Social self and the social desirability motive

PDF ( 3 MBs ) ( .pdf )

SOCIAL SELF AND THE SOCIAL DESIRABILITY

MOTIVE














By
MACK R. HICKS


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












UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
August, 1964





















TO SUSAN















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


The writer wishes to express his appreciation to

Dr. Audrey S. Schumacher, Dr. Ben Barger, Dr. Hugh C. Davis, Jr.,

Dr. John R. Barry, and Professor Mell H. Atchley for serving on

his supervisory committee.

Dr. Harry C. Anderson, Jr. and Dr. Lorna S. Benjamin

offered valuable suggestions for the design and statistical

analysis of the study. Special thanks also to Dr. Norman S.

Greenfield for arranging for the use of subjects at the

University of Wisconsin. The writer is indebted to the

Wisconsin Psychiatric Institute for the preparation of the

manuscript and the statistical analysis of data.

The writer is particularly indebted to Dr. Schumacher,

chairman of the committee, who devoted considerable time in

helping the writer to develop and clarify theoretical concepts.














TABLE OF CONTENTS


PAGE

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

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . .... . vi

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . .. ... . vii

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . .

BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . .

-Tie Concept of Self . . . . . . . .
Theory . . . . . . . . . . .
Research . . . . . . . .... . 6
Tr,e Concept of Social S If . . . . . . .
Theory . . . . . . . . ... .. .
Research . . . . . . .. . . 12
Anxiety and Dynamic Structure of the Self. ... 13
Stages of Development. . . . . . .. 1
A Theory of D velopment. . . . . . .. 14
Concept of Social Desirability . . . . .. 24

SUMMARY AND STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESES. . . . . .. 0

METHOD . ..... ... ... . . . . . . .
Subjects . . . . . . . .... . .. 7
Procedure and Instruments. . . . . . . .
Tne Self-Rating Muthodology. . . . . ... 8
Position and Sequence. . . . . . ... 40
The Social Situation . . . . . . . 40
Te Private Situation. . . . . . ... .
The Picture Identification Test. . . . ... 41
Statistical Methodology. . . . . . .. 43
Experimental H potheses. . . . . . . . 4

RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
The Analysis . . . . . . . .. .. . 47
Findings . . . . . . . . . . . 417
High tied for Social Approval Group. . . . 52
Moderate Need for Social Approval Group. ... 53
Lcw N ,ed for Social Approval Group . . . 54
Convergent Versus Divergent S.If-Ratings . . 55











PAGE
DISCUSSION 57
Discussion of Findings ............... 57
High Need for Social Approval Group . . . 57
Moderate Need for Social Approval Group . 59
Low Need for Social Approval Group . . .. 62
Convergent Versus Divergent Self-Ratings .. 63
Questions and Inferences Related to these Findings 64

SUMMARY . . . . . . . . .. . 70

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . 73

APPENDIX ..... . . ........... . 76

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH . . . 79














LIST OF FIGURES


FIGURE PAGE

1. Topographical model of the self-system representing the
absolutism level of self-development. . . . . ... 19

2. Topographical model of the self-system representing the
relativism level of self-development. . . . . ... 21

3. Topographical model of the self-system representing the
inconsistent level of self-development. . . . .. 23














LIST OF TABLES


TABLE PAGE

1. Mean scores and standard deviations for subjects on
the Marlowe-Crowne and Edwards Social Desirability
Scales .................. .. . 25

2. Correlations between scores on the Marlowa-Crowne
and Edwards Social Desirability Scales and scales
on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory 25

3. Correlations of scores on two Social Desirability
Scales and the Barron Conformity Scale ...... 27

4. Analysis of variance . . . . . . . . 48

5. Ratings of pictures (as to likeability in social
and private situations) by subjects grouped accord-
ing to need for social approval. . . . .. 49

6. Statistical analysis of experimental predictions .50

7. Average scores of all groups on the Marlowe-
Crowne Social Desirability Scale . . . ... 52

8. Average divergence between self-ratings in social
and private situations for discrepant convergent
groups . . . . . . . . . . . 5

9. Average ajg and education of subjects grouped
according to scores on the Marlow3-Crowne Social
Desirability Scale . . . . . . . ...

10. Average age End education of subjects. . . . 7

11. Average salf-avaluations of subjects in the social
and private situations . . . . . . . 7

12. Average scores of subjects on the Harlowo-Crowne
Social Desirability Scale. . . . . . . 75









TABLE


PAGE


13. Number of Wisconsin and Florida subjects in
social desirability groups .......... . 77

14. Average self-ratings of Florida and Wisconsin
subjects grouped according to need for social
approval, . . . . . . . . .. .77

15. Self-ratings of all subjects grouped according
to need for social approval and situation . . .78














INTRODUCTION


There is little question that the self-concept has been a

useful construct in clinical service and in the construction of

personality theories. The writings of various psychological and

social psychological theorists attest to this fact (29,22,19,20,15,9).

There has also been a large quantity of experimental research in

recent years (32).

While the evidence indicates that this is a profitable area

of research, unequivocal support for the utility of this construct

In the prediction of human behavior has not been established

experimentally. It is felt by some (32) that these Inconsistent

findings have resulted because of premature attempts to relate

the self-concept variable to other complex variables, without first

exploring and rigorously defining the structure of the self-concept.

The present study Is directed towards the solution of this

problem. It constitutes an attempt to explore experimentally the

relationship between two important aspects of the self-structure.

The social aspect of the self has intrigued theorists for a

number of years (17). Mead (19) and Piaget (6) have attempted to

relate the social aspect of the self and, to a lesser extent, the

self-concept in general to the incorporation of sociocultural

attitudes and roles. For this reason, the social aspect of self










would seem to be a logical point of entry into the study of the

relationship between personality and cultural attitudes. Sullivan

(29) has utilized the construct of interpersonal anxiety in

explaining how these attitudes are incorporated into the individual.

An attempt will be made, in this paper, to relate the constructs

of sociocultural roles and interpersonal anxieties to aspects of

the self-structure.

More specifically, the social aspect of the self-structure

and the private phenomenal aspect of the self-structure will be

related to the social-desirability variable. The degree of

divergence between these two aspects of self, the absolute dif-

ferences between the two, the direction of differences, and

individual variability within the two aspects will all be related

to degree of need for social approval.

The question is: will the individual who finds it necessary

to play inflexible and conflicting social roles, as inferred from

a strong need to behave in a socially approved manner in many

different situations, have a greater divergence between the private

phenomenal aspect and the social aspect of his self-structure than

the individual who does not find it necessary to adhere absolutely

to these roles.

In addition, an attempt will be made to relate the divergence

and convergence of these aspects of self to psychological health,

with the need for social approval held constant.














BACKGROUND


Since the concept of self provides the general framework

for this study, theoretical formulations and research findings in

this area will be considered. The other main topics of Interest,

which will be discussed in the remaining sections of this chapter,

are: the social aspect of the self-structure, the concept of

social desirability, and the dynamic structure of the self as

it develops through experiences with anxiety. This review will

consider theory and research in these four areas and move towards

the theoretical formulation which underlies the present research.

The concept of self

Theory.

Psychologists are funny fellows. They have before
them at the heart of their science, a fact of perfect
certainty, the one warrant for the being of all other
things and yet they pay no attention to it (2).

This statement, according to Allport (2), is the kind of thing

a layman might ask the psychologist about the concept of self. It

is true that until recently there has been little work done on

investigation of the self.

The concept of self has been of great concern since early In

the history of philosophy and psychology. More recently, Herbart

(14) stated that man conceives of himself as part of the subjective









world and depending on the situation may see himself as figure

or ground. Theodore Lipps (14) proposed that man has knowledge

of things, own self, and other selves. Lipps is best known

for his theory of empathy. A more recent point of departure,

and one that is often referred to by current theorists in this

area, is found in the writings of William James (15).

In his book, The Principles of Psychology (15), James devoted

a chapter to the consideration of self. James proposed four

constituents of the self: the material self, the social self,

the spiritual self, and pure ego.

That there are many different conceptions of the self is

evidenced by Allport's "The Ego in Contemporary Psychology" (2).

In this paper, Allport considers eight different conceptions of

the self: first, the ego may be considered as a knower. As he

points out, this concept was given the coup de grace by James

in The Principles of Psychology. Second, the ego may be viewed

as an object of knowledge. This Is concerned with the problem of

the nature of our experience of the self. Third, the ego is viewed

as primitive selfishness. Fourth, the ego may be viewed in terms

of dominance, drive, status, and recognition. Fifth, the ego may be

viewed as a passive organization of mental processes which con-

ciliates warring forces (i.e., Freud's usage). The ego may be

viewed as a fighter for ends. This view is represented by McDougall,

Koffka, and Goldstein. Also, the self has been considered to be a

behavioral system by Koffka and Lewin. Finally, the ego may reflect









the subjective organization of culture as proposed by Sherif and

Cantril. This last concept eradicates the distinction by Freud

of ego and superego.

Symond's (30) concept of self-as-process develops and executes

a plan of action for attaining satisfaction In response to inner

drives. The self-as-object Is how a person perceives himself;

what he thinks of himself; how he values himself; and how he

attempts to enhance or define himself.

Snygg and Combs (8) do not differentiate between the self as

an object and doer. The phenomenal self is differentiated out of

the phenomenal field and is all those parts of the field which the

individual experiences as part or characteristic of himself.

Sherif and Cantril (27) also propose no construct of ego but

have a self-as-object which they call the ego. It is a constellation

of attitudes which somehow motivate behavior.

Sarbin (25) presents no ego, but presents a self which is a

cognitive structure about various aspects of the individual's

being: conceptions of the body (somatic-self), conceptions of

the sense organs and musculature (receptor-effector-self), and

social behavior (social-self).

Hilgard (14) conceptualizes no ego and the self is defined as N

one's image of himself. It cannot be studied by asking the subject

because of unconscious factors. Rather, he suggests using projective

techniques to get a picture of the inferred self. Self-as-process,

he says, comes from the layman's mistaken belief that his behavior

is completely determined by him.









G. H. Mead (19) conceives of no ego but states that many

selves may develop, each of which presents a more or less separate

group of responses acquired from different social groups. At <

first there is no self because the person cannot enter his own

experiences directly. He becomes a self insofar as he can take

the attitude of another and act towards himself as others act.

Hall and Lindzey (14) feel that the term self has come to

have two distinct meanings: self-as-object and self-as-process.

Self-as-object is defined as the person's attitudes, feelings,

perceptions, and evaluations of himself as an object; what a

person thinks of himself. They call this the self. They define

self-as-process as a doer. It consists of an active group of

processes such as thinking, remembering, and perceiving. They

call this the ego.

The self-concept as defined In this paper is similar to Hall

and Lindzey's construct of self-as-object (14). It is a hypothetical

construct which represents the individual's conception, perception,

feeling (affect), and evaluation of his own psychophysical processes

as an object.

Research. -- An enormous amount of self-concept research has

been reported in recent years (2). One might wonder why psychologists

have felt the need to postulate inferred variables referring to the

self.

For one thing, psychologists of a number of schools
of thought have noted that antecedent conditions, defined
in terms of interexperimenter agreement, are not sufficient










to predict either group trends or Individual differences
in human behavior. They have suggested that one could
increase the accuracy of predictions of behavior if one
found out what the subject perceives, knows, or feels
about the "objective" situation, including his own
characteristics. Personality theorists have also pointed
out that general behavior theorists, for purposes of their
own, have thus far delimited their theories in such a
way that they are unable to account for some of the
behaviors one can observe In the clinic, in school, and
in other "every day life" situations. In addition,
many personality theorists have felt that the organizational
or configurational properties of human functioning are
not subsumed by the constructs of most present day general
behavior theories (32, p. 318).

Wylie (32) states that while constructs concerning the self may

be needed for the above reasons, the way they have been used creates

another problem. That is, these self-constructs have been stretched

to cover so many cognitive and motivational processes that their

utility has been greatly reduced.

The result Is a good deal of ambiguity In the Interpretations

of various studies and considerable apparent contradictions of results.

"in short, the total accumulation of substantive findings is dis-

appointing, especially in proportion to the great amount of effort

which obviously has been expended" (32, p. 317).

Two main approaches, which may offer a solution to this

dilemma, are suggested by Wylie (32, p. 319). One is to improve

the constructs and hypotheses through the use of more carefully

delineated definitions of variables. The second approach, which

Is also suggested as an alternative to abandoning self theories, is

to improve their predictability by the addition of more variables.

The present study is directed towards the solution of this

problem. By exploring the relationship between two of the aspects









of the self-structure, the writer hopes to reduce the molar quality

of the processes which are studied and, at the same time, increase

predictability by the consideration of more than one inferred sub-

structure. The study of the self-structure, then, focuses on a

specific aspect of personality, but one which is meaningfully

related to other dimensions of personality.

The concept of social self

Theory. -- In the previous discussion, some of the problems

in current self-concept research were outlined, and the type of

research which may aid in solving this dilemma has been suggested.

The remaining discussion will give the background of variables

which are more directly pertinent to this particular study. The

first of these concerns the inferred levels of self with special

emphasis on the social-self level.

Recently, some theoretical consideration has been given to

the structure of the self (30,25,17). Leary's (17) proposals

are probably most relevant to this study. Leary presents five

levels of interpersonal relationships, which are viewed by the

present writer as characterizing five levels of self:

Level I comprises automatic role relationships in

standard institutional situations.

Level II Is the conscious verbal report of the individual

and it reflects how he chooses to present himself and his

view of the world.

Level III concerns those preconscious themes which the

individual expresses in a projective testing situation.










Level IV relates those unconscious interpersonal themes

which the individual consistently, significantly, and specifically

omits in the other three levels.

Level V represents the values which the individual

consciously stresses.

Other levels could have undoubtedly been used, but for the purposes

of this paper, Leary's primary contribution appears to be the

consideration of "psychological pressures among different levels

of personality" (14, p. vi).

The present writer's conceptualization of aspects of self

overlaps, in many cases, with those of Leary. It is, however,

more closely tied to the previously presented definition of self-

concept, which emphasizes the individual's perception of his own

processes. Several aspects of self are hypothesized, each of which

can be inferred from the individual's verbal and expressive behaviors:

1. Private Phenomenal Aspect What the person believes are his

own characteristics (self-concept) under conditions of minimal

social pressure. The degree of distortion from the person's

characteristics as they "really" exist depends upon the degree

of previous anxiety to which the individual has been subjected

and his success in coping with it. Unconscious seif-enhancement

may be found. Since present measurement techniques usually

involve the subject's realization that he is an experimental

subject, some conscious self-enhancement will probably be

measured, even though it is not included as part of this

defined aspect.










2. Social Aspect What the person believes are his own

characteristics (self-concept) within the current interaction

of a social situation. This depends upon:

(1) The Individual's ability to recognize various social

roles and situations.

(2) The ability to enact and respond to these roles.

(3) The motivation (conscious and unconscious) to respond

in accordance with these roles.

3. Public Aspect What the person communicates verbally about

himself. This differs frcm his private phenomenal view of

himself and he realizes that it differs. It mey also differ

from his real self, as inferred by others.

4. Real-Self These are the "true" characteristics of the individual

which are not distorted by the defensive perception of aspects

one and two, or the protective corrjnunicat ons of aspect three.

This aspect includes accurate self-perceptions (conscious and

unconscious). As with other aspects, the real self must be

inferred from the statements and behavior of the individual.

Since the social aspect of the self-structure is of primary

Interest here, It might help to clarify the definition of this aspect

by examining related constructs of other theorists.

The present definition of social-self resembles Leary's level 1,

public communication (17). This level includes automatic responses

in standard institutional situations. These are subtle, ubiquitous,

automatic role relationships, which to a considerable extent, function









to minimize anxiety.

Most everyone assumes automatic role responses which
he automatically assumes in the presence of each significant
"other" in his life. These roles are probability tendencies
to express certain Interpersonal purposes with significantly
higher frequency. The individual may be quite unaware of
these spontaneous tendencies (17, p. 109).

Leary compares this level to Jung's "Persona" and Reich's

"Character Armor".

Reich, as reviewed by Leary (17), defines character armor

as a chronic alteration of the ego which has rigidity. The degree

of character mobility constitutes the difference between healthy

and neurotic character structures. Reich finds that analysis of

different characters shows them all to be merely different forms

of armoring tf the ego against the dangers threatening from the

outer world and from repressed Inner impulses. They represent

different reactions to anxiety. From Reich's frame of reference,

the establishment of character armoring solves a repression

problem: it either makes the process of repression unnecessary,

or it changes the repression into a relatively rigid, ego accepted

formation.

Jung, as reviewed by Leary (17), saw the persona as a compromise

between the Individual end society as to the kind of scmblance to

adopt, or as we might say, those aspects of the ego which are

concerned with adaptation to social roles. The persona in its

way Is a necessity:










Society expects, and indeed must expect, every individual
to play the part assigned to him as perfectly as possible, so
that a m n who is a person must not only carry out his official
functions objectively, but must ?t all times and in all cir-
cumsta'nces play the role of ~arson in : flawless ma-ner...each
must stand at his post, here a cobbler, there a poet. No ran
is expected to be both (17, p. 4) ).

Research. -- As far as the present writer can determine, there

have been no investigations of the social aspect of self, as presented

here, reported in the literature to date.

In one Investigation, Brownfaln (5) Investigated the "social-

self" which was operationally defined as the subject's rating of

himself as he believes other people in the group see him. This

measurement approach, however, does not get at many elements of

social-self as defined in this paper. First, the interpersonal

pressure of the current social situation was not present. Thus,

certain elements of the real-self, which might be called out under

this pressure, would not be measured. Also; different social

situations call for differing role qualities (I.e., modesty,

bravery, assertiveness, etc.). Actually, one would expect to

tap elements from the private phenomenal level and the public

level through the use of this procedure.

How, then, can the social aspect be tapped for measurement?

The method to be used here Involves obtaining an individual's

evaluation of self in a particular social situation. In this way,

in addition to the social aspect, elements of the public aspect

and of the real-self aspect can be inferred. Also, a definite

role behavior will be called for.









The individual's evaluation of self In a private anonymous

situation will also be used. Not only the private phenomenal

aspect, but certain elements of the public aspect and of the

real-self aspect can be obtained In this manner.

With this brief description of the social aspect of self, it

might be appropriate here to take a closer look at how the dynamic

structure of the self develops.

Anxiety and dynamic structure of the self

Stages of development. -- Three basic stages have been differ-

entiated by Piaget (20) in describing how children come to apply

social norms to their behavior. Newcomb's (20) account of the

development of the self, based upon Piaget's thinking, will be

reviewed briefly:

The first stage, called the stage of autism, is the early

period In infancy when the wishes and demands of the infant are

met without reslstence on the part of the significant adult.

The second stage, absolutism, is marked by four phenomena:

first, there is some resistance to the demands of the child. This

results in the child's learning to inhibit some impulses and learning

to perform certain acts in order to have his needs satisfied. Second,

because of developing intellectual capacities, the child is able to

make discrimination, especially among people. Third, the child

Interiorizes social norms as a part of the universe (absolutism).

Finally, he learns to play the roles of others, often in rapid

succession. In this way he learns to respond to the anticipated

behavior of others. He is now able to do this because he is









capable of taking longer time perspectives, and because of the

development of language, the child is able to take a dual role

when he speaks.

The third stage in the development of the self is the stage

of relativism. Now the child recognizes that there are different

perspectives in the world and that they are not absolute. The

mother is more variable than the child's fixed anticipations of

her so he anticipates her actions in order to make his life less

chaotic. He discovers that he will be more successful in his

anticipations of her if he puts himself in his mother's place.

This is how he comes to identify with her. Then he learns that

all of his mother's motives are not necessarily of Importance to

him. This is the fact of different perspectives.

A theory of development. -- It Is the writer's view, utilizing

Piaget's concepts of absolutism and relativism, that to the extent

the individual is able to graduate from the absolutism level to the

relativism level, he will have an autonomous self-identity in which

the various aspects of the self are highly congruent. To the extent

that he is unable to make this step, the Individual will be characterized

by self-diffusion. He will play many rigid, Inflexible roles, and

this absolute construction of the world will Interfere with the

individual's ability to perceive and experience accurately new sltua-

tions.

What is it that prevents some individuals from successfully

making the transition? Speaking primarily from a Sulllvanlan (29)









framework, one might hypothesize that anxiety (attack on the then

established self-structure) will stifle the individual initiative

and industry which is necessary for relinquishment of the safe but

non-functional and inflexible roles.

From a more positive point of view, two qualities are necessary:

positive and approving feedback from others, and consistent feedback

from others. As Erickson has stated:

The form of ego identity is more than the sum of the
childhood identifications. A sense of ego identity (ego
synthesis) is the accrued confidence that one's ability
to maintain inner sameness and continuity is matched by
the sameness and continuity of one's meaning for others.
The child must recognize that his way of recognizing
reality and mastering experience is a successful variant *
of the way other people around him master experience (13
p. 228).

Also pertinent to this discussion are the viewpoints of several

other theorists:

Kelly (16) sees the psychological disorder as resulting from

any personal construction which is used repeatedly in spite of con-

sistent Invalidation. He presents a constructive alternativism

which emphasizes "the creative capacity of the living thing to

represent the environment, and not merely to respond to It" (16, p. 3).

Rogers (22) presents a process view of adjustment in which the

movement towards adjustment is away from fixity towards an integrated

fluidity of experiencing and feeling.

Leary explains how different human beings develop different, rigid,

self-defeating techniques of adjustment.


* Underline added.





-16-


In the adjusted, well-functioning individual, the
entire repertoire of interpersonal reflexes is operating
spontaneously, flexibly, and appropriately. Human societies,
however, tend not to be too well balanced. They tend to
put a premium on certain interpersonal responses--compet!-
tiveness or slavish submission for example. To survive
and flourish, human beings must tailor their responses to
the demands of such imbalanced cultures.
Even In the rost heterogeneous and tolerant society,
the developing personality interacts with so many inflexible
pressures (e.g., parents' personalities, subculture demands)
that 6 hierarchy of preferred reflexes develops. To say
that human personality is varied and different, is to say--at
this level--that most everyone tends to overemphasize certain
automatic Interpersonal responses and to underemphasize
others (17, p. 31).

Leary emphasizes the Sullivanian framework in explaining why the

individual is willing to tailor his responses to the demands of

significant others and their cultures. He employs these interpersonal

responses In order to reduce anxiety, ward off disapproval, and

maintain self-esteem. The individual discovers, as he develops,

that certain interpersonal responses bring danger, while other

responses bring a narrow, uncomfortable, but certain security.

Taking these theoretical viewpoints concerning the development

and structure of the self into consideration, the present writer

theorizes two types of individuals who behave in ways which are

consistent with the absolutism and relativism levels of self

development.

More specifically, individuals who behave In a way which is

characteristic of the absolutism level of self-development have

indiscriminately incorporated the roles of significant others as a

means of warding off anxiety. These roles or rules of the game are

seen as absolute.










The boundary of the self-structure Is permeable and stimuli

are primarily incoming. The Individual reacts to the environment.

He is dependent on the field and oversensitive to the expectations

of others. Solf-csteem Is based almost entirely on the reactions

of others. Rigid barriers separate roles within the self-structure,

resulting in a lack of consistency within the self.

Because of the individual's dependence and oversensitivity,

behavior In a particular role situation will be highly predictable.

It will conform with the social demands of the situation. Since

rigid barriers separate roles within the self-system, behavior in

one role is, to a large degree, Isolated from the rest of the self,

but consistently so. Individuals who behave in a way which is

characteristic of the relativism and inconsistent stages of self-

development are less predictable.

The public aspect of self will be emphasized ac the expense

of other aspects of self because of the individual's need to conform

to the expectations of others (oversensitivlty) and the ability

to recognize behavior which is socially desirable. High anxiety is

expected in this group because of conflicting roles within the

self-structure arid lessened ability to act on the environment. The

individual perceives the world (and himself) through previously

assimilated rigid constructs. This results in a lessened ability

to act spontaneously in new situations.

Fewer intricate roles are developed because the perception of

new roles must be made to conform to old constructs. This brings a

narrow and uncomfortable, but certain security.





-18-


The private phenomenal self-evaluation should be lower than

that of individuals who have progressed to the relative stage because

of conflict and anxiety leading to lowered self-esteem. It should

be higher than that of individuals who, for some reason or other,

have been unable to assimilate meaningful and useful roles into

their self-structure. This is because of the greater role play-

ing ability in the absolutism group and the positive, if limited,

social feedback and communication which results from this con-

formity. Also, it Is socially unacceptable in this culture to

give ones self very low self-ratings in any situation.

The relatlvlsim stage of development represents individuals

who were able, because of minimal anxiety in their environment, to

be discriminating in the acceptance of roles. These roles are

seen as relative Instruments which are useful In achieving goals.

The boundary of the self-structure is less permeable than that

of the absolute stage Individual, but is not rigid. This Is

because of the greater autonomy of the individual. Stimuli are

both incoming and outgoing. The Individual reacts to and acts

upon the environment. He Is sensitive to the field, but not

overly so. Self-esteem Is based upon reactions from others and

a relatively permanent and consistent self-structure.

Barriers within the self-structure are more permeable than

in the absolute stage individual. This results in greater

consistency within the self. Because of the Individual's greater

autonomy, behavior in a particular role situation should be less























LUL


/


Figure I.-- Topographical model of the self-system representing
the absolutism level of self-development.
KEY:
OUTER PERIMETER OF CIRCLE REPRESENTS BOUNDARY
OF SELF :S M.


TH CKNESS
REPRESE


NESS D MESION OF PFRIME'ER
PERMEABIL T OF 5. BOUDARY


GRID # REPRESENTS NUMBER OF INCRP. RATD ROLES AND
A TTTUDES NHICH COhPSE SELF -S'EM
THICKNESS- DIMENSION OF R LINES REPRESENTS
FLEXIBILITY OF ROLES AND AT TUDES T A HIN LHE SELF -SYSTEM.
ARROWS REPRESENT DIRECTION AND Q ANTITY
OF STIM LAT ON.


>E CIRCLES REPRESENT SI(
= THE SELF-SYSTEM.


;ANT OTHERS


FILLED IN AREA REPRESENTS THE SOCIAL SITUATION
AS USED IN THIS STUDY.


SMALL OUL
OUTSIDE









predictable than in individuals who represent the absolute stage of

development. He has learned the utility of social roles, however,

and will act in conformance with them unless this produces conflict

within the established self-structure.

The public aspect of self should come into play, but since the

individual feels autonomous as an individual and consistent within

his self-structore, this factor should not be as influential as

it is in the absolute stage individual. Low anxiety is expected

in this group because of the congruence of rjles within the self-

structure.

More intricate roles are developed because of the capacity

to perceive and experience new roles spontaneously. The private

phenomenal self-evaluation should be higher than in individuals

representing the other stages of development because of the greater

self-esteem in this group.

A logical extension of this theorizing allows the writer to

hypothesize a third type of individual. This individual is incon-

sistent in his behavior and insensitive to the roles and attitudes

of the culture.

Individuals who behave in a manner which is characteristic of

this inconsistent stage have been unable to asslilate meaningful

and useful roles into their self-structure because of Inconsistent

and negative feedbacks from significant others.

The boundary of the self-structure is rigid and while the

individual does act upon the environment it is often in a role

deviant manner.














O



*-0
L "_o


"O








Figure 2.-- Topographical model of the self-system representing
the relativism level of self-development.
%KEY:
OUTER PERIMETER OF CIRCLE REPRESENTS BOUNDARY
OF SELF-SYSEM.
THICKNESS-THINNESS DIMENSION OF OUTER PERIMETER
REPRESENTS PERMEABILITY OF SELF-BOUNDARY.
GRID # REPRESENTS NUMBER OF INCORPORATED ROLES AND
ATTITUDES WHICH COMPRISE .. F-SYSTEM.
THICKNESS-THINNESS DIMENSION OF GRID LINES REPRESENTS
FLEXIBILITY OF ROLES AND ATTITUDES WITHIN THE SELF-SYSTEM.
ARROWS REPRESENT DIRECTION AND QUANTITY
OF STIMULATION.
SMALL OUTSIDE CIRCLES REPRESENT SIGNIFICANT OTHERS
OUTSIDE OF THE SELF-SYSTEM.
FILLED IN AREA REPRESENTS THE SOCIAL SITUATION
AS USED IN THIS STUDY.










The individual is largely independeLnt of the field and insensitive

to the expectations of others. Sarbin (25) has found that persons

who Frequently make nonconfoi-mlng perceptual responses are charac-

terized by social behavior which is socially invalid. Individuals

who were high on the F scale of the 4ilinesota Multiphasic Personality

Inventory were low in perceptual conformity.

Because c. the individual's Independence, lack of sensitivity,

and limited ability to perceive social situations, behavior in a par-

ticular situation will be highly unpredlctab.e, both within the

group and within the Individual.

The public aspect will be less influential than it is in the

self-structure of individuals in tlie otiter two stages because of

the individual's lack of awareness of the feelings of others.

There will not be conflicting roles within the self-structure which

would produce anxiety, but the negative feedback due to socially

deviant performance ray bring it about.

Fewer intricate roles are developed and new situations are

often not accurately perceived. The private phenomenal self-

evaluation should be low because of negative feedback from others,

but this will be tempered by lack of insight.

In this section, stages in the development of the self have

been presented, and it is hypothesized that Individuals whose

behavior is characteristic of these various stages will differ in

regard to their self-structures.

In the remaining sections, a rationale for selecting individuals

who represent these various stages of development and a methodology

for testing differences in the self-structure will be presented.




































Figure 3.-- Topographical model of the self-system representing
the inconsistent level of self-development.

rEY:
OUTER PERIMrE" I OF CIRCLE REPRESENTS BOUNDARY
OF SELF SI'M.
THICKNESS- THNNESS DIVENSON OF TER PERIMETER
REPRESENTS PERMEABL ITY OF SEL-BOUNDARY
GRID # REPRESENTS NUMBER OF INCORPORATED ROLES AND
ATTITUDES WHICH COMPRISE SELF -SYSTEM.
THICKN SS THINNESS DIMENSION OF GRID LINES REPRESENTS
FLE ABILITY OF ROLES AND AT TITUDES /THIN THE S L-SYSTEM.
ARROWS REPRESENT DIRECTION AND QUANTITY
OF STIMULATION.
SMALL OUTSIDE CIRCLES REPRESENT SIGN FIANT OTHERS
OUTSIDE OF THE SELF-SYSTEM.
FILLED IN AREA REPRESENTS THE SOCIAL SITUATION
AS USED IN THIS STUDY.










Concept of social desirability

One variable which Is directly related to the need for

conformity to the rules and regulations of society Is the social

desirability variable. The social desirability construct, which

has gained wide attention in recent years both as a response set

and as a motivational variable, gives promise of providing a

classification of individuals according to the hypothesized stages

of self-development.

The investigation of social desirability as a motivational

variable which is relevant to non-test situations has been

initiated. Marlowe and Crowne define social desirability as

"a need for social approval and acceptance and the belief that

this can be obtained by means of culturally acceptable and

appropriate behaviors (11, p. 109).

In developing a scale to measure this motive, the authors

hoped to overcome the limitations of the statistical deviation

model drawn from the Minnesota Muitiphasic Personality Inventory

by Edwards (12). When subjects given the Edwards Scale deny,

for example, that their sleep is fitful and disturbed, it cannot

be determined whether these responses are attributable to social

desirability or to a genuine absence of such symptoms. In a

college population, high social desirability scores may reflect

the low frequency of pathological symptoms in this population

and not the needs of the subjects to present themselves In a

favorable light.





-25-


In their scale, Crowne and Marlowe drew from a population of

Items which are culturally approved, but improbable of occurrence.

Fifty items meeting this criterion were submitted to ten judges

for social desirability ratings. Judges were asked to score each

item in the socially desirable direction from the point of view

of college students, using true and false response categories.

Unanimous agreement was obtained on 36 items and 90 per cent

agreement was obtained on II additional items. The scale was

then reduced to 39 Items by the elimination of Items with content

relevant to pathology.

An item analysis showed 33 items that discriminated at the

.05 level or better between high and low total scores. Eighteen

items are keyed true and 15 false to control for response set.

Reliability is .88 using the Kuder-Richardson 20 to test for

reliability. A one month test-retest correlation of .89 was

obtained. The correlation between this scale and the Edwards

Scale is .35. The distribution of scores on this scale closely

approximates a normal one, while negative skewness is found on

the Edwards Scale (Tables 1-3 from Crowne and Marlowe (11)).


Table I. --- Mean scores and standard deviations for subjects
on the Marlcwe-Crowne and Edwards Social
Desirability Scales (11).









Table 2. --- Correlations between scores on the Marlowe-Crowne
and Edwards Social Desirability Scales, and scales
on the Minnesota Hultlphasic Personality Inventory (11).


HHPI Hlar low-Crowne Edwards SOS

K .40 .65
L .54 .22
F -.36 -.61
HS -.30 -.52
D -.27 -.72
Hy .15 .03
Pd -.i4 -.73
Pa .21 -.02
Pt -.30 -.80
Sc -.40 -.77
Ma -.24 -.42
Prejudice Gough 1951 Pr -.27 -.5G
Status Gough 1948 St .16 .14
Ego Strength ES .17 .46
Anxiety Taylor MAS -.25 -.75
Anxiety Welsh A -.23 -.61
Repression Welsh R .28 .07


Crowne and Marlowe administered the scale to subjects .t two

universities and then had the subjects perform a boring task for

25 minutes. They found that subjects with a strong need for social

approval (as measured by their scale) expressed significantly more

favorable attitudes towards the experiment than subjects with a weak

need for social approval(ll).

The high 5-0 (social desirability) group differed fror the low

S-0 group at the .01 level on all of the following attitudes: how

enjoyable the tasks were, how much they learned, scientific importance,

and willingness to participate in a similar experiment.

High and low groups on Barron's Conformity Scales were discriminated

only by question two, how much they learned (.05 one-tailed). But










response to the ether questions were In the same direction as the

S-D groups.

Groups divided on the basis of the Edwards S-D Scale did not

differ significantly on these questions.


Table 3. --- Correlations of scores on tuo Social Desirability
Scales and the Barrcn Conformity S-cle (11).


Edwards S-D Scale Mar lowe-Crowne
S- D Solle
Barren's
Confornlty -.12 (R-1 ) -.54** (N-5?)
Scale
Hlr towe-
Crowne S-0 .56* (r )
Scale
**.01


As a result of this analysis, Crowne and Marlowe define the

need for social approval as a iotivatrinal variable, while conformity

refers to a clsss of behaviors. They stat, that high need for social

approval is a characteritic of the Individual who gives responses on

the birron scale which are indicative of a relative lack Independence

of Judgment. Since the EAwirds Scade was unrelated to Barron's Con-

fcrmity scale, and since it correlates highly with various Minnesota

Hultiphesic Personality Inventory scales and the Toylor Menife;t

Anxiety Scale, the authors cf thli study Inferred tht it measures

the extent to WhLch an individual is w 1t(n to admit syr.ptorsn

indicativet of e.inac'l.rr.wni. Therefore, they expect relationships

between the Edwards Scale and other measures where there is a

corresponding over ep in Item content, particularly related to

psychloipetlo')tflgy.









Strickland and Crowne (28) used 85 outpatients with primarily

neurotic and characterological diagnoses, who were treated at the

Columbus, Ohio Psychiatric Clinic, and found that individuals with

high need for social approval terminate psychotherapy prematurely

(p <.005) and are rated by the therapist as more defensive and

less improved than those with less need for social approval. The

authors concluded that Individuals with high need for social

approval are "disorganized" and "concerned with protecting and

maintaining a vulnerable self-image" (28, p. 99).

Crowne and Liverant (10) tested the hypothesis that conformity

Is related to low expectations of success in socially evaluative

situations and is consequently accompanied by defensive processes.

The authors saw this as lending support to Rotter's social learning

theory (23). They concluded that individuals with high need for

social approval engage in defensive personal enhancement.

Allison and Hunt (1) studied the relationship between the

Edwards Scale and expression, as measured by a paper and pencil

technique, in a situational frustration test. They found that

subjects who were high on the Edwards Social Desirability Scale

expressed less aggression when the intention of the frustrating source

was not specified and, therefore, the culturally approved response

was not Implicitly defined.

It would appear, on the basis of these studies, that subjects

with very high needs for social approval resemble those individuals

who have been less successful in graduating from the absolute stage

of self-development. Individuals with a high need for social approval










lack independence of judgement, are disorganized and defensive, and

attempt to obtain social acceptance through culturally appropriate

behaviors In many situations. This conforming behavior in many

different social situations should result in the assimilation of

many conflicting roles.

Sarbin (24), writing about Piaget's stage of absolutism, stated

that "Fixation at this level leads to behavior which is primarily

'other' oriented. That Is to say, actions must first be considered

in terms of possible approval or disapproval, reward or punishment"

(24, p. 242).

Those individuals with very low needs for social approval, on

the other hand, appear to resemble Individuals who have found It

necessary to reject many of the roles of significant others. Low

social approval Individuals are not responsive to culturally approved

forms of behavior.

Individuals with moderate needs for social approval have apparently

found It useful to incorporate some culturally approved behaviors, but

are not slavishly following the cultural dictates of every situation.

In this respect, they are similar to individuals who have achieved

the developmental stage of relativism.

Following the above reasoning, individuals with high, medium and

low scores on the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale can be assumed

to represent individuals whose behavior is characteristic of absolutism,

relativism, and inconsistent stages of self-development.














SUMMARY AND STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESES


A good deal of ambiguity has resulted from self-concept

research because of premature attempts to relate self-constructs

to other complex phenomena. Before this type of research can be

meaningful, studies must first be undertaken to explore and define

the structure of the self. The present study is directed towards

the solution of this problem.

Based upon the writings of various sociological (19,20) and

psychological theorists (29,22), the self is defined here as a

hypothetical construct which represents the individual's conception,

perception, feeling (affect), and evaluation of his own psycho-

physical processes as an object.

Drawing upon the writings of Leary (17) and others (32,2), the

present writer has conceptualized four aspects which comprise the

self-structure. Two of these aspects, the private phenomenal aspect

and the social aspect, are of primary interest in this study. The

private phenomenal aspect is defined as the Individual's evaluation

of himself with a minimal amount of social pressure. The social

aspect Is defined as the individual's evaluation of himself within

a social situation.

In conceptualizing the development of the self, the writings of

Piaget (20) and Sarbin (25) were reviewed. Three stages of development

were discussed:










During the autism stage of development, the individual has

been unable to incorporate the roles and acts of others into his

self-structure. The stage of absolutism is marked by the indis-

criminate incorporation of the roles of others, and these roles

are seen as absolute. In the third stage of development, the

roles of others are useful to him. lie discovers that roles

represent relative rather than absolute rules and he becomes

discriminating in his acceptance of them.

It is the general hypothesis of this study that individual

self-systems will vary, depending upon the individual's ability

to incorporate meaningful roles and acts of others into his

self-concept. In terms of Uerner's theory of mental development

(31), it Is hypothesized that differentiation of the levels of

the self is associated with the stage of absolutism, while

integration of self levels is associated with the stage of

relativism. More specifically, it is hypothesized that individuals

who are at the absolute stage will have a greater divergence between

their private phenomenal and social aspects of self than will individ-

uals who have made the transition to the stage of relativism.

In order to test this hypothesis, individuals who represent the

three stages of self-development are needed. Based upon a review

of the literature, it was determined that the need for social

approval was related to the need to accept and incorporate role

models. The Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale appeared to

be the instrument which would best measure this variable, and it





-32-


was decided that subjects would be selected to represent the three

stages of self-development based upon their scores on the Marlowe-

Crowne Social Desirability Scale.

More specific hypotheses are as follows:

1. Assuming that individuals with high scores on the

Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale represent individuals

whose behavior is characteristic of the absolutism stage of

development, the following relationships can be expected.

First, because of rigid barriers separating roles within

the self-structure, these individuals should have a greater

divergence between the private and social aspects of the self

than individuals at either the relativism or inconsistent

stage of self-development.

Second, because the social aspect of self has been molded

rigidly in accordance with various social roles and situations,

this group should show less individual variation as regards the

social aspect of self than individuals at either the relativism

or inconsistent stage of self-development.

Finally, individuals in this group should have lower self-

esteem than individuals at the relativism stage of self-development.

This is because of the limited social feedback and communication

which results from over-conformity. At the same time, however,

individuals In this group have assimilated some useful and

meaningful roles into their self-structure. This results In

some degree of positive feedback from significant others. For









this reason, self-esteem should be higher in this group than

in the group representing the inconsistent stage of self-

development.

2. Assuming that individuals with moderate scores on the

Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale represent individuals

whose behavior is characteristic of the relativism stage of

development, the following relationships can be expected.

First, because of the highly permeable barriers separating

roles within the self-structure, these individuals should have

Fless divergence between the private and social aspects of the

self than individuals at either the absolutism or inconsistent

stage of self-development.

Second, since the social aspect of self has been molded

flexibly through the discriminate incorporation of social roles,

this group should show greater individual variation as regards

the social aspect of the self than individuals at the

absolutism stage of develcprent. On the other hand, since

the social aspect of self has developed from val'd and useful

social perceptions, less individual variation will be found

here than in the group representing the inconsistent stage of

self-development.

Finally, the positive social feedback and communication,

along with congruence of roles within the self-structure, should

result In higher self-esteem in this group than in groups

representing the absolutism end inconsistent stages of self-

development.









3. Assuming that individuals with low scores on the Marlowe-

Crowne Social Desirability Scale represent individuals whose

behavior is characteristic of the inconsistent stage of

development, the following relationships can be expected.

First, the barriers separating roles within the self-

structure of this group are considered to be more permeable

than those of individuals in the absolutism stage of

development. On tie other hand, these barriers are not

as permweble as those found in the individual at the relativism

stage of development. For this reason, these individuals

should have less divergence between the private and social

aspects of self than individuals in the absolutism stage,

but more divergence than individuals in the relativism stage.

Second, since the social self has been molded on the basis

of inconsistent and negative feedbacks from significant others,

the highest degree of individual variation can be expected in

this group. Socially invalid social perceptions are anticipated.

Finally, the negative and inconsistent social feedback

experienced by this group should result in lower self-esteem

than in groups representing the relativism and absolutism

stages of self-development.

4. Conflict within the self has been considered by various

writers (17,22,24,29) to be conducive to anxiety and lowered

psychological adjustment. On this basis, It is expected that

those individuals with a w-:dc divergence between the private






-35-



and social aspects of self, regardless of the stage of

development which they represent, will have lower psychological

adjustment than individuals with a narrow divergence between

the private and social aspects of self.















METHOD


The procedure to employ, in attempting to elicit social factors

which influence the individual's self-concept, presents many

difficulties, as discussed previously. If one assumes that behavior

is not a product of self (as a doer), but rather a product of a

complex of stimuli, of which the individual is only partly aware,

then any procedure which is devised will tap various levels of

self, Focial and private, conscious and unconscious.

In a projective test type situation, for example, in addition

to tapping unconscious self-feelings, the responses will be a product

of both the individual's private feelings about himself and his

defensive presentations of himself as an individual in a social

situation. It has been demonstrated that the presence of the

examiner in the administration of the Thematic Apperception Test

has an inhibiting effect upon strongly emotional material (4).

Similarly, in a private self-evaluation situation, various

unconscious and socially defensive factors will probably be present.

It appears that unconscious, private, and social factors will be

tapped in any situation, but the degree to which each is elicited

should depend largely upon the situation itself. Self-evaluative

response in a social situation should be more influenced by social

factors than private self-evaluative factors. The reverse should be

true in the private, anonymous, self-evaluation.

-36-





-37-


Several steps will be taken to overcome these design problems.

Subjects will be grouped according to high, moderate, and low scores

on the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Then they will

rate the pictures of 12 coeds as to likeability, relative to

themselves. in this way, an inference about each subject's

feelings of self-likeability can be inferred. Half of the

ratings will be made in a private anonymous situation, and

the other half in a clearly defined social situation which calls

for some degree of modesty. Since the 12 pictures will have

already been selected by each subject as being neither liked

nor disliked in terms of likeability, any differences found should

be a product of the treatment situation (social or private).

To control for position and sequence effect half of the subjects

will proceed from the social to the private situation and the

other half from the private to the social situation.

Subjects

Forty-six female students who were enrolled in basic psychology

courses at the University of Florida and 44 female students who were

enrolled in basic sociology courses at the University of Wisconsin

were used. Most of the girls were freshmen or sophomores and were

18 to 20 years of age. The average age, education, and results

on the various measures used were very similar (see Tables 10,11,12,

13 and 14 in the Appendix). When this was established, both groups

were combined to make up one pool of subjects.

The first 44 subjects were students at the University of

Florida, and they participated in the experiment during the summer









of 1963. Thirteen of these subjects fell in the high social-

desirability category, 10 in the moderate category, and 21 in the

low category.

The remaining 46 subjects were from the University of

Wisconsin and participated in the fall of 1963. These subjects

were selected so that each of the three categories (high, moderate,

and low) would be brought up to a total of ;0. Therefore, the

Wisconsin and Florida samples tend to approach a significant

difference in social desirability scores (x2 = 3.56, df=l, p .10

two-tailed) (see Table 13 in the Appendix).

Subjects from the two samples did not differ, however, in the

direction of their self-ratings in the private and social situations.

Differences in the magnitudes of self-ratings were evidenced (see

Table 14 in the Appendix).

Procedure and instruments

A group administration of Part A of the Picture Identification

Test (6) and the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (11) was

accomplished approximately one week before the individual self-

evaluations were made. All instructions were standard and the

tests were administered in the order mentioned above.

The self-rating methodology. --After the group administration

of tests, the experimenter placed the 30 subjects with the highest

scores on the Social-Desirability Scale into one group, the 30

subjects with the lowest scores into a second group, and the 30 sub-

jects with scores clustering around the median into a third group.










For each of these subjects, the experimenter selected the 12

pictures which each subject had not placed into the most likeable

or least likeable categories on the Picture Identification Test.

Six of the pictures were used for the subject's private evaluation

and the other six for her social self-evaluation. Since these 12

pictures had previously been selected by the subject as neither

liked nor disliked, it was assumed that any differences In the

subject's evaluation of herself relative to them, from the private

situation to the social situation, would be a function of the

situation itself rather than any absolute difference in stimulus

quality (attractiveness) of the girls pictured or of the subject

herself. In this way, the experimenter feels that he is controlled

for a methodological weakness which has been evidenced in many

experiments of this type. For example, in one study (21), a subject

was presented with her own photograph (in a tachistoscopic procedure)

along with other photographs which had been Judged by the experimenter

of average attractiveness. This judgement, in the writer's opinion,

may have varied widely from the subject's phenomenal view of the

photos.

Neither is it satisfactory, in the writer's opinion, for the

subject to rate the pictures of others as equal to himself and

then to present these pictures to the subject In a different

procedure (i.e., tachistoscopic) (3). In this case, the initial

evaluation may be influenced by social and unconscious factors, and

may not represent the subject's private opinion.









Position and sequence. -- Half of the high social approval

group went from the social self-evaluation situation to the private

self-evaluation situation and the other half from the private

situation to the social one. The same counter-balance procedure

was used for the middle and low social approval groups.

The social situation. -- The social self-evaluation situation

consisted of the subject, two female peers (confederates of the

experimenter) and the experimenter. After the subject was seated,

the experimenter handed the subject and the confederates six

pictures each and read the following instructions:

"In front of you there is a measurement scale which runs from

(-) minus three to (+) plus three. Your job will be to rate these

people In terms of likeability. Use yourself as a reference point,

or zero on the scale. If a person is more likeable than you, rate

her on the plus side. If a person is less likeable than you, rate

her on the minus side. The one, two, and three represent the degree

to which she is more or less likeable than yourself. Plus three is

quite a bit more likeable than yourself. Plus one is a little more

likeable than yourself. Minus three is quite a bit less likeable

than yourself. Minus one is a little less likeable than yourself.

Tell me your ratings and I will write them down. Do not use zero.

Are there any questions?" Then the experimenter will look at the

subject and say,-----"(name), you go first".

After each rating, the experimenter restated out loud the position

of the pictured girl on the scale. For example, "She is a little more

likeable than yourself." When the subject was finished, she was excused





-41-


and taken directly to the private situation, or excused from the

experiment If she had been assigned to the private situation

immediately before the social one.

The private situation. -- The private rating situation took

place In a different room. After the subject was seated, the

experimenter gave her the other six pictures, a slip of paper

marked from one to six, and a coded envelope. The instructions

were the same as in the social situation, with the exception that

in the place of saying "Tell me your ratings", the experimenter

read the following instructions:

'Put down a number from minus three to plus three for each per-

son on this slip of paper. Then put the slip of paper in an envelope

with the letter (letter assigned to the subject) on it. This letter

is used so that your rating will be held confidential. No one

will know how you rated these people. When you have finished

and placed your ratings In the envelope, leave the envelope here

and you may leave." Then the experimenter left the subject alone

in the room. When finished, the subject was taken directly to

the social situation or dismissed from the experiment, depending

upon the order to which she had been assigned.

The Picture Identification Test. -- The full Picture Identification

Test (6) was administered to each subject approximately one week

before the individual self-evaluation was made.

The Picture identification Test is a projective test which

requires the subject to make judgements about photographs of people









of the same sex as the subject. The subject selects the pictures

of people he likes best and of the people he likes least. He also

selects the people who, in his judgement, best fit descriptions of

21 needs of the Murray Need System. He receives a Judgement, an

Attitude, and an Association score for each of the 21 Murray needs.

Since the overall Association index score was used as P criterion

of adjustment, it is of primary interest here. An Association Index

is computed for each need. This score is based on the degree to which

the subject conforms to a norm group in associating needs by attributing

them to the same person. For example, it has been quite common in norm

groups to associate need-dominance and need-aggression by attributing

these two needs to the same person, whereas the need-dominance and need-

deference were seldom associated in this manner. A high Association

Index for a need is interpreted by the authors of the test as meaning that

the subject knows how to fit the need in well by the system of other needs

which help him to satisfy the needs in an acceptable wa It means that

the individual knows that the need does not combine well with certain

other needs so that ie wouldn't try to satisfy it and these other needs

at the same time.

In one study (18), 94 male prisoners from a correctional institu-

tion and 94 male students from a technical and vocational high school

were administered a group form of the Picture Identification Test, A

procedure was established to test the hypothesis that the profiles

adequately represented various types of prisoners and non-prisoners, so

that a new subject could be correctly classified according to whether

his profile was most similar to the prisoner or non-prisoner group.

T..e results showed that 68 per cent of the subjects were correctly!









classified by a median cutting point. It was noted that while the

prisoner profile showed low association scores, there were no particu-

larly low association scores in the student profiles.

In another study (7), using college students as subjects, the

Association Index was again found to be positively related to

adjustment.

Statistical methodology. --Since a counter-balance procedure was

used to obtain the self-ratings in the two situations, it was decided

that a 2 x 2 counter-balanced analysis of variance would be the most

appropriate statistical methodology. The most important advantage to

this methodology is that subjects are orthogonal to treatments and

each subject therefore serves as his own control. This feature provides

that the usually large between subjects variance is removed from the

error term used for testing treatments, and thus the design is extremely

sensitive for treatments. Te assumptions of a normal distribution of

the population, random and independent observations, and similar popu-

lation variances, seemed reasonable for this type of research. T.e

sample is one which is often used in research of this type. The n of

90 is large enough to enable the use of parametric methods of analysis.

The variances were not found to differ significantly.

Experimental hypotheses

Combining the previous theoretical hypotheses with this methodology,

several specific experimental hypotheses can now be discussed:

I. Individuals at the absolutism stage of self-development can be

expected to have a greater divergence between the social and

private aspects of self than individuals at either the relativism

or inconsistent stages. It can be expected than: a. That the









high need for social approval group will have a greater divergence

between self-ratings in the private and social situations than will

the moderate need for social approval group. b. Tuat the high need

for social approval group will have a greater divergence between

self-ratings in the private and social situations than will the

low need for social approval group.

Because of the oversensitivity of individuals at the absolutism

stage of self-development to social expectations, it can be

expected: c. Ti.at the high need for social approval group will

have higher self-ratings in the private situation than in the

social situation.

Finally, since individuals at the absolutism stage of self-

development can be expected to have higher self-esteem and to

respond more appropriately to social expectations than individuals

at the inconsistent stage of development, it can be expected that

c. The high need for social approval group will have higher self-

ratings in the private situation than will the low need for social

approval group.

2. Individuals at the relativism stage of self-development are not

expected to have a great divergence between the social and private

"spects of self. It can be expected then: a. That the mocerite

need for social approval group will not have a great divergence

between self-ratings in the private and social situations.

b. Toat the moderate need for social approval group will not have

a greater divergence between self-ratings in the private and social

situation than the low need for social approval group.









Individuals at the relativism stage of self-develo7ment are

expected to have a high degree of self-esteem and the ability to

make appropriate, yet discriminating, evaluations of social

situations. It can be expected than: c. That the moderate need

for social approval group will have higher self-ratings in the

social situation than will the igh need for social approval

group. d. That the moderate need for social approval group will

have higher self-ratings in the private situation than will the low


need for social


approval group. e.


T :at the


4"erate need for


social approval group vill have higher combined self-ratings in

both the social and private situations than will the low need for

social approval group.

Individuals at the inconsistent stPge of self-development are

not expected to have a great .r bet-ween the social and

-iv te aspects of self. It can be expected then: a. T.at the

low need for social approval group will not have a great i r

between self-ratings in the private and social situations.

Individuals at the inconsistent stage of self-development are

expected to have a low degree of self-esteem and to make inappro-

priate and invalid social perceptions. It can be expected then:

b. Trat the low need for social approval group will have loi r

self-ratings in the private situation than will the moderate need

for social approval group. (See hypothesis 2 d.) c. That the

low need for social approval group will have lower self-ratings

in the private situation than i il the high need for social


approval group. (S

For social approval


e hypothesis I d.) d. That the low need

group will have lower combined self-ratings





-46-


in both the social and private situations than will the moderate

need for social approval group. (See hypothesis 2 e.)

Since the social aspect of self in this group has developed

from Inconsistent communications from others, individual

variations in reactions to social cues are expected. It can be

expected thc-: e. Trat the low need for social approval group

will have higher individual variations in self-ratings in the

social and private situations than the moderate need for social

approval group.

4. Individuals ;ith s wide divergence between the private and

social aspects of self are expected to be lower in their psycho-

logical adjustment. It can be expected, ti, that those indivi-

duals with a wide divergence between self-ratings in the private

and social situations will have lower Association Index scores on

LhC Picture Icencification than will individuals with convergent

self-ratings in the two situations (with the need for social

approval factor held constant).















RESULTS


The analysis

In the general statistical analysis, en analysis of variance was

used to compare the two treatments (private and social) and the three

groups (.igh, mAderate, and low need for social approval). It allowed

for the simultaneous control of individual differences and temporal order

of treatments. Each individual received each treatment once and different

groups of individuals received treatments in the two possible different

orders (social to private and private to social). Each treatment appears

once and onl, once in each row (group of individuals) and in each column

(ordinal position).

T. subjects x sequence ; groups and subjects position x groups

x sequence interactions were used as error terms for groups and groups

x treatments effects respectively. Error terms not including all of

these interactions could lead to a positive F test bias (Type I error).

For example, the use of the groups x sequence mean square as the error

term would have resulted in a significant F for groups. T is error term

would not have contained the replicated subjects variance.

Tne group times treatments interaction was found to be significant

at Ahe .05 level. Once this was determined, t tests were used for each

variable between the two groups. Finally, t tests for correlated means

were used to test between variables for each group. In addition, the

nonparametric median test (26) was used to test hypothesis number 12

involving two small groups of subjects.

-47-









While the variances were not found to be significantly different, a

slight correlation between means and variances was observed. This was

not considered serious enough to prevent the analysis of differences

in terms of means, however.

Findings

The analysis of variance showed the groups times treatments effect

to be significant at the .05 level. The groups effect represents the

high, moderate, and low need for social approval groups. The treat-

ments effect represents the private and social situations. The F for

the groups times treatments effect was 4.01. At 84 and 2 degrees of

freedom, the critical value needed for significance at the .05 level was

3.11.

Tie groups effect alone was not quite significant at the .05 level.

The F for the groups effect alone was 3.02. With 84 and 2 degrees of

freed-m, the critical value for significance at the .05 level was .11.

The first and most general finding then was that female

students, grouped according to scores on thae Marlowe-Crowne Social

D sirability Scale and making their self-ev 'utions in private and

social situations, would show significant variation.










Table 4. ---Analysis of Variance.


Source of Variatic

Groups
Sequence
Groups x Sequence
S's x Sequence x Group
Position
Groups x Position
Treatments
Groups x Treatments
S's x Pos x Grps x


Total


Sum of Square? df Mean Square F


114.4300
1.5278
9.9432
>s 1591.4000
.9389
7.9983
10. 222
64.0677
b. 6;0.9263


57.24
1.53
4.97
18.94
.94
4.0
10.27
32.03
7.S9


4.01"*


24, .5654 17-


*p .05
At DF = 84 and 2, the critical value is F = 3.11

**p .05
At DF = and 2, tiie critical value is F = ,.ll


Table 5. ---Ratings of pictures (as to
and private situations) by
according to need for soci


High need for social
approval group.




Moderate need for
social approval group.




Low need for social
approval group.


likeability in social
subjects grouped
al approval.


PRIVATE SITUATION SOCIAL SITUATION

X = X 2 = 283*
( X2= 1289 ( X) = 193
X = = .914
x = X = 10.93


X 2 = 24 X 2 = 251
( X) =59049 ( X)2 = 60959
X = 2213 X = 2469
X = 8.10 = 8.36


X = ;11 X 2 = 285
(X)2 = 96721 ( X)2 = 10006
X = 3/15 X = 175
X = 10.37 X = 9.50


*R w score represents the subjects' rating of the pictures and
not a self-rating. Tuus, high raw score = low self-rating.

















L- U


o OL . L L-
L0 a 0 L 1- CL l- l-0
O 0l 0 0 '-3-





S 3 8 8 8 S3
X 0. 0




o0 ijL( 0 o LA LA-I I '- r '-ALA
a s o 0 00 0 0 00

'VAA v V A A V VA



r 3 a 1 4 0 4A














OR 0 L 0 IU' &0v
SZ *000 1 0 0 a 0 0 0
.-0-->. VVV V V V V VV




0 j <
J.--L WZW






0 c o
(I J 1- c I 0


S- o0- -3- A - 'U~


S I -I -I LI L.
L 1- 0 a4Q Co O L Li


fi) t3 000 OO QU 3

xi












-n .
w- UJ I ____


4.4 z Un 3 0) o
(- LI uj 00 0 z -




i >U 0 o 0 0 o0 Lo o n u
I C&lU..JWC aJ uWi .Q .jjW
I


u U UJ-) U 00 007
-W -- -- 1 1= %n C
(U0)0I00. ) )































3-






V. w

c-



0 wk
_i -u -










s -q Co
o. a x a 0 -


0 -- O
Oi >u Au









4A LI L CL


fto '
C L 0 -*







o w 04 3 ad C
33 -C 3 L
- I u- 5 0 (1
i---- n

LI < 2!s Z wJOU- au
-e -I c*-a Wo mC
S-l CE Q )-. 0-q 3


C C
< 0O O O



-C *-- u!a

Wta A A A r n- Cai
Xu (t
a. a a M-




-am t E m a- Y o f e
l < S: S SC MC -

5 -)C (548 S .......3 u









Table 7. ---Average scores of all groups on the Marlowe-
Crowne Social Desirability Scale.

Average Score Standard Deviation
High group 20.87 2.80

Moderate group 14.20 1.65

Low group 7.97 2.43

High need for social approval group. --Hypothesis I a., that

the high need for social approval group would have a greater divergence

between self-ratings than the moderate need for social approval group,

was correct (t = 2.94, df = 58, p .01 one-tailed). A t test for

uncorrelated means was used to compare the difference between the

private and social situations for the high group with the difference

scores between the private and social situations for the moderate group.

The sign (or direction) of the difference scores was token into

account (see Table 6).

Hypothesis I b., that the high need for social approval group

would have a greater divergence between self-ratings than the low

need for social approval group, was incorrect (t = 1.38, df = 58,

p .10 one-tailed). A t test for uncorrelated means was used to

compare the difference scores between the private and social situa-

tions for the high group with the difference scores between the

private and social situations for the low group. The sign (or direction)

of the difference scores was taken into account (see Table 6).










Hypothesis I c., that the high need for social approval group

would have higher self-ratings in the private situation than in the

social situation, was supported (t = 4.03, df = 29, p .001 two-

tailed). The statistical test used here was the t test for correlated

means (see Table 6).

Hypothesis 1 d., that the high need for social approval

group would have higher self-ratings in the private situation than

would the low need for social approval group, was not supported

(t = 1.22, df = 58, p .10 one-tailed). An inspection of the data

reveal that the direction was correctly predicted here, however,

since the high need for social approval group did tend to have higher self-

ratings in private situations than the low need for social approval group.

The statistical test used for this analysis was the t test for uncorre-

lated means (see Table 6).

Moderate need for social approval group. --Hypothesis 2 a.,

that the moderate need for social approval group would not have

different ratings in the two situations, which were statistically

significant, was supported (t = .38, df = 29, p .10 two-tailed).

Here again, while one cannot prove the null hypothesis, it is

interesting to note that significantly different ratings in the two

situations were not expected. The statistical test for this analysis

was the t test for correlated means (see Table 6).

Hypothesis 2 b., that the low need for social approval group

and the moderate need for social approval group would not show a

significant statistical difference In their self-ratings in the two









situations, was supported (t = .54, df = 58, p .10 one-tailed).

W.ile one cannot prove the null hypothesis, it is interesting

to note that the smallest difference was expected, and found,

between these two groups (see Table 6).

Hypothesis 2 c., that the moderate need for social approval

group would have higher self-rating in the social situation than

the high need for social approval group, was supported (t = 1.88,

df = 58, p .05 one-tailed). The statistical test used for this

analysis was the t test for uncorrelated means (see Table 6).

Hypothesis 2 d., that the moderate need for social approval

group would have higher self-ratings in the private situation than

would the low need for social approval, was supported (t = 2.46, df = 58,

p .01 one-tailed). The statistical test used in this analysis was

the t test for uncorrelated means (see Table 6).

Hypothesis 2 e., that the moderate need for social approval

group would have higher combined self-ratings in both the social

and private situations than would the low need for social approval

group, was supported (t = 2.54, df = 118, p .05 two-tailed).

The statistical test used for this analysis was the t test for

uncorrelated means (see Table 6).

Low need for social approval group. --Hypothesis 3 a., that

the low need for social approval group would not have ratings

in the two situations which were significantly different, was

supported (t = .96, df = 29, p .10 two-tailed). H-re again, while

one cannot prove the null hypothesis, it is interesting






-55-


to note that no statistically significant differences were expected.

T.e statistical test used for this analysis was the t test for

correlated means (two-tailed) (see Table 6).

Hypothesis 3 e., that the low need for social approval group

would have higher individual variations in ratings in the two

situations than would the moderate need for social approval group,

was not supported (t = .87, df = 118, p .10 two-tailed). The

statistical test used in this analysis was the t test for uncorrelated

means comparing the difference scores of individuals in the low

need for social approval group, with the difference scores of

individuals in the 'o rate need for social approval group. The

sign (or direction) was not considered in these difference scores

(between social and private situations). Here again, while not

statistically significant, the trend was in the direction predicted

(see Table 6).

Convergent versus divergent self-ratings. --Hypothesis 4, that

individuals, disregarding social desirability scores, with con-

vergent ratings between the private and social situations would

have higher association index scores on the Picture Identification

Test than individuals with divergent ratings, was incorrect (t = 4.16,

df = 1, p .02 one-tailed). In fact, the result here was in the

opposite direction to that predicted. Individuals with divergent

ratings between the social and private situations had significantly

higher association index scores. There were 15 subjects in the

convergent group representing the high, moderate, and low need for










social approval groups. The discrepant ratings group was comprised

of 14 subjects also from the high, moderate, and low need for social

approval groups (see Table 6).


Table 8. ---Average divergence between self-ratings in
social and private situations for discrepant
convergent groups.


Average Divergence
Discrepant groups 6.4

Convergent groups 1.9


Of the 12 experimental predictions made, 8 were correct and

4 were incorrect. The correct direction was predicted in 11 of

the 12 experimental hypotheses. Of the 9 hypotheses where statisti-

cal differences were expected, statistical significance was achieved

in 6 of the 9 hypotheses. As was expected, no statistical difference

was found in 3 hypotheses, but the correct direction was predicted

for these 3 hypotheses.

Perhaps one reason for the lack of statistically significant

differences, in some of these findings, is the homogeneous population

which was used. In the pilot study the top and bottom 10 scores

out of a total of 50 Social Desirability Records were used. This

allowed for a considerable divergence in the scores of the two

groups. In the final study, the top, middle, and lowest 30 scores

were used out of a total population of only 120 records.














DISCUSSION


Discussion of findings

The most general finding, and perhaps the one with the broadest

theoretical applications, was that individuals grouped according

to need for social approval would differ significantly in the

pattern of their self-ratings In private and social situations.

This finding lends support to those theorists who see the self-

concept as developing from a subjective organization of the

culture (27,25,14,19). Certainly, the fact that group differences

can be expected, in specific aspects of self, based on the knowledge

of general social attitudes, is provocative.

High need for social approval group. -- The first hypothesis,

that the high need for social approval group would have a greater

divergence between self-ratings than the moderate group lends

support to the notion that individuals who have found It necessary

to indiscriminately incorporate the roles of significant others,

will be characterized by self-diffusion. Rigid barriers separate

roles within the self-structure, resulting in a lack of consistency

within the self. The moderate approval group, on the other hand,

showed relatively less divergence, and this confirmed the expectation

of this group as having more permeable barriers within the self-

structure and greater consistency within the self.









It Is important to note, however, in analyzing this finding,

that the statistical test which was used took into consideration

both amount of difference between ratings in the two situations

and direction of difference. In ter.s of Individual variation,

vglugo regard to directlon, the group tra is reversed. The

high need for approval group has less Individual variation without

regard to direction than does the moderate need for approval group.

While this nay appear to be contradictory to the major hypothesis

at first glance, It Is actually consistent with the theoretical

formulation proposed previously. Because in the high need

group, while rigid barriers separate roles within the self-system,

behavior In one role is isolated from the rest of the self, but

consistently so. Because of the -Woindeoce end ovor-,ansitivity,

behavior ii a particular role situation is highly predictable.

The moderate need group, on the other hand, while having greater

consistency within the self is less predictable Individually

because of their greater autonomy. One would expect the low need

group to heve even greater Individuel variation without regard to

direction than the moderate need group. This is because of their

lack of sensitivity and limited ability to perceive social situations.

There was a trend In this direction but it did nctreach significance.

The second hypcthesis, that the high need group would have a

greater divergence than the low need group, wa: n;t supported at the

.05 level of significance, but did reach the .10 level of significance.

One would expect a less clear cut difference between these two









groups than between the high and moderate groups because, like

the high need group, they have assimilated few roles and these

are not consistently In*egrated. But unlike the high need group,

the reason for this is inconsistent and negative feedback from

others; not slavish compliance to a few safe roles.

The third hypothesis was correct and lends support to the

theoretical expectation that the high need group is dependent

on the field and overly sensitive to the expectations of others.

These individuals will conform to the social demands of the situation.

In this instance, modesty was built i;ito the social self-rating

situation, and this group responded with lower self-ratings in this

situation relative to the private one.

The fourth hypothesis, that ths high need for social approval

group would have higher self-ratings In the private situation than

would the low need for social approval group, was not supported

statistically. With more subjects and a wider range of social-desirability

records, this might have reached a significant level.

Moderate need for social approval aroup. -- In the first

hypothesis, no statistically significant difference was expected

between the moderate need group's ratings in the two situations.

This was because this group was not expected to be overly sensitive

to the expectations of others. On the other hand, this group has

recognized the utility of social roles and will usually act in

conformance with them. An Inspection of the raw data shows slightly

lower self-ratings in the social situation in conformance with the

social situation.





-60-


The second hypothesis, that the moderate and low need groups

would not show a significant difference in their self-ratings in the

two situations, was made to point up the curvilinear quality of the

need for social approval variable. As stated in the previous

discussion, these two groups would be expected to show certain

similarities as regards their self-concepts, but for different

reasons. While one cannot prove the null hypothesis, these "no

difference" hypotheses may have some meaning in the total context

of successful predictions of differences between other groups.

Findings related to the third hypothesis lend support to

two theoretical expectations. The first, and most obvious reason,

for the moderate group to have a significantly higher self-rating

in the social situations, is that the moderate group is not overly

sensitive to the social response of modesty which is inherent in

the situation. If this were the only reason for this finding,

however, one would also expect the low need group to have signifi-

cantly higher ratings in the social situation relative to the high

need group. This is because the low need group is insensitive to

these social pressures. The low need group did not have significantly

higher ratings than the high need group, however. Therefore, another

causal factor must account for the moderate need group's higher self-

ratings. This factor is probably the greater overall self-esteem

of this group due to the positive and consistent feedback from significant

others.

The findings of the fourth hypothesis also offer support for

two theoretical expectations. The first reason why the moderate










group can be expected to have higher self-ratings in the private

situation than the low need group is that the low need group makes

invalid social perceptions resulting in higher self-ratings in a

situation calling for modesty and lower self-ratings in a situation

not calling for modesty. The second reason for this finding is the

greater overall self-esteem of the moderate need group.

In fact, both of the previous findings lend support to the

theoretical expectation that the moderate need group has greater

overall self-esteem. The findings of the fourth prediction could

be explained by the deviant role reversal of the low need group.

If this were the onli causal factor, however, then one would expect

the high need group to also have significantly higher self-ratings

in the private situation than the low need group. This was not the

case since prediction Id. was incorrect. Therefore, the moderate

need group's higher self-ratings probably relates to their overall

greater self-esteem.

These findings offer some tentative support for the curvilinearity

of the social desirability factor as an indication of greater self-

esteem. This is contrary to the viewpoint that a high degree of

conformance is equivalent to a high degree of self-esteem and adjust-

ment.

The fifth experimental prediction was supported statistically,

and this lends support Lo the greater self-esteem of the moderate need

group. Where levels of significance were not achieved in this study,

one might be able to explain this in terms of the limited number of

Social Desirability Records from which extreme scores could be selected.





-62-


Therefore, the range of subjects may have been too houogenoous.

Another possibility would be that the Harlowa-Crowne Social

Desirability Scale da s not allow for a sufficient range of

responses. A greater rarnt of responses would allow for the

selection of more entree groups.

Low need for sc ral a-,rov'pl orcr., -- The first hypothesis

was made because It was not expected that the low need group

would have statistically significant differences In ratings In

the two situations. This is because the low need group Is

largely independent of Ote field and insensitive to the expecta-

tions of others. Not only was the null hypothesis of no dif-

ferences supported, but inspection of the data shows this group

to have made higher self-ratlngs in the social situation thar In

the private one. This is in direct opposition to the quality of

modesty which was called for in the social situation. This gives

qualitative support for the invalidity of the social behavior of

this group.

The theoretical meanings involved in the second experimental

prediction were discussed previously within the context of prediction

a1 The low need group was expected to have greater individual

variation without regard to whether the social or private self-ratings

were higher than the moderate need group. This is because of their

lack of sensitivity and limited ability to perceive social situations.

In turn, the moderate need group Is expected to show greater individual

variation than the high need group. The reader is asked to compare

the outer perimeters of the drawing of the self-systems for the three










groups: iow noed -- inconsistent stage, r,iodcrate need riclet.vmsn

stLge, and high ned.d absuiutism stage. While this hypothesis wes

not supported statistically, once again the trend was in the expected

direction.

Convererit vers',s divergent self-rratrins. -- The final hypothesis

was made because one would expect to fiic iowered adjustment In

individuals who have conflict between the private arnd social aspects

of their self-systems. The results were the opposite of those

expected. Individuals with wide discrepancies between the two

aspects of self had significantly higher association index scores.

One possible explanation for this result is that the Picture

Identification Test is, in a sense, a test of attitudinal conformity.

That is, high scores are given to those individuals whose attitudes

are in conformance with the majority. Therefore, while individuals

representing the discrepant and convergent groups were selected

equally from all three social desirability groups to eliminate

the social desirability factor, the discrepant group itself may

represent those individuals who are more sensitive to what is

socially desirable than is the convergent group. If this is true,

then it would nrt be surprising to find this group having high

scores on a test which is strongly influenced by one's ability to

recognize that which is socially desirable.

A further analysis of these data shows that the higher associ-

ation index scores of the divergent group are not a function of the

direction of their self-ratings, however. They do not give themselves






-64-


iore low self-ratings in the social situation relative to the private

situOtion than eots the convergent group. Seven waaber of the

divergent group gave themselves iowr self-ratings In the social

situation relative to t.he private situation, while seven mfwbers

gave thcrseIves higher ratings. Lieven iuabers of the convergent

grcup gave themselves lower salt-ratings In the social situation

reltlve to the private situation, while 'for members gave them-

seivies higher ratings. This evidence would seem to contradict

the attitudinal owntormity hypothesis.

Questions and inerrienes rglitei to these finalnq4

These findings can be Interpreted as ending support to tae

major .ypothesis; that- inalvlduais wro hece been force, as a

way of aviloing eAceisivt 4nAlety, to iaoiscriminately essimliate

aony social roies will have a graster oevergi et wiciuin their self-

structu.re tlha ,Eiiv6uis t who have been alsoweu to be more dia-

crimititing In titeir acceptance of social roles.

Toe dats coua. e expiainea without necessarily accepting the

uniirsyinrg theory relating to anxiety anJ the iccrporstion of

sociia roles. t ne tt.gni -say that v etever the reason for differences

in e-dj fiai socicu izpproval, individuals with a high need, as

metasurct by the scale, will respond ln the socially approved manner

in a au,.vi-Vail s ,tLon. it .i.i ds Vjil'ji;y i4 ~ ;ie hI iaoow~e-

Crtwn SoCd Cl Desliubi ity SC4ise. f' ui, ilTisurprliitati Wa i'lS Lt

acitui..: i t t. o'i do f ; 4a y.i;upi s Iigwar ratings oi iouif i i the

Irlv1e 2LtutLi.. i 4;-l tOhd u unad group, !cwavrJr. it su aitunld










not account for the tendency (not significant) of the moderate need

group to give itself higher self-ratings in the social situation

than the low need group. One would expect, rather, that the lower

the need for social approval, the higher the self-ratings in the

social situation. The data show a curvilinear effect which is

more congruent with the anxiety, role assimilation hypothesis.

It is interesting to note, as regards the importance of anxiety

in this study, that subjects usually appeared to respond with varying

degrees of anxiety to the social situation. Some were hesitant in

complying with the task after only hearing the instructions, while others

appeared to comprehend the subtle pressures of the situation at some

point during the rating task.

Another interpretation of these data would relate to the age and

education of the subjects. Slightly older and better educated students

are exposed to the university climate which reinforces a constructive

criticism of the expectations of society. The older, more sophisticated

student also has a different test taking response set. He learns to

reject as false those test items which are couched in terms requiring the

acceptance of extremes (i.e., always, never, etc.). This group may also

be more intelligent since these students have managed to stay in school

longer. In this way, one could account for lower scores on the Marlowe-

Crowne Social Desirability Scale and lower self-ratings in the social

situation. H re again, however, this interpretation is not compatible

with the curvilinearity of self-ratings in the social situation by

the three groups. Aiso, differences in education and age are very

slight.









Table 9. --- Average age and education of subjects grouped
according to scores on the Marlowe-Crowne
Social Desirability Scale.


Age Years of completed college work

High S-0 group 18.55 1.04

Moderate S-D group 18.27 1.14

Low S-D group 18.96 1.27


As mentioned previously, these findings lend support to those

theorists who have emphasized the contributions of culture In the

development of the personality. The measurement of broad cultural

attitudes has enabled the prediction of behavior in specific tasks

related to self-esteem.

Certainly a replication of this work is necessary, and the use

of other populations would be of Interest. It would be interesting

to conduct this experiment utilizing males; various socio-economic

groups; individuals of various ages end degrees of education; and

various pathological groups (i.e., schizophrenics who theoretically

have fragmented self-concepts and difficulty In recognizing socially

approved behavior). It would be of great interest to examine the

longitudinal development of need for social approval in young children,

particularly during the development of the self-concept. The addition

of other aspects of the self-structure might also prove fruitful;

the unconscious and public aspects might be examined alone or in

conjunction with the private and social aspects. The reliability

of the self-rating scales should be checked, and their relationship

to some behavioral measure would be of interest.






-67-


These findings offer some support for the validity of both

the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale and the need for social

approval as a motivational construct. One future area of exploration

would be the expansion of the social-desirability scale to provide

a greater range of items and to examine possible conflicts between

need for social approval in various areas. There is no reason to

consider Lhis ds a unitary construct. Rather, an individual may vary

in his need for social approval according to the area or experience

which is Involved (i.e., he may have a high need for social approval

in the area of sexual relationships and a low need for social

approval in the area of dominance, etc.).

Tie possible curvilinearity of the social desirability factor

as an indicator of adjustment leads one to question the validity of

many psychological instruments which purport to measure adjustment

(i.e., Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory) and which may

be measuring need for social approval or the ability to recognize

that which is socially approved. While individuals with low scores

on these Instruments are less well-adjusted, those with high scares

may be less adjusted than their scores would indicate.

At a more general level, these findings add construct validity

to the value of the self-concept in the Investigation of personality.

They also stress the necessity for considering the dynamic interaction

of structures and levels within the personality.

Several general Implications can be derived from the findings

of this study:





-68-


In terms of personality theory, some support has been offered

to those theorists who have emphasized levels of self (i.e., Leary

(17)) and role constructs (1.e., Sarbin (25) and Kelly (16)). Further

investigation into the development of social roles and their incor-

poration into the self-picture are needed. Role-role conflicts and

self-role c-nflicts must also be studied more extensively if

sophisticated theories of personality are to be developed. The

incorporation of social roles and norms into the Individual per-

sonality appears to provide a natural bridge between psychology

and disciplines concerned with group and cultural variables

(i.e., Sociology and Anthropology).

In the area of diagnosis, an emphasis on the client's self-

organization and his exposure to and assimilation of conflicting

roles, offers a new perspective to the armamentarium of the

clinician. Kelly's Aole Reperatory Tests (16) may be of value

in researching this area. The recognition by the clinician of the

various aspects of self which will be tapped by various measurement

instruments should also have the effect of increasing the precision

and rigor of these diagnoses. The growing acceptance of the social

desirability variable as a motive, as well as a response set, should

serve as a caution to diagnosticians who propose to correct for it

as if it were irrelevant to the individual's personality.

In terms of the prevention and treatment of psychological

disorders, this study offers support for those clinicians who have

emphasized role relationships, role playing, and role flexibility









in their treatment programs. The approaches of Kelly (16) and Rogers

(22) are particularly relevant. It appears that personality dis-

orders may be associated with the assialiation to too many roles,

thus resulting in self-structure dlscrepances, or the assimilation

of too few roles, resulting In an ability to recog:ize many roles,

and thus tie Inabillty to profit from their utilization.

ECplideological studies might be directed towards uncovering

role conflicts within the cownunity and examining areas where

exposure to various roles and norms Is minimal. Lack of role

assimilettion may be related to a lack of knowledge concerning

roles, the Inability to absorb these roles, or the lack of motiva-

tion to learn these roles.

On the level of family adjustment, one i;ht look for less

cohesiveness in families which Indiscriminately adopt conflicting

roles as a unit. Family congruence, on the other hand, might be

found In families which have failed to aocpt important social roles,

but one would expect these families to be less effective as e unit.














SUMMARY


This study attempted to throw some light on the organization

of the self-concept within the individual by relating the social

and private aspects of self to need for social approval.

Ninety coeds were asked to evaluate pictures of six coeds as

to likeability, relative to themselves, in the presence of a male

graduate student and two female peers. This comprised the social

aspect of the self-concept. These same coeds were then asked to

evaluate six other pictures as to likeability In a private

anonymous situation. This comprised the private aspect of the

self-concept. A counterbalanced assignment to situations was

used. Previous to the evaluations, the subjects had been

assigned to high, moderate, or low need for social approval groups,

based upon their scores on the Crowne-Marlowe Social Desirability

Scale.

A theory of the development of the self-concept within the

individual was presented. This theory stressed the importance

of anxiety and the assimilation of social roles in the development

of the self-concept. It was felt that individuals who had

indiscriminately assimilated many social roles from significant

others would have a wide divergence between the two aspects of

the self-concept. Individuals with high need for social approval

scores were used to represent this group. It was felt that individuals






-71 -


who had not ndiscriira nately ass iilated many social roles would

have greater convere&rnce tetweer, the two aspects of the self-concept.

Individuals with moderate need fcr social approval scores were used

to represent this gro'p. Finally, those individuals who had been

unable tc esi ii ilte i 'tan u-eful ac' :erningful rcls oI .uld I! ve

great in-kl\ijiI veriWillty ir. the dere-e of dlversence between

aspects cf the self-ccncept. Inrivic'luels with loc' naed for social

approval scores weri. usei to represent this group.

Ecme interesting relationships were found which offer tentative

support for tt.e gererl thcoretic.l framework. The which need for

Cppicvea group hat .a reatter circrrparry between self-ratings in the

two situEtions then the other two groups; it was intermediate in

self-c-ste-e relAtive to the other grstps.; tnd the grcup Las a whole

conforQied tc the detrrc:s (S the scociE'l situt ilon.

The moder te rcecd troup hao 'Tes rlicrepincy in self-ratings

In the two situatit (;: ; the t.ighE. t d(ree of self-cstemr; arnd

r.; d degreee of conforriance to the der.ands of the scctal situation.

The lov need group had the lowest degree of self-esteen; the

greatest individual variability ii, self-ratings ;n the two situations;

and tended to respond opposite to the dcnmands (f the social sl'uation.

The hypothesis thac inrdiruovci's with a wide degree of divergence

between self-rating s in the two situations vculi have lower association

index scores on the Picture identification Test than individuals with

a high degree of convergence was not supported. In fact, the opposite

relationship was found.










because of tne number of correct statistical predictions and

tile numnler uf correct predictions of direction where s.atiisical

significance was noiu ochieveu, it is fe.t that tnis tIuay ienos

tentacive support to icre rajor nypotiesis; cnat indiviiauas wno

lave ueeln tfrcec, ds a way or avoudial excCssive d..xilty, to

indiscriunately assica late erany sucidi roles wi ij neve a greater

divergence. witulil their self-structure tiian inoividuais who ihve

been allowed to be more jiscril1inatini- in iceir acceptance of

social roies.

This stuoy also lends tentative support co tne methodology

useu and to ie inportaiice or tia social approval construct in

the scudy of tne sei --cncepc.














BIBLIOGRAPHY


i. Allison, J. and Hunt, D. E. Social Desirability and the
Expression of Aggression under Varying Conditions of
Frustration. J. Consult. Psychol. 1959, 23, 528-532.

2. Allport, Gordon. The Ego in Contemporary Ps.holoay.
Psychol. Review. 1943, 50. 45.

3. Beloff, Haila and Beloff, J. Unconscious Self-Evaluation
Using a Stereoscope. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 1959, 59
275-278.

4. Bernstein, L. The Examiner as an Inhibiting Factor in Clinical
Testing. J. Consult. Psychol. 1956, 20, 287-290.

5. Brownfain, J. J. Stability of the Self-Concept as a Dimension
ot Personality. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psycnol. 1952, 4 597-606.

6. Chambers, J. L. and Lieberman, Lewis R. Picture Identification
Test Manual for Subjects. Charles L. Mix Memorial Fund, Inc.
Americus Georgia, 1960.

7. Chambers, J. L. Trait Juagment of Photographs and Adjustment of
College Students. J. Consult. Psychol. 1961, 2, 433-435.

8. Combs, A. W. and Snygg, D. Individual Behavlor (rev. ed.) Harper
and Brothers, New York, 1959.

9. Cooley, Charles H. Human Nature and the Social Oraer. Scrlbner's,
New York, 1922.

10. Crowne, C. P. and Liverant, S. Conformity Under Conditions of
Personal Commitment. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 1963, bt. 547-
555.

11. Crowne, D. P. and Marlcwe, D. A New Scale of Social Desirability
independent of Psychopdthology. J. Consult. Psychol. 1960, 24,
349 -3.r'4.

12. Edwards, A. L. The Social Desirabilitv Variable In Personcllty
Assessment and Research. Dryden, New York, 1957.









13. Erickson, Erick H. Childhood and Society W.W. Norton and
Company, Inc., New York, 1947.

14. Hall, C. S. and Lindzey, Gardner. Theories of Personality.
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1957.

15. Ja:mes, Wiliar.. The Principles of Psycholcqy. Dover Pub.
Co., New York, 1950.

16. Kelly, Georye A. The Psychology of Personal Constructs. 1,
.V'. Norton end Co., Inc., Nz'; York, 1355.

17. Leary, T. inter3crsonal Diarncsis of Pcrsonality. Ronsld,
New York, 1957.

18. Lieben an, Lewis R. and Chambers, J. L. Differences Between
Prisoners and Trade Schgol Stud'Entr n the Picture lientifl-
cation Test. Based on a paper read at the Southeastern
Psycholoc;ical Associatior Corvzntion in Miami, Florlda, 1963.

15. Mead, G. H. Min.c, 3Slf sn Scciety. Univc-sity of C-.i;ca~ Press,
Chicago, 1934.

20. Newcomb, T. M. Social Psycholoqy. Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
Hew York, 13S0.

21. Rogers, A. H. :nd l,- lsh, T. M. Dcfensiveress enc' Ur'nwittin3
Self-Evaluation. J. Clin. Psychol. 1958, Ijj 302-304.

22. Rogers, C. R. On Becoming a Person. Houghton-Mifflin Co.,
New York, 1961.

23. Rotter, J. B. Social Ler-.irng d li.i:csl PSycholo'1.j Prentice
Hall Co., New York, 1954.

24. Sarbin, T. R. A Preface to a Psychological Analysis of the
Self. ?5syc.l. Rev. 1332, 2 1!-22.

25. Sorbir., T. P.. and Hair-yck, Curt;z C. "Co.,for:nnce in Role
Perception as a Personality Variable". In T. R. Sarbin (ed.)
:t:c 1: 32:hsvicr Path:lc~ hclt, RIe-.ar't :r.d Winston,
New York, 1961.

26. Seigel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics for the B~hevioral

W :Cy, s. I rc.. i, 'c I ;.7..
WI l'y, New York, i9-7.






-75-



28. Strickland, B"nnie R. and Crowne, Douglas P. Need for Anproval
and the Prerature Termination of Psychotherapy. J. Consult.
?PXschl. 1963, 2Z, 476-485.

29. Sullivan, H. S. The Interpersonal Theory of Psychiatry. Perry,
H. S. and Gawel, M. L. (eds.) W.W. Norton Co., New York, 1953.

30. Synonds, P. '. Thle Ego and The Seif. Appieton-Century-Crofts,
New York, i9r1.

31. Werner, Heinz. Conarative P-cholqcr of mental Development.
international Universities Press, Inc., New York, i357.

32. Wylie, Rutn. Thie Self Concet. University of Nebraska Press,
Lincoin, Nebraska, 1961.














APPeiDIX


Table 10. -- Average age and education of subjects.


Age Years of completed college work

Florida 19.15 1.39

Wisconsin 18.50 1.02



Table 11. ---Average self-evaluations of subjects in
the social and private situation.


Private self-ratings Social self-ratlngs

Florida 9.09 9.98

Wisconsin 9.15 9.24

Combined 9.12 9.60

*Rw score represents the subject's ratings of the pictures
and not self-ratings. Thus, high raw scores are equivalent
to low self-ratings.



Table 12. --- Average scores of subjects on the HMrlowe-
Crowne Social Desirability Scale.


Scores

Florida 14.01

Wisconsin 15.11


-76-





-77.


Table 13. --- Number of Wisconsr.n and Florida subjects
in social desirability groups.


ilgh S-D Moderate S-D Low S-D

Florida 13 10 21

Wisconsin 17 20 9

Comb ine 30 0 30


Table 14, -- Average self-ratings of Florida and Wisconsin
subjects grotped according to need for social
approval.


Need for Socis Approva Florida

Private Situation Social Situation

High 7.33 10.31

ttoderate X 7.50 x 8.30

Low 10.91 10.57











The Florida sample had higher self-ratings in their high group than

the Wisconsin sample (t = 2.05, df = 58, p< .05 two-tailed, t test for

uncorrelated means).

The Florida and Wisconsin samples did not differ in self-ratings for

the moderate groups (t = .56, df = 58, p> .10 two-tailed, t test for


uncorrelated means).








The Florida s~cple had lower self-ratings In their low group ti.

the Wisconsin sample (t = 2.05, df = < tw-tiled, t test

for uncorrelated means) .

Tible 15. ---Self-ratings of 11 sujects grouped accur
to need for social approval and situation.




Subject Private Social Private Social Private Social
-nuiber Situation Situat ion i ion Stuation Situation Situatution
Rating Pating Rztlny Rating --Lii atlnrg

2. 13 5 7

3,. I. 1I 7 i
*. iO 10 5 I Id i
6. 12 7 g 13 10
7. 8 S & 3 12 I
6. 11 3 I1 V; 13 10
10. il 1; 7 S 10

11. i 13 3
12. 10 3 1
13. 5 11 1 10 0

I. 0 10 3 t0 3 2
16 a
17. 11 il 5 I I1 5
1l. 9 12 13 13 2
18. 1 9 13
20. i 17 9 O
21. 8 12
22. 10 Y 3 ,
23. 4 2 11 12 5 12
24. j 7 7 5
2. 10 10 5 0
26. 1014 5 12
27. ii 13 5 it 12 K
2. 9 13

30.6 It 17 12














BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH


Mack R. Hicks was born April 16, 1935, in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

In 1953 he was graduated from Watertown High School, Watertown,

Wisconsin. In June, 1957, he received the degree of Bachelor of

Science from Notre Dame University. From 1958 until 1960 he

served as a supply officer in the United States Air Force and

was stationed in England. Following his discharge from the

Air Force in 1960, he enrolled in the Graduate School of the

University of Florida. He worked as a graduate assistant in

the Department of Psychology in 1961, and received the degree

of Master of Arts in 1962. From February, 1962, until the

present time, he has pursued his work toward the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy.

Mack R. Hicks is married to the former Kathleen Susan Raue

and Is the father of three children. He currently holds a

Florida State Mental Health Grant and is a member of Psi Chi

Fraternity and the Southeastern Psychological Association.


-79-














Tiis dissertation wos prepared under the direction of

the chairman of the candidate's supervisory co~rittee and has

been approved by all ennbers of that conxittee. It waa sub-

nitted to the Decn of the Colleye of Arts jnd Sciences and to

the Graduate Council, and was approved as partial fulfillment

of the re uireents for the decree of Doctor of Philosophy.




SAugust U, Sd&4


Dean, Colle /kf Ars & Sciences




Dean, Graduate Scinol

Supervisory Con-Tfiitee:


C: ia i man







/AIL~r

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 EGRBIUDF4_MT87PD INGEST_TIME 2017-07-19T20:47:10Z PACKAGE UF00097931_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES



PAGE 1

SOCIAL SELF AND THE SOCIAL DESIRABILITY MOTIVE By MACK R. HICKS A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA August, 1964

PAGE 2

HUMP

PAGE 3

TO SUSAN

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to express his appreciation to Dr. Audrey S. Schumacher, Dr. Ben Barger, Dr. Hugh C. Davis, Jr., dr. John R. Barry, and Professor Mell H. Atchley for serving on his supervisory committee. Dr. Harry C. Anderson, Jr. and Dr. Lorna S. Benjamin offered valuable suggestions for the design and statistical analysis of the study. Special thanks also to Dr. Norman S. Greenfield for arranging for the use of subjects at the University of Wisconsin. The writer is indebted to the Wisconsin Psychiatric Institute for the preparation of the manuscript and the statistical analysis of data. The writer is particularly indebted to Dr. Schumacher, chairman of the committee, who devoted considerable time in helping the writer to develop and clarify theoretical concepts. i li

PAGE 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii LIST OF FIGURES vl LIST OF TABLES vil INTRODUCTION 1 BACKGROUND 3 •The Concept of Self Theory Research 6 Tl e Concept of Social Slf 3 Theory '6 Research 12 * Anxiety and Dynamic Structure of the Self 13 Stages of Development 13 A Theory of Development \k Concept of Social Desirability 2k SUMMARY AND STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESES METHOD 36 Subjects 37 Procedure and Instruments 8 The Self-Rating Methodology 38 Position and Sequence kO The Social Situation kO The Private Situation k\ The Picture Identification Test k] Statistical Methodology '. 3 Experimental H potheses k'j RESULTS 47 The Analysis k~] Findings ^7 High Need for Social Approval Group 52 Moderate Need for Social Approval Group 53 Low Need for Social Approval Group 5k Convergent Versus Divergent Self-Ratings .... 55

PAGE 6

PAGE DISCUSSION 57 Discussion of Findings t 57 High Need for Social Approval Group, 57 Moderate Need for Social Approval Group .... 59 Low Need for Social Approval Group 62 Convergent Versus Divergent Self-Ratings .... 63 Questions and Inferences Related to these Findings . 6k SUMMARY 70 BIBLIOGRAPHY 73 APPENDIX 76 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH , 79

PAGE 7

LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1. Topographical modal of tha self -system representing the absolutism level of self -development 19 2. Topographical model of the self -system representing the relativism level of self -development 21 3. Topographical model of the self-system representing the inconsistent level of self -development 23 vi

PAGE 8

LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. Mean scores and standard deviations for subjects on the Ha rl owe -Crowns and Edwards Social Desirability Scales 25 2. Correlations between scores on the Marl owe -Crowns and Edwards Social Desirability Scales and scales on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory . 26 3. Correlations of scores on two Social Desirability Scales and the Barron Conformity Scale ....... 27 k. Analysis of variance f*8 5. Ratings of pictures (as to likeebility in social and private situations) by subjects grouped according to need for social approval k3 6. Statistical analysts of experimental predictions . . 50 7. Average scores of all groups on the MarloweCrowne Social Desirability Scale 52 8. Average divergence between self -ratings in social and private situations for discrepant convergent groups 56 9. Average age and education of subjects grouped according to scores on the Marl owe -Crowne Social Desirability Scale (6 10. Average age and education of subjects ?6 11. Average sal r -evaluations of subjects in the social and private situations 7& 12. Average scores of subjects on the Marl owe -Crowne Social Desirability Scale J& vli

PAGE 9

TABLE PAGE 13. Number of Wisconsin and Florida subjects in social desirability groups 77 \k. Average self-ratings of Florida and Wisconsin subjects grouped according to need for social approval 77 15. Self-ratings of all subjects grouped according to need for social approval and situation 78 vii

PAGE 10

INTRODUCTION There is little question that the self-concept has been a useful construct in clinical service and in the construction of personality theories. The writings of various psychological and social psychological theorists attest to this fact (29,22,19,20,15,9) There has also been a large quantity of experimental research in recent years (32) . While the evidence indicates that this is a profitable area of research, unequivocal support for the utility of this construct In the prediction of human behavior has not been established experimentally. It is felt by some (32) that these Inconsistent findings have resulted because of premature attempts to relate the self-concept variable to other complex variables, without first exploring and rigorously defining the structure of the self-concept. The present study is directed towards the solution of this problem. It constitutes an attempt to explore experimentally the relationship between two important aspects of the self-structure. The social aspect of the self has intrigued theorists for a number of years (1/). Mead (19) and Piaget (6) have attempted to relate the social aspect of the self and, to a lesser extent, the self -concept in general to the incorporation of soclocultural attitudes and roles. For this reason, the social aspect of self -I-

PAGE 11

-2would seem to be a logical point of entry into the study of the relationship between personality and cultural attitudes. Sullivan (29) has utilized tne construct of interpersonal anxiety in explaining how these attitudes are incorporated into the individual. An attempt will be made, in this paper, to relate the constructs of sociocultural roles and interpersonal anxieties to aspects of the self-structure. More specifically, the social aspect of the self-structure and the private phenomenal aspect of the self -structure will be related to the social-desirability variable. The degree of divergence between these two aspects of self, the absolute differences between the two, the direction of differences, and individual variability within the two aspects will all be related to degree of need for social approval. The question is: will the individual who finds it necessary to play inflexible and conflicting social roles, as inferred from a strong need to behave in a socially approved manner in many different situations, have a greater divergence between the private phenomenal aspect and the social aspect of his self-structure than the individual who does not find it necessary to adhere absolutely 0 to these roles. In addition, an attempt will be made to relate the divergence and convergence of these aspects of self to psychological health, with the need for social approval held constant.

PAGE 12

BACKGROUND Since the concept of self provides the general framework for this study, theoretical formulations and research findings in this area will be considered. The other main topics of interest, which will be discussed in the remaining sections of this chapter, are: the social aspect of the self-structure, the concept of social desirability, and the dynamic structure of the self as it develops through experiences with anxiety. This review will consider theory and research in these four areas and move towards the theoretical formulation which underlies the present research. The concept of self Theory . Psychologists are funny fellows. They have before them at the heart of their science, a fact of perfect certainty, the one warrant for the being of all other things and yet they pay no attention to it (2). This statement, according to Allport (2), is the kind of thing a layman might ask the psychologist about the concept of self. It is true that until recently there has been little work done on investigation of the self. The concept of self has been of great concern since early in the history of philosophy and psychology. More recently, Herbart (1**) stated that man conceives of himself as part of the subjective •3-

PAGE 13

-itwort d and depending on the situation may see himself as figure or ground. Theodore Lipps (1*0 proposed that man has knowledge of things, own self, and other selves. Lipps is best known for his theory of empathy. A more recent point of departure, and one that is often referred to by current theorists in this area, is found in the writings of William James (15) • In his book, The Principles of Psychology (15), James devoted a chapter to the consideration of self. James proposed four constituents of the self: the material self, the social self, the spiritual self, and pure ego. That there are many different conceptions of the self is evidenced by Allport's "The Ego in Contemporary Psychology" (2). In this paper, Allport considers eight different conceptions of the self: first, the ego may be considered as a knower. As he points out, this concept was given the coup de grace by James in The Principles of Psychology . Second, the ego may be viewed as an object of knowledge. This is concerned with the problem of the nature of our experience of the self. Third, the ego is viewed as primitive selfishness. Fourth, the ego may be viewed in terms of dominance, drive, status, and recognition. Fifth, the ego may be viewed as a passive organization of mental processes which conciliates warring forces (i.e., Freud's usage). The ego may be viewed as a fighter for ends. This view is represented by McDougall, Koffka, and Goldstein. Also, the self has been considered to be a behavioral system by Koffka and Lewin. Finally, the ego may reflect

PAGE 14

-5the subjective organization of culture as proposed by Sherif and Cantril. This last concept eradicates the distinction by Freud of ego and superego. Symond's (30) concept of self -as-process develops and executes X a plan of action for attaining satisfaction in response to inner drives. The self -as -object is how a person perceives himself; what he thinks of himself; how he values himself; and how he attempts to enhance or define himself. Snygg and Combs (8) do not differentiate between the self as an object and doer. The phenomenal self is differentiated out of the phenomenal field and is all those parts of the field which the individual experiences as part or characteristic of himself. Sherif and Cantril (27) also propose no construct of ego but have a self -as -object which they call the ego. It is a constellation of attitudes which somehow motivate behavior. Sarbin (25) presents no ego, but presents a self which is a K cognitive structure about various aspects of the individual's being: conceptions of the body (somatic-self), conceptions of the sense organs and musculature (receptor-effector-self), and social behavior (social-self). Hilgard ( 1h) conceptualizes no ego and the self is defined as X one's image of himself. 5t cannot be studieJ by asking the subject because of unconscious factors. Rather, he suggests using projective techniques to get a picture of the inferred self. Self-as-process, he says, comes from the layman's mistaken belief that his behavior is completely determined by him.

PAGE 15

-6G. H. Mead (19) conceives of no ego but states that many selves may develop, each of which presents a more or less separate group of responses acquired from different social groups. At first there is no self because the person cannot enter his own ' experiences directly. He becomes a self insofar as he can take the attitude of another and act towards himself as others act. Hall and Lindzey (\k) feel that the term self has come to have two distinct meanings: self -as -object and self-as-process. Self-as-object is defined as the person's attitudes, feelings, perceptions, and evaluations of himself as an object; what a person thinks of himself. They call this the self. They define self -as-process as a doer. It consists of an active group of processes such as thinking, remembering, and perceiving. They cal 1 this the ego. The self-concept as defined in this paper is similar to Hall and Lindzey's construct of self-as-object (14). It is a hypothetical construct which represents the individual's conception, perception, feeling (affect), and evaluation of his own psychophysical processes as an object. Research . — An enormous amount of self -concept research has been reported in recent years (" 2) . One might wonder why psychologists have felt the need to postulate inferred variables referring to the self. For one thing, psychologists of a number of schools of thought have noted that antecedent conditions, defined in terms of interexperimenter agreement, are not sufficient

PAGE 16

-7to predict either group trends or individual differences in human behavior. They have suggested that one could increase the accuracy of predictions of behavior if one found out what the subject perceives, knows, or feels about the "objective" situation, including his own characteristics. Personality theorists have also pointed out that general behavior theorists, for purposes of their own, have thus far delimited their theories in such a way that they are unable to account for some of the behaviors one can observe in the clinic, in school, and in other "every day life" situations. In addition, many personality theorists have felt that the organizational or conf igurational properties of human functioning are not subsumed by the constructs of most present day general behavior theories (32, p. 318). Wylie (32) states that while constructs concerning the self may be needed for the above reasons, the way they have been used creates another problem. That is, these self-constructs have been stretched to cover so many cognitive and motivational processes that their utility has been greatly reduced. The result is a good deal of ambiguity in the interpretations of various studies and considerable apparent contradictions of results, "In short, the total accumulation of substantive findings is disappointing, especially in proportion to the great amount of effort which obviously has been expended" (32, p. 317). Two main approaches, which may offer a solution to this dilemma, are suggested by Wylie (32, p. 319). One is to Improve the constructs and hypotheses through the use of more carefully delineated definitions of variables. The seccnd approach, which is also suggested as an alternative to abandoning self theories, is to improve their predictability by the addition of more variables. The present study is directed towards the solution of this problem. By exploring the relationship between two of the aspects

PAGE 17

—8— of the self-structure, the writer hopes to reduce the molar quality of the processes which are studied and, at the same time, increase predictability by the consideration of more than one inferred substructure. The study of the self-structure, then, focuses on a specific aspect of personality, but one which is meaningfully related to other dimensions of personality. The concept of social self Theory . — In the previous discussion, some of the problems in current self-concept research were outlined, and the type of research which may aid in solving this dilemma has been suggested. The remaining discussion will give the background of variables which are more directly pertinent to this particular study. The first of these concerns the inferred levels of self with special emphasis on the social-self level. Recently, some theoretical consideration has been given to the structure of the self (30,25,17). Leary's (17) proposals are probably most relevant to this study. Leary presents five levels of interpersonal relationships, which are viewed by the present writer as characterizing five levels of self: Level I comprises automatic role relationships in standard institutional situations. Level II Is the conscious verbal report of the individual and it reflects how he chooses to present himself and his view of the world. Level III concerns those preconscious themes which the individual expresses In a projective testing situation.

PAGE 18

-9Level IV relates those un console us interpersonal themes which the Individual consistently, significantly, and specifically omits in the other three levels. Level V represents the values which the individual consciously stresses . Other levels could have undoubtedly been used, but for the purposes of this paper, Leary's primary contribution appears to be the consideration of "psychological pressures among different levels of personality" ( Us-, p. vi). The present writer's conceptualization of aspects of self overlaps, in many cases, with those of Leary. It is, however, more closely tied to the previously presented definition of selfconcept, which emphasizes the individual's perception of his own processes. Several aspects of self are hypothesized, each of which can be inferred from the individual's verbal and expressive behaviors: 1. Private Phenomenal Aspect What the person believes are his own characteristics (self -concept) under conditions of minimal social pressure. The degree of distortion from the person's characteristics as they "really" exist depends upon the degree of previous anxiety to which the individual has been subjected and his success in coping with it. Unconscious self -enhancement may be found. Since present measurement techniques usually involve the subject's realization that he is an experimental subject, some conscious self -enhancement will probably be measured, even though it Is not included as part of this defined aspect.

PAGE 19

102. Social Aspect What the person believes are his own characteristics (self-concept) within the current interaction of a social situation. This depends upon: (1) The individual's ability to recognize various social roles and situations. (2) The ability to enact and respond to these roles. (3) The motivation (conscious and unconscious) to respond in accordance with these roles. 3. Public Aspect What the person communicates verbally about himself. This differs frcm his private phenomenal view of himself and he realizes that it differs. It msy also differ from his real self, as inferred by others. k. Real-Self These are the "true" characteristics of the individual which are not distorted by the defensive perception of aspects one and two, or the protective communications of aspect three. This aspect includes accurate self -percept Ions (conscious and unconscious). As with other aspects, the real self must be inferred from the statements and behavior of the individual. Since the social aspect of the self-structure is of primary interest here, it might help to clarify the definition of this aspect by examining related constructs of other theorists. The present definition of social-self resembles Leary's level I, public communication (17)« This level includes automatic responses in standard institutional situations. These are subtle, ubiquitous, automatic role relationships, which to a considerable extent, function

PAGE 20

-11to minimise anxiety. Most everyone asstnes automatic role responses which he automatically assumes In the presence of each significant "other" in his life. These roles 3re probability tendencies to express certain interpersonal purposes with significantly higher frequency. Thrt Individual may be quite unaware of these spontaneous tendencies (17, p. 109). Leary compares this level to Jung's "Persona" and Reich's "Character Armor". Reich, as reviewed by Leary (17). defines character armor as a chronic alteration of the ego which has rigidity. The degree of character mobility constitutes the difference between healthy end neurotic character structures. Reich finds that analysis of different characters shows them all to be merely different forms of armoring c f the ego against the dangers threatening from the outer world and from repressed Inner impulses. They represent different reactions to anxiety. From Reich's frame of reference, the establishment of character armoring solves a repression problem: it either makes the process of repression unnecessary, or it changes the repression into £ relatively rigid, ego accepted formation. Jung, as reviewed by Leary (17)» saw the persona as a compromise between the individual end society as to the kind of semblance to adopt, or as we might say, those aspects of the ego which are concerned with adaptation to social roles. The persona in its way is a necessity:

PAGE 21

-12Society expects, and indeed must expect, every individual to play the part assigned to him as perfectly as possible, so that a mon who is a p?r*icn must not only carry out his official function? objectively, but must at all times and !n all circumstances nlay the role of oarson in B flawless manner. • .each must stand at hla post,, hers a cobbler, there a poet. Mo nan is ejected to be bot^ (17.. ;>.
PAGE 22

-13The individual's evaluation of self in a private anonymous situation will also be used. Not only the private phenomenal aspect, but certain elements of the public aspect and of the real-self aspect can be obtained in this manner. With this brief description of the social aspect of self, it might be appropriate here to take a closer look at how the dynamic structure of the self develops. Anxiety and dynamic structure of the self Stages of development . — Three basic stages have been differentiated by Piaget (20) in describing how children come to apply social norms to their behavior. Newcomb's (20) account of the development of the self, based upon Piaget's thinking, will be reviewed briefly: The first stage, called the stage of aut ism, is the early period in infancy when the wishes and demands of the infant are met without resistance on the part of the significant adult. The second stage, absolutism, is marked by four phenomena: first, there is some resistence to the demands of the child. This results in the child's learning to inhibit some impulses and learning to perform certain acts in order to have his needs satisfied. Second, because of developing intellectual capacities, the child is able to make discriminations, especially among people. Third, the child inter iorizes social norms as a part of the universe (absolutism). Finally, he learns to play the roles of others, often in rapid succession. In this way he learns to respond to the anticipated behavior of others. He is now able to do this because he is

PAGE 23

-Incapable of taking longer time perspectives, and because of the development of language, the child is able to take a dual role when he speaks. The third stage in the development of the self is the stage of relativism . Now the child recognizes that there are different perspectives in the world and that they are not absolute. The mother is more variable than the child's fixed anticipations of her so he anticipates her actions in order to make his life less chaotic. He discovers that he will be more successful in his anticipations of her if he puts himself in his mother's place. This is how he comes to identify with her. Then he learns that all of his mother's motives are not necessarily of importance to him. This is the fact of different perspectives. * A theory of development . — It is the writer's view, utilizing Piaget's concepts of absolutism and relativism, that to the extent the individual is able to graduate from the absolutism level to the relativism level, he will have an autonomous self-identity in which the various aspects of the self are highly congruent. To the extent that he is unable to make this step, the Individual will be characterized by self-diffusion. He will play many rigid, inflexible roles, and this absolute construction of the world will Interfere with the individual's ability to perceive and experience accurately new situations. What is it that prevents some individuals from successfully making the transition? Speaking primarily from a Sulllvanlan (29)

PAGE 24

-15framework, one might hypothesize that anxiety (attack on the then established self-structure) will stifle the individual initiative and industry which is necessary for relinquishment of the safe but non-functional and inflexible roles. From a more positive point of view, two qualities are necessary: positive and approving feedback from others, and consistent feedback from others. As Erickson has stated: The form of ego identity is more than the sum of the childhood identifications. A sense of ego identity (ego synthesis) is the accrued confidence that one's ability to maintain inner sameness and continuity is matched by the sameness and continuity of one's meaning for others. The child must recognize that his way of recognizing reality and mastering experience is a successful variant * of the way other people around him master experience (13, p. 228). Also pertinent to this discussion are the viewpoints of several other theorists: Kelly (16) sees the psychological disorder as resulting from any personal construction which is used repeatedly in spite of consistent invalidation. He presents a constructive alternat ivism which emphasizes "the creative capacity of the living thing to represent the environment, and not merely to respond to It" (16, p. 3). Rogers (22) presents a process view of adjustment in which the movement towards adjustment is away from fixity towards an integrated fluidity of experiencing and feeling. Leary explains how different human beings develop different, rigid, self-defeating techniques of adjustment. * Under 1 ine added.

PAGE 25

-16ln the adjusted, well-functioning individual, the entire repertoire of interpersonal reflexes is operating spontaneously, flexibly, and appropriately. Human societies, however, tend not to be too well balanced. They tend to put a premium on certain interpersonal responses --competitiveness or slavish submission for example. To survive and flourish, human beings must tailor their responses to the demands of such imba lanced cultures. Even in the most heterogeneous and tolerant society, the developing personality interacts with so many inflexible pressures (e.g., parents' personalities, subculture demands) that a hierarchy of preferred reflexes develops. To say that human personality is varied and different, is to say— at this level--that most everyone tends to overemphasize certain automatic iiterpersonal responses and to underemphas ize others (1/, p. 30 • Leary emphasizes the Sullivan fan framework in explaining why the individual is willing to tailor his responses to the demands of significant others and their cultures. He employs these interpersonal responses in order to reduce anxiety, ward off disapproval, and maintain self-esteem. The individual discovers, as he develops, that certain interpersonal responses bring danger, while other responses bring a narrow, uncomfortable, but certain security. Taking these theoretical viewpoints concerning the development and structure of the self into consideration, the present writer theorizes two types of individuals who behave in ways which are consistent with the absolutism and relativism levels of self development. More specifically, individuals who behave in a way which is characteristic of the absolutism level of self -development have indiscriminately incorporated the roles of significant ethers as a means of warding off anxiety. These roles or rules of the game are seen as absolute.

PAGE 26

-17' The boundary of the self-structure is permeable and stimuli are primarily incoming. The individual reacts to the environment. He is dependent on the field and oversensitive to the expectations of others. Self-esteem is based almost entirely on the reactions of others. Rigid barriers separate roles within the self -structure, resulting in a lack of consistency within the self. Because of the individual's dependence and oversensi t ivity, behavior in a particular role situation will be highly predictable. It will conform with the social demands of the situation. Since rigid barriers separate roles within the self-system, behavior in one role is, to a large degree, Isolated from the rest of the self, but consistently so. Individuals who behave in a way which Is characteristic of the relativism and inconsistent stages of selfdevelopment are less predictable. The pualic aspect of self will be emphasized at the expense of other aspects of self because of the individual's need to conform to the expectations of others (oversens i c ivity) ana the ability to recognize behavior which is socially desirable. High anxiety is expected in this group oecause of conflicting roles wicnin the self -structure arid lessened ability to act on the environment. The inoivioual perceives the world (and himself) through previously assimilated rigid constructs. This results in a lessened ability to act spontaneously in new situations. Fewer intricate roles are developed because the perception of new roles must be made to conform to old constructs. This brings a narrow and uncomfortable, but certain security.

PAGE 27

18The private phenomenal self-evaluation should be lower than that of Individuals who have progressed to the relative stage because of conflict and anxiety leading to lowered self-esteem. It should be higher than that of individuals who, for some reason or other, have been unable to assimilate meaningful and useful roles into their self-structure. This is because of the greater role playing ability in the absolutism group and the positive, if limited, social feedback and communication which results from this conformity. Also, it is socially unacceptable !n this culture to give ones self very low self-ratings in any situation. The relativisim stage of development represents individuals who were able, because of minimal anxiety in their environment, to be discriminating in the acceptance of roles. These roles are seen as relative instruments which are useful in achieving goals. The boundary of the self-structure is less permeable than that of the absolute stage individual, but is not rigid. This is because of the greater autonomy of the individual. Stimuli are both incoming and outgoing. The individual reacts to and acts upon the environment. He is sensitive to the field, but not overly so. Self-esteem is based upon reactions from others and a relatively permanent and consistent self-structure. Barriers within the self -structure are more permeable than in the absolute stage individual. This results in greater consistency within the self. Because of the individual's greater autonomy, behavior in a particular role situation should be less

PAGE 28

-»9Figure !.— Topographical model of the self-system representing the absolutism level of self -development. KEY: OUTER PERIMETER OF CIRCLE REPRESENTS BOUNDARY OF SELF-SYSTEM. THICKNESS-THINNESS DIMENSION OF OU^ER PERIMETER REPRESENTS PERMEABILITY OF SELFBOUNDARY. GRID # REPRESENTS NUMBER OF INCORPORATED ROLES AND ATTITUDES WHICH COMPRISE SELF-SYSTEM. THICKNESS-THINNESS DIMENSION OF GRID LINES REPRESENTS FLEXIBILITY OF ROLES AND ATTITUDES WITHIN THE SELF -SYSTEM. ARROWS REPRESENT DIRECTION AND QUANTITY OF STIMULATION. SMALL OUTSIDE CIRCLES REPRESENT SIGNIFICANT OTHERS OUTSIDE OF THE SELF-SYSTEM. FILLED IN AREA REPRESENTS THE SOCIAL SITUATION AS USED IN THIS STUDY.

PAGE 29

•unpredictable than In individuals who represent the absolute stage of development. He has learned the utility of social roles, however, and will act in conformance with them unless this produces conflict within the established self -structure. The public aspect of self should come into play, but since the individual feels autonomous as an individual and consistent within his self-structare, this factor should not be as influential as it is in the absolute stage individual. Low anxiety is expected in this group because of the congruence of roles within the selfstructure. More intricate roles are developed because of the capacity to perceive and experience new roles spontaneously. The private phenomenal self-evaluation should be higher than in individuals representing the other stages of development because of the greater self-esteem in this group. A logical extension of this theorizing allows the writer to hypothesize a third type of individual. This individual is inconsistent in his behavior and insensitive to the roles and attitudes of the culture. Individuals who behave in a manner which is characteristic of this inconsistent stage have been unable to assiiilate meaningful and useful roles into their self-structure because of inconsistent and negative feedbacks from significant others. The boundary of the self-structure Is rigid and while the individual does act upon the environment it is often In a role deviant manner.

PAGE 30

Figure 2.— Topographical model of the self-system representing the relativism level of self -development. KEY: OUTER PERIMETER OF CIRCLE REPRESENTS BOUNDARY OF SELFSYSTEM. THICKNESS-THINNESS DIMENSION OF OUTER PERIMETER REPRESENTS PERMEABILITY OF SELF-BOUNDARY. GRID # REPRESENTS NUMBER OF INCORPORATED ROLES AND ATTITUDES WHICH COMPRISE SELF -SYSTEM. THICKNESS-THINNESS DIMENSION OF GRID LINES REPRESENTS FLEXIBILITY OF ROLES AND ATTITUDES WITHIN THE SELF-SYSTEM. ARROWS REPRESENT DIRECTION AND QUANTITY OF STIMULATION. SMALL OUTSIDE CIRCLES REPRESENT SIGNIFICANT OTHERS OUTSIDE OF THE SELF-SYSTEM. FILLED IN AREA REPRESENTS THE SOCIAL SITUATION AS USED IN THIS STUDY.

PAGE 31

The individual is largely independent of the field and insensitive to the expectation^ of others. Serb in (23) has found that persona who frequently make nonconforming perceptual responses are characterised by social behavior which is socially Invalid. Individuals who were high on the F scale of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory were lew in perceptual conform ity. Because c. the individual's independence, jack of sensitivity, and limited ability to perceive social situations, behuvior in a particular situation wiil be highly unpredictab .e, both within the group and within the individual. The public aspect will be less influential ihan it is in the self -structure of individuals in the other two stages because of the individual's lack of awareness of the feelings of others. There will not be conflicting roles within the se. (-structure which would produce anxiety, but the negative feedback due to socially deviant performance may bring it about. Tewer intricate roles are deve "toped and new situations are often not accurately perceived. The private phenomena] selfevaluation should be low because of negative feedback from others, but this will be tempered by lack of insight. In this seccion, stages in the development of the self have been presented, and it is hypothesized that inui vidua is whose behavior is characteristic of these various stages wiii differ in regard to their self -structures. in the remaining sections, a rationale for selecting individuals who represent these various stages of development and a methodology for testing differences in the self -structure will be presented.

PAGE 32

Figure 3«"~ Topographical model of the self-system representing the inconsistent level of self -development. KEY: OUTER PERIMETER OF CIRCLE REPRESENTS BOUNDARY OF SELFSYSTEM. THICKNESS-THINNESS DIMENSION OF OUTER PERIMETER REPRESENTS PERMEABILITY OF SELF -BOUNDARY. GRID # REPRESENTS NUMBER OF INCORPORATED ROLES AND ATTITUDES WHICH COMPRISE SELF-SYSTEM. THICKNESSTHINNESS DIMENSION OF GRID LINES REPRESENTS FLEXIBILITY OF ROLES AND ATTITUDES WITHIN THE SELF -SYSTEM. ARROWS REPRESENT DIRECTION AND QUANTITY OF STIMULATION. SMALL OUTSIDE CIRCLES REPRESENT SIGNIFICANT OTHERS OUTSIDE OF THE SELF-SYSTEM. FILLED IN AREA REPRESENTS THE SOCIAL SITUATION AS USED IN THIS STUDY.

PAGE 33

-24Concept of social desirability One variable which is directly related to the need for conformity to the rules and regulations of society is the social desirability variable. The social desirability construct, which has gained wide attention In recent years both as a response set and as a motivational variable, gives promise of providing a classification of individuals according to the hypothesized stages of self -development. The investigation of social desirability as a motivational variable which is relevant to non-test situations has been initiated. Marlowe and Crowne define social desirability as "a need for social approval and acceptance and the belief that this can be obtained by means of culturally acceptable and appropriate behaviors " (11, p. 109). In developing a scale to measure this motive, the authors hoped to overcome the limitations of the statistical deviation model drawn from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory by Edwards (12). When subjects given the Edwards Scale deny, for example, that their sleep is fitful and disturbed, it cannot be determined whether these responses are attributable to social desirability or to a genuine absence of such symptoms. In a college population, high social desirability scores may reflect the low frequency of pathological symptoms in this population and not the needs of the subjects to present themselves In a favorable light.

PAGE 34

-25lo their scale, Crowne and Marie*** drew from a population of items which are culturally approved, but Improbable of occurrence. Fifty items meeting this criterion were submitted to ten judges for social desirability ratings. Judges were asked to score each item in the socially desirable direction from the point of view of college students, using true and false response categories. Unanimous agreement was obtained on 36 items and 90 per cent agreement was obtained on II additional items. The scale was then reouced to 39 Hems by the elimination of items with content relevant to pathology. An Item analysis showed 33 Items that discriminated at the .05 level or better between high and low total scores. Eighteen items ere keyed true and 15 false to control for response set. Reliability is .88 using the Kuder-ftichardson 20 to test for reliability. A one month test-retest correlation of .89 was obtained. The correlation between this scale and the Edwards Scale is .35. The distribution of scores on this scale closely approximates a normal one, while negative skewness is found on the Edwards Scale (Tables 1-3 from Crowne and Marlowe (11)). Table 1. — Mean scores and standard deviations for subjects on the Mar f ewe -Crowne and Edwards Social Desirability Scale* (11).

PAGE 35

-26Table 2. •— Correlations between scores on the Marlowe-Crowne and Edwards Social Desirability Scales, and sc«lev> on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (11)

PAGE 36

~lh response to the other questions were In the same direction as the S-3 groups. Groups divided on the basis of the Edwards S-0 Scale did not differ significantly on these Quest ens. Table J. — Correlations of scores on two Social Desirability Scutes and the Barron Conformity Scslc (11) . Edwards S-0 Scale Mar iowe-Crowne S-0 Sce-te Barron's Conform fty Scale .12 (M-23) .$**** »»s of behaviors . They state that hloh need for social approve! Is • characteristic of the individual who glvet responses on the Barron sceie which are indicative of a relative tack o. independence of judgement. Since the Edwards ic*»e w*» unrelated to Barron's Con* fcrmity scaie, end since it correlates highly with various Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory scales *n4 the Taylor M*r.«f#;,t Anxiety Scale, the authors cf this study inferred tls&t it measures the extent to which an individual is willing to admit symptoms indicative of maladjustment. Therefore, they expect relationships between the Edwards Sceie »n4 other measures where there is e corresponding overlap in item content, particularly related to

PAGE 37

-28Strickland and Crowne (28) used 85 outpatients with primarily neurotic and charactero logical diagnoses, who were treated at the Columbus, Ohio Psychiatric Clinic, and found that individuals with high need for social approval terminate psychotherapy prematurely (p <.005) and are rated by the therapist as more defensive and less improved than those with less need for social approval. The authors concluded that individuals with high need for social approval are "disorganized" and "concerned with protecting and maintaining a vulnerable self-image" (28, p. 99)* Crowne and Liverant (10) tested the hypothesis that conformity is related to low expectations of success in socially evaluative situations and is consequently accompanied by defensive processes. The authors saw this as lending support to Rotter's social learning theory (23). They concluded that individuals with high need for social approval engage in defensive personal enhancement. Allison and Hunt (1) studied the relationship between the Edwards Scale and expression, as measured by a paper and pencil technique, in a situational frustration test. They found that subjects who were high on the Edwards Social Desirability Scale expressed less aggression when the intention of the frustrating source was not specified and, therefore, the culturally approved response was not implicitly defined. it would appear, on the basis of these studies, that subjects with very high needs for social approval resemble those individuals who have been less successful in graduating from the absolute stage of self -development. Individuals with a high need for social approval

PAGE 38

-29lack independence of judgement, are disorganized and defensive, and attempt to obtain social acceptance through culturally appropriate behaviors in many situations. This conforming bahavior in many different social situations should result in the assimilation of many conflicting roles. Sarbin (24), writing about Piaget's stage of absolutism, stated that "Fixation at this level leads to behavior which is primarily •other' oriented. That is to say, actions must first be considered in terms of possible approval or disapproval, reward or punishment" (24, p. 242). Those individuals with very low needs for social approval, on the other hand, appear to resemble individuals who have found it necessary to reject many of the roles of significant others. Low social approval individuals are not responsive to culturally approved forms of behavior. Individuals with moderate needs for social approval have apparently found it useful to incorporate some culturally approved behaviors, but are not slavishly following the cultural dictates of every situation. In this respect, they are similar to individuals who have achieved the developmental stage of relativism. Following the above reasoning, individuals with high, medium and low scores on the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale can be assumed to represent individuals whose behavior is characteristic of absolutism, relativism, and inconsistent stages of self -development.

PAGE 39

SUMMARY AND STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESES A good deal of ambiguity has resulted from self-concept research because of premature attempts to relate self -constructs to other complex phenomena. Before this type of research can be meaningful, studies must first be undertaken to explore and define the structure of the self. The present study is directed towards the solution of this problem. Based upon the writings of various sociological (19,20) and psychological theorists (29,22), the self is defined here as a hypothetical construct which represents the individual's conception, perception, feeling (affect), and evaluation of his own psychophysical processes as an object. Drawing upon the writings of Leary (17) and others (32,2), the present writer has conceptualized four aspects which comprise the self -structure. Two of these aspects, the private phenomenal aspect and the social aspect, are of primary interest in this study. The private phenomenal aspect is defined as the individual's evaluation of himself with a minimal amount of social pressure. The social aspect is defined as the individual's evaluation of himself within a social situation. In conceptualizing the development of the self, the writings of Piaget (20) and Sarbin (25) were reviewed. Three stages of development were discussed: -30-

PAGE 40

-31Durlng the autism stage of development, the individual has been unable to incorporate the roles and acts of others into his self-structure. The stage of absolutism is marked by the indiscriminate incorporation of the roles of others, and these roles are seen as absolute. In the third stage of development, the roles of others are useful to him. He discovers that roles represent relative rather than absolute rules and he becomes discriminating in his acceptance of than. It is the general hypothesis of this study that individual self-systems wili vary, depending upon the individual's ability to incorporate meaningful roles and acts of others into his self -concept. In terms of Werner's theory of mental development (30, it is hypothesized that differentiation of the levels of the self is associated with the stage of absoiut ism, while integration of self levels is associated with the stage of relat Ivism . More specifically, it is hypothesized that individuals who are at the absolute stage will have a greater divergence between their private phenomenal and social aspects of self tfehn wiii individuals who have made the transition to the stage of relat ivism . In order to test this hypothesis, Individuals who represent the three stages of self -development are neeoed. Based upon a review of the literature, it was determined that the need for social approval was related to the need to accept and incorporate role models. The Mar lowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale appeared to be the instrument which would best measure this variable, and it

PAGE 41

-32was decided that subjects would be selected to represent the three stages of self -development based upon their scores on the MarloweCrowne Social Desirability Scale. More specific hypotheses are as follows: 1. Assuming that individuals with high scores on the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale represent individuals whose behavior is characteristic of the absolutism stage of development, the following relationships can be expected. First, because of rigid barriers separating roles within the self-structure, these Individuals should have a greater divergence between the private and social aspects of the self than individuals at either the relativism or incons istent stage of self -development. Second, because the social aspect of self has been molded rigidly in accordance with various social roles and situations, this group should show less individual variation as regards the social aspect of self than individuals at either the relativism or inconsistent stage of self -development. Finally, individuals in this group should have lower selfesteem than individuals at the relativism stage of self -development. This is because of the limited social feedback and communication which results from over-conformity. At the same time, however, individuals in this group have assimilated some useful and meaningful roles into their self-structure. This results in some degree of positive feedback from significant others. For

PAGE 42

-3?this reason, self-esteem should be higher in this group than in the group representing the inconsistent stage of selfdevelopment. 2. Assuming thet individuals with moderate scores on the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale represent individuals whose behavior is characteristic of the relativism stage of development, the following relationships can be expected. First, because of the highly permeable barriers separating roles within the seif-structure, these individuals should have less divergence between the private and social aspects of the self than individuals at either the absolutism or inconsistent stage of s e If -development . Second, since the social aspect of self ha? been molded flexibly through the discriminate incorporation of social roles, this group should show greater individual variation as regards the social aspect of the self than Individuals at the absolutism stare of development. On the other hand, since the social aspect cf self has developed from val'H and useful social perceptions, 'ess individual vsr iat ion wil 1 be fcunci here than in the group rf presenting the inconsistent stage cf self -development. Finally, the positive social feedback and communication, along with congruence of roles within the self-structure, should result in higher self-esteem in this croup then in groups representing the absolutism en: 1 inconsistent stages of selfdevelopment.

PAGE 43

.yk3. Assuming that Individuals with low scores on the MarloweCrowne Social Desirability Scale represent individuals whose behavior is characteristic of the Inconsistent stage of development, the following relationships can be expected. First, the barriers separating roles within the selfstructure of this group are considered to be more permeable than those of individuals in the absolutism stage of development. On tie other hand, these barriers are not as psrmeoble as those found In the individual at the relativism stagp of development. For this reason, these Individuals should have les? divergence between the private and social aspects of self than individuals in the absolutism stage, but more divergence than individuals in the relativism stage. Second, since the social self has been molded on the basis of Inconsistent and negative feedbacks from significant others, the highest degree of individual variation can be expected in this group. Socially invalid social perceptions are anticipated. Finally, the negative and inconsistent social feedback experienced by this group should result in lower self-esteem than in groups representing the relativism and absolutism stages of self -development . 4. Conflict within the self has been ccnsidered by various writers ( 17,7.2, 7. 1 *, 29) to be conducive to anxiety and lowered psychological adjustment. On this basis, it Is expected that these Individuals with a v.Idc divergence between the private

PAGE 44

-35and social aspects of self, regardless of the stage of development which they represent, will have lower psychological adjustment than individuals with a narrow divergence between the private and social aspects of self.

PAGE 45

METHOD The procedure to employ, in attempting to elicit social factors which influence the Individual's self-concept, presents many difficulties, as discussed previously. If one essumes that behavior is not a product o^ self (as a doer), but rather a product of a complex of stimuli, of which the individual is only partly aware, then any procedure which is devised will tap various levels of self, social and private, conscious and unconscious. In a projective test type situation, for example, in addition to tapping unconscious sel f-feel 'ngs , the responses will be a product of both the individual's private feelings about himself and his defensive presentations of himself as an individual in a social situation. It has been demonstrated that the presence of the examiner in the administration of the Thematic Apperception Test has an inhibiting effect upon strongly emotional material (*:). Similarly, in a private sel f -evaluation situation, various unconscious and socially defensive factors will probably be present. It appears that unconscious, private, and social factors will be tapped in any situation, but the degree to which each is elicited should depend largely upon the situation itself. Self-evaluative response*" in a social situation should be more influenced by social factors than private sel f -evaluative factors. The reverse should be true in the private, anonymous, sel f-evaluation. -36-

PAGE 46

•37Several steps will be taken to overcome these design problems. Subjects will be grouped according to high, moderate, and low scores on the Marl owe -Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Then they will rate the pictures of 12 coeds as to likeability, relative to themselves. In this way, an inference about each subject's feelings of self-l ikeabi 1 i ty can be inferred. Half of the ratings will be made in a private anonymous situation, and the other half in a clearly defined social situation which calls for some degree of modesty. Since the 12 pictures will have already been selected by each subject as being neither liked nor disliked in terms of likeability, any differences found should be a product of the treatment situation (social or private). To control for position and sequence effect half of the subjects will proceed from the social to the private situation and the other half from the private to the social situation. Subjects Forty-six female students who were enrolled in basic psychology courses at the University of Florida and hk female students who were enrolled in basic sociology courses at the University of Wisconsin were used. Most of the girls were freshman or sophomores and were 18 to 20 years of age. The average age, education, and results on the various measures used were very similar (see Tables 10,11,12, 13 and )k in the Appendix). When this was established, both groups were combined to make up one pool of subjects. The first kk subjects were students at the University of Florida, and they participated in the experiment during the summer

PAGE 47

38of 1963. Thirteen of these subjects fell in the high socialdesirability category, 10 in the moderate category, and 21 in the low category. The remaining 46 subjects were from the University of Wisconsin and participated in the fall of 1S63These subjects were selected so that each of the three categories (high, moderate, and low) would be brought up to a total of 30. Therefore, the Wisconsin and Florida samples tend to approach a significant difference in social desirability scores (x 2 3.56, df=l , p .10 two-tailed) (see Table 13 in the Appendix). Subjects from the two samples did not differ, however, in the direction of their self-ratings in the private and social situations, Differences in the magnitudes of self-ratings were evidenced (see Table 14 in the Appendix). Procedure and instruments A group administration of Part A of the Picture Identification Test (6) and the Marl oweCrowne Social Desirability Scale (11) was accomplished approximately one week before the individual selfevaluations were made. Ail instructions were standard and the tests were administered in the order mentioned above. The self-rating methodology . --After the group administration of tests, the experimenter placed the 30 subjects with the highest scores on the Social-Desirability Scale into one group, the 30 subjects with the lowest scores into a second group, and the 30 subjects with scores clustering around the median into a third group.

PAGE 48

•39For each of these subjects, the experimenter selected the 12 pictures which each subject had not placed into the most likeable or least likeable categories on the Picture Identification Test. Six of the pictures were used for the subject's private evaluation and the other six for her social self-evaluation. Since these 12 pictures had previously been selected by the subject as neither liked nor disliked, it was assumed that any differences in the subject's evaluation of herself relative to them, from the private situation to the social situation, would be a function of the situation itself rather than any absolute difference in stimulus quality (attractiveness) of the girls pictured or of the subject herself. In this way, the experimenter feels that he is controlled for a methodological weakness which has been evidenced in many experiments of this type. For example, in one study (21), a subject was presented with her own photograph (in a tachistoscopic procedure) along with other photographs which had been judged by the experimenter of average attractiveness. This judgement, in the writer's opinion, may have varied widely from the subject's phenomenal view of the photos. Neither Is It satisfactory, in the writer's opinion, for the subject to rate the pictures of others as equal to himself and then to present these pictures to the subject In a different procedure (i.e., tachistoscopic) (3). In this case, the initial evaluation may be influenced by social and unconscious factors, and may not represent the subject's private opinion.

PAGE 49

•40Positlon and sequen c e . -Half of the high social approval group went from the social self-evaluation situation to the private self-evaluation situation and the other half from the private situation to the social one. The same counter-balance procedure was used for the middle and low social approval groups. The social situation . — The social self-evaluation situation consisted of the subject, two female peers (confederates of the experimenter) and the experimenter. After the subject was seated, the experimenter handed the subject and the confederates six pictures «ach and read the following instructions: "In f r ont of you there is a measurement scale which runs from (-) minus three to (+) plus three. Your job will be to rate these people in terms of 1 ikeabl 1 i ty. Use yourself as a reference point, or zero on the scale. If a person is reore likeable than you, rate her on the plus side. If a person is less likeable than you, rate her on the minus side. The one, two, and three represent the degree to which she is more or less likeable than yourself. Plus three is quite a hit more likeable than yourself. Plus one is a little more likeable than yourself. Minus three is quite a bit less likeable than yourself. Minus one is a little less likeable than yourself. Tell me your ratings and I will write them down. Do not use zero. Are there any questions?" Then the experimenter will look at the subject and say,— —"(name) , you go first". After each rating, the experimenter restated out loud the position of the pictured girl on the scale. For example, "She is a little more likeable than yourself." When the subject was finished, sh« was excused

PAGE 50

4»1and taken directly to the private situation, or excused from the experiment if she had been assigned to the private situation immediately before the social one. The private situation . ~ The private rating situation took place in a different room. After the subject was seated, the experimenter gave her the other six pictures, a slip of paper marked from one to six, and a coded envelope. The instructions were the same as in the social situation, with the exception that in the place of saying 'Tell me your ratings", the experimenter read the following instructions: "Put down a number from minus three to plus three for each person on this slip of paper. Then put the slip of paper in an envelope with the letter (letter assigned to the subject) on it. This letter is used so that voir rating will be held confidential. No one will know how you rated these people. When you have finished and placed your ratings in the envelope, leave the envelope here and you may leave." Then the experimenter left the subject alone in the room. When finished, the subject was taken directly to the social situation or dismissed from the experiment, depending upon the order to which she had been assigned. The Picture i dentification Test . — The full Picture Identification Test (6) was administered to each subject approximately one week before the individual self -evaluation was made. The Picture Identification Test is a projective test which requires the subject to make judgements about photographs of people

PAGE 51

-42of the same sex as the subject. The subject selects the pictures of people he likes best and of the people he likes least. He also selects the people who, in his judgement, best fit descriptions of 21 needs of the Murray Need System. H: receives a Judgement, an Attitude, and an Association score for each of the 21 Murray needs. Since the overall Association Index score was used as a criterion of adjustment, it is of primary interest here. An Association Index is computed for each need. This score is based on the degree to which the subject conforms to a norm group in associating needs by attributing them to the same person. For example, it has been quite common in norm groups to associate need-dominance and need-aggression by attributing these two needs to the same person, whereas the need-dominance and needdeference were seldom associated in this manner. A high Association Index for a need is interpreted by the authors of the test as meaning that the subject knows how to fit the need in well by the system of other needs which help him to satisfy the needs in an acceptable wa . . It means that the individual knows that the need does not combine well with certain other needs so that he wouldn't try to satisfy it and these other needs at the same time. In one study (13), Sk male prisoners from a correctional institution and Sk male students from a technical and vocational high school were administered a group form of the Picture Identification Test. A procedure was established to test the hypothesis that the profiles adequately represented various types of prisoners and non-prisoners, so that a new subject could be correctly classified according to whether his profile was most similar to the prisoner or non-prisoner group. Tne results showed that 68 per cent of the subjects were correctly

PAGE 52

-'reclassified by a median cutting point. It was noted that while the prisoner profile showed low association scores, there were no particularly low association scores in the student profiles. In another study (7), using college students as subjects, the Association Index was again found to be positively related to adjustment. Statistical methodology . --Since a counter-balance procedure was used to obtain the self-ratings in the two situations, it was decided that a 2 x 2 counter-balanced analysis of variance would be the most appropriate statistical methodology. The most important advantage to this methodology is that subjects are orthogonal to treatments and each subject therefore serves as his own control. This feature provides that the usually large between subjects variance is removed from the error term used for testing treatments, and thus the design is extremely sensitive for treatments. Tie assumptions of a normal distribution of the population, random and independent observations, and similar population variances, seemed reasonable for this type of research. T e sample is one which is often used in research of this type. The n of 90 is large enough to enable the use of parametric methods of analysis. The variances were not found to differ significantly. Experimental hypotheses Combining the previous theoretical hypotheses with this methodology, several specific experimental hypotheses can now be discussed: 1. Individuals at the absolutism stage of self-development can be expected to have a greater divergence between the social and private aspects of self than individuals at either the relativism or inconsistent stages. It can be expected than: a. That the

PAGE 53

high need for social approval group will have a greater divergence between self-ratings in the private and social situations than will the moderate need for social approval group, b. Twat the high need for social approval group will have a greater divergence between self-ratings in the private and social situations than wi 1 1 the low need for social approval group. Because of the oversensi t ivi ty of individuals at the absolutism stage of self-development to social expectations, it can be expected: c. Tl.at the high need for social approval group will have higher self-ratings in the private situation than in the social situation. Finally, since individuals at the absolutism stage of selfdevelopment can be expected to have higher self-esteem and to respond more appropriately to social expectations than individuals at the inconsistent stage of development, it can be expected that c. The high need for social approval group wi 1 1 have higher selfratings in the private situation than will the low need for social approval group. Individuals at the relativism stage of self-development are not expected to have a great divergence between the social and private aspects of self. It can be expected then: a. Ti>at the mocerate need for social approval group will not have a great divergence between self-ratings in the private and social situations. b. That the moderate need for social approval group will not have a greater divergence between self-ratings in the private and social situation than the low need for social approval group.

PAGE 54

-45Individuals at the relativism stage of self -development are expected to have a high degree of self-esteem and the ability to make appropriate, yet discriminating, evaluations of social situations, |t can be expected than: c. That the moderate need for social approval group will have higher self-ratings in the social situation than will the high need for social approval group, d. That the moderate need for social approval group will have higher self-ratings in the private situation than will the low need for social approval group, e. That the : -^derate need for social approval group will have higher combined self-ratings in both the social and private situations than will the low need for social approval group. 3. Individuals at the inconsistent stage of self-development are not expected to have a great divergence between the social and "vnte aspects of self. It can be expected then: a. That the low need for social approval group will not have a great divergence between self-ratings in the private and social situations. Individuals at the inconsistent stage of self-development are expected to have a low degree of self-esteem and to make inappropriate and invalid social perceptions. It can be expected then: b. That the low need for social approval group will have lower self-ratings in the private situation than will the moderate need for social approval group. (See hypothesis 2 d.) c. That the low need for social approval group will have lower self-ratings in the private situation than wi 1 1 the high need for social approval group. (See hypothesis id.) d. That the low need for social approval group will have lower combined self-ratings

PAGE 55

hein both the social and private situations than will the moderate need for social approval group. (See hypothesis 2 e.) Since the social aspect of self in this group has developed from inconsistent communications from others, individual variations in reactions to social cues are expected. It can he expected then: e. Tnat the low need for social approval group will have higher individual variations in self-ratings in the social and private situations than the moderate need for social approval group. h. Individuals fcich a wide divergence between the private and social aspects of self are expected to be lower in their psychological adjustment. It can be expected, then, that those individuals with a wide divergence between self-ratings in the private and social situations will have lower Association Index scores on the Picture I cent if icat ion than will individuals with convergent selfratings in the two situations (with the need for social approval factor held constant).

PAGE 56

RESULTS Ti'.e anal ysi s In the general statistical analysis, an analysis of variance was used to compare the two treatments (private and social) and the three groups (nigh, moderate, and low need for social approval). It allowed for the simultaneous control of individual differences and temporal order of treatments. Each inaividual received each treatment once and different groups of individuals received treatments in the two possible different orders (social to private and private to social). Each treatment appears once and only once in each row (group of individuals) and in each column (ordinal position). The subjects x sequence x groups and subjects x position x groups x sequence interactions were used as error terms for groups and groups x treatments effects respectively. Error terms not including all of these interactions could lead to a positive F test bias (T/pe I jrror). For example, the use of the groups x sequence mean square as the error term would have resulted in a significant F for groups. lis error term would not have contained the replicated subjects variance. The group times treatments interaction was found to be significant at -he .05 level. Once this was determined, t tests were used for each variable between the two groups. Finally, t tests for correlated means were used to test between variables for each group. In addition, the nonparametric median test (26) was used to test hypothesis number 12 involving two small groups of subjects. -47-

PAGE 57

-48While the variances were not found to be significantly different, a slight correlation between means and variances was observed. This was not considered serious enough to prevent the analysis of differences in terms of means, however. Findi ngs The analysis of variance showed the groups times treatments effect to be significant at the .05 level. The groups effect represents the high, moderate, and low need for social approval groups. The treatments effect represents the private and social situations. The F for the groups times treatments effect was 4.01. At 84 and 2 degrees of freedom, the critical value needed for significance at the .05 level was 3.11. The groups effect alone was not quite significant at the .05 level. The F for the groups effect alone was 3.02. With 84 and 2 degrees of freedom, the critical value for significance at the .05 level was 3.11. The first and most general finding then v/as that female students, grouped according to scores on the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale and making their sel f-evc! nations in private and social situations, would show significant variation.

PAGE 58

-49Table 4. Analysis of Variance. Source of Variation Sum of Square; df Mean Square £ Groups 114.4300 2 57.24 j.02* Sequence 1.5278 1 1.53 Groups x Sequence 9.9432 2 4.97 S's x Sequence x Groups 1591.4000 84 18.94 Position .9389 1 .94 Groups x Position 7.9988 2 4.0 Treatments 10.2"/22 1 10.27 Groups x Treatments 64.0677 2 32.03 4.01** S's x Pos x Grps x Sequence . j263 84 Total 24; 1.5654 179 *P .05 At DF = 84 and 2, the critical value is F = j.ll **p .05 At DF = 84 and 2, the critical value is F = j.W Table 5. — -Ratings of pictures (as to likeability in social and private situations) by subjects grouped according to need for social approval. PRIVATE SITUATION SOCIAL SITUATION Xo = x ? = ^28* Ao = ^-O/ A o j£-Q* High need for social ( X) 2 = 71289 ( X)^ = 153193 approval group. X = 2759 X, = ->9l4 X = 8.90 X = 10.93 x 2 = x 2 = 251 Moderate need for ( X) 9 = 59049 ( X) £ = 60959 social approval group. X ~ = 2213 X = 2469 X = 3.10 X = 8.36 X 2 = .; 1 1 X 2 = 285 Low need for social ( X) 2 = 96721 ( X) 2 = 100806 approval group. >i =3/15 X =3175 X = 10.37 X = 9.50 *Raw score represents the subjects' rating of the pictures and not a self-rating. Tiius, high raw score = low self-rating.

PAGE 59

-50X O o — o a 5UJ o a. U. I o — u. > „l — ! ai z «.) — 3» cj Z X u — —I V) o < '-••) m a: u. ui o o o x m z U. HE < Z O ou-uaoa. ._ O — UJ — >w u. a: ix .) j ' j Ul Z 3 U J ~a > -j 4) U — UJ UJ 3 u _i a* ac z a. A t— Ul to J— 2z z o UJ — ec — UJ u o »o c o U — O t — *A Lrt O O O V A A a. a. a. V V V a a a x 2: -I > 00 o -J Z UJ < =» V UJ UJ _l ue 1 V o
PAGE 60

->l-

PAGE 61

-52Table ~J . ---Average scores of all groups on the MarloweCrowne Social Desirability Scale.

PAGE 62

-53Hypothesis 1 c. , that the high need for social approval group would have higher self-ratings in the private situation than in the social situation, was supported (t = 4.03, df = 29, p .001 twotailed). The statistical test used here was the t test for correlated means (see Table 6). Hypothesis 1 d. , that the high need for social approval group would have higher self-ratings in the private situation than would the low need for social approval group, was not supported (t = 1.22, df = 58, p .10 one-tailed). An inspection of the data reveal that the direction was correctly predicted here, however, since the high need for social approval group did tend to have higher selfratings in private situations than the low need for social approval group. The statistical test used for this analysis was the t test for uncorrected means (see Table 6). Moderate need for social approval group . —Hypothesis 2 a., that the moderate need for social approval group would not have different ratings in the two situations, which were statistically significant, was supported (t = .38, df = 29, p .10 two-tailed). Here again, while one cannot prove the null hypothesis, it is interesting to note that significantly different ratings in the two situations were not expected. The statistical test for this analysis was the t test for correlated means (see Table 6). Hypothesis 2 b. , that the low need for social approval group and the moderate need for social approval group would not show a significant statistical difference in their self-ratings in the two

PAGE 63

.Kksituations, was supported (t = .5^, df = 58, p .10 one-tciled). While one cannot prove the null hypothesis, it is interesting to note that the smallest difference was expected, and found, between these two groups (see Table 6). H/pothesis 2 c. , that the moderate need for social approval group would have higher self-rating in the social situation than the high need for social approval group, was supported (t = 1.88, df = 58, p .05 one-tailed). The statistical test used for this analysis was the t test for uncorrelated means (see Table 6). Hypothesis 2 d. , that the moderate need for social approval group would have higher self-ratings in the private situation than would the low need for social approval, was supported (t = 2.46, df = 58, p .01 one-tailed). The statistical test used in this analysis was the t test for uncorrelated means (see Table 6). Hypothesis 2 e. , that the moderate need for social approval group would have higher combined self-ratings in both the social and private situations than would the low need for social approval group, was supported (t = 2.5^, df = 118, p .05 two-tailed). The statistical test used for this analysis was the t test for uncorrelated means (see Table 6). Low need for social approval group . —Hypothesis 3 a., that the low need for social approval group would not have ratings in the two situations which were significantly different, was supported (t = .96, df = 29, p .10 two-tailed). Here again, while one cannot prove the null hypothesis, it is interesting

PAGE 64

-55to note that no statistically significant differences were expected. Tie statistical test used for this analysis was the t test for correlated means (two-tai led) (see Table 6). Hypothesis 3 e. » that the low need for social approval group would have higher individual variations in ratings in the two situations than would the moderate need for social approval group, was not supported (t .87, df = 118, p .10 two-tailed). The statistical test used in this analysis was the t test for uncorrelated means comparing the difference scores of individuals in the low need for social approval group, with the difference scores of individuals in the moderate need for social approval group. The sign (or direction) was not considered in these difference scores (between social and private situations). Here again, while not statistically significant, the trend was in the direction predicted (see Table 6) . Convergent versus divergent self-ratings . —Hypothesis k , that individuals, disregarding social desirability scores, with convergent ratings between the private and social situations would have higher association index scores on the Picture Identification Test than individuals with divergent ratings, was incorrect (t = 4.16, df = 1, p .02 one-tailed). In fact, the result here was in the opposite direction to that predicted. Individuals with divergent ratings between the social and private situations had significantly higher association index scores. There were 15 subjects in the convergent group representing the high, moderate, and low need for

PAGE 65

social approval groups. The discrepant ratings group was comprised of \k subjects also from the high, moderate, and low need for social approval groups (see Table 6). Table 8. —-Average divergence between self-ratings in social and private situations for discrepant convergent groups. Averaqe Civerqence

PAGE 66

DISCUSSION Discussion of findings The most general finding, and perhaps the one with the broadest theoretical applications, was that individuals grouped according to need for social approval would differ significantly in the pattern of their self-ratings in private and social situations. This finding lends support to those theorists who see the selfconcept as developing from a subjective organization of the culture (27,25,1^,19). Certainly, the fact that group differences can be expected, In specific aspects of self, based on the knowledge of general social attitudes, is provocative. High nee d for social approval group . — The first hypothesis, that the high need for social approval group would have a greater divergence between self -ratings than the moderate group, lends support to the notion that individuals who have found it necessary to indiscriminately incorporate the roles of significant others, will be characterized by self-diffusion. Rigid barriers separate roles within the self-structure, resulting In a lack of consistency within the self. The moderate approval group, on the other hand, showed relatively less divergence, and this confirmed the expectation of this group as having more permeable barriers within the selfstructure and greater consistency within the self. -57-

PAGE 67

-boIt Is Important to note, however, in analyzing this finding, that th« statistical test which was uses too*. Into consideration both amount of difference between ratings in the two situations and direction of difference. In terns of individual variation. without regard to direction, the group trend is reversed. The high need for approval group hes less individual variation without regard to direction than does the federate need for approval group. While this way ^p?9»r to be contradictory to the major hypothesis at first glance, It is actually consistent with the theoretical formulation proposed previously. Because in the high need group, while rigid barriers separate roles within the self-system, behavior in one role is isolated from the rest of the self, but consistently so. Because of the dependence and over-sens 't+vity, oehavior la a particular role situation is highly predictable. The moderate ne*d group, on the other hand, while having greater consistency within the self is less predictable individually because of their greater autonomy. One would expect the low need group to tutvt even greeter individual variation without regard to direction than the tKoderete need group. This is because of their lack of sensitivity and limited ability to perceive social situations. There was a trend in this direction but it did not reach significance. The second hype thesis, that the high rmtl group would have a greeter divergence than the low need grou,i, was not supported at the .0$ level of significance, but did reach the .10 level of significance. One would expect a less deer cut difference between these two

PAGE 68

-59groups than between the high and moderate groups because, like the high need group, they have assimilated few roles and these are not consistently integrated. But unlike the high need group, the reason for this Is inconsistent and negative feedback from others; not slavish compliance to a few safe roles. The third hypothesis was correct and lends support to the theoretical expectation that the high need group is dependent on the field and overly sensitive to the expectations of others. These individuals will conform to the social demands of the situation. In this instance, modesty was built into the social self-rating situation, and this groun responded with lower self-ratings In this situation relative to the private one. The fourth hypothesis, that the high need for social approval group would have higher self -ratings in the private situation than vjould the low need for social aporoval group, was not supported statistically. With more subjects and a wider range of social -desirabl 1 1 ty records, this might have reached a significant level. Moderate, need for soc j a j approval group.. — In the first hypothesis,, no statistically significant difference was expected between the moderate need group's ratings in the two situations. This was because this group was not expected to be overly sensitive to the expectations of others. On the other hand, this group has recognized the utility of social roles and will usually act in conformance with them. An inspection of the raw data shows slightly lower self -ratings in the social situation In conformance with the social situation.

PAGE 69

-oOTha second hypothesis, that the moderate and low need groups would not show a significant difference in their self-ratings in the two situations, was made to point up the curvilinear quality of the need for social approval variable. As stated in the previous discussion, these two groups would be expected to show certain similarities as regards their sel f -concepts, but for different reasons. While one cannot prove the null hypothesis, these "no difference" hypotheses may have some meaning in the total context of successful predictions of differences between other groups. Findings related to the third hypothesis lend support to two theoretical expectations. The first, and most obvious reason, for the moderate group to have a significantly higher self-ratine in the social situations, is that the moderate group is not overly sensitive to the social response of modesty which is inherent in the situation. If this were the only reason for this finding, however, one would also expect the low need group to have significantly higher ratings in the social situation relative to the high need group. This is because the low need group is insensitive to these social pressures. The low need group did not have significantly higher ratings than the high need group, however. Therefore, another causal factor must account for the moderate need group's higher selfratings. This factor is probably the greater overall self-esteem of this group due to the positive and consistent feedback from significant others. The findings of the fourth hypothesis also offer support for two theoretical expectations. The first reason why the moderate

PAGE 70

6\group can be expected to have higher self-ratings in the private situation than the low need group is that the low need group makes invalid social perceptions resulting in higher self-ratings in a situation calling for modesty and lower self-ratings in a situation not calling for modesty. The second reason for this finding is the greater overall self-esteem of the moderate need group. In fact, both of the previous findings lend support to the theoretical expectation that the moderate need group has greater overall self-esteem. The findings of the fourth prediction could be explained by the deviant role reversal of the low need group. If this were the only causal factor, however, then one would expect the high need group to also have significantly higher self-ratings in the private situation than the low need group. This was not the case since prediction Id. was incorrect. Therefore, the moderate need group's higher self-ratings probably relates to their overall greater self-esteem. These findings offer some tentative support for the curvi 1 ineari ty of the social desirability factor as an indication of greater selfesteem. This is contrary to the viewpoint that a high degree of conformance is equivalent to a high degree of self-esteem and adjustment. The fifth experimental prediction was supported statistically, and this lends support to the greater self-esteem of the moderate need group. Where levels of significance were not achieved in this study, one might be able to explain this in terms of the limited number of Social Desirability Records from which extreme scores could be selected.

PAGE 71

-62Thercfore, the ranges of subjects may have been toe hutacgei^ecus* Another possibility would be that the Marl ewe -Crowne Social Seslrabllity Scsle does not a How for * sufficient r*ng€ of responses. A greater rarje of responses would allow for the selection of raore e*trerae groups. toy n$ad for social approval grog? . — The first hypothesis was made because it was not expected that the low need group would have statistically significant differences in ratings in the two situations. This is because the low need group is largely independent of the field end insensitive to the expectations of others. Jfot only was the null hypothesis of no differences supported, but inspection of the data shows this group to have made higher self -ratings in the social situation than in the private one. This is N direct opposition to the quality of modesty which was sailed for in the social situation. This gives qualitative support for the invalidity of the social behavior of this group. The theoretical meanings Involved In the second experimental prediction were discussed previously within the context of prediction 1 a. The low need group was expected to have greater Individual variation without regard to whether the social or private self-ratings were higher than the moderate r^«4 group. This is because of their lack of sensitivity end limited ability to perceive social situations. In turn, the moderate n—d group is expected to show greater Individual variation than the high need group. The re&der is asked to compare the cuter perimeters of the drawing of the self-systems for the three

PAGE 72

-62groups: low need •• inconsistent stage, moderate need relativism stage, and iii'jft nt*ed absolutism stage. While this hypothesis was not supported statistical ly, once again the trend was in the expected dt recti on. Copvfjrcient versus divergent self-ratings . -•The final hypothesis was made because or,e would expect to fiiic lowered adjustment in individuals who have conflict between the private and social aspects of their scl f -systems . The results weri the oppos i t3 of those expected. Individuals with wide discrepancies between the two aspects of self had significantly higher association index scores. One possible explanation for this result is that the Picture Identification Test is, in a sense, a test of attitudinal conformity. That is, high scores are given to those individuals whose attitudes are in conformance with the majority. Therefore, while individuals representing the discrepant and convergent groups were selected equally from all three social desirability groups to eliminate the social desirability factor, the discrepant group itself may represent those individuals who are more sensitive to what is socially desirable than is the convergent group. If this is true, then it would net be surprising to find this group having high scores on a test which is strongly influenced by one's ability to recognize that which is socially desirable. A further analysis of these data shows that the higher association index scores of the divergent group are not a function of the direction of their self-ratings, however. They do not give themselves

PAGE 73

**o*+** wore low self -ratings in the social situation relative to the private situation than ooes the conversant group. Seven Members of the divergent group g*ve the&saives iowvr se it -ratings in tne sccisi situation relative to tha private situation, wni ie seven mewoers gave themselves nigner ratings, eleven ftie&fcers of the convergent ijreup gave themselves lower self •ratings in the social situation relative to the private situation, while loir aenbers gave thewseives higher ratings. This evloence woula see* to contradict the attituainai conformity hypothesis. These findings can he interpreted as lending support to tne aajor hypothesis; U*at i not vidua is wn© have ueen forces, as a way or' av©lctng eAcessiv* anxiety, to inoiscriainateiy as&i/ni Ute May social roies *»tll tm>f e greater uivcrgencc within their sett* structure UMM tnefvieweli who have deer. Aiioweu to tenure aiscriKuneting in tfteir acceptance of social roles. T>e data cou.u be expteined without necessarily Accepting the unaar tying theory reiating to anxiety anu tne icorporation of sociat roles, one aignt *ay tn*t winuevar the reason for differences in -med for suiiti approval* individuals with « ftign need, *t «^easurad by the scale, will respona in the socially ttfiprwG manner la behavioral situation* Tile leade *>i£4ity to kJm Hw .owecttwne WsUi Cesifebsiity aca
PAGE 74

-65not account for the tendency (not significant) of the moderate need group to give itself higher self-ratings in the social situation than the low need group. One would expect, rather, that the lower the need for social approval, the higher the self-ratings in the social situation. The data show a curvilinear effect which is more congruent with the anxiety, role assimilation hypothesis. It is interesting to note, as regards the importance of anxiety in this study, that subjects usually appeared to respond with varying degrees of anxiety to the social situation. Some were hesitant in complying with the task after only hearing the instructions, while others appeared to comprehend the subtle pressures of the situation at some point during the rating task. Another interpretation of these data would relate to the age and education of the subjects. Slightly older and better educated students are exposed to the university climate which reinforces a constructive criticism of the expectations of society. The older, more sophisticated student also has a different test taking response set. He learns to reject as false those test items which are couched in terms requiring the acceptance of extremes (i.e., always, never, etc.). This group may also be more intelligent since these students have managed to stay in school longer. In this way, one could account for lower scores on the MarloweCrowne Social Desirability Scale and lower self-ratings in the social situation. Here again, however, this interpretation is not compatible with the curvi 1 ineari ty of self-ratings in the social situation by the three groups. Aiso, differences in education and age are very si ight.

PAGE 75

-66Table 9« — — Average age and education of subjects grouped according to scores on the Harlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale.

PAGE 76

-67These findings offer some support for the validity of both the Karlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale and the need for social approval as a mot i vational construct. One future area of exploration would be the expansion of the socia i -desi rabi I i ty scale to provide a greater range of items and to examine possible conflicts between need fu» social approval in various areas. There is no reason to consider this as a unitary construct. Kather, an individual may vary in his need for social approval according to the area or experience which is Involved (i.e., he may have a high need for social approval In the area of sexual relationships and a tow need for social approval in tne area of dominance, etc.). The possible curvi 1 ineari ty of the social desirability factor as an indicator of adjustment leads one to question the validity of many psychological instruments which purport to measure adjustment (i.e., Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory) and which may be measuring need for social approval or the ability to recognize that which is socially approved. While individuals with low scores on these instruments are less well-adjusted, those with high scores may be iess adjusted than their scores would indicate. At a more general ievel, these findings add construct validity to the value of the self-concept in the Investigation of personality. They also stress the necessity for considering the dynamic interaction of structures and levels within the personality. Several general Implications can be derived from the findings of this study:

PAGE 77

-68In terms of personality theory, some support has been offered to those theorists who have emphasized levels of self (i.e., Leary (17)) and role constructs (i.e., Sarbin (25) and Ae\]y (16)). Further investigation into the development of social roles and their Incorporation into the self-picture are needed. Role-role conflicts and self-role c.nflicts .oust also be studied more extensively if sophisticated theories of personality are to be cev/eloped. The incorporation of social roles and norms into the individual personality appears to provide a natural bridge between psychology and disciplines concerned with group and cultural variables (i.e., Sociology and Anthropology) . In the area of diagnosis, an emphasis on the client's selforganization and his exposure to and assimilation of conflicting roles, offers a new perspective to the armamentarium of the clinician. Kelly's Role Repertory Tests (16) may be of value in researching this area. The recognition by the clinician of the various aspects of self wnich will be tapped by various measurement instruments should also have the effect of increasing tne precision and rigor of these diagnoses. The growing acceptance of the social desirability variable as a motive, as well as a response set, should serve as a caution to diagnosticians who propose to correct for It as if it were irrelevant to the individual's personality. In terms of the prevention and treatment cf psychological disorders, this study offers support for those clinicians who have emphasized roie relationships, role playing, and role flexibility

PAGE 78

in their treatment programs. The approach** of Kelly (io) and Rogers (22) *f particularly relevant. It *&**'$ that personal Jty disorders stay be associated with tha assimilation to too many roles, thus resulting in sa If -structure discrepancies, or the assimilation of too few roles, resulting In an ability to recogsUe Many roles, and thus the inability to profit from their utilization. tpfderoeo logical studies night be directed towards uncovering role conflicts within the community and examining areas where exposure to various roles and norms is minimal, tack of role assimilation may be related to a lack of knowledge concerning roles, the inability to absorb tnese roles, or the lack of motivation to learn tnese roles. On the level of family edjustment, one might look for less cobeslveness in families which indiscriminately adopt conflicting roles as a unit. Family congruence, on the other hand, might be found in families which have felled to adopt Important social roles, but one would expect these families to be less effective as a unit.

PAGE 79

SUMMARY This study attempted to throw some light on the organization of the self-concept within the individual by relating the social and private aspects of self to need for social approval. Ninety coeds were asked to evaluate pictures of six coeds as to likeability, relative to themselves, in the presence of a male graduate student and two female peers. This comprised the social aspect of the se If -concept . These same coeds were then asked to evaluate six other pictures as to likeability in a private anonymous situation. This comprised the private aspect of the self-concept. A counterbalanced assignment to situations was used. Previous to the evaluations, the subjects had been assigned to high, moderate, or low need for social approval groups, based upon their scores on the Crowne-Mar lowe Social Desirability S ca 1 e . A theory of the development of the self-concept within the individual was presented. This theory stressed the importance of anxiety and the assimilation of social roles in the development of the self -concept. It was felt that individuals who had indiscriminately assimilated many social roles from significant others would have a wide divergence between the two aspects of the self-concept. Individuals with high need for social approval scores were used to represent this group. It was felt that individuals -70-

PAGE 80

-71 w;-,c had not indiscriminately assimilated many social roie3 would hsve greater convergence between the two aspects cf the self-cc~?eot . Individuals with moderate r.eec 1 for -c;?' 1 spprcyel scores were used to represent this group* Finally, those individuals who had been unableto assimilate many useful am r . r -inr:ful rel?s would have treat Individual variability In the degree of divergence between aspect; cf the self-concept. Individuals with low need for sccis' approval sccre-i wti i ,s«tc represent this gre .. Some Interesting relationships were founc which offer tentative support for the general theoretical framework. The high reed for cfpicval group hat zrrtateT circreparcy between t elf -ratings in the two situations thar the other two groups; if was Intermediate in self-esteem relative tc the other groups; and the group as «' vhole conformed tc the demands cf the social situation. The moderate nee( group hai less discrepancy in self-ratings in the two situation; the highest degree of self-esteem; and a mild degree of sonformance to the der.ands cf the social situation. The low need group had the lowest degree of self-esteem; the greatest individual variability In self-ratings in the two situations; and tended to respond opposite to the demands of the social situation. The hypothesis th; t indiv dw 's with a wide degree of divergence between self-ratings in the two situations would have lower association index scores on the Picture Identification Test than Individuals with a high degree of convergence was not supported. In fact, the opposite relationship was found.

PAGE 81

72Because pf the number of correct statistical predictions and the number of correct predictions of direction where statistical significance was not achieved, it is re»t that this study lends tentative support to tne major nypotnesis; tnat individuals woo have been forced, a» _ May of avuiamy excessive a..xiety< to indiscriminately assimilate many social roles will nave a greater uivery^in-c within their self -structure titan individuals who have been jiiuweu to be mors discriminating in tneir acceptance of social roles* This Study also lends tentative support to tne metnouology used and to the importance o( tne social approval construct in tiie study of tne set f -concept.

PAGE 82

BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Allison, J. and Hunt, 0. E. Social Desirability and the Expression of Aggression under Varying Conditions of Frustration. J. Consult. Psychol . 1959, 23_, 528-532. 2. Allport, Gordon. The Ego in Contemporary Ps; .nology. Psychol. Review . ly^3, ££_, 45. 3. Beloff, Haiia and Beloff, J. Unconscious Self -Evaluation Using a Stereoscope. J. Abnorm. Sop. Psychol . 1959, 5_2j 2?5-2/6. 4. Bernstein, L. The Examiner as an Inhibiting Factor in Clinical Testing. J. Consult. Psychol . 1956, 20, 237-290. 5BrownfeiT, J. J. Stability of the Self-Concept as a Dimension or Personality. J. Abnorrn. Soc. Psvcnol . 1952, hj_, 59/-606. 6. Chambers, J. L. and Lieberman, Lewis K. Picture Identification T est Manual for Sub j ects . Charles L. Mix Memorial Fund, Inc. Americus Georgia, lybO. 7. Chambers, J. L. Trait Juagment of Photographs ano Aajustment of College Students. J . Consult. Psychol . 1961, 25_, ^33*435. 8. Combs, A. W. and Snycg, D. Individual Behavior (rev. ed.) Harper and Brothers, New York, 1959 • 9« Coo ley, Charles H. Human Nature ana the Social Oroer . Scribner's, New York, 1922. 10. Crowne, D. P. <~nd Liverant, S. Conformity Under Conditions of Personal Commitment. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol . i9o3, bo, 5^7ccr. 11. Crowne, D. P. ?nd Marlcwe, D. A New Scale of Social Desirability Independent of Psychopdthoiogy . J. Consult. Psychol . iy60, 2k, 12. Edwards, A. L. The Social Desirability. Variable I n Perso n ality Assessment and Research . Dry den, New York, 1957* •73-

PAGE 83

7413« Erickson, Erick H. Childhood and Society W.W. Norton and Company, Inc., New York, 1947. 14. Hall, C. S. and Lindzey, Gardner. Theories of Personality . John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1?57?£• James, Wflllam. The Principles of Psycho lcoy . Dover Pub. Co., New York, 1950. 16. Kelly, George A. The Psychology of Personal Constructs . 1, W.l'. Morton snd Co., Ire, New Y.rk, I955. ly. Lesry, T. I ritencrsor.g 1 Disrncsi: of Perrons! ity . Konslri, New York, 1957. 18. Lieberman, Lewis R. and Chambers, J. L. Differences Between Priijreri and Trade Sc'.icol ;tL^£-.t; on thf Picture identifi cation Test . Based on a paper read at the Southeastern Psychological A:sccirt!or Convention In Miami, Florida, 1963. 19. Head, G. H. MinJ, Self zr.l Scciet, . University of Chlcagc Press, Chicago, 1934. 20. NewcomD, T. M. Social Psycho ioqy . Holt, Kinehart and Winston, New York, i960. 21. Rogers, A. H. snd Walsh, T. M. Defensiveness end Unwitting Self -Evaluation. J. Clin. Psychol . 1958, 15_, 302-304. 22. Rogers, C. R. On Becoming a Person . Houghton-Mifflin Co., New York, 1961. 23. Rotter, J. B. Sociii Le^r.-.i:.;, :-,J 3:'.;:-! F„ ; cSoIc c, y . rrentice Hail Co., New York, 1954. 2k. Serb in, T. R. A Preface to a Psychological Analysis of the Self. ?svc!\:l. Rsv . 1952, £L 11-22. 25« Sarbln, T. R. and H. 1 1 , :k, Curtis D. "Conformance in Role Perception as a Personality Variable". In T. R. Sarbin (ea.) : t " es i:; 2;S:;'. icr P^th. lev, Holt, Rtnehart and Winston, New York, 1961. 26. Seigei, Sidney. Nonparametr ic Statistic for the Ssr.>viorai :..\z:...iz . McGrefc Hill, IncT, Ne\ Y.:';, ::;C I.'/. .t.w.'iv, ii. -.,.: C::.....-::, H. T'..z. r-,^.l1z^ zi : l:.>.-l;:::.'lvc:,i.atS . Wiley, New York, 1947.

PAGE 84

--":28. Strickland, Bonnie R. and Crowne, Douglas P. Need for Approval and the Premature Termination of Psychotiieraoy. J. Consult. PsvchoJ.. 1963, 22, 476-485. 29. Sullivan, H. S. Thjejr^tejj^erspnaj LTJJSP.EY. oL p sych_tatrv. Perry, H. S. and Gawei, M. L. (eds.) W.W.' Norton Co., New York, 1953. 30. Symonds, p. M. The Ecu an a The Stetf . Appleton-Century-Crot ts. New York, 1951. y ' }l. Werner. Heinz. Comparative Psychology of Mental Development . International Universities Press, Inc.*, New York," 1257. |2« Wyu'e, Ruth. Jne S elf Concept. University of Nebraska Press, Ltncoin, Nebraska. 1961.

PAGE 85

APP£MCIa Teble 10* — Average age and education of subjects.

PAGE 86

•77Table 13. — Huabar of Wisconsin »n4 nor ids subject* In social desirability groups* High S-D i Moderate $-$ ' Low S-B T Florida I] *0 1 1 Wisconsin 17 M Combined #> >u P Table \k. — Average self-ratings of Florida end Wisconsin subjects grouped according to need for social approve I . Heed for Social Approval Florida Private Situation Social Situation High X 7-$J X • 10.31 Moderate X • 7-50 X d.30 ww X 10.91 10.57 Wisconsin Private Situation! Social Situation m . |h iO.U^. Jl.-l Moderate X 8.^*0 X 8.^0 Low .:.!< 7.00 The Florida sample had higher self-ratings in their high group than the Wisconsin sample (t = 2.05, df = 58, p< .05 two-tailed, t test for uncorrelated means) . The Florida and Wisconsin samples did not differ in self-ratings for the moderate groups (t = .56, df = 58, p> .10 two-tailed, t test for uncorrelated means) .

PAGE 87

-78The Florida sample had lower self -ratings In their low group than tne Wisconsin sample (t 2.05, df » 58, P< .05 two-tailed, t test for uncorrelated means)* Table 15. -—Self -ratings of o N subjects grouped according to need for social approve) and situation.

PAGE 88

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Mack R. Hicks was born April 16, 1935, in Tulsa, Oklahoma. In 1953 he was graduated from Watertown High School, Watertown, Wisconsin. In June, 1957, he received the degree of Bachelor of Science from Notre Dame University. From 1958 until I960 he served as a supply officer in the United States Air Force and was stationed in England. Following his discharge from the Air Force In I960, he enrolled in the Graduate School of the University of Florida. He worked as a graduate assistant in the Department of Psychology in 1961, and received the degree of Master of Arts in 1962. From February, 1962, until the present time, he has pursued his work toward the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Mack R. Hicks is married to the former Kathleen Susan Raue and is the father of three children. He currently holds a Florida State Mental Health Grant and is a member of Ps i Chi Fraternity and the Southeastern Psychological Association. -79-

PAGE 89

This dissertation was prepared under the direction of the chairman of the candidate's supervisory committee and has been ap,;rcve "7/uj'f'h :,&,.< '

PAGE 90

4 2 1