AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OP ALTRUISM
DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
By SALOMON RETTIG, B.A., M.A.
*****
The Ohio State University
1956
Approved by:
Adviser Dépirtment of Psychology To My Wife
11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am happy to express my gratitude to the following people: To: Dr. Julian B. Rotter for his enoouragement and critical supervision of this research; for his most stimulating thinking and his important contribution to the psychological theoretical framework of this study. To; Dr. Robert A. Wherry for his advice on the statistical aspects of this study. To: Dr. Alvin Scodel for his critical review of this study and for his constant guidance and interest throughout my graduate training. To: Dr.Lauren G. Wispe for his support throughout my graduate training. To; Dr. Max Goodson and Dr. H. Gordon Hullfish who were instrumental in providing many of the subjects for this research. To: Dr. Norman Preeberg for his unfailing willingness and assistance in carrying out this research. To: Several teaching assistants for their fine cooperation in the collection of subjects and data. Finally, I wish to express my appreciation to my wife, for whose encouragement, faith, and patience I am deeply grate ful.
iii TABLE OP CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I INTRODUCTION ...... 1 II THEORETICAL AND RESEARCH BACKGROUND ...... 3 A. Historical Review ...... 3 B. Modem Viewpoints ...... 6 C. Studies In Altruism...... 9 III HYPOTHESES ...... l6 A. Definition ...... l6 B. Social Learning Theory ...... l6 C. Measures ...... 19 D. Hypotheses...... 21 IV METHODOLOGY...... 23 A. Pretest ...... 23 B. The Main Experiment ...... 32 C. Specific Hypotheses ...... 37 V RESULTS AND DISCUSSION...... 39 A. Treatment of D a t a ...... 39 B. Reliability...... 40 C. The Relationship between the Altruism Scale and the Home Background Inventory ...... 42 D. The Relationship between the Altruism Scale and the Behavioral Tests...... 48 E. The Relationship between the'Home Background Inventory and the Behavioral Tests ...... 49 P. Summary of the Results...... 50 G. Discussion of Results ...... 51 VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ...... 60 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 65 APPENDIX A; 1. Sex, Scores on the Altruism Scale, and Home Background Categories, of Sample I ...... 69 2. Sex, Scores on the Altruism Scale, and Home Background Categories, of Sample II ...... 77 Iv V
TABLE OP CONTENTS (CONTINUED) CHAPTER PAGE 3. Sex, Scores on the Altruism Scale, and Home Background Categories, of Sample III ...... 81 APPENDIX B; 1. The Test Booklet ...... 83 2. Home Background Categories ...... 91 3. Slgn-up Sheet ...... 95 APPENDIX C: The Extended P-scale ...... 96 LIST OP TABLES TABLE PAGE
1. PRODUCT MOMENT CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN EACH ALTRUISM SCALE SITUATION AND THE TOTAL ALTRUISM SCALE SCORE, AND BISERIAL CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN EACH SITUATION AND VOLUN TEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE TEST (PRETEST) ...... 29 2. PRODUCT MOMENT CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE TWELVE-ITEM ALTRUISM SCALE AND THE MAJOR CATEGORIES OF THE HOME BACKGROUND INVENTORY (PRETEST) ...... 30 3. DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE MAJOR HOME BACK GROUND CATEGORIES BETWEEN THE VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE TEST (PRETEST) ...... 31 4. SEX DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE ALTRUISM SCALE IN THE THREE SAMPLES...... 40 5. KUDER-RICHARDSON RELIABILITY CORRELATION CO EFFICIENTS OF THE HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES (SAMPLE I) ...... 41 6. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAMPLE I ...... 42 7. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAMPLE I ...... , 42 8. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE I) ...... 43 9. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE l) ...... 43 10. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEENIOHE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAMPLE I I ...... 44 11. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAI4PLE II ...... 44 Vi vil
LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED) TABLE PAGE 12. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE II) ...... 45 13. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE II) ...... 45 14. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAMPLE III ...... 46 15. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAMPLE III ...... 46 16. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE III) ...... 4? 17. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE III) ...... 4? 18. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE ALTRUISM SCALE BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON- VOLUNTEERS ON THE BLIND STUDENT TEST (SAMPLES I AND II) ...... 48 19. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE ALTRUISM SCALE BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON VOLUNTEERS ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE TEST (SAMPLE I) 48 20. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE QUESTION NAIRE TEST (SAMPLE l) ...... 49 21. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE BLIND STUDENT. TEST (SAMPLE l) ...... 49 22. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE BLIND STUDENT TEST (SAMPLE II) ...... 50 AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OP ALTRUISM
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Among the various types of human behavior of interest to the psychologist is the problem of man's relationship to man. Of the many forms that this relationship may take, one in particular seems of utmost necessity to the existence of man, namely the relationship which is characterized by the mutual aid that men give each other. Man all over the world is gregarious. Hence, it would seem sound to assume that the association with other men is not accidental and that it must be of great value to every human being for otherwise man would live in isolation. The expression of the relationship of mutual aid may differ from society to society, and from individual to individual. This expression is a function of the particu lar cultural system, the specific time and the specific situation in which an individual may find himself. The form of this expression may vary anywhere from that of inten tional mutual benefit to that of the administration of help without the clear awareness of any specific gain. Tradi tionally, we refer to the former as cooperation and to the latter as altruism. It is with the latter that this investigation is concerned. 1 2 The Investigation of the existence of altruism, the antecedent conditions which make for it, and the frequency of its occurrence, are some of the questions with which the author confronted himself. Because of the complexity of the topic under investigation, this study could only be exploratory in nature. Yet because of the many important implications attached to the notion of altruism, and the scarcity of experimental evidence, it was felt that even an exploration of this topic may be of some value in the pre diction of human behavior. Some of the psychological theoretical frameworks will be reviewed with particular focus on learning theory, and some of the experimental findings will be cited. In reading the following study it would be helpful to bear in mind that the interest of this investigation is focused upon altruistic behavior rather than cooperative behavior and that the purpose of this discussion is psychological rather than ethical in nature. The concern is primarily with what man does, not with what man ought to do. CHAPTER 2
THEORETICAL AND RESEARCH BACKGROUND
A. HISTORICAL REVIEW
Although philanthropy is a Greek word, it is not a Greek idea. The concept of altruism did not originate in Greek civilization. "The thought of whole-hearted giving without correspondent personal gain would have puzzled a Greek" (25, p.2). The roots of the concept of altruism in the Western mind probably lie in the Old and later the New Testament. The Hebrew notion of "love thy neighbor as thyself" (Leviticus, 19, 18) corresponds closely to the notion of "love your enemies" (St. Matthew, 5, 44) in the New Testament. Prom here on the belief in the love of our fellow man was accepted until it received its first setback from the philosophers in the doctrine of hedonism (4,8,14, 24). The human being, according to hedonism, is motivated by the pain-pleasure principle. That which is directly pleasurable to the individual is striven for, and that which is painful is avoided. Altruistic motivation under this direct form of psychological hedonism was inconceivable. Only with Bentham’s revision of the doctrine of hedonism (4) did altruistic motivation become possible. He changed the
3 4 concept of psychological hedonism into the principle of hedonic calculus, or the greatest pleasure for the greatest number of people. Under this new formulation of hedonism altruistic motives could become possible if they represented pleasure for the greater number of people. Yet the status of altruism was never quite clear until the rise of asso- ciationism (3 ,12). For Hartley (12) altruistic motives arise by their association with egotistic motives. Direct egotistic pleas ure can only come about with the assistance of others, so that whenever we engage in satisfying our pleasure, we are necessarily also engaged in the reception of help from others. Thus, by the process of association we eventually leam to focus our attention upon the help of others. But here the question naturally arises as to whether the asso ciation of reception of help from others is identical with the motive of administering help ^ others. In the theory of evolution (7,16,18,30) we seem to come a step closer to the problem of altruistic motivation. Prom a more modem psychological point of view the evolution ary origin of altruism is probably best expressed by Holmes (15). For him egoistic motives represent the preservation of the self, while altruistic motives characterize the pres ervation of the group. These two are by no means in conflict. Just as that single organism survives which has the strong est egoistic tendencies and is, therefore, the best fit, so 5 will survive only those groups or species which have the strongest in-group or altruistic tendencies. For Holmes, altruistic motives originated in the animal kingdom, from whence they developed and became differentiated so that today altruism in human beings represents a basic and unique system which is not connected to any other system. With the rise of social psychology, altruistic motives were included in the motive of sympathy, which, in turn, was primarily a matter of instinct. McDougall states: The human mind has certain innate tendencies which are the essential springs or motive powers of all thought and action, whether individual or collective, and are the basis from which the character and will of individuals and of nations are gradually developed under the guidance of the intellectual faculties (21, p.20), McDougall than presents a list of instincts which includes the instinct of gregariousness (ibid.. p.844ff.). In a more recent work (22) McDougall changed this list to include the instinct of "primitive passive sympathy." William James also partially adhered to the instinctual basis of altruism (17, vol. II, pp.410-411). For him sym pathy and love had their origin in instinctual tendencies which in turn became fixated by habit. In his description of the "social self," however no mentioning of an instinctual basis appears. He writes instead: The most peculiar social self which one is apt to have is in the mind of the person one is in love with. The good and bad fortunes of this self cause the most intense elation and dejec tion-unreasonable enough as measured by every other standard than that of the organic feeling of the individual. To his own consciousness he is (italics) not, so long as this particular social self fails to get recognition, and when it is recognized his contentment passes all bounds (17, Vol. I, p.294). Since the anti-instinct bombshell of Dunlap (9) the instinct theory of altruism has rarely been mentioned.
B, MODERN VIEWPOINTS
A new approach to the problem of altruism comes from the psychoanalysts. For Freud, although the notion of altruism is not mentioned directly, it seems to have its origin in the formation of the ego-ideal. The formation of the ego-ideal is brought about by the process of identifica tion. The child imitates and adopts the behavior and attitudes of his parents and desires to become like them (11, pp.39-40), The result of this identification process is the formation of the ego-ideal which develops as part of the super-ego. According to Erich Fromm, man feels himself isolated in his world. This feeling of loneliness will result in I various character orientations, one of which is that of the "productive" character. Fromm describes the characteristics of the productive orientation as follows: With his power of reason he can penetrate the surface of phenomena and understand their essence. With his power of love he can break the wall which separates one person from another (10, p.88). 7 Altruism, according to Fromm, would be the realization of the potentials of the productive man for whom the satis factions of the loved person are as important as one*s own (ibid.. p.129). A great emphasis upon the relationship with our fellow- men appears in the works of Adler (1), For Adler the notion of social feeling (Gemeinschaftsgefuehl) is central to the development of character. Adler writes: The degree to which the social feeling has developed in any individual is the sole criterion of human values, universally valid. We cannot deny our psychic dependency upon social feeling. There is no human being who is capable of actu ally breaking off his social feeling in its entirety. There are no words with which we could entirely escape our duties to our fellow man (ibid.. p.167), This social feeling originates in the feeling of infer iority and its compensatory striving for power. Psychic life, according to Adler, needs security, peace and happi ness, which are only obtained by social feeling, thus over coming the feeling of inferiority. According to Lewin, altruism is a matter of the resolution of forces acting on the individual (19). A child who has in his possession a toy which is desired by another child has two forces acting upon himself in his psychological field, the attractive force that the toy exerts upon him, and the attractive force that the toy exerts upon the other child for the subject. Altruistic behavior will occur if 8 the second valence proves the stronger one (20). Closer inspection of the many theoretical frameworks mentioned above will reveal, in the opinion of the author, that they do not enable the experimentalist to pursue a specific set of measurable hypotheses or predictions. The hedonistic approach, in addition to its denial of altruistic motivation, remains vague about the concept of pleasure. It seems conceivable that altruistic behavior may be pleasur able to some persons. The evolutionary as well as the psychoanalytic frame works leave us without specific predictability. Group evolution does not explain to us phenomena of altruistic behavior that rise above and beyond group belongingness, e.g., Albert Schweitzer, Abraham Lincoln, and others. Psy choanalysis remains vague about the process of identifica tion and man's potentialities. Alfred Adler does not tell us the specific relationship between feelings of inferiority and its compensatory striving for power versus altruistic behavior. Are we to assume that the greater the feeling of inferiority and its compensatory striving for power, the greater the altruistic motivation? This does not seem plausible since the origin of neuroses is explained in similar fashion.
Lewin's topological approach probably comes closest to a learning theory approach. Yet his extreme emphasis upon 9 the great specificity of the situation seems too specific for any scientific prediction. Altruistic behavior, in the opinion of the author, does demonstrate some generality. These criticisms have led the author to accept a learning theory frame of reference for the purpose of this study. Social learning theory (28) represents, to some degree, a synthesis of some of the previously mentioned points of view. Here, predictability is obtained by employ ing the construct of reinforcement rather than the concept of hedonism, the process of learning rather than the process of identification, and the construct of e:xpectancy in a situation rather than the psychological field,
G. STUDIES IN ALTRUISM
One of the most extensive studies of the organization of character in children was undertaken by Hartshome and May (13). Of the multitude of behavioral measures used, five tests dealt with “service." Three of these five tests of "service" involved the child's cooperation with his class; the other two were more of the altruistic type of be havior and consisted of the "kit" test, which gave the children an opportunity to give away some recently possessed school utilities, and the 'envelope? test, where the chil dren were asked to do something about sick children in "hospitals who needed some pictures and stories. A total of 800 children, 9-15 years of age, participated in the study. 10
Following statistical analyses the authors arrived at the over-all conclusion that the behavioral tests of the entire Character Education Inquiry, as well as those of the ser vice studies in particular, pointed toward greater specifi city of behavior. Moral conduct, such as honesty, coopera tion, helpfulness, and persistence, are determined by the specific situation in which the child finds himself. These conclusions were drawn by the authors on the basis of low intercorrelations between behavioral tests of the same type of behavior, normal distribution of honesty scores, and the great differences of the amount of honesty that were elicited by the various tests. An additional finding with respect to the service tests was that, on the whole, girls tended to be more helpful than boys, but this difference did not reach significance and showed up on some tests only. The "envelope" test, for example, showed a sex difference while the "kit" test did not. Scores on "parental cooperation" were also secured and compared with the "service" scores of their children. Par ental cooperation was obtained by having the parents fill out information blanks and take a test. Pilling out informa tion blanks was related to high "service" scores at the ten percent level of significance, while the relationships be tween the test taking of parents and "service" scores was significant below the one percent level. On the basis of 11 these findings the authors concluded that the parental exam ple is one important source of influence on the hatits of service in children. The correlation between length and frequency of Sunday school attendance and service was only about ,10, hence, no relationship was found here. Age showed small correlations with service, but was negative in the "kit" ^ d "envelope" tests. Grades in school and intelligence showed little if any correlation with service. McGrath (23) found a definite relationship between age and altruism scores as measured by a questionnaire which presented hypothetical altruistic situations to a group of children. Wright (33) found that eight year old children pre ferred to give away an attractive toy to strange children rather than to friends. The children explained their gener osity by indicating that they did so "to gain a new friend," to "eliminate inequality between the friend and the strang er," and because of "social grace." In another study Wright (34) tried to determine the relationship between age and behavior that is selfish, fair, and generous. He compared the behavior of a group of 36 eight year old children with a group of 36 eleven year olds. Each child had in his possession eight toys, four of which were very attractive as determined by previous preferences. Each child was then instructed to give away any four toys to 12
another child. Generosity, as indicated by the giving away of the four attractive toys, occurred more frequently in the eight year old group. The eleven year old group tended more towards fairness, giving away two attractive toys and keep ing two for themselves, Wright interpreted this as an indi cation of the increased importance of the situation with increased age. Turner (31) constructed an altruism scale for children which is given to an informant about a subject. This scale was administered to the mothers of ll6 boys. In addition he obtained measurements on 48 different personality varia bles of the boys. These variables ranged from physical and intellectual measures to measures of ethical goodness and altruism ratings by social workers. Turner obtained high correlations between his altruism scale and measures of ethical goodness, altruism ratings, and measures of freedom from anti-social tendencies. The correlations with the more tangential physical and intellectual measures were either very low or zero. On the basis of this evidence Turner con cluded that altruism is a general trait, Cattell and Horovitz (5) factor-analyzed thirteen dif ferent tests which were designed to measure altruistic be havior, These authors found that four tests had especially high loadings of altruism. The tests were; 1. Friend remembrance, 2, Modesty as to own correctness. 13 3. Freedom from hostilities over irritations, 4, Willingness to give information risky to oneself. The most extensive study of altruism in adults was undertaken by Sorokin (29). In his investigation of Ameri can Good Neighbors he used a sample of more than a thousand people who were selected as "good neighbors" and sent an orchid by a committee for the late Tom Breneman#s "Breakfast in Hollywood" radio program. The committee selected these people on the basis of letters of recommendation which were sent in by various listeners. Prom these one thousand letters Sorokin selected some 500 persons whose deeds seemed more genuine. A group of ninety-three of the 500 persons wrote an autobiography and answered a questionnaire. A second sample consisted of 112 people who were selected as altruists by Harvard graduate and undergraduate students, and by some social workers. These 112 persons answeres a ques tionnaire, some wrote their autobiographies and some were interviewed. Sorokin found that 24 percent of the good neighbor's daily activities consisted in alleviating their own boredom. Since 75 percent of the persons in the samples consisted of women, Sorokin concluded that women are more neighborly than men. This he explains on the basis of differential cultural upbringing for the sexes. The good neighbors come primarily from large homes, 71 percent indicated a happy childhood while only 11 percent mentioned their childhood as an unhappy 14 one. Seventy-seven percent of the good neighbors were mar ried at the time of the study, and one percent were divorced. Of the married good neighbors 69 percent in the first sample and only four percent in the second sample reported that they had no raarrital trouble at home. Thirty-nine percent of all the good neighbors indicated that they would marry persons of a different race, 50 percent said they would marry people of a different faith. Thirty percent attended church regularly, and nine percent not at all. Twenty-nine percent stated that the most important factor of their good neighborliness was their home and par ents, 28 percent mentioned universal life experiences, 21 percent attributed it to religion, eight percent to edu cation, 11 percent to personal life experiences, and three percent reported some unûsual specific life experiences, such as death or illness of loved ones, as the most important contributory factor of their neighborliness. Thirty-nine percent of the recipients of the altruistic behavior consisted of Military groups, 14 percent were in valids or sick people, and 14 percent were social groups in general. Sorokin also indicates that good neighbors more often have trouble with the law because they appear as sus picious, subversives, or are conscientious objectors. No statistics are quoted here. In evaluating Sorokin's findings, one encounters great difficulties. Sorokin employed no control group. This makes 15 any comparitive analysis impossible. Also the within-group comparisons do not make any use of statistical tests of significance, so that one is unable to determine whether any differences are due to chance. One must also realize that the large sample of good neighbors was not a random sample. It consisted of a group of people which was select ed by a specific daytime radio audience, which in turn is a highly selective group. CHAPTER 3
HYPOTHESES
A. DEFINITION
The concept of altruism has traditionally referred to the notion of "helping other people." However, in order to differentiate it from the concept of cooperation, it should be added that this help has to be given without the desire for, or the awareness of any specific gain. We thus define altruism as "any response by an individual A to an individ ual B which is directed toward an increase of B#s probabil ity of attaining a goal, without A's desire for or awareness of an increase of the probability of attaining one of A's goals other than that of increasing B^s probability of attaining a goal." Altruism, according to this definition, is a goal in itself. Any direct measurement of the degree of awareness of a specific gain is extremely difficult at this time. One can, however, design the measure in such a manner that, from an objective point of view, no specific gains are probable.
B. SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY
In recent years Rotter (28) has developed a theoreti cal framework for the prediction of human behavior from the point of view of the clinical and social psychologist. 16 17 According to social learning theory, behavior is goal di rected and is a function of the particular value of the goal (reinforcement value) and the expectancy that this behavior will lead to the goal. The expectancy is a function of the degree to which the same or similar behavior has previously led to the same or similar goals. Since, however, "...for most purposes it would not be possible to make an exhaustive study of pre cisely when the subject utilizes behaviors leading to one reinforcement rather than another," (ibid.. p.185) one can use a practical estimate. Such a practical estimate of the expectancy that a particular behavior will lead to the ac complishment of a particular goal can be obtained initially on a cultural basis by the use of a highly controlled situa tion. A controlled situation may be produced by having specific alternatives present in one or more situations, where each alternative has an established, culturally predetermined relation ship to a given reinforcement or need. By cul turally predetermined (italicized) is meant that within a given group it is established that a particular behavior leads to (or is directed toward) the accomplishment of a particular goal or reinforcement for the majority of people within the culture... (ibid.. pp.185-186). The reinforcement value of a goal is determined by previous learning and is a function of the degree to which this reinforcement value has previously led to other subse quent reinforcements (ibid., pp. I5I-I52). Four major influ ences in the home background of a person which make for the 18 learning of altruism were hypothesized in this study; 1. The learning of altruism that occurs on the basis of the altruistic behavior of the parents. Adoption of this behavior by the child will lead, in turn, to the increased love of the child by the parents. 2. The learning of altruism that occurs on the basis of the administration of rewards and punishments by the par ents for the altruistic behavior of the child. 3. The learning of altruism that will occur on the basis of the altruistic behavior of the parents and the administration of rewards and punishments by the parents within a religious framework. This religious framework may be "love" centered, emphasizing the more positive aspects of religion such as brotherhood and heaven; or it may be "fear" centered, emphasizing the more negative aspects of religion such as sin and hell. 4. The learning of altruism which will occur on the basis of habitual sharing with others, called for by the particular home circumstances. The adoption of altruistic behavior in such circumstances will lead, in turn, to the increased acceptance of the child by the other members of the family. It should be borne in mind that the home background influences mentioned above could be postulated not only from social learning theory, but from psychoanalysis or from other learning theories as well. 19 C. MEASURES
Since measures of altruistic behavior or past experi ence with altruism of adults were not available, the author was faced with the task of designing the measures himself. Two types of measures were necessary; (1) measures of altru istic behavior which are culturally predetermined to lead to the accomplishment of altruistic goals and in which the objective probability of specific ulterior gains is reduced to a minimum; and (2) measures of previous home background experience with altruism. The first objective was obtained by the use of three different measures: 1. An altruism scale consisting of a set of different hypothetical situations, each accompanied by three alterna tive choices. Each choice had to be responded to with a probability statement ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (always). The alternative choices in each situation represented three points on the altruism continuum, low or zero altruism, medium altruism or group norm, and high altruism. The points of this continuum were obtained by the interagreement of a group of "Judges" which consisted of ten graduate students in psychology, all of whom were candidates for the Ph.D. degree. This scale was adopted from a model by Churchman and Ackoff (6). 2, A behavioral situation which called for volunteers 20 to help blind university students by reading their textbooks to them. The blind student test was administered by two consecutive appeals, 3. A behavioral situation which called for volunteers to help a graduate student by taking a questionnaire home, filling it out, and returning it at the next class meeting. The measurement of the home background experience with altruism was obtained by the use of an inventory which was administered at the same time as the altruism scale. This home background inventory consisted of 47 items pertaining to the following categories; 1. The direct reinforcement of altruistic behavior by the parents (R category). This direct reinforcement may occur in positive form, that is the administration of re wards for behaving altruistically (R+ category), and in negative form, that is the administration of punishments for not behaving altruistically (R- category). 2. The altruistic behavior of the parents (I category). 3. Religious reinforcement (REL category), which con sists of direct religious reinforcement(R REL category), religious altruistic behavior as demonstrated by the parents (I REL category), and other general religious reinforcements. The total REL category is also subdivided into positive religious reinforcements or the appeal to altruistic behavior by love (RELf category), and negative religious reinforcement or the appeal to altruistic behavior by fear (REL- category). 21
All Of the Items pertaining to the direct religious rein forcement and the religious altruistic behavior of the par ents (I REL and R REL categories) are stated positively and are therefore included in the positive religious (RELf) category. 4. Circumstantial reinforcement, where altruistic behavior is called for by particular home circumstances (H category). All of the items were randomized with respect to the order of their appearance. The inventory also included 14 buffer items which were interspersed randomly among the 47 items. In order to check the reliability of the inventory, nine additional items, identical in content to nine of the 6l just mentioned, but stated in contrary form, were also included in the Inventory. This made a total of 70 items. To each of the items the subjects had a choice of responding with "True," "False," or "?," The score of each subject on the inventory was ob tained by totaling his "True" responses for each category.
D. HYPOTHESES
The purpose of this study was to determine the rela tionship between home background and altruistic behavior.
Pour major hypotheses were established with respect to this relationship : 1. There is a positive relationship between the 22
administration of rewards and punishments for altruistic behavior by the parents and the altruistic behavior of their children. 2. There is a positive relationship between the altru istic behavior of parents and the altruistic behavior of their children. 3. There is a positive relationship between the prac tice and teaching of religious altruistic principles of parents and the altruistic behavior of their children. 4. There is a positive relationship between the par ental home circumstances of a person which necessitate altruistic behavior and the altruistic behavior of that person. These four major hypotheses gave rise to a number of additional related minor hypotheses which intended to pre dict a positive relationship between altruism and each of the following sub-categories; positive direct reinforcement, negative direct reinforcement; the teaching and practice of "positive" religious principles, the teaching and practice of "negative" religious principles; the teaching of religious principles, and the practice of religious principles. CHAPTER 4
METHODOLOGY
A. PRETEST
A preliminary Investigation was called, for to determine the reliability and suitability of the measures and the validity of the hypotheses. The first step of the pre-test consisted of the administration of the home background inven tory and the altruism scale to a class of 34 students of elementary psychology. The inventory and the scale were combined into one test booklet so that the first half of the booklet consisted of the inventory and the second half of the scale,
THE HOME BACKGROUND INVENTORY
The first form of the home background inventory con sisted of; 1, twenty-five items designed to measure the altruis tic behavior of parents (I category); 2, nineteen items designed to measure the direct re inforcement of altruistic behavior by the parents (R cate gory); 3, fifteen items designed to measure the extent of circumstantial reinforcement (H category). The inventory also included 14 buffer items and 10 23 24
reliability items which were identical with 10 items of the previous categories but stated in contrary form. All in all there was a total of 82 items. This total is less than the sum of the above mentioned categories because one item repre sented two categories. All items appeared in randomized order in the inventory.
The instructions accompanying the home background inventory were as follows:
The questions in the first part of this questionnaire are designed to indicate your home background. This is not an intelligence test, nor are there any right or wrong answers. The correctness of a question will depend upon your own home background. In front of each answer you will find "Trueij." "False," and "?." If your answer is "true," draw a circle around the "True." If your answer is "false," draw a circle around the "False." If you are entirely unable to remember whether "true" or "false," or if the question is not applicable to you at all then draw a circle around the question mark. If, however, the question is more true than false, draw a circle around "True," and if more false than true, draw a circle around "False." Answer every question.
Scoring of the home background inventory was done by totaling the number of "True" responses for each category.
THE ALTRUISM SCALE
The first form of the altruism scale consisted of 25 situations. Each situation had three choices representing three points on the continuum of altruism, zero altruism, medium altruism, and high altruism. These 25 situations were selected from a total of 35 situations by a group of 25 judges, consisting of 10 graduate students in psychology, all of whom were Ph.D. candidates. The choice of these 25 situations and their three alternative responses was made on the basis of the interagreement among the judges on the validity of the situations and the degree to which the three alternative responses represented zero, medium, and high altruism. Any situation which had more than one disagreement was discarded. The situations, as well as the order of the alternative choices for each situation appeared in randomized order on the altruism scale. The instructions for the altruism scale were given as follows; In the following part of the questionnaire you are presented with more or less familiar sit uations in which you are to choose among 3 ways of behaving. After each choice you are to place the number 0,1,2,3,4,5, 6 according to the fol lowing scheme: Write 0 if you would never choose this type of behavior. Write 1^ if you would almost never choose the behavior. Write 2^ if you would sometimes choose the behavior. Write 3. If you would choose it about half the time. Write 4 if you would choose it often. Write 3.If you would choose it very often or almost always. Write ^ if you would choose it always. SO PAR AS POSSIBLE, BASE YOUR ANSWERS ON WHAT YOU ACTUALLY WOULD DO IN THESE SITUATIONS. REMEM BER! THIS INFORMATION WILL REMAIN CONFIDENTIAL! ANSHER EVERY QUESTION 3 TIMES. Example: 26 As you start to cross the street, a car stops directly in front of you. As you walk around the car, you would: a) Shout at the driver 1 b ) Give him a dirty look 6 c) Do nothing 2 If you answer as above then you would almost never shout at the driver; you would often give him a dirty look; and you would sometimes do nothing at all. No restrictions were placed on the subjects with re spect to the use of the above numbers, since the choices were neither exclusive nor exhaustive. The score of the altruism scale was obtained by multi plying the number with which the subject responded by -1,1, and 2 for the zero altruism, medium altruism, and high altru ism choices respectively. This resulted in a score for each situation. These scores were added together to give the subject’s total score of the altruism scale. The entire test booklet, consisting of the home back ground inventory and the altruism scale, was preceded by a title page which presented some general information about the test booklet (Appendix B).
THE QUESTIONNAIRE TEST
Two weeks following the administration of the test booklet the first behavioral test was presented to the same class of elementary psychology students. The author entered the class for the first time and the regular instructor in charge of the class left the classroom. The author then 27 proceeded by asking for volunteers to take a questionnaire home with them, to fill It out and return It at the next class period. This request was explained to the students as being of great Importance to the author, since he needed a number of additional subjects for the completion of his research. The questionnaire consisted of an extension of the P-scale (2,27) (Appendix C). Ten students took the questionnaire and returned It.
THE INSTITUTION TEST
Two weeks following the questionnaire test the second behavioral test was administered. The regular classroom Instructor read off an appeal to the same students of ele mentary psychology. The students were asked to contribute a small amount of their spare time for volunteer service at a local State Institution for the mentally deficient. The students were told that they would receive free transporta tion to tod from the Institution, which Is located about five miles from the university. The volunteers were asked to sign their names on a notice which was posted for this purpose on a bulletin board In the hall outside their class room, Only one volunteer signed up following two consecu tive appeals. 28 ITEM ANALYSES
Following the administration of the various tests, item analyses of the altruism scale and the home background inventory were undertaken to obtain a measure of the internal consistency. Biserial correlation coefficients between the responses to each separate item on the inventory and the responses to the total category to which the item belonged were computed. All items with a biserial correlation coefficient of less than .30 were removed from the inventory. This resulted in the removal of 12 items from the inventory, leaving a total of 70 items (Appendix B). The item analysis of the altruism scale consisted of the computation of product-moment correlation coefficients between the responses to each situation and the responses to the total scale. In addition, biserial correlations between each situation and volunteers and non-volunteers on the questionnaire test were obtained. Twelve situations were retained in the final scale as a result of this analysis (Appendix B), The split-half correlation between the odd and even items of the 12 item altruism scale was .64 and .78 corrected with the Spearman-Brown formula (32, p. 310). TABLE 1
PRODUCT MOMENT CORRELATION COEEPICIENTS BETWEEN EACH ALTRUISM SCALE SITUATION AND THE TOTAL ALTRUISM SCALE SCORE, AND BISERIAL CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN EACH SITUA TION AND VOLUNTEERS AND NON- VOLUNTEERS ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE TEST. (Pre-Test)
ALTRUISM SCALE SITUATIONS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 r with total score .31 .62 .45 .36 .47 .23 .20 .56 .51 .48 .31 .56 rbis with ques tionnaire test .16 .16 .10 .13 .16 .26 .38 .14 .20 .46 .24 .49 30
RESULTS Following the item analyses of the home background inventory and the altruism scale, product-moment correla tions between the major categories of the inventory and the altruism scale were obtained, and "t" tests between the categories and volunteers and non-volunteers on the question naire test were computed,
TABLE 2
PRODUCT-MOMENT CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE TWELVE ITEM ALTRUISM SCALE AND THE MAJOR CATEGORIES OF THE HOME BACKGROUND INVENTORY (PRE-TEST)
HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES
I R REL H
r .25 .54 .27 .15
P >.05 < .001 > .05 > .05
The only statistically significant correlation occurred between the altruism scale and the "R" category (direct rein forcement). The category (parental altruistic behavior) and the "REL" category (religious reinforcement) do, however, indicate a positive trend. The "H" category (circumstantial reinforcement) did not hold up. These findings were con firmed by the differences of means of the home background categories of the volunteers and non-volunteers 6n the questionnaire test. 31
TABLE 3 DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGOR IES BETWEEN THE VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE QUES TIONNAIRE TEST (PRE-TEST)
HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES I R REL H
t 3.56 2.23 2.52 0.00 p < ,01 c .05 C .02 .25
Three of these categories are significant and only the category did not hold up. No computations were done with the institution test because only one person volunteered on this test. Inspec tion of this volunteer’s scores revealed, however, that she had the highest score of the entire sample on the altruism scale, and that her responses to the home background inven tory were also very high,
CONCLUSIONS
On the basis of the results of the preliminary investi gation it was decided to change the institution test, and then to proceed with the main experiment. The institution test was changed from the appeal for volunteer service at a remote institution to an appeal to volunteer to aid blind university students. 32
B. THE MAIN EXPERIMENT
The main experiment was administered In three parts. In each part the sample and the procedures for the admin istration of the tests were varied. The use of three dif ferent samples and the changes In the procedures of testing became necessary because of some difficulties In the Inter pretation of the results In each sample separately,
PART I
The sample In part one of the main experiment con sisted of five elementary psychology classes, a total of 204 students of which 146 were female students and 58 were male students. These students came from the various schools of the university among which were the school of Education, Liberal Arts college, school of Commerce, school of Nursing, and the school of Agriculture, This sample represented thus a heterogeneous group of college students. The large major ity of these students were first quarter freshmen. All but one of these students were b o m in the U.S,A, The five psychology classes met at different hours of the day. These students were administered the final form of the test booklet which consisted of a’,?D Item home background Inventory and a 12 item altruism scale (Appendix B). Three weeks following the administration of the test booklet the questionnaire test was undertaken, A "graduate 33 student of the Department of Sociology" appeared in each of these classes requesting the student's help. With the ap pearance of the "graduate student" the regular class instruc tor left the classroom. The "graduate student" then pro ceeded to make the following statement; This is somewhat in the nature of an appeal. I am a graduate student in Sociology and I am working on my thesis. Now it is too late to com plete the thesis this quarter but I have obtained a job out of town and have been given permission to complete the work in absentia. In order to do this, I have to finish gathering all of my data this quarter. Unfortunately, though, I have used all of the Sociology students available but I still need a number of people. Your instructor has been nice enough to let me ask for help. Un fortunately, you cannot receive any experimental credit for this because I am not in the Psychol ogy department. I will ask those of you who are willing to help me to please take one of these questionnaires home with you, fill it out and return it on Monday. It is important that you return them on Monday the latest. Of the 204 students in this sample, 192 were present during the questionnaire test. A large majority of students took a questionnaire, but only 72 returned it. Three weeks following the administration of the ques tionnaire test the blind student test was undertaken. The regular class instructor in each class read the following note to his class: A committee has recently been formed on the campus to help blind students. Since very few of our textbooks are available in braille, it be comes necessary for blind students to have some one read the material to them. It is the pur pose of this committee to obtain volunteers for those blind students who are financially unable 34 to pay readers. It Is our feeling that If many students were to contribute a small amount of time each, the situation could easily be handled. We realize, of course, that many of you are quite busy. If, however, you have any free time regardless of how little it may be, on any day of the week, including Saturdays and Sundays, we urge you to sign your name on the sheet which we posted for this purpose on your bulletin board.* You will be contacted by the committee and the time and place will be arranged at your convenience. Thank you for your cooperation. Committee for the Aid of Blind University Students. Of 190 students present during the first appeal of the blind student test, seven students signed up. One week after the first appeal, the second appeal was undertaken. This time the regular class instructors read the following note to their classes: A number of days ago the Committee for the Aid of Blind. University Students appealed to you for help. The response to this appeal was so small that we could not plan any kind of sched ule. We are therefore repeating our request. There are a large number of blind students on the campus who cannot afford to pay readers. We sin cerely hope that you will find it possible to contribute only a small amount of your spare time to help these students. So, would you please add your name to the list of names of students who have already volunteered their service. You will find a sheet posted for this purpose on the bulletin board of the Psychology Department, Thank you. The Committee for the Aid of Blind University Students.
Two additional students signed up after the second ap peal. All in all, of I8l students present during both blind student appeals, nine students volunteered their service. Of these nine students, eight were female students.
* See Appendix B for sheet. 35 The one male student who volunteered was also unique in that he had lost his parents in very early childhood and for that reason he had answered almost all home background inventory items with "False," Because of the extremely small group of volunteers in the blind student test, this test was repeated in another sample, where the procedure for the administration was changed,
PART II
The sample in the second part of the main experiment consisted of a class of 108 students who were taking a course in philosophy of education. All of these students were seniors and graduate students who majored in the field of education. Of these students 77 were females and 31 males. Three of these students were foreign bom. These students were administered the home background inventory and the altruism scale in the same fashion as the previous sample of elementary psychology students. One week following the administration of the test booklet the blind student test was undertaken. Here the procedure was varied. Instead of the regular class instructor reading off the ap peal, this was done by a person who represented himself as a doctor who was a member of the Uhiversity Committee for the Aid of Blind University Students, Here the appeal was presented in the form of a speech. Also the students were asked to sign up in class immediately following the appeal. 36
The speech was memorized and consisted of the following appeal;
I am Dr. Preeberg and represent the Univers ity Committee for the Aid of Blind Students. Every year at this time we appeal to advanced students for help. As you may realize, many textbooks used on this campus are not available to blind students in braille form. Consequently we have a larger, number of these blind students who need the ser vice. For this reason we request your help in aiding these blind students. Now we realize, of course, that all of you have busy schedules. However, we can arrange the program in such a manner that we might use your services at any time, even Saturdays and Sundays and even for periods as brief as half an hour. Those of you who care to volunteer would be helping someone who is certainly in need of help. Let me ask those of you who will agree to volunteer to please come up here and I will take your name and phone number. We will contact you and make arrangements at your convenience. Of 108 students present 21 volunteered their service.
Eighteen of the volunteers were females.
Because of some difficulty in the interpretation of the results (see chapter 5) in the relationship between the home background inventory and the altruism scale in the second sample, this part of the experiment was repeated in a third sample, where the procedure for the administration of the test booklet was ch^ged.
PART III
The sample in the third part of the main experiment consisted of 59 elementary psychology students. Twenty- 37 seven of these students were females. The majority of these students were second quarter freshmen, all of whom were
American bom. These students were administered the home background inventory and the altruism scale. This time, however, the administration of the test booklet was done anonymously.
Except for sex, no other personal information was requested.
No other tests were done with this group,
C, SPECIFIC HYPOTHESES
GENERAL HYPOTHESIS
There is a positive relationship between altruistic behavior and the occurrence of reinforcement of altruism during childhood and adolescence. The reinforcement of altruism refers to the administration of rewards and punish ments by the parents, the altruistic behavior of the parents, and to home circumstances which call for altruistic behavior,
NULL HYPOTHESES A: The correlation between the altruism scale and the "l" category (parental altruistic behavior) and "I REL" category (religious parental altruistic behavior) will be no greater than might be expected on the basis of chance alone,
B: The correlation between the altruism scale and the "R" category (direct reinforcement of altruistic behavior by parents), the "R+" category (direct positive rein forcement), the "R-" category (direct negative rein forcement) and "R REL" category (direct positive relig- ’ gious reinforcement) will be no greater than might be expected on the basis of chance alone. 38
C: The correlation between the altruism scale and the "REL" category (religious reinforcement of altruism), the "REL+" category (love centered religious reinforcement) and the "REL-" category (fear centered religious rein forcement) will be no greater than might be expected on the basis of chiance alone.
D: The correlation between the altruism scale and the "h " category (circumstantial reinforcement of altruistic behavior) will be no greater than might be expected on the basis of chance alone,
E: The mean altruism scale score of the volunteers on the questionnaire test will not exceed the mean score of the non-volunteers more than might be expected on the basis of chance alone.
F; The mean altruism scale score of the volunteers on the blind student test will not exceed the mean score of the non-volunteers more than might be expected on the basis of chance alone.
G: The mean "I," "R," "REL," and "h " responses of the vol unteers on the questionnaire test will not exceed the mean "I," "R," "REL," and "h " responses of the non volunteers more than might be expected on the basis of chance alone.
H: The mean "I," "R," "REL," and "h " responses of the vol unteers on the blind student test will not exceed the mean "I," "R," "REL," and "H" responses of the non volunteers more than might be expected on the basis of chance alone. CHAPTER 5
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. TREATMENT OP DATA
The data reported here (Appendix A) consist of the number of "True" responses to the various categories of the home background inventory, and the total scores of the altruism scale. The scores on the altruism scale were obtained by the multiplication of the probability responses of the sub jects, ranging from 0 to 6 on each of the three alternatives of a situation, by the weight of each of the alternatives. These weights were: -1 for zero altruism, 1 for medium altru ism, and 2 for high altruism (Appendix B). The sum of the three products of these multiplications indicated the altru ism score for each situation. Totaling the scores of the 12 situations resulted in the total score of the altruism scale. Examination of the hypotheses was done for each sample separately since the conditions of testing differed in each sample. Table 4 illustrates sex differences in the responses to the altruism scale. Because of these differences, some of the data will also be treated for sex differences. The statistical methods utilized in the testing of the hypotheses consisted of product-moment correlations for the testing of relationships 39 40 and student "t" tests for the testing of differences of means.
TABLE 4 SEX DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE ALTRUISM SCALE IN THE THREE SAMPLES
Sample Sex N Means t P 1 F 146 111.43 22.898 6.072 <.001 1 M 58 93.79 15.543 11 F 77 105.66 19.441 11 M 31 101.10 23.893 .931 >.20 111 F 118.11 19.446 27 3.952 <.001 111 M 32 99.34 15.725
B. RELIABILITY
In order to obtain a measure of the internal consistency of the altruism scale, a split-half correlation between the ■ old and even items of the scale was computed, using the first sample of 204 students only. The resulting correlation co efficient was .523, and .687 when corrected with the Spearman- Brown formula (32, p.310). The intemàl consistency of the home background inven tory was obtained by the computation of Kuder-Richardson correlations of reliability (32, pp. 311-314) for each cate gory separately. Table 5 illustrates the resulting reliabil ity correlation coefficients. 41
TABLE 5 KUDER-RICHARDSON RELIABILITY CORRELATION COEEP- PICIENTS OP THE HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES (SAMPLE I)
CATEGORY r%x
I .710 I REL .432 R .653 R+ .582 R- .544 R REL .372 REL .622 RELf .622
REL- .317 H .590
In addition. Inspection of the nine reliability Items of the home background Inventory revealed that of the 204 subjects taking the Inventory, only three subjects answered a total of three Items In contradictory manner. 42
C. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND THE HOME BACKGROUND INVENTORY
SAMPLE I
TABLE 6
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAMPLE I (ELEMENTARY PSYCHOLOGY STUDENTS, N = 204)
CATEGORY r P I .381 < .001 R .287
TABLE 7 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAMPLE I (N = 204)
CATEGORY r P I REL .260 < .001 R+ .265 .001 R- .207 C .01 R REL .226
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE I)
SEX N CATEGORY r P
P 146 I .227 <■.01 M 58 I .327 < .0 1 P 146 R .227 < .01 M 58 R .401 < .01 F 146 REL .250 < .01 M 58 REL .411 < .001 F 146 H .055 > .10 M 58 H .098 > .10
TABLE 9
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE l)
SEX N CATEGORY r P
p 146 I REL .227 < .01 M 58 I REL .419 < .001 P 146 R+ .215 < .01 M 58 R+ .344 C .01 F 146 R- .156 < .10 M 58 R- .335 < .01 P 146 R REL .174 < .05 M 58 R REL .283 < .05 P 146 REL+ .262 < .01 M 58 REIrk .343 < .01 F 146 REL- .012 > .10 M 58 REL- .381 < .01 44
SAMPLE II
TABLE 10 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAMPLE II (EDUCATION STUDENTS, N = 108)
CATEGORY r P I .200 < .05 R .122 > .10 REL .110 > .10
H .307 C ,01
TABLE 11 NATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCAU HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES (SAMPLE II, N = 1C
CATEGORY r p
I REL .051 > .10 R+ .110 :> .10 R- .056 > .10 R REL .085 2>.10
RELf .104 2>.10
REL- .117 > . 1 0 45 TABLE 12
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE II)
SEX N CATEGORY r P
F 77 I .027 > .10 M 31 I .468 < .01 P 77 R .019 > .10 M 31 R .247 > .10 P 77 REL -.001 > .10 M 31 REL .269 > .10 F 77 H .194 C .10 M 31 H .471 < .01
TABLE 13 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE II)
SEX N CATEGORY r P
F 77 I REL -.104 .10 M 31 I REL .300 < ,10 P 77 R+ -J012 .10 M 31 R+ .277 > .10 F 77 R- .053 .10 M 31 R- .145 .10 P 77 R REL .003 > .10 M 31 R REL .176 .10 P 77 REL+ -.014 .10 M 31 REIh- .287 .10 F 77 REL- .037 > .10 M 31 REL- .122 > . 1 0 46
SAMPLE III
TABLE 14 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OP SAMPLE III (ELEMEN% TARY PSYCHOLOGY STUDENTS, N = 59)
CATEGORY r P
I .213 .10 R .236 < .10
REL .276 < .05 H .018 > . 1 0
TABLE 15 jATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCAL: HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES (SAMPLE III, N = !
CATEGORY r p
I REL .252 .05 R+ .259 .05 R- .082 > .10
R REL .185 > .10
REIh- .286 c .05 REL- .050 > .10 47 TABLE 16 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAM PLE III)
SEX_____ N______CATEGORY
F 27 I .313 .10 M 32 I .050 > .10 F 27 R .196 > .10 M 32 R .255 > .10 P 27 REL .194 > .10 M 32 REL .190 > .10
P 27 H .191 > .10 M 32 H -.027 .10
TABLE 17 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAM PLE III)
SEX N CATEGORY r P P 27 I REL .240 > .10 M 32 I REL .067 > .10 P 27 R+ .239 > .10 M 32 R+ .216 .10
P 27 R- .077 > .10 M 32 R- .148 > .10 F 27 R REL .091 => .10 M 32 R REL .057 > .10 P 27 RELf .202 > .10 M 32 RELf .136 .10
P 27 REL- .087 > ,10 M 32 REL- .189 > .10 48 D. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND BEHAVIORAL TESTS
TABLE 18 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE ALTRUISM SSALE BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE BLIND STUDENT TEST
SAMPLE APPEAL t P I 1st 2.312 < .05 I 1st and 2nd 2.095 C .05 II -- .900 > .25
TABLE 19 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE ALTRUISM SCALE BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE QUES TIONNAIRE TEST (SAMPLE I)
-.290 > .25 49 E. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE HOME BACKGROUND INVENTORY AND BEHAVIORAL TESTS
TABLE 20 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE TEST (SAMPLE l)
CATEGORY
I 1.317 c .20 R -.064 > .25
REL -.257 > .25 H .479 > .25
TABLE 21 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS* AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE BLIND STUDENT TEST (SAMPLE l)
CATEGORY t P
I .752 > .25 R -.454 .25 REL -.330 .25 H -1.613 > .10
» The scores of one of the volunteers were not utilized be cause of special circumstances (see p. 35). 50
TABLE 22 THE SIGNIFICANCE OP DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE BLIND STUDENT TEST (SAMPLE II)
CATEGORY______t______P__ I -.601 >.25 R .040 > .25 REL 1.852 < .10 H -1.113 > .25
F. SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE HOME BACKGROUND INVENTORY AND THE ALTRUISM SCALE
In spite of the low reliability of the instruments consistently significant product moment correlations were obtained on all three samples between the altruism scale
and the "I" category (Tables 6,10,14). The "r " and "REL” categories failed to reach significance in the second sample
(Table 10). The "h " category reached significance in the second sample only (Table 10). None of the minor categories was consistently significant on all three samples. The categories ”l REL," "R+," and "REL+" were significant in both elementary psychology samples (Tables 7,15). 51 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND THE BEHAV IORAL TESTS
The altruism scale indicated a significant difference between the volunteers and non-volunteers on the blind stu dent test in the first sample only (Table 18). This dif ference does not reach significance in the second sample. The altruism scale did not differentiate between volunteers and non-volunteers on the questionnaire test.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE HOME BACKGROUND INVENTORY AND THE BEHAVIORAL TESTS
With one exception, none of the home background cate gories differentiated between the volunteers and non-volun teers on either behavioral test. The exception occurred in the “REIl' category and blind student test in the second sample (Table 22). This finding was not supported in the first sample (Table 21).
G. DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS
In the evaluation of the results two factors have to be taken into consideration which may account for some of the seeming inconsistencies, and which will make any simple interpretation of the findings extremely difficult. The factors to be considered are; (l) the characteristics of the different samples which were utilized in this study, and 52
(2) the nature of the measures employed.
THE DIFFERENCE OF SAMPLES The first and third samples in this study were selected from a heterogeneous population of college students, drawn from the various sbhools and colleges of the university. The large majority of these students were first quarter freshmen who had been separated from their parental homes only very recently. The average age of these students was between 17-18 years. The second sample in this study consisted of a homogen eous group of students, all of whom were drawn from the college of education. The majority of these students were seniors in the last and next to the last quarter of college. Over ten percent of the students in this sample were first and second year graduate students. The average age of the second sample was between 21-22 years. Most of thesb stu dents had been separated from their parental homes for three or four years. Many of them had established their own homes and were raising their own families.■ In the comparison of the results of the relationship between the home background inventory and the altruism scale in the total group of the elementary psychology students and the education students it is found that the "l” category remains significant in both; the "R" and "REL"categories are significant in the first group primarily; and the "h " 53 category Is significant in the education students only, more so in the males than in the females. Here it must be remembered that the "H" category had the lowest reliability of all major categories. These above findings seem to suggest that there may be a relationship between the length of separation from the parental home and the effect of the home influences upon altruism. Direct reinforcement and religious reinforcement of altruism seem to have a more immediate effect upon altru istic behavior which decreases with an increased separation from the parental home. Circumstantial reinforcement, how ever, seems to become important only following a substantial period of separation from the parental home, at a time when increased responsibilities for the building and maintenance of a person's own home are placed upon the individual. The influence of parental altruistic behavior upon the altruism of a person seems to have a more continuous effect. This effect occurs in the more immediate situation and stays on for a more prolonged period of time following separation from the parental home. This interpretation is in agreement with a more "common sense" notion which declares that the child behaves not so much as he is told to behave but more as he sees his parents behave.
THE NATURE OP THE MEASURES Table 17 indicates a significant difference of means 54 of the altruism scale between the volunteers and non-volun teers on the blind student test in the first sample but not in the second sample. The blind student appeal in the second sample was undertaken in order to obtain a larger number of volunteers. This appeal was therefore changed in an attempt to obtain a larger response. The change of appeal, however, seems to have introduced different variables which bear little relationship to altruism, such as conformity behavior and susceptibility to emotional appeal. The blind student appeal in the first sample was administered by the regular class instructor who read the appeal in a factual tone with out any personal interest or involvement. The signing up of the volunteers took place outside the classroom at the con venience of the students and in the absence of any university representative and fellow students. The blind student appeal in the second sample was administered by an university representative in the form of a speech, which was accompanied by personal interest and emotional appeal so as to increase the number of volunteers. The signing up of the volunteers took place immediately in the classroom and in the presence of the: representative and fellow students. The questionnaire test showed no relationship to either the altruism scale or the home background inventory. Volunteering In the questionnaire test consisted in taking 55 and returning the questionnaire. Here It seems that the questionnaire test may not have been a genuine measure of altruism, but more a matter of curiosity In taking the questionnaire, and a matter of conformity to authority In returning the questionnaire, since for many freshmen stu dents a graduate student represents superior status. Finally, there were no significant differences of means on the home background Inventory between the volun teers and non-volunteers on the blind student test (Table 21), It seems that the blind student test was too specific for the categories to show any differentiation. Of the nine volun teers on the blind student test In the first sample, four were student nurses, while nurses represented only 14 per cent of the total sample. The blind student test, by the nature of Its appeal, seems to favor a specific group of altruistic students. It Is here that the potential advantages of the altru ism scale over any specific behavioral test Is to be recog nized In that the altruism scale covers twelve different situations. Naturally, the responses to the scale are verbal only, and It Is because of this that behavioral measures were utilized. The number of behavioral situations should have been larger so as to sample altruistic behavior In various situations. This, however. Is an extremely dif ficult task because each of the situations to be utilized must be a realistic one, that Is the students must not 56 suspect that they are being experimented upon. In the sit uations utilized in this study this was accomplished success fully as was indicated by the extreme surprise of the stu dents when they were notified of the experiment that had taken place. The specificity of the behavioral tests is also demon strated by the comparison of the number of participators and non-participators in the blind student test and questionnaire test in the first sample. Of the nine students who volun teered on the blind student test, eight were present during the questionnaire test. Of these eight, four students (50^) also volunteered on the questionnaire test. Of 172 students who were present during both behavior tests but did not volunteer on the blind student test 68 students (40^) volunteered for the questionnaire test. The difference in these proportions is not significant (x^=.35). It seems that both behavioral tests are specific and probably do not measure the same variable. Table 5 demonstrates the internal consistency of the various categories of the home background inventory. Three of these categories, "I REL,” "R REL,” and "REL-” have very low reliabilities (.43, .37, .32 respectively). The reason for the low internal consistency is that each of these three subcategories consisted of three items only. In order to increase the internal consistency it would be necessary to increase the number of items in each of these three categories. 57 The highest reliability obtained on any of the sub- categories was ,62 for the "REL+" category. The corrected split-half reliability of the altruism scale was .69. With such low reliabilities of the altruism scale and the sub categories the reader should recognize that any obtained correlations are seriously attenuated, and that more reli able instruments might result in higher correlations.
GENERAL FINDINGS Table 4 illustrates the significant sex differences in the responses to the altruism scale in the first and third samples. In the second sample mean male scores went up so that the sex differences disappeared. This lack of sex differences on the altruism scale in uppergrade education students seems to be a function of the selectivity of male students who enter the field of education. Sex differences in the responses to the altruism scale illustrate that these responses are partially a matter of cultural idealism which differs in the two sexes, rather than differential cultural reinforcement in the past, since no significant sex differ ences occurred in the home background categories. There were no significant sex differences on the be havioral tests, although there was a tendency for more female students to respond to the blind student test (x2 = .62 and 2.65 at 1 df.). Tables 7 and 15 illustrate that in those samples in 58 which religious reinforcements are of Importance, "love" oriented religious reinforcement (REL+) Is superior to "fear" oriented religious reinforcement (REL-), There Is also a tendency for general positive reinforcement (R+) to be somewhat superior to negative reinforcement(R-). Both of these differences can be explained on the basis of the fact that any form of negative reinforcement Is not Informative. It tells the Individual what not to do, but leaves him guessing the correct behavior. Finally, most of the significant results obtalnes In this study occur In the relationship between the home back ground Inventory and the altruism scale. The responses to both of these measures were on a verbal level only. The underlying assumption of such verbal responses Is that they are, at least In part. Indicative of behavior that Is non verbal. Such an assumption may not be realistic, and any obtained relationships may represent the subjects' opinions and beliefs rather than actual behavioral Indices. In such a case It would be necessary to retest the hypotheses by utilizing measures which do not necessitate this assumption. This could be accomplished by the use of longitudinal obser vational studies for the measurement of home background and the use of behavioral situations for the measuranent of altruism. Naturally such an approach to the problem of altruism would be very expensive and extremely time consum ing. Such an approach, however, would prove extremely 59 valuable and would provide the psychologist, the educator, the parent and others with additional information about the previous findings. In this sense, the results of this study are tentative only and must await further substantia tion by additional experimentation in the area of altruism. CHAPTER 6
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
PROBLEM
Behavior, according to social learning theory, is goal directed and is a function of (1) the expectancy that a particular behavior will lead to the goal, and (2) the reinforcement value of the goal. The expectancy is, in turn, a function of the degree to which similar behavior has in the past led to similar reinforcements. The reinforce ment value of a goal is determined by previous learning and is a function of the degree to which this reinforcement value has led in the pafet to subsequent reinforcements. This study tried to invetigate the type of experience in the parental homes of college students which exerts a significant influence upon altruistic behavior. Four major home influences were hypothesized: 1, The direct reinforcement of altruistic behavior of parents, by the administration of punishments and rewards. 2, The altruistic behavior of the parents themselves.
3, The religious reinforcement of altruistic behavior. 4, Home circumstances which call for altruistic be havior. Three of these four major influences were broken down into more specific hypotheses: ^ 60 61 la. Direct positive reinforcement, or the administra tion of rewards for altruistic behavior. lb. Direct negative reinforcement, or the administra tion of punishments for non-altruistic behavior, Ic. Direct religious reinforcement, or the administra tion of rewards for altruistic behavior, within a religious framework, 2a. Religious altruistic behavior of the parents, 3a. “Love" centered religious reinforcement, or the emphasis upon brotherhood and heaven, 3b. "Fear" centered religious reinforcement, or the emphasis upon sin and hell.
METHOD
Measurement of altruistic behavior was obtained by means of a self constructed altruism scale in which the expectancies were partially controlled on a cultural pre determined basis, a blind student test in which subjects were asked to volunteer to help blind university students, and a questionnaire test in which subjects were asked to volunteer to help a graduate student by taking a question naire. The altruism scale consisted of 12 hypothetical situations, each having three alternative choices. These alternative choices represented low, medium, and high altruism as determined by a group of judges consisting of 10 graduate students in psychology. The subjects responded 62 with a probability statement, ranging from 0 (nevei) to 6 (always), to each alternative. Measurement of the home background influences was obtained by means of a self constructed inventory consist ing of ?0 items pertaining to the various influences to which the subjects responded with "True," "False," or "?." A measure of these influences was obtained by totaling the "True" responses for each influence separately.
SAMPLE
Three samples were used in this study. Samples 1 and 3 consisted of 204 and 59 elementary psychology students respectively; the second sample was a class of 108 seniors and graduate students in the school of education. All of these students attended a large mid-western state unjjjersity.
RESULTS
In the relationship between the various home influ ences and the altruism scale, only the altruistic behavior of the parents presented a consistently significant influ ence in all three samples. Direct reinforcement and religious reinforcement were significant influences in the elementary psychology students primarily, while circumstantial rein forcement was a significant factor in the upperclass education students only. The altruism scale differentiated significantly 63 between the volunteers and non-volunteers In the blind stu dent test In the first sample. This differentiation did not occur in the second sample because of a change in the admin istration of the blind student test. The blind student test was not administered to the third sample, because all the data collected in this group were obtained anonymously. The questionnaire test showed no differentiation. Significant sex differences in the responses to the altruism scale occurred in the first and third samples, the females indicating higher altruism. No other consistent significant sex differences were obtained in this study, although there was a tendency for more female students to volunteer on the blind student test.
CONCLUSIONS
On the basis of the results it is suggested that the direct reinforcement and religious reinforcement of altru istic behavior may have a more immediate effect. This effect tends to disappear with increased separation from the parental home. Circumstantial reinforcement of altruism may show its influence only following an extended period of separation from the parental home, at a time when persons become ready to establish their own homes and raise their own children. The influence of parental altruistic behavior seems to show its effect in the immediate situation and may 64 be maintained for a more prolonged period of time. The sex differences In the responses to the altruism scale seem to be the result of greater expressed cultural Idealism among females In the American culture. Most of the results obtained In this study were on a verbal level only. The behavioral tests suggested great specificity In their elicitation of altruistic behavior. The use of a larger number of different behavioral tests seems Indicated for the study of generality of altruistic behavior. Finally, all of the measuring Instruments utilized In this study require additional refinements so as to Increase their reliabilities and precision of prediction. BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Adler, A. Understanding Human Nature. Translated, by W. B. Wolfe. New York: Garden City Publishing Co., inc., 1927. 2. Adorno, T. W., E. Prenkel-Brunswlck, D. J. Levinson, and R. N. Sanford. The Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1950. 3. Bain, A. The Emotions and the Will. 3rd ed. New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1875. 4. Bentham, J. "Principles of Morals and Legislation," Works. Vol. 1, Edinburgh: W. Trait, London: Simpkin, Marshall and Co., 1843. 5. Cattell, R. B. and J. Z. Horowitz, "Objective Personal ity Tests Investigating the Structure of Altruism in Relation to Source Traits." J. Person. 1952, 21, 103-117. 6. Churchman, C. W. and R. L. Ackoff, Psychologistics (mimeographed). Univ. of Pa., 1946. 7. Darwin, Charles. The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. Ed. P. Darwin. London: J. Murray, Î9Ô41 8. Descartes, R. Les Passion de L'ame. Paris: Boivin et oie, 1937. 9. Dunlap, K, "Are There Any Instincts?" J. Abnorm. Psych. 1919, 14, 307-311. 10. Promm, E. Man for Himself. New York: Rinehart and Co., 1 9 W - 11. Preud, S. The Ego and the Id. London: Hogarth Press, Ltd., and The Institute of Psycho-Analysis, 1935. 12. Hartley, D. Observations on Man. London: T. Tegg and Son, 1834. 13 . Hartshorne, H. and. M. A. May. Studies in the Nature of Character. Character Education Inquiry, New York: McMillen Co., 1928. 14. Hobbes, T. Leviathan. Oxford: B. Blackwell, 1946. 65 66
15. Holmes, S. J. "The Reproductive Beginnings of Altruism," Psych. Rev.. 1945, 52, 109-112. 16. Huxley, J. S. Stands Alone. New York: Harper and Brothers, 194Ï. 17. James, W. Principles of Psychology. Vols. I and II. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1890. 18. Kropotkin, P. Mutual Aid, a Factor of Evolution. London: W. Heineman, 1919. 19. Lewin, K. A Dynamic Theory of Personality. Translated by D. K. Adams and K. E. Zener. New York: McGraw Hill, 1935. 20. _____ "The Conceptual Representation and the Measure ment of Psychological Forces," Contributions to Psychological Theory. Durham, N.C.: Duke Univers- ity Press, 1938. 21. McDougall, Wm. An Introduction to Social Psychology Boston: J. W. Luce and Co., 1923. 22. ______. Outline of Psychology. New York: Charles Scribner?s Sons, 1923. 23. McGrath, M. C. "A Study of Moral Development in Chil dren." Psych. Monog. 32, No. 2, 1-190. 24. Mill, J. An Analysis of the Phenomena of the Human Mind. 2nd ed., Longon: Longmans, Green, Reader and Dyer, 1878. 25. Palmer, G. H. Altruism. Its Nature and Varieties. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1919. 26. Piaget, J. The Moral Judgment of the Child. Translated by M. Gabain, Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1932. 27. Rettig, S. "An E)q)#rimental Inquiry into the Relation ship of Authoritarianism, Fascism, and Sado- Masochism. Unpublished Master's Theèis, The Ohio State University, 1953. 28. Rotter, J. Social Learning and Clinical Psychology. New Yorkl Prentice-Hall, Inc., 195^. 29. Sorokin, P. A. Altruistic Love. Boston: The Beacon Press, 1950. 67 30. Spencer, H. Principles of Psychology. New York: D. Appleton and CoT, 1878. 31. Turner, W. T. "Altruism and Its Measurement In Chil dren," J. Abnorm. and Soc. Psych. 1938, 43, 502- 516. 32. Walker, H. M. and J. Lev. Statistical Inference. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1953. 33. Wright, B. "Altruism In Children and In the Perceived Conduct of Others," J. Abnorm. and Soc. Psych. 37, 218-233. 34. ______. *The Development of the Ideology of Altruism and Fairness In Children," (Abstr.) Psych. Bull. 39, 485-486. 35. Wright, H. W. "The Problem of Altruistic Motivation," (Abstr.) Bull. Canad. Psych. Assoc. 1946, 6, 82- 83. APPENDIXES
68 APPENDIX A TABLE I SEX, SCORES ON THE ALTRUISM SCALE, AND HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES,OP SAMPLE I IDENTIFI CATION ALTRUISM I CATE. R CATEGORY REL CATEGORY H CAT. NO. SEX SCALE I IREL R R+ R- RREL REL REIh- REL- H la M 34 4 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 M 57 8 0 6 5 1 2 3 3 0 3 :3q M 59 7 0 6 3 3 1 1 1 0 5 4 M 71 13 1 7 4 3 1 2 2 0 7 59 M 71 8 1 5 4 1 1 2 2 0 1 6 M 74 3 0 4 3 1 1 3 2 1 1 79 M 75 10 1 6 5 1 2 3 3 0 4 8 M 78 13 1 8 5 3 2 3 3 0 8 99 M 78 13 3 9 6 3 3 6 6 0 6 109 P 86 4 0 4 2 2 1 1 1 0 1 lia,q M 87 3 0 7 6 1 2 3 2 1 3 12 M 89 8 0 4 3 1 1 1 1 0 0 139 M 95 13 2 8 5 3 3 6 6 0 6 14^ P 95 9 2 6 5 1 3 6 6 0 6 159 P 96 12 2 7 4 3 1 3 3 0 4 169 P 99 13 2 6 4 2 2 4 4 0 7 179 M 103 10 2 6 4 2 3 5 5 0 4 189 M 108 18 3 12 7 5 3 9 7 2 4 f = Students who volunteered for blind student test, after firsteppeal. 8 = Students who volunteered for blind student test, after second appeal, q ÿ Students who volunteered for questionnaire test. a = Students who were absent during the first appeal of the blind student test, b = Students who were absent during the second appeal of the blind student test, c = Students who were absent during the questionnaire test. Ch VO TABLE I (CONTINUED) identi f i cat i on ALTRUISM I GATE. E CATEGORY REL CATEGORY H CAT. NO.______3EX SCALE I IREL R R+ R- RREL REL RELf REL- H 19 P 109 12 2 6 4 2 1 4 4 0 3 20 M 116 14 1 15 9 6 3 4 4 0 5 21 P 117 12 1 7 5 2 2 3 3 0 3 22 P 118 15 3 12 8 4 3 7 7 0 4 23a P 119 12 2 8 6 2 2 4 4 0 4 249 P 121 11 2 4 4 0 2 4 4 0 3 P 121 9 0 3 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 i P 122 11 1 9 7 2 3 5 4 1 4 279 P 125 5 0 7 5 2 1 1 1 0 3 28 P 125 16 3 5 5 0 2 6 6 0 1 299 P 125 12 1 8 5 3 2 3 3 0 4 309 P 126 14 1 9 6 3 3 4 4 0 5 319 P 127 12 1 7 4 3 2 3 3 0 4 32 P 127 12 0 9 6 3 2 3 2 1 2 P 130 14 1 7 5 2 2 3 3 0 3 34 M 135 16 3 8 5 3 1 5 4 1 5 P 141 15 2 9 6 3 2 3 3 0 1 P 141 11 1 9 5 4 1 2 2 0 5 I-" P 161 9 0 5 3 2 2 2 2 0 3 389 P 170 11 0 6 4 2 2 3 3 0 4 39 M 65 10 1 9 4 5 1 3 3 0 3 40 M 73 8 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 4l9 M 86 11 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 42 M 88 9 1 5 3 2 2 4 4 0 2 439 P 93 15 3 6 5 1 2 5 5 0 3 44 P 93 12 2 7 6 1 2 5 5 0 3 4 5 c P 96 12 2 6 5 1 3 5 5 0 4 469 P 96 11 2 6 4 2 2 4 4 0 5 47. P 96 10 1 8 7 1 3 4 4 0 4 48f'9 P 97 9 2 5 4 1 3 5 0 2 4 9 s 5 P 98 9 2 0 3 3 1 3 3 0 1 TABLE I (CONTINUED) IDENTIPI- CATION ALTRUISM I CATE. R CATEGORY REL CATEGORY H ( NO. SEX SCALE I IREL R R+ R- RREL - REL REL+ REL- H
59% P 101 10 1 3 2 1 1 2 2 0 2 51^ P 101 9 1 7 5 2 1 2 2 0 5 P 104 - 12 2 6 4 2 2 7 4 3 6 539 M 105 11 1 8 7 1 3 5 4 1 1 P 106 10 1 7 5 2 3 4 4 0 3 55^ P 107 10 2 7 6 1 3 6 5 1 4 P 107 11 0 5 4 1 2 4 3 1 2 57b P 110 8 2 8 5 3 2 6 5 1 1 589 P 110 14 2 7 6 1 2 5 5 0 4 59 M 111 14 2 10 8 2 3 5 5 0 4 60 M 112 15 2 11 8 3 2 7 5 2 5 615 P 112 12 2 5 4 1 2 4 4 0 5 62^ P 112 11 1 8 5 3 2 3 3 0 4 P 113 13 2 8 7 1 3 5 5 0 3 64° P 114 14 1 8 7 1 3 6 5 1 5 P 116 14 2 6 5 1 2 6 5 1 1 66 M 116 14 2 11 7 4 2 4 4 0 3 679 P 118 13 2 8 7 1 3 5 5 0 4 68 P 119 12 1 9 6 3 3 4 4 0 3 69^ P 121 14 1 13 9 4 3 6 4 2 7 P 122 1 4 2 4 70%l8,q^ n 7 9 5 3 1 4 P 123 13 2 7 6 1 3 5 5 0 3 72f,q F 123 11 2 6 4 2 0 2 2 0 1 73. P 127 7 2 7 5 2 2 6 4 2 3 749 P 128 17 3 11 7 4 3 8 7 1 4 759 P 129 14 3 8 6 2 3 8 7 1 3 76 P 130 15 3 9 8 1 3 7 7 0 3 U n P 131 9 0 13 8 5 3 3 3 0 6 789 P 132 16 3 9 7 2 2 7 6 1 2 TABLE I (CONTINUED) IDENTIFI CATION ALTRUISM I CATE. R CATEGORY REL CATEGORY H CAT. NO. SEX SCALE I IREL R R+ R- RREL REL REIh- REL- H 79 P 138 15 I 9 7 2 3 3 5 0 4 F 138 13 2 6 5 1 2 6 5 1 6 8%; a M 140 13 1 10 5 5 2 4 3 1 3 82a,@ F I4l 14 1 12 5 7 0 1 1 0 2 839 F 141 14 2 6 5 1 1 4 4 0 5 84 F 157 17 3 7 7 0 3 7 7 0 2 85 M 45 9 2 4 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 86° M 77 13 1 5 4 1 2 3 3 0 4 87 F 78 10 1 7 5 2 2 4 3 1 2 88^ F 78 7 0 7 3 4 1 1 1 0 4 89^ M 80 16 3 11 8 3 3 8 7 1 2 90g M 86 5 0 5 2 3 1 2 1 1 2 F 86 8 0 3 3 0 1 1 1 0 2 92 M 86 6 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 93 ^ F 86 13 3 8 4 4 2 7 6 1 7 94a,c M 87 7 1 2 2 0 0 2 2 0 1 95® : F 88 9 1 6 6 0 1 2 2 0 6 96Q F 90 14 2 12 6 6 2 4 4 0 4 97 F 90 6 0 5 5 0 2 2 2 0 2 98, F 91 10 0 9 5 4 2 2 2 0 2 99 F 93 9 0 7 3 4 0 0 0 0 2 100 M 93 7 2 12 8 4 3 6 6 0 3 1019 F 93 15 2 10 8 2 3 7 6 1 3 102 F 100 8 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 7 103° F 102 9 1 4 4 0 2 3 3 0 2 104 F 104 7 2 11 8 3 3 5 5 0 7 105 F 106 13 1 5 3 2 1 2 2 0 2 106 F 107 12 2 9 6 3 2 6 5 1 4 1079 M 108 6 1 5 3 2 1 2 2 0 3 1089 F 110 9 1 9 7 2 2 5 4 1 4 to TABLE I (CONTINUED) IDENTIFI CATION ALTRUISM I CATE. R CATEGORY REL CATEGORY H CAT. NO. SEX SCALE I IREL R R+ R- RREL REL RELf REL- H 109 P 111 14 110",0 2 11 7 4 3 6 6 0 6 M 112 11 0 9 4 5 2 4 3 1 6 111 F 115 13 2 7 5 2 3 5 5 0 4 112 F 118 8 G 6 3 3 1 3 2 1 0 113^ F 119 10 1 12 8 4 3 5 5 0 5 1140 F 120 14 2 8 5 3 2 6 5 1 1 1159 F 120 13 3 10 7 3 3 7 7 0 5 ll6a M 127 15 2 10 6 4 2 5 4 1 4 117 F 131 14 3 7 6 1 3 7 7 0 7 118 F 131 15 1 11 8 3 3 5 5 0 5 119^ . F 132 3 0 4 2 2 1 2 1 1 120&'0 3 F 151 15 3 7 6 1 3 7 7 0 7 121 M 60 7 0 3 3 0 2 3 3 0 2 122 F 71 11 1 8 5 3 2 5 4 1 3 1239 F 72 11 1 9 7 2 1 2 2 0 2 124 M 75 7 1 7 6 1 3 5 5 0 7 125b M 77 7 1 6 5 1 2 3 3 0 4 126 F 78 10 0 10 7 3 2 2 2 0 7 1279 F 79 11 1 3 3 0 2 4 3 1 3 1289 F 79 11 0 7 5 2 1 1 1 0 3 129b F 80 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 130 M 83 11 2 5 5 0 2 4 4 0 1 131 M 88 11 1 3 3 0 1 2 2 0 2 1329 P 91 10 1 10 7 3 3 5 5 0 2 133 M 93 12 2 10 6 4 2 5 5 0 3 134 M 95 14 2 3 1 2 0 2 2 0 2 1359 F 96 15 2 11 7 4 3 6 5 1 8 136 F 96 13 2 5 4 1 1 3 3 0 4 137 F 96 8 1 7 5 2 2 4 4 0 3 1389 M 98 13 3 10 6 4 3 7 7 0 6 139 M 103 11 1 6 3 3 2 5 4 1 5 -q U3 TABLE I (CONTINUED) IDENTIFI CATION ALTRUISM 1 CATE. R CATEGORY REL CATEGORY H Ci NO.______3EX SCALE 1 IREL R R+ R- RREL REL RELf REL- H 1409 P 104 12 1 11 9 2 3 4 4 0 3 l4l F 106 12 1 8 5 3 2 3 3 0 3 1429 F 108 6 0 8 4 4 2 2 2 0 3 F 109 12 1 8 5 3 2 4 4 0 4 M 110 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 145 F 111 11 1 6 3 3 1 2 2 0 6 146 F 111 14 0 8 6 2 2 3 3 0 1 F 114 14 1 7 5 2 2 4 4 0 2 1489 F 114 13 2 6 6 0 2 5 5 0 3 149 F 115 6 0 8 4 4 2 4 3 1 6 1509 F 116 15 2 10 6 4 2 4 4 0 2 151 F 116 7 0 8 6 2 3 3 3 0 5 152 M 117 15 3 12 8 4 3 7 7 0 5 F 118 13 1 8 6 2 2 4 4 0 6
154a,q M 122 14 3 6 6 0 2 5 5 0 7 F 127 9 1 8 7 1 2 4 3 1 8 156? F 128 18 3 11 8 3 3 7 7 0 4 157 F 145 16 2 12 8 4 3 7 6 1 1 F 64 3 0 5 4 1 2 2 2 0 2 1599 F 71 8 0 9 7 2 2 2 2 0 2 160 M 73 9 1 5 5 0 2 4 4 0 3 I6l9 F 79 7 1 6 4 2 1 5 3 2 4 162 F 4 0 4 4 0 2 2 2 0 2 1639 F 84 13 1 6 6 0 3 5 5 0 8 1649 M 91 10 1 7 5 2 1 2 2 0 1 165 M 93 12 1 4 3 1 0 2 2 0 4 166 F 93 9 1 7 4 3 2 5 4 1 3 167 F 94 11 0 8 5 3 2 2 2 0 0 168 F 94 6 1 3 2 1 1 2 2 0 7 169° F 96 12 2 8 5 3 2 5 5 0 4 1709 M 97 9 0 6 5 1 1 2 2 0 5 TABLE I (CONTINUED) IDENTIPI- CATION ALTRUISM I CATE. R CATEGORY REL CATEGORY H a NO. SEX SCALE I IREL R R+ R- RREL REL REIrl- REL- H 1719 h M 98 13 2 9 6 3 2 5 5 0 4 M 101 9 2 8 7 1 3 6 6 0 3 1739 M 102 12 2 9 7 2 3 5 5 0 3 1749 P 104 17 3 , 13 9 4 3 9 7 2 4 1759 P 105 12 2 10 5 5 2 5 4 1 5 1769 P 107 9 0 4 3 1 1 1 1 0 6 177 P 107 11 1 8 4 4 2 3 3 0 1 1789 P 108 13 1 8 6 2 2 3 3 0 5 179 P 109 9 1 9 7 2 3 4 4 0 3 180 P 109 10 1 5 4 1 1 2 2 0 3 181 P 111 17 2 10 9 1 3 7 6 1 6 182 M 112 11 2 6 6 0 3 5 5 0 4 1839 P 113 12 0 7 5 2 2 3 3 0 3 184 P 113 16 3 9 6 3 3 7 7 0 2 185 P 117 10 2 12 8 4 3 6 6 0 1 186 P 117 12 0 10 6 4 2 2 2 0 6 187„ P 122 13 1 10 6 4 2 3 3 0 2 1889 P 124 9 0 10 5 5 1 1 1 0 4 1899 P 125 11 2 8 6 2 3 5 5 0 2 190 M 126 12 1 8 5 3 1 3 3 0 3 191 P 128 4 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 192 P 129 16 2 14 8 6 3 8 6 2 6 193 P 130 13 1 6 5 1 2 4 4 0 1 1949 P 132 11 2 8 5 3 1 4 4 0 3 1959 P 139 13 3 8 5 3 1 5 5 0 3 196 P l4o 10 1 11 0 6 2 4 4 0 5 197b P 141 5 1 2 1 1 0 2 1 1 4 198 P 143 8 2 6 4 2 1 3 3 0 2 199 P 143 14 1 6 5 1 2 3 3 0 3 2009 ^ P 105 9 1 2 2 0 2 0 4 201&*b 3 3 M 106 5 0 5 4 1 2 2 2 0 3 TABLE I (CONTINUED) IDENTIFI CATION ALTRUISM I CATE. R CATEGORY REL CATEGORY H CAT. NO. SEX SCALE I IREL R R+ R- RREL REL RSLf RSL- H 202& F 73 6 0 5 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 203a M 94 11 1 5 5 0 3 7 5 2 8 204 F 87 13 1 10 6 4 2 3 3 0 5
-q ON t a b l e 2
SEX, AND SCORES ON THE ALTRUISTS SCALE AND HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES,OP SAMPLE II
IDENTIFI CATION ALTRUISM I CATE. R CATEGORY REL CATEGORY H CAT. NO.______SEX SCALE______I IREL R R+ R- RREL REL RELt- REL-______H 1 M 33 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2^ F 61 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 3 3 F 79 13 2 5 5 0 2 5 5 0 3 4 F 9 1 6 6 0 3 5 5 0 3 5 F 66 15 2 8 7 1 3 6 6 0 2 6 M 75 8 0 4 3 1 2 3 2 1 G 7. F 87 10 2 9 6 3 1 3 3 0 5 8^ M 72 6 2 7 5 2 2 4 4 0 1 9 M 72 13 2 10 7 3 3 6 5 1 1 10 F 85 12 2 3 2 1 1 5 3 2 6 11 F 94 10 1 5 4 1 2 4 4 0 1 12. F 87 7 1 5 3 2 1 3 3 0 2 13^ F 118 10 1 7 6 1 3 4 4 0 2 14 F 87 13 1 3 2 1 0 1 1 G 3 15^ F 87 19 3 6 4 2 2 6 6 G 3 l6f F 99 10 1 6 4 2 2 6 4 2 4 IT F 103 13 2 6 4 2 2 5 4 1 2 18 M 111 6 0 3 1 2 G 0 0 G 1 19 M 79 8 1 8 1 1 0 1 1 G 1 20 M 65 6 G 8 4 4 1 2 2 G 2 21 F 88 5 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 G 2 22 F 92 11 1 7 6 1 3 5 5 G 3 23 M 116 5 0 3 2 1 1 1 1 G 2 24 M 125 12 1 9 7 2 3 5 5 G 4 25 F 81 6 0 3 3 0 1 1 1 G G 26 F 65 15 2 7 5 2 2 4 4 G 3 27 F 91 14 2 8 4 4 1 4 4 G 4 f = Students who folunteered for blind :student test. TABLE 2 (CONTINUED) IDENTIFI CATION ALTRUISM I CATE. R CATEGORY REL CATEGORY H CAT. NO. 3EX SCALE I IREL R R+ R- RREL REL REIrl- REL- H m ------P 115 9 0 5 5 0 1 1 1 0 2 29 P 78 11 1 5 5 0 2 4 4 0 5 P 116 12 2 8 6 2 1 3 3 0 4 P 70 12 1 7 7 0 3 4 4 0 2 32 P 72 9 1 9 7 2 2 3 3 0 2 P 86 12 1 7 4 3 2 3 3 0 2 34 M 89 11 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 P 92 2 0 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 36 P 96 13 2 4 3 1 2 5 5 0 5 37 P 118 8 1 4 4 0 1 2 2 0 1 38 P 97 13 2 5 5 0 2 4 4 0 5 P 101 9 1 8 5 3 2 6 4 2 7 P 116 14 3 7 6 1 3 8 7 1 3 41 M 110 12 0 5 3 2 0 1 1 0 3 42 P 101 8 0 4 3 1 1 1 1 0 4 P 94 15 1 16 9 7 3 5 5 0 4 P 136 14 1 7 6 1 2 3 3 0 2 P 101 16 2 4 4 0 2 4 4 0 2 I M 89 6 0 4 2 2 1 1 1 0 1 P 97 5 0 3 2 1 1 1 1 0 2 P 90 12 2 11 6 5 3 6 6 0 3 49f M 92 11 1 6 5 1 1 2 2 0 1 50 P 105 13 2 10 7 3 1 4 4 0 6 51 P 108 13 1 5 5 0 2 3 3 0 2 52 P 126 10 0 10 6 4 3 3 3 0 3 P 128 9 1 6 4 2 1 2 2 0 3 P 140 14 2 9 7 2 3 7 6 1 7 % P 125 13 1 6 4 2 2 4 4 0 3 56f M 97 3 1 2 1 1 0 2 2 0 2 57 P 104 11 2 7 3 4 1 3 3 0 4 58 M 110 16 1 6 4 4 0 4 -O 9 3 3 00 TABLE 2 (CONTINUED) IDENTIPI- CATION ALTRUISM I CATE. R CATEGORY ' REL CATEGORY . H CAT. NO. SEX SCALE I IREL R R+ R- RREL REL REIrf REL- H P 119 Ô 2 5 4 1 2 5 5 0 5 60^ P 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 61 P 96 4 1 2 2 0 1 2 2 0 3 62 M 89 9 1 3 2 1 I 2 2 0 3 63^ P 111 11 2 6 5 1 2 8 5 3 4 64- M 77 , 6 0 7 4 3 1 1 1 0 3 6f P 120 4 0 3 2 1 1 1 1 0 4 66 P 118 11 2 8 5 3 1 3 3 0 4 67 P 103 7 1 9 5 4 3 5 5 0 3 68 P 136 5 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 6 69 P 122 12 2 9 7 2 3 6 6 0 2 70 M 87 3 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 71 P 103 9 1 6 3 3 1 3 3 0 6 72- P 111 9 2 5 4 1 2 4 4 0 6 73^ P 112 15 2 10 7 3 3 6 6 0 1 74 P 89 13 2 6 5 1 2 5 5 0 5 75^ P 105 4 1 5 3 2 2 3 3 . 0 0 76 P 106 13 1 7 6 1 3 5 4 1 7 77 M 117 15 2 12 7 5 2 5 4 1 6 78 P 91 5 1 5 4 1 2 3 3 0 5 79 M 123 14 2 7 5 2 2 6 5 1 3 80 P 119 9 1 7 5 2 2 4 4 0 6 81^ P 127 2 1 3 1 2 0 2 1 1 3 82 P 120 14 1 5 3 2 1 3 3 0 6 83 M 88 12 1 4 3 1 1 3 2 1 2 84- M 119 3 0 3 3 0 2 2 2 0 0 P 136 13 2 5 5 0 3 6 6 0 3 86„ M 108 15 3 5 4 1 0 3 3 0 5 87^ P 112 15 1 10 7 3 2 3 3 0 3 88 P 98 8 1 4 4 0 1 3 3 0 4 89 M 131 15 1 6 4 2 0 1 1 0 3 90 P 110 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 3 TABLE 2 (CONTINUED) IDENTIFI CATION ALTRUISM I CATE. R CATEGORY REL CATEGORY H CAT. NO. SEX SCALE I IREL R R+ R- RREL REL REL+ REL- H F 130 13 2 10 7 3 3 b 6 0 4 92 F 122 10 1 9 5 4 2 4 4 0 4 93 F 121 12 1 6 3 3 0 2 2 0 8 94 M 132 13 2 11 7 4 3 6 5 1 7 95f F 124 11 2 8 7 1 2 6 5 1 5 96 M 126 10 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 5 97 M 110 4 1 2 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 98 M 120 17 2 12 7 5 3 8 5 3 6 99 F 126 11 1 5 4 1 2 4 4 0 5 100 M 127 16 3 3 2 1 1 4 4 0 3 1011 M 142 8 1 6 3 3 1 2 2 0 1 102 F 145 11 0 4 3 1 1 2 2 0 3 103 F 112 11 1 5 4 1 1 2 2 0 2 104 F 135 10 0 5 4 1 2 4 3 1 3 F 119 6 0 3 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 ïoEf F 117 13 3 7 5 2 3 8 7 1 3 107 F 151 10 0 2 2 0 1 1 1 0 4 108 M 103 10 1 9 7 2 2 4 4 0 6
8 TABLE 3
SEX, SeORBS ON THE ALTRUISM SCALE, AND HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES, OF SAMPLE III IDENTIPI- CATION ALTRUISM I CATE. R CATEGORY REL CATEGORY H CAT. NO. SEX SCALE I IREL R R+ R- RREL REL REIrl- REL- H. 1 M 91 3 0 3 1 2 1 1 1 Q 1 2 M 99 12 2 9 6 3 3 6 5 1 6 3 M 137 11 1 12 7 5 3 6 5 1 4 4 M 121 7 0 4 4 0 1 2 2 0 1 5 M 84 5 0 4 3 1 1 1 1 0 4 6 M 90 16 2 10 6 4 3 6 6 0 5 7 M 83 8 0 6 4 2 1 3 1 2 3 8 M 134 13 1 8 4 4 1 4 3 1 2 9 M 106 9 2 11 8 3 3 6 6 0 2 10 M 78 11 2 6 6 0 3 6 5 1 4 11 M 116 10 2 8 7 1 2 4 4 0 5 12 M 102 13 2 10 7 3 3 6 6 0 4 13 M 83 11 0 6 4 2 1 1 1 0 0 14 M 111 15 2 12 9 3 3 7 6 1 2 15 M 118 19 3 8 6 2 2 5 5 0 2 16 M 80 15 2 9 7 2 3 6 6 0 3 17 M 79 12 2 9 5 4 1 4 3 1 4 18 M 93 12 2 9 8 1 3 8 6 2 2 19 M 119 10 1 9 4 5 0 1 1 0 1 20 M 104 9 0 5 5 0 2 3 2 1 5 21 M 106 3 0 6 2 4 1 3 1 2 5 22 M 101 10 1 9 6 3 2 3 3 0 5 ' 23 M 95 7 0 7 3 1 1 1 0 6 24 M 118 12 1 8 5 3 2 7 4 3 6 25 M 82 14 1 8 4 4 1 2 2 0 4 26 M 98 12 1 10 5 5 1 2 2 0 6 27 M 91 18 3 9 5 4 3 7 7 0 2 28 M 105 15 2 7 7 0 3 7 6 1 3 00 29 M 98 9 1 2 1 1 1 3 2 1 6 TABLE 3 (CONTINUED) IDENTIFI CATION ALTRUISM I CATE. R CATEGORY REL CATEGORY H CAT. NO.______SEX SCALE I IREL R R+ R- RREL REL RELf REL- H 30 M — m — TT" 1 10 5 5 1 2 0 3 31 M 7 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 4 32 M ii 12 1 9 5 4 3 0 1 33 P 113 16 2 8 7 1 3 6 1 0 3 34 P 130 9 1 10 5 5 3 4 4 0 4 P 124 18 3 10 7 3 3 9 6 3 3 3^ P 118 10 0 8 5 3 1 2 2 0 3 37 P 111 11 2 6 4 2 2 4 4 0 5 38 P 111 8 1 9 4 5 2 5 4 1 2 39 P 125 12 3 6 5 1 2 5 5 0 4 40 P 118 12 1 6 1 2 4 4 0 3 41 P 86 11 0 6 i 0 2 3 0 2 42 P 82 10 2 10 3 2 i 1 2 P 105 11 3 11 I 5 3 6 i 0 5 ti P 105 10 1 6 1 3 5 5 0 4 P 13 2 10 i 4 2 4 4 0 5 Hi P ^96 13 2 13 7 6 3 7 6 1 2 P 1S3 15 2 10 8 2 3 8 6 2 2 tl P 111 12 2 4 4 0 2 5 5 0 3 49 P 139 10 1 5 3 2 1 3 3 0 3 50 P 112 9 1 9 5 4 3 4 4 0 3 51 P 118 12 1 5 4 1 2 4 4 0 1 52 P 129 15 2 10 6 4 2 6 5 1 5 53 P 95 12 1 7 5 2 2 3 3 0 3 54 P 93 14 2 5 3 2 1 4 4 0 4 P 147 17 3 11 4 3 0 6 56 P 108 10 2 9 I 3 3 I I 0 3 57 P 151 11 2 9 2 2 5 0 1 58 P 122 13 0 7 Î 1 3 4 Î 0 3 59 P 130 15 3 8 7 1 3 7 7 0 3 oo APPENDIX B
1. THE TEST BOOKLET
COLLEGE STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE
This questionnaire is designed to find out various information about College Students in general. There are two parts to this questionnaire. The first part deals with your home background, and the second part tries to find out how College Students behave in various situations, This study is undertaken by a graduate student for his dissertation. All information is guaranteed to remain strictly confidential. Except for the graduate student, nobody will ever see your answers. The questionnaire has absolutely no connection with your grades. Hence, will you please be as honest as possible with your answers. Answer every question. Do not consult your neighbors about the answers, for everybody will answer differently. Do not hurry, you will get as much time as you need. Answer the biographical information first, then go ahead and start the questionaire.
Biographical Information
Name: Instructor's_Name______Hour please print Age:_____ Sex______School______Year in College, Religion______Race______Parent's Religion_____ Country of Birth______
83 84 1. THE TEST BOOKLET.(CONT'D.) The questions in the first part of this questionnaire are designed to indicate your home background. This is not an intelligence test, nor are there any right or wrong answers. The correctness of a question will depend upon your own home background. IN PROMT OP EACH QUESTION YOU WILL PIND; "TRUE" "PALSE" "?" IP YOUR ANSWER IS "TRUE," DRAW A CIRCLE AROUND THE "TRUE." IP YOUR ANSWER IS "PALSE," DRAW A CIRCLE AROUND THE PALSE." IP YOU ARE ENTIRELY UNABLE TO REMEMBER WHETHER "TRUE" OR "PALSE," OR IP THE QUESTION IS NOT APPLICABLE TO YOU AT ALL THEN DRAW A CIRCLE AROUND THE QUESTION MARK. IF, HOWEVER, THE QUESTION IS MORE TRUE THANERLSE, DRAW A CIRCLE AROUND "TRUE," AND IP MORE PALSE THAN TRUE, DRAW A CIRCLE AROUND "PALSE." ANSWER EVERY QUESTION. 1. True Pal se ? My parents were people who feared the wrath of God. 2. True Palse 9 My parents used to bawl me out when I was not kind or respectful to older people. 3. True Palse ? My parents considered it a sin to go to dances, to smoke, to drink, or to play cards. 4. True Palse ? I was taught by my parents that to love other people is the same as to love God. 5. True Palse ? I was often reprimanded by my parents for not sharing my toys with the other kids in the neighborhood. 6, True Palse ? My parents had a large circle of friends. 7. True Palse ? I was often unjustly punished. 8. True Palse ? My parents were people who believed that God and Love are the same thing. 9. True Palse ? My parents often emphsized that we were born in sin and were all basically evil. 10. True Palse ? I always had to share my things with the others at home. 11. True Palse ? My parents impressed upon me that it is more blessed to give than to receive. 12. True Palse ? My parents took a great interest in social affairs. 13. True Palse ? My father was very domineering at home. 14. True Palse ? My folks encouraged me to go and visit sick people. 15. True Palse ? I come from a large family 16. True Palse ? I was very close to my brothers and sisters. 17. True Palse ? My parents encouraged me to bring my friends home whenever I wanted to. 1. THE TEST BOOKLET (CONT'D.) 85 18, True Palse ? My mother was a very nervous person. 19. True Palse ? My parents put themselves out for other people, 20, True Palse ? I had to take care of some of my younger brothers or sisters. 21, True Palse ? My parents really practiced "turn the other cheek," 22, True Palse ? My parents showed a great deal of favoritism toward my brother or sister, 23. True Palse ? I had to help my parents a lot around the house or farm. 24. True Palse ? My parents did not care very much about me. 25. True Palse ? My folks used to scold me whenever I refused to make errands for other people. 26, True Palse ? My parents were extremely tolerant of other people. 27. True Palse ? My father and mother liked to listen to other people's trouble more than to talk about their own. 28, True Palse ? My mother was always happy when I prayed for other less fortunate people, 29. True Palse ? I used to help support the family by de- ing all kinds bf odd jobs. 30, True Palse ? My parents actually hated me. 31. True Palse ? My parents disapproved strongly if I did not spend part of my allowance for contributions or charity. 32, True Palse ? My parents used to criticize me often for not being concerned about people who were worse off than we were. 33. True Palse ? My folks were very much interested in people, 34. True Palse ? I never had a room for myself. 35. True Palse ? My parents were convinced that I would never amount to anything, 36. True Palse ? I was praised by my parents whenever I shared my things with others. 37. True Palse ? My folks were very generous. 38, True Palse ? My parents had the habit of always com paring me unfavorably to other children. 39. True Palse ? My parents used to comment often that I was very ugjy. 40, True Palse ? My parents would never fight with anybody. 41, True Palse ? My mother often packed extra food in my lunch box so I could share it with other kids. 42, True Palse ? My parents used to support other members of the family. 86 1. THE TEST BOOKLET (CONT'D.)
43. True Palse ? My folks never carried a grudge for long. 44. True Palse ? My parents never trusted me. 45. True Palse ? Hospitality was one of thé raofet impor tant rules at home. 46. True Palse ? My parents never hesitated to show me that I was a burden to them. 47. True Palse ? My folks used to give a lot for charity. 48. True Palse ? I was very unhappy at home. 49. True Palse ? I helped to take care of somebody who had a physical handicap. 50. True Palse ? My mother did not know how to say "No” to other people. 51. True Palse ? My folks used to say that if I am kind with other people, they will be kind with me. 52. True Palse ? My father used to drink a lot. 53. True Palse ? Our neighbors were always like part of the family. 54. True Palse ? My folks really practiced the golden rule. 55. True Palse ? My folks used to scold me if I did not visit my relatives. 56. True Palse ? My parents never understood me. 57. True Palse ? My mother used to give me rewards for every good deed I had done. 58. True Palse ? My mother was friendly with everybody. 59. True Palse ? Our home was always open to strangers. 60. True Palse ? We never associated much with our neighbors. 61. True Palse ? My folks used to criticize me severely when they thought that I was not hospit able enough toward my friends. 62. True Palse ? I was very happy at home. 63. True Palse ? I always had a room of my own. 64. True Palse ? My parents used to talk more about Heaven than about Hell. 65. True Palse ? My parents had hardly any friends. 66. True Palse ? My parents had no interest in social affairs. 67. True Palse ? I come from a small family. 68. True Palse ? I was never allowed to bring my friends home. 69. True Palse ? My father and mother liked to talk more about their own troubles than listen to the troubles of other people. 70. True Palse ? I never had to help support my family. 87 1. THE TEST BOOKLET (CONT'D.)
In the following part of the questionnaire you are pre sented with more or less familiar situations in which you are to choose among 3 ways of behaving.
After each choice you are to place either the number 0,1,2, 3,4,5,6 according to the following scheme:
Write 0 if you would never choose this type of behavior. Write 1_ if you would almost never choose the behavior. Write £ if you would sometimes choose the behavior. Write 3 if you would choose it about half the time. Write ± if you would choose it often. Write ^ if you would choose if very often or almost always. Write 6 if you would choose it always.
SO FAR AS POSSIBLE, BASE YOUR ANSWER ON WHAT YOU ACTUALLY WOULD DO IN THESE SITUATIONS. REMEMBER! THIS INFORMATION WILL REMAIN CONFIDENTIAI,! ANSWER EVERY QUESTION Î TIMES.
Example:
As you start to cross the street a car stops directly in front of you. As you walk around the car, you would: ^ a) Shout at the driver. 1 b) Give him a dirty look. ff c) Do nothing 2 If you answer as above then you would almost never shout at the driver; you would often give him a dirty look; and you would sometimes do nothing at all. 88 1. THE TEST BOOKLET (CONT'D.) 0 - Never 4 - Often 1 - Almost never 5 - Very often (almost 2 - Sometimes always) 3 - Half the time 6 - Always SITUATIONS WEIGHTS* (1) If you had to study late and your roommate complained that the light was keeping him awake you would: a) Try to shield the light. 1 b) Go to the library or somewhere else to study. - 2 c) Think It Inconsiderate of him to ask you to put the light out. -1 (2) If you were asked to contribute to a charity with which you are only vaguely familiar, you would: a) Not contribute. -1 b) Probably give something. 1 c) Contribute as much as yojj can. 2 (3) If you were sitting In the bus and another passenger discovers that he has no money for fare, you would: a) Pay his fare for hlm\,, 1_ b) Lend him a couple dollars to make sure he had some money In his pocket 2_ e) Not worry about It since the conduc tor would probably let him go by. -1 (4) If one of your friends were sick for a period of time, you would: a) Just send him a card. -1 b) Try to find out how he Is doing, every once In a while ^ c) Go over to his house dally and help him catch up with school. 2 (5) If your roommate had to work his way through school while you dldn?t, you would: a) Expect him to do his share of the housekeeping. -1 b) Do all the housekeeping for both. __ 2_ c) Help him with his share when he's especially tired. 1 * These weights were not given during the administration of the test booklet. 89 1. THE TEST BOOKLET (CONT'D.) 0 - Never. 4 - Often 1 - Almost never 5 - Very often (almost 2 - Sometimes always) 3 - Half the time 6 - Always SITUATIONS WEIGHTS (6) If an acquaintance who was looking for a Job came to you for help, you would: a) Refer him to some agency. -1 b) Help him search the newspaper want ads. 1 c) Try all possible connections and not give up until you've found him a job 2
(7) If you had lent somebody money who promised to give it back but who is still in need of it, but you needed it also, you would: a) Demand it back immediately -1 b) Make some remark to the effect that you needed the money. 1_ c) Try to get money somewhere else, 2_ (8) If a student borrowed your typewriter with out asking because he needed it for a term- paper, you would: a) Tell him he could have it any time it was not being used. 2_ b) Make him return it because he took it without asking. -1 c) Let him have it if you did not need it, but tell him to ask you next time. 1 (9) If one of your classmates were in danger of failing a course and he asked you,„to help him out a little during an examination, you would: a) Tell him that you are sorry but you don ' t cheat. 1_ b) Not help him but give him a good pep talk to raise his confidence. 2_ c) Tell him that he should be ashamed of himself for trying to cheat. -1 90
1. THE TEST BOOKLET (CONT'D.) 0- Never 4 - Often 1 - Almost never 5 - Very often (almost 2 - Sometimes always) 3 - Half the time 6 - Always SITUATIONS WEIGHTS (10) If you were studying for an examination for the next day, and an acquaintance of yours drops by to discuss a personal problem with you, you would; a) Explain to him that you have to study for an exam, but that you would see him after the exam, __ b) Try to help him with his problems. __ c) Tell him to leave you alone. -1 (11) If you were given one wish that would come true, you would wish for: A lot of money. -1 Brotherhood of all nations Health and happiness for you and your family. (12) If you owned a car and you knew that an acquaintance of yours, who does not own a car, had to move, you would: a) Offer to help him move with your car. bj Help him move if he asked you to. c) Try to avoid using your car for moving purposes. -1 91 2. HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES
TOTAL "I" CATEGORY 1. My parents had a large circle of friends. 2. My parents were extremely tolerant of other people, 3. My parents took a great Interest in social affairs. 4. My parents put themselves out for other people. 5. My father and mother liked to listen to other people's trouble more than to talk about their own. 6. My folks were very generous. 7. My folks were very much interested in people, 8. My parents would never fight with anybody. 9. My parents used to support other members of the family. 10. My folks never carried a grudge for long. 11. Hospitality was one of the most important rules at home. 12. My folks used to give a lot for charity. 13. My mother did not know how to say "No" to other people, 14. Our neighbors were always like part of the family. 15. My mother was friendly with everybody. 16 . Our home was always open to strangers. A-1. "l Rel+" Category; 17. My parents were people who believed that God and love are the same thing. 18. My parents really practiced "turn the other cheek," 19. My folks really practiced the golden rule.
B. TOTAL "R" CATEGORY B-1. "R+" Category; 1. My folks encouraged me to go and visit sick people. 2. 1 was praised by my parents whenever 1 shared my things with others. 3. My parents encouraged my (me) to bring my friends home whenever 1 wanted to. 4. My mother often packed extra food in my lunch box so 1 could share it with other kids. 5. My folks used to say that if 1 am kind withother people, they will be kind with me. 6. My mother used to give me rewards for every good deed 1 had done. 92
2. HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES (CONT'D.) B-2. "R-" Category; 7. My parents used to bawl me out when I was not kind or respectful to older people. 8. 1 was often reprimanded by my parents for not shar ing my toys with the other kids in the neighbor hood. 9. My folks used to scold me whenever 1 refused to make errands for other people. 10. My parents disapproved strongly if 1 did not spend part of my allowance for contributions or chàcity. 11. My parents used to criticize me often for not being concerned about people who were worse off than we were. 12. My folks used to scold me if 1 did not visit my relatives. 13. My folks used to criticize me severely when they thought that 1 was not hospitable enough toward my friends.
B-3. "R Rel" Category; 14. 1 was taught by my parents that to love other people is the same as to love Gdd, 15. My parents impressed upon me that it is more blessed to give than to receive. 16 . My mother was always happy when 1 prayed for other less fortunate people,
C. TOTAL "REL" CATEGORY C-1. "Rel+" Category; 1 - 3 (see "1 Rel+"). 4 - 6 (see "H Rel+”). 7. My parents used to talk more about Heaven than about Hell. C-2. "Rel-" Category; 8. My parents were people who feared the wrath of God. 9. My parents considered it a sin to go to dances, to smoke, to drink or to play cards, 10, My parents often emphasized that we were b o m in sin and were all basically evil. 93 2. HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES (CONT'D.)
D. TOTAL "H" CATEGORY 1 . I come from a large family. 2 . I had to take care of some of my younger brothers or sisters. 3. I always had to share my things with the others at home. 4. I was very close to my brothers and sisters. 5 . I had to help my parents a lot around the house or farm. 6. I used to help support the family by doing all kinds of odd Jobs. 7. I never had a room for myself. 8. Hospitality was one of the most Important rules at home (see also "l" category). 9. I helped to take care of somebody who had a physi cal handicap.
E. RELIABILITY ITEMS 1 . We never associated much with our neighbors (see "I" categpry). 2 . I always had a room of my own (see "H" category). 3 . My parents had hardly any friends (see "I" category), 4. My parents had no Interest In social affairs (see "l" category). 5 . I come from a small famlly(see "H" category). 6. I was never allowed to bring my friends home (see "R" category) 7 . I never had to help support my family (see "H“ category). 8. My father and mother liked to talk more about their own troubles than to listen to the troubles of other people (see "I" category). 9. I was very happy at home (see "buffer Items).
P. BUFFER ITEMS 1. I was often unjustly punished. 2. My father was very domineering at home. 3. My mother was a very nervous person. 4. My parents showed a great deal of favoritism toward my brother or sister. 5. My parents did not care very much about me. 6. My parents actually hated me. 7. My parents were convinced that I would never amount to anything. 94
2. HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES (CONT'D.) 8. My parents had the habit of always comparing me unfavorably to other children. 9. My parents used to comment often that I was very ugly. 10. My parents never trusted me. 11. parents never hesitated to show me that I was a burden to them. 12. I was very unhappy at home. 13. My parents never understood me. 14. My father used to drink a lot. 95 3. THE SIGN-UP SHEET
COMMITTEE FOR THE AID OP BLIND UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
Sign your name, your classroom no., class hour, and phone no. here if you care to volunteer your service to the com mittee. (This is not for experimental credits.)
NAME CLASSROOM NO. CLASS HOUR PHONE 1. 2. 3. 4.
5. 6.
7. 8. 9. 1 0 . 11. 12.
13. 14.
15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 2 0 . 21. AffENDIX C 1. THE EXTENDED P-SCALE QUESTIONNAIRE Study of College Students
Instructions: We are trying to collect some Information about college students, their opinions and attitudes about various Issues, and some of their Ideas about themselves. We are sure you will find this questionnaire Interest ing. It Is made up of a series of statements with which you agree or disagree. Some of the statements are about Impor tant social Issues you have thought about, and some refer to feelings and Ideas people have about themselves. This Is not an Intelligence test. There are no "right" or "wrong" answers. The best answer Is your personal opinion. You can be sure that, whatever your opinion may be on a cer tain statement, there will be many who agree, many who dis agree, And this Is what we want to find out: How do college students really feel about themselves and about these Impor tant topics? It must be emphasized that the sponsors of this survey do not necessarily agree or disagree with the statements In It, We have tried to cover a great many points of view. You will probably find yourself agreeing strongly with some statements, disagreeing Just as strongly with others. You are to express your agreement or disagreement with the 96 97 1. THE EXTENDED P-SCALE (CONT'D.) statements in accordance with the Instructions below.
All that we ask is that you; (a) Read each statement carefully and answer it ac cording to your first reaction. It is not neces sary to take a lot of time for any one question, (b) Answer every question, (c) Give your personal point of view. Do not discuss the questions with anyone until you have finished, (d) Be as sincere, accurate, and complete as possible in the limited time.
PERSONAL INFORMATION
NAME______SEX______AGE_ Pleast print
INSTRUCTOR______HOUR
Your answers will be treated as confidential and will have nothing to do with your grade in this or any other course. 98 1. THE EXTENDED P-SCALE (C0NT'D.) Please mark your agreement or disagreement with each item in the left margin. Use the following scale: +1 slight support, agreement -1 slight opposition, dis- +2 moderate support, agreement agreement +3 strong support, agreement -2 moderate opposition, disagreement -3 strong opposition, dis agreement 1. The real coward fears death more than he fears anything else. 2. An insult to our honor shall always be punished. 3* If people would talk less and work more, everybody would be off. _4. Human nature being what it is, there will always be war and conflict. __3. No weakness or difficulty can hold us back if we have enough will power. 6. Some day it will probably be shown that astrology can explain lot of things. _7. Personal problems are less important than the problems of one’s country. __8. The right to own individual property is good not be cause it serves the individual, but because it serves the country best. __g. Homosexuals are hardly better than criminals and ought to be severely punished. _10. The wild sex life of the old Greeks and Romans was tame compared to some of the goings-on in this country, even in places where people might least expect them. 11. Some people are more important than others. _12. Young people sometimes get rebellious ideas, but as they grow up they ought to get over them and settle down. _13. Wars and social troubles mag^ some day be ended by an earthquake or a flood that will destroy the whole world. 99 1. THE EXTENDED P-SCALE (CONT'D.) _l4. The most Important people in a society are usually those people who are least influenced by that society, _15. Familiarity breeds contempt. _l6. Science has its place, but there are many important things that can never possibly be understood by the human mind. _17. What this country needs most, more than laws and political programs, is a few courageous, tireless, devoted leaders in whom the people can put their faith. 18. Pacifism should be condemned. _19. There is hardly anything lower than a person who does not feel a great love, gratitude and respect for his parents. _20. Nothing great in this world was ever achieved by the cooperation of groups, but only by the success of a single group. _21. The businessman and the manufacturer are much more important to society than the artist and the pro fessor. _22. In politics, emotions are often more important than logic in arriving at correct decisions. _23. People can b# divided into two distinct classes: the weak and the strong. _24. Labor unions should concern themselves only with work conditions and not with politics. _25. Actions are useful only if they serve society. _26. Nowadays more and more people are prying into matters that should remain personal and private. _27. Say what you will, different social classes are neces sary in a modern society. _28. "Majority" rule gives undue representation to the ignorant. 100 1. THE EXTENDED F-SCALE (CONT'D.) 29. Nowadays when so many different kinds of people move around and mix together so much, a person has to pro tect himself especially carefully against catching an infection or disease from them, 30. The means are not important, what really counts is the end, 31, It is best to use some pre-war authorities in Germany to keep order and prevent chaos, 32. No child should leave school without knowing the importance of pure bloodedness. 33. He who is not hated by his opponents is not worthy of anyone's friendship, _34, Staring grom yourth, the people should be taught the rights of their country, 35. What the youth needs most is strict discipline, rugged determination, and the will to work and fight for family and country, 36, One studies history in order to le am how to strength en one's country, 37. Most people don't realize how much our lives are con trolled by plots hatched in secret places,
38, It can be said that any creative thought that a per son might have in his lifetime will appear during his youth, 39. History is not made by neutrals, but only by those who fight for their ideas, ÿO, Sex crimes, such as rape and attacks on children, deserve more than mere imprisonment; such criminals ought to be publicly whipped, or worse, 41, Most of our social problems would be solved if we could somehow get rid of the immoral, crooked, feebleminded, 42, Socialism always loads to bolshevism. 43 , No sane, normal, decent person could ever think of hurting a close friend or relative. 101
1 . THE EXTENDED F-SCALE (CONT‘D.) 44 . Those Individuals whose interests do not coincide with the interests of.their country do not have to be protected by it. 4-3 . Some people are b o m with an urge to jump from high places.
46 . A good education would use the spare time of boys for the development of their bodies. 47 . When a person has a problem or worry, it is best for him not to think about it, but to keep busy with more cheerful things. 48. The honor of one's country, its array, and its ideal of freedom should be sacred to a citizen.
49 . "Leadership" means to move masses of people, not to formulate ideas.
30. Every person should have complete faith in some super natural power whose decision he obeys without question.
31, World peace is impossible unless there are powerful countries who desire it.
32. A person who has bad manners, habits, and breeding can hardly expect to get along with decent people,
33. It is nonsense to believe that the right of a country to supervise its young citizens ends after they finish school.
34. Strikes and lock-outs lead to anarchism, 35. A society is always more than just the sum of its individuals.
36. The only heroic actions are those which have no guarantee of success.
Cleanliness is one of the most basic requirements of a good civilization.
38. Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues children should le am.
__ 39. The newspaper is the best source for truth about politics for adults. 102 1. THE EXTENDED P-SCALE (CQNT'D.) _6o. Action is always more important than thought. _6l, A country cannot have a healthy economy without a large defense program. j52. Nobody ever learned anything important except through suffering. _63. It is important for a scientist to be great not only as a scientist, but even more so as a patriot. _64. War is really not so terrible because it is some times necessary to sacrifice the individual for the good of the country. _65. Humanity is only a biological concept, not a social one. j66. Public opinion is more influenced by propaganda than by personal experience. _67. The desires of a group are not necessarily the desires of the individuals belonging to that group. 103
AUTOBIOGRAPHY
I, Salomon Rettig, was born In Berlin, Gemany, on April 20, 1923. In 1937 I moved to Israel. I received part of my secondary school education in Germany and Israel, In 1947 I came to the United States of America where I completed by secondary school education at the Harlem Evening High School In New York city. In 1950 I entered the New York University where I finished the first year of college. In September, 1950, I transferred to Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, from which I received the degree Bachelor of Arts In August, 1952. I received the degree Master of Arts from The Ohio State University In 1953. While completing the requirements for the degree Doctor of philosophy, I held the following positions; teaching assistant at The Ohio State University during the academic years 1954-1956; Psychologist II at the Columbus State School, Columbus, Ohio, during six months of 1954; Ohio State University Scholar during 1953-1954.