9  119  3.01  1.5  0 0  12 12  28 40  120  5.21  2.1  2 2  5 7  6 13  For  each item, the f i r s t  the second  G  H  I  .3 3  19 22  28 50  30 80  7 16  21 37  38 75  4 79  1 80  26 66  8 74  5 79  1 80  0 80  0 80  10 23  11 34  31 65  13 78  1 79  1 80  l i n e i s the frequency  l i n e i s the cumulative frequency  distribution,  distribution.  APPENDIX B THE PILOT STUDY  127  THE THURSTONE SCALE DEVELOPED FOR THE PILOT STUDY  ATTITUDE TOWARD THE LABORATORY T h i s i s an e x p e r i m e n t a l study o f the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f a t t i t u d e toward your l a b o r a t o r y . You w i l l be asked t o r e a d a l i s t o f statements about your l a b o r a t o r y and endorse those t h a t express your own sentiment. L e t your own experience w i t h the l a b o r a t o r y determine your endorsements. 1.  Name *  2.  High School P h y s i c s courses completed P h y s i c s 11 P h y s i c s 12 P h y s i c s 91 Others  3.  (specify)  I n d i c a t e your f u t u r e i n t e n t i o n s w i t h r e g a r d a.  To n o t c o n t i n u e i n p h y s i c s  b.  To c o n t i n u e i n p h y s i c s :  to physics, -  Honors Major Undecided  c. 4.  Undecided  Write an X somewhere on t h e l i n e below t o i n d i c a t e where you t h i n k you b e l o n g . Strongly favorable to the' l a b o r a t o r y  5.  Neutral  Strongly against the l a b o r a t o r y  In form A and B t h a t f o l l o w c i r c l e t h e numbers of the statements t h a t most c l o s e l y express your sentiment towards the l a b o r a t o r y . I n t e r p r e t the statements i n accordance w i t h your own e x p e r i e n c e . *  (optional)  128  Form A 1.  I have found no v a l u e i n the l a b o r a t o r y .  2.  I t h i n k our l a b r a i s e s t h i s course t o a h i g h e r than i t c o u l d achieve without i t .  3.  The l a b o r a t o r y ' s good and bad p o i n t s balance each o t h e r .  4.  Due t o l a c k o f l a b o r a t o r y time, I f i n d I am seldom a b l e to attempt an o p t i o n a l (C) experiment.  5.  The l a b o r a t o r y t o me i s synonymous w i t h  6.  I f e e l we a r e p r e s e n t e d w i t h apparatus our present l e v e l o f understanding.  7.  Some experiments  8.  I f i n d t h a t most experiments  standard  frustration. t o o f a r beyond  a r e good, b u t i n o t h e r s I see no v a l u e .  9. . I f e e l my l a b i n s t r u c t o r  a r e too d i f f i c u l t  f o r me.  i s incompetent.  10.  I f e e l the need f o r a l a b o r a t o r y program, and am p l e a s e d w i t h ours.  11.  I l e a r n much from the experiments, not h e l p some people.  12.  I have found t h i s l a b o r a t o r y the most i n t e r e s t i n g of any o f my c o u r s e s .  13.  I t h i n k the l a b o r a t o r y i s a h i n d r a n c e to t r u e p h y s i c s because one s t i l l must "cook r e s u l t s " .  14.  I r e g a r d the l a b o r a t o r y as a f u t i l e , time-wasting a c t i v i t y , and as such i t should be d e l e t e d from the course.  15.  I t h i n k too much time i s "demanded by the l a b o r a t o r y f o r the b e n e f i t t h a t i s b e i n g d e r i v e d .  16.  With r e a s o n a b l e e f f e c t , I r e g a r d the ideas presented i n the l a b o r a t o r y w e l l w i t h i n my reach.  17.  I f i n d the time a l l o t t e d t o prepare a w r i t e - u p f o r handing i n i s ample.  18.  I t h i n k our l a b i s a v a l u a b l e e d u c a t i o n a l experience, even though p h y s i c s i s n o t my major i n t e r e s t .  b u t I f e e l they do aspect  129  19.  I b e l i e v e i t makes l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e whether or not l e c t u r e s and l a b o r a t o r i e s are based on common ideas.  20.  My e x p e r i e n c e i s t h a t the l a b o r a t o r y turmoil of confusion.  i s a hopeless  130  Form B 1.  To me  the  laboratory  i s more or l e s s b o r i n g .  2.  O c c a s i o n a l l y I f e e l I have t r u l y b e n e f i t t e d from an experiment, but i n most i n s t a n c e s I doubt i t .  3.  Quite o f t e n chore.  4.  I f e e l the  5.  I f i n d t h a t the i n s t r u c t o r ' s time i s i n such demand t h a t I cannot o b t a i n adequate a s s i s t a n c e .  6.  T h i s l a b o r a t o r y has k i l l e d any d e s i r e I might have to take f u t u r e p h y s i c s l a b o r a t o r i e s .  7.  Although I concede the l a b o r a t o r y may purpose, I hate i t .  8.  I t h i n k the course would be were scrapped.  9.  I have found the challenge.  10.  I b e l i e v e t h a t the i n s t r u c t i o n s p r o v i d e d experiments i n s u f f i c i e n t d e t a i l .  11.  I r e g a r d the l a b o r a t o r y as e s s e n t i a l , but i n ours.  12.  The  13.  I u s u a l l y f i n d i t n e c e s s a r y to j u s t fumble my through experiments.  14.  I f i n d the experiments assume we a c t u a l l y do.  15.  The l a b o r a t o r y c e r t a i n l y s t i m u l a t e s physics.  16.  I f i n d no p a r t i c u l a r l i k e or d i s l i k e toward laboratory.  17.  I enjoy the experiments because they are f a i r l y  I b e l i e v e the l a b o r a t o r y laboratory  l a b to me  is a fruitless  i s essential for learning  serve  improved i f the  l a b o r a t o r y presents  physics.  had  a useful laboratory  me w i t h a reasonable explain I am  the  disappointed  i s p r i m a r i l y a waste o f time." way  know more than an  we  interest in the easy.  131  18.  I f i n d the l a b o r a t o r y does f a r more f o r p r o j e c t i n g knowledge of p h y s i c s than l e c t u r e s .  19.  I f i n d working enjoyable.  20.  I f e e l the experiments are j u s t i f i e d i n h a v i n g us use formulae t h a t we c o u l d not d e r i v e .  i n the l a b o r a t o r y both i n s p i r i n g  and  132  TABLE 6 THE SCORES OF THE PHYSICS 120 STUDENTS WHO  PARTICIPATED IN  THE PILOT STUDY, ACCOMPANIED BY THE STATISTICS REQUIRED IN THE CALCULATION OF A SPLIT-HALF CORRELATION COEFFICIENT USING THE GUTTMAN FORMULA Student No.  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  Total Scale Score A + B 4.13 4. 25 4. 28 4.30 4.32 4.41 4.43 4.43 4.48 4.50 4.55 4.53 4.58 4.61 4.62 4.65' 4.73 4. 78 4. 78 4.80 4.83 4.88 4.87 4.88 4. 96 4.99 5. 05 5.08 5.12 5.12 5.14 5.16 5.15 5. 26 5.25  Form A Score A  Form B Score  2.16 2.10 2.14 2.14 2.16 2.65 1.87 1.80 2.18 1. 90 2.55 2.38 2.58 2.45 2.37 2.18 2.57 2.68 2.46 2.40 2.53 2.45 2.55 1. 85 2.40 2.54 3.05 2.58 2.56 2.17 2.06 2.66 2.37 2.94 2. 72  1.97 2.15 2.14 2.16 2.16 1. 76 2.56 2.63 2. 30 2.60 2.00 2.15 2.00 2.16 2. 25 2.47 2.16 2.10 2.32 2.40 2.30 2.43 2. 32 3.03 2.56 2.45 2.00 2.50 2.56 2. 95 3.08 2.50 2. 78 2.32 2.53  (A ••+• B) 17.05 18. 06 18.31 18.49 18.66 19. 44 19. 62 19.62 20.07 20. 25 20. 70 20.52 20. 97 21. 25 21.34 . 21. 62 22. 37 22.84 22. 84 23.04 23.32 23.81 23.71 23.81 24.60 24.90 25.50 25.80 26. 21 26.21 26.41 26.62 26.51 27.66 27.56  A  2  4.66 4.41 4.56 4.56 4.66 7.02 3.50 3.25 4.75 3.61 6.51 5.66 6. 65 6.00 5.62 4.75 6.61 7.18 6.05 ' 5. 76 6.40 6.00 6.51 3.43 5. 76 6.45 9.30 6.65 6.55 4.71 4. 24 7.07 5.62 8.64 7.39  B  2  3.88 4.62 4.56 4.66 4. 66 3.09 6.57 6.89 5.31 6. 76 4.00 4.62 4.00 4.66 5.08 6.10 4.66 4.41 5. 38 5. 76 5. 29 5.90 5.39 9. 20 6.55 6.00 4.00 6. 25 6.55 8. 70 9.48 6. 25 7. 72 5.38 6.40  133  TABLE Total Scale Score A + B  Student No.  36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76  ,  5.35 5.39 5.42 5.44 5.51 5.54. 5.54 5.53 5.55 5.57 5.61 5.71 5. 70 5. 73 5.88 5. 90 5. 99 6.00 6.03 6.10 6.18 6.20 6.20 6. 22 6.21 6. 23 6.30 6.30 6.33 6.37 6.38 6.41 6.45 6.48 6.54 6.55 6.61 6.63 6.63 6. 73 6.75  6—Continued  Form A Score A  Form B Score B  (A + B)  2.95 2.53 2.55 2.82 3.35 3.88 3.08 2.43 2. 95 3.27 3.05 2. 95 2. 74 2. 95 2.85 3.30 3.33 2.86 3.10 3. 22 2. 82 3.45 3. 00 3.10 2. 96 3.45 2. 70 2. 90 2. 83 2. 97 2. 88 2. 95 3.44 3.68 3.43 3. 20 2. 75 3.40 3.33 2.73 3. 77  2.40 2.86 2. 87 2.62 2.16 2.16 2.46 3.10 2.60 2.30 2.56 2. 76 2. 96 2.78 3. 03 2.60 2.66 3.14 2. 93 2.88 3.36 2.75 3. 20 3.12 3. 25 2. 78 3.60 3.40 3.50 3.40 3.50 3.46 3. 01 2.80 3.11 3. 35 3.86 3. 23 3.30 4.00 2. 98  28.62 29. 05 29.37 29.59 30. 36 30.69 30.69 30.58 30. 80 31.02 31.47 32.60 32.49 32. 83 34.57 34.81 35.88 36.00 36.36 37. 21 38.19 38.44 38.44 38.68 38.56 38.81 39.69 39.69 40.06 40.57 40.70 41. 08 41.60 41. 99 42.77 42. 90 43.69 43. 95 43. 95 45.29 45.56  A 8. 70 6.41 6.51 7.95 11. 22 11.42 9.48 5. 91 8. 70 10.69 9.30 8. 70 7.50 8.70 8.12 10.89 11.08 8.18 9. 61 10.36 7. 95 11. 90 9.00 9.61 8.76 11. 90 7. 29 8.41 8. 00 8. 82 8. 29 8.70 11.83 13.54 11. 76 10. 24 7.56 11.56 11.08 7.45 14. 21  B 5. 76 8.17 8.24 6.86 4.66 4.66 6.05 9.61 6. 76 5.29 6.55 7.61 8. 76 7. 72 9.18 6. 76 •7.07 9.85 8.58 8. 29 11.28 7.56 10. 24 9. 73 10.56 7. 72 12. 96 11.56 12.25 11.56 12. 25 11.97 9. 06 7.84 9.67 11. 22 14.89 10.43 10.89 16.00 8.88  134 TABLE  Student No.  77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117  Total Scale Score A + B  Form A Score A  6. 75 6.82 6.82 6.87 6. 95 6. 97 7.04 7.03 7.08 7.08 7.09 7.16 7.18 7.21 7.22 7. 24 7. 25 ... 7.26 7.31 7.32 7.37 7.38 7.46 7.49 7.49 7.49 7.63 7.60 7.61 7.65 7. 72 7. 72 7.98 7. 97 7. 98 7.98 8. 04 8.09 8.12 8. 21 8.42  2.75 4.02 3. 30 3.47 3.33 3. 20 3.84 3. 27 3.85 3.38 3. 21 4. 23 3.00 3.85 3.46 3.44 3. 70 3.55 3.60 3.10 4.14 3.52 3.80 3. 93 3.47 3.41 4. 33 4.00 3. 94 3. 63 3. 80 3.76 3.52 3.86 3-. 98 3.54 4.30 3.92 3.47 3.36 3.60  6—Continued  Form B Score B 4.00 2.80 3.52 3.40 3.62 3. 77 3. 20 3.76 3. 23 3.70 3.88 2.93 4.18 3.36 3. 76 3.80 3.55 3. 71 3.71 4. 22 3.23 . 3. 86 3.66 3.56 4.02 4.08 3.30 3.60 3.67 4. 02 3.92 3.96 4.46 4.11 4. 00 4.44 3.74 4.17 4.65 4.85 4.82  (A + B) 45.56 46.51 46.51 47.19 48.30 48.58 49.56 49.42 50.12 50.12 50. 26 51. 26 51.55 51.98 52.12 52.41 52.56 52. 70 53.43 53.58 54.31 54.46 55.65 56.10 56.10 56.10 58. 21 57. 76 57. 91 58.52 59.59 59.59 63.68 63.52 63.68 63. 68 64.64 65.44 65. 93 67.40 70.89  A 7.56 16.16 10.89 12.04 11.08 10.24 14.74 10. 96 14.82 11.42 10.30 17. 89 9.00 14."82 11.97 11.83 13.69 12.60 12.96 9. 61 17.13 " 12.39 14.44 15.44 12. 04 11.62 18.74 16.00 15.52 13. 17 14.44 14.13 12. 39 14.89 15.84 12.53 18.49 15.36 12.04 11.28 12. 96  B 16. 00 7. 84 12.39 11.56 13.10 14.21 10.24 14.13 10.43 13.69 15.05 8.58 17.47 11. 28 14.13 14.44 12.60 13. 76 13.76 17.80 10.43 14.89 13.39 12.67 16.16 16. 64 10.89 12.96 13.46 16.16 15.36 15.68 19. 89 16. 89 16.00 19.71 13.98 17.38 21.62 23.52 23. 23  135 TABLE  . Student No.  118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158  6—Continued  Total Scale Score A + B  Form A Score A  8.43 8.44 8.47 8.50 8.51 8.55 8.57 8. 60 8.63 8.69 8.72 8.71 8. 75 8.90 8. 96 9.00 9.03 9.10 9.16 9.18 9.19 9.27 9.38 9.40 9.42 9.45 9.48 9.62 9. 63 9.92 10.05 10.09 10.18 10.20 10.28 10.37 10.37 10.40 10.58 10.66 10.88  4.57 4.36 3.90 4.00 4.35 4. 20 4.27 4.00 3. 97 4.66 4.12 4. 20 4.40 4. 20 4.15 4.05 4.46 4.80 4. 60 4.38 3.93 4. 20 4.58 4.10 5.52 4.85 5.04 4. 82 4. 73 4.41 4. 70 5.17 4.23 5.02 4.90 5.01 4.65 5.80 4.68 4. 83 5.40  Form B Score B 3.86 4.08 4.57 4.50 4.16 4.35 4.30 4.60 4.64 4.03 4.60 4.51 4.35 4. 70 4.81 4.95 . 4.57 4.30 4.56 4. 80 5. 26 5.07 4: 80 5.30 3. 90 4.60 4.44 4.80 4.90 5.51 5.35 4. 92 5.95: 5.18 5.38 5.36 5. 72 4.60 5. 90 5. 83 5.48  (A + B ) 71.06 71.23 71.74 72.25 72.42 73.10 73.44 73.96 74.47 75.51 76.03 75.86 76.56 79.21 80.28 81.00 81.54 82. 81 83. 90 84.27 84.45 85.93 87. 98 88. 36 88. 73 89. 30 89. 87 92.54 92. 73 98.40 101.00 101.80 103.63 104.04 105.67 107.53 107.53 108.16 111.93 113.63 118.37  Z  A  2  20. 88 19.00 15. 21 16.00 18.92 17.64 18. 23 16.00 15. 76 21.71 16.97 17.64 19. 36 17.64 17. 22 16.40 19.89 23. 04 21.16 19.18 15.44 17.64 20.97 16.81 30.47 23.52 25.40 23. 23 22.37 19.44 22.09 26. 72 17.89 25. 20 24.01 25.10 21.62 33.64 21. 90 23.32 29.16  B  2  14.89 16.64 20.88 20. 25 17.30 18.92 18.49 21.16 21. 25 16.24 21.16 •20.34 18.92 22.09 23.13 24.50 20.88 18.49 20. 79 23.04 27.66 25. 70 23.04 28. 09 15. 21 21. 16 19. 71 23. 04 24. 01 30. 30 28.62 24.20 35.40 26. 83 28. 94 28.72 32.71 21. 16 34.81 33. 98 30.03  136 TABLE  6—Continued  Total Scale Score A + B  Form A Score A  159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180  10. 88 10.89 10.95 10. 97 11.10 11.09 11.16 11.25 11. 30 11.37 11.44 11.49 11.80 11.88 12.04 12.12 12. 32 12.59 12.83 14.00 14. 22 15. 80  5.33 5.62 5.50 4. 82 5.80 5.08 4.93 5.25 5.30 6.12 5. 81 5.67 6.08 5.96 5.56 5.80 6.10 6.07 6.60 6.55 7.02 7.80  Totals  1367.10  673.68  Student No.  Form B Score B  _ (A + B)  5.55 5.62 5.45 6.15 5.30 6.01 6. 23 5.90 6.00 5.25 5.63 5.82 5.72 5. 92 6.48 6.326.22 6.52 6.23 7.45 7. 20 8.00 . 693.24  118.37 118.59 119.90 120.34 123.21 122.98 124.54 126.56 127.69 129.27 130.87 132.02 139.24 141.13 144.93 146.89 151.78 158.50 164.60 196.00 202.20 249.64  _ A  B  28.40 31.58 30.25 23.23 33.64 25.80 24.30 28.62 28.09 37.45 33. 75 32.14 36.96 35.52 30.91 33.64 37. 21 36.84 43.56 42. 90 49. 28 60. 84  30. 80 27. 77 29.70 37. 82 28.09 36.12 38. 81 34.81 36.00 25.56 31.69 33.87 32. 71 35.04 41. 99 39.94 38.68 42.51 38. 81 55.50 51.84 64.00  11360.72 2741.90 2971.78  137  F i g . 4 . — C a l c u l a t i o n of the R e l i a b i l i t y  Coefficient  V a r i a n c e o f scores on Form A <f  A  2  = *A  2  -  (£A)  2  N  N  =  1.22  V a r i a n c e of scores on Form B S  2  = £B  -  2  N  V  (zB) N  2  Variance of the t o t a l K ,  2  = £(A+B)  2  -  = 1.67  scores  (JA+B)  2  =5.32  N The Guttman c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t f o r the s c a l e i s  r  (A+B) (A+B) = 2 (1 - ^A +^B ) <A+B 2  2  2  = .912  APPENDIX C ANALYSIS OF STATEMENTS FOR THEIR DISCRIMINATING POWER  139  THE LIKERT SCALE DEVELOPED TO DETERMINE THE DISCRIMINATING POWER OF THOSE 68 OF THE ORIGINAL 120 STATEMENTS WITH LOWEST Q VALUE  ATTITUDE TOWARD THE LABORATORY T h i s i s an e x p e r i m e n t a l study o f the d i s t r i b u t i o n of a t t i t u d e toward your l a b o r a t o r y . You a r e asked t o read each statement i n the f o l l o w i n g l i s t , and p l a c e an X i n one o f the s i x response c a t e g o r i e s p r o v i d e d f o r each statement, Your c h o i c e o f c a t e g o r y f o r a statement i s t o be based on the degree o f agreement o r disagreement you f i n d w i t h the statement. The s i x c a t e g o r i e s a r e c l e a r l y l a b e l l e d . Name: <u CU  u  O Ci  60  <  00  c u  o 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.  u  bD < cu <u  u  bo <  >,  i-4 T3  Ci Ci  0)  bD  U  U  «.  >•  r-t T3  2 S  <u CU CU  U  bO co CO  •i-i P  <:  u  >>b0 60 co C-i-i o p  60 d o  u  4J CO  * optional  cu cu i-i 60  60  CU  ta  •i-i P  Ci Ci  CD  u  4-1  24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46.  <  60  •1-1  >,  Ci r-t Ci T3  1-1  60  •i-l  U  <  cu cu  CO CO  p  T3  •-I  a  cu  <u cu  u  cu cu  u  60 ca CO  P  u >>60  CU  u  cu cu  60  <  u 60  <!  i - l cB 60 to  60 c o  C-r4  O P  u  u 4J  47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52, 53, 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68.  4J CO  i-(  <u  u  60  T3 1-1  . T4  u 60 c«  CU CU  CO 1-4  P  >.  •-4  X) i-l  •r4  2 a  <U CU  U  >.60  r-4 CO  1-1  60 co  CO CO  O P  60 •1-1  p  C-r4  U  J-t  CO  140  1.  I have found no v a l u e  2.  In most i n s t a n c e s I f e e l the standing of physics.  3.  I do not r e g a r d our l a b o r a t o r y as e s s e n t i a l to o b t a i n i n g a t r u e understanding o f p h y s i c s .  4.  I f e e l my i n s t r u c t o r i s i n c a p a b l e o f g i v i n g a s s i s t a n c e when r e q u i r e d .  5.  To me  6.  I t h i n k our l a b r a i s e s t h i s course to a higher than i t c o u l d achieve without i t .  7.  I h a t e the l a b o r a t o r y .  8.  The l a b o r a t o r y ' s good and bad other.  9.  O c c a s i o n a l l y I f e e l I have t r u l y b e n e f i t t e d from an experiment, but i n most i n s t a n c e s I doubt i t .  10.  I f i n d our l a b o r a t o r y most, e f f i c i e n t an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of p h y s i c s .  11.  I b e l i e v e the l a b o r a t o r y has v a l u e my i n t e r e s t i n p h y s i c s .  12.  Quite o f t e n I b e l i e v e the l a b o r a t o r y i s a f r u i t l e s s chore. •  13.  The  14.  The l a b o r a t o r y succeeds i n p r o v i d i n g an understanding o f the a p p l i c a t i o n o f modern instruments.  15.  I f e e l the l a b o r a t o r y i s e s s e n t i a l f o r l e a r n i n g p h y s i c s .  16.  I f i n d t h a t the i n s t r u c t o r ' s time i s i n such demand t h a t I cannot o b t a i n adequate a s s i s t a n c e .  17.  T h i s l a b o r a t o r y has k i l l e d any d e s i r e I might have had to take f u t u r e p h y s i c s l a b o r a t o r i e s .  18.  I f i n d the experiments an o r g a n i z e d I c a n . l e a r n on my own.  the  i n the  laboratory. labs a i d me  i n my  under-  l a b o r a t o r y i s more or l e s s b o r i n g .  l a b o r a t o r y to me  standard  7  p o i n t s b a l a n c e each  in  developing  in that i t stimulates  i s synonymous w i t h  frustration.  situation  i n which  141  19.  The l a b o r a t o r y o u t l i n e seems t o e x p l a i n any ideas p r e v i o u s l y f o r e i g n t o me.  20.  I f e e l much time i s wasted because t h e i n s t r u c t o r s do n o t p r o v i d e enough a i d .  21.  Due t o l a c k o f l a b o r a t o r y time, I f i n d I am seldom a b l e t o attempt an o p t i o n a l (C) experiment.  22.  Many c a l c u l a t i o n s have l i t t l e s i g n i f i c a n c e t o me s i n c e I do n o t understand the b a s i s upon which the formulae were d e r i v e d .  23.  I r e g a r d the l a b o r a t o r y as an extremely b e n e f i c i a l activity.  24.  I l i k e t h e l a b o r a t o r y because i t o f f e r s for i n d i v i d u a l i n i t i a t i v e .  25.  Although I concede the l a b o r a t o r y may serve a u s e f u l purpose, I hate i t .  26.  The awarding o f e x t r a marks f o r o p t i o n a l is unfair.  27.  I find  28.  I t h i n k the course would be improved i f the l a b o r a t o r y were scrapped.  29.  I f e e l we a r e presented w i t h apparatus too f a r beyond our present l e v e l o f understanding.  30.  Some experiments a r e good, but i n others value.  31.  I f i n d t h a t most experiments a r e too d i f f i c u l t f o r me.  32.  I have found the l a b o r a t o r y presents challenge.  33.  I f e e l my l a b i n s t r u c t o r i s incompetent.  34.  I b e l i e v e t h a t the i n s t r u c t i o n s provided experiments i n s u f f i c i e n t d e t a i l .  35.  Our l a b o r a t o r y . f a i l s i n t h a t i t does n o t r e l a t e t o lecture material.  i t a pleasure  opportunity  (C) s e c t i o n s  t o work w i t h such f i n e equipment.  I see no  me w i t h a reasonable  e x p l a i n the  142  36.  I r e g a r d t h e l a b o r a t o r y as e s s e n t i a l , b u t I am d i s a p p o i n t e d i n ours.  37.  My l a b o r a t o r y i n s t r u c t o r appears able t o g i v e good e x p l a n a t i o n s when I r e q u i r e them.  38.  I f e e l the need f o r a l a b o r a t o r y program, and am p l e a s e d w i t h ours.  39.  I l e a r n much from the experiments, but I f e e l they do n o t h e l p some people.  40.  The l a b t o me i s p r i m a r i l y a waste o f time.  41.  The experiments i n g e n e r a l  42.  I l i k e our l a b o r a t o r y because the experiments demand we t h i n k , r a t h e r than p r o v i d i n g us w i t h a step by step procedure.  43.  I have found t h i s l a b o r a t o r y the most i n t e r e s t i n g aspect o f any o f my courses.  44.  I usually find experiments.  45.  I f i n d t h e experiments assume we know more than we a c t u a l l y do.  46.  The l a b o r a t o r y c e r t a i n l y s t i m u l a t e s an i n t e r e s t i n physics.  47.  I think the laboratory i s a hindrance to true because one s t i l l must "cook r e s u l t s " .  48.  Through l a c k o f guidance I f i n d most t h i n g s I do a r e by t r i a l and e r r o r .  49.  I f i n d no p a r t i c u l a r l i k e or d i s l i k e toward the laboratory.  50.  I a c t u a l l y b e l i e v e the experiments have taught me some b a s i c ideas o f p h y s i c s f a r b e t t e r than books could.  51.  I r e g a r d the l a b o r a t o r y as a f u t i l e , time-wasting a c t i v i t y , and as such i t should be d e l e t e d from the course.  a r e q u i t e easy.  i t n e c e s s a r y t o j u s t fumble my way through  physics  143  52.  I enjoy the experiments because they a r e f a i r l y  53.  I f e e l our experiments attempt to cover too many ideas i n too s h o r t a time.  54.  I l i k e the s t r e s s our experiments p l a c e on the importance of e r r o r s .  55.  I t h i n k too much time i s demanded by the l a b o r a t o r y f o r the b e n e f i t t h a t i s b e i n g d e r i v e d .  56.  I can seldom get any a i d from the l a b o r a t o r y i n s t r u c t o r .  57.  With reasonable e f f o r t , I r e g a r d the ideas i n the l a b o r a t o r y w e l l w i t h i n my reach.  58.  I f i n d the l a b o r a t o r y does f a r more f o r p r o j e c t i n g knowledge o f p h y s i c s than l e c t u r e s .  59.  I find  I can seldom o b t a i n o u t s i d e  easy.  presented  references.  60. .1 f i n d working i n the l a b o r a t o r y both i n s p i r i n g and enjoyable. 61.  T h i s l a b o r a t o r y has k i l l e d my i n t e r e s t i n p h y s i c s .  62.  I f i n d the time a l l o t t e d to prepare a w r i t e - u p f o r handing i n i s ample.  63.  I t h i n k our l a b i s a v a l u a b l e educational'experience, even though p h y s i c s i s not my major i n t e r e s t .  64.  I f i n d the i n s t r u c t i o n s i n the l a b o r a t o r y manual  65.  I f e e l the experiments are j u s t i f i e d formulae t h a t we could not d e r i v e .  66.  I b e l i e v e i t makes l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e whether or not l e c t u r e s and l a b o r a t o r i e s are based on common ideas.  67.  My experience i s t h a t the l a b o r a t o r y i s a hopeless turmoil of confusion.  68.  I b e l i e v e some experiments attempt t o cover a t o p i c too deeply a t t h i s l e v e l .  i n having  confusing.  us use  144  TABLE 7 THE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSE TO EACH OF THE 6 8 STATEMENTS ON THE LIKERT SCALE BY THE LOW SCORING AND HIGH SCORING GROUPS OF STUDENTS b No. L.G. H. G. No. L.G.  H. G. No. L.G.  a  H.G.  No. L.G.  H.G.  1.  0 0 0 3 40 30  4 15 20 15° 17 4  2.  2 0 1 15 44 10  3 24 15 19 14 0  3.  0 2 2 12 33 26  7 22 1910 12 4  . 4.  1 1 5 5 28 34  6 8 4 15 29 13  5.  1 3 2 8 34 26  5 22 18 11 14 5  6.  2 3 4 18 35 11  12 26 21 15 " 9 1  7.  0 1 2 3 23 45  11 13 21 12 16 2  8.  5 22 . 0 12 28 4  11 20 30 11 3 0  9.  3 6 10 13 36 6  14 40 13 4 3 0  10.  3 3 18 25 22 4  14 34 15 12 0 0  il-  1 2 5 15 38 14  13 31 11 15 4 0  12.  0 3 3 13 39 16  9 38 11 11 5 1  13.  1 3 7 "10 37 15  12 20 20 12 9 1  14.  2 3 4 19 37 9  6 22 10 21 14 2  ls.  0 3 7 17 29 18  10 18 14 12 -12 8  16.  1 4 6 6 42 16  5 10 19 8 25 8  17.  2 1 4 3 39 25  6 8 16 19 19 ' 5  18.  4 9 8 14 34 5  14 22 25 12 1 1  19.  0 4 7 38 24 2  11 24 16 12 11 1  20.  0 0 6 11 44 12  5 9 21 13 25 2  21.  21 18 15 5 9 4  34 15 17 5 3 1  22.  2 6 16 12 30 8  19 29 18 6 5 0  23.  0 2 4 25 31 12  16 31 10 13 2 2  24.  2 3 7 25 31 6  11 26 22 12 4 0  •  145 TABLE 7 — C o n t i n u e d No.  L. G.  H.G.  No. •L. G.  25.  0 0 2 9 35 26  7 13 27 13 13 1  26.  29.  0 1 5 5 41 23  0 9 16 18 17 14  33.  0 1 4 4 33 33  37.  H.G.  No.  L. G.  H. G.  No.  L. G.  5 9 9 10 16 9  14 16 15 9 11 2  27.  2 5 14 24 22 5  11 20 12 20 10 0  28.  0 0 3 3 28 41  5 9 15 27 14 5  30.  4 16 19 8 25 0  13 36 18 3 4 1  3.1.  0 1 1 10 41 20  1 5 21 25 15 7  32.  0 1 1 18 41 11  7 11 9 27 20 0  6 3 9 18 27 "10  34.  0 6 12 •1927 7  17 14 -15 16 12 1  35.  1 4 21 19 21 9  22 23 13 9 5 3  36.  1 2 5 16 42 7  20 12 21 13 8 0  0 2 2 13 40 17  2 11 9 14 29 10  38.  0 2 4 22 38 6  13 27 20 13 2 0  39.  1 4 6 33 24 5  6 23 28 12 5 0  40.  2 0 0 5 38 30  14 13 26 14 6 1  41.  2 11 20 19 16 4  8 19 20 11 12 4  42.  4 4 14 20 27 4  15 14 27 15 1 0  .43.  7 13 19 18 15 2  37 26 7 5 0 0  44.  0 4 3 16 37 12  8 25 20 12 9 1  45.  0 9 18 17 28 3  - 6 30 25 7 6 0  46.  1 3 8 29 30 4  14: 24 19 13 5 0  47.  0 4 9 9 38 13  10 12 26 15 12 0  48.  0 3 6 12 45 9  2 13 24 16 19 21  H.G.  146 TABLE No.  L.G.  H.G.  No.  L. G.  49.  7 34 17 8 8 1  11 26 16 16 4 2  50.  53.  1 2 19 13 25 6  11 15 16 16 11 2  57.  0 3 3 10 44 13  61.  65.  7—Continued  H.G.  No.  L. G.  0 4 6 24 26 12  12 27 18 15 3 0  51.  1 1 2 3 20 43  6 6 20 24 17 2  52.  3 18 17 22 10 1  13 33 21 5 2 1  54.  4 12 16 19 15 5  11 27 13 16 7 1  55.  1 3 5 12 41 7  20 19 18 7 4 1  56.  0 0 3 2 35 32  5 4 7 20 28 11  0 10 13 34 18 0  58.  1 12 17 24 13 5  ' 13 31 18 7 2 4  59.  0 8 12 18 27 4  7 11 19 15 17 5  60.  1 2 12 25 29 4  18 32 15 6 1 1  0 0 4 3 35 30  "7 8 20 20 15 5  62.  7 22 17 7 18 2  31 18 8 10 7 1  63.  1 7 9 11 35 9  12 18 14 21 9 1  64.  0 1 13 14 37 7  10 17 18 20 7 2  2 4 14 24 31 0  29 19 19 4 3 1  66.  16 29 14 5 8 3  29 19 19 4 3 0  67.  0 2 1 2 39 30  5 11 29 20 8 2  68.  3 0 13 12 37 10  5 19 21 11 15 4  H.G.  No. .'L.G.  H.G.  The responses f o r each statement are quoted such t h a t the f i r s t number i n the column corresponds to the response weight 5, and the l a s t number corresponds t o the response weight 0. In terms of response c a t e g o r i e s , responses are l i s t e d i n the order " s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e " through " s t r o n g l y agree" f o r items whose Thurstone s c a l e v a l u e s are 0 to 5.00, and " s t r o n g l y agree" through " s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e " f o r items w i t h s c a l e v a l u e s 5.00 to 9.  I  147  TABLE 7 — C o n t i n u e d "L.G. " i s the low group o f students on the t o t a l score, and "H.G." i s the h i g h group of students. These groups were d e f i n e d r e s p e c t i v e l y by t a k i n g the bottom and top 27% o f the s c o r e s .  The l i n e s drawn between two response c a t e g o r i e s f o r a g i v e n item dichotomize the response c a t e g o r i e s by m i n i m i z i n g the sum of the number o f s u b j e c t s i n the low group above the l i n e and the number o f s u b j e c t s i n the h i g h group below the l i n e .  148  TABLE 8 DICHOTOMIZED RESPONSE DISTRIBUTION OF THE HIGH SCORING AND LOW SCORING GROUPS ON THE LIKERT SCALE No. L.G.  H. G.  No. L. G.  H.G.  No. L.G.  H.G.  3  No. L.H.  H.G.  1.  3 70  54 21  2.  18 54  61 14  3.  4 71  48 26  4.  40 34  62 13  5.  14 60  56 19  6.  9 64  50 25  7.  6 68  57 18  8.  27 44  61 14  9.  19 55  67 7  10.  6 69  48 27  11.  8 66  55 19  12.  6 68  58 17  13.  21 52  64 10  14.  28 46  59 16  15.  10 64  42 32  16.  17 58  42 33  17.  10 64  49 33  18.  21 64  61 24  19.  11 53  51 14  20.  17 64  48 24  21.  21 51  34 41  22.  24 50  66 11  23.  6 68  57 17  24.  12 62  59 16  25.  11 61  60 14  26.  23 35  45 22  27.  7 65  33 42  28.  6 69  56 19  29.  11 64  43 31  30.  20 52  49 26  31.  12 61 .  52 22  32.  20 52  54 20  33.  9 66  36 37  34.  18 53  46 29  35.  5 70  45 30  36.  8 65  53 21  37.  17 57  36 39  38.  6 66  60 15  39.  11 62  57 17  40.  7 68  67 7  41.  13 59  27 49  42.  22 51  58 16  43.  20 54  63 12  44.  7 65  53 22  45.  27 48  61 13  46.  12 63  57 18  47.  22 51  63 12  48.  21 54  55 20  49.  7 68  11 64  50.  12 63  57 18  51.  7 63  56 19  52.  38 33  67 8  149 TABLE No. L.G.  H.G.  No. L.G.  8--Continued  H.G.  No. L.G.  H.G.  No. L. G.  H. G.  53.  35 31  58 13  54.  16 55  38 37  55.  9 60  57 12  56.  5 67  36 39  57.  16 57  57 18  58.  30 42  62 13  59.  20 49  37 37  60.  15 58  65 8  61.  7 65  55 20  62.  7 66  31 44  63.  28 43  65 10  64.  28 44  65 9  65.  20 55  67 8  66.  16 59  29 45  67.  5 69  65 10  68.  28 47  56 19  1  These d i c h o t o m i z e d s c o r e s were o b t a i n e d by grouping the responses above and below the l i n e i n the response d i s t r i b u t i o n s i n T a b l e 6. Consequently, f o r an a r b i t r a r y statement whose response c a t e g o r i e s are o f the form  a b c d  r , =  ^  then, cb - ad  J(a + b) (b + d) (a + c) (c + d)  where r ^ i s the p h i c o e f f i c i e n t .  150  .  . . TABLE 9  PHI COEFFICIENTS FOR THE 68 STATEMENTS ON THE LIKERT SCALE. No.  No.  No.  No.  1.  .70  18.  .54  35.  • 57  52.  .39  2.  .57  19-  .53  36.  .62  53.  .31  3.  .62  20.  .41  37.  .26  54.  .29  4.  .31  21.  . 18  38.  .72  55.  . 70  5.  .60  22.  .58  39.  .62  56.  .46  6.  .56  23.  .70  40.  .81  57.  .54  7.  .69  24.  .63  41.  . 20  58.  .42  8.  .47  25.  .77  4'2.  .41  59.  . 21  9.  .66  26.  . 30  43.  .59  60.  .69  10.  .33  27.  .38  44.  .63  61.  .65  11.  .64  28.  .68  45.-  .47  62.  .36  12.  .70  29.  .45  46..  .60  63.  .49  13.  .58  30.  .33  47.  .54  64.  • 51  14.  .41  31.  .55  48.  .45  65.  .61  15.  •45  32.  .45  49.  .08  66.  . 20  16.  .33  33.  .41  50.  .62  67.  . 84  17.  .55  34. .  .40  51.  .65  68.  .39  APPENDIX D THE- STATEMENTS JUDGED FOR THEIR VALIDITY  152  THE 35 STATEMENTS SELECTED ON THE BASIS OF HIGH PHI COEFFICIENT AS PRESENTED TO FOUR FACULTY MEMBERS TO BE JUDGED FOR  THEIR  VALIDITY AS POSSIBLE CANDIDATES FOR THE FINAL SCALE These statements have been chosen from the o r i g i n a l 120 i n the l i g h t of the o b j e c t i v e s of the study, as the most d e s i r a b l e p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r the f i n a l d r a f t o f the s c a l e . From these, 25 t o 30 must be s e l e c t e d . Numbers 28 - 35 have a low r ^ v a l u e (to be expected s i n c e many have a c e n t r a l s c a l e - v a l u e ) , b u t are i n c l u d e d because they r e l a t e t o important aspects o f the l a b o r a t o r y . Q Value 1. 0.70  Scale Value 6.11  r^ .51 I f i n d the i n s t r u c t i o n s i n the l a b o r a t o r y manual c o n f u s i n g .  2.  0.55  1.55  .69 I f i n d working i n the l a b o r a t o r y both i n s p i r i n g and enjoyable.  3.  0.55  1.27  .70 I r e g a r d  the l a b o r a t o r y as an extremely .  beneficial  activity.  4.  0.40  8.32  .69 I hate the l a b o r a t o r y .  5.  0.60  1.19  6.  0.60  1.65  7.  0.60  2.13  .57 In most i n s t a n c e s I f e e l the l a b s a i d me i n my understanding o f p h y s i c s .  8.  0.70  6.19  .57 Our l a b o r a t o r y f a i l s i n that i t does not r e l a t e t o l e c t u r e m a t e r i a l .  9.  0.55  7.54  .81 The l a b t o me of time.  10.  0.70  2.17  .54 I f i n d the experiments an organized s i t u a t i o n i n which I can l e a r n on my own.  11.  0.60  7.34  .58 The l a b o r a t o r y t o me i s synonymous with f r u s t r a t i o n .  ,.59 I have found t h i s l a b o r a t o r y the most i n t e r e s t i n g aspect o f any o f my courses. .63 I l i k e the l a b o r a t o r y because i t o f f e r s opportunity f o r i n d i v i d u a l i n i t i a t i v e .  i s p r i m a r i l y a waste  153 Q Value  Scale Value  12.  0.75  6.14  .55  I f i n d t h a t most experiments are d i f f i c u l t f o r me.  13.  0.70  6.54  .63  I u s u a l l y f i n d i t n e c e s s a r y to j u s t fumble my way through experiments.  14.  0.70  1.96  .62  I a c t u a l l y b e l i e v e the experiments have taught me some b a s i c ideas of p h y s i c s f a r b e t t e r than books c o u l d .  15.  0.70  6.82  .54  I t h i n k the l a b o r a t o r y i s a h i n d r a n c e to t r u e p h y s i c s because one s t i l l must "cook r e s u l t s " .  16.  0.50  8.18  .65  T h i s l a b o r a t o r y has k i l l e d my in physics.  17.  0.50  2.52  ...54  With reasonable e f f o r t , I r e g a r d the ideas presented i n the l a b o r a t o r y w e l l w i t h my reach.  18.  0.75  7.09  .70  Q u i t e o f t e n I b e l i e v e the i s a f r u i t l e s s chore.  19.  0.85  7.04  .60  To me the l a b o r a t o r y i s more or boring.  20.  0.55  6.17  ".70  21.  1.20  5.32  .66  O c c a s i o n a l l y I f e e l I have t r u l y b e n e f i t t e d from an experiment, but i n most i n s t a n c e s I doubt i t .  22.  0.85  3.24  .61  I f e e l the experiments are j u s t i f i e d i n having us use formulae t h a t we c o u l d not d e r i v e .  23.  0.65  2.00  .64  24.  0.55  7.78  .70  I have found no v a l u e  25.  0.75  7.67  .84  My experience i s t h a t the l a b o r a t o r y i s a h o p e l e s s t u r m o i l of c o n f u s i o n .  too  interest  laboratory less  I t h i n k too much time i s demanded by the l a b o r a t o r y f o r the b e n e f i t that i s being derived.  I b e l i e v e the l a b o r a t o r y has v a l u e " i n t h a t i t s t i m u l a t e s my i n t e r e s t in physics. i n the  laboratory.  154 Q Value  Scale Value  26.  0.65  1.83  .72  I f e e l the need f o r a l a b o r a t o r y program, and am p l e a s e d w i t h ours.  27.  0.65  2.42  .53  The l a b o r a t o r y o u t l i n e seems to e x p l a i n any ideas p r e v i o u s l y f o r e i g n t o me.  28.  0.60  2.39  .49  I t h i n k our l a b i s a v a l u a b l e e d u c a t i o n a l experience even though p h y s i c s i s not my major i n t e r e s t .  29.  0.65  1.81  .49  I l i k e our l a b o r a t o r y because the experiments demand we t h i n k , r a t h e r than p r o v i d i n g us w i t h a step by step procedure.  30.  0.75  5.93  .47  I f i n d the experiments assume we know more than we a c t u a l l y do.  31.  0.45  4.47  .47  The'.laboratory' s good and bad p o i n t s balance each other.  32.  0.60  - 6.75  .45  I f e e l we are presented w i t h apparatus too f a r beyond our present l e v e l o f understanding.  33.  0.65  1.70  .45  I f e e l the l a b o r a t o r y i s e s s e n t i a l for learning physics.  34.  0.80  3.24  .36  I f i n d the time a l l o t t e d t o prepare a w r i t e - u p f o r handing i n i s ample.  35.  0.35  4.57  .08  I f i n d no p a r t i c u l a r l i k e or d i s l i k e toward the l a b o r a t o r y .  APPENDIX E THE FINAL ATTITUDE SCALE  156  ATTITUDE  TOWARD THE  PHYSICS  LABORATORY  This scale represents a c o n t r o l l e d study to determine t h e s u c c e s s o f t h e l a b o r a t o r y program as t h e s t u d e n t sees it. The s t a t e m e n t s on t h e s c a l e r e p r e s e n t o p i n i o n s p u t f o r t h by p r e v i o u s p h y s i c s students. You a r e p r e s e n t e d w i t h 5 r e s p o n s e c a t e g o r i e s f o r each statement: (1) s t r o n g l y a g r e e , (2) a g r e e , (3) n e u t r a l (4) d i s a g r e e , a n d (5) s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e . The numbers (1) to (5) c o r r e s p o n d t o t h e n u m b e r s o f t h e c o l u m n s f o u n d o n t h e accompanying answer s h e e t . Choose the response c a t e g o r y which b e s t expresses your degree o f agreement or disagreement w i t h each statement. Your responses to the statements w i l l undergo programmed s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s , and t h e r e s u l t s w i l l used to a i d i n r e d e s i g n i n g the present laboratory.  a be  NOTE:  every  S t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s by computor statement be responded t o .  1.  In most i n s t a n c e s I f e e l of physics.  2.  I find  3.  The  4.  I r e g a r d the activity.  5.  I find  6.  I usually find experiments.  7.  I feel  8.  This  9.  I t h i n k t o o much t i m e i s demanded b y t h e for the b e n e f i t that i s being derived.  10.  I f i n d the experiments a c t u a l l y do.  that  most  l a b t o me  the  the  the  experiments  is primarily laboratory  instructions  as  has  are  a i d me  too  a waste an  i n the  i t necessary  laboratory  laboratory  labs  requires  to  my  of  beneficial  manual c o n f u s i n g .  fumble  my  way  for learning  interest  a s s u m e we  understandin  time.  laboratory  is essential  killed  i n my  difficult.  extremely  just  that  in  through  physics.  physics. laboratory  know more  than  we  157  11.  I l i k e the l a b o r a t o r y because i t o f f e r s for individual i n i t i a t i v e .  opportunity  12.  The l a b o r a t o r y o u t l i n e seems to e x p l a i n ideas p r e v i o u s l y f o r e i g n to me.  13.  The l a b o r a t o r y ' s good and bad other.  14.  I f e e l the need f o r a l a b o r a t o r y program, and w i t h ours.  15.  I hate the  16.  I have found no v a l u e  17.  The  18.  I have found t h i s l a b o r a t o r y the most i n t e r e s t i n g o f any o f my courses.  19.  I f i n d the time a l l o t t e d to prepare a w r i t e - u p f o r handing i n i s ample.  20.  I a c t u a l l y b e l i e v e the experiments have taught me some b a s i c ideas o f p h y s i c s . f a r b e t t e r than books c o u l d .  21.  I f e e l we are presented w i t h apparatus too f a r beyond our p r e s e n t l e v e l o f understanding.  22.  I l i k e our l a b o r a t o r y because the experiments demand we t h i n k , r a t h e r than p r o v i d i n g us w i t h a step by step procedure.  23.  I b e l i e v e the l a b o r a t o r y has value my i n t e r e s t i n p h y s i c s .  24.  My experience i s t h a t the l a b o r a t o r y i s a h o p e l e s s turmoil of confusion.  25.  With reasonable e f f o r t , I r e g a r d i n the l a b o r a t o r y w e l l w i t h i n my  26.  To me  p o i n t s b a l a n c e each am  pleased  laboratory.  l a b o r a t o r y to me  i n the  laboratory.  i s synonymous w i t h  frustration. aspect  in that i t stimulates  the ideas reach.  presented  the l a b o r a t o r y i s more or l e s s b o r i n g .  158  . TABLE 10 THE SCALE-VALUES, Q-VALUES, AND PHI COEFFICIENTS OF THE 26 STATEMENTS ON THE FINAL ATTITUDE SCALE No.  ScaleValue  QValue  1.  2.13  .60  •  3.  7.54  .55  5.  6.11  7. 9.  .No.  ScaleValue  QValue  2.  6.14  .75  .55  .81  4.  1.27  .55  .70  .70  .51  6.  6.54  .70  .63  1.70  .65  .45  8.  8.18  .50  .65  6.17  .55  .70  10.  5.93  -75  .47  il-  1.65  .60  .63  12.  2.42  .65  .53  ls.  4.47  .45  .47  14  1.83  .65  .72  15.  8.32  .40  .69  16.  7.78  .55  .70  17.  7.34  .60  .58  18.  1.19  .60  . 59  19.  3.24  .80  .36  20.  1.96  .70  .62  21.  6.75  .60  .45  22.  1.81  .65  .49  23.  2.00  .65  .64  24.  7.67  .75  .84  25.  2.52  .50  .54  26.  7. 04  .85  .60  5  7  APPENDIX F DATA REQUIRED FOR THE RELIABILITY STUDY ON THE FINAL ATTITUDE SCALE  160  TABLE 11 THE ATTITUDE SCORES OF THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP IN DECEMBER THAT WERE REQUIRED IN THE CALCULATION OF GUTTMAN'S INTERNAL CONSISTENCY RELIABILITY COEFFICIENT , , . :udent No. 0071670 0081662 0081671 0119671 0324673 0396670 0405671 0409670 0416672 0432671 0566672 0763672 0765670 0768672 0794671 0795672 0819673 0834678 0843674 0871671 0880671 0913671 0918674 0920671 0921672 0944671 0974672 0988673 0995671 1001676 1030672 1043673 1047671 1058673 1074670 1075672 1081672  L i k e r t Score ; • Odd Even Total 2. 154 3. 846 2. 077 4. 385 2. 154 2. 692 2. 769 1. 769 3. 462 2. 923 2. 538 4. 462 1. 692 2. 538 2. 692 2. 077 2. 462 3. 615 4. 077 2. 692 3. 385 2. 538 2. 923 2. 615 2. 538 2. 846 3. 231 2. 692 2. 615 3. 308 3. 538 2. 385 2. 923 2. 154 1. 923 1. 923 3. 385  3. 077 4. 231 2. 154 3. 846 2. 462 2. 538 2. 385 2. 692 3. 615 2. 923 2. 615 4. 308 1. 769 2. 615 2. 846 2. 462 . 2-769 4. 000 3. 846 3. 154 3. 538 2. 538 3. 308 2. 769 2. 923 2. 615 3. 231 3. 308 2. 692 2. 846 3. 692 2. 308 .2846 2. 385 2. 000 1. 846 3. 462  Scale Products Score a  3. 115 4. 038 2. 115 4. 115 2. 308 2. 615 2. 577 2. 231 3. 538 2. 923 2. 577 4. 385 1. 731 " 2. 577 2. 769 2. 269 2. 615 3. 808 . 3. 962 2. 923 3. 462 2. 538 3. 115 2. 692 2. 731 2. 731 3. 231 3. 000 2. 654 3. 077 3. 615 2. 346 2. 885 2. 269 1. 962 1. 885 3. 423  Odd 13. 046 18. 192 9. 036 20. 686 8. 962 11. 106 11. 817 7. 357 15. 643 12. 844 10. 465 20. 108 6.710 12. 167 11. 968 9. 658 10. 715 16. 503 19. 419 12. 407 14. 759 10. 962 12. 906 11. 157 12. 292 12. 692 14. 278 12. 727 11. 565 15. 205 15. 352 10. 445 13. 498 9. 582 8. 549 8. 197 16. 166  Even •12.454 19. 317 9. 742 16. 687 9. 093 9. 371 9. 948 10. 678 16. 195 12. 656 10. 766 19. 068 6.918 11. 019 11. 882 10. 535 11-. 067 17. 032 18. 186 14. 492 14. 798 10. 119 14. 907 11. 441 13. 842 9. 115 13. 874 13. 488 10. 962 12. 552 15. 554 9. 268 12. 992 9. 948 7. 798 7. 296 15. 319  Total 12. 750 18. 755 9. 389 18. 687 9. 028 10. 238 10. 882 9. 017 15. 919 12. 750 10. 615 19. 588 6.814 11. 593 11. 925 10. 097 10. 891 16. 767 18. 803 13. 449 14. 778 10. 540 13. 907 11. 299 13. 067 10. 904 14. 076 13. 107 11. 264 13. 879 15. 453 9. 85 7 13. 245 9. 765 8. 174 7. 747 15. 743  161  TABLE Student  11—Continued  L i k e r t Score  NO.  Odd  1103674 1112673 1147673 1149671 1164671 1171672 1253672 1302662 1322670 1358672 1358675 1373671 1389671 1397678 1405670 1424672 1465673 1466674 1492671 1492673 1537673 1558673 1567672 1573673 1575670 1579660 1580676 1584671 1604671 1613671 1719670 1719671 1727670 1765671 1786671 1789671 1802671 1806672 1808674 1812661 1812672 1844671 1896675  2. 846 2. 154 2. 308 1. 846 2. 769 2. 692 4. 077 2. 385 2. 154 3. 000 2. 308 2. 308 2. 385 2. 846 2. 385 2. 154 2. 385 3. 077 2. 769 2. 154 1. 846 2. 538 2. 000 2. 846 1. 538 4. 000 1. 769 2. 692 2. 692 2. 923 2. 769 2. 462 2. 077 2. 615 2. 846 3. 000 2. 077 2. 231 2. 769 2. 385 3. 385 2. 923 2. 846  Even 3. 308 2. 462 2. 385 1. 769 2. 769 2. 769 3. 923 2. 231 2. 385 3. 000 2. 615 2. 385 2. 692 2. 846 2. 231 1. 923 2. 538 2. 615 2. 923 2. 231 1. 692 2. 385 ' 1.692 2. 615 1. 846 4. 462 1. 462 2. 692 3. 154 2. 923 3. 385 2. 615 2. 385 3. 308 3. 077 2. 769 1. 923 2. 077 2. 231 2. 385 2. 846 2. 769 2. 769  Total 3. 077 2. 308 2. 346 1. 808 2. 769 2. 731 4. 000 2. 308 2. 269 3. 000 . 2462 2. 346 2. 538 2. 846 2. 308 2. 038 2. 462 2. 846 2. 846 2. 192 1. 769 2. 462 1. 846 2. 731 1. 692 4. 231 1. 615 2. 692 2. 923 2. 923 3. 077 2. 538 2. 231 2. 962 2. 962 2. 885 2. 000 2. 154 2. 500 2. 385 3. 115 2. 846 2. 808  S c a l e Products Odd •11. 734 9. 239 9. 698 8. 737 12. 632 12. 465 18. 895 10. 562 7. 866 12. 670 10. 287 10. 621 11. 607 12. 166 10. 625 9. 766 10. 072 13. 421 13. 399 9. 602 7. 926 11. 421 8. 765 13. 178 6. 978 19. 408 7. 377 11. 388 12. 579 13. 522 12. 652 10. 265 9. 782 10. 789 13. 082 15. 010 8. 861 10. 049 10. 925 10. 703 14. 931 11. 661 12. 085  Even 13. 830 10. 362 9. 178 7. 973 11. 213 10. 969 18. 486 10. 015 8. 956 12. 345 10. 812 10. 830 10. 652 12. 528 10. 351 8. 411 10. 418 9. 730 13. 372 9. 345 5. 915 9. 194 7. 324 9. 813 7. 146 21. 619 6. 099 9. 935 13. 810 13. 358 14. 980 11. 139 10. 792 13. 461 12. 671 12. 015 7. 654 8. 700 8. 928 8. 772 11. 887 11. 597 10. 825  Score Total 12. 782 9. 801 9. 438 8. 355 11. 923 11. 717 18. 690 10. 288 8. 411 12. 507 : 10.549 10. 725 11. 130 12. 347 10. 488 9. 088 10. 245 11. 575 13. 386 9. 473 6. 920 10. 307 8. 045 11. 496 7. 062 20. 514 6. 738 10. 662 13. 195 13. 440 13. 816 10. 702 10. 287 12. 125 12. 877 13. 512 8. 257 9. 375 9. 927 9. 737 13. 409 11. 629 11. 455  162  TABLE  u  d  e  n  L i k e r t Score  t  No.  11—Continued  Odd  Even  Total  •  1896676 1901673 1929671 1954672 1954673 1966670 2073671 2114672 2333672 2361671 2390671 2390673 2391672 2392672 2586671 2586672 2587672 2734672 2734673 2738672 2738673 2754671 2776674 2826673 2844670 2855675 2858674 2894671 2905661 2908671 2937672 2937675 2937677 2937678 3023671 3027672 3042675 3043672 3136672 3146670 3201671 3201672 3209673  2. 385 2. 923 1. 692 2. 385 2. 769 2. 000 2. 385 1. 615 3. 077 2. 769 2. 692 3. 308 2. 308 2. 000 2. 692 2. 231 -3. 231 3. 077 2. 231 2. 308 3. 385 2. 615 2. 538 3. 692 2. 000 2. 538 2.462 3. 000 3. 462 2. 692 2. 462 3. 154 3. 000 2. 154 2. 538 3. 462 2. 231 2. 154 3. 769 1. 846 2. 769 2. 538 2. 462  Scale Products Odd  Even  -  2. 615 2. 500 3. 308 3. 115 1. 692 1. 692 2. 769 2. 577 2. 923 2. 846 2. 000 2. 000 2. 462 2. 423 2. 154 1. 885 3. 308 3. 192 2. 615 2. 692 2. 385 2. 538 3. 385 3. 346 2. 000 2. 154 2. 538 2. 269 2. 7692. 731 2. 308 2. 269 3. 154 3. 192 3. 000 3. 0382. 462 2. 346 2. 615 2. 462 3. 923 3. 654 2. 692 2. 654 ' 2.769 2. 654 3. 769 3. 731 2. 077 2. 038 2. 231 2. 385 2. 538 2. 500 2. 769 2. 885 3. 769 3. 615 3. 231 2. 962 2. 615 2. 538 3. 385 3. 269 3. 308 . 3. 154 2. 000 2. 077 2. 308 2. 423 3. 346 • 3.231 2. 077 2. 154 2. 231 2. 192 3. 385 3. 577 2. 154 2. 000 2. 538 2. 654 2. 923 2. 731 2. 077 2. 269  10. 123 10. 548 12. 299 13. 520 8. 293 8. 235 10. 338 11. 955 12. 616 13. 678 8. 984 9. 060 10. 035 8. 671 6. 710 9. 664 14. 036 14. 297 12. 180 10. 092 11. 247 7. 875 15. 102 15. 387 8. 827 7. 378 7. 856 10. 089 11. 525 11. 233 9. 699 10. 289 14. 782 14. 273 13. 706 13. 272 9. 972 10. 368 9. 602 10. 182 16. 374 17. 773 . 11.070 10. 610 9. 898 11. 225 17. 554 16. 926 8. 476 7. 886 9. 691 11. 438 9. 382 10. 962 12. 648 10. 528 15. 862 .16. 829 12. 274 12. 930 11. 054 . 10. 738 15. 797 15. 126 13. 772 , 13. 783 9. 242 8. 128 11. 205 9. 242 14. 992 13. 635 9. 611 8. 338 9. 982 9. 528 14. 908 17. 005 7. 550 .7.588 13. 330 10. 096 11. 398 13. 259 9. 928 8. 389  Score Total  (  10. 335 12. 910 8. 264 11. 147 13. 147 9. 022 9. 353 8. 187 14. 167 11. 136 9. 561 15. 244 8. 103 8. 973 11. 379 9. 994 14. 528 13. 489 10. 170 9. 892 17. 073 10. 840 10. 561 17. 240 8. 181 10. 565 10. 172 11. 588 16. 346 12. 602 10. 896 15. 462 13. 778 8. 685 10. 223 14. 313 8. 974 9. 755 15. 95 7 7. 569 11. 713 12. 329 9. 159  163  TABLE Student No.  11—Continued  L i k e r t Score Odd  3210678 1. 769 3285671 1. 769 3315673 2. 154 3385671 2. 385 3409660 2. 692 3409674 2. 462 3432670 2. 615 3438670 2. 615 3442673 2. 923 3445670 - 3. 154 3477672 2. 769 3498672 2. 923 3545671 .2. 923 3552671 2. 154 3567670 2. 077 3568670 -3. 615 3573671 2. 538 3672671 2. 385 3731673 3. 077 3734670 3. 23. 3744673 2. 462 3765670 3. 308 3843673 2. 154 3845672 3. 385 3849670 2. 692 4144670 2. 385 4569672 3. 2/31 4575669 3. 308 4575672 2. 846 4576678 2. 846 4671671. 2. 692 4673670 2. 846 4694670 2. 077 4694671 3. 385 4713672 2. 462 4741672 2. 538 4815670 2. 692 4831671 2. 846 4839670 2. 692 4852670 2. 846 4866671 2. 231 4875670 3. 462  Even  Total  2. 462 1. 692 2. 538 2. 615 3. 308 2. 692 3. 000 2. 769 2. 538 3. 385 2. 615 2. 923 3. 231 '2. 231 2. 231 3. 923 2. 462 2. 385 2. 692 3. 308 2. 615 3.462 2. 615 3. 462 3. 000 2. 154 3. 769 3. 154 2. 846 2. 000 2. 846 2. 231 2. 615 2. 769 2. 538 2. 538 2. 615 2. 692 2. 615 2. 846 2. 308 3. 077  2. 115 1. 731 2. 346 2. 500 3. 000 2. 577 2. 808 2. 692 2. 731 3. 269 2. 692 2. 923 2. 0772. 192 2. 154 3. 769 2. 50O 2. 385 2. 885 3. 269 2. 538 3. 385 2. 385 3. 423 2. 846 2. 269 3. 500 3. 231 2. 846 1. 923 2. 769 2. 538 2. 346 3. 077 2. 500 2. 538 2. 654 2. 769 2. 654 2. 846 2. 269 3. 269  S c a l e Products Odd  Even  7. 995 10. 437 8. 287 6. 923 8. 860 10. 590 10. 611 10. 958 12. 901 14. 409 12. 071 13. 075 11. 210 . 11. 154 11. 556 12. 030 12. 734 10. 092 14. 392 13. 147 12. 507 11. 025 13. 761 12. 904 13. 179 14. 300 9. 413 9. 097 9. 155 8. 789 16. 327 16. 115 12. 198 10. 487 10. 446 10. 378 13. 376 10. 998 14. 368 14. 840 10. 829 11. 821 15. 560 16. 297 9. 425 10. 706 15. 053 15. 822 11. 615 12. 028 8. 893 .11. 090 13. 999 16. 476 15. 010 13. 233 12. 180 11. 735 8. 742 8. 385 11. 851 11. 575 9. 236 13. 092 8. 077 11. 032 17. 112 13. 092 10. 677 11. 65 7 11. 041 10. 765 12. 246 11. 218 13. 116 12. 455 12. 008 10. 201 13. 069 12. 478 10. 839 9. 825 15. 5 94 13. 038  Score Total 9. 216 7. 605 9. 725 10. 784 13. 655 12. 573 11. 182 11. 793 11. 413 13. 769 11. 766 13. 332 13. 740 9. 255 8. 972 16. 221 11. 342 10. 412 12. 187 14. 554 11. 325 15. 928 10. 066 15. 438 11. 821 9. 992 15. 238 14. 122 11. 957 8. 563 11. 713 11. 164 9. 555 15. 102 11. 167 10. 903 11. 732 12. 786 11. 105 12. 773 10. 332 14. 316  164  TABLE 1 1 — C o n t i n u e d udent No. 4884670 4888674 4891672 4897670 4899672 4925672 4932670 4960672 4964670 4983671 4983672 4984670 4999672 5016670 5021670 5035675 5042674 5116673 5151672 5187671 5192676 5304673 5326622. 5337673 5406674 5425677 5438671 5449670 5469674 5585674 5622670 5662671 5835670 5897670 6019670 6041676 6215670 6507670 6901675 6985676 7036673 7082674 7189670  L i k e r t Score Odd  Even  2. 769 2. 538 2. 231 2. 462 1. 923 2. 077 2. 000 1. 846 2. 077 1. 615 2. 077 2. 231 2. 538 2. 154 2. 462 2. 692 2. 538 2. 538 2. 000 2. 154 3. 000 3. 077 1. 923 2. 231 2. 538 2. 462 1. 769 . 2.000 2. 615 2. 231 2. 769 3. 077 2. 692 2. 923 4. 000 4. 231 2. 385 2. 923 3. 154 2. 308 2. 538 2. 769 2. 308 2. 154 2. 615 ' 2. 462 2. 385 2. 462 2. 462 2. 462 2. 154 2. 231 2. 538 2. 769 2. 385 2. 154 2. 077 2. 385 3. 538 3. 385 3. 077 3. 231 2.462 2. 308 : 2.769 2. 923 2. 692 3. 692 4. 077 4. 000 3. 462 3. 769 1. 462 1. 615 2. 615 2. 923 1. 692 1. 692 2. 692 2. 615 L. 538 .1.538 2. 385 2. 923 2. 231 2. 154  Scale Products Score  Total  Odd  Even  2. 654 2. 346 2. 000 1. 923 1. 846 2. 154 2. 346 2. 577 2. 538 2. 077 3. 038 2. 077 2. 500 1. 885" 2. 423 2. 923 2. 808 4. 115 2. 654 2. 731 2. 654 2. 231 2. 538 2. 423 2. 462 2. 192 2. 654 2. 269 2. 231 3. 462 3. 154 2. 385 2. 846 3. 192 4. 038 3. 615 1. 538 2. 769 1. 692 2. 654 1. 538 2. 654 2. 192  11. 583 9. 224 8. 207 8. 259 6. 468 8. 858 11. 311 11. 115 10. 638 8. 215 13. 923 8. 260 11. 442 8. 392 11. 222 12. 082 12. 458 18. 678 11. 022 13. 918 10. 951 10. 497 11. 065 11. 252 10. 425 8. 748 12. 514 11. 008 9. 929 16. 419 14. 020 11. 583 13. 309 12. 339 18. 010 16. 374 6. 295 11. 337 7. 525 12. 126 6. 730 11. 801 9. 699  11. 095 10. 268 8. 258 7. 898 7. 589 9. 179 8. 929 11. 506 11. 128 8. 638 13. 342 9. 151 9. 933 8. 572 9. 518 12. 615 12. 533 18. 632 12. 265 10. 095 12. 366 -9.430 10. 227 11. 265 10. 053 8. 634 11. 690 8. 966 10. 768 14. 045 13. 415 9. 162 12. 965 16. 785 17. 318 16. 949 7.407 13. 248 7. 285 12. 010 7. 035 10. 728 9. 372  Total 11. 339 9. 746 8. 232 8. 079 7. 028 9. 018 10. 120 11. 311 10. 883 8. 427 13. 633 8. 705 10. 688 8. 482 10. 370 12. 349 12. 496 18. 655 11. 644 12. 006 11. 658 9. 963 10. 646 11. 258 10. 239 8. 691 12. 102 9. 987 10. 348 15. 232 13. 718 10. 373 13. 137 14. 562 17. 664 16. 662 6. 851 12. 292 7.405 12. 068 6. 883 11. 264 9. 536  165  TABLE 1 1 — C o n t i n u e d  u  d  e  n  L i k e r t Score  t  S c a l e Products Score  No.  Odd  Even  Total  Odd  Even  7198672 7400675 7522672 7535674 7549670 7555675 7593671 7695675 7704674 771670 7742672 7783672 7807671 7813673 7827678 7924676 7927672 8040671 8041671 8186672 8321673 8390675 9227679 9287670 9303674 9430671 9465672 9513673 9513674 9513676 9526675 9716672 9725672 9912673  2. 615 2. 846 1. 769 3. 000 2. 000 3. 077 • 2. 000 2. 231 2. 538 3. 769 2. 077 2. 231 2. 538 2. 308 2. 462 2. 385 -3. 231 2. 154 3. 769 1. 846 2. 231 2. 385 1. 846 ' 3. 385 2. 538 2. 846 3. 538 2. 462 2. 385 2. 308 2. 615 2. 231 3. 231 2. 385  2. 538 3. 000 1. 769 3. 154 2. 231 3. 000 2. 154 2. 154 2. 308 4. 000 2. 308 2. 154 2. 615 2. 462 2. 615 2. 615 3. 308 2. 538 3. 692 1. 923 2. 308 2. 615 1. 769 3. 538 3. 846 3. 231 3. 143 2. 385 2. 077 2. 769 2. 538 2. 462 3. 462 2. 000  2. 577 2. 923 1. 769 3. 077 2. 115 3. 038 2. 077 2. 192 2. 423 3. 885 2. 192 2. 192 2. 577 . 2.385 2. 538 2. 500 3. 269 2. 346 3. 731 1. 885 2. 269 2. 500 1. 808 3. 462 3. 692 3. 038 3. 346 2. 423 2. 231 2. 538 2. 577 2. 346 3, 346 2. 192  11. 387 13. 168 6. 903 13. 217 9. 006 13. 441 8. 482 10. 468 11. 099 17. 580 9. 045 10. 148 11. 548 9. 015 10. 788 9. 965 12. 85 2 9. 814 16. 730 9. 018 10. 027 11. 018 8. 208 13. 778 11. 042 13. 707 15. 713 10. 598 11. 016 11. 632 12. 164 9. 892 13. 521 10. 479  10. 103 14. 285 6. 188 12. 735 8. 851 12. 585 8. 120 10. 246 9. 708 18. 043 8. 472 9. 492 10. 014 9. 118 10. 688 10. 988 13. 517 10. 372 15. 710 8. 452 9. 749 12. 040 7. 138 13. 488 12. 828 15. 505 14. 324 9. 022 7. 002 11. 233 10. 392 10. 204 14. 634 7. 874  Total 10. 745 13. 727 6. 545 12. 976 8. 928 13. 013 8. 301 10. 357 10. 404 17. 812 8. 759 8. 820 10. 781 9. 067 10. 738 10. 477 13. 184 10. 093 16. 220 8. 735 9. 888 11. 529 7. 673 13. 633 11. 935 14. 606 15. 018 9. 810 9. 009 11. 433 11. 278 10. 048 14. 077 9. 177  The terms odd, even, and t o t a l , f o r e i t h e r s c o r i n g technique, r e f e r r e s p e c t i v e l y t o the average score on the 13 odd numbered statements, the average score on 13 even numbered statements, and the average score on the e n t i r e 26 statements.  166  TABLE 12 THE ATTITUDE SCORES OF THE CONTROL GROUP IN DECEMBER THAT WERE REQUIRED IN THE CALCULATION OF GUTTMAN'S INTERNAL CONSISTENCY RELIABILITY COEFFICIENT u  d  e  n  L i k e r t Score  t  No. 0363671 0403673 0437671 0812670 0813672 0898671 0966676 0982670 1047673 1127672 1241671 1376676 1387662 1407673 1459671 1496672 1534662 1536672 1762672 1838675 1839660 1843672 2109663 2127674 2191670 2854673 2889674 2905671 2921677 3081670 3127670 3289672 3391671 3460651 3475673 3615672 3698672  Odd 2. 538 2. 385 3. 077 2. 077 1. 692 3. 231 2. 846 2. 000 3. 846 2. 231 2. 308 2.462 3. 154 2. 462 2. 692 2. 538 2. 846 2. 462 2. 462 2. 308 2. 692 2. 615 1.538 2. 154 2. 154 2. 154 . 3. 385 3. 308 2. 154 3. 615 2. 077 2. 692 2. 923 3. 077 1. 923 2. 385 3. 846  S c a l e Products  Even  Total  2. 231 2. 615 3. 538 2. 385 1.462 3. 077 2. 769 2. 000 3. 769 2. 308 2. 538 2. 231 3. 154 2. 462 2. 692 2. 154 2. 462 2. 615 2. 538 2. 615 2. 923 2. 692 1. 538 2. 231 2. 308 2. 692 2. 615 3. 462 2. 154 2. 69-2 2. 692 3. 077 2. 846 3. 538 1. 846 2. 462 3. 923  2. 385 2. 500 3. 308 2. 231 1. 577 3. 154 2. 808 2. 000 3. 808 2. 269 2. 423 2. 346 3. 154 2. 462 2. 692 2. 346 2. 654 2. 538 2. 500 2. 462 2. 808 2. 654 1. 538 2. 192 2. 231 2. 423 3. 000 3. 385 2. 154 2. 654 2. 385 2. 885 2. 885 3. 308 1. 885 2. 423 3. 885  :  3 ,  Odd 10. 472 10. 311 13. 433 8. 312 7. 090 12. 884 12. 608 9. 052 17. 784 9. 099 . 9.880 11. 396 14. 144 10. 238 11. 483 10. 339 12. 248 i d . 930 11. 046 10. 237 11. 824 11. 360 6. 857 8. 161 9. 5 93 8. 965 15. 965 "14. 558 9. 178 17. 002 9. 512 12. 495 12. 082 12. 839 7. 553 9. 476 17. 495  Even 9. 708 10. 910 15. 199 9. 163 6. 120 11. 439 12. 222 8. 751 15. 698 " 9..565 10. 186 9. 390 13. 391 9. 232 10. 598 9. 080 10'. 764 10. 897 10. 492 11. 465 11. 415 11. 101 6. 253 8. 135 10. 355 11. 051 11. 598 14. 518 8. 591 17. 608 11. 719 13. 653 11. 168 15. 795 7. 318 9. 437 18. 807 ..  Score Total 10. 090 10. 610 14. 316 8. 737 6. 605 12. 162 12. 415 8. 901 16. 741 9. 332 10. 033 10. 393 13. 767 9. 735 11. 040 9. 710 11. 506 10. 913 10. 769 10. 851 11. 619 11. 230 6. 555 8. 148 9. 974 10. 008 13. 782 14. 538 8. 885 17. 305 10. 615 13. 074 11. 625 14. 317 7.435 9. 45 7 18. 151  167  TABLE Student No. 3720672 3793670 3817673 3841670 4049670 4412670 4616670 4671676 • 4739672 5009670 5121670 5122663 5148670 5148672 5192673 5206670 5207670 5211670 5215672 5250675 5304675 5314670 5338672 5402670 5417674 5417677 542;679 5422671 5422674 5423674 5423675 5424679 5428674 5445672. 5459673 5467675 5468672 5470672 5480673 5486671 5499670 5505673 5514672 .  12—Continued  L i k e r t Score Odd 3. 692 3. 462 2. 462 1. 769 3. 308 2. 615 2. 000 3. 077 2. 538 1. 769 3. 077 3. 462 .1. 846 2. 692 2. 308 3. 615 1. 692 2. 846 3. 462 3. 462 3. 154 2. 769 3. 462 2. 077 3. 000 2. 077 2. 923 3. 462 2. 231 2. 769 2. 538 3. 077 2. 615 3. 615 2. 923 4. 077 3. 231 2. 462 2. 385 2. 615 2. 462 3. 923 2. 308  Even 3. 462 3. 538 2. 385 1. 846 3. 000 2. 769 2. 000 2. 769 2. 308 1. 692 2. 615 3. 154 2. 308 2. 385 2. 308 3. 538 2. 077 2. 385 3. 462 3. 154 3. 308 2. 846 3. 308 2. 231 2. 692 2. 462 2. 769 3. 615 2. 000 3. 308 2. 615 3. 000 2. 846 3. 308 2. 538 4. 077 3. 231 2. 692 2. 846 2. 615 2. 923 3. 615 2. 231  Total 3. 577 3. 500 2. 423 1. 808 3. 154 2. 692 2. 000 2. 923 2.423 1. 731 2. 846 3. 308 2. 077 2. 538 2. 308 3. 577 1. 885 2. 615 3. 462 3. 308 3. 231 2. 808 3. 385 2. 154 2. 846 2. 269 2. 846 3. 538 2. 115 3. 038 2. 577 3. 038 2. 731 3. 462 2. 731 4. 077 3, 231 2. 577 2. 615 2. 615 2. 692 3. 769 . 2. 269  Scale Products Odd 16. 631 15. 203 10. 557 7. 035 14. 938 11. 775 7. 825 14. 795 10. 698 7. 306 13. 816 16. 692 8. 268 12. 570 9. 848 15. 3 95 - 7.438 14. 727 14. 692 15. 600 14. 755 12. 780 14. 752 8. 098 11. 445 8. 957 13. 314 16. 149 9. 758 12. 992 10. 628 13. 378 11. 968 16. 885 12. 375 16. 387 14. 659 10. 445 10. 350 12. 065 10. 255 17. 218 10. 767  Even  Score Total  14. 455 15. 543 15. 344 15. 273 8. 876 9.717 6. 491 6. 763 13. 475 14. 207 ;0. 712 . 11.243 6. 675 7. 250 11. 95 7 13. 376 9. 902 10. 300 7. 315 7. 310 11. 566 12. 691 14. 200 15. 446 8. 832 8. 550 10. 655 11. 613 9. 456 9. 652 15. 052 15. 223 8. 155 7. 797 11. 282 13. -005 14. 952 14. 822 12. 697 14. 148 14. 358 14. 557 12. 630 12. 705 14. 648 14. 700 8. 597 8. 348 10. 552 10. 998 10. 798 9. 877 11. 787 12. 550 15. 545 15. 847 8. 483 9. 121 14. 495 13. 744 10. 697 10. 766 12. 411 12. 895 12. 603 ' 12.286 13. 618 15. 25 2 10. 842 11. 608 17. 258 16. 823 1-3.081 13. 870 10. 840 11. 235 11. 697 11. 023 11. 554 11. 809 12. 461 11. 358 14. 511 15. 865 9. 522 10. 145  168  TABLE  u  d  e  n  L i k e r t Score  t  No. 5517673 5567641 5567672 5567674 5584650 5584670 5605670 5606670 5607672 5608657 5616673 5618671 5619672 5619673 5633670 5637670 5642671 5679674 5705670 5712672 5734671 5739673 5753676 5779670 5833673 5836670 5842670 5887671 5890670 5928672 5964670 5975671 5982670 6008670 6041672 6065671 6085670 6159670 6180671 6240673 6528671 6665670 6885670  12—Continued  Odd  Even  Total  3. 000 2. 846 2. 692 2. 538 2. 308 2. 308 3. 154 3. 000 2. 846 2. 769 1. 692 2. 077 3. 000 2. 846 2. 231 2. 538 3. 462 3. 231 2. 692 2. 846 1. 846 1. 615 1. 923 1. 769 2. 308 2. 615 2. 923 2. 231 2. 154 2. 385 2. 692 3. 154 2. 385 3. 000 3. 692 3. 538 2. 692 2. 538 2. 231 2. 462 2. 077 1. 923 3. 769 4. 000 2. 385 ; 2.231 3. 923 3. 308 3. 308 3. 615 2. 077 2. 077 2. 462 3. 077 2. 538 3. 000 2. 538 2.462 2. 538 2. 538 3. 231 3. 385 2. 000 2. 462 2. 538 2. 923 2. 462 3. 000 2. 385 2. 846 2. 846 2. 846 2. 769 3. 000 2. 308 2. 462 3. 077 3. 154 3. 462 3. 077 2. 000 2. 154 2. 923 2. 923 2. 231 2. 154  2. 923 2. 615 2. 308 3. 077 2. 808 1. 885 2. 923 2. 385 3. 346 2. 769 1. 731 1. 846 2. 462 2. 577 2. 269 2. 923 2. 692 3. 615 2. 615 2. 346 2. 000 3. 885 2. 308 3. 615 3.462 2. 077 2. 769 2. 769 2. 500 2. 538 3. 308 2. 231 2. 731 2. 731 2. 615 2. 846 2. 885 2. 385 3. 115 3. 269 2. 077 2. 923 2. 192  Scale Products Odd  Even  13. 006 12. 265 12. 424 9. 654 10. 236 9. 675 14. 635 13. 477 12. 048 11. 263 7. 387 7. 706 12. 813 11. 853 8. 675 10. 443 15. 917 12. 599 11. 985 12. 815 7. 645 6. 371 8. 493 7. 021 10. 442 11. 085 13. 055 9. 098 9. 315 9. 795" 12. 755 15. 519 10. 174 13. 142 17. 475 16. 264 12. 965 10. 764 9. 010 9. 352 8. 610 8. 225 16. 865 17. 339 10. 877 10. 064 18. 195 13. 292 15. 782 15. 946 8. 837 9. 335 10. 604 12. 174 10. 765 12. 122 11. 316 10. 995 11. 308 10. 624 14. 144 13. 804 8. 529 9. 242 10. 770 11. 796 11. 063 12. 838 10. 305 11. 496 12. 219 12. 145 • 12.420 •• 12. 443 10. 413 10. 573 14. 831 13. 358 15. 072 13. 116 8. 715 8. 124 12. 404 12. 974 9. 663 8. 616  Score Total 12. 636 11. 039 9. 955 14. 056 11. 655 7. 547 12. 333 9. 559 14. 258 12. 400 7. 008 7. 757 10. 764 11. 077 9. 555 14. 137 11. 658 16. 870 11." 865 9. 181 8. 417 17. 102 10. 470 15. 744 15. 864 9. 086 11. 389 11. 444 11. 156 10. 966 13. 974 8. 886 11. 283 11. 951 10. 901 12. 182 12. 432 10. 493 14. 095 14. 094 8. 420 12. 689 9. 140  169  TABLE Student No. 6897674 6905673 6930671 6932673 6934671 6934673 6950672 6977672 6996671 7005670 7024676 7026660 7026673 7062672 7082672 7104650 7104670 7104674 7121670 7139670 7149673 7176670 7177672 7194673 7300671 7324670 7347672 7347675 7347676 7399673 7441675 7467663 7491670 7544672 7555673 7576672 7619650 6788673 7691672 7697678 7701671 7701676 7707672  12—Continued  L i k e r t Score Odd  .  Even  Total  2. 308 2. 385 3. 308 3. 154 2. 769 2. 846 2. 538 2. 769 3. 615 3. 538 3. 077 3. 154 2. 538 2. 615 2. 923 2. 769 1. 651 1. 231 2. 231 2. 615 3. 154 3. 615 2. 692 3. 077 2. 769 2. 923 2. 000 1. 846 1. 692 2. 077 2. 385 2. 615 -2. 385 2. 308 2. 077 2. 000 3. 462 3. 231 1. 769 1. 923 2. 846 2. 692 3. 000 3. 000 2. 615 ' 2. 846 2. 308 2. 538 2. 077 2. 000 2. 231 2. 692 2. 692 2. 538 3. 538 4. 231 3. 231 2. 154 2. 385 2. 077 2. 846 2. 692 2. 154 2. 308 3. 846 3. 769 3. 154 3. 077 2. 462 2. 538 3. 385 3. 846 2. 385 2. 692 2. 000 2. 154 3. 000 2. 923 4. 231 3. 923 2. 538 2. 462 3. 000 2. 077 3. 538 3. 308  2. 346 3. 231 2. 808 2. 654 3. 577 3. 115 2. 577 2. 846 1. 423 2. 423 3. 385 2. 885 2. 846 -1. 923 1. 885 2. 500 2. 346 2. 038 3. 346 1. 846 2. 769 3. 000 2. 731 2.423 2. 038 2. 462 2. 615 3. 885 3. 192 2. 231 2. 769 2. 231 3. 808 3. 115 2. 500 3. 615 2. 538 2. 077 2. 962 4. 077 2. 500 3. 038 3. 423  Scale Products Odd 10. 750 13. 948 11. 195 10. 853 16. 427 13. 802 11. 065 12, 895 6. 334 9. 989 14. 205 11. 907 11. 995 9. 402 6. 522 10. 321 10. 131 9. 058 15. 328 8. 068 12. 983 14. 342 11. 177 10. 006 9. 015 10. 664 12. 320 17. 420 14. 001 10. 909 12. 165 9. 900 17. 176. 14. 318 10. 999 13. 775 10. 788 9. 042 13. 192 19. 688 9. 989 13. 026 16. 822  Even 10. 951 13. 006 12. 347 11. 096 15. 863 13. 867 11. 323 11. 887 5. 712 11. 819 16. 438 13. 512 12. 264 8. 528 9. 191 10. 505 9. 220 8. 553 13. 176 8. 321 10. 625 13. 989 12. 326 10. 615 8. 244 11. 356 9. 770 18. 522 13. 333 8. 890 11. 079 9. 623 15. 362 13. 360 10. 391 16. 747 13. 750 8. 924 12. 666 17. 232 9. 451 11. 699 16. 013  Score Total 10. 850 13. 477 11. 771 10. 975 16. 145 13. 834 11. 194 12. 391 6. 023 10. 904 15. 322 12. 710 12. 130 8. 965 7. 85 7 10. 413 9. 675 8. 805 14. 252 8. 195 11. 804 14. 165 11. 752 10. 310 8. 629 11. 010 11. 045 17. 971 13. 667 9. 900 11. 622 9. 762 16. 269 13. 839 10. 695 15. 261 12. 269 8. 983 12. 930 18. 460 9. 720 12. 363 16. 418  170  TABLE u  d  e  n  t  No. 7713671 7713674 7713675 7715674 7716671 7733676 7801670 7807673 7824670 7868672 7918650 7918671 7961671 7980673 7990676 7994674 7997670 8020671 8050670 8117672 8121671 8124673 8125672 8127660 8151674 8160671 8161673 8189670 8219671 8220673 8232674 8238672 8286672 8315671 8316670 8321674 8348672 8367671 8373674 8415674 8423670 8427671 8432670  12-—Continued  L i k e r t Score Odd ~ 2. 692 3. 154 2. 154 2. 692 2. 615 3. 077 3. 000 1. 462 2. 538 2. 462 3. 462 2. 462 2. 769 2. 923 2. 846 3. 385 . 2.231 2. 308 3. 231 3. 308 2. 077 2. 231 2. 308 < 3. 538 3. 077 2. 615 2. 000 2. 538 3. 615 2. 923 1. 385 2. 308 3. 462 2. 077 2. 231 2. 615 , 2. 615 2. 692 2. 154 2.462 2. 846 2. 846 2. 231  Even  Total  2. 538 3. 615 2. 231 3. 077 2. 615 3. 231 2. 615 1. 462 2. 769 2. 077 3. 077 2. 308 2. 923 2. 846 2. 769 3. 231 2. 385 2. 231 2. 769 3. 231 2. 308 2. 077 2. 462 3. 615 3. 154 2. 692 1. 923 2. 923 3. 308 2. 923 1. 308 2. 615 3. 462 2. 154 2. 077 2. 846 2.462 2. 923 2. 308 2. 615 3. 308 2. 769 2. 154  2. 615 3. 385 2. 192 2. 885 2. 615 3. 154 2. 808 1. 462 2. 654 2. 269 3. 269 2. 385 2. 846 2. 885 2. 808 3. 308 2. 308 2. 269 3. 000 3. 269 2. 192 2. 154 2. 385 3. 577 3. 115 2. 654 1. 962 2. 731 3. 462 2. 923 1. 346 2. 462 3. 462 2. 115 2. 154 2. 731 2. 538 2. 808 2. 231 2. 538 3. 077 2. 808 2. 192  S c a l e Products Odd 12. 894 15. 078 8. 332 12. 208 12. 641 13, 556 13. 439 6. 536 11. 165 10. 587 15. 656 10. 203 11. 935 12. 804 13. 162 15. 115 9. 617 10. 104 13. 902 15. 216 8. 528 9. 587 9. 255 15. 520 14. 596 11. 257 7. 976 11. 313 15. 698 12. 571 6. 050 10. 385 15. 5-94 9. 692 9. 343 12. 018 11. 221 12. 148 9. 107 10. 980 12. 282 13. 298 9. 905  Score  Even  Total  10. 711 16. 135 8. 825 12. 763 12. 213 13. 595 9. 505. 6. 295 11. 046 9. 252 13. 322 9. 910 12. 130 11. 864 11. 619 14. 584 10. 245 9. 755 11. 952 14. 522 9. 218 8. 286 10. 064 15. 691 12. 849 12. 458 8. 058 13. 488 14. 788 11. 741 5. 208 10. 997 15. 292 8. 816 10. 472 13. 514 9. 858 13. 483 8. 494 11. 816 13. 147 11. 938 8. 756  11. 802 15. 607 8. 579 12. 486 12. 427 13. 576 11. 472 6. 416 11. 105 9. 920 14. 489 10. 057 12. 032 12. 334 12. 390 14. 849 9. 931 9. 929 12. 927 14. 869 8. 873 8. 937 9. 659 15. 605 13. 723 11. 85 7 8. 017 12. 401 15. 243 12. 156 5. 629 10. 691 15. 443 9. 254 9. 907 12. 766 10. 539 12. 815 8. 800 11. 398 . 12. 715 12. 618^ 9. 330  171  TABLE  u  d  e  n  L i k e r t Score  t  No. 8432671 8532671 8563672 8568670 8947671 8957670 9010672 9166670 9179671 9235676 9274670 9303672 9379673 9452670 9457671 9464672 9481672 95126749513672 9513677 9515676 9554671 9627670 9700672 9718650 9749675 9774673 9796672 9810670  12~Continued  Odd 3. 538 2. 769 3. 000 3. 000 1. 462 1. 615 1. 769 2. 615 2. 000 2. 769 2. 692 2. 385 2. 385 3. 154 2. 692 2. 615 2. 923 3. 615 3. 077 2. 154 2. 846 2. 538 3. 000 ' 1. 692 3. 615 2. 615 2. 462 3. 000 2. 231  Even  Total  3. 538 3. 154 3. 154 2. 923 1. 692 2. 154 2. 000 2. 538 2. 000 2. 769 2. 769 2. 154 2. 769 3. 538 2. 615 3. 077 2. 846 3. 923 3. 231 2. 231 2. 923 2. 385 3. 077 1. 769 3. 538 2. 615 2. 154 3. 615 2. 077  3. 538 2. 962 3. 077 2. 962 1. 577 1. 885 1. 885 2. 577 2. 000 2. 769 2. 731 2. 269 2. 577 3. 346 2. 654 2. 846 2. 885 3. 769 3. 154 2. 192 2. 885 2. 462 3. 038 1. 731 3. 577 2. 615 2. 308 3. 308 2. 154  S c a l e Products Score Odd 15. 689 11. 809 12. 818 14. 108 5. 952 7. 048 7. 674 12. 213 8. 998 12. 162 10. 525 10. 862 10. 475 14. 062 11. 842 11. 036 13. 032 16. 268 14. 208 10. 272 13. 461 11. 630 13. 227 7. 586 16. 500 10. 942 10. 537 12. 738 9. 666  Even 14. 868 12. 281 13. 371 14. 267 5. 962 8. 417 7. 888 11. 000 8. 112 11. 290 10. 791 8. 990 12. 034 14. 980 10. 601 12. 487 12. 486 17. 345 14. 460 9. 968 12. 118 10. 062 12. 602 7. 891 15. 940 10. 082 8. 946 14. 493 9. 493  Total 15. 279 12. 045 13. 095 14. 188 5. 95 7 7. 733 7. 781 11. 607 8. 555 11. 726 10. 658 9. 926 11. 254 14. 521 11. 222 11. 762 12. 759 16. 807 14. 334 10. 120 12. 790 10. 846 12. 914 7. 738 16. 220 10. 512 9. 742 13. 615 9. 580  The terms odd, even, and t o t a l , f o r e i t h e r s c o r i n g technique, r e f e r r e s p e c t i v e l y t o the average score on the 13 odd numbered statements, the average score on the.13 even numbered statements, and the average.score on the e n t i r e 26 statements.  172  TABLE 13 THE ATTITUDE SCORES OF THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP IN MARCH THAT WERE REQUIRED.IN THE CALCULATION OF GUTTMAN'S INTERNAL CONSISTENCY RELIABILITY COEFFICIENT Student No. 0071670 0081662 0081671 0119671 0324673 0396670 0405671 0409670 0416672 0432671 0566672 0763672 0765670 0768672 0794671 0795672 0819673 0834678 . 0843674 0871671 0880671 0913671 0918674 0920671 0921672 0944671 0974672 0988673 0995671 1001676 1030672 1043673 1047671 1058673 1074670 1075672 1081672 1103674  L i k e r t Score Odd Even Total 2. 231 4. 231 1. 923 2. 385 1. 923 4. 077 2. 923 2. 154 2. 231 2. 385 2. 462 4. 231 1. 923 3. 000 3. 000 2. 077 2. 308 4.•000 4. 462 1. 923 2. 692 2. 077 1. 923 2. 462 2. 385 1. 769 3. 615 2. 538 1. 846 1. 615 1. 923 2. 308 2. 154 2. 000 2. 231 2. 077 3. 462 4. 308  a  2. 077 2. 154 4. 308 4. 269 1. 846 1. 885 2. 692 2. 538 2. 231 2. 077 4. 077 4. 077 2. 923 2. 923 2. 769 • 2. 462 2. 385 2. 308 2. 308 2. 346 2. 154 2. 308 4. 462 4. 346 . 1. 692 1. 8083. 385 3. 192 000 3. 3. 000 2. 077 2. 077 2. 308 2. 308 ' 4.231 4. 115 4. 077 4. 269 2. 154 2. 038 2. 846 2. 769 2. 000 2. 038 1. 846 1. 885 2. 538 2. 500 2. 231 2. 308 1. 692 1. 731 3. 692 3. 654 2. 308 2. 423 . 1. 769 1. 808 1. 692 1. 654 1. 538 1. 731 . 2. 231 2. 269 1. 846 2. 000 2. 077 2. 038 2. 077 2. 154 1. 846 1. 962 3. 615 3.538 4. 538 4. 423  Scale Products Score Odd Even Total 9. 307 19. 660 9. 034 10. 752 8. 032 18. 697 13. 037 9. 65 7 10. 208 10. 924 11. 840 19. 895 7. 688 13. 450 13. 825 9. 561 9. 127 18. 392 21. 158 8. 143 12. 767 9. 521 8. 478 10. 682 10. 921 7. 345 16. 644 11. 597 8. 012 7. 404 8. 065 10. 233 10. 511 8. 974 9. 946 9. 371 16. 692 19. 850  8. 754 9. 030 19. 729 19. 695 8. 949 8. 992 11. 5 92 11. 172 7. 904 7. 968 18. 488 18. 593 12. 214 12. 625 10. 458 11. 260 10. 123 10. 165 9. 668 10. 296 10. 111 . 10. 975 18. 980 19. 437 6.413 7. 050 14. 115 13. 783 13. 791 13. 808 8. 767 9. 164 10.. 542 .. 9. 835 18. 522 18. 457 20. 430 20. 794 9. 655 8. 899 12. 302 12. 534 8. 555 9. 038 7. 897 8. 187 10. 408 10. 545 10. 926 10. 923 6.218 6.782 16. 182 16. 413 9. 582 10. 590 7. 044 7. 528 7. 795 7. 600 6.674 7. 369 9. 565 9. 894 8. 587 9. 549 8. 748 8. 861 8. 793 9. 370 7. 620 8. 495 16. 552 16. 413 21. 188 20. 519  173  TABLE  u  d  e  n  L i k e r t Score  t  No. 1112673 1147673 1149671 1164671 1171672 1253672 1302662 1322670 1358672 1358675 1365679 1373671 1389671 1397678 1405670 1424672 1465673 1466674 1492671 1492673 1537673 1558673 1567672 1573673 1575670 1579660 1580676 1582671 1604671 1613671 1719670 1719671 1727670 1765671 1786671 1789671 1802671 1806672 1808674 1812661 1812672 1844671 1896675  13—Continued  Odd 2. 077 1. 846 2. 154 2. 769 2. 077 3. 769 2. 308 2. 385 2. 615 2. 462 2. 308 2. 000 2. 615 3. 615 . 2.385 2. 077 2. 308 2. 154 2. 615 1. 846 1. 769 2. 308 1. 615 2."769 1. 462 2. 923 1. 538 2. 462 2. 615 1. 615 2. 231 2. 923 2. 385 2. 154 2. 308 3. 154 2. 846 2. 077 1. 308 1. 846 3. 231 2. 308 2. 077  Even 2. 308 1.462 2. 231 2. 538 1. 769 3. 769 2. 308 2. 615 2. 692 2. 692 3. 538 2. 077 2. 769 3. 769 2. 231 1. 923 2. 538 2. 385 2. 692 1. 692 1. 846 2. 538 / 1. 308 2. 769 1. 923 2. 846 1. 385 2. 769 3. 154 1. 846 2. 538 3. 154 2. 308 2. 692 2. 308 . 3.231 3. 000 1. 846 1.462 1.462 3. 077 2. 385 1. 692  Total 2. 192 1. 654 2. 192 2. 654 1. 923 3. 769 2. 308 2. 500 2. 654 2. 577 3. 423 2. 038 2. 692 3. 692 2. 308 ' 2. 000 2. 423 2. 269 2. 654' 1. 769 1. 808 2. 423 1. 462 2. 769 1. 692 2. 885 1. 462 2. 615 2. 885 1. 731 2. 385 3. 038 2. 346 2. 423 2. 308 3. 192 2. 923 1. 962 1. 385 1. 654 3. 154 2. 346 1. 885  Scale Products Odd 8. 129 8. 146 10. 017 12. 422 9. 522 17. 724 10. 079 10. 289 11. 322 10. 830 14. 236 10. 095 12. 298 17. 193 10. 257 9. 452 .... 10. 309 9. 064 13. 429 7. 952 8. 078 10. 982 8. 059 11. 762 6. 776 14. 770 6. 710 10. 883 13. 232 7. 381 10. 277 13. 018 10. 426 9. 259 9. 942 14. 439 13. 486 8. 925 6. 277 8. 404 14. 542 10. 455 8. 685  Even  Score Total  8. 862 8. 496 5. 718 6. 932 9. 944 9. 980 10. 688 11. 555 7. 376 8. 449 16. 445 17. 085 10. 472 10. 275 10. 339 10. 314 11. 335 11. 328 11. 438 11. 134 17. 426 15. 831 10. 078 10. 086 11. 851 12. 074 17. 348 17. 271 10. 148 10. 202 8. 595 9. 024 10. 138 10. 224 9. 812 • 9. 438 13. 386 13. 408 7. 443 7. 697 7. 221 7. 650 11. 865 11. 423 6. 184 7. 122 11. 188 11. 475 8. 188 7. 482 11. 238 13. 004 6. 262 6. 486 10. 465 10. 674 14. 658 13. 945 8. 821 8. 101 10. 818 10. 547 13. 682 13. 350 9. 615 10. 021 10. 744 10. 002 10. 092 10. 017 14. 125 14. 282 12. 938 13. 212 7. 700 8. 313 6. 445 6. 361 7. 038 7. 721 13. 135 13. 838 10. 616 10. 536 6. 537 7. 611  174  TABLE Student  13—Continued  L i k e r t Score  No.  Odd  1896676 1901673 1929671 1954672 1954673 1966670 2073671 2114672 2333672 2361671 2390672 2390673 2391672 2392672 2586671 2586672 2587672 2734672 2734673 2738672 2738673 2754671 2776674 2826673 2844670 2855675 2858674 2894671 2905661 2908671 2937672 2937675 2937677 2937678 3023671 3027672 3042675 3043672 3136672 3146670 3201671 3201672 3209673  2. 385 2. 231 1. 923 2. 385 4. 077 2. 000 2. 231 1. 692 2. 615 2. 000 1. 923 2. 923 2. 154 2. 692 1. 769 3. 231 2. 538 2. 538 2. 077 3. 231 2. 769 2. 308 1. 538 2. 385 2. 231 3. 231 2. 308 2. 385 2. 615 2. 000 2. 692 3. 385 2. 538 1. 923 3. 231 2. 077 2. 923 1. 769 2. 077 1. 846 2. 231 2. 538 1. 923  -.  Even  2. 692 2. 231 2. 000 2. 462 4. 000 2. 462 2. 692 1. 769 2. 846 2. 000 1. 923 3. 231 2. 077 3. 231 1. 923 3. 769 2. 692 2. 692 2. 154 3. 000 2. 769 2. 538 , 1.462 2. 462 2. 154 3. 154 2. 923 2. 308 3. 077 1. 769 2. 846 3. 615 2. 846 2. 077 3. 385 2. 231 2. 154 2. 154 2. 462 1. 846 2. 846 2. 462 2. 154  Scale Products  Total  Odd  Even  2. 538 2. 231 1. 962 2. 423 4. 038 2. 231 . 2. 462 1. 731 2. 731 2. 000 1. 923 3. 077 2. 115 2. 962 1. 846 3. 500 2. 615 2. 615 2. 115" 3. 115 2. 769 2. 423 1. 500 2. 423 2. 192 3. 192 2. 615 2. 346 2. 846 1. 885 2. 769 3. 500 2. 692 2. 000 3. 308 2. 154 2. 538 . 1.962 2. 269 1. 846 2. 538 2. 500 2. 038  10. 234 9. 040 9. 246 10. 967 18. 664 9. 585 10. 454 7. 499 12. 413 9. 649 8. 799 14. 367 8. 958 11. 119 7. 067 15. 480 11. 489 11. 285 9. 351 14. 824 12. 101 10. 113 6. 436 9. 996 8. 592 14. 75 7 10. 836 11. 119 11. 534 9. 797 11. 254 16. 081 11. 042 8. 553 15. 359 9. 174 12. 734 8. 360 9. 308.; 7. 552 9. 826 11. 596 8. 731  10. 998 9. 465 8. 369 10. 047 19. 052 9. 798 11. 122 7. 211 12. 982 8. 648 8. 288 14. 342 8. 568 12. 950 7. 741 17. 935 12. 683 11. 102 10. 842 12. 665 12. 095 11. 029 6. 429 10. 410 8. 563 14. 030 12. 862 9. 425 12. 578 8. 574 11. 775 15. 968 12. 490 8. 807 14. 561 9. 438 8. 735 11. 205 7. 998 7. 642 10. 815 10. 051 9. 041  Score Total 10. 616 9. 252 8. 808 10. 507 18. 858 9. 692 10. 788 7. 355 12. 698 9. 148 8. 544 14. 354 8. 763 12. 035 7. 404 16. 707 12. 086 11. 193 10. 096 13. 745 12. 098 10. 571 6. 433 10. 203 8. 578 14. 393 11. 849 10. 272 12. 056 9. 185 11. 514 16. 025 11. 766 - 8.680 14. 960 9. 306 10. 734 9. 783 8. 653 7. 597 10. 321 10. 823 8. 886  175  TABLE u  d  e  n  L i k e r t Score  t  No. 3210678 3285671 3315673 3385671 3409660 3409674 3432670 3438670 3442673 3445670 3477672 3498672 3545671 3552671 . .3567670 3568670 3573671 3672671 . 3731673 3734670 3744673 3765670 3843673 3845672 3849670 4144670 4569672 4575669 4575672 4576678 4671671 4672670 4694670 4694671 4713672 4741672 4815670 4821671 4839670 4852670 4866671 4875670 4884670  13—Continued  Odd  S c a l e Products Score  Even  Total  Odd  Even  2. 385 2. 692 1. 769 1. 615 1. 615 1. 769 2. 538 2. 615 3. 615 3. 077 2. 308 2. 462 3. 308 3. 000 2. 692 2. 769 2. 154 2. 462 2. 154 2. 308 2. 308 2. 154 2. 385 2. 692 1. 846 1. 923 2. 692 2. 846 2. 000 2. 231 2. 077 2. 231 2. 000 1. 769 2. 231 2. 538 2. 077 2. 231 2. 692 3. 308 2. 231 2. 846 2. 538 2. 462 2. 308 ' 2.385 2. 615 2. 385 3. 231 3. 077 2. 308 2. 308 3. 462 3. 615 1. 846 1. 846 1. 769 1. 923 1. 846 1. 846 2. 923 3. 000 2. 154 1. 923 1. 846 2. 000 2. 846 2. 538 1. 231 1. 154 2. 308 2. 231 2. 462 2. 692 2. 692 2. 538 2. 000 2. 231 2. 385 2. 615 2. 000 2. 077 2. 154 2. 000 2. 231 2. 538  2. 538 1. 692 1. 692 2. 577 3. 346 2. 385 3. 154 2. 731 2. 308 2. 231 2. 231 2. 538 1. 885 2. 769 2. 115 2. 154 1. 885 2. 385 2. 154 3. 000 2. 538 2. 500 2. 346 2. 500 3. 154 2. 308 3. 538 1. 846 1. 846 1. 846 2. 962 2. 038 1. 923 2. 692 1. 192 2. 269 2. 577 2. 615 2. 115 2. 500 2. 038 2. 077 2. 385  11. 409 7. 748 7. 065 11. 374 16. 849 11. 272 16. 272 13. 442 8. 868 9. 418 10. 640 11. 135 7. 819 11. 466 9. 302 9. 400 9. 280 9. 577 9. 348 12. 272 9. 972 10. 993 10. 592 11. 824 14. 977 10. 405 18. 096 8. 099 7. 935 8. 405 13. 291 9. 895 8. 258 12. 911 5. 985 10. 103 11. 477 13. 605 8. 918 10. 448 9. 491 9. 172 9. 989  11. 469 6. 412 . 7. 522 11. 712 14. 141 11. 359 12. 684 11. 816 10. 212 9. 673 1.0.047 11. 644 8. 058 11. 767 9. 718 9. 277 8. 044 10. 605 9.475 : 14.946 11. 681 10. 528 10. 809 9. 713 14. 462 10. 390 18. 112 7. 364 7. 654 7. 802 12. 803 8. 122 8. 052 11. 835 5. 690 9. 524 12. 547 12. 091 9. 569 10. 828 8. 662 9. 039 10. 672  !  Total 11. 439 7. 080 7. 293 11. 543 15. 495 11. 315 14. 478 12. 629 9. 540 9. 545 10. 343 11. 389 7. 938 11. 617 9. 510 9. 338 8. 662 10. 091 9. 411 13. 609 10. 827 10. 761 10. 701 10. 768 14. 720 10. 397 18. 104 7. 732 7. 795 8. 103 13. 047 9. 008 8. 155 12. 373 5. 837 9. 813 12. 012 12. 848 9. 244 10. 638 9. 077 9. 106 10. 330  176  TABLE 13—Continued  u  d  e  n  L i k e r t Score  t  No. 4888674 4891672 4897670 4899672 4925672 4932670 4960672 4964670 4983671 4983672 4984670 4999672 5016670 5021670 5035675 5042674 5116673 5151672 5187671 5192676 5304673 5326622 5337673 5406674 5425677 5438671 5449670 5468674 5585674 5622670 5662671 5825670 5897670 6019670 6215670 6507670 6901675 6985676 7036673 7082674 7189670 7198672 7400675  Odd  Even  2. 231 2. 615 1. 846 1. 846 2. 769 2. 538 1. 923 1. 846 2. 231 2. 308 2. 538 3. 077 2. 923 3. 154 2. 462 2. 769 2. 000 1. 769 2. 846 3. 000 2. 615 2. 615 2. 462 2. 308 2. 000 2. 077 2. 308 2. 231 2. 385 2. 692 2. 538 2. 923 2. 000 1. 846 1. 923 2. 000 2. 462 2. 462 2. 923 2. 846 2. 385 2. 231 2. 385 2. 308 2. 615 ' 2.923 2. 231 2. 154 2. 077 2. 538 1. 846 1. 615 " 2. 154 2. 846 2. 538 2. 385 2. 923 2. 462 2. 385 2. 308 1. 846 1. 769 2. 538 2. 462 2. 846 4. 000 4. 538 4. 385 1. 615 1. 846 4. 538 3. 923 1. 923 1. 692 2. 692 2. 462 2. 077 1. 769 2. 154 3. 077 2. 615 2. 846 2. 231 2. 077 2. 769 3. 231  Total 2. 423 1. 846 2. 654 1. 885 2. 269 2. 808 ' 3. 038 2. 615 1. 885 2. 923 2. 615 2. 385 2. 038 2. 269 • 2. 538 2. 731 1. 923 1. 9622. 462 2. 885 2. 308 2. 346 2. 769 2. 192 2. 308 1. 731 2. 500 2. 462 2. 692 2. 346 1. 808 2. 500 3. 423 4. 462 1. 731 4. 231 1. 808: 2. 577 1. 923 .2615 2. 731 2. 154 3. 000  Scale Products Score Odd  Even  9. 816 11. 015 8. 208 7. 175 12. 898 10. 656 6. 972 6. 736 9. 467 9. 316 12. 129 12. 691 12. 665 12. 634 11. 010 11. 917 8. 492 7. 129 13. 208 13. 295 13. 045. 10. 632 10. 875 10. 563 9. 590 9. 408 11. 282 9. 252 10. 312 10. 323 11. 758 12. 693 8. 742 7. 985 8. 577 7. 719 10. 591 11. 128 12. 952 12. 375 11. 012 9. 518 10. 436 9. 661 13. 001 14. 124 10. 640 9. 788 8. 831 10. 601 9. 576 7. 359 10. 398 12. 385 12. 143 11. 248 12. 477 9. 949 11. 108 10. 390 7. 613 6. 574 11. 678 . 11.352 13. 946 . 18. 925 20. 842 19. 023 7. 668 8. 015 18. 240 20. 472 8. 782 6. 870 12. 413 10. 907 9. 051 7. 683 10. 832 14. 658 12. 571 13. 156 9. 820 9. 238 14. 870 13. 288  Total 10. 415 7. 691 11. 777 6. 854 9. 392 12. 410 12. 644 11. 463 7. 811 13. 252 11. 838 10. 719 9. 499 10. 267 10. 317 12. 226 8. 364 8. 148 10. 860 12. 663 10. 265 10. 048 •13. 562 10. 214 9. 716 8. 468 11. 392 11. 696 11. 213 10. 749 7. 093 11. 515 16. 435 19. 932 7. 841 19. 356 7. 826 11. 660 8. 367 12. 745 12. 863 9. 529 14. 079  177  TABLE Student No. 7522672 7525674 7549670 7555675 7593671 7695675 . 7704674 7710670 7742672 7783672 7807671 7813673 7827678 7924676 7927672 8040671 8041671 8186672 8321673 8390675 9227679 9287670 9303674 9430671 9465672 9513673 9513674 9513676 9536675 9716672 9725672  13—Continued  L i k e r t Score Odd 1. 308 2. 538 2. 000 2. 923 1. 923 2. 231 2. 538 2. 846 2. 385 2. 385 1. 692 2. 538 3. 000 2. 769 1. 923 2. 308 2. 538 1. 385 2. 231 2. 231 1. 923 2. 923 2. 231 , 1. 923 2. 154 2. 615 2. 231 1. 846 2. 154 2. 692 2. 692  S c a l e Products  Score  Even  Total  Odd  Even  Total  1. 615 2. 692 2. 385 2. 923 2. 462 2. 385 3. 000 3. 077 2. 769 2. 385 1. 923 2. 538 2. 923 3. 154 2. 077 2. 769 2. 538 1. 692 2. 154 2. 231 2. 000 3. 231 2. 231 2. 3 85 2. 154 2. 846 2. 077 1. 692 1. 615 3. 154 2. 769  1. 462 2. 615 2. 192 2. 923 2. 192 2. 308 2. 769 2. 962 2. 577 2. 385 1. 808 2. 538 2. 962 2. 962 2. 000 2. 538 2. 538 1. 538 2. 192 2. 231 1. 962 2. 077 2. 231 2. 154 2. 154 2. 731 2. 154 1. 769 1. 885 2. 923 2. 731  5. 633 11. 769 9. 462 13. 461 7. 748 10. 288 10. 981 13. 555 10. 867 11. 252 7. 602 11. 532 13. 750 12. 233 7. 762 11. 167 11. 699 6. 934 9. 729 11. 102 8. 572 12. 558 10. 699 9. 270 10. 100 11. 548 9. 572 8. 862 9. 580 13. 108 12. 762  5. 914 10. 831 10. 431 12. 442 9. 101 10. 434 12. 421 13. 094 10. 818 10. 345 7. 016 10. 550 13. 262 13. 556 8. 101 12. 282 10. 764 7. 861 8. 612 10. 426 8. 060 13. 086 10. 263 10. 570 8. 212 12. 095 8. 866 8. 962 7. 577 13. 800 12. 412  5. 773 11. 300 9. 947 12. 952 8. 424 10. 361 11. 701 13. 324 10. 842 10. 798 7. 309 11. 041 13. 506 12. 895 7. 932 11. 725 11.232. 7. 397 9. 171 10. 764 8. 316 12. 822 10. 481 9. 920 9. 156 11. 822 9. 219 8. 912 8. 578 13. 454 12. 587  The terms odd, even, and t o t a l , f o r e i t h e r s c o r i n g technique, r e f e r r e s p e c t i v e l y t o the average score on the 13 odd numbered statements, the average score on the 13 even numbered statements, and the average score on the e n t i r e 26 statements.  178  TABLE 14 THE ATTITUDE SCORES ON THE CONTROL GROUP IN MARCH THAT WERE REQUIRED IN THE CALCULATION OF GUTTMAN S INTERNAL CONSISTENCY 1  RELIABILITY COEFFICIENT u  d  e  n  L i k e r t Score  t  No.  Odd  Even  Total  0363671 0403673 0437671 0812670 0813672 0898671 0966676 0982670 1047672 1241671 1376676 1387662 1407673 1459671 1496672 1534662 1536672 1762672 1838675 1839660 1843672 2109663 2127674 2191670 2854673 2889674 2905671 2921677 3081670 3127670 3289672 3391671 3460651 3475673 3615672 3698672 3720672 3793670 3817673  2. 462 2. 385 2. 923 1. 692 2. 308 2. 846 3.462 2. 231 2. 846 2. 231 2. 385 3. 077 2. 692 2. 385 2. 462 2. 615 2. 615 2. 692 1. 923 3. 538 3. 462 1. 692 2. 231 2. 154 3. 000 2. 077 3. 000 2. 308 2. 692 2. 692 2. 615 2. 923 3. 692 2. 154 3. 385 2. 462 3. 923 3. 462 2. 692  2. 615 2. 385 3. 231 1. 923 1. 923 2. 615 3. 000 2. 385 2.462 2. 538 2. 538 3. 308 2. 769 2. 462 2. 538 2. 615 2. 615 3. 077 2. 077 3. 923 3. 538 1. 385 2. 308 2. 154 2. 154 2. 231 3. 000 2. 615 3. 000 2. 462 2. 692 3. 538 3. 846 2. 000 3. 077 2. 692 3. 846 3. 462 2. 692  2. 538 2. 385 .3. 077 1. 808 2. 115 2. 731 3. 231 2. 308 2. 654 2. 385 2. 462 3. 192 2. 731 2. 423 2. 500 2. 615 2. 615 2. 885 2. 000 3. 731 3. 500 1. 538 2. 269 2. 154 2. 077 2. 154 3. 000 2. 462 2. 846 2. 577 2. 654 3. 231 3. 769 2. 077 3. 231 2. 577 3. 885 3. 462 2. 692  S c a l e Products a  Odd  Even  10. 428 10. 555 13. 348 6.278 10. 809 11. 829 16. 379 9. 949 14. 198 9. 432 10. 889 " 13.632 11. 075 10. 288 10. 213 11. 827 11. 536 12. 022 8. 075 15. 960 16. 366 7. 224 9. 025 9. 808 13. 399 9. 292 13. 825 10. 252 12. 222 .11. 653 12. 190 12. 609 •16. 932 8. 582 14. 633 9. 05 7 18. 090 15. 583 12. 128  11. 295 9. 805 13. 662 27. 364 8. 104 10. 418 12. 779 10. 255 10. 993 10. 127 10. 397 13. 307 11. 306 9. 452 10. 377 11. 715 10. 105 12. 825 7. 944 18. 390 15. 308 5. 897 9. 538 9. 758 14. 122 10. 091 13. 791 10. 378 . 12. 437 11. 066 12. 099 14. 629 16. 472 8. 035 13. 346 11. 470 17. 489 15. 366 11. 055  Score Total 10. 862 10. 180 13. 505 6.821 9. 457 11. 123 14. 579 10. 102 12. 596 9. 779 10. 643 13. 470 11. 191 9. 870 10. 295 11. 771 10. 816 12. 423 8. 010 17. 175 15. 83 7 6.560 9. 282 9. 783 13. 760 9. 691 13. 808 10. 315 •12. 329 11. 360 12. 145 13. 619 16. 702 8. 308 13. 990 10. 263 17. 790 .15.475 11. 591  179  TABLE Student No. 3841670 4049670 4412670 4616670 4671676 4739672 5009670 5121670 5122663 5148670 5148672 5192673 5206670 5207670 5211670 5215672 5250675 5304675 5314670 5338672 5423674 5402670 5417674 5417677 5421679 5422671 5422674 5423675 5424679 5428674 5445672 5459673 5467675 5468672 5470672 5480673 5499670 5505673 5514672 5517673 5567641 5567672 5567674.  14—Continued  L i k e r t Score Odd  Even  1. 769 2. 077 2. 846 2. 846 2. 462 2. 308 2. 385 3. 385 2. 923 3. 000 2. 462 2. 462 1. 692 1. 769 3. 154 2. 923 3. 000 2. 769 2. 538 3. 308 2. 769 2. 923 2. 538 2. 231 2. 846 - 3.154 1. 692 2. 462 2. 769 2. 692 2. 615 2. 538 2. 846 3. 231 2. 923 3. 231 2. 462 2. 231 2. 692 2. 538 3. 077 3. 231 2. 154 2. 308 3. 615 ' 4. 077 2. 846 2. 846 2. 538 2. 462 3. 154 3. 077 3. 308 2. 846 2. 538 2. 462 3. 308 3. 385 2. 923 2. 769 2. 692 2. 692 3. 538 3.462 3. 231 3. 846 4. 308 3. 692 2. 846 2. 692 ,2. 231 1. 615 2. 923 2. 846 4. 000 3.462 2. 385 2. 385 3. 538 3. 385 2. 692 2. 923 2.462 2. 000 2. 692 2. 846  Total 1. 923 2. 846 2. 385 2. 885 2. 962 2. 462 1. 731 3. 038 2. 885 2. 923 2. 846 2. 385 3. 000 2. 077 2. 731 2. 577 3. 038 3. 077 2. 346 2. 615 3. 154 2. 231 3. 846 2. 846 2. 500 3. 115 3. 077 2. 500 3. 346 2. 846 2. 962 3. 500 3. 538 4. 000 2. 769 1. 923 2. 885 3. 731 2. 385 3. 462 2. 808 . 2. 231 2. 769  S c a l e Products Odd 8. 364 12. 096 10. 348 10. 392 13. 075 10. 790 7. 179 14. 238 14. 245 10. 983 13. 175 11. 034 12. 054 7. 247 12. 713 12. 451 12. 745 13. 882 12. 163 11. 988 14. 003 8. 837 16. 878 11. 816 11. 755 14. 912 14. 637 10. 982 14. 688 13. 494 12. 106 15. 159 15. 115 17. 845 11. 962 9. 995 11. 952 17. 367 10. 714 16. 707 12. 938 11. 052 11. 802  Even 8. 705 13. 105 9. 055 12. 380 13. 237 9. 462 7. 508 12. 766 12. 310 13. 418 12. 376 8. 994 14. 128 11. 062 11. 136 10. 114 14. 737 13. 623 10. 262 10. 350 14. 042 9. 022 17. 218 11. 438 10. 587 12. 517 12. 007 10. 162 14. 459 11. 754 10. 318 14. 558 15. 723 19. 398 11. 943 6. 388 11. 378 13. 811 10. 664 15. 081 11. 960 9. 021 11. 386  Score Total 8. 534 12. 601 9. 702 11. 386 13. 156 10. 126 7. 343 13. 502 13. 278 12. 200 12. 775 10. 014 13. 091 9.-155 11. 925 11. 282 13. 741 13- 753 11. 212 11. 169 14. 022 8. 929 17. 048 11. 627 11. 171 13. 714 13. 322 10. 572 14. 573 12. 624 11. 212 14. 85 8 15. 419 18. 622 11. 95 2 8. 192 11. 665 15. 589 10. 689 15. 894 12. 449 10. 037 11. 594  180  TABLE 14—Continued  u  d  e  n  L i k e r t Score  t  No. 5584650 5584670 5605670 5606670 5607672 5608657 . 5616673 5618671 5619672 5619673 5633670 5637670 5642671 5679674 5705670" 5712672 5739673 5753676 5779670' 5833673 5836670 5842670 5887671 5890670 5928672 5964670 5975671 5982670 6008670 6041672 6065671 6085670 6159670 6180671 6240673 6528671 6665670 6885670 6897674 6905673 6930671 6932673 6934671  Odd  Even  Total  2. 615 1. 846 3. 077 2. 769 3. 923 2. 923 1. 615 2. 692 2. 231 2. 308 2. 692 3. 077 2. 769 2. 615 2. 615 3. 231 4. 000 2. 462 .2. 615 3. 000 2. 385 2. 692 2. 923 , 2. 462 2. 692 3. 308 2. 000 2. 308 2. 615 2. 385 2. 923 2. 462 3. 077 2. 846 3. 154 2. 308 3. 000 2. 692 2. 154 3. 923 3. 231 2. 538 3. 308  2. 769 1. 846 2. 923 2. 846 3. 923 3. 077 1. 846 2. 462 2. 385 2. 769 2. 000 3. 308 2. 538 2. 923 2. 385 3. 308 4. 615 2. 077 3. 000 3. 154 2. 769 2. 538 3. 385 2. 538 3. 077 3. 462 2. 154 2. 692 2. 846 2. 615 2. 769 2. 615 3. 538 2. 769 2. 846 2. 462 3. 615 2. 692 2. 000 3. 846 3. 538 2. 308 3. 154  2. 692 1. 846 3. 000 2. 808 3. 923 3. 000 1. 731 2. 577 2. 308 2. 538 2. 346 3. 192 2. 654 2. 769 2. 500 3. 269 4. 308 2. 269 2. 808 3. 077 2. 577 2. 615 3. 154 2. 500 2. 885 3. 385 2. 077 2. 500 2. 731 2. 500 2. 846 2. 538 3. 308 2. 808 3. 000 2. 385 3. 308 2. 692 2. 077 3. 885 3. 385 2. 423 3. 231  S c a l e Products Score Odd 12. 148 8. 414 15. 049 11. 698 17. 737 13. 629 7. 122 12. 635 9. 847 9. 532 11. 369 14. 490 12. 126 11. 518 12. 073 14. 722 18. 795 11. 167 11. 455 13. 580 10. 127 12. 128 13. 728 10. 587 12. 493 14. 132 8. 562 9. 461 12. 123 11. 037 12. 572 10. 135 13. 933 13. 114 13. 588 10. 222 . 13. 134 . 12. 575 11. 142 18. 270 14. 178 10. 682 14. 720  Even 11. 643 7. 552 12. 357 11. 324 18. 532 13. 762 6. 807 11. 614 10. 749 11. 915 8. 751 15. 580 10. 528 12. 632 10. 109 12. 789 20. 522 9. 254 11. 818 13. 922 10. 558 9. 219 14. 858 10. 759 12. 779 14. 273 8, 062 10. 048 12. 838 11. 210 11. 873 10. 266 14. 878 11. 428 13. 894 10-. 444 15. 757 11. 185 10. 050 17. 571 15. 690 9. 537 13. 506  Total 11. 895 7. 983 13. 703 11. 511 18. 135 13. 695 6. 964 12. 125 10. 298 10. 724 10. 060 15. 035 11. 327 12. 075 11. 091 13. 755 19. 658 10. 210 11. 637 13. 751 10. 342 10. 673 14. 293 10. 673 13. 636 14. 203 8. 312 9. 755 12. 481 11. 123 12. 223 10. 201 14. 406 12. 271 13. 741 10. 333 14. 445 11. 880 10. 596 17. 920 14. 934 10. 110 14. 113  181  TABLE 14—Continued udent No. 6934673 6950672 6977672 6996671 7005670 7024676 7026660 7026673 7062672 7082672 7104650 7104670 7104674 7121670 7139670 7149673 7176670 7177672 7194673 7300671 7324670 7347672 7347675 7347676 7399673 7441675 7467663 7491670 7544672 7555673 7576672 7619650 7688673 7691672 7697678 ' 7701671 7701676 7707672 7713671 7713674 7713675 7715674 7716671  L i k e r t Score Odd 2. 385 3. 462 2. 308 2. 154 2. 462 3. 308 3. 000 2. 769 •1. 769 2. 077 2. 231 2. 692 2. 538 3. 923 2. 462 4. 462 2. 923 2. 615 3. 385 2. 923 2. 462 2. 692 2. 462 2. 615 2. 231 2. 846 1. 923 3. 692 3. 231 3. 308 2. 923 3. 385 2. 462 3. 538 4. 385 3. 000 ' 3.077 3. 923 3. 308 3. 000 3. 000 3. 000 3. 769  Even 2. 769 3. 615 2. 692 2. 231 1. 846 4. 000 3. 385 3. 154 1. 692 2. 154 2. 077 2. 538 2. 462 3. 692 2. 538 4. 385 3. 462 2.462 3. 385 2. 923 2. 538 2. 385 3. 077 2. 538 2. 154 3. 000 2. 077 3. 923 3. 077 3. 538 2. 615 3. 615 2. 538 . 3.615 4. 692 3. 077 3. 077 3. 846 3. 231 3. 385 2. 923 3. 615 3. 692  Total 2. 577 3. 538 2. 500 2. 192 2. 154 3. 654 3. 192 2. 962 1. 731 2. 115 2. 154 2. 615 2. 500 3. 808 2. 500 4. 423 3. 192 . . 2. 538 3. 385 2. 923 2. 500 2. 538 3. 769 2. 577 2. 192 2. 923 2. 000 3. 808 3. 154 3. 423 2. 769 3. 500 2. 500 3. 577 4. 538 3. 038 3. 077 3. 885 3. 269 3. 192 2. 962 3. 308 3. 731  S c a l e Products Score Odd  Even  10. 545 12. 605 15. 148 16. 336 10. 660 11. 368 8. 105 9. 054 11. 222 7. 233 20. 077 15 o 783 12. 565 14. 588 12. 247 14. 023 7. 943 7. 562 8. 958 8. 382 9. 315 8. 706 11. 998 10. 542 11. 572 10. 602 17. 915 16. 914 11. 273 11. 955 20. 643 20. 051 14. 690 13.475 11. 406 10. 270 16. 255 15. 055 13. 152 11. 768 10. 608 10. 186 12. 228 9. 465 10. 171 .12. 393 10. 579 "11. 745 10. 290 . 9. 789 170 12. 798 13. 8. 166 7. 661 16. 874 17. 158 14. 141 13. 389 14. 625 13. 682 11. 814 10. 110 15. 732 16. 855 10. 725 10. 123 16. 930 15. 786 20. 277 21. 954 14. 468 13. 287 13. 135 12. 090 19. 208 18. 170 14. 771 13. 522 13. 992 14. 757 12. 307 11. 794 12. 915 15. 785 17. 448 17. 562  Total 11. 575 15. 742 11. 014 8. 580 9. 227 17. 930 13. 576 13. 135 7. 753 8. 670 9. 011 11. 270 11. 087 17. 414 11. 614 20. 347 14. 083 10. 838 15. 655 12. 460 10. 397 10. 847 11. 282 11. 162 10. 040 12. 984 7. 913 17. 016 13. 765: 14. 153 10. 962 16. 293 10. 424 16. 358 21. 090 13. 878 12. 613 18. 689 14. 146 14. 374 12. 500 14. 350 17. 505  182  TABLE Student No. 7733676 7801670 7807673 7824670 7868672 7918650 7918671 7961671 7980673 7990676 7994674 7997670 8020671 8050670 8117672 8121671 8124673 8125672 8127660 8151674 8160671 8161673 8189670 8219671 8220673 8232674 8238672 8286672 8315671 8316670 8321674 8348672 8367671 8373674 8415674 8423670 8427671 8432670 8432671 8532671 8563672 8568670 8947671  14—Continued  L i k e r t Score Odd  S c a l e Products  Even  Total  Odd  Even  2. 077 2. 154 3. 308 3. 769 1. 462 1. 923 2. 615 2. 615 2. 462 2. 308 3. 846 4. 000 2. 615 2. 385 3. 000 3. 154 2. 538 2. 231 '2. 846 3. 077 3. 538 3. 923 2. 923 2. 462 2. 769 .3. 077 3. 231 3. 154 3. 462 3. 462 000 3. 2. 385 2. 769 3. 000 2. 923 2. 923 3. 385 3. 385 2. 846 3. 077 2. 385 2. 692 2. 769 2. 077 3. 000 ' 3.385 3. 000 2. 769 3. 538 3. 154 2. 077 2. 308 2. 615 2. 615 3. 077 3. 308 2. 000 2 . 231 2. 231 2. 846 2. 308 2. 285 2. 462 2. 385 2. 769 2. 538 2. 077 2. 077 2. 692 2. 538 2. 231 2. 692 2. 538 2. 923 1. 923 2. 000 2. 385 2. 769 3. 231 2. 846 3. 308 3. 615 3. 077 3. 385 1. 692 1. 769  2. 115 3. 538 1. 692 2. 615 2. 385 3. 923 2. 500 3. 077 2. 385 2. 962 3. 731 2. 692 2. 923 3. 192 3. 462 3. 692 2. 885 2. 923 3. 385 2. 962 2. 538 1. 923 3. 192 2. 885 3. 346 2. 192 2. 615 3. 192 2. 115 2. 538 2. 346 . 2.423 2. 654 2. 077 2. 615 2. 462 2. 731 .1. 962 2. 577 3. 038 3. 462 3. 231 1. 731  9. 769 13. 578 6. 181 12. 019 10. 605 17. 668 11. 967 12. 919 10. 388 13. 878 16. 552 13. 462 12. 538 15. 802 15. 846 13. 658 -13. 509 12. 864 14. 548 12. 326 10. 945 7. 525 13. 308 14. 871 16. 250 8. 453 12. 105 14. 022 8. 495 10. 435 10. 538 11. 521 12. 436 8. 996 12. 412 9. 812 10. 962 8. 458 10. 649 14. 722 16. 088 14. 035 7. 272  8. 656 15. 988 8. 162 11. 538 9. 651 17. 998 10. 809 12. 931 8. 843 14. 247 16. 882 10. 117 13. 677 13. 835 15. 712" 10. 960 13. 498 12. 588 14. 150 13. 726 11. 205 8. 064 14. 692 12. 907 13. 782 8. 822 11. 714 14. 634 9. 609 12. 907 10. 364 10. 505 11. 946 8. 253 11. 908 9. 997 12. 581 8. 646 11. 335 11. 65 9 16. 004 15. 623 6. 418  Score Total 9. 213 14. 783 7. 172 11. 779 10. 128 17. 833 11. 388 12. 925 9. 615 14. 063 16. 717 11. 789 13. 108 14. 818 15. 779 12. 309 13. 504 12. 726 14. 349 13. 026 11. 075 7. 794 14. 000 13. 889 15. 016 8. 637 11. 910 14. 328 9. 052 11. 671 10. 451 11. 013 12. 191 8. 625 12. 160 9. 904 11. 772 8. 552 10. 992 13. 190 16. 046 14. 829 6. 845  183  TABLE Student  14—Continued  L i k e r t Score  No.  Odd  8957670 9010672 9166670 9179671 9235676 9274670 9303672 9379673 9452670 9457671 9464672 9481672 9512674 9513672 9513677 9515676 9554671 9627670 9700672 9718650 9749675 9774673 9796672 9810670  2. 231 2. 077 1. 923 2. 308 3. 000 3. 846 2. 846 3. 462 3. 231 2. 692 3. 231 2. 615 3. 077 2. 538 2. 308 2. 231 2. 231 1. 923 2. 077 3. 231 3. 154 2. 538 2. 462 2. 308  Even  Total  2. 077 1. 923 2. 308 2. 192 1. 769 1. 846 2. 615 . 2. 462 2. 769 2. 885 3. 769 3. 808 2. 923 3. 000 3. 308 3. 385 3. 231 3. 231 2. 923 2. 808 3. 615 3. 423 3. 154 2. 885 3. 154 3. 115 2. 538 2. 538 2. 538 2. 423 2. 538 2. 385 2. 077 1. 923 2. 231 2. 077 2. 000 1. 923 3. 077 3. 154 3. 231 3. 192 2. 231 2. 385 2. 654 / 2. 846 2. 154 2. 231  S c a l e Products Odd 10. 138 8. 748 8. 725 9. 768 13. 675 17. 199 13. 949 16. 927 14. 866 12. 388 13. 475 11. 902 13. 357 11. 973 10 446 9. 920 _ 9. 595 8. 331 9. 273 15. 235 13. 758 11. 079 10. 532 10. 483 o  Score  Even  Total  8. 142 9. 140 9. 165 8. 956 7.433 8. 079 10. 776 10. 272 10. 996 12. 335 16. 215 15. 231 13. 594 13. 772 14. 430 15. 678 13. 341 14. 103 12. 404 12. 396 14. 539 14. 007 12. 635 13. 368 14. 703 • 14. 030 11. 173 11. 573 10. 472 10. 459 10. 445 10. 182 7. 508 8. 552 8. 724 8. 527 8. 209 8. 741 14. 370 13. 505 13. 145 13. 452 9. 118 10. 099 11. 532 11. 032 8. 732 9. 608  The terms odd, even, and t o t a l , f o r e i t h e r s c o r i n g technique, r e f e r r e s p e c t i v e l y t o the average score on the 13 odd numbered statements, the average s c o r e on the 13 even numbered statements, and the average score on the e n t i r e 26 statements.  184  TABLE 15 STATISTICS REQUIRED FOR THE CALCULATION OF A GUTTMAN  INTERNAL  CONSISTENCY RELIABILITY COEFFICIENT  S t a t i s t i c s o f Scores Obtained by the L i k e r t Date  Group  December  Control Exp e r i m e n t a l  1967 March  Control  1968  Exp er imen t a1  *o  2  s  2  e  Technique  s S  Group  r  t  .3192  . 3091  .2970  .942  .3136  .3294  .3025  .937  .3003  .3576  .3102  . 937  .3352  .4032  .3516  .950  S t a t i s t i c s o f Scores Obtained by the Scale Products Date  b  2 a  s  2  O  s  Technique r  2  e  December  Control  7.529  6.912  6. 760  .932  1967  Experimental  7.530  7.947  7.241  . 932  March  Control  7.447  8.486  7.469  .933  1968  Experimental  8.082  9.229  8.288  .956  SQ / S # and S^ a r e r e s p e c t i v e l y t h e sample v a r i a n c e s of the average s c o r e s on the 13 odd, 13 even, and the e n t i r e 26 statements about t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e mean v a l u e s f o r a g i v e n sample o f students. e  k r i s Guttman's i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t , c a l c u l a t e d from _ _ r = 2 (1 - S + Se ) ~~4Sp For each a p p l i c a t i o n t h e r e were 238 students i n the c o n t r o l group, and 242 i n the experimental group. 0  APPENDIX G DATA REQUIRED IN THE VALIDITY STUDIES ON THE FINAL ATTITUDE SCALE  186  TABLE 16 ATTITUDE SCORES AND DERIVED DATA PERTAINING TO STUDENTS WHO ELECTED NO"PHYSICS COURSES IN THEIR SECOND YEAR NO.  X  X  2  No.  X  x  2  No.  X  X  2  1.  2. 769  7.667  17.  3. 077  9.467  33.  2. 885  8.323  2.  3. 115  9.703  18.  4. 038  16.305  34.  3. 346  11.195  3.  4. 077  16.056  19.  2. 500  6.250  35.  2. 346  5.503  4.  2. 923  8.543  20.  3. 654  13.351  36.  2. 231  4. 977  5.  2. 846  8.099'  21.  3. 769  14.205  37.  2. 731  7.458  6.  2. 538  6.441  22.  3. 808  14.500  38.  2. 769  7.667  7.  3. 692  •13.690  23.  2. 423  5.870  39.  3. 077  9.467  8.  3. 231  10.439  24.  3. 038  14.103  40.  2. 538  6.441  9.  3. 077  9.042  25.  2. 962  8.773  41.  2. 192  4.804  10.  3. 308  10.942  26.  1. 885  3.553  42.  2. 500  6. 250  11.  2. 154  27.  2. 308  5. 326  43.  3. 231  12.  3. 885  15.093  28.  3. 885  44.  3. 000  13.  3. 038  9.229  29.  2. 392  45.  3. 654  13.351  14.  2. 038  4.153  30.  3. 885  46.  2. 846  8.099  15.  2. 769  7.669  31.  2. 423  47.  2. 808  7.884  16.  2. 846  8.099  32.  3. 538  48.  2. 615  11.093  IX  9. 947  -  143.969  S  2  15.093 7. 246 15.093 5. 870 12.517  X = 2.9999  = ix  2  - (£x) N  2  £x  = .2463  2  10.439 9. 000  •= 443.638  187  TABLE 17 ATTITUDE SCORES AND DERIVED DATA PERTAINING TO STUDENTS  WHO  ELECTED PURE PHYSICS COURSES IN THEIR SECOND YEAR X  x  1.  3.769  14.205  2.  2.692  3.  No.  No.  X  14.  7. 246  2.000  4.  No.  X  2.423  5.870  27.  3. 385  11.458  15.  3.000  9.000  28.  3. 077  9.467  4.000  16.  2.769  7.667  29.  2.846  8.099  2. 846  8. 099  17.  2.500  6. 250  30.  2.308  5. 326  5.  2.615  6. 838  18.  2.077  4.313  31.  3. 231  10.439  6.  4.115  16.933  19.  3. 231  10.439  32.  2.115  4.473  7.  3. 269  10.689  20.  2. 346  5.503  33.  2.423  5. 870  8.  3.385  11.458  21.  2. 308  5.326  34.  2.654  7.043  9.  3.038  9. 229  22.  2. 769  7.667  35.  2.192  4.804  10.  2.731  7.458  23.  3.808  14.500  36.  2.038  4.153  11.  2.423  5. 870  24.  2.577  6.640  37.  3.154  9. 947  12.  2.615  6.838  25.  3.000  9. 000  38.  3.231  13.  2.577  6.538  26.  2. 885  8. 323  £ x = 106.422  X  x  2  2  X = 2. 8005  s  2  = ix  2  - (£x) N  N  2  £x  =. 2442  2  2  10.439  = 307.327  188  TABLE 18 ATTITUDE SCORES AND DERIVED DATA PERTAINING TO STUDENTS  WHO  ELECTED APPLIED PHYSICS COURSES IN THEIR SECOND YEAR No.  X  x  2  No.  X  13.  2.654  x  No.  X  7. 043  25.  2.654  7. 043  2  x  2  1.  3. 269  2.  2.654  7. 043  14.  3. 077  9.467  26.  2. 962  8.773  3.  2.846  8. 099  15.  3. 115  9.703  27.  3. 269  10.686  4.  2.538  6.441  16.  2. 962  8. 773  28.  2.346  5.503  5.  2.154  4.639  17.  2.115  4.473  29.  2. 000  4. 000  6.  2.192  4.804  18.  2. 885  8.323  30.  2.192  8. 902  7.  1.885  3.553  19.  2.500  6. 250  31.  3.077  9.467  8.  8.385  11.458  20.  2.308  5. 326  32.  3. 269  9.  2.192  4.804  21.  3. 231  10.439  33.  2.615  6.838  10.  3.346  11.195  22.  3. 038  9.229  34.  3.115  9. 703  11.  3.423  11.716  23.  2.462  6.061  35.  2.462  6.061  12.  2.115  4.473  24.  3.462  11.985  36.  1.615  2.608  10.686  X = 2.7050  f x - 97.381  S  2  = £x  2  - {JX) . _ N  2  £x  2  = . 2426  10.686  = 272.155  189  Fig.  6 . — T h e S i g n i f i c a n c e o f D i f f e r e n c e s E x i s t i n g i n the  Mean A t t i t u d e Scores Toward the P h y s i c s 110 L a b o r a t o r y o f P a s t P h y s i c s 110 Students E l e c t i n g A p p l i e d p h y s i c s , Pure P h y s i c s , or No P h y s i c s i n T h e i r Second Year. A.  Applied Physics t =  (2) Versus No P h y s i c s (1)  Xl - X (Nl - 1 ) S ^ + (N - D S Ni + N - 2 2  2  Z 2  2  2.9999 - 2.7050 (47) ( .2463) + (35) (.2426) 82 =  1 + 1_ J Nl N 2  1 + 1 48 36.  2.748  t = 2.748 i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .005 l e v e l - ^.005,00 =  B.  Pure P h y s i c s t =  2  '  5 7 6  >  (2) Versus No P h y s i c s (1)  2.9999 - 2 .8005 (47)(.2463) + (37)( .2442) J 84  1 + 1 48 38  1.854  t = 1.854 i s s i g n i f i c a n t  a t the .05 l e v e l  ^.05,oo = !-645)  190  Fig.  7 . — T h e Form Given t o t h e Teaching A s s i s t a n t s A s k i n g  Them t o Judge T h e i r Students' A t t i t u d e s Toward t h e Laboratory  TO:  '  . .'  GROUP:  ;  FROM:  G. PAGE  We a r e p r e s e n t i n g you w i t h the r a t h e r s u b j e c t i v e and perhaps d i f f i c u l t task o f j u d g i n g your s t u d e n t s ' a t t i t u d e s toward t h e l a b o r a t o r y . T h i s a t t i t u d e ( p o s i t i v e or n e g a t i v e f e e l i n g ) can be thought o f as a composite o f t h e student's i n t e r e s t , m o t i v a t i o n , e t c . , as i n d i c a t e d by h i s behaviour e x h i b i t e d i n t h e l a b o r a t o r y . P l e a s e l i s t t h e students' names below a l p h a b e t i c a l l y , and u s i n g responses o f (1) very good, (2) good, (3) i n d i f f e r e n t , (4) poor, and (5) very poor, i n d i c a t e the corresponding number o f the response which b e s t expresses t h e i r a t t i t u d e toward t h e l a b t h i s term (perhaps t h i s t a s k c o u l d b e s t be accomplished d u r i n g t h i s group's l a b p e r i o d ) . No.  Name  No.  Name  191  TABLE 19 STUDENTS' ATTITUDE SCORES ON THE ATTITUDE SCALE AND THE ATTITUDE SCORES GIVEN THEM BY THEIR TEACHING ASSISTANTS Student  No.  x  0081662 0119671 0432671 0768672 0834678 0880671 0944671 1001676 1043673 1074670 1081672 1112673 1149671 1253672 1322670 1397678 1492671 1573673 1719670 1727670 1789671 1808674 1812672 1896675 1954672 2073671 2361671 2392672 2734672 2738672 2776674 2905661 2937672 2937678 3201671 3315673 3409660 3438670 3477672  2 3 1 4 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 1 4 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 1  Y  a  .  4.3 2.5 2.3 3.2 4.1 2.8 1.7 1.7 2.3 2.1 3.5 2.2 2.2 3.8 2.5 3.7 2.7 2.8 2.4 2.3 3.2 1.4 3.2 1.9 2.4 2.5 2.0 3.0 2.6 3.1 1.5 2.8 2.8 2.0 2.5 1.7 3.3 2.7 2.2  Student  No.  X  Y  0081671 0416672 0463672 0794671 0871671 0920671 0995671 1030672 1058673 1075672 1103674 1147673 1164671 1302662 1358672 1465673 1492673 1613671 1719671 1765671 1802671 1812661 1844671 1929671 1954673 2114672 2391672 2586672 2734673 2754671 2858674 2908671 2937677 3043672 3285671 3385671 3432670 3445670 3567670  3 3 4 3 2 1 2 2 1 1 3 1 2 2 3 3 3 1 2 2' 1 3 3 2 3 2 1 2 1 2 2 3 2 1 1 3 2 1 2  1.9 2.3 4.3 3.0 2.0 2.5 1.8 1.7 2.0 2.0 4.4 1.6 2.7 2.3 2.7 2.4 1.8 1.7 3.0 2.4 2.9 1.7 2.3 2.0 4.0 1.7 2.1 3.5 2.1 2.4 2.6 1.9 2.7 2.0 1.7 2.6 3.1 2.3 2.1  192  TABLE  19—Continued  Student No.  X  Y  Student No.  X  Y  3573671 3843673 3849670 4694670 4852670 4891672 4960672 4999672 5042674 5151672 5406674 5622670 5835670 6215670 7082674. 7522672 7593671 7704674 7742672 7807671 7927672 9227679 9513673 9536675 0363671 0898671 0982670 1376676 1407673 1536672 2191670 2905671 3081670 3289672 3460651 3698672 3817673 4412670 5009670 5122663 5211670 5417677 5422674 5424679  3 2 2 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 2 3 1 3 3 3 2 1 3 2 2 2 2 1 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2  1.9 2.3 3.2 1.9 2.5 1.8 3.0 2.4 2.7 1. 9 2.2 2.3 2.5 1.7 2.6 1.5 2.2 2.8 2.6 1.8 2.0 2.0 2.7 1.9 2.5 2.7 2.3 2.5 2.7 2.6 2.2 3.0 2.8 2.7 3.7 2.6 2.7 2.4 1.7 2.9 2.7 2.8 3.0 3.3  3731673 3845672 4671671 4713672 4866671 4932670 4984670 5021670 5116673 5326622 5585674 5662671 6019670 6901675 7189670 7549670 7695675 7710670 7783672 7827678 8186672 9465672 9513676 9912673 0813672 0966676 1241671 1387662 1534662 2109663 2889674 2921677 3127670 3391671 3475673 3793670 4049670 4671676 5121670 5148670 5250675 5421679 5423675 5445672  3 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 1 1 1 2 2. 3 1 3 3 3 3 2 1 1 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 3 2  2.2 2.5 3.0 1.2 2.0 2.8 2.6 2.3 1.9 2.3 2.7 1.8 4.5 1.8 2.7 2.2 2.3 3.0 2.4 3.0 1.5 2.2 1.8 3.3 2.1 3.2 2.4 3.2 2.6 1.5 2.2 2.5 2.6 3.2 2.0 3.5 2.8 3.0 3.0 2.9 3.0 2.5 2.5 2.7  193  TABLE 1 9 — C o n t i n u e d Student No.  X  5459673 5480673 5514672 5567672 5607672 5618671 5633670. 5642671 5753676 5833673 5890670 6008670 6159670 6665670 6930671 6950672 6996671 7024676 7026673 7082672 7104674 7149673 7177672 7347672 7467663 7555673 7713671 7713675 7716671 7807673 7918650 7961671 8020671 8125672 8160671 8189670 8232674 8321674 8367671 8423670 8957670 9235676 9481672 9554671 9718650 9796672  2 1 2 3 3 3 2 3 1 2 4 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 4 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 4 2 3 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 1  ..  Y  Student No.  X  3.5 1.9 2.4 2.2 3.9 2.6 2.4 2.6 2.3 3.0 2.5 2.7 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.5 2.2 3.7 3.0 2.1 2.5 4.4 2.5 2.5 2.0 3.4 3.3 3.0 3.7 1. 7 3.9 3.0 2.9 3.0 2.5 3.2 2.2 2.3 2.6 2.4 2.0 2.9 2.9 2.0 3.2 2.7  5470672 5499670 5517673 5567674 5616673 5619673 5637670 5739673 5779670 5887671 5964670 6065671 6528671 6905673 6932673 6977672 7005670 7026660 7062672 7104670 7139670 7176670 7324670 7347676 7491670 7619650 7713674 7715674 7733674 7824670 7918671 7980673 8121671 8127660 8161673 8219671 8315671 8348672 8415674 8947671 9179671 9464672 9515676 9700672 9774673. 9810670  1 3 3 4 2 3 2 2 2 3 1 3 2 3 3. 3 1 4 3 3 2 2 2 r l 2 2 1 • 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 1 3 2 4 1 3 3 1 3 2  Y 2.8 2.9 3.5 2.8 1.7 2.5 3.2 4.3 2.8 3.2 3.4 2.9 2.4 3.9 2.4 2.5 2.2 3.2 1.7 2.6 2.5 3.2 2.5 2.6 3.8 3.5 3.2 3.3 2.1 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.7 3.4 1. 9 2.9 2.1 2.4 2.6 1.7 2.5 3.4 2.4 2.0 2.4 2.2  194  TABLE  19—Continued  "X" i s the s t u d e n t s ' a t t i t u d e score g i v e n by the. t e a c h i n g a s s i s t a n t , and »Y" i s the score a c h i e v e d on the a t t i t u d e scale.  195  Fig.  8.--The C o r r e l a t i o n o f Students' A t t i t u d e Scores on the  A t t i t u d e S c a l e With the A t t i t u d e Scores Given Them By T h e i r Teaching A s s i s t a n t s . Y - A t t i t u d e Score o b t a i n e d on A t t i t u d e S c a l e X - A t t i t u d e Score g i v e n by Teaching A s s i s t a n t .  £x = 583  £x  2  = 1473  £Y = 670.6  £Y  2  = 1834.5  r  ixY - (fx) (£Y) N (£x - (£x) ) UY -  =  z  .,  z  2  N  (1521.8) (1473  =  0.032  £XY = 1521.8 N = 257  (|Y) ) 2  N  (583)(670.6) 257  - (583)2)(1834.5 257  _  (670.6) ) 257 2  196  TABLE 20 THE DATA UTILIZED IN THE VALIDITY STUDY RELATING STUDENT ATTITUDE AND ACHIEVEMENT Student No. 0081671 0119671. 0416672 0432671 0324673 0566672 0768672 0794671 0795672 0834678 0843674" 0871671 0880671 0913671 0918674 0921672 0944671 0974672 0988673 0995671 1001676 1030672 1043673 1047671 1058673 1074670 1075672 1081672 1103674 1112673 1149671 1164671 1171672 1302662 1322670 1358672 1373671 1389671 1397678  Y 1.885 2.538 2.308 2.346 2.077 2.3 08 3.192 3.000 2.077 3.115 . 4.269 2.038 2.769 2.038 1.885 . 2.3 08 1.731 3.654 2 .423 1.808 1.654 1.731 2.269 2.000 2. 038 2.154 1.962 3.538 4.423 2.192 2.192 2.654 1.923 2.3 08 2.500 3.000 2.038 2.393 3.692  X  l  70 57 80 73 80 55 43 73 47 64 39 79 66 43 70 59 51 72 64 75 84 84 71 63 67 61 63 70 53 54 72 48 72 61 73 63 68 69 86  X  2  46 36 33 30 53 24 35 47 25 16 4 45 29 11 31 26 52 32 26 31 51 48 51 42 45 36 31 33 18 40 38 21 32 32 25 8 32 40 43  X  3  3  115 93 113 103 113 79 78 ~ 120 7.5 85 43 f 124 95 54 101 85 103 104 90 106 .135 13 2 122 105 112 97 94 103 71 94 110 69 104 93 98 71 100 109 129  X  4  103 100 100 110 100 97 74 88 81 78 68 118 93 97 77 80 97 103 - 95 115 100 114 100 91 102 82 108 102 96 100 92 89 102 95 98 96 87 90 107  X  5  23 20 24 26 25 22 19 21 20 21 16 28 24 21 21 18 21 24 22 27 25 26 24 20 25 19 26 23 22 23 23 20 24 21 24-21 22 21 26  197  TABLE  20—Continued  Student  NO.  Y  1405670 1424672 1465673 1466674 1492671 1492673 1537673 1567672 1573673 1575670 1579660 1580676 1584671 1604671 1613671 1719670 1719671 1727670 1765671 1786671 1789671 1802671 1808674 1812672 1844671 1896676 1901673 1929671 1954672 1954673 1966670 2073671 2114672 2333672 2390672 239 0673 2391672 2392672 2586671 2586672 2587672 2734672 2734673  2.308 2.000 2.423 2.269 2.654 1.769 1.808 1.462 2.769 1.692 2.885 1.462 2.615 2.885 1.7.31 2.384 3.038 2.346 2.432 2.308 3.192 2.923 1.-385 3.154 2.346 2.538 2.231 1.962 2.423 4.038 2.231 2.462 1.732 2.731 1.923 3.077 2.115 2.962 1.846 3.500 2.615 2.615 • 2.115  X  l  75 65 64 74 71 80 50 79 75 63 72 72 62 67 97 74 61 . 53 55 73 83 73 56 60 66 69 79 68 53 73 57 84 52 67 80 64 69 37 65 70 70 65 76  x  2  38 32 41 50 26 57 29 47 40 33 39 19 24 38 55 50 25 26 10 36 47 34 10 28 33 30 50 25 22 31 33 47 29 50 51 43 39 23 32 38 40 37 43  X  3  113 98 111 124 97 137 79 126 115 96 111 94 86 105 . 152 126 86 79 65 109 120 107 66 88 99 99 129 93 75 104 90 131 81 117 131 107 108 60 98 108 110 102 119.  X  4  112 88 80 93 110 110 89 91 102 107 94 107 78 102 142 91 92 84 79 85 107 108 123 82 107 109 108 108 84 82 94 110 102 86 125 90 109 77 95 93 85 105 100  X  5  25 20 21 24 24 27 22 23 25 20 21 25 21 23 32 23 23 21 21 20 26 25 24 19 24 27 25 26 22 21 20 28 22 21 27 23 26 19 20 22 22 23 24  198  TABLE Student No. 2738672 2738673 2754671 2776674 2826673 2844670 2855675 2858674 2894671 2905661 2908671 2937672 2937675 2937678 3023671 3027672 3 04267.5 3136672 3146670 3201671 3201672 32 09673 3210678 3285671 3315673 3385671 3409660 3438670 3445670 3477672 3498672 3545671 3552671 3567670 3568670 3573671 3672671 3731673 3734670 3744673 3765670 3843673  Y  s  3.115 2.769 2.423 1.500 2.423 2.192 3.192 2.615 2.346 2.846 1.885 2.769 3.500 2.000 3.308 2.154 2.538 2.269 1.846 2.538 2.500 2^038 2.538 1.692 1.692 2.577 3.346 2.731 2.231 2.231 2.538 1.885 2.769 2.115 2.154 1.885 2.385 2.154 3.000 2.538 2.500 2.346  X  20—Continued  l  55 60 71 57 35 59 75 57 59 64 68 67 51 57 62 55 58 76 54 62 67 55 56 66 58 67 61 78 92 74 48 63 68 42 63 71 71 64, 62 73 73 69  X  2  34 27 30 41 20 20 49 20 18 48 37 31 23 25 38 33 32 47 57 31 39 29 18 46 32 27 32 52 51 29 37 40 33 33 53 45 47 40 30 40 31 34  X  3  89 87 101 98 55 79 124 77 77 112 94 98 89 82 100 87 90 123 148 93 106 84 74 112 90 94 93 13 0 143 103 85 103 101 96 132 116 118 104 92 113 104 103  X  4  92 84 104 97 84 85 79 93 102 79 111 95 111 • 106 97 99 97 112 112 97 92 • 104 99 97 111 •98 77 104 135 140 88 109 87 93 110 112 102 96 84 105 101 106  X  5  22 21 25 22 17 20 21 23 22 20 25 23 24 22 25 22 21 24 27 22 21 23 23 23 24 23 20 26 30 30 18 24 19 21 24 23 22 23 19 25 22 22  199  TABLE  20--Continued  Student  No.  Y  3845672 3849670 4144670 4569672 4575669 4575672 4671671 4673670 4694670 4694671 4713672 4741672 4815670 4831671 4839670 4852670 4866671 4875670 4888674 4891672 4897670 4899672 4925672 4932670 4960672 4999672 5016670 5021670 5116673 5151672 5187671 5192676 5304673 5326622 5337673 5406674 5449670 5468674 5585674 5622670 5662671 5835670  2.500 3.154 2.3 08 3.538 1.846 1.846 2.962 2.038 1.923 2.692 1.192 2.269 2.577 2.615 2.115 2.500 2.038 2.077 2.423 1.846 2.654 1.885 2.269 2.808 3.038 2.385 2.038 2.269 1.923 1.962 2.462 2.885 2.3 08 2.346 2.769 2.192 2.500 2.462 2.692 2.346 1.808 2.500  ' . .  X  l  68 68 81 71 53 66 63 71 49 54 68 62 65 56 67 71 61 53 56 78 78 69 51 65 68 48 55 73 59 67 70 63 84 58 47 55 84 74 46 54 87 45  X  2  36 33 50 34 22 40 29 36 37 25 38 31 32 20 38 37 37 17 39 37 52 40 14 36 42 23 24 42 16 39 48 22 34 34 30 32 58 31 30 25 55 14  X  3  104 92 131 105 75 106 92 107 86 79 106 93 98 80 105 108 98 70 95 115 140 109 65 101 110 71 79 115 75 106 118 85 118 92 77 87 142 105 76 79 142 59  X  4  104 92 97 105 106 117 88 94 103 92 106 102 109 90 107 110 119 102 83 107 93 96 102 97 90 .86 91 123 94 101 98 88 107 114 .85 102 97 103 108 105 111 99  X  5  23 21 24 22 22 24 22 21 22 20 24 22 23 21 24 25 25 21 21 25 24 22 23 22 24 19 22 27 21 22 24 20 26 26 20 22 21 19 23 23 26 22  200  TABLE Student No.  Y  6019670 6215670 6507670 6901675 6985676 7082674 7189670 7198672 7522672 7549670 7555675 7593671 7695675 7704674 7710670 7742672 7813673 7827678 7927672 8040671 8041671 8186672 8321673 8390675 9227679 9287670 9303674 9430671 9465672 9513676 9536675 9716672 9725672 9912673  4.462 1.731 4.231 1.808 2.577 2.615 2.731 2.154 1.462 2.192 2.923 2.192 2.308 2.769 2.962 2.577 2.538 2.962 2.000 2.538 2.538 1.538 2.192 2.231 1.962 3.077 2.231 2.154 2.154 1.769 1.885 2.923 2.731 3.346  X  l  72 41 43 50 42 68 53 80 61 57 58 .76 58 43 62 62 79 65 89 52 61 61 59 49 87 65 73 69 75 65 56 66 69 73  20—Continued  X  2  31 14 29 8 18 36 33 80 27 27 44 42 30 24 38 13 42 13 55 24 35 35 22 4 47 23 43 46 48 34 22 20 35 44  X  3  103 55 72 60 60 104 86 51 88 84 102 117' 88 67 100 75 121 78 144 76 96 96 82 . 53 134 88 116 115 123 99 78 86 104 114  X  4  94 98 79 81 93 92 85 92 98 79 89 105 97 87 99 87 93 105 117 80 106 - 96 103 104 109 71 98 104 103 102 104 108 104 93  X  5  23 20 21 19 21 23 20 22 21 19 19 25 23 21 22 21 22 25 26 20 24 22 23 23 25 19 24 25 23 21 23 25 24 24  Y i s the s t u d e n t ' s s c o r e on the f i n a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f the a t t i t u d e s c a l e , and through X 5 a r e r e s p e c t i v e l y the course mark p r i o r to the f i n a l exam, the f i n a l exam mark, the f i n a l course mark, the l a b mark i n the second term, and the t o t a l l a b mark.  APPENDIX H THE DATA USED IN THE ANALYSIS OF THE ATTITUDINAL STUDY  202  TABLE  22  THE FINAL ATTITUDE SCORE FOR EACH STUDENT IN THE CONTROL GROUP, TOGETHER WITH THOSE FACTORS UPON WHICH THIS SCORE MAY DEPEND Student No. 0348673 0363671 0403673 0437671 0591670 0768670 0802660 0812670 0813672 0898671 0926673 0966676 0982670 1032672 1047673 1127672 1241671 1363675 1376676 1387662 1407673 1459671 1496672 1534662 1536672 1580677 1653670 1762672 1838675 1839660 1843672 1860670 1931672 2109663 2127674 2191670 2358672 2527660 2788670  Y _  2..538 2..385 3..077  --  -  1.. 808 2.. 115 2.. 731  -  3..231 2.. 308  -  4..000 2.,654 2.. 385  -  2..462 3.. 192 2.. 731 2..423 2..500 2..615 2.,615  -  2..885 2.,000 2., 731 3.,500  -  1..538 2., 269 2., 154  -. — -  x 9  a  X  l  X  2  X  3  2..346 89 43 2..385 63 29 2..500 96 49 3..308 80 34 2..615 58 22 1..962 86 . 36 2.. 923 79 37 2.. 231 — — 1..577 77 33 3..154 99 51 2.. 923 87 40 2..808 82 33 2..000 97 49 3..538 87 42 3.. 808 77 32 2.. 269 64 35 2.,423 86 40 2.. 269 77 31 2., 346 93 46 3., 154 75 . 38 2..462 80 43 2.,692 82 36 2..346 75 32 2., 654 67 31 2.,538 72 31 3..154 80 37 2.,692 93 44 2.,500 73 37 2.,462 77 38 — .— 2..808 2.,654 81 35 3..000 75 38 2., 731 77 32 1.,538 80 40 2., 192 86 44 2., 231 82 38 2., 808 93 48 2.,538 3.,538 10.1. 55  X  4  46 34 47 46 36 50 42  X  5  X  6  46 37 45 40 42 44 45  3 1 2 1 2 1 3 1 4 2 3 1 5 1 3 1 4 2 2 2 1 1 3 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 3 1 2 2 4 2 .1- 2 3 1 5 1 2 3 3 2 5 1 5 2 6 2 2 5 2 2 3 2 3 1 2 1 5 - 1 4 2 •2 — 11 2 2 4 1  46  3  _  44 48 47 49 48 45 45 29 46 46 47 37 37 46 43 36 41 43 49 36 39  — .  1  X  7 3 3 2 3 3 3 4  X  8  2 1 2  0 1 2 1 0 0 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 2 1 1 0  3  1  4 1 2 3 2 2 3 4 1 2 1 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 2 2 3 3 3 4 3 _.  X  _  60 73 51  — — _  74 73  _  75 73 81 60 83 84 20 56 55 66 45 54 _ _  81 56 52 63  72 84 _  —  203 TABLE Student No. 2854673 2855672 2889672 2889674 2905671 2921677 2935661 3081670 3127670 3289672 3391671 3460651 3475673 3515674 3615672 3676671 3698672 3720672 3744660 3793670 3817673 3841670 4049670 4412670 4545671 4616670 4671672 4671676 4739672 4825660 4889671 5011672 5009670 5019660 5074670 5121670 5122663 5123670 5140672 5148670 5148672 5149673 5158670 5190671 5192673  Y  X  3.077 • -  -  2.154 3.000 2.462 2.846 2.577 2.654 3.231 3. 769 2. 077 3.231  -  2.577 3.885  -  3.462 . 2.692 1.923 2.846 2. 385 -  .,.  2.885 2. 962 2.462  -  1.731  -  3.038 2.885 2.923 2.846 -  -  —  2.385  l  2.423 2.769 2.077 3.000 3. 385 2.154 4.269 3.654 2.385 2.885 2.885 3.308 1.885 2.500 2.423 3.577 3. 885 3. 977 2. 231 3.500 2.423 1.808 3.154 2.692 1. 769 2.000 2.462 2. 923 2.423 3.615 3.000 2.808 1. 731 2.654 2.500 2.846 3. 308 3.231 3.769 2.077 2.538 2.923 2.038 2. 731 2.308  22—Continued  V  X  3  V  79 75 85 92 70 89 86 57 77 77 79  31 33 38 46 31 42 40 24 41 36 39  48 42 47 46 39 47 46 33 36 41 40  85 77 65 83 89 73 98 97 78 83 76 78 74  44 34 26 44 44 33 50 51 31 37 35 31 30  43 39 39 45 40 48 46 47 46 41 47 44  _  _  73 71 94 77 76 99 63 102 69 91 75 71 87 94 90 75 78  36 32 50 38 32 54 26 53 36 45 38 34 42 48 41 37 40  37 39 44 39 44 45 37 49 33 46 37 37 45 46 49 38 38  86  38  48  —  —  — — 41  X  5 3 3 2 4 4 1 1 5 2 3  X  6-  X  7  X  8  X  9  6 1  2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1  3 4 3 3 3 1 2 4 2 3 1 3 3  1 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 2 1  2 4 4 2  1 2 1 1  3 4 3 2  1 2 2 2  47  3  1  3  1  65  4 3 4 4'  3 2 4 3  64 63 62  3 4  1 2 2 2 2 1 1  4 3  2 1 2 2 1 1 1 _ 1 1  6 2  0 1  4 2 2 3 2 4 4 4 3 2 2  1 •1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2  2 2 2 4 2 4 2 3 2 3 2  1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1  3  2  3  1  _  _  3 2  —  79 _  69 57 82 59 54 62 65 48  60 81  _ _  58  — 67 _  56 49 _ 64 59 _  — 67  204 TABLE 22—Continued Student No. 5206670 5207670 5211670 5215672 5232670 5250675 5254670 5304675 5314670 5338672 5359671 5402670 5415673 5417674 5417677 5419672 5421679 5422671 5422673 5422674 5422678 5423674 5423675 5423678 5424679 5428674 5430670 5445672 5459673 5467675 5468672 5470672 5480673 5486671 5499670 5505673 5514672 5517673 5535670 5548662 5567641 5567672 5567674 5570676 5583671  Y 3.000 2.077 2.731 2.577  -  2.028 —  2.077 2.346 2.615  -  2.231 — .  2.846 2. 846  -  2.500 3.115 "  -  3.077  -  3. 154 2.500  -  3.346 2.846  -  2.692 3.500 3.538 4.000 2.769 1.923  -  2.885 3. 731 2. 385 3.462 —  -  2. 808 2.231 2.769 . -•  -  x  i  3.577 1.885 2.615 3.462 2.462 2. 208 1.962 3. 231 2.808 3. 385 2. 962 2.154 2.577 2. 846 2.269 3. 769 2.846 3.538 3. 923 2.115 2. 192 3.038 2.577 2.231 3.038 2. 731 2.885 3.462 2.731 4.077 3. 231 2.577 2.615 2.615 2.692 3.659 2. 269 2. 923 2.462 2.615 2.615 2.308 3.077 3.500 3.654  X  2  X  3  X  4  X  5  75 83 61 82 87 80 84 71 63 95 88 9.0 67  31 41 26 36 40 35 34 30 23 46 45 42 31  44 42 35 46 47 45 50 41 40 49 43 48 36  3 5 4  87 84 63 96 90 82 91 97 73 90 92 78 72 71 103 81 107 87 90  41 39 37 52 48 37 41 52 32 43 48 35 36 30 53 39 57 46 42  46 45 26 44 42 45 50 45 41 47 44 43 36 41 50 42 50 41 48  X  6  *7  2 1 1  X  8  2 2 4  _  1 2 1  —  —  4 3 3 3 5 1 2 2 5  1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2  4 2 2 3 4 1 4 2 4  1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1  1 3 3 4 4 2 2  1 2 1 1 1 2 2  2 2 3 3 4 3 1  —  —  _  2 2 0 1 0 1 1  5 3 4 1 3 3 1 2 1 4  1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2  3 3 2 1 2 3 1 3 1 3  1 2 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 1  4 3 3 3  1 2 2 1  —  _  •'  —  —  —  —  77 96 93 83 75  37 49 48 36 34  40 47 45 47 41  4 4 4  0 2 2 1  —  —  —  —  —  74 98 85 80 72  31 52 43 36 30  43 46 42 44 42  2 4 3 4 2 2 2  2 1 1 2 1 2 1  _  -  _  —  _  3 4 3 3 2 3 3  1 1 1 1 2 1 0  X  9  52 35 61 —  70 .  —  55 59 8,5 —  87 75 —  58 69 _  62 _ _  72 —  54 85 —  63 86 72 91 73 58 74 56 _ _ —  70 57 51 — —  205 TABLE Student No. 5584650 5584670 5595673 5600679 5605670 5606670 5607672 5608657 5608670 5616673 5618671 5619672 5619673 5620672 5626592 5629674. 5633670 5637670 5639674 5642671 5648670 5679674 5705670 5712672 5734671 5739671 5739673 5752660 5753676 5767670 5779670 5833673 5836670 5842670 5887671 5890670 5928672 5964670 5975671 5982670 6008670 6041672 6065671 6078670 6085670  Y 2..692 1..846  -  - .  3..000 2..808 3.. 923 3..000  -  1.. 731 2..577 2. .308 2. .538 -  2. .346  3.. 192  -  2..654 -•  2.. 769 2..500 3.. 269 - ' -  .4..308 -  2..269  -  2.,808 3.. 077 2. 577 2. 615 3., 154 2.,500 2..885 / 3.,385 2. 077 2.,500 2. 731 2.,500 2.,846 • -  2.,538  X  l  22—Continued  X  2  2., 808 — 1..885 88 1..346 3..192 — 2..923 89 2.. 385 89 3..346 73 2.. 769 63 3.. 115 102 68 1.. 731 1..846 86 2..362 67 2..577 91 2..423 86 3..654 77 3..308 82 2.,269 74 2., 923 75 2. .692 65 2. .962 2. ,577 92 3..615 90 2. ,615 105 2. .346 96 100 2. ,000 1. . 731 83 3.,885 99 3..385 87 2.,308 66 2., 154 52 3..615 78 3.,462 78 2.,077 78 2., 769 88 2., 769 97 2.,500 87 2.,538 84 3.,308 86 2., 231 77 2., 731 74 2., 731 72 2.,615 76 2., 846 85 — 96 88 •2.,885  X  3  _  X  4  X  5 4  X  6  X  7  X  8 2 1 2 1 1 1 1  9  47 40 32 37 55 30 41 26 45 49 44 43 33 30 23  42 49 41 26 47 38 45 41 46 37 33 39 41 45 42  3 3 4  1 2 2 2 2 2 2  4 4 2 3 3 1 4 3 4 4 3  1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1  3 4 2 4 2 3 4 3 4 4 3  1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 0 1  46 42 55 54 50 38 55 38 32 12 37 41 31 39 52 40 38 40 31 30 28 35 39 58 39  46 48 50 42 50 45 44 49 34 40 41 37 47 49 45 47 46. 46 46 44 44 41 46 38 49  1 3 2 3 1 4 2 4 4 4 2 3 2 3  1 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2  2 1 1 3 1 3 3 3 4 4 2 3 3 3  1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 0  3 2 3 2 3  1 1 1 2 1  2 2 3 2 2  2 1 1 1 2  55 65 68 78 75  3 3 5 2  1 1 2 2  3 2 4 3  1 0 1 1  73 45  • __  .— — 2 41 47 4 — • — .4  2 3 3 3 3 2 3  X  _ _  — 56 80 73 _  51 76 67 75  — _  —  61 34 _-  _'  68 86 70 _ _  74  — 63 _  84 61 66 64  •_  55  206 TABLE Student No. 6115671 6159670 5180671 6240673 6493672 6511674 6528671 6665670 6717661 6882672 6885670 6897674 6905671 6905673 6924677 6926672 6930671 6932673 6934671 6934673 6950672 6965661 6972671 6977672 6996671 7005670 7024676 7026660 7026673 7062672 7082672 7085671 7104650 7104670 7104674 7121670 7139670 7139673 7149673 7176670 7177672 7183673 7194673 7300671  Y  3.308 . 2. 808 3.000  -  2. 385 3. 308  -  2.692 2.077  -  3.885  -  -  3.385 2.423 3.231 2.577 3.538  -  2.500 2.192 2. 154 3.654 3.192 2.962 1.731 2.115  -  2.154 2.615 2.500 2.808 2.500 4.423 3.192 2.538  -  3. 385 2.923  x  i  3.000 2.385 3.115 3.269 1.962 2.346 2.077 2.923 3.462 2.885 2.192 3. 346 2.885 3. 231 2.385 2.615 2.808 2.654 3.577 3.115 2.577 3.115 2.615 2.846 1.423 2.423 3.385 2.885 2.846 1. 923 1.885 2.385 2.500 2. 346 2.038 3. 346 1.846 - 3.654 2.769 3.000 2. 731 2.423 2.423 2.038  22—Continued  X  2  98 97 87 89 94  —  X  3  50 49 45 43 48  X  4  48 48 42 46 46  — —  X  5 1 4 2 2 2  X  6  X  7  1 2 2 1 1 0 2 2 1 2 1 1 1  2 2 3 2 2 4 3 3 4 2 2 4 1 2 3 2 2 2 3 2  3 3 3 3 4 3 1 5 2 2 4 2  1 2 .1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1  1  1  _  70 86 81 83 45 82 100  32 45 37 35 9 49 50  38 41 44 48 36 33 50  4 4 4 1 1 3 1  68 85 96 81 103 66 63 103 68 69 70 81 84 74 87 38 72 85 86 66 59 85 95 88 83 104 100 92 86 76  34 47 47 38 - 55 29 25 56 40 31 38 42 39 31 43 19 29 40 41 29 22 35 45 51 43 55 53 43 40 29  34 38 49 43 48 37 38 47 28 38 32 39 45 43 44 19 43 45 46 37 37 50 50 37 40 49 47 49 46 47  2 4 2 3 1 4 3 _  3 5 3 4 1 3 4  —  X  8 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2  2 -2 1 0 2 - 2 1 _ 0 3 1 3 2 3 1 4 2 2 1 3 2 4 1 — 2 3 2 2 1 4 1 3 1 4 1 2 1 1 2 4 2 2 1 2 1 3 1 4. 1 1  X  1  9  66 63 79  —  65 65 _  _  85 72 _  _ _  73 63 62 66 54 _  — 52 54 63 48 52 71 '  55 _  62 66 47 78 89 _  50 74 54 63  207 TABLE Student No. 7324670 7332673 7347672 7347675 7347676 7366676 7399673 7441675 . 7442673 7467663 7489671 7491670 7544672 7555673 7576672 7593672 7619650 7659670 7688673 7691672 7694671 7697678 7700677 7701671 7701676 7707672 7710672 7713671 7713674 7713675 7715674 7716671 7733674 7733676 7767631 7767671 7801670 7807673 7824670 7842670 7868672 7900670 7918650 7918671  Y  .  2,.500  -  2..538 2, . 769 • 2..577  -  2. . 192 2. .923  -  2..000  -  3.. 808 3.. 154 3..423 2..769  -  3..500  -  2..500 .3..577  -  4..538  X  22—Continued  l  2..462 2..346 2..615 3..885 3..192 3..923 2..231 2.. 769 2., 269 2..231 3., 192 3.. 808 3., 115 2..500 3.,615 3..769 2..538 1..654 2.,077 2..962  —  2. 385  4..077 2.. 962 2.,500 3..038 3.,423 2.. 192 2.,615 3.. 385 2.,192 2., 885 2.,615 3., 115 3., 154 2., 731 2.,692 3..808 1.,462 2.,654 2.,538 2. 269  3. 923 2. 500  3.,269 2. 385  -  3.,038 3..077 3., 885  -  3.,269 3.. 192 2., 962 3..308 3. 731  -  2.,115  -  -  3..538 1.,692 2.,615  -  —  —  x  2  81 93 78 91 86 53 77 89 92 72 89 95 81 92 81 81 78 90 96 81 46 78 81 83 77 85 83 77 73 103 80 61 92 77 75 108 86 76 62 84 102  — — 83  X  3  37 53 43 46 43 22 39 50 49 32 43 50 32 45 39 36 39 42 47 41 16 43 37 35 37 39 34 32 41 55 40 14 46 35 36 58 40 29 23 43 58  X  4  44 40 35 45 43 31 38 39 43 40 46 45 49 47 42 45 39 48 49 40 30 35 44 48 40 46 49 45 32 48 40 47 46 42 39 50 46 47 39 41 44  — _ — —. 34  49  X  5 2 3 2 4 3 4 4 4 1 2 3 1 3 3 2 3 2 1 1 3  X  6 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1  X  7 2 2 2 3 2 4 4 4 1 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 1 2  X  8  X  9  _  '—  3 3 3 2 3  2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 2 1 2 1 2  3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 1 4 2 4 3 2 2 2 3 3 3  1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 1 2 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 _  _  3 3  1 1 2  2 3 3  0 4 1  _  _  2 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 1 4 2 4 4  —  — 1  _  _  72 78 53 79 _  65 54 _  48 68 75 70 74 _  60 80  51 "  73  _  74 58 58  —  67 56 81 64 69 _  55 _  — 88 68 72  —  61  208 TABLE Student No. 7961671 7980673 7983671 7988671 7989672 7990660 7990676 7994674 7997670 8009672 8020671 8050670 8109661 8117672 8121671 8125672 8125672 8127660 8151674 8160671 8161673 8189670 8219671 8220673 8232674 8238672 8286672 8315671 8316670 8321674 8348672 8367671 8368673 8373674 8415674 8423670 8427671 8432670 8432671 8437670 8498671 8508672 8528662 8532671  Y  X  3.077 2.385 -  •  2. 962 - • ' /  .  3.731 2.692 -  2.923 3.192  -  3.462 2. 692 2. 885 2. 923 3. 385 2. 962 2.538 1.923 3.192 2. 885 3. 346 2.192 2.615 3.192 2.115 2.538 2. 346 2.432 2.654 -  2.077 2.615 2.462 2.731 , 1.962 2.577 -  -  3.038  22--Continued  l  2.846 2.885 2.385 2.308 2.346 3. 269 2.808 3. 308 2.308 2.769 2.296 3. 000 2.423 3. 269 2. 192 2. 154 2.385 3.577 3. 115 2.654 1.962 2. 731 3.462 2. 923 1. 346 2.462 3.462 2.115 2.154 2.731 2.538 2. 808 2.692 2.231 2.538 3.077 2. 808 2.192 3.538 3.154 2.923 1.692 2.308 2. 962  X  2  X  101 92 92 77 82 97 89 90 •  — .  91 84 76 82 86 71 69 102 —  82 100 98 78 82 92 94 88 68 67 42 84 61 85 —  83 78 90 72 93 89 95 72 102 83  -  3  X  54 49 50 32 34 54 41 40 .  45 34 27 46 39 23 24 52 —  .  42 52 50 42 43 53 47 48 27 28 11 40 29 37 • — •  X  47 43 42 45 48 43 48 50 .  — .  4  5  —  40 48 48 36 39 39 47 40 41 39 31 44 32 48 —  36 38 42 29 44 42 46 24 54 42  47 40 48 43 49 47 49 48 48 41  —  —  X  8  1 2  2  3  3  4 2 2 6 3 3 3 2 4 4 2 3 3 4 3 2 2 4  1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 2  3 3 2 3 2 3 2 1 3 4 2 3 4 3 3 3 2 3  1 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 2 2 1  4 3 4 2 3 3 2 4 1 3 4 3 4 2 1  1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1  3 2 3 2 3 3 1 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 1  1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2  —  2' 2 1  6  1 3  —  46 50 49 36 47 48 45 49  X  3  —  3 2 _  2 1  X  9  81 79 —  56 —  92 _ —  74 81 _  70 57 71 77 _ 34 69 61 58 74 59 58 53 55 62 80 56 _  44 57 70 59 62 85 —  _ — — —  209  TABLE Student No. 8540678 8563672 8568670 8568672 8571670 8582671 8947671 8957670 8959672 9010672 9044670 9082670 9166670 9179671 9215674 9235676 9242671 9273671 9274670 9293671 9303672 9304678 9368670 9379673 9452670 9457671 9457673 9464672 9481672 9512674 9513671 9513672 9513677 9515676 9515678 9533672 9554671 9570670 9627670 9696672 9700672 9718650 9749675 9750671  Y —  3.462 3.231  1.731  2.077  • 2.192 — —  1.846 2.462  3.808 2.923 2.885  -  3.385  3. 231 2.808  -  3.423 2.885 3.115  -  2.538 2.423 2. 385  --  2.077 '  -  2.077  -  2.000 3.154 3.192 •  X  l  2.231 3.077 2. 962 2.808 2.423 2.692 1.577 1.885 2.769 1.885 2.923 2.115 2.557 2. 000 1.808 2. 769 2.462 1. 808 2.731 2.692 2.269 2.462 2.846 2.577 3.346 2.654 2.577 2. 846 2.885 3.769 1.500 3.154 2.192 2.885 2. 308 1.923 2.462 21769 3.038 2.154 1. 731 3.577 2.615 3.231  22—Continued  X  2  83 103 92 81 86 88 —  82  - •• • ' 84 82  75 79 98 100 81 95 94 90 92 84 93 88 90 91 88 83 73 75 85 83 71 72 64 98 83 88 72 89 —  79 91 72  X  3  X  4  39 53 47 34 44 44  44 50 45 47 42 44  —  —  X  5  X  6  X  7  X  8  2 2 5 2 4 3 3 38 ,44 5 — .•'— •. : > 3 39 45 2 40 42 3  2 2 1 2 1 1 2 0 2 2 1  2 3 3 2 3 3 3 4 4 2 2  1 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2  29 . 30 52 51 37 46 46 43 46 39 47 40 41 53 39 41 35 31 40 39 25 27 23 57 38 42 35 41  2 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 0 1 1  3 3 2 1 3 1 2 3 2 4 3 1  1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 1 2 0 1 0 1 2 2  ,  .  —  . —  25 44 29  46 49 46 49 44 49 48 47 46 45 46 48 49 38 49 42 38 44 45 44 46 45 41 41 45 46 37 48 _ 44 47 43  3 4 —  1 3 3 1 4 2 4 7 2 3 4 4 5 5 3 4 2 3 2 4 4 4 2 1 1 3 —  2 3  _  3 3 3 4 2 4 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 1 3 —  2 2  x  9  75 48 _  46 69 _  75 67 78 79 74 —  86 68 63 45 61 62 70 44 _  69 _  56 _  73 55 68 —  210 TABLE 2 2 — C o n t i n u e d Student No.  Y  9774673 9796672 9810670  2.385 2.654 2.231  X  l  2. 308 3. 308 2. 154  X  2  78 80 80  X  3  35 39 43  X  4  43 41 47  X  5 4 3  X  6 1 2 1  X  7 4 2  X  8 1 1 1  X  9  56 73 57  Y i s the student's score on the f i n a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f the a t t i t u d e s c a l e , and X]_, through Xg a r e r e s p e c t i v e l y h i s s c o r e on the i n i t i a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f . t h e a t t i t u d e s c a l e , h i s t o t a l , v e r b a l and q u a n t i t a t i v e s c o r e s on the School and C o l l e g e A b i l i t y T e s t s , the mark o b t a i n e d i n h i s l a s t h i g h s c h o o l p h y s i c s course, the number o f high s c h o o l p h y s i c s courses taken, h i s high s c h o o l g r a d u a t i n g average, the number o f l a b o r a t o r y s c i e n c e s taken c o n c u r r e n t l y w i t h P h y s i c s 110, and h i s P h y s i c s 110 mark a t the time o f w r i t i n g the f i n a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f the s c a l e . The h i g h s c h o o l p h y s i c s mark and high s c h o o l g r a d u a t i n g average were coded i n the f o l l o w i n g manner: A (86% 100%) was g i v e n the v a l u e 1, B (72% - 85%) the value 2, C+ (65% - 71%) the v a l u e 3, C (57% - 64%) the value 4, C- (50% - 56%) the v a l u e 5, and D (40% - 49%) the v a l u e 6.  211  TABLE 23 THE FINAL ATTITUDE SCORE FOR EACH STUDENT IN THE  EXPERIMENTAL  GROUP, TOGETHER WITH THOSE FACTORS UPON WHICH THIS SCORE MAY DEPEND Student No. 0071670 0071671 0081662 0081671 0119671 0324673 0393672 0396670 0400673 0405671 0409670 0416672 0432671 0519674 0566672 0623660 0713670 0713671 0763672 0765670 0768672 0794671 0795672 0819673 0819675 0823672 0834678 0843674 0871671 0880671 0913671 0913673 0918674 0920671 0921672 0944671 0962664 0974672 0975673  Y 2.154  -  4. 269 1.885 2.538 2.077  -  4.077 -  2.923 2.462 2.308 2.346  -  2.308  -  4.346 •1.808 3.192 3.000 2.077 2. 308  -  4. 115 4.269 2.038 2.769 2.038  —  1.885 2.500 2.308 1. 731 . -  3.654  -  X  l  X  2  3.115 77 3.077 68 4. 038 2.115 98 4.115 71 2.308 90 3.692 95 2. 615 101 1. 923 88 2.577' 87 2. 231 90 3.538 73 2. 923 90 2. 269 87 2.577 80 2.423 93 2.538 86 2.346 75 4.385 83 1.731 85 2.577 75 2. 769 87 2. 269 77 2.615 77 3.115 80 2.808 73 3.808 98 3. 962 96 2. 923 78 3.462 77 2.538 85 — 2. 231 80 3.115 2.692 90 2. 731 53 2. 731 83 3.346 79 2.231 70 3.231 67  X  3  31 27  X  4  46 41  — 46 —  52 33 41 52 52 47 45 47 35 47 39 42 46 40 35 45 49 37 41 33 35 41 31 52 51 33 30 38  38 49 43 49 41 42 43 38 43 48 38 47 46 40 38 36 . 38 46 44 42 39 42 46 45 45 47 47  44 21 44 40 26 33  46 32 39 39 44 34  — — 34 46  X  5 5 4  — 3 2 1 2  3  X  6  X  2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1  7  8  3 3 3 2 3 1 3  2 1 4 2 1 1 2  2  1  _  _  X  X 9  a  X  69 _ •  70 57 80 49 _  -  3 4  2 2  3 3  1 1  80 73  5 3 1 3  1 1 1 2  4 3 2 3  2 2 1 1  55  — — — 2 1  _  — — 2 1  _  _  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 0 0  5 4 5  2 0  2 3  3 3 6 2 2 4 2 4  2 2 0 1 1 2 2 2  3 3 4 4 2 3 3 2 4  4 2 2 2 4  1 1 1 1 2  3 2 2 2 3  2 1 1  —  43 73 47 _ _ _  64 39 79 66 43 70 59 51 _  72  _  212 TABLE Student No. 0988673 0995671 1001676 1030672 1034673 1039672 1043673 1047671 . 1058673 1072677 1074670 1075672 1081672 1088670 1092671 1103674 1112673 1132673 1147673 1149671 1164671 1171672 1253662 1253672 1264675 1283670 ' 1286673 1300670 1302662 1302673 1322670 1358672 1358675 1365674 1365679 1368672 1373671 1384673 1387673 1389671 1397671 1397678 1397679 1405670 1424672  23—Continued  Y X  2.423 1.808 1.654 1.731 -  2.269 2.000 2. 038 2.154 1. 962 3.538  -  4.423 2. 192  -  1.654 2.192 . 2.654 1. 923 3.769 - - ,  2.308 2.500 2.654 2.577 • 3.423 '-  -  2.038 2.692 —  3.692 -  2.308 2.000  l  3.000 2.654 3.077 3.615 3.615 2.308 2.346 2.885 2.269 1.185 1. 962 1.885 3.423 2.500 2.538 3.077 2.308 2.538 2.346 1. 808 2.769 2.731 3.346 4.000 2.346 2.462 2.346 2.154 2.308 3.692 2. 269 3.000 2.462 3.000 •  — .  3.577 2.346 2.308 2. 885 2.538 3.769 2. 846 2.423 2.308 2.038  X  2  89 78 88 74 65 82 94 96 99 64 74 80 72 76 81 55 72' 88 —  75 77 74  X  3  V  41 33 42 30 32 39 46 49 51 36 26 35 30 42 43 21 36 42  X  48 45 46 44 33 43 48 47 48 38 48 45 42 34 38 34 36 46  — 33  3 3 2 —  3 4 2 5 1 5 5 3 3 3 3 3 5 3 2 3 4 2 5  —  30 33  42 47 41  —  _  _  79 88 86 77 92 84 89 87 67  46 51 41 34 47 44 45 40 30  33 37 45 43 45 40 44 47 37  5  97 ; 48 40 7 91 49 93 49 81 41 76 33 65 22  4' 2 4 1 4 2 2 4 2 49 : j - • 33 42 2 44 3 40 3 43 4 4 43  75 60 55 85  44 36 40 43  —  .  31 24 15 42  . •  — . ,  ;  —  3 5 5 4  X  6  X  7  X  8  1 2 2 0 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1  3 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 3 4 2 3  2 0 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 1 0 1 2  2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 2  2 2 4 1 3 2 2 3 2 1 2 2 2 3 4 4  1 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1  2 1 2 1  2 3 3 5  2 2 1 2  _  X  9 64 75 84 84  _  71 63 67  _  61 63 70  — —  53 54 72 48 72 _  —  _  61 _  73 63 _ _  68 —  _  69 86 _  75 65  213 TABLE Student No. 1449671 1453673 1465661 1465673 1466674 1469673 1492671 1492673 • 1537673 1558673 1567672 1573673 1575670 1579660 1580676 1584671 1604671 1613671 1624674 1652672 1719670 1719671 1727670 1765671 1786671 1789671 1802671 1806672 1808674 1812661 1812672 1820671 1841670 1844671 1896675 1896676 1901673 1901675 1910675 1925673 1929671 1940670 1954672 1954673 1966670  Y _  -  2.423 2.269  -  2.654 1.769 1.808 2.423 1.462 2. 769 1.692 2. 885 1.462 2.615 2. 885 1. 731  -  ... 2.385 3.038 2.346 2.423 2.308 3.192 2.923 1. 962 1.385 1.654 3.154  -  2. 346 1.885 2.538 2. 231  -  1.962  -.  2.423 4.038 2.231  X  l  2.615 3.038  -  2.462 2.846 3.269 2. 846 2.192 1. 769 2.462 1.846 2. 731 1.692 4.231 1.615 2.692 2. 923 2. 923 1. 962 2.731 3.077 2.538 2. 231 2. 962 2.962 2.885 2.000 2.154 2.500 2.385 3.115 2. 269 2.115 2.846 2. 808 2.500 3.115 4. 346 2.231 3. 731 1.692 3.615 2.577 2.846 2.000  23—Continued  X  2  82 96 75 73 98 86 92 92 100  —  86 89 86 88 88 71 89 98 86 72 76 80 57 80 89 79 97 77 68  — 64 81 67 85  —  100 106 67 86 77 83 53 96 77 86  X  3  38 51 36 36 51 39 47 46 52  — 38  39 48 43 42 30 45 52 43 34 43 35 26 34 53 32 47 32 33 —  30 38 33 46  —  51 58 27 43 35 37 22 55 31 45  X  4  44 45 39 37 47 47 45 46 48 _  48 50 38 45 46 41 44 46 43 38 33 45 31 46 36 47 50 45 35  — 34  43 34 39 _  49 48 40 43 42 46 31 41 46 41  X  5  3 2 5 3 3 3 2 1 3 3 1 3 2 2 .3 2 4 1 2 3 4  X  6  X  7  X  8  3 4 3' 2 4  1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 2 2 1 2  3 2 3 2 2 2 1 1 2 3 2 2 2 1 3 2 4 1 2 3 4 3 4 4 3 2 3  1 2 1 1 2 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1  5 4 3 3 4 3 2 3 1 4 3 4 1 3 3 3 4  2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 0  4 4 3 4 4 3 3 2 1 3 4 2 2 4 3 3 4  2 3 2 1 0 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2  —  9  X  _ _  — 64 74  .  71 80 50 79 75 63 72 72 62 67 97 _.  _  74 61 53 55 73 83 73 56 _  60 _  66 69 78  .— _ _  68 ' _  53 73 57  214 TABLE Student No. 2073671 2114672 2333672 2361671 2387671 2390671 2390672 2390673 2391672 2392672 2586671 2586672 2587672 2649671 2734672 2734673 2738672 2738673 2754671 2768671 2776674 " 2788678 2816673 2826673 2836674 2844670 2855675 2858674 2892673 2894671 2905661 2908671 2922671 2937672 2937675 2937677 2937678 3012672 3023671 3027672 3042675 3043672 3103671 3136672 3146670  Y 2.462 1.732 2. 731 2.000  -  1. 923 3.077 2.115 2. 962 1. 846 3.500 2.615  -  2.615 2.115 3.115 2. 769 2.423 - .1.500  -  2.423  -  2.192 3.192 2.615  -  2.346 2.846 1.885  -  2. 769 3.500 2.692 2.000  -  3.308 2.154 2.538 1. 962  -  2. 269 1.846  X  l  2.423 1.885 3.192 2.692 2.885 2.538 2. 308 3.346 2.154 2. 269 2.731 2. 269 3.192 1. 846 3.038 2.346 2.462 3.654 2.654 2.231 2.654 1.962 3.192 3. 731 2.346 2. 038 2.385 2.500 3.192 2.885 3. 615 2.962 2.462 2.538 3.269 3.154 2.077 2.192 2.423 3.346 2.154 2.192 2.808 , 3.577 2.000  23—Continued  X  2  98 93 98 71 99 86 91 74 91 66 82 83 86 76 76 85 89 91 103 76 74 84 69 89 69 70 97 75 57 68 94 83 78 77 70 83 87 86 89 73 63 66 80 86 91  X  3  X  4  54 44 54 39 56 42 29 42 50 49 40 4644 47 27 47 44 47 32 34 34 48 41 42 40 46 34 42 33 43 42 43 41 48 46 45 57 46 36 40 42 32 41 43 28 41 55 34 37 32 33 '37 50 47 34 41 31 26 34 34 49 45 39 44 31 47 39 38 45 45 37 46 43 44 42 44 46 43 41 32 24 39 24 42 41 39 43 44 43 48  X  5  X  6  X  7  X  8  X  9  2 3 1  2 1 2  2 2 2  1 1 1  1 2 2 3 2 4 4 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 4 1 3 4 2 4 2 3 3 3 3 3  1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 '1 1 1 2 11 2 1  2 2 1 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 1 1 3 1 3 4 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 2  1 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 2 1 0 2 1 2 1 4 2  4 4  2 2  3 2  67 51  —  —  _  1 2 — .  _.  3 1 2 4 5  2 2 1 2 1  3 1 3 4 4  0 1 1 2 2  57  _  2 4 2  84 52 67 —  t  80 64 69 37 65 70 70 65 76 55 60 71 57 _  35 _  59 75 57 59 64 68  62 55 58 •  1 2 2  2 4 1  0 0 1  76 54  215 TABLE 23--Continued Student No. 3160670 3160671 3192671 3201671 3201672 3209673 3210678 3220672 3260673 3285671 320672 3315673 3378670 3385671 3409660 3409672 3409674 3410670 3432670 3438670 3442673 3445670 3458670 3475671 3477672 3482676 3498672 3522670 3522672 3530650 3545671 3552671 3556671 3567670 3568670 3573671 3581676 3615673 3616671 3672671 3674672 3679671 3726671 3731673 3733673  Y  _  --  2.538 2.500 2.038 2.538  -  -  1.692  -  1.692  -  2.577 3. 3 4 6  -5 4 3.1  2.385  2. 7 3 1 . 2.308 2. 2 3 1  - • 2. 2 3 1 -  2.538  - • 1.885  2. 7 6 9  -  2.115 2.154 1.885  -  -  2. 3 8 5  -5 4 2.1  X  l  3.000 2.923 2.500 2.654 2. 7 3 1 2. 2 6 9 2.115 3.500 2. 2 6 9 1. 7 3 1 1.885 2.346 2.462 2.500 3.000 2.423 2.577 3.115 2.808 2.692 2.731 3. 2 6 9 2.808 3.615 2.692 3.115 2. 9 2 3 3. 2 3 1 1. 9 2 3 3.500 3.077 2.192 2.423 2.154 3.769 2.500 3.231 2.846 3.462 2.385 3.500 2.231 3.615 2. 8 8 5 2.308  2  , 3  77 67 100 76 84 74 78 91 71 81 85 88 88 92 70 68  34 37 52 41 35 38 40 46 26 34 38 49 39 47 31 27  43 30 48 35 49 36 38 45 45 47 47 39 49 45 39 41.  90 76 99  30 52  46 47  92 94 82 73  47 53 46 32  41 36 41  81 65 95 70 76 73  43 17 46 32 35 34  38 48 49 38 41 39  83 81 88 94 74 77 80 95 95  36 33 43 49 32 33 ' 35 47 48  47 48 45 45 42 44 45 48 47  X  -  —  —  . — 74 85  X  X  4  — — 52 48  — 4— 5  — —  — — 32 37  42 48  *5  X  6  X  ?  X  8  4 4 2 4 3 5 4 4 5 3 1 3 4 3 3 6 4 1  1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1  2 4 1 4 3 4 ' 4 4 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 1  2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  2  1  2  1  4 3  2 2  3 3  1 1  3 3 1 2 3 4  2 2 I : I 2 2 2 2 1 0 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 2  4 3 1  2 1 2 2 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 1 0 2 1 1 2 1 2  X  9  _ — _ 62 67 55 56 _ 66  _  58 _ 67 61  —  _ . _ . —— — 2 2 2 1 78 4 4 1 2 • •_ •  — 3 1  — 1 2 3 3 3 2 5 4 3  -  2 2 4 3 1 3 1 3 3 3 3 1 5 2 3  92  — 74 48  —  63 68  —  42 63 71  — — 71  — — 64  —  216 TABLE Student No. 3734670 3739670 3744673 3765670 3843673 3845672 3849670 4144670 4569672 4575669 4575672 4575678 4576678 4580671 4626671 4671671 4673670 4694670 4694671 4713672 4726670 4741672 4815670 4831671 4839670 4847670 4852670 4866671 .4866672 4875670 4884670 4888674 4891672 4897670 4897674 4899672 492-674925672 4932670 4933672 4960672 4964670 4983671 4983672 4984670  Y  -.  2.538 2.500 2. 346 2.500 2.154 2.308 3.538 1.846 1.846  -  1.846 — —  •  2. 962 2.038 1.923 2.692 1.192  -  2. 269 2.577 2.615 2.115 - '  2.500 2.038 —  •  2.077 2.385 2.423 1.846 2.654  -  1.846 —  , 2.269 2.808  -  l  V  3.269 2.192 2.538 3.385 2.385 2.423 2.846 2. 269 3.500 3. 231 2.846 3.000 1. 923 2.308 3.000 2.769 2.538 2.346 3.077 2.500 3.731 2.538 2.654 2. 769 2.654 2.885 2. 846 2. 269 2. 846 3. 269 2.654 2.346 2.000 1.923 2.115 1.846 2.615 2.154 2.346 3.077 2.577 2.538 2.077 3.038 2.077  55 48 66 80 85 81 82 77 79 75 93 93 53 91 73 85 70 71 85 84 88 85 83 87 75 78 80 95 83 86 92 92 76 104 80 80 74 63 66  X  3.000  3.038 2.615 1.885 2.923 2.615  23—Continued  X  3  X  24 14 26 39 46 38 33 32 39 35 45 43 24 44 35 40 29 24 40 42 43 39 41 40 33 37 43 53 44 43 43 48 36 55 36 35 31 27 25  4  31 34 40 41 39 43 49 45 40 40 48 50 29 47 38 45 41 47 45 42 45 46 42 47 42 41 37 42 39 43 49 44 40 49 44 45 43 36 41,  .*5 2 1 2 3 4 3 1 4 3 2 2 3 -  —  2 3 3 3 3 6 4 4 4 4 3 1 2 1 2 4 3 2 2 4 1 3 2 3. 5 4  —  —  —  —  86 83  40 37  46 46  —  —  70 99  27 49  3 2 3  .  —  43 50  ••'  — —  X  6 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 1 1  X  7 3. 2 2 3 4 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 —  2 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 2 4 2 3 2 1 2 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 3  X  8  9  X  0 62 1 0 73 1 73 1 69 1 68 1 68 1 81 1 71 3 53 2 66 1 0 2 1 1 63 1 71 2 49 2 54 1 68 1 1 • 62 2 65 1 56 1 67 1 2 71 2 61 2 1 53 1 57 2 56 2 78 2 78 1 1 69 2 0 51 1 65 2 1 68 1 76 2 -  —  — — —  —  —. •  •  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  -  V  217 TABLE Student No. 4986670 4999672 5004670 5016670 5021670 5035675 5042671 5042674 5116673 5151672 5187671 5192676 5292671 5304673 5321676 5326622 5329673 5337673 5406674 5425677 5438671 5449670 5468674 5585674 5599671 5622670 5662671 5835670 5896670 5897670 6019670 6041676 6215670 6264671 6507670 6542670 6707672 6901671 6901675 6981674 6985676 7036673 7082674 7150673 7189670  Y  — 2.385 -  2.038 2. 269 2.538 2.731 --  1.923 1. 962 2.462 2.885 .-  2.308 -  2.346  -  2.769 2.192 2.308 1.731 2.500 2.462 2.692  -  2.346 1.808 2.500  —  3.423 4.462 -  1.731 -. •  4. 231 -  -  1.808  -  2.577 1.923 2.615  -  2.731  X  l  _  2.500 2.385 1. 885 2.423 2. 923 2.538 2.808 4.115 2.654 2. 731 2.654 3.077 2.231 2.346 2.538 3.385 2.423 2.462 2.192 2.654 2. 269 2. 231 3.462 2.731 3.154 2.385 2. 846 2.692 3.192 4.438 3.615 1.538 2.538 2.769 2. 962 2.500 2. 923 1.692 3.769 2.654 1.538 2.654 1.500 2.192  23—Continued  X  2  X  3  56 83 76 76 89  24 36 29 27 41  87 87 92 90 69 78 83 107 94 87 78 76 91  42 47 49 44 37 37 41 57 47 40 30 28 -48  —  — -  95 68 91 84 85 76 74 84 84 81 55 81 71 75 80 90 83 74 91 74 91 94 88 69  X  4  32 47 47 49 48  —. — 45 40 43 46 32 41 42 50 47 47 48 48 45  — — — — 47 48 25 47 40 39 34 31 45 33 37 19 42 28 34 34 42 39 33 43 34 44 45 43 40  43 44 44 46 42 43 39 51 44 36 39 43 41 46 48 44 41 48 40 47 49 45 29  X  6  X  7  *8  4 4 4 3 2 2 3 4 2 4 1 3 5 1 1 3 3 4 3 2 2 2 2 2 5' 5 2 4 2  2 4 2 4 2 3 2 3 1 2 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 3 4 1 1 3 1 3 2 2 1 1 1 . 2 1 2 4 1 2 4 2 2 1 4 1 3  0 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1  2 4 4 4 3 3 2 3 3 3 5 3 3 4 4  1 2 2 - 4 2 3 1 3 2 2 1 3 2 2 2 2 1 4 1 2 2 4 1 4 2 3 2 3 1 3'  1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2  X  9  _  48 _  55 73 _  20  —  59 67 70 63 _  84  —  58 _  47 55 _ _  84 74 46  —  54 87 45 _  72 _  41 _  43  — — _ 50 _  42 45 68  —  53  218  TABLE Student No. 7198672 7400675 7522672 7535674 7549670 7555675 7593671 7695675 7696679 7704674 7709676 7710670 7742672 7783672 7807671 7813673 7827678 7924676 7927672 8040671 8041671 8145670 8170673 8186672 8290672 8321673 8390675 8499674 8501673 9220675 9227679 9287670 9303674 9430671 9467672 9513673 9513674 9513676 9515671 9536675 9566671 9700670 9716672 9725672 9774660 9912673  Y 2.154 3.000 1.462 2.615 2.192 2. 923 2. 192 2.308 -  2.769 -  2. 962 2.577 2.385 1. 808 2.538 2. 962 2.962 2. 000 2.538 . 2.538 - •  1.538 • -  2.192 2. 231  -  -  1.962 3. 077 2. 231 2. 154 2.154 2.731 2.154 1.769  -  1.885 -  -  2.923 2.731 -  3.346  x  i  2.577 2. 933 1.769 3.077 2.115 3.038 2.077 2.192 3.000 2.423 2.500 3.885 2.192 2.192 2.577 2.385 2.538 2.500 3. 269 2.346 3. 731 3.308 2.768 1. 885 -  2. 269 2.500 3.192 —  3.192 1.808 3.462 2.692 3.038 3.346 2.423 2.231 2.538 3.385 2.577 3.038 2. 269 2.340 3.346 3.269 2.192  23—Continued  X  2  X  3  X  4  X  5  X  6  82 74 68 88 85 88 72 60 84 86 104 71 85 68 59 75 86  35 31 33 41 38 45 28 28 38 47 54 29 42 32 23 35 43  47 43 35 47 47 43 44 32 46 39 50 42 43 36 36 40 43  3 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 3  2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2  —  —  2 3 4  2 2 2  —  91 76 80 84 96 73 73 79 82 70 98 90 90 79 85 92 77 74 89 80 88 80 84 75 53 66 89 81  53 . 33 38 41 49 32 35 39 37 32 50 45 43 30 40 46. 35 29 40 34 43 37 92 33 14 20 39 33  38 43 42 43 47 41 38 40 45 38 48 45 47 49 45 46 42 45 49 46 45 43 42 42 39 46 50 48  X  7 2 4 3 4 3 2 2 3 3 3  X  8 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1  X  9  80 36 61 65 57 58 76 58 43  —  _  3 4 3  1 1 1  62 62 60  —  —  —  _  2 2  2 2  3 2  1 1  79 65  1 4 •2  1 1 1 1  2 4 2 3  1 1 1 1  89 52  —  .  —  —  —  —  3 3 5 2 2 2 4 1 3 3 2 1 2  2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2  3 3 3 3 4 1 3 2 3 3 2 1 2  —  —  —  4 4 4 3 1 3 3 3 4  2  3 4 3 3 2 3 3 2 3  1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2  _  1 2 1 1 1. •1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 _  1 1 2 2 1 1 1  —  61 _  59 49 _ —  87 65 73 69 75 63 —  65 56 _ -  _  66 69  _  _  1  70  219  TABLE 2 3 — C o n t i n u e d  Y - i s the student's score on the f i n a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f the a t t i t u d e s c a l e , and X± through Xg a r e r e s p e c t i v e l y h i s s c o r e on the i n i t i a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f the a t t i t u d e s c a l e , h i s t o t a l , v e r b a l and q u a n t i t a t i v e s c o r e s on the School and C o l l e g e A b i l i t y T e s t s , the mark o b t a i n e d i n h i s l a s t h i g h s c h o o l p h y s i c s course, the number o f high s c h o o l p h y s i c s courses taken, h i s high s c h o o l g r a d u a t i n g average, the number o f l a b o r a t o r y s c i e n c e s taken c o n c u r r e n t l y w i t h P h y s i c s 110, and h i s P h y s i c s 110 mark a t the time o f w r i t i n g the f i n a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f the s c a l e . The high s c h o o l p h y s i c s mark and h i g h s c h o o l g r a d u a t i n g average were coded i n the f o l l o w i n g manner: A (86% 100%) was g i v e n the value 1, B (72% - 85%) the v a l u e 2, C+ (65% - 71%) the v a l u e 3, C (57% - 64%) the v a l u e 4, C- (50% - 56%) the v a l u e 5, a n d D (40% - 49%) the value 6.  220  TABLE 26 THE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSE TO EACH STATEMENT BY THE CONTROL AND EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS ON THE INITIAL APPLICATION OF THE ATTITUDE . SCALE Statement No.  1  2  3  Response Category 3 4  5  1  24 32  115 122  59 51  37 28  3 9  2  5 6  23 29  74 71  123 122  13 14  3  6 13  28 17  49 43  110 118  45 51  4  9 18  74 77  83 81  63 54  9 12  5  12 16  44 45  69 62  93 99  20 20  6  9 9  34 32  51 49  117 127  27 25  26 50  101 86  44 42  55 49  12 15  8  3 5  14 13  51 44  93 99  77 81  9  24 25  59 44  47 57  83 97  25 19  10  18 19  67 78  65 51  76 81  12 13  9 12  50 56  83 86  74 74  22 14  12  1 9  76 79  83 86  68 62  10 6  13  6 5  70 79  93 96  60 52  9 10  7  '  11 -  221  TABLE 2 6 — C o n t i n u e d Statement No.  Response Category 3 4  1  2  14  9 8  69 78  82 78  • 58 57  20 21  15  5 13  17 9  47 41  94 98  75 81  16  3 7  20 .14  34 30  136 139  45 52  17  7 16  44 37  66 65  88 93  33 31  18  12 5  21 26  54 50  99 114  52 47  19  10 12  49 62  26 29  95 63  58 76  20  14 14  91 99  70 59  53 58  10 12  21  0 3  9 9  34 34  148 152  47 44  22  8 3  70 77  102 . 94  46 53  12 15  23  11 14  70 79  77 89  71 51  9 9  24  3 7  18 17  52 47  131 132  34 39  25  25 33  149 167  48 30  15 11  1 1  26  5 7  26 24  73 53  106 113  28 45  For each statement, the f i r s t l i n e i s the frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the e x p e r i m e n t a l group, the second l i n e the frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the c o n t r o l group.  5  222  TABLE  THE  FREQUENCY D I S T R I B U T I O N  THE  CONTROL AND  EXPERIMENTAL OF  Statement No.  OF  THE  27  RESPONSE  TO  GROUPS ON  ATTITUDE  THE  SCALE  Response 2  1  EACH  STATEMENT  FINAL  BY  APPLICATION  3  Category 3  4  5  1  37 20  142 110  37 72  21 25  5 9  2  7 1  18 25  59 78  132 120  26 12  3  8 14  21 31  29 61  120 97  64 33  4  25  94 57  72 81  41 70  10 19  5  18 8  53 59  71 77  86 84  14 8  6  9 13  27 45  50 49  132 106  24 23  7  47 31  91 75  52 55  38 64  14 11  8  5 10  10 14  24 69  122 95  81 48  9  20 18  40 66  50 48  111 94  21 10  10  13 12  66 70  57 67  93 78  13 9  11  26 6  71 43  95 93  36 69  14 25  12  15 2  92 70  74 82  56 70  5 12  5 6  67 65  101 91  61 66  8 8  >  13  ..  223  TABLE . Statement No.  1  27—Continued  2  Response Category 3 4  5  14  28 6  103 62  75 83  27 68  9 17  15  9 14  11 30  30 53  97 81  95 58  16  5 8  14 18  22 38  129 139  72 33  17  10 7  18 41  53 64  132 95  29 29  18  12 4  49 32  61 55  88 90  32 55  19  79 11  128 68  23 41  5 72  7 44  20  38 15  102 92  60 59  34 57  8 13  21  5 6  15 20  51 50  133 125  38 35  22  19 2  114 49  76 107  26 60  7 18  23  20 4  99 58  84 96  24 64  15 14  24  8 7  16 19  38 57  132 120  48 33  25  51 37  148 137  31 44  11 17  1 1  26  14 16  27 39  36 64  122 97  43 20  For each statement, the f i r s t l i n e i s the frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n of the e x p e r i m e n t a l group, the second l i n e the frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the c o n t r o l group.  224  Fig.  10.—The Response D i s t r i b u t i o n to Statement 14 By the  E x p e r i m e n t a l Group on the I n i t i a l A p p l i c a t i o n of the A t t i t u d e Scale.  120  100  80  60  40  20  0 . 1  2  3  Response Category  4  225  Fig.  11.—The Response D i s t r i b u t i o n to Statement 14 By the  C o n t r o l Group on the I n i t i a l A p p l i c a t i o n o f the A t t i t u d e S c a l e .  120  100  tu en  80  O th  m <D  m o  >i o  60  CD 0)  u  40  fa  20  0 2  3  Response Category  226  Fig.  12.—The Response D i s t r i b u t i o n to Statement 14 By the  E x p e r i m e n t a l Group on the F i n a l A p p l i c a t i o n o f the A t t i t u d e Scale.  120  100  80 co CO  o co  60.  4-1  o >. o  c  CD  CJ 0)  1  40  fa  20  —r-  2  ——  '  I  3  4  Response Category  1—  5  227  Fig.  13.—The Response D i s t r i b u t i o n t o Statement 14 By the  C o n t r o l Group on the F i n a l A p p l i c a t i o n o f the A t t i t u d e  120.  100  80  60  40  20  _  °u 1  ,  2 3 Response Category  . 4  Scale.  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0104487/manifest

Comment

Related Items