• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 Acknowledgement
 Table of Contents
 List of Tables
 Abstract
 The alcoholic in abstinence: A...
 The review of the literature
 The investigation
 Pre- and post-test results for...
 Summary and conclusions
 Appendices
 Bibliography
 Biographical sketch






Group Title: self-concept of alcoholics during the process of abstinence
Title: The self-concept of alcoholics during the process of abstinence
CITATION PDF VIEWER THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00098121/00001
 Material Information
Title: The self-concept of alcoholics during the process of abstinence
Physical Description: viii, 71 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Harrell, Michael Almond, 1940-
Publication Date: 1976
Copyright Date: 1976
 Subjects
Subject: Alcoholism -- Psychological aspects   ( lcsh )
Self-perception   ( lcsh )
Counselor Education thesis Ph. D
Dissertations, Academic -- Counselor Education -- UF
Genre: bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Thesis: Thesis--University of Florida.
Bibliography: Bibliography: leaves 66-70.
General Note: Typescript.
General Note: Vita.
Statement of Responsibility: by Michael A. Harrell.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00098121
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: alephbibnum - 000175320
oclc - 03030833
notis - AAU1792

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

PDF ( 2 MBs ) ( PDF )


Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Page i
        Page ii
    Acknowledgement
        Page iii
    Table of Contents
        Page iv
        Page v
    List of Tables
        Page vi
    Abstract
        Page vii
        Page viii
    The alcoholic in abstinence: A perspective
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
    The review of the literature
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
    The investigation
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
    Pre- and post-test results for alcoholic subjects and statistical treatments
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
    Summary and conclusions
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
    Appendices
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
    Bibliography
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
    Biographical sketch
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
Full Text









THE SELF-CONCEPT OF ALCOHOLICS DURING
THE PROCESS OF ABSTINENCE



















By

MICHAEL A. HARRELL


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY



UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA




























































Copyright

1976













ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


My grateful appreciation to David Lane, a good friend, and

father of my graduate education; to Audrey Schumacher for her astute

insistence upon standard; to Bruce Thomason for his faith and sponsor-

ship; to Gilbert Milner without whose guidance this dissertation

might never have materialized; and to Caryl and Ethel whose patience

and loyalty are exemplary.












TABLE OF CONTENTS


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................. .... iii

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

ABSTRACT ... . . . . . . .... ....... . vii

CHAPTER I THE ALCOHOLIC IN ABSTINENCE: A PERSPECTIVE . . 1

Introduction and Purpose of the Study . . . 1
Survey of the Problem . . ... . . . 3
A Theoretical Framework . ... . . . 7
Definition of Terms . ... . . . 10
Alcoholic . . . . . . . . 10
Abstinence . . . .... .. ........ 10
Self-esteem System ............... 11
Internal External Control . . . .... 12
Overview of the Study . . . . . . . 13

CHAPTER II THE REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . .... .15

Introduction . . ... .... . . . 15
General Review . ............... 15
The Rotter I-E Scale, Tennessee Self Concept Scale,
and Associated Studies . . . . . . 21


CHAPTER III THE INVESTIGATION .... . . . . ..... 26

Introduction . . . . . . . . 26
Hypotheses .... . . . . . . 28
Subjects .... . . . . . .... 29
Instruments . . . ... ........ . 31
Rotter I-E Scale . . . . . . . 31
Tennessee Self Concept Scale . . . . 33
Collection and Analysis of Data . . . ... 34
Limitations of the Study . . . . . .... 37

CHAPTER IV PRE-AND POST-TEST RESULTS FOR ALCOHOLIC SUBJECTS
AND STATISTICAL TREATMENTS . . . . .... . 40

Introduction and Tables . . . . . .. 40

CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . .... 49

Discussion of the Hypotheses . . . . .. 49









TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)



Interpretation of the Results . . . . .. 55
Implications for the Counselor and Future
Research .... . . . . .... .59

APPENDIX 1 . . . . . . . . . ...... .62

APPENDIX 2 . . . . . . . . .. . ... . . 63

APPENDIX 3 . . . . . . . ..... ....... 64

APPENDIX 4 . . . . . . . ........ .... 65

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .... . . . . . . ..... 71











LIST OF TABLES


TABLE 1 z Test Comparison of Pre-test Group Means with
Instrument Norm Group Means .. . . . . .. 41

TABLE 2 t Test Comparison of Pre-test Mean Scores for
Abstainers and Non-abstainers . . . . .... .42

TABLE 3 Post-test Mean Scores for Abstainers and Non-
abstainers . . . . . . . .. . .43

TABLE 4 Analysis of Covariance for Post-test Mean I-E
Scores for Abstainers and Non-abstainers ...... 44

TABLE 5 Analysis of Covariance and Post-test Mean P
Scores for Abstainers and Non-abstainers ...... 45

TABLE 6 Analysis of Covariance of Post-test Mean T/F
Scores for Abstainers and Non-abstainers ...... 45

TABLE 7 Analysis of Covariance for Post-test Mean N/C
Scores for Abstainers and Non-abstainers ...... 46

TABLE 8 t Test and Correlation Comparison of Pre-test
and Post-Test Mean Scores for Abstainers ... . .. 47

TABLE 9 t Test and Correlation Comparison of Pre-test
and Post-test Mean Scores for Non-abstainers .... . 48











ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY



THE SELF-CONCEPT OF ALCOHOLICS DURING
THE PROCESS OF ABSTINENCE

By

Michael A. Harrell

August, 1976

Chairman: Larry Loesch
Major Department: Counselor Education


The researcher selected 30 alcoholics who terminated excessive

alcohol consumption within a two-week period and asked them to complete

the Tennessee Self Concept Scale, the Rotter I-E Scale, and a question-

naire concerning drinking habits prior to testing. Two months later,

all subjects were retested with the same instruments, and the results

were used to test 8 hypotheses concerning the identity of alcoholics

tested in comparison to norm groups, differences between successful

abstainers and non-abstainers, and differences in the self-concept and

perception of locus of control which occur over time.

The researcher proposes a theoretical model of the alcoholic

process and offers three basic ideas that are pertinent to this research:

1. The alcoholic sees himself as in control of his reinforce-
ments.

2. In a period of abstinence, the alcoholic modifies his self-
image by changing his perceptions of the positive and
negative aspects of his self-concept.








3. Successful abstinence is an expression of a modification
in the way the alcoholic maintains his self-concept.

Results of testing indicate that abstainers and non-abstainers

do not differ significantly with regard to Rotter I-E Scale means over

a two-month period and that both groups tend to score consistently toward

internal locus of control. Abstainers move significantly in a positive

direction with regard to self-esteem and show change in the manner in

which they balance their positive and negative self-characteristics.

Non-abstainers tend to remain consistent with regard to self-definition

and this group shows significant negative movement in terms of self-

esteem.

The researcher concludes that respecting the alcoholic's predelic-

tion for internal control and understanding the self-esteem problems

of the alcoholic commencing abstinence are important factors in good

counseling support of these individuals. The elemental view that the

alcoholic needs to stop drinking is given added dimension as the alcoholic

in order to sustain abstinence needs to be effective for himself and

work out the negative facets of his experience with alcohol.












CHAPTER I

THE ALCOHOLIC IN ABSTINENCE: A PERSPECTIVE


Introduction and Purpose of the Study


The purpose of this study is to explore several dimensions of

the self-concept of persons diagnosed as alcoholic, during a period of

abstinence through the use of two instruments, the Tennessee Self-Concept

Scale and the Rotter I-E Scale.

The Researcher intends to investigate how alcoholics maintain

their self-concept in a period of abstinence in relationship to the

following four aspects of the self-concept:

1. Perception of locus of control

2. Self-esteem

3. Perception of positive and negative characteristics

4. Self-definition

Impetus for this study arose out of concern centering around the

following general questions which are relevant to this investigation:

1. How is the phenomenon of alcoholism related to the self-
concept of the alcoholic?

2. What is the impact of a successful period of abstinence
from heavy alcohol consumption upon the self-concept of
the alcoholic?

3. Is abstinence from alcohol related to a particular
pattern of self-concept maintenance or perception
of the locus of control for reinforcement?





2


4. How does the phenomenon of alcoholism relate to the
individual's ability to assess and take responsibility
for his positive and negative self-characteristics?

5. Is there a relationship between perceived locus of
control and self-esteem maintenance that has relevance
to the alcoholic process?

The researcher has worked in group and individual counseling

with clients diagnosed as "alcoholic" over a period of several years as

a clinician at a community mental health center. This experience gene-

rated questions as to the personality make-up of these individuals called

"alcoholic," especially in the areas of self-esteem and the ability to

prefer control of one's self-directions.

The program at the mental health center included group and indi-

vidual therapy for these individuals. The cessation of alcohol consump-

tion is viewed as the best option in promoting recovery. Participating

in these sessions as group leader, the researcher noted several phenomena

particularly evident in the self-description of these individuals which

sparked interest for this investigation.

Alcoholic clients, when describing themselves, were often un-

realistic in assessing their past and present behavior although the facts

were known by both the client and the therapist. This distortion of

experience puzzled the researcher in that the client appeared to be con-

firming himself and seemed unaware of the denial of his experience. The

researcher questioned whether this phenomenon was important to the client's

ability to maintain his self-esteem while abstinent or played some role

in the client's proclivity to be alcoholic.

The researcher also noted that clients who had recently terminated

heavy drinking consistently made attempts to explain their motivation for

maintaining abstinence in terms of their past alcoholic behavior.







Especially in group therapy there would occur much competitive remines-

cence about the control that alcohol had exercised over the client and

that constructive growth towards abstinence was perceived in the acknowl-

edgment that the individual himself was inadequate to deal with the con-

trol that alcohol had asserted in his life.

The researcher wondered how the termination of alcohol consumption

was related to the individual's perception of himself as having the choice

or power to help himself. In addition, it appeared that recovery for

the alcoholic meant more than simply not drinking alcohol and that

alcoholics may be involved in some form of self-concept change in order

to maintain abstinence.

The character of this study is primarily theoretical research.

Although the researcher is employing two objective instruments and will

study a group of alcoholics over a period of time, the general thrust

of this study will be to illuminate a concept of the alcoholic process

as a function of the self-concept and to define the role of abstinence

in this process.


Survey of the Problem

According to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, an

estimated 7 percent of the adult population in this country manifest

the behaviors of alcohol abuse and alcoholism, making alcohol the most

abused drug in the United States. Among an estimated 95 million drinkers,

approximately 9 million adults and adolescents may be labelled "alcoholic,"

as the term is generally used (Rosenberg, 1971).

The researcher who wishes to explore this problem must encounter

and explore the dimensions of two vital questions: (1) what is an

alcoholic, and (2) what determines alcoholism? The problems inherent in








definition and etiology of the phenomena termed alcoholism point to a

core of difficulties which are largely responsible for a dearth of con-

clusive information regarding this condition.

The factor or factors which tend to define an individual as

alcoholic are largely, for lack of information, within the province

of direct observation of behavior after the fact of repeated indulgence

in alcohol. For example, Keller (1962) defines alcoholism as a chronic

disease manifested by repeated implicative drinking so as to cause injury

to the drinker's health or to his social or economic functioning. Milt

(1971) defines alcoholism more empirically, citing four characteristics

and consequences of the alcoholic's drinking behavior: (1) compulsive,

uncontrollable drinking, (2) chronicity, (3) intoxication, and (4) injury

to functioning.

Although Milt's and Keller's definitions attempt to describe the

phenomenon of the alcoholic, they also tend to hint at some psychological

or physiological dynamic inherent in the alcoholic's condition. They

use such terms as "chronic disease" and "compulsive." More direct in

this regard is the following definition: "Alcoholics are those excessive

drinkers whose dependence on alcohol has attained such a degree that it

shows a noticeable mental disturbance or an interference with their

bodily and mental health, interpersonal relations, and their smooth social

and economic functioning" (Expert Committee on Mental Health, 1952, p. 85).

Here the problem in definition becomes clearer. One cannot simply

define the alcoholic in terms of a factor or factors which, when present

and observable, determine that this individual is an alcoholic. The

general effort seems to be to isolate a number of criteria into which the

vast number of individuals can be placed who overindulge in alcohol, lose









control of their ability to stop overindulging, and function inadequately

in some social or personal sense.

Isolating a psychological or physiological cause for these

behaviors would solve the dilemma as to whether alcoholism is a discrete

condition, disease, inherited disposition, or is behaviorally symptomatic

of the effects of prolonged indulgence. Milt (1971, p. 10) comments on

this: "The continued consumption of alcohol, regardless of the reason

for the need, will produce certain predictable mental, emotional, and

physical effects which are similar from case to case, especially in the

advanced stages. This similarity produced by the alcohol and its effects

make different subjects look and act alike at times, adding to the im-

pression of a single disease." Milt suggests that evidence from the re-

search points away from such a conclusion and the search for "the"

cause of alcoholism, conceived as a unitary disease, has not produced

convincing results.

Psychological research has approached the problem of defining

the alcoholic by attempting to define an "alcoholic personality." The

theoretical basis for this research lies in the assumption that in the

pre-alcoholic stage a personality pattern or constellation of characteris-

tics should be identifiable and should correlate with a predisposition

toward alcoholism. One of the main difficulties in this approach is that

the population usually available for this study is already involved with

alcohol. The question arises as to whether the personality traits ob-

served in these people existed before the onset of alcoholism, or are a

consequence of the alcoholism.

Attempts to find an "alcoholic personality" through projective

tests have produced no conclusive evidence that such a personality type








exists. Syme (1957) reviewed all available research studies published

since 1936 which endeavored to differentiate the personality traits of

alcoholics from non-alcoholics using non-projective testing. His

general impression was that non-projective tests of personality fail

to provide data for the theory of an "alcoholic personality."

More fruitful are the research findings which relate alcoholism

to different types of personality structure and different kinds of

psychiatric disorder. Sherfy (1955) concludes in his study of the

underlying psychopathology and personalities of 161 chronic alcoholics,

that alcoholism is not a single entity or disease, but a symptom asso-

ciated with several illnesses or syndromes. Chafetz and Demone (1962)

conclude:

The causes of alcoholism are unknown, although the number
of theories that have been advanced are as numerous as
the professions and scientific disciplines concerned with
the problem. No single theory has yet proved adequate
to explain the complex of symptoms which are collectively
called alcoholism, alcohol addiction, or alcohol depen-
dence. (p. 14)

Many theorists suggest a multifaceted approach which incorporates

elements from two or more hypotheses. A model developed by Plaut (1967)

tentatively defines the alcoholic as follows:

An individual who (1) responds to beverage alcohol in a
certain way, perhaps physiologically determined, by ex-
periencing intense relief and relaxation, and who (2)
has certain personality characteristics, such as diffi-
culty in dealing with and overcoming depression, frus-
tration, and anxiety, and who (3) is a member of a
culture that induces guilt and confusion regarding what
kinds of drinking behavior are appropriate, is more
likely to develop trouble than will most other persons.
(p. 22)

Franks (1966) suggests that a general systems theory approach could

be helpful to clarify the complexities in defining alcoholism. He

indicates that in the general field of human actions, behavior is composed








of several layers of action and reaction, with each layer related to

other layers that are more or less complex . in a systems hierarchy.

He concludes that we cannot treat disordered behavior by assigning ulti-

mate cause to one system but that multiple, interacting systems must be

taken into account.


A Theoretical Framework

This theoretical proposition is reflective of Frank's systems

theory approach and is presented so that the reader may understand the

researcher's conception of the alcoholic process.

The researcher assumes that the alcoholic process is in part a

function of an inadequate self-concept and reflects a need for control

in a dependent situation in which inadequacy tends to increase. Corre-

spondingly, the researcher views the maintenance of sobriety or absti-

nence as an expression of self-confirmation and self-affirmation and as

a reflection of a modification in the alcoholic's self-concept.

The following postulates define the basis for these assumptions:

1. Alcohol is a consciousness altering drug.

Ethyl alcohol when ingested into the body acts as a central nervous

system depressant. This quality gives alcohol a capability to affect

both the physical and mental state of an individual and therefore alter

his consciousness of self. The initial effect of the drug produces a

state of consciousness in which the individual experiences a reduction

of anxiety and tension which is reflected in the self-concept as a reduc-

tion of inadequacy.

2. Alcoholism is a cylical consciousness of self.

The ability of an individual to maintain a satisfactory drug-state

consciousness or experience a consistent reduction of inadequacy, is limited








because of the progressive effect of the drug, alcohol, as a depressant

and an anesthetic. These effects of alcohol tend to result in the

cessation of consumption and the decline of intoxication. The individual

returns to a sober-state consciousness with a reexperiencing of inade-

quacy, and its physical and mental correlates, tension and anxiety. In

alcoholism, reexperiencing of anxiety and tension is met with renewed

drinking, completing the cycle.

3. The alcoholic process is progressive expression of an

inadequate self-concept.

The effects of the drug, alcohol, are utilized by the alcoholic

to avoid the personification of his inadequacies in terms of his self-

image. The immediate effects of the drug are offset in the repeated use

of alcohol by an increase of conflict in the self-concept produced by the

ineffectiveness of the drug-state consciousness in achieving a meaningful

solution in coping with inadequacy. The individual comes to experience

more of a sense of inadequacy in the drug state but at the same time

depends on the drug to reduce his feelings of anxiety and tension, which

tend to become progressively more pervasive.

4. The alcoholic engages alcohol to gain control of the negative

aspects of his self-concept.

In alcoholism, the repeated use of alcohol is supported by the

individual's belief thathe is in control of his reinforcements and there-

fore can control the negative aspects of repeated indulgence on his self-

esteem. He uses alcohol to repress or modify the negative aspects of

his self-concept and tends to deny that his repeated use of alcohol may

be responsible for his increasing inadequacy. At times, the alcoholic may

be aware of this, but he insists that he is in control and therefore is








more powerful than the drug. Basically, this satisfies the alcoholic's

need for control in a dependent situation.

5. Sobriety is an expression of self-confirmation for the

alcoholic.

When the alcohol permits himself to remain sober, he is in effect

rejecting the meaningless of the drug-state consciousness and entertaining

the possibility of dealing with his inadequacies on a more substantial

level than simply attempting to control his inadequacy. The major dynamic

inherent in the maintenance of sobriety is self-acceptance and self-

affirmation. The alcoholic acknowledges the positive and negative

characteristics of his self on a more realistic plane than self-indulgence.

He must allow himself to affirm what is positive about himself and reject

those negative aspects which do not reflect what he is but are products

of unrealistic self-expectations and inadequate behavior.

6. Successful abstinence is an expression of a modified self-

concept for the alcoholic.

Continued sobriety or successful abstinence must indicate a

reformation in the individual's self-concept. It is likely that the

alcoholic cycles back to indulgence in response to anxiety and tension

produced by an inadequate self-concept which cannot cope. Indeed, it is

common for an alcoholic to cycle between abstinence and indulgence,

according to a pattern that is individual. However, this pattern is

primarily a function of the unrealistic supposition on the part of the

alcoholic that he can drink without ill effect. Successful abstinence

is not necessarily the avoidance of alcohol. It may reflect an intimate

knowledge on the part of the alcoholic of the relationship between himself

and alcohol and his ability to maintain and support his self-esteem from








within, instead of needing to use a drug to control his sense of inade-

quacy.


Definition of Terms


Alcoholic

Clark (1966) suggests that alcoholism definitions usually share

four elements: (1) excessive intake of alcohol; (2) a mental disturbance

due to drinking; (3) disturbed social and economic behavior; and (4)

loss of control over drinking behavior. The Diagnostic and Statistical

Manual of Mental Disorders published by the American Psychiatric Asso-

ciation defines alcoholism as a category, "for patients whose alcohol

intake is great enough to damage their physical health, or their personal

or social functioning" (American Psychiatric Association, 1968, p. 45).

In view of these definitions and the definitions cited in this

proposal in the "Survey of the Problem" section, alcoholic subjects

selected for this study will have met the following criteria:

History of repeated intoxication resulting in significant
physical and/or social dysfunction.

History of admission into an outpatient or inpatient
facility designed to treat alcoholism and alcoholics.

History ofhaving one's drinking behavior termed
"alcoholism" by medical or psychological personnel.

Abstinence

Abstinence represents the avoidance of alcohol for a given period

of time after a period of heavy consumption of alcohol. Abstinence is

considered as part of the alcoholic process, as it is common for alcoholics

to cycle between drinking and abstinence during their alcoholic career.

Long term abstinence, which is out of the context of this research, may

be considered an index of cure for alcoholism; however, for the majority








of alcoholics abstinence is temporary and it is for this reason that

members of Alcoholics Anonymous consider themselves to be "alcoholics"

or "recovered alcoholics" although they are not currently drinking.

Abstinence may be motivated by many factors including the debili-

tating effects of repeated intoxification, diminished functioning, and

social and moral pressure. Furthermore, the meaning of abstinence may

be essential for rehabilitation but also semi-pathological in the sense

that it may be substituting one compulsion for another.

In the context of this research, abstinence represents the choice

of wanting to avoid alcohol and is considered operational when the

individual does not engage in more than one episode of alcohol consumption

for more than 48 hours during the period of time that he participates

in this study.


Self-esteem System

This term is operationally defined with regard to this research in

terms of the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale and how an individual scores

on the following scales: Total P Score, the T/F Ratio, and the Net

Conflict Score, hereafter called the N/C score.

The Total P Score reflects the over-all level of self-esteem and

is a composite of how the individual rates himself in terms of positive

and negative characteristics within the following dimensions: (1) physical

self; (2) moral-ethical self; (3) personal self; (4) family self;

(5) social self; (6) basic identity; (7) self-satisfaction; and

(8) behavior.

Persons with high scores tend to like themselves, feel that they

are of value and worth, have confidence in themselves, and act accordingly.

People with low scores are doubtful of their own worth, see themselves as








undesirable, often feel anxious, depressed and unhappy, and have little

faith or confidence in themselves (Fitts, 1965).

The T/F Scale indicates how the individual is achieving self-

definition or self-description and how he affirms what is self and what

is not self. High scores indicate the individual is achieving self-

definition by focusing on what he is and is relatively unable to accom-

plish the same by eliminating what he is not. Scores in the middle

ranges indicate that the subject achieves self-definition by a more

balanced employment of both tendencies (Fitts, 1966).

The N/C Scale measures the extent to which an individual's responses

to positive items in the TSCS differ from, or conflict with, his re-

sponses to negative items in the same area of self-perception. Fitts

(1966) describes two kinds of conflict, both of which are dependent upon

the ratio of positive scores to negative scores. If the sum of the posi-

tive scores exceed the negative, this is termed "acquiescence conflict,"

and can be interpreted that the subject over-affirms his positive attri-

butes. If the negative scores exceed the positive, this is termed

"denial conflict," and can be interpreted that the subject over-denies

his negative attributes in relation to the way he affirms his positive

characteristics.

Each of these scales, especially if they yield significant scores,

may reveal the manner in which an alcoholic maintains his self-esteem

and the way he deals with his positive and negative characteristics of

self.


Internal External Control

The concept of internal external control of reinforcements grew

out of a social learning theory advanced by Julian Rotter. He suggests








that there are basic differences among people in the dimension of expec-

tancy for internal versus external control of reinforcement. He defines

people who perceive reinforcements as being the result of luck or

chance, "externalizers," and those people who perceive events as being

contingent upon their own behavior or their own relatively permanent

characteristics, "internal izers."

According to Morgan (1967, p. 31), externalizers differ from in-

ternalizers in the following ways:

High externals are more likely to behave as if all their
reinforcements were determined by luck or chance--that is,
they seem to feel and behave as if they had no real con-
trol over the course of events. They are likely to
learn little from their experiences. They often tend
to be passive and to wait for things to happen to them.
They tend to be more conforming and less confident of
themselves than are internalizers.

High internalizers, . tend to behave in ways con-
sistent with the behavior called for by the situation.
They tend to be more capable of handling others (more
successfully persuasive) and themselves. . They
place more emphasis on achievement, but are more likely
to repress failures. . When given conscious choices
internalizers tend to act on them, but when they per-
ceive subtle attempts to influence them, they become re-
sistive. They feel that they are in control whether
they are, in fact, or not.

In this research, an individual's score on the Rotter I-E Scale

is viewed as indicative of the status of the self-concept with regard

to a preference for internal versus external control of reinforcements.


Overview of the Study

The researcher selected 30 alcoholics who terminated excessive

alcohol consumption within a two-week period and had them complete the

Tennessee Self-Concept Scale, the Rotter I-E Scale, and a brief question-

naire concerning drinking habits prior to testing. Two months later, all

subjects were retested with the same instruments. The results are used









to test 8 hypotheses concerning the identity of alcoholics tested in

comparison to norm groups, differences between successful abstainers and

non-abstainers, and differences in the self-concept and perception of

locus of control that may occur over time.

The researcher presents a theoretical framework concerning the

role of the self-concept and abstinence in the alcoholic process. The

results from testing the hypotheses are discussed in terms of questions

which relate to this theoretical framework in order to establish the

validity of the proposed assumptions.

In summary, this research is a study of 30 alcoholic individuals

in order to explore four variables of self-perception. The results of

testing with the Tennessee Self Concept Scale and the Rotter I-E Sca.le

are related to a proposed theoretical model concerning the role of the

self-concept to abstinence in the alcoholic process.













CHAPTER II

THE REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE


Introduction


The review of the literature is divided into two sections:

(1) general review of the literature regarding the alcoholic process

and personality studies; and (2) review of the literature with regard

to the Tennessee Self Concept Scale and the Rotter I-E Scale and

studies utilizing these instruments in describing alcoholics.


General Review


Fox (1972) indicates that a certain cluster of personality traits

are found in most alcoholics during the active phase of the disease.

These traits, he asserts, may be as much a result of years of addictive

drinking as they are the cause. Fox lists the following as most fre-

quently mentioned: (1) extremely low frustration tolerance, (2) inability

to endure anxiety or tensions, (3) feelings of isolation, (4) devalued

self-esteem, (5) a tendency to act impulsively, (6) a repetitive "acting

out" of conflicts, (7) often an extreme narcissism and exhibitionism,

(8) a tendency toward masochistic self-punitive behavior, (9) somatic

preoccupation and hypochondriasis, and (10) often extreme mood swings.

Fox cautions, however, that projective and non-projective tests

revealing these personality traits were conducted with people who had

already become heavily addicted to alcohol and may in no way represent








their personalities before the addictive process took over. He indicates

that these traits may express either fixations or regressions and they

may be considered as immature methods of coping with sgressful situations.

McCord and McCord (1960) studied the personality characteristics

of a group of adult alcoholics as compared with the childhood personality

characteristics of a group of boys who eventually became alcoholics.

McCord and McCord indicate that,

It is important to recognize that the sample of pre-alcoholics
(the children who eventually became alcoholics) differed in
several important respects from the sample of adult alcoholics.
The adult alcoholics, (1) tended to feel victimized by society;
the pre-alcoholics appeared to be self-confident; (2) the
adult alcoholics were often highly dependent, the pre-alcohol-
ics emphasized their independence; (3) whereas the adult
alcoholics tended to avoid group activities and to express
feelings of grandiousity, we found that neither of these
traits distinguished the pre-alcoholics from the non-alcoholic
children. (p. 28)

The McCord and McCord study is significant in that it deals with

persons who became alcoholic before as well as after the onset of heavy

drinking behavior. Robins et al. (1962) studied the follow-up case

records of several hundred children who had originally been seen in child

guidance and social status and anti-social behavior in these children's

histories correlate with alcoholism in later life; however, Robins'

sample was highly weighted with socially deviant children.

Psychological theorists tend to assume that alcoholism is a symptom

of an underlying personality or emotional disorder. McCord and McCord

(1960) state that psychodymanic explanations of the causes of alcoholism

rest on one or another of three major theoretical positions: (1) the

Freudian view that alcoholism results from one or more of three unconscious

tendencies, including self-destruction, oral fixation, and latent homo-

sexuality; (2) the Adlerian view that alcoholism represents a struggle for








power, and (3) the view that alcoholism develops as a response to an

inner conflict between dependency drives and aggressive impulses.

The Adlerian view poses a model which is relevant to this research.

This view theorizes that alcoholism represents a striving for power which

compensates for a pervasive feeling of inferiority. It is assumed that

the alcoholic person derives his feelings of inferiority from a child-

hood in which overindulgent parents did not permit him to learn how to

cope with the problems of adult life. The alcoholic person turns to

alcohol to enhance his feelings of self-esteem and prowess (Rosenberg,

1971).

Studies by McClelland and associates (1971) suggest that the

alcoholic may have an enhanced need for power but finds himself inadequate

to achieve his goals. He resorts to alcohol because it provides a

sense of release, power, and a feeling of achievement. Since overindul-

gence in alcohol precludes an effective coping with problems needing

solution and leads to additional problems, this vicious cycle results

in confirmed alcoholism.

According to learning and reinforcement theory, alcoholism can be

explained as a reflex response to some stimulus and as a way to reduce

an inner drive state such as fear or anxiety. Characterizing life situa-

tions in terms of approach and avoidance, this theory holds that persons

tend to be drawn to pleasant situations or repelled by unpleasant or

tension producing ones. In the latter case, alcohol ingestion is said to

reduce the tension of feelings of unpleasantness and to replace them with

the feeling of well being or euphoria generally observed in most persons

after they have consumed one or two drinks (Rosenberg, 1971).








Schilder (1941) gives us a graphic description of the alcoholic

process somewhat reflective of Rosenberg's comments.

The chronic alcoholic is one who from earliest childhood
on has lived in a state of insecurity. The characteristic
of the alcoholicissocial tension, with the tendency to
give in passively to the assumed pressure or to react by
over-compensation. Alcoholism reverses the process. It
gives security and acceptance as long as the intoxication
lasts. With the wearing off of the intoxication, the
underlying tensions and terrors reappear in increased
form and create the demand for renewed drinking ..
(p. 293)

Wexberg (1951) indicates that there is some evidence in the

dynamics of alcoholic patients that they were less able to "take it"

than the average person long before they started drinking to excess. He

explains, "When something went wrong, when they failed to obtain a goal

they had been hoping for, . they became desperately unhappy to the

point that they 'just had to do something about it'" (p. 219).

Zwerling and Rosenbaum (1959) state, "In essence, the alcoholic

is seen as having been rendered vulnerable by early security threatening

experiences to addiction by a . fluid which dispels tension and

depression, relieves the sense of aloneness, places an instantaneously

available source of pleasure at his disposal . (p. 405).

White (1948) probes the alcoholic's self-concept in the following

description:

His childhood experiences have given him a personality
characterized by excessive demands for indulgence. These
demands are doomed to frustration in the world of adults.
He reacts to frustration with intolerable disappointment
and rage. This reaction impels him to hostile acts and
wishes against the thwarting individuals for which he
feels guilty and then punishes himself masochistically.
As reassurance against guilty feelings and fears of
dangerously destructive masochism and the reality conse-
quences of his behavior, he feels excessive needs for
affection and indulgence as real proof of affection.








Again, the excessive claims, doomed to frustration arise,
and the circle is complete. (p. 417)

White's description of the alcoholic lacks specification. He

does not explain what such terms as "needs for affection," "demands,"

and so forth, mean operationally, but he does point out and clarify

some interrelationships between internal dynamics and behavior in the

alcoholic. Lolli (1956, p. 96) poses a more concise explanation of the

alcoholic's personality characteristics which reflect White's reasoning.

He indicates that the alcoholic person experiences overwhelming uncon-

scious longings for warmth and nurture, equivalent to longings for

security and self-respect, which cannot be satisfied in ordinary relation-

ships.

In an earlier section, the researcher discussed the problems in-

herent in attempting to define an "alcoholic personality," reporting

Syme's (1957) general assertion that there is no conclusive evidence

through non-projective testing and that no such personality type exists.

Many researchers, however, have attempted to isolate personality variables

or traits which seem to emerge again and again when alcoholics are tested.

Blane et al. (1970) have set forth some of the personality

characteristics commonly seen in alcoholism, suggesting that they are

relevant to treatment and rehabilitation of alcoholics. These charac-

teristics include: (1) low frustration tolerance, (2) feelings of in-

feriority combined with attitudes of superiority, (3) sociability,

(4) fearfulness, and (5) dependency.

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory is widely used

to assess the degree to which an individual possesses the characteristics

of people in various psychiatric diagnostic groups. Alcoholic persons








tend to show an elevated Pd (psychopathic deviate) trait score on the

MMPI. This subscale is related to the category sometimes labeled

"psychopathic personality." Although such individuals have not lost

touch with reality, they seem unable to profit from experience and come

into conflict with societal norms in a variety of ways, including the

abuse of alcohol (Rosenberg, 1971).

Lisansky (1960) suggests a predisposed personality constellation

type awaiting the stresses and strains of the environment and the possible

resort to alcohol. She indicates that this predisposed personality type

has (1) an intensely strong need for dependency, and (2) a weak and in-

adequate defense mechanism against this excessive need, leading, under

certain conditions, to (3) an intense dependence-independence conflict.

There is also, she adds, (4) a low degree of tolerance for frustration

or tension, and (5) unresolved love-hate ambivalences.

Jellinek (1952) has developed a classification system which divides

alcoholics into two main classes, "alcohol addicts" and "habitual

symptomatic excessive drinkers." In this system, the author separates

alcoholic behavior from the "alcoholic personality" or addicted personality.

To Jellinek, "habitual symptomatic excessive drinkers" are persons who

rely on alcohol consumption in response to a psychological need as opposed

to a chemical-somatic habituation or addiction to alcohol. He identifies

four phases of alcoholism and indicates that self-esteem loss may be only

a function of the social setting after the alcoholic has entered a

"crucial phase."

Williams (1964), in a study which compared the self-concepts of

college problem drinkers with those of alcoholics, indicates that problem

drinking is associated with low self-evaluation. He questions whether








the loss of self-esteem evidenced in his research was a function of

the role the alcoholic is subjected to after he becomes an alcoholic

as opposed to a pre-disposed personality factor.


The Rotter I-E Scale, Tennessee Self Concept Scale,
and Associated Studies


Rotter (1966) notes that correlations of the I-E Scale scores

with measures of adjustment (Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank and Taylor

Manifest Anxiety Scale) have generally been difficult to interpret. He

suggests that the test may discriminate between well adjusted and mal-

adjusted groups, and one might expect a positive relationship between

both extreme internality and extreme externality and maladjustment. The

author hypothesizes that more seriously maladjusted individuals would

probably score more toward the externalizer end of the scale than would

normals or less seriously maladjusted individuals.

Smith et al. (1971) indicate that members of a severely emotionally

impaired group were significantly higher in external control than were

members of a mildly impaired group when tested with the Rotter I-E Scale

and the Behavioral Adjustment Scale. Cash and Stack (1973) found a

positive relationship between external control and degree of psychological

disturbance.

Examining the relationship between the Rotter I-E Scale and the

MMPI Clinical Scale scores of 15 alcoholics, Lottman et al. (1973) found

a positive relationship between external control perception and elevated

MMPI scales. This relationship did not hold, however, for other diagnostic

groups, and Lottman et al., conclude that alcoholics are more environ-

mentally focused than are other groups. They found a significant negative









correlation between external perception of control and a preference for

success attainment over failure avoidance with two samples of 75

alcoholics.

Hersch and Sheibe (1967) found that internals are a more homo-

geneous group than externals and suggest that "external orientation"

has more than one psychological meaning. They indicate that one may

be an externalizer because he is fact intellectually or physically weak

in relation to those around him. He adds that a person may describe

himself as external because he is in a highly competitive social situa-

tion, where the actions of others may have great relevance for the

success of his own efforts.

Davis and Davis (1972) indicate that some individuals who obtain

external scores on the Rotter I-E Scale and may have developed this expec-

tancy for defensive reasons. Studies suggest that externals have less

need than internals to resort to forgetting and denial as defensive

strategies since they can readily account for failures by attributing

them to impersonal forces. Phares et al. (1968) offer further support

for a defensive interpretation of externality in a study in which they

report that externals attribute more blame for their failures to environ-

mental factors than do internals.

Rotter (1966) reports a 1963 study by Efran which found that people

who scored toward the internal end of the Rotter I-E Scale tended

significantly to repress failures. He also quotes Deever and suggests

that people with high achievement motivation may defensively adopt an

external orientation as a protection against self-blame in case of

failure.








In a conditioning situation, internalizers who have already

learned drinking habits and regard them as being under their control

tend not to resist extinction. They apparently feel that they have

already learned to drink as a consequence of their own actions. Ex-

ternalizers, in extinction, tend not to unlearn the conditioning be-

cause they regard it as under someone else's control and so beyond their

power to change (Cohen and Phelen, 1972).

Distefano et al. (1972) found that alcoholics tested with the

Rotter I-E Scale scored significantly towards the internal end when

compared with normals, while emotionally disturbed patients scored more

towards the externalizer and than normals. Goss and Morosko (1970)

also found that alcoholics tested scored significantly lower (towards

the internal end) than normals.

Comparing alcoholics with non-alcoholics, Gozale and Sloan (1971)

found that their alcoholic subjects were significantly more internally

oriented. They suggest this accounts for the alcoholics' belief that

they could control their drinking. The authors add that although in-

ternally oriented persons are considered "healthier," an internal

orientation may contribute to a person's proclivity to become an addict.

Berzins and Ross (1973) predicted that because the use of opiates

enables the user to exert direct control over reinforcements, opiate

addicts would show strongly internal expectancies on the Rotter I-E

Scale, especially on items referring to personal control. Their prediction

was strongly supported in a study of 200 male and 100 female narcotic

addicts.








Comparing a sample of 20 "first time" alcoholics, 20 repeat

members of Alcoholics Anonymous, Carothers (1971) concludes that the

successfully rehabilitated alcoholic's locus of control is more internal

than that of the intemperate. His results indicate that intemperate

and rehabilitated alcoholics reveal different personality characteristics

and can be considered as two distinct groups.

Fitch (1970), testing 135 undergraduates, reports that his sub-

jects attribute significantly more causality to internal sources for

success outcomes than for failure outcomes. Low self-esteem subjects

who received failure feedback attributed significantly more casualty

to internal sources than did high self-esteem subjects who received

failure feedback. This finding supports a self-esteem consistency pre-

diction for low self-esteem subjects using the Rotter I-E Scale.

Fish and Karabenick (1971) administered the Rotter I-E Scale

and the Janis and Field Feelings of Inadequacy Scale to 285 male under-

graduates. They interpret their results as supporting the contention

that persons of high self-esteem have greater potential for self-

reinforcement. Ryckman and Sherman (1973) conclude that subjects with

high self-esteem tend to be more internally controlled. This finding

adds support to Fish and Karabenick's conclusion.

In a study using the Tennessee Self Concept Scale, Vanderpool

(1969) offers two conclusions concerning the self-concepts of alcoholics

he tested: (1) an alcoholic probably has a poor self-concept when sober;

and (2) even when he is drinking, he does not feel more positive about

himself; in fact, he tends to confirm and worsen his already low self-

concept.








Vanderpool concludes that the alcoholic while drinking does not

enhance his self-esteem but undermines his already poor sober self-

concept. He adds that drinking appears to be a mechanism to effect a

positive self-image and to enable the drinker to give the impression

of being friendly, outgoing, and socially adequate, while permitting

him to disguise his feelings of social inadequacy. From the results

of testing with the Tennessee Self Concept Scale, Vanderpool hypothesizes

that the drinking alcoholic tries to project a self-image by calling

attention to what he is or would like to be, but at the same time has

reduced capacity to eliminate or reject what he is not or feels he is

not.

Wells and Bueno (1975) found that a group of male and female

alcoholics had significantly low P Scores (general self-esteem), high

V Scores (inconsistency from one area of self-perception to another),

and more extreme D Scores (defensiveness) than normals.













CHAPTER III

THE INVESTIGATION


Introduction


The purpose of this study is to explore four dimensions of the

self-concept of a group of individuals diagnosed as alcoholic, during

a period of two months, in order to investigate the meaning of abstinence.

Two instruments, the Tennessee Self Concept Scale and the Rotter I-E

Scale will be used in a pre-test/post-test model to gather information

on the following areas of the self-concept:

1. Perception of locus of control

2. Self-esteem level

3. Perception of positive and negative self-characteristics

4. Self-definition

The researcher proposes a theoretical model of the alcoholic

process and asserts three basic ideas that are pertinent to this research:

1. The alcoholic sees himself as in control of his reinforce-
ments.

2. In a period of abstinence, the alcoholic modifies his self-
image by changing his perceptions of the positive and nega-
tive aspects of his self-concept.

3. Successful abstinence is an expression of a modification
in thewaythe alcoholic maintains his self-concept.

The researcher chose two instruments, the Tennessee Self Concept

Scale and the Rotter I-E Scale in order to test the validity of these ideas

and their application to the treatment of alcoholism.








The Rotter I-E Scale yields one score which indicates how an

individual perceives the locus of control for reinforcements. The data

provided by this instrument is pertinent to the researcher's consider-

ations of the nature of alcohol addiction for the drinking alcoholic.

The Tennessee Self Concept Scale yields three scores which

operationalize facets of the self-concept pertinent to this research;

self-esteem, perception of positive and negative self-characteristics,

and mode of self-definition. The Tennessee Self Concept Scale is de-

signed to assess the self-esteem of an individual as a balance of his

perception of his positive and negative self-characteristics and the

mannerin which he maintains these characteristics.

The researcher proposes 8 hypotheses which refer to possible

differences between alcoholics who do and do not remain abstinent as

evidenced in the pre-test and post-test results, differences that may

occur over time, and the identity of alcoholics tested when compared

to the norm groups for both test instruments.

The research design is basically a pre-test/post-test model but

is somewhat unusual in the idea that the post-test data must be gathered

before the pre-test data can be analyzed.

The post-test data gathered after a two-month interval represents

individuals who did and did not remain abstinent according to the criteria

outlined in the "Definition of Terms" section of this proposal. These

test data are statistically compared to the pre-test data in order to

determine whether a significant change occurs in an interval of time.

Statistical measures are used to determine whether the pre-test and

post-test scores of those individuals who remained abstinent over a two-









month period are significantly different from the pre-test and post-test

scores of those alcoholics who did not remain abstinent. The purpose

of this procedure is to determine whether alcoholics tested have different

self-concepts when entering abstinence and when tested two months later.

In addition, a Pearson correlation is used to determine whether the

effect that may occur between pre-test and post-test is consistent for

those alcoholics who remain abstinent and those who do not.


Hypotheses


Hypothesis 1 Alcoholic subjects will not score significantly

toward internal locus of control on the pre-test score of the Rotter I-E

Scale in comparison with a norm group for that instrument.

Hypothesis 2 The pre-test P Score of alcoholic subjects will

not be significantly below the mean P Score (self-esteem) of a norm

group for the Tennessee Self Concept Scale.

Hypothesis 3 The pre-test Net Conflict Score of alcoholic sub-

jects will not be significantly below the mean Net Conflict Score of a

norm group of the Tennessee Self Concept Scale.

Hypothesis 4 The pre-test T/F Ratio Score of alcoholic subjects

will not be significantly above the mean T/F Ratio Score of a norm group

for the Tennessee Self Concept Scale.

Hypothesis 5 Alcoholic subjects who remain abstinent will not

differ significantly at the beginning of abstinence from those subjects

who do not so remain, when compared according topre-test P Score, Net

Conflict Score, and T/F Ratio Score on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale

and the pre-test I-E Score on the Rotter I-E Scale.








Hypothesis 6 There will be no significant difference between the

group of alcoholics who remain abstinent and the group who do not so re-

main, when compared according to post-test P Score, Net Conflict Score,

and T/F Ratio on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale and the post-test I-E

Score on the Rotter I-E Scale.

Hypothesis 7 Alcoholic subjects who remain successfully abstinent

will show no significant change over time in P Score, Net Conflict Score,

and T/F Ratio on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale and the I-E Score on

the Rotter I-E Scale.

Hypothesis 8 Alcoholic subjects who do not remain successfully

abstinent will show no significant differences over time in P Score,

Net Conflict Score, and T/F Ratio on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale and

the I-E Score on the Rotter I-E Scale.


Subjects


Subjects selected for this investigation have met the criteria

to be termed "alcoholic" described in the "Definition of Terms" section

of this proposal. Data for testing the hypotheses represent the pre-

test and post-test results of a group of thirty subjects, some of whom

remained abstinent and some of whom did not.

Alcoholic subjects asked to participate in this study were

selected from clients of the North Central Florida Community Mental Health

Center Alcohol Program and its associate helping organizations; The Bridge

Council on Alcoholism, Inc., Gainesville, Florida, and Alcothon House,

Gainesville, Florida.








The following is a description of these treatment facilities

and organizations:

1. North Central Florida Community Mental Health Center
Alcohol Program.

Description: This outpatient program provides psychiatric
and evaluation services, treatment planning, and individual
and group counseling to individuals with alcohol related
problems. The Alcohol Program is active in a ten county
area and is open to any resident within that area who de-
sires help with an alcohol problem.

2. Alcothon House.

Description: This facility provides a supervised residential
setting for individuals who have progressed through alcohol
detoxification and are unable to return directly to their
home and community. Alcothon House associates itself with
Alcoholics Anonymous and urges its residents to become mem-
bers of this organization in order to help maintain
sobriety.

3. The Bridge Council on Alcoholism, Inc.

Description: The Bridge Council provides limited medical,
psychiatric, and residential treatment to individuals under-
going alcohol detoxification. The Council also provides
alcohol information, counseling, and job placement for a
limited period of time.

Participants selected for this study completed detoxification or

withdrawal from alcohol consumption within two weeks before testing. The

detoxification process commences with the individual's request for help

in terminating heavy drinking and consists of supervision with medical

support for approximately one week. The completion of the detoxification

process signifies the beginning of abstinence; detoxification having

occurred after the individual becomes systematically free of alcohol.

Medical personnel monitor the individual and observe when he has passed

the point of danger from withdrawal symptoms such as delirium tremens,

malnutrition, and other physical and nervous conditions associated with

acute and prolonged intoxification from alcohol.








The researcher accepted variety in the selection of subjects, as

the purpose of this study is to explore the relevance of a general

theoretical framework to particular changes which may take place in the

self-concept in a two-month period after abstinence commences. In order

to produce a subject pool of both abstainers and non-abstainers, the

researcher pre-tested more than thirty subjects but post-tested no more

than this number. The testing results generated data on twelve alcoholics

who did not remain abstinent and eighteen alcoholics who did remain

abstinent for two months.

All subjects selected came to a treatment facility and therefore,

were initially in treatment on an outpatient basis. The problem of

accounting for treatment as part of the variance is discussed in the

"Limitations of the Study" section of this proposal.

The researcher obtained information as to age, sex, treatment,

education, and work involvement during the two-month period between

testing and this data is presented in the Appendix of this research.

Within the scope of this study, the researcher attempts to achieve a

balance within the subject pool for these variables.


Instruments


Rotter I-E Scale. This instrument consists of 29 items, including

6 filler items, in a forced-choice format scored by counting the number

of choices of external items. High scores indicate a preference for

external locus of control; scores which fall below the norm mean 8.15

indicate externality. The Rotter I-E Scale is considered a measure of

generalized expectancy because the items deal with the subjects' beliefs

about the world. Rotter (1966, p. 10) states, "Such a generalized








expectancy may correlate with the value the subject places on internal

control but none of the items is directly addressed to the preference

for internal or external control."

The Rotter I-E Scale has become popular in recent years and has

been utilized in hundreds of studies exploring locus of control with

a diversity of populations and variables. Construct validity for the

Rotter has been generally supported in the literature (Throop and Mac-

Donald, 1971) and several studies have helped to validate the Scale as

a predictor of generalized interpersonal control expectancy (Goldberg,

1972).

Hersch and Scheibe (1967) assert that the test-retest reliability

of the Rotter I-E Scale is consistent and acceptable, varying between

.49 and .83 for varying samples and intervening time periods. Test-retest

comparisons over a month-long period were consistent for two different

samples with correlations of .72 for a group of elementary psychology

students and .78 for a group of prisoners (Rotter, 1966).

Internal consistency estimates were somewhat low in the studies

reported (.65 .79), however, Rotter suggests that this is due to the

forced-choice format of the test.

The researcher will use a sample of 575 male and 605 female Ohio

State psychology students as the norm group for this test (Rotter, 1966).

This group produced a mean of 8.15 for males and 8.45 for females with

a standard deviation of 3.88 (male) and 4.06 (female). These figures

will be used in testing Hypothesis 1 in ascertaining whether subjects

in this research differ significantly from a norm group in perceived

locus of control.








Tennessee Self Concept Scale. The Tennessee Self Concept Scale

was developed as atool in a research program on self-concept and rehabili-

tation conducted by William H. Fitts in 1955. The instrument has been

standardized on a norm group of 626 people from various parts of the

country ranging from ages 12 to 68. Special norm groups of 100 persons

standardize four of the empirical scales, none of which are used in this

research. This instrument was standardized on a total of 1,091 persons

representing all social, economic, and intellectual levels and educational

levels from 6th grade through the Ph.D. degree (Fitts, 1966, p. 12).

The 100 items on this paper and pencil test represent 8 dimensions

of the self-concept. Scales were derived from a phenomenological

classification scheme based upon what subjects were saying about them-

selves. The original analysis of the item pool revealed that subjects

conveyed three primary messages: (1) this is what I am; (2) this is

how I feel about myself; and (3) this is what I do. These scores repre-

sent an internal frame of reference within which the individual is de-

scribing himself and comprise part of the P Score (self-esteem) pertinent

to hypotheses 2, 5, 6, 7, and 8.

The other five scores which compose part of the P score are indi-

cative of an external frame of reference and refer to how the individual

sees his physical self, moral-ethical self, personal self, family self,

and social self. There are 29 scales on the Tennessee Self Concept

Scale, plotted on a profile sheet titled the "Clinical Form."

In this investigation, the researcher uses three scores on The

Tennessee Self Concept Scale; the P Score (self-esteem), the Net Conflict

Score (perception of positive and negative characteristics), and the T/F

Ratio (self-definition). A description of these three scales and their









operational definitions is discussed in the "Definition of Terms"

section of this proposal and how they will be used to describe what the

researcher calls the "self-esteem system."


Collection and Analysis of Data


Subjects selected for this study were asked to complete the Rotter

I-E Scale, the Tennessee Self Concept Scale, and a brief questionnaire

concerning their drinking habits on two occasions. Advance arrangements

were made with each subject as to the date of each testing and where

the event was to take place. On each testing occasion, the subject was

given a packet consisting of both instruments and a questionnaire with

directions on how to complete them. At the end of each testing occasion,

each subject was given notice of the next testing.

Each subject was tested in accordance with the following timetable.

First, testing was conducted within two weeks of terminating indulgence

in alcohol after detoxification, and second, two months after the first

testing. The researcher attempted to maintain consistent conditions

within the testing situation for each subject and conducted the second

testing reasonably close to the prearranged date.

The final data consists of initial and follow-up scored answer

sheets for each test instrument and initial and follow-up completed

questionnaires concerning drinking habits (see Appendix) concerning the

two-month period prior to each testing. The researcher accepted the

subject's word concerning his drinking habits and corroborated this in-

formation with that of treatment personnel.









The data from the questionnaires is used to identify those

alcoholics tested who remained abstinent according to the criteria pro-

posed in the "Definition of Terms" section of this proposal. The data

is statistically processed in order to test 8 hypotheses.

The post-test data determines which of the pre-test alcoholics

tested were abstainers and non-abstainers. Hypotheses 1, 2, 3, and 4

is subjected to a z test which compares subject pre-test scores with

the norm group scores for each scale mentioned. This treatment is used

to test the difference between the sample mean and the population mean.

The formula for this procedure is as follows:
x p
z=
in
X equals the mean of the subject sample; i equals the mean of the

norm group; o is the standard deviation of the norm group; and /n is the

square root of the sample size.

The results of this treatment for hypotheses 1, 2, 3, and 4 is

discussed in relation to the following questions.

1. How does the alcoholic who has recently terminated
drinking perceive the locus of control of reinforce-
ments?

2. How does the alcoholic who has recently terminated
drinking maintain his self-esteem system in relation
to his perception of his positive and negative self-
characteristics?

The researcher integrates this discussion to the following assump-

tions proposed in the theoretical model.

1. The alcoholic sees himself as in control of his reinforce-
ments.

2. The alcoholic's self-concept is negative.








Hypotheses 5 and 6 are tested with two statistical treatments in

order to compare the pre-test and post-test scores of alcoholics after

thay have been separated into two groups; abstainers and non-abstainers.

This is done in order to determine whether there is a significant

difference between these two groups of alcoholics.

Hypothesis 5 is tested with an independent t test to determine

whether the abstainers and non-abstainers are significantly different

in their pre-test scores. Hypothesis 6 is tested by an analysis of co-

variance on the post-test scores using the pre-test scores as the co-

variate. This is to determine whether in the post-test scores there is

a significant difference between abstainers and non-abstainers.

The results of the testing of Hypotheses 5 and 6 are discussed in

relation to the following questions.

1. How do alcoholics tested who successfully remain abstinent
differ from alcoholics who do not in terms of perception
of locus of control and self-esteem system when entering
abstinence?

2. After a two-month period, how do alcoholics tested who
remain abstinent differ from alcoholics who do not in
terms of perception of locus of control and self-esteem
system?

Hypotheses 7 and 8 are tested using a dependent t test to deter-

mine whether significant changes occur over time for alcoholics who

do not remain abstinent over a two-month period. An additional treat-

ment, a Pearson correlation for pre-test/post-test scores for abstainers

and non-abstainers is used to determine whether the effect over time is

consistent.

The results of these treatments for hypotheses 7 and 8 are dis-

cussed in terms of the following questions.









1. What differences occur over time in perceived locus of
control of reinforcements when alcohol consumption is
and is not terminated?

2. What differences occur over time in the self-esteem
system of alcoholics when alcohol consumption is and
is not terminated?

3. What reformation in the manner in which the alcoholic
maintains his self-esteem occurs during a two-month
period of abstinence?

4. What reformation in the manner in which the alcoholic
assesses his positive and negative characteristics occurs
during a two-month period of abstinence?

The researcher then integrates this discussion to the following

assumptions proposed in the theoretical model.

1. In a period of abstinence, the alcoholic modifies his self-
image by changing his perceptions of the positive and
negative aspects of his self-concept.

2. Successful abstinence is an expression of a modification in
the way the alcoholic maintains his self-concept.

In addition, the researcher discusses the following question in

order to provide direction for future research.

1. What relationship may exist between perceived locus of con-
trol of reinforcements and self-esteem maintenance system for
the alcoholic who remains abstinent for a two-month period?


Limitations of the Study


The limitations of this study are presented in terms of two

aspects, the scope of the study and methodology. More fundamental limi-

tations concerning problems in the etiology and definition of alcoholism

and the alcoholic are discussed in the "Survey of the Problem" section


of this proposal.








In determining the scope of this study, the researcher decided

to investigate alcoholism by assuming a general point of view and pre-

senting these assumptions in a theoretical framework. In this frame-

work, the researcher asserts that alcoholism is a complex process, al-

ternating between abstinence and indulgence, and that a part of this

process concerns the relationship between alcohol and the self-concept

of the alcoholic. The researcher does not seek to solve the problem of

what factor or factors cause alcoholism or establish that abstinence is

a solution to this condition. The intent of the researcher is heuristic

in that by probing a conception, facts may emerge that generate more

specific directions for future research.

The researcher's methodology is a pre-test/post-test design

which employs two instruments to provide empirical data in order to

assess psychological movement over time. The hypotheses are constructed

so that the researcher may be able to relate operational definitions

of test scales to more general assumptions in a theoretical model. The

problems inherent in this approach are particular to inductive research.

Stated specifically, how does the researcher establish that the results

of testing are more relevant to the alcoholic process as theorized than

to other factors such as treatment variables and individual differences

among subjects?

In order to cope with this problem, the researcher will, in the

Appendix, list aspects of the subjects' identity and treatment during

the course of this study. The researcher presents information regarding

the age, sex, education, and work involvement of subjects selected in

table form. Treatment information is presented with regard to the use





39

of Antabuse and involvement in psychotherapy.

In this sense, the identity of the subjects somewhat determines

the limit to which the researcher is able to relate the results from

testing the hypotheses to the general assumptions of the theoretical

framework. However, the researcher is confident that the literature

concerning the self-concept of alcoholic individuals gives broad support

to the idea that alcoholism is a manifestation of a personal process.













CHAPTER IV

PRE-AND POST-TEST RESULTS FOR ALCOHOLIC
SUBJECTS AND STATISTICAL TREATMENTS


Introduction and Tables


The following tables depict the statistical information generated

by pre-and post-test results from the testing of 30 alcoholic subjects

over a two-month period. The data are divided into pre-test and post-

test results and further subdivided into two groups, labeled abstainers

and non-abstainers. The rationale for using the following statistical

treatments is discussed in Chapter III, in the section entitled "Collec-

tion and Analysis of the Data," and the tables listed are sequenced to

correspond with the numerical order of hypotheses.

The comparisons of alcoholic subjects pre-test means with instru-

ment norm group means are shown in Table 1. Significant differences

(P <.01) were found for the Rotter I-E Scale and the Tennessee Self Con-

cept Scale P Score. In addition, a significant difference (P <.05) was

found for the N/C Scale on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale. Thus,

significant differences were found for 3 of the 4 scales investigated

in this manner.

Results from the test for significant differences between the pre-

test means for abstainers and non-abstainers are shown in Table 2. No

significant differences (P <.05) were found for Rotter I-E Scale or











TABLE 1


z Test Comparison of Pre-test Group Means with
Instrument Norm Group Means


N1 (Pre-test) N2 (Norm)

Scale x 7 z
(S.D.)


I-E 6.20 8.15 -2.75**
(3.88)

P 313.57 345.57 -5.71**
(30.70)

T/F .97 1.03 -1.20
(.29)

N/C 9.73 -4.91 2.03*
(13.01)


**P <.01


N1 = 30 alcoholic subjects


N2 = 626 norm group of Tennessee Self Concept Scale
1,180 norm group of Rotter I-E Scale


*P <.05











TABLE 2

t Test Comparison of Pre-test Mean Scores for
Abstainers and Non-abstainers


N1 Abstainers (Pre-test) N2 Non-abstainers (Pre-test)

Scale x x t
(S.D.) (S.D.)


I-E 5.89 6.67 +0.56
(6.67) (4.27)

P 306.39 324.33 +1.20
(40.19) (39.88)

T/F 1.02 0.91 -0.70
(0.30) (0.59)

N/C 4.56 17.50 +1.78
(17.49) (22.39)


*P <.05

df = 28

N1 = 18


**P <.01

for all tests

abstainers


N2 = 12 non-abstainers








Tennessee Self Concept Scale scores.

The post-test mean scores for abstainers and non-abstainers are

presented in Table 3. The negative N/C score is almost the same as the

mean for the norm group for this scale, and norms for other scales are

listed in Table 1.


TABLE 3

Post-test Mean Scores for Abstainers


and Non-abstainers


N1 Abstainers (Post-test) N2 Non-abstainers (Post-test)

Scale x x


I-E 5.50 7.50

P 323.33 303.58

T/F 0.90 0.65

N/C -6.44 8.83



N1 = 18 abstainers

N2 = 12 non-abstainers


Table 4 presents the analysis of covariance for the post-test mean

I-E scores for abstainers and non-abstainers with the pre-test I-E

scores as the covariate. There are no significant differences between the

mean post-test scores on the Rotter I-E Scale indicated in these results.









TABLE 4

Analysis of Covariance for Post-test Mean I-E
Scores for Abstainers and Non-abstainers


Source of Variation Sum of Squares df Mean Square F



Covariates Pre-test I-E 188.53 1 188.53 43.83

Main Effects Group 15.63 1 15.63 3.63

Explained 204.16 2 102.08 23.73

Residual 116.14 27 4.30

Total 320.30 29 11.05



*P <.05 **P <.01

N = 30 alcoholic subjects


The analysis of covariance for post-test mean P scores for

abstainers and non-abstainers is presented in Table 5. Significant

differences were found (P <.05) between the post-test means. This

indicates that the abstainers' P score post-test mean was significantly

higher than the one for non-abstainers.

Table 6 shows the analysis of covariance for post-test mean T/F

scores for abstainers and non-abstainers. Significant differences

(P <.05) were found between post-test mean T/F scores for abstainers

and non-abstainers. The mean T/F score of the abstainers was signifi-

cantly lower.









TABLE 5

Analysis of Covariance for Post-test Mean P Scores
for Abstainers and Non-abstainers


Source of Variation Sum of Squares df Mean Square F


Covariance Pre-test P 24145.88 1 24145.88 73.56

Main Effects Group 8034.57 1 8034.57 24.48*

Explained 32180.45 2 16090.23 49.02

Residual 8862.87 27 328.25

Total 41043.32 29 1415.29



*P <.05 **P <.01

N = 30 alcoholics


TABLE 6

Analysis of Covariance of Post-test Mean T/F Scores
for Abstainers and Non-abstainers



Source of Variation Sum of Squares df Mean Square F


Covariates Pre-test T/F 0.02 1 0.02 0.21

Main Effects Group 0.41 1 0.41 5.65*

Explained 0.42 2 0.21 2.93

Residual 1.95 27 0.07

Total 2.38 29 0.08



*P <.05 **P <.01

N = 30 alcoholics


i









The analysis of covariance for post-test mean N/C scores for

abstainers and non-abstainers is presented in Table 7. This analysis

reveals no significant differences between these two groups.


TABLE 7

Analysis of Covariance for Post-test Mean N/C Scores
for Abstainers and Non-abstainers



Source of Variation Sum of Squares df Mean Square F


Covariates Pre-test N/C 2387.20 1 2387.20 11.17

Main Effects Group 720.68 1 720.68 3.37

Explained 3107.88 2 1553.94 7.27

Residual 5772.76 27 213.81

Total 8880.64 29 306.23



*P <.05 **P <.01

N = 30 alcoholic subjects


The tests of significance of difference between the pre and post-

test means for abstainers on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale and the

Rotter I-E Scale are presented in Table 8. Significant differences in a

positive direction were found for the P score means (P <.01) and in a

negative direction for the N/C score means (P <.05) on the Tennessee Self

Concept Scale. Table 8 also shows the pre-test and post-test correlation

coefficients. Significant correlations were found for the Rotter I-E

Scale and the P Scale on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale.









TABLE 8

t Test and Correlation Comparison of Pre-test and Post-test
Mean Scores for Abstainers



Scale Pre-test Post-test t value r

x x
(S.D.) (S.D.)

I-E 5.89 5.50 -0.79 0.80**
(3.38) (3.13)

P 306.39 323.33 +3.52** 0.87**
(40.19) (30.17)

T/F 1.02 0.90 -1.32 -0.32
(0.30) (0.18)

N/C 4.56 -6.44 -2.75* 0.33
(17.49) (9.91)


*P <.05 **P <.01

df = 17 for all t tests

N = 18 abstainers


The tests of significance of difference between the pre and post-

test means for non-abstainers and correlations are presented in Table 9.

A significant difference in a negative direction was found for the P

score on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale (P <.05) and significant corre-

lation coefficients were found for the Rotter I-E Scale (P <.01), P

Scale (P <.01), and N/C Scale (P <.05) on the Tennessee Self Concept

Scale.









TABLE 9

t Test and Correlation Comparison of Pre-test and
Post-test Mean Scores for Non-abstainers


Scale Pre-test Post-test t value r


x x
(S.D.) (S.D.)

I-E 6.67 7.50 +1.03 0.76**
(4.27) (3.37)

P 324.33 303.58 -4.08* 0.92**
(39.88) (45.49)

T/F 0.91 0.65 -1.39 0.17
(0.59) (0.36)

N/C 17.50 8.83 -1.38 0.53*
(22.39) (22.42)


*P <.05


**P <.01


df = 11 for all t tests

N = 12 non-abstainers













CHAPTER V

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS


The results given in Chapter IV serve as the basis for discussion

for each of the 8 hypotheses proposed in this research. As indicated

previously in Chapter III, testing results are evaluated with regard to

questions pertinent to each hypothesis and consequently to the proposed

theoretical nodel.


Discussion of the Hypotheses


Hypothesis 1 Alcoholic subjects will not score significantly

toward internal locus of control of the pre-test score of the Rotter I-E

Scale in comparison with a norm group for that instrument.

The z test comparison of the pre-test group mean with the Rotter

I-E Scale norm group yields a z score of -2.75, indicating a significant

difference at the .01 level. The null hypothesis is rejected. Alcoholics

tested who have recently terminated drinking show a statistically signifi-

cant expectancy for internal control.

Hypothesis 2 The pre-test P Score of alcoholic subjects will not

be significantly below the mean P Score (self-esteem) of a norm group for

the Tennessee Self Concept Scale.

The z test comparison of the pre-test group mean score for the P

Scale on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale with the norm group mean for

that instrument yields a z score of -5.71, indicating a significant

difference at the .01 level. The null hypothesis is rejected, since the








pre-test group of 30 alcoholics, when rating themselves in terms of

positive and negative characteristics, tend significantly towards the

negative.

Fitts (1965) indicates that people with low P scores are doubtful

of their own worth, see themselves as undesirable, often feel anxious,

depressed and unhappy, and have little faith or confidence in themselves.

Test results for this group of alcoholics indicate an overall low sense

of self-worth as these individuals enter a period of abstinence from

alcohol.

Hypothesis 3 The pre-test Net Conflict score of alcoholic sub-

jects will not be significantly below the mean Net Conflict score of a

norm group for the Tennessee Self Concept Scale.

A z test comparison of pre-test group mean N/C score on the

Tennessee Self Concept Scale with the norm group mean N/C score for that

instrument yields a z score of -2.03. This result indicates a signifi-

cant difference at the .05 level; however, as the direction of the

difference is above the mean the researcher chooses not to reject the

null hypothesis.

Hypothesis 3 is worded in the null fashion as the assumption

supporting it was that alcoholic subjects, when entering abstinence,

might be more likely to over-deny their negative characteristics in

relation tothe way they affirm their positive characteristics. This

would yield a negative N/C score; however, the pre-test results reveal

a significant leaning toward what Fitts (1965) describes as "acquiescence

conflict," indicating that these subjects tend to over-affirm their posi-

tive attributes when compared to a norm group.








Hypothesis 4 The pre-test T/F ratio score of alcoholic subjects

will not be significantly above the mean T/F ratio score of a norm group

for the Tennessee Self Concept Scale.

The z test comparison of the pre-test group mean T/F score on the

Tennessee Self Concept Scale with the norm group mean T/F score for that

instrument yields a z score of -1.20. The researcher chooses not to

reject the null hypothesis as the level of difference between the means

is not significant (p <.05).

Fitts (1965) describes the T/F scale as a measure of response set

or response bias and as an indicator of whether a test subject's approach

to the test involves any strong tendency to agree or disagree regardless

of item content. Hypothesis 4, although worded in the null fashion, is

based on the assumption that alcoholics, upon entering abstinence, might

show an inability to achieve self-definition by eliminating what they

are not. The pre-test group mean fell below the norm group mean but is

considered in the mid-range for this scale, indicating that alcoholic

subjects tested achieve self-definition by a balanced employment of the

tendency to focus upon what they are, and a tendency to eliminate or re-

ject what they are not.

To summarize, the results of the statistical treatment for hypotheses

1, 2, 3, and 4 appear to verify two assumptions inherent in the proposed

theoretical model; that the alcoholic sees himself in control of his re-

inforcements, and the alcoholic's self-concept is negative upon entering

abstinence.

Hypothesis 5 Alcoholic subjects who remain abstinent will not

differ significantly at the beginning of abstinence from those subjects

who do not so remain, when compared according to pre-test P score, Net








Conflict score, and T/F ratio score on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale

and the pre-test I-E score on the Rotter I-E Scale.

The t test comparison of pre-test mean scores for alcoholics who

did not remain abstinent over a two-month period reveals no significant

differences on either the Rotter I-E Scale score or the P, T/F, and N/C

Scale scores on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale. The researcher

chooses not to reject the null hypothesis since there is no significant

difference found in terms of perception of locus of control and self-

esteem system at the beginning of abstinence for alcoholics tested.

Hypothesis 6 There will be no significant difference between

the group of alcoholics who remain abstinent and the group who do not

so remain, when compared according to post-test P score, Net Conflict

score, and T/F ratio on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale and the post-

test I-E score on the Rotter I-E Scale.

The analysis of co-variance for the post-test mean I-E score and

N/C score for abstainers and non-abstainers revealed an F ratio that was

not significant (greater than the .05 level). The post-test mean scores

on the Rotter I-E Scale for both abstainers and non-abstainers fell

below the norm group mean score, indicating that the post-test group as

a whole showed a leaning toward internal locus of control.

The analysis of co-variance for post-test mean P scores and mean

T/F scores for abstainers and non-abstainers yielded significant (P <.05)

F ratios indicating a difference between the post-test means and that

these groups are different with regard to these scores.

The abstaining group in the post-test results tended to show a

higher P score than non-abstainers and their T/F score mean indicates








that abstainers achieve self-definition by a more balanced evaluation of

positive and negative self-characteristics than do non-abstainers.

The researcher chooses not to reject hypothesis 6 in relation to the

post-test I-E and Net Conflict scores; however, rejects the null hypothesis

with regard to the post-test P score and T/F score on the Tennessee Self

Concept Scale.

Hypothesis 7 Alcoholic subjects who remain successfully abstinent

will show no significant change over time in P score, Net Conflict score,

and T/F ratio on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale and the I-E score of

the Rotter I-E Scale.

For abstainers, the t test and correlation comparison of pre-test

and post-test mean P scores yields a significant difference (P <.01),

indicating that significant positive movement had taken place in terms of

self-esteem for this group. The P score increase was highly consistent

(r = .87) for each subject and significant movement (P <.05) was noted

for the N/C mean score on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale; however, this

movement was not significantly consistent for abstainers.

Movement on the Rotter I-E Scale and the T/F score on the Tennessee

Self Concept Scale was not significant; however, the pre-test post-test

scores on the Rotter I-E Scale were significantly consistent (r = .80;

p <.01) and not significantly consistent for the T/F Scale score. The

researcher rejects the null hypothesis for P score and N/C score in

hypothesis 7, but chooses not to reject for I-E and T/F scores.

These results indicate that abstainers tend to remain internalizers

during a two-month period, and that positive changes do take place in

terms of these alcoholics' level of self-esteem. There is movement in

the way in which abstainers perceive their positive and negative attributes.








Test results indicate that alcoholic subjects during abstinence tend to

move from over-affirming positive attributes towards over-denying nega-

tive characteristics in relationship to the way they affirm positive ones.

Fitts (1965) indicates that individuals who show a negative N/C

score tend to concentrate on "eliminating the negative." The researcher

proposes that this movement between pre-test and post-test for abstainers

may indicate a movement from "acquiescence conflict" to "denial conflict,"

(see p. 13), but at the same time the individual also shows an increased

ability to balance positive and negative characteristics as indicated by

the T/F Scale score.

Hypothesis 8 Alcoholic subjects who do not remain successfully

abstinent will show no significant difference over time in P score, Net

conflict score and T/F ratio on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale on the

I-E Score in the Rotter I-E Scale.

The t test and correlation comparison of pre-test and post-test

mean P scores for non-abstainers yields a significant (P <.05) negative

movement for non-abstainers and a pearson correlation coefficient reveals

that this effect was significantly (R .02; p <.01) consistent. The

Rotter I-E score and the T/F and N/C scores on the Tennessee Self Concept

Scale did not significantly move over time for non-abstainers.

The researcher chooses not to reject the null hypothesis except

for the P score on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale. Correlation co-

efficients reveal that the I-E, P, and N/C scores move consistently from

pre-test to post-test for non-abstainers. These results for the I-E

and P scores are similar to the pre- and post-test mean score t test

and correlation comparisons for abstainers; however, the P score movement

for non-abstainers was in the opposite (negative) direction and less








significant (P <.05 for non-abstainers, P <.01 for abstainers). Movement

for the N/C score was more consistent for non-abstainers (r = .53;

P <.05) than for abstainers (r = .33; P <.05).


Interpretation of the Results


In this study, the researcher found that abstainers and non-

abstainers do not differ significantly with regard to Rotter I-E Scale

means over a two-month period and that both groups tend to score con-

sistently toward internal locus of control. Abstainers move significantly

in a positive direction with regard to overall self-esteem and show

change in the manner in which they balance their positive and negative

self-characteristics. Non-abstainers tend to remain consistent with

regard to self-definition, and this group shows significant negative

movement in terms of self-esteem.

The researcher assumes that alcoholism is a process and, in part,

a function of an inadequate self-concept reflecting a need for control

in a dependent situation for the alcoholic. The maintenance of abstinence

is viewed as an expression of self-confirmation and self-affirmation

and may be a reflection of a modification of the alcoholic's self-concept.

The researcher assumes that the alcoholic engages alcohol to gain

control of the negative aspects of his self-concept, as he believes that

he is in control of his reinforcements and therefore can control the

negative effects of repeated indulgence. He may use alcohol to repress

or modify the negativity in his self-concept and tends to deny that

his repeated use of alcohol may be responsible for his increasing sense

of inadequacy.







Three basic ideas are reflected in these assumptions: (1) the

alcoholic sees himself as in control of his reinforcements, (2) in a

period of abstinence, the alcoholic modifies his self-image by changing

his perceptions of the positive and negative aspects of his self-concept,

and (3) Successful abstinence is an expression of a modification in the

way the alcoholic maintains his self-concept.

Results from testing the hypotheses confirm the idea that the

alcoholic sees himself as in control of his reinforcements. This is in

accordance with the findings of Distefano et al. (1972), Goss and

Morosko (1970), Gozale and Sloan (1971), and Carothers (1971). This

preference for internality may contribute to the alcoholic's proclivity

and to addiction, and reveals a dilemma for the alcoholic who wishes to

remain abstinent. The alcoholic when entering abstinence must adopt ways

of controlling his reinforcements without using alcohol.

In the proposed theoretical model, the researcher assumes that the

alcoholic uses alcohol to avoid the personification of his inadequacies

in terms of his self-image. Studies such as McClelland et al. (1971),

Schilder (1941), White (1948), and Williams (1965) suggest how the

effects of heavy alcohol consumption can be responsible for the alcoholic's

low self-esteem in terms of the consequences of inebriation and the de-

bilitating differential between the drug-state and sober-state.

It is in this context that the researcher questioned what relation-

ship exists between perceived locus of control of reinforcements and self-

esteem maintenance for the alcoholic who attempts abstinence. Fitch

(1970) reports that low self-esteem subjects who receive failure feedback

attribute significantly more causality to internal forces that do high

self-esteem subjects who receive failure feedback. Vanderpool (1969)








concludes that the alcoholic while drinking does not enhance his self-

esteem, but undermines his already poor sober self-concept.

Another element which may be important to the relationship between

internality and low self-esteem for the alcoholic is Efran's finding

(Rotter, 1966) that people who score toward the internal end of the

Rotter I-E Scale tend to significantly repress failures. This may be

relevant to the stance of alcoholics commencing abstinence in this study

as their T/F scores on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale indicate they

"over-affirm the positive."

These findings suggest that when the alcoholic enters abstinence,

he is faced with the challenge of reinterpreting his sense of control

through a self-esteem system which tends to over-affirm positive charac-

teristics. The negative consequences of his alcoholic behavior are in-

terpreted by the internally oriented alcoholic as his own fault. This

interpretation adds impetus for some form of self-concept modification

or a return to drinking.

An alternative to these interpretations would be based upon the

assumptions of Fox (1966), Keller (1962), and Sherfy (1955) who attempt

to establish premorbid personality characteristics or disease process

which re-occur to undermine successful abstinence. Milt (1971), Syme

(1957), and Plaut (1967) negate the idea of an alcoholic personality

or specific syndrome in favor of describing constellations of factors

which appear at different points in the process of alcoholism.

The researcher asserts in the theoretical model that the major

dynamic inherent in the maintenance of sobriety is self-acceptance and

self-affirmation. The assumption is that the abstinent alcoholic

acknowledges the positive and negative characteristics of his self-concept








on a more realistic plane than self-indulgence. He allows himself to

affirm what is positive about himself and reject those negative aspects

which do not reflect what he is but are products of unrealistic self-

expectation and past inadequate behavior.

Significant movement in the Net Conflict Scale for abstainers

indicates that this group tends to concentrate upon eliminating negative

characteristics. Fitts (1966) terms this effect "denial conflict" and

sees it as a contributor to a low self-esteem score. The alcoholic may,

however, be eliminating negative aspects which are not truly authentic;

for example, introjected and socially motivated guilt feelings which are

appropriate to drinking behavior but not to sober functioning.

In this tense, effective abstinence coincides with a more balanced

appraisal of positive and negative characteristics within the alcoholic's

self-concept and would be analgous to the process of grieving as a "letting

go" of parts of the self-concept which are no longer appropriate. This

direction could produce an effective modification of the self-concept while

maintaining the stance of the internalizer. The alcoholic who is no

longer drinking retains the opportunity to maintain control as well as

moving toward a more realistically positive appraisal of self. In other

words, he modifies his dependency from alcohol to a self-reliance based

on more appropriate self-evaluation.

A return to drinking would not support further movement in these

directions. Test results indicate that non-abstainers show a significantly

negative movement in self-esteem but do not change significantly with re-

gard to self-definition. The return to drinking after asserting to help-

ing persons that the alcoholic will control his drinking may be responsible

for the negative change in self-esteem as internally oriented persons tend








to blame themselves for failures. The lack of significant change with

regard to self-definition may suggest need to maintain defenses by

over-affirming the positive characteristics of self in the aftermath of

failure to control alcohol.

The successful abstainer can accomplish self-concept modification

using treatment variables such as support psychotherapy and Antabuse to

assess his positive characteristics more realistically and gradually

eliminating distorted self-perceptions and negative aspects of past

behavior because his internality is a positive motivating factor in the

absence of alcohol indulgence.

Appendices 1 and 2 list treatment variables as well as age, sex,

race, level of education, and work involvement for abstainers and non-

abstainers. In this study, individuals in both groups entertained

treatment in psychotherapy and/or with Antabuse; however, the base data

does not suggest that these were solely instrumental in assuring successful

abstinence and may give support to the idea that other factors may be

more important.


Implications for the Counselor and Future Research


A fundamental assertion in this study is that alcoholism is a com-

plex process, alternating between abstinence and indulgence, and that part

of this process concerns the relationship between alcohol and the self-

concept of the alcoholic. This research supports the idea that signifi-

cant changes occur in the self-concept of alcoholics attempting abstinence

over a two-month period. The counselor who works with the alcoholic in'

process works primarily in two areas: (1) helping the alcoholic to








withdraw from dependency on alcohol, and (2) providing support to the

abstinent alcoholic in order to help him maintain a prolonged sobriety.

Although this research does not focus on the variables which pro-

mote the drinking alcoholic to commence abstinence, it does illuminate

elements which characterize the alcoholic when entering abstinence. The

30 alcoholics who participated in this study were persons who were

significantly oriented to internal locus of control and characterized by

significantly low self-esteem scores.

Respecting the alcoholic's predeliction for internal control and an

understanding of the self-esteem problems of the alcoholic commencing

abstinence are important factors in good counseling support of these per-

sons. The elemental view that the alcoholic merely needs to stop drinking

is given added dimension as we see the alcoholic as needing to be effective

for himself and work out negative facets of his experience with alcohol.

Personality factors which are self-destructive when the alcoholic

is involved in heavy drinking may be used as strengths when support is

provided. An internal locus of control is considered a healthy orientation

for most persons and probably is responsible in part for some of the dramatic

changes which alcoholics can produce in their lives with sustained support

for their self-esteem problems. The clinician who works with alcoholics

over time must respect the alcoholic's need for accurate negative feedback

and realistic positive assessment.

The researcher proposed a theoretical framework in this study in part

for its heuristic value in generating future research. The propositions

that "alcohol is a consciousness-altering drug" and "alcoholism is a

cyclical consciousness of self" are ideas which lend themselves to

empirical as well as theoretical research. Investigating the behavior of









the drinking alcoholic is a difficult task, but may produce individual

elements which are thematically consistent from the drug-state to the

sober-state. This information would be invaluable as a diagnostic tool

as well as a basis from which to evaluate change and the outcome of

treatment.

Other areas suitable for investigation related to this research

are the processes of dependency, self-confirmation, and self-definition

which are beyond the scope of the empirical scales used in this research.

A working knowledge of the alcoholic in process, whether abstinent or

non-abstinent, is fundamental to effective intervention. Alcoholism,

like other historically misunderstood conditions, can be appreciated

more as a human personal process than as an individual moral failure.

Future research might well be addressed to areas which reflect

this central theme of alcoholism as a personal process. The researcher

believes that we need to study individuals who are alcoholic and retreat

from concepts of alcoholism as a disease entity or personality type.

This study and related research gives credence to the idea that the

self-concept is fertile ground for revealing aspects of individuals

which constitute the alcoholic process.










APPENDIX 1

Abstinent Subjects' Demographic Information as to Age, Sex,
Race, Treatment, Level of Education, and Work Involvement
during Course of Study


Sex/
Subject # Age Race


14 39 W/M

15 49 W/M

16 28 W/M

17 52 B/M

18 56 W/M

Mean age: 41
Mean level of education:


Treatment Level of Education
(last grade completed)


None

None

Psychotherapy
Antabuse

Antabuse

Antabuse

None

None

Antabuse

Antabuse

Antabuse

Antabuse

Antabuse

Psychotherapy
Antabuse

Antabuse

None

Antabuse

Antabuse

None


Work Involvement
During Study


Laborer

Not Employed

Medical Adminis-
trator

Not Employed

Bartender

Not Employed

Laborer

Laborer

Self Employed

Cook

Laborer

Not Employed

Secretary


Laborer

Truck Driver

Not Employed

Cook

Not Employed










APPENDIX 2

Non-abstinent Subjects' Demographic Information as to Age, Sex,
Race, Treatment, Level of Education, and Work Involvement
during Course of Study


Sex/
Subject # Age Race


Treatment Level of Education
(last grade completed)


Work Involvement
During Study


27 W/M Psychotherapy
Antabuse

27 W/M Psychotherapy
Antabuse

63 W/M None

62 W/M Antabuse

45 W/M None

58 W/M Antabuse

47 W/M None

57 B/M Antabuse

48 W/M Antabuse

34 W/M None

46 B/M Antabuse

32 W/M None


None


None


Not Employed

Salesman

Secretary

Not Employed

Truck Driver

Not Employed

Not Employed

Not Employed

Laborer

Lineman


Mean age: 45

Mean level of education: 11









APPENDIX 3

Table Listing Base Data for Abstainers and Non-abstainers


Subjects Pre-test
(Abstainers) I-E P T/F N/C


2 360 .97 -10
3 315 1.4 11
2 355 1.0 9
6 327 .70 -21
4 296 .93 -10
4 346 .95 1
1 325 1.09 1
6 355 .95 1
9 323 1.55 18
10 279 1.21 7
11 259 1.4 10
12 246 1.14 24
6 326 .88 6
10 236 1.18 38
7 263 .97 13
2 320 .83 -10
5 328 1.02 -22
6 256 .18 38


Post-test
I-E P T/F

4 348 .97
4 322 .78
1 381 1.02
1 342 .92
5 303 .93
3 348 .93
2 328 .88
3 371 .86
7 334 .60
8 295 .88
9 270 1.05
10 282 .62
6 349 .92
12 310 .51
9 308 1.21
5 322 .92
5 320 1.2
5 287 .92


Subjects
(Non-Abstainers)


5 358 1.96 39
9 313 1.58 15
4 363 1.6 29
2 402 1.04 -20
6 280 .96 2
4 358 .42 32
3 338 1.08 0
10 303 .63 7
2 299 .18 39
13 285 .64 24
15 265 .04 55
7 318 .74 2


11 310 1.06
12 287 .28
6 368 .05
4 398 .80
8 285 .85
7 320 .60
5 335 1.20
8 290 .70
1 260 .40
10 272 .80
12 240 .20
6 278 .90













APPENDIX 4


QUESTIONNAIRE


Name:

Date:


Please check the appropriate statement which describes your drinking
habits within the last two months. "Intoxicated" means having consumed
an alcoholic beverage to a point where you could no longer say or feel
you were sober. Check only one statement.

I have consumed alcohol in the last two months but did not
feel intoxicated.
(If you checked this statement, on how many occasions did
you consume alcohol?)

I have not consumed any alcohol in the last two months.

I have been intoxicated one time for no more than 48 hours.

I have been intoxicated no more than two times in the last
two months.

I have been intoxicated several times in the last two months.


I give the researcher permission to use this information and test
results in a research project. I understand that this information is
confidential in that my name will not be revealed. The results of this
testing can be made available to me by my request only after I have been
retested in two months.




Signature


Witness













BIBLIOGRAPHY


Berger, M. S., & Krocher, G. P. "Locus of Control in Narcotic Addicts"
State or Trait Phenomenon?" Journal of Clinical Psychology,
28:468-69, October, 1972.

Berzins, J. I., & Ross, W. F. "Locus of Control Among Opiate Addicts."
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 40:84-91,
February, 1973.

Blane, H. T., Chafetz, M. E., & Hill, M. J. Frontiers of Alcoholism.
New York: Science House, 1970.

Blum, E. M., & Blum, R. H. Alcoholism: Modern Psychological Approaches
to Treatment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc., 1969.

Bolman, W. M. "Abstinence Versus Permissiveness in the Psychotherapy
of Alcoholism." Archives of General Psychiatry, 12:456-63, 1965.

Carothers, C. "A Discriminatory Analysis of Personality Characteristics
of the Intemperate and the Rehabilitated Alcoholic." Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Texas Tech University, 1971.

Cash, T. F., & Stack, James J. "Locus of Control Among Schizophrenics
and Other Hospitalized Psychiatric Patients." Genetic Psychology
Monographs, 87:105-22, February, 1973.

Chafetz, M. E., & Demone, H. W. Alcoholism and Society. New York:
Oxford Univerity Press, 1962.

Clark, W. "Operational Definitions of Drinking Problems and Associated
Prevalence Rates." Berkeley Drinking Practices Study, 1966.
(Unpublished), University of California at Berkeley.

Cohen, D. J., & Phelen, J. G. "Difference in Degree of Generalization
in Extinction of Compulsive Drinking Between One-type and Multi-
type Beverage Drinkers." Journal of Psychology, 80:309-17,
March, 1972.

Davis, W. L., & Davis, D. E. "Internal-External Control and Attribution
of Responsibility for Success and Failure." Journal of Personality,
40:123-36, March, 1972.

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Washington, D. C.:
American Psychiatric Association, 1968.








Distefano, M. K., Pryer, M. W., & Garrison, J. L. "Internal-External
Control Among Alcoholics." Journal of Clinical Psychology,
28:36-37, January, 1972.

Expert Committee on Mental Health: Alcoholism Subcommittee. Washington,
D. C. 2nd Report World Health Organization, No. 48, August, 1952.

Ferguson, G. A. Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966.

Fish, B., & Karabenick, S. A. "Relationship Between Self Esteem and
Locus of Control." Psychological Reports, 29:784, December, 1971.

Fitch, G. "Effects of Self Esteem, Perceived Performance, and Choice
on Causal Attributions." Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 16:311-15, October, 1970.

Fitts, W. H. Manual for the Tennessee Self Concept Scale. Nashville,
Tennessee: Counselor Recordings and Tests, 1965.

Fox, R. "Alcoholism and Depression." American Journal of Psycho-
Therapy, 23:21-30, January, 1972.

Franks, C.M. "Conditioning and Conditioned Aversion Therapies in the
Treatment of the Alcoholic." International Journal of Addiction,
1:61-98, 1966.

Gerard, D. L., & Saenger, G. Out-Patient Treatment of Alcoholism: A
Study of Outcome and its Determinants. Toronto: University of
Toronto Press, 1966.

Goldberg, E. M. "I-E Expectancy and Perception of Interpersonal Control."
Ph.D. Dissertation, Northwestern University, 1971.

Goss, A., & Morosko, T. E. "Relation Between a Dimension of Internal-
External Control and the MMPI with an Alcoholic Population."
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 35:189-92,
March, 1970.

Gozali, J., & Sloan, J. "Control Orientation as a Personality Dimension
Among Alcoholics." Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcoholism.
32:159-61, March, 1971.

Hersch, P. D., & Schiebe, K. E. "Reliability and Validity of Internal-
External Control as a Personality Dimension." Journal of Consulting
Psychology, 31:609-13, December, 1967.

Hill, M. J., & Blane, H. T. "Evaluation of Psychotherapy with Alcoholics:
A Critical Review." Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcoholism,
28:76-104, 1967.








Jellinek, E. M. "The Phases of Alcohol Addiction." Quarterly Journal
of Studies on Alcoholism, 13:673-84, 1952.

Keller, M. The Definition of Alcoholism and the Estimation of its
Prevalence, in Society, Culture, and Drinking Patterns. Pittman,
E. and Snyder, N. (editors). New York: Wiley Press, 1962.

Krystal,H., & Moore, R. A. "Who is Qualified to Treat the Alcoholic?"
Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcoholism, 24:705-20, 1963.

Lefcourt, HJi. "Internal Versus External Control of Reinforcement:
A Review." Psychological Bulletin, 65:206-20, 1966.

Lefcourt, H. M. "Recent Developments in the Study of Locus of Control."
B. A.Maher, Editor, Progress in Experimental Personality Research,
New York: Academic Press, 1972.

Lisansky, E. S. "The Etiology of Alcoholism: The Role of Psychological
Predisposition." Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcoholism,
21:314-43, 1960.

Lolli, G. "Alcoholism as a Disorder of the Love Disposition." Quarterly
Journal of Studies on Alcoholism, 17:96-197, 1956.

Lottman, T. J., Davis, W. E., & Gustafson, R. C. "MMPI Correlates with
Locus of Control in a Psychiatric Population." Journal of Per-
sonality Assessment, 37:78-82, February, 1973.

McClelland, D. C., Davis, W. N., Kalin, R., & Wanner, H. E. Alcohol
and Human Motivation. New York: Free Press, 1971.

McCord, W., & McCord, J. Origins of Alcoholism. Sanford University Press,
1960.

Milt, H. Basic Handbook on Alcoholism. Scientific Aids Publications,
1971.

Moore, R. A., & Krystal, H. "The Problem of Abstinence by the Patient
as a Requisite for the Psychotherapy of Alcoholism." Quarterly
Journal of Studies on Alcoholism. 23:105-23, 1962.

Morgan, J. I. "Internal Versus External Control Correlates Among
Counseling Center Clients." Ph.D. Dissertation, University of
Florida, 1967.

Pattison, E. M. "A Critique of Alcoholism Treatment Concepts." Quarterly
Journal of Studies on Alcoholism. 27:49-71, 1966.
Phares, E. J., Wilson, K. G., & Klyver, N. W. "Internal-External Control
and the Attribution of Blame Under Neutral and Distractive Condi-
tions." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 10:402-405,
September, 1968.
Plaut, T. F. Alcohol Problems: A Report to the Nation by the Cooperative
Commission on the Study of Alcoholism. New York: Uxord University
Press, 195/.








Robins, L. N., Bates, W., & O'Neal, P. "Adult Drinking Patterns of
Former Problem Children," in Society, Culture, and Drinking
Patterns. New York: Oxford University Press, 1962.

Rosenberg, S. First Special Report to the United States Congress on
Alcohol and Health. Rockville, Maryland: Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, 1971.

Rotter, J. "Generalized Expectancies for Internal Versus External
Control of Reinforcement." Psychological Monographs: General
and Applied, 80:1-28, 1966.

Ryckman, R. M., & Sherman, M. F. "Relationship Between Self Esteem
and Internal-External Control for Men and Women." Psychological
Reports, 32:1106, June, 1973.

Schilder, P., "Psychogenesis of Alcoholism." Quarterly Journal of
Studies of Alcoholism, 2:77-79, 1941.

Schroeder, P. "Client Acceptance of Responsibility and Difficulty
in Therapy." Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24:467-71, 1960.

Sherfy, M. J. "Psychopathy and Character Structure in Chronic
Alcoholism," in Etiology of Chronic Alcoholism, Diethelem, 0.,
(Editor), Springfield, Illinois. Thomas Press, 1955.

Smith, C. E., Pryer, M. W., & Distefano, M. K. "Internal-External
Control and Severity of Emotional Impairment Among Impairment
Among Psychiatric Patients." Journal of Clinical Psychology,
27:449-50, October, 1971.

Storm, T., & Smart, R. G. "Dissociation: A Possible Explanation of
Some Features of Alcoholism and Implication for its Treatment."
Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcoholism, 26:120-24, 1967.

Strong, D., & Feder, D. "Measurement of the Self Concept: A Critique
of the Literature." Journal of Counseling Psychology, 8:170-78,
1961.

Syme, L. "Personality Characteristics and the Alcoholic: A Critique
of Current Studies." Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcoholism,
18:288-301, 1957.

Throop, W. F., & MacDonald. A. P. "Internal-External Locus of Control:
A Bibliography." Psychological Reports, 28:175-90, February, 1971.

Vanderpool, J. A. "Alcoholism and the Self Concept." Quarterly
Journal of Studies on Alcoholism, 30:59-77, 1969.

Wexberg, I. E. "Alcoholism as a Sickness." Quarterly Journal of Studies
on Alcoholism, 12:217-30, 1951.





70


White, R. The Abnormal Personality. New York: Ronald Press, 1948.

Williams, A. F. "Self-Concepts of College Problem Drinkers: A Comparison
with Alcoholics." Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcoholism,
26:586-94, 1965.

Winer, B. J. Statistical Principles in Experimental Design. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1962.

Wrenn, C. G. "The Self Concept in Counseling." Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 5:104-109, 1958.

Zwerling, A., & Rosenbaum, M. "Alcoholic Addiction and Personality," in
American Handbook of Psychiatry, Silvano Arieti, Editor, New York:
Basic Books, 1959.













BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH


Michael A. Harrell was born in New York City on June 3, 1940, and

has resided most of his life in Coral Gables and Gainesville, Florida.

He attended the University of Florida in both undergraduate and graduate

schools and earned a Bachelor of Arts in Education degree in English,

speech, and journalism and a Master of Education degree in counselor

education.

The author has taught in public high school and junior college

as well as the University of Florida until beginning work for the

Doctor of Philosophy degree at that institution. After completing class-

work, the author has worked for five years in a Community Mental Health

Center as a psychotherapist and clinician, and with alcoholic persons

in the capacity of coordinator of drug and alcohol programs.

Married to Caryl Crosby in August, 1969, the author currently

lives in Gainesville, Florida with his wife, daughter Andrea, and an

expected event due in March, 1977.











I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it
conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully
adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.




Larry -Lesch, Chairman
Assistant Professor of Education



I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it
conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully
adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.




David Lane
Professor of Counselor Education


I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it
conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully
adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.




Audrey Schumacher
Professor of Psychology


I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it
conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully
adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.




ames G. J6fner/
Assistant Professor of Rehabilitation
Counseling












This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the College
of Education and to the Graduate Council, and was accepted as partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

August, 1976




Dean, College ofJEducation


Dean, Graduate School




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs