Citation
The importance of music in adolescent life

Material Information

Title:
The importance of music in adolescent life the relationship between music preference, values, attitudes, and behaviors
Creator:
Kruse, Steven J., 1968-
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
viii, 118 leaves : ill. ; 29 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Adolescents ( jstor )
Alcohols ( jstor )
Heavy metals ( jstor )
Music analysis ( jstor )
Music appreciation ( jstor )
Music preferences ( jstor )
Music psychology ( jstor )
Musical aesthetics ( jstor )
Rock music ( jstor )
Sensation seeking ( jstor )
Dissertations, Academic -- Psychology -- UF ( lcsh )
Psychology thesis, Ph.D ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1997.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 112-117).
Additional Physical Form:
Also available online.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Steven J. Kruse.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
0028676990 ( ALEPH )
38736788 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
















THE IMPORTANCE OF MUSIC IN ADOLESCENT LIFE: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MUSIC PREFERENCE,
VALUES, ATTITUDES, AND BEHAVIORS










By

STEVEN J. KRUSE













A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1997

























To Wendy Kruse














ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thanks go to Dr. Dorothy Nevill for the tireless hours she has spent assisting me to develop, edit, and bring this project to completion and for the support and encouragement she has provided every step of the way. I would also like to thank Dr. Martin Heesacker for the time and support he has given-often on the phone and after hours-to help ensure the scientific integrity and statistical accuracy of this project. His dedication to his students and their success is truly exemplary. And thanks also go to Dr. Kim Walsh-Childers who continued to provide information and insight to help me build a bridge between the divergent fields of psychology and communications. Thanks also go to Drs. Shae Kosch and Robert Ziller who graciously participated as committee members and provided their expertise in family therapy and social psychology, respectively, to the understanding of this study. I would also like to thank all the faculty and students of the counseling psychology program for the support, advice, and patient ears they have graciously rendered. Finally, my deepest gratitude goes to my wife, Wendy Kruse, whose companionship, support, and continual sacrifice have not only made my success possible, but have made the process enjoyable and deeply satisfying.















TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOW LEDGM ENTS ........................................................... iii

A B ST R A C T ........................................................................ vii

CHAPTERS

I IN TR OD U CTION ........................................................

The Im pact of M usic ................................................... 2
The Impact of M usic Videos ....................................... 3
The Im pact of Lyrics ............................................... 4
The Impact of M usic Alone ........................................ 5
M usic is a Complex Stimulus .......................................... 5
"Massive" vs. "Conditional" Effects ................................... 6
M usic as a C ause ...................................................... 8

2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ....................................... 12

Independent V ariables ................................................ 13
M usic Preference ................................................. 13
Global Com m itm ent .............................................. 15
D ependent V ariables .................................................. 16
V alues ............................................................ 16
A ttitudes ..... .................................................... 18
Attitudes toward women ...................................... 18
Substance use ................................................. 19
B ehaviors ......................................................... 20
Sexual coercion ............................................... 20
Substance use ................................................. 21
Sensation Seeking .................................................... 21
Sum m ary ............................................................. 22
H ypotheses ........................................................... 22
G eneral H ypotheses ............................................... 22
Specific H ypotheses .............................................. 23
V alues ........................................................ 23
A ttitudes ...................................................... 24
B ehaviors ..................................................... 25



iv









3 M E T H O D ................................................................ 26

P articipants ........................................................... 26
Instrum ents ........................................................... 26
Procedure ............................................................ 34

4 R E SU L T S ............................................................... 35

Prelim inary A nalyses ................................................. 35
M usic Preference ................................................. 35
D ependent V ariables .............................................. 36
Music Preference Questionnaire ................................... 37
Factor A nalyses ...................................................... 39
Substance Abuse Instruments ..................................... 39
Attitudes toward substances ................................... 39
Substance use scale ........................................... 41
Sexual Experiences Survey ....................................... 43
Music Preference Questionnaire ................................... 46
M ain A nalyses ........................................................ 47
V alues ............................................................ 47
A ttitudes .......................................................... 5 1
Attitudes toward women ...................................... 51
Attitudes toward substances ................................... 53
B ehaviors ......................................................... 55
Sexual coercion ............................................... 55
Substance use ................................................. 56
A ncillary A nalyses ................................................... 58
Individual V alues ................................................. 59
Attitudes Toward Substances ..................................... 62
Substance U se .................................................... 64
C onsensual Sex ................................................... 69
Sensation Seeking ................................................ 69
Global Com m itm ent .............................................. 70

5 D ISCU SSIO N ............................................................ 74

V alues ................................................................ 74
A ttitudes ............................................................. 78
Attitudes Toward W omen ......................................... 78
Attitudes Toward Substances ..................................... 79
B ehaviors ............................................................ 80
Sexual B ehaviors ................................................. 80
Substance U se .................................................... 80
Sensation Seeking .................................................... 82
G lobal Com m itm ent .................................................. 83


v









Future R esearch ...................................................... 86
S am ple ........................................................... 87
Music Preference Groups ......................................... 89
Music Preference Questionnaire ................................... 90
C onclusions .......................................................... 9 1

APPENDICES

A MUSIC PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE ............................. 95

B V ALU ES SCALE ........................................................ 99

C SEX-ROLE STEREOTYPING SUBSCALE, ............................ 102

D RAPE MYTH SCALE .................................................. 103

E SEXUAL EXPERIENCES SURVEY .................................... 104

F SUBSTANCE ABUSE ATTITUDES SCALE ........................... 106

G ATTITUDES TOWARD SUBSTANCES SCALE ....................... 107

H SUBSTANCE USE SCALE ............................................. 108

1 SENSATION SEEKING SCALE ........................................ 109

J DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE .................................. 110

R EFER EN C E S ..................................................................... 112

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ........................................................ 118

















vi









Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

THE IMPORTANCE OF MUSIC IN ADOLESCENT LIFE: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MUSIC PREFERENCE, VALUES, ATTITUDES, AND BEHAVIORS By

Steven J. Kruse

December, 1997

Chairman: Dorothy D. Nevill, Ph.D.
Major Department: Psychology


The purpose of this study was to determine whether significant differences exist between fans of popular rock (PR) and college/alternative (CA) music and whether fans' global commitment (GC) to their preferred style of music interacts with music preference

(MP) such that differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors are only significant when GC is high. Twenty different values were assessed using Super and Nevill's Values Scale. Attitudes assessed included 1) attitudes toward women using Burt's Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale and Lonsway and Fitzgerald's Rape Myth Scale and 2) permissive attitudes toward substance use using the Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale by Chappel, Veach, and Krug and a 10-item Attitudes Toward Substances Scale constructed by the author. Behaviors assessed included 1) sexually coercive behavior using the Sexual Experiences Survey by Koss and Oros and 2) substance use using a 10-item Substance Use Scale constructed by the author. MP and GC were assessed using the Music Preference Questionnaire constructed by the author. Sensation seeking was included as a covariate for some dependent variables using a 10-itemn Sensation Seeking Scale by Madsen, Das, Bogen, and Grossman. Significant MP differences were found for 1) the



vii









values of Ability Utilization, Achievement, Advancement, Authority, Cultural Identity, Economics, Prestige, Social Interaction, and Social Relations, 2) sex-role stereotyping, 3) attitudes toward marijuana and all drugs, and 4) use of tobacco, marijuana, hallucinogens, psychedelics, legal, illegal, and all drugs. PR fans were found to score higher than CA fans on the listed values and on the SRS. CA fans were found to be more permissive toward the listed substances and to use the listed substances more than PR fans. Significant MP x GC interaction effects were found for the value of Prestige and the use of alcohol and heroin. All three interaction effects found CA fans' valuing of Prestige and use of alcohol and heroin remaining fairly constant across GC whereas popular rock fans show a sharp increases in valuing Prestige and use of alcohol and heroin as their GC increases. The conclusions and limitations of this study are discussed as are implications for future research.




























viii














CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Social scientists widely acknowledge the importance of music to youth culture (Christenson & Roberts, 1990; Frith, 1981; Roe, 1987). This connection is also obvious to the general public in phenomenon such as MTV, the advent of rock W roll in the '50s, the hippie movement in the '60s and early '70s, and, of course, "Beatlemania." In fact, the scenario of a teenager holed up in his room with music blaring has become a cliche. The available research on adolescent music consumption confirms this image of music forming a "soundtrack" to the daily lives of youth (Lull, 1987).

Research on adolescents' attitudes toward music confirms the importance of music to youth. Leming (1987) reports that 46% of a sample of I I- to 15-year-olds said music was "very important" to them and an additional 47% said that it was "somewhat important." Only 7% of these adolescents said music was "not important at all."

The importance of music to youth is also evident in their behavior-their reported consumption of music media. Popular music plays an important role in the lives of children throughout their childhood. Their consumption of popular music typically accelerates about 3rd or 4th grade and peaks in late high school or college. Television, in contrast, rises to a peak in early adolescence (about age 12). Over the course of high school, adolescents begin to spend more time listening to music at the expense of watching TV (Christenson & Roberts, 1990; Larson & Kubey, 1983; Larson, Kubey, & Colletti, 1989). For example, Christenson and Roberts (1990) surveyed a largely middle-class, Caucasian sample of California teenagers and found that until 9th grade, both TV viewing and music listening increased almost equally with a slight preference for

1





2



music listening. By eleventh grade, TV viewing had declined by almost 30 minutes whereas music consumption remained consistent.

Just how much do they listen? In a review of the literature, Christenson and Roberts (1990) concluded that by late adolescence the average teenager listens to between four and five hours of all music media every day. The primary source of music for adolescents is the radio, occupying almost 50% of all music listening throughout adolescence. Listening to CDs or tapes makes up another significant source of music, but the extent of this use is often highly dependent on available economic resources. In Christenson and Roberts' (1990) sample, consumption of CDs and tapes gradually increased from 34% of total music listening in 7th grade to 41 % by 1 lth grade, which likely reflects the increasing financial resources of employed high school students. Music videos are the least important source of music, consuming less time and, like TV, declining steadily throughout late adolescence as audio-only music consumption increases. In Christenson and Roberts' (1990) sample, viewing music videos decreased from 22% of total music listening in 7th grade to 11% by llth grade. Keith Roe concludes, "it is becoming increasingly difficult to escape the conclusion, in terms of both the sheer amount of time devoted to it and the meanings it assumes, that it is music, not television, that is the most important medium for adolescents" (Roe, 1987, pp. 215 16).

The Impact of Music

If music is indeed the most important medium for adolescents, anyone interested in adolescents (e.g., psychologists, counselors, educators, parents) should be concerned about the impact of music. At the same time, the available literature is very sketchy. There are large gaps in our knowledge. Consequently, developing a broad theory based on the available research ends up being largely conjecture. However, the data that are available testify to the powerful impact music has on youth.





3



Often, when a complex phenomenon such as music is studied, theorists tend to focus on a particular element or component of the phenomenon. In the study of music, this reductionism is often based on assumptions about which component is the most potent. First, when MTV started in 198 1, music videos became the focus of attention and a flurry of studies looking at music videos were soon published (e.g., Sherman & Dominick, 1986; Greeson & Williams, 1986; Zillman & Mundorf, 1987). Soon a considerable public reaction to the lyrical content of the songs launched more studies looking at the impact of music lyrics (e.g., Norwood, 1987; St. Lawrence & Joiner, 199 1). Other studies have focused more on the music itself as the most potent component (Kruse, 1994). Whereas research in these three areas has not demonstrated the exclusive importance of one component, the research has provided important information about the impact of music.

The Impact of Music Videos

Music videos receive a great deal of attention by researchers because videos combine music, which by itself is not seen as compelling, with TV, which is generally perceived by researchers and the general public as the most potent form of mass communication. However, as already noted above, music videos are not a significant source of music for adolescents nor do they receive a significant amount of adolescent's attention, particularly in late adolescence (Christenson & Roberts, 1990; Larson & Kubey, 1983; Larson, Kubey, & Colletti, 1989). However, that videos are not a major source of music media does not mean that they are irrelevant and without impact.

In terms of content, Sherman and Dominick (1986) found that more than half of all videos contained some form of violence and almost 75 percent contained sexual intimacy in some form. Other research has demonstrated that this sexual and violent content affects both the participants' appreciation of the video (Hansen & Hansen, 1990b;





4



Zillman & Mundorf, 1987) and the participant's attitudes toward women (Peterson & Pfost, 1989). Videos have also proved to be effective at priming sex-role stereotypic event schemes (Hansen, 1989; Hansen & Hansen, 1988), eliminating participant's disapproval of confederates performing defiant behaviors (Hansen & Hansen, 1990a), and altering attitudes toward premarital sex and peer violence (Greeson & Williams, 1986). This latter study is particularly relevant as the authors found that exposure to only 30 minutes of videos recorded either randomly from MTV or selected specifically for their reference to sex, violence or antiestablishment themes resulted in greater approval of premarital sex. The above research makes it clear that music videos have an impact, but because of the small role they play in adolescent's music use, videos by themselves cannot account for the full impact of music media. The I=act of Lyrics

Music lyrics are also a popular target of concern by parents, public policy administrators, and social scientists. However, like video, research about how adolescents use and interpret lyrics suggest that lyrics themselves are not the most important component of music. In fact, few adolescents report that they pay much attention to the lyrics or that the lyrics are an important reason why they listen to or like music (Gantz, Gartenberg, Pearson, & Schiller, 1978; Rosenbaum & Prinsky, 1987).

In addition, research suggests that adolescents are largely incapable of "correctly" interpreting song lyrics (Leming, 1987; Greenfield et al., 1987; Rosenbaum & Prinsky, 1987). Often adolescents do not understand-nor are they even aware of-the objectionable material that is the cause of adults' reactions to music and music lyrics. However, some adolescents do understand these themes and, as Christenson and Roberts (1990) point out, it is unlikely that an adolescent's interpretation of lyrics is random. They argue that an adolescent's attention to a particular theme or interpretation of a song





5



is directly related to the adolescent's psychological and developmental variables. Still the impact of the lyrics does not account for the full impact of music media. The Impact of Music Alone

The final component that has received some attention in the literature is the impact of the music itself, without reference to lyrics or visuals. Very few studies have addressed this topic specifically, but implications from other studies (e.g., Hansen & Hansen, 1990b; Peretti & Zweifel, 1990;1983) confirm the obvious: that the music itself is central to the impact of music. The importance of music alone is also confirmed in the reports of adolescents regarding why they listen to music or why they like their favorite song, with many stating they just "like the beat" (Rosenbaum & Prinsky, 1987). One study that tried to assess the impact of the music only found that instrumental heavy metal rock music had the same impact on attitudes toward women as sexually violent heavy metal rock music, but the impact for both was modest at best (Kruse, 1994).

Music is a Complex Stimulus

When the above studies are considered, it becomes obvious that music is not a simple stimulus that can be reduced to lyrics, visuals, musical notes, rhythms, or melodies. Nor can music be considered the sum of these factors alone. In time a particular style of music begins to embody more than just the sound and lyrics. Heavy metal rock music, for instance, is not just a style of music, but also can be interpreted as including an ideological stance (e.g., personal freedom, antiestablishment), a fashion esthetic (e.g., long-hair, black concert T-shirts), role-models (the musicians), and behavioral expectations (e.g., "head-banging," partying, substance use). James Lull (1987) vividly describes this way of understanding music:

These cultural distinctions are important to pop music fans. The music of Elvis Costello might sound the same as that of Bruce Springsteen to an outsider, but young people know that the difference between these two





6


artists is something more than musical. They represent different lifestyle orientations. Costello is a major exponent of "modern" music while Springsteen is the respected spokesman for blue-collar, East Coast rock and roll. Allegiance to one or the other says something important about the listener. Some modem music fans think Bruce Springsteen is boring old news. Some blue-collar rockers regard Costello as a lightweight, new wave wimp. These are not casual distinctions, and some members of these two camps would rather die than be associated with the other, even though their parents and other naive observers may not be able to tell the
difference in their styles of music. (pp. 144 5)

Notice that the uninitiated (e.g., adults, counselors, parents, and social scientists) do not recognize the glaring differences between the music genres, differences that are sometimes embodied more in the nonmusical characteristics than in the sound. However, this understanding of music as a complex stimulus is crucial to understanding the function of music in youth culture. In order to discover the impact of music, researchers need to understand that music is consumed holistically. In other words, listeners do not analyze the independent contribution of the rhythm, the melody, the harmonic qualities, the lyrical content, the musician's social presence, and the values, attitudes, behaviors, and lifestyle implied in the performance. When listeners hear a song, they are responding to the whole stimulus. Therefore, when considering the impact of music, one must consider the entire stimulus, musical and nonmusical.

"Massive" vs. "Conditional" Effects

When the impact of media in general is addressed, the effect expected is often cast in terms of a massive, direct, and negative effect (e.g., Postman, 1982; Winn, 1985) These same fears have been applied to music media, most prominently-and successfully-by Parents' Music Resource Center (Norwood, 1987). The basic

assumption seems to be that "mass" media must have a "massive" effect on "masses" of people. It is as if the audience is passive, bringing nothing to the encounter-the ,&message" of the media is communicated, received, and will have a specific, universal





7



effect. It is assumed in this view that the listeners simply respond, with no reference to their own personal dynamics.

The empirical literature on mass media effects does not support this view of "massive" effects (McGuire, 1986; Christenson & Roberts, 1990), but rather suggests a more modest impact of mass media. However, this does not mean that there is no effect or that smaller effects are not important. The music research briefly outlined above, although inconsistent with "massive" effects, clearly indicates that music affects people and that these effects can be of the utmost importance. For example, if heavy metal songs with themes of suicide influence only 1 or 2% of a high school class of 600 to commit suicide, the deaths of those 6 to 12 adolescents will have a profound effect on that school and cause a great deal of concern in the community.

The rejection of "massive" effects also raises other questions about the impact of media. If mass media affect only a limited number of people who are exposed to them, there must be mediating factors. A recent development in mass communication research deals specifically with this issue (McLeod & Reeves, 1980; Roberts & Maccoby, 1985). Called the "conditional approach," this approach assumes the consumer's response is dependent on the psychological, social, and cultural characteristics of that consumer.

Applied specifically to music, this conditional approach may cause even greater concern about the impact of music. For instance, the literature suggests that even though adolescents' comprehension of music lyrics is often inaccurate, it is not random. Christenson and Roberts (1990) theorize that adolescents' misinterpretations are systematic and correspond to their developmental level and the conflicts associated with that level:

Nor does it mean that we shouldn't be concerned about teenagers' understanding of the various sexually explicit, violent, or suicidal lyrics that elicit comment from adult critics. Obviously, some young teenagers





8


do apprehend some songs in these terms, at least some of the time....
And there is reason to suspect that the youngsters most likely to comprehend the more horrific lyrics in terms of their manifest content might be just those who are more at risk. If adolescents' interpretation of information is sensitive to current needs and activities, one might expect those who are becoming sexually active to be most likely to concentrate on the sexual content of lyrics, those who are considering experimenting with drugs may be most likely to attend to drug-oriented lyrics, those who are highly alienated or depressed to be most likely to focus on songs about
suicide (pp. 52 54).

Thompson, Pingree, Hawkins, and Draves's (1989) study validates this concern when they found that high school girls interpreted and processed Madonna's "Papa Don't Preach" video differently depending on whether they had had prior "pregnancy experiences" and whether their fathers stressed social harmony in interpersonal relationships or exploring ideas at the possible expense of social harmony.

Music as a Cause

Understanding that the impact of music is dependent on an individual's psychological and developmental level answers some questions about adolescent music subcultures. Nearly everyone, including social scientists and the general public, agrees that music is important to youth. But more than being important, many theorists assert that music is used in the youth culture to define and differentiate between subcultures (e.g., Frith, 1981; Roe, 1990; Christenson & Roberts, 1990; Lull, 1987). One can witness music subcultures on the streets and campuses of America every day.

But all adolescents are not impacted by music in the same way. Not all youths have a meaningful identification with a particular style of music. Many listeners have a wide variety of tastes. Even within a particular music preference, there is a considerable amount of variability in how each individual interacts with the music and the subculture that surrounds it. In other words, not all adolescents who prefer punk-rock have a pink-spiked mohawk; not all adolescents who prefer heavy metal have long hair; not all





9



adolescents who prefer college/altemative dye their hair black and put in an eyebrow ring. The conditional approach to media effects can account for this variability. The goal then becomes identifying the psychological or developmental factors that predict whether music will have a profound effect on a given adolescent. The question becomes, "Under what conditions does music act as an agent of cause in values, attitudes, and behaviors?"

At one level, asking this question is premature because it is not altogether clear from the literature if music ever acts as an agent of cause in adolescent behavior. Studies often find relationships between music preference and other behaviors. However, the fact that listening to music is inversely correlated with academic performance (Larson & Kubey, 1983) or that adolescents who were alienated from mainstream school life more often prefer heavy metal rock music (Tanner, 1981) or that substance abuse is positively correlated with use of heavy metal rock music (King, 1988) does not mean that music is the cause. In fact, as Keith Roe (1990, 1987) argues, music preference may just be an effect, a superficial indicator of other psychological, sociological, and cultural processes at work in the life of the adolescent. With respect to these correlational studies, one valid explanation is that students who do not do well in school become alienated and become interested in other activities that are more gratifying such as substance use or listening to heavy metal rock music.

But the stance that music is not a causative factor at all is difficult to reconcile with the research on the impact of music (e.g., Greeson & Williams, 1986; Hansen & Hansen, 1989, 1990a, 1990b, 1991; Kruse 1994), analyses of how youth use music (Frith, 198 1; Lull, 1987; Grossberg, 1987), and the general intuitive sense of the importance of music to youth, However, researchers must not be deceived into thinking the choice is between "massive" effects and no effects. There may be conditional effects. In other words, music may act as an agent of cause for certain subgroups.





10



Christenson and Roberts (1990) argue this position most eloquently. They maintain that while music may not cause adolescent values, attitudes, and behaviors in most cases, there may be subgroups in which music can act as an agent of cause. For example, heavy metal fans seem to be an at-risk group (Tanner, 1981; King, 1988) who may be more susceptible to the sexually violent, rebellious, anti-establishment messages of heavy metal rock music. In addition, heavy metal rock fans also report being more familiar with the content and meaning of these lyrics (Wass, Raup, Cerullo, Martel, et al., 1988 89), which increases the danger. Christenson and Roberts (1990) stated the following regarding the potential influence of music:

Yet we have hinted at some areas in which the impact of music in social settings and social groups might be problematic. Certain types of music do stand for rebellion and alienation, do represent antisocial philosophies.
There is the possibility that the message of this kind of music (which is as much in the sound and the images of the artists as in the lyrics) may solidify certain subgroups in adolescent culture and articulate values and
feelings for their members.

We say certain subgroups because most teens who listen, for example, to heavy metal are not alienated or at risk. For others, though, the preference for heavy metal is more than just a "taste." It is an identity, a source of group cohesion, a life philosophy. For these listeners, there is the strong possibility that a certain type of music, once adopted by their group, may begin to act as a source of information, values, and even
behavior (pp. 60 61).

However, Christenson and Roberts (1990) were able to find only one study in their review of the literature that relates to this hypothesis. This study, by Roe (1984), offers limited support for the contention that music can act as a cause of adolescent attitudes and behavior. In a longitudinal study of Swedish youth, Roe found that adolescents who were strongly interested in pop music at the age of I I later were more oriented toward their peers and less oriented toward their parents than were adolescents who were not interested in pop music at an early age. This study suggests that the music





I I



(or the messages contained in the music and in the subculture surrounding the music) may have accelerated these adolescents' separation from their parents. A similar result may occur in heavy metal subcultures in which adolescents with a tendency toward delinquent behavior adopt heavy metal rock as their music. By doing this they gain a group identity; however, they also are exposed to the sexually violent, antisocial themes of the music, which may lead them into drug addiction, antisocial behaviors, and acts of violence against women.

Christenson and Roberts (1990) hypothesized that music can act as a source of information, values, and behaviors for those listeners for whom their music preference is more than just a "taste." In other words, music is not expected to act as a primary source of information, values, and behaviors for all adolescents, but when an adolescent is deeply committed to a particular style of music he or she is more likely to internalize the values, attitudes, and behaviors found within that music subculture. This study tests Christenson and Roberts' (1990) hypothesis to determine if (a) there is a significant relationship between preference for musical styles and values, attitudes, and behaviors and (b) differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors between music preference groups will only be statistically significant when commitment is high,














CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Christenson and Roberts' (1990) hypothesis involves many variables. This chapter begins by identifying and defining the two independent variables of music preference and global commitment. These variable specify which style of music the listener favors and whether this preference is "more than just a 'taste."' To provide a broad test of Christenson and Roberts' (1990) hypothesis, dependent variables will be included from three distinct domains: 1) values, 2) attitudes, and 3) behaviors. There is a natural progression here from internal variables to external variables, beginning with values, which are deeply held ideas about what is important in life, to attitudes, which are often more superficial and malleable by the influences of society, to behaviors, which provide objective, external evidence of these internal states. The attitude and behavior variables have been selected based on a common theme whereby these variables will serve to verify one another. In other words, attitudes toward substances will be paired with an assessment of substance use so that if attitude differences are found, it can be determined if these attitude differences relate to behavioral differences. The attitudinal and behavioral variables have been chosen based on issues relevant to both adolescent life and music based on the available literature. These dependent variables will focus on attitudes toward women and sexually coercive behavior and on attitudes and behavior as the relate to substance use.







12





13



Independent Variables

Music Preference

To test adequately Christenson and Roberts' (1990) hypothesis that music can become a source of information, values and behaviors in some cases, two independent variables need to be considered. The first is music preference itself. Christenson and Peterson (1988) found that adolescents could identify and differentiate among 26 distinct musical styles. Clearly there is a wide variety of music preferences available. However, a music preference must be sufficiently distinct from all other music styles and have a sufficiently large following to provide enough data to make a valid test of whether adolescents who prefer this style of music are different in their behavior and in the values and attitudes they hold and whether this difference is related to their commitment to this preferred style of music. In short, to test Christenson and Roberts' (1990) hypothesis properly, it will be necessary to group related music styles together to form a smaller number of general but distinct groups.

Kruse (1994) used five general groups to classify music preference: popular rock, college/alternative, heavy metal rock, country/folk, and classical/jazz. This grouping, although reducing the 26 music styles identified by Christenson and Peterson (1988) to a smaller number, would prove unsatisfactory for the present study on two counts. First, out of a sample of 200 male undergraduates at the University of Florida, only 8 (4%) expressed a preference for classical/jazz and an additional 7 (4%) expressed a preference for country/folk (pretesting data from the University of Florida Psychology Department participant pool for the Fall semester of 1992 confirmed the small percentage of University of Florida undergraduate males who prefer country/folk and classical/jazz music). Clearly these categories, although representing very distinct musical styles, do not have sufficient support in the population to be used in this study to make a valid test





14



of the hypothesis and will therefore not be included in the analysis. The remaining three music preference groups did receive sufficient endorsement by Kruse's sample with 66 (33%) preferring popular rock, 95 (48%) preferring college/altemative, and 24 (12%) preferring heavy metal.

The second problem with the particular grouping of music preference used by Kruse (1994) is that rap was conceptually included in the popular rock group. This grouping, although appropriate for the prior study, is not consistent with the intent of the present study. In particular, rap represents a musical style and musical culture very distinct from popular rock and so it must be treated as a separate music style in the present study. Conceptually, rap is an important music category because it, like heavy metal rock music, has come under considerable attack by parents, civic groups, and social scientists for its controversial, violent, and misogynistic themes of gangster behavior, selling drugs, rape, and killing police officers. However, whether rap music will be endorsed as a music preference by sufficient numbers of this sample is in question. Existing pretesting data from the University of Florida Psychology Department participant pool for the Fall semester of 1992 indicate that only 9% of a sample of 647 undergraduate males indicated a preference for rap music. Whether rap music is included in the present study is entirely dependent on the number of participants who endorse it as their music preference.

It is also possible that other music styles could enter the analysis if enough participants identify it as their preferred style. Again, based on the previous data from Kruse (1994) and pretesting data from the University of Florida Psychology participant pool for 1992, it is unlikely that any other music style will satisfy this criterion. Therefore, the music styles that are likely to be included as independent variables in the analysis are popular rock, college/alternative, and heavy metal rock. Participants who





15



indicate a different music preference that is not endorsed by at least 10% of the sample will be excluded from the analysis.

Global Commitment

The second independent variable for this study is the adolescent's reported global commitment to his or her preferred style of music. The global commitment variable will be used to predict when music preference will become a particularly salient variable for distinguishing between adolescents based on their values, attitudes, and behaviors. In many ways global commitment is an obvious predictor variable. Anyone predicting which of two individuals is more likely to be influenced by music would certainly expect the individual who is committed to the music-who has greater exposure (e.g., listens more), more exclusive exposure (e.g,, prefers exclusively the music in question), actively seeks out the music (e.g., purchases CDs), publicly identifies with the music (e.g., wears concert T-shirts), personally identifies with the music (e.g., fantasizes about becoming a musician), and identifies his/her music preference as an important descriptor of him/herself-to be more open to and receptive of the messages communicated through the complex stimulus of music.

It also becomes obvious that this commitment variable must be a "global" variable because there are many ways adolescents can commit themselves to a music preference. Therefore, this global commitment variable is broadly defined and must contain multiple measures. For example, purchasing tapes or CDs is an indicator of commitment to a music preference, but that an adolescent does not purchase tapes or CDs may simply mean he or she lacks the disposable income necessary to buy them. Consequently, global commitment will include such variables as the exclusiveness of music preference, the amount of listening, percentage of friends who also prefer the style, tape or CDs purchases, concert attendance, and self-reported identification with the music style, etc.





16



Making global commitment a predictor variable is also consistent with Christenson and Roberts' (1990) hypothesis. Their concern is that "a certain type of music, once adopted by their group, may begin to act as a source of information, values, and even behavior" (Christenson & Roberts, 1990, p. 61). The current project measures the extent to which a particular music style is adopted by an individual and determines whether individuals who are highly committed to their favorite music have different values, attitudes, and behaviors than individuals who are not as committed or who prefer another style of music.

Dependent Variables

The dependent variables in the present study include both a priori variables, in which differences are expected on theoretical grounds, and exploratory variables, which are salient in adolescent culture but whose relationship to music and music preference is unknown. The dependent variables are grouped into three classes of variables: values, attitudes, and behaviors.

Values

Values are long-standing beliefs that certain ways of acting are more personally or socially desirable than are other ways. Personal values represent what an individual wants or considers to be good or important. Values are often categorized as either intrinsic, that is inherent in the activity itself, or extrinsic, the result of the activity. An example of an intrinsic value would be aesthetics, where a music listener may directly experience the artistic beauty of the music. An extrinsic value would include cultural identity, where the listener is able to deepen a connection to his or her own culture by listening to music. Values are central to the way individuals understand their world and are probably the deepest level at which music is expected to have an impact. If music is





17



found to have a significant impact on values, then the influence of music is penetrating and pervasive.

The Values Scale (VS; Super & Nevill, 1986) will be used to assess values. The US version of the VS includes 21 scales in 106 items measuring both intrinsic and extrinsic values. The values assessed by the VS include Ability Utilization, Achievement, Advancement, Aesthetics, Altruism, Authority, Autonomy, Creativity, Cultural Identity, Economic Rewards, Economic Security, Life Style, Personal Development, Physical Activity, Physical Prowess, Prestige, Risk, Social Interaction, Social Relations, Variety, and Working Conditions. The VS, although developed as a career assessment instrument, includes both work and general values, providing a fairly comprehensive list of values. The VS was developed by a multinational team of researchers as part of the Work Importance Study. As a result the VS is a carefully constructed, psychometrically sound instrument that is available in nine languages (Nevill & Super, 1989; Nevill & Kruse, 1996).

Sverko (1995) completed a cross-national factor analysis of the VS using data collected as part of the WIS. International scoring was used that includes only the first 18 scales listed above (Economic Rewards and Economic Security are combined as Economics) and only the three items per scale that were adopted by all countries in the WIS. This sample included 18,318 participants from 10 countries, with some countries providing separate samples for secondary school, higher education, and adults. Factor analysis of this pooled sample yielded a five-factor structure. The first factor, Utilitarian Orientation, included Economics, Advancement, Prestige, Authority, and Achievement and focuses on extrinsic values that stress the importance of economic conditions and material career progress. The second factor is Orientation Toward Self-Actualization and primarily includes Ability Utilization, Personal Development, and Altruism, with some





18



samples including salient loadings on Achievement, Aesthetics, and Creativity. The third factor, Individualistic Orientation, is primarily made up of Life-Style and Autonomy with Creativity and Variety included in some samples. The fourth factor is Social Orientation and is defined by Social Interaction and Social Relations. Some samples' loadings on this factor also include Variety and Altruism. The fifth factor, which verko labeled Adventurous Orientation, primarily includes Risk with some samples also loading Physical Activity and Authority on this factor.

There are no available data on specific value differences between different music styles and subcultures. As a result, although a relationship between music and values is theoretically predicted, the exact nature of this relationship is speculative. However, the relationship between music and values need not be entirely exploratory, as some reasonable predictions can be made based on an understanding of the different music styles and subcultures. For example, preference for heavy metal rock music is expected to be positively related to an Adventurous Orientation whereas preference for college/alternative is expected to be positively related to an Individualistic Orientation. Attitudes

Attitudes toward women

The relationship between attitudes toward women and music has received considerable attention in the literature (St. Lawrence & Joiner, 1991; Peterson & Pfost, 1989). In particular, Kruse (1994) found that although heavy metal rock music with or without lyrics negatively influences attitudes toward women, a preference for heavy metal music is associated with less restrictive attitudes toward women. In fact the most restrictive attitudes were associated with a preference for popular rock and country/folk music. These results are confusing, somewhat contradictory, and make it difficult to predict how different music styles might affect listener's attitudes toward women. It is





19



expected that the present study will help clarify this important relationship. To this end, attitudes toward women are measured using two scales: the Sex-role Stereotyping Scale (SRS; Burt, 1980), and Rape Myth Scale (RMS; Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1995), which is a revision of Burt's (1980) Rape Myth Acceptance Scale that attempts to correct both theoretical and psychometric weaknesses of the Burt scale. The SRS will allow a replication of Kruse's (1994) work and helps clarify the relationship between music preference and sex-role stereotyping, as well as demonstrate the role of global commitment in this relationship. The RMS is being included because a moderate relationship exists between sex-role stereotyping and the acceptance of rape myths (Burt, 1980). The RMS will help to extend the findings of Kruse (1994) by determining if the relationship between attitudes toward women and music preference is limited to sex-role stereotyping or if the relationship extends to attitudes toward women that are of greater concern to social scientists.

Substance use

Attitudes toward substance use are another important area of concern with respect to adolescents and music (Christenson & Roberts, 1990; King, 1988). The connection between music and drug use is most clearly illustrated in the cliche "sex, drugs, and rock W roll." Because of this relationship, it is expected that music, particularly certain music styles, will have a strong relationship with adolescents' attitudes toward drug use, if not their actual behavior (see below for a discussion of drug use). In general, preferences for heavy metal and college/alternative music are expected to be more strongly associated with permissive attitudes toward substance use because these music cultures most openly endorse drug use.

It also will be important when assessing drug use attitudes to differentiate between different substances. Alcohol and tobacco should be about equally endorsed by fans of





20



all music styles because they are legal substances that do not form a substantial theme in the music or music cultures. Heavy metal fans are expected to be accepting of all drugs including hard drugs and narcotics. College/alternative fans may have a profile quite similar to heavy metal rock, but college/alternative fans are more likely to favor psychedelics, hallucinogens, and heroin, which are substances often associated with this music culture.

Behaviors

Sexual coercion

Music is expected to be related to more than just attitudes. A relationship between music preference and adolescent behavior should also be found. Sexual coercion as a behavior is being included because it is the explicitly sexually violent themes in music that draw the greatest criticism from the public (Norwood, 1987) and social scientists (e.g., St. Lawrence & Joiner, 1991). Sexually coercive behavior in males also is expected to follow from high sex-role stereotyping and greater acceptance of rape myths.

Researchers rarely consider women as perpetrators of sexual coercion or men as victims, but the research that is available suggests that this dynamic is not as unusual as it would seem to be at first glance. For example, Johnson and Johnson (1994) found that 34% of a sample of 204 college men reported incidents of pressured or forced sexual touching or intercourse since age 16 years, with 30% of these incidents involving a female perpetrator or perpetrators of both sexes. Lottes (1991) also found substantial proportions of male undergraduates reporting that women had tried to have sex with them through nonphysical coercive strategies. In another study, McConaghy, Zamir, and Manicavasagar (1993) found that 6% of a sample of 51 female medical students reported being so aroused that they could not stop when their partner did not want intercourse and 13% of the sample of 66 male medical students reported having intercourse against their





21



will. As a result of these studies, females also will be asked to report their sexually coercive behaviors as well.

Regarding sexual coercion, it is expected that heavy metal and rap music listeners (heavy metal and rap most often contain sexually violent/coercive lyrics) will report a higher incidence of sexual violence than will either popular rock or college/alternative listeners.

Substance use

Again the obvious link between music and drugs clearly implies that music preference should be related to substance use (King, 1988). It is expected that participants who prefer heavy metal rock or college/alternative music will report the most frequent drug use. Drug use will be assessed by asking participants how frequently they use different classes of drugs on a scale from "never" to "several times daily."

As noted above, different music styles also should be more strongly associated with certain classes of drugs. Again, fans of all music styles should show roughly equivalent use of alcohol and tobacco. Heavy metal rock and college/altemative fans are expected to report more frequent use of illegal drugs with college/altemative fans showing a preference for psychedelics, hallucinogens, and heroin. Sensation Seeking

There are other variables that may be of interest in the present study. One such variable is Sensation Seeking (Zuckerman, 1978), which has been associated with a preference for hard rock and heavy metal rock music (Arnett, 1992, 1991). Sensation seeking has been associated with other high-risk/reckless behaviors including drug use, promiscuous sex, unprotected sex, driving while intoxicated, shoplifting, and vandalism (Arnett, 1992, 1991). The association between heavy metal, high-risk behaviors, and sensation seeking could potentially confound the results of this study. In particular, if





22



sensation seeking is correlated with both heavy metal rock music and other high risk behaviors, then the relationship between heavy metal rock music and high risk behaviors might be explained by sensation seeking. However, if the relationship between heavy metal rock music and these high risk behaviors is independent of sensation seeking, then this leaves open the possibility that a preference for heavy metal rock music influences these behaviors. As a result, sensation seeking will need to be controlled for in all analyses in this study.

Summary

This study seeks to test whether music can begin to act as a source of information, values, and behaviors for certain fans whose lives are specifically oriented around their preferred style of music. To test this hypothesis, the participants' music preference and their global commitment to the music will be assessed. This study also will measure the participants' values, attitudes toward women, acceptance of rape myths, attitudes toward substances, frequency of sexually coercive behavior, and frequency of substance use. This study is less concerned about the specific differences between music preference groups in terms of their values, attitudes, and behaviors and is more interested in the general relationship between music preference and global commitment and its significance across the domains of values, attitudes, and behaviors. To this end, the following hypotheses were made regarding the dependent variables in this study.

Hypotheses

General Hypotheses

A. Music preference, as indicated by the participant's self-reported preference from

among specified styles of music (i.e., heavy metal rock, popular rock, college/alternative, and rap), and global commitment to the preferred style of

music will be significantly associated with values, attitudes, and behaviors.





23



B. Music preference and global commitment to that music preference as measured

by the Music Preference Questionnaire will interact such that differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors between music preference groups will only be

statistically significant when commitment is high. Specific Hypotheses

Values

1. On the Utilitarian Orientation factor of the Values Scale (Super & Nevill,

1986), music preference (MP) and global commitment (GC) will interact such that popular rock fans will place more importance on this factor (i.e., score higher) as their GC increases whereas college/alternative fans will

place less importance on this factor (i.e., score lower) as their GC increases.

2. On the Orientation Toward Self-Actualization factor of the Values Scale

(Super & Nevill, 1986), MP and GC will interact such that college/alternative fans will place more importance on this factor (i.e., score higher) as their GC increases whereas heavy metal rock fans will place less

importance on this factor (i.e., score lower) as their GC increases.

3. On the Individualistic Orientation factor of the Values Scale (Super &

Nevill, 1986), MP and GC will interact such that college/alternative fans will place more importance on this factor (i.e., score higher) as their GC increases whereas popular rock fans will place less importance on this factor (i.e.,

score lower) as their GC increases.

4. On the Social Orientation factor of the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986),

MP and GC will interact such that popular rock fans will place more importance on this factor (i.e., score higher) as their GC increases whereas





24



heavy metal rock fans will place less importance on this factor (i.e., score

lower) as their GC increases.

5. On the Adventurous Orientation factor of the Values Scale (Super & Nevill,

1986), MP and GC will interact such that heavy metal rock and college/alternative fans will place more importance on this factor (i.e., score higher) as their GC increases whereas popular rock fans will place less

importance on this factor (i.e., score lower) as their GC increases. Attitudes

6. On the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale (Burt, 1980), MP and GC will interact

such that popular rock fans will be more sex-role stereotyped (i.e., score higher) as their GC increases whereas college/alternative fans will be less

sex-role stereotyped (i.e., score lower) as their GC increases.

7. On the Rape Myth Scale (Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1995), MP and GC will

interact such that heavy metal rock fans will be more accepting of rape myths (i.e., score higher) as their GC increases whereas college/alternative fans will

be less accepting of rape myths (i.e., score lower) as their GC increases.

8. Permrissive attitudes toward tobacco and alcohol will be equal for all music

preference groups. Preference for college/alternative and heavy metal rock will be associated with more permissive attitudes toward illegal drug use.

College/alternative and heavy metal rock fans' attitudes toward illegal drug use will become more permissive as their GC increases. Attitudes toward drug use will be measured by the Permissiveness Subscale from the Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale (Jenkins, Fisher, & Applegate, 1990) and

by the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale (constructed by the author).





25



Behaviors

9. Consistent with the hypotheses regarding sex-role stereotyping and rape

myth acceptance, MP and GC will interact such that heavy metal rock fans will report more sexually coercive behaviors (i.e., score higher on the Sexual Experiences Survey; Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1995) as their GC increases whereas college/alternative fans will report fewer sexually coercive behaviors (i.e., score lower on the Sexual Experiences Survey; Lonsway &

Fitzgerald, 1995) as their GC increases.

10. Preference for college/alternative and heavy metal rock will be associated

with more frequent use of illegal drugs, whereas use of tobacco and alcohol use will be equal for all music preference groups. College/alternative and heavy metal rock fans' use of illegal drugs will increase as their GC increases. Substance use will be measured by the Substance Use Scale

(constructed by the author).














CHAPTER 3
METHOD

Partici2gnts

Participants were 282 undergraduates (93 males and 189 females, 33% and 67% respectively) solicited from psychology classes at the University of Florida who volunteered to participate in this research for course credit. Undergraduate students were invited to participate in this study because music consumption remains an important part of life for youth throughout adolescence and the college years (Christenson & Roberts, 1990). The ages of the participants included 7% age 18, 23% age 19, 28% age 20, 20% age 21, 9 % age 22 and 13% age 23+. The academic class range of the participants included 5% freshman, 20% sophomores, 36% juniors, 36% seniors, 1% post-bac, and 2% graduate students. The racial makeup of the sample was 76% White, 9% Latino, 5% Asian, 8% Black, and 2% other. Data for all subjects were retained for analysis.

Instruments

The instruments used in the present study include the following:

1 Music preference and global commitment were both assessed using the

Musical Preference Questionnaire (MPQ). The MPQ was used to gather detailed information about the participants' musical tastes and how committed they were to listening to their favorite music. Item 1 assesses music preference and the remainder of the items assess global commitment.

Consistent with the discussion above, the assessment of global commitment is multi-dimensional and includes a comprehensive list of items to assess the many ways in which fans can commit themselves to a particular style of 26





27



music. This instrument was constructed by the author, and validation of this instrument, including reliability and factor analysis, is reported in the Results Section. The Musical Preference Questionnaire can be found in Appendix

A.

2. Values were assessed using the Values Scale (VS; Super & Nevill, 1986),

which provides scales for the following values: Ability Utilization, Achievement, Advancement, Aesthetics, Altruism, Authority, Autonomy, Creativity, Cultural Identity, Economics, Life Style, Personal Development, Physical Activity, Physical Prowess, Prestige, Risk, Social Interaction, Social Relations, Variety, and Working Conditions. In order to minimize the number of items on the battery, the cross-national scoring system was used, reducing the number of items from 106 to 60. The participants rated the importance of a value statement on a 4-point Likert scale from "of little or no importance" to "very important." The following is a sample item: "It is now or will in the future be important for me to ... use all my knowledge and skills." Higher scores reflect placing greater importance on value. Nevill & Super (1989) report the (x and test-retest reliabilities for the individual value scales to be greater than .70, with the exception of Ability Utilization, Life Style, and Personal Development. The construct validity of the VS is established by a variety of indices beginning with the use of proper inventory development procedures (Nevill & Super, 1989). Factor analysis of the VS demonstrated the expected correlations between related values (e.g. between Achievement and Personal Development) while maintaining the independence of divergent factors (Nevill & Super, 1989). Moreover, the factor structure of the VS remains consistent across cultures ( verko, 1995)





28



and among different age groups within the same culture (i.e., high school, university and adult samples; Nevill & Super, 1989). Additional studies have further validated the VS by demonstrating its high correlations with other instruments that assess similar values (Nevill & Kruse, 1996). The

Values Scale can be found in Appendix B.

3. Sex-role stereotyping was assessed using the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale

(SRS; Burt, 1980). This instrument contains nine statements to which the participants must respond on a 7-point Likert scale from "strongly disagree"

to "strongly agree." The following is a sample item: "A woman should never contradict her husband in public." Higher scores reflect greater endorsement of sex-role stereotyping. Burt (1980) reported a Cronbach's a of .80 for the SRS. The validity of the SRS is demonstrated by its high correlation (-.73; Check & Malamuth, 1983) with the Attitudes Toward Women Scale (Spence & Helmreich, 1972; higher scores reflect more pro-feminist attitudes) and its ability to predict attitudes and beliefs regarding sexuality and violence (Check & Malamuth, 1983). The Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale can be found

in Appendix C.

4. Rape myth acceptance was assessed using the Rape Myth Scale (RMS;

Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1995). This is a 19-item scale where the participants respond on a 7-point Likert scale from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." The following is a sample item: "Women tend to exaggerate how much rape affects them." Higher scores reflect greater acceptance of "attitudes and beliefs that are generally false but widely and persistently held, and that serve to deny and justify male sexual aggression against women"

(Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1995, p. 704). Lonsway and Fitzgerald (1995)





29



report a coefficient u. of .89 (compared to a .88 Cronbach's ax for the original scale; Burt, 1980) with item-to-total correlations ranging from .38 to .73.

Content validity was ensured in the development of the scale by generating questions to cover all seven areas of the rape myth construct identified by Payne (1993): victim precipitation, definition of rape, male intention, victim desire-enjoyment, false charges, trivialization of the crime, and deviance of the act. Evidence for the construct validity is found in the RMS's positive correlations with measures of hostility toward women, acceptance of interpersonal violence, and adversarial sexual beliefs (Lonsway & Fitzgerald,

1995). The Rape Myth Scale can be found in Appendix D.

5. Permissive attitudes toward general drug use was assessed using the

Permissiveness Subscale of the Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale (SAA; Chappel, Veach, & Krug, 1985; Jenkins, Fisher, & Applegate, 1990). The Permissiveness Subscale is a 10-item scale where the participants respond on a 7-point Likert scale from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." The following is a sample item: "It can be normal for a teenager to experiment with drugs." Higher scores reflect more permissive attitudes toward substance use. Jenkins, et al. (1990) validated the SAA (Chappel, et al., 1985) for a college population because the original instrument was developed for medical students and substance abuse professionals. Jenkins, et al. (1990) replicated the essential factor structure of the SAA, identifying 3 factors: (1) Stereotypes and Moralism (a synthesis of the Nonstereotypes and Nonmoralism factors identified by Chappel, et al., 1985), (2) Treatment (a synthesis of the Treatment Intervention and Treatment Optimism factors identified by Chappel, et al., 1985), and (3) Permissiveness, which shared 6





30



items with the Permissiveness Factor identified by Chappel, et al. (1985).

Jenkins, et al. (1990) reported an Eigenvalue of 2.43 for the Permissiveness factor, which accounted for 20% of the variance. Jenkins, et al. (1990) reported Cronbach's (x of .74 and a test-retest reliability over 6 weeks of .82.

The Permissiveness Subscale from the Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale can

be found in Appendix E.

6. Permissive attitudes toward the use of specific drugs was assessed using the

Attitudes Toward Substances Scale (ATS), a 10-item constructed by the author to assess permissive attitudes toward various substances or classes of substances. The ATS was included to allow the assessment of attitudes toward specific substances and thereby determine if certain music preference groups held permissive attitudes toward specific substances. The question structure of the ATS follows the format "The use of [substance or class of substances] should not be regulated or restricted in any way." The ten questions assess the following ten substances: 1) tobacco, 2) alcohol, 3) marijuana, 4) hallucinogens, 5) designer drugs, 6) prescription drugs, 7) stimulants, 8) depressants, 9) cocaine, and 10) heroin. The following is a sample item: "The use of hallucinogens such as LSD, mushrooms, or PCP should not be regulated or restricted in any way." The participants respond on a 7-point Likert scale from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." This instrument was constructed by the author, and validation of this instrument, including reliability and factor analysis, is reported in the Results Section.

The Attitudes Toward Substances Scale can be found in Appendix F.

7. The frequency of sexually coercive behaviors for both males and females

was assessed using the Sexual Experiences Survey (SExS; Koss & Oros,





31



1982). The scale was originally written to assess both males' reports of sexually coercive behaviors against females and females' reports of sexually coercive behavior committed against them by males. McConaghy, Zamir, and Manicavasagar (1993) used a modified version of this scale that allowed both men and women to report how often they have engaged in sexually coercive behavior and how often they were a victim of sexually coercive behavior. In the current study, the SExS was limited to focus only on the frequency with which the participants have engaged in sexually coercive behavior. In addition, the SExS was modified from the simple yes/no format of the original form (Koss & Oros, 1982) to a 7-point Likert scale, which allowed the participants to indicate how frequently they have engaged in the target behavior from "never" to "often." The scale utilizes a dimensional view of rape, in which "rape represents an extreme behavior but one that is on a continuum with non-nal male behavior within the culture" (Koss & Oros, 1982, p. 455). The SExS takes into consideration the possibility that force or the threat of force may have been used in a situation, but for various reasons sexual intercourse did not occur. The scale consists of 10 statements that include a progression on the type of coercion (i.e., from verbal coercion, to threats of violence, to the use of violence) and a progression on the type of sexual acts (i.e., kissing and petting, to attempted intercourse, to oral or anal intercourse). The SExS also includes three unscored items assessing consensual sexual intercourse, having another person misinterpret the level of intimacy one desires, and having been raped. The following is a sample item: "Have you ever ... been in a situation where you tried to get sexual intercourse with another person when he or she didn't want to by threatening





32



to use physical force (twisting his or her arm, holding him or her down, etc.) if he or she didn't cooperate, but for various reasons sexual intercourse did not occur?" Higher scores reflect a greater reported frequency of engaging in sexually coercive behaviors. No reliability or validity data is available for this modified SExS. However, Koss & Oros (1982) found that between 2 6% of their university sample of men reported using some degree of physical force or threats of physical force to coerce partners into sexual acts. The authors concluded that the instrument was a valid approach to sampling in rape research. Factor analysis of the SExS by Koss & Oros (1982) revealed one factor that accounted for 67% of the variance. The modified SExS used in this study was tested for reliability and validity and the results of these analyses, including reliability and factor analysis, is reported in the Results

Section. The Sexual Experiences Survey can be found in Appendix G.

8. Substance use behavior was assessed using the Substance Use Scale, a

10-item scale constructed by the author. The participants indicated on a 7-point Likert scale (0 = "never," 6 = "several times daily") the frequency of their use of the following ten substances: 1) tobacco, 2) alcohol, 3) marijuana, 4) hallucinogens, 5) designer drugs, 6) prescription drugs, 7) stimulants, 8) depressants, 9) cocaine, and 10) heroin. The following is a sample item: "How often do you use hallucinogens such as LSD, mushrooms, or PCPT' This instrument was constructed by the author, and validation of this instrument, including reliability and factor analysis, is reported in the Results Section. The Substance Use Scale can be found in

Appendix H.





33



9. A short (10-item) form of the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, Das,

Bogen, & Grossman, 1987) was used to assess sensation seeking. For each item, participants choose between two alternatives the one which best describes their personal attitude. The following is a sample item: "I would like to hitchhike across the country. OR Hitchhiking is too dangerous a way to travel." Madsen, et al. (1987) reported a test-retest reliability over a 2 month interval of .78. and a Cronbach's cx of .43. Madsen, et al. (1987) reported that this short form SSS correlates .78 with the total score of the Sensation Seeking Scale, Form V (Zuckerman, 1978). The validity of the SSS is demonstrated by its high correlation with the Sensation Seeking Scale, Form V (Zuckerman, 1978), which is used in virtually all of the recent research conducted in the area of sensation seeking (Arnett, 1994).

Furthermore, Madsen, et al. (1987) found that men score higher than women on the short form SSS, and that it correlates positively with alcohol use, drug use, and sexual expressiveness, but is uncorrelated with social desirability.

This short form also avoids the use of dated language and questions concerning alcohol and drug use found in Form V, which Arnett (1994) identified as limitations of Form V. The Sensation Seeking Scale can be

found in Appendix 1.

10. A Demographic Questionnaire was used to gather information on the

participants, including age, race, gender, college class, fraternity/sorority membership, SES, school background, and cultural background. The

demographic questionnaire can be found in Appendix J.





34



Procedure

Participants were recruited for this study from psychology classes at the University of Florida. The instructor from the course was approached in order to obtain permission to sample his or her class and to make arrangements for extra credit for those students who elected to participate. The instruments were administered during the regular class time to help ensure maximum participation.

Participants were given an informed consent form to read and sign. All participants were then given two assessment batteries. These batteries are separated because Battery I required that participants bubble in their responses on an answer sheet whereas Battery II required that they write or mark their answers directly on the form.

Battery 1, which took about 30 minutes to complete, includes nine scales: 1) the Demographic Survey, 2) the Values Scale, 3) the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale, 4) the Rape Myth Scale, 5) the Sexual Experiences Survey, 6) the Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale, 7) the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale, 8) the Substance Use Scale, and 9) the Sensation Seeking Scale. Battery II, which took about 15 minutes to complete, measures two variables: 1) music preference and 2) Global Commitment to the preferred style of music.

In order to protect their confidentiality, participants were identified only by a Code Number on all instruments. After completing the assessment batteries, the participants brought their material to the experimenter where they were individually thanked for participating in the study and given a debriefing form with a full description of the study. Participants who experienced any discomfort were invited to discuss their concerns with the investigator and/or solicit counseling at UF's Counseling Center. No participant reported any discomfort as a result of participating in this study.














CHAPTER 4
RESULTS

Preliminary Analyses

Before running the main analyses to test the hypotheses, several preliminary analyses were computed. In particular, it was necessary first to determine which music preference groups would be included in the main analyses and which analyses of dependent variables would include the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987) as a covariate. In addition, the Attitudes Toward Substances, Substance Use Scale, and the Sexual Experiences Survey (Koss & Oros, 1982) needed to be scored and analyzed to confirm the reliability and validity of the these instruments. The Music Preference Questionnaire, which included 31 write-in items, also needed to be scored and validated after Windsorizing (Marascuilo & McSweeney, 1977) and standardizing these write-in items.

Music Preference

On the MPQ, participants indicated their preferred style of music from among nine choices or wrote in their preference, if it was not listed. Table 1 displays the distribution of participants into the different music preference categories. The criterion established for including a particular music preference category in the main analysis was that the category must be endorsed by at least 10% of the sample. According to this criterion, only popular rock and college/alternative will be included in the main analysis examining the relationship between music preference and global commitment and values, attitudes and behavior. However, all music preference groups were included in the




35





36



validation of the MPQ, the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale, the Substance Use Scale, and the Sexual Experiences Survey. Table I Number of Participants in all Music Preference Categories Music Style Number Percentage
Classical 2 1%
College/Alternative 82 30%
Country 20 7%
Folk 5 2%
Heavy Metal Rock 1 0%
Jazz 2 1%
New Age 6 2%
Other 54 19%
Popular Rock 86 30%
Rap 10 3%
Rhythm &Blues 14 5%
NOTE: Rhythm & Blues was not included as a standard category on the MPQ but was written in by 14 participants.


Dependent Variables

Sensation seeking as measured by the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987) was proposed as a possible confounding variable in the relationship between music preference and the dependent variables. As a preliminary analysis, Pearson product moment correlation coefficients were computed to determine which dependent variables were significantly related to the SSS. The sample used in this analysis was limited to only participants who preferred popular rock or college/alternative (N = 168) because only these participants will be used in the main analysis. The statistically significant results of this analysis are provided in Table 2. An independent samples t-test was calculated to test for significant differences in SSS scores between popular rock and college/alternative fans. The results were significant (t = -3.51, p < .01) with means of





37



5.7 for college/alternative fans and 4.7 for popular rock fans. The fact that music preference and several of the dependent variables are correlated with the SSS justifies its inclusion as a covariate in the main analyses. Dependent variables for which the SSS was significantly correlated will include the SSS as a covariate in all analysis examining the relationship between music preference and global commitment and values, attitudes and behavior.


Table 2 Correlation of Dependent variables with Sensation Seeking Scale


Dependent Variables Pearson R p Value
Music Preference 0.27 < 0.01
Values Scale
Adventurous Orientation 0.29 < 0.01
Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale -0.21 < 0.01
Substance Use Scale
Sum of Illegal Drug Items 0.16 < 0.01
Sum of Alcohol and Tobacco Items 0.22 < 0.01
NOTE: The correlations between the dependent variables and the SSS are
calculated using only popular rock and college/alternative fans (N=162).


Music Preference Questionnaire

The Music Preference Questionnaire (MPQ) included 36 items with 59 data points (i.e., several items included 2 or more data points) designed to measure global commitment. These data points included 3 different response methods including: 1) 31 data points for which participants wrote in a value, 2) 10 data points for which they endorsed a statement, and 3) 18 data points for which they respond to a statement on a Likert scale. The data points in which participants wrote in a value presented a variety of problems for data entry. First, participants often wrote in a range of values (e.g., "'3 4"9)





38



for an item (e.g., "How many months has your indicated preference been your clear favorite?"). In all cases, the value entered corresponded to the highest value in the range.

A second problem was that some participants wrote in extreme values that were inconsistent with the overall sample. These extreme values may have represented a misunderstanding of the item by the participant or may have reflected accurate information. In either case the frequency distribution and variability statistics for these items were severely compromised. To correct the problems while maintaining the integrity of the data, responses for these 31 data points were Windsorized by resetting extreme values to the nearest value in the distribution of scores for that item (e.g., if an item had a consistent distribution of scores ranging from 0 to 8, scores of 12, 15, and 20 would be recoded as 8). These Windsorized scores were then converted to Z-scores to standardize them and make the values more consistent with the other Likert-scale items in the MPQ. These standardized scores were used in both reliability and factor analyses of the MPQ The standardized scores were also used when scoring the MPQ items. However, because Z-scores can be negative, a constant of 3 was added to the Z-scores when scoring to make them positive.

A third problem encountered refers specifically to the question regarding how many months participants had preferred a particular style of music. For this item, several participants wrote in "forever," "all my life," and similar phrases indicating a long, but indefinite, time period. Other participants wrote in a value that reflected an age before 5 years old, equaled their age, or in rare cases, exceeded their age. These later cases were considered another way of indicating "forever." To assign a valid number for this "forever" group, the length item was first Windsorized, reducing the range from 0 25 years to 0 8.3 years. Next, the mean and standard deviation of the length item were computed for each age group in the sample. The value for the length item for each person





39



in the "forever" group was then set to the mean plus two times the standard deviation using the mean and standard deviation for their age group. In this way, an 18-year-old who indicated "forever" as the length he has preferred a specific style of music was assigned a value consistent with his age, whereas a 22-year-old was assigned a different (and higher) value consistent with other 22-year-olds in the sample.

Factor Analyses

Substance Abuse Instruments

Attitudes toward substances

One of the instruments developed by the author is the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale (ATS), which is designed to measure permissive attitudes toward ten specific substances or classes of substances. The item structure of the ATS follows the format "The use of [substance or class of substances] should not be regulated or restricted in any way." The ten questions assess the following ten substances: 1) tobacco, 2) alcohol, 3) marijuana, 4) hallucinogens, 5) designer drugs, 6) prescription drugs, 7) stimulants, 8) depressants, 9) cocaine, and 10) heroin. The participants responded on a 7-point Likert scale (0 6) from "strongly disagree"~ to "strongly agree." A frequency analysis of the responses shows participants endorsing the full range of the Likert scale with the modal response being "strongly disagree."

Principle components factor analysis of the ATS produced the scree plot depicted in Figure 1. The scree plot graphs eigenvalues from largest to smallest. Cattell (1978) advocated using the plot to determine the number of factors to retain. The recommended decision is to retain all factors before the line dramatically changes slope from the graphically depicted sharp descent of eigenvalue magnitudes. The results of this procedure suggest that one factor should be retained. Factor loadings for all items range from .60 to .95. The a coefficient for the scale was found to be .95 with corrected item





40



to total correlations ranging from .92 to .57. The alcohol and tobacco items showed the weakest item to total correlations (.57 and .64 respectively) and if dropped would increase the (x coefficient for the scale.


8
7J ------------------------------------------------------------------6 -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------4 ----- --------------------------------------------------------------(D
.2)
LLJ 3 ------ -------------------------------------------------------------2 ------- ------------------------------------------------------------1 ....... ---------2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Factor Number
Figure I Factor Scree Plot of the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale


The ATS is highly correlated with the Permissiveness Subscale from the Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale (r = .41) and with the Substance Use Scale (r = .40) discussed next. In addition, the ATS is uncorrelated with only partly similar constructs, including the Sensation Seeking Scale (Madsen, et al., 1987), the values of Autonomy, Life Style, Individualistic Orientation, Risk and Variety from the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986), Age, Race, and Gender. Overall, the reliability of the ATS is clearly demonstrated and initial support for its validity exists, as well. The scale is extremely reliable with respect to internal consistency. Factor analysis yields one factor that accounts for 71 % of the total variance. These results justify the retention of the ATS as a measure of permissive attitudes toward substances. Individual items from the ATS will





41



also be used to measure attitudes toward specific substances or groups of substances as predicted by the hypotheses.

Substance use scale

The Substance Use Scale (SUS) also was developed by the author and was designed to measure participants' frequency of use of ten specific substances or classes of substances. The question structure of the SUS follows the format "How often do you use [substance or class of substances]?" and includes the following substances: tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, designer drugs, prescription drugs, stimulants, depressants, cocaine, and heroin. The participants respond on a 7-point Likert scale (0 6) from "never" to "several times daily." A frequency analysis of the responses shows that participants endorsed the full range of the Likert scale for alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana and a restricted range of 0 5 for designer drugs, 0 4 for prescription drugs, stimulants and depressants, and 0 3 for hallucinogens and heroin.

Principle components factor analysis of the SUS produced the scree plot depicted in Figure 2. The results of the scree test (Cattell, 1978) for the SUS are equivocal for one or two factors. In an attempt to find simple structure (Cattell, 1978; Kline, 1994) the one- and two-factor solutions were compared. The two factors were rotated using the Direct Oblimin method, which uses an oblique rotation that allows the resulting factors to be correlated (Kline, 1994). The resulting two-factor rotation retained 7 of the 10 items and accounted for 48% of the total variance. The (x reliability for the two factors combined was found to be .44.

The first factor in the two-factor solution includes 5 items assessing the use of prescription drugs, stimulants, depressants, cocaine, and heroin. Factor loadings range from .36 to .86 and include no loadings on Factor 2 > .16. This first factor clearly represents illegal substances that might be called "hard" drugs. The cc reliability for this





42



first factor was found to be .60. The second factor of the two-factor solution is made up of the 2 items referring to alcohol and tobacco, with factor loadings of .53 and .82, respectively. This second factor clearly represents legal substances. The (x reliability for this second factor was found to be .34. The items assessing use of marijuana,

hallucinogens, and designer drugs load >32 on both factors suggesting that, at least for this sample, marijuana, hallucinogens, and designer drugs do not fit neatly into either the legal or illegal drug categories. The correlation between these two factors is .31 and indicates that these factors, although distinct, are both assessing use of substances.


4


3 --- ----------------------------------------------------------------W
2 ------ -------------------------------------------------------------Lu
-------------------- ---------------------------------------------5 6 7 8 9 10
Factor Number
Figure 2 Factor Scree Plot of the Substance Use Scale


The one-factor solution retains all 10 items with factor loadings ranging from .32 to .80. This factor accounts for 36% of the total scale variance. The (x coefficient for the 10-item SUS was found to be .67, with corrected item to total correlations ranging from .64 to .24. The tobacco item showed the weakest item to total correlations (.24) and if dropped would increase the (x coefficient for the scale to .70. Because the one factor solution retains all items and is more reliable (a = .67) than the two factors individually





43



or combined, it is a better representation of simple structure and will be retained for use in the main analyses.

The validity of the SUS is supported by its high correlation with the Permissiveness Subscale from the Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale (r = .46) and with the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale (r = .40). It also correlates with constructs associated with drug use including age (r = -. 13), gender (r = -. 16; male = 0, female = 1), SES of father (r = -.13), and Life Style and Risk from the Values Scale (r = .12 and .25, respectively). Overall, the reliability and validity of the SUS is demonstrated. The reliability for the scale is weaker than is ideal, but it is as reliable as would be theoretically predicted. To boost reliability, substance users would have to use all 10 substances fairly equally, a pattern inconsistent with users who frequently identify a "drug of choice." These results justify the retention of the SUS as a measure of substance use behavior. Individual items from the SUS will be used to measure the use of specific substances or groups of substances as predicted by the hypotheses. Sexual Experiences Survey

The Sexual Experiences Survey (SExS) was substantially modified from Koss and Oros's (1982) original design and purpose for the instrument. In particular, the original instrument (Koss and Oros, 1982) was designed to measure males' commission of sexually coercive acts and females' experiences as recipients of sexually coercive acts. Koss and Oros (1982) also used a "yes/no" response format. The scale was modified to measure commission of sexually coercive acts by both males and females. In addition, the response format was changed to a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 0 = "never" to 6 = "often." The SExS considers the possibility that force or the threat of force may have been used in a situation, but for various reasons sexual intercourse did not occur. The scale consists of 10 statements that include a progression of the type of coercion (i.e.,





44



from verbal coercion, to threats of violence, to the use of violence) and a progression on the type of sexual acts (i.e., kissing and petting, to attempted intercourse, to oral or anal intercourse). The SExS also includes three unscored items assessing consensual sexual intercourse, having another person misinterpret the level of intimacy one desires, and having been raped. Higher scores reflect a greater reported frequency of engaging in sexually coercive behaviors.

A frequency analysis of the responses shows participants endorsing the full range of the Likert scale for items assessing verbal coercion and a restricted range (0 4) for some items assessing the use of force or the threat of force. On the three verbal coercion items, 82 96% of the sample reported never engaging in the target behavior. On the six items assessing the use of force or the threat of force, 94 98% of the sample reported never engaging in the target behavior. On the final item assessing being "so aroused you could not stop," 82% of the sample reported never being in this situation.

Principle components factor analysis of the SExS produced the scree plot depicted in Figure 3. The results of the scree test (Cattell, 1978) for the SExS indicate that one factor should be retained. This factor includes all 10 items and accounts for 68% of the total scale variance. Factor loadings range from .43 to .97. The (X coefficient for the scale was found to be .84 with corrected item to total correlations ranging from .44 to .83. The items assessing being "so aroused you could not stop" and "saying things you didn't really mean" showed the weakest item to total correlations (.45 and .48 respectively) and if these items had been dropped the a coefficient for the scale would increase.

The validity of the SExS is supported by its significant correlations with other variables including the Rape Myth Scale (r = .50), Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale (r = .26), gender (r = -.1607; male = 0, female = 1), the Permissiveness Subscale from the Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale (r = .30), the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale (r =





45



.26), and the Substance Use Scale (r = .3 1). In addition, the SExS is negatively correlated with many values including Altruism (r = -.30), Personal Development (r = -.36), Orientation Toward Self-Actualization (r = -.38), and Social Orientation (r = -.25). Factor analysis yielded one factor that accounts for 68% of the total variance. This is highly consistent with the factor analysis by Koss and Oros (1982), which found one factor that accounted for 67% of the variance. Koss and Oros (1982) also found that between 2 6% of their university sample of men reported using some degree of physical force or threats of physical force to coerce partners into sexual acts. In the current sample, 5 14% of males reported using some degree of physical force or threats of physical force to coerce partners into sexual acts (1.6% of the females reported using some force to obtain kissing or petting). Overall, the validity of the SExS is clearly demonstrated. The items for the scale are also very reliable. These results justify the retention of the SExS as a measure of coercive sexual behavior.


7-1

6 -- -----------------------------------------------------------------5 --- ----------------------------------------------------------------4 ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------3- --- --------------------------------------------------------------W
2 ------ -------------------------------------------------------------11 ----------- ----------------------------------------------------1 6 i 6 5 10 11 12 13
Factor Number
Figure 3 Factor Scree Plot of the Sexual Experiences Survey





46



Music Preference Questionnaire

The Music Preference Questionnaire (MPQ) was developed by the author and is designed to measure participants' global commitment to their preferred style of music. Principle components factor analysis of the MPQ yielded the scree plot depicted in Figure 4. The results of the scree test (Cattell, 1978) for the MPQ indicate that either six or possibly eleven factors should be retained. However, it is difficult to interpret six different factors and nearly impossible to interpret eleven factors. In addition, the purpose of this study is to determine how global commitment (rather than specific commitment factors) interacts with music preference, values, attitudes, and behaviors. Consequently, these individual factors are not specifically of interest in this study. In fact, the MPQ was intended to assess global commitment by tapping a wide variety of possible ways in which listeners commit to their music preference. The presence of a large number of factors indicates that the instrument is functioning as expected.


10,

-----------------------------------------------------------------.2 6 -------------------------------------------------------------------W

4 -------------------------------------------------------------------2 -------0 -,
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 Factor Number

Figure 4 Factor Scree plot of the Music Preference Questionnaire





47



In order to obtain a measure of global commitment, the unrotated factor matrix was used to select items that loaded > .30 on the first factor, which accounts for 13.9% of the total MPQ variance. Thirty-one items loaded > .30 on the first factor. An coefficient (x was computed for these 31 items and yielded a value of .89. One item, which assessed hours spent listing to non-favorite styles of music via CDs on weekdays, contributed almost nothing to the reliability of the 31-itern scale. Because of this negligible contribution and the fact that the item did not relate to the listeners' preferred style of music, this item was dropped from the scale, resulting in a final total of 30 items with an (x coefficient of .89.

The final 30-item scale retained items from all domains of the MPQ, including amount of listening, desire to listen more, context of listening, spending money on music related activities, music preference influencing behavior and fantasizing about being and meeting a famous musician. Three items also were included relating to consuming other styles of music. The total score for these 30 items is labeled the Global Commitment Index (GCI) and will be used as the measure of global commitment hypothesized to interact with music preference to impact the dependent variables in this study. The 30 items from the MPQ included in the GCI are highlighted in bold in Appendix A.

Main Analyses

Values

Five hypotheses were made regarding the relationship between music preference, global commitment, and five groups of values from the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986). It was expected that significant differences in values would be found for the different music preference groups and that these differences would be mediated by the listeners' global commitment to their preferred style of music. In particular, global commitment and music preference were expected to interact such that as global





48



commitment increased, the value differences between the music preference groups would also increase.

Hypothesis I predicted that on the Utilitarian Orientation factor of the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986), music preference (MP) and global commitment (GQ will interact such that popular rock fans will score higher as their GC increases whereas alternative fans will score lower on this factor as their GC increases. To test this hypothesis, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with MP, the Global Commitment Index (GCI), and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and Utilitarian Orientation serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into the model in the order listed. The results indicate that there is no significant interaction effect for MP x GCI on the Utilitarian Orientation factor and that Hypothesis I was not supported, F(3, 164) = 2.08, p < 0. 16. However, a significant main effect for MP was found, FQ, 164) = 6.40, p < 0.02. The means for the MP categories were 48.8 for popular rock fans and 46.2 for college/alternative fans, indicating that popular rock fans were more oriented to the utilitarian values of Economics, Advancement, Prestige, Authority, and Achievement than were college/alternative fans.

Hypothesis 2 predicted that on the Orientation Toward Self-Actualization factor of the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986), MP and GC will interact such that college/alternative fans will score higher on this factor as their GC increases whereas heavy metal rock fans will score lower on this factor as their GC increases. This hypothesis could not be tested in the current analysis because heavy metal rock fans were not sufficiently represented in the sample (i.e., only I out of 282 indicated a preference for heavy metal rock). However, to examine the relationship between the Orientation Toward Self-Actualization factor, MP, and GC, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and





49



Orientation Toward Self-Actualization serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into the model in the order listed. The results indicate that there is no significant interaction effect for MP x GCI on the Orientation Toward Self-Actualization factor, F(3, 164) = 0.32, p < 0.58. The main effect for MP was also nonsignificant, F(3, 164) = 1.44, p < 0.24.

Hypothesis 3 predicted that on the Individualistic Orientation factor of the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986), MP and GC will interact such that college/alternative fans will score higher on this factor as their GC increases whereas popular rock fans will score lower as their GC increases. To test this hypothesis, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987), MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and Individualistic Orientation serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into the model in the order listed. The SSS was included as a covariate because it is significantly related to both Individualistic Orientation and MP and may be a confounding factor (see above). The results indicate that Hypothesis 3 was not supported, F(3, 163) = 0.27, p < 0.61. The main effect for MP was also nonsignificant, F(3, 163) = 0.05, p < 0.82.

Hypothesis 4 predicted that on the Social Orientation factor of the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986), MP and GC will interact such that popular rock fans will score higher on this factor as their GC increases whereas heavy metal rock fans will score lower as their GC increases. This hypothesis could not be tested in the current analysis because heavy metal rock fans were not sufficiently represented in the sample (i.e., only I out of 282 indicated a preference for heavy metal rock). However, to examine the relationship between the Social Orientation, MP, and GC, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and Social Orientation serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into





50



the model in the order listed. The results indicate that there is no significant interaction effect for MP x GC on the Social Orientation factor, F(3, 163) = 0.01, p < 0.93. The main effect for MP was also nonsignificant, FQ, 163) = 3.83, p < 0.06.

Hypothesis 5 predicted that on the Adventurous Orientation factor of the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986), MP and GC will interact such that heavy metal rock and college/alternative fans will score higher on this factor as their GC increases whereas popular rock fans will score lower as their GC increases. This hypothesis could not be fully tested in the current analysis because heavy metal rock fans were not sufficiently represented in the sample (i.e., only I out of 282 indicated a preference for heavy metal rock). However, a partial test of the hypothesis concerning the relationship of popular rock and college/alternative with the Adventurous Orientation factor was performed. To provide a partial test of the hypothesis, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987), MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and Adventurous Orientation serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into the model in the order listed. The SSS was included as a covariate because it is significantly related to both the Adventurous Orientation and MP and may be a confounding factor as indicated earlier. The results indicate that Hypothesis 5 was not supported, F(4, 157) = 0.21, p < 0.66. The main effect for MP was also nonsignificant, F(4, 157) = 1.04, p < 0.3 1.

In summary, it was hypothesized that when value differences occurred between music preference groups, these differences would be mediated by global commitment such that the music preference groups' values would continue to diverge as their commitment to their music preference increased. This interaction between music preference and global commitment with groups of related values was not supported in this study. However, significant differences in Utilitarian Orientation values were found





51



for popular rock and college/alternative fans. On the Utilitarian Orientation values, popular rock fans scored significantly higher than college/alternative fans. These results indicate that the differences between music preference groups are not just superficial differences of music tastes or fashion aesthetics, but extend to the deeper levels of the person, to the values that they hold.

Attitudes

Three hypotheses were made regarding the relationship between music preference, global commitment and three attitude assessment instruments. It is believed that fans of popular rock, for instance, will have significantly different attitudes toward women and toward substances than fans of other music styles. It is further believed that as popular rock fans become more committed to their preference for popular rock, their attitudes toward women and toward substances will become increasingly divergent from fans of other music styles.

Attitudes toward women

Hypothesis 6 predicted that on the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale (SRS; Burt, 1980), MP and GC will interact such that popular rock fans will score higher as their GC increases whereas college/alternative fans will score lower as their GC increases. To test this hypothesis, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987), MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and the SRS serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into the model in the order listed. The SSS was included as a covariate because it is significantly related to both the SRS and MP and may be a confounding factor (see above). The results indicate that Hypothesis 6 was not supported, F(4, 157) = 0.00, p < 0.96. The main effect for MP was also nonsignificant, F(4, 157) = 2.73, p <

0.11.





52



These results are inconsistent with the findings of Kruse (1994), who found significant differences on the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale for different music preference categories. Considering that the above analysis approached statistical significance and that Kruse (1994) did not include the SSS as a covariate, a separate one-way ANOVA with MP as the IV and the SRS as the DV was also computed to allow a comparison between this study and Kruse (1994). The result of this test was significant, F(1, 166) = 4.94, p < 0.03. The means for the MP categories were 25.9 for popular rock fans and 23.3 for college/alternative fans, indicating that popular rock fans were more sex-role stereotyped than were college/alternative fans.

These results are confusing. MP differences on the SRS are nonsignificant when the SSS is included in the model, but the relationships of MP with the SRS and MP with the SSS are not symetrical. In particular, college/alternative fans score high on the SSS and low on the SRS, but popular rock fans score low on the SSS and high on the SRS. This pattern suggests a possible interaction effect. A separate multiple regression was calculated using the SSS, MP, and MP x SSS as predictor variables and the SRS as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into the model in the order listed. The results indicate that only the main effect for the SSS is significant, F(3, 158) = 11.72, p < 0.01. MP was again nonsignificant when the SSS was entered first in the model (F(3,158) = 2.80, p < 0. 10) and the interaction was also nonsignificant (F(3,158) = 3.05, p < 0.09). However, when the Type III Sums of Squares were used for the F tests, the main effects for both the 555 (F(3,158) = 8.01, p < 0.01) and MP (F(3,158) = 4.83, p < 0.03) were significant. Type III Sums of Squares factors out the variance common to all predictor variables so that each variable is tested as if it was entered into the regression equation last. In other words, MP differences in Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale scores are





53



significant when the effects of the Sensation Seeking Scale and the interaction MP x SSS are factored out.

Hypothesis 7 predicted that on the Rape Myth Scale (RMS; Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1995), MP and GC will interact such that heavy metal rock fans will score higher as their GC increases whereas college/alternative fans score lower as their GC increases. This hypothesis could not be tested in the current analysis because heavy metal rock fans were not sufficiently represented in the sample (i.e., only 1 out of 282 indicated a preference for heavy metal rock). However, to examine the relationship between the RMS, MP, and GC, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and the RMS serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered in the order listed. The results indicate that there is no significant interaction effect for MP x GC on the RMS, F(3, 164) = 0.79, p < 0.38. The main effect for MP with the RMS was also nonsignificant, F(3, 164)=

0.06, p < 0.8 1.

Attitudes toward substances

Hypothesis 8 has three parts: 1) permissive attitudes toward tobacco and alcohol will be equal for all music preference groups; 2) preference for college/alternative and heavy metal rock will be associated with more permissive attitudes toward illegal drug use; and 3) college/alternative and heavy metal rock fans' attitudes toward illegal drug use will become more permissive as their GC increases. Attitudes Toward the use of specific substances or groups of substances were measured by the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale (ATS; constructed by the author). This hypothesis could not be tested in the current analysis because heavy metal rock fans were not sufficiently represented in the sample (i.e., only 1 out of 282 indicated a preference for heavy metal rock). However, a partial test of Hypothesis 8 was possible concerning the relationship between the ATS,





54



preference for college/alternative music, and GC. A partial test of Hypothesis 8 requires two separate analyses. The first analysis involved a hierarchical multiple regression with MP, the GCI, and MP x GO serving as predictor variables and the sum of the two items from the ATS assessing alcohol and tobacco serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered in the order listed. The results indicate no MP differences on the ATS items assessing alcohol and tobacco, F(3, 164) = 2.53, p < 0. 12. The interaction effect for MP x GO was also nonsignificant, F(3, 164) = 0.45, p < 0.5 1. These results are consistent with Part 1 of Hypothesis 8.

To provide a partial test of Parts 2 and 3, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with MP, the GCI, and MP x GO serving as predictor variables and the sum of the eight items from the ATS assessing illegal substances serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered in the order listed. The results indicate no MP differences on the ATS items assessing illegal substances (F(3, 163) = 3.72, p < 0.06), which fails to support Part 2 of Hypothesis 8. The interaction effect for MP x GO was also nonsignificant (F(3, 163) = 0.28, p < 0.60), again failing to support Part 3 of Hypothesis 8. The relationship between MP, GC, and attitudes toward drugs anticipated by Hypothesis 8 was not supported.

To explore further the relationship between permissive attitudes toward drug use, MP, and GC, an hierarchical multiple regression was computed with the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987), MP, the GCI, and MP x GO serving as predictor variables and the Permissiveness Subscale from the Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale (SAA; Jenkins, Fisher, & Applegate, 1990) serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered in the order listed. The SSS was included as a covariate because it is significantly related to both the SAA and MP and may be a confounding factor (see above). The results indicate no main effect for MP differences on the SAA





55



(F(4, 157) = 1.99, p < 0.17) and no interaction effect for MP x GO on the SAA (F(4, 157) = 0,39, P < 0.54).

No significant differences were found for music preference groups on any of the attitude measures used in this study. All tests for an interaction between music preference and global commitment on the attitude measures were also nonsignificant. These results indicate very clearly that attitudes toward women and permissive attitudes toward substances are unrelated to music preference and the listener's global commitment to that music style.

Behaviors

The third area in which a relationship with music preference and global commitment was predicted is behaviors, specifically sexually coercive and substance use behaviors. Again it was hypothesized that there would be music preference differences in reported sexually coercive acts and the use of substances. Global commitment was expected to interact with music preference such that one music preference group would report higher frequencies of the target behaviors as their global commitment increased whereas another group would report lower frequencies of the target behaviors as their global commitment increased.

Sexual coercion

Hypothesis 9 states that MP and GC will interact such that heavy metal rock fans will score higher on the Sexual Experiences Survey (SExS; Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1995) as their GC increases whereas college/alternative fans will score lower on the SExS as their GC increases. This hypothesis could not be tested in the current analysis because heavy metal rock fans were not sufficiently represented in the sample (i.e., only I out of 282 indicated a preference for heavy metal rock). However, to examine the relationship between the SExS, MP, and GC, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with





56



MP, the CI and MP x CCO serving as predictor variables and the SExS serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered in the order listed. The results indicate that there is no significant interaction effect for MP x GC on the SExS, F(3, 16 1) = 0.52, p < 0,48. The main effect for MP was also nonsignificant, F(3, 161) = 2.61, p <

0.11.

Substance use

Hypothesis 10 has three parts: 1) the use of tobacco and alcohol will be equal for all music preference groups; 2) preference for college/alternative and heavy metal rock will be associated with higher usage of illegal drugs; and 3) college/alternative and heavy metal rock fans' use of illegal drugs will increase as their CC increases. The use of specific substances or groups of substances was measured by the Substance Use Scale (SUS; constructed by the author). This hypothesis could not be tested in the current analysis because heavy metal rock fans were not sufficiently represented in the sample (i.e., only 1 out of 282 indicated a preference for heavy metal rock). However, a partial test of Hypothesis 10 was possible concerning the relationship between the SUS, preference for college/alternative, and GC. A partial test of Hypothesis 10 requires two separate analyses. The first analysis involved a hierarchical multiple regression with the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987), MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and the sum of the two items from the SUS assessing alcohol and tobacco serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered in the order listed. The SSS was included as a covariate because it is significantly related to both MP and the sum of the two items from the SUS assessing alcohol and tobacco and therefore may be a confounding factor (see above). The results indicate significant MP differences on the SUS items assessing alcohol and tobacco, F(4, 157) = 6.56, p < 0.02. The means for the MP categories were 3.5 for college/alternative fans and





57



2.6 for popular rock fans, indicating that college/alternative fans report more frequent use of alcohol and tobacco than do popular rock fans. The interaction effect for MP x GO was nonsignificant, F(4, 157) = 2.78, p < 0. 10. These results are inconsistent with Part I of Hypothesis 10.

To provide a partial test of Parts 2 and 3, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with the SSS, MP, the GCL and MP x GO serving as predictor variables and the sum of the eight items from the SUS assessing illegal substances serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into the model in the order listed. The SSS was included as a covariate because it is significantly related to both MP and the sum of the eight items from the SUS assessing illegal drugs and may therefore be a confounding factor (see above). The results indicate significant MP differences on the SUS items assessing illegal substances (F(4, 157) = 5.77, p < 0.02), which supports Part 2 of Hypothesis 10. The means for the MP categories were 2.4 for college/alternative fans and 1.2 for popular rock fans, indicating that college/alternative fans report more frequent use of illegal drugs than do popular rock fans. The interaction effect for MP x GO was nonsignificant (F(4, 157) = 0.04, p < 0.85), failing to support Part 3 of Hypothesis 10. The relationship between MP, GC, and attitudes toward drugs anticipated by Hypothesis 10 was not supported.

These above results regarding the relationship between sexually coercive and substance use behaviors with music preference and global commitment offer limited support for one of the two general hypotheses of this study. Hypothesis A states that music preference will be significantly associated with values, attitudes, and behaviors. Hypothesis B states that music preference and global commitment to that music preference will interact such that differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors between music preference groups will only be statistically significant when commitment is high.





58



Support for Hypothesis A was also found in the significant results regarding the relationship between values, music preference, and global commitment.

The main analyses of this study identified several differences between popular rock and college/alternative fans. Significant differences were found between popular rock fans and college/alternative on values (Utilitarian Orientation), and on behaviors (the use of alcohol, tobacco, and a variety of illegal substances). In particular, popular rock fans place more emphasis on the Utilitarian Orientation than their college/alternative counterparts. In addition, college/alternative fans reported more frequent use of alcohol, tobacco, and a variety of illegal substances than their popular rock counterparts. These results provide solid support for Hypothesis A concerning values and behaviors, but not attitudes.

No support for Hypothesis B was found. Although several interaction effects approached statistical significance, none reach the criterion of p < .05. However, several ancillary analyses, which follow, provide additional support for Hypotheses A and B and strengthen the conclusion that music preference and global commitment are related to values, attitudes, and behaviors.

Ancillary Analyses

Because the main analyses focused primarily on grouped or summed dependent variables, it is possible that grouping individual scales (i.e., individual values from the Values Scale, Super & Nevill, 1986) or items (i.e., individual items from the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale and Substance Use Scale) left significant differences in the components of these variables obscured or overlooked. To determine whether this occurred, a series of ancillary analyses was computed on the 20 individual values from the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986), on the ten individual items from the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale, and the ten individual items from the Substance Use Scale.





59



These analyses were expected to provide more specific information regarding the relationship between music preference, global commitment, values, attitudes, and behaviors will be revealed.

Individual Values

The Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986) was used to assess the following values: Ability Utilization, Achievement, Advancement, Aesthetics, Altruism, Authority, Autonomy, Creativity, Cultural Identity, Economics, Life Style, Personal Development, Physical Activity, Physical Prowess, Prestige, Risk, Social Interaction, Social Relations, Variety, and Working Conditions. For the main analyses, these 20 values were grouped into five factors identified by Sverko (1995) and significant differences were found between popular rock fans and college/alternative fans on the Utilitarian Orientation and Social Orientation factors. To provide a more detailed analysis of the value differences between popular rock and college/alternative fans, each of the 20 values assessed by the Values Scale was subjected to the same analysis as the five factors. In particular, a hierarchical multiple regression analysis was computed for each of the 20 values for a total of 20 analyses.

Before running these analyses, Pearson R correlations were computed to determine which values were significantly correlated with the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987), a potential confound controlled for in the main analyses. The results of this analysis found five values significantly correlated with the SSS: Ability Utilization, Cultural Identity, Physical Activity, Physical Prowess, and Risk. All analyses involving these five values included the SSS as a covariate, which was entered first into the hierarchical multiple regression models.

Each analysis used a hierarchical multiple regression with MP, the Global Commitment Index (GCI), and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and the






60



individual values scales serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered in the order listed. The analyses involving Ability Utilization, Cultural Identity, Physical Activity, Physical Prowess, and Risk included the SSS as a predictor variable, which was entered first in the model. The results of these 20 analyses indicate significant main effects of MP for Ability Utilization (F(4, 157) = 6.72, p < 0.02), Achievement (F(3, 164) = 4.59, p < 0.04), Cultural Identity (F(4, 156) =6.44, p < 0.02), Economics (F(3, 164) = 6.60, p < 0.02), Social Interaction (F(3, 164) =5.38, p < 0.03), and Social Relations (F(3, 164) = 10.32, p < 0.01). For all values on which significant differences were found between popular rock and college/alternative fans, popular rock fans reported placing greater importance on that value than their college/alternative counterparts. Table 3 shows the mean value score for popular rock and college/alternative fans for the six values on which significant differences were found. No other main effects for MP were significant at the p < .05 level.


Table 3 Mean value scores for popular rock and college/alternative music fans.


Value Popular Rock College/Alternative
Ability Utilization 10.9 10.5
Achievement 10.9 10.5
Cultural Identity 9.3 8.1
Economics 10.6 10.0
Social Interaction 9.1 8.4
Social Relations 11.1 10.4


One significant interaction effect for MP x GCI was found for the value of Prestige (F(4, 157) = 8.44, p < 0.01). Figure 5 depicts the interaction effect between Prestige, MP and the GCI. As Figure 5 shows, popular rock fans place increasingly more importance on Prestige as their GCI scores increase whereas college/alternative fans'





61



valuing of Prestige remains consistent or increases only slightly as their GCI scores increase.


16


1412


0




6- Music Preference
College/Altematke
41~o12 Popular Rock

Global Commitment Index

Figure 5 -Interaction effect between Music Preference and the Global Commitment Index on the value of Prestige

In summary, value differences were found between popular rock and college/alternative fans for the values of Ability Utilization, Achievement, Cultural Identity, Economics, Prestige, Social Interaction, and Social Relations. On all these values, popular rock fans scored higher than college/alternative fans. This pattern is consistent with the findings on the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986) factors Utilitarian Orientation and Social Orientation where popular rock fans also scored higher than their college/alternative counterparts. This is to be expected as Economics, Advancement, Prestige, Authority, and Achievement make up the Utilitarian Orientation factor and Social Interaction, and Social Relations make up the Social Orientation factor. However, the differences found for Ability Utilization, which was one of six values included in the





62



Orientation Toward Self-Actualization factor, and Cultural Identity, which was not included in any of the five factors identified by verko (1995), make an additional contribution to our understanding of the relationship between MP and values beyond the main analyses. They provide further evidence of significant differences between popular rock and college/alternative fans at the very deep level of the values they hold.

In addition, an interaction effect was found for MP x GCI on the value of Prestige, which provides some evidence that a relationship between global commitment, MP and values exist. In particular, college/alternative fans valuing of Prestige remains fairly constant whereas popular rock fans show a sharp increase in the importance they place on Prestige as their GCI scores increase. One implication of these results is that to understand how MP groups differ in their values, it is important to understand their level of commitment to their preferred style of music. Attitudes Toward Substances

The Attitudes Toward Substances (ATS) was used to assess attitudes toward the following substances: tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, designer drugs, prescription drugs, stimulants, depressants, cocaine, and heroin. For the main analyses, attitudes toward these 10 substances were divided into legal and illegal drugs. No significant differences were found between popular rock fans and college/alternative fans in their attitudes toward either legal or illegal drugs. To provide a more detailed analysis of possible attitude differences between popular rock and college/alternative fans toward the 10 substances assessed by the ATS, each of the 10 items from the ATS was subjected to the same analysis as the legal and illegal drug groupings in the main analyses. In addition, individual items were regrouped to assess attitudes toward psychedelic drugs (i.e., marijuana, hallucinogens, designer drugs), "hard" drugs (i.e., prescription drugs, stimulants, depressants, cocaine, and heroin) and all substances (i.e., the sum of all 10





63



items). A hierarchical multiple regression analysis was computed for each of the 10 items and the three additional groupings, for a total of 13 analyses.

Before running these analyses, Pearson R correlations were computed to determine which items or item groupings were significantly correlated with the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987), a potential confound controlled for in the main analyses. The results of this analysis found significant correlations between the 555 and attitudes toward designer drugs, stimulants, and psychedelic drugs. All analyses involving these three scores included the SSS as a covariate, which was entered first into the hierarchical multiple regression models.

Each analysis used a hierarchical multiple regression with MP, the Global Commitment Index (GCI), and MP x GCO serving as predictor variables and each of the 10 individual items from the ATS plus the psychedelic drug, hard drug, and all drug groupings individually serving as the criterion variable in separate analyses. The predictor variables were entered in the order listed. All analyses involving attitudes toward designer drugs, stimulants, and psychedelic drugs included the SSS as a predictor variable, which was entered in the model first. The results of these 13 analyses indicate significant main effects of MP for attitudes toward marijuana (F(3, 164) = 7.29, p < 0.01) and attitudes toward all drugs (F(3, 163) = 4.19, p < 0.05). For all substances for which significant attitude differences were found between popular rock and college/alternative fans, college/alternative fans reported more permissive attitudes toward these substances than their popular rock counterparts. Table 4 shows the mean score for popular rock and college/alternative fans for the three substances or groups of substances on which significant differences were found. No other main effects for MP were significant at the p <.05 level.





64


Table 4 Mean Attitudes Toward Substances scores for popular rock and college/alternative music fans.


Substance Popular Rock College/Alternative
Marijuana 0.8 1.3
All Substances 5.1 7.9


The results of these ancillary analyses provide some evidence of a relationship between music preference and attitudes toward substances. In particular, college/alternative fans report more permissive attitudes toward all substances in general and marijuana in particular than do their popular rock counterparts. These results provide some evidence that MP groups hold significantly different attitudes, supporting Hypothesis A. However, the absence of significant interaction effects between MP x GO with attitudes toward substances suggests that global commitment is not relevant to understanding the relationship between music preference and attitudes toward substances. Substance Use

The Substance Use Scale (SUS) was used to assess frequency of use of the following substances: tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, designer drugs, prescription drugs, stimulants, depressants, cocaine, and heroin. For the main analyses, these 10 substances were divided into legal and illegal drugs. Significant differences were found between popular rock fans and college/alternative fans in their use of both legal or illegal drugs when one or more of the GC factors were included in the analysis. To provide a more detailed analysis of possible differences between popular rock and college/alternative fans use of the 10 substances assessed by the SUS, each of the 10 items from the SUS was subjected to the same analysis as the legal and illegal drug groupings in the main analyses. In addition, individual items were regrouped to assess use of psychedelic drugs (i.e., marijuana, hallucinogens, designer drugs), "hard" drugs





65



(i.e., prescription drugs, stimulants, depressants, cocaine, and heroin) and all substances (i.e., the sum of all 10 items). A hierarchical multiple regression analysis was computed for each of the 10 items and the three additional groupings, for a total of 13 analyses.

Before running these analyses, Pearson R correlations were computed to determine which items or item groupings were significantly correlated with the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987), a potential confound controlled for in the main analyses. The results of this analysis found significant correlations between the SSS and the use of alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, psychedelic drugs, and all drugs. All analyses involving these five scores included the SSS as a covariate, which was entered first into the hierarchical multiple regression models.

Each analysis used a hierarchical multiple regression with MP, the Global Commitment Index (GCI), and MP x GO serving as predictor variables and each of the 10 individual items from the SUS plus the psychedelic drug, hard drug, and all drug groupings individually serving as the criterion variable in separate analyses. The predictor variables were entered in the order listed. All analyses involving the use of alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, psychedelic drugs, and all drugs included the SSS as a predictor variable, which was entered first in the model. The results of these 13 analyses indicate significant main effects of MP for use of tobacco (F(3, 164) = 4.58, p < 0.04), marijuana (F(4, 157) = 8.10, p < 0.01), hallucinogens (F(4, 157) = 6.32, p < 0.02), psychedelic drugs (F(4, 157) = 9,38, p < 0.01), and all drugs (F(4, 157) = 10.58, p < 0.01). Significant interaction effects for MP x GO were found for the use of alcohol and heroin.

For all substances for which significant differences in usage frequency were found between popular rock and college/alternative fans, college/alternative fans reported more frequent use of these substances than their popular rock counterparts. Table 5 shows the





66



mean frequency of use for popular rock and college/alternative fans for the five substances or groups of substances on which significant differences were found. No other main effects for MP were significant at the p < .05 level. Table 5 Mean substance use scores for popular rock and college/alternative music fans.


Substance Popular Rock College/Alternative
Tobacco 0.7 1.2
Marijuana 0.5 1.1
Hallucinogens 0.1 0.3
Psychedelics 0.6 1.6
All Substances 3.8 5.9


Two significant interaction effects for MP x GCO were found for the use of alcohol (F(4, 157) = 8.44, p < 0.01) and for the use of heroin (F(4, 157) = 8.44, p < 0.01). Figure 6 depicts the interaction effect between use of alcohol, MP and the GC. As Figure 6 shows, popular rock fans' use of alcohol is dramatically more frequent as their GCI scores increase, whereas college/alternative fans' alcohol use is more consistent and increases less dramatically as their GOI scores increase. Figure 7 depicts the interaction effect between use of heroin, MP and the GCI. As Figure 7 shows, popular rock fans' use of heroin is increasingly more frequent as their GCO scores increase whereas college/alternative fans' heroin use is consistently near zero as their GCI scores increase. It should be noted that this relationship is based on only 4 of 168 subjects marking I on a scale of 0 6 (0 = "never" and 6 = "several times daily"). This indicates that popular rock fans are more likely to have tried heroin as their GCI scores increase, whereas college/alternative fans are less likely to have tried heroin as their GCI scores increase. However, because of the number of participants reporting any heroin use, this relationship is likely to be unreliable.







67





6



5.



4

0 0
<3


2,




Music Preference College/Altemativa Popular Rock
0 0 O100 120

Global Commitment Index Figure 6 Interaction effect between Music Preference and the Global Commitment Index on the Use of Alcohol






1.0



.8



.6







.2



0.0 .. ..... Music Preference

College/Alternative

-.2 _Popular Rock
0 20 40 0 80 160 120

Global Commitment Index


Figure 7 Interaction effect between Music Preference and the Global Commitment Index on the Use of Heroin





68



In summary, differences were found between popular rock and college/alternative fans in their use of tobacco, marijuana, hallucinogens, psychedelic drugs, and all substances combined. For all these substances, college/alternative fans reported higher frequencies of drug use than popular rock fans. This pattern is consistent with the findings on the use of alcohol and tobacco and the use of illegal substances where college/alternative fans also scored higher than their popular rock counterparts. The results of these ancillary analyses provide further confirmation of a relationship between substance use and music preference.

In addition, interaction effects for MP x GCI were also found for the use of alcohol and heroin. These interaction effects add a great deal to our understanding of the relationship between commitment to music, MP and substance use. The interaction involving alcohol shows popular rock fans reporting sharp increases in the use of alcohol as their Global Commitment Index scores increase. Popular rock fans appear to begin with near zero alcohol use at low levels of commitment and develop into chronic daily use of alcohol at high levels of commitment. College/alternative fans on the other hand report more consistent use of alcohol beginning at higher levels of use than popular rock fans at low commitment levels with only minimal increase in frequency at higher levels of commitment, at which time their reported use is dramatically lower than popular rock fans at the same commitment level. The interaction involving heroin is similar. In this case, popular rock fans are more likely to have tried heroin as their GCI scores increase, whereas college/alternative fans are less likely to have tried heroin as their GCI scores increase. One clear implication of these results is that to understand how MP groups differ in their substance use, it is important to understand their level of commitment to their preferred style of music.





69



Consensual Sex

The Sexual Experiences Survey (SExS; Koss & Oros, 1982), included one item assessing the frequency of engaging in consensual sexual intercourse. This question was not included in the score of the SExS because it does not relate to coercive sexual behaviors. However, the frequency with which adolescents engage in consensual sexual intercourse is relevant to understanding the lives of adolescents. It is also possible that consensual sex is related to MP and the Global Commitment Index (GC). To examine the relationship between the consensual sex, MP, and GC, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and the consensual sex serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into the model in the order listed. The results indicate that there is no significant interaction effect for MP x GCI on consensual sex (F(3, 162) = 1.49, p < 0.23) or for the main effect of MP (F(3, 162) = 1. 8 6, p < 0. 18). Sensation Seeking

The Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS, Zuckerman, 1978) has been used as a covariate in many analyses in this study because it has been associated with music preference (MP) and with other high-risk/reckless behaviors including drug use, promiscuous sex, unprotected sex, driving while intoxicated, shoplifting, and vandalism (Arnett, 1992;1991). This study has also found that the SSS correlates with MP, drug use, drug attitudes, attitudes toward women, sexual behaviors and also with specific values. Because the SSS is correlated with MP, it is also possible that there is an interaction for MP x the GCI. To examine the relationship between the SSS, MP, and GC, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and the SSS serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into the model in the order listed. The results indicate that there is





70



no significant interaction effect for MP x GOI on the SSS, F(3, 158) = 0.30, p < 0.59. However, a significant main effect for MP was found, F(3, 158) = 12.59, p < 0.01. The means for the MP categories were 5.7 for college/alternative fans and 4.7 for popular rock fans, indicating that college/alternative fans were higher in sensation seeking than were popular rock fans.

Global Commitment

The general hypotheses of this study focus on music preference differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors and on an interaction between music preference and the Global Commitment Index. The Global Commitment Index has been found to interact with music preference for only three of the dependent variables used in this study: the value of Prestige, use of alcohol, and use of heroin. These results suggest that global commitment plays a very limited role in music preference and its relationship to values, attitudes, and behaviors, but the above analyses only consider global commitment's possible interaction with music preference and not main effects for global commitment alone, as main effects for global commitment did not relate to the hypotheses. A one-way ANOVA with the Global Commitment Index as the independent variable and music preference as the dependent variable confirmed significant differences in global commitment between popular rock and college/alternative fans (F(l, 166) = 21.53, p < 0.00). The group means were 48.3 for college/alternative fans and 36.7 for popular rock fans with college/alternative fans reporting greater global commitment than their popular rock counterparts.

These differences indicate that global commitment is relevant to music preference and may be relevant to values, attitudes, and behaviors separate from the interaction with music preference. To determine if global commitment makes a significant independent contribution to the prediction of the dependent variables in this study (i.e., values,





71



attitudes toward women, attitudes toward substances, sexually coercive behavior, and substance use), all the main analyses and ancillary analyses were recalculated using the Type III Sums of Squares for all F tests. Type III Sums of Squares factor out the variance common to all predictor variables so that each predictor variable is tested as if it was entered into the regression equation last. In other words, using Type III Sums of Squares tests whether music preference (MP) is a significant predictor of the criterion variable independent of the Global Commitment Index (GCI) score and the interaction between MP and the GO and whether the GO is a significant predictor of the criterion variable independent of MP and the interaction between MP and the GCL This analysis allows the independent contribution of both MP and the GO to be evaluated and also allows for a comparison between the separate contribution of MP and the GO to the prediction of the criterion variables. The statistically significant results of these analyses are reported in Tables 6 and 7.


Table 6 Significant main effects of Music Preference independent of the Global Commitment Index and the interaction between Music Preference and the Global Commitment Index


Variable DF F Value p Value
Attitudes Toward Substances Scale
Attitudes Toward Marijuana 3, 164 4.24 < 0.05
Substance Use Scale
Use of Alcohol' 4, 157 6.32 < 0.02
Use of Alcohol and Tobacco' 4,157 4.55 < 0.04
"Me Sensation Seeking Scale was included in the model for this analysis.





72


Table 7 Significant main effects of the Global Commitment Index independent of Music Preference and the interaction between Music Preference and the Global Commitment Index

Variable DF F Value p Value
Values
Advancement 3, 164 5,90 < 0.02
Prestige 3, 164 11.69 < 0.01
Working Conditions 3, 163 4.26 < 0.05
Cultural Identity a 4, 157 6.26 < 0.02
Utilitarian Orientation Factor 3, 164 4.98 < 0.03
Attitudes Toward Substances Scale
Attitudes Toward Marijuana 3,164 4.16 < 0.05
Substance Use Scale
Use of Alcohol' 4,157 19.50 < 0.01
Use of Marijuana' 4, 157 5.50 < 0.03
Use of Hallucinogens' 4, 157 3.96 < 0.05
Use of Prescription Drugs 3, 164 13.02 < 0.01
Use of Depressants 3, 164 7.11 < 0.01
Use of Heroin 3, 164 4.82 < 0.03
Use of Alcohol and Tobacco' 4, 157 12.25 < 0.01
Use of Psychedelic Drugs a 4, 157 5.70 < 0.02
Use of Hard Drugs 3,164 11.85 < 0.01
Use of Illegal Drugs a 4, 157 11.01 < 0.01
Use of All Drugs a 4, 157 20.00 < 0.01
a The Sensation Seeking Scale was included in the model for this analysis.



The results of these analyses indicate that music preference is significant independent of the Global Commitment Index and the interaction (MP x GCI) for only three dependent variables: permissive attitudes toward marijuana, use of alcohol and tobacco combined, and use of psychedelic drugs (see Table 6). By comparison the Global Commitment Index is significant independent of music preference and the interaction (MP x GCI) for no less than 15 dependent variables: permissive attitudes toward marijuana, use of marijuana, hallucinogens, prescription drugs, depressants, heroin,





73



alcohol and tobacco combined, psychedelic drugs, hard drugs, illegal drugs, all drugs, the values of Advancement, Working Conditions, Cultural Identity, and the Utilitarian Orientation factor (see Table 7). Based on the number of significant relationships, global commitment seems to be a more important predictor variable than music preference.

For all 17 variables, the relationship between the Global Commitment Index and the dependent variables is in the positive direction such that higher scores on the Global Commitment Index are associated with higher scores on all the dependent variables. These results indicate that global commitment is extremely important for understanding and predicting differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors. These results also provide further confirmation of the importance of music preference for understanding and predicting differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors, but suggest that global commitment may be even more important.














CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION

Christenson and Roberts (1990) hypothesized that music can act as a source of information, values, and behaviors for those listeners whose music preference is more than just a "taste." Music is not expected to act as a primary source of information, values, and behaviors for all adolescents, but when an adolescent is deeply committed to a particular style of music he or she is more likely to internalize the values, attitudes, and behaviors found within that music subculture. This relationship was expressed in two general hypotheses that were tested in this study. Hypothesis A states that music preference will be significantly associated with values, attitudes, and behaviors. Hypothesis B states that music preference and global commitment to that music preference will interact such that differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors between music preference groups will only be statistically significant when commitment is high. Support for Hypothesis A was found in the areas of values, attitudes, and behaviors. Support for Hypothesis B was found only for values and behaviors.

Values

Support for Hypothesis A was quite strong in the area of values. Significant value differences were found between popular rock and college/alternative fans for the individual values of Ability Utilization, Cultural Identity, Social Interaction, and Social Relations, and for the Utilitarian Orientation factor, which includes Economics, Advancement, Prestige, Authority, and Achievement. Popular rock fans placed significantly more importance on all the above values than did their college/alternative counterparts. The Utilitarian Orientation values represent the traditional values most 74





75



associated with business and industry. This suggests that popular rock fans may be more likely to enter traditional occupations (e.g., business, law, medicine, etc.) which typically offer the greatest possibility of satisfying the values of Economics, Advancement, Prestige, Authority, and Achievement. This relationship is to be expected as the Utilitarian Orientation values are generally important to mainstream Americans ( verko, 1995) and popular rock is the music of mainstream America. The values of Social Interaction and Social Relations represent a desire to be around and in relationship with other people. The fact the popular rock fans place more emphasis on these values than college/alternative fans suggests that popular rock fans are likely to be more extroverted, another trait highly valued in American society. Ability Utilization can be characterized as the "be all you can be" value and represents making use of one's abilities. Cultural Identity involves being accepted and given equal opportunity based on one's racial or ethnic identity. One factor that seems to connect these values is that they are mainstream values. It is therefore consistent that popular rock fans place more importance on these values because, again, popular rock is the music of mainstream America.

Another interpretation is that popular rock fans generally place more importance on values than their college/alternative counterparts. That popular rock fans scored higher on the nine values above lends some support to this position. In addition, a review of the music preference group means for the 20 values measured by the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986) reveals that although the differences were not always statistically significant, popular rock fans scored higher on 15 of the 20 values (see Table 8). Only on the value of Risk did college/ alternative fans score significantly higher than popular rock fans (Note: This difference was not statistically significant when the Sensation Seeking Scale was included in the model).





76


Table 8 Mean Value Scale scores for popular rock and college/alternative music preference groups

Popular College/
Value Rock Alternative p Value
Ability Utilization 10.9 10.5 < 0.05
Achievement 10.9 10.5 < 0.03
Advancement 9.9 9.4 < 0.09
Aesthetic 9.6 9.6 < 0.98
Altruism 10.2 10.1 < 0.65
Authority 7.6 7.0 < 0.07
Autonomy 9.9 10.0 < 0.77
Creativity 8.4 8.5 < 0.73
Cultural Identity 9.3 8.1 < 0.01
Economics 10.6 10.0 < 0.01
Life Style 10.0 9.8 < 0.54
Personal Development 11.4 11.3 < 0.45
Physical Activity 8.3 8.2 < 0.58
Physical Prowess 5.9 6.0 < 0.80
Prestige 9.8 9.3 < 0.08
Risk 5.3 6.1 < 0.02
Social Interaction 9.1 8.4 < 0.02
Social Relatations 11.1 10.4 < 0.01
Variety 8.1 7.9 < 0.51
Working Conditions 9.6 9.3 < 0.40
NOTE: p values based on independent samples t-tests.


The fact that popular rock fans place more importance on values generally

suggests that popular rock fans may be more engaged in life, more enthusiastic about their values, and possibly more aware of their own values than college/alternative fans. On the other hand, college/alternative fans may be more detached, disinterested, and disaffected, a description that fits well with the angst and hopelessness descriptive of the college/alternative subculture. These results may provide objective confirmation of the "slacker" theme associated with the college/alternative subculture and "Generation X,"





77



wherein college/alternative fans may be pessimistic, cynical, and disenchanted with mainstream society and the values it upholds. They may be skeptical whether or not success is attainable and that even if attained, the utilitarian rewards of economics, prestige, advancement, authority, and achievement are worthy of pursuit. In contrast, popular rock fans may remain dedicated to pursuing these values and continue to find them valuable.

Music preference and global commitment to one's preferred style of music were found to interact with the value of Prestige, which provides some evidence that a relationship between global commitment, music preference and values exists. In particular, college/alternative fans' valuing of Prestige remains fairly constant whereas popular rock fans show a sharp increase in the importance they place on Prestige as their Global Commitment Index scores increase. One implication of these results is that to understand how music preference groups differ in their valuing of Prestige, it is important to understand their level of commitment to their preferred style of music.

Overall, the data available involving values provides strong evidence that popular rock fans are substantively different from college/alternative fans in the values they hold. The value differences are in the expected directions with popular rock fans valuing mainstream values more than their college/alternative counterparts. The data also provide limited evidence that popular rock and college/alternative fans' values differ based on their global commitment to their preferred style of music.





78



Attitudes

Attitudes Toward Women

Support for Hypothesis A in the area of attitudes was weak, at best. Regarding attitudes toward women, no significant differences were found between popular rock and college/alternative fans for either sex-role stereotyping or rape myth acceptance. These results are surprising given that significant differences were found between popular rock and college/alternative fans on the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale by Kruse (1994). The current study was unable to replicate the findings of Kruse (1994). However, the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS) was included in the present analysis and was not included by Kruse (1994). When the SSS is removed from the model in the current analysis, significant group differences were found with popular rock fans scoring 25.7 on average and college/alternative fans scoring 23.3 on average on the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale where higher numbers reflected greater sex-role stereotyping. These differences were consistent with Kruse (1994), who found popular rock fans scoring 32.0 on average and college/alternative fans scoring 29.9 on average. These results show a consistent pattern of popular rock fans being more sex-role stereotyped than college/alternative fans. However, it also should be noted that these differences become statistically insignificant when the sensation seeking differences are removed.

It appears that music preference does not contribute to predicting sex-role stereotyping beyond the sensation seeking differences of music preference groups, but the relationship between music preference, sex-role stereotyping, and sensation seeking is complex. Popular rock fans score high on sex-role stereotyping but low on sensation seeking. On the other hand, college/alternative fans score low on sex-role stereotyping and high on sensation seeking. The implied interaction between these variables was not statistically significant. However, differences in sex-role stereotyping between popular





79



rock and college/alternative fans are statistically significant after the influence of sensation seeking and the interaction between music preference and sensation seeking are removed. This finding suggests that music preference does make a significant contribution toward the prediction of sex-role stereotyping. Attitudes Toward Substances

Hypothesis A received only minimal support from the results relating to attitudes toward substances. College/alterriative fans were found to be more permissive in their attitudes to all substances generally and to marijuana in particular than their popular rock counterparts. It is interesting to note that marijuana was the only individual drug to evidence significant attitude differences between popular rock and college/alternative fans whereas significant differences in frequency of use were found for tobacco, marijuana, hallucinogens and designer drugs. When summed across 10 different substances, college/alternative fans have more permissive attitudes toward substances generally, but for any specific substance, only their attitudes toward marijuana are more permissive. This result may indicate that marijuana holds a privileged place in college/altemative subculture and that they support legalizing this drug in particular but not necessarily any other drugs.

Overall, support for Hypotheses A and B in the area of attitudes toward women and attitudes toward substances was weak at best for Hypotheses A and completely absent for Hypotheses B. The fact that significant differences were found for substance use behaviors but not for the attitudes themselves is puzzling. One explanation for the lack of attitudinal differences between music preference groups found on the attitudes toward substances instruments may be a result of popular rock fans adopting pluralistic attitudes consistent with the American values of personal freedom and choice. Popular rock fans may be saying in effect, "I don't use drugs myself, but others should have the





80



right to use them if they see fit." This explanation finds some support in the fact that popular rock fans valued Autonomy more than their college/alternative counterparts, a value that taps the desire to decide and act as one sees fit. However, additional research is necessary to determine if this explanation is accurate or to identify other explanations for the inconsistencies between attitudes and behaviors.

Behaviors

Sexual Behaviors

No differences were found between popular rock and college/alternative fans with either their consensual or coercive sexual behavior. The nonsignificant findings for sexually coercive behavior are consistent with the absence of significant differences between music preference groups on attitudes toward women and acceptance of rape myth scores. No support for either Hypothesis A or B was found in the area of sexual behaviors.

Substance Use

Analysis of substance use revealed many significant differences between popular rock and college/alternative fans. For all substances and groups of substances for which music preference group differences were found, college/alternative fans reported more frequent use of these substances than popular rock fans. No previous studies had been found that compared substance use for college/alternative fans to fans of other music styles. It was expected that college/alternative fans would tend to use psychedelic drugs including marijuana, hallucinogens, and designer drugs because these drugs appear to be consistent with the neo-hippie image that is characteristic of the college/alternative subculture. However, it was still surprising that this group's more frequent use of drugs also included all drugs in general, illegal drugs, and the legal drugs of alcohol and tobacco. This profile is generally consistent with the results regarding attitudes toward





81



substances, where college/alternative fans also reported more permissive attitudes toward all drugs in general and marijuana in particular. However, use of tobacco, alcohol, hallucinogens, psychedelics and illegal drugs evidenced significant differences in usage but corresponding attitude differences were not found.

Music preference and global commitment to one's preferred style of music were found to interact with the use of alcohol and with the use of heroin. For alcohol use, popular rock fans' use of alcohol is dramatically more frequent as their Global Commitment Index scores increase whereas college/alternative fans' alcohol use is more consistent and increases less dramatically as their Global Commitment Index scores increase. For heroin use, popular rock fans use of heroin is increasingly more frequent as their Global Commitment Index scores increase whereas college/alternative fans' heroin use is consistently near zero as their Global Commitment Index scores increase. It should be noted that this relationship is based on only 4 of 168 subjects marking I on a scale of 0

- 6 (0 = "never" and 6 = "several times daily") for heroin use in the past month. This indicates that popular rock fans are more likely to have used heroin once in the last month as their Global Commitment Index scores increase, whereas college/alternative fans are less likely to have used heroin as their Global Commitment Index scores increase. However, because of the low number of participants reporting any heroin use, this relationship is likely to be unreliable.

These interaction effects between music preference and global commitment to one's preferred style of music with alcohol and heroin add a great deal to our understanding of the relationship between commitment to music, music preference and substance use. The interaction involving alcohol shows popular rock fans reporting sharp increases in the use of alcohol as their Global Commitment Index scores increase. Popular rock fans appear to begin with near zero alcohol use at low levels of commitment





82



and develop into chronic daily use of alcohol at high levels of commitment. College/alternative fans on the other hand report more consistent use of alcohol beginning at higher levels of use than popular rock fans at low commitment levels with only minimal increase in frequency at higher levels of commitment, at which time their reported use is dramatically lower than popular rock fans at the same commitment level. The interaction involving heroin is similar. In this case, popular rock fans are more likely to have used heroin as their Global Commitment Index scores increase, whereas college/alternative fans are less likely to have used heroin as their Global Commitment Index scores increase.

Overall, the results involving substance use behavior demonstrate clear behavioral differences between popular rock and college/alternative fans, providing solid support for Hypothesis A. In addition, these results also provide some support for Hypothesis B, suggesting that global commitment is important for understanding the differences between music preference groups. The behavioral differences found were generally consistent with the attitudinal differences, but the behavioral differences were also more robust because differences were found for the use of substances for which no differences in permissive attitudes toward these substances were found.

Sensation Seeking

This study included sensation seeking as a covariate in many of the analyses based on previous findings that sensation seeking is correlated with music preference (Arnett, 1991) and with many of the dependent variables in this study (Arnett, 1991; Zuckerman, 1978). Group differences in sensation seeking were found between popular rock and college/alternative fans with college/alternative fans reporting greater sensation seeking. These differences are to be expected as college/alternative music has a more harsh, aggressive sound that would likely be experienced as unpleasant to a listener who is





83



uncomfortable with higher levels of stimulation. The fact that sensation seeking was included as a covariate means that all significant findings involving variables that are correlated with sensation seeking are statistically independent of sensation seeking. The independence of music preference from sensation seeking is important because sensation seeking is usually seen as a personality variable (Arnett, 1991; Zuckerman, 1978). Therefore, if an individual's personality influences them to listen to college/altemative music and to use drugs, for example, because they both provide increased sensation, then it is unlikely that music preference has any influence on substance use apart from the fact that they are both related to sensation seeking. The fact that college/alternative fans report higher substance use independent of sensation seeking leaves open the possibility that college/alternative music somehow influences substance use.

Global Commitment

The general hypotheses of this study focused on music preference differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors and on an interaction between music preference and global commitment. Consequently, main effects for the Global Commitment Index were not considered, as they did not relate to the hypotheses. A recalculation of main and ancillary analyses compared the independent contribution of music preference to the independent contribution of the Global Commitment Index. The results indicated that music preference is significant independent of the Global Commitment Index and the interaction between music preference and the Global Commitment Index for only three dependent variables: permissive attitudes toward marijuana, use of alcohol and tobacco combined, and use of psychedelic drugs. By comparison, the Global Commitment Index is significant independent of music preference and the interaction between music preference and the Global Commitment Index for no less than 17 dependent variables: the values of Advancement, Cultural Identity, Prestige, Working Conditions, and the





84



Utilitarian Orientation factor, permissive attitudes toward marijuana, and the use of alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, prescription drugs, depressants, heroin, alcohol and tobacco combined, psychedelic drugs, hard drugs, illegal drugs, and all drugs. The relationship between the Global Commitment Index and each of these variables is in the positive direction such that higher scores on the Global Commitment Index are associated with higher scores on each variable. In addition, significant group differences in global commitment were found between popular rock and college/alternative fans with college/alternative fans reporting greater global commitment than their popular rock counterparts.

Superficially, these results suggest that music preference is virtually unrelated to values, attitudes, and behaviors beyond the global commitment differences of the music preference groups. However, the relationship is more complex. First of all, global commitment is conceptually dependent on music preference. Global commitment is about commitment to one's preferred style of music and has limited meaning outside its reference to the preferred style of music. The fact that college/alternative fans are so much more committed to their preferred style of music than popular rock fans also suggests that global commitment is to some extent a characteristic of music preference. Because college/alternative fans are identified with high global commitment and popular rock fans are identified with low global commitment, when significant relationships are found between global commitment and values, attitudes, and behaviors, these relationships can be interpreted in part as indicating differences between college/alternative and popular rock fans.

Another factor to consider is that the significance of global commitment may be an artifact of this sample in which only popular rock and college/alternative fans were included. Again, for these two groups, global commitment differences are more or less





85



equivalent to music preference differences and these variables serve as confounds for one another. Including another music preference group that is also highly committed to their preferred style of music (e.g., rap or heavy metal rock) would help to determine to what extent these two constructs are independent of one another.

Finally, the results of this study indicated both music preference and global commitment are important to the understanding of values, attitudes, and behaviors. Three significant interaction effects were found, for the value of Prestige and the use of alcohol and heroin. The fact that music preference and global commitment were found to interact means that both variables are important. In addition, the relationships between values, music preference, and global commitment cannot be fully understood without both music preference and the Global Commitment Index. In particular, popular rock fans score higher than college/alternative fans on the values of Advancement, Cultural Identity, Prestige, and Working Conditions (the differences are statistically significant for Cultural Identity). In contrast, the positive relationship between the Global Commitment Index and these four values means that lower Global Commitment Index scores are associated with lower value scores and visa versa. According to this relationship, popular rock fans, who on average score substantially lower than college/alternative fans on the Global Commitment Index, would be expected to score lower on these four values. This relationship demonstrates that both music preference and global commitment, although highly correlated, both make important contributions to our understanding of values, attitudes, and behaviors.

Overall, the justification for including both music preference and global commitment in future research is clearly documented. The results of this study by themselves cannot fully illuminate the relationship between music preference, global commitment, values, attitudes, and behaviors. What is clear is that relationships between





86



these variables do exist. However, further research is essential to understanding how music preference and global commitment relate to values, attitudes, and behaviors.

One line of research that is likely to be crucial to understanding the relationship between music preference, global commitment, values, attitudes, and behaviors is the factor analysis of the Music Preference Questionnaire. In this study, a factor analysis was computed, but only to extract a measure of global commitment. The key to the relationship between music preference and global commitment likely resides in the factor structure of global commitment. For example, although global commitment can be viewed as a univariate variable, it is likely made of up factors that help distinguish both between and within music preference groups. Certain music preference groups may identify themselves through advertising their music preference (e.g., displaying bumper stickers or dressing in a highly stylized way). However, these same characteristics may serve to distinguish between subgroups who share the same music preference (e.g., some fans may advertise and not listen to radio whereas others may avoid advertisement and be an avid radio listener). Consequently, two fans can score equally on global commitment but one is high on an "advertisement" factor whereas the other is high on a "radio" factor, and the way each is oriented toward a values such as Prestige might be antithetical. To determine whether these types of relationships exist and to better understand the relationship between music preference, global commitment, values, attitudes, and behaviors, a program of research involving a factor analysis of global commitment will need to be completed. This study also provides a fruitful foundation for other future research projects,

Future Research

This study leaves many questions unanswered regarding the relationship between music preference, global commitment, values, attitudes, and behaviors. Some of these





87



questions remain because of weaknesses in the present study. Still other questions are stimulated by the results of this study. Future research should redress limitations in the sample, broaden the music preference groups sampled, and refine the Music Preference Questionnaire to explore further the significance of global commitment and the individual factors involved.

Sample

Although the population from which the current sample was taken is relevant to the study of music preference and global commitment, the fact that college students were used limits the generalizability of the results. One limiting factor is age. The mean age for the sample was 20.5 years old with a standard deviation of 1.7 years. The modal class rank was Junior with 75% of the sample ranked as juniors and seniors. This is a decidedly older college sample taken primarily from upper-level psychology courses. These participants are certainly avid consumers of music but are likely different in their use of music media than younger college students and particularly high school or junior high students. The fact that for this sample global commitment declined with both age and class rank supports this contention and indicates that younger and less advanced students reported greater commitment to their preferred style of music. This finding may mean that the more advanced students have less time for music-related activities. Another explanation for this finding is that music preference is not as important for establishing and maintaining an identity for more advanced students. It may be that for upper-level students, academic pursuits have begun to replace music preference as a means of identity formation and sense of belonging. In any case, it is important that this study be replicated with different age groups to test its reliability and to demonstrate the generalizability of its findings. The role of music preference and global commitment in identity formation is also an essential topic for exploration.





88



Another sampling limitation of this study is the educational level of the participants. Adolescents who are able to succeed in college (at least until junior or senior levels) are generally not considered an at-risk group by social scientists. Of more concern are high school dropouts and students who never pursue college or technical degrees after high school. In particular, it is feared that at-risk students are likely to be most susceptible to negative themes and influences in music (Christenson & Roberts, 1990). Again the current sample likely does not provide adequate generalizability to this at-risk population.

The fact that this sample was drawn primarily from psychology classes also may have imposed certain limitations on the generalizability of results. Certainly choice of majors is not a random process, and students who choose psychology as a major or even to attend psychology courses are likely different in some ways from students in other disciplines. This is likely to be especially true at the level of values. Psychology majors could be expected to place the highest value on Personal Development, Altruism, Social Interaction, and Social Relations, whereas business majors, for example, could be expected to place the highest value on Utilitarian Orientation values of Achievement, Advancement, Authority, Economics, and Prestige. Since significant differences were found in the current study for the social interaction, social relations, and the Utilitarian Orientation values, it is clear that including a broader sample in terms of academic interests could be very important to both the findings and generalizability of these findings.

The limitations of the current sample cited above do not detract from or negate the significant findings of this study. Instead, these limitations simply place the findings in a proper context as being most generalizable to upper-level college students with interests in psychology. However, the obvious conclusion is that these limitations call loudly for





89



additional research to determine the relationship between music preference, global commitment, values, attitudes, and behaviors for other populations and the population of adolescents as a whole.

Music Preference Groups

Another limitation of this study and its sample is the limited number of music preference groups represented. Only two music preference groups were represented in sufficient numbers to be included in the analyses. This limitation may result from: 1) the age of the sample (upper-level college students may have outgrown more extreme music forms such as rap or heavy metal rock), 2) the context of the sample as university students (a context in which college/alternative, for example, is more accepted), or 3) the academic discipline of the sample (students in agriculture, for instance, would be expected to have a stronger representation of country music fans) as noted above. In any case, efforts should be made in any future research to include a broader number of music preference groups by targeting groups more likely to prefer a specific style of music.

In addition to sampling limitations, the music preference choices offered in the Music Preference Questionnaire also may have had the effect of limiting the endorsement of particular music styles. In particular, failure to include a separate rhythm & blues (R & B) category (R & B was included with popular rock, but 14 subjects wrote in R & B) was almost certainly responsible for this group not being endorsed by 10% of the sample. The result of this omission is that others who would have chosen R & B if it had been listed separately indicated another preference, thereby increasing the error variance for those groups. It is impossible to determine how often this happened or how it affected the outcome of the analyses, but future research should correct this omission. It was also brought to the author's attention by graduate students who administered the study that the musicians offered as examples for heavy metal rock were out of date or inaccurate. This





90



oversight may account for only one out of 282 participants endorsing heavy metal rock as their preferred style of music when as much as 17% of a previous sample (Kruse, 1994) chose heavy metal rock as their preferred style of music. Another explanation is that heavy metal rock is fading as a dominant music style. In either case, future research should also consider grouping heavy metal rock with "hard rock" to broaden this category somewhat while maintaining its focus on more aggressive forms of rock music. Music Preference Questionnaire

The Music Preference Questionnaire (MPQ) demonstrated adequate reliability and validity, but future projects should continue to develop and validate this instrument for the comprehensive assessment of global commitment. Two issues relevant for continued development of the MPQ were identified in the process of scoring and working with this instrument. First, some items seemed to have highly variable data that was likely inaccurate. This was particularly true of write-in items where participants appeared not to have read the entire question. A prime example noted above was the length of time the indicated music preference had been their clear favorite. Many subject indicated "forever" or a value that represented all their lives. In addition, when participants entered a number less than 10 it was uncertain whether they intended the value in months (as the question read) or years. For other items, the question placed limits on the response that were sometimes invalid. For instance, number of concerts was specified as "per month," but many subjects attended concerts once per year or once every three months. These problems could likely be solved by rewording the questions or changing the formatting to highlight the most salient parts of the question so that readers would process the necessary information.

A second issue relates to which items to retain in future versions. In the current version, only 30 of the 59 data points were scored for the Global Commitment Index.





91



However, the problems noted above may be responsible for these items not being retained on the Global Commitment Index. In support of this explanation, only 9 of 29 write-in items were included in the Global Commitment Index. Another possibility is that the omitted questions may not be relevant for popular rock and college/altemative music that formed two thirds of the sample. For example, the exclusivity and percentage of friends who share one's music preference items were not included in the Global Commitment Index, but heavy metal rock or rap fans may express more exclusive tastes and share their music preference with their friends more than popular rock or college/altemative fans. In addition, some items form a conceptual cluster, which is meaningful as a unit but may not be included in the Global Commitment Index as a unit. An example of this is hours listening to radio, where none of the four items assessing radio listening was included in the Global Commitment Index, but radio is a meaningful part of the medium of delivery cluster, along with CDs, clubs, and videos. Finally, the current items may be meaningful for future factor analysis, which will identify discreet global commitment factors. Because of these reasons, it is advisable to retain all current items in future versions until they have been demonstrated to make no contribution to the scale either conceptually or psychometrically.

Conclusions

Research into the impact of music on human beings has lacked the programmatic direction needed to provide more than a basic understanding of the phenomenon. In the area of sensation and perception, psychologists have been studying the psychophysical characteristics of the music's sound stimulus almost since psychology's inception. This research has provided a basic understanding of the essential components of music and how they are perceived. Other researchers have found evidence of subtle and not so subtle differences between people who prefer one style of music over another in such





92



areas as sensation seeking (Arnett, 1991), substance use (King, 1988), and attitudes toward women (Kruse, 1994). However, very few of these studies have been done, and as a result there are large gaps in our knowledge of how music preference relates to individual differences. Other researchers have moved forward to investigate the direct impact of the music stimulus on relevant variables such as attitudes toward women (Kruse, 1994; St. Lawrence et al., 1991) perception (Lindner and Hynan, 1987), and emotional state (Peretti and Zweifel, 1990; 1983) to test whether music produces massive effects on listeners' emotions, life style, attitudes, and behaviors. These studies have demonstrated significant short-term effects of music on listeners, which are particularly dramatic considering the brevity of the music exposure. However, these studies investigating the short-term impact of music are somewhat premature because it is as yet unclear whether listening to different styles of music over an extended period is associated with pervasive differences between music preference groups. The central question for research into music and music preference is to determine whether music plays a significant role in human development and socialization or whether listeners choose their music preference solely based on preexisting differences. The real question is causation and whether music causes subsequent behavior or whether individual differences cause both music preference and subsequent behavior.

The available research still has not answered the question of causation nor has it demonstrated that meaningful differences between music preference groups even exist. This study has filled in some of the gaps in our knowledge by demonstrating that significant differences between music preference groups exist and that these differences are pervasive across a variety of variables (i.e., values, attitudes, and behaviors). This study documents some specific differences that exist between popular rock and college/alternative fans in the areas of values, attitudes toward substance use, and




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EXED05FWJ_6CR7LV INGEST_TIME 2014-08-25T21:14:19Z PACKAGE AA00024952_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES


THE IMPORTANCE OF MUSIC IN ADOLESCENT LIFE:
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MUSIC PREFERENCE,
VALUES, ATTITUDES, AND BEHAVIORS
By
STEVEN J. KRUSE
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1997

To Wendy Kruse

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Thanks go to Dr. Dorothy Nevill for the tireless hours she has spent assisting me
to develop, edit, and bring this project to completion and for the support and
encouragement she has provided every step of the way. I would also like to thank Dr.
Martin Heesacker for the time and support he has given—often on the phone and after
hours—to help ensure the scientific integrity and statistical accuracy of this project. His
dedication to his students and their success is truly exemplary. And thanks also go to Dr.
Kim Walsh-Childers who continued to provide information and insight to help me build
a bridge between the divergent fields of psychology and communications. Thanks also go
to Drs. Shae Kosch and Robert Ziller who graciously participated as committee members
and provided their expertise in family therapy and social psychology, respectively, to the
understanding of this study. I would also like to thank all the faculty and students of the
counseling psychology program for the support, advice, and patient ears they have
graciously rendered. Finally, my deepest gratitude goes to my wife, Wendy Kruse, whose
companionship, support, and continual sacrifice have not only made my success possible,
but have made the process enjoyable and deeply satisfying.
iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii
ABSTRACT vii
CHAPTERS
1 INTRODUCTION 1
The Impact of Music 2
The Impact of Music Videos 3
The Impact of Lyrics 4
The Impact of Music Alone 5
Music is a Complex Stimulus 5
“Massive” vs. “Conditional” Effects 6
Music as a Cause 8
2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 12
Independent Variables 13
Music Preference 13
Global Commitment 15
Dependent Variables 16
Values 16
Attitudes 18
Attitudes toward women 18
Substance use 19
Behaviors 20
Sexual coercion 20
Substance use 21
Sensation Seeking 21
Summary 22
Hypotheses 22
General Hypotheses 22
Specific Hypotheses 23
Values 23
Attitudes 24
Behaviors 25
iv

3METHOD
26
Participants 26
Instruments 26
Procedure 34
4 RESULTS 35
Preliminary Analyses 35
Music Preference 35
Dependent Variables 36
Music Preference Questionnaire 37
Factor Analyses 39
Substance Abuse Instruments 39
Attitudes toward substances 39
Substance use scale 41
Sexual Experiences Survey 43
Music Preference Questionnaire 46
Main Analyses 47
Values 47
Attitudes 51
Attitudes toward women 51
Attitudes toward substances 53
Behaviors 55
Sexual coercion 55
Substance use 56
Ancillary Analyses 58
Individual Values 59
Attitudes Toward Substances 62
Substance Use 64
Consensual Sex 69
Sensation Seeking 69
Global Commitment 70
5 DISCUSSION 74
Values 74
Attitudes 78
Attitudes Toward Women 78
Attitudes Toward Substances 79
Behaviors 80
Sexual Behaviors 80
Substance Use 80
Sensation Seeking 82
Global Commitment 83
v

Future Research 86
Sample 87
Music Preference Groups 89
Music Preference Questionnaire 90
Conclusions 91
APPENDICES
A MUSIC PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE 95
B VALUES SCALE 99
C SEX-ROLE STEREOTYPING SUBSCALE 102
D RAPE MYTH SCALE 103
E SEXUAL EXPERIENCES SURVEY 104
F SUBSTANCE ABUSE ATTITUDES SCALE 106
G ATTITUDES TOWARD SUBSTANCES SCALE 107
H SUBSTANCE USE SCALE 108
I SENSATION SEEKING SCALE 109
J DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE 110
REFERENCES 112
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 118
vi

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the
University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
THE IMPORTANCE OF MUSIC IN ADOLESCENT LIFE:
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MUSIC PREFERENCE,
VALUES, ATTITUDES, AND BEHAVIORS
By
Steven J. Kruse
December, 1997
Chairman: Dorothy D. Nevill, Ph.D.
Major Department: Psychology
The purpose of this study was to determine whether significant differences exist
between fans of popular rock (PR) and college/altemative (CA) music and whether fans’
global commitment (GC) to their preferred style of music interacts with music preference
(MP) such that differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors are only significant when
GC is high. Twenty different values were assessed using Super and Nevill's Values
Scale. Attitudes assessed included 1) attitudes toward women using Burt's Sex-Role
Stereotyping Scale and Lonsway and Fitzgerald's Rape Myth Scale and 2) permissive
attitudes toward substance use using the Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale by Chappel,
Veach, and Krug and a 10-item Attitudes Toward Substances Scale constructed by the
author. Behaviors assessed included 1) sexually coercive behavior using the Sexual
Experiences Survey by Koss and Oros and 2) substance use using a 10-item Substance
Use Scale constructed by the author. MP and GC were assessed using the Music
Preference Questionnaire constructed by the author. Sensation seeking was included as a
covariate for some dependent variables using a 10-item Sensation Seeking Scale by
Madsen, Das, Bogen, and Grossman. Significant MP differences were found for 1) the

values of Ability Utilization, Achievement, Advancement, Authority, Cultural Identity,
Economics, Prestige, Social Interaction, and Social Relations, 2) sex-role stereotyping, 3)
attitudes toward marijuana and all drugs, and 4) use of tobacco, marijuana, hallucinogens,
psychedelics, legal, illegal, and all drugs. PR fans were found to score higher than CA
fans on the listed values and on the SRS. CA fans were found to be more permissive
toward the listed substances and to use the listed substances more than PR fans.
Significant MP x GC interaction effects were found for the value of Prestige and the use
of alcohol and heroin. All three interaction effects found CA fans’ valuing of Prestige
and use of alcohol and heroin remaining fairly constant across GC whereas popular rock
fans show a sharp increases in valuing Prestige and use of alcohol and heroin as their GC
increases. The conclusions and limitations of this study are discussed as are implications
for future research.
Vlll

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Social scientists widely acknowledge the importance of music to youth culture
(Christenson & Roberts, 1990; Frith, 1981; Roe, 1987). This connection is also obvious
to the general public in phenomenon such as MTV, the advent of rock ’n’ roll in the ‘50s,
the hippie movement in the ‘60s and early ‘70s, and, of course, “Beatlemania.” In fact,
the scenario of a teenager holed up in his room with music blaring has become a cliché.
The available research on adolescent music consumption confirms this image of music
forming a “soundtrack” to the daily lives of youth (Lull, 1987).
Research on adolescents’ attitudes toward music confirms the importance of
music to youth. Leming (1987) reports that 46% of a sample of 11- to 15-year-olds said
music was “very important” to them and an additional 47% said that it was “somewhat
important.” Only 7% of these adolescents said music was “not important at all.”
The importance of music to youth is also evident in their behavior—their reported
consumption of music media. Popular music plays an important role in the lives of
children throughout their childhood. Their consumption of popular music typically
accelerates about 3rd or 4th grade and peaks in late high school or college. Television, in
contrast, rises to a peak in early adolescence (about age 12). Over the course of high
school, adolescents begin to spend more time listening to music at the expense of
watching TV (Christenson & Roberts, 1990; Larson & Kubey, 1983; Larson, Kubey, &
Colletti, 1989). For example, Christenson and Roberts (1990) surveyed a largely
middle-class, Caucasian sample of California teenagers and found that until 9th grade,
both TV viewing and music listening increased almost equally with a slight preference for
1

2
music listening. By eleventh grade, TV viewing had declined by almost 30 minutes
whereas music consumption remained consistent.
Just how much do they listen? In a review of the literature, Christenson and
Roberts (1990) concluded that by late adolescence the average teenager listens to between
four and five hours of all music media every day. The primary source of music for
adolescents is the radio, occupying almost 50% of all music listening throughout
adolescence. Listening to CDs or tapes makes up another significant source of music, but
the extent of this use is often highly dependent on available economic resources. In
Christenson and Roberts’ (1990) sample, consumption of CDs and tapes gradually
increased from 34% of total music listening in 7th grade to 41% by 11th grade, which
likely reflects the increasing financial resources of employed high school students. Music
videos are the least important source of music, consuming less time and, like TV,
declining steadily throughout late adolescence as audio-only music consumption
increases. In Christenson and Roberts’ (1990) sample, viewing music videos decreased
from 22% of total music listening in 7th grade to 11% by 11th grade. Keith Roe
concludes, “it is becoming increasingly difficult to escape the conclusion, in terms of both
the sheer amount of time devoted to it and the meanings it assumes, that it is music, not
television, that is the most important medium for adolescents” (Roe, 1987, pp. 215 - 16).
The Impact of Music
If music is indeed the most important medium for adolescents, anyone interested
in adolescents (e.g., psychologists, counselors, educators, parents) should be concerned
about the impact of music. At the same time, the available literature is very sketchy.
There are large gaps in our knowledge. Consequently, developing a broad theory based
on the available research ends up being largely conjecture. However, the data that are
available testify to the powerful impact music has on youth.

3
Often, when a complex phenomenon such as music is studied, theorists tend to
focus on a particular element or component of the phenomenon. In the study of music,
this reductionism is often based on assumptions about which component is the most
potent. First, when MTV started in 1981, music videos became the focus of attention and
a flurry of studies looking at music videos were soon published (e.g., Sherman &
Dominick, 1986; Greeson & Williams, 1986; Zillman & Mundorf, 1987). Soon a
considerable public reaction to the lyrical content of the songs launched more studies
looking at the impact of music lyrics (e.g., Norwood, 1987; St. Lawrence & Joiner, 1991).
Other studies have focused more on the music itself as the most potent component
(Kruse, 1994). Whereas research in these three areas has not demonstrated the exclusive
importance of one component, the research has provided important information about the
impact of music.
The Impact of Music Videos
Music videos receive a great deal of attention by researchers because videos
combine music, which by itself is not seen as compelling, with TV, which is generally
perceived by researchers and the general public as the most potent form of mass
communication. However, as already noted above, music videos are not a significant
source of music for adolescents nor do they receive a significant amount of adolescent’s
attention, particularly in late adolescence (Christenson & Roberts, 1990; Larson &
Kubey, 1983; Larson, Kubey, & Colletti, 1989). However, that videos are not a major
source of music media does not mean that they are irrelevant and without impact.
In terms of content, Sherman and Dominick (1986) found that more than half of
all videos contained some form of violence and almost 75 percent contained sexual
intimacy in some form. Other research has demonstrated that this sexual and violent
content affects both the participants’ appreciation of the video (Hansen & Hansen, 1990b;

4
Zillman & Mundorf, 1987) and the participant’s attitudes toward women (Peterson &
Pfost, 1989). Videos have also proved to be effective at priming sex-role stereotypic
event schemas (Hansen, 1989; Hansen & Hansen, 1988), eliminating participant’s
disapproval of confederates performing defiant behaviors (Hansen & Hansen, 1990a), and
altering attitudes toward premarital sex and peer violence (Greeson & Williams, 1986).
This latter study is particularly relevant as the authors found that exposure to only 30
minutes of videos recorded either randomly from MTV or selected specifically for their
reference to sex, violence or antiestablishment themes resulted in greater approval of
premarital sex. The above research makes it clear that music videos have an impact, but
because of the small role they play in adolescent’s music use, videos by themselves
cannot account for the full impact of music media.
The Impact of Lyrics
Music lyrics are also a popular target of concern by parents, public policy
administrators, and social scientists. However, like video, research about how
adolescents use and interpret lyrics suggest that lyrics themselves are not the most
important component of music. In fact, few adolescents report that they pay much
attention to the lyrics or that the lyrics are an important reason why they listen to or like
music (Gantz, Gartenberg, Pearson, & Schiller, 1978; Rosenbaum & Prinsky, 1987).
In addition, research suggests that adolescents are largely incapable of “correctly”
interpreting song lyrics (Leming, 1987; Greenfield et al., 1987; Rosenbaum & Prinsky,
1987). Often adolescents do not understand—nor are they even aware of—the
objectionable material that is the cause of adults’ reactions to music and music lyrics.
However, some adolescents do understand these themes and, as Christenson and Roberts
(1990) point out, it is unlikely that an adolescent’s interpretation of lyrics is random.
They argue that an adolescent’s attention to a particular theme or interpretation of a song

5
is directly related to the adolescent’s psychological and developmental variables. Still the
impact of the lyrics does not account for the full impact of music media.
The Impact of Music Alone
The final component that has received some attention in the literature is the
impact of the music itself, without reference to lyrics or visuals. Very few studies have
addressed this topic specifically, but implications from other studies (e.g., Hansen &
Hansen, 1990b; Peretti & Zweifel, 1990; 1983) confirm the obvious: that the music itself
is central to the impact of music. The importance of music alone is also confirmed in the
reports of adolescents regarding why they listen to music or why they like their favorite
song, with many stating they just “like the beat” (Rosenbaum & Prinsky, 1987). One
study that tried to assess the impact of the music only found that instrumental heavy metal
rock music had the same impact on attitudes toward women as sexually violent heavy
metal rock music, but the impact for both was modest at best (Kruse, 1994).
Music is a Complex Stimulus
When the above studies are considered, it becomes obvious that music is not a
simple stimulus that can be reduced to lyrics, visuals, musical notes, rhythms, or
melodies. Nor can music be considered the sum of these factors alone. In time a
particular style of music begins to embody more than just the sound and lyrics. Heavy
metal rock music, for instance, is not just a style of music, but also can be interpreted as
including an ideological stance (e.g., personal freedom, antiestablishment), a fashion
esthetic (e.g., long-hair, black concert T-shirts), role-models (the musicians), and
behavioral expectations (e.g., “head-banging,” partying, substance use). James Lull
(1987) vividly describes this way of understanding music:
These cultural distinctions are important to pop music fans. The music of
Elvis Costello might sound the same as that of Bruce Springsteen to an
outsider, but young people know that the difference between these two

6
artists is something more than musical. They represent different lifestyle
orientations. Costello is a major exponent of “modern” music while
Springsteen is the respected spokesman for blue-collar, East Coast rock
and roll. Allegiance to one or the other says something important about
the listener. Some modem music fans think Bruce Springsteen is boring
old news. Some blue-collar rockers regard Costello as a lightweight, new
wave wimp. These are not casual distinctions, and some members of these
two camps would rather die than be associated with the other, even though
their parents and other naive observers may not be able to tell the
difference in their styles of music, (pp. 144 - 5)
Notice that the uninitiated (e.g., adults, counselors, parents, and social scientists)
do not recognize the glaring differences between the music genres, differences that are
sometimes embodied more in the nonmusical characteristics than in the sound. However,
this understanding of music as a complex stimulus is crucial to understanding the
function of music in youth culture. In order to discover the impact of music, researchers
need to understand that music is consumed holistically. In other words, listeners do not
analyze the independent contribution of the rhythm, the melody, the harmonic qualities,
the lyrical content, the musician’s social presence, and the values, attitudes, behaviors,
and lifestyle implied in the performance. When listeners hear a song, they are responding
to the whole stimulus. Therefore, when considering the impact of music, one must
consider the entire stimulus, musical and nonmusical.
“Massive” vs. “Conditional” Effects
When the impact of media in general is addressed, the effect expected is often cast
in terms of a massive, direct, and negative effect (e.g., Postman, 1982; Winn, 1985)
These same fears have been applied to music media, most prominently—and
successfully—by Parents’ Music Resource Center (Norwood, 1987). The basic
assumption seems to be that “mass” media must have a “massive” effect on “masses” of
people. It is as if the audience is passive, bringing nothing to the encounter—the
“message” of the media is communicated, received, and will have a specific, universal

7
effect. It is assumed in this view that the listeners simply respond, with no reference to
their own personal dynamics.
The empirical literature on mass media effects does not support this view of
“massive” effects (McGuire, 1986; Christenson & Roberts, 1990), but rather suggests a
more modest impact of mass media. However, this does not mean that there is no effect
or that smaller effects are not important. The music research briefly outlined above,
although inconsistent with “massive” effects, clearly indicates that music affects people
and that these effects can be of the utmost importance. For example, if heavy metal songs
with themes of suicide influence only 1 or 2% of a high school class of 600 to commit
suicide, the deaths of those 6 to 12 adolescents will have a profound effect on that school
and cause a great deal of concern in the community.
The rejection of “massive” effects also raises other questions about the impact of
media. If mass media affect only a limited number of people who are exposed to them,
there must be mediating factors. A recent development in mass communication research
deals specifically with this issue (McLeod & Reeves, 1980; Roberts & Maccoby, 1985).
Called the “conditional approach,” this approach assumes the consumer’s response is
dependent on the psychological, social, and cultural characteristics of that consumer.
Applied specifically to music, this conditional approach may cause even greater
concern about the impact of music. For instance, the literature suggests that even though
adolescents’ comprehension of music lyrics is often inaccurate, it is not random.
Christenson and Roberts (1990) theorize that adolescents’ misinterpretations are
systematic and correspond to their developmental level and the conflicts associated with
that level:
Nor does it mean that we shouldn’t be concerned about teenagers’
understanding of the various sexually explicit, violent, or suicidal lyrics
that elicit comment from adult critics. Obviously, some young teenagers

8
do apprehend some songs in these terms, at least some of the time. . . .
And there is reason to suspect that the youngsters most likely to
comprehend the more horrific lyrics in terms of their manifest content
might be just those who are more at risk. If adolescents’ interpretation of
information is sensitive to current needs and activities, one might expect
those who are becoming sexually active to be most likely to concentrate on
the sexual content of lyrics, those who are considering experimenting with
drugs may be most likely to attend to drug-oriented lyrics, those who are
highly alienated or depressed to be most likely to focus on songs about
suicide (pp. 52 - 54).
Thompson, Pingree, Hawkins, and Draves’s (1989) study validates this concern
when they found that high school girls interpreted and processed Madonna’s “Papa Don’t
Preach” video differently depending on whether they had had prior “pregnancy
experiences” and whether their fathers stressed social harmony in interpersonal
relationships or exploring ideas at the possible expense of social harmony.
Music as a Cause
Understanding that the impact of music is dependent on an individual’s
psychological and developmental level answers some questions about adolescent music
subcultures. Nearly everyone, including social scientists and the general public, agrees
that music is important to youth. But more than being important, many theorists assert
that music is used in the youth culture to define and differentiate between subcultures
(e.g., Frith, 1981; Roe, 1990; Christenson & Roberts, 1990; Lull, 1987). One can witness
music subcultures on the streets and campuses of America every day.
But all adolescents are not impacted by music in the same way. Not all youths
have a meaningful identification with a particular style of music. Many listeners have a
wide variety of tastes. Even within a particular music preference, there is a considerable
amount of variability in how each individual interacts with the music and the subculture
that surrounds it. In other words, not all adolescents who prefer punk-rock have a
pink-spiked mohawk; not all adolescents who prefer heavy metal have long hair; not all

9
adolescents who prefer college/alternative dye their hair black and put in an eyebrow ring.
The conditional approach to media effects can account for this variability. The goal then
becomes identifying the psychological or developmental factors that predict whether
music will have a profound effect on a given adolescent. The question becomes, “Under
what conditions does music act as an agent of cause in values, attitudes, and behaviors?”
At one level, asking this question is premature because it is not altogether clear
from the literature if music ever acts as an agent of cause in adolescent behavior. Studies
often find relationships between music preference and other behaviors. However, the fact
that listening to music is inversely correlated with academic performance (Larson &
Kubey, 1983) or that adolescents who were alienated from mainstream school life more
often prefer heavy metal rock music (Tanner, 1981) or that substance abuse is positively
correlated with use of heavy metal rock music (King, 1988) does not mean that music is
the cause. In fact, as Keith Roe (1990, 1987) argues, music preference may just be an
effect, a superficial indicator of other psychological, sociological, and cultural processes
at work in the life of the adolescent. With respect to these correlational studies, one valid
explanation is that students who do not do well in school become alienated and become
interested in other activities that are more gratifying such as substance use or listening to
heavy metal rock music.
But the stance that music is not a causative factor at all is difficult to reconcile
with the research on the impact of music (e.g., Greeson & Williams, 1986; Hansen &
Hansen, 1989, 1990a, 1990b, 1991; Kruse 1994), analyses of how youth use music (Frith,
1981; Lull, 1987; Grossberg, 1987), and the general intuitive sense of the importance of
music to youth. However, researchers must not be deceived into thinking the choice is
between “massive” effects and no effects. There may be conditional effects. In other
words, music may act as an agent of cause for certain subgroups.

10
Christenson and Roberts (1990) argue this position most eloquently. They
maintain that while music may not cause adolescent values, attitudes, and behaviors in
most cases, there may be subgroups in which music can act as an agent of cause. For
example, heavy metal fans seem to be an at-risk group (Tanner, 1981; King, 1988) who
may be more susceptible to the sexually violent, rebellious, anti-establishment messages
of heavy metal rock music. In addition, heavy metal rock fans also report being more
familiar with the content and meaning of these lyrics (Wass, Raup, Cerullo, Martel, et al.,
1988 - 89), which increases the danger. Christenson and Roberts (1990) stated the
following regarding the potential influence of music:
Yet we have hinted at some areas in which the impact of music in social
settings and social groups might be problematic. Certain types of music
do stand for rebellion and alienation, do represent antisocial philosophies.
There is the possibility that the message of this kind of music (which is as
much in the sound and the images of the artists as in the lyrics) may
solidify certain subgroups in adolescent culture and articulate values and
feelings for their members.
We say certain subgroups because most teens who listen, for example, to
heavy metal are not alienated or at risk. . . . For others, though, the
preference for heavy metal is more than just a “taste.” It is an identity, a
source of group cohesion, a life philosophy. For these listeners, there is
the strong possibility that a certain type of music, once adopted by their
group, may begin to act as a source of information, values, and even
behavior (pp. 60 - 61).
However, Christenson and Roberts (1990) were able to find only one study in
their review of the literature that relates to this hypothesis. This study, by Roe (1984),
offers limited support for the contention that music can act as a cause of adolescent
attitudes and behavior. In a longitudinal study of Swedish youth, Roe found that
adolescents who were strongly interested in pop music at the age of 11 later were more
oriented toward their peers and less oriented toward their parents than were adolescents
who were not interested in pop music at an early age. This study suggests that the music

11
(or the messages contained in the music and in the subculture surrounding the music) may
have accelerated these adolescents’ separation from their parents. A similar result may
occur in heavy metal subcultures in which adolescents with a tendency toward delinquent
behavior adopt heavy metal rock as their music. By doing this they gain a group identity;
however, they also are exposed to the sexually violent, antisocial themes of the music,
which may lead them into drug addiction, antisocial behaviors, and acts of violence
against women.
Christenson and Roberts (1990) hypothesized that music can act as a source of
information, values, and behaviors for those listeners for whom their music preference is
more than just a “taste.” In other words, music is not expected to act as a primary source
of information, values, and behaviors for all adolescents, but when an adolescent is
deeply committed to a particular style of music he or she is more likely to internalize the
values, attitudes, and behaviors found within that music subculture. This study tests
Christenson and Roberts’ (1990) hypothesis to determine if (a) there is a significant
relationship between preference for musical styles and values, attitudes, and behaviors
and (b) differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors between music preference groups
will only be statistically significant when commitment is high.

CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Christenson and Roberts’ (1990) hypothesis involves many variables. This
chapter begins by identifying and defining the two independent variables of music
preference and global commitment. These variable specify which style of music the
listener favors and whether this preference is “more than just a ‘taste.’” To provide a
broad test of Christenson and Roberts’ (1990) hypothesis, dependent variables will be
included from three distinct domains: 1) values, 2) attitudes, and 3) behaviors. There is a
natural progression here from internal variables to external variables, beginning with
values, which are deeply held ideas about what is important in life, to attitudes, which are
often more superficial and malleable by the influences of society, to behaviors, which
provide objective, external evidence of these internal states. The attitude and behavior
variables have been selected based on a common theme whereby these variables will
serve to verify one another. In other words, attitudes toward substances will be paired
with an assessment of substance use so that if attitude differences are found, it can be
determined if these attitude differences relate to behavioral differences. The attitudinal
and behavioral variables have been chosen based on issues relevant to both adolescent life
and music based on the available literature. These dependent variables will focus on
attitudes toward women and sexually coercive behavior and on attitudes and behavior as
the relate to substance use.
12

13
Independent Variables
Music Preference
To test adequately Christenson and Roberts’ (1990) hypothesis that music can
become a source of information, values and behaviors in some cases, two independent
variables need to be considered. The first is music preference itself. Christenson and
Peterson (1988) found that adolescents could identify and differentiate among 26 distinct
musical styles. Clearly there is a wide variety of music preferences available. However,
a music preference must be sufficiently distinct from all other music styles and have a
sufficiently large following to provide enough data to make a valid test of whether
adolescents who prefer this style of music are different in their behavior and in the values
and attitudes they hold and whether this difference is related to their commitment to this
preferred style of music. In short, to test Christenson and Roberts’ (1990) hypothesis
properly, it will be necessary to group related music styles together to form a smaller
number of general but distinct groups.
Kruse (1994) used five general groups to classify music preference: popular rock,
college/alternative, heavy metal rock, country/folk, and classical/jazz. This grouping,
although reducing the 26 music styles identified by Christenson and Peterson (1988) to a
smaller number, would prove unsatisfactory for the present study on two counts. First,
out of a sample of 200 male undergraduates at the University of Florida, only 8 (4%)
expressed a preference for classical/jazz and an additional 7 (4%) expressed a preference
for country/folk (pretesting data from the University of Florida Psychology Department
participant pool for the Fall semester of 1992 confirmed the small percentage of
University of Florida undergraduate males who prefer country/folk and classical/jazz
music). Clearly these categories, although representing very distinct musical styles, do
not have sufficient support in the population to be used in this study to make a valid test

14
of the hypothesis and will therefore not be included in the analysis. The remaining three
music preference groups did receive sufficient endorsement by Kruse’s sample with 66
(33%) preferring popular rock, 95 (48%) preferring college/altemative, and 24 (12%)
preferring heavy metal.
The second problem with the particular grouping of music preference used by
Kruse (1994) is that rap was conceptually included in the popular rock group. This
grouping, although appropriate for the prior study, is not consistent with the intent of the
present study. In particular, rap represents a musical style and musical culture very
distinct from popular rock and so it must be treated as a separate music style in the
present study. Conceptually, rap is an important music category because it, like heavy
metal rock music, has come under considerable attack by parents, civic groups, and social
scientists for its controversial, violent, and misogynistic themes of gangster behavior,
selling drugs, rape, and killing police officers. However, whether rap music will be
endorsed as a music preference by sufficient numbers of this sample is in question.
Existing pretesting data from the University of Florida Psychology Department
participant pool for the Fall semester of 1992 indicate that only 9% of a sample of 647
undergraduate males indicated a preference for rap music. Whether rap music is included
in the present study is entirely dependent on the number of participants who endorse it as
their music preference.
It is also possible that other music styles could enter the analysis if enough
participants identify it as their preferred style. Again, based on the previous data from
Kruse (1994) and pretesting data from the University of Florida Psychology participant
pool for 1992, it is unlikely that any other music style will satisfy this criterion.
Therefore, the music styles that are likely to be included as independent variables in the
analysis are popular rock, college/alternative, and heavy metal rock. Participants who

15
indicate a different music preference that is not endorsed by at least 10% of the sample
will be excluded from the analysis.
Global Commitment
The second independent variable for this study is the adolescent’s reported global
commitment to his or her preferred style of music. The global commitment variable will
be used to predict when music preference will become a particularly salient variable for
distinguishing between adolescents based on their values, attitudes, and behaviors. In
many ways global commitment is an obvious predictor variable. Anyone predicting
which of two individuals is more likely to be influenced by music would certainly expect
the individual who is committed to the music—who has greater exposure (e.g., listens
more), more exclusive exposure (e.g., prefers exclusively the music in question), actively
seeks out the music (e.g., purchases CDs), publicly identifies with the music (e.g., wears
concert T-shirts), personally identifies with the music (e.g., fantasizes about becoming a
musician), and identifies his/her music preference as an important descriptor of
him/herself—to be more open to and receptive of the messages communicated through
the complex stimulus of music.
It also becomes obvious that this commitment variable must be a “global” variable
because there are many ways adolescents can commit themselves to a music preference.
Therefore, this global commitment variable is broadly defined and must contain multiple
measures. For example, purchasing tapes or CDs is an indicator of commitment to a
music preference, but that an adolescent does not purchase tapes or CDs may simply
mean he or she lacks the disposable income necessary to buy them. Consequently, global
commitment will include such variables as the exclusiveness of music preference, the
amount of listening, percentage of friends who also prefer the style, tape or CDs
purchases, concert attendance, and self-reported identification with the music style, etc.

16
Making global commitment a predictor variable is also consistent with
Christenson and Roberts’ (1990) hypothesis. Their concern is that “a certain type of
music, once adopted by their group, may begin to act as a source of information, values,
and even behavior” (Christenson & Roberts, 1990, p. 61). The current project measures
the extent to which a particular music style is adopted by an individual and determines
whether individuals who are highly committed to their favorite music have different
values, attitudes, and behaviors than individuals who are not as committed or who prefer
another style of music.
Dependent Variables
The dependent variables in the present study include both a priori variables, in
which differences are expected on theoretical grounds, and exploratory variables, which
are salient in adolescent culture but whose relationship to music and music preference is
unknown. The dependent variables are grouped into three classes of variables: values,
attitudes, and behaviors.
Values
Values are long-standing beliefs that certain ways of acting are more personally or
socially desirable than are other ways. Personal values represent what an individual
wants or considers to be good or important. Values are often categorized as either
intrinsic, that is inherent in the activity itself, or extrinsic, the result of the activity. An
example of an intrinsic value would be aesthetics, where a music listener may directly
experience the artistic beauty of the music. An extrinsic value would include cultural
identity, where the listener is able to deepen a connection to his or her own culture by
listening to music. Values are central to the way individuals understand their world and
are probably the deepest level at which music is expected to have an impact. If music is

17
found to have a significant impact on values, then the influence of music is penetrating
and pervasive.
The Values Scale (VS; Super & Nevill, 1986) will be used to assess values. The
US version of the VS includes 21 scales in 106 items measuring both intrinsic and
extrinsic values. The values assessed by the VS include Ability Utilization,
Achievement, Advancement, Aesthetics, Altruism, Authority, Autonomy, Creativity,
Cultural Identity, Economic Rewards, Economic Security, Life Style, Personal
Development, Physical Activity, Physical Prowess, Prestige, Risk, Social Interaction,
Social Relations, Variety, and Working Conditions. The VS, although developed as a
career assessment instrument, includes both work and general values, providing a fairly
comprehensive list of values. The VS was developed by a multinational team of
researchers as part of the Work Importance Study. As a result the VS is a carefully
constructed, psychometrically sound instrument that is available in nine languages (Nevill
& Super, 1989; Nevill & Kruse, 1996).
Sverko (1995) completed a cross-national factor analysis of the VS using data
collected as part of the WIS. International scoring was used that includes only the first 18
scales listed above (Economic Rewards and Economic Security are combined as
Economics) and only the three items per scale that were adopted by all countries in the
WIS. This sample included 18,318 participants from 10 countries, with some countries
providing separate samples for secondary school, higher education, and adults. Factor
analysis of this pooled sample yielded a five-factor structure. The first factor, Utilitarian
Orientation, included Economics, Advancement, Prestige, Authority, and Achievement
and focuses on extrinsic values that stress the importance of economic conditions and
material career progress. The second factor is Orientation Toward Self-Actualization and
primarily includes Ability Utilization, Personal Development, and Altruism, with some

18
samples including salient loadings on Achievement, Aesthetics, and Creativity. The third
factor, Individualistic Orientation, is primarily made up of Life-Style and Autonomy with
Creativity and Variety included in some samples. The fourth factor is Social Orientation
and is defined by Social Interaction and Social Relations. Some samples’ loadings on this
factor also include Variety and Altruism. The fifth factor, which Sverko labeled
Adventurous Orientation, primarily includes Risk with some samples also loading
Physical Activity and Authority on this factor.
There are no available data on specific value differences between different music
styles and subcultures. As a result, although a relationship between music and values is
theoretically predicted, the exact nature of this relationship is speculative. However, the
relationship between music and values need not be entirely exploratory, as some
reasonable predictions can be made based on an understanding of the different music
styles and subcultures. For example, preference for heavy metal rock music is expected
to be positively related to an Adventurous Orientation whereas preference for
college/alternative is expected to be positively related to an Individualistic Orientation.
Attitudes
Attitudes toward women
The relationship between attitudes toward women and music has received
considerable attention in the literature (St. Lawrence & Joiner, 1991; Peterson & Pfost,
1989). In particular, Kruse (1994) found that although heavy metal rock music with or
without lyrics negatively influences attitudes toward women, a preference for heavy metal
music is associated with less restrictive attitudes toward women. In fact the most
restrictive attitudes were associated with a preference for popular rock and country/folk
music. These results are confusing, somewhat contradictory, and make it difficult to
predict how different music styles might affect listener’s attitudes toward women. It is

19
expected that the present study will help clarify this important relationship. To this end,
attitudes toward women are measured using two scales: the Sex-role Stereotyping Scale
(SRS; Burt, 1980), and Rape Myth Scale (RMS; Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1995), which is a
revision of Burt’s (1980) Rape Myth Acceptance Scale that attempts to correct both
theoretical and psychometric weaknesses of the Burt scale. The SRS will allow a
replication of Kruse’s (1994) work and helps clarify the relationship between music
preference and sex-role stereotyping, as well as demonstrate the role of global
commitment in this relationship. The RMS is being included because a moderate
relationship exists between sex-role stereotyping and the acceptance of rape myths (Burt,
1980). The RMS will help to extend the findings of Kruse (1994) by determining if the
relationship between attitudes toward women and music preference is limited to sex-role
stereotyping or if the relationship extends to attitudes toward women that are of greater
concern to social scientists.
Substance use
Attitudes toward substance use are another important area of concern with respect
to adolescents and music (Christenson & Roberts, 1990; King, 1988). The connection
between music and drug use is most clearly illustrated in the cliché “sex, drugs, and rock
‘n’ roll.” Because of this relationship, it is expected that music, particularly certain music
styles, will have a strong relationship with adolescents’ attitudes toward drug use, if not
their actual behavior (see below for a discussion of drug use). In general, preferences for
heavy metal and college/altemative music are expected to be more strongly associated
with permissive attitudes toward substance use because these music cultures most openly
endorse drug use.
It also will be important when assessing drug use attitudes to differentiate between
different substances. Alcohol and tobacco should be about equally endorsed by fans of

20
all music styles because they are legal substances that do not form a substantial theme in
the music or music cultures. Heavy metal fans are expected to be accepting of all drugs
including hard drugs and narcotics. College/alternative fans may have a profile quite
similar to heavy metal rock, but college/alternative fans are more likely to favor
psychedelics, hallucinogens, and heroin, which are substances often associated with this
music culture.
Behaviors
Sexual coercion
Music is expected to be related to more than just attitudes. A relationship
between music preference and adolescent behavior should also be found. Sexual coercion
as a behavior is being included because it is the explicitly sexually violent themes in
music that draw the greatest criticism from the public (Norwood, 1987) and social
scientists (e.g., St. Lawrence & Joiner, 1991). Sexually coercive behavior in males also is
expected to follow from high sex-role stereotyping and greater acceptance of rape myths.
Researchers rarely consider women as perpetrators of sexual coercion or men as
victims, but the research that is available suggests that this dynamic is not as unusual as it
would seem to be at first glance. For example, Johnson and Johnson (1994) found that
34% of a sample of 204 college men reported incidents of pressured or forced sexual
touching or intercourse since age 16 years, with 30% of these incidents involving a
female perpetrator or perpetrators of both sexes. Lottes (1991) also found substantial
proportions of male undergraduates reporting that women had tried to have sex with them
through nonphysical coercive strategies. In another study, McConaghy, Zamir, and
Manicavasagar (1993) found that 6% of a sample of 51 female medical students reported
being so aroused that they could not stop when their partner did not want intercourse and
13% of the sample of 66 male medical students reported having intercourse against their

21
will. As a result of these studies, females also will be asked to report their sexually
coercive behaviors as well.
Regarding sexual coercion, it is expected that heavy metal and rap music listeners
(heavy metal and rap most often contain sexually violent/coercive lyrics) will report a
higher incidence of sexual violence than will either popular rock or college/alternative
listeners.
Substance use
Again the obvious link between music and drugs clearly implies that music
preference should be related to substance use (King, 1988). It is expected that
participants who prefer heavy metal rock or college/altemative music will report the most
frequent drug use. Drug use will be assessed by asking participants how frequently they
use different classes of drugs on a scale from “never” to “several times daily.”
As noted above, different music styles also should be more strongly associated
with certain classes of drugs. Again, fans of all music styles should show roughly
equivalent use of alcohol and tobacco. Heavy metal rock and college/altemative fans are
expected to report more frequent use of illegal drugs with college/alternative fans
showing a preference for psychedelics, hallucinogens, and heroin.
Sensation Seeking
There are other variables that may be of interest in the present study. One such
variable is Sensation Seeking (Zuckerman, 1978), which has been associated with a
preference for hard rock and heavy metal rock music (Arnett, 1992, 1991). Sensation
seeking has been associated with other high-risk/reckless behaviors including dmg use,
promiscuous sex, unprotected sex, driving while intoxicated, shoplifting, and vandalism
(Arnett, 1992, 1991). The association between heavy metal, high-risk behaviors, and
sensation seeking could potentially confound the results of this study. In particular, if

22
sensation seeking is correlated with both heavy metal rock music and other high risk
behaviors, then the relationship between heavy metal rock music and high risk behaviors
might be explained by sensation seeking. However, if the relationship between heavy
metal rock music and these high risk behaviors is independent of sensation seeking, then
this leaves open the possibility that a preference for heavy metal rock music influences
these behaviors. As a result, sensation seeking will need to be controlled for in all
analyses in this study.
Summary
This study seeks to test whether music can begin to act as a source of information,
values, and behaviors for certain fans whose lives are specifically oriented around their
preferred style of music. To test this hypothesis, the participants’ music preference and
their global commitment to the music will be assessed. This study also will measure the
participants’ values, attitudes toward women, acceptance of rape myths, attitudes toward
substances, frequency of sexually coercive behavior, and frequency of substance use.
This study is less concerned about the specific differences between music preference
groups in terms of their values, attitudes, and behaviors and is more interested in the
general relationship between music preference and global commitment and its
significance across the domains of values, attitudes, and behaviors. To this end, the
following hypotheses were made regarding the dependent variables in this study.
Hypotheses
General Hypotheses
A. Music preference, as indicated by the participant’s self-reported preference from
among specified styles of music (i.e., heavy metal rock, popular rock,
college/altemative, and rap), and global commitment to the preferred style of
music will be significantly associated with values, attitudes, and behaviors.

23
B. Music preference and global commitment to that music preference as measured
by the Music Preference Questionnaire will interact such that differences in
values, attitudes, and behaviors between music preference groups will only be
statistically significant when commitment is high.
Specific Hypotheses
Values
1. On the Utilitarian Orientation factor of the Values Scale (Super & Nevill,
1986), music preference (MP) and global commitment (GC) will interact
such that popular rock fans will place more importance on this factor (i.e.,
score higher) as their GC increases whereas college/alternative fans will
place less importance on this factor (i.e., score lower) as their GC increases.
2. On the Orientation Toward Self-Actualization factor of the Values Scale
(Super & Nevill, 1986), MP and GC will interact such that
college/altemative fans will place more importance on this factor (i.e., score
higher) as their GC increases whereas heavy metal rock fans will place less
importance on this factor (i.e., score lower) as their GC increases.
3. On the Individualistic Orientation factor of the Values Scale (Super &
Nevill, 1986), MP and GC will interact such that college/altemative fans will
place more importance on this factor (i.e., score higher) as their GC increases
whereas popular rock fans will place less importance on this factor (i.e.,
score lower) as their GC increases.
4. On the Social Orientation factor of the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986),
MP and GC will interact such that popular rock fans will place more
importance on this factor (i.e., score higher) as their GC increases whereas

24
heavy metal rock fans will place less importance on this factor (i.e., score
lower) as their GC increases.
5. On the Adventurous Orientation factor of the Values Scale (Super & Nevill,
1986), MP and GC will interact such that heavy metal rock and
college/altemative fans will place more importance on this factor (i.e., score
higher) as their GC increases whereas popular rock fans will place less
importance on this factor (i.e., score lower) as their GC increases.
Attitudes
6. On the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale (Burt, 1980), MP and GC will interact
such that popular rock fans will be more sex-role stereotyped (i.e., score
higher) as their GC increases whereas college/alternative fans will be less
sex-role stereotyped (i.e., score lower) as their GC increases.
7. On the Rape Myth Scale (Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1995), MP and GC will
interact such that heavy metal rock fans will be more accepting of rape myths
(i.e., score higher) as their GC increases whereas college/altemative fans will
be less accepting of rape myths (i.e., score lower) as their GC increases.
8. Permissive attitudes toward tobacco and alcohol will be equal for all music
preference groups. Preference for college/altemative and heavy metal rock
will be associated with more permissive attitudes toward illegal drug use.
College/altemative and heavy metal rock fans’ attitudes toward illegal drug
use will become more permissive as their GC increases. Attitudes toward
drug use will be measured by the Permissiveness Subscale from the
Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale (Jenkins, Fisher, & Applegate, 1990) and
by the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale (constmcted by the author).

25
Behaviors
9. Consistent with the hypotheses regarding sex-role stereotyping and rape
myth acceptance, MP and GC will interact such that heavy metal rock fans
will report more sexually coercive behaviors (i.e., score higher on the Sexual
Experiences Survey; Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1995) as their GC increases
whereas college/altemative fans will report fewer sexually coercive
behaviors (i.e., score lower on the Sexual Experiences Survey; Lonsway &
Fitzgerald, 1995) as their GC increases.
10. Preference for college/alternative and heavy metal rock will be associated
with more frequent use of illegal drugs, whereas use of tobacco and alcohol
use will be equal for all music preference groups. College/alternative and
heavy metal rock fans’ use of illegal drugs will increase as their GC
increases. Substance use will be measured by the Substance Use Scale
(constructed by the author).

CHAPTER 3
METHOD
Participants
Participants were 282 undergraduates (93 males and 189 females, 33% and 67%
respectively) solicited from psychology classes at the University of Florida who
volunteered to participate in this research for course credit. Undergraduate students were
invited to participate in this study because music consumption remains an important part
of life for youth throughout adolescence and the college years (Christenson & Roberts,
1990). The ages of the participants included 7% age 18, 23% age 19, 28% age 20, 20%
age 21, 9 % age 22 and 13% age 23+. The academic class range of the participants
included 5% freshman, 20% sophomores, 36% juniors, 36% seniors, 1% post-bac, and
2% graduate students. The racial makeup of the sample was 76% White, 9% Latino, 5%
Asian, 8% Black, and 2% other. Data for all subjects were retained for analysis.
Instruments
The instruments used in the present study include the following:
1. Music preference and global commitment were both assessed using the
Musical Preference Questionnaire (MPQ). The MPQ was used to gather
detailed information about the participants’ musical tastes and how
committed they were to listening to their favorite music. Item 1 assesses
music preference and the remainder of the items assess global commitment.
Consistent with the discussion above, the assessment of global commitment
is multi-dimensional and includes a comprehensive list of items to assess the
many ways in which fans can commit themselves to a particular style of
26

27
music. This instrument was constructed by the author, and validation of this
instrument, including reliability and factor analysis, is reported in the Results
Section. The Musical Preference Questionnaire can be found in Appendix
A.
2. Values were assessed using the Values Scale (VS; Super & Nevill, 1986),
which provides scales for the following values: Ability Utilization,
Achievement, Advancement, Aesthetics, Altruism, Authority, Autonomy,
Creativity, Cultural Identity, Economics, Life Style, Personal Development,
Physical Activity, Physical Prowess, Prestige, Risk, Social Interaction, Social
Relations, Variety, and Working Conditions. In order to minimize the
number of items on the battery, the cross-national scoring system was used,
reducing the number of items from 106 to 60. The participants rated the
importance of a value statement on a 4-point Likert scale from “of little or
no importance” to “very important.” The following is a sample item: “It is
now or will in the future be important for me to . . . use all my knowledge
and skills.” Higher scores reflect placing greater importance on value. Nevill
& Super (1989) report the a and test-retest reliabilities for the individual
value scales to be greater than .70, with the exception of Ability Utilization,
Life Style, and Personal Development. The construct validity of the VS is
established by a variety of indices beginning with the use of proper inventory
development procedures (Nevill & Super, 1989). Factor analysis of the VS
demonstrated the expected correlations between related values (e.g. between
Achievement and Personal Development) while maintaining the
independence of divergent factors (Nevill & Super, 1989). Moreover, the
factor structure of the VS remains consistent across cultures (Sverko, 1995)

28
and among different age groups within the same culture (i.e., high school,
university and adult samples; Nevill & Super, 1989). Additional studies
have further validated the VS by demonstrating its high correlations with
other instruments that assess similar values (Nevill & Kruse, 1996). The
Values Scale can be found in Appendix B.
3. Sex-role stereotyping was assessed using the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale
(SRS; Burt, 1980). This instrument contains nine statements to which the
participants must respond on a 7-point Likert scale from “strongly disagree”
to “strongly agree.” The following is a sample item: “A woman should never
contradict her husband in public.” Higher scores reflect greater endorsement
of sex-role stereotyping. Burt (1980) reported a Cronbach’s a of .80 for the
SRS. The validity of the SRS is demonstrated by its high correlation (-.73;
Check & Malamuth, 1983) with the Attitudes Toward Women Scale (Spence
& Helmreich, 1972; higher scores reflect more pro-feminist attitudes) and its
ability to predict attitudes and beliefs regarding sexuality and violence
(Check & Malamuth, 1983). The Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale can be found
in Appendix C.
4. Rape myth acceptance was assessed using the Rape Myth Scale (RMS;
Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1995). This is a 19-item scale where the participants
respond on a 7-point Likert scale from “strongly disagree” to “strongly
agree.” The following is a sample item: “Women tend to exaggerate how
much rape affects them.” Higher scores reflect greater acceptance of
“attitudes and beliefs that are generally false but widely and persistently held,
and that serve to deny and justify male sexual aggression against women”
(Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1995, p. 704). Lonsway and Fitzgerald (1995)

29
report a coefficient a of .89 (compared to a .88 Cronbach’s a for the original
scale; Burt, 1980) with item-to-total correlations ranging from .38 to .73.
Content validity was ensured in the development of the scale by generating
questions to cover all seven areas of the rape myth construct identified by
Payne (1993): victim precipitation, definition of rape, male intention, victim
desire-enjoyment, false charges, trivialization of the crime, and deviance of
the act. Evidence for the construct validity is found in the RMS’s positive
correlations with measures of hostility toward women, acceptance of
interpersonal violence, and adversarial sexual beliefs (Lonsway & Fitzgerald,
1995). The Rape Myth Scale can be found in Appendix D.
5. Permissive attitudes toward general drug use was assessed using the
Permissiveness Subscale of the Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale (SAA;
Chappel, Veach, & Krug, 1985; Jenkins, Fisher, & Applegate, 1990). The
Permissiveness Subscale is a 10-item scale where the participants respond
on a 7-point Likert scale from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” The
following is a sample item: “It can be normal for a teenager to experiment
with drugs.” Higher scores reflect more permissive attitudes toward
substance use. Jenkins, et al. (1990) validated the SAA (Chappel, et al.,
1985) for a college population because the original instrument was
developed for medical students and substance abuse professionals. Jenkins,
et al. (1990) replicated the essential factor structure of the SAA, identifying 3
factors: (1) Stereotypes and Moralism (a synthesis of the Nonstereotypes and
Nonmoralism factors identified by Chappel, et al., 1985), (2) Treatment (a
synthesis of the Treatment Intervention and Treatment Optimism factors
identified by Chappel, et al., 1985), and (3) Permissiveness, which shared 6

30
items with the Permissiveness Factor identified by Chappel, et al. (1985).
Jenkins, et al. (1990) reported an Eigenvalue of 2.43 for the Permissiveness
factor, which accounted for 20% of the variance. Jenkins, et al. (1990)
reported Cronbach’s a of .74 and a test-retest reliability over 6 weeks of .82.
The Permissiveness Subscale from the Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale can
be found in Appendix E.
6. Permissive attitudes toward the use of specific drugs was assessed using the
Attitudes Toward Substances Scale (ATS), a 10-item constructed by the
author to assess permissive attitudes toward various substances or classes of
substances. The ATS was included to allow the assessment of attitudes
toward specific substances and thereby determine if certain music preference
groups held permissive attitudes toward specific substances. The question
structure of the ATS follows the format “The use of [substance or class of
substances] should not be regulated or restricted in any way.” The ten
questions assess the following ten substances: 1) tobacco, 2) alcohol, 3)
marijuana, 4) hallucinogens, 5) designer drugs, 6) prescription drugs, 7)
stimulants, 8) depressants, 9) cocaine, and 10) heroin. The following is a
sample item: “The use of hallucinogens such as LSD, mushrooms, or PCP
should not be regulated or restricted in any way.” The participants respond
on a 7-point Likert scale from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” This
instrument was constructed by the author, and validation of this instrument,
including reliability and factor analysis, is reported in the Results Section.
The Attitudes Toward Substances Scale can be found in Appendix F.
7. The frequency of sexually coercive behaviors for both males and females
was assessed using the Sexual Experiences Survey (SExS; Koss & Oros,

31
1982). The scale was originally written to assess both males’ reports of
sexually coercive behaviors against females and females’ reports of sexually
coercive behavior committed against them by males. McConaghy, Zamir,
and Manicavasagar (1993) used a modified version of this scale that allowed
both men and women to report how often they have engaged in sexually
coercive behavior and how often they were a victim of sexually coercive
behavior. In the current study, the SExS was limited to focus only on the
frequency with which the participants have engaged in sexually coercive
behavior. In addition, the SExS was modified from the simple yes/no format
of the original form (Koss & Oros, 1982) to a 7-point Likert scale, which
allowed the participants to indicate how frequently they have engaged in the
target behavior from “never” to “often.” The scale utilizes a dimensional
view of rape, in which “rape represents an extreme behavior but one that is
on a continuum with normal male behavior within the culture” (Koss &
Oros, 1982, p. 455). The SExS takes into consideration the possibility that
force or the threat of force may have been used in a situation, but for various
reasons sexual intercourse did not occur. The scale consists of 10 statements
that include a progression on the type of coercion (i.e., from verbal coercion,
to threats of violence, to the use of violence) and a progression on the type of
sexual acts (i.e., kissing and petting, to attempted intercourse, to oral or anal
intercourse). The SExS also includes three unscored items assessing
consensual sexual intercourse, having another person misinterpret the level
of intimacy one desires, and having been raped. The following is a sample
item: “Have you ever . . . been in a situation where you tried to get sexual
intercourse with another person when he or she didn’t want to by threatening

32
to use physical force (twisting his or her arm, holding him or her down, etc.)
if he or she didn’t cooperate, but for various reasons sexual intercourse did
not occur?” Higher scores reflect a greater reported frequency of engaging in
sexually coercive behaviors. No reliability or validity data is available for
this modified SExS. However, Koss & Oros (1982) found that between 2 -
6% of their university sample of men reported using some degree of physical
force or threats of physical force to coerce partners into sexual acts. The
authors concluded that the instrument was a valid approach to sampling in
rape research. Factor analysis of the SExS by Koss & Oros (1982) revealed
one factor that accounted for 67% of the variance. The modified SExS used
in this study was tested for reliability and validity and the results of these
analyses, including reliability and factor analysis, is reported in the Results
Section. The Sexual Experiences Survey can be found in Appendix G.
8. Substance use behavior was assessed using the Substance Use Scale, a
10-item scale constructed by the author. The participants indicated on a
7-point Likert scale (0 = “never,” 6 = “several times daily”) the frequency of
their use of the following ten substances: 1) tobacco, 2) alcohol, 3)
marijuana, 4) hallucinogens, 5) designer drugs, 6) prescription drugs, 7)
stimulants, 8) depressants, 9) cocaine, and 10) heroin. The following is a
sample item: “How often do you use hallucinogens such as LSD,
mushrooms, or PCP?” This instrument was constructed by the author, and
validation of this instrument, including reliability and factor analysis, is
reported in the Results Section. The Substance Use Scale can be found in
Appendix H.

33
9. A short (10-item) form of the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, Das,
Bogen, & Grossman, 1987) was used to assess sensation seeking. For each
item, participants choose between two alternatives the one which best
describes their personal attitude. The following is a sample item: “I would
like to hitchhike across the country. OR Hitchhiking is too dangerous a way
to travel.” Madsen, et al. (1987) reported a test-retest reliability over a 2
month interval of .78. and a Cronbach’s a of .43. Madsen, et al. (1987)
reported that this short form SSS correlates .78 with the total score of the
Sensation Seeking Scale, Form V (Zuckerman, 1978). The validity of the
SSS is demonstrated by its high correlation with the Sensation Seeking
Scale, Form V (Zuckerman, 1978), which is used in virtually all of the recent
research conducted in the area of sensation seeking (Arnett, 1994).
Furthermore, Madsen, et al. (1987) found that men score higher than women
on the short form SSS, and that it correlates positively with alcohol use, drug
use, and sexual expressiveness, but is uncorrelated with social desirability.
This short form also avoids the use of dated language and questions
concerning alcohol and drug use found in Form V, which Arnett (1994)
identified as limitations of Form V. The Sensation Seeking Scale can be
found in Appendix I.
10. A Demographic Questionnaire was used to gather information on the
participants, including age, race, gender, college class, fratemity/sorority
membership, SES, school background, and cultural background. The
demographic questionnaire can be found in Appendix J.

34
Procedure
Participants were recruited for this study from psychology classes at the
University of Florida. The instructor from the course was approached in order to obtain
permission to sample his or her class and to make arrangements for extra credit for those
students who elected to participate. The instruments were administered during the regular
class time to help ensure maximum participation.
Participants were given an informed consent form to read and sign. All
participants were then given two assessment batteries. These batteries are separated
because Battery I required that participants bubble in their responses on an answer sheet
whereas Battery II required that they write or mark their answers directly on the form.
Battery I, which took about 30 minutes to complete, includes nine scales: 1) the
Demographic Survey, 2) the Values Scale, 3) the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale, 4) the
Rape Myth Scale, 5) the Sexual Experiences Survey, 6) the Substance Abuse Attitudes
Scale, 7) the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale, 8) the Substance Use Scale, and 9) the
Sensation Seeking Scale. Battery II, which took about 15 minutes to complete, measures
two variables: 1) music preference and 2) Global Commitment to the preferred style of
music.
In order to protect their confidentiality, participants were identified only by a
Code Number on all instruments. After completing the assessment batteries, the
participants brought their material to the experimenter where they were individually
thanked for participating in the study and given a debriefing form with a full description
of the study. Participants who experienced any discomfort were invited to discuss their
concerns with the investigator and/or solicit counseling at UF’s Counseling Center. No
participant reported any discomfort as a result of participating in this study.

CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
Preliminary Analyses
Before running the main analyses to test the hypotheses, several preliminary
analyses were computed. In particular, it was necessary first to determine which music
preference groups would be included in the main analyses and which analyses of
dependent variables would include the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al.,
1987) as a covariate. In addition, the Attitudes Toward Substances, Substance Use Scale,
and the Sexual Experiences Survey (Koss & Oros, 1982) needed to be scored and
analyzed to confirm the reliability and validity of the these instruments. The Music
Preference Questionnaire, which included 31 write-in items, also needed to be scored and
validated after Windsorizing (Marascuilo & McSweeney, 1977) and standardizing these
write-in items.
Music Preference
On the MPQ, participants indicated their preferred style of music from among
nine choices or wrote in their preference, if it was not listed. Table 1 displays the
distribution of participants into the different music preference categories. The criterion
established for including a particular music preference category in the main analysis was
that the category must be endorsed by at least 10% of the sample. According to this
criterion, only popular rock and college/altemative will be included in the main analysis
examining the relationship between music preference and global commitment and values,
attitudes and behavior. However, all music preference groups were included in the
35

36
validation of the MPQ, the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale, the Substance Use Scale,
and the Sexual Experiences Survey.
Table 1 - Number of Participants in all Music Preference Categories
Music Style
Number
Percentage
Classical
2
1%
College/Altemative
82
30%
Country
20
7%
Folk
5
2%
Heavy Metal Rock
1
0%
Jazz
2
1%
New Age
6
2%
Other
54
19%
Popular Rock
86
30%
Rap
10
3%
Rhythm & Blues
14
5%
NOTE: Rhythm & Blues was not included as a standard
category on the MPQ but was written in by 14 participants.
Dependent Variables
Sensation seeking as measured by the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et
al., 1987) was proposed as a possible confounding variable in the relationship between
music preference and the dependent variables. As a preliminary analysis, Pearson
product moment correlation coefficients were computed to determine which dependent
variables were significantly related to the SSS. The sample used in this analysis was
limited to only participants who preferred popular rock or college/altemative (N = 168)
because only these participants will be used in the main analysis. The statistically
significant results of this analysis are provided in Table 2. An independent samples r-test
was calculated to test for significant differences in SSS scores between popular rock and
college/altemative fans. The results were significant (t = -3.51, p < .01) with means of

37
5.7 for college/altemative fans and 4.7 for popular rock fans. The fact that music
preference and several of the dependent variables are correlated with the SSS justifies its
inclusion as a covariate in the main analyses. Dependent variables for which the SSS was
significantly correlated will include the SSS as a covariate in all analysis examining the
relationship between music preference and global commitment and values, attitudes and
behavior.
Table 2 - Correlation of Dependent variables with Sensation Seeking Scale
Dependent Variables
Pearson R
p Value
Music Preference
0.27
<0.01
Values Scale
Adventurous Orientation
0.29
<0.01
Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale
-0.21
<0.01
Substance Use Scale
Sum of Illegal Drug Items
0.16
<0.01
Sum of Alcohol and Tobacco Items
0.22
<0.01
NOTE: The correlations between the dependent variables and the SSS are
calculated using only popular rock and college/alternative fans (N= 162).
Music Preference Questionnaire
The Music Preference Questionnaire (MPQ) included 36 items with 59 data points
(i.e., several items included 2 or more data points) designed to measure global
commitment. These data points included 3 different response methods including: 1) 31
data points for which participants wrote in a value, 2) 10 data points for which they
endorsed a statement, and 3) 18 data points for which they respond to a statement on a
Likert scale. The data points in which participants wrote in a value presented a variety of
problems for data entry. First, participants often wrote in a range of values (e.g., “3 - 4”)

38
for an item (e.g., “How many months has your indicated preference been your clear
favorite?”)- In all cases, the value entered corresponded to the highest value in the range.
A second problem was that some participants wrote in extreme values that were
inconsistent with the overall sample. These extreme values may have represented a
misunderstanding of the item by the participant or may have reflected accurate
information. In either case the frequency distribution and variability statistics for these
items were severely compromised. To correct the problems while maintaining the
integrity of the data, responses for these 31 data points were Windsorized by resetting
extreme values to the nearest value in the distribution of scores for that item (e.g., if an
item had a consistent distribution of scores ranging from 0 to 8, scores of 12, 15, and 20
would be recoded as 8). These Windsorized scores were then converted to Z-scores to
standardize them and make the values more consistent with the other Likert-scale items
in the MPQ. These standardized scores were used in both reliability and factor analyses
of the MPQ. The standardized scores were also used when scoring the MPQ items.
However, because Z-scores can be negative, a constant of 3 was added to the Z-scores
when scoring to make them positive.
A third problem encountered refers specifically to the question regarding how
many months participants had preferred a particular style of music. For this item, several
participants wrote in “forever,” “all my life,” and similar phrases indicating a long, but
indefinite, time period. Other participants wrote in a value that reflected an age before 5
years old, equaled their age, or in rare cases, exceeded their age. These later cases were
considered another way of indicating “forever.” To assign a valid number for this
“forever” group, the length item was first Windsorized, reducing the range from 0-25
years to 0 - 8.3 years. Next, the mean and standard deviation of the length item were
computed for each age group in the sample. The value for the length item for each person

39
in the “forever” group was then set to the mean plus two times the standard deviation
using the mean and standard deviation for their age group. In this way, an 18-year-old
who indicated “forever” as the length he has preferred a specific style of music was
assigned a value consistent with his age, whereas a 22-year-old was assigned a different
(and higher) value consistent with other 22-year-olds in the sample.
Factor Analyses
Substance Abuse Instruments
Attitudes toward substances
One of the instruments developed by the author is the Attitudes Toward
Substances Scale (ATS), which is designed to measure permissive attitudes toward ten
specific substances or classes of substances. The item structure of the ATS follows the
format “The use of [substance or class of substances] should not be regulated or restricted
in any way.” The ten questions assess the following ten substances: 1) tobacco, 2)
alcohol, 3) marijuana, 4) hallucinogens, 5) designer drugs, 6) prescription drugs, 7)
stimulants, 8) depressants, 9) cocaine, and 10) heroin. The participants responded on a
7-point Likert scale (0 - 6) from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” A frequency
analysis of the responses shows participants endorsing the full range of the Likert scale
with the modal response being “strongly disagree.”
Principle components factor analysis of the ATS produced the scree plot depicted
in Figure 1. The scree plot graphs eigenvalues from largest to smallest. Cattell (1978)
advocated using the plot to determine the number of factors to retain. The recommended
decision is to retain all factors before the line dramatically changes slope from the
graphically depicted sharp descent of eigenvalue magnitudes. The results of this
procedure suggest that one factor should be retained. Factor loadings for all items range
from .60 to .95. The a coefficient for the scale was found to be .95 with corrected item

40
to total correlations ranging from .92 to .57. The alcohol and tobacco items showed the
weakest item to total correlations (.57 and .64 respectively) and if dropped would increase
the a coefficient for the scale.
Factor Number
Figure 1 - Factor Scree Plot of the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale
The ATS is highly correlated with the Permissiveness Subscale from the
Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale (r = .41) and with the Substance Use Scale (r - .40)
discussed next. In addition, the ATS is uncorrelated with only partly similar constructs,
including the Sensation Seeking Scale (Madsen, et ah, 1987), the values of Autonomy,
Life Style, Individualistic Orientation, Risk and Variety from the Values Scale (Super &
Nevill, 1986), Age, Race, and Gender. Overall, the reliability of the ATS is clearly
demonstrated and initial support for its validity exists, as well. The scale is extremely
reliable with respect to internal consistency. Factor analysis yields one factor that
accounts for 71% of the total variance. These results justify the retention of the ATS as a
measure of permissive attitudes toward substances. Individual items from the ATS will

41
also be used to measure attitudes toward specific substances or groups of substances as
predicted by the hypotheses.
Substance use scale
The Substance Use Scale (SUS) also was developed by the author and was
designed to measure participants’ frequency of use of ten specific substances or classes of
substances. The question structure of the SUS follows the format “How often do you use
[substance or class of substances]?” and includes the following substances: tobacco,
alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, designer drugs, prescription drugs, stimulants,
depressants, cocaine, and heroin. The participants respond on a 7-point Likert scale (0 -
6) from “never” to “several times daily.” A frequency analysis of the responses shows
that participants endorsed the full range of the Likert scale for alcohol, tobacco, and
marijuana and a restricted range of 0 - 5 for designer drugs, 0 - 4 for prescription drugs,
stimulants and depressants, and 0 - 3 for hallucinogens and heroin.
Principle components factor analysis of the SUS produced the scree plot depicted
in Figure 2. The results of the scree test (Cattell, 1978) for the SUS are equivocal for one
or two factors. In an attempt to find simple structure (Cattell, 1978; Kline, 1994) the
one- and two-factor solutions were compared. The two factors were rotated using the
Direct Oblimin method, which uses an oblique rotation that allows the resulting factors to
be correlated (Kline, 1994). The resulting two-factor rotation retained 7 of the 10 items
and accounted for 48% of the total variance. The a reliability for the two factors
combined was found to be .44.
The first factor in the two-factor solution includes 5 items assessing the use of
prescription drugs, stimulants, depressants, cocaine, and heroin. Factor loadings range
from .36 to .86 and include no loadings on Factor 2 > .16. This first factor clearly
represents illegal substances that might be called “hard” drugs. The a reliability for this

42
first factor was found to be .60. The second factor of the two-factor solution is made up
of the 2 items referring to alcohol and tobacco, with factor loadings of .53 and .82,
respectively. This second factor clearly represents legal substances. The a reliability for
this second factor was found to be .34. The items assessing use of marijuana,
hallucinogens, and designer drugs load >.32 on both factors suggesting that, at least for
this sample, marijuana, hallucinogens, and designer drugs do not fit neatly into either the
legal or illegal drug categories. The correlation between these two factors is .31 and
indicates that these factors, although distinct, are both assessing use of substances.
Factor Number
Figure 2 - Factor Scree Plot of the Substance Use Scale
The one-factor solution retains all 10 items with factor loadings ranging from .32
to .80. This factor accounts for 36% of the total scale variance. The a coefficient for the
10-item SUS was found to be .67, with corrected item to total correlations ranging from
.64 to .24. The tobacco item showed the weakest item to total correlations (.24) and if
dropped would increase the a coefficient for the scale to .70. Because the one factor
solution retains all items and is more reliable (a = .67) than the two factors individually

43
or combined, it is a better representation of simple structure and will be retained for use
in the main analyses.
The validity of the SUS is supported by its high correlation with the
Permissiveness Subscale from the Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale (r - .46) and with the
Attitudes Toward Substances Scale (r = .40). It also correlates with constructs associated
with drug use including age (r = -.13), gender (r = -.16; male = 0, female = 1), SES of
father (r = -.13), and Life Style and Risk from the Values Scale (r = .12 and .25,
respectively). Overall, the reliability and validity of the SUS is demonstrated. The
reliability for the scale is weaker than is ideal, but it is as reliable as would be
theoretically predicted. To boost reliability, substance users would have to use all 10
substances fairly equally, a pattern inconsistent with users who frequently identify a “drug
of choice.” These results justify the retention of the SUS as a measure of substance use
behavior. Individual items from the SUS will be used to measure the use of specific
substances or groups of substances as predicted by the hypotheses.
Sexual Experiences Survey
The Sexual Experiences Survey (SExS) was substantially modified from Koss and
Oros’s (1982) original design and purpose for the instrument. In particular, the original
instrument (Koss and Oros, 1982) was designed to measure males’ commission of
sexually coercive acts and females’ experiences as recipients of sexually coercive acts.
Koss and Oros (1982) also used a “yes/no” response format. The scale was modified to
measure commission of sexually coercive acts by both males and females. In addition,
the response format was changed to a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 0 = “never” to 6
= “often.” The SExS considers the possibility that force or the threat of force may have
been used in a situation, but for various reasons sexual intercourse did not occur. The
scale consists of 10 statements that include a progression of the type of coercion (i.e.,

44
from verbal coercion, to threats of violence, to the use of violence) and a progression on
the type of sexual acts (i.e., kissing and petting, to attempted intercourse, to oral or anal
intercourse). The SExS also includes three unscored items assessing consensual sexual
intercourse, having another person misinterpret the level of intimacy one desires, and
having been raped. Higher scores reflect a greater reported frequency of engaging in
sexually coercive behaviors.
A frequency analysis of the responses shows participants endorsing the full range
of the Likert scale for items assessing verbal coercion and a restricted range (0 - 4) for
some items assessing the use of force or the threat of force. On the three verbal coercion
items, 82 - 96% of the sample reported never engaging in the target behavior. On the six
items assessing the use of force or the threat of force, 94 - 98% of the sample reported
never engaging in the target behavior. On the final item assessing being “so aroused you
could not stop,” 82% of the sample reported never being in this situation.
Principle components factor analysis of the SExS produced the scree plot depicted
in Figure 3. The results of the scree test (Cattell, 1978) for the SExS indicate that one
factor should be retained. This factor includes all 10 items and accounts for 68% of the
total scale variance. Factor loadings range from .43 to .97. The a coefficient for the
scale was found to be .84 with corrected item to total correlations ranging from .44 to .83.
The items assessing being “so aroused you could not stop” and “saying things you didn’t
really mean” showed the weakest item to total correlations (.45 and .48 respectively) and
if these items had been dropped the a coefficient for the scale would increase.
The validity of the SExS is supported by its significant correlations with other
variables including the Rape Myth Scale (r = .50), Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale (r = .26),
gender (r = -.1607; male = 0, female = 1), the Permissiveness Subscale from the
Substance Abuse Attitudes Scale (r = .30), the Attitudes Toward Substances Scale (r =

45
.26), and the Substance Use Scale (r = .31). In addition, the SExS is negatively correlated
with many values including Altruism (r = -.30), Personal Development (r = -.36),
Orientation Toward Self-Actualization (r = -.38), and Social Orientation (r = -.25).
Factor analysis yielded one factor that accounts for 68% of the total variance. This is
highly consistent with the factor analysis by Koss and Oros (1982), which found one
factor that accounted for 67% of the variance. Koss and Oros (1982) also found that
between 2 - 6% of their university sample of men reported using some degree of physical
force or threats of physical force to coerce partners into sexual acts. In the current
sample, 5 - 14% of males reported using some degree of physical force or threats of
physical force to coerce partners into sexual acts (1.6% of the females reported using
some force to obtain kissing or petting). Overall, the validity of the SExS is clearly
demonstrated. The items for the scale are also very reliable. These results justify the
retention of the SExS as a measure of coercive sexual behavior.
Factor Number
Figure 3 - Factor Scree Plot of the Sexual Experiences Survey

46
Music Preference Questionnaire
The Music Preference Questionnaire (MPQ) was developed by the author and is
designed to measure participants’ global commitment to their preferred style of music.
Principle components factor analysis of the MPQ yielded the scree plot depicted in Figure
4. The results of the scree test (Cattell, 1978) for the MPQ indicate that either six or
possibly eleven factors should be retained. However, it is difficult to interpret six
different factors and nearly impossible to interpret eleven factors. In addition, the
purpose of this study is to determine how global commitment (rather than specific
commitment factors) interacts with music preference, values, attitudes, and behaviors.
Consequently, these individual factors are not specifically of interest in this study. In
fact, the MPQ was intended to assess global commitment by tapping a wide variety of
possible ways in which listeners commit to their music preference. The presence of a
large number of factors indicates that the instrument is functioning as expected.
Factor Number
Figure 4 - Factor Scree plot of the Music Preference Questionnaire

47
In order to obtain a measure of global commitment, the unrotated factor matrix
was used to select items that loaded > .30 on the first factor, which accounts for 13.9% of
the total MPQ variance. Thirty-one items loaded > .30 on the first factor. An coefficient
a was computed for these 31 items and yielded a value of .89. One item, which assessed
hours spent listing to non-favorite styles of music via CDs on weekdays, contributed
almost nothing to the reliability of the 31-item scale. Because of this negligible
contribution and the fact that the item did not relate to the listeners’ preferred style of
music, this item was dropped from the scale, resulting in a final total of 30 items with an
a coefficient of .89.
The final 30-item scale retained items from all domains of the MPQ, including
amount of listening, desire to listen more, context of listening, spending money on music
related activities, music preference influencing behavior and fantasizing about being and
meeting a famous musician. Three items also were included relating to consuming other
styles of music. The total score for these 30 items is labeled the Global Commitment
Index (GCI) and will be used as the measure of global commitment hypothesized to
interact with music preference to impact the dependent variables in this study. The 30
items from the MPQ included in the GCI are highlighted in bold in Appendix A.
Main Analyses
Values
Five hypotheses were made regarding the relationship between music preference,
global commitment, and five groups of values from the Values Scale (Super & Nevill,
1986). It was expected that significant differences in values would be found for the
different music preference groups and that these differences would be mediated by the
listeners’ global commitment to their preferred style of music. In particular, global
commitment and music preference were expected to interact such that as global

48
commitment increased, the value differences between the music preference groups would
also increase.
Hypothesis 1 predicted that on the Utilitarian Orientation factor of the Values
Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986), music preference (MP) and global commitment (GC) will
interact such that popular rock fans will score higher as their GC increases whereas
alternative fans will score lower on this factor as their GC increases. To test this
hypothesis, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with MP, the Global
Commitment Index (GCI), and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and Utilitarian
Orientation serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into
the model in the order listed. The results indicate that there is no significant interaction
effect for MP x GCI on the Utilitarian Orientation factor and that Hypothesis 1 was not
supported, F{3, 164) = 2.08, p < 0.16. However, a significant main effect for MP was
found, F(3, 164) = 6.40, p < 0.02. The means for the MP categories were 48.8 for
popular rock fans and 46.2 for college/altemative fans, indicating that popular rock fans
were more oriented to the utilitarian values of Economics, Advancement, Prestige,
Authority, and Achievement than were college/alternative fans.
Hypothesis 2 predicted that on the Orientation Toward Self-Actualization factor
of the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986), MP and GC will interact such that
college/alternative fans will score higher on this factor as their GC increases whereas
heavy metal rock fans will score lower on this factor as their GC increases. This
hypothesis could not be tested in the current analysis because heavy metal rock fans were
not sufficiently represented in the sample (i.e., only 1 out of 282 indicated a preference
for heavy metal rock). However, to examine the relationship between the Orientation
Toward Self-Actualization factor, MP, and GC, a hierarchical multiple regression was
computed with MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and

49
Orientation Toward Self-Actualization serving as the criterion variable. The predictor
variables were entered into the model in the order listed. The results indicate that there is
no significant interaction effect for MP x GCI on the Orientation Toward
Self-Actualization factor, F(3, 164) = 0.32, p < 0.58. The main effect for MP was also
nonsignificant, F(3, 164) = 1.44, p < 0.24.
Hypothesis 3 predicted that on the Individualistic Orientation factor of the Values
Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986), MP and GC will interact such that college/altentative fans
will score higher on this factor as their GC increases whereas popular rock fans will score
lower as their GC increases. To test this hypothesis, a hierarchical multiple regression
was computed with the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987), MP, the
GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and Individualistic Orientation serving
as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into the model in the order
listed. The SSS was included as a covariate because it is significantly related to both
Individualistic Orientation and MP and may be a confounding factor (see above). The
results indicate that Hypothesis 3 was not supported, F(3, 163) = 0.27, p < 0.61. The
main effect for MP was also nonsignificant, F(3, 163) = 0.05, p < 0.82.
Hypothesis 4 predicted that on the Social Orientation factor of the Values Scale
(Super & Nevill, 1986), MP and GC will interact such that popular rock fans will score
higher on this factor as their GC increases whereas heavy metal rock fans will score lower
as their GC increases. This hypothesis could not be tested in the current analysis because
heavy metal rock fans were not sufficiently represented in the sample (i.e., only 1 out of
282 indicated a preference for heavy metal rock). However, to examine the relationship
between the Social Orientation, MP, and GC, a hierarchical multiple regression was
computed with MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and Social
Orientation serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into

50
the model in the order listed. The results indicate that there is no significant interaction
effect for MP x GC on the Social Orientation factor, F{3, 163) = 0.01, p < 0.93. The
main effect for MP was also nonsignificant, F(3, 163) = 3.83, p < 0.06.
Hypothesis 5 predicted that on the Adventurous Orientation factor of the Values
Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986), MP and GC will interact such that heavy metal rock and
college/alternative fans will score higher on this factor as their GC increases whereas
popular rock fans will score lower as their GC increases. This hypothesis could not be
fully tested in the current analysis because heavy metal rock fans were not sufficiently
represented in the sample (i.e., only 1 out of 282 indicated a preference for heavy metal
rock). However, a partial test of the hypothesis concerning the relationship of popular
rock and college/alternative with the Adventurous Orientation factor was performed. To
provide a partial test of the hypothesis, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed
with the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et ah, 1987), MP, the GCI, and MP x
GCI serving as predictor variables and Adventurous Orientation serving as the criterion
variable. The predictor variables were entered into the model in the order listed. The
SSS was included as a covariate because it is significantly related to both the
Adventurous Orientation and MP and may be a confounding factor as indicated earlier.
The results indicate that Hypothesis 5 was not supported, F(4, 157) = 0.21, p < 0.66. The
main effect for MP was also nonsignificant, F(4, 157) = 1.04, p < 0.31.
In summary, it was hypothesized that when value differences occurred between
music preference groups, these differences would be mediated by global commitment
such that the music preference groups’ values would continue to diverge as their
commitment to their music preference increased. This interaction between music
preference and global commitment with groups of related values was not supported in
this study. However, significant differences in Utilitarian Orientation values were found

51
for popular rock and college/altemative fans. On the Utilitarian Orientation values,
popular rock fans scored significantly higher than college/alternative fans. These results
indicate that the differences between music preference groups are not just superficial
differences of music tastes or fashion aesthetics, but extend to the deeper levels of the
person, to the values that they hold.
Attitudes
Three hypotheses were made regarding the relationship between music preference,
global commitment and three attitude assessment instruments. It is believed that fans of
popular rock, for instance, will have significantly different attitudes toward women and
toward substances than fans of other music styles. It is further believed that as popular
rock fans become more committed to their preference for popular rock, their attitudes
toward women and toward substances will become increasingly divergent from fans of
other music styles.
Attitudes toward women
Hypothesis 6 predicted that on the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale (SRS; Burt,
1980), MP and GC will interact such that popular rock fans will score higher as their GC
increases whereas college/alternative fans will score lower as their GC increases. To test
this hypothesis, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with the Sensation
Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et ah, 1987), MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as
predictor variables and the SRS serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables
were entered into the model in the order listed. The SSS was included as a covariate
because it is significantly related to both the SRS and MP and may be a confounding
factor (see above). The results indicate that Hypothesis 6 was not supported, F(4, 157) =
0.00, p < 0.96. The main effect for MP was also nonsignificant, F(4, 157) = 2.73, p <
0.11.

52
These results are inconsistent with the findings of Kruse (1994), who found
significant differences on the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale for different music preference
categories. Considering that the above analysis approached statistical significance and
that Kruse (1994) did not include the SSS as a covariate, a separate one-way ANOVA
with MP as the IV and the SRS as the DV was also computed to allow a comparison
between this study and Kruse (1994). The result of this test was significant, F(l, 166) =
4.94, p < 0.03. The means for the MP categories were 25.9 for popular rock fans and
23.3 for college/alternative fans, indicating that popular rock fans were more sex-role
stereotyped than were college/alternative fans.
These results are confusing. MP differences on the SRS are nonsignificant when
the SSS is included in the model, but the relationships of MP with the SRS and MP with
the SSS are not symetrical. In particular, college/altemative fans score high on the SSS
and low on the SRS, but popular rock fans score low on the SSS and high on the SRS.
This pattern suggests a possible interaction effect. A separate multiple regression was
calculated using the SSS, MP, and MP x SSS as predictor variables and the SRS as the
criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into the model in the order listed.
The results indicate that only the main effect for the SSS is significant, F(3,158) = 11.72,
p < 0.01. MP was again nonsignificant when the SSS was entered first in the model
(F(3,158) = 2.80, p < 0.10) and the interaction was also nonsignificant (F(3,158) = 3.05,
p < 0.09). However, when the Type III Sums of Squares were used for the F tests, the
main effects for both the SSS (F(3,158) = 8.01, p < 0.01) and MP (F(3,158) = 4.83, p <
0.03) were significant. Type III Sums of Squares factors out the variance common to all
predictor variables so that each variable is tested as if it was entered into the regression
equation last. In other words, MP differences in Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale scores are

53
significant when the effects of the Sensation Seeking Scale and the interaction MP x SSS
are factored out.
Hypothesis 7 predicted that on the Rape Myth Scale (RMS; Lonsway &
Fitzgerald, 1995), MP and GC will interact such that heavy metal rock fans will score
higher as their GC increases whereas college/altemative fans score lower as their GC
increases. This hypothesis could not be tested in the current analysis because heavy metal
rock fans were not sufficiently represented in the sample (i.e., only 1 out of 282 indicated
a preference for heavy metal rock). However, to examine the relationship between the
RMS, MP, and GC, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with MP, the GCI,
and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and the RMS serving as the criterion
variable. The predictor variables were entered in the order listed. The results indicate
that there is no significant interaction effect for MP x GC on the RMS, F(3, 164) = 0.79,
p < 0.38. The main effect for MP with the RMS was also nonsignificant, F(3, 164) =
0.06, p < 0.81.
Attitudes toward substances
Hypothesis 8 has three parts: 1) permissive attitudes toward tobacco and alcohol
will be equal for all music preference groups; 2) preference for college/altemative and
heavy metal rock will be associated with more permissive attitudes toward illegal drug
use; and 3) college/altemative and heavy metal rock fans’ attitudes toward illegal drug
use will become more permissive as their GC increases. Attitudes Toward the use of
specific substances or groups of substances were measured by the Attitudes Toward
Substances Scale (ATS; constructed by the author). This hypothesis could not be tested
in the current analysis because heavy metal rock fans were not sufficiently represented in
the sample (i.e., only 1 out of 282 indicated a preference for heavy metal rock). However,
a partial test of Hypothesis 8 was possible concerning the relationship between the ATS,

54
preference for college/altemative music, and GC. A partial test of Hypothesis 8 requires
two separate analyses. The first analysis involved a hierarchical multiple regression with
MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and the sum of the two items
from the ATS assessing alcohol and tobacco serving as the criterion variable. The
predictor variables were entered in the order listed. The results indicate no MP
differences on the ATS items assessing alcohol and tobacco, F(3, 164) = 2.53, p < 0.12.
The interaction effect for MP x GCI was also nonsignificant, F(3, 164) = 0.45, p < 0.51.
These results are consistent with Part 1 of Hypothesis 8.
To provide a partial test of Parts 2 and 3, a hierarchical multiple regression was
computed with MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and the sum of
the eight items from the ATS assessing illegal substances serving as the criterion variable.
The predictor variables were entered in the order listed. The results indicate no MP
differences on the ATS items assessing illegal substances (F(3, 163) = 3.72, p < 0.06),
which fails to support Part 2 of Hypothesis 8. The interaction effect for MP x GCI was
also nonsignificant (F(3, 163) = 0.28, p < 0.60), again failing to support Part 3 of
Hypothesis 8. The relationship between MP, GC, and attitudes toward drugs anticipated
by Hypothesis 8 was not supported.
To explore further the relationship between permissive attitudes toward drug use,
MP, and GC, an hierarchical multiple regression was computed with the Sensation
Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987), MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as
predictor variables and the Permissiveness Subscale from the Substance Abuse Attitudes
Scale (SAA; Jenkins, Fisher, & Applegate, 1990) serving as the criterion variable. The
predictor variables were entered in the order listed. The SSS was included as a covariate
because it is significantly related to both the SAA and MP and may be a confounding
factor (see above). The results indicate no main effect for MP differences on the SAA

55
(F(4, 157) = 1.99, p < 0.17) and no interaction effect for MP x GCI on the SAA (F(4,
157) = 0.39, p< 0.54).
No significant differences were found for music preference groups on any of the
attitude measures used in this study. All tests for an interaction between music preference
and global commitment on the attitude measures were also nonsignificant. These results
indicate very clearly that attitudes toward women and permissive attitudes toward
substances are unrelated to music preference and the listener’s global commitment to that
music style.
Behaviors
The third area in which a relationship with music preference and global
commitment was predicted is behaviors, specifically sexually coercive and substance use
behaviors. Again it was hypothesized that there would be music preference differences in
reported sexually coercive acts and the use of substances. Global commitment was
expected to interact with music preference such that one music preference group would
report higher frequencies of the target behaviors as their global commitment increased
whereas another group would report lower frequencies of the target behaviors as their
global commitment increased.
Sexual coercion
Hypothesis 9 states that MP and GC will interact such that heavy metal rock fans
will score higher on the Sexual Experiences Survey (SExS; Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1995)
as their GC increases whereas college/altemative fans will score lower on the SExS as
their GC increases. This hypothesis could not be tested in the current analysis because
heavy metal rock fans were not sufficiently represented in the sample (i.e., only 1 out of
282 indicated a preference for heavy metal rock). However, to examine the relationship
between the SExS, MP, and GC, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with

56
MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and the SExS serving as the
criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered in the order listed. The results
indicate that there is no significant interaction effect for MP x GC on the SExS, F(3, 161)
= 0.52, p < 0.48. The main effect for MP was also nonsignificant, F(3, 161) = 2.61, p <
0.11.
Substance use
Hypothesis 10 has three parts: 1) the use of tobacco and alcohol will be equal for
all music preference groups; 2) preference for college/altemative and heavy metal rock
will be associated with higher usage of illegal drugs; and 3) college/altemative and heavy
metal rock fans’ use of illegal drugs will increase as their GC increases. The use of
specific substances or groups of substances was measured by the Substance Use Scale
(SUS; constructed by the author). This hypothesis could not be tested in the current
analysis because heavy metal rock fans were not sufficiently represented in the sample
(i.e., only 1 out of 282 indicated a preference for heavy metal rock). However, a partial
test of Hypothesis 10 was possible concerning the relationship between the SUS,
preference for college/altemative, and GC. A partial test of Hypothesis 10 requires two
separate analyses. The first analysis involved a hierarchical multiple regression with the
Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et ah, 1987), MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI
serving as predictor variables and the sum of the two items from the SUS assessing
alcohol and tobacco serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were
entered in the order listed. The SSS was included as a covariate because it is significantly
related to both MP and the sum of the two items from the SUS assessing alcohol and
tobacco and therefore may be a confounding factor (see above). The results indicate
significant MP differences on the SUS items assessing alcohol and tobacco, F(4, 157) =
6.56, p < 0.02. The means for the MP categories were 3.5 for college/altemative fans and

57
2.6 for popular rock fans, indicating that college/alternative fans report more frequent use
of alcohol and tobacco than do popular rock fans. The interaction effect for MP x GCI
was nonsignificant, F(4, 157) = 2.78, p < 0.10. These results are inconsistent with Part 1
of Hypothesis 10.
To provide a partial test of Parts 2 and 3, a hierarchical multiple regression was
computed with the SSS, MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and
the sum of the eight items from the SUS assessing illegal substances serving as the
criterion variable. The predictor variables were entered into the model in the order listed.
The SSS was included as a covariate because it is significantly related to both MP and the
sum of the eight items from the SUS assessing illegal drugs and may therefore be a
confounding factor (see above). The results indicate significant MP differences on the
SUS items assessing illegal substances (F(4, 157) = 5.77, p < 0.02), which supports Part 2
of Hypothesis 10. The means for the MP categories were 2.4 for college/alternative fans
and 1.2 for popular rock fans, indicating that college/altemative fans report more frequent
use of illegal drugs than do popular rock fans. The interaction effect for MP x GCI was
nonsignificant (F(4, 157) = 0.04, p < 0.85), failing to support Part 3 of Hypothesis 10.
The relationship between MP, GC, and attitudes toward drugs anticipated by Hypothesis
10 was not supported.
These above results regarding the relationship between sexually coercive and
substance use behaviors with music preference and global commitment offer limited
support for one of the two general hypotheses of this study. Hypothesis A states that
music preference will be significantly associated with values, attitudes, and behaviors.
Hypothesis B states that music preference and global commitment to that music
preference will interact such that differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors between
music preference groups will only be statistically significant when commitment is high.

58
Support for Hypothesis A was also found in the significant results regarding the
relationship between values, music preference, and global commitment.
The main analyses of this study identified several differences between popular
rock and college/alternative fans. Significant differences were found between popular
rock fans and college/altemative on values (Utilitarian Orientation), and on behaviors (the
use of alcohol, tobacco, and a variety of illegal substances). In particular, popular rock
fans place more emphasis on the Utilitarian Orientation than their college/alternative
counterparts. In addition, college/altemative fans reported more frequent use of alcohol,
tobacco, and a variety of illegal substances than their popular rock counterparts. These
results provide solid support for Hypothesis A concerning values and behaviors, but not
attitudes.
No support for Hypothesis B was found. Although several interaction effects
approached statistical significance, none reach the criterion of p < .05. However, several
ancillary analyses, which follow, provide additional support for Hypotheses A and B and
strengthen the conclusion that music preference and global commitment are related to
values, attitudes, and behaviors.
Ancillary Analyses
Because the main analyses focused primarily on grouped or summed dependent
variables, it is possible that grouping individual scales (i.e., individual values from the
Values Scale, Super & Nevill, 1986) or items (i.e., individual items from the Attitudes
Toward Substances Scale and Substance Use Scale) left significant differences in the
components of these variables obscured or overlooked. To determine whether this
occurred, a series of ancillary analyses was computed on the 20 individual values from
the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986), on the ten individual items from the Attitudes
Toward Substances Scale, and the ten individual items from the Substance Use Scale.

59
These analyses were expected to provide more specific information regarding the
relationship between music preference, global commitment, values, attitudes, and
behaviors will be revealed.
Individual Values
The Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986) was used to assess the following values:
Ability Utilization, Achievement, Advancement, Aesthetics, Altruism, Authority,
Autonomy, Creativity, Cultural Identity, Economics, Life Style, Personal Development,
Physical Activity, Physical Prowess, Prestige, Risk, Social Interaction, Social Relations,
Variety, and Working Conditions. For the main analyses, these 20 values were grouped
into five factors identified by Sverko (1995) and significant differences were found
between popular rock fans and college/altemative fans on the Utilitarian Orientation and
Social Orientation factors. To provide a more detailed analysis of the value differences
between popular rock and college/alternative fans, each of the 20 values assessed by the
Values Scale was subjected to the same analysis as the five factors. In particular, a
hierarchical multiple regression analysis was computed for each of the 20 values for a
total of 20 analyses.
Before running these analyses, Pearson R correlations were computed to
determine which values were significantly correlated with the Sensation Seeking Scale
(SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987), a potential confound controlled for in the main analyses.
The results of this analysis found five values significantly correlated with the SSS:
Ability Utilization, Cultural Identity, Physical Activity, Physical Prowess, and Risk. All
analyses involving these five values included the SSS as a covariate, which was entered
first into the hierarchical multiple regression models.
Each analysis used a hierarchical multiple regression with MP, the Global
Commitment Index (GCI), and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and the

60
individual values scales serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were
entered in the order listed. The analyses involving Ability Utilization, Cultural Identity,
Physical Activity, Physical Prowess, and Risk included the SSS as a predictor variable,
which was entered first in the model. The results of these 20 analyses indicate significant
main effects of MP for Ability Utilization (F(4, 157) = 6.72, p < 0.02), Achievement
(F(3, 164) = 4.59, p < 0.04), Cultural Identity (F(4, 156) = 6.44, p < 0.02), Economics
(F(3, 164) = 6.60, p < 0.02), Social Interaction (F(3, 164) = 5.38, p < 0.03), and Social
Relations (F(3, 164) = 10.32, p < 0.01). For all values on which significant differences
were found between popular rock and college/altemative fans, popular rock fans reported
placing greater importance on that value than their college/altemative counterparts. Table
3 shows the mean value score for popular rock and college/alternative fans for the six
values on which significant differences were found. No other main effects for MP were
significant at the p < .05 level.
Table 3 - Mean value scores for popular rock and college/altemative music fans.
Value
Popular Rock
College/Alternative
Ability Utilization
10.9
10.5
Achievement
10.9
10.5
Cultural Identity
9.3
8.1
Economics
10.6
10.0
Social Interaction
9.1
8.4
Social Relations
11.1
10.4
One significant interaction effect for MP x GCI was found for the value of
Prestige (F(4, 157) = 8.44, p < 0.01). Figure 5 depicts the interaction effect between
Prestige, MP and the GCI. As Figure 5 shows, popular rock fans place increasingly more
importance on Prestige as their GCI scores increase whereas college/altemative fans’

61
valuing of Prestige remains consistent or increases only slightly as their GCI scores
increase.
Figure 5 - Interaction effect between Music Preference and the Global Commitment
Index on the value of Prestige
In summary, value differences were found between popular rock and
college/altemative fans for the values of Ability Utilization, Achievement, Cultural
Identity, Economics, Prestige, Social Interaction, and Social Relations. On all these
values, popular rock fans scored higher than college/altemative fans. This pattern is
consistent with the findings on the Values Scale (Super & Nevill, 1986) factors Utilitarian
Orientation and Social Orientation where popular rock fans also scored higher than their
college/alternative counterparts. This is to be expected as Economics, Advancement,
Prestige, Authority, and Achievement make up the Utilitarian Orientation factor and
Social Interaction, and Social Relations make up the Social Orientation factor. However,
the differences found for Ability Utilization, which was one of six values included in the

62
Orientation Toward Self-Actualization factor, and Cultural Identity, which was not
included in any of the five factors identified by Sverko (1995), make an additional
contribution to our understanding of the relationship between MP and values beyond the
main analyses. They provide further evidence of significant differences between popular
rock and college/alternative fans at the very deep level of the values they hold.
In addition, an interaction effect was found for MP x GCI on the value of Prestige,
which provides some evidence that a relationship between global commitment, MP and
values exist. In particular, college/altemative fans valuing of Prestige remains fairly
constant whereas popular rock fans show a sharp increase in the importance they place on
Prestige as their GCI scores increase. One implication of these results is that to
understand how MP groups differ in their values, it is important to understand their level
of commitment to their preferred style of music.
Attitudes Toward Substances
The Attitudes Toward Substances (ATS) was used to assess attitudes toward the
following substances: tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, designer drugs,
prescription drugs, stimulants, depressants, cocaine, and heroin. For the main analyses,
attitudes toward these 10 substances were divided into legal and illegal drugs. No
significant differences were found between popular rock fans and college/alternative fans
in their attitudes toward either legal or illegal drugs. To provide a more detailed analysis
of possible attitude differences between popular rock and college/altemative fans toward
the 10 substances assessed by the ATS, each of the 10 items from the ATS was subjected
to the same analysis as the legal and illegal drug groupings in the main analyses. In
addition, individual items were regrouped to assess attitudes toward psychedelic drugs
(i.e., marijuana, hallucinogens, designer drugs), “hard” drugs (i.e., prescription drugs,
stimulants, depressants, cocaine, and heroin) and all substances (i.e., the sum of all 10

63
items). A hierarchical multiple regression analysis was computed for each of the 10 items
and the three additional groupings, for a total of 13 analyses.
Before running these analyses, Pearson R correlations were computed to
determine which items or item groupings were significantly correlated with the Sensation
Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987), a potential confound controlled for in the
main analyses. The results of this analysis found significant correlations between the SSS
and attitudes toward designer drugs, stimulants, and psychedelic drugs. All analyses
involving these three scores included the SSS as a covariate, which was entered first into
the hierarchical multiple regression models.
Each analysis used a hierarchical multiple regression with MP, the Global
Commitment Index (GCI), and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and each of the
10 individual items from the ATS plus the psychedelic drug, hard drug, and all drug
groupings individually serving as the criterion variable in separate analyses. The
predictor variables were entered in the order listed. All analyses involving attitudes
toward designer drugs, stimulants, and psychedelic drugs included the SSS as a predictor
variable, which was entered in the model first. The results of these 13 analyses indicate
significant main effects of MP for attitudes toward marijuana (F(3, 164) = 7.29, p < 0.01)
and attitudes toward all drugs (F(3, 163) = 4.19, p < 0.05). For all substances for which
significant attitude differences were found between popular rock and college/altemative
fans, college/altemative fans reported more permissive attitudes toward these substances
than their popular rock counterparts. Table 4 shows the mean score for popular rock and
college/alternative fans for the three substances or groups of substances on which
significant differences were found. No other main effects for MP were significant at the p
< .05 level.

64
Table 4 - Mean Attitudes Toward Substances scores for popular rock and
college/alternative music fans.
Substance Popular Rock College/Alternative
Marijuana 0.8 1.3
All Substances 5.1 7.9
The results of these ancillary analyses provide some evidence of a relationship
between music preference and attitudes toward substances. In particular,
college/alternative fans report more permissive attitudes toward all substances in general
and marijuana in particular than do their popular rock counterparts. These results provide
some evidence that MP groups hold significantly different attitudes, supporting
Hypothesis A. However, the absence of significant interaction effects between MP x GCI
with attitudes toward substances suggests that global commitment is not relevant to
understanding the relationship between music preference and attitudes toward substances.
Substance Use
The Substance Use Scale (SUS) was used to assess frequency of use of the
following substances: tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, designer drugs,
prescription drugs, stimulants, depressants, cocaine, and heroin. For the main analyses,
these 10 substances were divided into legal and illegal drugs. Significant differences
were found between popular rock fans and college/alternative fans in their use of both
legal or illegal drugs when one or more of the GC factors were included in the analysis.
To provide a more detailed analysis of possible differences between popular rock and
college/alternative fans use of the 10 substances assessed by the SUS, each of the 10
items from the SUS was subjected to the same analysis as the legal and illegal drug
groupings in the main analyses. In addition, individual items were regrouped to assess
use of psychedelic drugs (i.e., marijuana, hallucinogens, designer drugs), “hard” drugs

65
(i.e., prescription drugs, stimulants, depressants, cocaine, and heroin) and all substances
(i.e., the sum of all 10 items). A hierarchical multiple regression analysis was computed
for each of the 10 items and the three additional groupings, for a total of 13 analyses.
Before running these analyses, Pearson R correlations were computed to
determine which items or item groupings were significantly correlated with the Sensation
Seeking Scale (SSS; Madsen, et al., 1987), a potential confound controlled for in the
main analyses. The results of this analysis found significant correlations between the SSS
and the use of alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, psychedelic drugs, and all drugs. All
analyses involving these five scores included the SSS as a covariate, which was entered
first into the hierarchical multiple regression models.
Each analysis used a hierarchical multiple regression with MP, the Global
Commitment Index (GCI), and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables and each of the
10 individual items from the SUS plus the psychedelic drug, hard drug, and all drug
groupings individually serving as the criterion variable in separate analyses. The
predictor variables were entered in the order listed. All analyses involving the use of
alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, psychedelic drugs, and all drugs included the SSS as a
predictor variable, which was entered first in the model. The results of these 13 analyses
indicate significant main effects of MP for use of tobacco (F(3, 164) = 4.58, p < 0.04),
marijuana (F(4, 157) = 8.10, p < 0.01), hallucinogens (F(4, 157) = 6.32, p < 0.02),
psychedelic drugs (F(4, 157) = 9.38, p < 0.01), and all drugs (F(4, 157) = 10.58, p <
0.01). Significant interaction effects for MP x GCI were found for the use of alcohol and
heroin.
For all substances for which significant differences in usage frequency were found
between popular rock and college/altemative fans, college/alternative fans reported more
frequent use of these substances than their popular rock counterparts. Table 5 shows the

66
mean frequency of use for popular rock and college/altemative fans for the five
substances or groups of substances on which significant differences were found. No
other main effects for MP were significant at the p < .05 level.
Table 5 - Mean substance use scores for popular rock and college/alternative music fans.
Substance
Popular Rock
College/Alternative
Tobacco
0.7
1.2
Marijuana
0.5
1.1
Hallucinogens
0.1
0.3
Psychedelics
0.6
1.6
All Substances
3.8
5.9
Two significant interaction effects for MP x GCI were found for the use of
alcohol (F(4, 157) = 8.44, p < 0.01) and for the use of heroin (F(4, 157) = 8.44, p < 0.01).
Figure 6 depicts the interaction effect between use of alcohol, MP and the GCI. As
Figure 6 shows, popular rock fans’ use of alcohol is dramatically more frequent as their
GCI scores increase, whereas college/altemative fans’ alcohol use is more consistent and
increases less dramatically as their GCI scores increase. Figure 7 depicts the interaction
effect between use of heroin, MP and the GCI. As Figure 7 shows, popular rock fans’ use
of heroin is increasingly more frequent as their GCI scores increase whereas
college/altemative fans’ heroin use is consistently near zero as their GCI scores increase.
It should be noted that this relationship is based on only 4 of 168 subjects marking 1 on a
scale of 0 - 6 (0 = “never” and 6 = “several times daily”). This indicates that popular
rock fans are more likely to have tried heroin as their GCI scores increase, whereas
college/altemative fans are less likely to have tried heroin as their GCI scores increase.
However, because of the number of participants reporting any heroin use, this relationship
is likely to be unreliable.

67
Figure 6 - Interaction effect between Music Preference and the Global Commitment
Index on the Use of Alcohol
Figure 7 - Interaction effect between Music Preference and the Global Commitment
Index on the Use of Heroin

68
In summary, differences were found between popular rock and college/alternative
fans in their use of tobacco, marijuana, hallucinogens, psychedelic drugs, and all
substances combined. For all these substances, college/alternative fans reported higher
frequencies of drug use than popular rock fans. This pattern is consistent with the
findings on the use of alcohol and tobacco and the use of illegal substances where
college/alternative fans also scored higher than their popular rock counterparts. The
results of these ancillary analyses provide further confirmation of a relationship between
substance use and music preference.
In addition, interaction effects for MP x GCI were also found for the use of
alcohol and heroin. These interaction effects add a great deal to our understanding of the
relationship between commitment to music, MP and substance use. The interaction
involving alcohol shows popular rock fans reporting sharp increases in the use of alcohol
as their Global Commitment Index scores increase. Popular rock fans appear to begin
with near zero alcohol use at low levels of commitment and develop into chronic daily
use of alcohol at high levels of commitment. College/alternative fans on the other hand
report more consistent use of alcohol beginning at higher levels of use than popular rock
fans at low commitment levels with only minimal increase in frequency at higher levels
of commitment, at which time their reported use is dramatically lower than popular rock
fans at the same commitment level. The interaction involving heroin is similar. In this
case, popular rock fans are more likely to have tried heroin as their GCI scores increase,
whereas college/altemative fans are less likely to have tried heroin as their GCI scores
increase. One clear implication of these results is that to understand how MP groups
differ in their substance use, it is important to understand their level of commitment to
their preferred style of music.

69
Consensual Sex
The Sexual Experiences Survey (SExS; Koss & Oros, 1982), included one item
assessing the frequency of engaging in consensual sexual intercourse. This question was
not included in the score of the SExS because it does not relate to coercive sexual
behaviors. However, the frequency with which adolescents engage in consensual sexual
intercourse is relevant to understanding the lives of adolescents. It is also possible that
consensual sex is related to MP and the Global Commitment Index (GC). To examine
the relationship between the consensual sex, MP, and GC, a hierarchical multiple
regression was computed with MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI serving as predictor variables
and the consensual sex serving as the criterion variable. The predictor variables were
entered into the model in the order listed. The results indicate that there is no significant
interaction effect for MP x GCI on consensual sex (F(3, 162) = 1.49, p < 0.23) or for the
main effect of MP (F(3, 162)= 1.86, p < 0.18).
Sensation Seeking
The Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS, Zuckerman, 1978) has been used as a
covariate in many analyses in this study because it has been associated with music
preference (MP) and with other high-risk/reckless behaviors including drug use,
promiscuous sex, unprotected sex, driving while intoxicated, shoplifting, and vandalism
(Arnett, 1992; 1991). This study has also found that the SSS correlates with MP, drug
use, drug attitudes, attitudes toward women, sexual behaviors and also with specific
values. Because the SSS is correlated with MP, it is also possible that there is an
interaction for MP x the GCI. To examine the relationship between the SSS, MP, and
GC, a hierarchical multiple regression was computed with MP, the GCI, and MP x GCI
serving as predictor variables and the SSS serving as the criterion variable. The predictor
variables were entered into the model in the order listed. The results indicate that there is

70
no significant interaction effect for MP x GCI on the SSS, F(3, 158) = 0.30, p < 0.59.
However, a significant main effect for MP was found, F(3, 158) = 12.59, p < 0.01. The
means for the MP categories were 5.7 for college/altemative fans and 4.7 for popular rock
fans, indicating that college/altemative fans were higher in sensation seeking than were
popular rock fans.
Global Commitment
The general hypotheses of this study focus on music preference differences in
values, attitudes, and behaviors and on an interaction between music preference and the
Global Commitment Index. The Global Commitment Index has been found to interact
with music preference for only three of the dependent variables used in this study: the
value of Prestige, use of alcohol, and use of heroin. These results suggest that global
commitment plays a very limited role in music preference and its relationship to values,
attitudes, and behaviors, but the above analyses only consider global commitment’s
possible interaction with music preference and not main effects for global commitment
alone, as main effects for global commitment did not relate to the hypotheses. A one-way
ANOVA with the Global Commitment Index as the independent variable and music
preference as the dependent variable confirmed significant differences in global
commitment between popular rock and college/altemative fans (F(l, 166) = 21.53, p <
0.00). The group means were 48.3 for college/altemative fans and 36.7 for popular rock
fans with college/altemative fans reporting greater global commitment than their popular
rock counterparts.
These differences indicate that global commitment is relevant to music preference
and may be relevant to values, attitudes, and behaviors separate from the interaction with
music preference. To determine if global commitment makes a significant independent
contribution to the prediction of the dependent variables in this study (i.e., values,

71
attitudes toward women, attitudes toward substances, sexually coercive behavior, and
substance use), all the main analyses and ancillary analyses were recalculated using the
Type III Sums of Squares for all F tests. Type III Sums of Squares factor out the variance
common to all predictor variables so that each predictor variable is tested as if it was
entered into the regression equation last. In other words, using Type III Sums of Squares
tests whether music preference (MP) is a significant predictor of the criterion variable
independent of the Global Commitment Index (GCI) score and the interaction between
MP and the GCI and whether the GCI is a significant predictor of the criterion variable
independent of MP and the interaction between MP and the GCI. This analysis allows
the independent contribution of both MP and the GCI to be evaluated and also allows for
a comparison between the separate contribution of MP and the GCI to the prediction of
the criterion variables. The statistically significant results of these analyses are reported
in Tables 6 and 7.
Table 6 - Significant main effects of Music Preference independent of the Global
Commitment Index and the interaction between Music Preference and the Global
Commitment Index
Variable
DF
F Value
p Value
Attitudes Toward Substances Scale
Attitudes Toward Marijuana
3, 164
4.24
<0.05
Substance Use Scale
Use of Alcohol3
4, 157
6.32
<0.02
Use of Alcohol and Tobacco3
4, 157
4.55
<0.04
a The Sensation Seeking Scale was included
in the model for this analysis.

72
Table 7 - Significant main effects of the Global Commitment Index independent of Music
Preference and the interaction between Music Preference and the Global Commitment
Index
Variable
DF
F Value
p Value
Values
Advancement
3, 164
5.90
<0.02
Prestige
3, 164
11.69
<0.01
Working Conditions
3, 163
4.26
<0.05
Cultural Identity3
4, 157
6.26
<0.02
Utilitarian Orientation Factor
3, 164
4.98
<0.03
Attitudes Toward Substances Scale
Attitudes Toward Marijuana
3, 164
4.16
<0.05
Substance Use Scale
Use of Alcohola
4, 157
19.50
<0.01
Use of Marijuana3
4, 157
5.50
<0.03
Use of Hallucinogensa
4, 157
3.96
<0.05
Use of Prescription Drugs
3, 164
13.02
<0.01
Use of Depressants
3, 164
7.11
<0.01
Use of Heroin
3, 164
4.82
<0.03
Use of Alcohol and Tobacco3
4, 157
12.25
<0.01
Use of Psychedelic Drugsa
4, 157
5.70
<0.02
Use of Hard Drugs
3, 164
11.85
<0.01
Use of Illegal Drugs3
4, 157
11.01
<0.01
Use of All Drugs3
4, 157
20.00
<0.01
3 The Sensation Seeking Scale was included
in the model for this analysis.
The results of these analyses indicate that music preference is significant
independent of the Global Commitment Index and the interaction (MP x GCI) for only
three dependent variables: permissive attitudes toward marijuana, use of alcohol and
tobacco combined, and use of psychedelic drugs (see Table 6). By comparison the Global
Commitment Index is significant independent of music preference and the interaction
(MP x GCI) for no less than 15 dependent variables: permissive attitudes toward
marijuana, use of marijuana, hallucinogens, prescription drugs, depressants, heroin,

73
alcohol and tobacco combined, psychedelic drugs, hard drugs, illegal drugs, all drugs, the
values of Advancement, Working Conditions, Cultural Identity, and the Utilitarian
Orientation factor (see Table 7). Based on the number of significant relationships, global
commitment seems to be a more important predictor variable than music preference.
For all 17 variables, the relationship between the Global Commitment Index and
the dependent variables is in the positive direction such that higher scores on the Global
Commitment Index are associated with higher scores on all the dependent variables.
These results indicate that global commitment is extremely important for understanding
and predicting differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors. These results also provide
further confirmation of the importance of music preference for understanding and
predicting differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors, but suggest that global
commitment may be even more important.

CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
Christenson and Roberts (1990) hypothesized that music can act as a source of
information, values, and behaviors for those listeners whose music preference is more
than just a “taste.” Music is not expected to act as a primary source of information,
values, and behaviors for all adolescents, but when an adolescent is deeply committed to
a particular style of music he or she is more likely to internalize the values, attitudes, and
behaviors found within that music subculture. This relationship was expressed in two
general hypotheses that were tested in this study. Hypothesis A states that music
preference will be significantly associated with values, attitudes, and behaviors.
Hypothesis B states that music preference and global commitment to that music
preference will interact such that differences in values, attitudes, and behaviors between
music preference groups will only be statistically significant when commitment is high.
Support for Hypothesis A was found in the areas of values, attitudes, and behaviors.
Support for Hypothesis B was found only for values and behaviors.
Values
Support for Hypothesis A was quite strong in the area of values. Significant value
differences were found between popular rock and college/altemative fans for the
individual values of Ability Utilization, Cultural Identity, Social Interaction, and Social
Relations, and for the Utilitarian Orientation factor, which includes Economics,
Advancement, Prestige, Authority, and Achievement. Popular rock fans placed
significantly more importance on all the above values than did their college/alternative
counterparts. The Utilitarian Orientation values represent the traditional values most
74

75
associated with business and industry. This suggests that popular rock fans may be more
likely to enter traditional occupations (e.g., business, law, medicine, etc.) which typically
offer the greatest possibility of satisfying the values of Economics, Advancement,
Prestige, Authority, and Achievement. This relationship is to be expected as the
Utilitarian Orientation values are generally important to mainstream Americans (Sverko,
1995) and popular rock is the music of mainstream America. The values of Social
Interaction and Social Relations represent a desire to be around and in relationship with
other people. The fact the popular rock fans place more emphasis on these values than
college/alternative fans suggests that popular rock fans are likely to be more extroverted,
another trait highly valued in American society. Ability Utilization can be characterized
as the “be all you can be” value and represents making use of one’s abilities. Cultural
Identity involves being accepted and given equal opportunity based on one’s racial or
ethnic identity. One factor that seems to connect these values is that they are mainstream
values. It is therefore consistent that popular rock fans place more importance on these
values because, again, popular rock is the music of mainstream America.
Another interpretation is that popular rock fans generally place more importance
on values than their college/altemative counterparts. That popular rock fans scored
higher on the nine values above lends some support to this position. In addition, a review
of the music preference group means for the 20 values measured by the Values Scale
(Super & Nevill, 1986) reveals that although the differences were not always statistically
significant, popular rock fans scored higher on 15 of the 20 values (see Table 8). Only on
the value of Risk did college/ alternative fans score significantly higher than popular rock
fans (Note: This difference was not statistically significant when the Sensation Seeking
Scale was included in the model).

76
Table 8 - Mean Value Scale scores for popular rock and college/altemative music
preference groups
Value
Popular
Rock
College/
Alternative
p Value
Ability Utilization
10.9
10.5
<0.05
Achievement
10.9
10.5
<0.03
Advancement
9.9
9.4
<0.09
Aesthetic
9.6
9.6
<0.98
Altruism
10.2
10.1
<0.65
Authority
7.6
7.0
<0.07
Autonomy
9.9
10.0
<0.77
Creativity
8.4
8.5
<0.73
Cultural Identity
9.3
8.1
<0.01
Economics
10.6
10.0
<0.01
Life Style
10.0
9.8
<0.54
Personal Development
11.4
11.3
<0.45
Physical Activity
8.3
8.2
<0.58
Physical Prowess
5.9
6.0
<0.80
Prestige
9.8
9.3
<0.08
Risk
5.3
6.1
<0.02
Social Interaction
9.1
8.4
<0.02
Social Relatations
11.1
10.4
<0.01
Variety
8.1
7.9
<0.51
Working Conditions
9.6
9.3
<0.40
NOTE: p values based on independent samples r-tests.
The fact that popular rock fans place more importance on values generally
suggests that popular rock fans may be more engaged in life, more enthusiastic about
their values, and possibly more aware of their own values than college/altemative fans.
On the other hand, college/altemative fans may be more detached, disinterested, and
disaffected, a description that fits well with the angst and hopelessness descriptive of the
college/alternative subculture. These results may provide objective confirmation of the
“slacker” theme associated with the college/altemative subculture and “Generation X,”

77
wherein college/altemative fans may be pessimistic, cynical, and disenchanted with
mainstream society and the values it upholds. They may be skeptical whether or not
success is attainable and that even if attained, the utilitarian rewards of economics,
prestige, advancement, authority, and achievement are worthy of pursuit. In contrast,
popular rock fans may remain dedicated to pursuing these values and continue to find
them valuable.
Music preference and global commitment to one’s preferred style of music were
found to interact with the value of Prestige, which provides some evidence that a
relationship between global commitment, music preference and values exists. In
particular, college/altemative fans’ valuing of Prestige remains fairly constant whereas
popular rock fans show a sharp increase in the importance they place on Prestige as their
Global Commitment Index scores increase. One implication of these results is that to
understand how music preference groups differ in their valuing of Prestige, it is important
to understand their level of commitment to their preferred style of music.
Overall, the data available involving values provides strong evidence that popular
rock fans are substantively different from college/altemative fans in the values they hold.
The value differences are in the expected directions with popular rock fans valuing
mainstream values more than their college/alternative counterparts. The data also provide
limited evidence that popular rock and college/altemative fans’ values differ based on
their global commitment to their preferred style of music.

78
Attitudes
Attitudes Toward Women
Support for Hypothesis A in the area of attitudes was weak, at best. Regarding
attitudes toward women, no significant differences were found between popular rock and
college/altemative fans for either sex-role stereotyping or rape myth acceptance. These
results are surprising given that significant differences were found between popular rock
and college/altemative fans on the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale by Kruse (1994). The
current study was unable to replicate the findings of Kruse (1994). However, the
Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS) was included in the present analysis and was not included
by Kruse (1994). When the SSS is removed from the model in the current analysis,
significant group differences were found with popular rock fans scoring 25.7 on average
and college/alternative fans scoring 23.3 on average on the Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale
where higher numbers reflected greater sex-role stereotyping. These differences were
consistent with Kruse (1994), who found popular rock fans scoring 32.0 on average and
college/alternative fans scoring 29.9 on average. These results show a consistent pattern
of popular rock fans being more sex-role stereotyped than college/altemative fans.
However, it also should be noted that these differences become statistically insignificant
when the sensation seeking differences are removed.
It appears that music preference does not contribute to predicting sex-role
stereotyping beyond the sensation seeking differences of music preference groups, but the
relationship between music preference, sex-role stereotyping, and sensation seeking is
complex. Popular rock fans score high on sex-role stereotyping but low on sensation
seeking. On the other hand, college/alternative fans score low on sex-role stereotyping
and high on sensation seeking. The implied interaction between these variables was not
statistically significant. However, differences in sex-role stereotyping between popular

79
rock and college/altemative fans are statistically significant after the influence of
sensation seeking and the interaction between music preference and sensation seeking are
removed. This finding suggests that music preference does make a significant
contribution toward the prediction of sex-role stereotyping.
Attitudes Toward Substances
Hypothesis A received only minimal support from the results relating to attitudes
toward substances. College/alternative fans were found to be more permissive in their
attitudes to all substances generally and to marijuana in particular than their popular rock
counterparts. It is interesting to note that marijuana was the only individual drug to
evidence significant attitude differences between popular rock and college/alternative
fans whereas significant differences in frequency of use were found for tobacco,
marijuana, hallucinogens and designer drugs. When summed across 10 different
substances, college/altemative fans have more permissive attitudes toward substances
generally, but for any specific substance, only their attitudes toward marijuana are more
permissive. This result may indicate that marijuana holds a privileged place in
college/altemative subculture and that they support legalizing this drug in particular but
not necessarily any other drugs.
Overall, support for Hypotheses A and B in the area of attitudes toward women
and attitudes toward substances was weak at best for Hypotheses A and completely
absent for Hypotheses B. The fact that significant differences were found for substance
use behaviors but not for the attitudes themselves is puzzling. One explanation for the
lack of attitudinal differences between music preference groups found on the attitudes
toward substances instruments may be a result of popular rock fans adopting pluralistic
attitudes consistent with the American values of personal freedom and choice. Popular
rock fans may be saying in effect, “I don’t use drugs myself, but others should have the

80
right to use them if they see fit.” This explanation finds some support in the fact that
popular rock fans valued Autonomy more than their college/alternative counterparts, a
value that taps the desire to decide and act as one sees fit. However, additional research
is necessary to determine if this explanation is accurate or to identify other explanations
for the inconsistencies between attitudes and behaviors.
Behaviors
Sexual Behaviors
No differences were found between popular rock and college/altemative fans with
either their consensual or coercive sexual behavior. The nonsignificant findings for
sexually coercive behavior are consistent with the absence of significant differences
between music preference groups on attitudes toward women and acceptance of rape
myth scores. No support for either Hypothesis A or B was found in the area of sexual
behaviors.
Substance Use
Analysis of substance use revealed many significant differences between popular
rock and college/altemative fans. For all substances and groups of substances for which
music preference group differences were found, college/altemative fans reported more
frequent use of these substances than popular rock fans. No previous studies had been
found that compared substance use for college/altemative fans to fans of other music
styles. It was expected that college/altemative fans would tend to use psychedelic drugs
including marijuana, hallucinogens, and designer drugs because these drugs appear to be
consistent with the neo-hippie image that is characteristic of the college/alternative
subculture. However, it was still surprising that this group’s more frequent use of drugs
also included all drugs in general, illegal drugs, and the legal drugs of alcohol and
tobacco. This profile is generally consistent with the results regarding attitudes toward

81
substances, where college/altemative fans also reported more permissive attitudes toward
all drugs in general and marijuana in particular. However, use of tobacco, alcohol,
hallucinogens, psychedelics and illegal drugs evidenced significant differences in usage
but corresponding attitude differences were not found.
Music preference and global commitment to one’s preferred style of music were
found to interact with the use of alcohol and with the use of heroin. For alcohol use,
popular rock fans’ use of alcohol is dramatically more frequent as their Global
Commitment Index scores increase whereas college/altemative fans’ alcohol use is more
consistent and increases less dramatically as their Global Commitment Index scores
increase. For heroin use, popular rock fans use of heroin is increasingly more frequent as
their Global Commitment Index scores increase whereas college/alternative fans’ heroin
use is consistently near zero as their Global Commitment Index scores increase. It should
be noted that this relationship is based on only 4 of 168 subjects marking 1 on a scale of 0
- 6 (0 = “never” and 6 = “several times daily”) for heroin use in the past month. This
indicates that popular rock fans are more likely to have used heroin once in the last month
as their Global Commitment Index scores increase, whereas college/altemative fans are
less likely to have used heroin as their Global Commitment Index scores increase.
However, because of the low number of participants reporting any heroin use, this
relationship is likely to be unreliable.
These interaction effects between music preference and global commitment to
one’s preferred style of music with alcohol and heroin add a great deal to our
understanding of the relationship between commitment to music, music preference and
substance use. The interaction involving alcohol shows popular rock fans reporting sharp
increases in the use of alcohol as their Global Commitment Index scores increase.
Popular rock fans appear to begin with near zero alcohol use at low levels of commitment

82
and develop into chronic daily use of alcohol at high levels of commitment.
College/alternative fans on the other hand report more consistent use of alcohol beginning
at higher levels of use than popular rock fans at low commitment levels with only
minimal increase in frequency at higher levels of commitment, at which time their
reported use is dramatically lower than popular rock fans at the same commitment level.
The interaction involving heroin is similar. In this case, popular rock fans are more likely
to have used heroin as their Global Commitment Index scores increase, whereas
college/alternative fans are less likely to have used heroin as their Global Commitment
Index scores increase.
Overall, the results involving substance use behavior demonstrate clear behavioral
differences between popular rock and college/altemative fans, providing solid support for
Hypothesis A. In addition, these results also provide some support for Hypothesis B,
suggesting that global commitment is important for understanding the differences
between music preference groups. The behavioral differences found were generally
consistent with the attitudinal differences, but the behavioral differences were also more
robust because differences were found for the use of substances for which no differences
in permissive attitudes toward these substances were found.
Sensation Seeking
This study included sensation seeking as a covariate in many of the analyses based
on previous findings that sensation seeking is correlated with music preference (Arnett,
1991) and with many of the dependent variables in this study (Arnett, 1991; Zuckerman,
1978). Group differences in sensation seeking were found between popular rock and
college/alternative fans with college/altemative fans reporting greater sensation seeking.
These differences are to be expected as college/altemative music has a more harsh,
aggressive sound that would likely be experienced as unpleasant to a listener who is

83
uncomfortable with higher levels of stimulation. The fact that sensation seeking was
included as a covariate means that all significant findings involving variables that are
correlated with sensation seeking are statistically independent of sensation seeking. The
independence of music preference from sensation seeking is important because sensation
seeking is usually seen as a personality variable (Arnett, 1991; Zuckerman, 1978).
Therefore, if an individual’s personality influences them to listen to college/alternative
music and to use drugs, for example, because they both provide increased sensation, then
it is unlikely that music preference has any influence on substance use apart from the fact
that they are both related to sensation seeking. The fact that college/alternative fans
report higher substance use independent of sensation seeking leaves open the possibility
that college/altemative music somehow influences substance use.
Global Commitment
The general hypotheses of this study focused on music preference differences in
values, attitudes, and behaviors and on an interaction between music preference and
global commitment. Consequently, main effects for the Global Commitment Index were
not considered, as they did not relate to the hypotheses. A recalculation of main and
ancillary analyses compared the independent contribution of music preference to the
independent contribution of the Global Commitment Index. The results indicated that
music preference is significant independent of the Global Commitment Index and the
interaction between music preference and the Global Commitment Index for only three
dependent variables: permissive attitudes toward marijuana, use of alcohol and tobacco
combined, and use of psychedelic drugs. By comparison, the Global Commitment Index
is significant independent of music preference and the interaction between music
preference and the Global Commitment Index for no less than 17 dependent variables: the
values of Advancement, Cultural Identity, Prestige, Working Conditions, and the

84
Utilitarian Orientation factor, permissive attitudes toward marijuana, and the use of
alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens, prescription drugs, depressants, heroin, alcohol and
tobacco combined, psychedelic drugs, hard drugs, illegal drugs, and all drugs. The
relationship between the Global Commitment Index and each of these variables is in the
positive direction such that higher scores on the Global Commitment Index are associated
with higher scores on each variable. In addition, significant group differences in global
commitment were found between popular rock and college/altemative fans with
college/altemative fans reporting greater global commitment than their popular rock
counterparts.
Superficially, these results suggest that music preference is virtually unrelated to
values, attitudes, and behaviors beyond the global commitment differences of the music
preference groups. However, the relationship is more complex. First of all, global
commitment is conceptually dependent on music preference. Global commitment is
about commitment to one’s preferred style of music and has limited meaning outside its
reference to the preferred style of music. The fact that college/altemative fans are so
much more committed to their preferred style of music than popular rock fans also
suggests that global commitment is to some extent a characteristic of music preference.
Because college/altemative fans are identified with high global commitment and popular
rock fans are identified with low global commitment, when significant relationships are
found between global commitment and values, attitudes, and behaviors, these
relationships can be interpreted in part as indicating differences between
college/alternative and popular rock fans.
Another factor to consider is that the significance of global commitment may be
an artifact of this sample in which only popular rock and college/altemative fans were
included. Again, for these two groups, global commitment differences are more or less

85
equivalent to music preference differences and these variables serve as confounds for one
another. Including another music preference group that is also highly committed to their
preferred style of music (e.g., rap or heavy metal rock) would help to determine to what
extent these two constructs are independent of one another.
Finally, the results of this study indicated both music preference and global
commitment are important to the understanding of values, attitudes, and behaviors. Three
significant interaction effects were found, for the value of Prestige and the use of alcohol
and heroin. The fact that music preference and global commitment were found to interact
means that both variables are important. In addition, the relationships between values,
music preference, and global commitment cannot be fully understood without both music
preference and the Global Commitment Index. In particular, popular rock fans score
higher than college/altemative fans on the values of Advancement, Cultural Identity,
Prestige, and Working Conditions (the differences are statistically significant for Cultural
Identity). In contrast, the positive relationship between the Global Commitment Index
and these four values means that lower Global Commitment Index scores are associated
with lower value scores and visa versa. According to this relationship, popular rock fans,
who on average score substantially lower than college/alternative fans on the Global
Commitment Index, would be expected to score lower on these four values. This
relationship demonstrates that both music preference and global commitment, although
highly correlated, both make important contributions to our understanding of values,
attitudes, and behaviors.
Overall, the justification for including both music preference and global
commitment in future research is clearly documented. The results of this study by
themselves cannot fully illuminate the relationship between music preference, global
commitment, values, attitudes, and behaviors. What is clear is that relationships between

86
these variables do exist. However, further research is essential to understanding how
music preference and global commitment relate to values, attitudes, and behaviors.
One line of research that is likely to be crucial to understanding the relationship
between music preference, global commitment, values, attitudes, and behaviors is the
factor analysis of the Music Preference Questionnaire. In this study, a factor analysis was
computed, but only to extract a measure of global commitment. The key to the
relationship between music preference and global commitment likely resides in the factor
structure of global commitment. For example, although global commitment can be
viewed as a univariate variable, it is likely made of up factors that help distinguish both
between and within music preference groups. Certain music preference groups may
identify themselves through advertising their music preference (e.g., displaying bumper
stickers or dressing in a highly stylized way). However, these same characteristics may
serve to distinguish between subgroups who share the same music preference (e.g., some
fans may advertise and not listen to radio whereas others may avoid advertisement and be
an avid radio listener). Consequently, two fans can score equally on global commitment
but one is high on an “advertisement” factor whereas the other is high on a “radio” factor,
and the way each is oriented toward a values such as Prestige might be antithetical. To
determine whether these types of relationships exist and to better understand the
relationship between music preference, global commitment, values, attitudes, and
behaviors, a program of research involving a factor analysis of global commitment will
need to be completed. This study also provides a fruitful foundation for other future
research projects.
Future Research
This study leaves many questions unanswered regarding the relationship between
music preference, global commitment, values, attitudes, and behaviors. Some of these

87
questions remain because of weaknesses in the present study. Still other questions are
stimulated by the results of this study. Future research should redress limitations in the
sample, broaden the music preference groups sampled, and refine the Music Preference
Questionnaire to explore further the significance of global commitment and the individual
factors involved.
Sample
Although the population from which the current sample was taken is relevant to
the study of music preference and global commitment, the fact that college students were
used limits the generalizability of the results. One limiting factor is age. The mean age
for the sample was 20.5 years old with a standard deviation of 1.7 years. The modal class
rank was Junior with 75% of the sample ranked as juniors and seniors. This is a
decidedly older college sample taken primarily from upper-level psychology courses.
These participants are certainly avid consumers of music but are likely different in their
use of music media than younger college students and particularly high school or junior
high students. The fact that for this sample global commitment declined with both age
and class rank supports this contention and indicates that younger and less advanced
students reported greater commitment to their preferred style of music. This finding may
mean that the more advanced students have less time for music-related activities.
Another explanation for this finding is that music preference is not as important for
establishing and maintaining an identity for more advanced students. It may be that for
upper-level students, academic pursuits have begun to replace music preference as a
means of identity formation and sense of belonging. In any case, it is important that this
study be replicated with different age groups to test its reliability and to demonstrate the
generalizability of its findings. The role of music preference and global commitment in
identity formation is also an essential topic for exploration.

88
Another sampling limitation of this study is the educational level of the
participants. Adolescents who are able to succeed in college (at least until junior or
senior levels) are generally not considered an at-risk group by social scientists. Of more
concern are high school dropouts and students who never pursue college or technical
degrees after high school. In particular, it is feared that at-risk students are likely to be
most susceptible to negative themes and influences in music (Christenson & Roberts,
1990). Again the current sample likely does not provide adequate generalizability to this
at-risk population.
The fact that this sample was drawn primarily from psychology classes also may
have imposed certain limitations on the generalizability of results. Certainly choice of
majors is not a random process, and students who choose psychology as a major or even
to attend psychology courses are likely different in some ways from students in other
disciplines. This is likely to be especially true at the level of values. Psychology majors
could be expected to place the highest value on Personal Development, Altruism, Social
Interaction, and Social Relations, whereas business majors, for example, could be
expected to place the highest value on Utilitarian Orientation values of Achievement,
Advancement, Authority, Economics, and Prestige. Since significant differences were
found in the current study for the social interaction, social relations, and the Utilitarian
Orientation values, it is clear that including a broader sample in terms of academic
interests could be very important to both the findings and generalizability of these
findings.
The limitations of the current sample cited above do not detract from or negate the
significant findings of this study. Instead, these limitations simply place the findings in a
proper context as being most generalizable to upper-level college students with interests
in psychology. However, the obvious conclusion is that these limitations call loudly for

89
additional research to determine the relationship between music preference, global
commitment, values, attitudes, and behaviors for other populations and the population of
adolescents as a whole.
Music Preference Groups
Another limitation of this study and its sample is the limited number of music
preference groups represented. Only two music preference groups were represented in
sufficient numbers to be included in the analyses. This limitation may result from: 1) the
age of the sample (upper-level college students may have outgrown more extreme music
forms such as rap or heavy metal rock), 2) the context of the sample as university students
(a context in which college/altemative, for example, is more accepted), or 3) the
academic discipline of the sample (students in agriculture, for instance, would be
expected to have a stronger representation of country music fans) as noted above. In any
case, efforts should be made in any future research to include a broader number of music
preference groups by targeting groups more likely to prefer a specific style of music.
In addition to sampling limitations, the music preference choices offered in the
Music Preference Questionnaire also may have had the effect of limiting the endorsement
of particular music styles. In particular, failure to include a separate rhythm & blues (R &
B) category (R & B was included with popular rock, but 14 subjects wrote in R & B) was
almost certainly responsible for this group not being endorsed by 10% of the sample. The
result of this omission is that others who would have chosen R & B if it had been listed
separately indicated another preference, thereby increasing the error variance for those
groups. It is impossible to determine how often this happened or how it affected the
outcome of the analyses, but future research should correct this omission. It was also
brought to the author’s attention by graduate students who administered the study that the
musicians offered as examples for heavy metal rock were out of date or inaccurate. This

90
oversight may account for only one out of 282 participants endorsing heavy metal rock as
their preferred style of music when as much as 17% of a previous sample (Kruse, 1994)
chose heavy metal rock as their preferred style of music. Another explanation is that
heavy metal rock is fading as a dominant music style. In either case, future research
should also consider grouping heavy metal rock with “hard rock” to broaden this category
somewhat while maintaining its focus on more aggressive forms of rock music.
Music Preference Questionnaire
The Music Preference Questionnaire (MPQ) demonstrated adequate reliability and
validity, but future projects should continue to develop and validate this instrument for
the comprehensive assessment of global commitment. Two issues relevant for continued
development of the MPQ were identified in the process of scoring and working with this
instrument. First, some items seemed to have highly variable data that was likely
inaccurate. This was particularly true of write-in items where participants appeared not
to have read the entire question. A prime example noted above was the length of time the
indicated music preference had been their clear favorite. Many subject indicated
“forever” or a value that represented all their lives. In addition, when participants entered
a number less than 10 it was uncertain whether they intended the value in months (as the
question read) or years. For other items, the question placed limits on the response that
were sometimes invalid. For instance, number of concerts was specified as “per month,”
but many subjects attended concerts once per year or once every three months. These
problems could likely be solved by rewording the questions or changing the formatting to
highlight the most salient parts of the question so that readers would process the
necessary information.
A second issue relates to which items to retain in future versions. In the current
version, only 30 of the 59 data points were scored for the Global Commitment Index.

91
However, the problems noted above may be responsible for these items not being retained
on the Global Commitment Index. In support of this explanation, only 9 of 29 write-in
items were included in the Global Commitment Index. Another possibility is that the
omitted questions may not be relevant for popular rock and college/altemative music that
formed two thirds of the sample. For example, the exclusivity and percentage of friends
who share one’s music preference items were not included in the Global Commitment
Index, but heavy metal rock or rap fans may express more exclusive tastes and share their
music preference with their friends more than popular rock or college/altemative fans. In
addition, some items form a conceptual cluster, which is meaningful as a unit but may not
be included in the Global Commitment Index as a unit. An example of this is hours
listening to radio, where none of the four items assessing radio listening was included in
the Global Commitment Index, but radio is a meaningful part of the medium of delivery
cluster, along with CDs, clubs, and videos. Finally, the current items may be meaningful
for future factor analysis, which will identify discreet global commitment factors.
Because of these reasons, it is advisable to retain all current items in future versions until
they have been demonstrated to make no contribution to the scale either conceptually or
psychometrically.
Conclusions
Research into the impact of music on human beings has lacked the programmatic
direction needed to provide more than a basic understanding of the phenomenon. In the
area of sensation and perception, psychologists have been studying the psychophysical
characteristics of the music’s sound stimulus almost since psychology’s inception. This
research has provided a basic understanding of the essential components of music and
how they are perceived. Other researchers have found evidence of subtle and not so
subtle differences between people who prefer one style of music over another in such

92
areas as sensation seeking (Arnett, 1991), substance use (King, 1988), and attitudes
toward women (Kruse, 1994). However, very few of these studies have been done, and
as a result there are large gaps in our knowledge of how music preference relates to
individual differences. Other researchers have moved forward to investigate the direct
impact of the music stimulus on relevant variables such as attitudes toward women
(Kruse, 1994; St. Lawrence et al., 1991) perception (Lindner and Hynan, 1987), and
emotional state (Peretti and Zweifel, 1990; 1983) to test whether music produces massive
effects on listeners’ emotions, life style, attitudes, and behaviors. These studies have
demonstrated significant short-term effects of music on listeners, which are particularly
dramatic considering the brevity of the music exposure. However, these studies
investigating the short-term impact of music are somewhat premature because it is as yet
unclear whether listening to different styles of music over an extended period is
associated with pervasive differences between music preference groups. The central
question for research into music and music preference is to determine whether music
plays a significant role in human development and socialization or whether listeners
choose their music preference solely based on preexisting differences. The real question
is causation and whether music causes subsequent behavior or whether individual
differences cause both music preference and subsequent behavior.
The available research still has not answered the question of causation nor has it
demonstrated that meaningful differences between music preference groups even exist.
This study has filled in some of the gaps in our knowledge by demonstrating that
significant differences between music preference groups exist and that these differences
are pervasive across a variety of variables (i.e., values, attitudes, and behaviors). This
study documents some specific differences that exist between popular rock and
college/alternative fans in the areas of values, attitudes toward substance use, and

93
substance use. For the purposes of this study, the particulars of the differences are not as
important as that differences were found across all areas investigated. These results
provide ample justification for a continuing program of research to discover ultimately
whether music can be a causal agent in human development and socialization and how
and under what conditions music influences human beings.
This study also has introduced the construct of global commitment as an essential
variable for understanding differences both between and within music preference groups.
It is clear from these results that a measure of global commitment should be included in
any study that examines possible differences between music preference groups.
Measuring global commitment allows serious fans to be isolated from casual fans. This
contribution is essential when music preference categories are broad and vaguely defined.
It is also possible that global commitment is more significant for understanding the
relationship between music, values, attitudes, and behaviors than is music preference.
Overall, popular rock fans were found to place more importance on mainstream
utilitarian and social values consistent with this mainstream music form.
College/altemative fans hold more permissive attitudes toward marijuana and all drugs in
general than their popular rock counterparts. Consistent with this finding,
college/altemative fans also use more tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, hallucinogens,
psychedelics, illegal drugs and all drugs generally than popular rock fans. On the other
hand, popular rock fans use alcohol and heroin more frequently as their commitment to
popular rock increases, whereas college/alternative fans use of these substances is more
stable across commitment level. How other music preference groups such as rhythm &
blues, country, heavy metal, and rap compare on these and other variables is up to other
projects to discover.

94
Christenson and Roberts (1990) hypothesized that music can act as a source of
information, values, and behaviors for those listeners whose music preference is more
than just a “taste” because when an adolescent is deeply committed to a particular style of
music he or she is more likely to internalize the values, attitudes, and behaviors found
within that music subculture. The current study found some support for Christenson and
Roberts’ (1990) hypothesis. The fact that significant differences were found between
popular rock and college/altemative fans in the areas of values, attitudes, and behaviors
indicates that substantive differences exist between these two groups. The fact that
interactions were found between music preference groups based on global commitment
indicates that listeners for whom their music preference is more than just a “taste” are
significantly different from more casual listeners. These results do not in any way prove
that music does act as a source of information, values, and behaviors for highly
committed listeners. Instead, this study demonstrates that music can act as source of
information, values, and behaviors. It remains for future researchers to determine
whether these differences are influenced specifically by the music to which these listeners
are committed.

APPENDIX A
MUSIC PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE
This is the second of two separate batteries of questions you are being asked to complete
as part of this study. This battery contains questions about your favorite style of music,
how much you listen, and what ways music affects your life. As in Battery I, specific
instructions {printed in italics) will proceed each series of questions. Please read these
instructions carefully as they inform you about the content of the questions and the
specific scale to be used to respond to the questions.
Your responses for all questions in this second battery must be written or marked on
this form. Do not attempt to mark your answers for this second battery on the bubble
answer sheet. Please begin by writing the Code Number (located on the cover of Battery I
in the upper right-hand comer) in the appropriate space at the top of this page. Also write
in the Class Number (located on the blackboard) in the appropriate space at the top of this
page.
You are encouraged to answer all the questions as well as you can without skipping any.
Please work rapidly. If you are not sure, guess—your first thought is most likely to be the
right answer for you. Be careful to write or mark your answers in the correct location. If
you have any questions about the materials or seem to be missing materials, please raise
your hand to ask the experimenter.
1. Please indicate in the space provided the style of music that best represents your
favorite style of music. Please do not specify OTHER unless your favorite music
cannot reasonably be classified by the music styles listed. CHOOSE ONLY ONE
STYLE AS YOUR FAVORITE.
Classical (e.g., Beethoven, Mozart, Pavarotti) ©
Jazz (e.g., Wynton Marsalis, Kenny G, Fourplay) ©
New Age (e.g., George Winston, Yanni, Enya) ©
Country (e.g., Dwight Yokam, Brooks & Dunn, Shania Twain) ©
Folk (e.g., Judy Collins, Joan Baez, or ethnic folk music) (4)
Popular Rock (e.g., Hootie & the Blowfish, Mariah Cary, Joan Osborne) ©
Rap (e.g., Das EFX, Goodie Mob, The Souls of Mischief) ©
College/Altemative (e.g., Green Day, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Jane’s Addiction)©
Heavy-metal Rock (e.g., Metallica, Anthrax, Megadeath) ©
Other: (e.g., , , ) ©
2. For how many months has your indicated preference been your CLEAR
favorite?
95

96
3. Please indicate the extent to which your music preference is limited to the chosen
music style on a scale from ©to (6) with © = “its my favorite but I like other styles
almost as well” and © = “I like only my indicated preference.”
Questions 4 through 9 are designed to assess how many hours per day you spend
listening to your favorite music vs. all other styles of music (weekdays and weekend days
are considered separately). When indicating the average number of hours per day you
listen to all other styles of music, only include music to which you want to listen.
4. Please indicate in the space provided the average number of HOURS PER DAY you
listen to your FAVORITE music ON WEEKDAYS using the following sources.
_____ Radio Clubs
Tapes or CDs Music Videos
5. Please indicate in the space provided the average number of HOURS PER DAY you
listen to your FAVORITE music ON WEEKEND DAYS using the following sources.
Radio Clubs
Tapes or CDs Music Videos
6. Please indicate in the space provided the average number of HOURS PER DAY you
choose to listen to ALL OTHER music styles ON WEEKDAYS using the following
sources.
Radio Clubs
Tapes or CDs Music Videos
7. Please indicate in the space provided the average number of HOURS PER DAY you
choose to listen to ALL OTHER music styles ON WEEKEND DAYS using the
following sources.
Radio Clubs
Tapes or CDs Music Videos
8. If you had the opportunity to listen to music more than you do now, how many
MORE HOURS PER DAY would you listen to the following ON WEEKDAYS.
Your favorite music style All other music styles
9. If you had the opportunity to listen to music more than you do now, how many
MORE HOURS PER DAY would you listen to the following ON WEEKEND
DAYS.
Your favorite music style All other music styles
Questions 10 and 11 ask about your friend’s favorite music. Everyone has friends, but
some friends are closer to you than others. These questions distinguish between people
who are your “close friends” and people who are “just friends. ”
10. Please indicate in the space provided the PERCENTAGE of your “close friends”
whose favorite music is the SAME as your favorite. (Scale: © = 0% to ® = 100%)
11. Please indicate in the space provided the PERCENTAGE of your “just friends” whose
favorite music is the SAME as your favorite. (Scale: © = 0% to © = 100%)

97
Question 12 asks about the different situations or activities in which you listen to your
favorite music.
12. Please indicate below in which of these situations you listen to your favorite style of
music (bubble all that apply):
(0) in the car
(D
while studying
© in bed
©
while working
(2) while exercising or playing sports
classes
while walking between
(3) during romantic or dating activities
drinking
while eating or
(4) sit down just to listen
©
while partying
Questions 13 through 22 ask how often you pursue entertainment that is directly related
to your favorite music. Please respond to each question by writing in the number that
most accurately reflects how often you engage in these behaviors.
13. How many tapes or CDs of your favorite style of music do you purchase
in an average month?
14. How many tapes or CDs of all other styles of music do you purchase in an
average month?
15. How many concerts of nationally known musicians who play your
favorite style of music do you attend in an average month?
16. How many concerts of nationally known musicians who play other
styles of music do you attend in an average month?
17. How many concerts of local bands who play your favorite style of music
do you attend in an average month?
18. How many concerts of local bands who play all other styles of music do you
attend in an average month?
19. How many clubs do you go to in an average month who PRIMARILY
feature recordings of your favorite style of music?
20. How many clubs do you go to in an average month who PRIMARILY
feature recordings of other styles of music?
21. How many movies do you see in an average month in part because they
PROMINENTLY feature your favorite style of music in the soundtrack?
22. How many movies do you see in an average month in part because they
PROMINENTLY feature other styles of music in the soundtrack?

98
Questions 23 through 35 ask about ways in which you might publicly declare what your
favorite music is or ways in which your favorite music has affected your lifestyle. For
each question, use the following scale:
© = 0% to ® = 100%
23. How often do you put bumper stickers on your car that explicitly indicate your
music preference or a favorite band?
24. How often do you purchase concert T-shirts, band T-shirts, or other clothing
explicitly linked to your favorite style of music?
25. How often do you wear your concert T-shirts, band T-shirts, or other clothing
explicitly linked to your favorite style of music (if you have purchased any)?
26. How often does your preference for your favorite style of music DIRECTLY
influence your purchase or acquisition of an article of clothing?
27. How often does your preference for your favorite style of music DIRECTLY
influence what you wear on a given day or to a given event?
28. How often does your preference for your favorite style of music DIRECTLY
influence your hair style?
29. How often has your preference for your favorite style of music influenced you to
get a tattoo, EITHER DIRECTLY OR IN PART?
30. How often has your preference for your favorite style of music influenced you to
have a part of your body pierced, EITHER DIRECTLY OR IN PART?
31. How often does your preference for your favorite style of music DIRECTLY
influence your choice of decorations for your room or apartment?
32. How often do you use terms or phrases that come from favorite songs?
33. How often do you leave a club or party because they are not playing your
favorite style of music.
34. How often do you fantasize about meeting your favorite musicians?
35. How often do you fantasize about “making it big” as a musician in your favorite
music style?
Questions 36 and 37 ask about how important you feel it is to know someone’s favorite
music style before dating them.
36. If you were considering going out on a date with someone, how important would
it be for you to know his or her favorite style of music. (Scale: © = “Not at all
important” to © = “Very important)
37. If you were considering going out on a date with someone, how important would
it be that you and your date both shared the SAME favorite style of music.
(Scale: © = ’’Not at all important11 to © = ’’Very important)
NOTE: Items highlighted in bold were included in the Global Commitment Index.

APPENDIX B
VALUES SCALE
The Values Scale uses a 4-point Likert scale: 1 = of little or no importance, 2 = of some
importance, 3 = important, 4 = very important
It is now or will in the future be important for me to ...
Ability Utilization
1. use all my skills and knowledge. (#1)
2. do work that takes advantage of my abilities. (#21)
3. develop my abilities. (#41)
Achievement
4. have results which show that I have done well. (#2)
5. know that my efforts will show. (#22)
6. reach a high standard in my work. (#42)
Advancement
7. get ahead.(#3)
8. get ahead quickly in my career. (#23)
9. be able to get promotions. (#43)
Aesthetics
10. make life more beautiful. (#4)
11. find pleasure in the beauty of my work. (#24)
12. be concerned with beauty in my work. (#44)
Altruism
13. help people with problems. (#5)
14. be involved in work in which the goal is helping people. (#25)
15. work in a way that makes the world a better place. (#45)
99

100
Authority
16. tell others what to do. (#6)
17. be able to be a leader at work. (#26)
18. be the one who manages things at work. (#46)
Autonomy
19. act on my own. (#7)
20. make my own decisions at work. (#27)
21. be free to get on with a job in my own way. (#47)
Creativity
22. discover, develop, or design new things. (#8)
23. create something new in my work. (#28)
24. have a chance to try out new ideas at work. (#48)
Economic Rewards
25. have a high standard of living. (#9)
26. have a good income. (#29)
27. be where employment is regular and secure. (#49)
Life Style
28. live according to my own ideas. (#10)
29. live my life my way. (#30)
30. work at what I want to when I want to. (#50)
Personal Development
31. develop as a person. (#11)
32. have ideas about what to do with my life. (#31)
33. find personal satisfaction in my work. (#51)
Physical Activity
34. get a lot of exercise. (#12)
35. take part in sports and other physical activities. (#32)
36. be physically active in my work. (#52)
Prestige
37. be admired for my knowledge and skills. (#13)
38. be recognized for my accomplishments. (#33)
39. be held in high esteem because of my work. (#53)

101
Risk
40. do risky things. (#14)
41. feel that there is some risk or some danger in the work I do. (#34)
42. take on dangerous tasks if they interest me. (#54)
Social Interaction
43. do things with other people. (#15)
44. work in a group rather than by myself. (#35)
45. be with other people while I work. (#55)
Social Relationships
46. be with friends. (#16)
47. do things with people 1 like. (#36)
48. be with my kind of people. (#56)
Variety
49. have every day be different in some way from the one before it. (#17)
50. do a number of different things during the day. (#37)
51. change work activities frequently (#57)
Working Conditions
52. have good space and light in which to work. (#18)
53. have good sanitary facilities (e.g. washroom) at work. (#38)
54. be protected from the weather while I work. (#58)
Cultural Identity
55. live where people of my religion and race are accepted. (#19)
56. work where people of my ethnic origin have good job possibilities. (#39)
57. feel accepted at work as a member of my race or ethnic group. (#59)
Physical Prowess
58. work hard physically. (#20)
59. use powerful machines. (#40)
60. use my strength. (#60)
NOTE: Items are grouped by the values being measured. Each item’s ordinal position in
the scale is indicated in parentheses.

APPENDIX C
SEX-ROLE STEREOTYPING SUBSCALE
The statements listed below describe attitudes toward the role of women in society which
different people have. Again, there are no right or wrong answers, only opinions. You
are asked to express your feelings about each statement by rating how much you agree or
disagree using a 7-point scale with (0) = “Strongly Agree” and (6) = “Strongly
Disagree.” Please indicate your opinion by marking the column on the answer sheet
which corresponds to the alternative which best describes your personal attitude. Please
respond to every item.
1. A man should fight when the woman he’s with is insulted by another man.
2. It is acceptable for a woman to pay for the date.
3. A woman should be a virgin when she marries.
4. There is something wrong with a woman who doesn’t want to marry and raise a
family.
5. A wife should never contradict her husband in public.
6. It is better for a woman to use her feminine charm to get what she wants rather than
ask for it outright.
7. It is acceptable for a woman to have a career, but marriage and family should come
first.
8. It looks worse for a woman to be drunk than for a man to be drunk.
9. There is nothing wrong with a woman going to a bar alone.
102

APPENDIX D
RAPE MYTH SCALE
The statements listed below describe attitudes toward the role of women in society which
different people have. Again, there are no right or wrong answers, only opinions. You
are asked to express your feelings about each statement by rating each question using a
7-point scale with (0) = “Strongly Agree” and (6) = “Strongly Disagree.”
1. When women talk and act sexy, they are inviting rape.
2. When a woman is raped, she usually did something careless to put herself in that
situation.
3. Any woman who teases a man sexually and doesn’t finish what she started
realistically deserves anything she gets.
4. Many rapes happen because women lead men on.
5. Men don’t usually intend to force sex on a woman, but sometimes they get too
sexually carried away.
6. In some rape cases, the woman actually wanted it to happen.
7. Even though the woman may call it rape, she probably enjoyed it.
8. If a woman doesn’t physically fight back, you can’t really say that it was a rape.
9. A rape probably didn’t happen if the woman has no bruises or marks.
10. When a woman allows petting to get to a certain point, she is implicitly agreeing to
have sex.
11. If a woman is raped, often it’s because she didn’t say “no” clearly enough.
12. Women tend to exaggerate how much rape affects them.
13. When men rape, it is because of their strong desire for sex.
14. It is just part of human nature for men to take sex from women who let their guard
down.
15. A rapist is more likely to be Black or Hispanic than White.
16. In any rape case, one would have to question whether the victim is promiscuous or
has a bad reputation.
17. Rape mainly occurs on the “bad” side of town.
18. Many so-called rape victims are actually women who had sex and “changed their
minds” afterwards.
19. If a husband pays all the bills, he has the right to sex with his wife whenever he
wants.
103

APPENDIX E
SEXUAL EXPERIENCES SURVEY
The questions listed below describe behaviors that may occur in the context of dating
relationships or between persons who do not know each other very well. You are asked
to indicate how often you have engaged in the following behaviors with another person
using a 7-point scale with (0) = “Never” and (6) - “Often.” Please respond to every item.
Have you ever:
1. Had sexual intercourse with another person when you both wanted to?
2. Had another person misinterpret the level of sexual intimacy you desired?
3. Been in a situation where you became so sexually aroused that you could not stop
yourself even though the other person didn’t want to have sexual intercourse?
4. Had sexual intercourse with another person even though he or she didn’t really want
to because you threatened to end your relationship otherwise?
5. Had sexual intercourse with another person when he or she didn’t really want to
because he or she felt pressured by your continual arguments?
6. Obtained sexual intercourse by saying things you didn’t really mean?
7. Been in a situation where you used some degree of physical force (twisting his or her
arm, holding him or her down, etc.) to try to make another person engage in kissing or
petting when he or she didn’t want to?
8. Been in a situation where you tried to get sexual intercourse with another person
when he or she didn’t want to by threatening to use physical force (twisting his or her
arm, holding him or her down, etc.) if he or she didn’t cooperate, but for various
reasons sexual intercourse did not occur?
9. Been in a situation where you used some degree of physical force (twisting his or her
arm, holding him or her down, etc.) to try to get another person to have sexual
intercourse with you when he or she didn’t want to, but for various reasons sexual
intercourse did not occur?
10. Had sexual intercourse with another person when he or she didn’t want to because
you threatened to use physical force (twisting his or her arm, holding him or her
down, etc.) if he or she didn’t cooperate?
11. Had sexual intercourse with another person when he or she didn’t want to because
you used some degree of physical force (twisting his or her arm, holding him or her
down, etc.)?
104

105
12. Been in a situation where you obtained sexual acts with another person such as anal or
oral intercourse when he or she didn’t want to by using threats or physical force
(twisting his or her arm, holding him or her down, etc.)?
13. Been raped?

APPENDIX F
SUBSTANCE ABUSE ATTITUDES SCALE
The questions listed below describe attitudes toward the use of alcohol, tobacco and other
drugs in society which different people have. There are no right or wrong answers, only
opinions. You are asked to express your feelings about each statement by rating how
much you agree or disagree using a 7-point scale with (0) = “Strongly Agree” and (6) =
“Strongly Disagree.” Please indicate your opinion by marking the column on the answer
sheet which corresponds to the alternative which best describes your personal attitude.
Please respond to every item.
1. Marijuana should be legalized.
2. Personal use of drugs should be legal in the confines of one’s own home.
3. Daily use of one marijuana cigarette is not necessarily harmful.
4. Weekend users of drugs will progress to drug abuse.
5. Any drug can be safely used by a person who is mentally healthy.
6. It can be normal for a teenager to experiment with drugs.
7. Alcohol is an effective social relaxant.
8. The laws governing the use of marijuana and heroin should be the same.
9. Tobacco smoking should be allowed in high schools.
10. Persons convicted of the sale of illicit drugs should not be eligible for parole.
106

APPENDIX G
ATTITUDES TOWARD SUBSTANCES SCALE
The questions listed below describe attitudes toward the use of alcohol, tobacco and other
drugs in society which different people have. There are no right or wrong answers, only
opinions. You are asked to express your feelings about each statement by rating how
much you agree or disagree using a 7-point scale with © = “Strongly Agree” and © =
“Strongly Disagree.” Please indicate your opinion by marking the column on the answer
sheet which corresponds to the alternative which best describes your personal attitude.
Please respond to every item.
1. The use of tobacco should not be regulated or restricted in any way.
2. The use of alcohol should not be regulated or restricted in any way.
3. The use of marijuana should not be regulated or restricted in any way.
4. The use of hallucinogens such as LSD, mushrooms, or PCP should not be regulated or
restricted in any way.
5. The use of “designer” drugs such as Ecstasy should not be regulated or restricted in
any way.
6. The use of prescription drugs without a prescription should not be regulated or
restricted in any way.
7. The use of “uppers” or amphetamines should not be regulated or restricted in any
way.
8. The use of “downers” or depressants (other than alcohol) should not be regulated or
restricted in any way.
9. The use of cocaine or cocaine derivatives should not be regulated or restricted in any
way.
10. The use of heroin should not be regulated or restricted in any way.
107

APPENDIX H
SUBSTANCE USE SCALE
The questions listed below ask how often you currently use alcohol, tobacco and other
drugs, based on your use of these substances in the past month. Please indicate how often
you currently use the following substances using a 7-point scale with (0) = “Never” and
(6) = “Several times daily.” Remember, your responses are entirely confidential, so please
respond to each item honestly.
1. How often do you use tobacco?
2. How often do you use alcohol?
3. How often do you use marijuana?
4. How often do you use hallucinogens such as LSD, mushrooms, or PCP?
5. How often do you use “designer” drugs such as Ecstasy?
6. How often do you use prescription drugs without a prescription?
7. How often do you use “uppers” or amphetamines?
8. How often do you use “downers” or depressants (other than alcohol)?
9. How often do you use cocaine or cocaine derivatives?
10. How often do you use narcotics including heroin?
108

APPENDIX I
SENSATION SEEKING SCALE
The questions listed below ask you to choose between two statements that describe
possible feelings and opinions which different people have. There are no right or wrong
answers, only opinions. You are asked to express your feelings about each statement by
indicating which of the two statements best describes you. Please indicate your opinion
by marking the column on the answer sheet which corresponds to the alternative which
best describes your personal attitude. Please respond to every item.
1. © I can’t wait to get into the indoors on a cold day.
© lam invigorated by a brisk, cold day.
2. (5) I would like to hitchhike across the country.
© Hitchhiking is too dangerous a way to travel.
3. © I would like to go water-skiing.
© I would not like to go water-skiing.
4. © I can’t stand watching a movie that I’ve seen before.
© There are some movies I enjoy seeing a second or even a third time.
5. © I would not like to leam to fly an airplane.
© I would like to leam to fly an airplane.
6. © A person should have some sexual experience before marriage.
© It is better if two married persons begin their sexual experience with each other.
7. © There is altogether too much portrayal of sex in movies.
© I enjoy watching many of the “sexy” scenes in movies.
8. © People who ride motorcycles must have some kind of an unconscious need to
hurt themselves.
© I would like to drive or ride a motorcycle.
9. © I would like to go scuba diving.
© I prefer the surface of the water to the depths.
10. © I enjoy spending time in the familial surroundings of home.
© I get very restless if I have to stay around home for any length of time.
109

APPENDIX J
DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE
The questions listed below ask about your age, race, gender and other demographic
information. Please respond to these items by marking the column on the answer sheet
which corresponds to the alternative which best describes you. Please respond to every
item.
1.
Age:
®
17 or younger
©
22
18
©
23
©
19
©
24
©
20
©
25
(I)
21
®
26 or older
2.
Academic classification:
®
Freshman
©
Senior
©
Sophomore
©
Post-Bac
©
Junior
©
Graduate school
3.
Fraternity
or sorority membership:
®
Fraternity
©
No affiliation
©
Sorority
4.
Gender:
®
Male
©
Female
5.
Race:
®
White/Caucasian
©
Asian
©
Black/African American
Other
©
Hispanic
6. What kind of work does your father do, or would he do
© Professional and managerial
© Clerical and sales
(2) Skilled
if working?
® Semi- or unskilled
(4) Does not apply
7. What kind of work does your mother do, or would she do if working?
@ Professional and managerial ® Semi- or unskilled
© Clerical and sales (4) Does not apply
(2) Skilled
110

Ill
8. High school:
© Public
© Private
9. Cultural Background:
® Rural
© Suburban
@ Urban
(2) Both
© Rural and Suburban
© Rural and Urban
© Urban and Suburban

REFERENCES
Arnett, J. (1991). Heavy metal music and reckless behavior among adolescents. Journal
of Youth & Adolescence, 20, 573-592.
Arnett, J. (1992). The soundtrack of recklessness: Musical preferences and reckless
behavior among adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7, 313-331.
Bums, G. (1983). Trends in lyrics in the annual top twenty songs in the United States,
1963-1972. Popular Music and Society, 9, 25^-0.
Burt, M. R. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 3, 217-230.
Burt, M. R., & Albin, R. S. (1981). Rape myths, rape definitions, and probability of
conviction. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 11, 212-230.
Chappel, J. N., Veach, T. L., & Krug, R. S. (1985). The Substance Abuse Attitude
Survey: An instmment for measuring attitudes. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 46,
48-52.
Check, I. V., & Malamuth, N. M. (1983). Sex role stereotyping and reactions to
depictions of stranger versus acquaintance rape. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 45, 344-356.
Christenson, P. G., & Peterson, J. B. (1988). Genre and gender in the structure of music
preferences. Communications Research, 15, 282-301.
Christenson, P. G., & Roberts, D. F. (1990). Popular Music in Early Adolescence.
Working Paper Series. Washington, DC: Carnegie Council on Adolescent
Development. (Available from The Carnegie Council on Adolescent
Development, 2400 N St., NW, Washington, DC 20037)
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis
issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Cripe, F. F. (1986). Rock music as therapy for children with Attention Deficit Disorder:
An exploratory study. Journal of Music Therapy, 23, 30-37.
Donnerstein, E. I., & Linz, D. G. (1986). Mass media sexual violence and male viewers:
Current theory and research. American Behavioral Scientist, 29, 601-618.
Fedler, F., Hall, J., & Tanzi, L. (1982). Popular songs emphasize sex, de-emphasize
romance. Mass Communication Review, 9(2/3), 10-15.
112

113
Frith, S. (1981). Sound effects: Youth, leisure, and the politics of rock V roll. New York:
Pantheon Books.
Gantz, W., Gartenberg, H., Pearson, M., & Schiller, S. (1978). Gratifications and
expectations associated with pop music among adolescents. Popular Music and
Society, 6, 81-89.
Greenfield, P. M., Bruzzone, L., Koyamatsu, K., Satuloff, W., et al. (1987). What is rock
music doing to the minds of our youth? A first experimental look at the effects of
rock music lyrics and music videos. Special Issue: Television and the popular
media in the world of the early adolescent. Journal of Early Adolescence, 7,
315-329.
Greeson, L. E., & Williams, R. (1986). Social implications of music videos for youth:
An analysis of the content and effects of MTV. Youth and Society, 18, 177-89.
Grossberg, L. (1987). Rock and roll in search of an audience. In J. Lull (Ed.), Popular
music and communication. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Hansen, C. H. (1989). Priming sex-role stereotypic event schemas with rock music
videos: Effects on impression favorability, trait inferences, and recall of a
subsequent male-female interaction. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 10,
371-391.
Hansen, C. H., & Hansen, R. D. (1988). How rock music videos can change what is seen
when boy meets girl: Priming stereotypic appraisal of social interactions. Sex
Roles, 19, 287-316.
Hansen, C. EL, & Hansen, R. D. (1990a). Rock music videos and antisocial behavior.
Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 11, 357-369.
Hansen, C. H., & Hansen, R. D. (1990b). The influence of sex and violence on the appeal
of rock music videos. Communication Research, 17, 212-234.
Hansen, C. H., & Hansen, R. D. (1991). Schematic information processing of heavy metal
lyrics. Communication Research, 18, 373-All.
Hansen, C. H., & Krygowski, W. (1994). Arousal-augmented priming effects: Rock
music videos and sex object schemas. Communication Research, 21, 24-47.
Hassner, M. (1983). Therapie durch Rockmusik? (Therapy via rock music?)
Musiktherapeutische Umschau, 4, 217-222.
Herberger, R. (1987). The degree on attractiveness to 15-year-old high school students in
the German Democratic Republic (GDR) of different styles, genres, and trends of
contemporary music: Results of a factor analysis. Eleventh International Seminar
on Research in Music Education (1986, Frankfurt, West Germany). Bulletin of the
Council for Research in Music Education, 91, 70-76.

114
Hirch, P. (1971). Sociological approaches to popular music phenomenon. American
Behavioral Scientist, 14, 373-378
Jenkins, S. J., Fisher, G. L., & Applegate, R. L. (1990). Factor analysis of the Substance
Abuse Attitude Survey with college undergraduates. Psychological Reports, 66,
331-336.
Johnson, C. S., & Johnson, D. S. (1994). Men pressured and forced into sexual
experience. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 23, 93-114.
King, P. (1988). Heavy metal music and drug abuse in adolescents. Postgraduate
Medicine, 83, 295-301 ;304.
Koss, M. P. & Oros, C. J. (1982). Sexual Experiences Survey: A research instrument
investigating sexual aggression and victimization. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 50, 455^457.
Kruse, S. I. (1994). The role of musical styles in attitudes toward women and the
acceptance of violence against women. Unpublished thesis, University of Florida.
Larson, R., & Kubey, R. (1983). Television and music: Contrasting media in adolescent
life. Youth and Society, 15, 13-31.
Larson, R., Kubey, R., & Coletti, J. (1989). Changing channels: Early adolescent media
choices and shifting investments in family and friends. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 18, 35-41.
Leming, J. (1987). Rock music and the socialization of moral values in early
adolescence. Youth and Society, 18, 363-383.
Lindner, D., & Hynan, M. T. (1987). Perceived structure of abstract paintings as a
function of structure of music listened to on initial viewing. Bulletin of the
Psychonomic Society, 25, 44^46.
Linz, D. G. (1989). Exposure to sexually explicit materials and attitudes toward rape: A
comparison of study results. Journal of Sex Research, 26, 50-84.
Linz, D., Donnerstein, E., & Adams, S. M. (1989). Physiological desensitization and
judgments about female victims of violence. Human Communication Research,
15, 509-522.
Linz, D. G., Donnerstein, E., & Penrod, S. (1988). Effects of long-term exposure to
violent and sexually degrading depictions of women. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 55, 758-768.
Lonsway, K. A. & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1995). Attitudinal antecedents of rape myth
acceptance: A theoretical and empirical reexamination. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 68, 704-711.

115
Lottes, I. L. (1991). The relationship between nontraditional gender roles and sexual
coercion. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 4, 89-109.
Lull, J. (1987). Listener’s communicative uses of popular music. In J. Lull (Ed.),
Popular music and communication. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Madsen, D. B., Das, A. K., Bogen, L, & Grossman, E. E. (1987). A short Sensation
Seeking Scale. Psychological Reports, 60, 1179-1184.
Malamuth, N. M. (1983). Factors associated with rape as predictors of laboratory
aggression against women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45,
432-A42.
Malamuth, N. M. (1988). Predicting laboratory aggression against female and male
targets: Implications for sexual aggression. Journal of Research in Personality,
22, 474-495.
Malamuth, N. M. & Briere, J. (1986). Sexual violence in the media: indirect effects on
aggression against women. Journal of Social Issues, 42, 75-92.
Malamuth, N., & Check, J. V. P. (1981). The effects of mass media exposure on
acceptance of violence against women: A field study. Journal of Research in
Personality, 15, 436^446.
Malamuth, N. M., & Check, J. V. (1985). The effects of pornography on beliefs in rape
myths: Individual differences. Journal of Research in Personality, 19, 299-320.
Marascuilo, L. A., & McSweeney, M. (1977). Nonparametric and distribution free
methods for the social sciences. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
McConaghy, N., Zamir, R., & Manicavasagar, V. (1993). Non-sexist Sexual
Experiences Survey and Scale of Attraction to Sexual Aggression. Australian &
New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 27, 686-693.
McGuire, W. (1986). The myth of massive media impact: Savagings and salvagings. In
G. Comstock, (Ed.), Public communication and behavior. Orlando, FL:
Academic Press.
McLeod, J., & Reeves, B. (1980). On the nature of mass media effects. In S. Withey &
R. Abeles (Eds.), Television and social behavior: Beyond violence of children.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Nevill, D. D., & Kruse, S. J. (1996). Career assessment and the Values Scale. Journal of
Career Assessment, 4, 383-397.
Nevill, D. D., & Super, D. E. (1989). The Values Scale: Theory, application, and
research (2nd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

116
Norwood, J. (1987). Lyrics, listening, and good sense. Popular Music and Society, 11,
91-94.
Peretti, P. O., & Zweifel, J. (1983). Affect of musical preference on anxiety as determined
by physiological skin responses. Acta Psychiatrica Bélgica, 83, 437-442.
Peretti, P. O., & Zweifel, J. (1990). Changes in galvanic skin response as affected by
musical preference, sex, and academic discipline. Psychological Studies, 35,
211-214.
Peterson, D. L., & Pfost, K. S. (1989). Influence of rock videos on attitudes of violence
against women. Psychological Reports, 64, 319-322.
Postman, N. (1982). The disappearance of childhood. New York: Delacorte Press.
Roberts, D., & Maccoby, N. (1985). Effects of mass communication. In G. Lindzey &
E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbood of social psychology, 3rd ed., Vol. 2. New York:
Addison-Westley.
Roe, K. (1984). Youth and music in Sweden: Results from a longitudinal study of
teenagers ’ media use. Paper presented to the International Association for Mass
Communication Research, Prague, Czechoslovakia.
Roe, K. (1987). The school and music in adolescent socialization. In J. Lull (Ed.),
Popular music and communication. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Roe, K. (1990). Adolescents’ music use: A structural-cultural approach. In K. Roe & J.
Carlsson (Eds.), Popular music research: An anthology. Nordicom, Sweden:
Goteborg.
Rosenbaum, J. & Prinsky, L. (1987). Sex, violence, and rock ‘n’ roll: Youth’s perceptions
of popular music. Popular Music and Society, 11, 79-89.
Russell, D. (1980). Pornography and violence: What does the new research say? In L
Lederer (Ed.), Take back the night: Women on pornography. NY: Morrow.
St. Lawrence, J., & Joyner, D. J. (1991). The effects of sexually violent rock music on
male’s acceptance of violence against women. Psychology of Women Quarterly,
15, 49-63.
Schacter, S. (1964). The interaction of cognitive and physiological determinants of
emotional state. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
psychology. Vol. 1. New York: Academic Press.
Sherman, B. L., & Dominick, J. R. (1986). Violence and sex in music: TV and rock ’n’
roll. Journal of Communication, 36, 79-93.

117
Shimai, S., Tanaka, M., & Terasaki, M. (1990). Pleasantness and unpleasantness of
environmental sounds. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 71, 960-962.
Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. (1972). The Attitudes Toward Women Scale: An
objective instrument to measure attitudes toward the rights and roles of women in
contemporary society. Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 2, 1-66.
Super, D. E., & Nevill, D. D. (1986). The Values Scale. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting
Psychologists Press.
Tanner, J. (1981). Pop music and peer groups: A study of Canadian high school students’
responses to pop music. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 18,
1-13.
Thompson, M., Pingree, S., Hawkins, R., & Draves, C. (1989). Television viewing
activity: The enduring effect of early communication experience. Unpublished
paper, School of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Wisconsin,
Madison, WI.
V
Sverko, B. (1995). The structure and hierarchy of values cross-nationally. In D. E. Super
V
& B. Sverko (Eds.), Life roles, values, and careers: International findings of the
Work Importance Study. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wass, H., Raup, J. L., Cerullo, K., Martel, L. G., et al. (1988-89). Adolescents’ interest
in and views of destructive themes in rock music. Omega Journal of Death and
Dying, 19, 177-186.
Winn, M. (1985). The plug-in drug. New York: Penguin.
Zillmann, D., & Bhatia, A. (1989). Effects of associating with musical genres on
heterosexual attraction. Communication Research, 16, 263-288.
Zillmann, D., & Mundorf, N. (1987). Image effects in the appreciation of video rock.
Communication Research, 14, 316-334.
Zuckerman, M. (1978). Sensation Seeking. In H. London & J. Exner, Jr. (Eds.),
Dimensions of personality. New York: Wiley.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Steven John Kruse was born in Asland, Wisconsin, on June 13, 1968. After
graduating from Plant City High School in 1986, he attended Florida Southern College in
Lakeland, Florida. Steven received the degree of Bachelor of Science from Florida
Southern College in December, 1989, with highest honors in his major field of
psychology and minors in English and chemistry. In August, 1991, he entered the
counseling psychology Ph.D. program at the University of Florida and received his
Master of Science degree in August of 1994. He completed his predoctoral internship at
the Washington State University Counseling Center in Pullman, WA, in 1996-97.
118

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.
Dorothy D. Ngvfll, Chairmai
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.
Martin Heesacker
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.
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.*
Robert C. Zilig^—''
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.
Kim Walsh-Childers
Associate Professor of Journalism
and Communications

This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Department of
Psychology in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and to the Graduate School and
was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy.
December, 1997
Dean, Graduate School




PAGE 1

7+( ,03257$1&( 2) 086,& ,1 $'2/(6&(17 /,)( 7+( 5(/$7,216+,3 %(7:((1 086,& 35()(5(1&( 9$/8(6 $77,78'(6 $1' %(+$9,256 %\ 67(9(1 .586( $ ',66(57$7,21 35(6(17(' 72 7+( *5$'8$7( 6&+22/ 2) 7+( 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ ,1 3$57,$/ )8/),//0(17 2) 7+( 5(48,5(0(176 )25 7+( '(*5(( 2) '2&725 2) 3+,/2623+< 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$

PAGE 2

7R :HQG\ .UXVH

PAGE 3

$&.12:/('*0(176 7KDQNV JR WR 'U 'RURWK\ 1HYLOO IRU WKH WLUHOHVV KRXUV VKH KDV VSHQW DVVLVWLQJ PH WR GHYHORS HGLW DQG EULQJ WKLV SURMHFW WR FRPSOHWLRQ DQG IRU WKH VXSSRUW DQG HQFRXUDJHPHQW VKH KDV SURYLGHG HYHU\ VWHS RI WKH ZD\ ZRXOG DOVR OLNH WR WKDQN 'U 0DUWLQ +HHVDFNHU IRU WKH WLPH DQG VXSSRUW KH KDV JLYHQf§RIWHQ RQ WKH SKRQH DQG DIWHU KRXUVf§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

PAGE 4

7$%/( 2) &217(176 $&.12:/('*0(176 LLL $%675$&7 YLL &+$37(56 ,1752'8&7,21 7KH ,PSDFW RI 0XVLF 7KH ,PSDFW RI 0XVLF 9LGHRV 7KH ,PSDFW RI /\ULFV 7KH ,PSDFW RI 0XVLF $ORQH 0XVLF LV D &RPSOH[ 6WLPXOXV f0DVVLYHf YV f&RQGLWLRQDOf (IIHFWV 0XVLF DV D &DXVH 5(9,(: 2) 7+( /,7(5$785( ,QGHSHQGHQW 9DULDEOHV 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW 'HSHQGHQW 9DULDEOHV 9DOXHV $WWLWXGHV $WWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ 6XEVWDQFH XVH %HKDYLRUV 6H[XDO FRHUFLRQ 6XEVWDQFH XVH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6XPPDU\ +\SRWKHVHV *HQHUDO +\SRWKHVHV 6SHFLILF +\SRWKHVHV 9DOXHV $WWLWXGHV %HKDYLRUV LY

PAGE 5

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

PAGE 6

)XWXUH 5HVHDUFK 6DPSOH 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH *URXSV 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH &RQFOXVLRQV $33(1',&(6 $ 086,& 35()(5(1&( 48(67,211$,5( % 9$/8(6 6&$/( & 6(;52/( 67(5(27<3,1* 68%6&$/( 5$3( 0<7+ 6&$/( ( 6(;8$/ (;3(5,(1&(6 6859(< ) 68%67$1&( $%86( $77,78'(6 6&$/( $77,78'(6 72:$5' 68%67$1&(6 6&$/( + 68%67$1&( 86( 6&$/( 6(16$7,21 6((.,1* 6&$/( '(02*5$3+,& 48(67,211$,5( 5()(5(1&(6 %,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+ YL

PAGE 7

$EVWUDFW RI 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 3UHVHQWHG WR WKH *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD LQ 3DUWLDO )XOILOOPHQW RI WKH 5HTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKH 'HJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ 7+( ,03257$1&( 2) 086,& ,1 $'2/(6&(17 /,)( 7+( 5(/$7,216+,3 %(7:((1 086,& 35()(5(1&( 9$/8(6 $77,78'(6 $1' %(+$9,256 %\ 6WHYHQ .UXVH 'HFHPEHU &KDLUPDQ 'RURWK\ 1HYLOO 3K' 0DMRU 'HSDUWPHQW 3V\FKRORJ\ 7KH SXUSRVH RI WKLV VWXG\ ZDV WR GHWHUPLQH ZKHWKHU VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV H[LVW EHWZHHQ IDQV RI SRSXODU URFN 35f DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH &$f PXVLF DQG ZKHWKHU IDQVf JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW *&f WR WKHLU SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF LQWHUDFWV ZLWK PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH 03f VXFK WKDW GLIIHUHQFHV LQ YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV DUH RQO\ VLJQLILFDQW ZKHQ *& LV KLJK 7ZHQW\ GLIIHUHQW YDOXHV ZHUH DVVHVVHG XVLQJ 6XSHU DQG 1HYLOOnV 9DOXHV 6FDOH $WWLWXGHV DVVHVVHG LQFOXGHG f DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ XVLQJ %XUWnV 6H[5ROH 6WHUHRW\SLQJ 6FDOH DQG /RQVZD\ DQG )LW]JHUDOGnV 5DSH 0\WK 6FDOH DQG f SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VXEVWDQFH XVH XVLQJ WKH 6XEVWDQFH $EXVH $WWLWXGHV 6FDOH E\ &KDSSHO 9HDFK DQG .UXJ DQG D LWHP $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6FDOH FRQVWUXFWHG E\ WKH DXWKRU %HKDYLRUV DVVHVVHG LQFOXGHG f VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRU XVLQJ WKH 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\ E\ .RVV DQG 2URV DQG f VXEVWDQFH XVH XVLQJ D LWHP 6XEVWDQFH 8VH 6FDOH FRQVWUXFWHG E\ WKH DXWKRU 03 DQG *& ZHUH DVVHVVHG XVLQJ WKH 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH FRQVWUXFWHG E\ WKH DXWKRU 6HQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ ZDV LQFOXGHG DV D FRYDULDWH IRU VRPH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV XVLQJ D LWHP 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH E\ 0DGVHQ 'DV %RJHQ DQG *URVVPDQ 6LJQLILFDQW 03 GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG IRU f WKH

PAGE 8

YDOXHV RI $ELOLW\ 8WLOL]DWLRQ $FKLHYHPHQW $GYDQFHPHQW $XWKRULW\ &XOWXUDO ,GHQWLW\ (FRQRPLFV 3UHVWLJH 6RFLDO ,QWHUDFWLRQ DQG 6RFLDO 5HODWLRQV f VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SLQJ f DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG PDULMXDQD DQG DOO GUXJV DQG f XVH RI WREDFFR PDULMXDQD KDOOXFLQRJHQV SV\FKHGHOLFV OHJDO LOOHJDO DQG DOO GUXJV 35 IDQV ZHUH IRXQG WR VFRUH KLJKHU WKDQ &$ IDQV RQ WKH OLVWHG YDOXHV DQG RQ WKH 656 &$ IDQV ZHUH IRXQG WR EH PRUH SHUPLVVLYH WRZDUG WKH OLVWHG VXEVWDQFHV DQG WR XVH WKH OLVWHG VXEVWDQFHV PRUH WKDQ 35 IDQV 6LJQLILFDQW 03 [ *& LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFWV ZHUH IRXQG IRU WKH YDOXH RI 3UHVWLJH DQG WKH XVH RI DOFRKRO DQG KHURLQ $OO WKUHH LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFWV IRXQG &$ IDQVf YDOXLQJ RI 3UHVWLJH DQG XVH RI DOFRKRO DQG KHURLQ UHPDLQLQJ IDLUO\ FRQVWDQW DFURVV *& ZKHUHDV SRSXODU URFN IDQV VKRZ D VKDUS LQFUHDVHV LQ YDOXLQJ 3UHVWLJH DQG XVH RI DOFRKRO DQG KHURLQ DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 7KH FRQFOXVLRQV DQG OLPLWDWLRQV RI WKLV VWXG\ DUH GLVFXVVHG DV DUH LPSOLFDWLRQV IRU IXWXUH UHVHDUFK 9OOO

PAGE 9

&+$37(5 ,1752'8&7,21 6RFLDO VFLHQWLVWV ZLGHO\ DFNQRZOHGJH WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI PXVLF WR \RXWK FXOWXUH &KULVWHQVRQ t 5REHUWV )ULWK 5RH f 7KLV FRQQHFWLRQ LV DOVR REYLRXV WR WKH JHQHUDO SXEOLF LQ SKHQRPHQRQ VXFK DV 079 WKH DGYHQW RI URFN fQf UROO LQ WKH fV WKH KLSSLH PRYHPHQW LQ WKH fV DQG HDUO\ fV DQG RI FRXUVH f%HDWOHPDQLDf ,Q IDFW WKH VFHQDULR RI D WHHQDJHU KROHG XS LQ KLV URRP ZLWK PXVLF EODULQJ KDV EHFRPH D FOLFK 7KH DYDLODEOH UHVHDUFK RQ DGROHVFHQW PXVLF FRQVXPSWLRQ FRQILUPV WKLV LPDJH RI PXVLF IRUPLQJ D fVRXQGWUDFNf WR WKH GDLO\ OLYHV RI \RXWK /XOO f 5HVHDUFK RQ DGROHVFHQWVf DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG PXVLF FRQILUPV WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI PXVLF WR \RXWK /HPLQJ f UHSRUWV WKDW b RI D VDPSOH RI WR \HDUROGV VDLG PXVLF ZDV fYHU\ LPSRUWDQWf WR WKHP DQG DQ DGGLWLRQDO b VDLG WKDW LW ZDV fVRPHZKDW LPSRUWDQWf 2QO\ b RI WKHVH DGROHVFHQWV VDLG PXVLF ZDV fQRW LPSRUWDQW DW DOOf 7KH LPSRUWDQFH RI PXVLF WR \RXWK LV DOVR HYLGHQW LQ WKHLU EHKDYLRUf§WKHLU UHSRUWHG FRQVXPSWLRQ RI PXVLF PHGLD 3RSXODU PXVLF SOD\V DQ LPSRUWDQW UROH LQ WKH OLYHV RI FKLOGUHQ WKURXJKRXW WKHLU FKLOGKRRG 7KHLU FRQVXPSWLRQ RI SRSXODU PXVLF W\SLFDOO\ DFFHOHUDWHV DERXW UG RU WK JUDGH DQG SHDNV LQ ODWH KLJK VFKRRO RU FROOHJH 7HOHYLVLRQ LQ FRQWUDVW ULVHV WR D SHDN LQ HDUO\ DGROHVFHQFH DERXW DJH f 2YHU WKH FRXUVH RI KLJK VFKRRO DGROHVFHQWV EHJLQ WR VSHQG PRUH WLPH OLVWHQLQJ WR PXVLF DW WKH H[SHQVH RI ZDWFKLQJ 79 &KULVWHQVRQ t 5REHUWV /DUVRQ t .XEH\ /DUVRQ .XEH\ t &ROOHWWL f )RU H[DPSOH &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWV f VXUYH\HG D ODUJHO\ PLGGOHFODVV &DXFDVLDQ VDPSOH RI &DOLIRUQLD WHHQDJHUV DQG IRXQG WKDW XQWLO WK JUDGH ERWK 79 YLHZLQJ DQG PXVLF OLVWHQLQJ LQFUHDVHG DOPRVW HTXDOO\ ZLWK D VOLJKW SUHIHUHQFH IRU

PAGE 10

PXVLF OLVWHQLQJ %\ HOHYHQWK JUDGH 79 YLHZLQJ KDG GHFOLQHG E\ DOPRVW PLQXWHV ZKHUHDV PXVLF FRQVXPSWLRQ UHPDLQHG FRQVLVWHQW -XVW KRZ PXFK GR WKH\ OLVWHQ" ,Q D UHYLHZ RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWV f FRQFOXGHG WKDW E\ ODWH DGROHVFHQFH WKH DYHUDJH WHHQDJHU OLVWHQV WR EHWZHHQ IRXU DQG ILYH KRXUV RI DOO PXVLF PHGLD HYHU\ GD\ 7KH SULPDU\ VRXUFH RI PXVLF IRU DGROHVFHQWV LV WKH UDGLR RFFXS\LQJ DOPRVW b RI DOO PXVLF OLVWHQLQJ WKURXJKRXW DGROHVFHQFH /LVWHQLQJ WR &'V RU WDSHV PDNHV XS DQRWKHU VLJQLILFDQW VRXUFH RI PXVLF EXW WKH H[WHQW RI WKLV XVH LV RIWHQ KLJKO\ GHSHQGHQW RQ DYDLODEOH HFRQRPLF UHVRXUFHV ,Q &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWVf f VDPSOH FRQVXPSWLRQ RI &'V DQG WDSHV JUDGXDOO\ LQFUHDVHG IURP b RI WRWDO PXVLF OLVWHQLQJ LQ WK JUDGH WR b E\ WK JUDGH ZKLFK OLNHO\ UHIOHFWV WKH LQFUHDVLQJ ILQDQFLDO UHVRXUFHV RI HPSOR\HG KLJK VFKRRO VWXGHQWV 0XVLF YLGHRV DUH WKH OHDVW LPSRUWDQW VRXUFH RI PXVLF FRQVXPLQJ OHVV WLPH DQG OLNH 79 GHFOLQLQJ VWHDGLO\ WKURXJKRXW ODWH DGROHVFHQFH DV DXGLRRQO\ PXVLF FRQVXPSWLRQ LQFUHDVHV ,Q &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWVf f VDPSOH YLHZLQJ PXVLF YLGHRV GHFUHDVHG IURP b RI WRWDO PXVLF OLVWHQLQJ LQ WK JUDGH WR b E\ WK JUDGH .HLWK 5RH FRQFOXGHV fLW LV EHFRPLQJ LQFUHDVLQJO\ GLIILFXOW WR HVFDSH WKH FRQFOXVLRQ LQ WHUPV RI ERWK WKH VKHHU DPRXQW RI WLPH GHYRWHG WR LW DQG WKH PHDQLQJV LW DVVXPHV WKDW LW LV PXVLF QRW WHOHYLVLRQ WKDW LV WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW PHGLXP IRU DGROHVFHQWVf 5RH SS f 7KH ,PSDFW RI 0XVLF ,I PXVLF LV LQGHHG WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW PHGLXP IRU DGROHVFHQWV DQ\RQH LQWHUHVWHG LQ DGROHVFHQWV HJ SV\FKRORJLVWV FRXQVHORUV HGXFDWRUV SDUHQWVf VKRXOG EH FRQFHUQHG DERXW WKH LPSDFW RI PXVLF $W WKH VDPH WLPH WKH DYDLODEOH OLWHUDWXUH LV YHU\ VNHWFK\ 7KHUH DUH ODUJH JDSV LQ RXU NQRZOHGJH &RQVHTXHQWO\ GHYHORSLQJ D EURDG WKHRU\ EDVHG RQ WKH DYDLODEOH UHVHDUFK HQGV XS EHLQJ ODUJHO\ FRQMHFWXUH +RZHYHU WKH GDWD WKDW DUH DYDLODEOH WHVWLI\ WR WKH SRZHUIXO LPSDFW PXVLF KDV RQ \RXWK

PAGE 11

2IWHQ ZKHQ D FRPSOH[ SKHQRPHQRQ VXFK DV PXVLF LV VWXGLHG WKHRULVWV WHQG WR IRFXV RQ D SDUWLFXODU HOHPHQW RU FRPSRQHQW RI WKH SKHQRPHQRQ ,Q WKH VWXG\ RI PXVLF WKLV UHGXFWLRQLVP LV RIWHQ EDVHG RQ DVVXPSWLRQV DERXW ZKLFK FRPSRQHQW LV WKH PRVW SRWHQW )LUVW ZKHQ 079 VWDUWHG LQ PXVLF YLGHRV EHFDPH WKH IRFXV RI DWWHQWLRQ DQG D IOXUU\ RI VWXGLHV ORRNLQJ DW PXVLF YLGHRV ZHUH VRRQ SXEOLVKHG HJ 6KHUPDQ t 'RPLQLFN *UHHVRQ t :LOOLDPV =LOOPDQ t 0XQGRUI f 6RRQ D FRQVLGHUDEOH SXEOLF UHDFWLRQ WR WKH O\ULFDO FRQWHQW RI WKH VRQJV ODXQFKHG PRUH VWXGLHV ORRNLQJ DW WKH LPSDFW RI PXVLF O\ULFV HJ 1RUZRRG 6W /DZUHQFH t -RLQHU f 2WKHU VWXGLHV KDYH IRFXVHG PRUH RQ WKH PXVLF LWVHOI DV WKH PRVW SRWHQW FRPSRQHQW .UXVH f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fV DWWHQWLRQ SDUWLFXODUO\ LQ ODWH DGROHVFHQFH &KULVWHQVRQ t 5REHUWV /DUVRQ t .XEH\ /DUVRQ .XEH\ t &ROOHWWL f +RZHYHU WKDW YLGHRV DUH QRW D PDMRU VRXUFH RI PXVLF PHGLD GRHV QRW PHDQ WKDW WKH\ DUH LUUHOHYDQW DQG ZLWKRXW LPSDFW ,Q WHUPV RI FRQWHQW 6KHUPDQ DQG 'RPLQLFN f IRXQG WKDW PRUH WKDQ KDOI RI DOO YLGHRV FRQWDLQHG VRPH IRUP RI YLROHQFH DQG DOPRVW SHUFHQW FRQWDLQHG VH[XDO LQWLPDF\ LQ VRPH IRUP 2WKHU UHVHDUFK KDV GHPRQVWUDWHG WKDW WKLV VH[XDO DQG YLROHQW FRQWHQW DIIHFWV ERWK WKH SDUWLFLSDQWVf DSSUHFLDWLRQ RI WKH YLGHR +DQVHQ t +DQVHQ E

PAGE 12

=LOOPDQ t 0XQGRUI f DQG WKH SDUWLFLSDQWfV DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ 3HWHUVRQ t 3IRVW f 9LGHRV KDYH DOVR SURYHG WR EH HIIHFWLYH DW SULPLQJ VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SLF HYHQW VFKHPDV +DQVHQ +DQVHQ t +DQVHQ f HOLPLQDWLQJ SDUWLFLSDQWfV GLVDSSURYDO RI FRQIHGHUDWHV SHUIRUPLQJ GHILDQW EHKDYLRUV +DQVHQ t +DQVHQ Df DQG DOWHULQJ DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG SUHPDULWDO VH[ DQG SHHU YLROHQFH *UHHVRQ t :LOOLDPV f 7KLV ODWWHU VWXG\ LV SDUWLFXODUO\ UHOHYDQW DV WKH DXWKRUV IRXQG WKDW H[SRVXUH WR RQO\ PLQXWHV RI YLGHRV UHFRUGHG HLWKHU UDQGRPO\ IURP 079 RU VHOHFWHG VSHFLILFDOO\ IRU WKHLU UHIHUHQFH WR VH[ YLROHQFH RU DQWLHVWDEOLVKPHQW WKHPHV UHVXOWHG LQ JUHDWHU DSSURYDO RI SUHPDULWDO VH[ 7KH DERYH UHVHDUFK PDNHV LW FOHDU WKDW PXVLF YLGHRV KDYH DQ LPSDFW EXW EHFDXVH RI WKH VPDOO UROH WKH\ SOD\ LQ DGROHVFHQWf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t 6FKLOOHU 5RVHQEDXP t 3ULQVN\ f ,Q DGGLWLRQ UHVHDUFK VXJJHVWV WKDW DGROHVFHQWV DUH ODUJHO\ LQFDSDEOH RI fFRUUHFWO\f LQWHUSUHWLQJ VRQJ O\ULFV /HPLQJ *UHHQILHOG HW DO 5RVHQEDXP t 3ULQVN\ f 2IWHQ DGROHVFHQWV GR QRW XQGHUVWDQGf§QRU DUH WKH\ HYHQ DZDUH RIf§WKH REMHFWLRQDEOH PDWHULDO WKDW LV WKH FDXVH RI DGXOWVf UHDFWLRQV WR PXVLF DQG PXVLF O\ULFV +RZHYHU VRPH DGROHVFHQWV GR XQGHUVWDQG WKHVH WKHPHV DQG DV &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWV f SRLQW RXW LW LV XQOLNHO\ WKDW DQ DGROHVFHQWfV LQWHUSUHWDWLRQ RI O\ULFV LV UDQGRP 7KH\ DUJXH WKDW DQ DGROHVFHQWfV DWWHQWLRQ WR D SDUWLFXODU WKHPH RU LQWHUSUHWDWLRQ RI D VRQJ

PAGE 13

LV GLUHFWO\ UHODWHG WR WKH DGROHVFHQWfV SV\FKRORJLFDO DQG GHYHORSPHQWDO YDULDEOHV 6WLOO WKH LPSDFW RI WKH O\ULFV GRHV QRW DFFRXQW IRU WKH IXOO LPSDFW RI PXVLF PHGLD 7KH ,PSDFW RI 0XVLF $ORQH 7KH ILQDO FRPSRQHQW WKDW KDV UHFHLYHG VRPH DWWHQWLRQ LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH LV WKH LPSDFW RI WKH PXVLF LWVHOI ZLWKRXW UHIHUHQFH WR O\ULFV RU YLVXDOV 9HU\ IHZ VWXGLHV KDYH DGGUHVVHG WKLV WRSLF VSHFLILFDOO\ EXW LPSOLFDWLRQV IURP RWKHU VWXGLHV HJ +DQVHQ t +DQVHQ E 3HUHWWL t =ZHLIHO f FRQILUP WKH REYLRXV WKDW WKH PXVLF LWVHOI LV FHQWUDO WR WKH LPSDFW RI PXVLF 7KH LPSRUWDQFH RI PXVLF DORQH LV DOVR FRQILUPHG LQ WKH UHSRUWV RI DGROHVFHQWV UHJDUGLQJ ZK\ WKH\ OLVWHQ WR PXVLF RU ZK\ WKH\ OLNH WKHLU IDYRULWH VRQJ ZLWK PDQ\ VWDWLQJ WKH\ MXVW fOLNH WKH EHDWf 5RVHQEDXP t 3ULQVN\ f 2QH VWXG\ WKDW WULHG WR DVVHVV WKH LPSDFW RI WKH PXVLF RQO\ IRXQG WKDW LQVWUXPHQWDO KHDY\ PHWDO URFN PXVLF KDG WKH VDPH LPSDFW RQ DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ DV VH[XDOO\ YLROHQW KHDY\ PHWDO URFN PXVLF EXW WKH LPSDFW IRU ERWK ZDV PRGHVW DW EHVW .UXVH f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f D IDVKLRQ HVWKHWLF HJ ORQJKDLU EODFN FRQFHUW 7VKLUWVf UROHPRGHOV WKH PXVLFLDQVf DQG EHKDYLRUDO H[SHFWDWLRQV HJ fKHDGEDQJLQJf SDUW\LQJ VXEVWDQFH XVHf -DPHV /XOO f YLYLGO\ GHVFULEHV WKLV ZD\ RI XQGHUVWDQGLQJ PXVLF 7KHVH FXOWXUDO GLVWLQFWLRQV DUH LPSRUWDQW WR SRS PXVLF IDQV 7KH PXVLF RI (OYLV &RVWHOOR PLJKW VRXQG WKH VDPH DV WKDW RI %UXFH 6SULQJVWHHQ WR DQ RXWVLGHU EXW \RXQJ SHRSOH NQRZ WKDW WKH GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ WKHVH WZR

PAGE 14

DUWLVWV LV VRPHWKLQJ PRUH WKDQ PXVLFDO 7KH\ UHSUHVHQW GLIIHUHQW OLIHVW\OH RULHQWDWLRQV &RVWHOOR LV D PDMRU H[SRQHQW RI fPRGHUQf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f 1RWLFH WKDW WKH XQLQLWLDWHG HJ DGXOWV FRXQVHORUV SDUHQWV DQG VRFLDO VFLHQWLVWVf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fV VRFLDO SUHVHQFH DQG WKH YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV EHKDYLRUV DQG OLIHVW\OH LPSOLHG LQ WKH SHUIRUPDQFH :KHQ OLVWHQHUV KHDU D VRQJ WKH\ DUH UHVSRQGLQJ WR WKH ZKROH VWLPXOXV 7KHUHIRUH ZKHQ FRQVLGHULQJ WKH LPSDFW RI PXVLF RQH PXVW FRQVLGHU WKH HQWLUH VWLPXOXV PXVLFDO DQG QRQPXVLFDO f0DVVLYHf YV f&RQGLWLRQDOf (IIHFWV :KHQ WKH LPSDFW RI PHGLD LQ JHQHUDO LV DGGUHVVHG WKH HIIHFW H[SHFWHG LV RIWHQ FDVW LQ WHUPV RI D PDVVLYH GLUHFW DQG QHJDWLYH HIIHFW HJ 3RVWPDQ :LQQ f 7KHVH VDPH IHDUV KDYH EHHQ DSSOLHG WR PXVLF PHGLD PRVW SURPLQHQWO\f§DQG VXFFHVVIXOO\f§E\ 3DUHQWVf 0XVLF 5HVRXUFH &HQWHU 1RUZRRG f 7KH EDVLF DVVXPSWLRQ VHHPV WR EH WKDW fPDVVf PHGLD PXVW KDYH D fPDVVLYHf HIIHFW RQ fPDVVHVf RI SHRSOH ,W LV DV LI WKH DXGLHQFH LV SDVVLYH EULQJLQJ QRWKLQJ WR WKH HQFRXQWHUf§WKH fPHVVDJHf RI WKH PHGLD LV FRPPXQLFDWHG UHFHLYHG DQG ZLOO KDYH D VSHFLILF XQLYHUVDO

PAGE 15

HIIHFW ,W LV DVVXPHG LQ WKLV YLHZ WKDW WKH OLVWHQHUV VLPSO\ UHVSRQG ZLWK QR UHIHUHQFH WR WKHLU RZQ SHUVRQDO G\QDPLFV 7KH HPSLULFDO OLWHUDWXUH RQ PDVV PHGLD HIIHFWV GRHV QRW VXSSRUW WKLV YLHZ RI fPDVVLYHf HIIHFWV 0F*XLUH &KULVWHQVRQ t 5REHUWV f EXW UDWKHU VXJJHVWV D PRUH PRGHVW LPSDFW RI PDVV PHGLD +RZHYHU WKLV GRHV QRW PHDQ WKDW WKHUH LV QR HIIHFW RU WKDW VPDOOHU HIIHFWV DUH QRW LPSRUWDQW 7KH PXVLF UHVHDUFK EULHIO\ RXWOLQHG DERYH DOWKRXJK LQFRQVLVWHQW ZLWK fPDVVLYHf HIIHFWV FOHDUO\ LQGLFDWHV WKDW PXVLF DIIHFWV SHRSOH DQG WKDW WKHVH HIIHFWV FDQ EH RI WKH XWPRVW LPSRUWDQFH )RU H[DPSOH LI KHDY\ PHWDO VRQJV ZLWK WKHPHV RI VXLFLGH LQIOXHQFH RQO\ RU b RI D KLJK VFKRRO FODVV RI WR FRPPLW VXLFLGH WKH GHDWKV RI WKRVH WR DGROHVFHQWV ZLOO KDYH D SURIRXQG HIIHFW RQ WKDW VFKRRO DQG FDXVH D JUHDW GHDO RI FRQFHUQ LQ WKH FRPPXQLW\ 7KH UHMHFWLRQ RI fPDVVLYHf HIIHFWV DOVR UDLVHV RWKHU TXHVWLRQV DERXW WKH LPSDFW RI PHGLD ,I PDVV PHGLD DIIHFW RQO\ D OLPLWHG QXPEHU RI SHRSOH ZKR DUH H[SRVHG WR WKHP WKHUH PXVW EH PHGLDWLQJ IDFWRUV $ UHFHQW GHYHORSPHQW LQ PDVV FRPPXQLFDWLRQ UHVHDUFK GHDOV VSHFLILFDOO\ ZLWK WKLV LVVXH 0F/HRG t 5HHYHV 5REHUWV t 0DFFRE\ f &DOOHG WKH fFRQGLWLRQDO DSSURDFKf WKLV DSSURDFK DVVXPHV WKH FRQVXPHUfV UHVSRQVH LV GHSHQGHQW RQ WKH SV\FKRORJLFDO VRFLDO DQG FXOWXUDO FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI WKDW FRQVXPHU $SSOLHG VSHFLILFDOO\ WR PXVLF WKLV FRQGLWLRQDO DSSURDFK PD\ FDXVH HYHQ JUHDWHU FRQFHUQ DERXW WKH LPSDFW RI PXVLF )RU LQVWDQFH WKH OLWHUDWXUH VXJJHVWV WKDW HYHQ WKRXJK DGROHVFHQWVf FRPSUHKHQVLRQ RI PXVLF O\ULFV LV RIWHQ LQDFFXUDWH LW LV QRW UDQGRP &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWV f WKHRUL]H WKDW DGROHVFHQWVf PLVLQWHUSUHWDWLRQV DUH V\VWHPDWLF DQG FRUUHVSRQG WR WKHLU GHYHORSPHQWDO OHYHO DQG WKH FRQIOLFWV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKDW OHYHO 1RU GRHV LW PHDQ WKDW ZH VKRXOGQfW EH FRQFHUQHG DERXW WHHQDJHUVf XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH YDULRXV VH[XDOO\ H[SOLFLW YLROHQW RU VXLFLGDO O\ULFV WKDW HOLFLW FRPPHQW IURP DGXOW FULWLFV 2EYLRXVO\ VRPH \RXQJ WHHQDJHUV

PAGE 16

GR DSSUHKHQG VRPH VRQJV LQ WKHVH WHUPV DW OHDVW VRPH RI WKH WLPH $QG WKHUH LV UHDVRQ WR VXVSHFW WKDW WKH \RXQJVWHUV PRVW OLNHO\ WR FRPSUHKHQG WKH PRUH KRUULILF O\ULFV LQ WHUPV RI WKHLU PDQLIHVW FRQWHQW PLJKW EH MXVW WKRVH ZKR DUH PRUH DW ULVN ,I DGROHVFHQWVf LQWHUSUHWDWLRQ RI LQIRUPDWLRQ LV VHQVLWLYH WR FXUUHQW QHHGV DQG DFWLYLWLHV RQH PLJKW H[SHFW WKRVH ZKR DUH EHFRPLQJ VH[XDOO\ DFWLYH WR EH PRVW OLNHO\ WR FRQFHQWUDWH RQ WKH VH[XDO FRQWHQW RI O\ULFV WKRVH ZKR DUH FRQVLGHULQJ H[SHULPHQWLQJ ZLWK GUXJV PD\ EH PRVW OLNHO\ WR DWWHQG WR GUXJRULHQWHG O\ULFV WKRVH ZKR DUH KLJKO\ DOLHQDWHG RU GHSUHVVHG WR EH PRVW OLNHO\ WR IRFXV RQ VRQJV DERXW VXLFLGH SS f 7KRPSVRQ 3LQJUHH +DZNLQV DQG 'UDYHVfV f VWXG\ YDOLGDWHV WKLV FRQFHUQ ZKHQ WKH\ IRXQG WKDW KLJK VFKRRO JLUOV LQWHUSUHWHG DQG SURFHVVHG 0DGRQQDfV f3DSD 'RQfW 3UHDFKf YLGHR GLIIHUHQWO\ GHSHQGLQJ RQ ZKHWKHU WKH\ KDG KDG SULRU fSUHJQDQF\ H[SHULHQFHVf DQG ZKHWKHU WKHLU IDWKHUV VWUHVVHG VRFLDO KDUPRQ\ LQ LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLSV RU H[SORULQJ LGHDV DW WKH SRVVLEOH H[SHQVH RI VRFLDO KDUPRQ\ 0XVLF DV D &DXVH 8QGHUVWDQGLQJ WKDW WKH LPSDFW RI PXVLF LV GHSHQGHQW RQ DQ LQGLYLGXDOfV SV\FKRORJLFDO DQG GHYHORSPHQWDO OHYHO DQVZHUV VRPH TXHVWLRQV DERXW DGROHVFHQW PXVLF VXEFXOWXUHV 1HDUO\ HYHU\RQH LQFOXGLQJ VRFLDO VFLHQWLVWV DQG WKH JHQHUDO SXEOLF DJUHHV WKDW PXVLF LV LPSRUWDQW WR \RXWK %XW PRUH WKDQ EHLQJ LPSRUWDQW PDQ\ WKHRULVWV DVVHUW WKDW PXVLF LV XVHG LQ WKH \RXWK FXOWXUH WR GHILQH DQG GLIIHUHQWLDWH EHWZHHQ VXEFXOWXUHV HJ )ULWK 5RH &KULVWHQVRQ t 5REHUWV /XOO f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

PAGE 17

DGROHVFHQWV ZKR SUHIHU FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH G\H WKHLU KDLU EODFN DQG SXW LQ DQ H\HEURZ ULQJ 7KH FRQGLWLRQDO DSSURDFK WR PHGLD HIIHFWV FDQ DFFRXQW IRU WKLV YDULDELOLW\ 7KH JRDO WKHQ EHFRPHV LGHQWLI\LQJ WKH SV\FKRORJLFDO RU GHYHORSPHQWDO IDFWRUV WKDW SUHGLFW ZKHWKHU PXVLF ZLOO KDYH D SURIRXQG HIIHFW RQ D JLYHQ DGROHVFHQW 7KH TXHVWLRQ EHFRPHV f8QGHU ZKDW FRQGLWLRQV GRHV PXVLF DFW DV DQ DJHQW RI FDXVH LQ YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV"f $W RQH OHYHO DVNLQJ WKLV TXHVWLRQ LV SUHPDWXUH EHFDXVH LW LV QRW DOWRJHWKHU FOHDU IURP WKH OLWHUDWXUH LI PXVLF HYHU DFWV DV DQ DJHQW RI FDXVH LQ DGROHVFHQW EHKDYLRU 6WXGLHV RIWHQ ILQG UHODWLRQVKLSV EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG RWKHU EHKDYLRUV +RZHYHU WKH IDFW WKDW OLVWHQLQJ WR PXVLF LV LQYHUVHO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH /DUVRQ t .XEH\ f RU WKDW DGROHVFHQWV ZKR ZHUH DOLHQDWHG IURP PDLQVWUHDP VFKRRO OLIH PRUH RIWHQ SUHIHU KHDY\ PHWDO URFN PXVLF 7DQQHU f RU WKDW VXEVWDQFH DEXVH LV SRVLWLYHO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK XVH RI KHDY\ PHWDO URFN PXVLF .LQJ f GRHV QRW PHDQ WKDW PXVLF LV WKH FDXVH ,Q IDFW DV .HLWK 5RH f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t :LOOLDPV +DQVHQ t +DQVHQ D E .UXVH f DQDO\VHV RI KRZ \RXWK XVH PXVLF )ULWK /XOO *URVVEHUJ f DQG WKH JHQHUDO LQWXLWLYH VHQVH RI WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI PXVLF WR \RXWK +RZHYHU UHVHDUFKHUV PXVW QRW EH GHFHLYHG LQWR WKLQNLQJ WKH FKRLFH LV EHWZHHQ fPDVVLYHf HIIHFWV DQG QR HIIHFWV 7KHUH PD\ EH FRQGLWLRQDO HIIHFWV ,Q RWKHU ZRUGV PXVLF PD\ DFW DV DQ DJHQW RI FDXVH IRU FHUWDLQ VXEJURXSV

PAGE 18

&KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWV f DUJXH WKLV SRVLWLRQ PRVW HORTXHQWO\ 7KH\ PDLQWDLQ WKDW ZKLOH PXVLF PD\ QRW FDXVH DGROHVFHQW YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV LQ PRVW FDVHV WKHUH PD\ EH VXEJURXSV LQ ZKLFK PXVLF FDQ DFW DV DQ DJHQW RI FDXVH )RU H[DPSOH KHDY\ PHWDO IDQV VHHP WR EH DQ DWULVN JURXS 7DQQHU .LQJ f ZKR PD\ EH PRUH VXVFHSWLEOH WR WKH VH[XDOO\ YLROHQW UHEHOOLRXV DQWLHVWDEOLVKPHQW PHVVDJHV RI KHDY\ PHWDO URFN PXVLF ,Q DGGLWLRQ KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV DOVR UHSRUW EHLQJ PRUH IDPLOLDU ZLWK WKH FRQWHQW DQG PHDQLQJ RI WKHVH O\ULFV :DVV 5DXS &HUXOOR 0DUWHO HW DO f ZKLFK LQFUHDVHV WKH GDQJHU &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWV f VWDWHG WKH IROORZLQJ UHJDUGLQJ WKH SRWHQWLDO LQIOXHQFH RI PXVLF
PAGE 19

RU WKH PHVVDJHV FRQWDLQHG LQ WKH PXVLF DQG LQ WKH VXEFXOWXUH VXUURXQGLQJ WKH PXVLFf PD\ KDYH DFFHOHUDWHG WKHVH DGROHVFHQWVf VHSDUDWLRQ IURP WKHLU SDUHQWV $ VLPLODU UHVXOW PD\ RFFXU LQ KHDY\ PHWDO VXEFXOWXUHV LQ ZKLFK DGROHVFHQWV ZLWK D WHQGHQF\ WRZDUG GHOLQTXHQW EHKDYLRU DGRSW KHDY\ PHWDO URFN DV WKHLU PXVLF %\ GRLQJ WKLV WKH\ JDLQ D JURXS LGHQWLW\ KRZHYHU WKH\ DOVR DUH H[SRVHG WR WKH VH[XDOO\ YLROHQW DQWLVRFLDO WKHPHV RI WKH PXVLF ZKLFK PD\ OHDG WKHP LQWR GUXJ DGGLFWLRQ DQWLVRFLDO EHKDYLRUV DQG DFWV RI YLROHQFH DJDLQVW ZRPHQ &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWV f K\SRWKHVL]HG WKDW PXVLF FDQ DFW DV D VRXUFH RI LQIRUPDWLRQ YDOXHV DQG EHKDYLRUV IRU WKRVH OLVWHQHUV IRU ZKRP WKHLU PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH LV PRUH WKDQ MXVW D fWDVWHf ,Q RWKHU ZRUGV PXVLF LV QRW H[SHFWHG WR DFW DV D SULPDU\ VRXUFH RI LQIRUPDWLRQ YDOXHV DQG EHKDYLRUV IRU DOO DGROHVFHQWV EXW ZKHQ DQ DGROHVFHQW LV GHHSO\ FRPPLWWHG WR D SDUWLFXODU VW\OH RI PXVLF KH RU VKH LV PRUH OLNHO\ WR LQWHUQDOL]H WKH YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV IRXQG ZLWKLQ WKDW PXVLF VXEFXOWXUH 7KLV VWXG\ WHVWV &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWVf f K\SRWKHVLV WR GHWHUPLQH LI Df WKHUH LV D VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ SUHIHUHQFH IRU PXVLFDO VW\OHV DQG YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV DQG Ef GLIIHUHQFHV LQ YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV ZLOO RQO\ EH VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW ZKHQ FRPPLWPHQW LV KLJK

PAGE 20

&+$37(5 5(9,(: 2) 7+( /,7(5$785( &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWVf f K\SRWKHVLV LQYROYHV PDQ\ YDULDEOHV 7KLV FKDSWHU EHJLQV E\ LGHQWLI\LQJ DQG GHILQLQJ WKH WZR LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV RI PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW 7KHVH YDULDEOH VSHFLI\ ZKLFK VW\OH RI PXVLF WKH OLVWHQHU IDYRUV DQG ZKHWKHU WKLV SUHIHUHQFH LV fPRUH WKDQ MXVW D fWDVWHff 7R SURYLGH D EURDG WHVW RI &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWVf f K\SRWKHVLV GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV ZLOO EH LQFOXGHG IURP WKUHH GLVWLQFW GRPDLQV f YDOXHV f DWWLWXGHV DQG f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

PAGE 21

,QGHSHQGHQW 9DULDEOHV 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 7R WHVW DGHTXDWHO\ &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWVf f K\SRWKHVLV WKDW PXVLF FDQ EHFRPH D VRXUFH RI LQIRUPDWLRQ YDOXHV DQG EHKDYLRUV LQ VRPH FDVHV WZR LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV QHHG WR EH FRQVLGHUHG 7KH ILUVW LV PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH LWVHOI &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 3HWHUVRQ f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f f K\SRWKHVLV SURSHUO\ LW ZLOO EH QHFHVVDU\ WR JURXS UHODWHG PXVLF VW\OHV WRJHWKHU WR IRUP D VPDOOHU QXPEHU RI JHQHUDO EXW GLVWLQFW JURXSV .UXVH f XVHG ILYH JHQHUDO JURXSV WR FODVVLI\ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH SRSXODU URFN FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH KHDY\ PHWDO URFN FRXQWU\IRON DQG FODVVLFDOMD]] 7KLV JURXSLQJ DOWKRXJK UHGXFLQJ WKH PXVLF VW\OHV LGHQWLILHG E\ &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 3HWHUVRQ f WR D VPDOOHU QXPEHU ZRXOG SURYH XQVDWLVIDFWRU\ IRU WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ RQ WZR FRXQWV )LUVW RXW RI D VDPSOH RI PDOH XQGHUJUDGXDWHV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD RQO\ bf H[SUHVVHG D SUHIHUHQFH IRU FODVVLFDOMD]] DQG DQ DGGLWLRQDO bf H[SUHVVHG D SUHIHUHQFH IRU FRXQWU\IRON SUHWHVWLQJ GDWD IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 3V\FKRORJ\ 'HSDUWPHQW SDUWLFLSDQW SRRO IRU WKH )DOO VHPHVWHU RI FRQILUPHG WKH VPDOO SHUFHQWDJH RI 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD XQGHUJUDGXDWH PDOHV ZKR SUHIHU FRXQWU\IRON DQG FODVVLFDOMD]] PXVLFf &OHDUO\ WKHVH FDWHJRULHV DOWKRXJK UHSUHVHQWLQJ YHU\ GLVWLQFW PXVLFDO VW\OHV GR QRW KDYH VXIILFLHQW VXSSRUW LQ WKH SRSXODWLRQ WR EH XVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ WR PDNH D YDOLG WHVW

PAGE 22

RI WKH K\SRWKHVLV DQG ZLOO WKHUHIRUH QRW EH LQFOXGHG LQ WKH DQDO\VLV 7KH UHPDLQLQJ WKUHH PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV GLG UHFHLYH VXIILFLHQW HQGRUVHPHQW E\ .UXVHfV VDPSOH ZLWK bf SUHIHUULQJ SRSXODU URFN bf SUHIHUULQJ FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH DQG bf SUHIHUULQJ KHDY\ PHWDO 7KH VHFRQG SUREOHP ZLWK WKH SDUWLFXODU JURXSLQJ RI PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH XVHG E\ .UXVH f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b RI D VDPSOH RI XQGHUJUDGXDWH PDOHV LQGLFDWHG D SUHIHUHQFH IRU UDS PXVLF :KHWKHU UDS PXVLF LV LQFOXGHG LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ LV HQWLUHO\ GHSHQGHQW RQ WKH QXPEHU RI SDUWLFLSDQWV ZKR HQGRUVH LW DV WKHLU PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH ,W LV DOVR SRVVLEOH WKDW RWKHU PXVLF VW\OHV FRXOG HQWHU WKH DQDO\VLV LI HQRXJK SDUWLFLSDQWV LGHQWLI\ LW DV WKHLU SUHIHUUHG VW\OH $JDLQ EDVHG RQ WKH SUHYLRXV GDWD IURP .UXVH f DQG SUHWHVWLQJ GDWD IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 3V\FKRORJ\ SDUWLFLSDQW SRRO IRU LW LV XQOLNHO\ WKDW DQ\ RWKHU PXVLF VW\OH ZLOO VDWLVI\ WKLV FULWHULRQ 7KHUHIRUH WKH PXVLF VW\OHV WKDW DUH OLNHO\ WR EH LQFOXGHG DV LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV LQ WKH DQDO\VLV DUH SRSXODU URFN FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH DQG KHDY\ PHWDO URFN 3DUWLFLSDQWV ZKR

PAGE 23

LQGLFDWH D GLIIHUHQW PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH WKDW LV QRW HQGRUVHG E\ DW OHDVW b RI WKH VDPSOH ZLOO EH H[FOXGHG IURP WKH DQDO\VLV *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW 7KH VHFRQG LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH IRU WKLV VWXG\ LV WKH DGROHVFHQWfV UHSRUWHG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW WR KLV RU KHU SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF 7KH JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW YDULDEOH ZLOO EH XVHG WR SUHGLFW ZKHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH ZLOO EHFRPH D SDUWLFXODUO\ VDOLHQW YDULDEOH IRU GLVWLQJXLVKLQJ EHWZHHQ DGROHVFHQWV EDVHG RQ WKHLU YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV ,Q PDQ\ ZD\V JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW LV DQ REYLRXV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOH $Q\RQH SUHGLFWLQJ ZKLFK RI WZR LQGLYLGXDOV LV PRUH OLNHO\ WR EH LQIOXHQFHG E\ PXVLF ZRXOG FHUWDLQO\ H[SHFW WKH LQGLYLGXDO ZKR LV FRPPLWWHG WR WKH PXVLFf§ZKR KDV JUHDWHU H[SRVXUH HJ OLVWHQV PRUHf PRUH H[FOXVLYH H[SRVXUH HJ SUHIHUV H[FOXVLYHO\ WKH PXVLF LQ TXHVWLRQf DFWLYHO\ VHHNV RXW WKH PXVLF HJ SXUFKDVHV &'Vf SXEOLFO\ LGHQWLILHV ZLWK WKH PXVLF HJ ZHDUV FRQFHUW 7VKLUWVf SHUVRQDOO\ LGHQWLILHV ZLWK WKH PXVLF HJ IDQWDVL]HV DERXW EHFRPLQJ D PXVLFLDQf DQG LGHQWLILHV KLVKHU PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DV DQ LPSRUWDQW GHVFULSWRU RI KLPKHUVHOIf§WR EH PRUH RSHQ WR DQG UHFHSWLYH RI WKH PHVVDJHV FRPPXQLFDWHG WKURXJK WKH FRPSOH[ VWLPXOXV RI PXVLF ,W DOVR EHFRPHV REYLRXV WKDW WKLV FRPPLWPHQW YDULDEOH PXVW EH D fJOREDOf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

PAGE 24

0DNLQJ JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW D SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOH LV DOVR FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWVf f K\SRWKHVLV 7KHLU FRQFHUQ LV WKDW fD FHUWDLQ W\SH RI PXVLF RQFH DGRSWHG E\ WKHLU JURXS PD\ EHJLQ WR DFW DV D VRXUFH RI LQIRUPDWLRQ YDOXHV DQG HYHQ EHKDYLRUf &KULVWHQVRQ t 5REHUWV S f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

PAGE 25

IRXQG WR KDYH D VLJQLILFDQW LPSDFW RQ YDOXHV WKHQ WKH LQIOXHQFH RI PXVLF LV SHQHWUDWLQJ DQG SHUYDVLYH 7KH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 96 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f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t 6XSHU 1HYLOO t .UXVH f 6YHUNR f FRPSOHWHG D FURVVQDWLRQDO IDFWRU DQDO\VLV RI WKH 96 XVLQJ GDWD FROOHFWHG DV SDUW RI WKH :,6 ,QWHUQDWLRQDO VFRULQJ ZDV XVHG WKDW LQFOXGHV RQO\ WKH ILUVW VFDOHV OLVWHG DERYH (FRQRPLF 5HZDUGV DQG (FRQRPLF 6HFXULW\ DUH FRPELQHG DV (FRQRPLFVf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

PAGE 26

VDPSOHV LQFOXGLQJ VDOLHQW ORDGLQJV RQ $FKLHYHPHQW $HVWKHWLFV DQG &UHDWLYLW\ 7KH WKLUG IDFWRU ,QGLYLGXDOLVWLF 2ULHQWDWLRQ LV SULPDULO\ PDGH XS RI /LIH6W\OH DQG $XWRQRP\ ZLWK &UHDWLYLW\ DQG 9DULHW\ LQFOXGHG LQ VRPH VDPSOHV 7KH IRXUWK IDFWRU LV 6RFLDO 2ULHQWDWLRQ DQG LV GHILQHG E\ 6RFLDO ,QWHUDFWLRQ DQG 6RFLDO 5HODWLRQV 6RPH VDPSOHVf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t -RLQHU 3HWHUVRQ t 3IRVW f ,Q SDUWLFXODU .UXVH f IRXQG WKDW DOWKRXJK KHDY\ PHWDO URFN PXVLF ZLWK RU ZLWKRXW O\ULFV QHJDWLYHO\ LQIOXHQFHV DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ D SUHIHUHQFH IRU KHDY\ PHWDO PXVLF LV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK OHVV UHVWULFWLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ ,Q IDFW WKH PRVW UHVWULFWLYH DWWLWXGHV ZHUH DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK D SUHIHUHQFH IRU SRSXODU URFN DQG FRXQWU\IRON PXVLF 7KHVH UHVXOWV DUH FRQIXVLQJ VRPHZKDW FRQWUDGLFWRU\ DQG PDNH LW GLIILFXOW WR SUHGLFW KRZ GLIIHUHQW PXVLF VW\OHV PLJKW DIIHFW OLVWHQHUfV DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ ,W LV

PAGE 27

H[SHFWHG WKDW WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ ZLOO KHOS FODULI\ WKLV LPSRUWDQW UHODWLRQVKLS 7R WKLV HQG DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ DUH PHDVXUHG XVLQJ WZR VFDOHV WKH 6H[UROH 6WHUHRW\SLQJ 6FDOH 656 %XUW f DQG 5DSH 0\WK 6FDOH 506 /RQVZD\ t )LW]JHUDOG f ZKLFK LV D UHYLVLRQ RI %XUWfV f 5DSH 0\WK $FFHSWDQFH 6FDOH WKDW DWWHPSWV WR FRUUHFW ERWK WKHRUHWLFDO DQG SV\FKRPHWULF ZHDNQHVVHV RI WKH %XUW VFDOH 7KH 656 ZLOO DOORZ D UHSOLFDWLRQ RI .UXVHfV f ZRUN DQG KHOSV FODULI\ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SLQJ DV ZHOO DV GHPRQVWUDWH WKH UROH RI JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW LQ WKLV UHODWLRQVKLS 7KH 506 LV EHLQJ LQFOXGHG EHFDXVH D PRGHUDWH UHODWLRQVKLS H[LVWV EHWZHHQ VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SLQJ DQG WKH DFFHSWDQFH RI UDSH P\WKV %XUW f 7KH 506 ZLOO KHOS WR H[WHQG WKH ILQGLQJV RI .UXVH f E\ GHWHUPLQLQJ LI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ DQG PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH LV OLPLWHG WR VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SLQJ RU LI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS H[WHQGV WR DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ WKDW DUH RI JUHDWHU FRQFHUQ WR VRFLDO VFLHQWLVWV 6XEVWDQFH XVH $WWLWXGHV WRZDUG VXEVWDQFH XVH DUH DQRWKHU LPSRUWDQW DUHD RI FRQFHUQ ZLWK UHVSHFW WR DGROHVFHQWV DQG PXVLF &KULVWHQVRQ t 5REHUWV .LQJ f 7KH FRQQHFWLRQ EHWZHHQ PXVLF DQG GUXJ XVH LV PRVW FOHDUO\ LOOXVWUDWHG LQ WKH FOLFK fVH[ GUXJV DQG URFN fQf UROOf %HFDXVH RI WKLV UHODWLRQVKLS LW LV H[SHFWHG WKDW PXVLF SDUWLFXODUO\ FHUWDLQ PXVLF VW\OHV ZLOO KDYH D VWURQJ UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK DGROHVFHQWVf DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG GUXJ XVH LI QRW WKHLU DFWXDO EHKDYLRU VHH EHORZ IRU D GLVFXVVLRQ RI GUXJ XVHf ,Q JHQHUDO SUHIHUHQFHV IRU KHDY\ PHWDO DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH PXVLF DUH H[SHFWHG WR EH PRUH VWURQJO\ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VXEVWDQFH XVH EHFDXVH WKHVH PXVLF FXOWXUHV PRVW RSHQO\ HQGRUVH GUXJ XVH ,W DOVR ZLOO EH LPSRUWDQW ZKHQ DVVHVVLQJ GUXJ XVH DWWLWXGHV WR GLIIHUHQWLDWH EHWZHHQ GLIIHUHQW VXEVWDQFHV $OFRKRO DQG WREDFFR VKRXOG EH DERXW HTXDOO\ HQGRUVHG E\ IDQV RI

PAGE 28

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f DQG VRFLDO VFLHQWLVWV HJ 6W /DZUHQFH t -RLQHU f 6H[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRU LQ PDOHV DOVR LV H[SHFWHG WR IROORZ IURP KLJK VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SLQJ DQG JUHDWHU DFFHSWDQFH RI UDSH P\WKV 5HVHDUFKHUV UDUHO\ FRQVLGHU ZRPHQ DV SHUSHWUDWRUV RI VH[XDO FRHUFLRQ RU PHQ DV YLFWLPV EXW WKH UHVHDUFK WKDW LV DYDLODEOH VXJJHVWV WKDW WKLV G\QDPLF LV QRW DV XQXVXDO DV LW ZRXOG VHHP WR EH DW ILUVW JODQFH )RU H[DPSOH -RKQVRQ DQG -RKQVRQ f IRXQG WKDW b RI D VDPSOH RI FROOHJH PHQ UHSRUWHG LQFLGHQWV RI SUHVVXUHG RU IRUFHG VH[XDO WRXFKLQJ RU LQWHUFRXUVH VLQFH DJH \HDUV ZLWK b RI WKHVH LQFLGHQWV LQYROYLQJ D IHPDOH SHUSHWUDWRU RU SHUSHWUDWRUV RI ERWK VH[HV /RWWHV f DOVR IRXQG VXEVWDQWLDO SURSRUWLRQV RI PDOH XQGHUJUDGXDWHV UHSRUWLQJ WKDW ZRPHQ KDG WULHG WR KDYH VH[ ZLWK WKHP WKURXJK QRQSK\VLFDO FRHUFLYH VWUDWHJLHV ,Q DQRWKHU VWXG\ 0F&RQDJK\ =DPLU DQG 0DQLFDYDVDJDU f IRXQG WKDW b RI D VDPSOH RI IHPDOH PHGLFDO VWXGHQWV UHSRUWHG EHLQJ VR DURXVHG WKDW WKH\ FRXOG QRW VWRS ZKHQ WKHLU SDUWQHU GLG QRW ZDQW LQWHUFRXUVH DQG b RI WKH VDPSOH RI PDOH PHGLFDO VWXGHQWV UHSRUWHG KDYLQJ LQWHUFRXUVH DJDLQVW WKHLU

PAGE 29

ZLOO $V D UHVXOW RI WKHVH VWXGLHV IHPDOHV DOVR ZLOO EH DVNHG WR UHSRUW WKHLU VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRUV DV ZHOO 5HJDUGLQJ VH[XDO FRHUFLRQ LW LV H[SHFWHG WKDW KHDY\ PHWDO DQG UDS PXVLF OLVWHQHUV KHDY\ PHWDO DQG UDS PRVW RIWHQ FRQWDLQ VH[XDOO\ YLROHQWFRHUFLYH O\ULFVf ZLOO UHSRUW D KLJKHU LQFLGHQFH RI VH[XDO YLROHQFH WKDQ ZLOO HLWKHU SRSXODU URFN RU FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH OLVWHQHUV 6XEVWDQFH XVH $JDLQ WKH REYLRXV OLQN EHWZHHQ PXVLF DQG GUXJV FOHDUO\ LPSOLHV WKDW PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH VKRXOG EH UHODWHG WR VXEVWDQFH XVH .LQJ f ,W LV H[SHFWHG WKDW SDUWLFLSDQWV ZKR SUHIHU KHDY\ PHWDO URFN RU FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH PXVLF ZLOO UHSRUW WKH PRVW IUHTXHQW GUXJ XVH 'UXJ XVH ZLOO EH DVVHVVHG E\ DVNLQJ SDUWLFLSDQWV KRZ IUHTXHQWO\ WKH\ XVH GLIIHUHQW FODVVHV RI GUXJV RQ D VFDOH IURP fQHYHUf WR fVHYHUDO WLPHV GDLO\f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f ZKLFK KDV EHHQ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK D SUHIHUHQFH IRU KDUG URFN DQG KHDY\ PHWDO URFN PXVLF $UQHWW f 6HQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ KDV EHHQ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK RWKHU KLJKULVNUHFNOHVV EHKDYLRUV LQFOXGLQJ GPJ XVH SURPLVFXRXV VH[ XQSURWHFWHG VH[ GULYLQJ ZKLOH LQWR[LFDWHG VKRSOLIWLQJ DQG YDQGDOLVP $UQHWW f 7KH DVVRFLDWLRQ EHWZHHQ KHDY\ PHWDO KLJKULVN EHKDYLRUV DQG VHQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ FRXOG SRWHQWLDOO\ FRQIRXQG WKH UHVXOWV RI WKLV VWXG\ ,Q SDUWLFXODU LI

PAGE 30

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f PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG WKHLU JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW WR WKH PXVLF ZLOO EH DVVHVVHG 7KLV VWXG\ DOVR ZLOO PHDVXUH WKH SDUWLFLSDQWVf YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ DFFHSWDQFH RI UDSH P\WKV DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VXEVWDQFHV IUHTXHQF\ RI VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRU DQG IUHTXHQF\ RI VXEVWDQFH XVH 7KLV VWXG\ LV OHVV FRQFHUQHG DERXW WKH VSHFLILF GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV LQ WHUPV RI WKHLU YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV DQG LV PRUH LQWHUHVWHG LQ WKH JHQHUDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW DQG LWV VLJQLILFDQFH DFURVV WKH GRPDLQV RI YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV 7R WKLV HQG WKH IROORZLQJ K\SRWKHVHV ZHUH PDGH UHJDUGLQJ WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV LQ WKLV VWXG\ +\SRWKHVHV *HQHUDO +\SRWKHVHV $ 0XVLF SUHIHUHQFH DV LQGLFDWHG E\ WKH SDUWLFLSDQWfV VHOIUHSRUWHG SUHIHUHQFH IURP DPRQJ VSHFLILHG VW\OHV RI PXVLF LH KHDY\ PHWDO URFN SRSXODU URFN FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH DQG UDSf DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW WR WKH SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF ZLOO EH VLJQLILFDQWO\ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV

PAGE 31

% 0XVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW WR WKDW PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DV PHDVXUHG E\ WKH 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW GLIIHUHQFHV LQ YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV ZLOO RQO\ EH VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW ZKHQ FRPPLWPHQW LV KLJK 6SHFLILF +\SRWKHVHV 9DOXHV 2Q WKH 8WLOLWDULDQ 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU RI WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH 03f DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW *&f ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW SRSXODU URFN IDQV ZLOO SODFH PRUH LPSRUWDQFH RQ WKLV IDFWRU LH VFRUH KLJKHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV ZLOO SODFH OHVV LPSRUWDQFH RQ WKLV IDFWRU LH VFRUH ORZHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 2Q WKH 2ULHQWDWLRQ 7RZDUG 6HOI$FWXDOL]DWLRQ IDFWRU RI WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f 03 DQG *& ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV ZLOO SODFH PRUH LPSRUWDQFH RQ WKLV IDFWRU LH VFRUH KLJKHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZLOO SODFH OHVV LPSRUWDQFH RQ WKLV IDFWRU LH VFRUH ORZHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 2Q WKH ,QGLYLGXDOLVWLF 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU RI WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f 03 DQG *& ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV ZLOO SODFH PRUH LPSRUWDQFH RQ WKLV IDFWRU LH VFRUH KLJKHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV SRSXODU URFN IDQV ZLOO SODFH OHVV LPSRUWDQFH RQ WKLV IDFWRU LH VFRUH ORZHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 2Q WKH 6RFLDO 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU RI WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f 03 DQG *& ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW SRSXODU URFN IDQV ZLOO SODFH PRUH LPSRUWDQFH RQ WKLV IDFWRU LH VFRUH KLJKHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV

PAGE 32

KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZLOO SODFH OHVV LPSRUWDQFH RQ WKLV IDFWRU LH VFRUH ORZHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 2Q WKH $GYHQWXURXV 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU RI WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f 03 DQG *& ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW KHDY\ PHWDO URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV ZLOO SODFH PRUH LPSRUWDQFH RQ WKLV IDFWRU LH VFRUH KLJKHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV SRSXODU URFN IDQV ZLOO SODFH OHVV LPSRUWDQFH RQ WKLV IDFWRU LH VFRUH ORZHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV $WWLWXGHV 2Q WKH 6H[5ROH 6WHUHRW\SLQJ 6FDOH %XUW f 03 DQG *& ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW SRSXODU URFN IDQV ZLOO EH PRUH VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SHG LH VFRUH KLJKHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV ZLOO EH OHVV VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SHG LH VFRUH ORZHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 2Q WKH 5DSH 0\WK 6FDOH /RQVZD\ t )LW]JHUDOG f 03 DQG *& ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZLOO EH PRUH DFFHSWLQJ RI UDSH P\WKV LH VFRUH KLJKHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV ZLOO EH OHVV DFFHSWLQJ RI UDSH P\WKV LH VFRUH ORZHUf DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 3HUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WREDFFR DQG DOFRKRO ZLOO EH HTXDO IRU DOO PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV 3UHIHUHQFH IRU FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH DQG KHDY\ PHWDO URFN ZLOO EH DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK PRUH SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG LOOHJDO GUXJ XVH &ROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH DQG KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQVf DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG LOOHJDO GUXJ XVH ZLOO EHFRPH PRUH SHUPLVVLYH DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV $WWLWXGHV WRZDUG GUXJ XVH ZLOO EH PHDVXUHG E\ WKH 3HUPLVVLYHQHVV 6XEVFDOH IURP WKH 6XEVWDQFH $EXVH $WWLWXGHV 6FDOH -HQNLQV )LVKHU t $SSOHJDWH f DQG E\ WKH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6FDOH FRQVWPFWHG E\ WKH DXWKRUf

PAGE 33

%HKDYLRUV &RQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH K\SRWKHVHV UHJDUGLQJ VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SLQJ DQG UDSH P\WK DFFHSWDQFH 03 DQG *& ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZLOO UHSRUW PRUH VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRUV LH VFRUH KLJKHU RQ WKH 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\ /RQVZD\ t )LW]JHUDOG f DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV ZLOO UHSRUW IHZHU VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRUV LH VFRUH ORZHU RQ WKH 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\ /RQVZD\ t )LW]JHUDOG f DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 3UHIHUHQFH IRU FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH DQG KHDY\ PHWDO URFN ZLOO EH DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK PRUH IUHTXHQW XVH RI LOOHJDO GUXJV ZKHUHDV XVH RI WREDFFR DQG DOFRKRO XVH ZLOO EH HTXDO IRU DOO PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV &ROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH DQG KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQVf XVH RI LOOHJDO GUXJV ZLOO LQFUHDVH DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 6XEVWDQFH XVH ZLOO EH PHDVXUHG E\ WKH 6XEVWDQFH 8VH 6FDOH FRQVWUXFWHG E\ WKH DXWKRUf

PAGE 34

&+$37(5 0(7+2' 3DUWLFLSDQWV 3DUWLFLSDQWV ZHUH XQGHUJUDGXDWHV PDOHV DQG IHPDOHV b DQG b UHVSHFWLYHO\f VROLFLWHG IURP SV\FKRORJ\ FODVVHV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD ZKR YROXQWHHUHG WR SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKLV UHVHDUFK IRU FRXUVH FUHGLW 8QGHUJUDGXDWH VWXGHQWV ZHUH LQYLWHG WR SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKLV VWXG\ EHFDXVH PXVLF FRQVXPSWLRQ UHPDLQV DQ LPSRUWDQW SDUW RI OLIH IRU \RXWK WKURXJKRXW DGROHVFHQFH DQG WKH FROOHJH \HDUV &KULVWHQVRQ t 5REHUWV f 7KH DJHV RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV LQFOXGHG b DJH b DJH b DJH b DJH b DJH DQG b DJH 7KH DFDGHPLF FODVV UDQJH RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV LQFOXGHG b IUHVKPDQ b VRSKRPRUHV b MXQLRUV b VHQLRUV b SRVWEDF DQG b JUDGXDWH VWXGHQWV 7KH UDFLDO PDNHXS RI WKH VDPSOH ZDV b :KLWH b /DWLQR b $VLDQ b %ODFN DQG b RWKHU 'DWD IRU DOO VXEMHFWV ZHUH UHWDLQHG IRU DQDO\VLV ,QVWUXPHQWV 7KH LQVWUXPHQWV XVHG LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ LQFOXGH WKH IROORZLQJ 0XVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW ZHUH ERWK DVVHVVHG XVLQJ WKH 0XVLFDO 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 034f 7KH 034 ZDV XVHG WR JDWKHU GHWDLOHG LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW WKH SDUWLFLSDQWVf PXVLFDO WDVWHV DQG KRZ FRPPLWWHG WKH\ ZHUH WR OLVWHQLQJ WR WKHLU IDYRULWH PXVLF ,WHP DVVHVVHV PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG WKH UHPDLQGHU RI WKH LWHPV DVVHVV JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW &RQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH GLVFXVVLRQ DERYH WKH DVVHVVPHQW RI JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW LV PXOWLGLPHQVLRQDO DQG LQFOXGHV D FRPSUHKHQVLYH OLVW RI LWHPV WR DVVHVV WKH PDQ\ ZD\V LQ ZKLFK IDQV FDQ FRPPLW WKHPVHOYHV WR D SDUWLFXODU VW\OH RI

PAGE 35

PXVLF 7KLV LQVWUXPHQW ZDV FRQVWUXFWHG E\ WKH DXWKRU DQG YDOLGDWLRQ RI WKLV LQVWUXPHQW LQFOXGLQJ UHOLDELOLW\ DQG IDFWRU DQDO\VLV LV UHSRUWHG LQ WKH 5HVXOWV 6HFWLRQ 7KH 0XVLFDO 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH FDQ EH IRXQG LQ $SSHQGL[ $ 9DOXHV ZHUH DVVHVVHG XVLQJ WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 96 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f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fRI OLWWOH RU QR LPSRUWDQFHf WR fYHU\ LPSRUWDQWf 7KH IROORZLQJ LV D VDPSOH LWHP f,W LV QRZ RU ZLOO LQ WKH IXWXUH EH LPSRUWDQW IRU PH WR XVH DOO P\ NQRZOHGJH DQG VNLOOVf +LJKHU VFRUHV UHIOHFW SODFLQJ JUHDWHU LPSRUWDQFH RQ YDOXH 1HYLOO t 6XSHU f UHSRUW WKH D DQG WHVWUHWHVW UHOLDELOLWLHV IRU WKH LQGLYLGXDO YDOXH VFDOHV WR EH JUHDWHU WKDQ ZLWK WKH H[FHSWLRQ RI $ELOLW\ 8WLOL]DWLRQ /LIH 6W\OH DQG 3HUVRQDO 'HYHORSPHQW 7KH FRQVWUXFW YDOLGLW\ RI WKH 96 LV HVWDEOLVKHG E\ D YDULHW\ RI LQGLFHV EHJLQQLQJ ZLWK WKH XVH RI SURSHU LQYHQWRU\ GHYHORSPHQW SURFHGXUHV 1HYLOO t 6XSHU f )DFWRU DQDO\VLV RI WKH 96 GHPRQVWUDWHG WKH H[SHFWHG FRUUHODWLRQV EHWZHHQ UHODWHG YDOXHV HJ EHWZHHQ $FKLHYHPHQW DQG 3HUVRQDO 'HYHORSPHQWf ZKLOH PDLQWDLQLQJ WKH LQGHSHQGHQFH RI GLYHUJHQW IDFWRUV 1HYLOO t 6XSHU f 0RUHRYHU WKH IDFWRU VWUXFWXUH RI WKH 96 UHPDLQV FRQVLVWHQW DFURVV FXOWXUHV 6YHUNR f

PAGE 36

DQG DPRQJ GLIIHUHQW DJH JURXSV ZLWKLQ WKH VDPH FXOWXUH LH KLJK VFKRRO XQLYHUVLW\ DQG DGXOW VDPSOHV 1HYLOO t 6XSHU f $GGLWLRQDO VWXGLHV KDYH IXUWKHU YDOLGDWHG WKH 96 E\ GHPRQVWUDWLQJ LWV KLJK FRUUHODWLRQV ZLWK RWKHU LQVWUXPHQWV WKDW DVVHVV VLPLODU YDOXHV 1HYLOO t .UXVH f 7KH 9DOXHV 6FDOH FDQ EH IRXQG LQ $SSHQGL[ % 6H[UROH VWHUHRW\SLQJ ZDV DVVHVVHG XVLQJ WKH 6H[5ROH 6WHUHRW\SLQJ 6FDOH 656 %XUW f 7KLV LQVWUXPHQW FRQWDLQV QLQH VWDWHPHQWV WR ZKLFK WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV PXVW UHVSRQG RQ D SRLQW /LNHUW VFDOH IURP fVWURQJO\ GLVDJUHHf WR fVWURQJO\ DJUHHf 7KH IROORZLQJ LV D VDPSOH LWHP f$ ZRPDQ VKRXOG QHYHU FRQWUDGLFW KHU KXVEDQG LQ SXEOLFf +LJKHU VFRUHV UHIOHFW JUHDWHU HQGRUVHPHQW RI VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SLQJ %XUW f UHSRUWHG D &URQEDFKfV D RI IRU WKH 656 7KH YDOLGLW\ RI WKH 656 LV GHPRQVWUDWHG E\ LWV KLJK FRUUHODWLRQ &KHFN t 0DODPXWK f ZLWK WKH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG :RPHQ 6FDOH 6SHQFH t +HOPUHLFK KLJKHU VFRUHV UHIOHFW PRUH SURIHPLQLVW DWWLWXGHVf DQG LWV DELOLW\ WR SUHGLFW DWWLWXGHV DQG EHOLHIV UHJDUGLQJ VH[XDOLW\ DQG YLROHQFH &KHFN t 0DODPXWK f 7KH 6H[5ROH 6WHUHRW\SLQJ 6FDOH FDQ EH IRXQG LQ $SSHQGL[ & 5DSH P\WK DFFHSWDQFH ZDV DVVHVVHG XVLQJ WKH 5DSH 0\WK 6FDOH 506 /RQVZD\ t )LW]JHUDOG f 7KLV LV D LWHP VFDOH ZKHUH WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV UHVSRQG RQ D SRLQW /LNHUW VFDOH IURP fVWURQJO\ GLVDJUHHf WR fVWURQJO\ DJUHHf 7KH IROORZLQJ LV D VDPSOH LWHP f:RPHQ WHQG WR H[DJJHUDWH KRZ PXFK UDSH DIIHFWV WKHPf +LJKHU VFRUHV UHIOHFW JUHDWHU DFFHSWDQFH RI fDWWLWXGHV DQG EHOLHIV WKDW DUH JHQHUDOO\ IDOVH EXW ZLGHO\ DQG SHUVLVWHQWO\ KHOG DQG WKDW VHUYH WR GHQ\ DQG MXVWLI\ PDOH VH[XDO DJJUHVVLRQ DJDLQVW ZRPHQf /RQVZD\ t )LW]JHUDOG S f /RQVZD\ DQG )LW]JHUDOG f

PAGE 37

UHSRUW D FRHIILFLHQW D RI FRPSDUHG WR D &URQEDFKfV D IRU WKH RULJLQDO VFDOH %XUW f ZLWK LWHPWRWRWDO FRUUHODWLRQV UDQJLQJ IURP WR &RQWHQW YDOLGLW\ ZDV HQVXUHG LQ WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI WKH VFDOH E\ JHQHUDWLQJ TXHVWLRQV WR FRYHU DOO VHYHQ DUHDV RI WKH UDSH P\WK FRQVWUXFW LGHQWLILHG E\ 3D\QH f YLFWLP SUHFLSLWDWLRQ GHILQLWLRQ RI UDSH PDOH LQWHQWLRQ YLFWLP GHVLUHHQMR\PHQW IDOVH FKDUJHV WULYLDOL]DWLRQ RI WKH FULPH DQG GHYLDQFH RI WKH DFW (YLGHQFH IRU WKH FRQVWUXFW YDOLGLW\ LV IRXQG LQ WKH 506fV SRVLWLYH FRUUHODWLRQV ZLWK PHDVXUHV RI KRVWLOLW\ WRZDUG ZRPHQ DFFHSWDQFH RI LQWHUSHUVRQDO YLROHQFH DQG DGYHUVDULDO VH[XDO EHOLHIV /RQVZD\ t )LW]JHUDOG f 7KH 5DSH 0\WK 6FDOH FDQ EH IRXQG LQ $SSHQGL[ 3HUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG JHQHUDO GUXJ XVH ZDV DVVHVVHG XVLQJ WKH 3HUPLVVLYHQHVV 6XEVFDOH RI WKH 6XEVWDQFH $EXVH $WWLWXGHV 6FDOH 6$$ &KDSSHO 9HDFK t .UXJ -HQNLQV )LVKHU t $SSOHJDWH f 7KH 3HUPLVVLYHQHVV 6XEVFDOH LV D LWHP VFDOH ZKHUH WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV UHVSRQG RQ D SRLQW /LNHUW VFDOH IURP fVWURQJO\ GLVDJUHHf WR fVWURQJO\ DJUHHf 7KH IROORZLQJ LV D VDPSOH LWHP f,W FDQ EH QRUPDO IRU D WHHQDJHU WR H[SHULPHQW ZLWK GUXJVf +LJKHU VFRUHV UHIOHFW PRUH SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VXEVWDQFH XVH -HQNLQV HW DO f YDOLGDWHG WKH 6$$ &KDSSHO HW DO f IRU D FROOHJH SRSXODWLRQ EHFDXVH WKH RULJLQDO LQVWUXPHQW ZDV GHYHORSHG IRU PHGLFDO VWXGHQWV DQG VXEVWDQFH DEXVH SURIHVVLRQDOV -HQNLQV HW DO f UHSOLFDWHG WKH HVVHQWLDO IDFWRU VWUXFWXUH RI WKH 6$$ LGHQWLI\LQJ IDFWRUV f 6WHUHRW\SHV DQG 0RUDOLVP D V\QWKHVLV RI WKH 1RQVWHUHRW\SHV DQG 1RQPRUDOLVP IDFWRUV LGHQWLILHG E\ &KDSSHO HW DO f f 7UHDWPHQW D V\QWKHVLV RI WKH 7UHDWPHQW ,QWHUYHQWLRQ DQG 7UHDWPHQW 2SWLPLVP IDFWRUV LGHQWLILHG E\ &KDSSHO HW DO f DQG f 3HUPLVVLYHQHVV ZKLFK VKDUHG

PAGE 38

LWHPV ZLWK WKH 3HUPLVVLYHQHVV )DFWRU LGHQWLILHG E\ &KDSSHO HW DO f -HQNLQV HW DO f UHSRUWHG DQ (LJHQYDOXH RI IRU WKH 3HUPLVVLYHQHVV IDFWRU ZKLFK DFFRXQWHG IRU b RI WKH YDULDQFH -HQNLQV HW DO f UHSRUWHG &URQEDFKfV D RI DQG D WHVWUHWHVW UHOLDELOLW\ RYHU ZHHNV RI 7KH 3HUPLVVLYHQHVV 6XEVFDOH IURP WKH 6XEVWDQFH $EXVH $WWLWXGHV 6FDOH FDQ EH IRXQG LQ $SSHQGL[ ( 3HUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WKH XVH RI VSHFLILF GUXJV ZDV DVVHVVHG XVLQJ WKH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6FDOH $76f D LWHP FRQVWUXFWHG E\ WKH DXWKRU WR DVVHVV SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG YDULRXV VXEVWDQFHV RU FODVVHV RI VXEVWDQFHV 7KH $76 ZDV LQFOXGHG WR DOORZ WKH DVVHVVPHQW RI DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VSHFLILF VXEVWDQFHV DQG WKHUHE\ GHWHUPLQH LI FHUWDLQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV KHOG SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VSHFLILF VXEVWDQFHV 7KH TXHVWLRQ VWUXFWXUH RI WKH $76 IROORZV WKH IRUPDW f7KH XVH RI >VXEVWDQFH RU FODVV RI VXEVWDQFHV@ VKRXOG QRW EH UHJXODWHG RU UHVWULFWHG LQ DQ\ ZD\f 7KH WHQ TXHVWLRQV DVVHVV WKH IROORZLQJ WHQ VXEVWDQFHV f WREDFFR f DOFRKRO f PDULMXDQD f KDOOXFLQRJHQV f GHVLJQHU GUXJV f SUHVFULSWLRQ GUXJV f VWLPXODQWV f GHSUHVVDQWV f FRFDLQH DQG f KHURLQ 7KH IROORZLQJ LV D VDPSOH LWHP f7KH XVH RI KDOOXFLQRJHQV VXFK DV /6' PXVKURRPV RU 3&3 VKRXOG QRW EH UHJXODWHG RU UHVWULFWHG LQ DQ\ ZD\f 7KH SDUWLFLSDQWV UHVSRQG RQ D SRLQW /LNHUW VFDOH IURP fVWURQJO\ GLVDJUHHf WR fVWURQJO\ DJUHHf 7KLV LQVWUXPHQW ZDV FRQVWUXFWHG E\ WKH DXWKRU DQG YDOLGDWLRQ RI WKLV LQVWUXPHQW LQFOXGLQJ UHOLDELOLW\ DQG IDFWRU DQDO\VLV LV UHSRUWHG LQ WKH 5HVXOWV 6HFWLRQ 7KH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6FDOH FDQ EH IRXQG LQ $SSHQGL[ ) 7KH IUHTXHQF\ RI VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRUV IRU ERWK PDOHV DQG IHPDOHV ZDV DVVHVVHG XVLQJ WKH 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\ 6([6 .RVV t 2URV

PAGE 39

f 7KH VFDOH ZDV RULJLQDOO\ ZULWWHQ WR DVVHVV ERWK PDOHVf UHSRUWV RI VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRUV DJDLQVW IHPDOHV DQG IHPDOHVf UHSRUWV RI VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRU FRPPLWWHG DJDLQVW WKHP E\ PDOHV 0F&RQDJK\ =DPLU DQG 0DQLFDYDVDJDU f XVHG D PRGLILHG YHUVLRQ RI WKLV VFDOH WKDW DOORZHG ERWK PHQ DQG ZRPHQ WR UHSRUW KRZ RIWHQ WKH\ KDYH HQJDJHG LQ VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRU DQG KRZ RIWHQ WKH\ ZHUH D YLFWLP RI VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRU ,Q WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ WKH 6([6 ZDV OLPLWHG WR IRFXV RQO\ RQ WKH IUHTXHQF\ ZLWK ZKLFK WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV KDYH HQJDJHG LQ VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRU ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH 6([6 ZDV PRGLILHG IURP WKH VLPSOH \HVQR IRUPDW RI WKH RULJLQDO IRUP .RVV t 2URV f WR D SRLQW /LNHUW VFDOH ZKLFK DOORZHG WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV WR LQGLFDWH KRZ IUHTXHQWO\ WKH\ KDYH HQJDJHG LQ WKH WDUJHW EHKDYLRU IURP fQHYHUf WR fRIWHQf 7KH VFDOH XWLOL]HV D GLPHQVLRQDO YLHZ RI UDSH LQ ZKLFK fUDSH UHSUHVHQWV DQ H[WUHPH EHKDYLRU EXW RQH WKDW LV RQ D FRQWLQXXP ZLWK QRUPDO PDOH EHKDYLRU ZLWKLQ WKH FXOWXUHf .RVV t 2URV S f 7KH 6([6 WDNHV LQWR FRQVLGHUDWLRQ WKH SRVVLELOLW\ WKDW IRUFH RU WKH WKUHDW RI IRUFH PD\ KDYH EHHQ XVHG LQ D VLWXDWLRQ EXW IRU YDULRXV UHDVRQV VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH GLG QRW RFFXU 7KH VFDOH FRQVLVWV RI VWDWHPHQWV WKDW LQFOXGH D SURJUHVVLRQ RQ WKH W\SH RI FRHUFLRQ LH IURP YHUEDO FRHUFLRQ WR WKUHDWV RI YLROHQFH WR WKH XVH RI YLROHQFHf DQG D SURJUHVVLRQ RQ WKH W\SH RI VH[XDO DFWV LH NLVVLQJ DQG SHWWLQJ WR DWWHPSWHG LQWHUFRXUVH WR RUDO RU DQDO LQWHUFRXUVHf 7KH 6([6 DOVR LQFOXGHV WKUHH XQVFRUHG LWHPV DVVHVVLQJ FRQVHQVXDO VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH KDYLQJ DQRWKHU SHUVRQ PLVLQWHUSUHW WKH OHYHO RI LQWLPDF\ RQH GHVLUHV DQG KDYLQJ EHHQ UDSHG 7KH IROORZLQJ LV D VDPSOH LWHP f+DYH \RX HYHU EHHQ LQ D VLWXDWLRQ ZKHUH \RX WULHG WR JHW VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH ZLWK DQRWKHU SHUVRQ ZKHQ KH RU VKH GLGQfW ZDQW WR E\ WKUHDWHQLQJ

PAGE 40

WR XVH SK\VLFDO IRUFH WZLVWLQJ KLV RU KHU DUP KROGLQJ KLP RU KHU GRZQ HWFf LI KH RU VKH GLGQfW FRRSHUDWH EXW IRU YDULRXV UHDVRQV VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH GLG QRW RFFXU"f +LJKHU VFRUHV UHIOHFW D JUHDWHU UHSRUWHG IUHTXHQF\ RI HQJDJLQJ LQ VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRUV 1R UHOLDELOLW\ RU YDOLGLW\ GDWD LV DYDLODEOH IRU WKLV PRGLILHG 6([6 +RZHYHU .RVV t 2URV f IRXQG WKDW EHWZHHQ b RI WKHLU XQLYHUVLW\ VDPSOH RI PHQ UHSRUWHG XVLQJ VRPH GHJUHH RI SK\VLFDO IRUFH RU WKUHDWV RI SK\VLFDO IRUFH WR FRHUFH SDUWQHUV LQWR VH[XDO DFWV 7KH DXWKRUV FRQFOXGHG WKDW WKH LQVWUXPHQW ZDV D YDOLG DSSURDFK WR VDPSOLQJ LQ UDSH UHVHDUFK )DFWRU DQDO\VLV RI WKH 6([6 E\ .RVV t 2URV f UHYHDOHG RQH IDFWRU WKDW DFFRXQWHG IRU b RI WKH YDULDQFH 7KH PRGLILHG 6([6 XVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ ZDV WHVWHG IRU UHOLDELOLW\ DQG YDOLGLW\ DQG WKH UHVXOWV RI WKHVH DQDO\VHV LQFOXGLQJ UHOLDELOLW\ DQG IDFWRU DQDO\VLV LV UHSRUWHG LQ WKH 5HVXOWV 6HFWLRQ 7KH 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\ FDQ EH IRXQG LQ $SSHQGL[ 6XEVWDQFH XVH EHKDYLRU ZDV DVVHVVHG XVLQJ WKH 6XEVWDQFH 8VH 6FDOH D LWHP VFDOH FRQVWUXFWHG E\ WKH DXWKRU 7KH SDUWLFLSDQWV LQGLFDWHG RQ D SRLQW /LNHUW VFDOH fQHYHUf fVHYHUDO WLPHV GDLO\ff WKH IUHTXHQF\ RI WKHLU XVH RI WKH IROORZLQJ WHQ VXEVWDQFHV f WREDFFR f DOFRKRO f PDULMXDQD f KDOOXFLQRJHQV f GHVLJQHU GUXJV f SUHVFULSWLRQ GUXJV f VWLPXODQWV f GHSUHVVDQWV f FRFDLQH DQG f KHURLQ 7KH IROORZLQJ LV D VDPSOH LWHP f+RZ RIWHQ GR \RX XVH KDOOXFLQRJHQV VXFK DV /6' PXVKURRPV RU 3&3"f 7KLV LQVWUXPHQW ZDV FRQVWUXFWHG E\ WKH DXWKRU DQG YDOLGDWLRQ RI WKLV LQVWUXPHQW LQFOXGLQJ UHOLDELOLW\ DQG IDFWRU DQDO\VLV LV UHSRUWHG LQ WKH 5HVXOWV 6HFWLRQ 7KH 6XEVWDQFH 8VH 6FDOH FDQ EH IRXQG LQ $SSHQGL[ +

PAGE 41

$ VKRUW LWHPf IRUP RI WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 666 0DGVHQ 'DV %RJHQ t *URVVPDQ f ZDV XVHG WR DVVHVV VHQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ )RU HDFK LWHP SDUWLFLSDQWV FKRRVH EHWZHHQ WZR DOWHUQDWLYHV WKH RQH ZKLFK EHVW GHVFULEHV WKHLU SHUVRQDO DWWLWXGH 7KH IROORZLQJ LV D VDPSOH LWHP f, ZRXOG OLNH WR KLWFKKLNH DFURVV WKH FRXQWU\ 25 +LWFKKLNLQJ LV WRR GDQJHURXV D ZD\ WR WUDYHOf 0DGVHQ HW DO f UHSRUWHG D WHVWUHWHVW UHOLDELOLW\ RYHU D PRQWK LQWHUYDO RI DQG D &URQEDFKfV D RI 0DGVHQ HW DO f UHSRUWHG WKDW WKLV VKRUW IRUP 666 FRUUHODWHV ZLWK WKH WRWDO VFRUH RI WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH )RUP 9 =XFNHUPDQ f 7KH YDOLGLW\ RI WKH 666 LV GHPRQVWUDWHG E\ LWV KLJK FRUUHODWLRQ ZLWK WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH )RUP 9 =XFNHUPDQ f ZKLFK LV XVHG LQ YLUWXDOO\ DOO RI WKH UHFHQW UHVHDUFK FRQGXFWHG LQ WKH DUHD RI VHQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ $UQHWW f )XUWKHUPRUH 0DGVHQ HW DO f IRXQG WKDW PHQ VFRUH KLJKHU WKDQ ZRPHQ RQ WKH VKRUW IRUP 666 DQG WKDW LW FRUUHODWHV SRVLWLYHO\ ZLWK DOFRKRO XVH GUXJ XVH DQG VH[XDO H[SUHVVLYHQHVV EXW LV XQFRUUHODWHG ZLWK VRFLDO GHVLUDELOLW\ 7KLV VKRUW IRUP DOVR DYRLGV WKH XVH RI GDWHG ODQJXDJH DQG TXHVWLRQV FRQFHUQLQJ DOFRKRO DQG GUXJ XVH IRXQG LQ )RUP 9 ZKLFK $UQHWW f LGHQWLILHG DV OLPLWDWLRQV RI )RUP 9 7KH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH FDQ EH IRXQG LQ $SSHQGL[ $ 'HPRJUDSKLF 4XHVWLRQQDLUH ZDV XVHG WR JDWKHU LQIRUPDWLRQ RQ WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV LQFOXGLQJ DJH UDFH JHQGHU FROOHJH FODVV IUDWHPLW\VRURULW\ PHPEHUVKLS 6(6 VFKRRO EDFNJURXQG DQG FXOWXUDO EDFNJURXQG 7KH GHPRJUDSKLF TXHVWLRQQDLUH FDQ EH IRXQG LQ $SSHQGL[ -

PAGE 42

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f WKH 'HPRJUDSKLF 6XUYH\ f WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH f WKH 6H[5ROH 6WHUHRW\SLQJ 6FDOH f WKH 5DSH 0\WK 6FDOH f WKH 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\ f WKH 6XEVWDQFH $EXVH $WWLWXGHV 6FDOH f WKH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6FDOH f WKH 6XEVWDQFH 8VH 6FDOH DQG f WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH %DWWHU\ ,, ZKLFK WRRN DERXW PLQXWHV WR FRPSOHWH PHDVXUHV WZR YDULDEOHV f PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG f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fV &RXQVHOLQJ &HQWHU 1R SDUWLFLSDQW UHSRUWHG DQ\ GLVFRPIRUW DV D UHVXOW RI SDUWLFLSDWLQJ LQ WKLV VWXG\

PAGE 43

&+$37(5 5(68/76 3UHOLPLQDU\ $QDO\VHV %HIRUH UXQQLQJ WKH PDLQ DQDO\VHV WR WHVW WKH K\SRWKHVHV VHYHUDO SUHOLPLQDU\ DQDO\VHV ZHUH FRPSXWHG ,Q SDUWLFXODU LW ZDV QHFHVVDU\ ILUVW WR GHWHUPLQH ZKLFK PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV ZRXOG EH LQFOXGHG LQ WKH PDLQ DQDO\VHV DQG ZKLFK DQDO\VHV RI GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV ZRXOG LQFOXGH WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 666 0DGVHQ HW DO f DV D FRYDULDWH ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6XEVWDQFH 8VH 6FDOH DQG WKH 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\ .RVV t 2URV f QHHGHG WR EH VFRUHG DQG DQDO\]HG WR FRQILUP WKH UHOLDELOLW\ DQG YDOLGLW\ RI WKH WKHVH LQVWUXPHQWV 7KH 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH ZKLFK LQFOXGHG ZULWHLQ LWHPV DOVR QHHGHG WR EH VFRUHG DQG YDOLGDWHG DIWHU :LQGVRUL]LQJ 0DUDVFXLOR t 0F6ZHHQH\ f DQG VWDQGDUGL]LQJ WKHVH ZULWHLQ LWHPV 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 2Q WKH 034 SDUWLFLSDQWV LQGLFDWHG WKHLU SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF IURP DPRQJ QLQH FKRLFHV RU ZURWH LQ WKHLU SUHIHUHQFH LI LW ZDV QRW OLVWHG 7DEOH GLVSOD\V WKH GLVWULEXWLRQ RI SDUWLFLSDQWV LQWR WKH GLIIHUHQW PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH FDWHJRULHV 7KH FULWHULRQ HVWDEOLVKHG IRU LQFOXGLQJ D SDUWLFXODU PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH FDWHJRU\ LQ WKH PDLQ DQDO\VLV ZDV WKDW WKH FDWHJRU\ PXVW EH HQGRUVHG E\ DW OHDVW b RI WKH VDPSOH $FFRUGLQJ WR WKLV FULWHULRQ RQO\ SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH ZLOO EH LQFOXGHG LQ WKH PDLQ DQDO\VLV H[DPLQLQJ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW DQG YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRU +RZHYHU DOO PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV ZHUH LQFOXGHG LQ WKH

PAGE 44

YDOLGDWLRQ RI WKH 034 WKH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6FDOH WKH 6XEVWDQFH 8VH 6FDOH DQG WKH 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\ 7DEOH 1XPEHU RI 3DUWLFLSDQWV LQ DOO 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH &DWHJRULHV 0XVLF 6W\OH 1XPEHU 3HUFHQWDJH &ODVVLFDO b &ROOHJH$OWHPDWLYH b &RXQWU\ b )RON b +HDY\ 0HWDO 5RFN b -D]] b 1HZ $JH b 2WKHU b 3RSXODU 5RFN b 5DS b 5K\WKP t %OXHV b 127( 5K\WKP t %OXHV ZDV QRW LQFOXGHG DV D VWDQGDUG FDWHJRU\ RQ WKH 034 EXW ZDV ZULWWHQ LQ E\ SDUWLFLSDQWV 'HSHQGHQW 9DULDEOHV 6HQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ DV PHDVXUHG E\ WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 666 0DGVHQ HW DO f ZDV SURSRVHG DV D SRVVLEOH FRQIRXQGLQJ YDULDEOH LQ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV $V D SUHOLPLQDU\ DQDO\VLV 3HDUVRQ SURGXFW PRPHQW FRUUHODWLRQ FRHIILFLHQWV ZHUH FRPSXWHG WR GHWHUPLQH ZKLFK GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV ZHUH VLJQLILFDQWO\ UHODWHG WR WKH 666 7KH VDPSOH XVHG LQ WKLV DQDO\VLV ZDV OLPLWHG WR RQO\ SDUWLFLSDQWV ZKR SUHIHUUHG SRSXODU URFN RU FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH 1 f EHFDXVH RQO\ WKHVH SDUWLFLSDQWV ZLOO EH XVHG LQ WKH PDLQ DQDO\VLV 7KH VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW UHVXOWV RI WKLV DQDO\VLV DUH SURYLGHG LQ 7DEOH $Q LQGHSHQGHQW VDPSOHV UWHVW ZDV FDOFXODWHG WR WHVW IRU VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV LQ 666 VFRUHV EHWZHHQ SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV 7KH UHVXOWV ZHUH VLJQLILFDQW W S f ZLWK PHDQV RI

PAGE 45

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f 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 7KH 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 034f LQFOXGHG LWHPV ZLWK GDWD SRLQWV LH VHYHUDO LWHPV LQFOXGHG RU PRUH GDWD SRLQWVf GHVLJQHG WR PHDVXUH JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW 7KHVH GDWD SRLQWV LQFOXGHG GLIIHUHQW UHVSRQVH PHWKRGV LQFOXGLQJ f GDWD SRLQWV IRU ZKLFK SDUWLFLSDQWV ZURWH LQ D YDOXH f GDWD SRLQWV IRU ZKLFK WKH\ HQGRUVHG D VWDWHPHQW DQG f GDWD SRLQWV IRU ZKLFK WKH\ UHVSRQG WR D VWDWHPHQW RQ D /LNHUW VFDOH 7KH GDWD SRLQWV LQ ZKLFK SDUWLFLSDQWV ZURWH LQ D YDOXH SUHVHQWHG D YDULHW\ RI SUREOHPV IRU GDWD HQWU\ )LUVW SDUWLFLSDQWV RIWHQ ZURWH LQ D UDQJH RI YDOXHV HJ f ff

PAGE 46

IRU DQ LWHP HJ f+RZ PDQ\ PRQWKV KDV \RXU LQGLFDWHG SUHIHUHQFH EHHQ \RXU FOHDU IDYRULWH"ff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f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fIRUHYHUf fDOO P\ OLIHf DQG VLPLODU SKUDVHV LQGLFDWLQJ D ORQJ EXW LQGHILQLWH WLPH SHULRG 2WKHU SDUWLFLSDQWV ZURWH LQ D YDOXH WKDW UHIOHFWHG DQ DJH EHIRUH \HDUV ROG HTXDOHG WKHLU DJH RU LQ UDUH FDVHV H[FHHGHG WKHLU DJH 7KHVH ODWHU FDVHV ZHUH FRQVLGHUHG DQRWKHU ZD\ RI LQGLFDWLQJ fIRUHYHUf 7R DVVLJQ D YDOLG QXPEHU IRU WKLV fIRUHYHUf JURXS WKH OHQJWK LWHP ZDV ILUVW :LQGVRUL]HG UHGXFLQJ WKH UDQJH IURP \HDUV WR \HDUV 1H[W WKH PHDQ DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ RI WKH OHQJWK LWHP ZHUH FRPSXWHG IRU HDFK DJH JURXS LQ WKH VDPSOH 7KH YDOXH IRU WKH OHQJWK LWHP IRU HDFK SHUVRQ

PAGE 47

LQ WKH fIRUHYHUf JURXS ZDV WKHQ VHW WR WKH PHDQ SOXV WZR WLPHV WKH VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ XVLQJ WKH PHDQ DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ IRU WKHLU DJH JURXS ,Q WKLV ZD\ DQ \HDUROG ZKR LQGLFDWHG fIRUHYHUf DV WKH OHQJWK KH KDV SUHIHUUHG D VSHFLILF VW\OH RI PXVLF ZDV DVVLJQHG D YDOXH FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK KLV DJH ZKHUHDV D \HDUROG ZDV DVVLJQHG D GLIIHUHQW DQG KLJKHUf YDOXH FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK RWKHU \HDUROGV LQ WKH VDPSOH )DFWRU $QDO\VHV 6XEVWDQFH $EXVH ,QVWUXPHQWV $WWLWXGHV WRZDUG VXEVWDQFHV 2QH RI WKH LQVWUXPHQWV GHYHORSHG E\ WKH DXWKRU LV WKH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6FDOH $76f ZKLFK LV GHVLJQHG WR PHDVXUH SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WHQ VSHFLILF VXEVWDQFHV RU FODVVHV RI VXEVWDQFHV 7KH LWHP VWUXFWXUH RI WKH $76 IROORZV WKH IRUPDW f7KH XVH RI >VXEVWDQFH RU FODVV RI VXEVWDQFHV@ VKRXOG QRW EH UHJXODWHG RU UHVWULFWHG LQ DQ\ ZD\f 7KH WHQ TXHVWLRQV DVVHVV WKH IROORZLQJ WHQ VXEVWDQFHV f WREDFFR f DOFRKRO f PDULMXDQD f KDOOXFLQRJHQV f GHVLJQHU GUXJV f SUHVFULSWLRQ GUXJV f VWLPXODQWV f GHSUHVVDQWV f FRFDLQH DQG f KHURLQ 7KH SDUWLFLSDQWV UHVSRQGHG RQ D SRLQW /LNHUW VFDOH f IURP fVWURQJO\ GLVDJUHHf WR fVWURQJO\ DJUHHf $ IUHTXHQF\ DQDO\VLV RI WKH UHVSRQVHV VKRZV SDUWLFLSDQWV HQGRUVLQJ WKH IXOO UDQJH RI WKH /LNHUW VFDOH ZLWK WKH PRGDO UHVSRQVH EHLQJ fVWURQJO\ GLVDJUHHf 3ULQFLSOH FRPSRQHQWV IDFWRU DQDO\VLV RI WKH $76 SURGXFHG WKH VFUHH SORW GHSLFWHG LQ )LJXUH 7KH VFUHH SORW JUDSKV HLJHQYDOXHV IURP ODUJHVW WR VPDOOHVW &DWWHOO f DGYRFDWHG XVLQJ WKH SORW WR GHWHUPLQH WKH QXPEHU RI IDFWRUV WR UHWDLQ 7KH UHFRPPHQGHG GHFLVLRQ LV WR UHWDLQ DOO IDFWRUV EHIRUH WKH OLQH GUDPDWLFDOO\ FKDQJHV VORSH IURP WKH JUDSKLFDOO\ GHSLFWHG VKDUS GHVFHQW RI HLJHQYDOXH PDJQLWXGHV 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKLV SURFHGXUH VXJJHVW WKDW RQH IDFWRU VKRXOG EH UHWDLQHG )DFWRU ORDGLQJV IRU DOO LWHPV UDQJH IURP WR 7KH D FRHIILFLHQW IRU WKH VFDOH ZDV IRXQG WR EH ZLWK FRUUHFWHG LWHP

PAGE 48

WR WRWDO FRUUHODWLRQV UDQJLQJ IURP WR 7KH DOFRKRO DQG WREDFFR LWHPV VKRZHG WKH ZHDNHVW LWHP WR WRWDO FRUUHODWLRQV DQG UHVSHFWLYHO\f DQG LI GURSSHG ZRXOG LQFUHDVH WKH D FRHIILFLHQW IRU WKH VFDOH )DFWRU 1XPEHU )LJXUH )DFWRU 6FUHH 3ORW RI WKH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6FDOH 7KH $76 LV KLJKO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK WKH 3HUPLVVLYHQHVV 6XEVFDOH IURP WKH 6XEVWDQFH $EXVH $WWLWXGHV 6FDOH U f DQG ZLWK WKH 6XEVWDQFH 8VH 6FDOH U f GLVFXVVHG QH[W ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH $76 LV XQFRUUHODWHG ZLWK RQO\ SDUWO\ VLPLODU FRQVWUXFWV LQFOXGLQJ WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 0DGVHQ HW DK f WKH YDOXHV RI $XWRQRP\ /LIH 6W\OH ,QGLYLGXDOLVWLF 2ULHQWDWLRQ 5LVN DQG 9DULHW\ IURP WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f $JH 5DFH DQG *HQGHU 2YHUDOO WKH UHOLDELOLW\ RI WKH $76 LV FOHDUO\ GHPRQVWUDWHG DQG LQLWLDO VXSSRUW IRU LWV YDOLGLW\ H[LVWV DV ZHOO 7KH VFDOH LV H[WUHPHO\ UHOLDEOH ZLWK UHVSHFW WR LQWHUQDO FRQVLVWHQF\ )DFWRU DQDO\VLV \LHOGV RQH IDFWRU WKDW DFFRXQWV IRU b RI WKH WRWDO YDULDQFH 7KHVH UHVXOWV MXVWLI\ WKH UHWHQWLRQ RI WKH $76 DV D PHDVXUH RI SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VXEVWDQFHV ,QGLYLGXDO LWHPV IURP WKH $76 ZLOO

PAGE 49

DOVR EH XVHG WR PHDVXUH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VSHFLILF VXEVWDQFHV RU JURXSV RI VXEVWDQFHV DV SUHGLFWHG E\ WKH K\SRWKHVHV 6XEVWDQFH XVH VFDOH 7KH 6XEVWDQFH 8VH 6FDOH 686f DOVR ZDV GHYHORSHG E\ WKH DXWKRU DQG ZDV GHVLJQHG WR PHDVXUH SDUWLFLSDQWVf IUHTXHQF\ RI XVH RI WHQ VSHFLILF VXEVWDQFHV RU FODVVHV RI VXEVWDQFHV 7KH TXHVWLRQ VWUXFWXUH RI WKH 686 IROORZV WKH IRUPDW f+RZ RIWHQ GR \RX XVH >VXEVWDQFH RU FODVV RI VXEVWDQFHV@"f DQG LQFOXGHV WKH IROORZLQJ VXEVWDQFHV WREDFFR DOFRKRO PDULMXDQD KDOOXFLQRJHQV GHVLJQHU GUXJV SUHVFULSWLRQ GUXJV VWLPXODQWV GHSUHVVDQWV FRFDLQH DQG KHURLQ 7KH SDUWLFLSDQWV UHVSRQG RQ D SRLQW /LNHUW VFDOH f IURP fQHYHUf WR fVHYHUDO WLPHV GDLO\f $ IUHTXHQF\ DQDO\VLV RI WKH UHVSRQVHV VKRZV WKDW SDUWLFLSDQWV HQGRUVHG WKH IXOO UDQJH RI WKH /LNHUW VFDOH IRU DOFRKRO WREDFFR DQG PDULMXDQD DQG D UHVWULFWHG UDQJH RI IRU GHVLJQHU GUXJV IRU SUHVFULSWLRQ GUXJV VWLPXODQWV DQG GHSUHVVDQWV DQG IRU KDOOXFLQRJHQV DQG KHURLQ 3ULQFLSOH FRPSRQHQWV IDFWRU DQDO\VLV RI WKH 686 SURGXFHG WKH VFUHH SORW GHSLFWHG LQ )LJXUH 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKH VFUHH WHVW &DWWHOO f IRU WKH 686 DUH HTXLYRFDO IRU RQH RU WZR IDFWRUV ,Q DQ DWWHPSW WR ILQG VLPSOH VWUXFWXUH &DWWHOO .OLQH f WKH RQH DQG WZRIDFWRU VROXWLRQV ZHUH FRPSDUHG 7KH WZR IDFWRUV ZHUH URWDWHG XVLQJ WKH 'LUHFW 2EOLPLQ PHWKRG ZKLFK XVHV DQ REOLTXH URWDWLRQ WKDW DOORZV WKH UHVXOWLQJ IDFWRUV WR EH FRUUHODWHG .OLQH f 7KH UHVXOWLQJ WZRIDFWRU URWDWLRQ UHWDLQHG RI WKH LWHPV DQG DFFRXQWHG IRU b RI WKH WRWDO YDULDQFH 7KH D UHOLDELOLW\ IRU WKH WZR IDFWRUV FRPELQHG ZDV IRXQG WR EH 7KH ILUVW IDFWRU LQ WKH WZRIDFWRU VROXWLRQ LQFOXGHV LWHPV DVVHVVLQJ WKH XVH RI SUHVFULSWLRQ GUXJV VWLPXODQWV GHSUHVVDQWV FRFDLQH DQG KHURLQ )DFWRU ORDGLQJV UDQJH IURP WR DQG LQFOXGH QR ORDGLQJV RQ )DFWRU 7KLV ILUVW IDFWRU FOHDUO\ UHSUHVHQWV LOOHJDO VXEVWDQFHV WKDW PLJKW EH FDOOHG fKDUGf GUXJV 7KH D UHOLDELOLW\ IRU WKLV

PAGE 50

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b RI WKH WRWDO VFDOH YDULDQFH 7KH D FRHIILFLHQW IRU WKH LWHP 686 ZDV IRXQG WR EH ZLWK FRUUHFWHG LWHP WR WRWDO FRUUHODWLRQV UDQJLQJ IURP WR 7KH WREDFFR LWHP VKRZHG WKH ZHDNHVW LWHP WR WRWDO FRUUHODWLRQV f DQG LI GURSSHG ZRXOG LQFUHDVH WKH D FRHIILFLHQW IRU WKH VFDOH WR %HFDXVH WKH RQH IDFWRU VROXWLRQ UHWDLQV DOO LWHPV DQG LV PRUH UHOLDEOH D f WKDQ WKH WZR IDFWRUV LQGLYLGXDOO\

PAGE 51

RU FRPELQHG LW LV D EHWWHU UHSUHVHQWDWLRQ RI VLPSOH VWUXFWXUH DQG ZLOO EH UHWDLQHG IRU XVH LQ WKH PDLQ DQDO\VHV 7KH YDOLGLW\ RI WKH 686 LV VXSSRUWHG E\ LWV KLJK FRUUHODWLRQ ZLWK WKH 3HUPLVVLYHQHVV 6XEVFDOH IURP WKH 6XEVWDQFH $EXVH $WWLWXGHV 6FDOH U f DQG ZLWK WKH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6FDOH U f ,W DOVR FRUUHODWHV ZLWK FRQVWUXFWV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK GUXJ XVH LQFOXGLQJ DJH U f JHQGHU U PDOH IHPDOH f 6(6 RI IDWKHU U f DQG /LIH 6W\OH DQG 5LVN IURP WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH U DQG UHVSHFWLYHO\f 2YHUDOO WKH UHOLDELOLW\ DQG YDOLGLW\ RI WKH 686 LV GHPRQVWUDWHG 7KH UHOLDELOLW\ IRU WKH VFDOH LV ZHDNHU WKDQ LV LGHDO EXW LW LV DV UHOLDEOH DV ZRXOG EH WKHRUHWLFDOO\ SUHGLFWHG 7R ERRVW UHOLDELOLW\ VXEVWDQFH XVHUV ZRXOG KDYH WR XVH DOO VXEVWDQFHV IDLUO\ HTXDOO\ D SDWWHUQ LQFRQVLVWHQW ZLWK XVHUV ZKR IUHTXHQWO\ LGHQWLI\ D fGUXJ RI FKRLFHf 7KHVH UHVXOWV MXVWLI\ WKH UHWHQWLRQ RI WKH 686 DV D PHDVXUH RI VXEVWDQFH XVH EHKDYLRU ,QGLYLGXDO LWHPV IURP WKH 686 ZLOO EH XVHG WR PHDVXUH WKH XVH RI VSHFLILF VXEVWDQFHV RU JURXSV RI VXEVWDQFHV DV SUHGLFWHG E\ WKH K\SRWKHVHV 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\ 7KH 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\ 6([6f ZDV VXEVWDQWLDOO\ PRGLILHG IURP .RVV DQG 2URVfV f RULJLQDO GHVLJQ DQG SXUSRVH IRU WKH LQVWUXPHQW ,Q SDUWLFXODU WKH RULJLQDO LQVWUXPHQW .RVV DQG 2URV f ZDV GHVLJQHG WR PHDVXUH PDOHVf FRPPLVVLRQ RI VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH DFWV DQG IHPDOHVf H[SHULHQFHV DV UHFLSLHQWV RI VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH DFWV .RVV DQG 2URV f DOVR XVHG D f\HVQRf UHVSRQVH IRUPDW 7KH VFDOH ZDV PRGLILHG WR PHDVXUH FRPPLVVLRQ RI VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH DFWV E\ ERWK PDOHV DQG IHPDOHV ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH UHVSRQVH IRUPDW ZDV FKDQJHG WR D SRLQW /LNHUW VFDOH UDQJLQJ IURP fQHYHUf WR fRIWHQf 7KH 6([6 FRQVLGHUV WKH SRVVLELOLW\ WKDW IRUFH RU WKH WKUHDW RI IRUFH PD\ KDYH EHHQ XVHG LQ D VLWXDWLRQ EXW IRU YDULRXV UHDVRQV VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH GLG QRW RFFXU 7KH VFDOH FRQVLVWV RI VWDWHPHQWV WKDW LQFOXGH D SURJUHVVLRQ RI WKH W\SH RI FRHUFLRQ LH

PAGE 52

IURP YHUEDO FRHUFLRQ WR WKUHDWV RI YLROHQFH WR WKH XVH RI YLROHQFHf DQG D SURJUHVVLRQ RQ WKH W\SH RI VH[XDO DFWV LH NLVVLQJ DQG SHWWLQJ WR DWWHPSWHG LQWHUFRXUVH WR RUDO RU DQDO LQWHUFRXUVHf 7KH 6([6 DOVR LQFOXGHV WKUHH XQVFRUHG LWHPV DVVHVVLQJ FRQVHQVXDO VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH KDYLQJ DQRWKHU SHUVRQ PLVLQWHUSUHW WKH OHYHO RI LQWLPDF\ RQH GHVLUHV DQG KDYLQJ EHHQ UDSHG +LJKHU VFRUHV UHIOHFW D JUHDWHU UHSRUWHG IUHTXHQF\ RI HQJDJLQJ LQ VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRUV $ IUHTXHQF\ DQDO\VLV RI WKH UHVSRQVHV VKRZV SDUWLFLSDQWV HQGRUVLQJ WKH IXOO UDQJH RI WKH /LNHUW VFDOH IRU LWHPV DVVHVVLQJ YHUEDO FRHUFLRQ DQG D UHVWULFWHG UDQJH f IRU VRPH LWHPV DVVHVVLQJ WKH XVH RI IRUFH RU WKH WKUHDW RI IRUFH 2Q WKH WKUHH YHUEDO FRHUFLRQ LWHPV b RI WKH VDPSOH UHSRUWHG QHYHU HQJDJLQJ LQ WKH WDUJHW EHKDYLRU 2Q WKH VL[ LWHPV DVVHVVLQJ WKH XVH RI IRUFH RU WKH WKUHDW RI IRUFH b RI WKH VDPSOH UHSRUWHG QHYHU HQJDJLQJ LQ WKH WDUJHW EHKDYLRU 2Q WKH ILQDO LWHP DVVHVVLQJ EHLQJ fVR DURXVHG \RX FRXOG QRW VWRSf b RI WKH VDPSOH UHSRUWHG QHYHU EHLQJ LQ WKLV VLWXDWLRQ 3ULQFLSOH FRPSRQHQWV IDFWRU DQDO\VLV RI WKH 6([6 SURGXFHG WKH VFUHH SORW GHSLFWHG LQ )LJXUH 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKH VFUHH WHVW &DWWHOO f IRU WKH 6([6 LQGLFDWH WKDW RQH IDFWRU VKRXOG EH UHWDLQHG 7KLV IDFWRU LQFOXGHV DOO LWHPV DQG DFFRXQWV IRU b RI WKH WRWDO VFDOH YDULDQFH )DFWRU ORDGLQJV UDQJH IURP WR 7KH D FRHIILFLHQW IRU WKH VFDOH ZDV IRXQG WR EH ZLWK FRUUHFWHG LWHP WR WRWDO FRUUHODWLRQV UDQJLQJ IURP WR 7KH LWHPV DVVHVVLQJ EHLQJ fVR DURXVHG \RX FRXOG QRW VWRSf DQG fVD\LQJ WKLQJV \RX GLGQfW UHDOO\ PHDQf VKRZHG WKH ZHDNHVW LWHP WR WRWDO FRUUHODWLRQV DQG UHVSHFWLYHO\f DQG LI WKHVH LWHPV KDG EHHQ GURSSHG WKH D FRHIILFLHQW IRU WKH VFDOH ZRXOG LQFUHDVH 7KH YDOLGLW\ RI WKH 6([6 LV VXSSRUWHG E\ LWV VLJQLILFDQW FRUUHODWLRQV ZLWK RWKHU YDULDEOHV LQFOXGLQJ WKH 5DSH 0\WK 6FDOH U f 6H[5ROH 6WHUHRW\SLQJ 6FDOH U f JHQGHU U PDOH IHPDOH f WKH 3HUPLVVLYHQHVV 6XEVFDOH IURP WKH 6XEVWDQFH $EXVH $WWLWXGHV 6FDOH U f WKH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6FDOH U

PAGE 53

f DQG WKH 6XEVWDQFH 8VH 6FDOH U f ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH 6([6 LV QHJDWLYHO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK PDQ\ YDOXHV LQFOXGLQJ $OWUXLVP U f 3HUVRQDO 'HYHORSPHQW U f 2ULHQWDWLRQ 7RZDUG 6HOI$FWXDOL]DWLRQ U f DQG 6RFLDO 2ULHQWDWLRQ U f )DFWRU DQDO\VLV \LHOGHG RQH IDFWRU WKDW DFFRXQWV IRU b RI WKH WRWDO YDULDQFH 7KLV LV KLJKO\ FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH IDFWRU DQDO\VLV E\ .RVV DQG 2URV f ZKLFK IRXQG RQH IDFWRU WKDW DFFRXQWHG IRU b RI WKH YDULDQFH .RVV DQG 2URV f DOVR IRXQG WKDW EHWZHHQ b RI WKHLU XQLYHUVLW\ VDPSOH RI PHQ UHSRUWHG XVLQJ VRPH GHJUHH RI SK\VLFDO IRUFH RU WKUHDWV RI SK\VLFDO IRUFH WR FRHUFH SDUWQHUV LQWR VH[XDO DFWV ,Q WKH FXUUHQW VDPSOH b RI PDOHV UHSRUWHG XVLQJ VRPH GHJUHH RI SK\VLFDO IRUFH RU WKUHDWV RI SK\VLFDO IRUFH WR FRHUFH SDUWQHUV LQWR VH[XDO DFWV b RI WKH IHPDOHV UHSRUWHG XVLQJ VRPH IRUFH WR REWDLQ NLVVLQJ RU SHWWLQJf 2YHUDOO WKH YDOLGLW\ RI WKH 6([6 LV FOHDUO\ GHPRQVWUDWHG 7KH LWHPV IRU WKH VFDOH DUH DOVR YHU\ UHOLDEOH 7KHVH UHVXOWV MXVWLI\ WKH UHWHQWLRQ RI WKH 6([6 DV D PHDVXUH RI FRHUFLYH VH[XDO EHKDYLRU )DFWRU 1XPEHU )LJXUH )DFWRU 6FUHH 3ORW RI WKH 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\

PAGE 54

0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 7KH 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 034f ZDV GHYHORSHG E\ WKH DXWKRU DQG LV GHVLJQHG WR PHDVXUH SDUWLFLSDQWVf JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW WR WKHLU SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF 3ULQFLSOH FRPSRQHQWV IDFWRU DQDO\VLV RI WKH 034 \LHOGHG WKH VFUHH SORW GHSLFWHG LQ )LJXUH 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKH VFUHH WHVW &DWWHOO f IRU WKH 034 LQGLFDWH WKDW HLWKHU VL[ RU SRVVLEO\ HOHYHQ IDFWRUV VKRXOG EH UHWDLQHG +RZHYHU LW LV GLIILFXOW WR LQWHUSUHW VL[ GLIIHUHQW IDFWRUV DQG QHDUO\ LPSRVVLEOH WR LQWHUSUHW HOHYHQ IDFWRUV ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH SXUSRVH RI WKLV VWXG\ LV WR GHWHUPLQH KRZ JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW UDWKHU WKDQ VSHFLILF FRPPLWPHQW IDFWRUVf LQWHUDFWV ZLWK PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV &RQVHTXHQWO\ WKHVH LQGLYLGXDO IDFWRUV DUH QRW VSHFLILFDOO\ RI LQWHUHVW LQ WKLV VWXG\ ,Q IDFW WKH 034 ZDV LQWHQGHG WR DVVHVV JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW E\ WDSSLQJ D ZLGH YDULHW\ RI SRVVLEOH ZD\V LQ ZKLFK OLVWHQHUV FRPPLW WR WKHLU PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH 7KH SUHVHQFH RI D ODUJH QXPEHU RI IDFWRUV LQGLFDWHV WKDW WKH LQVWUXPHQW LV IXQFWLRQLQJ DV H[SHFWHG )DFWRU 1XPEHU )LJXUH )DFWRU 6FUHH SORW RI WKH 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH

PAGE 55

,Q RUGHU WR REWDLQ D PHDVXUH RI JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW WKH XQURWDWHG IDFWRU PDWUL[ ZDV XVHG WR VHOHFW LWHPV WKDW ORDGHG RQ WKH ILUVW IDFWRU ZKLFK DFFRXQWV IRU b RI WKH WRWDO 034 YDULDQFH 7KLUW\RQH LWHPV ORDGHG RQ WKH ILUVW IDFWRU $Q FRHIILFLHQW D ZDV FRPSXWHG IRU WKHVH LWHPV DQG \LHOGHG D YDOXH RI 2QH LWHP ZKLFK DVVHVVHG KRXUV VSHQW OLVWLQJ WR QRQIDYRULWH VW\OHV RI PXVLF YLD &'V RQ ZHHNGD\V FRQWULEXWHG DOPRVW QRWKLQJ WR WKH UHOLDELOLW\ RI WKH LWHP VFDOH %HFDXVH RI WKLV QHJOLJLEOH FRQWULEXWLRQ DQG WKH IDFW WKDW WKH LWHP GLG QRW UHODWH WR WKH OLVWHQHUVf SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF WKLV LWHP ZDV GURSSHG IURP WKH VFDOH UHVXOWLQJ LQ D ILQDO WRWDO RI LWHPV ZLWK DQ D FRHIILFLHQW RI 7KH ILQDO LWHP VFDOH UHWDLQHG LWHPV IURP DOO GRPDLQV RI WKH 034 LQFOXGLQJ DPRXQW RI OLVWHQLQJ GHVLUH WR OLVWHQ PRUH FRQWH[W RI OLVWHQLQJ VSHQGLQJ PRQH\ RQ PXVLF UHODWHG DFWLYLWLHV PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH LQIOXHQFLQJ EHKDYLRU DQG IDQWDVL]LQJ DERXW EHLQJ DQG PHHWLQJ D IDPRXV PXVLFLDQ 7KUHH LWHPV DOVR ZHUH LQFOXGHG UHODWLQJ WR FRQVXPLQJ RWKHU VW\OHV RI PXVLF 7KH WRWDO VFRUH IRU WKHVH LWHPV LV ODEHOHG WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ *&,f DQG ZLOO EH XVHG DV WKH PHDVXUH RI JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW K\SRWKHVL]HG WR LQWHUDFW ZLWK PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH WR LPSDFW WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV LQ WKLV VWXG\ 7KH LWHPV IURP WKH 034 LQFOXGHG LQ WKH *&, DUH KLJKOLJKWHG LQ EROG LQ $SSHQGL[ $ 0DLQ $QDO\VHV 9DOXHV )LYH K\SRWKHVHV ZHUH PDGH UHJDUGLQJ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW DQG ILYH JURXSV RI YDOXHV IURP WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f ,W ZDV H[SHFWHG WKDW VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV LQ YDOXHV ZRXOG EH IRXQG IRU WKH GLIIHUHQW PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV DQG WKDW WKHVH GLIIHUHQFHV ZRXOG EH PHGLDWHG E\ WKH OLVWHQHUVf JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW WR WKHLU SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF ,Q SDUWLFXODU JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW DQG PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH ZHUH H[SHFWHG WR LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW DV JOREDO

PAGE 56

FRPPLWPHQW LQFUHDVHG WKH YDOXH GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ WKH PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV ZRXOG DOVR LQFUHDVH +\SRWKHVLV SUHGLFWHG WKDW RQ WKH 8WLOLWDULDQ 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU RI WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH 03f DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW *&f ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW SRSXODU URFN IDQV ZLOO VFRUH KLJKHU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV DOWHUQDWLYH IDQV ZLOO VFRUH ORZHU RQ WKLV IDFWRU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 7R WHVW WKLV K\SRWKHVLV D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZDV FRPSXWHG ZLWK 03 WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ *&,f DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG 8WLOLWDULDQ 2ULHQWDWLRQ VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQWR WKH PRGHO LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH WKDW WKHUH LV QR VLJQLILFDQW LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW IRU 03 [ *&, RQ WKH 8WLOLWDULDQ 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU DQG WKDW +\SRWKHVLV ZDV QRW VXSSRUWHG )^ f S +RZHYHU D VLJQLILFDQW PDLQ HIIHFW IRU 03 ZDV IRXQG ) f S 7KH PHDQV IRU WKH 03 FDWHJRULHV ZHUH IRU SRSXODU URFN IDQV DQG IRU FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV LQGLFDWLQJ WKDW SRSXODU URFN IDQV ZHUH PRUH RULHQWHG WR WKH XWLOLWDULDQ YDOXHV RI (FRQRPLFV $GYDQFHPHQW 3UHVWLJH $XWKRULW\ DQG $FKLHYHPHQW WKDQ ZHUH FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV +\SRWKHVLV SUHGLFWHG WKDW RQ WKH 2ULHQWDWLRQ 7RZDUG 6HOI$FWXDOL]DWLRQ IDFWRU RI WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f 03 DQG *& ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV ZLOO VFRUH KLJKHU RQ WKLV IDFWRU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZLOO VFRUH ORZHU RQ WKLV IDFWRU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 7KLV K\SRWKHVLV FRXOG QRW EH WHVWHG LQ WKH FXUUHQW DQDO\VLV EHFDXVH KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZHUH QRW VXIILFLHQWO\ UHSUHVHQWHG LQ WKH VDPSOH LH RQO\ RXW RI LQGLFDWHG D SUHIHUHQFH IRU KHDY\ PHWDO URFNf +RZHYHU WR H[DPLQH WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH 2ULHQWDWLRQ 7RZDUG 6HOI$FWXDOL]DWLRQ IDFWRU 03 DQG *& D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZDV FRPSXWHG ZLWK 03 WKH *&, DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG

PAGE 57

2ULHQWDWLRQ 7RZDUG 6HOI$FWXDOL]DWLRQ VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQWR WKH PRGHO LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH WKDW WKHUH LV QR VLJQLILFDQW LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW IRU 03 [ *&, RQ WKH 2ULHQWDWLRQ 7RZDUG 6HOI$FWXDOL]DWLRQ IDFWRU ) f S 7KH PDLQ HIIHFW IRU 03 ZDV DOVR QRQVLJQLILFDQW ) f S +\SRWKHVLV SUHGLFWHG WKDW RQ WKH ,QGLYLGXDOLVWLF 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU RI WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f 03 DQG *& ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV ZLOO VFRUH KLJKHU RQ WKLV IDFWRU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV SRSXODU URFN IDQV ZLOO VFRUH ORZHU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 7R WHVW WKLV K\SRWKHVLV D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZDV FRPSXWHG ZLWK WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 666 0DGVHQ HW DO f 03 WKH *&, DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG ,QGLYLGXDOLVWLF 2ULHQWDWLRQ VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQWR WKH PRGHO LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH 666 ZDV LQFOXGHG DV D FRYDULDWH EHFDXVH LW LV VLJQLILFDQWO\ UHODWHG WR ERWK ,QGLYLGXDOLVWLF 2ULHQWDWLRQ DQG 03 DQG PD\ EH D FRQIRXQGLQJ IDFWRU VHH DERYHf 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH WKDW +\SRWKHVLV ZDV QRW VXSSRUWHG ) f S 7KH PDLQ HIIHFW IRU 03 ZDV DOVR QRQVLJQLILFDQW ) f S +\SRWKHVLV SUHGLFWHG WKDW RQ WKH 6RFLDO 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU RI WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f 03 DQG *& ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW SRSXODU URFN IDQV ZLOO VFRUH KLJKHU RQ WKLV IDFWRU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZLOO VFRUH ORZHU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 7KLV K\SRWKHVLV FRXOG QRW EH WHVWHG LQ WKH FXUUHQW DQDO\VLV EHFDXVH KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZHUH QRW VXIILFLHQWO\ UHSUHVHQWHG LQ WKH VDPSOH LH RQO\ RXW RI LQGLFDWHG D SUHIHUHQFH IRU KHDY\ PHWDO URFNf +RZHYHU WR H[DPLQH WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH 6RFLDO 2ULHQWDWLRQ 03 DQG *& D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZDV FRPSXWHG ZLWK 03 WKH *&, DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG 6RFLDO 2ULHQWDWLRQ VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQWR

PAGE 58

WKH PRGHO LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH WKDW WKHUH LV QR VLJQLILFDQW LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW IRU 03 [ *& RQ WKH 6RFLDO 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU )^ f S 7KH PDLQ HIIHFW IRU 03 ZDV DOVR QRQVLJQLILFDQW ) f S +\SRWKHVLV SUHGLFWHG WKDW RQ WKH $GYHQWXURXV 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU RI WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f 03 DQG *& ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW KHDY\ PHWDO URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV ZLOO VFRUH KLJKHU RQ WKLV IDFWRU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV SRSXODU URFN IDQV ZLOO VFRUH ORZHU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 7KLV K\SRWKHVLV FRXOG QRW EH IXOO\ WHVWHG LQ WKH FXUUHQW DQDO\VLV EHFDXVH KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZHUH QRW VXIILFLHQWO\ UHSUHVHQWHG LQ WKH VDPSOH LH RQO\ RXW RI LQGLFDWHG D SUHIHUHQFH IRU KHDY\ PHWDO URFNf +RZHYHU D SDUWLDO WHVW RI WKH K\SRWKHVLV FRQFHUQLQJ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS RI SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH ZLWK WKH $GYHQWXURXV 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU ZDV SHUIRUPHG 7R SURYLGH D SDUWLDO WHVW RI WKH K\SRWKHVLV D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZDV FRPSXWHG ZLWK WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 666 0DGVHQ HW DK f 03 WKH *&, DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG $GYHQWXURXV 2ULHQWDWLRQ VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQWR WKH PRGHO LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH 666 ZDV LQFOXGHG DV D FRYDULDWH EHFDXVH LW LV VLJQLILFDQWO\ UHODWHG WR ERWK WKH $GYHQWXURXV 2ULHQWDWLRQ DQG 03 DQG PD\ EH D FRQIRXQGLQJ IDFWRU DV LQGLFDWHG HDUOLHU 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH WKDW +\SRWKHVLV ZDV QRW VXSSRUWHG ) f S 7KH PDLQ HIIHFW IRU 03 ZDV DOVR QRQVLJQLILFDQW ) f S ,Q VXPPDU\ LW ZDV K\SRWKHVL]HG WKDW ZKHQ YDOXH GLIIHUHQFHV RFFXUUHG EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV WKHVH GLIIHUHQFHV ZRXOG EH PHGLDWHG E\ JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW VXFK WKDW WKH PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSVf YDOXHV ZRXOG FRQWLQXH WR GLYHUJH DV WKHLU FRPPLWPHQW WR WKHLU PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH LQFUHDVHG 7KLV LQWHUDFWLRQ EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW ZLWK JURXSV RI UHODWHG YDOXHV ZDV QRW VXSSRUWHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ +RZHYHU VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV LQ 8WLOLWDULDQ 2ULHQWDWLRQ YDOXHV ZHUH IRXQG

PAGE 59

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f 03 DQG *& ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW SRSXODU URFN IDQV ZLOO VFRUH KLJKHU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV ZLOO VFRUH ORZHU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 7R WHVW WKLV K\SRWKHVLV D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZDV FRPSXWHG ZLWK WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 666 0DGVHQ HW DK f 03 WKH *&, DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG WKH 656 VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQWR WKH PRGHO LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH 666 ZDV LQFOXGHG DV D FRYDULDWH EHFDXVH LW LV VLJQLILFDQWO\ UHODWHG WR ERWK WKH 656 DQG 03 DQG PD\ EH D FRQIRXQGLQJ IDFWRU VHH DERYHf 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH WKDW +\SRWKHVLV ZDV QRW VXSSRUWHG ) f S 7KH PDLQ HIIHFW IRU 03 ZDV DOVR QRQVLJQLILFDQW ) f S

PAGE 60

7KHVH UHVXOWV DUH LQFRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH ILQGLQJV RI .UXVH f ZKR IRXQG VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV RQ WKH 6H[5ROH 6WHUHRW\SLQJ 6FDOH IRU GLIIHUHQW PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH FDWHJRULHV &RQVLGHULQJ WKDW WKH DERYH DQDO\VLV DSSURDFKHG VWDWLVWLFDO VLJQLILFDQFH DQG WKDW .UXVH f GLG QRW LQFOXGH WKH 666 DV D FRYDULDWH D VHSDUDWH RQHZD\ $129$ ZLWK 03 DV WKH ,9 DQG WKH 656 DV WKH '9 ZDV DOVR FRPSXWHG WR DOORZ D FRPSDULVRQ EHWZHHQ WKLV VWXG\ DQG .UXVH f 7KH UHVXOW RI WKLV WHVW ZDV VLJQLILFDQW )O f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f S 03 ZDV DJDLQ QRQVLJQLILFDQW ZKHQ WKH 666 ZDV HQWHUHG ILUVW LQ WKH PRGHO )f S f DQG WKH LQWHUDFWLRQ ZDV DOVR QRQVLJQLILFDQW )f S f +RZHYHU ZKHQ WKH 7\SH ,,, 6XPV RI 6TXDUHV ZHUH XVHG IRU WKH ) WHVWV WKH PDLQ HIIHFWV IRU ERWK WKH 666 )f S f DQG 03 )f S f ZHUH VLJQLILFDQW 7\SH ,,, 6XPV RI 6TXDUHV IDFWRUV RXW WKH YDULDQFH FRPPRQ WR DOO SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV VR WKDW HDFK YDULDEOH LV WHVWHG DV LI LW ZDV HQWHUHG LQWR WKH UHJUHVVLRQ HTXDWLRQ ODVW ,Q RWKHU ZRUGV 03 GLIIHUHQFHV LQ 6H[5ROH 6WHUHRW\SLQJ 6FDOH VFRUHV DUH

PAGE 61

VLJQLILFDQW ZKHQ WKH HIIHFWV RI WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH DQG WKH LQWHUDFWLRQ 03 [ 666 DUH IDFWRUHG RXW +\SRWKHVLV SUHGLFWHG WKDW RQ WKH 5DSH 0\WK 6FDOH 506 /RQVZD\ t )LW]JHUDOG f 03 DQG *& ZLOO LQWHUDFW VXFK WKDW KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZLOO VFRUH KLJKHU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV VFRUH ORZHU DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 7KLV K\SRWKHVLV FRXOG QRW EH WHVWHG LQ WKH FXUUHQW DQDO\VLV EHFDXVH KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZHUH QRW VXIILFLHQWO\ UHSUHVHQWHG LQ WKH VDPSOH LH RQO\ RXW RI LQGLFDWHG D SUHIHUHQFH IRU KHDY\ PHWDO URFNf +RZHYHU WR H[DPLQH WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH 506 03 DQG *& D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZDV FRPSXWHG ZLWK 03 WKH *&, DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG WKH 506 VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH WKDW WKHUH LV QR VLJQLILFDQW LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW IRU 03 [ *& RQ WKH 506 ) f S 7KH PDLQ HIIHFW IRU 03 ZLWK WKH 506 ZDV DOVR QRQVLJQLILFDQW ) f S $WWLWXGHV WRZDUG VXEVWDQFHV +\SRWKHVLV KDV WKUHH SDUWV f SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WREDFFR DQG DOFRKRO ZLOO EH HTXDO IRU DOO PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV f SUHIHUHQFH IRU FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH DQG KHDY\ PHWDO URFN ZLOO EH DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK PRUH SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG LOOHJDO GUXJ XVH DQG f FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH DQG KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQVf DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG LOOHJDO GUXJ XVH ZLOO EHFRPH PRUH SHUPLVVLYH DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG WKH XVH RI VSHFLILF VXEVWDQFHV RU JURXSV RI VXEVWDQFHV ZHUH PHDVXUHG E\ WKH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6FDOH $76 FRQVWUXFWHG E\ WKH DXWKRUf 7KLV K\SRWKHVLV FRXOG QRW EH WHVWHG LQ WKH FXUUHQW DQDO\VLV EHFDXVH KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZHUH QRW VXIILFLHQWO\ UHSUHVHQWHG LQ WKH VDPSOH LH RQO\ RXW RI LQGLFDWHG D SUHIHUHQFH IRU KHDY\ PHWDO URFNf +RZHYHU D SDUWLDO WHVW RI +\SRWKHVLV ZDV SRVVLEOH FRQFHUQLQJ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH $76

PAGE 62

SUHIHUHQFH IRU FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH PXVLF DQG *& $ SDUWLDO WHVW RI +\SRWKHVLV UHTXLUHV WZR VHSDUDWH DQDO\VHV 7KH ILUVW DQDO\VLV LQYROYHG D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZLWK 03 WKH *&, DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG WKH VXP RI WKH WZR LWHPV IURP WKH $76 DVVHVVLQJ DOFRKRO DQG WREDFFR VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH QR 03 GLIIHUHQFHV RQ WKH $76 LWHPV DVVHVVLQJ DOFRKRO DQG WREDFFR ) f S 7KH LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW IRU 03 [ *&, ZDV DOVR QRQVLJQLILFDQW ) f S 7KHVH UHVXOWV DUH FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK 3DUW RI +\SRWKHVLV 7R SURYLGH D SDUWLDO WHVW RI 3DUWV DQG D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZDV FRPSXWHG ZLWK 03 WKH *&, DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG WKH VXP RI WKH HLJKW LWHPV IURP WKH $76 DVVHVVLQJ LOOHJDO VXEVWDQFHV VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH QR 03 GLIIHUHQFHV RQ WKH $76 LWHPV DVVHVVLQJ LOOHJDO VXEVWDQFHV ) f S f ZKLFK IDLOV WR VXSSRUW 3DUW RI +\SRWKHVLV 7KH LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW IRU 03 [ *&, ZDV DOVR QRQVLJQLILFDQW ) f S f DJDLQ IDLOLQJ WR VXSSRUW 3DUW RI +\SRWKHVLV 7KH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ 03 *& DQG DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG GUXJV DQWLFLSDWHG E\ +\SRWKHVLV ZDV QRW VXSSRUWHG 7R H[SORUH IXUWKHU WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG GUXJ XVH 03 DQG *& DQ KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZDV FRPSXWHG ZLWK WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 666 0DGVHQ HW DO f 03 WKH *&, DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG WKH 3HUPLVVLYHQHVV 6XEVFDOH IURP WKH 6XEVWDQFH $EXVH $WWLWXGHV 6FDOH 6$$ -HQNLQV )LVKHU t $SSOHJDWH f VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH 666 ZDV LQFOXGHG DV D FRYDULDWH EHFDXVH LW LV VLJQLILFDQWO\ UHODWHG WR ERWK WKH 6$$ DQG 03 DQG PD\ EH D FRQIRXQGLQJ IDFWRU VHH DERYHf 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH QR PDLQ HIIHFW IRU 03 GLIIHUHQFHV RQ WKH 6$$

PAGE 63

) f S f DQG QR LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW IRU 03 [ *&, RQ WKH 6$$ ) f f 1R VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG IRU PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV RQ DQ\ RI WKH DWWLWXGH PHDVXUHV XVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ $OO WHVWV IRU DQ LQWHUDFWLRQ EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW RQ WKH DWWLWXGH PHDVXUHV ZHUH DOVR QRQVLJQLILFDQW 7KHVH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH YHU\ FOHDUO\ WKDW DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ DQG SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VXEVWDQFHV DUH XQUHODWHG WR PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG WKH OLVWHQHUf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t )LW]JHUDOG f DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV ZLOO VFRUH ORZHU RQ WKH 6([6 DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 7KLV K\SRWKHVLV FRXOG QRW EH WHVWHG LQ WKH FXUUHQW DQDO\VLV EHFDXVH KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZHUH QRW VXIILFLHQWO\ UHSUHVHQWHG LQ WKH VDPSOH LH RQO\ RXW RI LQGLFDWHG D SUHIHUHQFH IRU KHDY\ PHWDO URFNf +RZHYHU WR H[DPLQH WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH 6([6 03 DQG *& D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZDV FRPSXWHG ZLWK

PAGE 64

03 WKH *&, DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG WKH 6([6 VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH WKDW WKHUH LV QR VLJQLILFDQW LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW IRU 03 [ *& RQ WKH 6([6 ) f S 7KH PDLQ HIIHFW IRU 03 ZDV DOVR QRQVLJQLILFDQW ) f S 6XEVWDQFH XVH +\SRWKHVLV KDV WKUHH SDUWV f WKH XVH RI WREDFFR DQG DOFRKRO ZLOO EH HTXDO IRU DOO PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV f SUHIHUHQFH IRU FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH DQG KHDY\ PHWDO URFN ZLOO EH DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK KLJKHU XVDJH RI LOOHJDO GUXJV DQG f FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH DQG KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQVf XVH RI LOOHJDO GUXJV ZLOO LQFUHDVH DV WKHLU *& LQFUHDVHV 7KH XVH RI VSHFLILF VXEVWDQFHV RU JURXSV RI VXEVWDQFHV ZDV PHDVXUHG E\ WKH 6XEVWDQFH 8VH 6FDOH 686 FRQVWUXFWHG E\ WKH DXWKRUf 7KLV K\SRWKHVLV FRXOG QRW EH WHVWHG LQ WKH FXUUHQW DQDO\VLV EHFDXVH KHDY\ PHWDO URFN IDQV ZHUH QRW VXIILFLHQWO\ UHSUHVHQWHG LQ WKH VDPSOH LH RQO\ RXW RI LQGLFDWHG D SUHIHUHQFH IRU KHDY\ PHWDO URFNf +RZHYHU D SDUWLDO WHVW RI +\SRWKHVLV ZDV SRVVLEOH FRQFHUQLQJ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH 686 SUHIHUHQFH IRU FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH DQG *& $ SDUWLDO WHVW RI +\SRWKHVLV UHTXLUHV WZR VHSDUDWH DQDO\VHV 7KH ILUVW DQDO\VLV LQYROYHG D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZLWK WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 666 0DGVHQ HW DK f 03 WKH *&, DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG WKH VXP RI WKH WZR LWHPV IURP WKH 686 DVVHVVLQJ DOFRKRO DQG WREDFFR VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH 666 ZDV LQFOXGHG DV D FRYDULDWH EHFDXVH LW LV VLJQLILFDQWO\ UHODWHG WR ERWK 03 DQG WKH VXP RI WKH WZR LWHPV IURP WKH 686 DVVHVVLQJ DOFRKRO DQG WREDFFR DQG WKHUHIRUH PD\ EH D FRQIRXQGLQJ IDFWRU VHH DERYHf 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH VLJQLILFDQW 03 GLIIHUHQFHV RQ WKH 686 LWHPV DVVHVVLQJ DOFRKRO DQG WREDFFR ) f S 7KH PHDQV IRU WKH 03 FDWHJRULHV ZHUH IRU FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV DQG

PAGE 65

IRU SRSXODU URFN IDQV LQGLFDWLQJ WKDW FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV UHSRUW PRUH IUHTXHQW XVH RI DOFRKRO DQG WREDFFR WKDQ GR SRSXODU URFN IDQV 7KH LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW IRU 03 [ *&, ZDV QRQVLJQLILFDQW ) f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f 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH VLJQLILFDQW 03 GLIIHUHQFHV RQ WKH 686 LWHPV DVVHVVLQJ LOOHJDO VXEVWDQFHV ) f S f ZKLFK VXSSRUWV 3DUW RI +\SRWKHVLV 7KH PHDQV IRU WKH 03 FDWHJRULHV ZHUH IRU FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV DQG IRU SRSXODU URFN IDQV LQGLFDWLQJ WKDW FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV UHSRUW PRUH IUHTXHQW XVH RI LOOHJDO GUXJV WKDQ GR SRSXODU URFN IDQV 7KH LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW IRU 03 [ *&, ZDV QRQVLJQLILFDQW ) f S f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

PAGE 66

6XSSRUW IRU +\SRWKHVLV $ ZDV DOVR IRXQG LQ WKH VLJQLILFDQW UHVXOWV UHJDUGLQJ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ YDOXHV PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW 7KH PDLQ DQDO\VHV RI WKLV VWXG\ LGHQWLILHG VHYHUDO GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV 6LJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG EHWZHHQ SRSXODU URFN IDQV DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH RQ YDOXHV 8WLOLWDULDQ 2ULHQWDWLRQf DQG RQ EHKDYLRUV WKH XVH RI DOFRKRO WREDFFR DQG D YDULHW\ RI LOOHJDO VXEVWDQFHVf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t 1HYLOO f RU LWHPV LH LQGLYLGXDO LWHPV IURP WKH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6FDOH DQG 6XEVWDQFH 8VH 6FDOHf OHIW VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WKH FRPSRQHQWV RI WKHVH YDULDEOHV REVFXUHG RU RYHUORRNHG 7R GHWHUPLQH ZKHWKHU WKLV RFFXUUHG D VHULHV RI DQFLOODU\ DQDO\VHV ZDV FRPSXWHG RQ WKH LQGLYLGXDO YDOXHV IURP WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f RQ WKH WHQ LQGLYLGXDO LWHPV IURP WKH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG 6XEVWDQFHV 6FDOH DQG WKH WHQ LQGLYLGXDO LWHPV IURP WKH 6XEVWDQFH 8VH 6FDOH

PAGE 67

7KHVH DQDO\VHV ZHUH H[SHFWHG WR SURYLGH PRUH VSHFLILF LQIRUPDWLRQ UHJDUGLQJ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV ZLOO EH UHYHDOHG ,QGLYLGXDO 9DOXHV 7KH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f ZDV XVHG WR DVVHVV WKH IROORZLQJ YDOXHV $ELOLW\ 8WLOL]DWLRQ $FKLHYHPHQW $GYDQFHPHQW $HVWKHWLFV $OWUXLVP $XWKRULW\ $XWRQRP\ &UHDWLYLW\ &XOWXUDO ,GHQWLW\ (FRQRPLFV /LIH 6W\OH 3HUVRQDO 'HYHORSPHQW 3K\VLFDO $FWLYLW\ 3K\VLFDO 3URZHVV 3UHVWLJH 5LVN 6RFLDO ,QWHUDFWLRQ 6RFLDO 5HODWLRQV 9DULHW\ DQG :RUNLQJ &RQGLWLRQV )RU WKH PDLQ DQDO\VHV WKHVH YDOXHV ZHUH JURXSHG LQWR ILYH IDFWRUV LGHQWLILHG E\ 6YHUNR f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f D SRWHQWLDO FRQIRXQG FRQWUROOHG IRU LQ WKH PDLQ DQDO\VHV 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKLV DQDO\VLV IRXQG ILYH YDOXHV VLJQLILFDQWO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK WKH 666 $ELOLW\ 8WLOL]DWLRQ &XOWXUDO ,GHQWLW\ 3K\VLFDO $FWLYLW\ 3K\VLFDO 3URZHVV DQG 5LVN $OO DQDO\VHV LQYROYLQJ WKHVH ILYH YDOXHV LQFOXGHG WKH 666 DV D FRYDULDWH ZKLFK ZDV HQWHUHG ILUVW LQWR WKH KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ PRGHOV (DFK DQDO\VLV XVHG D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZLWK 03 WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ *&,f DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG WKH

PAGE 68

LQGLYLGXDO YDOXHV VFDOHV VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH DQDO\VHV LQYROYLQJ $ELOLW\ 8WLOL]DWLRQ &XOWXUDO ,GHQWLW\ 3K\VLFDO $FWLYLW\ 3K\VLFDO 3URZHVV DQG 5LVN LQFOXGHG WKH 666 DV D SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOH ZKLFK ZDV HQWHUHG ILUVW LQ WKH PRGHO 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKHVH DQDO\VHV LQGLFDWH VLJQLILFDQW PDLQ HIIHFWV RI 03 IRU $ELOLW\ 8WLOL]DWLRQ ) f S f $FKLHYHPHQW ) f S f &XOWXUDO ,GHQWLW\ ) f S f (FRQRPLFV ) f S f 6RFLDO ,QWHUDFWLRQ ) f S f DQG 6RFLDO 5HODWLRQV ) f S f )RU DOO YDOXHV RQ ZKLFK VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG EHWZHHQ SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV SRSXODU URFN IDQV UHSRUWHG SODFLQJ JUHDWHU LPSRUWDQFH RQ WKDW YDOXH WKDQ WKHLU FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH FRXQWHUSDUWV 7DEOH VKRZV WKH PHDQ YDOXH VFRUH IRU SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV IRU WKH VL[ YDOXHV RQ ZKLFK VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG 1R RWKHU PDLQ HIIHFWV IRU 03 ZHUH VLJQLILFDQW DW WKH S OHYHO 7DEOH 0HDQ YDOXH VFRUHV IRU SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH PXVLF IDQV 9DOXH 3RSXODU 5RFN &ROOHJH$OWHUQDWLYH $ELOLW\ 8WLOL]DWLRQ $FKLHYHPHQW &XOWXUDO ,GHQWLW\ (FRQRPLFV 6RFLDO ,QWHUDFWLRQ 6RFLDO 5HODWLRQV 2QH VLJQLILFDQW LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW IRU 03 [ *&, ZDV IRXQG IRU WKH YDOXH RI 3UHVWLJH ) f S f )LJXUH GHSLFWV WKH LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW EHWZHHQ 3UHVWLJH 03 DQG WKH *&, $V )LJXUH VKRZV SRSXODU URFN IDQV SODFH LQFUHDVLQJO\ PRUH LPSRUWDQFH RQ 3UHVWLJH DV WKHLU *&, VFRUHV LQFUHDVH ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQVf

PAGE 69

YDOXLQJ RI 3UHVWLJH UHPDLQV FRQVLVWHQW RU LQFUHDVHV RQO\ VOLJKWO\ DV WKHLU *&, VFRUHV LQFUHDVH )LJXUH ,QWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW EHWZHHQ 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH DQG WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ RQ WKH YDOXH RI 3UHVWLJH ,Q VXPPDU\ YDOXH GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG EHWZHHQ SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV IRU WKH YDOXHV RI $ELOLW\ 8WLOL]DWLRQ $FKLHYHPHQW &XOWXUDO ,GHQWLW\ (FRQRPLFV 3UHVWLJH 6RFLDO ,QWHUDFWLRQ DQG 6RFLDO 5HODWLRQV 2Q DOO WKHVH YDOXHV SRSXODU URFN IDQV VFRUHG KLJKHU WKDQ FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV 7KLV SDWWHUQ LV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH ILQGLQJV RQ WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 6XSHU t 1HYLOO f IDFWRUV 8WLOLWDULDQ 2ULHQWDWLRQ DQG 6RFLDO 2ULHQWDWLRQ ZKHUH SRSXODU URFN IDQV DOVR VFRUHG KLJKHU WKDQ WKHLU FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH FRXQWHUSDUWV 7KLV LV WR EH H[SHFWHG DV (FRQRPLFV $GYDQFHPHQW 3UHVWLJH $XWKRULW\ DQG $FKLHYHPHQW PDNH XS WKH 8WLOLWDULDQ 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU DQG 6RFLDO ,QWHUDFWLRQ DQG 6RFLDO 5HODWLRQV PDNH XS WKH 6RFLDO 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU +RZHYHU WKH GLIIHUHQFHV IRXQG IRU $ELOLW\ 8WLOL]DWLRQ ZKLFK ZDV RQH RI VL[ YDOXHV LQFOXGHG LQ WKH

PAGE 70

2ULHQWDWLRQ 7RZDUG 6HOI$FWXDOL]DWLRQ IDFWRU DQG &XOWXUDO ,GHQWLW\ ZKLFK ZDV QRW LQFOXGHG LQ DQ\ RI WKH ILYH IDFWRUV LGHQWLILHG E\ 6YHUNR f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f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f fKDUGf GUXJV LH SUHVFULSWLRQ GUXJV VWLPXODQWV GHSUHVVDQWV FRFDLQH DQG KHURLQf DQG DOO VXEVWDQFHV LH WKH VXP RI DOO

PAGE 71

LWHPVf $ KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ DQDO\VLV ZDV FRPSXWHG IRU HDFK RI WKH LWHPV DQG WKH WKUHH DGGLWLRQDO JURXSLQJV IRU D WRWDO RI DQDO\VHV %HIRUH UXQQLQJ WKHVH DQDO\VHV 3HDUVRQ 5 FRUUHODWLRQV ZHUH FRPSXWHG WR GHWHUPLQH ZKLFK LWHPV RU LWHP JURXSLQJV ZHUH VLJQLILFDQWO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 666 0DGVHQ HW DO f D SRWHQWLDO FRQIRXQG FRQWUROOHG IRU LQ WKH PDLQ DQDO\VHV 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKLV DQDO\VLV IRXQG VLJQLILFDQW FRUUHODWLRQV EHWZHHQ WKH 666 DQG DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG GHVLJQHU GUXJV VWLPXODQWV DQG SV\FKHGHOLF GUXJV $OO DQDO\VHV LQYROYLQJ WKHVH WKUHH VFRUHV LQFOXGHG WKH 666 DV D FRYDULDWH ZKLFK ZDV HQWHUHG ILUVW LQWR WKH KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ PRGHOV (DFK DQDO\VLV XVHG D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZLWK 03 WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ *&,f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f S f DQG DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG DOO GUXJV ) f S f )RU DOO VXEVWDQFHV IRU ZKLFK VLJQLILFDQW DWWLWXGH GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG EHWZHHQ SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV UHSRUWHG PRUH SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WKHVH VXEVWDQFHV WKDQ WKHLU SRSXODU URFN FRXQWHUSDUWV 7DEOH VKRZV WKH PHDQ VFRUH IRU SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV IRU WKH WKUHH VXEVWDQFHV RU JURXSV RI VXEVWDQFHV RQ ZKLFK VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG 1R RWKHU PDLQ HIIHFWV IRU 03 ZHUH VLJQLILFDQW DW WKH S OHYHO

PAGE 72

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f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f fKDUGf GUXJV

PAGE 73

LH SUHVFULSWLRQ GUXJV VWLPXODQWV GHSUHVVDQWV FRFDLQH DQG KHURLQf DQG DOO VXEVWDQFHV LH WKH VXP RI DOO LWHPVf $ KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ DQDO\VLV ZDV FRPSXWHG IRU HDFK RI WKH LWHPV DQG WKH WKUHH DGGLWLRQDO JURXSLQJV IRU D WRWDO RI DQDO\VHV %HIRUH UXQQLQJ WKHVH DQDO\VHV 3HDUVRQ 5 FRUUHODWLRQV ZHUH FRPSXWHG WR GHWHUPLQH ZKLFK LWHPV RU LWHP JURXSLQJV ZHUH VLJQLILFDQWO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 666 0DGVHQ HW DO f D SRWHQWLDO FRQIRXQG FRQWUROOHG IRU LQ WKH PDLQ DQDO\VHV 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKLV DQDO\VLV IRXQG VLJQLILFDQW FRUUHODWLRQV EHWZHHQ WKH 666 DQG WKH XVH RI DOFRKRO PDULMXDQD KDOOXFLQRJHQV SV\FKHGHOLF GUXJV DQG DOO GUXJV $OO DQDO\VHV LQYROYLQJ WKHVH ILYH VFRUHV LQFOXGHG WKH 666 DV D FRYDULDWH ZKLFK ZDV HQWHUHG ILUVW LQWR WKH KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ PRGHOV (DFK DQDO\VLV XVHG D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZLWK 03 WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ *&,f DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG HDFK RI WKH LQGLYLGXDO LWHPV IURP WKH 686 SOXV WKH SV\FKHGHOLF GUXJ KDUG GUXJ DQG DOO GUXJ JURXSLQJV LQGLYLGXDOO\ VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH LQ VHSDUDWH DQDO\VHV 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG $OO DQDO\VHV LQYROYLQJ WKH XVH RI DOFRKRO PDULMXDQD KDOOXFLQRJHQV SV\FKHGHOLF GUXJV DQG DOO GUXJV LQFOXGHG WKH 666 DV D SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOH ZKLFK ZDV HQWHUHG ILUVW LQ WKH PRGHO 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKHVH DQDO\VHV LQGLFDWH VLJQLILFDQW PDLQ HIIHFWV RI 03 IRU XVH RI WREDFFR ) f S f PDULMXDQD ) f S f KDOOXFLQRJHQV ) f S f SV\FKHGHOLF GUXJV ) f S f DQG DOO GUXJV ) f S f 6LJQLILFDQW LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFWV IRU 03 [ *&, ZHUH IRXQG IRU WKH XVH RI DOFRKRO DQG KHURLQ )RU DOO VXEVWDQFHV IRU ZKLFK VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV LQ XVDJH IUHTXHQF\ ZHUH IRXQG EHWZHHQ SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV UHSRUWHG PRUH IUHTXHQW XVH RI WKHVH VXEVWDQFHV WKDQ WKHLU SRSXODU URFN FRXQWHUSDUWV 7DEOH VKRZV WKH

PAGE 74

PHDQ IUHTXHQF\ RI XVH IRU SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV IRU WKH ILYH VXEVWDQFHV RU JURXSV RI VXEVWDQFHV RQ ZKLFK VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG 1R RWKHU PDLQ HIIHFWV IRU 03 ZHUH VLJQLILFDQW DW WKH S OHYHO 7DEOH 0HDQ VXEVWDQFH XVH VFRUHV IRU SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH PXVLF IDQV 6XEVWDQFH 3RSXODU 5RFN &ROOHJH$OWHUQDWLYH 7REDFFR 0DULMXDQD +DOOXFLQRJHQV 3V\FKHGHOLFV $OO 6XEVWDQFHV 7ZR VLJQLILFDQW LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFWV IRU 03 [ *&, ZHUH IRXQG IRU WKH XVH RI DOFRKRO ) f S f DQG IRU WKH XVH RI KHURLQ ) f S f )LJXUH GHSLFWV WKH LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW EHWZHHQ XVH RI DOFRKRO 03 DQG WKH *&, $V )LJXUH VKRZV SRSXODU URFN IDQVf XVH RI DOFRKRO LV GUDPDWLFDOO\ PRUH IUHTXHQW DV WKHLU *&, VFRUHV LQFUHDVH ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQVf DOFRKRO XVH LV PRUH FRQVLVWHQW DQG LQFUHDVHV OHVV GUDPDWLFDOO\ DV WKHLU *&, VFRUHV LQFUHDVH )LJXUH GHSLFWV WKH LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW EHWZHHQ XVH RI KHURLQ 03 DQG WKH *&, $V )LJXUH VKRZV SRSXODU URFN IDQVf XVH RI KHURLQ LV LQFUHDVLQJO\ PRUH IUHTXHQW DV WKHLU *&, VFRUHV LQFUHDVH ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQVf KHURLQ XVH LV FRQVLVWHQWO\ QHDU ]HUR DV WKHLU *&, VFRUHV LQFUHDVH ,W VKRXOG EH QRWHG WKDW WKLV UHODWLRQVKLS LV EDVHG RQ RQO\ RI VXEMHFWV PDUNLQJ RQ D VFDOH RI fQHYHUf DQG fVHYHUDO WLPHV GDLO\ff 7KLV LQGLFDWHV WKDW SRSXODU URFN IDQV DUH PRUH OLNHO\ WR KDYH WULHG KHURLQ DV WKHLU *&, VFRUHV LQFUHDVH ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV DUH OHVV OLNHO\ WR KDYH WULHG KHURLQ DV WKHLU *&, VFRUHV LQFUHDVH +RZHYHU EHFDXVH RI WKH QXPEHU RI SDUWLFLSDQWV UHSRUWLQJ DQ\ KHURLQ XVH WKLV UHODWLRQVKLS LV OLNHO\ WR EH XQUHOLDEOH

PAGE 75

)LJXUH ,QWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW EHWZHHQ 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH DQG WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ RQ WKH 8VH RI $OFRKRO )LJXUH ,QWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW EHWZHHQ 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH DQG WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ RQ WKH 8VH RI +HURLQ

PAGE 76

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

PAGE 77

&RQVHQVXDO 6H[ 7KH 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\ 6([6 .RVV t 2URV f LQFOXGHG RQH LWHP DVVHVVLQJ WKH IUHTXHQF\ RI HQJDJLQJ LQ FRQVHQVXDO VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH 7KLV TXHVWLRQ ZDV QRW LQFOXGHG LQ WKH VFRUH RI WKH 6([6 EHFDXVH LW GRHV QRW UHODWH WR FRHUFLYH VH[XDO EHKDYLRUV +RZHYHU WKH IUHTXHQF\ ZLWK ZKLFK DGROHVFHQWV HQJDJH LQ FRQVHQVXDO VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH LV UHOHYDQW WR XQGHUVWDQGLQJ WKH OLYHV RI DGROHVFHQWV ,W LV DOVR SRVVLEOH WKDW FRQVHQVXDO VH[ LV UHODWHG WR 03 DQG WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ *&f 7R H[DPLQH WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH FRQVHQVXDO VH[ 03 DQG *& D KLHUDUFKLFDO PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZDV FRPSXWHG ZLWK 03 WKH *&, DQG 03 [ *&, VHUYLQJ DV SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV DQG WKH FRQVHQVXDO VH[ VHUYLQJ DV WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH 7KH SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV ZHUH HQWHUHG LQWR WKH PRGHO LQ WKH RUGHU OLVWHG 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH WKDW WKHUH LV QR VLJQLILFDQW LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW IRU 03 [ *&, RQ FRQVHQVXDO VH[ ) f S f RU IRU WKH PDLQ HIIHFW RI 03 ) f S f 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 7KH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 666 =XFNHUPDQ f KDV EHHQ XVHG DV D FRYDULDWH LQ PDQ\ DQDO\VHV LQ WKLV VWXG\ EHFDXVH LW KDV EHHQ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH 03f DQG ZLWK RWKHU KLJKULVNUHFNOHVV EHKDYLRUV LQFOXGLQJ GUXJ XVH SURPLVFXRXV VH[ XQSURWHFWHG VH[ GULYLQJ ZKLOH LQWR[LFDWHG VKRSOLIWLQJ DQG YDQGDOLVP $UQHWW f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

PAGE 78

QR VLJQLILFDQW LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFW IRU 03 [ *&, RQ WKH 666 ) f S +RZHYHU D VLJQLILFDQW PDLQ HIIHFW IRU 03 ZDV IRXQG ) f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fV SRVVLEOH LQWHUDFWLRQ ZLWK PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG QRW PDLQ HIIHFWV IRU JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW DORQH DV PDLQ HIIHFWV IRU JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW GLG QRW UHODWH WR WKH K\SRWKHVHV $ RQHZD\ $129$ ZLWK WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ DV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DQG PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH FRQILUPHG VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV LQ JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW EHWZHHQ SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV )O f S f 7KH JURXS PHDQV ZHUH IRU FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV DQG IRU SRSXODU URFN IDQV ZLWK FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV UHSRUWLQJ JUHDWHU JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW WKDQ WKHLU SRSXODU URFN FRXQWHUSDUWV 7KHVH GLIIHUHQFHV LQGLFDWH WKDW JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW LV UHOHYDQW WR PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG PD\ EH UHOHYDQW WR YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV VHSDUDWH IURP WKH LQWHUDFWLRQ ZLWK PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH 7R GHWHUPLQH LI JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW PDNHV D VLJQLILFDQW LQGHSHQGHQW FRQWULEXWLRQ WR WKH SUHGLFWLRQ RI WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV LQ WKLV VWXG\ LH YDOXHV

PAGE 79

DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VXEVWDQFHV VH[XDOO\ FRHUFLYH EHKDYLRU DQG VXEVWDQFH XVHf DOO WKH PDLQ DQDO\VHV DQG DQFLOODU\ DQDO\VHV ZHUH UHFDOFXODWHG XVLQJ WKH 7\SH ,,, 6XPV RI 6TXDUHV IRU DOO ) WHVWV 7\SH ,,, 6XPV RI 6TXDUHV IDFWRU RXW WKH YDULDQFH FRPPRQ WR DOO SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOHV VR WKDW HDFK SUHGLFWRU YDULDEOH LV WHVWHG DV LI LW ZDV HQWHUHG LQWR WKH UHJUHVVLRQ HTXDWLRQ ODVW ,Q RWKHU ZRUGV XVLQJ 7\SH ,,, 6XPV RI 6TXDUHV WHVWV ZKHWKHU PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH 03f LV D VLJQLILFDQW SUHGLFWRU RI WKH FULWHULRQ YDULDEOH LQGHSHQGHQW RI WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ *&,f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

PAGE 80

7DEOH 6LJQLILFDQW PDLQ HIIHFWV RI WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ LQGHSHQGHQW RI 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH DQG WKH LQWHUDFWLRQ EHWZHHQ 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH DQG WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ 9DULDEOH ') fn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f IRU RQO\ WKUHH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG PDULMXDQD XVH RI DOFRKRO DQG WREDFFR FRPELQHG DQG XVH RI SV\FKHGHOLF GUXJV VHH 7DEOH f %\ FRPSDULVRQ WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ LV VLJQLILFDQW LQGHSHQGHQW RI PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG WKH LQWHUDFWLRQ 03 [ *&,f IRU QR OHVV WKDQ GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG PDULMXDQD XVH RI PDULMXDQD KDOOXFLQRJHQV SUHVFULSWLRQ GUXJV GHSUHVVDQWV KHURLQ

PAGE 81

DOFRKRO DQG WREDFFR FRPELQHG SV\FKHGHOLF GUXJV KDUG GUXJV LOOHJDO GUXJV DOO GUXJV WKH YDOXHV RI $GYDQFHPHQW :RUNLQJ &RQGLWLRQV &XOWXUDO ,GHQWLW\ DQG WKH 8WLOLWDULDQ 2ULHQWDWLRQ IDFWRU VHH 7DEOH f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

PAGE 82

&+$37(5 ',6&866,21 &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWV f K\SRWKHVL]HG WKDW PXVLF FDQ DFW DV D VRXUFH RI LQIRUPDWLRQ YDOXHV DQG EHKDYLRUV IRU WKRVH OLVWHQHUV ZKRVH PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH LV PRUH WKDQ MXVW D fWDVWHf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

PAGE 83

DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK EXVLQHVV DQG LQGXVWU\ 7KLV VXJJHVWV WKDW SRSXODU URFN IDQV PD\ EH PRUH OLNHO\ WR HQWHU WUDGLWLRQDO RFFXSDWLRQV HJ EXVLQHVV ODZ PHGLFLQH HWFf ZKLFK W\SLFDOO\ RIIHU WKH JUHDWHVW SRVVLELOLW\ RI VDWLVI\LQJ WKH YDOXHV RI (FRQRPLFV $GYDQFHPHQW 3UHVWLJH $XWKRULW\ DQG $FKLHYHPHQW 7KLV UHODWLRQVKLS LV WR EH H[SHFWHG DV WKH 8WLOLWDULDQ 2ULHQWDWLRQ YDOXHV DUH JHQHUDOO\ LPSRUWDQW WR PDLQVWUHDP $PHULFDQV 6YHUNR f DQG SRSXODU URFN LV WKH PXVLF RI PDLQVWUHDP $PHULFD 7KH YDOXHV RI 6RFLDO ,QWHUDFWLRQ DQG 6RFLDO 5HODWLRQV UHSUHVHQW D GHVLUH WR EH DURXQG DQG LQ UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK RWKHU SHRSOH 7KH IDFW WKH SRSXODU URFN IDQV SODFH PRUH HPSKDVLV RQ WKHVH YDOXHV WKDQ FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV VXJJHVWV WKDW SRSXODU URFN IDQV DUH OLNHO\ WR EH PRUH H[WURYHUWHG DQRWKHU WUDLW KLJKO\ YDOXHG LQ $PHULFDQ VRFLHW\ $ELOLW\ 8WLOL]DWLRQ FDQ EH FKDUDFWHUL]HG DV WKH fEH DOO \RX FDQ EHf YDOXH DQG UHSUHVHQWV PDNLQJ XVH RI RQHfV DELOLWLHV &XOWXUDO ,GHQWLW\ LQYROYHV EHLQJ DFFHSWHG DQG JLYHQ HTXDO RSSRUWXQLW\ EDVHG RQ RQHf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t 1HYLOO f UHYHDOV WKDW DOWKRXJK WKH GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH QRW DOZD\V VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW SRSXODU URFN IDQV VFRUHG KLJKHU RQ RI WKH YDOXHV VHH 7DEOH f 2QO\ RQ WKH YDOXH RI 5LVN GLG FROOHJH DOWHUQDWLYH IDQV VFRUH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU WKDQ SRSXODU URFN IDQV 1RWH 7KLV GLIIHUHQFH ZDV QRW VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW ZKHQ WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH ZDV LQFOXGHG LQ WKH PRGHOf

PAGE 84

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fVODFNHUf WKHPH DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKH FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH VXEFXOWXUH DQG f*HQHUDWLRQ ;f

PAGE 85

ZKHUHLQ FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV PD\ EH SHVVLPLVWLF F\QLFDO DQG GLVHQFKDQWHG ZLWK PDLQVWUHDP VRFLHW\ DQG WKH YDOXHV LW XSKROGV 7KH\ PD\ EH VNHSWLFDO ZKHWKHU RU QRW VXFFHVV LV DWWDLQDEOH DQG WKDW HYHQ LI DWWDLQHG WKH XWLOLWDULDQ UHZDUGV RI HFRQRPLFV SUHVWLJH DGYDQFHPHQW DXWKRULW\ DQG DFKLHYHPHQW DUH ZRUWK\ RI SXUVXLW ,Q FRQWUDVW SRSXODU URFN IDQV PD\ UHPDLQ GHGLFDWHG WR SXUVXLQJ WKHVH YDOXHV DQG FRQWLQXH WR ILQG WKHP YDOXDEOH 0XVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW WR RQHfV SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF ZHUH IRXQG WR LQWHUDFW ZLWK WKH YDOXH RI 3UHVWLJH ZKLFK SURYLGHV VRPH HYLGHQFH WKDW D UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG YDOXHV H[LVWV ,Q SDUWLFXODU FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQVf YDOXLQJ RI 3UHVWLJH UHPDLQV IDLUO\ FRQVWDQW ZKHUHDV SRSXODU URFN IDQV VKRZ D VKDUS LQFUHDVH LQ WKH LPSRUWDQFH WKH\ SODFH RQ 3UHVWLJH DV WKHLU *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ VFRUHV LQFUHDVH 2QH LPSOLFDWLRQ RI WKHVH UHVXOWV LV WKDW WR XQGHUVWDQG KRZ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV GLIIHU LQ WKHLU YDOXLQJ RI 3UHVWLJH LW LV LPSRUWDQW WR XQGHUVWDQG WKHLU OHYHO RI FRPPLWPHQW WR WKHLU SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF 2YHUDOO WKH GDWD DYDLODEOH LQYROYLQJ YDOXHV SURYLGHV VWURQJ HYLGHQFH WKDW SRSXODU URFN IDQV DUH VXEVWDQWLYHO\ GLIIHUHQW IURP FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV LQ WKH YDOXHV WKH\ KROG 7KH YDOXH GLIIHUHQFHV DUH LQ WKH H[SHFWHG GLUHFWLRQV ZLWK SRSXODU URFN IDQV YDOXLQJ PDLQVWUHDP YDOXHV PRUH WKDQ WKHLU FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH FRXQWHUSDUWV 7KH GDWD DOVR SURYLGH OLPLWHG HYLGHQFH WKDW SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQVf YDOXHV GLIIHU EDVHG RQ WKHLU JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW WR WKHLU SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF

PAGE 86

$WWLWXGHV $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG :RPHQ 6XSSRUW IRU +\SRWKHVLV $ LQ WKH DUHD RI DWWLWXGHV ZDV ZHDN DW EHVW 5HJDUGLQJ DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ QR VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG EHWZHHQ SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV IRU HLWKHU VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SLQJ RU UDSH P\WK DFFHSWDQFH 7KHVH UHVXOWV DUH VXUSULVLQJ JLYHQ WKDW VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG EHWZHHQ SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV RQ WKH 6H[5ROH 6WHUHRW\SLQJ 6FDOH E\ .UXVH f 7KH FXUUHQW VWXG\ ZDV XQDEOH WR UHSOLFDWH WKH ILQGLQJV RI .UXVH f +RZHYHU WKH 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 666f ZDV LQFOXGHG LQ WKH SUHVHQW DQDO\VLV DQG ZDV QRW LQFOXGHG E\ .UXVH f :KHQ WKH 666 LV UHPRYHG IURP WKH PRGHO LQ WKH FXUUHQW DQDO\VLV VLJQLILFDQW JURXS GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG ZLWK SRSXODU URFN IDQV VFRULQJ RQ DYHUDJH DQG FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV VFRULQJ RQ DYHUDJH RQ WKH 6H[5ROH 6WHUHRW\SLQJ 6FDOH ZKHUH KLJKHU QXPEHUV UHIOHFWHG JUHDWHU VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SLQJ 7KHVH GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK .UXVH f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

PAGE 87

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f, GRQfW XVH GUXJV P\VHOI EXW RWKHUV VKRXOG KDYH WKH

PAGE 88

ULJKW WR XVH WKHP LI WKH\ VHH ILWf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fV PRUH IUHTXHQW XVH RI GUXJV DOVR LQFOXGHG DOO GUXJV LQ JHQHUDO LOOHJDO GUXJV DQG WKH OHJDO GUXJV RI DOFRKRO DQG WREDFFR 7KLV SURILOH LV JHQHUDOO\ FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH UHVXOWV UHJDUGLQJ DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG

PAGE 89

VXEVWDQFHV ZKHUH FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV DOVR UHSRUWHG PRUH SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG DOO GUXJV LQ JHQHUDO DQG PDULMXDQD LQ SDUWLFXODU +RZHYHU XVH RI WREDFFR DOFRKRO KDOOXFLQRJHQV SV\FKHGHOLFV DQG LOOHJDO GUXJV HYLGHQFHG VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV LQ XVDJH EXW FRUUHVSRQGLQJ DWWLWXGH GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH QRW IRXQG 0XVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW WR RQHfV SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF ZHUH IRXQG WR LQWHUDFW ZLWK WKH XVH RI DOFRKRO DQG ZLWK WKH XVH RI KHURLQ )RU DOFRKRO XVH SRSXODU URFN IDQVf XVH RI DOFRKRO LV GUDPDWLFDOO\ PRUH IUHTXHQW DV WKHLU *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ VFRUHV LQFUHDVH ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQVf DOFRKRO XVH LV PRUH FRQVLVWHQW DQG LQFUHDVHV OHVV GUDPDWLFDOO\ DV WKHLU *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ VFRUHV LQFUHDVH )RU KHURLQ XVH SRSXODU URFN IDQV XVH RI KHURLQ LV LQFUHDVLQJO\ PRUH IUHTXHQW DV WKHLU *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ VFRUHV LQFUHDVH ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQVf KHURLQ XVH LV FRQVLVWHQWO\ QHDU ]HUR DV WKHLU *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ VFRUHV LQFUHDVH ,W VKRXOG EH QRWHG WKDW WKLV UHODWLRQVKLS LV EDVHG RQ RQO\ RI VXEMHFWV PDUNLQJ RQ D VFDOH RI fQHYHUf DQG fVHYHUDO WLPHV GDLO\ff IRU KHURLQ XVH LQ WKH SDVW PRQWK 7KLV LQGLFDWHV WKDW SRSXODU URFN IDQV DUH PRUH OLNHO\ WR KDYH XVHG KHURLQ RQFH LQ WKH ODVW PRQWK DV WKHLU *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ VFRUHV LQFUHDVH ZKHUHDV FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV DUH OHVV OLNHO\ WR KDYH XVHG KHURLQ DV WKHLU *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ VFRUHV LQFUHDVH +RZHYHU EHFDXVH RI WKH ORZ QXPEHU RI SDUWLFLSDQWV UHSRUWLQJ DQ\ KHURLQ XVH WKLV UHODWLRQVKLS LV OLNHO\ WR EH XQUHOLDEOH 7KHVH LQWHUDFWLRQ HIIHFWV EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW WR RQHfV SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF ZLWK DOFRKRO DQG KHURLQ DGG D JUHDW GHDO WR RXU XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ FRPPLWPHQW WR PXVLF PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG VXEVWDQFH XVH 7KH LQWHUDFWLRQ LQYROYLQJ DOFRKRO VKRZV SRSXODU URFN IDQV UHSRUWLQJ VKDUS LQFUHDVHV LQ WKH XVH RI DOFRKRO DV WKHLU *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ VFRUHV LQFUHDVH 3RSXODU URFN IDQV DSSHDU WR EHJLQ ZLWK QHDU ]HUR DOFRKRO XVH DW ORZ OHYHOV RI FRPPLWPHQW

PAGE 90

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f DQG ZLWK PDQ\ RI WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV LQ WKLV VWXG\ $UQHWW =XFNHUPDQ f *URXS GLIIHUHQFHV LQ VHQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ ZHUH IRXQG EHWZHHQ SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV ZLWK FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV UHSRUWLQJ JUHDWHU VHQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ 7KHVH GLIIHUHQFHV DUH WR EH H[SHFWHG DV FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH PXVLF KDV D PRUH KDUVK DJJUHVVLYH VRXQG WKDW ZRXOG OLNHO\ EH H[SHULHQFHG DV XQSOHDVDQW WR D OLVWHQHU ZKR LV

PAGE 91

XQFRPIRUWDEOH ZLWK KLJKHU OHYHOV RI VWLPXODWLRQ 7KH IDFW WKDW VHQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ ZDV LQFOXGHG DV D FRYDULDWH PHDQV WKDW DOO VLJQLILFDQW ILQGLQJV LQYROYLQJ YDULDEOHV WKDW DUH FRUUHODWHG ZLWK VHQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ DUH VWDWLVWLFDOO\ LQGHSHQGHQW RI VHQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ 7KH LQGHSHQGHQFH RI PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH IURP VHQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ LV LPSRUWDQW EHFDXVH VHQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ LV XVXDOO\ VHHQ DV D SHUVRQDOLW\ YDULDEOH $UQHWW =XFNHUPDQ f 7KHUHIRUH LI DQ LQGLYLGXDOf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

PAGE 92

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f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

PAGE 93

HTXLYDOHQW WR PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH GLIIHUHQFHV DQG WKHVH YDULDEOHV VHUYH DV FRQIRXQGV IRU RQH DQRWKHU ,QFOXGLQJ DQRWKHU PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXS WKDW LV DOVR KLJKO\ FRPPLWWHG WR WKHLU SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF HJ UDS RU KHDY\ PHWDO URFNf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f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

PAGE 94

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f +RZHYHU WKHVH VDPH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV PD\ VHUYH WR GLVWLQJXLVK EHWZHHQ VXEJURXSV ZKR VKDUH WKH VDPH PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH HJ VRPH IDQV PD\ DGYHUWLVH DQG QRW OLVWHQ WR UDGLR ZKHUHDV RWKHUV PD\ DYRLG DGYHUWLVHPHQW DQG EH DQ DYLG UDGLR OLVWHQHUf &RQVHTXHQWO\ WZR IDQV FDQ VFRUH HTXDOO\ RQ JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW EXW RQH LV KLJK RQ DQ fDGYHUWLVHPHQWf IDFWRU ZKHUHDV WKH RWKHU LV KLJK RQ D fUDGLRf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

PAGE 95

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b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

PAGE 96

$QRWKHU VDPSOLQJ OLPLWDWLRQ RI WKLV VWXG\ LV WKH HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV $GROHVFHQWV ZKR DUH DEOH WR VXFFHHG LQ FROOHJH DW OHDVW XQWLO MXQLRU RU VHQLRU OHYHOVf DUH JHQHUDOO\ QRW FRQVLGHUHG DQ DWULVN JURXS E\ VRFLDO VFLHQWLVWV 2I PRUH FRQFHUQ DUH KLJK VFKRRO GURSRXWV DQG VWXGHQWV ZKR QHYHU SXUVXH FROOHJH RU WHFKQLFDO GHJUHHV DIWHU KLJK VFKRRO ,Q SDUWLFXODU LW LV IHDUHG WKDW DWULVN VWXGHQWV DUH OLNHO\ WR EH PRVW VXVFHSWLEOH WR QHJDWLYH WKHPHV DQG LQIOXHQFHV LQ PXVLF &KULVWHQVRQ t 5REHUWV f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

PAGE 97

DGGLWLRQDO UHVHDUFK WR GHWHUPLQH WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV IRU RWKHU SRSXODWLRQV DQG WKH SRSXODWLRQ RI DGROHVFHQWV DV D ZKROH 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH *URXSV $QRWKHU OLPLWDWLRQ RI WKLV VWXG\ DQG LWV VDPSOH LV WKH OLPLWHG QXPEHU RI PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV UHSUHVHQWHG 2QO\ WZR PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV ZHUH UHSUHVHQWHG LQ VXIILFLHQW QXPEHUV WR EH LQFOXGHG LQ WKH DQDO\VHV 7KLV OLPLWDWLRQ PD\ UHVXOW IURP f WKH DJH RI WKH VDPSOH XSSHUOHYHO FROOHJH VWXGHQWV PD\ KDYH RXWJURZQ PRUH H[WUHPH PXVLF IRUPV VXFK DV UDS RU KHDY\ PHWDO URFNf f WKH FRQWH[W RI WKH VDPSOH DV XQLYHUVLW\ VWXGHQWV D FRQWH[W LQ ZKLFK FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IRU H[DPSOH LV PRUH DFFHSWHGf RU f WKH DFDGHPLF GLVFLSOLQH RI WKH VDPSOH VWXGHQWV LQ DJULFXOWXUH IRU LQVWDQFH ZRXOG EH H[SHFWHG WR KDYH D VWURQJHU UHSUHVHQWDWLRQ RI FRXQWU\ PXVLF IDQVf DV QRWHG DERYH ,Q DQ\ FDVH HIIRUWV VKRXOG EH PDGH LQ DQ\ IXWXUH UHVHDUFK WR LQFOXGH D EURDGHU QXPEHU RI PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV E\ WDUJHWLQJ JURXSV PRUH OLNHO\ WR SUHIHU D VSHFLILF VW\OH RI PXVLF ,Q DGGLWLRQ WR VDPSOLQJ OLPLWDWLRQV WKH PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH FKRLFHV RIIHUHG LQ WKH 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH DOVR PD\ KDYH KDG WKH HIIHFW RI OLPLWLQJ WKH HQGRUVHPHQW RI SDUWLFXODU PXVLF VW\OHV ,Q SDUWLFXODU IDLOXUH WR LQFOXGH D VHSDUDWH UK\WKP t EOXHV 5 t %f FDWHJRU\ 5 t % ZDV LQFOXGHG ZLWK SRSXODU URFN EXW VXEMHFWV ZURWH LQ 5 t %f ZDV DOPRVW FHUWDLQO\ UHVSRQVLEOH IRU WKLV JURXS QRW EHLQJ HQGRUVHG E\ b RI WKH VDPSOH 7KH UHVXOW RI WKLV RPLVVLRQ LV WKDW RWKHUV ZKR ZRXOG KDYH FKRVHQ 5 t % LI LW KDG EHHQ OLVWHG VHSDUDWHO\ LQGLFDWHG DQRWKHU SUHIHUHQFH WKHUHE\ LQFUHDVLQJ WKH HUURU YDULDQFH IRU WKRVH JURXSV ,W LV LPSRVVLEOH WR GHWHUPLQH KRZ RIWHQ WKLV KDSSHQHG RU KRZ LW DIIHFWHG WKH RXWFRPH RI WKH DQDO\VHV EXW IXWXUH UHVHDUFK VKRXOG FRUUHFW WKLV RPLVVLRQ ,W ZDV DOVR EURXJKW WR WKH DXWKRUfV DWWHQWLRQ E\ JUDGXDWH VWXGHQWV ZKR DGPLQLVWHUHG WKH VWXG\ WKDW WKH PXVLFLDQV RIIHUHG DV H[DPSOHV IRU KHDY\ PHWDO URFN ZHUH RXW RI GDWH RU LQDFFXUDWH 7KLV

PAGE 98

RYHUVLJKW PD\ DFFRXQW IRU RQO\ RQH RXW RI SDUWLFLSDQWV HQGRUVLQJ KHDY\ PHWDO URFN DV WKHLU SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF ZKHQ DV PXFK DV b RI D SUHYLRXV VDPSOH .UXVH f FKRVH KHDY\ PHWDO URFN DV WKHLU SUHIHUUHG VW\OH RI PXVLF $QRWKHU H[SODQDWLRQ LV WKDW KHDY\ PHWDO URFN LV IDGLQJ DV D GRPLQDQW PXVLF VW\OH ,Q HLWKHU FDVH IXWXUH UHVHDUFK VKRXOG DOVR FRQVLGHU JURXSLQJ KHDY\ PHWDO URFN ZLWK fKDUG URFNf WR EURDGHQ WKLV FDWHJRU\ VRPHZKDW ZKLOH PDLQWDLQLQJ LWV IRFXV RQ PRUH DJJUHVVLYH IRUPV RI URFN PXVLF 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 7KH 0XVLF 3UHIHUHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 034f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fIRUHYHUf RU D YDOXH WKDW UHSUHVHQWHG DOO WKHLU OLYHV ,Q DGGLWLRQ ZKHQ SDUWLFLSDQWV HQWHUHG D QXPEHU OHVV WKDQ LW ZDV XQFHUWDLQ ZKHWKHU WKH\ LQWHQGHG WKH YDOXH LQ PRQWKV DV WKH TXHVWLRQ UHDGf RU \HDUV )RU RWKHU LWHPV WKH TXHVWLRQ SODFHG OLPLWV RQ WKH UHVSRQVH WKDW ZHUH VRPHWLPHV LQYDOLG )RU LQVWDQFH QXPEHU RI FRQFHUWV ZDV VSHFLILHG DV fSHU PRQWKf EXW PDQ\ VXEMHFWV DWWHQGHG FRQFHUWV RQFH SHU \HDU RU RQFH HYHU\ WKUHH PRQWKV 7KHVH SUREOHPV FRXOG OLNHO\ EH VROYHG E\ UHZRUGLQJ WKH TXHVWLRQV RU FKDQJLQJ WKH IRUPDWWLQJ WR KLJKOLJKW WKH PRVW VDOLHQW SDUWV RI WKH TXHVWLRQ VR WKDW UHDGHUV ZRXOG SURFHVV WKH QHFHVVDU\ LQIRUPDWLRQ $ VHFRQG LVVXH UHODWHV WR ZKLFK LWHPV WR UHWDLQ LQ IXWXUH YHUVLRQV ,Q WKH FXUUHQW YHUVLRQ RQO\ RI WKH GDWD SRLQWV ZHUH VFRUHG IRU WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[

PAGE 99

+RZHYHU WKH SUREOHPV QRWHG DERYH PD\ EH UHVSRQVLEOH IRU WKHVH LWHPV QRW EHLQJ UHWDLQHG RQ WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ ,Q VXSSRUW RI WKLV H[SODQDWLRQ RQO\ RI ZULWHLQ LWHPV ZHUH LQFOXGHG LQ WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[ $QRWKHU SRVVLELOLW\ LV WKDW WKH RPLWWHG TXHVWLRQV PD\ QRW EH UHOHYDQW IRU SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH PXVLF WKDW IRUPHG WZR WKLUGV RI WKH VDPSOH )RU H[DPSOH WKH H[FOXVLYLW\ DQG SHUFHQWDJH RI IULHQGV ZKR VKDUH RQHf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fV VRXQG VWLPXOXV DOPRVW VLQFH SV\FKRORJ\fV LQFHSWLRQ 7KLV UHVHDUFK KDV SURYLGHG D EDVLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH HVVHQWLDO FRPSRQHQWV RI PXVLF DQG KRZ WKH\ DUH SHUFHLYHG 2WKHU UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH IRXQG HYLGHQFH RI VXEWOH DQG QRW VR VXEWOH GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ SHRSOH ZKR SUHIHU RQH VW\OH RI PXVLF RYHU DQRWKHU LQ VXFK

PAGE 100

DUHDV DV VHQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ $UQHWW f VXEVWDQFH XVH .LQJ f DQG DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ .UXVH f +RZHYHU YHU\ IHZ RI WKHVH VWXGLHV KDYH EHHQ GRQH DQG DV D UHVXOW WKHUH DUH ODUJH JDSV LQ RXU NQRZOHGJH RI KRZ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH UHODWHV WR LQGLYLGXDO GLIIHUHQFHV 2WKHU UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH PRYHG IRUZDUG WR LQYHVWLJDWH WKH GLUHFW LPSDFW RI WKH PXVLF VWLPXOXV RQ UHOHYDQW YDULDEOHV VXFK DV DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ .UXVH 6W /DZUHQFH HW DO f SHUFHSWLRQ /LQGQHU DQG +\QDQ f DQG HPRWLRQDO VWDWH 3HUHWWL DQG =ZHLIHO f WR WHVW ZKHWKHU PXVLF SURGXFHV PDVVLYH HIIHFWV RQ OLVWHQHUVf HPRWLRQV OLIH VW\OH DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV 7KHVH VWXGLHV KDYH GHPRQVWUDWHG VLJQLILFDQW VKRUWWHUP HIIHFWV RI PXVLF RQ OLVWHQHUV ZKLFK DUH SDUWLFXODUO\ GUDPDWLF FRQVLGHULQJ WKH EUHYLW\ RI WKH PXVLF H[SRVXUH +RZHYHU WKHVH VWXGLHV LQYHVWLJDWLQJ WKH VKRUWWHUP LPSDFW RI PXVLF DUH VRPHZKDW SUHPDWXUH EHFDXVH LW LV DV \HW XQFOHDU ZKHWKHU OLVWHQLQJ WR GLIIHUHQW VW\OHV RI PXVLF RYHU DQ H[WHQGHG SHULRG LV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK SHUYDVLYH GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV 7KH FHQWUDO TXHVWLRQ IRU UHVHDUFK LQWR PXVLF DQG PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH LV WR GHWHUPLQH ZKHWKHU PXVLF SOD\V D VLJQLILFDQW UROH LQ KXPDQ GHYHORSPHQW DQG VRFLDOL]DWLRQ RU ZKHWKHU OLVWHQHUV FKRRVH WKHLU PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH VROHO\ EDVHG RQ SUHH[LVWLQJ GLIIHUHQFHV 7KH UHDO TXHVWLRQ LV FDXVDWLRQ DQG ZKHWKHU PXVLF FDXVHV VXEVHTXHQW EHKDYLRU RU ZKHWKHU LQGLYLGXDO GLIIHUHQFHV FDXVH ERWK PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH DQG VXEVHTXHQW EHKDYLRU 7KH DYDLODEOH UHVHDUFK VWLOO KDV QRW DQVZHUHG WKH TXHVWLRQ RI FDXVDWLRQ QRU KDV LW GHPRQVWUDWHG WKDW PHDQLQJIXO GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV HYHQ H[LVW 7KLV VWXG\ KDV ILOOHG LQ VRPH RI WKH JDSV LQ RXU NQRZOHGJH E\ GHPRQVWUDWLQJ WKDW VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV H[LVW DQG WKDW WKHVH GLIIHUHQFHV DUH SHUYDVLYH DFURVV D YDULHW\ RI YDULDEOHV LH YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUVf 7KLV VWXG\ GRFXPHQWV VRPH VSHFLILF GLIIHUHQFHV WKDW H[LVW EHWZHHQ SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHUQDWLYH IDQV LQ WKH DUHDV RI YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VXEVWDQFH XVH DQG

PAGE 101

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t EOXHV FRXQWU\ KHDY\ PHWDO DQG UDS FRPSDUH RQ WKHVH DQG RWKHU YDULDEOHV LV XS WR RWKHU SURMHFWV WR GLVFRYHU

PAGE 102

&KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWV f K\SRWKHVL]HG WKDW PXVLF FDQ DFW DV D VRXUFH RI LQIRUPDWLRQ YDOXHV DQG EHKDYLRUV IRU WKRVH OLVWHQHUV ZKRVH PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH LV PRUH WKDQ MXVW D fWDVWHf EHFDXVH ZKHQ DQ DGROHVFHQW LV GHHSO\ FRPPLWWHG WR D SDUWLFXODU VW\OH RI PXVLF KH RU VKH LV PRUH OLNHO\ WR LQWHUQDOL]H WKH YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV IRXQG ZLWKLQ WKDW PXVLF VXEFXOWXUH 7KH FXUUHQW VWXG\ IRXQG VRPH VXSSRUW IRU &KULVWHQVRQ DQG 5REHUWVf f K\SRWKHVLV 7KH IDFW WKDW VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG EHWZHHQ SRSXODU URFN DQG FROOHJHDOWHPDWLYH IDQV LQ WKH DUHDV RI YDOXHV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV LQGLFDWHV WKDW VXEVWDQWLYH GLIIHUHQFHV H[LVW EHWZHHQ WKHVH WZR JURXSV 7KH IDFW WKDW LQWHUDFWLRQV ZHUH IRXQG EHWZHHQ PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH JURXSV EDVHG RQ JOREDO FRPPLWPHQW LQGLFDWHV WKDW OLVWHQHUV IRU ZKRP WKHLU PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH LV PRUH WKDQ MXVW D fWDVWHf DUH VLJQLILFDQWO\ GLIIHUHQW IURP PRUH FDVXDO OLVWHQHUV 7KHVH UHVXOWV GR QRW LQ DQ\ ZD\ SURYH WKDW PXVLF GRHV DFW DV D VRXUFH RI LQIRUPDWLRQ YDOXHV DQG EHKDYLRUV IRU KLJKO\ FRPPLWWHG OLVWHQHUV ,QVWHDG WKLV VWXG\ GHPRQVWUDWHV WKDW PXVLF FDQ DFW DV VRXUFH RI LQIRUPDWLRQ YDOXHV DQG EHKDYLRUV ,W UHPDLQV IRU IXWXUH UHVHDUFKHUV WR GHWHUPLQH ZKHWKHU WKHVH GLIIHUHQFHV DUH LQIOXHQFHG VSHFLILFDOO\ E\ WKH PXVLF WR ZKLFK WKHVH OLVWHQHUV DUH FRPPLWWHG

PAGE 103

$33(1',; $ 086,& 35()(5(1&( 48(67,211$,5( 7KLV LV WKH VHFRQG RI WZR VHSDUDWH EDWWHULHV RI TXHVWLRQV \RX DUH EHLQJ DVNHG WR FRPSOHWH DV SDUW RI WKLV VWXG\ 7KLV EDWWHU\ FRQWDLQV TXHVWLRQV DERXW \RXU IDYRULWH VW\OH RI PXVLF KRZ PXFK \RX OLVWHQ DQG ZKDW ZD\V PXVLF DIIHFWV \RXU OLIH $V LQ %DWWHU\ VSHFLILF LQVWUXFWLRQV ^SULQWHG LQ LWDOLFVf ZLOO SURFHHG HDFK VHULHV RI TXHVWLRQV 3OHDVH UHDG WKHVH LQVWUXFWLRQV FDUHIXOO\ DV WKH\ LQIRUP \RX DERXW WKH FRQWHQW RI WKH TXHVWLRQV DQG WKH VSHFLILF VFDOH WR EH XVHG WR UHVSRQG WR WKH TXHVWLRQV
PAGE 104

3OHDVH LQGLFDWH WKH H[WHQW WR ZKLFK \RXU PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH LV OLPLWHG WR WKH FKRVHQ PXVLF VW\OH RQ D VFDOH IURP kWR f ZLWK k fLWV P\ IDYRULWH EXW OLNH RWKHU VW\OHV DOPRVW DV ZHOOf DQG k f, OLNH RQO\ P\ LQGLFDWHG SUHIHUHQFHf 4XHVWLRQV WKURXJK DUH GHVLJQHG WR DVVHVV KRZ PDQ\ KRXUV SHU GD\ \RX VSHQG OLVWHQLQJ WR \RXU IDYRULWH PXVLF YV DOO RWKHU VW\OHV RI PXVLF ZHHNGD\V DQG ZHHNHQG GD\V DUH FRQVLGHUHG VHSDUDWHO\f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
PAGE 105

4XHVWLRQ DVNV DERXW WKH GLIIHUHQW VLWXDWLRQV RU DFWLYLWLHV LQ ZKLFK \RX OLVWHQ WR \RXU IDYRULWH PXVLF 3OHDVH LQGLFDWH EHORZ LQ ZKLFK RI WKHVH VLWXDWLRQV \RX OLVWHQ WR \RXU IDYRULWH VW\OH RI PXVLF EXEEOH DOO WKDW DSSO\f f LQ WKH FDU ZKLOH VWXG\LQJ k LQ EHG k ZKLOH ZRUNLQJ f ZKLOH H[HUFLVLQJ RU SOD\LQJ VSRUWV FODVVHV ZKLOH ZDONLQJ EHWZHHQ f GXULQJ URPDQWLF RU GDWLQJ DFWLYLWLHV GULQNLQJ ZKLOH HDWLQJ RU f VLW GRZQ MXVW WR OLVWHQ k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

PAGE 106

4XHVWLRQV WKURXJK DVN DERXW ZD\V LQ ZKLFK \RX PLJKW SXEOLFO\ GHFODUH ZKDW \RXU IDYRULWH PXVLF LV RU ZD\V LQ ZKLFK \RXU IDYRULWH PXVLF KDV DIIHFWHG \RXU OLIHVW\OH )RU HDFK TXHVWLRQ XVH WKH IROORZLQJ VFDOH k b WR p b +RZ RIWHQ GR \RX SXW EXPSHU VWLFNHUV RQ \RXU FDU WKDW H[SOLFLWO\ LQGLFDWH \RXU PXVLF SUHIHUHQFH RU D IDYRULWH EDQG" +RZ RIWHQ GR \RX SXUFKDVH FRQFHUW 7VKLUWV EDQG 7VKLUWV RU RWKHU FORWKLQJ H[SOLFLWO\ OLQNHG WR \RXU IDYRULWH VW\OH RI PXVLF" +RZ RIWHQ GR \RX ZHDU \RXU FRQFHUW 7VKLUWV EDQG 7VKLUWV RU RWKHU FORWKLQJ H[SOLFLWO\ OLQNHG WR \RXU IDYRULWH VW\OH RI PXVLF LI \RX KDYH SXUFKDVHG DQ\f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fPDNLQJ LW ELJf DV D PXVLFLDQ LQ \RXU IDYRULWH PXVLF VW\OH" 4XHVWLRQV DQG DVN DERXW KRZ LPSRUWDQW \RX IHHO LW LV WR NQRZ VRPHRQHfV IDYRULWH PXVLF VW\OH EHIRUH GDWLQJ WKHP ,I \RX ZHUH FRQVLGHULQJ JRLQJ RXW RQ D GDWH ZLWK VRPHRQH KRZ LPSRUWDQW ZRXOG LW EH IRU \RX WR NQRZ KLV RU KHU IDYRULWH VW\OH RI PXVLF 6FDOH k f1RW DW DOO LPSRUWDQWf WR k f9HU\ LPSRUWDQWf ,I \RX ZHUH FRQVLGHULQJ JRLQJ RXW RQ D GDWH ZLWK VRPHRQH KRZ LPSRUWDQW ZRXOG LW EH WKDW \RX DQG \RXU GDWH ERWK VKDUHG WKH 6$0( IDYRULWH VW\OH RI PXVLF 6FDOH k ff1RW DW DOO LPSRUWDQW WR k ff9HU\ LPSRUWDQWf 127( ,WHPV KLJKOLJKWHG LQ EROG ZHUH LQFOXGHG LQ WKH *OREDO &RPPLWPHQW ,QGH[

PAGE 107

$33(1',; % 9$/8(6 6&$/( 7KH 9DOXHV 6FDOH XVHV D SRLQW /LNHUW VFDOH RI OLWWOH RU QR LPSRUWDQFH RI VRPH LPSRUWDQFH LPSRUWDQW YHU\ LPSRUWDQW ,W LV QRZ RU ZLOO LQ WKH IXWXUH EH LPSRUWDQW IRU PH WR $ELOLW\ 8WLOL]DWLRQ XVH DOO P\ VNLOOV DQG NQRZOHGJH f GR ZRUN WKDW WDNHV DGYDQWDJH RI P\ DELOLWLHV f GHYHORS P\ DELOLWLHV f $FKLHYHPHQW KDYH UHVXOWV ZKLFK VKRZ WKDW KDYH GRQH ZHOO f NQRZ WKDW P\ HIIRUWV ZLOO VKRZ f UHDFK D KLJK VWDQGDUG LQ P\ ZRUN f $GYDQFHPHQW JHW DKHDGf JHW DKHDG TXLFNO\ LQ P\ FDUHHU f EH DEOH WR JHW SURPRWLRQV f $HVWKHWLFV PDNH OLIH PRUH EHDXWLIXO f ILQG SOHDVXUH LQ WKH EHDXW\ RI P\ ZRUN f EH FRQFHUQHG ZLWK EHDXW\ LQ P\ ZRUN f $OWUXLVP KHOS SHRSOH ZLWK SUREOHPV f EH LQYROYHG LQ ZRUN LQ ZKLFK WKH JRDO LV KHOSLQJ SHRSOH f ZRUN LQ D ZD\ WKDW PDNHV WKH ZRUOG D EHWWHU SODFH f

PAGE 108

$XWKRULW\ WHOO RWKHUV ZKDW WR GR f EH DEOH WR EH D OHDGHU DW ZRUN f EH WKH RQH ZKR PDQDJHV WKLQJV DW ZRUN f $XWRQRP\ DFW RQ P\ RZQ f PDNH P\ RZQ GHFLVLRQV DW ZRUN f EH IUHH WR JHW RQ ZLWK D MRE LQ P\ RZQ ZD\ f &UHDWLYLW\ GLVFRYHU GHYHORS RU GHVLJQ QHZ WKLQJV f FUHDWH VRPHWKLQJ QHZ LQ P\ ZRUN f KDYH D FKDQFH WR WU\ RXW QHZ LGHDV DW ZRUN f (FRQRPLF 5HZDUGV KDYH D KLJK VWDQGDUG RI OLYLQJ f KDYH D JRRG LQFRPH f EH ZKHUH HPSOR\PHQW LV UHJXODU DQG VHFXUH f /LIH 6W\OH OLYH DFFRUGLQJ WR P\ RZQ LGHDV f OLYH P\ OLIH P\ ZD\ f ZRUN DW ZKDW ZDQW WR ZKHQ ZDQW WR f 3HUVRQDO 'HYHORSPHQW GHYHORS DV D SHUVRQ f KDYH LGHDV DERXW ZKDW WR GR ZLWK P\ OLIH f ILQG SHUVRQDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ LQ P\ ZRUN f 3K\VLFDO $FWLYLW\ JHW D ORW RI H[HUFLVH f WDNH SDUW LQ VSRUWV DQG RWKHU SK\VLFDO DFWLYLWLHV f EH SK\VLFDOO\ DFWLYH LQ P\ ZRUN f 3UHVWLJH EH DGPLUHG IRU P\ NQRZOHGJH DQG VNLOOV f EH UHFRJQL]HG IRU P\ DFFRPSOLVKPHQWV f EH KHOG LQ KLJK HVWHHP EHFDXVH RI P\ ZRUN f

PAGE 109

5LVN GR ULVN\ WKLQJV f IHHO WKDW WKHUH LV VRPH ULVN RU VRPH GDQJHU LQ WKH ZRUN GR f WDNH RQ GDQJHURXV WDVNV LI WKH\ LQWHUHVW PH f 6RFLDO ,QWHUDFWLRQ GR WKLQJV ZLWK RWKHU SHRSOH f ZRUN LQ D JURXS UDWKHU WKDQ E\ P\VHOI f EH ZLWK RWKHU SHRSOH ZKLOH ZRUN f 6RFLDO 5HODWLRQVKLSV EH ZLWK IULHQGV f GR WKLQJV ZLWK SHRSOH OLNH f EH ZLWK P\ NLQG RI SHRSOH f 9DULHW\ KDYH HYHU\ GD\ EH GLIIHUHQW LQ VRPH ZD\ IURP WKH RQH EHIRUH LW f GR D QXPEHU RI GLIIHUHQW WKLQJV GXULQJ WKH GD\ f FKDQJH ZRUN DFWLYLWLHV IUHTXHQWO\ f :RUNLQJ &RQGLWLRQV KDYH JRRG VSDFH DQG OLJKW LQ ZKLFK WR ZRUN f KDYH JRRG VDQLWDU\ IDFLOLWLHV HJ ZDVKURRPf DW ZRUN f EH SURWHFWHG IURP WKH ZHDWKHU ZKLOH ZRUN f &XOWXUDO ,GHQWLW\ OLYH ZKHUH SHRSOH RI P\ UHOLJLRQ DQG UDFH DUH DFFHSWHG f ZRUN ZKHUH SHRSOH RI P\ HWKQLF RULJLQ KDYH JRRG MRE SRVVLELOLWLHV f IHHO DFFHSWHG DW ZRUN DV D PHPEHU RI P\ UDFH RU HWKQLF JURXS f 3K\VLFDO 3URZHVV ZRUN KDUG SK\VLFDOO\ f XVH SRZHUIXO PDFKLQHV f XVH P\ VWUHQJWK f 127( ,WHPV DUH JURXSHG E\ WKH YDOXHV EHLQJ PHDVXUHG (DFK LWHPfV RUGLQDO SRVLWLRQ LQ WKH VFDOH LV LQGLFDWHG LQ SDUHQWKHVHV

PAGE 110

$33(1',; & 6(;52/( 67(5(27<3,1* 68%6&$/( 7KH VWDWHPHQWV OLVWHG EHORZ GHVFULEH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WKH UROH RI ZRPHQ LQ VRFLHW\ ZKLFK GLIIHUHQW SHRSOH KDYH $JDLQ WKHUH DUH QR ULJKW RU ZURQJ DQVZHUV RQO\ RSLQLRQV
PAGE 111

$33(1',; 5$3( 0<7+ 6&$/( 7KH VWDWHPHQWV OLVWHG EHORZ GHVFULEH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WKH UROH RI ZRPHQ LQ VRFLHW\ ZKLFK GLIIHUHQW SHRSOH KDYH $JDLQ WKHUH DUH QR ULJKW RU ZURQJ DQVZHUV RQO\ RSLQLRQV
PAGE 112

$33(1',; ( 6(;8$/ (;3(5,(1&(6 6859(< 7KH TXHVWLRQV OLVWHG EHORZ GHVFULEH EHKDYLRUV WKDW PD\ RFFXU LQ WKH FRQWH[W RI GDWLQJ UHODWLRQVKLSV RU EHWZHHQ SHUVRQV ZKR GR QRW NQRZ HDFK RWKHU YHU\ ZHOO
PAGE 113

%HHQ LQ D VLWXDWLRQ ZKHUH \RX REWDLQHG VH[XDO DFWV ZLWK DQRWKHU SHUVRQ VXFK DV DQDO RU RUDO LQWHUFRXUVH ZKHQ KH RU VKH GLGQfW ZDQW WR E\ XVLQJ WKUHDWV RU SK\VLFDO IRUFH WZLVWLQJ KLV RU KHU DUP KROGLQJ KLP RU KHU GRZQ HWFf" %HHQ UDSHG"

PAGE 114

$33(1',; ) 68%67$1&( $%86( $77,78'(6 6&$/( 7KH TXHVWLRQV OLVWHG EHORZ GHVFULEH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WKH XVH RI DOFRKRO WREDFFR DQG RWKHU GUXJV LQ VRFLHW\ ZKLFK GLIIHUHQW SHRSOH KDYH 7KHUH DUH QR ULJKW RU ZURQJ DQVZHUV RQO\ RSLQLRQV
PAGE 115

$33(1',; $77,78'(6 72:$5' 68%67$1&(6 6&$/( 7KH TXHVWLRQV OLVWHG EHORZ GHVFULEH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WKH XVH RI DOFRKRO WREDFFR DQG RWKHU GUXJV LQ VRFLHW\ ZKLFK GLIIHUHQW SHRSOH KDYH 7KHUH DUH QR ULJKW RU ZURQJ DQVZHUV RQO\ RSLQLRQV
PAGE 116

$33(1',; + 68%67$1&( 86( 6&$/( 7KH TXHVWLRQV OLVWHG EHORZ DVN KRZ RIWHQ \RX FXUUHQWO\ XVH DOFRKRO WREDFFR DQG RWKHU GUXJV EDVHG RQ \RXU XVH RI WKHVH VXEVWDQFHV LQ WKH SDVW PRQWK 3OHDVH LQGLFDWH KRZ RIWHQ \RX FXUUHQWO\ XVH WKH IROORZLQJ VXEVWDQFHV XVLQJ D SRLQW VFDOH ZLWK f f1HYHUf DQG f f6HYHUDO WLPHV GDLO\f 5HPHPEHU \RXU UHVSRQVHV DUH HQWLUHO\ FRQILGHQWLDO VR SOHDVH UHVSRQG WR HDFK LWHP KRQHVWO\ +RZ RIWHQ GR \RX XVH WREDFFR" +RZ RIWHQ GR \RX XVH DOFRKRO" +RZ RIWHQ GR \RX XVH PDULMXDQD" +RZ RIWHQ GR \RX XVH KDOOXFLQRJHQV VXFK DV /6' PXVKURRPV RU 3&3" +RZ RIWHQ GR \RX XVH fGHVLJQHUf GUXJV VXFK DV (FVWDV\" +RZ RIWHQ GR \RX XVH SUHVFULSWLRQ GUXJV ZLWKRXW D SUHVFULSWLRQ" +RZ RIWHQ GR \RX XVH fXSSHUVf RU DPSKHWDPLQHV" +RZ RIWHQ GR \RX XVH fGRZQHUVf RU GHSUHVVDQWV RWKHU WKDQ DOFRKROf" +RZ RIWHQ GR \RX XVH FRFDLQH RU FRFDLQH GHULYDWLYHV" +RZ RIWHQ GR \RX XVH QDUFRWLFV LQFOXGLQJ KHURLQ"

PAGE 117

$33(1',; 6(16$7,21 6((.,1* 6&$/( 7KH TXHVWLRQV OLVWHG EHORZ DVN \RX WR FKRRVH EHWZHHQ WZR VWDWHPHQWV WKDW GHVFULEH SRVVLEOH IHHOLQJV DQG RSLQLRQV ZKLFK GLIIHUHQW SHRSOH KDYH 7KHUH DUH QR ULJKW RU ZURQJ DQVZHUV RQO\ RSLQLRQV
PAGE 118

$33(1',; '(02*5$3+,& 48(67,211$,5( 7KH TXHVWLRQV OLVWHG EHORZ DVN DERXW \RXU DJH UDFH JHQGHU DQG RWKHU GHPRJUDSKLF LQIRUPDWLRQ 3OHDVH UHVSRQG WR WKHVH LWHPV E\ PDUNLQJ WKH FROXPQ RQ WKH DQVZHU VKHHW ZKLFK FRUUHVSRQGV WR WKH DOWHUQDWLYH ZKLFK EHVW GHVFULEHV \RX 3OHDVH UHVSRQG WR HYHU\ LWHP $JH p RU \RXQJHU k k k k k k p RU ROGHU $FDGHPLF FODVVLILFDWLRQ p )UHVKPDQ k 6HQLRU k 6RSKRPRUH k 3RVW%DF k -XQLRU k *UDGXDWH VFKRRO )UDWHUQLW\ RU VRURULW\ PHPEHUVKLS p )UDWHUQLW\ k 1R DIILOLDWLRQ k 6RURULW\ *HQGHU p 0DOH k )HPDOH 5DFH p :KLWH&DXFDVLDQ k $VLDQ k %ODFN$IULFDQ $PHULFDQ 2WKHU k +LVSDQLF :KDW NLQG RI ZRUN GRHV \RXU IDWKHU GR RU ZRXOG KH GR k 3URIHVVLRQDO DQG PDQDJHULDO k &OHULFDO DQG VDOHV f 6NLOOHG LI ZRUNLQJ" p 6HPL RU XQVNLOOHG f 'RHV QRW DSSO\ :KDW NLQG RI ZRUN GRHV \RXU PRWKHU GR RU ZRXOG VKH GR LI ZRUNLQJ" # 3URIHVVLRQDO DQG PDQDJHULDO p 6HPL RU XQVNLOOHG k &OHULFDO DQG VDOHV f 'RHV QRW DSSO\ f 6NLOOHG

PAGE 119

,OO +LJK VFKRRO k 3XEOLF k 3ULYDWH &XOWXUDO %DFNJURXQG p 5XUDO k 6XEXUEDQ k 8UEDQ k %RWK k 5XUDO DQG 6XEXUEDQ k 5XUDO DQG 8UEDQ k 8UEDQ DQG 6XEXUEDQ

PAGE 120

5()(5(1&(6 $UQHWW f +HDY\ PHWDO PXVLF DQG UHFNOHVV EHKDYLRU DPRQJ DGROHVFHQWV -RXUQDO RI
PAGE 121

)ULWK 6 f 6RXQG HIIHFWV
PAGE 122

+LUFK 3 f 6RFLRORJLFDO DSSURDFKHV WR SRSXODU PXVLF SKHQRPHQRQ $PHULFDQ %HKDYLRUDO 6FLHQWLVW -HQNLQV 6 )LVKHU / t $SSOHJDWH 5 / f )DFWRU DQDO\VLV RI WKH 6XEVWDQFH $EXVH $WWLWXGH 6XUYH\ ZLWK FROOHJH XQGHUJUDGXDWHV 3V\FKRORJLFDO 5HSRUWV -RKQVRQ & 6 t -RKQVRQ 6 f 0HQ SUHVVXUHG DQG IRUFHG LQWR VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH $UFKLYHV RI 6H[XDO %HKDYLRU .LQJ 3 f +HDY\ PHWDO PXVLF DQG GUXJ DEXVH LQ DGROHVFHQWV 3RVWJUDGXDWH 0HGLFLQH .RVV 0 3 t 2URV & f 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\ $ UHVHDUFK LQVWUXPHQW LQYHVWLJDWLQJ VH[XDO DJJUHVVLRQ DQG YLFWLPL]DWLRQ -RXUQDO RI &RQVXOWLQJ DQG &OLQLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ A .UXVH 6 f 7KH UROH RI PXVLFDO VW\OHV LQ DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ DQG WKH DFFHSWDQFH RI YLROHQFH DJDLQVW ZRPHQ 8QSXEOLVKHG WKHVLV 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD /DUVRQ 5 t .XEH\ 5 f 7HOHYLVLRQ DQG PXVLF &RQWUDVWLQJ PHGLD LQ DGROHVFHQW OLIH
PAGE 123

/RWWHV / f 7KH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ QRQWUDGLWLRQDO JHQGHU UROHV DQG VH[XDO FRHUFLRQ -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKRORJ\ DQG +XPDQ 6H[XDOLW\ /XOO f /LVWHQHUfV FRPPXQLFDWLYH XVHV RI SRSXODU PXVLF ,Q /XOO (Gf 3RSXODU PXVLF DQG FRPPXQLFDWLRQ %HYHUO\ +LOOV &$ 6DJH 0DGVHQ % 'DV $ %RJHQ / t *URVVPDQ ( ( f $ VKRUW 6HQVDWLRQ 6HHNLQJ 6FDOH 3V\FKRORJLFDO 5HSRUWV 0DODPXWK 1 0 f )DFWRUV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK UDSH DV SUHGLFWRUV RI ODERUDWRU\ DJJUHVVLRQ DJDLQVW ZRPHQ -RXUQDO RI 3HUVRQDOLW\ DQG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\ $ 0DODPXWK 1 0 f 3UHGLFWLQJ ODERUDWRU\ DJJUHVVLRQ DJDLQVW IHPDOH DQG PDOH WDUJHWV ,PSOLFDWLRQV IRU VH[XDO DJJUHVVLRQ -RXUQDO RI 5HVHDUFK LQ 3HUVRQDOLW\ 0DODPXWK 1 0 t %ULHUH f 6H[XDO YLROHQFH LQ WKH PHGLD LQGLUHFW HIIHFWV RQ DJJUHVVLRQ DJDLQVW ZRPHQ -RXUQDO RI 6RFLDO ,VVXHV 0DODPXWK 1 t &KHFN 9 3 f 7KH HIIHFWV RI PDVV PHGLD H[SRVXUH RQ DFFHSWDQFH RI YLROHQFH DJDLQVW ZRPHQ $ ILHOG VWXG\ -RXUQDO RI 5HVHDUFK LQ 3HUVRQDOLW\ A 0DODPXWK 1 0 t &KHFN 9 f 7KH HIIHFWV RI SRUQRJUDSK\ RQ EHOLHIV LQ UDSH P\WKV ,QGLYLGXDO GLIIHUHQFHV -RXUQDO RI 5HVHDUFK LQ 3HUVRQDOLW\ 0DUDVFXLOR / $ t 0F6ZHHQH\ 0 f 1RQSDUDPHWULF DQG GLVWULEXWLRQ IUHH PHWKRGV IRU WKH VRFLDO VFLHQFHV 0RQWHUH\ &$ %URRNV&ROH 0F&RQDJK\ 1 =DPLU 5 t 0DQLFDYDVDJDU 9 f 1RQVH[LVW 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFHV 6XUYH\ DQG 6FDOH RI $WWUDFWLRQ WR 6H[XDO $JJUHVVLRQ $XVWUDOLDQ t 1HZ =HDODQG -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKLDWU\ 0F*XLUH : f 7KH P\WK RI PDVVLYH PHGLD LPSDFW 6DYDJLQJV DQG VDOYDJLQJV ,Q &RPVWRFN (Gf 3XEOLF FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DQG EHKDYLRU 2UODQGR )/ $FDGHPLF 3UHVV 0F/HRG t 5HHYHV % f 2Q WKH QDWXUH RI PDVV PHGLD HIIHFWV ,Q 6 :LWKH\ t 5 $EHOHV (GVf 7HOHYLVLRQ DQG VRFLDO EHKDYLRU %H\RQG YLROHQFH RI FKLOGUHQ +LOOVGDOH 1(UOEDXP 1HYLOO ' t .UXVH 6 f &DUHHU DVVHVVPHQW DQG WKH 9DOXHV 6FDOH -RXUQDO RI &DUHHU $VVHVVPHQW 1HYLOO ' t 6XSHU ( f 7KH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 7KHRU\ DSSOLFDWLRQ DQG UHVHDUFK QG HGf 3DOR $OWR &$ &RQVXOWLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVWV 3UHVV

PAGE 124

1RUZRRG f /\ULFV OLVWHQLQJ DQG JRRG VHQVH 3RSXODU 0XVLF DQG 6RFLHW\ 3HUHWWL 3 2 t =ZHLIHO f $IIHFW RI PXVLFDO SUHIHUHQFH RQ DQ[LHW\ DV GHWHUPLQHG E\ SK\VLRORJLFDO VNLQ UHVSRQVHV $FWD 3V\FKLDWULFD %OJLFD 3HUHWWL 3 2 t =ZHLIHO f &KDQJHV LQ JDOYDQLF VNLQ UHVSRQVH DV DIIHFWHG E\ PXVLFDO SUHIHUHQFH VH[ DQG DFDGHPLF GLVFLSOLQH 3V\FKRORJLFDO 6WXGLHV 3HWHUVRQ / t 3IRVW 6 f ,QIOXHQFH RI URFN YLGHRV RQ DWWLWXGHV RI YLROHQFH DJDLQVW ZRPHQ 3V\FKRORJLFDO 5HSRUWV 3RVWPDQ 1 f 7KH GLVDSSHDUDQFH RI FKLOGKRRG 1HZ
PAGE 125

6KLPDL 6 7DQDND 0 t 7HUDVDNL 0 f 3OHDVDQWQHVV DQG XQSOHDVDQWQHVV RI HQYLURQPHQWDO VRXQGV 3HUFHSWXDO DQG 0RWRU 6NLOOV 6SHQFH 7 t +HOPUHLFK 5 f 7KH $WWLWXGHV 7RZDUG :RPHQ 6FDOH $Q REMHFWLYH LQVWUXPHQW WR PHDVXUH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WKH ULJKWV DQG UROHV RI ZRPHQ LQ FRQWHPSRUDU\ VRFLHW\ &DWDORJ RI 6HOHFWHG 'RFXPHQWV LQ 3V\FKRORJ\ 6XSHU ( t 1HYLOO ' f 7KH 9DOXHV 6FDOH 3DOR $OWR &$ &RQVXOWLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVWV 3UHVV 7DQQHU f 3RS PXVLF DQG SHHU JURXSV $ VWXG\ RI &DQDGLDQ KLJK VFKRRO VWXGHQWVf UHVSRQVHV WR SRS PXVLF &DQDGLDQ 5HYLHZ RI 6RFLRORJ\ DQG $QWKURSRORJ\ 7KRPSVRQ 0 3LQJUHH 6 +DZNLQV 5 t 'UDYHV & f 7HOHYLVLRQ YLHZLQJ DFWLYLW\ 7KH HQGXULQJ HIIHFW RI HDUO\ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ H[SHULHQFH 8QSXEOLVKHG SDSHU 6FKRRO RI -RXUQDOLVP DQG 0DVV &RPPXQLFDWLRQ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI :LVFRQVLQ 0DGLVRQ :, 9 6YHUNR % f 7KH VWUXFWXUH DQG KLHUDUFK\ RI YDOXHV FURVVQDWLRQDOO\ ,Q ( 6XSHU 9 t % 6YHUNR (GVf /LIH UROHV YDOXHV DQG FDUHHUV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO ILQGLQJV RI WKH :RUN ,PSRUWDQFH 6WXG\ 6DQ )UDQFLVFR -RVVH\%DVV :DVV + 5DXS / &HUXOOR 0DUWHO / HW DO f $GROHVFHQWVf LQWHUHVW LQ DQG YLHZV RI GHVWUXFWLYH WKHPHV LQ URFN PXVLF 2PHJD -RXUQDO RI 'HDWK DQG '\LQJ :LQQ 0 f 7KH SOXJLQ GUXJ 1HZ
PAGE 126

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

PAGE 127

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r 5REHUW & =LOLJAf§nn 3URIHVVRU RI 3V\FKRORJ\ FHUWLI\ WKDW KDYH UHDG WKLV VWXG\ DQG WKDW LQ P\ RSLQLRQ LW FRQIRUPV WR DFFHSWDEOH VWDQGDUGV RI VFKRODUO\ SUHVHQWDWLRQ DQG LV IXOO\ DGHTXDWH LQ VFRSH DQG TXDOLW\ DV D GLVVHUWDWLRQ IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ M/G-tL AA .LP :DOVK&KLOGHUV $VVRFLDWH 3URIHVVRU RI -RXUQDOLVP DQG &RPPXQLFDWLRQV

PAGE 128

7KLV GLVVHUWDWLRQ ZDV VXEPLWWHG WR WKH *UDGXDWH )DFXOW\ RI WKH 'HSDUWPHQW RI 3V\FKRORJ\ LQ WKH &ROOHJH RI /LEHUDO $UWV DQG 6FLHQFHV DQG WR WKH *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO DQG ZDV DFFHSWHG DV SDUWLDO IXOILOOPHQW RI WKH UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ 'HFHPEHU 'HDQ *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO