University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

A study of the effects of tutoring upon alienation as measured by an original scale

(USC Thesis Other)

A study of the effects of tutoring upon alienation as measured by an original scale

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content A STUDY OF THE EFFECTS OF TUTORING UPON ALIENATION AS MEASURED BY AN ORIGINAL SCALE by Frank Paul Besag . >/ V A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Education) August 1965 UMI Number: DP24067 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI DP24067 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 U N IVE R SITY O F S O U TH E R N C A LIFO R N IA T H E G R A D U A T E S C H O O L U N IV E R S IT Y P A R K LO S A N G E L E S , C A L IF O R N IA 9 0 0 0 7 D '(pfo fcs'SH' This dissertation, w ritte n by ..........Frank._Paul..Bte .......... under the direction o f h. i ®...,Dissertation Com mittee, and approved by a ll its members, has been presented to and accepted by the Graduate School, in p a rtia l fu lfillm e n t o f requirements fo r the degree of D O C T O R O F P H IL O S O P H Y Date. COMMITT 'ATI' \Qirjndn\ COPYRIGHT BY FRANK PAUL BESAG 1966 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES iChapter I. THE PROBLEM, THE LIMITATIONS, THE DELIMITA TIONS, AND THE THEORETICAL FORMULATION OF THE STUDY .................................. I ] Introduction Statement of the Problem Limitations Delimitations Organization of the Remainder of the Dissertation The Theoretical Formulation of Alienation Parameters of Alienation Specific Hypotheses Drawn from the Theoretical Formulation Summary of the Chapter II. METHODOLOGY, VARIABLES, AND PROCEDURES . . . Methodology ; Variables Sampling I Design Samples Drawn from the Standardization Population Parameters of the Population of Tutorial Projects in the Los Angeles Area and the Samples Drawn from This Population Statistical Procedures | Summary of the Chapter i | III. STANDARDIZATION OF THE INSTRUMENT .......... I Introduction Face Validity of the Items Reliability of the Instrument Chapter Validity of the Instrument Item Discrimination Factors Found in the Standardization Population The Socioeconomic Status and Sex Variables Summary of the Chapter Findings Conclusions IV. THE EXPERIMENT............................. Introduction Reliability of the TT Scale Reliability of Individual Items on the TT Scale Factors Found in the TT Scale Discrimination of the Items Intercorrelations of Groups of Items The Independent Variable, Tutoring Time The First Confounding Factor, Socioeconomic Status The Second Confounding Factor, Educational Level Achieved The Third Confounding Factor, Sex The Fourth Confounding Factor, Age Items Which Segregated by Project The Post-Test Summary of Findings Relating to the Specific Hypotheses Listed in Chapter I Parameters of Alienation Summary of the Chapter V. IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH..................... Introduction Implications for Action in Education Possible Areas for Future Research Specific Recommendations for the Tutorial Projects Summary of the Chapter BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................ APPENDIX. Scales Used with the Standardization and Experimental Population ............... iii Page 175 289 303 308 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Socioeconomic Status by Sample ............... 118 2. Hypotheses Deduced from Chapter I and the Corresponding Items on the TT Scale .... 145 3. Point Biserial r of the Standardization Items 147 4. Distribution of Alienation Scores in Percentages................................ 149 5. Phi/Phimax of Rewrite Items and the Corres ponding Original I t e m ..................... 151 6. Intercorrelations Between Groups of Items . . 153 7. Percentage of MYes, f and 1lNo, f Replies on Each Item........................................ 156 8. "Top-Bottom” Analysis........................ 159 9. Intercorrelations of the Major Factors .... 161 10. Items Which Segregated by Socioeconomic Status 166 11. Items Which Segregated Each Class from Every Other Class or Showed a Trend from One Class to Another . ................... 167 12. Items Which Segregated by S e x ............... 171 13. Reliability Coefficients of the Instrument as Used with Separate Samples................. 176 14. Point Biserial r of All Items with Separate Samples.................................... 178 15. Distribution of Percentage Scores (Tutors and Tutees).................................... 182 16. Distribution of Scores (Tutees Only) ......... 183 iv Table Page 17. Distribution of Scores (Tutors Only) ......... 184 18. Intercorrelations of Major Factors ........... 187 19. Percentage of ,,Yes, t and ’’ No1’ Replies on Each Item.................................. 191 20. r,Top-Bottom, f Analysis........... 193 21. All Subjects Excluding Post-Test ............. 195 22. Projects A, ELA, W, WE Tutees......... 196 23. Project LA and MC Tutees............... 197 24. Projects A, ELA, W, and WE Tutors.......... 198 25. Projects LA and MC Tutors................... 199 26. Items Which Segregated by Tutoring Time . . . 203 27. Items Which Showed a Trend on Tutoring Time . 204 28. Items Which Showed a Trend on Tutoring Time . 205 29. Means and Standard Errors of Alienation Scores by Amount of Tutoring................ . 208 30. Items Which Segregated by Socioeconomic Status 212 31. Items Which Did Not Segregate by Socioeconomic Status ....................... 213 32. Items Which Showed a Trend on Socioeconomic Status................................ 214 33. Means and Standard Errors of Alienation Scores by Socioeconomic Status............. 215 t 34. Items Which Segregated by Socioeconomic Status, Tutees O n l y ......................... 217 35. Items Which Segregated by Socioeconomic Status, Tutees O n l y ......................... 219 36. Items Which Showed a Trend on Socioeconomic Status, Tutees O n l y ................. 221 v Table Page 37. Items Which Segregated by Socioeconomic Status, Tutors Only .................................. 223 38. Items Which Segregated by Socioeconomic Status, Tutors O n l y ......................... .. 225 39. Items Which Showed a Trend on Socioeconomic Status ....................... . . . . . . . . 226 40. Items Which Segregated by Educational Level . . 230 41. Items Which Segregated by Educational Level . . 232 42. Items Which Segregated by Educational Level . . 233 43. Items Which Segregated by Educational Level . . 234 44. Items Which Indicated a Trend on Educational Level ........................................ 236 45. Means and Standard Errors of Alienation Scores by Educational Level ......................... 237 46. Items Which Discriminated by Sex ............... 240 47. Means and Standard Errors of Alienation Scores by Sex, All Subjects ......................... 242 48. Items Which Segregated by Age ................. 244 49. Items Which Segregated by Age ................. 246 50. Items Which Segregated by Age ................. 247 51. Items Which Showed a Trend or Segregated .... 249 52. Means and Standard Errors of Alienation Scores by Age, All Subjects ......................... 250 53. Items Which Segregated by Projects ............. 254 54. Means and Standard Errors of Alienation Scores by Projects .................................. 255 55. Pre-Test and Post-Test Means and Standard Errors for Samples A and MC, Tutors and Tutees Combined.........................................260 vi Table Page 56. Pre-Test and Post-Test Means and Standard Errors for Samples A and MC, Tutees Only .......... 261 57. Pre-Test and Post-Test Means and Standard Errors for Samples A and MC, Tutors Only ........... 265 58. Items Which Segregated Between Matched Pre-Test and Post-Test Subjects, Projects A and MC Combined ...................................... 267 59. Items Which Segregated Between Matched Pre-Test and Post-Test Subjects, Project A ........... 269 60. Items Which Segregated Between Matched Pre-Test and Post-Test Subjects, Project MC ........... 270 I vii CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM, THE LIMITATIONS, THE DELIMITATIONS, AND THE THEORETICAL FORMULATION OF THE STUDY Introduction The author first became interested in the problem of alienation when he noticed that the students in his remedial classes had an entirely different attitude toward the school and the society which the school represented than did the students in his non-remedial classes. Further, although remedial students were, by definition, at least three years retarded educationally, they were by no means unintelligent or uncreative. Given the opportunity, they could express themselves lucidly (though not liter ally) . Approximately 85 per cent of the students in the remedial classes were lower-class Negro or Mexican, though the school was at least 50 per cent middle- and upper-class white. Lower-, middle-, and upper-class students all had the same teachers, went to the same school, used the same texts, and so on. Through questioning the lower-class, minority-status students with whom the author became friendly, it was determined that these students felt an 1 2 estrangement from both the school and the society. How ever, this estrangement was often alleviated through personal, one-to-one contact between teacher and student. It was noted that where this contact took place, the educa tional level of the child quickly improved. It was, there fore, hypothesized that alienation was a factor in the educational process, and that if there was some way to achieve a one-to-one relationship between the student and some representative of the conventional society, this alienation would be reduced. One attempt to work with lower-class children on a one-to-one basis was the tutorial projects. These projects were designed to aid lower-class minority-group children with their school work. One of the assumptions of this paper was that an attitude toward school work rather than only the work itself was learned. The concept of aliena tion was used as the vehicle to determine both the child's attitude toward his society and his school, and to deter mine any changes in this attitude caused by the tutorial situation. Statement of the Problem 3 There were three basic questions to be dealt with in this paper: 1 2 1. What were the parameters of alienation ? 2. Was it possible to develop a scale which could measure alienation and could be used with the population of this study? 3. What was the effect of tutoring (and the other variables, socioeconomic status, educational level, sex, and age) upon alienation? The first question was the most difficult for it involved synthesizing the thoughts of five major authors. Further, the question , f What is alienation?1 1 could not be fully answered for the experimental population until the data were examined. Therefore, the parameters listed at the end of this chapter were tentatively held until their relevance to the present study could be shown. The question of developing a new scale was equally difficult, but more specific in nature. There were a ■^Parameter was defined as the operational defini tion of a population, concept, sample, etc., i.e., those factors included under a particular rubric for the purposes of this study. 2 Alienation, Anomie« and Estrangement were used interchangeably to mean: the separation of the individual from himself (Marx, Fromm), from his work (Marx), from his society*s norms (Durkheim), and the conflict between desires and the means with which to satisfy these desires (Durkheim, Merton). For a fuller discussion, see Chapter II. 4 number of good scales of alienation which had been stand ardized, e.g., Srole's (45) and Nettler*s (42). Most of the standardization samples, however, were made up of college students and the scales were obviously designed for a population which could read and understand a college vocabulary, something not true of the population of this study. Determining the validity of the instrument was particularly difficult, since it was impossible to match the experimental population with a control group (see Chapter III). The reliability was easily determined through the use of the Kuder-Richardson and Spearman-Brown formulas (see Chapter III). The effect of tutoring upon alienation was the easiest to determine: here the data were of a specific nature, and, therefore, the interpretation was less prone to error. The question at hand was actually the experi mental variable, i.e., "What was the effect of tutoring on alienation?" In summary, then, there were three basic questions which the research attempted to answer: 1. For the population of this study, what were the parameters of alienation (Chapters I and IV)? 2. Could a scale of alienation be designed, vali dated, and made reliable for use with that population (Chapter III)? 3. What was the effect of tutoring upon alienation 5 (included here were the factors of socioeco nomic status, educational level, sex, and age)? (See Chapter V.) Limitations Originally the researcher hoped to be able (1) to compare the alienation scores with the grade-point averages of the subjects; (2) to interview the teachers to determine if there had been any noticeable change in the behavior or attitude of the tutees; (3) to give the questionnaire to the teachers in order to determine their alienation and see if the tutorial projects induced any change. It was not possible to investigate any of these questions since the Los Angeles City Schools had a number of rules prohibiting such activity. An approximation of the tutee1s grade-point average was attempted by asking the tutees what their grades were. However, it was concluded that this procedure had little or no reliability. This study did not concern itself with investigating the relationship of academic success to alienation, not through any oversight or desire on the part of the researcher, but rather due to necessity. The research was limited to the three questions asked under the statement of the problem. Delimitations 6 Alienation was discussed only as it related to the population at hand. This population included tutees"** and 2 3 tutors of those tutorial projects which were in operation in the Los Angeles Area during the academic year 1964-65, and the standardization population. (See Chapter II for a full discussion of the parameters of the population.) Organization of the Remainder of the Dissertation The remainder of Chapter I (the Theoretical Formu lation of Alienation) dealt primarily with the works of Marx, Durkheim, Merton, Fromm, and Seeman. Very little experimental research had been done on the specific topic of this dissertation; therefore, most of the recent research was referred to in the body of Chapters III and IV where it was brought to bear upon the empirical data of this study. Chapter II discussed the methodology, variables, " **A tutee was defined as anyone actively engaged in one of the tutorial projects in the Los Angeles Area and receiving academic aid from a tutor. 2 A tutor was defined as anyone actively engaged in one of the tutorial projects in the Los Angeles Area and giving academic aid to a tutee. 3 A tutorial project was defined as being made up of tutors and tutees in which academic aid was given to the tutee in a one-to-one or small group situation. 7 sampling procedures used, experimental design, parameters of the population and samples, and statistical procedures used in this study. Chapter III dealt with the standardization of the new scale of alienation which was used as the dependent variable in this study. Chapter IV dealt with the experimental data gathered in the process of the study. Included here were the findings of the study with regard to the hypotheses developed in Chapter I. Chapter V discussed conclusions, evaluations, recommendations, and suggestions for further research. The Theoretical Formulation of Alienation Introduction Between the time of Durkheim*s writings (1905) and those of Merton (1957), little was written on alienation. In the years since 1957 there was a revival of the concept of alienation. In these recent writings, however, there had been a dwindling of any systematic effort to define operationally the parameters of the concept. To be sure, there were those who discussed the concept generally. Paul Goodman, Paul Tillich, Viktor Frankl, Jules Henry, Betty Friedan, William Faulkner, Jean Paul Sartre, even Ernest Hemingway all discussed the conflict of the indi vidual with himself or with his society. David Reissman 8--- did the most systematic work in The Lonely Crowd. Even here, however, alienation was not specifically discussed. In 1938, Merton wrote ’’Social Structure and Anomie” (41), his first systematic categorization of deviant modes of adaptation to the cultural structure. But Merton did not pursue his discussion of Anomie until the publication of Social Theory and Social Structure. Here the discussion went further than the discussion of deviant behavior. Between the works of Marx and Durkheim and the publishing of Social Theory and Social Structure, there was little systematic discussion of alienation. During the five years previous to this dissertation, however, there was a great deal written under the rubric of ’’ alienation.” Much of this material consisted of a restatement of either Marx and Engels, Durkheim or Merton. In this chapter of the dissertation, no attempt was made to introduce empirical verification of the theories presented. The purpose here was to establish some of the parameters of alienation on the theoretical level and to draw from these parameters hypotheses applicable to the present paper. All five of the quoted authors cited either the research of others or their own research, but the emphasis was the theoretical formulation itself. Empirical validation of that formulation was the purpose of the chap ters which followed. Theories and research in the field of alienation 9 fell roughly into three categories: (1) value-oriented formulations which attempted to change the social structure or cultural structure; (2) non-value-oriented formulations which attempted to determine the parameters of alienation without regard to the effect of their work upon the social or cultural structure; and (3) compilatory and encyclopedic formulations which attempted to reorganize the theories of other men. The first category included the modern social critics (Goodman, Erikson, Tillich, May, Shills, Riesman, and Henry), the old revolutionaries (Marx and Engels), and the revolutionaries* modern counterparts (Fromm, Frieden- berg). All felt that the society was to blame for the ills of its members. The second category included those theorists, such as Durkheim and Merton, who attempted to eliminate most of the value-orientations from their formu lations. They attempted to gather only the social facts and report results, regardless of the social or cultural effects of their report. Merton, though included here, was also a compiler; his specific modes of adaptation were traced back to Durkheim and Marx. The concept of *’ modes of adaptation** to the social and cultural structures was original, however, even though the particular "modes*1 were not. The third group, the compilers, rather than adding anything new, attempted to systematize the works of other authors. Some of them did a great service by indicating 10 areas of specific interest and pointing out hypotheses for further research. Others did little but restate the posi tion of the original authors in new, and not always better, terms. These latter, who were in the majority, were not discussed in this paper. In addition, there were two sub groups of the three categories: (1) authors interested in deviant behavior (primarily criminologists and social- psychologists) and authors not interested in deviant behavior; (2) authors who wrote from the psychological perspective as opposed to those who wrote from the sociolog ical perspective. Though this dissertation dealt primarily with the sociological dimension, it was not possible to omit reference to the internal workings of the individual. In this chapter, then, the major theorists were discussed, the implications of their theories for this paper were listed, the hypotheses of concern to this paper were drawn from their theories, and the parameters of alienation were tentatively established. A Nineteenth-Century Value-Oriented Sociological Formulation Most theoretical formulations of alienation were based on the works of two authors--Marx and Durkheim. Marx, who was rarely understood as a social theorist, antedated the work of Durkheim by some sixty years. Marx and Engels were interested in the etiology of alienation and believed that alienation was caused by the social and 11 cultural structures. Their sociological work was largely denied recognition because those who agreed with their I economic theories forgot their theories of alienation as the cause of the revolution of the proletariat, and those who disagreed spent most of their time attempting to show that the theories did not withstand empirical research. Both missed the point. The relevance of Marx and Engels was that they were the originators of one branch of the (alienation theorists, namely, that branch which held society responsible for alienation. Any reading of Marx and Engels showed that an understanding of their theory of alienation was basic to an understanding of their economic theories. The revolution of the proletariat would not have occurred, according to Marx and Engels, without the worker becoming alienated from himself, his work, and his society. [The process was as follows: (1) through a division of labor came private ownership; (2) with private ownership came the estrangement of labor from itself and others; ( 3 ) through the realization that he was not free, the i worker became frustrated and rebelled in order to (4) restore the unity of work and thereby the unity of all men. The discussion here was not to be of the method with which f Marx and Engels proposed to re-establish this unity, since their method was outdated and impractical. Their doctrine of the economic system causing alienation was subsequently 12 discussed, however, since it was a theme which ran through one whole section of the literature on alienation (Fromm, Goodman, Henry, etc.). In order to understand fully Marx and Engels' theory of alienation, it was necessary to understand their concept of history as the cause of all social facts. Marx and Engels conceived of the individual history of persons and societies as the causal factor of every act within that society. Society was a totality of all of the things which had happened within the framework of that society; i.e., history and society were one. In Marx's words: Our conception of history depends on our ability to expound the real process of production, starting out from the simple material production of life, and to comprehend the form of intercourse connected with this and created by this (i.e., civil society in its various stages), as the basis of all history; further, to show it in its action as State; and so, from this starting-point, to explain the whole mass of different theoretical products and forms of consciousness, religion, philosophy, ethics, etc., and trace their origins and growth, by which means, of course, the whole thing can be shown in its totality (and therefore, too, the reciprocal action of these various sides on one another). (24:28) Within this framework of history, Marx and Engels felt that man was determined by his history; that is, man was made by circumstances, not circumstances by man. According to Marx, his conception of history . . . shows that history does not end by being resolved into "self-consciousness" as "spirit of the spirit," but that in it at each stage there is found a material result: a sum of productive forces, a historically created relation of indi viduals to nature and to one another, which is handed down to each generation from its predecessor; 13 a mass of productive forces, different forms of capital, and conditions, which, indeed, is modified by the new generation on the one hand, but also on the other prescribes for it its conditions of life and gives it a definite development, a special character. It shows that circumstances make men just as much as men make circumstances. (24:29) One of the difficulties with any theory of history was to account for both the equilibrium of the society and at the same time to account for the change within the same society. Normally this was accomplished through some doctrine of external forces (Pareto, Weber, and others). Marx and Engels, however, attempted to account for these seemingly contradictory aspects of society through the theory of interaction of spheres. There were three aspects of this theory. First, Marx and Engels pointed out that within each society there were the seeds of both equilibrium and change History is nothing but the succession of the separate generations, each of which exploits the materials, the forms of capital, the productive forces handed down to it by all preceding ones, and thus on the one hand continues the traditional activity in completely changed circumstances and, on the other, modifies the old circumstances with a completely changed activity. (24:38) Second, Marx and Engels pointed out that there was an inverse proportion between the size of the sphere of action of a society or individual and the independence of that individual and the other societies and individuals with which he came into contact. Thus, a national history became world history, or the reactional biography of an individual became the history of a society._______________ 14 The further the separate spheres, which interact on one another, extend in the course of this develop ment, the more the original isolation of the sepa rate nationalities is destroyed by the developed mode of production and intercourse and the division of labour naturally brought forth by these, the more history becomes world-history. Thus, for instance, if in England a machine is invented, which in India or China deprives countless workers of bread, and overturns the whole form of existence of these empires, this invention becomes a world- historical fact. (24:38) Third, Marx pointed out that this was not a process of ’’coming to consciousness” or ”self-consciousness” of history, which could be neither explained nor measured, but rather a concrete, material act which was amenable to proof. From this it follows that this transformation of history into world-history is not indeed a mere abstract act on the part of the ’’self-consciousness,” the world-spirit, or of any other metaphysical spectre, but a quite material, empirically verifi able act, an act the proof of which every individual furnishes as he comes and goes, eats, drinks and clothes himself. (24:39) Within any society, conflict was caused by the existence of two opposed classes. These two classes were usually differentiated on the basis of wealth, but not always on this basis. Marx and Engels referred to these two classes as the ’’ruling class” and the ’’ working class” or ’’ ruled class.” Though the distinction had become some what vague in our society, there were still ruling norms within our society. Further, there were some members of the society who contributed to the establishment of these norms and some who did not. Marx and Engels called the 15 contributors to the conventional norms of the society ”the ruling class” and the non-contributors ”the working class.” Seen in this light, Marx and Engels* theories were perti nent . Keeping in mind that Marx and Engels* concept of the ruling class was couched in the terminology of the first half of the nineteenth century, here was their state ment of the difference between the ruling and the ruled: The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas: i.e., the class, which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, gener ally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expres sion of the dominant material relationships, the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas; hence of the relationships which make the one class the ruling one, therefore the ideas of its domi nance. (24:39) A revolution occurred when the ruling class was challenged by a non-ruling class which better represented all of the non-ruling classes. If successful, the ruled became the rulers, and vice versa. The class making a revolution appears from the very start, merely because it is opposed to a class, not as a class but as the representative of the whole of society; it appears as the whole mass of society confronting the one ruling class. It can do this because, to start with, its interest really is more connected with the common interest of all other non-ruling classes, because under the pressure of conditions its interest has not yet been able to develop as the particular interest of a particular class. Its victory, therefore, benefits also many individuals of the other classes which are not_________ 16 winning a dominant position, but only in so far as it now puts these individuals in a position to raise themselves into the ruling class. (24:41) If, however, the ruling class controlled the norms of the society, how was it possible that the revolutionary class ever came into being? Here Marx and Engels devel oped, in a systematic fashion, the concept of nthe estrangement of labor.1 1 They saw the greatest alienation in the proletarian class. We have proceeded from the premises of political economy. We have accepted its language and its laws. We presupposed private property, the separa tion of labour, capital and land, and of wages, profit of capital and rent of land--likewise divi sion of labour, competition, the concept of exchange-value, etc. On the basis of political economy itself, in its own words, we have shown that the worker sinks to the level of a commodity and becomes indeed the most wretched of commodities; that the wretchedness of the worker is in inverse proportion to the power and magnitude of his produc tion; that the necessary result of competition is the accumulation of capital in a few hands, and thus the restoration of monopoly in a more terrible form; that finally the distinction between capitalist and land-rentier, like that between the tiller of the soil and the factory-worker, disappears and that the whole of society must fall apart into the two classes— the property-owners, and the propertyless workers. (23:67) The concept of the worker as a commodity was a precursor of the contemporary theories of the individual as manipulated object. The basic difference between the con struct as developed by Marx and Engels and the more modern writers was that the latter felt that the individual usually did not know that he was alienated. Another concept in which Marx and Engels antedated the modern 17 writers was that as emphasis was placed on material objects, man became devaluated. This concept as propounded by Marx and Engels was somewhat different than that of the modern writers. The former stated that the worker was exploited during his working hours and that the worker was not able to acquire consumer items to any great degree. Since the time of Marx and Engels, however, the capitalis tic system changed so that there was a large and thriving middle class. These workers were able to acquire most of the luxuries of the upper classes. But if Marx and Engels were right, the ruling classes would find another way to exploit the worker. According to Fromm, Goodman, Henry, and Merton this occurred in the form of exploitation of consumption. The success value and the consumption value were placed above the other values in our society. In brief, the process which Marx and Engels described took place in our modern society. The difference was that the worker was exploited after work rather than during work. The end product, however, was the same, viz., alienation. Marx and Engels described in the following way the process whereby the worker became alienated: The worker becomes all the poorer the more wealth he produces, the more his production increases in power and range. The worker becomes an ever cheaper commodity the more commodities he creates. With the increasing value of the world of things proceeds in direct proportion the devaluation of the world of men. Labour produces not only commodities: it produces itself and the worker as a commodity--and does so in the proportion in which it produces commodities generally._____________ 18 This fact expresses merely that the object which labour produces— labour*s product--confronts it as something alien. as a power independent of the pro ducer. The product of labour is labour which has been congealed in an object, which has become mate rial: it is the objectification of labour. Labour*s realization is its objectification. In the condi tions dealt with by political economy this realiza tion of labour appears as loss of reality for the workers; objectification as loss of the object and object-bondage: appropriation as estrangement, as alienation. {23:69) Marx and Engels went further than did Weber as they felt that the estrangement from work was the primary cause of alienation. The alienation of the worker in his product means not only that his labour becomes an object, an external existence, but that it exists outside him, independently, as something alien to him, and that it becomes a power on its own confronting him; it means that the life which he has conferred on the object confronts him as something hostile and alien. (23:70) Marx and Engels summarized their position on the estrangement of labor in the following way: What, then, constitutes the alienation of labour? First, the fact that labour is external to the worker, i.e., it does not belong to his essential being; that in his work, therefore, he does not affirm himself but denies himself, does not feel content but unhappy, does not develop freely his physical and mental energy but mortifies his body and ruins his mind. The worker therefore only feels himself outside his work, and in his work feels outside himself. He is at home when he is not working, and when he is working he is not at home. His labour is therefore not voluntary, but coerced; it is forced labour. It is therefore not the satisfaction of a need; it is merely a means to satisfy needs external to it. (23:72) We have considered the act of estranging prac tical human activity, labour, in two of its aspects. (1) the relation of the worker to the product of labour as an alien object exercising______ 19 power over him. The relation is at the same time the relation to the sensuous external world, to the objects of nature as an alien world antagonistically opposed to him. (2) The relation of labour to the act of production with the labour process. This relation is the relation of the worker to his own activity as an alien activity not belonging to him; it is activity as suffering, strength as weakness, begetting as emasculating, the worker1s own physical and mental energy, his personal life or what is life other than activity--as an activity which is turned against him, neither depends on nor belongs to him. Here we have seIf-estrangement. as we had previously the estrangement of the thing. (23:73-74) We have yet a third aspect of estranged labour to deduce from the two already considered. Man is a species being, not only because in practice and in theory he adopts the species as his object (his own as well as those of other things), but--and this is only another way of expressing it-- but also because he treats himself as the actual, living species; because he treats himself as a universal and therefore a free being. (23:74) The Implications of the Formulation of Marx and Engels for the Present Paper 1. The theory of two classes: Mthe rulers1 1 and Mthe ruled.*1 Marx equated the ruling class with the wealthy class. What operationally^ distinguished the rul ing class, however, was that it was the prime formulator of the dominant or conventional values. Defined in this way, our society also has a ruling class. It was not neces sarily a wealthy class, since reasonable affluence had come An operational definition was the definition of a concept, population, sample, etc., in terms of quantifiable measures or overt observable behavior; e.g., the parameters of Project A were defined in terms of observable, quantifi able variables. 20 to a large portion of the society, and was therefore not a distinction. But the ruling class still formulated the dominant ideas, i.e., the success value, normally measured in terms of pecuniary success (Merton); consumption of material goods (Fromm and Henry); unlimited desire (Good man, Fromm, Friedenberg). 2. Marx was the first writer to discuss work as it affected the worker. As the worker felt himself to be a commodity, he felt alienated from his work; he then felt /alienated from the self and eventually would revolt in order to re-establish unity with work and self. In our society there was alienation from work; it, in turn, caused alienation from the self and from the society in general. If there were a decrease in the worthiness of work, then there should have been an increase in alienation. 3. Any revolution would have been led by those who best represented the desires and feelings of all of the non-ruling classes. Hypotheses Drawn from the Formulations of Marx and Engels 1. There was little class differentiation on the understanding of cultural norms. 2. There was a class differential in the attitude toward these norms. 3. If the individual felt that the existent cultural norms were not the best which a society could 21 offer, then his alienation score would increase. 4. Under certain circumstances, the alienation became sufficiently intense that the individual became a revolutionary. In our society this usually took the form of deviant behavior rather than an active attempt to over throw the government. 5. Attitudes toward work had a high correlation to alienation score. 6. If the individual recognized the lack of oppor tunity presented to him by his society, his alienation score rose. 7. If, however, he felt that something were being done for him to improve his opportunities, his alienation score would recede. An Early Twentieth-Century Non-Value-Oriented Sociological Formulation Durkheim wrote some fifty years after Marx and was influenced by somewhat different factors. By Durkheim*s time, there was an attempt to make the social sciences as consistent as the physical sciences. There was an empha sis upon factoring concepts into smaller more manageable and quantifiable units. Durkheim was one of the leaders of this school. Durkheim did not discuss anomie as a generalized phenomenon, but rather centered his discussion on the social fact of suicide (an observation measurable within a 22 society). Durkheim felt that ". . .a given effect has always a single corresponding cause,*1 As an example of this theory, he postulated that there were three types of suicide and that they each had a different cause. Durkheim pointed out that there were different ways to give up one’s life. One could give one’s life for one’s country as in a war or for the good of the community as in hari-kari (altruistic suicide), to escape from the group (egoistic suicide), or one could give up one’s life because one felt that society’s norms had deteriorated to the point (indi vidual morality) that there was no longer any reason to \ live (anomic suicide). In the latter, Durkheim formally discussed alienation. Before discussing alienation, it was necessary to understand Durkheim*s concept of society. According to Durkheim, there were two basic forms of societies: (1) those characterized by mechanical solidarity or dominated by the collective consciousness; or (2) those characterized by organic solidarity and cominated by specialization, division of labor, and interdependence. The former type of society would have been called the ’’tradition directed society" by Riesman. In this society most of the people accepted the collective representations and the collective consciousness was pivotal. Because of the increase in the division of labor, the collective consciousness deteriorated, and with it, the 23 mechanical solidarity of the society. The transformation of social solidarity had begun. There was an observable shift from collective social consciousness to individual morality. With the advent of individual morality (i.e., the deterioration of the fixed norms of mechanical solidar ity) , the potential for alienation increased. Durkheim defined alienation as this lack of norms, or the feeling that the norms of society had nothing to do with one!s own life. Alienation could occur until such time as the indi vidual morality of each person separately merged into the collective consciousness of the society as a whole. Durkheim1s definition of alienation was dependent upon this distinction between societies characterized by mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity. In Durkheim* s words: No living thing can be contented, or even go on living, unless its wants are sufficiently harmonized with the means at its disposal. If these wants ^require more or something different than is avail able, they will constantly be thwarted and will be unable to function without pain. Now, a movement which cannot occur without pain tends not to be repeated. Tendencies which fail of fulfillment atrophy, and, since the urge to live is merely the resultant of all other tendencies, it cannot but weaken if these other tendencies lose their force. (39:52) Durkheim* s definition was based specifically upon the interaction of the individual and his society. That is, the individual had certain needs which had to be satis fied in order that he could function efficiently. Durkheim 24 pointed out that one of the things which caused a sharp rise in the suicide (alienation) rate was the lack of societal norms which were understood by all of the members of the society. The unique characteristic of man is the fact that the check to which he is subjected is not physical but moral, that is, social. He received his law not from a material environment which imposes itself upon him by brute force, but from a mind that is superior to his own, and whose superiority he realizes. Because the greater and better part of his life transcends the life of the body, he escapes the yoke of the body but becomes subject to that of society. (39:56) Specifically, Durkheim stated: People no longer feel sure about what is possible and what is not, what is just and what is unjust, which claims or aspirations are legitimate and which go beyond the bounds of propriety. As a result, there is nothing to which men do not lay claim. If the disturbance is at all profound, it affects even the principles which govern the distribution of individuals among the various occupations (the division of labor). (39:57) This problem was not so very different from the one which faced our society. Durkheim would not say that we have no consciences, but rather that we did not know what to do with them. We were in the state of individual morality. We were in a state of disequilibrium, which, in turn, led to normlessness or alienation. According to Durkheim, two things were necessary for the maintenance of societal and individual equilibrium: (1) there had to be some under standable limits to individual desires; and (2) the indi vidual had to have the feeling that his efforts were not in vain. If the first was missing, then the individuals_____ 25 desires would have been insatiable. As each desire was met another would take its place. But then, if no external force limits our feel ing, it can be by itself nothing but a source of pain. For unlimited desires are insatiable by definition, and it is not without reason that insa tiability is regarded as a sign of morbidity. (39:53) Durkheim did not conceive of a society which created rather than curbed these insatiable desires (7), and yet, many of the recent writers listed this as a probable cause of alienation. Henry discussed the way in which high school students were inculcated into a pleasure-seeking, consuming society (17). Friedan placed most of the blame for the "Feminine Mystique*1 upon the shoulders of the Madison Avenue society (9). Durkheim*s concept of societal curbs seemed to be negated by the norms of our society. If the society spurred appetites, then the societal norms should have increased alienation. Under these circumstances, as Fromm implied, the person who was not alienated from him self was alienated from society, but the person who was not alienated from society was alienated from himself (12). This was a difficult concept to fit into Durkheim*s formu lation, since he did not conceive of a society which would increase appetites and thereby increase alienation. But Durkheim would have postulated that in this type of society, alienation would be rampant. Whether or not the individual had to be aware of his alienation was not determined.___________________________________________________ 26 If the person felt that his goals were useless, too far removed from him, or that there was no progress toward the &oal, then the person would stop working toward the goal, or, in the extreme case, would commit suicide (stop everything). Whatever pleasure man may experience in acting, mov ing, exerting effort, he still needs to feel that his efforts are not futile and that as he travels he gets somewhere. But one does not progress when one is moving toward no goal, or, what comes to the same thing, when the goal toward which one is moving is infinitely far away. (39:53) According to Durkheim, it was not possible for a man to limit his own desires; for if man were left to his own designs, his desires would run rampant. There was, according to Durkheim, nothing within the individual which would tend to limit the desires. If the outcome is to be different, the first requisite is that bounds be set to the passions. Only then can they be harmonized with onefs powers and consequently gratified. But since there is nothing within the individual which can set a limit to his propensities, any such limitation must come from a source outside himself. (39:54) Rather than an internal force, Durkheim postulated a social or moral force. (He did, however, make a distinction between moral facts and social facts since 11. . . the most widespread social facts must be best since if they were not, they would have died out” [7].) The purpose of this social force was to re-establish the equilibrium which was lost because of the undue effect of the unlimited desires. 27 In other words, this power must itself be a moral (social) force. For it was the awakening of the mind which began to upset the equilibrium in which the animal lay sleeping; thus mind alone can pro vide the means for restoring it. Physical checks would be useless here; human passions cannot be changed by physico-chemical forces. To the extent that appetites are not curbed automatically by physiological mechanisms, they cannot be halted except by a limitation which they themselves recog nize as just. (39:54) Furthermore, it was not enough that the authority structure of the society force an individual to conform, for if the individual felt that his behavior was justified (as opposed to the behavior sanctioned by the society), he would con tinue to engage in the activity overtly or clandestinely. The only authority which had both the power and the persu asiveness to hold the individual in check was society itself. Yet they cannot prescribe this rule of justice to themselves, for the reasons we have indicated. They must receive it from an authority which they respect and before which they bow spontaneously. Only society, whether directly and as a whole, or indi rectly through one of its agencies, is in a position to play this restraining role; for it is the only moral power which is superior to the individual and which he acknowledges as superior. Society alone has the authority necessary to say what is right, and set for the passions the point beyond which they are not to go. (39:54) Within this framework it was possible for each person to know what the norms of his society were. It was possible for the individual to recognize the powers and rights of the others within his sphere of influence, and to recognize his position within that same framework. 28 Under this pressure, each person in his own orbit takes account in a general way of the extreme point to which his ambitions may go, and aspires to nothing beyond it. At least, if he respects the rule and submits to group authority--that is, if he is of sound moral make-up--he feels that it is not right to demand more. (39:55) This, then, was the basis for happiness while liv ing in a society. Generally speaking, everyone is then well adjusted to his station in life and desires only those things for which he can legitimately hope as the normal reward for his efforts. Moreover, a man is not thereby condemned to immobility. He can try to embellish or improve his life; but such attempts may fail without leaving him despondent. For, as he enjoys what he has, and does not put his whole soul into seeking what he has not, he may not succeed in getting all the new things he desired and hoped to acquire, without feeling that he has lost everything at the same time. The essentials he still has. The equilibrium of his happiness is stable because it is determinate and a few disappointments are not enough to upset it. (39:55) In this situation an individual could see his goals and could see himself eventually arriving at these goals. At the same time, his goals were not beyond his reach. In brief, the society recognized the needs of the individual and the individual recognized the limitations placed upon him by society. What, then, could have caused anomie within a person or a society? The first indication of disequilib rium within the society was the belief that the mores of the society were maintained by their own momentum rather than because anyone believed in them. When this occurred, those who were supposedly held in check by the patterns of 29 the society would feel ill at ease with these norms. (Durkheim attempted to make a case for the non-equality of individuals on the basis of their natural gifts. There would always be some who would be meant to rule and others who would be meant to follow [39:54].) The consequence of this alienation was that the society would be racked by revolt. This rarely occurred, however, since most societies were made up of individuals who accepted the values of the conventional society. (This was one of the major points of conflict between Durkheim and Marx.) Moreover, the majority of the members of society not only accepted the values of the society but felt that these values were the best which any society could offer. But this state of disturbance is unusual; it occurs only when society is passing through some abnormally disturbed period of transition. Normally, the social order is acknowledged as equitable by the vast majority of its subjects. Thus, when we say that an authority is required to impose this order upon the individuals, we do not imply at all that violence is the only means by which it can be imposed. Because this control is to restrain the passions of individ uals, it must emanate from a power which can master these individuals; but it is equally true that this power must be obeyed from respect and not from fear. (39:56) The individual, then, was, and of necessity had to be, controlled by society. It was the only agency which could control him. It was the only agency which had both the power through holding the respect of the majority of the people. 30 The unique characteristic of man is the fact that the check to which he is subjected is not physical but moral, that is, social. He receives his law not from a material environment which imposes itself upon him by brute force, but from a mind that is superior to his own, and whose superiority he realizes. Because the greater and better part of his life transcends the life of the body, he escapes the yoke of the body but becomes subject to that of society. (39:56) Equilibrium could be turned to disequilibrium when the society was no longer capable of exercising authority over the individual. One of the definitions which Durkheim gave of alienation was that the individual no longer knew what the bounds (norms) of his existence were. Durkheim found that where the society was normless there was a dis tinct rise in the suicide rate. This was what led him to his discussion of alienation as one cause of suicide. However, when society is disturbed or disorgan ized, whether by a painful crisis or by a fortunate but too sudden turn of events, it is temporarily incapable of exercising this influence upon the individual; and such conditions lead to those abrupt rises in the suicide curve which we have proved in a preceding section of this book. (39:56) Durkheim's definition of normlessness was that: People no longer feel sure about what is possible and what is not, what is just and what is unjust, which claims or aspirations are legitimate and which go beyond the bounds or propriety. As a result, there is nothing to which men do not lay claim. (39:57) Durkheim also pointed out the difference between a society which was normless and one which was not. Since a body of rules is the definite form which spontaneously established relations between social functions take in the course of time, we can say, a priori, that the state of anomie is impossible__________ 31 wherever solitary organs are sufficiently in contact or sufficiently prolonged. In effect, being contig uous, they are quickly warned, in each circumstance, of the need which they have of one another, and, consequently, they have a lively and continuous sentiment of their mutual dependence. For the same reason that exchanges take place among them easily, they take place frequently; being regular, they regularize themselves accordingly, and in time the work of consolidation is achieved. Finally, because the smallest reaction can be felt from one part to another, the rules which are thus formulated carry this imprint; that is to say, they foresee and fix, in detail, the conditions of equilibrium. But, on the contrary, if some opaque environment is inter posed, then only stimuli of a certain intensity can be communicated from one organ to another. Rela tions, being rare, are not repeated enough to be determined; each time there ensues new groping. The lines of passage taken by the streams of movement cannot deepen because the streams themselves are too intermittent. If some rules do come to constitute them, they are, however, general and vague, for under these conditions it is only the most general contours of phenomena that can be fixed. (7:368-369) This, then, was the basic theory of anomie as stated by Durkheim: (1) Under normal circumstances the society was capable of checking the rampant desires of the individual and at the same time to fulfill his needs for success and happiness; (2) the society due to its power and the respect in which it was held was the only agency capa ble of exercising this control over the individual; (3) in some instances the society lost the power to control the desires of the individual; and (4) under those circum stances both the society and the individual became alienated. 32 Implications of the Work of Durkheim for This Paper 1. Durkheim*s major contribution was in formally stating a definition of and the parameters of alienation. Alienation was defined as the lack of harmony between desires and the means for achieving those desires. If the desires of the individual were insatiable or the means for achieving goals were not available, alienation was the result. 2. Durkheim discussed the unlimited desires of man as a source of alienation since man had no means for achieving these unlimited desires. In our society it was the purpose of the ruling classes to create desire and, if possible, to create unlimited desire (Henry, Goodman, Friedan). Durkheim had not envisioned such a society. The basic concept, however, that unlimited desires led inevit ably to alienation still held. 3. If the conventional goals of the society (norms) were not understood by the individual, then aliena tion (normlessness) occurred. There was confusion of norms in our society (see Friedenberg, Henry, Goodman, Fromm, Horney, Merton). 4. The concept that individual morality character ized the alienated society (as opposed to mechanical solidarity which characterized the non-alienated society) was applicable since there had been a breakdown of the 33 "moral dictates" (mechanical solidarity) of the society. There was an increase in the attitude that the individual was the last and only authority in matters of conscience. Under these circumstances, it was possible to postulate that the society as a whole was alienated, or at least those portions of society which indicated a desire for individual morality. Hypotheses Which Were Drawn from the Formulations of Durkheim 1. If there was a feeling of disjunction between the desires of the subject and his ability to achieve these desires, then there was an increase in the alienation score. 2. If the subject had unlimited desires, then he manifested alienation. 3. If the subject did not understand the norms of the conventional society, then he was in a state of norm- lessness. 4. A belief in individual morality by a majority of the subjects was an indication that the society as a whole was alienated. 5. A belief that life was ruled by luck or fate indicated that the subject was alienated. 6. An indication of alienation was the subject’s belief that regardless of how hard he worked, little would come of it. 34 7. A feeling of dissatisfaction with societal norms was an indication that the subject was alienated. 8. If the society established unattainable goals, alienation would increase. 9. If the subject believed that the rules of the society were arbitrary or had no reference to him, aliena tion was increased. 10. In all of the foregoing, if there was an increase in the alienation score, the subject either would withdraw (suicide) or attack and attempt to change the system. A Modern Compilation-Original Sociological Formulation As previously noted, it was difficult to place Merton into a specific category. To some authorities Merton was one of the truly great original sociological thinkers of our time. In his discussion of alienation, however, he relied heavily upon both Durkheim and Marx. For this reason he was placed into the category of a com piler and that of an original thinker. His unique concepts were more fully discussed in this paper than were his compilatory contributions. Merton attempted to fill the void which had been created by the lack of any really systematic attempt to determine the operational parameters of alienation. Since the writings of Durkheim no author really attempted to 35 discuss the parameters of alienation as a social phenome non. In order to establish some theoretical framework Merton wrote "Social Structure and Anomie."'*' His original interest was deviant modes of adaptation to social and cultural structures. In the introduction Merton explained his purposes. The framework set out in this essay is designed to provide one systematic approach to the analysis of social and cultural sources of deviant behavior. Our primary aim is to discover how some social structures exert a definite pressure upon certain persons in the society to engage in non-conforming rather than conforming conduct. If we can locate groups peculiarly subject to such pressures, we should expect to find fairly high rates of deviant behavior in these groups, not because the human beings comprising them are compounded of distinctive biological tendencies but because they are respond ing normally to the social situation in which they find themselves. Our perspective is sociological. We look at variations in the rates of deviant behavior, not at its incidence. Should our quest be at all successful, some forms of deviant behavior will be found to be as psychologically normal as conformist behavior, and the equation of deviation and psychological abnormality will be put in ques tion. (27:132) According to Merton there were two basic elements within social structure. The first of these was the cultural structure or goals of the society. Merton's original work on alienation was written in 1938 under the title "Social Structure and Anomie." In his later work, Social Theory and Social Structure, he enlarged upon the earlier work. Since the two chapters in Social Theory and Social Structure were more complete and since this work was considered to be Merton's greater work, it was used here as the major source for the discussion of Merton. 36 Among the several elements of social and cultural structures, two are of immediate importance. These are analytically separable although they merge in concrete situations. The first consists of cultur ally defined goals, purposes and interests, held out as legitimate objectives for all or for diversely located members of the society. (27:132) The second element of the social structure was the means of social structure which the society found accept able . A second element of the cultural structure defines, regulates and controls the acceptable modes of reaching out for these goals. Every social group invariably couples its cultural objectives with regulations, rooted in the mores or institutions, of allowable procedures for moving toward these objec tives. (27:133) These two elements worked in conjunction but they were not to be confused, for the goals which the society approved may not have been amenable to the means which the society approved for reaching them. Both the goals and the means were limited by social norms. But the means were the more limited of the two, since the means by their nature were more visible. However, according to Merton, aliena tion was defined as (1) the conflict of the individual with societal goals, or (2) that these goals were acceptable to him but that conventional means were not accessible. Merton*s definition of alienation was based on deviance; therefore his classification was concerned with the modes of adaptation to the conventional norms. In other words, deviation from one of the four basic control mechanisms of the society. Merton lists these mechanisms 37 as follows: They are subject to a wide gamut of control. They may represent definitely prescribed or preferential or permissive or proscribed patterns of behavior. In assessing the operation of social controls, these variations--roughly indicated by the terms prescrip* tion. preference« permission and proscription"-must of course be taken into account. (27:133) According to Merton, who in this case used Perato*s concept of equilibrium (29), a balance was maintained so long as the individual felt that there was good reason to accept the prescriptions, preferences, permissions, and proscriptions of the society. The individual also had to have the feeling that the goals and the means to achieve these goals were within his reach. An effective equilibrium between these two phases of the social structure is maintained so long as satisfaction accrues to individual conforming to both cultural constraints, viz.„ satisfactions from the institutionally canalized modes of striving to attain them. (27:134) Merton*s discussion was almost wholly sociological in viewpoint. Whereas some authors had defined alienation psychologically as a purely internal mechanism, Merton felt that the society itself was the major factor in turning the individual against himself and society. Merton wished to maintain a strict division between the psychological’ * ' and sociological concepts of anomie. He stated that there was Psychological alienation was alienation from the self manifested most often by withdrawal or aggression. The etiology was usually some sort of psycho-neurotic syndrome. 2 __________Sociological alienation was alienation from the 38 a need to distinguish the concept of alienation as a state of mind as opposed to alienation as a state of the society. That the psychological concept of anomie has a defi nite referent, that it refers to identifiable "states of mind1 1 of particular individuals, is beyond ques tion, as the crowded casebooks of psychiatrists attest. But the psychological concept is neverthe less a counterpart of the sociological concept of anomie, and not a substitute for it. (27:162) In order to define alienation accurately Merton distinguished between the social and cultural structure. He felt that this distinction indicated a source of con flict between the individual and his society. The sociological concept of anomie, as developed in the preceding pages, presupposes that the salient environment of individuals can be usefully thought of as involving the cultural structure, on the one hand, and the social structure, on the other. It assumes that, however intimately connected these in fact are, they must be kept separate for purposes of analysis before they are brought together again. In this connection, cultural structure may be defined as that organized set of normative values governing behavior which is common to members of a designated society or group. And by social struc ture is meant that organized set of social relation ships in which members of the society or group are variously implicated. Anomie is then conceived as a breakdown in the cultural structure, occurring particularly when there is an acute disjunction between the cultural norms and goals and the socially structured capacities of members of the group to act in accord with them. In this conception, cultural values may help to produce behavior which is at odds with the mandates of the values themselves. (27:162) society, manifested by normlessness, a sense of powerless ness, or meaninglessness. This form of alienation usually resulted in innovation, conformity, retreatism, rebellion, or ritualism (Merton). The etiology was sociological, i.e., the society was both the cause and potential cure. 39 In brief, the "cultural structure1 1 indicated the goals of society. The flsocial structure” indicated the means by which an individual could legitimately arrive at the cultural structure. Alienation was defined as that state where these two structures were in conflict or where the individual was in conflict with the proscription or prescriptions of the structures. For example, in our society the cultural structure emphasized competition and success to the detriment of an equal emphasis upon the social structure (means) to be used to arrive at these values. If concern shifts exclusively to the outcome of com petition, then those who perennially suffer defeat may, understandably enough, work for a change in the rules of the game. (27:134) However, when we consider the full configuration-- poverty, limited opportunity and the assignment of cultural goals--there appears some basis for explaining the higher correlation between poverty and crime in our society than in others where rigidified class structure is coupled with differen tial class symbols of success. (27:147) In the competitive society, such as ours, there had to be sufficient incentive on every level for the indi vidual to remain satisfied with his status. The wise leaders, then, attempted to establish some form whereby the individual at the lowest level felt as much a part of the over-all structure as did those of the upper positions, e.g., the attempt on the part of many businesses to inspire loyalty to the firm by inculcating a pseudo-teamanship. The feeling that the individual had a stake in the_________ 40 organization was a powerful deterrent to the feeling that the situation had to be changed. As Marx and Engels pointed out, the major cause of revolt was the feeling on the part of the worker that he had no contact with the product. The distribution of statuses through competition must be so organized that positive incentives for adherence to status obligations are provided for every position within the distributive order. Otherwise, as will soon become plain, aberrant behavior ensues. It is, indeed, my central hypoth esis that aberrant behavior may be regarded socio logically as a symptom of dissociation between culturally prescribed aspirations and socially structured avenues for realizing these aspirations. (27:134) Here, the individual felt that he was being frus trated by rather specific forces which kept him from achieving the culturally prescribed goals. What, then, of the society in which the goals had become dominant and there was a lack of interest in, or knowledge of, the pre scribed means to achieve these goals? This question was incorporated into Mertonfs definition of an alienated society. No society lacks norms governing conduct. But societies do differ in the degree to which the folk ways, mores and institutional controls are effec tively integrated with the goals which stand high in the hierarchy of cultural values. The culture may be such as to lead individuals to center their emotional convictions upon the complex of cultur ally acclaimed ends, with far less emotional support for prescribed methods of reaching out for these ends. With such differential emphases upon goals and institutional procedures, the latter may be so vitiated by the stress on goals as to have the behavior of many individuals limited only by con- siderations of technical expediency. In this__________ 41 context, the sole significant question becomes: Which of the available procedures is most efficient in netting the culturally approved value? The technically most effective procedure, whether cul turally legitimate or not, becomes typically pre ferred to institutionally prescribed conduct. As this process of attenuation continues, the society becomes unstable and there develops what Durkheim called "anomie** (or normlessness). (27:135-136) In the American society there was little possibil ity of achieving the cultural goal of absolute success. The end product, therefore, was a society in which the individual was almost certain to manifest some alienation. Moreover, in the American Dream there is no final stopping point. The measure of "monetary success1 1 is conveniently indefinite and relative. At each income level, as H. F. Clark found, Americans want just about twenty-five per cent more (but of course this "just a bit more" continues to operate once it is obtained). In this flux of shifting standards, there is no stable resting point, or rather, it is the point which manages always to be njust ahead." An observer of a community in which annual salaries in six figures are not uncommon, reports the anguished words of one victim of the American Dream: "In this town, I'm snubbed socially because I only get a thousand a week. That hurts.1* (27:136) With the emphasis upon the financial goal, there was a lessening of the emphasis upon the means for achiev ing that goal, although there were still the conceived values which seemed to place a great deal of emphasis upon honesty, diligence, truthfulness, and so on. All of these were means, not goals. Here there was not only the con flict between the individual's non-achievable goals and his inability to achieve a non-achievable goal, but also there was the basic conflict between the illicit means which the society seemed to tacitly approve ("everybody cheats on his 42 income tax,1 1 etc.) and the conceived values of the society ("honesty is the best policy*') . A further difficulty, as Merton had pointed out, was that the society refused to allow the individual to curb his ambitions. In this way the structure increased the patterned defect. As had been pointed out, neither Marx nor Durkheim conceived of this type of society. Merton conceived of it as follows: Coupled with this positive emphasis upon the obligation to maintain lofty goals is a correlative emphasis upon the penalizing of those who draw in their ambitions. Americans are admonished "not to be a quitter" for in the dictionary of American culture, as in the lexicon of youth, "there is no such word as 'fail.'" The cultural manifesto is clear; one must not quit, must not cease striving, must not lessen his goals, for "not failure, but low aim, is crime." (27:138-139) Merton stated his position that in our society the feeling that success was inherent in the way of things permeated the whole society. This was distinctive since in many societies the upper classes maintained rigid class distinctions. (The latter was true of the society in which Marx lived. He, therefore, felt that his task was to con vince the workers that their lot could be better.) Ours was the only society which seemed to insist that everyone had the opportunity and the obligation to become rich, Merton maintained. The only things needed were hard work, honesty, truthfulness, and so on. But what makes American culture relatively dis tinctive in this regard and what was taken as central to the analysis of this case in the foregoing chapter 43 is that this is ,fa society which places a high premium on economic affluence and social accent for all its members., f (27:167) The distinctive nature of this cultural doctrine is twofold: first, striving for success is not a matter of individuals happening to have acquisitive impulses, rooted in human nature, but is a socially- defined expectation, and second, this patterned expectation is regarded as appropriate for everyone, irrespective of his initial lot or station in life. (27:167) If the whole culture expected success of all of its members, it would define failure in terms of personal inadequacy rather than in terms of the nature of the society, e.g., the poor were poor because they were lazy. There was an immoral tone to failure. This leads naturally to the subsidiary theme that success or failure are results wholly of per sonal qualities; that he who fails has only himself to blame, for the corollary to the concept of the self-made man is the self-unmade man. To the extent that this cultural definition is assimilated by those who have not made their mark, failure repre sents a double defeat: the manifest defeat of remaining far behind in the race for success and the implicit defeat of not having the capacities and moral stamina needed for success. (27:168) The lack of emphasis upon means increased the inci dence of deviant behavior through a lessening of negative sanctions on proscriptions. It is in this way that the culturally established goal moves toward sanctifying all those means which enable one to attain it. This is what was meant in the foregoing essay by the process of "de-moraliza- tion,*' in which norms are robbed of their power to regulate behavior, and the "normlessness" component of anomie ensues. (27:167) According to Merton, Cohen, Parson, Fromm, and others, there were three basic agencies which transmitted 44 to the young the values of the society: the family, the school, and the workplace. Both defective and non-defec tive patterns were inculcated. The family, the school and the workplace— the major agencies shaping the personality structure and goal formation of Americans--join to provide the inten sive disciplining required if an individual is to retain intact a goal that remains elusively beyond reach, if he is to be motivated by the promise of a gratification which is not redeemed. As we shall presently see, parents serve as a transmission belt for the values and goals of the groups of which they are a part--above all, of their social class or of the class with which they identify themselves. And the schools are of course the official agency for the passing on of the prevailing values, with a large proportion of the textbooks used in city schools implying or stating explicitly ’’that educa tion leads to intelligence and consequently to job and money success.1’ Central to this process of disciplining people to maintain their unfulfilled aspirations are the cultural prototypes of success, the living documents testifying that the American Dream can be realized if one but has the requisite abilities. (27:137) In summary, then, . . . the culture enjoins the acceptance of three cultural axioms: First, all should strive for the same lofty goals since these are open to all; second, present seeming failure is but a way- station to ultimate success; and third, genuine failure consists only in the lessening or withdrawal of ambition. (27:139) Assuming that there were certain societal prescrip tions and proscriptions, and that our society in particular was prone to some sort of societal dislocation, Merton's major contribution to the study of anomic behavior was a categorization of the types of individual adaptations to the anomic situation. Merton took the sociological per- spective in that all of the adaptations were between the 45 individual and his society. It would have been false to i 1 say that Merton did not recognize the internal psycholog ical processes involved. It would be more accurate to say that he felt that they were not as easily defined or measured as were the sociological dimensions. These categories refer to role behavior in specific types of situation, not to personality. They are t types of more or less enduring response, not types of personality organization. (27:140) i \ Basically, Merton described five modes of individ- i ual adaptation to social conflicts: (I) Conformity, (II) Innovation, (III) Ritualism, (IV) Retreatism, (V) Rebel lion. In terms of the social and cultural structure, Merton diagrammed these five as follows (27:140): Culture Institutionalized Goals Means I. Conformity 4* 4- II. Innovation 4* - III. Ritualism - 4* IV. Retreatism - - V. Rebellion ir + Conformity.--Merton did not discuss this form of adaptation at any great length since it was not a form of deviant behavior. Further, the type of society which engendered this form of adaptation did not manifest con flict between the goals and means prescribed by the society. By implication it was assumed that most of the members of the society felt that their needs for satisfac- i tion were being met. 46 Innovation.— Innovation was the most significant mode of adaptation to Merton. This mode was most often used in a society which placed great emphasis upon goals to the detriment of an emphasis upon means. Since this was true of the United States and much of Western Europe (there was also some indication that the Soviet Union was follow ing this pattern), it was logical that Merton spent the greatest amount of time on this mode. The basic concept here was that there was an internalization of the conven tional goals without an equal internalization of the conventional means. Great cultural emphasis upon the success-goal invites this inode of adaptation through the use of institutionally proscribed but often effective means of attaining at least the simulacrum of success— wealth and power. This response occurs when the individual has assimilated the cultural emphasis upon the goal without equally internalizing the institutional norms governing ways and means for its attainment. (27:141) It was interesting to note that Merton never really came to grips with the concept of conceived*- versus opera- 2 tional values. For what Merton was basically saying was that the operational and conceived virtue or goal (money) was difficult to achieve through the conceived virtues or Conceived values were defined as the manifest values of the society, i.e., the stated beliefs which may or may not have been practiced. 2 Operant or operational values were defined as the actual behavior of most of the members of a society. These values may or may not have been in conflict with the con ceived values. 47 means (honesty, truthfulness, pride in work, etc.) but was not as difficult to achieve through operational virtues or means (cheating on taxes, built-in inefficiency, etc.). In this type of society it was functional for the individual to innovate since innovation became the only way in which he could achieve. The moral mandate to achieve success thus exerts pressure to succeed, by fair means if possible and by foul means if necessary. The moral norms of course continue to reiterate the rules of the game and to call for "fair play," even while behavior departs from the norm. On occasion, however, even success-manuals urge men to "go in and win" by mak ing use of all available means of scrambling ahead of competitors, as in the understandably anonymous tract of 1878, How to Become Rich. (27:169) Assuming that this innovation was not culturally approved, there were basically two types of innovation which were possible. The first of these was the form of innovation which was not culturally proscribed, i.e., there were few if any negative sanctions placed upon these forms of innovation. This was what Sutherland referred to as "white collar crime" (47). This form of deviant behav ior rarely was negatively sanctioned by the society. It may have been publicly frowned upon, but it was practiced by most of the members of the society. The second form of innovation was culturally proscribed, i.e., it was a form of innovation which was negatively sanctioned by the society. It usually was placed under the rubric of "crime," which included many things other than garden variety criminal behavior, e.g., desertion, child neglect, 48 and so on. According to Merton, the reason that there was a difference in the crime rate in the various classes was that there was a differential opportunity to achieve alter nate solutions to the problem of attaining wealth. It first was proved that the desire for financial aggrandize ment (cultural structure) was not limited to the upper and middle classes. Merton pointed to the study of the National Opinion Research Center in order to help validate this point. Given the American stigmatization of manual labor which has been found to hold rather uniformly in all social classes, and the absence of realistic oppor tunities for advancement beyond this level, the result is a marked tendency toward deviant behavior. The status of unskilled labor and the consequent low income cannot readily compete in terms of established standards of worth with the promises of power and high income from organized vice, rackets and crime. (27:145) According to some authorities, this conflict between prescribed cultural goals and available social means, through alienation, caused the lower-class individ ual to retreat into a lower-class subculture which was qualitatively different from the conventional culture. The problem of the qualitative difference between social classes was most systematically discussed by criminolo gists. They believed that there was a qualitative differ ence between the life ethic of the criminal and the life ethic of the non-criminal. This criminal ethic (according to Reckless. Closer and Ohlin; Cohen; etc.) was largely 49 restricted to the lower class. This ’’subculture of delin quency” was the reason for a higher crime and juvenile delinquency rate among members of the lower classes. If this ”sub-cultural” theory held, then the cause of juvenile delinquency, at least on the lower-class level, could be laid to the lower-class subculture. In order for Merton’s concept of alienation to be consistent, however, it had to be assumed that the values of the conventional society were not limited to the members of the upper strata, i.e., if there were a basic difference between the ethic of the lower and the other classes, then Merton would have had to leave any discussion of the lower class to some area other than that of alienation. Further, he pointed out that innovation was the largest single mode of adaptation to the society and that the lower classes (lower middle and upper lower) were those which were most prone to innovation. If the lower classes were of a different subculture than the conventional society, then, by definition, they were not innovating on the conventional values. For this reason, Merton discussed the problem of the assimilation of success values across class lines at some length. The first thing which Merton pointed out was that it was not necessary that all of the members of the lower classes adopt the conventional success value. Rather it was necessary that a "substantial number” accept them. 50 In view of the data which are subsequently presented, it becomes essential to state this assumption more clearly by qualifying it: the analysis assumes that some individuals in the lower economic and social strata actually adopt the success-goal. For, after all, the analysis holds not that all or most members of the lower strata are subject to pressure toward nonconformist behavior of the various kinds set out in the typology of adaptation, but only that more of them are subject to this pressure than of those in the higher strata. On the hypothesis under review, deviant behavior is still the subsidiary pattern and conformity the modal pattern. It is therefore suffi cient that a sizable minority of the lower strata assimilate this goal for them to be differentially subject to this pressure as a result of their rela tively smaller opportunities to achieve monetary success. (27:171) In a later section, Merton defined what was meant by a " substantial number.” By a "substantial number," then, is meant a number sufficiently large to result in a more frequent disjunction between goals and opportunity among the lower-class strata than among the more advantaged upper-class strata. It may even be, though adequate empirical data on this are still wanting, that this disjunction is more frequent in the lower strata than in the middle strata, since the evidently larger number of middle-class Americans adopting the success-goal may include a sufficiently smaller proportion who are seriously impeded in their efforts to reach out toward this goal. (27:174-175) In his critique of the empirical data on social class differences, Merton pointed out that most of the studies which purported to discuss the social class vari able in terms of aspiration, dealt in percentages rather than in absolute numbers. Since there was almost always less representation of the upper classes than of the lower, the total number of individuals in the lower classes who had high aspirations was much higher than the total number 51 of the upper classes even though the percentages seemed to indicate the opposite Merton*s discussion was not particu larly clear on this point. His feeling seemed to be that there was far more assimilation of the success value than was usually suspected. Merton gave some rather specific areas in which further research was needed. Further research will have to solve the difficult problem of obtaining systematic data on both goals and on patterned access to opportunity and of analyzing these jointly to see whether the combina tion of lofty aspirations and small opportunity occurs with substantially different frequency in various social strata, groups, and communities and whether, in turn, these differentials are related to differing rates of deviant behavior. Schemat ically, this would call for data on socially pat terned differentials in 1* exposure to the cultural goal and norms regulating behavior oriented toward that goal; 2. acceptance of the goal and norms as moral mandates and internalized values; 3* relative accessibility to the goal: life- chances in the opportunity-structure; 4. the extent of discrepancy between the accepted goal and its accessibility; 5. the degree of anomie: and 6• the rates of deviant behavior of the various kinds set out in the typology of modes of adaptation. (27:175) It will become possible to locate the structural places in American society, for example, where the disjunction between the cultural values enjoining people to aim for certain goals and the patterned possibilities or living up to these values is at a maximum. Such inquiry would counter any unthinking tendency to assume that American society is uni formly riddled with anomie. It would search out, QP—the contrary, the statuses in the structure of______ 52 American society which entail the greatest diffi culty for people to live up to the normative requirements, for this is what is meant by saying that the disjunction between accepted norms and opportunities for socially rewarded conformity to these norms f,exerts pressure*’ for deviant behavior and produces anomie. (27:176) Finally, Merton pointed out that even though the statis tical information regarding crime rates in the various classes was incomplete and biased, it still seemed to indi cate greater tendency to innovate in the lower social strata. But whatever the differential rates of deviant behavior in the several social strata, and we know from many sources that the official crime statistics uniformly showing higher rates in the lower strata are far from complete or reliable, it appears from our analysis that the greatest pressures toward deviation are exerted upon the lower strata. (27:144) According to Merton, we then had the situation in the lower classes in which the individual felt that he should have been able to attain the cultural structure goal (money), and yet he felt that he was blocked from achieving this end. For our purposes, these situations exhibit two salient features. First, incentives for success are provided by the established values of the cul ture and second, the avenues available for moving toward this goal are largely limited by the class structure to those of deviant behavior. It is the combination of the cultural emphasis and the social structure which produces intense pressure for deviation. Recourse to legitimate channels for ’’ getting in the money” is limited by a class struc ture which is not fully open at each level to men of good capacity. (27:145) It is only when a system of cultural values extols, virtually above all else, certain common success- goals for, the population at large while the social_____ 53 structure rigorously restricts or completely closes access to approved modes of reaching these goals for a considerable portion of the same population, that deviant behavior ensues on a large scale. (27:146) This was approximately the position of Cohen in Delinquent Bovs (6). Cohen felt that the values of the conventional society pervaded the whole spectrum of the culture. One of the primary methods of transmission of these cultural values (particularly the financial ones) was the school. Cohen felt that as the child found that he was blocked from achieving the goal set forth by the society, he developed a Mreaction formation*’ and thereby came to hate everything which the society stood for. In this way, the lower-class child entered a subculture of delinquency which would determine his actions from that point on. Clower and Ohlin, Reckless, and other cultural determinists also felt that there was a subculture of delinquency but were not as specific as to how the subculture evolved. Whether or not there was a subculture of a delin quency, one of the basic hypotheses deduced from Merton was that there was some relation between class and alienation. For as Merton had pointed out, incompatible demands were made upon the lower-class child. Of those located in the lower reaches of the social structure, the culture makes incompatible demands. On the one hand, they are asked to orient their conduct toward the prospect of large wealth-- ’’Every man a king,” said Marden and Carnegie and Long--and on the other, they are largely denied effective opportunities to do so institutionally. (27:146)_____________________________________________ 54 Blocked opportunity, however, was not sufficient to explain the increase in crime. Something more was needed. Poverty as such and consequent limitation of oppor tunity are not enough to produce a conspicuously high rate of criminal behavior. Even the notorious "poverty in the midst of plenty" will not necessa rily lead to this result. But when poverty and associated disadvantages in competing for the culture values approved for all members of the society are linked with a cultural emphasis on pecuniary success as a dominant goal, high rates of criminal behavior are the normal outcome. (27:147) Moreover, what appeared to be a pattern of subcultural delinquency might have been a process of reinforcement of a deviant means through arriving at a socially acceptable goal. That is, if the criminal act was followed by the reinforcement of riches, then not only the individual who performed the deviant act, but also those who saw that the deviant act was rewarded, tended to perform the same act. A mounting frequency of deviant but "successful" behavior tends to lessen and, as an extreme poten tiality, to eliminate the legitimacy of the insti tutional norms for others in the system. The process thus enlarges the extent of anomie within the system so that others, who did not respond in the form of deviant behavior to the relatively slight anomie which first obtained, come to do so as anomie spreads and is intensified. This, in turn, creates a more acutely anomic situation for still other and initially less vulnerable individuals in the social system. In this way, anomie and mounting rates of deviant behavior can be conceived as interacting in a process of social and cultural dynamics, with cumulatively disruptive consequences for the normative structure unless counteracting mechanisms of control are called into play. In each specific case under examination, then, it is essential, as we have said before, to identify the control mechanisms which "minimize the strains resulting from seeming (or actual) contradic tions between cultural goals and socially restricted access" to them. (27:180) 55 In this way innovation could have become a cultural pattern for whole groups of the population, but all of this rested upon the assumption that there was an assimilation of the conventional value of success by the lower as well as the upper classes. Merton was also using the goal of financial success as a vehicle for a discussion of his theory of alienation. His theory could just as easily have been used for a discussion of any other value held by a majority of the members of a society. Before turning to evidence on other major types of response— ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion--we must emphasize again that the general theory of social structure and anomie is not confined to the specific goal of monetary success and of social restrictions upon access to it. (27:181) In terms of the general conception, any cultural goals which receive extreme and only negligibly qualified emphasis in the culture of a group will serve to attenuate the emphasis on institutional ized practices and make for anomie. (27:181) One of the assumptions of this paper was that the society in general held educational opportunities in much the same light as it did the monetary value. As Brookover pointed out there was a feeling on the part of the conven tional society that education could and would solve most of the problems of our society (2). The Lynds, too, pointed out that whereas the upper classes felt that education was necessary to future success, the lower classes looked to education with an almost religious fervor (22). As an indication of this lower-class faith in education, Reissman indicated that there were a greater number of lower-class 56 than upper-class children who knew how to read upon enter ing school (34). For the purposes of this paper, then, much of what Merton said regarding the pecuniary value also held for the education value. As an example of the foregoing Merton's concept of the need for some deviation held at least as well for the education value as it did for the pecuniary value. Merton's basic concept here was that there was some need for deviation in order that the society might progress. Finally, by way of preamble to this review of other types of deviant behavior, it should be noted j once again that, from the standpoint of sociology, not all such deviation from the dominant norms of the group is necessarily dysfunctional to the basic values and adaptation of the group. Correlatively, strict and unquestioned adherence to all prevailing norms would be functional only in a group that never was: a group which is completely static and unchanging in a social and cultural environment which is static and unchanging. Some (unknown) degree of deviation from current norms is probably functional for the basic goals of all groups. A certain degree of "innovation," for example, may result in the formation of new institutionalized patterns of behavior which are more adaptive than the old in making for realization of primary goals. (27:182) Merton further pointed out that no ethical or moral judgment should be made with regard to what the conven tional society considered dysfunctional. (This distin guished him from Marx and Engels, who saw little but dysfunctional elements in their society, and from Durkheim, who felt that what was had to be good since it had with stood the test of time.) 57 It would be a shortsighted view and a concealed ethical judgment, moreover, to assume that even the deviant behavior which is dysfunctional to the current values of the group is also ethically defi cient. For, as we have had frequent occasion to note in this book, the concept of social dysfunction is not a latter-day terminological substitute for "immorality1’ or "unethical practice." A particular pattern of behavior which departs from the dominant norms of the group may be dysfunctional in lessening the stability of the group or in reducing its pros pect of achieving the goals it values. But, judged by one or another set of ethical standards, it may be the norms of the group which are at fault, not the innovator who rejects them. (27:182) Deviance, in the form of rebellion, was by no means the most common response of our society. The response to cultural and social structures was basically a matter of the degree of pressures brought to bear upon the individual and his peers. It should also be said again, since it is so easily forgotten, that to center this theory upon the cultural and structural sources of deviant behavior is not to imply that such behavior is the characteristic, let alone the exclusive, response to the pressures we have been examining. This is an analysis of varying rates and types of deviant behavior, not an empirical generalization to the effect that all those subject to these pressures respond by deviation. The theory only holds that those located in places in the social structure which are particularly exposed to such stresses are more likely than others to exhibit deviant behavior. Yet, as a result of countervailing social mechan isms, most even of these stressful positions do not typically induce deviation; conformity tends to remain the modal response. Among the countervail ing mechanisms, as has been suggested in the preceding chapter, is access to "alternative goals in the repository of common values. . . . To the extent that the cultural structure attaches prestige to these alternatives and the social structure per mits access to them, the system is somewhat stabil ized. Potential deviants may still conform in terms of these auxiliary sets of values." (27:183) 58 Merton proposed that the individual who felt his conflict with the norms of society but who could not explain the nature of this conflict, often proclaimed that his life was ruled by luck. For the unsuccessful and particularly for those among the unsuccessful who find little reward for their merit and their effort, the doctrine of luck serves the psychological function of enabling them to preserve their self-esteem in the face of failure. It may also entail the dysfunction of curbing moti vation for sustained endeavor. Sociologically, as implied by Blake, the doctrine may reflect a failure to comprehend the workings of the social and economic system, and may be dysfunctional inasmuch as it eliminates the rationale of working for structural changes making for greater equities in opportunity and reward. (27:149) Matza, in Delinquency and Drift (25), discussed this concept of luck in the lower-class predelinquent. His position was that the feeling that life was ruled by the capricious will of the fates was one of the determining factors of alienation and preparation for the delinquent act. When this feeling that the inanimate world allowed little control over one's own actions was reinforced by a seemingly capricious power structure, the predelinquent felt little incentive to follow the prescribed norms of the society. Since the lower-class child did not have as many alternative modes of adaptation, he was more prone to enter a life of delinquency than was the middle- or upper- class child. In this case the lower-class child would enter the area of proscribed innovation while the upper- or middle-class child might have entered the area of 59 non-proscribed innovation. Merton pointed out that those who did not blame luck for their lack of success were more prone to blame the society. Among those who do not apply the doctrine of luck to the gulf between merit, effort and reward there may develop an individuated and cynical atti tude toward the social structure, best exemplified in the cultural cliche that "it's not what you know, but who you know, that counts." (27:149) Merton summarized his discussion of innovation as a mode of adaptation in the following way: In quick summary, then, it should be evident that (1) the theory under review deals with cultur ally emphasized goals of diverse kinds and not only with the goal of monetary success which was exam ined for the purpose of illustration; (2) that it distinguished forms of deviant behavior which may be far removed from those which represent violations of the law; (3) that the deviant behavior is not neces sarily dysfunctional to the effective operation and development of the group; (4) that the concepts of social deviation and social dysfunction do not harbor concealed ethical premises; and (5) that alternative cultural goals provide a basis for stabilizing the social and cultural systems. (27:184) Ritualism.--Ritualism was the opposite mode of adaptation to innovation. In the ritualistic form the individual had, for one reason or another (Merton did not give any example or description of the process), lowered his aspirations with regard to the pecuniary goals of the society and had replaced them with an over-concern for the means of attaining the goal. The ritualistic type of adaptation can be readily identified. It involves the abandoning or scaling down of the lofty cultural goals of great pecuniary success and rapid social mobility to the point where one’s aspirations can be satisfied. But though one 60 rejects the cultural obligation to attempt "to get ahead in the world," though one draws in one’s hori zons, one continues to abide almost compulsively by institutional norms. (27:147) Here again Merton did not make a distinction between the operational and conceived values of the society for what Merton described was the individual who had adopted the conceived means as the goals of his life. He was not dis cussing the individual who was prone to white collar crime but rather the opposite, the individual who refused even to think about committing any crime. Ritualism was a form of retreatism in which the individual felt that he could not compete on the level which was needed for success in our society, therefore he withdrew into the safety of patterns which he knew would be acceptable. Even though they might not be the operant values, they were the conceived values. It is, in short, the mode of adaptation of individu ally seeking a private escape from the dangers and frustrations which seem to them inherent in the com petition for major goals by abandoning these goals and clinging all the more closely to the safe routines and the institutional norms. (27:151) Merton stated that whereas one expected to find innovation on the lower-class level, one expected to find ritualism on the lower-middle-class level. If we should expect lower-class Americans to exhibit Adaptation II--"innovation"--to the frustra tions enjoined by the prevailing emphasis on large cultural goals and the fact of small social opportu nities, we should expect lower-middle class Americans to be heavily represented among those making Adapta tion III, "ritualism." For it is in the lower middle class that parents typically exert continuous___________ 61 pressure upon children to abide by the moral mandates of the society, and where the social climb upward is less likely to meet with success than among the upper middle class. (27:151) Merton did not discuss those who had attempted upward social mobility and had failed in their attempt and had therefore retreated into ritualism. In concluding his discussion on ritualism Merton quoted two sources to define what was meant by this mode of adaptation. In the first Merton established the cause of ritualism. Of more direct relevance is the study of the behavior of bureaucrats by Peter M. Blau. He sug gests that observed cases of over-conformity are ■not due to the fact that ritualistic adherence to existing operating procedure had become an ines capable habit” and that "ritualism results not so much from overidentification with rules and strong habituation to established practices as from lack of security in important social relationships in the organization.” (27:185) From this quotation the conclusion was drawn that this form of alienation would appear on any scale as total non alienation from society. Whether it would have been possi ble to observe this mode of adaptation sociologically was never brought out. In the second of his two quotations, however, he defined his conception of the individual who was prone to retreatism. As set forth in a recent rapid inventory, the com ponents of intolerance of ambiguity include: "undue preference for symmetry, familiarity, definiteness, and regularity; tendency toward black-white solu tions, over-simplified dichotomizing, unqualified either-or solutions, premature closure, persevera tion and stereotype; a tendency toward excessively 'good1 form (that is, excessive Pragnanz of Gestalt organization), achieved either by diffuse globality or by over-emphasis on concrete detail; compart- 62 mentalization, stimulus-boundness; avoidance of uncertainty as accomplished by the narrowing of mean ings, by inaccessibility to experience, by mechanical repetition of sets, or by a segmentary randomness and an absolutizing of those aspects of reality which have been preserved. 9 1 (27:187) The characteristics described were primarily psychological rather than sociological. Retreatism.--As Merton pointed out retreatism was the mode of adaptation whereby the individual completely withdrew his support from the norms of society (as opposed to ritualism where the individual negated the cultural structure in favor of the social structure). By retreatism was meant that the only real contact of the individual with the society was his physical existence in some geographical propinquity to it. This individual felt none of the pro scription or prescriptions which guided the members of the society. This form of adaptation was the least common for the obvious reason that the individual had to have either great strength to remain within and at the same time out side of the society, or the individual had to enter an almost pathological withdrawal from the society. Just as Adaptation I (conformity) remains the most frequent, Adaptation IV (the rejection of cultural goals and institutional means) is probably the least common. People who adapt (or maladapt) in this fashion are, strictly speaking, in the society but not of: it. Sociologically, these con stitute the true aliens. Not sharing the common frame of values, they can be included as members of the society (in distinction from the population) only in a fictional sense. (27:153) Retreatism was most common where the means and the 63 goals established by the conventional society had been internalized but the individual had been frustrated on both levels and withdrew into himself. From the standpoint of its sources in the social structure, this mode of adaptation is most likely to occur when both the culture goals and the institu tional practices have been thoroughly assimilated by the individual and imbued with affect and high value, but accessible institutional avenues are not produc tive of success. There results a twofold conflict: the interiorized moral obligation for adopting insti tutional means conflicts with pressures to resort to illicit means (which may attain the goal) and the individual is shut off from means which are both legitimate and effective. The competitive order is maintained but the frustrated and handicapped indi vidual who cannot cope with this order drops out. Defeatism, quietism and resignation are manifested in escape mechanisms which ultimately lead him to "escape” from the requirements of the society. It is thus an expedient which arises from continued failure to near the goal by legitimate measures and from an inability to use the illegitimate route because of internalized prohibitions, this process occurring while the supreme value of the success- goal has not vet been renounced. (27:153) Retreatism, as opposed to ritualism, was a response to purely societal pressures. There was breakdown of the norms with which the conventional society maintained con trol similar to Durkheim's normlessness. Generally, however, retreatism seems to occur in response to acute anomie, involving an abrupt break in the familiar and accepted normative framework and in established social relations, particularly when it appears to individuals subjected to it that the condition will continue indefinitely. (27:188) Because of this normlessness there was a feeling of nostalgia for a time when society was supposedly more stable. This feeling was followed by the rejection of the ambiguous norms of the present society. Merton quoted_____ 64 Williams in order to indicate his point. . . . rejection of norms and goals includes the phenomenon of cultural apathy with respect to stand ards of conduct. Qualitatively different aspects of the latter condition are variously connoted by terms such as indifference, cynicms, moral fatigue, disenchantment, withdrawal of affect, opportunism. One prominent type of apathy is the loss of involve ment in a previously sought cultural goal, such as occurs when continued striving results in persistent and seemingly unavoidable frustration. The loss of central life-goals leaves the individual in a social vacuum, without focal direction or meaning. But another crucial kind of apathy seems to emerge from conditions of great normative complexity and/or rapid change, when individuals are pulled this way and that by numerous conflicting norms and goals, until the person is literally dis-oriented and de moralized, unable to secure a firm commitment to a set of norms that he can feel as self-consistent. Under certain conditions, not yet understood, the result is a kind of "resignation from responsibil ity"; a discounting of principled conduct, a lack of concern for the maintenance of a moral community. It seems that this lostness is one of the basic conditions out of which some types of political totalitarianism emerge. The individual renounces moral autonomy, and is subjected to an external discipline. (27:189-190) The conflict was resolved when the individual gave up both the means and the goals which the conventional society prescribed, i.e., he retreated. The conflict is resolved by abandoning both precipi tating elements, the goals and the means. The escape is complete, the conflict is eliminated and the individual is asocialized. (27:190) As could be imagined, the society negatively sanc tioned this behavior since it was non-productive and threatening to the competitive success value of our society. 65 In public and ceremonial life, this type of deviant behavior is most heartily condemned by con ventional representatives of the society. In contrast to the conformist, who keeps the wheels of society running, this deviant is a non-productive liability; in contrast to the innovator who is at least nsmart” and actively striving; he sees no value in the success-goal which the culture prizes so highly; in contrast to the ritualist who conforms at least to the mores, he pays scant attention to the institutional practices. (27:154) However, a distinction between active retreat and passive retreat was not maintained. If a person merely was passive, then the society often did not even recognize his existence. But if the person indicated actively that he was negating the controls of the society, the threat of this action was severely sanctioned by the group. This phenomenon could be seen in small group behavior in which the individual who remained passive was not negatively sanctioned, but the individual who attempted to evade the norms of the group was negatively sanctioned. Perhaps the difficulty here was that the line between retreat and rebellion was not clearly established. It would appear that rebellion was an attempt on the part of a member or a group of members to change the make-up of the norms of the group. Active retreat was an attempt to withdraw from the group. This was the difference between a revolutionary and a beatnik. One attempted to change the society while the other actively withdrew from it. In Merton*s summary of the retreatist mode of adaptation, he indicated that retreatism was functional for 66 certain individuals. This fourth mode of adaptation, then, is that of the socially disinherited who if they have none of the rewards held out by society also have few of the frustrations attendant upon continuing to seek these rewards. It is, moreover, a privatized rather than collective mode of adaptation. Although people exhibiting this deviant behavior may gravitate toward centers where they come into contact with other devi ants and although they may come to share in the sub culture of these deviant groups, their adaptations are largely private and isolated rather than unified under the aegis of a new cultural code. (27:155) Here Merton implied, but never discussed, that form of retreatism which Riesman called autonomy (33). The autonomous individual was one who could function conven tionally but who had not internalized the values of the conventional society. This individual could lead two lives. One of these was the flnine to five1 1 life (conven tional) while the other was considered by him to be his "real life*' which was sometimes not conventional. This person was productive in his "nine to five1 1 capacity and therefore not be negatively sanctioned by the conventional society. However, he was not a member of the society since he did not respect the conventional structures. It was not determined if this would be considered alienated behavior. In the highly complex, urban society, there was great opportunity to separate aspects of one*s life. Autonomy was, then, one possible adaptation which was open to the modern man. Whether or not it was open to the lower-class child was less clear. It was more difficult for children to engage in a double life than for adults, and the lower 67 class, due to overcrowding, extended family units, and so on, found it more difficult to separate spheres of exist ence. There were, then, two distinct forms of retreatism: (1) withdrawal, and (2) autonomy (in Riesman's sense of the term). Rebellion.--The fifth alternative was qualitatively different from the others. This fifth alternative is on a plane clearly different from that of the others. It represents a transitional response seeking to institutionalize new goals and new procedures to be shared by other members of the society. It thus refers to efforts to change the existing cultural and social structure rather than to accommodate efforts within this structure. (27:192) Rebellion was not really a mode of adaptation to cultural and social structures. It was rather an attempt by the nout-group, f to establish their structures as the conventional ones by supplanting those of the nin group., f In this way rather than adapting to the society they adapted the society to themselves. This adaptation leads men outside the environing social structure to envisage and seek to bring into being a new, that is to say, a greatly modified social structure. It presupposes alienation from reigning goals and standards. These come to be regarded as purely arbitrary. And the arbitrary is precisely that which can neither exact allegiance nor possess legitimacy, for it might as well be otherwise. (27:155) When the institutional system is regarded as the barrier to the satisfaction of legitimized goals, the stage is set for rebellion as an adaptive response. To pass into organized political action, allegiance must not only be withdrawn from the pre- vailing social structure but must be transferred to____ 68 new groups possessed of a new myth. The dual func tion of the myth is to locate the source of large- scale frustrations in the social structure and to portray an alternative structure which would not, presumably, give rise to frustration of the deserv ing. It is a charter for action. (27:156) This was exactly the point made by Marx and Engels. Alienation led to both capitalism and the estrangement of labor, which in turn led to the desire for a change. This, in turn, led to the revolt of the masses and the communist revolution. In Merton1s terminology: It is the conflict between culturally accepted values and the socially structured difficulties in living up to these values which exerts pressure toward deviant behavior and disruption of the norma tive system. This outcome of anomie, however, may be only a prelude to the development of new norms, and it is this response which we have described as ’’rebellion” in the typology of adaption. (27:191) Merton implied a distinction between rebellion and revolution which was based upon the size and power of the group which was alienated and how well the group understood the basis of their alienation. When rebellion is confined to relatively small and relatively powerless elements in a community, it provides a potential for the formation of sub groups, alienated from the rest of the community but unified within themselves. This pattern is exempli fied by alienated adolescents teaming up in gangs or becoming part of a youth movement with a distinctive subculture of its own. This response to anomie tends, however, to be unstable unless the new groups and norms are sufficiently insulated from the rest of the society which rejects them. (27:191) Merton did not discuss rebellion in detail, since it was not a major mode of adaptation in our society. Some might have disagreed with him, particularly with regard to 69 such phenomena as the "Negro Revolt." The attempt here, however, was not so much to change the underlying social norms as it was to become a basic part of these norms. Against this strain toward rebellion the conserva tive element within the society attempted to establish an equilibrium in order to quell the reason for the rebellion. In this context, the functions of the counter-myth of the conservatives--briefly sketched in an earlier section of this chapter--become further clarified: whatever the source of mass frustration, it is not to be found in the basic structure of the society. The conservative myth may thus assert that these frustrations are in the nature of things and would occur in any social system. "Periodic mass unemploy ment and business depressions can't be legislated out of existence: it's just like a person who feels good one day and bad the next." (27:156) Both the doctrine of rebellion and that of conser vatism attempted to sway the minds of the populace. Only in this way could either hope to gain control. Since both the conservative and the rebellious groups had their way of life at stake, the battle was often a long and bitter one. The population with which we were dealing was not in a state of rebellion. To a great extent they were not aware of their predicament. There were, however, possibil ities of increasing this awareness and potential for rebellion through the process of broadening the horizons of the lower-class child. Merton maintained that there was a "strain toward anomie*1 in our society. That is, within our society there were conflicting roles which made it virtually impossible 70 for the individual to live within the bounds of the society without becoming alienated. The social structure we have examined produces a strain toward anomie and deviant behavior. The pressure of such a social order is upon outdoing one*s competitors. So long as the sentiments sup porting this competitive system are distributed throughout the entire range of activities and are not confined to the final result of ’’success,” the choice of means will remain largely within the ambit of institutional control. When, however, the cul tural emphasis shifts from the satisfactions deriv ing from competition itself to almost exclusive concern with the outcome, the resultant stress makes for the breakdown of the regulatory structure. (27:157) The truth or falsity of this statement was difficult to determine since there was always the possibility that alienation was hidden under the mantle of conformity. In the summary Merton discussed the implications of his theory for social change. He again presented the hypothesis that all members of a society were subject to pressures but that there was a differential rate of societal and cultural pressure. In terms of the theory under review, it is plain that differential pressures for deviant behavior will continue to be exerted upon certain groups and strata only as long as the structure of opportunity and the cultural goals remain substantially unchanged. Correlatively, as significant changes in the struc ture or goals occur, we should expect corresponding changes in the sectors of the population most severely exposed to these pressures. (27:192) In Merton, then, was presented a theory which explained societal equilibrium, individual modes of adapta tion to the structures of society, and societal change. 71 Implications of the Work of Merton for This Paper 1. Merton*s major contribution to the study of alienation was his categorization of the various forms of alienation. Though Durkheim distinguished different forms of suicide, one of which was the anomic form, he never presented a statement of different forms of alienation. Merton filled this need. 2. There were different rates of alienation in different strata of society. This enabled Merton to dis cuss degrees of alienation whereas Durkheim, for example, could only discuss alienation as a social fact which was either present or not present. 3. Merton extended the concept of alienation to include deviant behavior, i.e., innovation. 4. Merton pointed out that there were certain values which permeated all strata of our society: the success value and the competition value. 5. Our society, because of the success and compe tition values, precluded the possibility of being non alienated. That is, society positively sanctioned goal- directed behavior with less regard for the means employed to attain the goal, i.e., innovation was encouraged. 6. Merton pointed out the two basic social struc tures: (a) the cultural structure which established legitimate goals; and (b) the social structure which 72 established legitimate means by which to arrive at these goals. 7. Merton pointed out the agencies by which the major patterns of the society were transmitted from one generation to the next, viz.« the family, the school, and the workplace. In the present paper we were most inter ested in the role of the school. 8. In Merton1s formulation both the culturally induced high aspirations and the socially structured obstacles had to be present to induce alienation. 9. In terms of deviance the greater the number of alternative solutions to the conflict, the lower would be the alienation. 10. It was Merton's concept that with the increase in awareness of the objective world there was an increase in alienation. 11. Rebellion was distinguished from the other modes of adaptation. If the individual became aware of the objects of this alienation, there was a greater chance that he would actively fight these objects. If there was a lack of awareness of the specific object, then the alienation would remain free-floating and the individual would adopt one of the other modes of adaptation. 73 Hypotheses Which Were Drawn from Merton1s Formulation 1. There were different types of alienation which were indicated by differentiating items on any scale of alienation. 2. There were varying degrees of alienation, i.e., it was possible to compare individuals on the basis of varying scores on an alienation scale. 3. There was some relationship between deviant behavior and alienation. 4. The lower-class subjects believed in the same culturally prescribed goals as the other subjects. (This was qualified by Merton to mean that a "sufficient number" of the members of the lower class manifested these goals.) 5. One form of alienation or another was found in almost every subject since our society indicated a "strain toward anomie." (This included the "conformist" who mani fested a zero alienation score.) 6. There was a relationship between the subject1s alienation from the society in general and his alienation from the school. 7. A high alienation score indicated a conflict between goals and means. 8. A belief in "luck" or "fate" as causal agent manifested itself where there was no awareness of the causes of alienation. Where there was an awareness of the 74 societal causes, there was greater potential for rebellion. 9. Attitude toward the family was positively correlated to the alienation score. A Modern Value-Oriented Psycho logical Formulation Fromm, whose basic orientation was psychological, attempted to bring the concept of the socially patterned defect into a sociological framework by pointing out that the individual internalized the societal defect. Fromm pointed out that in this situation the individual became estranged, not from the society whose forces were too great for the individual to contend with, but rather from him self. In Merton there was an implied value judgment that deviation or alienation was caused by the society and that the ensuing disequilibrium was not necessarily dysfunc tional. This, in some ways, was the position of Fromm in his concept of the "socially patterned defect.1’ Fromm pointed out that due to the socially patterned emphasis upon consumption of goods and the general preoccupation with material objects rather than upon the production and use of goods, the individual became alienated not only from himself but also from the society at large. In this situ ation the individual who was not estranged from himself was alienated from society, since he was not following its 75 dictates. Here, then, was a situation in which the individual had to be alienated from himself in order to be at one with the society, or, conversely, alienated from the society so that he could be at one with himself. Fromm felt that the major share of the blame lay with the "market system." But the market system has reached out further than the economic sphere of commodities and labor. Man has transformed himself into a commodity, experi ences his life as capital to be invested profitably; if he succeeds in this, he is "successful," and his life has meaning; if not, "he is a failure." His "value" lies in his salability, not in his human qualities of love and reason or in his artistic capacities. Hence his sense of his own value de pends on extraneous factors, his success, the judg ment of others. Hence he is dependent on these others, and his security lies in conformity, in never being more than two feet away from the herd. (11:73) In the development of both capitalism and communism as we can visualize them in the next fifty or a hundred years, the process of automatization and alienation will proceed. Both these systems are developing managerial societies in which inhabitants are well fed and well clad, having their wishes satisfied, and not having wishes that cannot be satisfied, automatons, who follow without force, who are guided without leaders, who make machines that act like men and produce men who act like machines; men whose reason deteriorates while their intelli gence rises, thus creating the dangerous situation of equipping man with the greatest material power without the wisdom to use rt. (11:76) Others agreed with Fromm: Henry, Goodman, Frieden- berg, and others all defined our culture in the same way. Assuming that they were right, what type of a man did such a society need in order to function smoothly? 76 It needs men who cooperate smoothly in large groups; who want to consume more and more, and whose tastes are standardized and can be easily influenced and anticipated. It needs men who feel free and inde pendent, who do not feel subject to any authority or principle or conscience, yet are willing to be commanded, to do what is expected, to fit into the social machine without friction--men who can be guided without force, led without leaders, be prompted without any aim except the one to be on the move, to function, to go ahead. Modern capitalism has succeeded in producing this kind of man; he is the automaton, the alienated man. He is alienated in the sense that his acts and forces have become estranged from him; they stand above and against him, and rule him rather than being ruled by him. His life forces have flowed into things and institu tions, and these things, having become idols, are not experienced as the result of his own efforts, but as something apart from him which he worships and to which he submits. Alienated man bows down before the works of his own hands. His idols repre sent his own life forces in an alienated form. Man does not experience himself as the active bearer of his own forces and riches, but as an impoverished ,fthing,, f dependent on other things— things outside himself, into which he has projected his living substance. (11:73-74) One of the recurring themes in Fromm* s work was that of the alienation from work. His theory largely corresponded to that of Marx and Engels, but Fromm added a dimension which had not occurred to them 150 years earlier, viz., that with alienation from work there was an increase in laziness. The meaninglessness and alienation of work result in a longing for complete laziness. Man hates his work ing life because it makes him feel a prisoner and a fraud. His ideal becomes absolute laziness, in which he will not have to make a move, where everything goes according to the Kodak slogan: **You press the button; we do the rest.*' (11:75) The veracity of this concept was not empirically validated. However, the hypothesis was that alienation 77 from self was positively correlated with alienation from work and a desire not to work. The alienated person, further, found it difficult, if not impossible, to postpone satisfaction of his desires. This concept led to the hypothesis that those who mani fested the highest alienation scores also manifested the greatest desire for immediate satisfaction. If I do not postpone the satisfaction of my wish (and I am conditioned only to wish for what I can get), I have no conflicts, no doubts; no decision has to be made: I am never alone with myself because I am always busy--either working or having fun. I have no need to be aware of myself as my self because I am constantly absorbed with consum ing. I am a system of desires and satisfactions; I have to work in order to fulfill my desires and satisfactions; I have to work in order to fulfill my desires, and these very desires are constantly stimulated and directed by the economic machine. (11:75) Here again the problem of definition had to be raised, Fromm used the term ,falienationn in two different senses. One was alienation from the self. This was the form which our society encouraged. The other sense was an implied one, namely, alienation from the society and, therefore, not from the self. The immediate satisfaction hypotheses assumed the former definition. In the psycho logical tradition "alienation1 1 almost always referred to the alienation from the self. Therefore those who were alienated from the self manifested tendency for immediate gratification. Those who were alienated from the society often had the opposite tendency. 78 Fromm presented a solution to the problem, viz., replace material values with human values. Since it was impossible to change only the material sphere without modi fying the rest of society, there would have to be a general overhaul. But any attempt to change only one section of life, the human or spiritual one, will fail. In fact, progress occurring only in one sphere is destruc tive of progress in all spheres. (11:77) Applying this principle of simultaneous change to all spheres of life, we must think of those eco nomic and political changes which are necessary in order to overcome the psychological fact of aliena tion. We must retain the industrial method. But we must decentralize work and the state so as to give them human proportions, and permit centralization only to an optimal point which is necessary because of the requirements of industry. In the economic sphere we need comanagement of all who work in an enterprise to permit their active and responsible participation. (11:77) In the political sphere, we must return to the town meeting by creating thousands of small face-to-face groups which are well informed, which discuss, and whose decisions are integrated in a new fflower house.*1 A cultural renaissance must combine work education for the young, adult education--and a new system of popular art and secular ritual throughout the whole nation. (11:77) Fromm* s solution was approximately the same as that presented by Marx and Engels. Implications of the Work of Fromm for This Paper 1. Fromm*s basic contribution to the study of alienation was the clear statement of the concept that the "sick society" was the cause of alienation. His discussion 79 centered around the concept of the "socially patterned defect." 2. Fromm most clearly stated Marx1s earlier con cept that materialism was the major cause of alienation. 3. Fromm presented the "sick society’s" prescrip tion for the individual, i.e., the individual who: could be led while believing that he was a free agent; had an insatiable desire for "fun"; felt little worth in his work and therefore would rather not work (a complete reversal of the Protestant Ethic); desired immediate satisfaction rather than future improvement. 4. Fromm’s solution to the problem was not dis cussed since it paralleled that of Marx. 5. The person who followed the dictates of the "sick society" would be alienated from himself. But the person who was not alienated from himself would, of necessity, be alienated from the "sick society." Hypotheses Which Were Drawn from the Work of Fromm 1. If the society was sick, then the individuals in it manifested laziness, a desire for "fun," conformity, and so on. 2. The individual who showed severe reservations about the social and cultural structure, showed the great est mental health. However, this individual also indicated certain anxieties usually manifested by doubts about his 80 individuality. 3. There was high correlation between alienation and the desire to remain free from work. 4. The alienated person found it difficult, if not impossible, to postpone his desires. A Recent Compiler Seeman factor-analyzed alienation and arrived at five descriptive categories. He did not attempt to dis cuss the etiology of any of his categories. He was inter ested primarily in arriving at an operational definition of alienation. The difficulty of the task was obvious and therefore in many ways Seemanfs work was somewhat superfi cial. Seeman also had a tendency to oversimplify the theories of some of the earlier writers so that they would fit into his categories. The first thing which Seeman attempted to do was to dispel the idea that alienation was a one-factor process. He pointed out that the term ’’ alienation1 1 had become so general that it was used to explain everything. In short, the idea of alienation is a popular vehicle for virtually every kind of analysis, from the prediction of voting behavior to the search for the same society. This inclusiveness, in both its historical and its contemporary import, is expressed in Erich Kahler’s remark: ”The history of men could very well be written as a history of the alienation of man." (43:783) After some discussion of the uselessness of attempting the molar approach. Seeman proceeded to outline five primary 81 forms of alienation: powerlessness, meaninglessness, norm- lessness, isolation, and self-estrangement. According to Seeman, each of these forms was independent of the other and had been discussed by a previous author. Seeman further implied that none of the previous authors discussed all of the forms. Purposelessness was defined ". . .as the expec tancy or probability held by the individual that his own behavior cannot determine the occurrence of the outcomes or reinforcements he seeks.” This form of alienation was called, by some writers, "the feeling of fate" (Matza, Fromm) . This feeling of powerlessness was not related to the actual power which the individual held. Feelings of alienation had no necessary relationship to "objective reality." Alienation was "real" in so far as the indi vidual felt that it was real, i.e., "subjective reality," not necessarily "objective reality.1 1 Meaninglessness was defined by Seeman in the fol lowing way: This variant of alienation is involved in Mannheim* s description of the increase of "functional rational ity" and the concomitant decline of "substantial rationality.1 1 This second type of alienation, then, refers to the individualfs sense of understanding the events in which he is engaged. We may speak of high alienation, in meaninglessness usage, when the individual is unclear as to what he ought to believe- -when the individual*s minimal standards for clarity in decision making are not met. (43:786) Seeman*s work implied that the individual had to be aware 82 of this sense of meaninglessness. Whether or not the indi vidual could have had a feeling of free floating anxiety about what was happening and still fall into the category of meaninglessness, alienation was not discussed by Seeman. Seeman stated that, operationally, meaninglessness was the belief that it was impossible to predict future outcomes. The individual felt that he lived in a social chaos rather than a social cosmos. One might operationalize this aspect of aliena tion by focusing upon the fact that it is character ized by a low expectancy that satisfactory predic tions about future outcomes of behavior can be made. But more simply, where the first meaning of aliena tion refers to the sensed ability to control out comes, the second meaning refers essentially to the sensed ability to predict behavioral outcomes. (43:786) Matza had described this feeling on the part of lower- class predelinquents (25). These delinquents had the feeling, not only that they were not capable of controlling their future, but that the justice they received was quixotic. They were not able to predict the justice they would receive from the courts, since they defined justice differently than did the courts. This led to the concept on the part of the delinquents that the court rulings were meaningless and that their lives were meaningless in rela tionship to the court. This feeling was extended to other realms of life. Redl and Wineman, for example, described children who were incapable of predicting anything about the future in terms of their own egos (32). Their lives 83 had been so disrupted that they were incapable of placing their trust (that is, they were incapable of predicting the actions) in anyone. In the case of the children discussed by Redl and Wineman, the process had gone so far that the children could not even predict their own behavior. Nothing had any meaning to these children, and they were not capable of explaining their own actions. The third of Seeman*s forms of alienation was the traditional anomie or normlessness, i.e., the societal norms had broken down to the extent that there was confu sion over what the norms were. A third variant of the alienation theme is derived from Durkheim* s description of "anomie,*1 and refers to a condition of normlessness. In the traditional usage anomie denotes a situation in which the social norms regulating individual conduct have broken down or are no longer effected as rules for behavior. (43:787) In philosophical terms, normlessness indicated conflicts between conceived and operant values. Following Merton’s lead, the anomic situation, from the individual point of view, may be defined as one in which there is a high expectancy that socially unapproved behaviors are required to achieve given goals. This third meaning of alienation is logi cally independent of the two versions discussed above. (43:788) There were, then, two types of normlessness: first, when there was confusion over what the norms were; and, second, when the society actively enforced operant norms which were in opposition to the conceived norms of the society. This form of alienation had been described by Sutherland in his 84 discussion of "White Collar Crime1 1 (47), e.g., cheating on income tax which was encouraged by the way the tax laws were written and yet was discouraged as unpatriotic, and so on. Seeman pointed out that even though this one classification was really two, it was not to be made three. Seeman did not include psychological disturbances. Unfortunately, the idea of normlessness has been over-extended to include a wide variety of both social conditions and psychic states: personal disorganization, cultural breakdown, reciprocal distress, etc. (43:787) Why Seeman preferred to exclude this particular form of alienation from normlessness was not made clear. However, he did include psychological disturbances under the general rubric, "Isolation., 1 Isolation was used in the sense of the individual withdrawing from the power of society. That is, the indi vidual who wished to become an isolate simply withdrew. This, it was assumed, could be done either through a process of physical withdrawal (e.g., a hermit), or through the withdrawal of the power of society (e.g., a beatnik attempting to show that society had no hold over him), or, in some cases, through psychotic withdrawal (this would not really be considered alienation in the usual sense of the word). 85 Implications of the Work of Seeman for This Paper Seeman placed the major writers into five separate categories: (1) powerlessness, (2) meaninglessness, (3) normlessness, (4) isolation, and (5) self estrangement. By oversimplifying the theories of these major writers he was able to place them in one category or another. Hypotheses Which Were Drawn from the Work of Seeman 1. There was more than one form of alienation. 2. Factors of alienation could be drawn from empirical data and named. Parameters of Alienation Following each of the major authors discussed in this chapter there was a section devoted to the implica tions of that author's work for the theoretical formulation of alienation. It was possible to tentatively list the parameters of the alienated society and the alienated individual based upon the implications and concepts of the authors. The final discussion of the parameters of aliena tion, however, had to be held in abeyance until the data were interpreted. 86 Parameters of the Alienated Society 1. Where the norms established by the ruling classes did not effectively represent the desires of the ruled classes. 2. The society characterized by individual moral ity, i.e., the belief that the individual was the final authority in any moral conflict. 3. The society which presented goals to the indi vidual but did not supply the means to arrive at these goals, i.e., the social and cultural structures were in conflict. 4. The society in which all strata held the same goals but where the means of arriving at these goals were differentiated on the basis of strata. 5. The f,sick society,1 1 i.e., that society which induced defects in its members (insatiable desires, desire to be led, etc.). Parameters of the Alienated Person 1. The subject who felt a lack of orientation to the conventional norms of his society. 2. The subject who felt that the ruling classes of the society had no interest in him and that their rules were arbitrary. .3. The subject who indicated that he had no inter est in the societal norms or was hostile to those norms. _________4. The individual who felt that there was little 87 opportunity for him to succeed in this society. 5. The subject with unlimited desires. 6. The subject who felt a conflict between desires and the means by which to achieve those desires. 7. The subject who did not understand what society*s norms were. 8. The subject who believed that fate governed the outcome of action. 9. The subject who did not respect authority. 10. The subject who felt that there were no alter natives to his present course of action. 11. The subject who was aware of the world (reality orientation). 12. The subject who had little desire to work. 13. The subject who desired immediate gratification to his desires. Specific Hypotheses Drawn from the Theoretical Formulation From the theoretical formulation of alienation presented in this chapter it was possible to extrapolate certain hypotheses. These hypotheses were based upon the authors* specific statements as well as the implications of these statements. There was no attempt to indicate the validity of these hypotheses, but rather that they were logical deductions from the formulations. The validity of 88 each hypothesis was discussed in Chapters III and IV. The hypotheses were as follows: Hypothesis 1. Rather than finding one general factor, the TT scale indicated that alienation was a multi factor construct.^ Hypothesis 2. Alienation scores indicated a dis tribution over a wide range from zero to 100 per cent alienated. Hypothesis 3. Both tutors and tutees understood the cultural and social structure. Hypothesis 4. Certain items on the scale differen tiated tutors from tutees. Hypothesis 5. Tutoring time was related to alienation. Hypothesis 6. Socioeconomic status, education level, sex, and age were related to alienation. Hypothesis 7. An interest in the society or a desire to change the status quo was related to alienation. Hypothesis 8. Some alienation was needed for the subject or the society to progress. Hypothesis 9. The sense of meaninglessness was related to alienation. Hypothesis 10. The feeling of being treated fairly was related to alienation. To facilitate ease of reading, the hypotheses were stated in the simple past tense rather than the subjunctive past tense._________________________________________________ 89 Hypothesis 11. The sense of powerlessness was related to alienation. Hypothesis 12. Religious beliefs were related to alienation. Hypothesis 13. Isolation, or the inability to relate to others or the society, was related to alienation. Hypothesis 14. The attitude toward work was related to alienation. Hypothesis 15. The attitude toward authority was related to alienation. Hypothesis 16. The attitude toward the family was related to alienation. Hypothesis 17. The attitude toward the school was related to alienation. Hypothesis 18. The desire for immediate satisfac tion was related to alienation. Hypothesis 19. Future orientation was related to alienation. Hypothesis 20. Fatalism was related to alienation. Summary of the Chapter In Chapter I the original reasons for the interest in the study were listed. Three problems grew out of this interest, namely: (1) "What were the parameters of aliena tion?" (2) "Was it possible to develop a scale of aliena tion to be used with the population of this study?" 90 (3) "What was the effect of tutoring (and the confounding variables) upon alienation as measured on the scale?1 1 The limitations and delimitations of the study were listed; an overview of the rest of the dissertation was presented; the theoretical formulation of alienation based upon the works of Marx, Durkheim, Merton, Fromm, and Seeman was outlined; the hypotheses drawn from these theoretical formulations were listed; and the tentative parameters of alienation based upon the theoretical formulation were deduced from the theoretical formulation. CHAPTER XI METHODOLOGY, VARIABLES, AND PROCEDURES Methodology The methodological format presented by Mills in The Sociological Imagination (28) was used as the basis of the dissertation. With certain changes made specifically for this paper, the methodological format was as follows: 1. There were three specific problems, namely: a. nWhat were the parameters of alienation?M b. "Was it possible to develop a scale which would measure alienation in lower-class children?" c. "What was the effect of tutoring, socioeco nomic status, education level, sex, and age upon alienation?" 2. The theoretical formulation was established in Chapter I. 3. Hypotheses were deduced from theoretical formu lation (see Chapter I). 4. Specific hypotheses for this paper were drawn (see conclusions to Chapter I). 91 92 5. The data were examined to determine whether or not the hypotheses held.^ Variables The dependent variable of this study was a scale of alienation designed by the author for the purpose of test ing lower-class children whose low vocabulary and reading ability precluded the use of other scales (see Appendix). The scale was fully standardized (see Chapter III), was dichotomous, and had a possible score of zero to 100 per cent (the "correct** answers were those which indicated that the subject was alienated). The form given to the tutors and tutees was identical, with the exception that the Los Angeles City School District requested that ten items be removed from the scale before it was given to the tutees in the projects under their control. The removal of the ten items did not significantly affect the validity or relia bility of the scores (see Chapter IV). Further, six of the items on the tutor form were written in the past tense. The independent variable was the amount of tutoring time to which the subject had been submitted. There were four time categories: (1) zero or one hour of tutoring; (2) two to six hours of tutoring; (3) seven to ten hours of tutoring; and (4) more than ten hours of tutoring. The ^Very little literature was reviewed since there was very little which was pertinent to the study and popu- lation of this paper. _____________________________________ 93 same categories were used for tutors and tutees. It was hypothesized that the amount of tutoring time would influ ence the alienation score. Other variables included socioeconomic status, educational level, sex, and age. Socioeconomic status was divided into three categories based upon occupation of the subject’s parents (mainly the father’s) and the ecological region in which the subject lived. The three categories were: (1) lower-class (manual labor, unskilled labor, average income below $4,000, etc.); (2) middle-class (white collar work, average income $4,000 to $7,000, etc.); and (3) upper-class (professional work, average income over $8,000, etc.). Educational level was divided into five categories: (1) elementary school; (2) junior high school; (3) senior high school; (4) junior college students, or freshmen and sophomores in a four-year college; and (5) juniors, seniors, or graduate students. Sex was catego rized into male and female. Age was divided into four categories: (1) under eleven years of age; (2) eleven to fourteen years of age; (3) fifteen to twenty years of age; and (4) over twenty years of age. These variables were identified, since it was hypothesized that any one of them could affect alienation scores, i.e., they were confounding variables. 94 Sampling In any quasi-experimental^ or experimental design there was an independent (experimental) variable which was manipulated by the experimenter, and a dependent variable which measured any change in the subjects. There was an implicit assumption that the independent variable caused any change in the dependent variable. Alternative hypoth eses stated that it was not the independent variable but rather confounding factors which caused this change, in brief, alternative hypotheses were possible explanations of a change in the dependent variable other than that caused by the independent variable. For example, if there were no reason to assume that all of the subjects were initially equivalent on the dependent variable, then an alternative hypothesis to the independent variable was, 1fAny difference between groups was caused by an initial difference on the dependent variable not by a difference in treatments." (In this study the independent variable was the tutorial situation. The dependent variable consisted of a score on a scale of alienation. There was, however, no way to determine variation of the initial alienation scores of the subjects.) R. A. Fisher*s major contribution of experimen tal design in the social sciences was his concept of ^A quasi-experimental design was one in which the experimenter could not control all of the variables, but in which he accounted for those he could, and listed those which he could not (Campbell and Stanley) . ________ 95 randomization, to insure a representative and unbiased sample. If subjects of groups were randomly selected, then theoretically any variation between the groups was by chance and was not a significant factor. All of the sta tistics which were used to determine differences between groups assumed that the groups had been equated on both the independent and dependent variables. This was accomplished through strict randomization. However, randomization was difficult to achieve in the social sciences, therefore, other forms of sampling were often used. The basis of any sampling procedure, however, was that the sample drawn be representative and unbiased. In the process of randomiza tion the problems of representativeness and bias were theoretically eliminated since it was assumed that all of the people chosen for the sample had an equal chance of being chosen. The basic task, then, was to find a sampling proce dure which was unbiased and representative. The first and simplest method of eliminating sampling errors was to limit the parameters of the population. In this paper, for exam ple, the study could have been limited to alienation scores of freshman students at the University of Southern Cali fornia, and there would have been an internally valid sample. However, the findings could not have been legiti mately generalized to any other institution besides the University of Southern California. In other words, by 96 limiting the parameters of the population the ability to generalize from the findings had been limited. If another school which had the same parameters as the University of Southern California had been found, then it would have been possible, with caution, to generalize to that school. Another type of sampling which was often used, and which Guilford felt had advantages over pure random sampling, was stratified-random sampling (15). For exam ple, in this study rather than randomly picking students from all of the tutorial projects of the city (which might or might not have provided a good sample) a certain number would have been taken from each of the projects in ratio to the projectfs size; e.g., if Project W.E. had 5 per cent of all subjects of all of the projects, then 5 per cent of our sample would have been picked from project W.E. and 95 per cent from the other projects. Each subject would have been selected randomly from his own project. In this way a stratified-random sample would have been supplied. Since with a pure random sample it would have been possible to have wide fluctuations in the number of subjects picked from Project W.E., stratification would have been the better procedure. Another sampling technique often used was purposive sampling. In this type of sample the assumption was made that, for a number of reasons, a particular sample could and did represent the rest of the population. The 97 statement, f , As goes Maine so goes the nation,1 1 was an example of purposive sampling. The assumption here was that on the basis of past experience, Maine had been a good indicator of the results in national elections. Therefore, if the results of the Maine voting were known, it would have been possible to predict the outcome of the national voting pattern. This was not a good example of valid purposive sampling since the nation did not always go the way Maine did. However, in the present instance, if a completely normative tutorial project were found, it would not have been necessary to test the rest of the projects, since by testing this sample a representative sample of the entire population had, in effect, been tested. All of the foregoing types of samples were ideals of one kind or another. Most samples were not this neat. It was difficult to account for all of the possible varia tions in sampling in social science research. Very often, samples were so difficult to acquire that the social scientist fell back on incidental samples, i.e., those which were chosen because of their availability without regard for valid sampling techniques. According to Guilford (15), it was possible to show that even a hap hazard or incidental sample was valid for some studies. In this case it became a type of pseudo-purposive sample. Generalizations beyond any sample can be made safely only when we have defined the population that the sample represents in every significant detail. If we know the significant properties of the incidental 98 sample well enough and can show that those proper ties apply to new individuals, those new individuals may be said to belong to the population as the members of the sample. By ’’significant properties*1 is meant those variables that correlate with the experimental variables involved. (15:159) If incidental samples are employed, the investigator is under scientific obligation to describe the properties of his group m all aspects that he can conceive as being related to the outcome of the investigation. (15:160) In order to fill the gap between faulty experimen tation due to unrepresentative and biased samples and true randomization, Campbell and Stanley wrote *’ Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research on Teaching” (4). Campbell and Stanley assumed truly representative and unbiased samples would be difficult if not impossible to achieve in many of the experiments carried out in educa tion. The problem, then, became to eliminate alternative hypotheses through the use of special designs, i.e., the quasi-experimental designs. The experimental population of the present study was neither representative nor unbiased since the samples were confounded by the following factors: 1. Both tutees and tutors were volunteers since no one was forced to come to the tutorial sessions. The implication was that there was a difference between those who did come to the sessions and those who did not. 2. Most of the tutees were lower-class minority group children. There was reason to believe that aliena- tion was affected by status, educational level, sex and age. 99 3. The tutors were predominantly middle-or upper- class college students. There was no necessary relationship between this population and the populations of any other tutorial projects. Therefore, it became the task of the writer to determine a design by which the findings of the study had internal and external validity. Campbell and Stanley*s discussion was used as the basis for determining the internal and external validity of the design. (The valid ity and reliability of the instrument were discussed in Chapter III.) Design Campbell and Stanley began by defining internal and external validity. Internal validity was: . . . the basic minimum without which any experiment is uninterpretable: Did in fact the experimental treatments make a difference in this specific experi mental instance? (4:175) Basically, internal validity had to do with whether or not the same results would be achieved if the same per son were tested again. If it was not possible to rely upon the results, then the researcher could not know what he was testing. External validity: . . . asks the question of generalizability: To what population, settings, treatment variables, and measurement variables can this effect be general ized? (4:175) 100 In the case of the present study if the population was a volunteer, lower-class, minority-group, childhood-age population, was it possible to generalize the results of a different make-up? Campbell and Stanley summarized the ideal situation succinctly: While internal validity is the sine qua non, and while the question of external validity, Tike the question of inductive inference, is never com pletely answerable, the selection of designs strong in both types of validity is obviously our ideal. (4:175) According to Campbell and Stanley, there were twelve groups of extraneous variables or confounding fac tors which indicated the possibility of alternative hypotheses, unless they were controlled. The first eight dealt with internal-validity while the last four dealt with external validity. They were: 1* History, the specific events occurring between the first and second measurement in addition to the experimental variable. 2. Maturation processes within the respondents operating as a function of the passage of time per se (not specific to the particular events), including growing older, growing hungrier, growing more tired, and the like. 3* Testing the effects of taking a (pre) test upon the scores of a second testing. 4. Instrumentation, in which changes in the cali bration of a measuring instrument of changes in the observers or scorers used may produce changes in the obtained measurements. 5. Statistical regression, operating where groups have been selected onthe basis of their extreme scores. 101 6. Biases resulting in differential selection of respondents for the comparison groups. 7. Experimental mortality, or differential loss of respondents for the comparison groups. 8. Selection-maturation interaction, etc., which in certain of the multiple-group quasi-experi- mental designs . . . is confounded with, i.e., might be mistaken for, the effect of the experimental variable. 9. The reactive or interaction effect of testing, in which a pretest might increase or decrease the respondent’s sensitivity or responsiveness to the experimental variable and thus make the results obtained for a pretested population unrepresentative of the effects of the experi mental variable for the unpretested universe from which the experimental respondents were selected. 10. The interaction effects of selection biases and the experimental variable. 11. Reactive effects of experimental arrangements. which would preclude generalization about the effect of the experimental variable upon persons being exposed to it in nonexperimental settings. 12. Multiple-treatment interference, likely to occur whenever multipletreatments are applied to the same respondents, because the effects of prior treatments are not usually erasable. (4:175-176) None of the twelve confounding effects had to do with instrument reliability and validity (see Chapter IV), but rather with design reliability and validity. Campbell and Stanley were interested in whether or not the results had validity and reliability regardless of the instruments used. In brief, was it possible to interpret change in the dependent variable in any meaningful way, or did alterna tive hypotheses explain the results just as well as did the independent variable? This was the basic problem of design 102 in any quasi-experimental approach: to determine whether or not the twelve alternative explanations which Campbell and Stanley listed were viable alternatives to the experi mental variable. In the instance of this dissertation, there were a number of practical considerations which precluded the use of the most desirable design. The varying degrees of cooperation received from the different projects, the peculiarities of the subject having been exposed to differ ent amounts of the experimental variable, the lack of equivalence of the different projects (race, class, educa tional level, and so on), and the volunteer nature of the population. The researcher kept these confounding factors in mind as the research was carried out.'*' A pre-test was given to all tutors and tutees enrolled in the major tutorial projects in the Los Angeles area. It was estimated that the instrument was adminis tered to approximately 85 per cent of all of the tutees and tutors in junior and senior high school projects. The tutors and tutees had experienced varying amounts of tutoring.^ ^This discussion did not include the standardiza tion population as they were not part of the design problem. In their case it was the validity of the instru ment not that of the design which was of major concern. 2 Four forms of the questionnaire were used: (1) The standardization population was given the thirty-five- item TT scale, the five-item Scrole scale, and the seven- teen-item Nettler scale. (2) The tutees of Projects A,____ 103 Five weeks after the pre-test, a post-test was given. Only two of the projects were post-tested, since one of the pre-test groups was not representative, one other group did not wish to be post-tested, and two others were too small to make post-testing worthwhile. "Matched*1 subjects were both pre- and post-tested and had their scores matched; "new" subjects were post-tested but not pre-tested; "drop-outs" were pre-tested but not post tested. The full design followed the following format: Post-Test (Tutors and Tutees) Project A: xi X2 X3 X4 0 Project A Post: Project ELA: xi X2 X3 X4 0 X1 x2 X3 Project W: xi X2 X3 X4 0 Project WE: xi X2 X3 X4 0 Project LA: xi X2 X3 X4 0 Project MC: xi X2 X3 X4 0 Project MC Post: X-, / OM X/ ON *1-4 0M 1 ^2 3 4 ON ELA, W, and WE were given all thirty-five items of the TT scale. (3) All tutors were given the full TT scale, the School Items were written in the past tense, and instruc tions were added to indicate that the tutor’s attitude toward high school and junior high were of interest, not his attitude toward college. (4) The tutees of Projects LA and MC, since they were under the control of the Los Angeles City School District, were given the same test as the other tutees except that items 5, 6, 8, 9, 13, 16, 18, 19, 24, and 31 were removed. Copies of all scales used are provided in the Appendix. 104 Where = 0 or 1 hour of tutoring, Where X2 = 2 to 6 hours of tutoring, Where = 7 to 10 hours of tutoring, Where X^ = More than 10 hours of tutoring, Where 0 = The presentation of the TT scale of alienation, Where OM = The presentation of the scale of alienation to subjects who had taken the scale previ ously and whose scores were matched to their previous score. Where ON = The presentation of the scale of alienation to ’’ new*' subjects. Campbell and Stanley's alternative hypotheses were dis cussed to determine the viability of the design. History. For history to be a plausible alter native hypothesis, the events which occurred between the pre- and post-test other than the experimental variable should have affected all of the subjects equally. In this case, the difference between "pre-test” and "new" subjects should have been noticed. Since this effect was tested for, we had accounted for history. 2. Maturation. Since the passage of time was equal for all of the subjects, maturation was not a viable alternative. Further, since chronological age was a pre dicted factor in alienation, this, too, was accounted for. 3* Testing. Since some of the subjects in the "post-test" group had not taken the pre-test, this was not a viable alternative unless the "new" subjects was signif- icantlv different from the "pre-tested" subjects.__________ 105 4. Instrumentation. Instrumentation was a problem in so far as the Los Angeles City Schools required that ten items be removed from the original scale as a prerequisite to the research. The exact effect of the removal of these questions was not known. However, if there were a striking difference between the scores of the Los Angeles City School District Projects (LA and MC) tutees, then instrumen tation became a viable alternative. 5. Statistical Regression. Since the groups were not picked on the basis of their extreme scores, this was not a confounding factor. 6* Selection Bias. Assuming that there would be no attempt to generalize the findings beyond the population in question (tutees and tutors in the Los Angeles area), there was no selection bias as virtually everyone was tested.^ 7. Experimental Mortality. Since a post-test was given which could determine the effects of experimental mortality, this was not a viable alternative. 8. Selection"Maturation Interaction. If the various groups were not initially equivalent on the inde pendent and dependent variables, then there was the possibility that one group or the other would show a ^If an attempt were to be made by others to gener alize the findings to other groups, care should be taken to see that the characteristics of these other groups matches the population of this study. 106 greater change on the dependent variable maturation rate. In the case of the present study, since two projects were matched against themselves, and each project was matched against every other project, this was a less likely alter native. However, since there was no way to determine initial equivalence or lack of it, this alternative hypoth esis could not be ruled out. 9• Reactive or Interaction Effect of Testing. Whereas the effects of history and maturation were con founded by the passage of time, the interaction effect of testing was decreased by the passage of time. It was assumed that the longer the period between the time of pre-test and post-test, the greater would be the tendency on the part of the subject to forget his responses on the pre-test. A period of five weeks elapsed between pre- and post-testing. This should have been sufficient time, how ever, it was not possible to completely rule out this alternative. 10. Interaction Effects of Selection Biases and the Experimental Variable. If there were no attempt to generalize the findings of the study to groups which were not representative of the population of this study, then this was not a viable alternative as there was no selection bias in this group. 11. Reactive Effects of Experimental Arrangements. Though it would have been impossible to completely 107 eliminate this factor, every attempt was made to minimize its effects. To this end the scale was administered in the usual tutorial setting and was administered by the tutor who customarily worked with the tutee. The experimenter administered the instrument to the tutors in the customary tutorial setting. 12. Multiple-Treatment Inference. In the present case it was assumed that the only experiment in which the subjects were engaged was the tutorial projects. It was also attempted to avoid such pitfalls as having the tutee read the scale himself and thereby testing his reading ability rather than his alienation score. (The tutor, with strict instructions as to the method of presentation, was asked to read the scale to the tutee while the tutee had a copy before him. In this way there was both a visual and an aural stimulus.) Campbell and Stanley used a "plus1 1 to indicate that an alternative had been accounted for, a "minus1 1 to indi cate that an alternative had not been accounted for, and a "?" to indicate a lack of certainty. In this terminology the design of this study was rated as follows: History, plus; Maturation, plus; Testing, plus; Instrumentation. questionable but a definite possibility for alternative hypotheses if significant differences appeared between the Los Angeles City tutees and the non-Los Angeles City tutees; Statistical Regression, plus; Selection Bias, plus ,__________________________________________________________________________ 108 (under the conditions stated above); Experimental Mortal" itv. plus; Selection Maturation-Interaction. questionable; Reactive or Interaction Effect of Testing, plus; Interac tion Effects of Selection Biases and the Experimental Variable, plus (under the conditions listed above); Reac tive Effects of Experimental Arrangements (never fully eliminated), plus for tutees and questionable for tutors; Multiple-Treatment Inference, plus (though always question able) . The question of whether or not a design accounted for sufficient errors due to biased or unrepresentative sampling to warrant drawing conclusions from the findings could never be fully answered. Since there was no such thing as a perfect design, it was the author*s attempt to account for as many alternatives as possible. Samples Drawn from the Standard ization Population Two purposive samples were chosen to standardize the TT scale of alienation. There was an attempt to find samples which had the characteristics of the lower-class minority group children of the experimental population. However, since the object of the validation procedure was to determine the relationship of the TT scale to those of Srole and Nettler, a sample had to be found which was able to read Srole*s and Nettler*s scales. At the same time, 109 since the new scale was to be used with the tutors as well as with the tutees, the standardization population had to have some of the characteristics of the tutor sample. Therefore, the best standardization population consisted of two junior college samples. Sample DT had the following characteristics: (1) The total number equaled fifty-nine; (2) all of the sub jects were students at a junior college located in the downtown area of Los Angeles in a lower-class neighborhood; (3) on the socioeconomic status variable, forty-two sub jects were defined as lower class, ten subjects were defined as middle class, and two subjects were defined as upper c l a s s (4) thirty-one of the subjects were male and twenty-eight were female. Sample CA had the following characteristics: (1) The total number equaled 159; (2) all of the subjects were students at a junior college which was located in a transi tional neighborhood, but which drew its students from the entire city of Los Angeles, most of the other states of the Union, and forty-seven foreign countries; it had more of the atmosphere of a college and many more full-time stu dents than did DT junior college; (3) on the socioeconomic status variable ninety-eight were defined as lower class, thirty-one were defined as middle class, and thirteen were ^"Sorne subjects did not reply to all questions. Therefore, the sums on the variables were not always equal to the total.____________________________ 110 defined as upper class; (4) 105 of the subjects were male and forty-nine were female. Parameters of the Population of Tutorial Projects in the Los Angeles Area and the Samples Drawn from This Population The basic division (excluding the standardization samples) was between tutees and tutors. The tutee samples were composed primarily of lower-class children (ages six to twenty-two) who were having some difficulty in school. (Project LA tutees were of a higher social class and were having less academic difficulties.) The tutor samples were made up almost exclusively of college and junior college students. Most of the tutors were female. The tutor*s social class tended to be higher than that of the tutees (the dissimilarity between tutees and tutors of Project LA was not as great). The tutees and tutors were divided into six sam ples, that is, Tutorial Projects: (1) Project A, (2) Project ELA, (3) Project W, (4) Project LA, (5) Project WE, and (6) Project MC. One sample of tutors and one sample of tutees was connected with each project. All subjects were volunteers, since no one was forced to attend the tutorial sessions (see Chapter IV). The subjects were also told that they did not have to take the questionnaire, but only one person (a tutor from Project A) refused. Ill Tutee Samples Approximately 85 per cent of all of the tutees engaged in tutorial projects in the Los Angeles area were contacted and tested. Since there would be no attempt to generalize to other tutorial projects, we were dealing with the total population. However, the various projects had certain distinguishing characteristics. Therefore, each project was a sample of the total and had to be defined separately. Sample A Tutee had the following characteristics: (1) The total number of subjects equaled forty-four; (2) of these, forty-one were defined as lower class, and three were defined as middle class; (3) thirty attended elemen tary school, thirteen attended junior high school, and one attended senior high school; (4) twenty-one were male and twenty-three were female; (5) twenty-nine were eleven years of age or under, fourteen were between twelve and fourteen years of age, and one was between fifteen and twenty; (6) ten subjects had either received zero or one hour of tutor ing; eight had received two to six hours of tutoring; two had received seven to ten hours of tutoring; and twenty- three had received over ten hours of tutoring. The ecological characteristics of the area were as follows: (1) The average value of the homes in the area was $11,000 to $13,000; (2) the family income ranged from $4,000 to $5,000; (3) the percentage of Negroes in the area 112 was over 75 per cent; (4) there were less than 8 per cent Mexican. The tutorial sessions were held at a community center which was located in the basement of a church. It was poorly lit and dingy. There were no characteristics which would identify it with a school room. The community center was financed by the United Fund though the Tutorial Project was unfinanced. Major academic areas of tutoring were remedial reading and composition. Sample ELA Tutee had the following characteristics: (1) The total number of subjects equaled twenty-nine; (2) of these, twenty-six were defined as lower class, two were defined as middle class, and one was defined as upper class; (3) one subject had reached the elementary school level, four had reached the junior high school level, and twenty-one had reached the senior high school level (all subjects were drop-outs); (4) nineteen were male and ten were female; (5) twenty-three were between fifteen and twenty years of age and six were over twenty; (6) eight of the subjects had received zero or one hour of tutoring; six had received two to six hours of tutoring; four had received seven to ten hours of tutoring; and eight had received more than ten hours of tutoring. The ecological characteristics of the area were as follows: Home values ranged from $11,000 to $14,000; family income ranged from $4,000 to $5,000; there were less than 20 per cent Negroes; over 50 per cent of the population was Mexican-American. 113 The tutorial project was held in a Youth Opportunities Board building. It was a noisy building since there were always people talking in halls. The rooms used for tutor ing were very run down. Plaster was coming off of almost the entire surface. Major academic areas of tutoring were remedial reading and arithmetic in preparation for employ ment . Sample W Tutee had the following characteristics: (1) The total number of subjects was five; (2) all five of the subjects were lower class; (3) one of the subjects had reached the junior high school level, four had reached high school (all were drop-outs); (4) three of the subjects were male, and two were female; (5) four of the subjects were fifteen to twenty years of age, one was over twenty; (6) four of the subjects had received two to six hours of tutoring, one had received seven to ten hours. The ecolog ical characteristics of the area were as follows: Home values were under $11,000; family income ranged from $3,000 to $5,000; over 75 per cent of the population was Negro; less than 15 per cent of the population was Mexican- American. The tutorial program was held in a small but new building in the community. The emphasis was less upon tutoring than upon guidance and vocational counseling. Major academic areas of tutoring were remedial reading and composition in preparation for employment. Sample LA Tutee had the following characteristics: 114 (1) The total number of subjects was seventy-two; (2) thirty-three of the subjects were defined as lower class, twenty-four were defined as middle class, and eight were defined as upper class; (3) all seventy-two subjects were enrolled in high school; (4) seventeen of the subjects were male and fifty-four were female; (5) one subject was between twelve and fourteen years of age, seventy-one were between fifteen and twenty; (6) eight of the subjects had received zero or one hour of tutoring, seventeen had received two to six hours of tutoring, twenty-three had received seven to ten hours of tutoring, and eleven had received over ten hours of tutoring. The ecological characteristics of the area were: Home values ranged from $13,000 to $25,000; family income ranged from $6,000 to over $15,000; though the population was not clearly defined, in the area to the east and south of Project LA the population was over 75 per cent Negro while in the area to the north and west of Project LA less than 7 per cent were Negroes; the population was less than 15 per cent Mexican-American. The project was held in the high school which the tutees attended, in the same rooms, and with at least one of the school’s teachers in attendance to supervise the project. The teachers did not tutor; they did, however, take roll and dealt with any discipline problems. The common complaint was that very few of the academically retarded students at the school 115 were attending the tutorial sessions. This problem was indicated by the academic subjects which were tutored, namely, chemistry, physics, languages, and others. There was also tutoring in remedial subjects but since the stu dents who most needed the remedial work did not attend the sessions in great numbers, there was not as much remedial tutoring here as there was in the other projects. Sample WE Tutee had the following characteristics: (1) The total number of subjects equaled thirteen; (2) all of the subjects were lower class; (3) all of the subjects were enrolled in a junior high school; (4) all of the sub jects were male; (5) all of the subjects were between twelve and fourteen years of age; (6) all of the subjects had received two to six hours of tutoring. The ecological characteristics of the area were as follows: Home values were under $11,000; family income ranged from $3,000 to $5,000; over 75 per cent of the population was Negro; less than 15 per cent of the popula tion was Mexican-American. The tutorial project was held in a community center financed by the United Fund. The building was in disrepair but neither as dingy as Project A nor as run down and noisy as Project ELA. Major academic areas of tutoring were remedial reading and composition to aid school work. Sample MC Tutee had the following characteristics: (1) The total number of subjects equaled 101; (2) there 116 were eighty-one subjects who were defined as lower class, ten subjects who were defined as middle class, four sub jects who were defined as upper class; (3) all of the subjects were enrolled in a junior high school; (4) thirty- two of the subjects were male and sixty-seven were female; (5) four of the subjects were under eleven years of age, ninety-three were between twelve and fourteen, and four were between fifteen and twenty; (6) sixteen of the sub jects had received zero or one hour of tutoring, twenty- five had received two to six hours of tutoring, forty had received seven to ten hours of tutoring, fourteen had received over ten hours of tutoring. The ecological characteristics of the area were: Home values ranged from $11,000 to $19,000; family income ranged from $4,000 to $8,000; the school’s attendance district was broken into four geographical regions: in the first, 7 to 14 per cent of the residents were Negro; in the second, 15 to 29 per cent were Negro; in the third, 45 to 59 per cent; and in the fourth over 75 per cent were Negro. The Mexican- American population was also broken into four regions, namely, 7 to 14 per cent, 15 to 29 per cent, 45 to 59 per cent, and over 75 per cent. The tutorial project was held in the school which the students attended. However, there were no teachers present at any time nor was roll taken. The tutors were in complete charge. There was some diffi culty noted, however, in recruiting remedial students, 117 though not nearly the difficulty mentioned in Project LA. All of the tutees, taken as a group, had the fol lowing characteristics: (1) The total number of subjects equaled 264; (2) 199 of the subjects were defined as lower class, 39 were defined as middle class, and 13 were defined as upper class; (3) 31 of the subjects had achieved an elementary school educational level, 132 had achieved junior high school level, and 98 had achieved senior high school level; (4) 104 of the subjects were male and 157 were female; (5) 33 of the subjects were under eleven years of age, 121 were between twelve and fourteen, 103 were between fifteen and twenty, and 7 were over twenty; (6) 42 of the subjects had received zero or one hour of tutor ing, 73 had received two to six hours of tutoring, 117 had received seven to ten hours of tutoring, and 57 had received over ten hours of tutoring. Of particular interest to this study was the decided difference between Sample LA Tutee and other sam ples on the socioeconomic variable (Table 1). Whereas all of the other tutee samples were comprised of at least 80 per cent lower-class subjects, Project LA Tutees were only 46 per cent lower class. This fact was important for two reasons: (1) The project was not fulfilling its purpose of tutoring underprivileged children, and (2) if socioeconomic status was shown to be a factor in alienation, then the findings from Project LA Tutees could not be interpreted 118 TABLE 1 SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS BY SAMPLE (Percentages) Lower Middle Upper Sample Tutee A 93 7 0 Sample Tutee ELA 90 7 3 Sample Tutee W 100 Sample Tutee LA 46 33 11 Sample Tutee WE 100 Sample Tutee MC 81 10 4 Sample Tutor A 6 20 60 Sample Tutor ELA 17 42 21 Sample Tutor W 100 Sample Tutor LA 14 50 33 Sample Tutor WE 100 Sample Tutor MC 5 50 43 119 the same way as could the findings from the other projects. The difference between Project LA and the other projects was the only significant difference among any of the groups. Tutor Samples Sample A Tutors had the following characteristics: (1) The total number of subjects was sixty-eight; (2) four subjects were defined as lower class, twenty-three as middle class, and thirty-nine as upper class; (3) fifty of the subjects were freshmen or sophomores in college, eighteen were juniors or above; (4) eighteen of the sub jects were male and fifty were female; (3) fifty-seven of the subjects were between fifteen and twenty years of age, eleven were over twenty; (6) thirty-two of the subjects had tutored zero or one hour, fifteen had tutored two to six hours; and nineteen had tutored more than ten hours; (7) all these tutors were students at one of the two major universities in the Los Angeles area.*" Sample ELA Tutors had the following characteris tics: (1) The total number of subjects equaled twenty- four; (2) four of the subjects were defined as lower class, ten were defined as middle class, and five were defined as upper class; (3) eight of the subjects were freshmen or ^It was not possible to determine the ecological region of the tutors* homes since they came from a variety of locations. Therefore, their socioeconomic status was determined on the basis of their parents* occupations. 120 sophomores in college, fifteen were juniors or above; (4) nine of the subjects were male and fourteen were female; (5) two of the subjects were between fifteen and twenty years of age, twenty-one were over twenty; and (6) three of the subjects had tutored for zero or one hour, three had tutored for two to six hours, three had tutored for seven to ten hours, and nine had tutored over ten hours. All these tutors were students at one of the state colleges in the Los Angeles area. Sample W Tutors had the following characteristics: | (1) The total number of subjects equaled three; (2) all three were defined as middle class; (3) all three were junior college students; (4) two of the subjects were male and one was female; (5) two of the subjects were between fifteen and twenty, one was over twenty; (6) all of the subjects had tutored zero or one hour; and (7) all these tutors were students at one of the junior colleges in the Los Angeles area. Sample LA Tutors had the following characteristics: (1) The total number of subjects equaled thirty-six; (2) five of the subjects were defined as lower class, eighteen of the subjects were defined as middle class, and twelve of the subjects were defined as upper class; (3) twenty of the subjects were freshmen and sophomores, and fifteen were juniors or above; (4) fourteen of the subjects were male and twenty-two were female; (5) twenty-six of the subjects 121 were between fifteen and twenty years of age and ten were over twenty; (6) eight of the subjects had tutored for two to six hours, fourteen had tutored for seven to ten hours, and thirteen had tutored over ten hours; and (7) all of the subjects were students at one of the two major universities in the Los Angeles area. Sample WE Tutors had the following characteristics: (1) The total number of subjects equaled four; (2) all four of the subjects were defined as middle class; (3) all four of the subjects were juniors or above at an all-male pri vate college in the Los Angeles area; (4) all four of the subjects were over twenty; and (5) three of the subjects had tutored for two to six hours and one had tutored for more than ten hours. Sample MC Tutors had the following characteristics: (1) The total number of subjects equaled twenty-one; (2) one of the subjects was lower class, ten were middle class, and nine were upper class; (3) eight of the subjects were freshmen and sophomores and thirteen were juniors or above; (4) eight of the subjects were female and thirteen were male; (5) thirteen of the subjects were between fifteen and twenty years of age and eight were over twenty; (6) six of the subjects had tutored for two to six hours, nine had tutored for seven to ten hours, and five had tutored over ten hours; and (7) all of the subjects were students at one of the state colleges in the Los Angeles area. 122 The tutors, taken as a group, had the following characteristics: (1) The total number of subjects equaled 156; (2) 14 of the subjects were defined as lower class, 65 as middle class, and 65 as upper class; (3) 93 were freshmen and sophomores in college or junior college, and 61 were juniors or above; (4) 55 of the subjects were male, and 100 were female; (5) 104 of the subjects were between fifteen and twenty years of age, and 51 were over twenty; and (6) 35 of the subjects had tutored for zero or one hour, 36 had tutored for two to six hours, 26 had tutored for seven to ten hours, and 47 had tutored for more than ten hours. There were four post-test samples: (1) A post-test was given to Project A Tutees (this included tutees who could be "matched" to a pre-test as well as some ’’ new” tutees who had not been previously tested); (2) a post-test was given to Project MC Tutees (both those who were ’’ matched1' and those who were "new") ; (3) a post-test was given to Project A Tutors (both those who were "matched" and those who were "new"); and (4) a post-test was given to Project MC Tutors (both those who were "matched" and those who were "new"). None of these groups differed signifi cantly in characteristics from the pre-test samples. Therefore, their characteristics were not discussed. These, then, were the parameters or characteristics of the population of this study. It was important that 123 these parameters be kept in mind, since any findings or conclusions drawn from this study could only be generalized to this or a highly similar population. Statistical Procedures This section was designed to indicate the proce dures which would be used. As was pointed out in the section dealing with sampling theory, methods for determin ing statistical significance could be used only with great caution. First, it was not possible to meet the assump tions inherent in these procedures, and second, since virtually the entire population (85 per cent of all of the tutors and tutees) was being dealt with, it was not reason able to perform statistical tests which would determine whether or not the samples had come from the same popula tion. The investigator was already aware that they did come from the same population. For this reason the only time that tests of significance were used was to determine whether means of samples drawn from the population were significantly different. Differences in a population were being described, not samples from one. Since different types of data warranted the use of different statistical procedures, the first task was to categorize the data which had been collected. From some data it was possible to indicate causal ity. In this type of data the experimenter had to show 124 that at least ordinal relationships existed between the variables. To some extent it was possible to show that there was a causal relationship between amount of tutoring time and alienation score, since tutoring time was the only new variable introduced. However, socioeconomic status, sex, educational level, and age could not have been causal factors in alienation. Rather, their relationship was associative, i.e., a relationship existed between these factors and alienation but the relationship was not ordinal. The data regarding parameters of the samples, the individual responses to various items, and the factors of alienation were descriptive, that is, no causal or associa tive inferences could be drawn. The data could only be described. There were, then, three basic types of data: (1) causal, (2) associative, and (3) descriptive. There were three corresponding types of statistical procedures. First, there were statistics to determine the differences between samples (the use of these statistics was not to be confused with the use of them to determine if samples were drawn from the same population); "t, f tests were used. The tests were used cautiously and descriptive data accompanied any ,ft, f tests. Second, there were associative statistics which determined relationships between items, between variables and items, and between variables and other variables, and so on. The first associative procedure used 125 was Pearson*s r. There were, however, two basic assump tions underlying Pearson*s r which confounded the use of this statistic, namely, rectilinearity and homoscedastic- ity. The former referred to the straight line relationship between two variables. If this straight line relationship did not exist, the obtained Pearson*s r would be smaller than if there had been rectilinearity. The greater was the curve describing the relationship between the variables, the smaller was the Pearson*s r. The second underlying assumption referred to equal variance of the two variables. This was not to imply that Pearson*s r required normal distribution, but rather that if the variables were skewed, they had to be skewed to the same degree and in the same direction. These assumptions were not often met by the data in the present study. It was therefore necessary to find a statistic which took into account both the curvi linear relationship and their lack of homoscedasticity of some of the variables. The phi coefficient was used in all cases where the data were dichotomous (‘’ yes*’ or nno, f with **no reply** excluded) and the assumptions of the other more commonly used measures of association could not be met. Pearson*s r was used as a measure of association in any case where the variables did not lend themselves to a two- by-two contingency table, i.e., the independent and con founding variables. On a two-by-two contingency table the phi 126 coefficient was algebraically equivalent to Pearson*s r. However, they were not interpretationally equivalent. While Pearson*s r was based upon a maximum score of plus or minus one, the phi coefficient was based upon a variable maximum figure (called phimax) determined by the distribu tion of raw data in the contingency table. Phimax was the equivalent to the plus or minus one of Pearson*s r and phi was the algebraic equivalent to the Pearson*s r. In order to convert phi to a base of plus or minus one, phimax was divided into phi. The result was the relationship stated in terms which were equivalent to Pearson*s r, i.e., the phi coefficient was converted to a base of plus or minus one. (For example: assuming that there was a curvilinear relationship between two variables, and that the phi and r coefficients indicated a relationship of .20.) However, with the curvilinear relationship a phi or r of .30 might have been the greatest relationship possible; if, then, the phimax were divided into the phi, the resulting coefficient took into account the curvilinear relationship and the lowering of the coefficient which resulted from it. In the present example the phi-phimax equaled .67. This was the true relationship between the two hypothetical variables.'*' The Pearson*s r and the phi over phimax were interpreted in ^For a full discussion of Phi and Phi-Phimax see J. P. Guilford, Psychometric Methods (New York; Toronto and London: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1954). 127 the same way: The square of the coefficient indicated the amount of explained relationship between the two variables, e.g., a correlation of .70 indicated that approximately 49 per cent of the relationship was explicable. This also meant, however, that 51 per cent of the relationship was not explicable and was left to chance variations. The third category of statistics was the descriptive statis tics. The descriptive statistics used were percentage analysis of the items, variables, and the means of samples. All of the means discussed in the data chapters were per- centage means. Percentage analysis was used to describe and to indicate direction of trends wherever they appeared. It was not used to determine statistical significance. Three procedures were used to determine the relia bility of the instrument: The Kuder-Richardson Reliability Coefficient, the Spearman Brown Prophecy formula, and the Point Biserial r. The Point Biserial r gave an indication of the amount each item contributed to the over-all relia bility of the scale and the relationship of each item to the total. Reliability coefficients were of little use except as their interpretation affected validity coeffi cients. The Kelly formula stated that the validity of a This unusual procedure was necessitated by the fact that the Los Angeles City schools requested that ten items be removed from the scale of alienation. With these items removed a tutee in one of the Los Angeles City schools projects indicated a lower alienation score due to the fact that he had answered less questions and therefore had a lower raw score. __________________________ 128 scale could not exceed the square root of the reliability of the scale, e.g., if the reliability of a scale were .25, then the validity of the scale could not exceed .50. This followed from the fact that if the researcher could not replicate results, then it was impossible to determine what it was that was being tested. In summary, then, the following procedures were used: ?ft, f tests (with great caution); Pearson1 s r_; Phi, Phimax, and Phi over Phimax; percentage analysis; the Kuder-Richardson Reliability Coefficient; the Spearman- Brown Prophecy formula; and the Point Biserial r. Summary of the Chapter In this chapter the methodological format used in the dissertation was presented; all the variables of the study were defined; sampling procedures were discussed and explained; the experimental design was formulated and the possible alternative hypotheses and confounding variables were discussed; the samples of the study were fully dis cussed and operationally defined; and the statistical procedures were explained. CHAPTER III ! STANDARDIZATION OF THE INSTRUMENT Introduction i i i j Since no scales were available for use with the |population of the present study, it was necessary to write, validate and determine the reliability of a new scale. The process was as follows: 1. Find a test or tests which had been standard ized and theoretically measured alienation. Srolefs scale of Anomie (46) and Nettler's scale of alienation (42) were used. Both had been standardized on college samples, but had been used extensively with various populations, e.g., Nettlerfs work with juvenile delinquents. - 2. All of the items on Srole's and Nettler's scales were rewritten in language which was understandable to the main population of tutees but was not too unsophis ticated for use with tutors. This meant that the language had to be simple while the concepts could lose none of their sophistication. 3. Find a population which had the characteristics of the lower social class children who were subjects of the 130 experimental study, and who could still read Srole's and Nettler's scales. Two junior college samples which approx imated the population of the main study were used (see i Chapter II)♦ This population was utilized to determine whether or not the rewritten items corresponded to their original counterparts, and to determine the reliability of I the test as a whole. 4. Determining the statistical procedures which |could be employed to define the validity and reliability of the scale of alienation. Phi over phimax and percentage analysis were the primary validation procedures. To deter mine reliability the Kuder-Richardson 20 and 21, the Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula, and the Point Biserial r were used. The rest of the chapter was organized under the following headings: 1. The face validity of the items. In this sec tion the rationale for the inclusion of each item was indicated and the hypotheses which the item investigated were listed. 2. The reliability of the instrument. ' 3. The validity of the instrument. 4. Item discrimination. t | 5. Factors found in the instrument. ! 6. The effect of socioeconomic status and sex upon the dependent variable. r3I 7. Summary, findings, and conclusions. 8. Table 13 graphically represented the relation ships between items on the TT Scale and the hypotheses !listed in Chapter I. 1 Face Validity of the Items i The face validity indicated the rationale for the inclusion of each item. Only the items from the TT Scale I 'were discussed. ! . 2 Item 1 (, f Do you enjoy television?,f) was a rewrite of Nettler*s item (item 42) which appeared unchanged. One ; of the interesting features of Nettler’s scale was that the j opening questions were used to decrease the subject*s J anxiety. Since, in most cases, the subject did not know the purpose of the test, the opening questions habituated !the subject to honesty. Therefore, even if this item did not correlate with any of the other items on the alienation I scale, it would still be of great value as a ,,leadf f to the rest of the scale. Item 2 (f , Do you like the new American cars?*1) was a rewrite of Nettler*s item (item 43) which appeared i unchanged. The rationale for this item was similar to that —iiM w im ir nnrnrfn f— ——— —i ----------------- 1 ------------- — -—■ — — — —————— — 1 , Listing of items appears in Appendix. i I 2 The rewrite items were those twenty-one items on j the TT Scale which were taken from Srole’s and Nettler’s scale and rewritten for use with the present population. 132 of item 1. The added feature, however, was that a new car was a high status symbol. This item, therefore, indicated [whether the subject was aware of, and interested in, the i i ;status symbols of the conventional society (hypothesis 3). Item 3 (*'Do you like school?M stated in the past tense for tutors) was a straightforward attempt to deter mine the subject*s attitude toward school. This was the first item in the series designed to determine the rela- itionship between the alienation score and the attitude I j . toward school (hypothesis 17). Item 4 (f , Were you interested in the elections for | president?**) was a rewrite of Nettler*s items 45 and 41 j (**Were you interested in the recent national elections?1 1 i and **Do you vote in national elections?**). The latter was not included in the TT Scale since most of the subjects | were minors. The nature of the national and state issues \ I in the election of 1964 may have confounded this item. On ! the California state level, Proposition 14, which nullified all fair housing legislation in the state, generated great interest in the minority community, particularly the Negro community. On the national level the nomination of Senator 1 Goldwater generated interest in the minority community since it was believed by many that Senator Goldwater would j retard the civil rights movement. In the recent election, The school items were those six items on the TT 1 Scale which dealt with the subject's relationship and attitude toward the school. ____________ 133 the most alienated groups (minorities, etc*) may have been the most interested. This variable may also have been age related as the older subjects would have shown a greater interest than would the younger subjects (hypothesis 6). Even taking into account these confounding factors, the fact still remained that a lack of interest in the society |indicated a form of alienation (hypothesis 7). Item 5 (MDo you think that children are a problem to their parents?**) was a rewrite of Nettler*s item, "Do you think that children are generally a nuisance to their parents?" There may have been confounding factors in this item as the standardization group used by Nettler was made up of young adults, and the population of the present study . : was made up of a younger age group (hypothesis 6) Further, the lower-class minority group family patterns of the tutee population were quite different from those of | Nettler's population (Kardiner and Ovesey) (hypothesis 16). The subject who answered affirmatively on this item showed a lack of ability to relate to others and was prone to isolation (hypothesis 13). i Item 6 ("Do you like to go to church activities?") | was a rewrite of Nettler's item, "Do you like to partici pate in church activities?" (item 48). Within the tutee population of this study, the church played an important role, particularly with the renewed vitality of the church in the civil rights movement. It was Nettler's assumption 134 that a desire to participate in church activities was a sign that one felt a kinship to the conventional norms (hypothesis 3). The confounding factor on this variable was that the social milieu of the tutors, i.e., the college campus, was such that religion was often ridiculed. It was therefore likely that a difference between the tutors and I !tutees would be noticed (hypothesis 4). i ] Item 7 ("Do your teachers ask you to do things that i I don't make sense to you?" stated in the past tense for I tutors) was the second item designed to test the subject's relationship to the school. The specific theme of the I !question was the meaningfulness of school work as seen i through the eyes of the student. If the subject saw no i relationship between the instructions of his teachers and his own life, then the subject was alienated from the school, and the society represented by them (hypothesis 17). The confounding factor here was that both the tutors and the tutees were volunteer populations which had indi- i cated a desire to learn more or to help others learn. It was assumed that these subjects recognized the value of education. The findings from this item could not be gener- i alized to any other population. This was true of all of the items but was particularly true of the items dealing with the school. Item 8 ("Do you want to have children some day?") was slightly changed from Nettler's item 47, "Do you want 135 to have children?” to account for the age of the subjects. 1 This item was designed to indicate the subject*s future I orientation (hypothesis 19) and his sense of meaningless- i ! ness (hypothesis 9). It would have to be determined, by i examining the data, whether this item had any relevance to | the younger tutees, i.e., whether or not there was an age | bias in this item. Item 9 (”Most politicians are interested only in i what is best for* themselves*1) corresponded to the second half of Nettler's item 51, ”Do you think most politicians are sincerely interested in (a) the public's welfare, or (b) more interested in themselves?” and Srole's item 36, "There's little use in writing to public officials because joften they aren't really interested in the problems of the average man." Item 9 investigated the feeling of kinship and respect for the official representatives of the conven tional society (hypothesis 15). There was a feeling on the part of many lower-class subjects that they were treated unfairly by the officials with whom they came in contact (e.g., police) (hypothesis 10), as well as a feeling of powerlessness with regard to being able to change the power structure (hypothesis 11). Item 10 ("Do you like to watch football or base ball?”) was a rewrite of Nettler's item 49, "Do national spectator sports interest you?” The assumption of the item was that most of the people in the United States did enjoy 136 spectator sports and that those who did not had a tendency to manifest other and more significant symptoms of aliena- i i tion. Whether they actually enjoyed sports was of no i |concern here, the attitude was significant. If the tutors and tutees understood the cultural and social structures (hypothesis 3), then item 10 should have been sex-related |(hypothesis 6) since males were expected to show greater 'interest in sports than were females. I ' Item 11 ("Do you think that you can handle any problem that comes along?") was a New'*' item, since neither Nettler nor Srole included the dimension of fatalism !(hypothesis 20). This item also investigated feelings of powerlessness and meaninglessness (hypotheses 9 and 11). According to Merton and Matza, feelings of powerlessness, meaninglessness, and fatalism were most common in the lower class. The item also was sex-related, since girls were not ! |faced with as many everyday problems in our society as were i jboys (hypothesis 6). Item 12 ("Do you learn things in school that help you outside of school?" stated in the past tense for 'tutors) was added since it was indicated by much of the |research that the underprivileged child felt that there was 'little or no connection between his school life and his Jlife outside of school (Reissman). This question was ^The New items were those eight items on the TT Scale which were neither rewrites of items on Srole's or Nettler* s_scaj.es, nor were they school items.________________ 137 designed to determine if there was any connection between this factor and alienation (hypothesis 17). The confound- i ,ing factor on this as on all the school items was that the 1tutees and tutors indicated that they recognized the value of education by attending the tutorial projects. i Item 13 ("Is there a special reason for our being i jhere on earth?") was a rewrite of Nettler's item 55, "Do ! you believe human life is an expression of (a) divine pur- i pose, or (b) the result of change and evolution?" This was one of the most difficult items to rewrite in a less sophisticated theological terminology. An attempt was made to maintain the concept and, at the same time, to place the concept in terminology which would be understandable to the population of the study. The item investigated whether the subject's theological beliefs were related to alienation (hypothesis 12). However, there was a confounding factor in that evolution did not indicate chaos to all the sub jects. On the contrary, some college students believed that evolution was ordered, while a God-centered universe was chaotic (hypothesis 4). i i The concept expressed in item 14 ("Do you wish your life were different from what it is?") was extrapolated from the works of Marx, Merton, and Fromm. All these writers indicated that the alienated person indicated dissatisfaction with his present situation (hypothesis 7). Since the lower-class subjects had fewer alternative 138 solutions to his problems, he indicated a greater tendency toward dissatisfaction, i.e., this item had a class bias (hypothesis 6). Item 16 (”Do you think that most married people lead unhappy lives?11) was a rewrite of Nettler’s item 50, MDo you think most married people lead trapped (frustrated) 1 lives?” This item indicated the individual’s ability to i !relate to others on a depth level. If the subject felt ! ;that the closest interpersonal relationship possible in our i society was little more than a trap, the implication was that the person was not capable of deep involvement, i.e., he was isolated (hypothesis 13). This tended to be more true of those subjects who came from broken homes or were products of an extralegal relationship. The lower-class subjects came from homes which had a high incidence of divorce, abandonment, illegitimacy, and so on. Therefore, I this question also indicated a class bias (hypothesis 6). Item 17 (’’ Does life depend mostly on luck?”) corresponded to the second half of Nettler’s item 55, ”Do you believe human life is an expression of (a) divine purpose, or (b) it is the result of chance and evolution?” Here this item attempted to translate the concept of change variations of the evolutionary process and accident into a terminology which was understandable to the subjects. Item 17 was the companion to item 24, ”Is human life a product of God's will?” Both items were intended to show 139 the subject*s sense of purposefulness (hypothesis 19), fatalism (hypothesis 20), and religious beliefs (hypothesis 12) . Item 18 (, f Do you like living in the United States?**) and item 19 ("Would you like to live in another country | just as much?**) were rewrites of Nettler* s item 57, **Do you !think you could just as easily live in another society-- i past or present?** There was a slightly different nuance to | ■the two rewrites. Item 18 attempted to determine whether i or not the subject was satisfied with his life in this society (hypothesis 7). In item 19, on the other hand, the emphasis of dissatisfaction with the present society was overshadowed by the desire to life in another society. There was the possibility that those who were of an adven turous spirit had a tendency to answer this question in the affirmative. The desire to live in another society did not indicate a necessary dissatisfaction with this one, but rather a possible desire to progress (hypothesis 8). Item 20 ("Do you think you will get anywhere in life?**) was a straightforward attempt to determine the sub ject* s future orientation (hypothesis 19). i Item 21 ("Are most politicians interested in what ris best for the people?**) was a rewrite of Nettler* s item 51, **Do you think most politicians are sincerely inter ested in (a) the public's welfare, or (b) more interested in themselves?*' Here, again, the variable was designed to 1 indicate a feeling of trust or distrust of authority j(hypothesis 15). This item also indicated a feeling of propinquity to the mainstream of society. The closer the individual felt to the powers that be, the less were his feelings of alienation from society. The lower-class subjects were more removed, had fewer alternatives open to t them, and, therefore, had less faith in the vested authori ties (hypothesis 6). Item 22 ("Is your school one of the best in the city?1 1 stated in the past tense for tutors) was one of the six items designed to determine the subject's attitude toward the school. Educators believed that the lower-class subject was dissatisfied with this particular school, and that the child felt that if he were allowed to go to another school, he would get a better education. "Best" was intentionally left undefined as the investigator did not wish to indicate that academic ability was the only measure of best. The lower-class subject, as opposed to the other subjects, may have had a completely different concept of what was good, better, or best in a school. The items did point out whether or not the child felt that ,the school was meeting his needs regardless of the nature r ; of these needs (hypothesis 17). Item 23 ("Do you think that life as most men live it is useless?") is a rewrite of Nettler's item 53, "Life as most men lead it is meaningless (agree or disagree)." 141 The item investigated the subject's sense of meaningless ness (hypothesis 9). Item 24 ("Is human life a product of God's will?") .was discussed under item 13 (hypothesis 12). Item 25 ("Do you think that life is just one prob lem after another?") was a rewrite of Nettler's item 56, j"Most people live lives of quiet desperation (agree or disagree)." The type of alienation manifested here was a sense of uselessness of effort, powerlessness, and meaning lessness (hypotheses 9, 11, 12). Item 26 ("Are your teachers fair to you in school?" jstated in the past tense for tutors) investigated Fromm's !concept that the alienated person felt that he was treated i unfairly by the society as a whole and its institutions in particular (hypothesis 10). Item 27 ("Will you have a better job than your i parents?") was a new item which investigated both the desire for social mobility, and faith in the future (hypothesis 19). There seemed to be some evidence to indi cate that before the child could change his attitude toward academic and social advancement he had to be educated to the possibilities which his parents had not had, i.e., he i | had to become alienated from his present environment (hypothesis 8). ! Item 28 ("A person has to live pretty much for today and let tomorrow take care of itself") was a rewrite 14~2 of Srole's item 37, f,Nowadays a person has to live pretty I much for today and let tomorrow take care of itself.1* This j item investigated the subject*s future orientation (hypoth esis 19) . Item 29 (,fThe average man is worse off today than 'he used to be**) was a rewrite of Srole's item 38, **In spite j I of what some people say, the lot of the average man is I getting worse, not better.** This item investigated the i subject’s sense of dissatisfaction with the status quo i (hypothesis 7). There was also the component of the belief in "the good old days.** It was expected that the lower- class subject would indicate the greatest dissatisfaction (hypothesis 6). Item 30 ("Is the world in bad shape?**) was a rewrite of Srole*s item 39, **It*s hardly fair to bring children into the world, the way things look for the I future.** Since most of our subjects were not of an age I where having children was common, the item would have no meaning in its original form. However, the item indicated a feeling of powerlessness in terms of the individual*s ; relationship to world affairs and a lack of faith in the i i ’future (hypothesis 19). Item 31 (**These days you can't trust anybody*') is a rewrite of Srole's item 40, "These days a person doesn't really know whom he can count on." The alienated person felt that he was alone and that he could not count on or 143 trust those around him (hypothesis 13). This should have been an age-related item in that one would expect children to be more trusting than adults (hypothesis 6), and a class-related item in that trust is less common in the lower classes (hypothesis 6). Further, an increase in tutoring time should have increased trust (hypothesis 5). i I Item 32 (f1Are your principals fair to you in j school?1 1 stated in the past tense for tutors) was similar to item 26 (nAre your teachers fair to you in school?1 1 j stated in the past tense for tutors) except that the prin cipal was more of an authority figure (hypothesis 15). | Here the feeling that the society and its representatives | were unjust was indicated (hypothesis 10). Item 33 was, ,fDo you wish you could live without working?1 1 All of the major writers in the field of aliena- 1 tion from Marx to Fromm indicated that the alienated person was almost completely alienated from work (hypothesis 14). i Item 34 (f1If someone gave you some money, would you spend it right away?11) indicated an ability on the part of the subject to allay his desire for immediate satisfaction (hypothesis 18). Item 35 (r,Do you think that the things you buy are built so that they will break?11) investigated whether the subject felt that the society generally and the business community in particular cheated him. Further, there was a feeling on the part of many lower-class subjects that 144 tradesmen did not deal fairly. There was also greater opportunity for the lower-class subject to feel slighted as there were fewer alternative actions possible, e.g., he was l limited to the merchants in his area due often to a lack of consumer knowledge (hypothesis 6). Tutors, on the con trary, were often more aware of nbuilt-in inefficiency1 1 than was the public at large. Therefore, they might have tended toward alienation on this item. In summary of the face validity section: (1) All of the items except item 1 aided in the process of proving or disproving the hypotheses stated in Chapter I (see Table 2). (2) All of the hypotheses stated at the end of | Chapter I (with the exception of hypotheses 1 and 2 which ! related to whether or not alienation was a single or multi ple factor construct) were represented by at least one item on the scale (see Table 2). ! Reliability of the Instrument i The instrument given to the standardization popula tion was made up of fifty-seven items. The first thirty- j five of these items made up the TT Scale, i.e., Rewrite j items, School items, and New items; items 36 to 40 were | Srole*s scale, and items 41 through 57 were taken from Nettler's scale. After 218 subjects of standardization samples DT and CA had taken all fifty-seven items, a f ; Kuder-Richardson Reliability Test was run. The reliability TABLE 2 HYPOTHESES DEDUCED FROM CHAPTER I AND THE CORRESPONDING ITEMS ON THE TT SCALE i j Hypoth- I eses Corres ponding i items: 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ■10 11 12 1 1 14 15 16 1 1 18 19 20 2 6 31 4 4 8 9 9 13 5 15 9 5 3 34 8 11 6 13 5 14 19 11 26 11 16 33 21 7 17 17 10 10 18 27 23 32 25 31 32 12 20 11 25 35 30 22 27 14 29 28 15 30 16 21 29 31 35 for all fifty-seven items was .84. In order to determine the reliability of the individual items on the scale, the Point Biserial r. for each item was defined (see Table 3). The purpose of the Point Biserial r was to give an indica tion of how much each item on the scale contributed to the over-all reliability of .84. According to Garrett (13:225), jany Point Biserial of more than .138 was statistically significant at the .05 level with 218 subjects. Under these circumstances, all of the items except 4, 18, 25, 39, 41, 45, 46, and 57 were statistically significant. However, the items which contributed most to the over-all reliabil ity were items 3, 6, 8, 9, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, i j29, 32, 35, 38, 47, 48, 52, 53, and 54. Of these items, fifteen were from the TT Scale, one was from Srole's scale, and five were from Nettler's scale. Of the three items on the TT Scale which seemed totally unreliable (items 4, 18, and 25), items 4 and 18 i were unreliable primarily because almost all of the sub jects answered the items in one way. This made the indi cated unreliability of the item as much an artifact of the distribution assumptions of the Point Biserial r as it was an artifact of reliability. However, the three items would have to be interpreted with great caution. One of the confounding factors in reliability tests was the range and shape of the distribution. If the range i was too narrow, or the distribution too skewed, then the 147 TABLE 3 POINT BISERIAL r OF THE STANDARDIZATION ITEMS Ctem ~PBS Item -PBS Item -PBS 1 = .13 20 ■= .50 39 -.06 2 .36 21 = .42 40 = .38 3 = .49 22 = .55 41 s s -.02 4 s s .04 23 = .49 42 ' s s .13 5 s s .22 24 = .70 43 = .37 6 = .61 25 = -.03 44 s = .21 7 = .28 26 = .29 45 = .04 8 — .55 27 s s .56 46 = -.01 9 .51 28 = .50 4 7 ' s s .55 10 — .37 29 s s .51 48 s s .61 11 s s .29 30 * = .35 49 s s .32 12 = .33 31 s s .19 50 s s .20 13 = .24 32 s s .54 51 s s .35 14 = .27 33 s s .18 52 s s .54 15 .17 34 = .14 53 s s .49 16 = .15 35 ss .50 54 ss .28 17 = 00 • 36 = .25 55 = .74 18 .00 37 .33 56 = .39 19 SB .25 38 a s .58 57 = -.09 148 reliability coefficients would not be accurate. Table 4 indicates the range and shape of the distribution of scores on all fifty-seven items of the alienation scale. From (Table 4 it could be seen that though the mean percentage alienation score was low (approximately 33 per cent) the range was sufficiently large and the shape of the curve was ;not sufficiently skewed to affect the reliability coeffi- !cients. ! In summary, (1) the scale as a whole indicated very ! high reliability; (2) all but three of the items on the TT Scale also indicated high reliability; (3) the items from Srole's scale indicated the lowest reliability; (4) five of jthe items from Nettler's scale also indicated low reliabil ity; and (5) all of these findings were based upon data gathered with the standardization population. Any general izations from these data to other populations were to be made with great caution. Validity of the Instrument If the reliability of the instrument was .84, then the highest possible validity of the instrument was the i I square root of .84, or .92. However, the TT Scale had not I |been validated. To accomplish this, a correlation analysis was performed to determine the relationship of every item on the TT Scale to every item of Srole's and Nettler's scales. Certain of the items on the TT Scale were direct TABLE 4 DISTRIBUTION OF ALIENATION SCORES IN PERCENTAGES (Numbers within parentheses indicate frequency per five-point ranges.) Mean =23; range « 64 30 25 o 20 c <u 3 15 cr <D u 10 U * 5 0 0 7 (5) (9) (15) (18) (27) (20) (19) (12) (8) (6) (3) (1) (0) (2) ______________________________ 5-point percentage ranges L64ZX 150 rewrites of items on Srole’s and Nettler's scales. The i validity of these items was shown through the correlation of the item on the TT Scale with its counterpart on either i Srole's scale or Nettler's scale (see Table 5). With the total number of subjects equal to 218, any correlation of .138 or over was significant at the .05 level (13:201). |However, items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 16, 21, 23, 24, 28, Und 29 showed the greatest relationship to their "original" i counterpart as measured by phi over phimax. This indicated that of the twenty-one rewrite items, thirteen showed a relationship of greater than .60 with the original item.^ Of the eight remaining, items 18 and 31 had relationships of greater than .50. Items 9, 13, 17, 19, 25, and 30 showed some relationship to the original item but not a sufficient amount. Of those non-correlating items, how- , i ever, item 9 showed a significant correlation (.80) to item 47; item 13 showed a significant correlation (.45) to item 6; items 19, 25, and 30 showed significant correlations to item 18 (.67, 1.00, and .47). This indicated that these items were measuring alienation but that the rewrite was interpreted differently by the subject than was the orig inal item. The validity of using these items could be shown by their presence in factors of alienation which were manifested by this population. ^Original items were the seventeen items on Nettler's scale and the five items on Srole's scale which were rewritten for use in the TT Scale._______ 151 TABLE 5 PHI/PHIMAX OF REWRITE ITEMS AND THE CORRESPONDING ORIGINAL ITEM Rewrite Original Phi/Phimax 1 by 42 * .96 2 by 43 = .87 4 by 45 ss .86 5 by 46 — .87 6 by 48 = .98 8 by 47 as .81 9 by 51 ss .15 9 by 36 « .31 10 by 49 as .72 13 by 55 * .02 13 by 52 - .09 16 by 50 ss .75 17 by 55 ss .07 18 by 57 — .54 19 by 57 * .18 21 by 51 as .67 21 by 36 - CM • 23 by 53 ss .65 24 by 55 as .86 24 by 52 - .74 25 by 56 as .23 28 by 37 as .91 29 by 38 ss .65 30 by 39 a* .09 31 by 40 a * • L n 00 152 1 In order to determine the validity of the TT Scale as a whole rather than the individual items on it, correla tion analyses were performed to determine the relationship among TT1s scale, Srole's scale, Nettler's scale, new items, school items, and rewrite items (see Table 6). I Table 6 was interpreted in the following way: ! 1. The relationship between the TT Scale and i ;either the Srole scale or the Nettler scale was greater i than the relationship between Srole's and Nettler's scales. i This lack of correlation between the two scales was pointed out by Dean who found that there was a correlation of only .31 between the two (38). This indicated that Srole and Nettler were measuring two different forms of alienation and that the TT Scale was, at least in part, measuring both Srole's and Nettler's form of alienation. (This followed from the fact that five of Srole's items and seventeen of Nettler's items were incorporated into the scale.) 2. The TT Scale showed a greater relationship to the total (all fifty-seven items) than did either Srole's scale or Nettler's scale. This may have been an artifact of the correlation procedure, since the TT Scale was the largest scale (thirty-five items). 3. The new items showed a low correlation with Srole's and Nettler's scales. This was expected since these items were written with the express purpose of including factors which had not been included by either TABLE 6 INTERCORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUPS OF ITEMS Total TT Srole's Nettler's Rewrite New School (1-57) (1-35) (36-41) (42-57) I i Total 1.00 .94 .48 .82 .90 .52 .28 TT .94 1.00 .37 .64 .88 .62 .39 Srole's .48 .37 1.00 .16 .33 .23 .17 Nettler's .83 .64 .16 1.00 .73 .23 .03 Rewrite .90 • 88 .33 .73 1.00 .28 .08 New .52 .62 CO CM .23 .28 1.00 .24 School .28 .39 .17 .03 0 0 o <* CM 1.00 154 Srole or Nettler. The new items, however, did correlate with the TT Scale even though they made up less than 25 per cent of that scale. This indicated that these items were measuring alienation but that the factors which they were measuring were different from those measured by Srole and Nettler. j 4. The school items showed no significant rela tionship with any of the other items. This indicated that ! |the subject*s attitude toward school had little relation ship to his alienation score. However, the selection- testing error might have played a part, i.e., since all of the subjects had continued their education voluntarily their attitude toward education would show bias. In summary, (1) fifteen of the twenty-one rewrite items showed a high correlation to their Original counter part; (2) the other six items measured alienation, however, their validity was shown through high correlations with I items other than the Original item from which they were i taken; (3) the correlations between the TT Scale and Srole*s and Nettler*s scales seemed to indicate that |alienation was measured by all three, i.e., the TT Scale, for the standardization population, was a valid measure of alienation; (4) the New items of the TT Scale measured factors not present on either Srole*s or Nettler*s scales but did measure alienation; (5) the School items were unrelated to the rest of the items; and (6) the makeup of 155 the population tested indicated that caution be used in generalizing the results to the experimental population or making definite statements regarding validity of the i !instrument. j ' Item Discrimination I One of the criteria of a usable item was its abil- i jity to discriminate, i.e., that not all of the subjects I answered the item in the same way. This was not to imply that the ideal would have been for half of the subjects to answer one way while the other half answered the other. The ideal situation was where there was a full range of items on the scale, namely, (1) all items discriminated, |i.e., at least 10 per cent of the subjects held the minor ity view; (2) that there were some items which were highly selective, i.e., that between 10 and 30 per cent of the subjects held the minority view; and (3) that the majority of the items did not indicate extremes, i.e., that between 30 and 50 per cent of the subjects held the minority view. Table 7 indicated the percentage of "yes1 1 and "no1 1 replies i and the ’’correct,1 1 i.e., alienating, replies and was inter preted as follows: items 4, 8, 12, 15, 18, 20, 26, 27, 32, :45, and 47 did not meet the basic criterion of at least 10 per cent of the subjects holding the minority opinion; I items 1, 2, 3, 10, 13, 16, 22, 34, 36, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, \ 44, 46, 49, 50, and 53 met the second criterion of TABLE 7 PERCENTAGE OF "YES" AND "NO" REPLIES ON EACH ITEM Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Correct* 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 Yes 87 83 89 92 52 52 33 95 37 79 44 97 80 46 92 15 10 87 38 No 13 17 11 7 48 67 5 63 21 21 56 3 20 54 8 85 90 2 62 Item 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Correct, 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Yes 97 68 80 23 70 41 93 91 32 11 68 31 94 41 23 38 23 28 17 No 3 32 20 77 30 59 7 9 68 89 32 69 5 59 77 62 77 72 83 I Item 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 Correct 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 Yes 12 38 80 85 82 54 91 21 95 54 79 17 68 66 22 77 55 42 65 No 88 62 20 15 18 46 9 79 5 46 21 83 32 34 78 23 45 58 35 ^Correct responses were alienated responses; ,flf l « , f yes, f and f,2, f « nno.f f 157 selection; the rest of the items (twenty-seven in all) fell into the category of having between 30 and 50 per cent of the subjects indicating the minority view. There were, then, eleven items which did not discriminate, nine of which were items on the TT Scale. Of these, items 12, 26, i and 32 were school items and may have manifested a I selection-testing interaction error since all of the sub- i jjects in the standardization population understood the value of education. Items 8, 15, 20, 27, and 47 may have fallen prey to the same error since all of the subjects felt that they were determining their future through their continued education. Item 4 was a rewrite of item 45 and both indicated an interest in the society. However, a sampling (history) error may have been made in that the test was given within three months of a national election which generated great interest in politics, i Another criterion of a valid item was that the i i majority of those who answered the item "correctly,1 1 i.e., I in the alienated direction, were also those who had the highest total score on the test. In order to determine ;which of the items met this criterion, a "Top-Bottom" ] analysis was performed. First, all of the subjects were I divided at the median into two groups, namely, those who had high alienation scores ("Top" group) in the upper half and those who had low alienation scores ("Bottom" group) in i the lower half. Second, the percentage of "yes" responses 158 on each item were presented in Table 8. Third, by analy- I sis, it was determined which of the items were most often answered ’’correctly” by the ’’Top” alienated group and i ’’incorrectly” by the ’’Bottom1 1 alienated group. Fourth, any item which segregated the two groups by at least 20 per cent was considered to have ”Top-Bottom” validity. Items 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 12, 15, 18, 20, 22, 26, 27, 32, 41, 45, 47, 54, and 57 did not meet the requirement. ! ! In summary, (1) forty-six of the items met the criterion that at least 10 per cent of the subjects hold the minority opinion, twenty-six of which were on the TT Scale; (2) nineteen of the items ’’selected’1 those who held i the minority view, of which eight were on the TT Scale; (3) eleven of the items may have fallen prey to errors in the design of the experiment or did not discriminate, eight of which were on the TT Scale; and (4) thirty-nine of the i j items met the ”Top-Bottom” requirement that they discrim- t !inate between the alienated and non-alienated subjects, twenty-two of which were on the TT Scale. Factors Found in the Standardization Population i It was not possible to perform a factor analysis i since it was not possible to meet the assumptions of that method. It was possible, however, to locate those items which had the greatest intercorrelations and list them by groups. The phi over phimax correlations were used for TABLE 8 "TOP-BOTTOM" ANALYSIS (Percentage of "yes" replies of the most alienated and least alienated subjects) Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Correct* 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 Top 77 64 79 91 70 32 34 86 52 66 36 91 63 52 86 34 23 91 63 Bottom 91 88 91 98 27 71 25 96 16 88 59 95 93 23 91 5 2 98 14 Item 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Correct 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Top 89 50 70 52 43 66 89 86 46 27 82 50 84 50 32 70 29 43 34 Bottom 100 88 88 5 82 16 96 93 18 4 46 18 95 18 11 21 11 14 7 Item 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 Correct 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 Top 27 57 73 71 59 36 84 34 88 30 57 41 46 32 50 54 23 66 65 Bottom 2 18 86 91 94 63 96 7 93 73 89 4 84 84 2 68 75 20 51 *Correct responses were alienated responses; "1" = "yes" and "2" = "no." Vjn 160 this purpose (see Table 9). The largest factor was headed by item 20 ("Do you think you will get anywhere in life?") which had seventeen items correlated with it; item 18 ("Do you like living in the United States?") had fifteen items correlated with it; item 48 from Nettler*s scale ("Do you like to participate in church activities?") had ten items i correlated with it; item 8 ("Do you want to have children some day?") had eight items correlated with it; and item 12 i !("Did you learn things in school that helped you outside of I school?*1) which was the only school item which correlated highly had eight items which correlated with it. In item 20, the highest correlations (.50 or above) were with items 9, 19, 22, 24, 35, 44, and 52. Of these, items 9, 15, 17, 19, 22, 27, 30, 35, and 44 did not appear in any of the other factors. Items 25, 29, and 40 appeared in only one other factor. All of the items, with the exception of item 44 which was removed from the scale, were ;related to the factor of trust and faith. Items 17, 24, 25, 29, 40, 52, 53, and 55 indicated the subject*s faith in a higher being, his life, and his fellow men; items 9, 19, and 35 indicated the subject*s trust and faith in the i ruling authorities and the producers of commodities; item 22 indicated the subject's attitude toward the school; and |items 15, 27, and 33 indicated the subject's attitude toward work as a solution to his predicament. Because alienated answers on these items indicated the subject's TABLE 9 INTERCORRELATIONS OF THE MAJOR FACTORS (Only intercorrelations of 0/0max over .39 were listed) Meaning lessness Isolation Family Negativism i i Religion Future ! Item Item Item Item Item Item imax Imax max Imax imax imax 12 by 18 by 24 by 8 by 48 by 20 by .48 .48 .47 .42 .58 .81 . 66 .46 .40 .44 .87 .50 .46 . 52 .39 .55 .54 .52 .40 .46 .66 -1.00 .55 .47 .48 .39 .46 .75 .50 .52 .52 .66 .44 .40 .46 .54 1.00 161 162 feeling of separation from his society, his fellow men, and from a friendly cosmos, this factor was called "isolation" (Seeman). i In the group headed by item 18. the highest corre lations (.45 and above) were with items 1, 2, 19, 25, 29, 30, 38, 40, 42, 49, 52, 53, 55, 56, and 57. Of these, i ) items 30, 38, 56, and 57 did not appear in any other i |factor. Items 25, 29, 40, 49, and 53 appeared in one other i factor. Item 18 indicated whether or not the subject was satisfied with his society. Items 19, 30, and 57 all expressed estrangement, explicitly. Items 25, 29, 38, 53, and 56 expressed the subject*s attitude toward his present existence and his faith in the future, that is, his faith in his ability to do something about his existence. Items 40 and 52 indicated the subject*s attitude toward his fellow man and his religion. Since the items in the factor seemed to indicate the subject's definition of the society, his role in that society, and his ability to control the events in that society, this factor was called "meaning- lessness" and "satisfaction.*' The factor headed by item 48 included items 6 (which was the rewrite of item 48 and correlated .98 with it), 13, 24, 43, 37, 52, and 55. This was the least inde pendent factor. There were only two items which did not appear in at least two other factors, i.e., items 13 and 47. Items 6, 13, 24, 52, and 55 all dealt directly with 163 the subject's concept of God and his relationship to God. Items 8 and 47 specifically asked the subject whether or not he wished to have children. Fromm indicated that there was a relationship between an individual's felt relation ship to God, to love, and to his attitude toward children, and his sense of alienation. For the purposes of this |discussion, the factor headed by item 48 was called the |religious factor of alienation. i The factor headed by item 24 included items 6, 12, i 13, 20, 48, 49, 52, and 55. Of these, items 12 and 20 did not appear in any other factor while items 13, 48, and 49 appeared in only one other factor. Items 6, 13, 48, 52, and 55 seemed to replicate the factor headed by item 48. iHowever, items 12 and 20 indicated a future orientation and whether or not the subject felt that he was receiving any help in improving his future. The tone of the factor was more active than was the tone of factor 48. Therefore ;factor 24 was called "future orientation." ! The factor headed by item 8. included items 1, 6, 16, 34, 42, 47, 48, and 50. Of these, items 16, 34, and 50 ;did not appear in any other factor, while items 47 and 48 appeared in only one other factor. Items 16, 47, and 50 indicated the subject's attitude toward the family. Item 34 was designed to measure the subject's need for immediate satisfaction of desires as opposed to his ability to wait i for future gain. The relationship of this item to the 164 subject*s attitude toward the family was still to be shown. Items 6 and 48 again showed the relationship of the sub- :ject*s attitude toward religion and a factor of alienation. The basic items, however, indicated that this factor should be called the "family** factor. The factor headed by item 12 included items 2, 3, 15, 11, 19, 24, 43, and 53. Of these, items 3, 5, and 11 i j did not appear in any other factor while item 53 appeared i in only one other factor. Items 3, 5, 11, 19, 24, and 53 i indicated feelings of negativism and powerlessness on the part of the subject. Life, the school, and the society were meaningless to the subject who answered the questions in an alienated way, and he had no power to change them. |For this reason the factor was entitled "negativism.* * In summary, (1) there were six factors which were identified and labeled (isolation, powerlessness, religion, jfuture orientation, family, and meaninglessness); (2) under i |each of these factors were included certain related sub factors; (3) there was some overlapping of sub-factors; and (4) the major factors were defined through intercorrela tions of items as answered by the standardization popula tion. Whether or not the factors would hold for the experimental population remained to be seen. 165 The Socioeconomic Status and Sex Variables There were two variables which were to play a major role in the experimental study: socioeconomic status and sex. A preliminary study of the relationship of these variables to specific items was therefore performed with !the standardization population. The findings here were not i j to be taken as final, since there might have been discrep ancies between this population and the experimental population. Table 10 indicated those items which discriminated between the socioeconomic classes. Those items which separated the lower class from the other two were: 6, 27, 29, 40, and 48. Of these, items 27, 29, and 40 related to the factor headed by item 20 (isolation--see Table 9). On every item in this factor, the lower-class subject indi cated less alienation than did the subjects of the other [two classes. In other words, the lower-class subject indicated that he had a greater faith in the future and in his fellow man than did the subjects of the other two classes. This was further corroborated by the items which showed a trend (Table 11). Items 5, 31, 38, and 40 all i ;were designed to measure the subject's attitude toward the society and his place in that society, i.e., his sense of powerlessness (factor headed by item 18). On these items 1 the trend indicated that the lower-class subject was less alienated than were the middle- or upper-class subjects. TABLE 10 166 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS (Percentages) Item Correct* Lower Middle Upper Items Which Segregated Lower-Class Subiects 6 2 54 42 40 27 2 94 81 80 29 1 8 17 10 40 1 35 44 47 48 2 54 44 40 Items Which Segregated Middle-Class Subiects 22 2 79 68 80 28 1 27 42 33 35 1 32 49 33 36 1 26 15 27 46 1 18 37 13 56 1 37 49 40 Items Which Segregated Upper-Class Subiects 14 • 1 44 44 68 16 1 12 17 27 21 2 70 68 47 49 2 84 78 53 50 1 14 15 27 52 2 63 59 46 53 1 21 22 33 57 1 61 59 80 ^ ’Correct" responses were alienated responses; M1M * "yes" and ,,2, f « ’ ’ no” ; only f,yesf f responses were listed. 167 TABLE 11 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED EACH CLASS FROM EVERY OTHER CLASS OR SHOWED A TREND FROM ONE CLASS TO ANOTHER (Percentages) * 4J O Item Q ) U V * o o Lower Middli Upper Trend** Did the item segregate? 5 1 48 61 73 Lower to Middle to Upper Yes 7 1 32 39 27 Upper to Lower to Middle No 10 2 81 73 68 Lower to Middle to Upper No 23 1 19 29 40 Lower to Middle to Upper Yes 30 1 63 73 87 Lower to Middle to Upper Yes 31 1 26 37 47 Lower to Middle to Upper Yes 33 1 43 32 60 Middle to Lower to Upper Yes 37 1 27 34 20 Upper to Lower to Middle No 38 1 13 20 33 Lower to Middle to Upper Yes 40 1 35 44 47 Lower to Middle to Upper No 48 2 54 44 40 Upper to Middle to Lower Yes *,,CorrectM responses were alienated responses; ,fln = f,yes" and ”2" * "no." **Trends were listed from least to most alienated; only j "yes1 1 percentages were listed. 168 On the factors of isolation and powerlessness, then, the lower-class subjects seemed to feel less alienated. This may have been due to the fact that the subjects were enrolled in junior colleges. The lower-class subjects may have been the first members of their families to attend any college, while for the middle- and upper-class subjects, i (attending a junior college may have been a demeaning expe dience. Therefore, while the lower-class subjects may have i |felt that they were upwardly mobile, the middle- and upper- class subjects may have felt that they were mobile down ward. There was, then, no sure way to interpret these findings. Those items which separated the middle class from ithe other two classes were: 22, 28, 35, 36, 46, and 56. There was no discernible pattern in these items, except that they all showed the middle-class subject to have most fully incorporated the conventional norms of the society, iThere was, however, one interesting feature to the responses of the middle-class subjects: items which related to the subject’s attitude toward the school were answered in a less alienated fashion by the middle-class isubjects. The middle-class subjects seemed to feel that their school was one of the best in the city (item 22) and that the teachers and principals were fair (items 26 and 32). However, item 7 indicated that the subjects felt that i sometimes they were asked to do things in school which did 169 not make sense to them (see Table 11). Though there were very few subjects who were defined as upper class, it was possible to determine those items which separated the upper-class subjects from those of the other two classes. These items were: 16, 49, 50, 52, 53, and 57. On each of these items the upper-class i ■ subject indicated greater alienation than did members of |the other two classes. Items 49, 52, and 53 related to the i 1 sense of powerlessness and a greater sense of estrangement from his family may have been due to the sampling of this population, i.e., the upper-class subject attending a junior college was functioning below expectations while the |lower-class subject attending a junior college may have been functioning above expectations. In those items which showed a trend from one class to another, item 5 may have shown the subject’s personal experience with his own family. It was usually assumed that the upper classes manifested the most stable and happiest home lives. How ever, in this population, the upper-class subject indicated that, in his experience, children were a problem to their I |parents. Further, items 23, 30, 31, 33, 37, 38, and 40 all i jindicated that the upper-class subject had little faith in i his own future when compared to the prospects or history of his family. The findings were difficult to determine since we could not account for the interaction of sampling and testing (Campbell and Stanley) in the upper-class 170 standardization sample. In summary, (1) the lower-class subjects felt them selves to be the least powerless and isolated; (2) the ! middle-class subjects seemed to have most fully incorpo rated the norms of the conventional society and seemed to show the least dissatisfaction with the school and their t jteachers; and (3) the upper-class subjects indicated the |greatest alienation. In particular, they manifested feel ings of powerlessness, of estrangement from their families, and lack of faith in their futures. Table 12 indicated those items which segregated by |sex. Females manifested greater alienation only on items 28, 37, 40, and 49. Of these items, item 28 was a rewrite of item 37 and manifested a feminine norm, i.e., to take things as they come and not worry overly about the future. It was further expected that the female subjects would show less interest in spectator sports (item 49). There was no |readily apparent reason why the female subjects indicated less trust of others (item 31). Over-all scores indicated that the female subjects were far less alienated than were the male subjects. This was predicted, since in our society women were not required to be aggressive, competi- i tive, or financially successful, and therefore had fewer feelings of conflict or alienation. In summary, (1) females were far less alienated than were males; and (2) this was predicted. | ITEMS TABLE 12 WHICH SEGREGATED (Percentages) BY SEX 171 Item Correct* Male Female i ' 5 1 56 45 6 2 41 69 13 2 74 86 17 1 14 3 19 1 35 43 24 65 77 25 1 50 35 28 1 26 39 30 1 73 58 33 1 45 35 36 1 29 14 37 1 24 66 40 1 32 46 46 1 25 16 48 2 43 54 49 2 84 71 52 2 49 76 53 1 25 17 55 2 48 64 ^'Correct** responses were alienated responses; f,lf f ■ * nyes* * and fl2f , » ’W * ; only "yes'* responses were listed. 172 Summary of the Chapter In this chapter the following topics were dis cussed: (1) the purpose of the chapter and the necessity for developing a new scale; (2) the face validity of the items of the TT Scale and the hypothesis to which each item related; (3) the reliability of Srole^, Nettler's and the jTT Scale taken together plus the reliability of each item \ lused; (4) the validity of the instrument with particular i !attention to the validity of the TT Scale; (5) item dis crimination; (6) factors found in the standardization population; and (7) the relationship of socioeconomic status and sex to alienation. Findings 1. The TT Scale tested for all of the hypothesis listed in Chapter II. | 2. The TT Scale indicated high reliability as did ithe items on it (Srole*s scale and Nettler's scale had fewer items which indicated high reliability). 3. The Rewrite items of the TT Scale indicated I ihigh correlation with the Original counterpart in fifteen iof the twenty-one cases. The other six items measured alienation but were not interpreted by the subjects in the same way as were their Original counterparts. 4. Forty-six of the items discriminated, twenty- six of which were on the TT Scale. Nineteen items selected, 173 eight of which were on the TT Scale. Thirty-nine of the items met the "Top-Bottom" requirement that the items dis criminate between the alienated and non-alienated subjects, twenty-two of which were on the TT Scale. Eleven of the items did not discriminate, eight of which were on the TT Scale. 5. Six factors (isolation, powerlessness, reli gion, future orientation, family, and meaninglessness) were i Jdefined and labeled (hypothesis 1). 6. The lower-class subjects did not feel that they were isolated or powerless. The middle-class subjects had most completely incorporated the norms of the society and the school. The upper-class subjects indicated the highest j amount of alienation (hypothesis 6). 7. Women were less alienated than were men (hypothesis 6). Conclusions 1. All of the findings of this chapter had to be held tentatively due to the peculiarities of the population tested. 2. The scale showed sufficient reliability and validity to warrant continuance of the study and use of the TT Scale with the experimental population. 3. There was every indication that alienation was not a one-factor construct but rather had many factors. 174 4. While any conclusions regarding the effect of i social class or sex were tentative, there was an indication that these two confounding factors did have an effect upon alienation. This effect was not cumulative, i.e., total alienation score did not fluctuate from class to class, or by sex but certain factors within alienation did fluctuate I j from class to class, and by sex. CHAPTER IV THE EXPERIMENT Introduction i — .... ...... . i j In Chapter III the TT Scale was standardized on a 'population which had many of the characteristics of the experimental population. Since there were distinct differ ences between the populations, it was necessary to estab lish that the TT Scale was as valid and reliable for the experimental population as for the standardization popula tion. The first section of this chapter was, therefore, devoted to a discussion of the reliability and validity of the TT Scale with the experimental population and samples drawn from that population. Reliability of the TT Scale Table 13 presented the reliability coefficients of |the TT Scale with samples drawn from the experimental popu lation. Both the Kuder-Richardson and the Spearman-Brown reliability coefficients were used, as was the Kelly jformula for the highest possible validity coefficient. In iall cases the reliability of the TT Scale was above .55, 175 TABLE 13 RELIABILITY COEFFICIENTS OF THE INSTRUMENT AS USED WITH SEPARATE SAMPLES Sample KR 20 Coefficients Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula (Based on 0/0max) Highest Possible Validity All subjects .70 .84 All subjects— excluding items removed by Los Angeles City Schools .78 .88 Projects A, ELA, W, and WE Tutors .67 .81 .90 Projects LA and MC Tutors .56 .86 .93 Projects A, ELA, W, and WE Tutees .60 .79 .99 Projects LA and MC Tutees .64 .70 .84 i —4 ■vj ON 177 or, using the Spearman-Brown Formula, above .70. This i indicated that the lowest possible validity was .84 (see Chapter II). In brief, the test had a sufficiently high reliability to warrant the assumption that the results were replicable with the experimental population. i Reliability of Individual Items on the TT Scale j Table 14 indicated the Point Biserial r of each item on the TT Scale with various samples from the experi mental population. The first column indicated the item; ithe second indicated the "correct*' or most alienated i 'response; the third showed the Point Biserial r, for all of the subjects dealt with jointly; and so on. According to Garrett, any Point Biserial r of .098 or greater was statistically significant at the .05 level (13:225). 'Accordingly, all of the items on the TT Scale, when the total experimental population was dealt with at one time, i were statistically significant Point Biserial r s. How ever, items 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19, 23, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, and 35 contributed the most to the !over-all reliability. Of these items, only items 9, 16, 23, 30, 33, and 35 indicated high Point Biserial r s with all samples listed in Table 14. Only items 11 and 27 had uniformly low Point Biserial r s. Items 1, 4, 13, 28, 29, and 34, however, had less than desirable characteristics of 178 TABLE 14 POINT BISERIAL r OF ALL ITEMS WITH SEPARATE SAMPLES Project A, Project LA Project A, Project LA All ELA, W and and MC ELA, W and and MC Item Subjects WE Tutors Tutors WE Tutees Tutees 1 1 .16 .11 .44 .15 .17 i 2 1 .30 .46 .41 .17 .24 i 3 .30 .44 .13 *15 .41 4 .24 .02 .06 .15 .42 5 .40 .40 .18 .35 - , 6 .21 .50 .02 .22 - f 7 .27 .26 -.14 .25 .49 ! 8 .42 .21 .27 .46 - i 9 .49 .47 .45 .40 - 10 .27 .38 .11 .27 .21 11 .11 .23 .14 .10 .16 12 i .32 .18 .24 .19 .25 13 .24 .31 .14 .19 - 14 .37 .27 .11 .33 .42 15 .28 .19 .45 .15 -.03 16 .54 .40 .45 .57 - 17 .29 .43 .31 .21 .14 18 .30 .32 .52 -.08 - 19 .36 .47 .26 .14 - 20 .26 .14 .26 .28 .21 179 TABLE 14 (continued) POINT BISERIAL r OF ALL ITEMS WITH SEPARATE SAMPLES Project A, Project LA Project A, Project LA All ELA, W and and MC ELA, W and and MC Item Subjects WE Tutors Tutors WE Tutees Tutees 21 .19 .32 • I-* 00 .31 .33 22 .28 .21 .33 .07 .38 23 .30 .30 .32 .31 .28 24 .23 .26 . 36 .16 - 25 .24 .41 .05 .43 .50 26 i .35 .32 .22 .31 .41 27 .12 -.08 .19 .23 .34 28 .30 .14 .33 .45 .27 29 .30 .23 .06 .17 .32 30 .33 .36 .37 .45 .45 31 .37 .37 .17 .27 - 32 .32 .24 .46 .28 .29 33 .34 .29 .34 .28 .29 34 .24 .02 .28 .20 .34 35 .41 .59 .32 .27 .41 i reliability. i In comparing the fifty-seven-item scale used with ' ;the standardization population, the over-all reliability of I the thirty-five-item TT Scale was slightly lower (.70 to .84). This was to be expected since reliability was affected by the number of items and twenty-two items had i !been removed in order to form the TT Scale. Of more con cern was the different ranges of contribution of each item i |on the TT Scale to the total reliability when compared to the first thirty-five items of the standardization scale. Twelve items (4, 5, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 25, 26, 31, 33, and 34) showed an increase in reliability on the TT Scale (compare Tables 3 and 14). However, twelve items (3, 6, 8, 10, 11, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, and 32) showed a decrease in reliability on the TT Scale. Eleven of the items showed no appreciable change. It was concluded that there had not been any significant negative change in I !reliability between the fifty-seven-item scale used with the standardization population and the TT Scale used with the experimental population. To some extent the distribution of scores could affect statistical procedures. Tables 15, 16, and 17 graphically represented the shape and range of the distri butions of the population as a whole, the tutees taken separately, and the tutors taken separately. Also included I on the charts were the mean, range, modal condition, and 181 the Pearsonian coefficient of skewness (all scores were [percentage scores). i Table 15 represented the distribution of the whole population. The two peaked points indicated the means of the tutors and tutees, respectively. The combined mean was ,26.6 per cent and the range was 68. The distribution was I i not sufficiently leptokurtic or skewed to affect the find ings. Table 16 represented the shape and range of the i !distribution of tutees. Here the mean was 29 per cent and the range was 68. The distribution was unimodal and was not seriously skewed. Table 17 represented the distribu tion of the tutor sample. The mean was 22.82, the range was 68, the distribution was unimodal but positively skewed. The skewness was not sufficient to influence the findings. The indicated distribution of the population related directly to hypothesis 2 listed at the end of * Chapter I since the alienation scores were distributed over i i ia wide range. This distribution was as true of the stand- i ardization population as it was of the experimental popula tion. This finding was of particular importance since it indicated that it was possible for the subject to manifest degrees of alienation. The distribution of the standardization population was similar to that of the experimental population, i.e., the mean of the standardization population was 23 per cent ! and the range was 64, indicating that the mean was slightly (Numbers 60 55 50 45 o 40 s 35 3 30 cr • 25 * 20 15 10 5 0 withir vii parer 5TRIBU1 itheses : ion OF indie PERCi ate tt Mean * TABLE 15 INTAGE SCORES (TUTORS AND TUTEES) le number of subjects in each percentage interval.) 26.6; range = 68 \ \ / f ’ \ \ ._ , ^ \ _ / * \ / / \ i \ 0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 66-70 (8) (22) (25) (56) (31) (39) (50) (23) (17) (17) (6) (4) (2) (2) g 5-point percentage intervals ^ TABLE 16 DISTRIBUTION OF SCORES (TUTEES ONLY) (Numbers within parentheses indicate the number of subjects in each percentage interval.) Mean = 29; range = 68; unimodal Pearsonian SK ■ .23 60 55 50 45 * 40 o e 35 v P 30 v H 20 fa 15 10 5 0 0 (3) (12) (12) (29) (23) (22) (38) (18) (13) (12) (4) (4) (2) (1)^ oo ____________________________ 5-point percentage intervals__________________________ ^ -5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31i35 36-40 41^45 46^50 51-55 56-60 61-65 66- TABLE 17 DISTRIBUTION OF SCORES (TUTORS ONLY) (Numbers within parentheses indicate the number of subjects in each percentage interval.) Mean = 22.82; range « 68; unimodal Pearsonian SK = .46 60 55 50 45 u 40 c 35 < D p 30 25 u 20 fa 15 10 5 0 (5) (10) (23) (27) (8) (17) (12) (5) (4) (5) (2) (1)M 5-point percentage intervals ? 0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-5051-55 56-60 61-65 66-70 185 lower and the range very slightly more restricted. There were no significant differences between the two populations. This lack of difference between the experimental population and the standardization population was the first tentative indication that tutors and tutees understood the cultural and social structure (hypothesis 3). The two populations were tested independently and yet indicated highly similar results. Therefore, it seemed that at least these two populations equally understood the norms of the conven tional society. However, since neither the experimental nor the standardization populations were randomly drawn from the society at large, it was not possible to cate gorically state that the tutors and tutees understood the conventional norms. In summary, (1) the reliability of the TT Scale was sufficiently high (.70) to warrant its use as the dependent variable; (2) eighteen of the items had Point Biserial r coefficients of over .30; (3) eight of the items showed low reliability and had to be interpreted with great care; (4) the distribution of scores was not sufficiently abnormal to :influence statistical procedures used in the study; and (5) neither the reliability nor the distribution of the experi- i mental population was significantly different from the standardization population. 186 Factors Found in the TT Scale i i As was the case with the standardization popula tion, it was not possible to meet the assumptions of the ifactor analytic method. However, it was possible to indi- i |cate items with sufficiently high intercorrelation to 'warrant calling them factors. j There were five factors established from the !experimental data (see Table 18). The largest with thir- i teen items was headed by item 18. Of these thirteen items, six did not appear in any of the other factors and three appeared in only one other factor. The factor headed by i item 18, then, was relatively independent. The items in this factor fell into two distinct groups: items 9, 14, 16, 19, 22, 26, and 35 indicated the subject's faith in the present; and items 8, 15, 20, 23, 27, and 28 indicated the subject's faith in the future. This corresponded to the factor headed by item 18 in the standardization population. Both were labeled "meaninglessness" factor. The factor headed by item 16 intercorrelated with eight items, namely, items 8, 9, 17, 18, 23, 28, 29, and 31. Of these, items 17 and 29 did not appear in any other factor and items 8 and 23 appeared in one other factor. Items 17, 23, 28, 29, and 31 indicated the subject's sense of isolation. This was combined with the subject's atti- i tude toward progeny (item 8) and his attitude toward the United States (item 18). This factor corresponded to the TABLE 18 INTERCORRELATIONS OF MAJOR FACTORS (Only intercorrelations of 0/0max over .39 were listed) _______________________________Base Item Family- Powerlessness- Society Negativism Satisfaction Isolation Meaninglessness 8 by 12 by 15 by 16 by 18 by 5 = .40 21 = .44 18 * .49 8 * .55 8 = .40 9 = .46 27 - .42 25 « .44 9 a .44 9 = .61 16 « .55 30 * .63 27 = .42 17 - .45 14 « .45 18 = .40 31 - .40 28 = .59 18 - .52 15 = .49 29 * .41 35 « .49 35- .44 23 - .30 16 = .52 28 = .38 19 * .80 29 = .43 20 * .46 31 = .48 22 - .68 23 - .82 26 - .77 27 - .61 28 « .77 35 = .84 ZSI | 188 |"isolation1 1 factor of the standardization population. The factor headed by item 15 intercorrelated with I five items: items 18, 25, 27, 28, and 35. Of these, item i i25 did not appear in the other factors. Items 25, 27, and 28 indicated the subject's sense of powerlessness. Items 18 and 35 indicated his satisfaction and trust in the power i |structure and economic structure of the society. The !factor was called "powerlessness-satisfaction." i 1 The factor headed by item 12 had five items inter- correlated with it: items 21, 27, 30, 31, and 35. Of these, items 21 and 30 were unique to this factor and item 31 appeared in one other factor. Items 21, 30, 31, and 35 |seemed to indicate a sense of negativism with regard to the society, the merchants, and one's fellow men. Therefore, this factor was labeled "negativism" and corresponded to the negativism factor headed by item 12 in the standardiza tion population. The factor headed by item 8 included items 5, 9, 16, i !18, and 29. Of these, item 5 was unique to this factor and items 16 and 29 appeared in one other factor. Items 5, 16, and 29 indicated the subject's attitude toward his family: I item 29 less so unless the subject was indicating his attitude toward the role of his father. Items 9 and 18 investigated the subject's attitude toward the society in which he lived. The factor was therefore called the "family-society" factor. 189 I Through the determination of factors it was possi- i ble to indicate the validity of seven of the hypotheses listed at the end of Chapter I, namely, the hypotheses dealing with the relationship of alienation to meaningless ness (hypothesis 9), powerlessness (hypothesis 11), isola tion (hypothesis 13), attitude toward authority (hypothesis 15), attitude toward family relationships (hypothesis 16), future orientation (hypothesis 19), and, to a lesser i extent, religious beliefs (hypothesis 12). In each case i there appeared to be a distinct factor which was related to alienation in a slightly different way than were the other factors. The religious factor appeared only in the stand ardization population which may have been due to the jremoval of the items dealing with religion by the Los Angeles City Schools. By the removal of these items, all of the tutees of Projects LA and MC were not presented with :these items. This was unfortunate for, even though reli gion did not appear as an independent factor, various items i dealing with religion did discriminate between samples. Aside from the religious factor, all of the factors in the experimental population corresponded to factors which appeared in the standardization population. As well as seemingly validating the hypotheses t listed above, the factor analysis also validated hypothesis 1 which stated that alienation was a multi-factor construct. i This was indicated not only in the factor analysis but also 190 in the item analyses (discussed later in this chapter) performed with various samples. In summary, (1) these factors were not achieved through the usual process of factor analysis but rather through an analysis of the intercorrelations of items; (2) it was possible through this method to separate, investi- jgate, and label five factors; (3) all five of the factors I corresponded to a factor found in the standardization i population (see Table 7). However, one factor found in the standardization population (religion) did not appear in the experimental population; and (4) alienation was a multi factor construct (hypothesis 1). Discrimination of the Items As described in Ghapter III, there were three criteria for items which discriminated: (1) that at least 10 per cent of the respondents held the minority opinion; (2) that some of the items selected subjects on the basis of extreme feelings toward alienation, i.e., 15 to 30 per cent of the respondents held the minority opinion; (3) that the majority of the items did not indicate extremes of response, i.e., between 30 and 50 per cent of the respond ents held the minority opinion. Only item 32 failed to meet the first requirement although items 1 and 12 came close (see Table 19). Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 24, 26, 29, 33, TABLE 19 PERCENTAGE OF "YES*' AND "NO” REPLIES ON EACH ITEM Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Correct* 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 Yes 89 87 83 85 51 64 45 77 42 69 36 87 84 40 85 35 13 No 11 13 16 15 49 36 54 23 58 31 63 11 16 59 15 65 86 Item 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Correct 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 Yes 80 47 86 70 74 23 64 36 82 71 42 18 53 27 90 22 16 31 No 20 53 14 28 24 76 36 63 16 27 58 81 44 73 9 77 82 68 *Correct responses were alienated responses; "1" < • "yes" and "2" = "no." 192 and 34 met the second requirement. Items 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 19, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 30, 31, and 35 met the third requirement. Of the first thirty-five items (the TT ,items) of the scale used with the standardization popula- tion, then, there were nine items which did not meet the requirement that at least 10 per cent of the respondents ■held the minority view. In the TT scale there was only one Jitem (though two others came close) which did not meet the 'requirement; eight of the first thirty-five standardization items met the second requirement while seventeen of the items on the TT Scale met the second requirement; eighteen of the standardization items met the third requirement while seventeen of the items on the TT Scale met the requirement. In order to determine the ability of the items to separate the most and least alienated subjects, a "Top- Bottom” analysis was run, i.e., Which of the items had at least a 20 per cent differential between responses of the most alienated subjects and the least alienated subjects? (For a fuller discussion of the "Top-Bottom" analysis, see Chapter III.) In the experimental population fourteen i jitems did not meet the requirements of having a 20 per cent 'discrimination between the responses of the most and least alienated subjects (see Table 20). Of the items on the TT Scale as they appeared in the standardization population, thirteen items did not meet the "Top-Bottom" requirement. TABLE 20 ”TOP-BOTTOM" ANALYSIS (Percentage of nyes, f replies of the most alienated and least alienated subjects) Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Correct* 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 Top 91 85 71 72 64 58 56 65 54 61 31 84 73 56 83 48 23 86 Bottom 91 95 92 92 35 67 43 99 8 81 41 98 93 23 95 5 16 100 Item 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Correct 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 Top 50 84 65 62 36 66 53 71 66 61 30 64 44 83 35 21 47 Bottom 22 96 45 85 12 76 18 94 69 30 10 39 12 96 12 8 11 ^Correct responses were alienated responses; (1) « "yes” and 1 f 2, f » "no." v O U) 194 In summary, (1) all but one of the items on the TT Scale discriminated; (2) seventeen of the items selected extreme feelings of alienation; (3) seventeen items did not indicate extremes of response; (4) the TT Scale, as used with the experimental population, better met the criteria of discrimination than did the first thirty-five items of the scale as used with the standardization population; (5) [the TT Scale as used with the experimental population and i |as used with the standardization population had approxi mately an equal number of items which did not meet the "Top-Bottom” requirement. I ! I Intercorrelations of Groups of Items j ■ Tables 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25 represented the intercorrelations of groups of items (TT Scale totally, Rewrite items, New items, and School items); the confound- |ing variables (socioeconomic status, educational level, ,sex, and age); and the independent variable (tutoring time). The tables were divided into those projects under the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles City Schools (Projects LA and MC) and those which were not (Projects A, ELA, W, ,and WE). Further, tutees were separated from tutors. Only i i in Table 21 were all of the subjects handled jointly. The separation was necessitated by the potential differences between these subject samples. The tables were interpreted in the following way: 195 TABLE 21 ALL SUBJECTS EXCLUDING POST-TEST (Intercorrelations of: Groups of Items, the Experimental Variable, and the Confounding Variables.) TT Scale i 1 1 11 1 1 ■ Rewrite Items New Items School Items Socioeconomic Status Educational Level Sex Age Tutoring Time TT Scale 1.00 00 00 • .67 .58 i • o i 00 0 • 1 -.11 -.95 .14 Rewrite Items .88 1.00 .38 .30 0 • 1 .096 0.07 -.03 .16 New Items .67 .38 1.00 .21 1 • o 4 > * -.05 00 0 • 1 -.03 00 o • School Items .58 .30 .21 1.00 0.11 -.09 -.14 -.06 .06 Socioeconomic Status i • o 0 • 1 .04 -.11 1.00 .53 .11 .38 .06 Educational Level i ' • o 00 -.06 -.05 -.09 .53 1.00 .08 .81 .04 Sex -.11 -.07 -.08 -.14 .11 .08 1.00 .05 -.05 Age -.05 -.03 -.03 -.06 .38 .81 .05 1.00 -.03 Tutoring Time .14 .16 .08 .06 .06 .04 i • o Ul i • o w 1.00 TABLE 22 PROJECTS A, ELA, W, WE TUTEES (Intercorrelations of: Groups of Items, the Experimental Variable, and Confounding Variables.) TT Scale Rewrite Items New Items School Items Socioeconomic Status Educational Level Sex Age Tutoring Time TT Scale 1.00 .90 .64 .42 -.00 -.14 .01 r - t 0 • 1 .01 Rewrite Items .90 1.00 .64 .10 -.01 -.16 .07 -.03 -.00 New Items .64 .42 1.00 .06 -.05 -.06 -.01 .07 .08 School Items .42 .10 .06 1.00 .06 .01 -.11 .05 .11 Socioeconomic Status -.00 -.01 -.05 .06 1.00 1 • o -.13 .00 .07 Educational Level i - • - P > -.16 -.06 •01 -.01 1.00 -.09 .67 -.06 Sex .01 .07 -.01 -.11 -.13 -.09 1.00 -.10 .12 Age .01 -.03 .07 .05 .00 .67 -.10 1.00 -.21 Tutoring Time .01 -.00 -.08 .11 .07 - .06 .12 -.21 1.00 197 TABLE 23 PROJECT LA AND MC TUTEES (Intercorrelations of: Groups of Items, the Experimental Variable, and Confounding Variables,) T T Scale Rewrite Items New Items School Items Socioeconomic Status Educational Level Sex Age Tutoring Time TT Scale 1.00 .84 .73 .70 -.09 -.18 -.17 -.17 i ■ ! o • p * Rewrite Items .84 1.00 .40 .39 -.05 -.13 -.15 -.11 .15 New Items .73 .40 1.00 .30 -.03 -.13 -.21 -.15 -.02 School Items .70 .39 .30 1.00 -.14 -.06 -.02 -.14 0 • 1 Socioeconomic Status 0 • 1 -.05 -.02 -.14 1.00 .24 .04 .19 .07 Educational Level -.18 -.13 -.13 -.16 .24 1.00 .09 .91 0 r - 4 • • 1 Sex -.17 -.1.5 -.21 -.02 .04 .09 1.00 .08 -.11 Age -.17 -.11 -.15 -.14 .19 .91 .08 1.00 -.10 Tutoring Time .04 .15 -.02 -.09 .07 -.10 -.11 -.10 1.00 I 198 TABLE 24 PROJECTS A, ELA, W, AND WE TUTORS (Intercorrelations of: Groups of Items, the Experimental Variable, and Confounding Variables.) TT Scale i ■ i . . .... ........................ Rewrite Items New Items \ School Items Socioeconomic Status Educational Level Sex Age Tutoring Time TT Scale 1.00 .90 .50 .52 .00 .24 -.06 .27 .19 Rewrite Items .90 1.00 .17 .29 -.03 .25 -.05 .26 .10 New Items .50 .17 1.00 .10 -.01 -.04 .16 .09 .17 School Items .52 .29 .10 1.00 .09 .22 -.29 .15 .19 Socioeconomic Status .00 -.03 -.01 .09 1.00 .08 .14 -.06 .10 Educational Level .24 .25 -.04 .22 .08 1.00 .09 .74 .21 Sex -.06 -.06 .16 -.29 .14 .09 1.00 .03 .03 Age r* C M • • .26 .09 .15 -.06 .74 .03 1.00 .23 Tutoring Time .19 .10 .17 .19 .10 .21 .03 .23 1.00 i 199 j TABLE 25 | PROJECTS LA AND MC TUTORS f (Intercorrelations of: Groups of Items, the Experimental Variable, and Confounding Variables.) i TT Scale Rewrite Items New Items School Items Socioeconomic Status Educational Level Sex Age Tutoring Time TT Scale 1.00 .86 .61 .39 .14 .06 .06 .21 .12 Rewrite Items .86 1.00 .22 .10 .26 .04 .14 .16 .09 New Items .61 .22 1.00 .12 -.08 -.03 .02 .01 .18 School Items .36 1.0 .12 1.00 0.07 .25 -.17 .34 -.02 Socioeconomic Status . 14 .26 00 0 • 1 i • o 1.00 .04 .24 -.02 .03 Educational Level .06 .04 0.03 .25 .04 1.00 0.13 .37 .29 Sex .06 .14 .02 -.17 .24 -.13 1.00 -.09 -.19 Age .21 .16 .01 .34 -.02 .37 -.09 1.00 -.00 Tutoring Time .12 .09 .18 -.02 -.03 .29 -.19 -.00 1.00 i ! I 200 1. All groups of items (Rewrite, New, and School items) correlated with the full TT Scale. This indicated that all groups of items were measuring alienation. This was true with all subject samples. 2. The School items had the lowest correlation with the full TT Scale. This indicated that there was less relationship between alienation and attitude toward the school than had originally been predicted for this popula- i jtion. This may have been due to the volunteer nature of the population. With this volunteer population, however, hypothesis 17 (that the attitude toward the school was related to alienation) was consistently invalidated. There appeared to be little if any correlation between attitude |toward the school and alienation, and the School items rarely if ever discriminated among various samples. 3. The Rewrite items had low correlations with both the New and the School items. This was predicted j since both groups of items were added for the specific purpose of identifying factors not included in Srolefs or Nettler's scales from which the Rewrite items were taken. 4. The samples did not differ significantly from one another or from the total population. In comparing the intercorrelations of the standard ization population with those of the experimental popula tions (see Table 6), there were no significant differences in the relationships between the TT Scale and the Rewrite 201 and New items. However, the correlation between the TT Scale and the School items was significantly higher in the jexperimental population than it was in the standardization i population (.58 to .39). The Independent Variable. Tutoring Time From Tables 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25 it was evident !that: I ! 1. Tutoring time had no significant effect upon i over-all alienation score. With all subjects taken together, the relationship was only .14. Among the tutors the relationship was slightly greater than among the tutees |(.19 and .12 as opposed to .01 and .04). All the correla tions were so low that any interpretation was difficult (except to state that there was no relationship). 2. What little correlation did exist was positive. :This indicated that as the amount of tutoring time increased, the alienation score did, too. i 3. The relationship of alienation and the attitude toward the school seemed to depend upon some other factor I than tutoring time. Though the correlations were very low, those projects which were held in school buildings indi cated negative correlations while those held outside of schools indicated positive correlations, that is, for those projects held in schools, as the tutoring time increased, the alienation from the school decreased while for the non 202 school projects, as the tutoring time increased the aliena tion from the school also increased (this latter was particularly true of the non-school tutees). 4. Tutoring time did not show any significant patterns of correlation with the confounding variables, i.e., socioeconomic status, educational level, sex, or age. Although the correlations between tutoring time and i i |groups of items were quite low, specific items did segre- i gate subjects by amount of tutoring received (see Tables 26, 27, and 28). Subjects with zero or one hour of tutor ing seemed more interested in national elections (item 4), iless likely to consider the requests of teacher to be senseless (item 7), more future oriented (item 18), and less negative (item 30) than were subjects with more tutor ing time. This indicated that either the tutorial sessions increased alienation in these areas or that the least alienated subjects dropped out of the program. Items 8, 9, 13, 18, 19, 24, 27, and 34 segregated subjects with seven to ten hours of tutoring. On every item the subject with seven to ten hours of tutoring was more alienated than subjects of other groups. The general factors involved were: meaninglessness (items 8, 27, and 34), attitude toward society (items 9, 18, and 19) and attitude toward |God and religion (items 13 and 24). Item 21 indicated that i !the subjects with more than ten hours of tutoring felt that most politicians were not interested in what was best for 203 TABLE 26 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY TUTORING TIME (Percentages) Item Correct* 0 or 1 2 to 6 7 to 10 Over 10 Items Which Segregated Subjects with Zero or One Hour of Tutoring i 4 2 93 75 78 80 7 1 36 53 47 48 28 1 29 55 59 45 30 1 38 55 52 54 t Items with Which 7 to Segregated 10 Hours of Subjects Tutoring 8 2 94 85 59 79 9 1 30 32 67 28 13 2 87 88 61 80 18 2 78 93 72 91 19 1 32 29 67 42 24 2 77 73 39 71 27 1 68 60 74 64 34 1 10 13 24 15 *,fCorrect, f responses were alienated responses; Ml, f = f,yesn and M2M = "no”; only "yes** responses were listed. TABLE 27 ITEMS WHICH SHOWED A TREND ON TUTORING TIME (Percentages) Item Correct* 0 or 1 2 to 6 7 to 10 Over 10 Items Which Segregated Subject with Over 10 Hours of Tutoring 21 2 68 65 67 81 Items in Which Were the Less Differences Than 10 Per Between Groups Cent 1 2 96 90 93 94 2 2 88 93 85 85 11 2 39 35 29 30 14 1 39 39 38 38 15 2 91 84 83 90 17 1 17 16 12 15 29 1 19 24 17 21 31 1 25 38 28 30 35 1 30 33 28 29 *,,CorrectM responses were alienated responses; ”1" = "yes" and "2 " = Mno"; only "yes" responses were listed. TABLE 28 ITEMS WHICH SHOWED A TREND ON TUTORING TIME Item Correct 0 to 1 2 to 6 7 to 10 Over 10 Trend (from low to high alienation) Did the item segregate? 6 2 71 57 67 62 ,f0 or 1” to ff7-10f f to "over 10M to "2-6" No ,10 | 2 81 77 53 66 "0 or l, f to ,f2-6M to , f over 10, f to M7-10, f Yes 16 1 17 31 44 26 M0 or l, f to Mover 10M to M2-6, f to f,7-10f l Yes 32 2 99 81 85 94 M0 or 1M to Mover 10M to ft7-10, f to M2-6, f No 33 1 20 31 16 25 fl7-10, f to M0 or 1” to ,fover 10" to f,2-6n No ^Correct responses were alienated responses; f,lM « f , yes, f and lf2M « "no"; only , f yesM responses were listed. N> O Cn 206 the people. Aside from those items which segregated by tutoring ,time, there were also certain items which indicated a trend |as tutoring time was increased (see Table 28). Again, i those subjects with the least amount of tutoring time mani fested the least amount of alienation with regard to the 1 school and authority (item 32), the family (item 16), and | |religion (item 6). The one interesting exception to this I high positive relationship between tutoring time and alien ation was that the f,7-10** group had the least alienated attitude toward work. It was possible that the tutorial situation had slightly altered the subject*s attitude toward work. However, none of the trends indicated great changes and therefore could not be easily interpreted. Aside from the items which segregated and showed trends with relation to tutoring time, it was also inter esting to note those items which indicated no segregation i ;at all, that is, those items in which the furthest removed i i groups were separated by less than ten percentage points (see Table 27). Of the non-segregating items, items 1 and 1 2 were ’’lead** or **fill** items and it was predicted that ,these items would not discriminate since everyone was ;expected to answer them in the same way. Items 14 and 29 indicated whether or not the subject was satisfied with his life and his society at present; items 31 and 35 indicated the subject*s negativism; item 11 indicated his feeling of 207 powerlessness; item 17 was a corollary of powerlessness, i.e., fatalism; and item 15 indicated the subject*s atti tude toward work. In none of these areas was there a I significant difference indicated among various amounts of tutoring time. As was indicated in Chapter II, ,!t, f tests were to J jbe used in certain instances to determine the difference between samples. When the tutees and tutors were dealt i with jointly, the differences between the mean scores of the tutoring time samples produced an F ratio of 4.71 which was statistically significant at the .01 level. The only significant difference between the means was between the low mean score of the ”zero or one hour” of tutoring group i ■ and all the other groups (see Table 29). This difference between the f,zero or one hourM of tutoring group and the other groups held true for the total population, the tutors dealt with separately, and the tutees dealt with sepa- i irately. It was as true of the school items as it was of the total TT Scale. The implication again was that either there was an initial increase in alienation due to the !tutorial situation, or that the least alienated subjects jdropped out of the program in their first two hours of I tutoring. Therefore, though the first indications were that hypothesis 5 was not viable, i.e., tutoring time did not seem to have any significant effect upon alienation scores, upon closer scrutiny differences did appear but TABLE 29 MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS OF ALIENATION SCORES BY AMOUNT OF TUTORING (All scores were percentage scores) TT Scale School Items i 0-1 hour 2-6 7-10 Over 10 hours hours hours 0-1 hour 2-6 hours 7-10 hours Over 10 hours TUTORS AND TUTEE COMBINED: AMOUNT OF TUTORING Means 22.12 28.72 28.92 26.96 15.72 24.51 23.21 22.06 Standard Errors 1.42 1.44 2.02 1.33 2.11 2.51 2.65 2.12 F ratio *4.71 p « .01 TUTEES ONLY: AMOUNT OF TUTORING Means 26.35 31.86 27.30 28.57 18.65 28.80 23.02 22.46 Standard Errors 2.14 1.66 2.16 1.81 3.26 3.22 3.12 2.83 TUTORS ONLY: AMOUNT OF TUTORING Means 18.00 22.22 35.00 24.86 12.89 15.59 23*92 21.54 Standard Errors 1.63 2.34 4.91 1.92 2.64 3.33 4.73 3.23 to o 00 209 these differences may have been affected by the confounding factors. No definite statements could be made, but there seemed to be some indication that tutoring time affected an I increase in alienation. In summary, (1) tutoring time showed no significant correlation with alienation score; (2) what small relation- i ]ship did exist indicated that as tutoring time increased so did total alienation score; (3) there was a greater posi- i tive relationship between tutoring time and alienation among tutors than among tutees; (4) those projects held in school buildings showed a slightly negative correlation between tutoring time and alienation from the school while i jthose projects which held their sessions in community cen- iters or Youth Opportunities Board buildings showed a slightly positive relationship between tutoring* time and alienation from the school; (5) the subjects with the least amount of tutoring showed the least alienation on attitude I toward national elections, teachers, the future, and their fellow men; (6) subjects with seven to ten hours of tutor ing were the most alienated on items indicating future orientation, attitude toward society, and attitude toward God and religion; (7) subjects with more than ten hours of tutoring felt that politicians were not interested in what was best for the people; (8) items which showed a trend with relation to tutoring time indicated that those with the least amount of tutoring had the lowest alienation 210 scores on Items dealing with the school and authority, the family, and religion; (9) items dealing with attitude toward jwork indicated that the seven-to-ten-hour group was least i lalienated; (10) items dealing with the subject*s affinity for the society, his feeling of powerlessness and fatalism, and his attitude toward work did not segregate subjects by tutoring time; (11) when tests of significance were applied, lit was found that the zero or one hour of tutoring groups i jwere significantly less alienated than the other groups. ! Whether this was due to an initial increase in alienation caused by tutoring or whether the least alienated subjects were leaving the program was not determined; and (12) hypothesis 5 seemed to be viable. The First Confounding Factor, Socioeconomic Status Tables 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25 indicated that in this study there were no significant relationships between any group of items and the socioeconomic variable. The prediction was that there would be a relationship since many authorities had stated that lower-class subjects would manifest greater alienation. The only indication of a i relationship between class and alienation occurred in the tutee and tutor samples of Projects LA and MC. In the LA and MC tutee samples the predicted negative correlation j between alienation score and social class did manifest 211 itself to a slight degree. In the LA and MC tutor samples the predicted negative correlation manifested itself on the New and School items (though to a small degree), but a positive correlation was manifested with regard to the entire TT Scale and the Rewrite items. This indicated that the higher the social class, the greater the alienation i. score. The LA and MC tutees did indicate some negative (correlation between class and alienation. i i Though the correlation analysis was not very help ful, there were specific items which did segregate by social class. When tutors and tutees were dealt with jointly (see Tables 30, 31, and 32), lower-class subjects were segregated in the following areas: (1) attitude toward the family (items 8 and 16) in which the lower-class subject indicated less alienation than did the middle-or upper-class subjects; (2) sense of powerlessness (items 11 and 25) in which the lower-class subjects indicated less alienation than did the other classes; (3) the sense of isolation (items 14, 29, and 31) indicated less alienation among the lower-class subjects; (4) however, the lower- class subjects indicated less interest in national elec tions and were less likely to believe that life was a product of God's will (item 24). In items 4 and 24, how ever, the lower-class subjects indicated less alienation. The means presented in Table 33 corroborated the evidence of the correlation analysis by indicating that the 212 ] TABLE 30 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS (Percentages) Item Correct* Lower Middle Upper Items Which Segregated Lower-Class Subiects 2 2 93 83 83 4 2 74 90 97 8 2 72 93 93 11 2 27 42 48 14 1 47 22 33 16 1 39 18 17 23 1 30 16 16 24 2 88 62 50 25 1 41 25 28 29 1 30 8 5 31 1 55 7 11 Item Which Segregated Upper-Class Subiects 33 1 29 20 9 ^Correct responses were alienated responses: "l, f « ‘'yes** and n2n «* HnoM; only "yes" responses were listed* 213 TABLE 31 ITEMS WHICH DID NOT SEGREGATE BY SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS (Percentages) Item Correct* Lower Middle Upper I 3 2 83 80 85 7 1 47 53 45 12 2 91 88 91 13 2 83 82 85 15 2 89 89 83 17 1 18 8 10 18 2 96 91 87 20 2 88 94 93 30 1 48 52 57 32 2 88 92 93 34 1 15 16 12 35 1 31 27 26 ^Correct responses were alienated responses; tfln = nyesn and ff2, f « fW f; only "yes" responses were listed. \ 214 TABLE 32 ITEMS WHICH SHOWED A TREND ON SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS (Percentages) Item Correct* Lower Middle Upper Trend Did the item segregate ? 1 2 96 77 86 Lower to Upper to Middle Yes 5 1 61 48 54 Middle to Upper to Lower Yes 6 2 77 59 46 Lower to Middle to Upper Yes 9 1 41 31 24 Upper to Middle to Lower Yes 24 2 88 62 50 Lower to Middle to Upper Yes 26 2 77 94 86 Middle to Upper to Lower No 27 1 79 59 48 Upper to Middle to Lower Yes 28 1 57 34 21 Upper to Middle to Lower Yes ^'Correct** responses were alienated responses; ,,ln *» f,yes, f and n2M « ”no"; only "yes" responses were listed. i 215 TABLE 33 MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS OF ALIENATION SCORES BY SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS (All means were percentage scores) TT Scale School Items Lower Middle Upper Lower Middle tflpper TUTORS AND TUTEES COMBINED: SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS Means Standard Errors 27,46 .84 26.24 1.17 25.86 1.52 F ratio + .624 Not significant TUTEES ONLY: SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS Means 28.57 28.53 27.40 23.43 26.27 19.80 Standard Errors .98 4.02 3.87 1.63 6.67 8.08 TUTORS ONLY: SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS Means 25.10 21.63 23.45 16.70 17.14 18.08 Standard Errors 4.96 1.55 1.85 8.20 2.03 2.36 216 differences between any two social classes were insignifi cant. Even the most divergent sample, that of the upper- class tutee sample on the school items, was not signifi cantly different. | It was possible that the lack of differentiation between socioeconomic classes was an artifact of the population of the study; i.e., there were far fewer tutors i !than tutees who were defined as lower class. This may have I presented an educational level and age bias. Because of i these biases an item analysis was performed on the tutee and tutor samples separately (Tables 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, and 39). j Table 34 indicated that the lower-class tutee more often felt that he would get somewhere in life (item 20) and that he would have a better job than his parents (item 27) than did the middle- or upper-class tutee. The middle-class tutees, on the other hand, seemed to indicate I ,greater alienation and estrangement from school (items 7, 12, and 32). However, this same class indicated less dissatisfaction with their present life (items 27 and 33). The middle-class tutor's attitude toward the school was not predicted. Most of the modern social critics who wrote i about the school complained about its middle-class orienta tion. Whether or not the school actually manifested this orientation, the middle-class subjects of this study were less satisfied with the school than were the other subjects. 217 TABLE 34 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS TUTEES ONLY (Percentages) Item Correct* Lower Middle Upper Items Which Segregated Lower-Class Subjects 20 2 88 100 100 27 1 78 67 60 Items Which Segregated Middle-Class Subiects 7 1 47 60 40 12 2 92 80 100 14 1 48 27 60 32 2 88 73 80 ! *,fCorrect" responses were alienated responses; ,flH - "yes" and ,f2n * Mno’’; only ,fyesf* responses were listed. 218 One possible explanation was that the subjects enrolled in the tutorial projects felt that they were not receiving a good enough education from the school and wanted more help. In other words, the middle-class tutee who was drawn to the tutorial project may have had greater dissatisfaction with the school than would the middle-class student who was not idrawn to the project. Though there were very few upper- class subjects, there were a number of items which segre- i 'gated this class from the others (see Table 35). The upper-class tutees indicated greater negativism (items 19, 21, 30, and 35). Whether this was an indication of aliena tion or an indication of greater knowledge and interest in the world and the society was not determined. On the other hand, in items dealing with religion (items 6 and 13), future orientation (item 28), isolation (items 17, 23, 25, and 29), and the attitude toward work (item 33), the upper- class subjects indicated less alienation. ! Aside from the items which did segregate subjects by class, there were also six items which did not segregate at all (see Table 35) . Items 1 and 2 were ’’lead1 1 items and everyone answered them the same way. There was no signifi cant difference between the classes in their attitude toward their ability to handle problems (item 11), satis- t faction with living in the United States (item 18), feeling that they were treated fairly by teachers (item 26), their desire to save money for future goals (item 34). That 219 TABLE 35 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY SOCIOECONOMIC TUTEES ONLY (Percentages) STATUS Item Correct* Lower Middle Upper Items Which Segregated Upper-Class Subiects 6 2 80 80 100 13 2 81 80 100 17 1 18 27 0 19 1 38 20 100 21 66 80 20 23 1 31 33 20 25 1 42 33 20 28 1 59 67 40 29 1 31 33 0 30 1 47 40 100 33 1 29 33 0 35 1 31 27 60 Items Which Showed No Difference Between Groups 1 2 97 100 100 2 2 93 93 100 11 2 28 20 20 18 2 97 100 100 26 2 77 87 80 34 1 15 13 20 *f,Correctn responses were alienated responses; ul, f * ”yes” and M2t l « >fno- : only Myes, f responses were listed. 220 there was no difference between the class in their attitude toward teachers was not expected. However, here again there may have been a selection-testing interaction error in that the tutees indicated a desire to learn by their presence in the program. Of those items which indicated a trend (Table 36), |items 4, 9, and 21 elicited contradictory responses from the upper-class tutees. These subjects indicated that they i jwere most interested in the national elections (item 4), I that politicians were interested in what was best for them- I selves (item 9), and that politicians were interested in | what was best for the people (item 21). In items dealing l with the family, the upper-class subjects indicated that they felt that children were a problem to their parents (item 5), but lower-class children indicated more often that they did not wish to have children (item 8), while i middle-class tutees felt that most married people led unhappy lives (item 16). The lower-class children liked school the best (item 3), but they were least likely to be satisfied with their school. The middle-class subjects were most satisfied with their lives and felt that they could trust people (item 31); however, the upper-class tutees most often felt that life was a product of God's will (item 24). In brief, lower-class tutees had greater faith in the future, but did not as often wish to have children. Middle-class tutees were more estranged from the 221 TABLE 36 ITEMS WHICH SHOWED A TREND ON SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS TUTEES ONLY (Percentages) Item o 0 ) u u Q O Lower 01 r “ 4 T3 TJ £ Upper Trend Did the item segregate? 3 J 2 83 73 60 Lower to Middle to Upper Yes 4 2 74 67 80 Upper to Lower to Middle No 5 1 61 80 100 Lower to Middle to Upper Yes 8 2 70 80 100 Upper to Middle to Lower Yes 9 1 42 67 0 Upper to Lower to Middle Yes 16 1 40 80 0 Upper to Lower to Middle Yes 21 2 66 80 20 Middle to Lower to Upper Yes 22 2 75 87 100 Upper to Middle to Lower Yes 24 2 89 75 100 Upper to Lower to Middle Yes 25 1 42 33 20 Upper to Middle to Lower Yes 31 1 60 20 100 Middle to Lower to Upper Yes *,1CorrectM responses were alienated responses; ,,1M « "yes" and « "no- ; only "yes*' responses were listed. i 222 school and less dissatisfied with their present life. The i upper-class tutees were more dissatisfied with the state of ;the world, politicians, consumer items, and less alienated with regard to religion, future orientation, meaningless- iness, and attitude toward work. These same subjects, how ever, felt that children were a problem to their parents, ^his latter may have been due to the greater pressures placed upon upper-class children to excel and maintain t social status. Lower-class tutors indicated a greater degree of alienation (see Table 37) with regard to being able to control their own lives and fatalism (items 11 and 17), I itheir attitude toward work (item 33), and their attitude toward the family (items 8 and 16), the value of the school (item 12), and attitude toward religion (item 13). How ever, they did feel that they would have better jobs than their parents. This, in most cases, was a statement of i fact since their college education almost guaranteed them a better job. Middle-class tutors indicated greater dis satisfaction with their lives and their society (items 14 and 19), felt that children were often a problem to their parents (item 5), and had less interest in church activi- i 'ties (item 6). There were no items which segregated the upper-class tutors. Of those items which indicated a trend (Table 39), item 27 was interesting since the results were exactly 223 TABLE 37 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS TUTORS ONLY (Percentages) Item i Correct* Lower Middle Upper Items Which Segregated Lower-Class Subjects 8 2 79 94 90 10 2 89 69 75 11 2 22 49 51 12 2 78 90 91 13 2 100 80 85 16 1 33 12 17 17 1 22 2 11 27 2 100 57 36 33 1 33 16 9 Items Which Segregated Middle-Class Subiects 1 2 89 69 85 5 1 56 45 53 6 2 44 51 40 14 1 33 20 30 19 1 44 35 43 ^Correct responses were alienated responses; "I" ® **yes1 1 and ,,2M » , f nofl; only ,fyesf f responses were listed. 224 predictable, namely, 100 per cent of the lower-class sub jects felt that they would have a better job than their parents, almost 60 per cent of the middle-class subjects felt the same way, but only 36 per cent of the upper-class subjects did. This indicated that the lower-class subjects recognized their upward mobility, as did most of the middle-class subjects. The upper-class subjects, on the !other hand, recognized that there were very few jobs which i |were better than those held by their parents. Item 24 i indicated that the lower-class subjects most often felt that life was a product of God's will while the upper-class subjects were least inclined toward this view. Aside from those items which segregated or showed a itrend by social class, there were also a large number of items (fifteen) which did not segregate at all (Table 38)* Items 7, 26, and 32 all dealt with the school and did not discriminate. Items dealing with politics and politicians did not discriminate (items 4, 9, and 21). Items dealing with negativism (items 29, 30, 31, and 35) also did not discriminate. Hypothesis 6 predicted that socioeconomic status :would be related to alienation. There was no consistent 1 pattern to indicate that this hypothesis was valid when tutors and tutees were dealt with jointly or individually. The mean scores of the different social classes did not indicate any significant differences although there were 225 TABLE 38 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS TUTORS ONLY (Percentages) i Item Correct* Lower Middle Upper Items Which Did Not Se&re^ate Subiects 2 2 89 80 81 3 2 89 82 87 4 2 89 98 98 7 1 44 51 45 9 1 33 29 25 15 2 79 86 83 21 2 78 78 74 25 1 22 22 28 26 2 89 96 87 28 1 22 25 19 29 1 11 0 6 30 1 56 55 53 31 1 11 6 9 32 2 89 98 94 35 1 22 27 23 *r,Correct,r responses were alienated responses ; "I1 1 » "yes1 1 and ,,2t f = f'no”; only "yes” responses were listed. i 226 TABLE 39 ITEMS WHICH SHOWED A TREND ON SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS (Percentages) * 4J Item o <u o o Lower Middle Upper * Trend Did the item segregate? 10 2 89 69 75 Lower to Upper to Middle Yes 24 2 78 59 47 Lower to Middle to Upper Yes 27 1 100 57 36 Upper to Middle to Lower Yes *"Correct” responses were alienated responses; "1" ■» "yes" and ,,2n = f,no,f; only "yes” responses were listed. i 227 certain items which did discriminate one class from 1 another. Those items which discriminated seemed to indi cate that the lower-class subject was the least alienated. ;This was the opposite of what was predicted by the authors discussed in Chapter I. Hypothesis 6, therefore, was not valid with regard to socioeconomic status. i i In summary, (1) lower-class tutors indicated |greater alienation with regard to fatalism, work, and i 'family; however, they did recognize their upward mobility; j (2) middle class tutors indicated greater dissatisfaction with their present status and their society, relationship of children to parents, and were less interested in church activities; and (3) no items segregated the upper-class i tutors except that they recognized their inability to be socially mobile upward. In comparing the lower-class standardization sub jects with the lower-class experimental subjects, (1) both i [groups were segregated from the other classes by items dealing with isolation and in general they indicated less alienation on this factor; (2) the lower-class standardiza tion sample was segregated by items dealing with religion | on which they were less alienated than the other classes; (3) the lower-class experimental subjects were segregated 4 by items dealing with meaninglessness on which they were more alienated. There were no items which segregated the middle-class experimental sample, while there were six 228 items which segregated the middle-class standardization sample. There was only one item which segregated the upper-class experimental sample, while there were nine items which segregated the upper-class standardization sample. In comparing those items which indicated a trend, i l(1) while the lower-class standardization sample was the least alienated with regard to religion, the upper-class i experimental sample was most alienated with regard to | religion; (2) while the upper-class standardization sample indicated the least alienation with regard to meaningless ness, the lower-class experimental sample indicated the greatest sense of meaninglessness; and (3) the lower-class experimental subject indicated the greatest isolation. Tests of statistical significance indicated that there was no difference between the social classes with i j regard to alienation which could not have occurred by chance, thereby further indicating that hypothesis 6 was not viable with regard to socioeconomic status. ; The Second Confounding Factor, Educational 1 Level Achieved i Tables 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25 indicated certain ! slight relationships between educational level and aliena tion. First, when the tutors and tutees were dealt with conjointly, there was a very slight and insignificant 229 negative relationship between educational level and aliena tion, i.e., what little relationship there was indicated that the higher the education level, the lower the aliena- jtion. This negative relationship approached significance among the tutees. Among the tutors, the relationship between educational level and alienation was positive, that I !is, as the educational level increased, so did the aliena- i Ition. This relationship was particularly noticeable in the |school items. On the same items the tutees indicated either no relationship or a negative one. The tutors, however, indicated a positive relationship in all cases. There was no immediately apparent explanation for this i i ;phenomenon. Of the items which segregated by educational level, elementary school subjects (Table 40) were most prone to indicate that life was a product of luck (item 17) and meaningless (items 23 and 28), and that children were a problem to their parents (item 5). Elementary school children were also prone to feel that their school was not one of the best in the city (item 22) but they did like i school (item 3) and they did feel that politicians were interested in the people (item 21). There was a possible confounding factor here in that some of the subjects may not have understood the questions. These questions were conceptually some of the most difficult on the TT Scale. Though there were no items which segregated the junior high 230 TABLE 40 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY EDUCATIONAL LEVEL (Percentages) Item Correct* Elemen tary Junior High Senior High Freshmen- Juniors Sophomores and above Items Which Segregated Elementary School Subiects 5 1 77 61 39 58 54 6 2 110 78 61 55 28 7 1 29 53 43 42 48 17 1 42 14 7 4 15 21 2 94 60 61 73 80 22 2 48 70 79 86 72 23 1 55 24 32 13 13 28 1 74 58 54 21 26 Items Which Segregated Junior High School Subiects N o n e ★"Correct*1 responses were alienated responses; "I” » "yes** and M2, f « "no**; only ’’yes” responses were listed. school subjects from the other groups, there were three items which segregated elementary and junior high school subjects (see Table 42) from the other groups. Elementary and junior high school subjects, taken together, indicated that they were less interested in having children (item 5) and wished that their lives were different from what they i i were (item 14). They did not, however, wish to live with out working (item 33) as often as did the subjects from the i 'other groups. All of these items may have been out of the conceptual sphere of these younger children. Items 14 and 34 indicated that senior high school ;subjects (Table 41) were less satisfied with their lives i and less future oriented with regard to money. Junior and i i senior high school subjects taken as a group (Table 43) indicated that most politicians were interested in the welfare of the people (item 21) but they also indicated less future orientation (item 28). When all college sub jects were handled jointly, they indicated a greater interest in the national elections (item 4) (this was to be expected of college students). However, they also indi cated greater alienation with regard to isolation (items 23, 29, and 31), less satisfaction with the present, and less faith in work (items 14 and 33). College freshmen and sophomores (Table 41) showed less alienation on all items which segregated them from the other educational levels. They showed greater faith in 232 TABLE 41 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY EDUCATIONAL LEVEL (Percentages) Elemen- Junior Senior Freshmen- Juniors Item Correct* tary High High Sophomores and above Items Which Segregated Senior High School Subiects_____ 14 1 45 44 61 23 30 34 1 10 13 25 13 15 Items Which and Segregated College Sophomore Subiects Freshman 9 1 48 33 36 18 39 14 1 45 44 61 23 30 16 1 45 28 39 7 28 25 1 45 39 36 17 41 26 2 84 74 86 99 78 ^ ’Correct'* responses were alienated responses; ,,l, f « "yes" and "2 " » f,nofl; only "y es" responses were listed. 233 TABLE 42 ! ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY EDUCATIONAL LEVEL • (Percentages) I I ' — ~ —»— — 1 — — — — — - ................ ' -" I — — — . ! Elemen- Junior Senior Freshmen- Juniors Item Correct* tary High High Sophomores and above Items Which Segregated College Juniors and Up 2 2 97 ‘ 92 96 87 67 6 2 100 78 61 55 28 15 j 2 87 91 89 90 74 18 i 2 97 96 96 91 80 24 2 97 87 75 62 4i Items Which Segregated Elementary and Junior High Subiects 8 2 61 67 86 93 87 14 1 45 44 61 23 30 33 1 32 30 21 13 15 ^"Correct" responses were alienated responses; "1" = "yes" i and "2" « "no”; only "yes" responses were listed. f TABLE 43 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY EDUCATIONAL LEVEL (Percentages) Elemen- Junior Senior Freshmen- Juniors Item Correct* tary High High Sophomores and above Items Which Segregated Junior and Senior High School Subiects : 21 28 2 94 1 74 Items Which 60 58 Segregated 61 54 College 73 21 Subiects 80 26 i 1 2 97 100 89 79 78 4 2 77 72 68 97 98 14 1 45 44 61 23 30 23 1 55 24 32 13 13 28 i 1 74 58 54 21 26 29 1 48 25 32 1 7 31 1 52 67 50 4 13 33 1 32 30 21 13 15 i ^ ’Correct" responses were alienated responses; "I1 1 - Myesn and fl2M « nnofl; only "y e s ” responses were listed. 235 politicians (item 9), the family (item 16), meaninglessness i (item 14), powerlessness (item 25), and their teachers (item 26). College juniors or above (see Table 42) indi cated greater alienation with regard to religion (items 6 and 24), work (item 15), and their satisfaction with the United States (item 18). It would appear from this that i I the negative correlation between educational level and alienation indicated by Tables 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25 held i only with the college freshmen and sophomores rather than upper-division college students. Of those items which indicated a trend (Table 44), items 24 and 29 (isolation) and items 27 and 28 (future orientation) indicated the lowest alienation among the college students. However, three of the four items indi cated highest alienation among elementary school subjects. On items dealing with religion and politics (items 6 and |21) the elementary school subjects indicated the least |alienation while on the items dealing with the family (item 5) or the ability to handle problems (item 11) they indicated the greatest alienation. As presented in Table 45, the "F*1 test indicated that the difference in means among the educational levels i was significant at the .01 level. The Mt’1 tests indicated that the only significant difference was that between the lower-division college students and all of the other educa tional levels (.01 level). This was true of the school TABLE 44 ITEMS WHICH INDICATED A TREND ON EDUCATIONAL LEVEL Item Correct* Elementar; Junior High Senior High Freshmen and Sophomore Juniors and above Trend** i Did the item segregate? 5 1 77 61 39 48 54 SH, UD, LD, JH, ELE Yes 6 2 100 78 61 55 28 ELE, JH, SH, UP, LD Yes 1 \ 11 2 35 23 36 44 50 UD, LD, SH, JH, ELE No I 21 2 94 60 61 73 80 ELE, UD, LD, SH, JH Yes 23 1 55 24 32 13 13 LD, UD, JH, SH, ELE Yes 27 1 65 75 86 44 63 LD, UD, ELE, JH, SH Yes 28 1 74 58 54 21 26 LD, UD, SH, JH, ELE Yes 29 1 48 25 32 1 7 LD, UD, JH, SH, ELE Yes ^Correct responses were alienated responses; ,flf f = ! , yes, ! and M2M = f , noff; only ’’yes" responses were listed. K> **ELE * elementary school; JH ■ junior high school; SH « senior high school; LD = lower division college or junior college; and UD = upper division college or graduate. TABLE 45 MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS OF ALIENATION SCORES BY EDUCATIONAL LEVEL (All means were percentage scores) Elementary School Junior Senior High High School School Lower Division College Upper Division and Graduate College TT Scale Means 30.29 28.63 28.00 19.29 28.32 Standard Errors 1.70 1.21 2.39 1.37 1.82 F ratio *= 4.433 p < School Items .01 Means 21.03 25.47 21.90 13.10 24.15 Standard Errors 2.65 2.04 3.89 1.65 2.89 238 items as well as the TT Scale. Hypothesis 6 predicted that there would be a rela tionship between education level achieved and alienation. Where a relationship did exist, and none were large, there was an indication that the elementary school children were the most alienated. These children, however, may have had isome difficulty in understanding some of the questions. I The least alienated group was the lower-division college i i sample. No reason for these findings was readily apparent, I but education level was not established as being definitely |related to alienation though there were certain items which i idiscriminated among the various samples. | In summary, (1) the tutees and tutors were not I 1 separated by education level since the tutors were all college students and the tutees were all elementary, junior high, or senior high students (or drop-outs); (2) the tutees indicated a predicted negative relationship between ieducation level and alienation; (3) the tutors, however, indicated a positive relationship between education level and tutoring; (4) elementary school children indicated greater alienation in terms of meaninglessness, fate, family relationships, and evaluation of their school. How ever, they did feel that politicians were interested in the people's welfare and they did like school; (5) there were no items which segregated junior high school subjects; (6) [when junior and senior high school subjects were handled 239 jointly, they indicated that they were less interested in i having children, wished that their lives were different from what they were, but they did not wish that they could jlive without working; (7) senior high school subjects indi- !cated that they were less satisfied with their present lives and were less future oriented; (8) lower-division icollege students indicated less alienation in terms of family relationships, future orientation, present life, 'politicians, and teachers; (9) upper-division college stu- i dents indicated less satisfaction with the United States and less interest in religion; (10) when 1ftH tests were • performed it was indicated that lower-division college students were significantly less alienated than the other educational level samples; (11) the data did not indicate any consistent pattern with regard to hypothesis 6. The Third Confounding Factor« Sex I According to Tables 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25, there was a slight relationship between sex and alienation. Males indicated a tendency to be slightly more alienated !than females. Of the six items which segregated by sex i (Table 46), two (items 10 and 27) indicated that the females were following the norms of the society, i.e., they were not as interested in sports nor did they feel that they would outdo their parents in terms of employment. i Of those items which indicated greater alienation on the 240 TABLE 46 ITEMS WHICH DISCRIMINATED BY SEX (Percentages) Item Correct* Male Female 6 2 58 69 7 1 60 38 10 2 76 64 27 2 79 69 33 1 28 18 35 1 40 26 ! *nCorrect” responses were alienated responses; ,fl" « "yes*1 and ,,2, , « f,nof*; only "y e s " responses were listed. i 241 part of the males, the greatest difference was indicated in the item dealing with a dislike for teachers (item 7). | Further, there were more males than females who indicated that they would just as soon not work (item 33), that they I | did not enjoy religious activities (item 6), and that they i did feel that things were built so that they would break (item 35). i ' By comparing the standardization population with ithe experimental population on the variable of sex it was indicated that (1) whereas none of the items dealing with meaninglessness and isolation were more often answered in ian alienated fashion by experimental females, on five occasions the standardization females indicated greater alienation on these factors; however (2), in general, the females of both populations indicated less alienation than did the males, as was predicted in hypothesis 6. | The difference between the sexes on the total TT !Scale was significantly different (F ratio = 3.968; p< .05) (see Table 47). The Fourth Confounding Factor, Age i j Tables 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25 indicated that among ,the tutees, age and alienation were either negligibly I related or were negatively related; that is, as age went up, alienation went down. Among the tutors, however, the i relationship between age and alienation was positive; that 242 TABLE 47 MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS OF ALIENATION SCORES BY SEX ALL SUBJECTS (All means were percentage scores) Male Female Means 28.54 1.02 Standard Errors 26.01 .78 F ratio = 3.968 P < .05 243 is, as age increased, so did alienation. This corresponded to the findings of the relationship between alienation and educational level. (Age and educational level correlated .81 and therefore any relationship of educational level to jalienation would likely be repeated in the relationship of age to alienation. ' Though the over-all relationship between age and I Jalienation corresponded to that of educational level and i •alienation, the specific items which segregated age groups were different (see Table 48), e.g., the items which segre gated the age group under eleven years of age were not the same items which segregated the elementary school children. In the areas of isolation (items 17, 23, 29, and 31) and meaninglessness (item 7), the subjects under eleven years ! of age indicated greater alienation. The political items seemed to have been confused. The school items which segregated this group (items 7 and 22) indicated that the I subjects felt that their school was one of the best in the city and that their teachers made reasonable requests. Subjects between twelve and fourteen years of age felt that both their teachers and principals (items 26 and 32) were junfair to them. These subjects further felt that they were i ,not capable of handling problems (item 11) and felt that most politicians were not interested in the people (item 21). Whether these attitudes indicated an increased i reality orientation or increased alienation was not 244 TABLE 48 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY AGE (Percentages) Item Under Correct* 11 12-14 15-20 Over 20 Items Which Se£ 11 Years oi |regated Subjects : Age or Less 7 1 24 53 46 48 9 1 52 33 26 35 17 1 39 15 5 19 21 2 91 60 70 77 22 1 58 69 79 73 23 1 49 26 18 15 29 1 39 27 11 10 31 1 44 16 19 10 Items Which Segregated Subjects 12 and 14 Years of Age Between 11 2 36 23 41 44 21 2 91 60 70 77 26 2 82 73 94 81 32 2 97 82 94 92 1*nCorrect" responses were alienated responses; f,ln >* "yes" and ” 2” » ’’no”; only " y e s ” responses were listed. 245 determined. The subjects who were between fifteen and i twenty years of age (see Table 49) indicated the least alienation of any group on items dealing with attitude toward teachers (item 26), ability to handle problems (item 25), family relationships (items 5 and 8), politi cians (item 9), and attitude toward consumer objects (item I 35). This age group consistently had the lowest alienation |scores (Table 52). On all six of the items, which segre gated subjects over twenty years of age, a higher aliena- i tion score was indicated. Items 6 and 24 indicated that subjects over twenty years of age were less interested and inclined toward religious belief. Item 34 indicated less I future orientation, item 15 indicated a more alienated attitude toward work, and item 19 indicated a lack of satisfaction with the United States. Aside from the items which segregated various sam ples, there were also some items which segregated those who were over fifteen years of age from those who were under fifteen (Table 50). The only factor on which the sample over fifteen years of age indicated a greater amount of alienation was religion (items 6 and 24). Concerning interest in the elections (item 4), desire to have children i(item 8), satisfaction with the society (item 14), attitude toward the plight of the average man (item 29), and desire not to work (item 33), the older age group indicated less alienation. 246 TABLE 49 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY AGE (Percentages) Under Over Item Correct* 11 12-14 15-20 20 Items Which Segregated Subjects Between 15 and 20 Years of Age 5 1 67 65 38 71 8 2 62 64 90 77 9 j 1 52 33 26 35 25 1 39 41 24 46 26 1 36 32 21 35 35 2 82 73 93 81 Items Which Segregated Subjects Over 20 Years of Aee 2 2 97 91 90 69 6 2 100 78 53 35 15 2 88 91 89 77 19 1 35 35 35 48 24 2 97 86 65 42 34 1 12 13 13 23 *,fCorrectM responses were alienated responses; ,,1M * "yes’* and ,,2, f - “no”; only ,,yes, t responses were listed. TABLE 50 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY AGE (Percentages) ' Item Correct* Under 11 12-14 I5r20 Over 20 Items Which Segregated from Those under 15 Subjects Years of Over 15 Age 1 2 37 100 82 81 4 2 79 71 91 92 6 2 100 78 53 35 8 2 62 64 90 77 14 1 42 44 34 35 24 2 97 86 65 42 29 1 39 27 11 10 33 1 30 32 14 21 ^'Correct** responses were alienated responses; ,,1M * f,yesM and ,,2M • ’’no”; only ” yesfi responses were listed. 248 Items which did not discriminate between age groups indicated that there was no particular difference in atti tude toward the school as an institution (items 3 and 12), nor was there a difference in attitude toward the future generally (item 20). Of the five items which indicated a trend according ito age (Table 51), four indicated that the least alienated group was over twenty years of age while the most alienated i group was under eleven. These items investigated feelings of isolation (item 23), attitudes toward the family (item 16), attitudes toward the future (item 28), and attitudes toward the plight of the average man (item 29). The one item which reversed this trend dealt with the subject*s attitude toward God (item 24) in which the over-twenty- year-old group indicated the greatest alienation. Table 52 gave the means and standard errors of the means for the various age groups. Both the TT Scale and the School items were presented. The difference in means on the TT Scale was statistically significant at the .01 level (F ratio =5.919). However, the main difference existed between the fifteen-to-twenty age group and the other age groups on the TT Scale. On the School items, the subjects under eleven years of age and those fifteen to twenty years of age had equally low means. This indicated that the fifteen-to-twenty-year-old subjects were the least alienated and that the subjects who were under eleven were TABLE 51 ITEMS WHICH SHOWED A TREND OR SEGREGATED I Item Correct* Under 11 12-14 15-20 Over 20 Trend ■ i Did the item segregate? 16 1 45 36 22 19 Over 20, 15-20, 12-14, under 11 Yes 23 1 49 26 18 15 Over 20, 15-20, 12-14, under 11 Yes j 24 2 97 86 65 42 Under 11, 12-14, 15-20, over 20 Yes 28 1 76 58 34 19 Over 20, 15-20, 12-14, under 11 Yes 29 1 39 27 11 10 Over 20, 15-20, 12-14, under 11 Yes Items Which Did Not Segregate by Age 3 2 85 78 86 79 12 2 88 93 89 87 20 2 89 89 92 85 ro ■ P * 250 TABLE 52 MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS OF ALIENATION SCORES BY AGE ALL SUBJECTS (All means were percentage scores) Under 11 years 12 to 14 years 15 to 20 years Over 20 years TT Scale Means 28.48 29.42 22.15 28.90 Standard Errors 1.56 1.31 1.17 1.82 F ratio * 5.919 School Items p < .01 Means 17.76 26.15 17.31 22.29 Standard Errors 2.49 2.16 1.66 2.81 equally non-alienated with regard to the school. The great est alienation was indicated by the twelve-to-fourteen-year age group. This corresponded to the alienation scores of i ithe junior high school group. The means of the groups, i then, clarified the relationship of age to alienation. Hypothesis 6 predicted a relationship between age i •and alienation. What little relationship did exist was very similar to the relationship which existed between edu- i cation level and alienation, i.e., the fifteen-to-twenty- year olds were the least alienated and the under eleven group was the most alienated. However, the same confound ing factors appeared here as did with the education level land this made the results difficult to interpret. This t difficulty of interpretation was true of all of the con founding factors. There was not enough research available to indicate clear-cut relationships. In summary, (1) the correlation findings relating age to alienation were very similar to the findings relat ing educational level to alienation, i.e., there was a slight negative correlation; (2) in the areas of trust, meaninglessness, the state of the average man, and belief that luck determined life, the subjects under eleven indi cated the greatest amount of alienation. These subjects were, however, satisfied with both their school and their \ teachers; (3) subjects between the age of twelve and four teen were definitely not satisfied with the behavior of 252 either their teachers or their principals. Further, they j felt that they were not capable of handling problems that I came along, and they did not trust politicians; (4) the j subjects between fifteen and twenty indicated the least alienation on items dealing with teachers, ability to handle problems, family relationships, politicians, and consumer items; (5) subjects over twenty years of age were more alienated in their religious belief, their future i orientation, their attitude toward work, and their attitude toward the United States; (6) an analysis of the means of the various age groups indicated that the fifteen-to- twenty-year olds were the least alienated and that the subjects who were under eleven years of age equaled the fifteen-to-twenty-year olds in their non-alienated attitude toward the school; (7) additionally, the comparison of means indicated that the twelve-to-fourteen-year old group was the most alienated and had the most negative attitude toward the school; and (8) no definite statements could be made with regard to hypothesis 6. | Items Which Segregated by Project ‘ The interest was not to attempt to determine which i ;was the most effective, but rather to find whether or not J the setting of the tutorial project had any effect upon [alienation. Two of the projects were held inside school buildings immediately after the regular school day (Projects LA and MC). The other four projects were held outside of school various times during the day. Whether any difference which might be found was due to the setting- tutoring interaction or due to the sample which would be jwilling to come to school after the regular school hours was not determined. Items 12, 15, 17, 21, 22, 23, and 29 segregated both tutee sample LA and tutee sample MC (Table 53). Items i 128 and 30 segregated tutee Project LA. Of the nine items mentioned above, two indicated that the ,fin school’* sub jects were less alienated with regard to meaninglessness (items 22 and 23); two items indicated less feeling of isolation (items 17 and 29); two items indicated a less negative attitude (items 21 and 30); and one indicated a less alienated attitude toward work (item 15). There was, however, greater negativism manifested with regard to the 'state of the world and the behavior of politicians. There was every reason to believe that these two projects were drawing a qualitatively different tutee. This was particu larly true of Project LA. For example, with the exception of Project W (which had only five subjects) there was no tutee sample which indicated such low alienation (see Table 54). The over-all difference between tutee samples was statistically significant at the .05 level (F ratio = 3.069); however, it was clear that most of the difference existed between sample tutee LA and the other tutee TABLE 53 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BY PROJECTS (Percentages) Item Correct* 0 u e c t A WE ELA W LA MC 10 2 77 92 62 100 74 62 12 2 86 85 83 100 96 95 15 2 86 77 86 100 99 94 17 1 36 31 10 20 8 11 21 2 93 69 66 40 56 54 22 2 52 69 55 100 83 74 23 1 46 31 31 40 24 23 28 1 70 61 52 60 32 56 29 1 46 31 31 40 18 23 30 1 30 61 55 20 60 55 *r,Correctn responses were alienated responses; ffl” ■* ’’yes” and ,,2H * Hno"; only nyesf* responses were listed. TABLE 54 MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS OF ALIENATION SCORES BY PROJECTS (All means were percentage scores) P r o j e c t A ELA W LA WE MC Tutees Means 28.68 31.41 24.4 23.57 34.39 28.37 Standard Errors 1.65 2.12 5.59 1.22 2.93 1.44 Tutee F ratio - 3.069 Tutors P < .05 Means 19.44 23.21 11.50 34.73 15.50 35.75 Standard Errors 1.24 2.41 5.50 1.33 2.87 2.90 256 samples. A series of "t" tests was performed to determine if the mean of Project LA was significantly different from the means of the other groups. In every case the differ ences between the mean alienation scores of the Project LA tutees and all of the other projects were significant at the .05 level. In Chapter II the characteristics of the !Project LA tutees were listed. It was pointed out that the socioeconomic status, the academic ability, and the ecolog ical characteristics of the homes of the tutees were higher i than was true of other projects. Therefore, the difference between this project and the other projects was expected. The difference in alienation score was manifested in the tutor populations of Projects LA and MC as well. However, here the alienation score was significantly higher than the alienation of the other tutors. The difference in means was close to ten percentage points. It was therefore clear !that these two projects were drawing a qualitatively idifferent tutor population as well as a qualitatively different tutee population. (Project W had only three tutor subjects. Therefore no conclusions could be drawn from this project.) i The differences between the ,,in-schoolM projects |and the "non-school" projects made hypothesis 15, which dealt with the subject's attitude toward authority, very difficult to interpret since there was reason to believe i that the students who had the most negative attitude toward 257 authority did not enroll in the "in-school" projects with the same frequency as they did in the "non-school1* projects. There was further reason to believe that the type of stu- Jdent who was willing to enroll in any kind of tutorial I jprogram might have been qualitatively different from stu dents who would not enroll. For this reason, no definite jconclusions could be drawn with regard to hypothesis 15. | Not only did various projects indicate significant i differences from one another, but there were also consist ent indications that tutors and tutees manifested differ ences. This was predicted in hypothesis 4. The differ ences between the tutors and tutees was sufficiently great ■ that the researcher separated the two groups in many of the ;analyses. All of the variables, both independent and con founding, indicated that there were distinct differences between the tutors and tutees both on individual item and factors of items, and on percentage means. It was not determined whether the confounding variables affected the | differences between tutees and tutors. In summary, (1) the "in-school" projects (LA and JMC) drew a qualitatively different type of tutee; (2) this was particularly true of Project LA tutees who were far less alienated than were the tutees of the other projects; (3) the tutors of Projects LA and MC were also qualita tively different, but in this case they were far more alienated. This could not have been related to the fact 258 that the projects were held in a school building. The Post-Test As stated in Chapter II, the rationale for giving a post-test was to determine whether or not the results were due to the variables predicted or to alternative hypoth- i eses. The primary purpose of this section, then, was to find whether or not differences existed among the following 'samples: (1) the "pre-test" sample made up of all subjects who had taken the test on the first occasion of its admin istration; (2) the "new" sample made up of those subjects who had taken the test on the second administration but had not taken the test on the first administration; (3) the ; f , matched pre-test"; and (4) the "matched post-test" samples. The same subjects were tested but the post-test was admin istered five weeks after the pre-test. The subjects* "pre-test" and "post-test" scores were "matched." The "drop-out" sample was made up of those subjects who had taken the test on the first administration but had not taken it on the second. Originally it was hoped that only those who had actually withdrawn from the tutorial project would be included in the "drop-out" sample. It could not be absolutely determined, however, whether the subject had withdrawn or was merely absent for the two weeks during which testing took place. Absence was more prevalent in * the MC tutee sample, where the tutee was tutored on an 259 average of only once a week than it was in the A tutee sample where the tutee might be tutored five days a week. Tables 55, 56, and 57 gave the means and standard errors of the means for the various samples with tutors and jtutees dealt with jointly, tutees dealt with separately, and tutors dealt with separately. The primary purpose was ;to determine if there were any differences between the ’’new*1 and "pre-test" samples. If there were no significant differences, then the alternative hypotheses of History, Maturation, Testing, Instrumentation, Experimental Mortal ity, and Selection-Maturation Interaction were not viable [alternatives to the hypotheses of the dissertation, since two independent samples had been tested at two different times and no difference was found between them; that is, no confounding design factors were present, Table 55 gave the means and standard errors of means for the combined population of tutors and tutees. i 'Neither the tutors and tutees of sample A nor the tutors and tutees of sample MC showed any significant differences between the "pre-test" and the ,fnew, j samples. This held i for both the TT Scale and the School items, and indicated i |that when the tutors and tutees were dealt with jointly, |the alternative hypotheses were not viable. Table 56 indicated the means and standard errors of the means when the tutees were dealt with separately. When Project A and Project MC tutees were combined, no 260 TABLE 55 PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS FOR SAMPLES A AND MC TUTORS AND TUTEES COMBINED (All means were percentage scores) TT Scale School Items Sample Mean Standard Error Mean Standard Error Project A Pre-test 22.69 1.06 17.20 1.68 Project A New 22.85 2.14 22.85 3.87 Project MC Pre-test 29.41 1.32 23.57 1.97 Project MC New 27.50 1.32 29.59 4.64 i 261 i A C i i L DO PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS FOR SAMPLES A AND MC TUTEES ONLY (All means were percentage scores) ,Proiect and Sample TT Scale School Items Mean Standard Error Mean Standard Error A and MC Pre-test 28.27 1.13 22.34 1.60 j |A and MC New i 29.00 2.40 31.59 1.77 i !A and MC Match Pre-test 1 29.04 1.48 22.64 2.90 I |A and MC Match Post-test 29.69 2.22 21.47 3.07 lA and MC Drop-out i 27.80 1.40 22.17 2.25 A Pre-test 28.68 1.65 21.64 4.35 A New 27.12 2.62 32.35 2.67 i A Match Pre-test 24.79 2.47 19.32 3.41 A Match Post-test 24.65 2.56 18.70 3.01 A Drop-out 31.64 2.07 23.40 3.94 MC Pre-test 28.09 1.45 22.65 2.27 MC New 30.08 4.06 30.82 4.35 MC Match Pre-test 31.28 2.52 24.39 4.06 MC Match Post-test 32.94 3.16 23.26 4.67 MC Drop-out 26.32 1.75 23.40 3.94 262 significant difference occurred on the full TT Scale between the ’’new" and ’’ pre-test*’ samples. However, the ’’ new*’ sample was significantly more alienated (.05 level of significance) than was the "pre-test” sample on the School items. The reason for this was not apparent, but it may have been due to the time of year. The post-test t was administered toward the end of the semester when the subjects may have been tired of school. This would indi- i cate that the School items may have fallen prey to a "history error." There was no reason to believe that the over-all TT Scale scores had fallen prey to any design error when the Project A and MC tutee samples were com- i jbined, i.e., there was no significant difference between the "new" and "pre-test" samples. When Project A tutees were dealt with separately, there was no significant difference between the "pre-test" and the "new" samples on the TT Scale. However, the difference between these two samples on the School items was approximately the same as on the combined A and MC samples, i.e., the "new" sample was significantly more alienated from the school (.05 level of significance). Exactly the same situation occurred when jthe Project MC tutees were dealt with separately, that is, i there was no difference between the means of the "pre-test" sample and the "new" sample on the TT Scale but a signifi cant difference did occur on the School items. When the "drop-out" sample of the combined A and MC 263 tutees was compared with the "matched post*test9' sample, no difference was noted. The interest here was to determine any possible difference between those subjects who dropped out of the program and those who remained with it. When the Project A tutee sample was dealt with separately the ■"drop-out" sample was significantly more alienated (.10 i ilevel) than was the "matched post-test" sample. This seemed to indicate that in the Project A tutee sample, I 1 those who dropped from the program were significantly more alienated than were those who remained with the program. In the Project MC tutee sample there was also a significant difference between the "drop-out" sample and the "matched post-test" sample (significant at the .05 level) but here jthe "drop-out" population was less alienated than the "matched post-test" sample. A possible explanation was that there was a greater chance of not being able to test the most alienated MC tutees (a confounding design factor). First, most of these tutees were tutored on the average of once a week (each day was allocated for a separate academic subject) whereas the Project A tutees were tutored up to five times a week. This meant that if the tutee were absent from the MC program for two tutoring sessions he would not be tested (testing took place for two weeks in a row). Second, since it was close to the end of the semes ter, the school at which Project MC was held had a number iof extra-curricular activities immediately after school. 264 Table 57 gave the means and standard errors of means for the tutors. When the Project MG and A tutors 'were dealt with jointly, there was no significant differ ence between the "pre-test** and "new" samples. When the Project A tutors were dealt with sepa rately, the "new" sample indicated the least alienation of i any sample in the study on the school items (mean = 6.70; see Table 56). This was significantly lower than the mean of the "pre-test" sample (.10 level of significance). i There was no ready explanation for this difference. The "new" tutors were less alienated than were the "pre-test" tutors on the TT Scale, though the difference was not significant. The Project MC tutors showed significant differences between the "pre-test" sample and the "new" sample on the TT Scale. The "new" sample was less alien ated (.05 level of significance; see Table 57). There was also a significant difference between "matched pre-test** sample and the "matched post-test" sample. In these two samples the same people were tested but a five-week delay. During that period, the tutors had shown a decided decrease in alienation. Under normal circumstances, this would have ;indicated that tutoring time had influenced the dependent variable. This may have been true, but the findings were confounded by the fact that the "new" tutors also indicated far less alienation. This seemed to indicate that some thing outside of the experimental variable was influencing 265 TABLE 57 PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS FOR SAMPLES A AND MC TUTORS ONLY (All means were percentage scores) Project and Sample TT Scale School Items Mean Standard Error Standard Mean A and MC Pre-test 22.82 1.36 17.56 1.90 A and MC New 18.21 2.55 15.89 4.69 A and MC Match Pre-test 20.58 1.77 17.11 2.77 A and MC Match Post-test 19.19 1.70 15.64 2.50 A and MC Drop-out 25.21 2.03 18.05 2.62 A Pre-test 19.44 1.24 14.81 2.11 A New 15.60 2.29 6.70 3.68 A Match Pre-test 16.31 1.53 15.31 3.29 A Match Post-test 18.03 1.87 13.86 2.77 A Drop-out 15.60 2.29 13.03 2.53 MC Pre-test 35.76 2.90 28.00 3.47 MC New 21.11 4.74 26.11 7.91 MC Match Pre-test 35.50 2.57 23.40 4.39 MC Match Post-test 27.10 2.73 25.00 5.66 MC Drop-out 36.00 5.18 32.18 5.15 266 the scores. If this were not the case, then only the i "matched post-test" tutors would have indicated a differ ence . Findings regarding the MC tutors would have to be j interpreted with great care. J Aside from the differences between means of the samples it was also of interest to determine if there were 'any items which segregated the "matched pre-test" sample from the "matched post-test" sample. Table 58 presented those items which segregated "pre-test" and "post-test" samples when Projects A and MC were dealt with jointly. The tutees of the combined samples indicated that the "matched post-test1 1 sample was significantly less alienated i with regard to attitude toward teachers* requests (item 7). There were no other items which segregated "matched pre test" from "matched post-test" in the combined tutee sample. In the combined A and MC tutor sample responses were somewhat more difficult to interpret. While there was Ian increase in the feeling of alienation from politicians (item 21), from manufacturers* consumer products (item 35), and the feeling that life was useless (item 23), there was |a definite decrease in the sense of meaninglessness (items 16 and 27). The possible explanation was that the increase i in alienated responses to items 21, 23, and 35 indicated increased awareness of the society, while items 16 and 27 indicated the tutor*s feeling that he was doing something i to improve the society. 267 TABLE 58 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BETWEEN MATCHED PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST SUBJECTS PROJECTS A AND MC COMBINED (Percentages) Item Correct* Pre-Test Post-Test 7 1 Tutees 45 28 16 1 Tutors 20 7 21 2 83 70 23 1 9 22 27 2 37 51 35 1 7 18 *,,Correct, t responses were alienated responses; f,lM * * Myesn and 2M « Mnon; only "yes responses were listed. 268 Table 59 presented those items which segregated the , T matched pre-test" sample from the "matched post-test" sample when Project A tutees and tutors were dealt with separately. The tutees indicated greater alienation with regard to religion (item 6), present meaninglessness and negativism, particularly with regard to authority figures I I (items 9 and 21), and the ability of school learning to jrelate to the subjectfs life outside of school (item 12). i jThe Project A tutee, however, indicated less alienation witfc ! 1 regard to his teacher*s requests (item 7), future meaning lessness (item 28), and isolation (item 31). Here, too, it was possible that the subject was increasing his reality orientation and at the same time increasing his faith in a better future. The same reactions appeared in the differ ences between the "matched pre-test" and "matched post- test" samples of Project A tutors. While these subjects I indicated greater negativism toward politicians (item 21), they indicated decreased alienation with regard to the actions of their school teachers (item 7) and future orientation (item 27). Table 60 presented those items which segregated I"matched pre-test" and "post-test" samples in Project MC tutors and tutees. The "matched post-test*1 tutees of Project MC indicated greater alienation with regard to future meaninglessness (items 15 and 28) and with regard to negativism (item 30). This sample too, however, indicated 269 TABLE 59 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BETWEEN MATCHED PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST SUBJECTS PROJECT A (Percentages) Item Correct* Pre-Test Post-Test 6 2 Tutees 94 75 7 1 39 15 9 1 22 40 12 2 100 85 21 1 94 75 28 1 61 40 31 1 56 30 7 1 Tutors 53 43 21 2 80 69 27 2 33 49 ★"Correct*1 responses were alienated responses; "1" ■= "yes" and "2" = "no*1; only "yes*1 responses were listed. 270 TABLE 60 ITEMS WHICH SEGREGATED BETWEEN MATCHED PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST SUBJECTS PROJECT MC (Percentages) Item Correct* Pre-Test Post-Test 4 2 Tutees 55 71 7 1 49 36 15 2 97 87 26 1 58 71 30 1 52 66 7 1 Tutors 30 60 8 2 70 100 9 1 80 20 10 2 40 80 15 2 40 80 16 1 70 10 18 2 40 90 20 2 70 100 ^ ’Correct1 1 responses were alienated responses; f,l, f = "yes" and ”2” - f,no’f; only ,fyesM responses were listed. 271 I less alienation toward the requests of teachers (item 7). They also indicated greater interest in elections (item 4). I There was not as great an indication that while present i reality orientation increased, so did faith in a better future. (It was more difficult to interpret the Project MC "matched post-test" sample as there were possible alterna tive hypotheses due to faulty sampling.) The tutors of Project MC "matched post-test" sample generally indicated I less alienation with regard to isolation (item 8), meaning lessness (items 9, 15, 16, and 20), and the desire to live outside of the United States (item 18). However, they were the only samples which indicated an increase in alienation with regard to the requests of teachers (item 7). No explanation for this fact was readily available. In summary, (1) a "post-test" was given in order to determine any confounding factors in the design. When the tutors and tutees were dealt with as a group, there were no confounding factors evident. However, when the tutors and tutees were dealt with separately, there seemed to be a difference between the "new" and "pre-test" samples on the School items. This was true of both the Project A and Project MC tutees and the Project A tutors; (2) the Project MC tutors indicated that very possibly a significantly different type of tutor was tested during the "post-test" than in the "pre-test," that is, there was a confounding design factor which could not be accounted for; (3) though 272 there was an indicated difference between the tutor "drop out" sample and the tutor "matched post-test" sample, this difference could not be easily interpreted due to the con- jfounding design factors; (4) the only item which segregated the "matched pre-test" and "matched post-test" tutees when Project A and MC were dealt with jointly was the one deal ing with teacher requests. The "matched post-test" sample felt that teacher requests were more reasonable than the i"matched pre-test" tutee sample; (5) when tutors were i handled jointly there was an increase in alienation with regard to politicians, consumer products, and the useless ness of life. There was, however, a decrease in the sense i of meaninglessness. This might have indicated an increased awareness or reality orientation combined with an increased faith in the future; (6) this same indication of greater estrangement from the present and greater faith in the future was a possible explanation for the findings of the Project A tutees and Project A tutors; (7) this indication of faith in the future was reversed in the Project MC tutors and tutees. Both indicated less alienation with i !regard to the present and greater alienation with regard to i |the future, thus indicating that the findings for the i ;combined Project A and MC tutors were largely a product of i the Project A tutor scores alone; and (8) the Project MC "matched post-test" tutor sample was the only group which indicated an increase in the feeling that teachers* 273 requests did not make sense. Summary of Findings Relating to the Specific 1 Hypotheses Listed in Chapter I I Incorporated into the body of Chapter IV were statements relating to the specific hypotheses of this jdissertation. In order to facilitate any future reference I to these findings, the specific hypotheses and the data |relating to them were restated and summarized. Hypothesis 1. "Rather than finding one general factor, the TT Scale indicated that alienation was a multi factor construct/* The factors of the standardization population corresponded to those of the experimental popu lation. The factors found in the experimental population were isolation, meaninglessness (divided into present and future), family-society, negativism, and powerlessness- satisfaction. Hypothesis 2. "Alienation scores indicated a distribution over a wide range from zero to 100 per cent alienated." It was also implied that the distribution |would not be seriously skewed. Durkheim had implied that alienation was an all or nothing response; that is, it was either totally present or totally absent and did not lend itself to degrees of presence or absence. The findings showed that alienation scores formed a distribution ranging from 3 per cent to 68 per cent. The distribution was 274 neither seriously skewed nor peaked. Further, each factor of alienation was distributed over a range of scores. Hypothesis 3. "Both tutors and tutees understood the cultural and social structure.*1 Since the alienation scores of the tutors and the tutees were not significantly different, it appeared that both groups understood similar i 1 cultural goals and acceptable means for arriving at these goals. It was not possible to determine if the alienation scores of the tutors and tutees differed significantly from those of the conventional society since no randomly selected control groups were available. However, the fact that the standardization population did not differ signifi cantly from the experimental population seemed to indicate i ■ that there were no significant differences between the experimental population and the conventional society. Therefore, it was tentatively held that both the tutors and the tutees understood the cultural and social structure of the conventional society. 4. "Certain items on the scale differentiated tutors from tutees." The findings verified this hypothe sis. However, since the tutors and tutees differed on the confounding variables of socioeconomic status, educational I level, sex, and age, it was not possible to determine the exact reason for the differences between the tutors and tutees. Hypothesis 5. "Tutoring time was related to 275 alienation." Preliminary findings indicated that there was a slight positive correlation between tutoring time and alienation. The "t" tests also indicated that the sample with the lowest alienation score was the sample which had had only zero or one hour of tutoring. The sample with the highest alienation score was the sample which had between seven and ten hours of tutoring. There was some doubt as to the reason for this increase in alienation. One explana- !tion was that while the alienation with regard to the t present increased, the alienation with regard to the future decreased. Hypothesis 6. "Socioeconomic status, education level, sex, and age were related to alienation." There was ino consistent pattern of relationship between socioeconomic i status and alienation. The predicted relationship was that the lower-class subjects would be most alienated. No rela tionship existed between socioeconomic status and aliena tion in the experimental population. Educational level was related to alienation in that the elementary school subjects indicated the greatest amount of alienation while the i j freshmen and sophomores in college indicated the least f |amount of alienation. There was some doubt as to whether or not the elementary school children understood all of the questions, since they indicated the greatest amount of alienation on those items which were conceptually the most i difficult and some of their answers were contradictory. 276 Sex was related to alienation in that females were slightly less alienated than were males. This was less true of the |standardization population than it was of the experimental j population. Age showed the same relationship to alienation and had the same confounding factors as did the education level-alienation relationship. No clear-cut statements i were made regarding the influence of the confounding vari ables and alienation. There were definitely items and i trends which segregated by class, education level, sex, and age, but the patterns were not clear. However, there were distinct differences between projects. Those projects which were run under the auspices of the Los Angeles City Schools attracted students who had lower alienation scores, were of a higher social class, and were better prepared academically than the tutees of the "non-school” projects. This was more true of Project LA which had greater control !by the teachers and principals of the school, while in the i i project which was run totally by the tutors, there was not as great a differential. Hypothesis 7. ”An interest in the society or a desire to change the status quo was related to alienation.” Though there was no direct evidence of this, there were indications that as tutoring time increased, there was also an increase in dissatisfaction with the subject's present life or the state of the society as it existed. However, i at the same time, there was an equal increase in faith that 277 the future could be made better. This pattern was not com pletely consistent in all projects, but the indication was that an interest in the status quo (albeit a negative one), and a desire to change the status quo were factors in alienation. Hypothesis 8. f,Some alienation was needed for the / 'subject or the society to progress., f This hypothesis could not be proved or disproved from the data of the present |study. Since there seemed to be a relationship between dissatisfaction with the present and faith in the future, however, the indication was that the hypothesis was correct. Hypothesis 9. f,The sense of meaninglessness was related to alienation.M Since there were two types of meaninglessness (present and future), the relationship of meaninglessness to alienation was complicated. For example, the subject could manifest present meaninglessness but j future meaning, present meaning, and future meaninglessness I or a sense of meaninglessness with regard to both the i present and the future. Therefore, it was not possible simply to state that meaninglessness was related to aliena- ,tion but rather that certain types and combinations of meaninglessness were related to alienation. Hypothesis 10. nThe feeling of being treated fairly was related to alienation., f There was no consistent relationship indicated by the data. However, the question of being treated fairly was incorporated into the school 278 items which consistently showed no relationship to aliena tion. If the questions regarding being fairly treated had been separated from the school items the results might have been different. Hypothesis 11. "The sense of powerlessness was related to alienation." Powerlessness did appear as a factor of alienation. It was not a particularly strong factor nor did it appear consistently in all samples. i 1 However, there was some relationship between the sense of ! power and alienation. Hypothesis 12. "Religious beliefs were related to alienation." Though the religious attitude appeared as a separate factor only in the standardization population, there was a consistent relationship between items dealing with religious beliefs and alienation. It was unfortunate that some of the items dealing with religion were removed by the Los Angeles School District (only for Projects LA and MC tutees). Hypothesis 13. "Isolation, or the inability to relate to others or the society, was related to aliena tion." Isolation appeared as a factor of alienation and showed a constant relationship to alienation in both the experimental and standardization populations. Hypothesis 14. "The attitude toward work was related to alienation." Marx and Fromm in particular predicated this relationship. It was by no means consistent 279 though in general there was a relationship between aliena tion and the subjectfs attitude toward future employment. Hypothesis 15. nThe attitude toward authority was related to alienation/1 There was a consistent pattern of interaction between increased alienation and a negative ,attitude toward authority. The relationship held whether 'the authority figure was the society, politicians, or jschool principals. However, this negative attitude toward i I authority often seemed to be accompanied by a positive attitude toward the future. This hypothesis was confounded by the absence of the most alienated subjects who normally did not enroll in the tutorial projects. This was more true of the ”in-school” projects than it was of the ’’non- school” projects. Hypothesis 16. MThe attitude toward the family was related to alienation.” There was a consistent relation ship between the attitude toward the family, particularly | those items which dealt with children, and faith in the future. Those subjects who indicated conflicting relation ships with their parents were more alienated in terms of future orientation than were those who manifested more congenial family relationships. Hypothesis 17. ”The attitude toward the school was related to alienation.” The subjectfs attitude toward the school showed very little relationship to alienation, with ' the exception of the item dealing with the subject’s 280 teachers asking him to do things which didn't make sense. Whether the lack of any significant relationship between ;attitude toward the school and alienation would have I f appeared with a non-volunteer population could not be determined by the data of this study. Hypothesis 18. "The desire for immediate satisfac tion was related to alienation." There seemed to be no relationship between this factor and alienation. The item i which tested this hypothesis (item 34) was answered in the non-alienated direction by most of the experimental and standardization subjects. Hypothesis 19. "Future orientation was related to ( alienation." As had been stated previously, future orien tation was often related to a lack of satisfaction with the present. However, those who showed satisfaction with the present also generally showed satisfaction with the future, and those who showed dissatisfaction with the future gener ally showed dissatisfaction with the present. Hypothesis 20. "Fatalism was related to aliena tion." A subject who indicated that he could not handle I the problems of the present or the future often felt that jlife was governed by luck. The most alienated subjects i ]indicated the greatest belief in fatalism. 281 Parameters of Alienation i ■ I | At the conclusion of Chapter I the parameters of i I alienation as deduced from the theoretical formulation were (presented. At that time it was indicated that these parameters would be changed as the data for the experimen tal population were presented. In the experimental popula- j tion there was a definite relationship between alienation and: belief that the "ruling classes” had no interest in i the people; a lack of future orientation; conflict between goals and means available; respect for authority; and reality orientation. As opposed to the parameters estab- |lished in Chapter I, there was little relationship between alienation and the subject!s attitude toward work, immedi ate gratification of desires, or knowledge of alternative means open to him in the experimental population. After gathering the data, then, the parameters of the alienated person appeared to be the following: (1) the subject who felt that the ,1ruling class” of society had no interest in him; (2) the subject who felt that there was little hope of future success; (3) the subject who believed that fate governed his life; (4) the subject who manifested an jincreased reality orientation also manifested increased i dissatisfaction with the present (but also often manifested decreased dissatisfaction with the future); (3) the subject who felt a conflict between his goals and his ability or opportunity__t o_ meet these goals; (6) the subject who felt a 282 general sense of isolation from his fellow men, his family, his society, and himself; (7) the subject who manifested a [generally negative attitude toward the school, the society, i |and state of his fellow men; and (9) (to a much lesser extent) the subject who manifested a feeling of powerless ness . i j Summary of the Chapter ! 1 1. The reliability of the TT Scale was suffi- i ciently high to warrant its use as the dependent variable. This held true for all samples of the experimental popula- i tion. 2. All of the items on the TT Scale indicated significant Point Biserial r coefficients; thus, all of the items contributed a statistically significant amount to the over-all reliability of the scale. However, nineteen items indicated the greatest Point Biserial r s, and five items jindicated less desirable characteristics of reliability. 3. The over-all reliability of the TT Scale was slightly less than that of the fifty-seven-item scale used with the standardization population. This was to be expected since there were less items on the TT Scale. I 4. When the first thirty-five items on the stand ardization scale were compared to the corresponding thirty- five -item TT Scale as used with the experimental popula- i i tion, no significant difference was found between the two 283 with regard to reliability. 5. The distribution of neither the standardization I nor the experimental population was sufficiently abnormal to seriously influence the findings of the study, j 6. Five factors were found and labeled (isolation, i t meaninglessness, family-society, negativism, powerlessness- 'satisfaction). All five factors corresponded to a factor ! ;found in the standardization population. The religion i !factor found in the standardization population, however, did not appear in the experimental population. 7. With regard to the discrimination ability of the items, all but one of the items discriminated, seven teen items selected extreme responses, and seventeen items did not select extreme responses. The TT Scale more ade quately met the discrimination requirement than did the first thirty-five items of the fifty-seven-item scale as used with the standardization population. The TT Scale ;equaled the standardization scale in meeting the MTop- Bottom** requirement. 8. The intercorrelation of groups of items indi- i ^cated that all groups were measuring alienation. The i School items had the lowest intercorrelation with the full TT Scale, while the Rewrite items had low intercorrelations with both the School and New items. This was expected since the New items were designed to measure factors not i included in the Rewrite items. The various samples drawn 284 from the population did not indicate significant differ ences on the intercorrelations of groups of items. The i jbasic difference between the standardization population and !the experimental population was that the correlation between } jthe School items and the TT Scale was higher in the experi mental population. 9. Tutoring time showed no significant correlation with alienation score. The MtM tests, however, indicated i |that the group with the least amount of tutoring had a significantly lower alienation score. The subjects with seven to ten hours of tutoring had the highest alienation scores. The items which segregated groups by time also indicated that subjects with the least amount of tutoring were least alienated with regard to national elections, teachers, the future, their fellow men, the school as an institution, and attitude toward religion. However, the seven-to-ten-hour group indicated the least amount of alienation in attitude toward work. Subjects from those i projects which were held in school buildings indicated less alienation toward the school as tutoring time increased. !The opposite was true of subjects from projects held in community centers or Youth Opportunities Board buildings. I 10. On the socioeconomic status variable, lower- class subjects indicated greater alienation with regard to fatalism, work, family, and religion. Middle-class sub jects indicated greater dissatisfaction with their present 285 status, their society, the relationship of children to parents, and attitude toward religion. No items segregated the upper-class subjects. However, on items which indicated i a trend the upper-class subjects indicated the greatest alienation with regard to religion and isolation while they indicated the least sense of meaninglessness. Tests of i I jsignificance indicated that there were no significant |differences in the means of the various socioeconomic i 1 classes. 11. While tutees indicated the predicted negative correlations between education level and alienation, tutors indicated positive correlations. Elementary school chil dren indicated greater alienation with regard to meaning lessness, fate, family relationships, and their evaluation of the school. These same subjects, however, felt that politicians were interested in the people, and they also liked school. When junior and senior high school subjects were dealt with jointly, they indicated greater alienation with regard to their own lives. Further, they signifi cantly more often did not wish to have children. Senior high school subjects indicated that they were less satis fied with their present lives and were less future !oriented. College freshmen and sophomores were signifi cantly less alienated than the other groups, particularly in the areas of family relationships, future orientation, i present life, politicians, and teachers. College juniors 286 or above indicated less satisfaction with the United States and less interest in religion. 12. There was a statistically significant differ ence between the alienation scores of the sexes. The females were less alienated than the males. This was more true of the standardization population than it was of the experimental population. 13. The correlation findings relating to the age factor were very similar to those relating to the education level factor. Subjects under eleven years of age seemed to have some difficulty interpreting the conceptually more difficult items. They did indicate the greatest amount of alienation with regard to meaninglessness, negativism, and the belief that life was governed by luck. The subjects between twelve and fourteen were least satisfied with the behavior of their teachers or principals. They were also not convinced about their ability to handle problems, and they did not trust politicians. The subjects who were between fifteen and twenty years of age manifested the least amount of alienation with regard to teachers, ability to handle problems, family relationships, politicians, and consumer items. The subjects who were over twenty, on the other hand, indicated more alienation with regard to religious beliefs, future orientation, orientation toward work, and attitude toward the United States. The means of the groups indicated that the subjects under eleven years 287 of age and those between fifteen and twenty years of age were the least alienated with regard to the school; the ,twelve-to-fourteen age group was most estranged from the school, and the fifteen-to-twenty-year olds were signifi cantly less alienated on the TT Scale. 14. The "post-test" indicated that when tutors and !tutees were dealt with jointly or when Projects A and MC were dealt with jointly, there was little indication that i |confounding design factors were in operation. However, i when the samples were separated, differences did occur, particularly in School items. There seemed to be some differences between the tutee '’drop-out1* samples and the "matched post-test" samples for tutees. However, while the Project A "drop-out" sample indicated greater alienation, the Project MC "drop-out** sample indicated less alienation. However, the scores of the tutors, particularly those of Project MC, indicated confounding design factors. There fore, any interpretation was difficult without change of i serious error. The Project A samples did not indicate confounding design errors, except in the school items, and |could therefore be interpreted with greater facility. Here !the indication was that the subjects who withdrew from the i project were more alienated than those who remained. 15. The specific hypotheses of this paper were restated and the findings with regard to their validity were presented. 288 16. The parameters of alienation were restated and expanded based upon the findings of the empirical data. I i i i { i CHAPTER V i I IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH I > I I i Introduction i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i j Much educational research has been confounded by [the lack of diligence in maintaining a distinction between findings and evaluations. Because of this lack of distinc tion, it is often difficult to interpret educational research since it is not easy to disentangle the findings ^of the study and the opinions of the author. In this dissertation the body of the data (Chapters III and IV) was limited to findings, except where conclusions were specifically labeled as such. The opinions of the i Researcher were held in abeyance until Chapter V. In this chapter the primary interest was not so much upon the actual findings of the study but rather upon the implications for future action by the schools, specific recommendations for tutorial projects, and suggestions for further research. 289 290 Implications for Action in Education ' | From the data presented in Chapter IV, five sugges- i itions for action by the school could be listed: 1. The school should make a greater effort to impress the lower-class child with the value of education jand the school*s desire to aid the child. 2. The school should increase the reality orienta- jtion of the children of all social classes. i ! 3. The school should attempt to increase the future orientation of the children. 4. The whole system of presenting academic mate rial and evaluating children's work should be re-studied. I 5. The schools should be more open to research. Some of the basic problems in the field of alienation could not be investigated in this dissertation, since it was not possible to gain access to the information needed. For example, as stated in the delimitations, there was no way !to determine the relationship of the tutees* alienation scores to the population of all students, since the researcher was not allowed to take a random sample from the i schools. The researcher was also not allowed to talk to the teachers of the tutees, review the cumulative folders, | and so on, even though he guaranteed anonymity. Aside from these restrictions upon the design of the study, the school also limited the use of the questionnaire by removing any item„which_it_deemed dealt_with sex, politics, or religion. 291 The interpretation of questions considered to be included under one of these three rubrics was somewhat farfetched. For example, of the ten questions removed by the Los Angeles City School District, item 5 (”Do you think that children are a problem to their parents?”) and item 16 (, f Do you think that most married people lead unhappy lives ?”) were removed supposedly because they dealt with sex. All of the religion items were removed (including i item 13, MIs there a special reason for our being here on earth?M). ”Do you like living in the United States?” was evidently considered a political item, as was, ”Most poli- i 1ticians are interested only in what is best for them- | |selves?M though its counterpart, "Are most politicians interested in what is best for the people?” was not removed, The researcher could find no reason for the removal of item 31 ("These days you can't trust anybody”) . That the schools had to maintain a public image and public relations .attitude was fully appreciated. However, since the schools also were interested in any results which might have come from this study, certain changes should have been made in the public relations area in order to gain the greatest benefits from the research findings. There seemed to be a ;fear that the school would be attacked by some of the pressure groups in the area. This was a legitimate con cern on the part of the schools, but it made research far i .more difficult and far less valid. It was the opinion of 292 this researcher that the central administrative offices of the Los Angeles City Schools over-reacted to the possible pressures and that they could have been far more lenient in iterms of what they allowed and what they did not allow. In any case, if education is to improve significantly, then there is a need to increase the amount and quality of the iresearch performed in the field. The first suggestion for action in education, then, is that the schools be far more I open to legitimate research in the social science areas. i 1. As was pointed out in Chapter IV with regard particularly to the "in-school" projects, as there was an !increase in the direct control of the tutorial project by teachers and administrators of the school, there was a decrease in the enrollment of the lower-class remedial students whose needs were greatest. Further, there were definite indications that in the "non-school" projects a Imore alienated subject was being reached, and that changes were wrought in this subject which had not occurred during the six to twelve years that he had been enrolled in school. The implication was that the schools were not |reaching the disadvantaged child. Riessman (34) discussed !this problem by indicating the school's lack of recognition of the Mslow-gifted** and the divergent-creative learners. Both were lower-class representatives who manifested their i academic abilities in ways often not recognized by the school. Goodman (14) and Henry (17) stated that any________ 293 divergence was negatively sanctioned by the school. Cohen (6) pointed out that one of the major causes of juvenile delinquency was the school's inability to recognize the validity of the lower-class child's cultural patterns. Thus, the normal behavior of the lower-class child was dysfunctional with regard to his interaction in the school. i jThe school, then, was decreasing its positive influence over this child. Since it appeared that the tutorial situ- i 'ation was able to change the student's behavior and atti tude, the school should investigate the methods, materials, and types of tutors participating in the projects and re-evaluate the educational system in light of these find- i i |ings. I 2. Some of the specific changes brought about by the tutorial situation should be of particular interest to educators. Both the tutees and the tutors gained a new awareness of the life pattern of the other. For example, i !changes appeared in some of the upper-class tutors (partic ularly those of Project A who had never seen any form of poverty first hand). It was also of interest to witness the change in the attitude of many of the tutees with regard to their own life patterns. They seemed to become aware that life as they knew it, which was often extremely depressing, was not the only possible life pattern open to ! them. The implication for the school is that few if any of the students during their six to twelve years of elementary 294 and secondary schooling had come into contact with ideas and concepts which were totally unfamiliar to them; that is, (there had been little if any increased awareness of life as i others led it. Part of the problem is that in order to |increase the awareness of the student it is often necessary to discuss controversial issues; e.g., the students of all ;classes might have to discuss the implications of, and ^reasons for, poverty, racial bigotry in housing and employ- i jment, and so on. This again would put the school in the position of bearing the brunt of possible conflict with pressure groups. The teacher in particular is vulnerable to attack. Because of the pressures and the specific rules against the discussion of controversial issues in many districts, there is a debilitation of the exchange of ideas and therefore of increased reality orientation. The tutor was not hampered by many of the rules and regulations which governed teachers, and therefore could discuss any and ievery topic with the tutee, thereby increasing the reality orientation of the tutee as well as his own through the interchange of ideas. The specific suggestion for the j schools is that every effort be made to break down some of ; the barriers to this free interchange of ideas between ! i teacher and student, student and student, teacher and i i teacher, and so on. 3. One of the most significant changes which occurred in many of the tutees was that the future 295 orientation increased with an increase in tutoring time. Possibly the closeness of the one-to-one relationship of the tutorial situation enabled the tutee to identify with a representative of a better future. Perhaps the school should therefore make provisions for greater student- teacher contact. Whatever the reason, the school was not I 'as adept at increasing the future orientation of the stu dent as was the tutorial project. This brought us to the i fourth implication for education. 4. There was every reason to believe that one of the major educational problems of the lower-class subjects of this study was that they did not wish to learn; that is, many tutees saw no relationship between learning and their own lives. This seems to imply that before it is possible to introduce academic material it is necessary to reach the student as a person and indoctrinate him into the values and virtues of education. This was possible in those itutorial situations where there was less emphasis upon specific subject matter. Where subject matter was the primary concern, there was little difference between the !tutorial situation and the school situation except that the l iclasses were smaller. (It was interesting to note that the I I I most academically oriented projects had a ratio of one tutor to approximately five to ten tutees in each session, rather than the one-to-one situation of the other projects.) The implication for education is that academics, grades, 296 assignments, and so on, are of little use if the student sees no relationship between school work and his life. Specifically, it is possible that the school will have to i ,re-evaluate and reorganize its method of teaching, e.g., !there should be more and better trained counselors who are I interested in and responsible for a group of students, not iin terms of programming them into classes, but in terms of relating to them as human beings; teachers will have to fine I other methods than the threat of low grades for increasing i student output; it is possible that grades will have to be eliminated altogether as not serving any function with the lower-class child. Possible Areas for Future Research An area which has been almost totally neglected by researchers is the effect of research itself upon the school and the community. There have been some studies on the relationship of the school to the community but very little with respect to the effect of pressure groups upon the educational philosophy and practices of a district. Since the school is an institution within the community and 1 since it is one of the major propagators of the conven tional norms of the society, it seems that a fruitful area for research is the whole area of the school*s relationship to the community. However, since in general it is diffi cult to entice the schools into research projects, perhaps 297 the first research project should be to determine the specific fears of the school and whether or not the commu- Inity feelings justify these fears. This would aid future researchers in knowing those areas which were "safe1 1 and i those which were not. It would also aid the school in that it would be possible to attempt a re-education of the popu- ilace in terms of the need for research in the areas which are "not safe.1 1 The first specific suggestion for future 1 research, then, is to study the school's attitude toward ! research, the community's attitude toward research, and how one or the other could be changed. Another area of research is the relationship of alienation to academic performance. Since it was not pos sible to select a random sample of students for this study, nor to look at the cumulative folders, nor talk to the teachers of those students who were tested, it was not |possible to determine if there was a change in the academic rating or behavior pattern of the student as the alienation score changed. No research was found which related to this topic. If a relationship did exist between academic per formance and alienation, this would be of great benefit to educators in counseling educationally retarded children. The whole area of the individual's conceived role i and his academic performance has been largely neglected by educators. One of the reasons for this neglect is that the social-psychological constructs are difficult to define 298 operationally. This, however, should not negate the neces sity nor the value of the study but should only indicate caution to the researcher. As a corollary to the study of the relationship of alienation to academic performance, the role concept of the 'most alienated children in the school is also of interest. i !Is alienation a factor in the over-all behavior of ’’bad” i students? Do these children serve a particular function in |the life of the institution, as examples to other children, i and so on? Basically, so little work has been done in the area of alienation that any question becomes significant. Another area of interest was the phenomenon that dissatisfaction with the present was correlated with posi tive future orientation. It appeared that in order to look forward to a better future the subject had to reject parts of the present. This area has been discussed previously but has not been researched empirically. i Another area for possible future research is the relationship of the teacher*s (tutor’s) alienation to the student*s (tutee*s) alienation, and the relationship of the |interaction of the two to the student’s (tutee*s) academic |performance. There are great implications for teacher i I evaluation if it could be shown that teachers or tutors of I a particular temperament are effective in one situation and not effective in another, based not upon any inherent effectiveness but rather upon the interactional situation 299 itself. The findings of this dissertation seemed to indi cate that there was little relationship between the confounding variables of socioeconomic status, educational level, sex and age and the dependent variable of aliena tion. If this finding were accurate, then it disagreed jwith the findings of many of the authorities in the field. One study is not sufficient to determine the viability of i 1 the hypotheses relating to the confounding variables. Therefore, it is recommended that further research be done on the relationship of the confounding variables to alienation. The last major suggestion for further research relates to the further validation and standardization of the TT Scale of alienation. Previous to its development there had been no other scale of alienation available which had been used and standardized on children. The TT Scale i iwas designed to fill this need. Specific Recommendations for the Tutorial Projects Aside from those recommendations which were made with regard to possible future actions by the school, there were also certain recommendations with regard to the tutorial projects specifically. It was assumed that the projects would continue and it was hoped that these 300 suggestions might be of some assistance to them. First, as had been pointed out, the projects were not uniformly drawing lower-class tutees. This situation 'should be rectified through a concerted effort to interest the enrollment of these students in the tutorial projects. As the first step in this direction, the second recoraraenda- i jtion is that the projects not be held in the school. If i |the directors of the projects feel that it is imperative i 1 that they hold the projects in the school, then every I effort should be made to exclude the influence and physical presence of teachers and administrators. The third recommendation is that the major emphasis in the tutorial situation be on the tutee as a person rather than upon the academic subject which is to be taught. Summary of the Chapter In this chapter certain suggestions were made with regard to possible future actions of the school. It was suggested that the school re-evaluate its attitude toward: research, the lower-class child's value patterns, the reality orientation of the child, the future orientation of the child, the method of presentation of academic material, and the evaluation of the child's work. Possible areas of future research were: research and the school; alienation and the student; the teacher, and the interaction of the alienation score of the student 301 and teacher; the role of the most alienated child; the relationship of present dissatisfaction to future orienta tion; the relationship of the confounding variables to alienation; and the continuation of research relating to the TT Scale. Finally, certain recommendations were made with i regard to the tutorial projects, namely, increase the enrollment of lower-class subjects, remove the project from i the school, and emphasize the human relationship of the tutorial situation rather than the purely academic one. I b i b l i o g r a p h y i I I BIBLIOGRAPHY Books 1. Arkin, Herbert, and Raymond R. Colton. Tables for Statisticians. 2d ed. New York: Barnes and i Noble, Inc., 1950. 2. Brookover, Wilbur B. A Sociology of Education, i New York: American Book Co., 1955. i 3. , and David Gottlieb. A Sociology of Education. 2d ed. New York: American Book Co., 1964. 4. Campbell, Donald T., and Julian C. Stanley. "Experi- mental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research on Teaching.*1 In Handbook of Research on Teaching. Edited by N. L. Gage. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1963. 5. Cloward, Richard, and Lloyd E. Ohlin. Delinquency and Opportunity. Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1961. 6. Cohen, Albert. Delinquent Boys. Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1955. 7. Durkheim, Emile. The Division of Labor in Society. Trans, by George Simpson. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1933. 8. Frankl, Victor. From Death Camp to Existentialism. Trans, by Use Lasch. Boston: The Beacon Press, 1959. 9. Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique. New York: W. W. Norton and Co., Inc., 1963. 10. Friedenberg, Edgar. The Vanishing Adolescent. Boston: The Beacon Press, 19-59^ ^ 11. Fromm, Erich. *1The Present Human Condition.1 1 In Varieties of Modern Social Theory. Edited and 303 304 with an Introduction by Hendrik M. Ruitenbeek. New York: E, P. Dutton and Co., Inc., 1963. 12. Fromm, Erich. The Sane Society. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1955. 13. Garrett, Henry E. Statistics in Psychology and Education. 5th ed. New York: David McKay Co., Inc., 1958. | 14. Goodman, Paul. Growing Up Absurd. New York: Random i House, 1956. | i15. Guilford, J. P. Fundamental Statistics in Psychology < and Education" New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., ! Inc., 1956. i 16. _______ . Psychometric Methods. New York; Toronto and London: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1954. 17. Henry, Jules. Culture Against Man. New York: Random House, 1963. 18. Horney, Karen. Our Inner Conflicts. New York: W. W. Norton and Co., 1945. 19. Kardiner, Abram, and Lionel Ovesey. The Mark of Oppression. Cleveland and New York: The World Publishing Co., 1962. 20. Kelly, T. L. Interpretation of Educational Measure- ments. Yonkers, N.Y.: World Publishers, 1927. 21. Lynd, Helen Merrell. On Shame and the Search for i Identity. New York: Harcourt, Brace\and World, ! Inc., 1958. i 22. Lynd, Robert S., and Helen Merrell Lynd. Middletown. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1929. 23. Marx, Karl. Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. Trans, by Martin Milligan II. London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1959. 24. , and Friedrich Engels. The German Ideology. New York: International Publishers, 1947. 25. Matza, David. Delinquency and Drift. New York, London and Sydney: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1964. ms 26. May, Rollo. The Meaning of Anxiety. New York: The Ronald Press Co., 1950. 27. Merton, Robert K. Social Theory and Social Structure. Revised and enlarged edition. Glencoe, ill.: The Free Press, 1949. 28. Mills, C. Wright. The Sociological Imagination. New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1961. 29. Pareto, Vilfredo. The Mind and Society. Trans, by A. Bongiorno and A. Livingston; edited by Arthur Livingston. Four volumes. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1935. 30. Parsons, Talcott. The Social System. Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1951. 31. Reckless, Walter C. The Crime Problem. 3rd ed. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1961. 32. Redl, Fritz, and David Wineman. Children Who Hate. New York: Collier Books, 1962. 33. Riesman, David, Nathan Glazer, and Reuel Denny. The Lonely Crowd. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday Anchor Books, Doubleday and Co., Inc., 1950. 34. Riessman, Frank. The Culturally Deprived Child. Preface by Goodwin Watson. New York, Evanston and London: Harper and Row, 1962. 35. Tillich, Paul. Systematic Theology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957. 36. Weber, Max. Essays in Sociology. Trans., edited and with an introduction by H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills. New York: Oxford University Press, 1946. Articles and Periodicals 37. Cloward, Richard A. ’illegitimate Means, Anomie, and Deviant Behavior,” American Sociological Review. XXIV (April 1959), 164-176. 38. Dean, D. G. ’’ Alienation: Its Meaning and Measure ment,” American Sociological Review. XXVI (October 1961), 754-757. 306 39. Durkheim, Emile. ”Selected Readings on Anomie.1 1 Trans, by William C. Bradbury, Jr.; Introduction by Sebastian de Grazia. University Observer. I (Winter 1947), 51-60. 40. Erikson, Erik Homburger. ”The Problem of Ego Iden tity,” Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association. IV (1956). 58-121. 41. Merton, Robert K. ”Social Structure and Anomie,” American Sociological Review. Ill (October 1938), 672-682. i (42. Nettler, Gwynn. ”A Measure of Alienation,” American ' Sociological Review. XXII (December 1957), (670- i 677. i ^43. Seeman, Melvin. ”0n the Meaning of Alienation,” American Sociological Review. XXIV (December 1959), 783-791. 44. Shils, Edward A. ”Daydreams and Nightmares: Reflec tions on the Criticism of Mass Culture,” Sewanee Review. LXV (Autumn 1957), 587-608. 45. Srole, Leo. ”Anomie Authoritarianism and Prejudice,1 1 American Journal of Sociology. LXII (July 1956), 63-67. 46. . ”Social Integration and Certain Corollaries: An Exploratory Study,” American Sociological Review. XXI (December 1956), 709-716. 147. Sutherland, Edwin H. ”Is 1 White Collar Crime* Crime?1 1 American Sociological Review. X (1945), 132-139. APPENDIX SCALES USED WITH THE STANDARDIZATION AND EXPERIMENTAL POPULATION THIRTY-FIVE-ITEM TT SCALE AS USED WITH THE TUTEE SAMPLES (Projects A, ELA, W, and WE) (Answer ’’ yes” or Mno” in the space provided) 1. Do you enjoy television? 2. Do you like the new American cars? 3. Do you like school? 4. Were you interested in the elections for president? 5. Do you think that children are a problem to their parents? 6. Do you like to go to church activities? 7. Do your teachers ask you to do things that don’t make sense to you? .8. Do you want to have children some day? 9. Most politicians are interested only in what is best for themselves. .10. Do you like to watch football or baseball? 11. Do you think that you can handle any problem that comes along? 12. Do you learn things in school that help you out side of school? 13. Is there a special reason for our being here on earth? 14. Do you wish your life were different from what it is? 15. Will working hard lead to a better life for you? 308 309 16. Do you think that most married people lead unhappy lives? 17. Does life depend mostly on luck? 18. Do you like living in the United States? 19. Would you like to live in another country just as much? 20. Do you think that you will get anywhere in life? 21. Are most politicians interested in what is best for the people? 22. Is your school one of the best in the city? 23. Do you think that life as most men live it is useless? 24. Is human life a product of God’s will? 25. Do you think life is just one problem after another? 26. Are your teachers fair to you in school? 27. Will you have a better job than your parents? 28. A person has to live pretty much for today and let tomorrow take care of itself. 29. The average man is worse off today than he used to be. 30. Is the world in bad shape? 31. These days you can’t trust anybody. 32. Are your principals fair to you in school? 33. Do you wish you could live without working? 34. If someone gave you some money, would you spend it right away? 35. Do you think that the things you buy are built so that they will break? CATEGORIES School now attending Sex Birthday ___________________ _ _ _ month day year TWENTY-FIVE-ITEM TT SCALE AS USED WITH THE TUTEE SAMPLES (Projects LA and MC) (Answer MyesM or Mno” in the space provided) 1. Do you enjoy television? 2. Do you like the new American cars? 3. Do you like school? 4. Were you interested in the elections for president? 7, Do your teachers ask you to do things that don*t make sense to you? _10. Do you like to watch football or baseball? 11. Do you think that you can handle any problem that comes along? JL2. Do you learn things in school that help you out side of school? 14. Do you wish your life were different from what it is? 15. Will working hard lead to a better life for you? 17. Does life depend mostly on luck? 20. Do you think that you will get anywhere in life? 21. Are most politicians interested in what is best for the people? .22. Is your school one of the best in the city? 23. Do you think that life as most men live it is useless? .25. Do you think life is just one problem after another? 310 311 26. Are your teachers fair to you in school? 27. Will you have a better job than your parents? 28. A person has to live pretty much for today and let tomorrow take care of itself. 29. The average man is worse off today than he used to be. 30. Is the world in bad shape? 32. Are your principals fair to you in school? 33. Do you wish you could live without working? 34. If someone gave you some money, would you spend it right away? 35. Do you think that the things you buy are built so that they will break? | CATEGORIES i I School now attending Sex Birthday__________________ j month day year THIRTY-FIVE-ITEM TT SCALE AS USED WITH THE TUTOR SAMPLES j (Answer "yes1 1 or Mno, f in the space provided) 1. Do you enjoy television? .2. Do you like the new American cars? 3. Did you like school (not college; just high school, etc.)? 4. Were you interested in the elections for president ? 5. Do you think that children are a problem to their parents? 6. Do you like to go to church activities? 7. Did your school teachers ask you to do things that didn*t make sense to you (not college teach ers; just high school, etc.)? ,8. Do you want to have children some day? 9. Most politicians are interested only in what is best for themselves? 10. Do you like to watch football or baseball? 11. Do you think that you can handle any problem that comes along? 12. Did you learn things in school that helped you outside of school (not college; just high school, etc.)? 13. Is there a special reason for our being here on earth? 14. Do you wish your life were different from what it is? 15. Will working hard lead to a better life for you? 312 313 16. Do you think that most married people lead unhappy lives? ,17. Does life depend mostly on luck? 18. Do you like living in the United States? ,19. Would you like to live in another country just as much? 20. Do you think that you will get anywhere in life? 21. Are most politicians interested in what is best for the people? ,22. Was your school one of the best in the city (not college)? ,23. Do you think that life as most men live it is useless? ,24. Is human life a product of God*s will? ,25. Do you think life is just one problem after another? 26. Were your teachers fair to you in school (not college)? ,27. Will you have a better job than your parents? 28. A person has to live pretty much for today and let tomorrow take care of itself. ,29. The average man is worse off today than he used to be. 30. Is the world in bad shape? 31. These days you can't trust anybody. 32. Were your principals fair to you in school (not college)? 33. Do you wish you could live without working? 34. * If someone gave you some money, would you spend it right away? 314 35. Do you think that the things you buy are built so that they will break? CATEGORIES School now attending Sex Birthday _________________ month day year FIFTY-SEVEN-ITEM SCALE USED WITH THE STANDARDIZATION POPULATION (Answer , f yes, f or , f no” in the space provided) 1. Do you enjoy television? 2. Do you like the new American cars? 3. Do you like school? 4. Were you interested in the elections for president ? 5. Do you think that children are a problem to their parents? 6. Do you like to go to church activities? 7. Do your teachers ask you to do things that don*t make sense to you? 8. Do you want to have children some day? 9. Most politicians are interested only in what is best for themselves? 10. Do you like to watch football or baseball? 11. Do you think that you can handle any problem that comes along? 12. Do you learn things in school that help you out side of school? 13. Is there a special reason for our being here on earth? 14. Do you wish your life were different from what it is? 15. Will working hard lead to a better life for you? 315 316 JL6. Do you think that most married people lead unhappy lives? 17. Does life depend mostly on luck? JL8. Do you like living in the United States? 19. Would you like to live in another country just as much? 2 0. Do you think that life as most men live it is useless? _21. Are most politicians interested in what is best for the people? _22. Is your school one of the best in the city? 23. Do you think that life as most men live it is useless? 24. Is human life a product of God's will? 25. Do you think life is just one problem after another? 26. Are your teachers fair to you in school? 27. Will you have a better job than your parents? 28. A person has to live pretty much for today and let tomorrow take care of itself. .29. The average man is worse off today than he used to be. 30. Is the world in bad shape? 31. These days you canft trust anybody. 32. Are your principals fair to you in school? 33. Do you wish you could live without working? 34. If someone gave you some money, would you spend it right away? 35. Do you think that the things you buy are built so that they will break? 317 36. There*s little use in writing to public officials because often they aren*t really interested in the problems of tne average man. 37. Nowadays a person has to live pretty much for today and let tomorrow take care of itself. 38. In spite of what some people say, the lot of the average man is getting worse, not better. ,39. It*s hardly fair to bring children into the world, the way things look for the future. 40. These days a person doesn*t really know whom he can count on. 41. Do you vote in national elections? _42. Do you enjoy television? _43. What do you think of the new model American cars? (good or bad) 44. Do you read the Reader*s Digest? _45. Were you interested in the recent national elec tions? _46. Do you think children are generally a nuisance to their parents? ,47. Do you want to have children? 48. Do you like to participate in church activities? 49. Do national spectator sports interest you? ,50. Do you think most married people lead trapped (frustrated) lives? 51. Do you think most politicians are sincerely interested in (a) the public*s welfare, or (b) more interested in themselves? (a or b) 52. Do you think religion is mostly myth or truth? (myth or truth) 53. **Life as most men lead it is meaningless.** (agree or disagree) 318 ,54. For yourself, assuming you could live it again, do you think single or married life is better? (single or married) ,55. Do you believe human life is an expression of (a) divine purpose, or (b) it is the result of chance or evolution? (a or b) ,56. "Most people live lives of quiet desperation." (agree or disagree) 57. Do you think you could just as easily live in another society--past or present? CATEGORIES Teacher's name_____________ Sex___ Birthday__________________ month day year INFORMATION SHEET (Tutees, Projects LA and MC) Date of Birth_________________________________ Sex____Age Month Day Year Mother's Job__________ Father's Job_______ Your Job______ ■How many hours have you been tutored? Tutor's Name____ INFORMATION SHEET (Standardization Population) Address____________________________ Phone____________ Number Street City Date of Birth_____________________ Sex__ Age_ MontE Day Year j Mother's Occupation______________ Father's Occupation____ Your Present or Proposed Occupation__________________ (Underline One) (State Occupation) School now attending____________ Grade level reached_____ Address INFORMATION SHEET (Tutor) _________ Phone Number Street City I Date of Birth Sex Age 1 Month Day I Year Mother's Occupation Father's Occupation iYour Present or Proposed Occupation j (Underline One) (State Occupation) | How many tutees do you have? i How many hours have you tutored? How many tutees do you have? How many hours have you tutored? School now attending Grade level reached College or University Maior Minor Tutees* Names Your Name INFORMATION SHEET (Tutees, Projects A, ELA, W, and WE) Address Phone Number Street City Date of Birth Sex Age Month Day Year Mother's Job Father's Job Your Job School now attending Grade level reached Total Hours of Tutoring____________ Tutor* s Name i 320

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A study of the effects of a race relations education program on attitudes of racial prejudice

PDF

An experimental study of the effect of reward and annoyance upon the immediate improvement in performance of hypophrenic subject

PDF

Selected attitude scales versus a behavioral measure in predicting effectiveness of a parental modeling program

PDF

An analytic study of the creative process as revealed by accounts of specific creative acts

PDF

An experimental study of the effect of two different verbal meditational methods upon concept attainment of disadvantaged kindergarten pupils

PDF

Family-of-origin intervention as a therapeutic resource in enhancing marital adjustment: An intergenerational approach

PDF

Videotape focused feedback techniques in marathon group therapy: Effects on self-actualization and psychopathology

PDF

An exploratory study of the relationship between selected environmental variables and a measure of creativity in children

PDF

The distribution of marital power in dual-career couples as measured by decision-making patterns

PDF

An experimental study of the longitudinal effects of a methadone treatment program on the personality structure of heroin addicts

PDF

An experimental study of the effect of electromyography (EMG) biofeedback on hyperactivity in children

PDF

The construct of integrative cognitive style and its measure as an indicator of advanced ego development

PDF

An experimental study of teacher reinforcement patterns as expressions of differential expectancies induced by bogus labels

PDF

An investigation of the effectiveness of behavioral competencies as educational needs assessment for compensatory education

PDF

A correlation study leading to the development of a scale useful in the prediction of potential juvenile fire setters

PDF

The foreign student as a resolver of conflict: an exploratory study of his emergent behavior

PDF

Frustration and prejudice development in a family health clinic: An ethnographic analysis of the effects of an influx of immigrant Armenians upon healthcare relationships

PDF

An investigation of the neuropsychological characteristics of learning disabled children as measured by the Luria-Nebraska (Children)

PDF

The good child as the unidentified patient in the family system: A study of childhood antecedents of adult alienation from self

PDF

An investigation of the effects of confrontation on procrastination

Asset Metadata

Creator Besag, Frank P (author)

Core Title A study of the effects of tutoring upon alienation as measured by an original scale

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, educational psychology,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c26-432616

Unique identifier UC11246884

Identifier usctheses-c26-432616 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier DP24067.pdf

Dmrecord 432616

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Besag, Frank P.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA