University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Effects Of Short-Term Group Counseling On Changes In Attitudes Of Flexibility, Tolerance, And Nonauthoritarianism

(USC Thesis Other)

Effects Of Short-Term Group Counseling On Changes In Attitudes Of Flexibility, Tolerance, And Nonauthoritarianism

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content EFFECTS OF SHORT-TERM GROUP COUNSELING ON
CHANGES IN ATTITUDES OF FLEXIBILITY,
TOLERANCE, AND NONAUTHORITARIANISM
by
Betty Ann Walker
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)
June 1971
72-3804
WALKER, Betty Ann, 1932-
EFFECTS OF LHORT-TERM GROUP COUNSELING ON
CHANGES IN ATTITUDES OF FLEXIBILITY,
TOLERANCE, AND NONAUTHORITARIANISM.
University of Southern California, Ph.D.,
1971
Education, guidance and counseling
/ University Microfilms, A X ER O X Com pany, Ann Arbor, Michigan
THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED
U'NfVERSTTY"'OF S O U T H E R N CACtFORNIA"
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 PA RK
L O S A N G E L E S , C A L IF O R N IA 9 0 0 0 7
This dissertation, w ritten by
.............BETTY. AM. WALKER.............
under the direction of hsx. Dissertation C om
mittee, and a p p ro ve d by all its m em bers, has
been presented to and accepted by T h e G radu
ate School, in partial fulfillm ent of require
ments of the degree of
D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y
if Dean
D a te....
DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
Chairman
PLEASE NOTE:
Some Pages have I n d i s t i n c t
p r i n t . Filmed as received.
UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES...................................... iv
Chapter
I. THE PROBLEM.................................. 1
Introduction
Statement of the Problem
Importance of the Problem
Scope of the Study
Definition of Terms Used
Organization of the Remainder of
the Dissertation
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE................... 13
Research Substantiating the Importance of
Personality and Attitudinal Variables
for Effective Counselor Functioning
Research Findings on Specific Personality
and Attitudinal Variables which Contribute
to Effective Counselor Functioning
Research on Changes in Personality and
Attitudinal Variables of Counselors
as a Result of Counselor Education Programs
Research on the Effectiveness of Group
Counseling in Accomplishing Attitudinal
Change
Research on the Effectiveness of Group
Counseling in Changing the Attitudes
of Counselors
Research on Instrumentation Utilized in
this Study
Summary
III. METHODS AND SOURCES OF DATA................. 56
Description of the Sample Groups
Sources of Data
Statistical Procedure
IV. FINDINGS: EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
Pretest Findings for USC Treatment Groups
Posttest Findings for USC Treatment
Groups
Pretest Findings for CSLA Treatment
Groups
Posttest Findings for CSLA Treatment
Groups
Pretest Findings for Combined Treatment
Groups
Posttest Findings for Combined Treatment
Groups
Summary
V. FINDINGS: CORRELATIONAL DESIGN..........
Findings for the Supervisor Variable
at CSLA
Findings for the Supervisor Variable
at USC
Peer Ratings at CSLA
Peer Ratings at USC
Supervisor Ratings at CSLA
Supervisor Ratings at USC
Relationship between Peer and Supervisor
Ratings at USC
Relationship of OPI Scales and the
Rokeach Dogmatism Scale
Summary
VI. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS.........................
Summary of Procedures
Summary of Findings
Conclus ions
Implications
Recommendations
APPENDICES ........................................
BIBLIOGRAPHY
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Analysis of Variance. Pretest Scores
for R-D and OPI Scales, Experimental
Versus Control at USC..................... 69
2. Analysis of Variance. Means and Standard
Deviations - U SC......................... 70
3. Analysis of Variance. Pretest Scores for
R-D and OPI Scales, Experimental
Versus Control at CSLA................... 73
4. Means and Standard Deviations. Response
Bias on OPI - CSLA....................... 74
5. Intercorrelation Matrix for CSLA........... 80
6. Intercorrelation Matrix for USC............. 81
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The counselor's professional duties and the program
;required to prepare him for these duties have been the con-
;cern of counselor educators and professional counseling or
ganizations. How to identify performance requirements for
j
|competency in counseling has received professional atten
tion, especially during the last decade. Graduate programs
which formerly stressed the didactic approach, leading to
the acquisition of skills and techniques, have shifted to
include an experiential approach, focusing upon counselor
development and emotional growth (Carkhuff and Berenson,
1967; Ohlsen, 1970).
The experiential approach has included the provision
of counseling practica, internships, and group counseling
experiences as part of the counselor's preparation. The use
of group counseling in the education of counselors, with
counselors-in-training as the group participants, has
gained general acceptance in many counselor education pro
grams (Betz, 19691. The desirability of providing group
counseling for counselor candidates received support from a
variety of authorities (Gazda, 1968; Cohn, 1964; Berman,
1953; Truax and Carkhuff, 1967).
1
2
Ohlsen (19 70) has stated that group counseling is an
effective treatment technique for counselors to better un
derstand themselves, to discover and solve their problems,
and to learn how to keep those problems that they cannot
solve with reasonable effort from interfering with their
effectiveness as counselors. The group experience helps
prospective counselors understand themselves and identify
personal values, attitudes, and unsolved problems (Ohlsen,
1970). The necessity for a counselor to be aware of his
personal values and attitudes has been emphasized by
Cohn (1967):
The counselor influences, consciously or uncon
sciously, by his orientation and motivation.
This can be either constructive, ineffective,
or even at times destructive. The counselor
must be aware of his inner feelings and atti
tudes, even if they are not verbalized, (p.78)
Cohn (1967) contends that outcomes of group counseling
may be evidenced in cognitive, attitudinal, and/or behavior
change. A good group counseling experience leads to im
proved empathy, tolerance, and symapthy for others, as well
as improved skill in verbal expression and social communi
cation. Inherent in this contention is that a group coun
seling experience for a counselor trainee should effect a
change in cognition, attitude, and/or behavior.
The inclusion of group counseling as an educational-
therapeutic experience in counselor education programs has
3
been the result of a concern that personality is a signi
ficant component of counselor success (Gruberg, 1969) .
Carkhuff and Berenson's research (1967) suggested that ex
periences can be provided to reinforce counselor behaviors
and attitudes which facilitate client growth. Patterson
(1967) concluded that characteristics of students may be.
differentially susceptible to change by graduate education
in counseling.
The inclusion of a sequence of didactic and labora
tory experiences in current counselor education programs to
provide counselor candidates with the knowledge, skills,
attitudes, and values required for their performance as suc
cessful practitioners has largely been the result of re
search on the impact of counselor personality characteris
tics on the counseling process.
The shift from didactic, cognitive counselor education
to the affective domain via participation in groups by coun
selor candidates was an outgrowth of the supportive litera
ture on the efficacy of group counseling.
The identification of a variety of personality factors
which contribute to the counseling relationship has been the
focus of considerable research in counseling and psycho
therapy. However, the relationship between the group coun
seling experience and the effect on personality variables of
counselors has yet to be well documented. There appears to
4 i
be little doubt that many questions in the area of group
process need investigation. Problems of establishing a
control group against which to measure the experimental
variable loom as research contaminants. The effect of the
group leader on the group is also a major variable which is
often ignored. As Cohn (1964) has pointed out:
The development of reliable measures in the
field of group counseling is far from an
advanced stage. This may, indeed, be one
of the reasons that the research to date has
not been able to supply the field with much
significant data related to change as a re
sult of group counseling, (p. 14)
Statement of the Problem
The purpose of this study was to assess the degree
and direction of change occurring among group members as a
result of a short-term group counseling experience on cer
tain personality and attitudinal variables. The study was
directed specifically to ascertain whether participation in
a short-term group experience could alter attitudes of
group members in the dimensions of flexibility, tolerance
and nonauthoritarian thinking. A further purpose of the
study was to determine whether self-report expressions of
attitudes correlated with observer ratings of the same
variables.
Utilizing trained group supervisors was an important
aspect of this study which attempted to answer questions
about the efficacy of group counseling for freeing the
5 1
individual group member to deal openly with new experiences
and tolerate ambiguity in thought and behavior in others.
Two groups of graduate students enrolled in required
group counseling courses leading toward certification in
counseling either at the master's or doctoral level were
studied. A similar sample of graduate students who had no
group experience was also studied as a control group. If
specific attitudinal variables can be altered by participa
tion in short-term group counseling experiences and if
these attitudes are exhibited in intra-group relations,
conclusions leading to the expansion of counselor education
practices may be warranted. If the specific attitudinal
variables are relatively stable attributes, then the coun
selor selection process needs to focus further onnonintel-
lective factors in the screening of counselor candidates.
Answers were sought to the following questions:
1. What effect does short-term group counsel
ing with trained group supervisors (leaders)
have on attitudinal variables of flexibility,
tolerance and nonauthoritarianism? For ex
ample, after the group experience is there
a change toward more flexibility, more tol
erance for different viewpoints and behavior
in others, and more nonauthoritarian orien
tation among group participants?
2. What is the relationship between self-report
inventories and observer reports in assess
ing the dimensions of flexibility, tolerance
and nonauthoritariansism?
3. Are specific Omnibus Personality Inventory
Scales and Rokeach Dogmatism Scale correla
ted as measures of flexibility, tolerance,
nonauthoritarian thinking? Are they
measures of the same variable?
4. Are there intergroup differences in
reported posttest scores that can be
attributed to the leader variable?
The following hypotheses stated in research form were!
tested:
1. Short-term group counseling with trained
supervisors does influence the personal
attitudinal variables of flexibility,
tolerance, and nonauthoritarianism of the
group participants and the experimental
groups will show greater growth in toler- i
ance/flexibility/nonauthoritarian levels
than the control group with no group ex
perience.
2. There is a direct relationship between self-
assessment and observer ratings on the di
mensions of flexibility, tolerance, and
nonauthoritarian orientation.
Importance of the Problem
Many considerations contribute to the importance of
a study of this nature. Recent economic, political, and
technological developments have caused professional and lay
leaders to think with renewed vigor about the quality and
depth of personal communications. As Gilbert Wrenn (1969)
has noted,
. . . the lack of personalized, meaningful com
munication seems to dominate almost every criti
cal area in our social scene, domestic and in
ternational. Sometimes the other side doesn't
want to hear, and sometimes the trouble lies in
fear of exposing oneself or in an inability to
project accurately what one really wants to say.
(Mahler, 1969)
The professional development which holds considerable
promise for improving the amount and quality of personalized
communication is group counseling. The interaction of group
counseling. The interaction of group participants and a
.trained group leader represents a communication that is rel
evant to member interests and needs. Members learn from
each other about themselves and about each other. Group
counseling has been heralded by some as the promise of the
jnew generation, wherein people in other subcultures than
;their own might learn to communicate better if they have
meaningful experiences of their own in groups small enough
and controlled enough for them to lose their fears.
Kemp (1970) has underscored the promise inherent in
the group process. He has admonished:
However, if this promise is to be fulfilled,
if small groups are to function with maximum
effectiveness, their leaders and members must
take a broad, experimental, flexible approach
to group process and undergird it with sound
theory, (p.vii)
Counselor educators have been concerned with training
effective counselors who are able to facilitate the commu
nicative process. The recent development of group counsel
ing experiences in counselor education has acknowledged the
fact that the counselor's personality has a marked influ
ence on the counseling relationship and can either hinder
or enhance the lines of communication.
The research directed toward the identification of
personal characteristics which enhance the lines of communi
cation and perceptual accuracy has suggested that low dog
matism, open belief systems, cognitive flexibility, non
authoritarianism, and tolerance for ambiguity are attitu
dinal variables related to effective counseling and related
to enhanced communication.
That group counseling is appropriate and valuable in :
the communicative process for improving the understanding
and acceptance of self and others has also been explored
and independently documented. The efficacy of group coun
seling has been attested to by many of the leaders in the
group process movement. However, as Kagan (1970) has suc
cinctly stated:
The methods and conditions required to help
people change or develop so that they find
greater satisfaction and effectiveness in
face to face relationships are as yet largely
unknown, and when known, are exceedingly com
plex, difficult to learn, and hard to teach
. others. (p.43)
Thus, the current investigation attempts to single out
specific personality and attitudinal variables and to study
whether participation in short-term group counseling affects
the open-mindedness, tolerance for ambiguity, nonauthori
tarianism, and flexibility of counselor candidates. The
utility of such information has implications and relevance
for selection and training practices in current counselor
education programs._____ ____ _ __ ____________ ___
9 :
I
Scope of the Study
The study was limited to graduate students enrolled
in required courses leading toward certification in coun
seling, either at the master's degree level at California
State College at Los Angeles or the master's or predoctoral
level at the University of Southern California. The experi
mental group consisted of twenty-two students from Calif
ornia State College at Los Angeles and thirty students from:
the University of Southern California. Twenty-two students
from the State College and twenty-six students from the
University comprised the control group. The experimental
treatment or short-term group counseling was an integral
part of the academic program and was an introductory exper
iential course. Students in the control group were at the
same stage of graduate study but were not participating in
any group process. The findings of this study should be
generalized only to a similar sample population involved in
a similar graduate program with equivalent course content
and sequence.
Definition of Terms Used
1. Group Counseling. This term was used to
refer to the interaction among basically
normal members and a supervisor (leader)
in a group setting for a total of 30 hours. As
a result of the interaction, members may in
crease their understanding and acceptance of
self and others, learn and/or unlearn certain
attitudes or behaviors and grow in interper
sonal effectiveness.
10
OPI. This term was used throughout the
study as the abbreviation for the Omni
bus Personality Inventory, an instrument
used to report selected personality var
iables . ..
R-D Scale. This term was used throughout
the study as the abbreviation for the Ro-
keach Dogmatism Scale, Form E, an instru
ment measuring open and closed belief sys
tems, general authoritarianism, and
general intolerance.
Open-belief System. This term was used
throughout the study'to refer to a way
of examining different aspects of an ex
perience, clarifying the ambiguity that
may exist and seeing the relationship
among parts, and to the ability to re
ceive stimuli without distortion and to
evaluate and act on information on its
intrinsic merits rather than from irre
levant preconceived factors from within
or outside the individual. The term is
also descriptive of those persons who
score low on the Dogmatism Scale.
Dogmatism. This term was used throughout
the study to refer to the tendency to dis
tort and ignore the content and meaning of
a new experience by fitting it into pre
formed value systems, to have great belief
in absolute authority, to find new ideas,
situations, and opportunities threatening,
to have a passive mind, to have excessive
need for structure, to be defensive and in
secure, to show a preference for rational
ization, and to be unwilling to entertain
new belief systems. The term was used in
terchangeably with the term "closed-belief
system," and is also descriptive of those
persons who score high on the Dogmatism Scale.
Flexibility. This term was used throughout
the study to mean, on a cognitive level, a
resistance to premature perceptual closure
and to think and act spontaneously in a given
situation. On a conative level, the term was
used to mean appreciation of individuality
11
and a receptiveness to new ideas, novel
situations, uncertainty and diversity,
and respect for a wide range of attitudes
and beliefs.
7. Tolerance. This term was used throughout
the study to describe a willingness to ac
cept others with differing viewpoints and
behaviors.
8. Nonauthoritarianism. This term was used
throughout the study to mean a preference
for personal autonomy, independence in
thought and action, and liberal, nonjudg-
mental attitudes toward those persons who
disagree with the nonauthoritarian indi
vidual. The term was used interchangeably
with the term "open-mindedness."
9. Diversity. This term was used throughout
the study as indicating enjoyment of novel
situations and a preference for complexity
rather than for simplicity.
10. Ambiguity. This term was used throughout
the study to indicate an ability to toler
ate uncertainty and indefiniteness.
Organization of the Remainder of the Dissertation
This chapter has introduced the study by discussing
the nature of the problem, establishing the importance of
the study, listing questions to be answered, hypotheses to
be tested, and defining the terms used.
Chapter II reviews the pertinent literature on group
counseling, criteria of counselor effectiveness, attitudinal
change, and measurement instruments applicable to this study
Chapter III details the instruments, methods, and pro
cedures used in the research. In Chapter IV the findings
12 !
from the experimental design are reported and organized in
relation to certain questions presented in Chapter I. Chap
ter V reports the data from the correlational design. The
findings are organized in relation to questions presented
in Chapter I dealing with the correlations existing for
the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale and Omnibus Personality Inven
tory, peer and supervisor ratings, and the supervisor
(leader) variable. Conclusions drawn from the findings, ;
implications of the study, and recommendations for further !
research appear in Chapter VI.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This chapter reviews the research literature as it
is appropriate to various aspects of the present study,
particularly research related to characteristics of effec
tive counselors, investigations pertaining to specific
personality and attitudinal variables of effective coun
selors, reports on changes in attitudinal variables as a
result of counselor education programs, studies dealing
with outcomes of group counseling, and research relevant
to measurement instruments utilized in this study.
Research Substantiating the Importance of
Personality and Attitudinal Variables for
Effective Counselor Functioning
Cash and Munger (1966) reviewed recent research and
philosophy regarding counselor effectiveness. Their re
view indicated that increasing emphasis continued to be
placed on the personal characteristics of the counselor.
Techniques and methods were considered less significant in
a counselor's behavior within the counseling relationship
than were his attidudes toward himself and his counselees.
Rogers (1965) had previously attempted to delineate
and establish experimentally specific counselor attitudes
13
and behaviors as the most relevant criteria of counselor ef
fectiveness. Among those he regarded as critical were:
(a) congruence, (b) empathy, and (c) unconditional positive
regard. His approach made it possible for the research to
evaluate counselor effectiveness in the actual counseling
situation, concentrating not on special techniques, but
rather on the attitudes of the counselor in action.
However, Carkhuff (1966) still maintained that:
The efforts to investigate the counselor's con
tribution to facilitative process and construc
tive outcome are sparse, revolving primarily
around the dimension of experience. Counselor
variables, such as influences upon the counselor's
concept and implementation of his role, as well
as personality, attitudinal and other personal
variables must be taken into consideration. (p467)
Johnson, Shertzer, Linden, and Stone (1967) agreed
that the characteristics of effective counselors must be
taken into consideration but were more pessimistic than
Carkhuff in their position:
Identification of personal qualities essential
for effective counseling has long been a concern
of counselor educators and has engaged the atten
tion of innumerable investigators. To date, the
subject remains largely enigmatic. Attempts to
identify the essential nonintellective variables
have been frustrated by inadequate instruments,
a lack of appropriate instruments, a lack of ap
propriate criteria, and the general elusiveness
of the qualities themselves. The matter has
been further complicated by the acknowledged
inability of counselor educators to reach total
agreement in terms of personality characteristics
necessary for counseling effectiveness, (p.297)
That there is agreement among counselor educators
15
that personal, or nonintellective qualities, are basic to
effective functioning in the counseling relationship is,
however, supported by the research of Patterson (1964) ,
Rogers (1961) , and Wrenn (1962) . Specific variables con
tinue to be investigated, always within the special context
of effective counseling as seen by the researcher. It ap
pears fairly certain from the research that the attitudes
and personal characteristics of the counselor are signifi
cant contributors to his effectiveness.
Scheerer's (1949) study hypothesized that one's atti
tudes toward others were related to a significant degree to
the attitudes one held toward one's self. Scheerer also
defined "acceptance of others" when she stated:
The individual who expresses acceptance and re
spect towards other persons does not reject, hate,
dislike, or pass judgement against others when
their behavior or values seem to him to be in
contradiction to his own standards or values. He
grants others the right to their own beliefs,
values, and standards, (p. 171)
This can be interpreted as an attitude of tolerance
which will later be seen more clearly in its relationship
to counselor effectiveness. The author concluded:
It might mean that change in attitudes of ac
ceptance towards others can come about basi
cally only through change in attitude toward
self . . . It might mean that increased accep
tance of minority groups, foreigners, and the
■ like, could best be achieved by some type of
group therapy which would tend to alter the
individuals' acceptance of, and respect for,
himself. (p.174)
These previous statements can be regarded as especially
significant for effective counselor functioning when coun
seling relationships involve clients of different personal
orientations, values, and life styles from those of the
counselor.
More recently, Gawrys and Brown (1965) agreed that
counseling was an attitude, not a technique; a way of look
ing at and living with people rather than a method for man
ipulating them; a way of life rather than a performance.
The attitude of the counselor influenced the nature of the ;
counseling process, whether individual or group, and af
fected the outcomes. Their concern was that the counselor
recognize and assume responsibility for his own values and
biases and the way these operate to influence the relation
ship between himself and another individual or group of
individuals.
The question of attitude thus looms large in a study
of characteristics which appear to be predictive criteria
of counselor effectiveness. Since reference is made con
tinuously in the research literature to attitudinal vari
ables and their importance to counselor effectiveness, it
appears appropriate to include the following definitions
and comments regarding attitude and attitude changes.
Horney (1945) defined attitude as a "tendency to
move toward, against, or away from a person, object, or
17
situation." Allport's (1935) definition included "a mental
and neutral state of readiness organized through experience
exerting a directive and/or dynamic influence upon the in
dividual's response to all objects and situations with
which it is related." Ruesch (1957) defined attitude as an
"abstract consistency to which an individual adheres when
he abandons behavioral rigidities." All three definitions
are appropriate to this study in view of its concern with
counselor attitudes and their concomitant affect on coun
selor effectiveness.
Commenting on attitudes, Wilson, Robeck, and Michael
(1969) have stated that the stronger the emotional tone of
the observer's attitude, the more his perception of another
person who holds a divergent attitude will be distorted.
Also, referring to attitudes, Combs and Snygg (1956)
have stated: "Shifts in attitudes may occur so impercep
tibly that they are unnoticed by the individual himself,
who assumes his attitudes are what they have always been."
This comment becomes especially noteworthy since the pre
sent study has included observer ratings in its format to
take into account the point made by Combs and Snygg.
Acknowledging and affirming the impact of counselor
characteristics on counseling effectiveness, an examination
will be made next of the research findings concerned with
those specific personality and attitudinal variables which
contribute to an effective counseling relationship and are
pertinent to this study.
Research Findings on Specific Personality and
Attitudinal Variables which Contribute to
Effective Counselor Functioning
Some studies have attempted to report on specific
characteristics which influence the effectiveness of coun
selors and have used experimentally derived designs to re
search such personality and attitudinal variables. Other
studies have presented their authors' viewpoints regarding
these specific variables and their relationship to effec
tive counselor functioning.
Sprinthall, Whiteley, and Mosher (1966), presenting
a model for rating counselors from their responses to cli
ents, were convinced that cognitive flexibility represented
the most relevant dimension in effective counseling beha
vior. Cognitive flexibility was defined as the ability to
respond to both the content and feeling which the client
communicated. "The rigid counselor, unable to respond to
the demands of the interaction with the client, construed
the situation in terms of his own frame of reference." Early
closure and "tuning out" specific client responses were con
sidered representative of cognitive inflexibility. Both
conceptually and operationally, cognitive flexibility may
be considered to be one of the significant factors in almost
any kind of human interaction.
Anderson and Hunka (1963), concerned with another di
mension of personality, had found that teachers and admin
istrators tended to be dogmatic and cognitively rigid.
They went on to posit that these qualities, if exhibited in
, counseling behavior, would be detrimental to the goals of
: counseling.
A statement by the Association for Counselor Education
;and Supervision (1961) listed open-mindedness as one of the.
!five important counselor qualities and defined it as:
. . . the flexibility of outlook toward others
' that makes it possible to appreciate individu
ality, to be receptive to new research findings,
new ideas and achievements, and to have respect
for a wide range of attitudes and beliefs.
Mahler (1969) has pointedly summarized:
Perhaps the most essential ingredient in a coun
selor's behavior is growing trust in his own
perceptions and reactions and a willingness to
be as open as possible to distortion and defense
in his own behavior, (p. 193)
The level of the counselor's openness has been found
to be related to counselor effectiveness by researchers
such as Jourard (1964) , Calhoun (1962) , and Tass (1968) .
Hough (1965) found that people who did not have open-belief
systems were seen by their peers as making less gain in
human relations than others, particularly so in the area of
empathic understanding.
Attitudes of openness have been correlated in studies
of perceptual accuracy. Croft (1964), following a survey
of the literature, concluded that "research has indicated
that certain personality characteristics of the perceiver
influence his perceptions of other people." Secund and
Backman (1964) found authoritarianism to be a character
istic that affected the manner in which counselors per
ceived others. Earlier, Jones (1954) had indicated that
the person with authoritarian tendencies is more likely to
view others in terms of power and is less sensitive to the
psychological or personality characteristics of other people
than is the nonauthoritarian person. Lipetz (1960) also
maintained that the low authoritarian perceived others more
accurately.
In accordance with these previous statements, another
authority, Kemp (1961), has discussed authoritarianism or
dogmatism extensively, especially as it affects the coun
seling relationship. Kemp cited Maslow as holding that a
distortion in the assimilation of ideas wards off threaten
ing aspects of reality and at the same time provides the
individual with a compensating feeling that he understands
it. Kemp stated that this form of thinking has been desig
nated as dogmatic and described by Rokeach as the extent to
which a person's belief system is open or closed:
Those who are highly dogmatic do not approach a
new experience openly; they are defensive, in
secure, and more threatened. They are inclined
21
to ignore, rationalize, project, distort,
or narrow in their attempts to deal with
it. (p.662)
Kemp also cited Fromm's conclusion that the more per
sons become disposed to accept closed ways of thinking, the
greater becomes their need for recognition and power. Ro-
keach's (1960) conclusion was also cited by Kemp that as
the individual tries to handle new experiences, ideational
or otherwise, through identification, rationalization, de
nial, or projection, his thinking becomes a tightly woven
network of cognitive defenses.
Of great significance to the present study, in terms
of group counseling experiences, is the following quotation
from Kemp's article:
This distinct difference in the approach to
experience between the open and closed-minded
thinker led to the assumption that in situa
tions requiring transfer of learning, the
making of inferences, and the analysis and
evaluation of ideas, the highly dogmatic in
dividual would be less likely to profit from
counseling, (p.663)
Although the previous quotation makes reference to
the client, it is important to add that the highly dogmatic
counselor would be less likely to make the counseling ex
perience profitable for the client.
Singer (1965) cites studies by Elmer on rigid persons
and by Kaplan and Singer on highly opinionated and dogmatic
individuals, in which the counselor's psychological well-
22
being, in addition to his effectiveness, was equated with
availability and openness to new experiences and flexibil
ity. Singer, in summary, depicted emotional health, sanity
and therapeutically effective characteristics in the fol
lowing way:
They are characterized by . . . openness to
experience, readiness for surprise, willing
ness to stand uncertainty, and the capacity
to shift flexibly the focus of perception and
inquiry. (p. 69)
In his book, Dye (1968) also stressed specific atti
tudes as being necessary for effective counselors. Included
in these was tolerance, or the ability to accept fully each
of a variety of viewpoints, philosophies, and attitudes,
some of which might be diametrically opposed to those of
the counselor.
Perhaps Van Kaam (1966) has summarized the essence of
the need for certain personality attributes in effective
counselors when he stated:
As a counselor, I should be flexible, my
counseling should not be relegated to a
rigid observation of rules . .. On the
contrary, I should be convinced that every
counselor and every world of meaning is in
some way unique. Everything that I say and
do should be the creative outgrowth of my
respectful participation in this ' nique ex
istence here and now. This presupposes that
I am a mature person, free from threat and,
therefore, free from rigidity. Rigid beha
vior is a defense against the possible chal
lenge of an unexpected world, when I feel
unable to risk the full revelation of another
world of meaning. There are two main forms
23
of rigidity: the one leading to a stiff, for
mal attitude in order to escape communication
in depth; the other leading to a compulsively
jolly good fellow attitude which may be an
even more effective defense against a true
human encounter, (p.140)
Van Kaam saw that creativity as a counselor implied
flexibility of attitude, feeling, and behavior in authentic
response to the real situation.
Flexibility was also emphasized in the Cohn, Combs,
I
;Gibian and Sniffen (1963) study of counselor characteris
tics. The authors concluded that the counselor must be
i flexible enough to make use of the many roles called for in
counseling situations.
The counselor is seen as one who is flexible,
accepting, sensitive, and empathetic, secure
and consistent, with a great deal of faith in
the ability of individuals to utilize their
own resources in problem-solving, (p. 358)
Thus the research has made evident that wide agreement does
exist among the opinions of authorities as to the impor
tance of certain attitudinal variables of concern to this
present study, i.e., flexibility, tolerance, and nonauthor
itarianism.
Following are research studies which give further
evidence as to the great significance of these variables to
counselor effectiveness.
Milliken and Peterson (1967) stated that the counsel
ing process would probably suffer deleterious results from
24 !
the affects of prejudiced counselors. The authors undertook
a study to measure the extent to which both prejudice and
dogmatism affected perceived effectiveness of counselors.
Their study was based on prior research by Milliken (1965)
which found an inverse relationship between prejudice and
counseling effectiveness.
In. this investigation, thirty NDEA Institute partici-'
:pants were administered the Boardus Ethnic Distance Scale
jand the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale. Findings indicated that
!only one of the analyses statistically supported the au
thor's hypothesis, although six of the remaining seven anal
yses were in the direction of the hypothesis. This allows
the conjecture that low dogmatism and prejudice may be fac
tors in a successful counseling relationship. Of special
importance is the finding that the only significant differ
ence that did result was in the rank in the Dogmatism Scale
when the "good" and "poor" counselors were defined from the
superior's ratings.
Another study was conducted by Reeves and Arbuckle
(1963) to measure effective counseling attitudes of deans
of women and professional college counselors. The authors
constructed an Attitude Scale of fifty hypothetical problems
to be answered in five categories: (1) authoritarian,
(2) persuasive, (3) sympathetic, (4) judgmental, and (5) un
derstanding .
Their findings showed that on every variable except
one (judgmental) the differences between the two groups
(deans and professional counselors) were statistically sig
nificant. College counselors were less authoritarian, less
persuasive, more sympathetic, more understanding than the
deans, and thereby deemed more effective.
Wittmer and Webster (1969) conducted a study in which
the relationship between dogmatism and teaching experience
in counselor trainees was investigated prior to a practicum
experience. The Rokeach Dogmatism Scale was administered
to twenty-five subjects with teaching experience and twenty-
four subjects without teaching experience. The authors were
concerned with the question of whether teaching experience
in any way facilitated or impeded counseling effectiveness.
Results of the study indicated that counselor trainees
with teaching experience were significantly more dogmatic
than those without teaching experience. Implied in these
findings was the adverse effect dogmatism has on counseling
effectiveness.
The Mezzano (1969) study, investigating the relation
ship between dogmatism, as measured by the Rokeach Dogmatism
Scale, and the effectiveness of counselor candidates enrol
led in counseling practica, raised an important research
question:
If open-mindedness is a characteristic that can
be developed in counselor trainees through counselor
26
education programs, selection becomes a second
ary point. On the other hand, if dogmatism is
a fairly stable attribute, not subject to any
real change, selection of future counselors be
comes of primary concern to counselor education
programs. (p.65)
Mezzano's actual study showed that persons low in
dogmatism are the more effective counselors in the judgment
of their supervisors. His findings also indicated that the
; less dogmatic counselors appeared to be more genuine, ac
cepting, and understanding in the counseling relationship
|as judged by their supervisors.
Calhoun (1963) attempted to investigate the relation
ship between measures of open-and-closed-mindedness and the
experiencing level of the counselor with his stated atti
tudes and orientation toward counseling. Results indicated
that the counselor's stated attitudes and orientation were
not, in general, related to the counseling relationship;
however, the experiencing level and the degree of open-
mindedness were significantly related to the counseling re
lationship .
Tosi (1970) , in his study dealing with dogmatism with
in the counselor-client dyad, stated:
Increasing evidence suggests that one factor
contributing to the quality of the counseling
relationship is the counselor's level of open
ness or dogmatism. Highly dogmatic or less
open counselors are more prone to distort
phenomena occurring within the therapeutic con
text because of greater difficulties in self
communication. (p.384)
By self-communication, Tosi was referring to the understand
ing of one's own thoughts, feelings, and desires.
Using the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale, Tosi examined the
effects of varying levels of counselor and client dogmatism
on client perception of the relationship following an ini
tial encounter. The results of the study indicated that
client ratings of the relationship were increasingly higher
as more openness occurred in the dyad. Both counselors'
and clients' levels of dogmatism did combine additively in
terms of their effect on the criterion measure.
The Tosi and Carlson study (1970) focused on the re
lationship between client dogmatism and perceptions of the
counselor's empathy, level of regard, congruence, and un
conditional positive regard. Instrumentation included the
Rokeach Dogmatism Scale. Findings of the study included
clients higher in dogmatism appeared to have more difficulty
in perceiving counselor expressions of empathy, uncondi
tional positive regard, and congruence during initial coun
seling sessions. While this study stressed the importance
of the dogmatism of the client as it related to initial im
pressions of a counselor's attempt to communicate various
facilitative conditions, it is included as further evidence
of the influence of certain attitudinal variables on the
counseling relationship.
Both through stated viewpoints and research findings,
28 ;
l ;
it has become apparent that the nonintellective variables
of flexibility, tolerance, and nonauthoritarianism are con
sidered as vital factors within the counselor's personality
and greatly contribute to his effective functioning in a
counseling relationship.
Research on Changes in Personality and Attitudinal
Variables of Counselors as a Result of
Counselor Education Programs
| Much of the current research has dealt with counselor
I |
j trainees and their practicum and/or group experiences as
:they related to changes in attitudes toward themselves,
their clients, their supervisors, and/or peers. Researchers
have tended to focus on changes that apparently occurred as
a result of the multiple experiences provided by counselor
education programs and NDEA Counseling and Guidance Insti
tutes in particular.
Demos and Zuwaylif (1963) utilized the Porter Attitude
Scale in pre and posttesting to measure counselor shifts in
attitude during an NDEA Institute. Their findings indicated
significant differences in all five categories of the Porter
Scale between pre and posttest administrations. The enrol-
lees became significantly less evaluative, supportive, and
probing, and more understanding and interpretive (reflec
tive) . Counselor-trainees who were rated higher by the
staff also made the greatest gains between the pre and post-
29
test. The authors stated that this point was particularly
provocative in that one might expect gains to be more dif
ficult to accrue for thosehigher on the scale to begin
with. The conclusions of this study were that an intensive
six-week Institute produced marked attitudinal changes,
i.e., counselors moved from being evaluative, supportive,
and probing to being more understanding and interpretive.
In addition, it was concluded that superior counselors be
gan and ended being less evaluative and more understanding
than did either average or below average counselors.
A study by Munger, Myers, and Brown (1963) attempted
to assess attitudinal changes in five categories and the
persistence of such changes with students in NDEA Insti
tutes. The instrument employed to gather data was the
Porter Attitude Scale. The conclusions of the study indi
cated that the eight-week Institute was effective in bring
ing about desirable attitudinal changes in the counselor
trainees. However, the temporary nature of these changes
suggested that rather than learning new attitudes, the
trainees were learning what the faculty thought were proper
answers to the Porter Scalej a problem which may exist in
all studies of this nature. Attitude changes in the semes
ter-long Institute did persist as long as three months af
ter. Attitude changes associated with Institute training,
regardless of length, were more persistent for trainees who
were not. This suggested that posttraining experiences
tended to have an effect on persistence of attitude change
initiated during the Institute training.
An investigation by Winkley, Munger, Gust, and Tieg-
land (1963) was made to determine whether a therapeutic at
mosphere, established by an NDEA Institute, facilitated
changes in the perceptions of students similar to those of
clients who have experienced counseling. The Butler-Haigh
Q-Sort was administered three times to members of both In
stitutes. Counseling Institute members had more positive
feelings initially toward others, and also made more thera
peutic gains in self-acceptance. Both groups made more gain
in similarity to others during the first part of the year
and more gain in acceptance of others during the last part
of the year.
This finding raises the question of whether a causal
relationship exists between the recognition of being simi
lar to others and the acceptance of others. Also, the ques
tion may be raised whether recognition of being similar to
others is simply a prerequisite for acceptance of others.
The purpose of a study by Jones (1963) was to deter
mine what, if any, changes in attitudes occurred among gui
dance counselors in a seven-week NDEA Summer Institute.
Jones also concerned himself with the degree to which any
changes that occurred were retained one-half year later,
when the counselors were back on their jobs.
Having utilized a self-report opinionnaire to assess
attitudes, Jones concluded that no changes were found in
the attitudes of the guidance counselors toward matters af
fecting the administrative framework of their jobs. A
shift was found in the direction of an attitude of accept
ing and understanding the counselee as a person, as con
trasted to one of informing or advising him. The data also
revealed a change away from primary concern with the imme
diate problem of the counselee and toward an empathetic
comprehension of the total setting in which the immediate
problem existed. There was also a change in the direction
of an attitude of greater listening and permissiveness in
the counselor's role and approach. Finally, a changed and
improved attitude of self-confidence was found on the part
of the guidance counselors in their use of certain profes
sional techniques. It is possible that this increased con
fidence considerably affected the counselor's self-concepts
and efficiency with counselees, parents, and fellow edu
cators .
Rochester's (1967) research attempted to assess the
permanency of changes in attitudes and values of 126 coun
selor trainees in eight one-year NDEA Guidance Institutes.
The Porter Attitude Scale and the Allport-Vernon-Lindzey
Study of Values were the instruments used on three separate
32 !
testing occasions. Findings of this study, as measured by
the Porter Scale, were that attitude changes occurred, but
that their permanency was questionable. The Study of
Values (Allport) reported minimal changes in values or per-;
sonality.
Munger and Johnson (1960) conducted their study with
twenty-eight graduate students during an eight-week NDEA
Guidance Institute. They attempted to determine changes ini
attitude toward clients which might accompany an instruc
tional program for counselors, as measured by the Porter
Attitude Scale. Results of the study indicated a signifi
cant change from evaluative, value-setting, probing and di
agnostic responses, to understanding-type responses. Prin
cipal changes in attitudes of the Institute participants
took place within the formal course work and these changes
in attitude continued and were strengthened during the prac-
ticum work. The authors concluded that the emphasis in the
Institute on an attitude of understanding of the client was
accepted by the trainees.
Addressing himself to the question of whether graduate
education in counseling influences the personality and atti
tudes of students in counseling, Patterson (1967) cited
various studies which suggested that changes in attitudes,
as measured by self-reports, occurred following relatively
short training periods, whether or not they persisted.
33
Patterson's research compared NDEA Institute students, stu
dents in regular counseling programs, and graduates in a
noncounseling curriculum, using the California Psychological
Inventory (CPI), the Barrons Ego Strength Scale, and a
Counseling Attitudes Scale. The obtained data supported the
contention that characteristics of students may be differ
entially susceptible to change by graduate education. More
"basic" personality characteristics, as measured by the CPI,
Iwere less susceptible to change, while attitudes toward
Ithe self as well as toward others were more susceptible.
The study also indicated that change toward a less author
itarian and more accepting attitude appeared to occur in
noncounselor as well as counselor students.
Kassera and Sease, in a 1970 study, found support for
the hypothesis that counselor education does enhance coun
selor candidates acceptance of others. The authors utilized
the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale and found a tendency for per
sons further along in their counselor education to be less
dogmatic, less authoritarian, and more open-minded.
These research findings give strong evidence of
changes in personality and attitudinal variables occurring
among counseling students enrolled in counselor education
programs.
Research on the Effectiveness of Group
Counseling in Accomplishing
Attitudanal Change
Lifton (1966) has stated that one measure of the so
phistication of a discipline is the extent and quality of
the research that has been performed. Although there has
been a plethora of recent research on group process, group
experience, and group dynamics, no clear-cut answer about
the effectiveness of group counseling exists. Evidence
does suggest that people exposed to group counseling report
the process as helpful, even when the instruments used in
measurement do not provide data which demonstrate statis
tically significant changes. Studies in a variety of set
tings and with a variety of populations do support the val
ue of group counseling. Research is available involving
underachieving students, anxious college freshmen, gifted
adolescents, prospective counselors, medical students, and
a variety of clients in psychotherapeutic settings.
An article by Gowan, Demos, and Wakefield (1970)
cited works by Mahler, Kemp, and Ribbeck which also testi
fied to the effectiveness of group counseling.
How to effect change in certain personality variables
has been inferred by several researchers, such as Mezzano
(1969), Kemp (1962), and Tosi (1970). Group counseling as
a means of effecting change on certain dimensions of per-
35
sonality has been inferred from numerous studies. Kemp
(1970) stated that in group counseling, creative differences
in values, ideas, and feelings are expected, accepted, and
encouraged with emphasis on acceptance and understanding.
Earlier, Bonner (1959) contended that one of the pro
ducts of group counseling was the acquiring of new atti
tudes toward other people. This suggestion has not been
overlooked by investigators.
The most comprehensive review of the literature on
;group counseling has been done by Gazda (1968). The goals
of group counseling were succinctly defined as: increased
self-awareness and understanding; more productive means for
problem-solving and decision-making; improved understanding
of group interaction; modified attitudes and facilitation
of personal changes and growth.
Implicit in definitions of group counseling was that
the process resulted in attitudinal change. Support from
Hinckley and Herman (1951), Warters (1960), and Lifton
(1967) substantiated group counseling as a dynamic interper
sonal process through which, in the normal range of adjust
ment, a peer group and a professionally trained leader ex
plore problems and feelings in an attempt to modify atti
tudes. Cohn and Gibian (1963) contended that group counsel
ing was an appropriate vehicle to assist normal individuals
with developmental problems. As an outgrowth of group ex
36
ploration and the resultant attitude change, Lifton (1967)
found "an acceptance of the right of other persons to be
different, and an acceptance of the idea that people are
different" (p. 210).
In a study of the effectiveness of group counseling,
using two contrasting formats, Bates (1967) found some evi
dence that students who worked in a group on a weekly basis
somehow came to place more value on themselves as unique
ipersons and that they became more accepting of others and
isaw others in a more favorable light. However, the reser
vation was made that changes in self-concept occurred in
■different dimensions, either positive or negative, and that
greater acceptance of others occurred in only one of the
formats. The researcher raised a question regarding the
results of the study in indicating that the participating
counselors had had no training for group work. Would the
results have been different if this had not been the case?
In his evaluation of a group counseling procedure
involving sixty college students, Ofman (1964) showed that
college students' grade point averages and attitudes toward
studying could be changed. As Ofman stated: "The outcomes
of this investigation support the results of many studies
of the effectiveness of group procedures in academic set
tings ."
Lodato, Sololoff, and Schwartz (1964) conducted a
37
study to determine whether group counseling could produce
changes among ”slow-learning" students in the areas of at
titude toward school, the learning situation, their peers
and teachers. Changes in attitude by faculty and peers
toward these students were also investigated. Results in
dicated positive changes in attitudes toward learning and
toward authority figures in a large majority of the stu
dents, as judged by teacher ratings on a behavior and atti
tude rating scale. Also indicated were increased toler
ance, insight, and understanding by teachers for these stu
dents. Conclusions were that group counseling was success
ful in modifying attitudes and that these changes in atti
tudes enabled the subjects to function more effectively in
the school setting.
Giving further indication as to the efficacy of group
counseling in producing attitudinal changes, Shaw and Wur-
sten's (1965) review of the literature on group procedures
in schools from 1953 through 1963 cited research by Miller
and Biggs (1958) in which attitude change was noted as a
result of group process.
A recent innovation in the area of group interaction
has been the marathon experience. Although relatively
little research is presently available for this form of
group process, several pertinent studies follow.
In a study of whether participation in a marathon
38
group experience would induce changes in the direction of
increased positive mental health and personal growth, Gui-
nan and Foulds (1970) conducted pre and posttesting using
the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) with ten college
student volunteers who participated in a thirty-hour mara
thon "growth group." A control group of an equal number of
matched students was also employed. Results disclosed sig
nificantly higher scores on seven of the twelve POI scales,
:representative of healthier personal functioning for the
experimental group. These findings suggested that marathon
groups may be a productive method of fostering increased
levels of personal growth and interpersonal functioning.
A study by Young and Jacobson (1970) attempted to
evaluate the effects of participation in a time-extended
marathon group on several aspects of personality. Experi
mental and control groups were employed with pre and post
testing administered to a population of "normals who hope
to find greater satisfaction in their lives."
The results of the study indicated that the experi
mental subjects demonstrated a significant decrease in de
fensiveness and constriction. This decreased defensiveness
of the experimental subjects, after the fifteen-hour mara
thon experience, significantly differentiated them from the
control group subjects. In addition, the experimental sub
jects demonstrated highly significant changes in personality
39
scores on almost all scales employed in the direction of
"greater mental health." From these findings the inference;
can certainly be made that attitude change was effected.
Another study was undertaken by Foulds, Wright, and
Guinan (1970) who used interviews to obtain self-reports of
participants in a marathon group of their perceptions of
the experience six months later. The subjects were fifteen
; college students who met with two leaders for a continuous
! twenty-four hour period. The self-reports were highly
| positive about the perceived value of the experience. Among;
the changes was greater acceptance of self and others.
Research on the Effectiveness of Group
Counseling in Changing the Attitudes
of Counselors
Additional studies follow which reveal the effective
ness of group counseling in changing nonintellectual vari
ables specifically within the personalities of counselors.
The possibility of altering attitudinal positions has, of
necessity, been a concern of those who counsel and those
who train counselors.
A study by Seegars and McDonald (196 3) was designed
to assess the effectiveness of an interaction group in fos
tering emotional growth and self-knowledge as part of a
counselor education program. The most dramatic change was
evidenced in the Ideal Self ratings as shifts occurred from ;
40
aggressive, distrustful behavior toward more competitive
qualities in interpersonal situations.
The Interpersonal Check List was used to obtain pre-
and post-group ratings from each of nine graduate students
enrolled in a counselor education program which included
:semester-long, weekly group meetings. The findings gave
evidence that personality and attitudinal changes resulted
from the group interaction process.
|
| Also of importance in this study were the ratings by
individual members of other group members after the group
process experience. This was a beginning attempt to focus
on reactions to participants by others in the group, an
integral part of the present study.
A study by Bonney and Gazda (1966) utilized a ques
tionnaire approach to evaluate the reactions of NDEA Insti
tute students who had participated in a group counseling
experience. The results of the study indicated predomin
ately positive reactions to the experience with the major
criticism the short duration of the experience (eight
weeks) .
The authors concluded that the issue of counseling
for students in counselor education programs cannot be ig
nored and that ideal counselor education programs should
be designed to accommodate the students' need for more in
tensive self-understanding.
In a very recent study, Rogal (1970), using specific
Guilford tests of behavior cognition, found that group
counseling for prospective counselors did increase the
counselor trainee's awareness of nonverbal gestures and
that the trainee seemed to become aware of similarity of
differing units of expressions, and of dyadic relationships.
"Awareness of others" was related, in this study, to coun
selor effectiveness. According to Rogal, the study helped
I
establish the efficacy of group counseling for counselors-
;in-training. Similar to the present study, his group
leaders were persons trained in group work.
Betz (1969) undertook a study to evaluate the use of
group procedures in the education of counselors. He spe
cifically addressed himself to the question of whether an
affectively-oriented or a cognitively-oriented group coun
seling approach would have greater effect on the counseling
behavior of counselor candidates participating in a super
vised practicum.
Results indicated that it was possible to increase
counselors' ability to respond to affect by involving them
in a group counseling experience which focused on affect
within the group setting. Betz's study also showed that
the climate of the group was generalized to individual be
havior outside the group. Betz concluded:
Group counseling of an affective nature will
assist counselors-in-training to become more
affective in their approach to clients, and
that as an educational experience, it has
value in the process of educating counselors.
(p. 533)
Despite all the previously cited attempts to relate
the development of specific counselor variables to counselor
preparation, Wirtz, Betz, and Engle (1969) have stated:
. . . in recent years, group counseling has
gained acceptance by counselors as an alterna
tive to individual counseling as an educational-
therapeutic experience. However, even though
there tends to be an increased use of group
counseling in counselor education programs,
little research is available evaluating its
effects on counselors in preparation, (p.189)
The present study is a further attempt to meet the
need for additional research, emphasized by Wirtz, Betz and
Engle.
Research on Instrumentation
Utilized in this Study
Changes in attitudinal and personality variables of
counselor candidates following group experiences have been
variously documented. Paper and pencil tests, standardized
personality instruments, and experimental scales and ques
tionnaires have comprised the measurement in a variety of
designs. Results have reflected the use of inappropriate
instrumentation, since often there is no evidence presented
as to the suitability of the measuring devices for the in
vestigation .
Rochester (1968) , seeking to measure attitudes of
counselors, stated:
One problem that confronts counselor-educators
involves the selection of appropriate measures
of behavioral or attitudinal changes that occur
in counselor training programs. Such tests are
practically nonexistent when it concerns the
measurement of counselor attitudes, (p.427)
But Kiesler, Collins, and Miller (1969) disagreed and
stated: "Social scientists have stopped asking the ques-
Ition: 'Can attitudes be measured?' The standard measure-
i
Iment techniques have been accepted--assumptions and all."
Of specific interest to this research design are
istudies which used the Omnibus Personality Inventory (OPI) ,
the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale (R-D Scale), and peer and super
visor ratings in the assessment of attitudinal change. Fol
lowing are noteworthy findings from such studies.
A study by Elton and Rose (1969) investigated the
changes in personality test scores over a two and one-half
year period among college students, utilizing the Omnibus
Personality Inventory (OPI). A major finding was that stu
dent attitudes do change differentially over the tested
time span and that significantly different patterns of
change are indicated in personality test scores as measured
by the OPI.
Another study by Elton and Rose (1968) was concerned
with an investigation of the dimensions of personality
change through a factor analysis of various OPI scales.
44 I
Other investigations, such as those by Lehman, Stewart,
and Webster, Freeman and Heist were cited by the authors
as having determined that change did occur in personality
test scores during the college years. However, Elton and
Rose, in their study, were concerned with individual differ
ences in change as contrasted to average change. The find
ings indicated that college students change individually
on various intellectual and attitudinal variables and that
these changes can be appropriately measured by the OPI.
; The factor stability of the OPI, Form C, was tested
by Elton and Terry (1969) in a pre and posttest format with
105 female education majors. The results indicated that the
factor structure of the OPI was stable over a four-year per
iod, a finding which was reported earlier by Stewart.
Gruberg (1969) singled out "tolerance for ambiguity"
as the personality characteristic to be assessed by the
Complexity Scale of the Omnibus Personality Inventory (OPI).
His sample consisted of 137 New York State counselors who
completed the OPI Complexity Scale. This study supported
the construct validity of that scale. Gruberg concluded:
The personality variable of tolerance of am
biguity should be considered in the selection
process of students for counselor education
programs . . . and the Complexity Scale of the
OPI may be used as one measure of potential
counselor success. (p.123)
Ohlsen (1970) indicated that although most personality
tests have not differentiated between effective and ineffec-
45
tive counselors, the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale has shown
promise.
In The Open and Closed Mind, Rokeach (I960) stated:
A basic definition for identifying a person's
system as open or closed is . . . the extent
to which the person can receive, evaluate, and
act on relevant information received from out
side on its own intrinsic merits, unencumbered
by irrelevant factors in the situation arising
from the outside. (p.5 7)
Rokeach postulated that "open" individuals differed
from "closed" individuals in the way they think, perceive,
remember, and feel. The open-minded tended to be more
aware of their reaction to stimuli, to be better able to
receive, evaluate, and act on relevant information received
from the outside, and to be better able to evaluate infor
mation on its own merits.
The Open-Closed Belief Systems were developed on the
premise that each individual was motivated by both national
and nationalizing forces, and it was assumed that all be-
lief-disbelief systems served two powerful and conflicting
sets of motives at the same time: the need for a cognitive
framework--to know and to understand--and the need to ward
off the threatening aspects of reality. Based on these
premises, the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale was developed.
Gratton and Kemp (1965), in discussing the suitability
of the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale, stated:
r ' ' 46 " I
Its use will make possible a new approach for
the understanding of the beliefs and behavior
of persons. It should prove especially useful
in the determination of those who experience
unusual difficulty in the toleration of ambi
guity and in the entertainment of radiaclly
new concepts and those who because of their
adjustment problems would benefit from coun
seling. (p.385)
Utilizing the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale and the Mooney
Problem Check List for instrumentation, Kemp (1961), con
ducted a study in which he hypothesized that persons who
iwere low in dogmatism or were open-minded would have fewer
personal problems than those who were closed-minded or dog
matic. He also hypothesized that those who were low in
dogmatism would respond more favorably in counseling than
those who were high in dogmatism. Findings supported
Kemp's hypotheses. Low dogmatic persons were defined as
those who comprehensively examined different aspects of an
experience, tried to clarify the ambiguity that might exist
and strove to see the relationship among parts. The closed-
minded, on the other hand, approached new experiences dif
ferently. They frequently found new ideas, situations, and
opportunities threatening. Rather than trying to confront
the meaning of the experience, they used several means of
avoiding the impact. One way of doing this was "to squeeze,
narrow and distort, or ignore the content and meaning of the
experience and thus make it fit comfortably into their pre
formed value system."
Kemp (1962) focused attention on the influence of emo
tional attitudes on critical thought and the relevance of
these to the function of critical change. Kemp used the
Rokeach Dogmatism Scale and The Porter Attitude Scale with
fifty graduate college students enrolled in a counseling
program.
Results of his study indicated that those persons
high in dogmatism changed significantly toward counseling
responses that were more evaluative, interpretive, probing,
or diagnostic. Subjects low in dogmatism responded in a
more understanding and supportive way at the beginning and
end of the study. Implied in the findings was the possibil
ity that students found to be more closed-minded simulated
change in accordance with the expectancies of the situation.
As has been pointed out previously, this "faking good" is a
hazard to be cognizant of in all research of this nature.
In his study to determine if the character of the be
lief systems of the members and leaders influenced the pro
gress of a group toward its goals, Kemp (1963) administered
the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale to ninety graduate college stu
dents .
Results of his investigation revealed that the atti
tudes and beliefs of members and leaders participating in
groups influenced the form content of interaction. Those
with Open-Belief Systems appeared more aware of the inabil
ity of the group members and themselves to relate fully on
a "psyche-process" (group counseling) level. They also
tried to create for one another a more accepting, permissive
climate. On the other hand, those subjects with Closed-Be-
lief Systems did not question their interaction but rather
assumed they were relating on a "psyche-process" level.
One implication of this investigation was that in
group counseling, those with "open minds" can be expected
to benefit more than those with "closed minds," since those
with "closed minds" seemed to avoid the personal involve
ment necessary for beneficial results to occur from group
counseling.
A study by Brumbaugh, Hoedt, and Beisel (1966) in
vestigated the relationship between dogmatism and accuracy
of interpersonal perception. The study concerned itself
with the relationship existing between dogmatism of student
teachers and supervising teachers, as measured by the Ro
keach Dogmatism Scale, and the perceptual accuracy of these
subjects in estimating each other's interpersonal needs, as
measured by the Schutz FIRO "B" Scale.
Results indicated that dogmatism and perceptual accu
racy appeared to be unrelated. A question raised by the
authors concerning their findings was:
Is it possible that dogmatism operates only
during the initial stages of interpersonal
relationships and its effect on accuracy of
perception is then parceled out during the
passage of time? (p.337)
Mouw (1969), using the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale, stu
died a group of college students in the areas of dogmatism
and cognitive processes. His results indicated that those
students measured as open-minded tended to increase in the
mean performance of tasks as the tasks became more complex
or autonomous. Subjects measured as closed-minded tended
to decrease in mean performance as the tasks became more
autonomous. Mouw concluded that closed-minded subjects
tended to rely on authority for direction and support more
than did open-minded subjects.
Implications from these findings include the premise
that both the OPI and R-D Scale are appropriate and accurate
measuring instruments for the attitudinal variables of spe
cific concern to the present study.
Ratings other than self-reports have been used exten
sively to evaluate attitudinal and behavioral changes in
subjects. It has been found that discrepancies sometimes
exist between the expressed attitudes a person reports and
his outward behavior in relation to these attitudes as ob
served by others. Cohen (1964) has stated:
Attitudes are always seen as precursors of beha
vior, as determinants of how a person will ac
tually behave in his daily affairs. In spite of
the wide acceptance of the assumption, however,
very little work on attitude change has dealt
explicitly with the behavior that may follow a
change in attitude. (p.138)
Hopke (1955) in his investigation of counselor atti-
50
tudes also commented on the relationship between attitudes
and behavior:
Only a thorough analysis of the counselor's use
of words, personal mannerisms, and methods of
handling clients' reactions . . . can adequately
determine the real attitude that a counselor
holds. (p.216)
Alice Miel (in Kemp, 1970), using self-report ques
tionnaires and observer reports in a group self-study,
found that there was a wide difference of opinion regarding
the amount of change taking place in an individual when the
person's analysis of himself was compared to an analysis of
that person by another. Conclusions were that attempts at
self-analysis are highly subjective, members of a group of
ten see changes in themselves which are not observed by
others, it is difficult to analyze or observe changes with
insufficient data, changes that were listed by persons as
having taken place in themselves were for the most part
changes in attitude and not in outward behavior, and the
change in attitude was the first type of change to take
place in an individual.
Additional studies also reflect a recognition of the
value of other-than-self-evaluation to assess attitude and
behavior change. Stefflre, King, and Leafgren (1962),
Combs and Super (1963), and Russo, Kelz and Hudson (1964)
all utilized supervisor ratings to evaluate counselor can
didates. A study by Wrightsman, Richard, and Nobel (1966)
51
employed peer ratings along with the Rokeach Dogmatism
Scale to assess changes in attitudes among counselor
trainees.
Zimpfer (1967) employed peer ratings to evaluate at
titude change among high school students who had partici
pated in a group counseling experience. Results of the in-1
vestigation revealed that changes in feelings and attitudes
seemed to correlate more with evaluation by peers than
with self-evaluation. This suggested that more accurate
assessments of changes in attitude of an individual may be
made from his interactional behavior than from his self-
report of progress. According to Zimpfer:
In reference to group situations, the best
method we have for understanding what goes
on "inside" the individual is the model of
what goes on "between" individuals. ( p,. 707)
Wiggins and Blackburn (1969) studied the usefulness
of peer ratings in academic prediction and concluded that
peer ratings demonstrated considerable promise as a method
for measuring graduate school success.
Seaman and Wurtz (1968) attempted to evaluate the re
lationships among test scores of counselor sensitivity, suc
cess in a counseling practicu, and peer and supervisory
ratings. Their findings showed substantial relationship
among test scores, peer, and supervisory ratings.
Vingoe and Antonoff (1968) investigated personality
characteristics of good peer judges and concluded that good
52
peer judges were those who minimized their worries and com
plaints, were well-adjusted, self-controlled, and tolerant.
Musella's study (1967) attempted to determine how and
to what extent open-minded and closed-minded school princi
pals differed in their ratings of teachers. As the author
stated: "In as much as rating is the function of social
perceptions, it is affected by the personal characteristics
of the rater" (p.76). For Musella, the term "social per
ception" was used to describe the manner in which one per
son perceived or inferred the traits and intentions of
another.
Findings indicated that the rating of teachers' effec
tiveness was, in some respects, a function of the percep
tual-cognitive style of the rater and was related to the
open or closed-mindedness of the rater.
These findings are also indicative of the value and
appropriateness of utilizing observer reports in addition to
to self-assessment measuring instruments employed in the
current study for assessing the personality and attitudinal
variables under investigation.
Summary
This chapter has reviewed the literature deemed rele
vant to the current investigation. Research has emphasized
the importance of nonintellective factors within the per
sonality of the counselor which contribute to his effective
53
functioning as a counselor. Ample evidence exists to sug
gest that an effective counseling relationship is not so
dependent on counseling techniques or the theoretical or
ientation of the counselor as it is on the attitudes held
and expressed by the counselor when he counsels. The need
for even further study on counselor characteristics which
contribute to improved counselor functioning was indicated.
Specific nonintellective factors of flexibility, tol
erance, and nonauthoritarianism were shown to be highly
significant to the counseling relationship. Research find
ings revealed that flexibility aided counselor effective
ness while rigidity impeded counselor functioning. Toler
ance, it appeared, facilitated the establishment and main
tenance of a positive counseling relationship, whereas an
attitude of intolerance contributed to negative and inef
fective counseling results. Similar findings were reported
for nonauthoritarian attitudes, i.e., nonauthoritarian
counselors were viewed as more effective and facilitative,
while dogmatic or authoritarian counselors were rated as
less able to establish and maintain effective counseling
relationships.
The efforts of counselor educators to effect attitu
dinal changes in students of counseling as reported in the
research literature was next reviewed. The literature dis
closed numerous positive results obtained through programs
54
focusing on the education of counselors for the changing of
attitudes. Several problems, however, were emphasized, one
concerned with the duration of the change and one with the
actuality of the change. The possibility of students re
sponding in a manner perceived as "acceptable" to counselor
educators was considered. The present investigation is
also concerned with this possibility and at a later point
examines the question in reference to OPI scales.
Since the changing of specific attitudinal variables
through the group counseling process was in the design of
the present study, research on the effectiveness of group
counseling in accomplishing attitudinal change was examined.
The findings indicated the efficacy of the group counseling
experience for producing change in personality and attitu
dinal variables. Several studies indicated the importance
of having trained group leaders, a fact the present study
has incorporated. Most of the studies took no note of the
leader variable as a significant part of the design, an
other factor the present study has considered. Findings
also revealed that not only the more conventional weekly
group counseling experiences, but also the innovative mara
thon experience produced attitudinal change.
In addition to studies on nonintellective changes re
sulting in the general population through participation in
group interaction, studies were also reviewed dealing spe
cifically with counselor trainees enrolled in counselor ed
ucation programs. These investigations focused on the
group experience as part of the program to effect attitu
dinal change and reported numerous successes.
Finally, research findings on the measurement instru
ments utilized in the present investigation were reviewed.
It appeared from the data examined that the Omnibus Person
ality Inventory and the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale were both
valid and reliable inventories as measures of change in
the nonintellective variables of flexibility, tolerance,
and nonauthoritarianism.
Implicit in the research was the patent value of ob
taining observer reports on the variables under study to
determine the congruence between self-evaluation and ob
server evaluation of these same specific attitudes.
CHAPTER III
METHODS AND SOURCES OF DATA
This chapter presents methodology of the study and
the research design under the following headings: (1) de
scription of the sample groups, (2) description of the
sources of data, and (3) the statistical procedures em
ployed in the analysis of the results.
Description of the Sample Groups
The sample population of this study was composed of
100 graduate students enrolled in counselor education
courses at the University of Southern California (USC) and
California State College at Los Angeles (CSLA). The USC
sample included 56 graduate students enrolled in the Coun
selor Education program. Thirty of these students, 13
males and 17 females, comprised the experimental group.
They were selected from 72 students involved in the pretest
administration as having met the criterion of no previous
group experience. All subjects in the experimental group
were enrolled in Counselor Education Ed.CE 541, a course
designed to introduce students to counseling theories and
procedures. The course requirements include student par
ticipation in a short-term group counseling experience dur
ing the laboratory section of the course. The 30 subjects
56
57
were assigned to one of six groups, led by different super
visors, for the group counseling experience.
Twenty-six graduate students at USC, enrolled in four
different counseling courses, (Ed.CE 500, 539, 544, 548),
none of which provided nor required a group experience as
part of the course work, represented the USC control group.
Of the 71 students enrolled in these courses at the time of
the pretest administration, only 26, 9 males and 17 females,
met the criteria of no previous group experience and no in
tention of participating in any group counseling during the
experimental period.
An additional 44 graduate students enrolled in the
Guidance and Counseling Department at CSLA were included in
the study. Twenty-two of these students, 11 males and 11
females, comprised the experimental group at CSLA. These
students were registered in three sections of Education
527A, a course whose purpose is to improve counselor effec
tiveness through the involvement of the students in a group
counseling experience as participating members. All 22
subjects enrolled in the 52 7A course met the criterion of
having had no prior group experience. They were assigned
to one of three subgroups, two led by the same supervisor
and the other led by a different supervisor, for group coun
seling .
In the CSLA control group, 22 students, 7 males and
58
15 females, were enrolled in Education 404A, an introduc
tory graduate course in developmental psychology, a re
quirement for admission into the counseling option involv
ing no group experience. Of the 2 7 students enrolled at
the time of pretesting, only 22 met the criteria of no
previous group experience and no intention of participating
in group counseling during the experimental period.
Sixteen males and 32 females comprised the total con
trol group and 24 males and 28 females comprised the total
experimental group from the combined schools. All subjects
were administered a pre and posttest of the Omnibus Person
ality Inventory, Form F, and the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale,
Form E. In addition, Peer Ratings were obtained for all
experimental group members at the conclusion of their
short-term group counseling experience.
All subjects in the control and experimental samples
were tested with the above instruments at the beginning and
end of the Fall, 1970, semester at USC and at the beginning
and end of the Fall, 1970, quarter at CSLA. All students
in the experimental group were involved in a total of 30
hours of group counseling which extended throughout the se
mester or quarter periods.
Sources of Data
Since the primary concern of this study was to assess
the degree and direction of change occurring among group
59
members bn certain personality and attitudinal variables,
as a result of a short-term group counseling experience, it
was necessary to administer tests to each subject to obtain
data on these variables.
The review of the literature revealed that several
standardized inventories were sufficiently valid for atti
tude and personality assessment.
The Omnibus Personality Inventory (OPI) was chosen as
one of the instruments. As stated in the manual, the OPI
contains fourteen scales, each of which is intended to mea
sure relevant aspects of the individual as a changing,
learning organism in the special context of academic insti
tutions. The major purposes of the OPI were to provide a
meaningful, differentiating description of students and a
means of assessing change rather than a device or instru
ment for testing a specific theory. Definitions of the
fourteen scales of the OPI, as described in the manual,
follow:
1. Thinking Introversion (TI) . Persons scoring
high on this measureare characterized by a
liking for reflective thought and academic
activities. They express interests in a
broad range of ideas found in a variety of
areas, such as literature, art, and philo
sophy. Their thinking is less dominated by
immediate conditions and situations, or by
commonly accepted ideas, than that of think
ing extroverts (low scorers). Most extro
verts show a preference for overt action
and tend to evaluate ideas on the basis of
their practical, immediate application, or
to entirely reject or avoid dealing with
ideas and abstractions.
60
Theoretical Orientation (TO). This scale
measures an interest m, or orientation
to, a more restricted range of ideas than
is true of TI. High scorers indicate a
preference for dealing with theoretical
concerns and problems and for using the
scientific method in thinking; many are
also exhibiting an interest in science
and in scientific activities. High
scorers are generally logical, analytical,
and critical in their approach to problems
and situations.
Estheticism (Es). High scorers endorse
statements indicating diverse interests
in artistic matters and activities and a
high level of sensitivity and response to
esthetic stimulation. The content of the
statements in this scale extends beyond
painting, sculpture, and music, and in
cludes interests in literature and
dramatics.
Complexity (Co). This measure reflects
an experimental and flexible orientation
rather than a fixed way of viewing and
organizing phenomena. High scorers are
tolerant of ambiguities and uncertainties;
they are fond of novel situations and
ideas. Most persons high on this dimen
sion prefer to deal with complexity, as
opposed to simplicity, and very high
scorers are disposed to seek out and to
enjoy diversity and ambituity.
Autonomy (Au). The characteristic measured
by this scale is composed of liberal, non
authoritarian thinking and a need for inde
pendence. High scorers show a tendency to
be independent of authority as traditionally
imposed through social institutions. They
oppose infringements on the rights of in
dividuals and are tolerant of viewpoints
other than their own; they tend to be real
istic, intellectually and politically liberal,
and much less judgmental than low scorers.
Religious Orientation (RO). High scorers are
skeptical of conventional religious beliefs
61
and practices and tend to reject most of
them, especially those that are orthodox
or fundamentalistic in nature. Persons
scoring around the mean are manifesting
a moderate view of religious beliefs and
practices; low scorers are manifesting a
strong commitment to Judaic-Christian be
liefs and tend to be conservative in gen
eral and frequently rejecting of other
viewpoints.
7. Social Extroversion (SE). This measure
reflects a preferred style of relating
to people in a social context. High
scorers display a strong interest in
being with people, and they seek social
activities and gain satisfaction from
them. The social introvert Clow scorer)
tends to withdraw from social contacts
and responsibilities.
8. Impulse Expression (IE). This scale as
sesses a general readiness to express im
pulses and to seek gratification either in
conscious thought or in overt action. High
scorers have an active imagination, value
sensual reactions and feelings; very high
scorers have frequent feelings of rebellion
and aggression.
9.. Personal Integration (PI)- The high scorer
admits to few attitudes and behaviors that
characterize socially alienated or emotionally
disturbed persons. Low scorers often inten
tionally avoid others and experience feelings
of hostility and aggression along with feel
ings of isolation, loneliness, and rejection.
10. Anxiety Level (AL). High scorers deny that
they have feelings or symptoms of anxiety
and do not admit to being nervous or worried.
Low scorers describe themselves as tense or
high-strung. They may experience some dif
ficulty in adjusting to their social environ
ment, and they tend to have a poor opinion
of themselves. (Note the direction of scor
ing on this scale: a high score indicates
a low level of anxiety and vice versa.)
11. Altruism (Am). The high scorer is an af-
filiative person and trusting and ethical
in his relations with others. He has
strong concern for the feelings and wel
fare of people he meets. Low scorers tend
not to consider the feelings and welfare
of others and often view people from an
impersonal, distant perspective.
12. Practical Outlook (PO) . The high scorer
on this measure is interested in practical,
applied activities and tends to value ma
terial possessions and concrete accomplish
ments. The criterion most often used to
evaluate ideas and things is one of imme
diate utility. Authoritarianism, conser
vatism, and nonintellectual interests are
very frequent personality components of
persons scoring above the average.
13. Masculinity-Femininity (MF). This scale
assesses some of the differences in atti
tudes and interests between college men
and women. High scorers (masculine) deny
interests in esthetic matters, and they
admit to few adjustment problems, feelings
of anxiety or personal inadequacies. They
also tend to be somewhat less socially
inclined than low scorers and more inter
ested in scientific matters. Low scorers
(feminine), besides having stronger es
thetic and social inclinations, also admit
to greater sensitivity and emotionality.
14. Response Bias (RB). This measure, composed
chiefly of items seemingly unrelated to the
concept, represents an approach to assess
ing the student's test-taking attitude. High
scorers are responding in a manner similar
to a group of students who were explicitly
asked to make a good impression by their
responses to these items. Low scorers, on
the contrary, may be trying to make a bad
impression or are indicating a low state of
well-being or feelings of depression.
The Rokeach Dogmatism Scale, Form E, was also chosen
as an instrument in this study. Kerlinger (1964) had noted
63
that an interesting and psychologically significant example
of construct validation is Rokeach’s work on the Dogmatism
(D) Scale. Rokeach (1960) reported odd-even reliabilities
of .82 and test-retest reliability of .84 with a twelve
month time lapse. Although the Rokeach "D" Scale is not
commercially available, anyone can use it for research pur
poses .
The Rokeach Dogmatism Scale is a measure of open and
closed-belief systems and nonauthoritarian thinking. An
operational definition of open-mindedness or flexible
thinking is described by Rokeach as receiving stimulus in
formation without distortion and evaluating and acting on
that information on its own intrinsic merits, unencumbered
by irrelevant factors.
Conversely, closed-mindedness or inflexible thinking
involves receiving stimulus information under pressure of
rewards or punishment meted out by authority figures and
reference groups which causes distorted perceptions, in
fluences evaluation, and directs actions.
Since several scales of the Omnibus Personality In
ventory purport ot measure attitudes of flexible, tolerant,
nonauthoritarian orientations, the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale
was chosen as a suitable check instrument to assess compar
able variables.
Since the secondary purpose of this study was to de-
64
termine the relationship between self-report inventories
and observer reports, a rating scale was devised. Group
supervisor ratings of group members and peer ratings for
other group members on the dimensions of flexibility, tol
erance, and nonauthoritarian thinking were incorporated
into the design to assess disparities between self-assess
ment and observer assessment. The aforementioned attri
butes were rated on a five-point scale, administered during
the final group counseling meetings of all groups.
Operational definitions for the variables were as
follows:
1. Flexibility. The perceived ability to
tolerate differences in others.
2. Diversity. The ability to enjoy novel
situations and a preference for complex
ity as opposed to simplicity.
3. Ambiguity. The ability to tolerate un
certainty and indefiniteness.
4. Tolerance. A willingness to accept others
with differing viewpoints and behaviors.
5. Nonauthoritarianism. Behavior exhibiting
personal autonomy and independence of
thought and judgment.
An average score for each of the five dimensions of
the rating scale was computed for each group member. This
score, representing peer assessment of the defined beha
vior, was included as a variable in the treatment and ana
lysis of the data.
The same procedure was followed for ratings of group
members by group supervisors; that is, the average score
for each dimension of the rating scale for each group mem
ber was incorporated as another variable, supervisor assess
ment, in the treatment and analysis of the data.
Statistical Procedure
The purpose of this study was to determine the de
gree and direction of change occurring among group members
as a result of a short-term counseling experience on cer
tain personality and attitudinal variables.
The data from the scales of the Omnibus Personality
Inventory, the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale, peer ratings, and
supervisor ratings were coded and prepared for the IBM 360
Computer at the USC University Computing Center. Analysis
of variance for the 15 variables on the OPI scales and the
Rokeach "D" scales for each subgroup, experimental and con
trol, was performed to determine whether significant dif
ferences existed between the experimental and control
groups on the pretest measures at the .05 significance
level.
The program utilized for the analysis of variance was
BMD01V which yielded analysis of variance tables with means
and standard deviations for the treatment groups.
Analysis of covariance for the 15 items was performed
with pretest scores serving as covariate and posttest
scores as the dependent variables. The BMD04V program gave
the analysis of covariance results.
The Kruskall-Wallis Analysis of Variance by Rank was
performed, since sample size was limited, on the experi
mental groups at both USC and CSLA in order to consider
the effect of the supervisor variable on the short-term
group counseling experience. The supervisor was the inde
pendent variable with the posttest scores for the 15 items
; serving as the dependent variables.
Next, Pearson correlation coefficients, utilizing the
! BMD03D program, were obtained to determine correlations
existing between peer and supervisor ratings at both
schools on the five dimensions of the rating scale.
Further correlations were obtained for all 15 vari
ables (R-D Scale plus 14 OPI scales). The averaged scores
from the five peer and supervisor rating scales for USC
and CSLA experimental groups were treated by Pearson cor
relation coefficients.
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS: EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
The purpose of this chapter is to present the find
ings from the statistical analyses employed in the experi
mental design to determine what effect short-term group
counseling with trained supervisors has on attitudinal var
iables of flexibility, tolerance, and nonauthoritarianism.
This chapter will report the findings for experimental and
control groups on fifteen attitudinal variables, assessed
by a pre and posttest format utilizing scales of the Omni
bus Personality Inventory and the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale.
Chapter V will deal with analyses of the correlational de
sign used to determine the relationships existing between
self-report measures of specific attitudinal variables and
observer ratings and the relationship existing between the
Rokeach Dogmatism Scale and the Omnibus Personality Inven
tory .
Also reported in Chapter V is the treatment of the
supervisor as a variable with the criterion of short-term
group counseling.
Because of the statistical treatment, it was possible
to analyze the data for three treatment groups: USC, CSLA,
and USC-CSLA combined. Initially, each group, experimental
67
68 '
and control, at the University of Southern California and
at California State College at Los Angeles was treated sep
arately. The rationale was that by treating the two col
lege populations separately the "spirit of place" would not
be violated and differences which might occur because of a
contrast between private and public graduate populations
could be considered.
Since the purpose of this study was to determine the
effect of short-term group counseling on specific attitu
dinal variables, it was also deemed appropriate to combine
the experimental and control groups at the two colleges
into one experimental design.
Pretest Findings for USC Treatment Groups
Analysis of variance was performed on the fifteen
variables in the pretests for both the experimental and
control groups at USC. The computed F ratios for all fif
teen variables for USC are reported in Table 1.
No significant differences existed between the ex
perimental and control groups at USC on twelve of the fif
teen variables. Significant differences did appear on
three variables, Thinking Introversion, Theoretical Orien
tation, and the Complexity scales of the OPI. Higher mean
scores for the control group at USC contributed to the sig
nificant differences on these three variables (Table 2).
TABLE 1
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
PRETEST SCORES FOR R-D and OPI SCALES
EXPERIMENTAL VERSUS CONTROL AT USC
Mean Scores
Item Experimental Control F Ratio
R-D 117.26 125.96 1.62
TI 52.16 55.80 4.11*
TO 45.60 53.46 11.95**
Es 51.60 55.57 3.48
Co 48. 86 54. 73 4.99*
Au 58 .43 59.73 0.33
RO 55.26 56.00 0.08
SE 49.10 51.53 0.80
IE 47.40 58.23 1.01
PI 61.33 61.38 0.02
AL 55.33 56. 76 0.49
Am 57.03 58. 50 0.42
PO 42.80 41.38 0.52
MF 45.20 47.15 0.80
RB 51.86 54.84 1.45
*p<.05=4.02
**p<,9k=7.12
TABLE 2
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS - USC
Variable Source Number Mean
Measurement
Error
Standard
Deviation
Thinking
Introversion (TI) Experimental 30 52.16 1.45 7.9
(TI) Control 26 55.80 0.95 4.8
(TI) Total 56 53.85 0.92 6.9
j
Theoretical Orientation (TO) Experimental 30 45.60 1.62 8.9
(TO) Control 26 53.46 1.55 7.9
(TO) Total 56 49.25 1.24 9.2
Complexity (Co) Experimental 30 48.86 1.60 8.7
Co Control 26 54.73 2.12 10. 8
Co Total 56 51.58 1.35 10.1
These pretest differences were later analyzed by analysis
of covariance which adjusts for pretest differences between
groups.
Posttest Findings for USC Treatment Groups
At USC, after employing analysis of covariance using
posttest scores, it was found that no significant differ
ences existed on eleven of the fifteen variables. Tables
7 through 36 in Appendix A report the F ratios and adjusted
means and standard errors for all fifteen variables.
Significant differences were found on four of the
fifteen variables: Theoretical Orientation, Practical Out
look, Masculinity-Femininity and Response Bias ( T a b l e s
11-12, 31-32, 33-34, 35-36 in Appendix A).
As a result of these findings from the experimental
and control groups at USC, the following null hypotheses
were not rejected:
No significant differences exist between experi
mental and control groups on measures of Dogma
tism, Thinking Introversion, Estheticism, Auto
nomy, Religious Orientation, Social Extroversion,
Impulse Expression, Personal Integration, Anxiety
Level and Altruism.
However, four significant differences were found be
tween experimental and control groups at USC on posttest
scores treated by analysis of covariance. As a result of
these findings, the following null hypotheses were rejected:
Significant differences do not exist between
experimental and control groups on a measure
72
of Theoretical Orientation, Practical Outlook,
Masculinity-Femininity, and Response Bias.
Pretest Findings for CSLA Treatment Groups
Analysis of variance for the data from the fifteen
input variables for experimental and control groups at CSLA
yielded no significant differences between groups on four
teen of the fifteen variables. Computed £ ratios for the
CSLA pretest groups are reported in Table 31 (Appendix A).
One significant difference appeared for the RB (Response
Bias) scale of the OPI. Higher mean scores for the experi
mental group contributed to the variance (Table 4). An
alysis of covariance performed later with posttest data
adjusted for pretest differences between groups.
Posttest Findings for CSLA Treatment Groups
At CSLA, after analysis of.coyariance was performed,
no significant differences existed on eleven of the fifteen
variables. Tables 37 through 66 in Appendix B report the
F ratios and adjusted means and standard errors for all fif
teen items.
Significant differences were found on four of the fif
teen variables: Dogmatism- Complexity, Masculinity-Femin
inity, and Response Bias (Tables 37-38, 45-46, 63-64, 65-66
in Appendix B).
As a result of these findings from the experimental
and control groups at CSLA, the following null hypothesis
were not rejected:
73
TABLE 3
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
PRETEST SCORES FOR R-D and OPI SCALES
EXPERIMENTAL VERSUS CONTROL AT CSLA
Item
Mean
Experimental
Scores
Control F Ratio
R-D 131.86 124.68 0.89
TI 52.22 52.50 0.01
TO 49.63 47.22 0.81
Es 51.81 53.09 0.23
Co 51.31 51.40 0.00
Au 59.13 61.36 0.88
RO 54.59 57. 50 1.52
SE 51.13 48.31 0.68
IE 50 .40 51.54 0.17
PI 59.86 57.63 0.92
AL 55.18 52.77 0. 72
Am 56.90 54.68 0. 80
PO 44.95 43.72 0.22
MF 48.45 45.77 1.28
RB 55.72 49 .90 4.95*
*p<.05 = 4.0 7
74
TABLE 4
MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS
RESPONSE BIAS ON OPI - CSLA
Source Number Mean
Measurement
Error
Standard
Deviation
Experimental 22 55.72 2.14 10.0
Control 22 49 .90 1.49 7.0
Total 44 52.81 1.36 9.0
Significant differences do not exist between
experimental and control groups on a measure
of Thinking Introversion, Theoretical Orienta
tion, Estheticism, Autonomy, Religious Orienta
tion, Social Extroversion, Impulse Expression,
Personal Integration, Anxiety,Level, Altruism,
and Practical Outlook.
However, four significant differences were found be
tween experimental and control groups at CSLA on posttest
scores treated by analysis of covariance. As a result of
these findings, the following null hypotheses were rejec
ted:
There are no significant differences between
experimental and control groups on measures
of Dogmatism, Complexity, Masculinity-Femi-
ninity, and Response Bias.
Pretest Findings for Combined Treatment Groups
When the two separate experimental groups were com
bined and when the two separate control groups were com
bined at both schools and treated as one experimental
group (52 subjects) and one control group (48 subjects),
75
no significant differences appeared for the fifteen vari
ables after analysis of variance. Table 67 in Appendix C
computed £ ratios for the fifteen variables for the com
bined experimental and control groups. It therefore can
be assumed that both the experimental and control groups
came from the same population.
Posttest Findings for Combined
Treatment Groups
For posttest comparisons of experimental and control
groups, analysis of covariance was performed (Tables 68 -
9 7 in Appendix D).
Significant differences between experimental and
control groups appeared on three of the fifteen variables:
Practical Outlook, Masculinity-Femininity, and Response
Bias. (Tables 92-93, 94-95, 96-97 in Appendix D).
No significant differences occurred on twelve of the
fifteen variables. The null hypotheses were therefore not
rejected for the following reason:
Significant differences do not exist between
experimental and control groups on a measure
of Dogmatism, Thinking Introversion, Theore
tical Orientation, Estheticism, Complexity,
Autonomy, Religious Orientation, Social Ex
troversion, Impulse Expression, Personal
Integration, Anxiety Level and Altruism.
Three significant differences were found between ex
perimental and control groups on posttest scores treated
by analysis of covariance. The following null hypotheses
were therefore rejected:
There are no significant differences between
experimental and control groups on measures
of Practical Outlook, Masculinity-Feminity
and Response Bias.
Summary
The findings reported in this chapter answer the
first question proposed in Chapter I.
The data yielded evidence that short-term group
counseling with trained group supervisors does effect
change on the attitudinal variables of flexibility, toler
ance, and nonauthoritarianism.
The treatment group at CSLA showed significant
change on two variables with which this study was specifi
cally concerned: Dogmatism as measured by the Rokeach
Dogmatism Scale and Complexity as measured by the OPI.
The change on the dimension of dogmatism was in the
direction of less dogmatism and toward more open-belief
systems. The change on the OPI Complexity scale was in
the direction of greater preference for complexity. The
fact that there was significant change on the Complexity
scale at SCLA indicates that the dimensions of tolerance
and flexibility were affected since Complexity is a gen
eral measure of these dimensions as well as being substan
tially correlated with liberalism and nonauthoritarianism.
The treatment group at USC showed significant change
on one variable with which this study was specifically
concerned: Practical Outlook, as measured by the OPI.
The change on the OPI scale of Practical Outlook was
toward a lower standard score. Since Practical Outlook as
defined in the manual states that high scores on Practical
Outlook would indicate authoritarianism and a tendency to
be dogmatic and fundamentalistic in beliefs and attitudes,
the change in the USC treatment group toward lowered PO
scores was interpreted as a changed toward less authori
tarianism and less dogmatism.
The total treatment group, the CSLA-USC experimental
groups combined, yielded a similar significant change on
the Practical Outlook scale. Since the change for the
total ecperimental group was toward lowered PO scores, the
change was again interpreted to mean a change toward less
dogmatism.
These findings suggest that in a study of the effect
of short-term group counseling with trained supervisors on
specific attitudinal variables, there is evidence that
group members will report on measures of attitude, changes
which indicate movement toward more flexibility, more tol
erance, and more nonauthoritarian orientation.
CHAPTER V
FINDINGS: CORRELATIONAL DESIGN
It is the purpose of this chapter to report the data
from the correlational design. The findings are organized
to answer specific questions stated in Chapter I. Corre
lational analyses were performed to assess the effect of
the supervisor on group response, to determine the rela
tionship between peer and supervisor ratings on the atti
tudinal scales employed in the study, and to ascertain
whether specific OPI scales and the Rokeach Dogmatism
Scale are correlated as measures of flexibility, tolerance
and nonauthoritarianism.
Findings for the Supervisor Variable at CSLA
Since one of the concerns of this study was to de
termine whether intergroup differences between experimental
and control posttest scores, after short-term group coun
seling, can be attributed to the supervisor variable, a
nonparametric analysis of variance was employed. Three
subgroups with two supervisors (one supervisor leading two
separate groups) at CSLA were treated by the Kruskal-
Wallis Analysis of Variance by Rank. Appendix E contains
the H statistic with significance levels for the CSLA
78
supervisors. The results did not find the supervisor to
be a significant variable.
Findings for the Supervisor Variable at USC
The same statistical treatment was applied to the
six groups with six different supervisors at USC. Appendix
F contains the H statistic with significance levels for
the USC supervisors. Again, the supervisor was not found
to be a significant variable.
Peer Ratings at CSLA
Another concern of this study was to determine the
relationship between self-assessment and observer ratings
(peer and supervisor) on the dimensions of flexibility,
tolerance, and nonauthoritarian orientation.
In order to determine the relationship between peer
and supervisor ratings and the fifteen posttest self-as
sessed variables from the experimental group, the data
were treated with a Pearson correlation subroutine which
yielded significance levels in a correlation matrix.
(Tables 5 , 6 ).
At CSLA, peer ratings correlated significantly with
the following self-assessed variables on the posttests.
1. Peer ratings on the dimension of flex
ibility (A) correlated significantly
with Theoretical Orientation, .37;
Religious Orientation, .41; and Response
Bias, .55.
2. Peer ratings on the dimension of diversity
TABLE 5
INTERCORRELATION MATRIX FOR CSLA
TI TO Es Co Au RO SE IE PI AL Am P0 MF RB A B C D E SA SB SC SD SD
RD -.38*-.25 -.30 -.25 -57*-.20 -.31 .11 -.25 -.04 -.49* .57* .32 -.19 -.30 - -.38*—.31 ■ -.34 -.05 - ..64*_.67*--.53*-..58*--.59*
TI .61* .54* . 36* .56*-.00 .28
.13
.23 -.09 .44*-.84*-.48* .14 .07 .35* .20 .02 -.04 . 62* .32
.25 .38* .48*
TO .50* .29 .32 .08 . 39* .15 .33 -.02 .34 -,60*-.18 .42* .37* .42* .18 .14 .09 .39* .25 .25 .23 .31
Es
.39* .35*-.11 .35*
.28 .11 -.14 .31 -.52*-.49*-.06 .22 . 62* .46* .30 .08 .49* .33 .32 .58* .38*
Co .24 . 36*-.09 .58*-.49*-.47*-.13 -.43*—.31 -.41*-.08 .09 .10 - -.29 -.39* .34 .18 .27 .23 .28
Au .38* .14 . -.05 .16 -.10 .38*-.65*-.25 -.15 -.03 .26 .20 .06 -.12 .60* .46* .29 .58* .38*
R0 -.34 .08 -.50*-.30 -.27 -.08 .04 -.44*-.41*.-.33 -.34 - -.53*-.62*- ..06 .07 .16 - -.05 - ..02
SE .12 .56* .23 .84*-.18 -.46* .40* .15 .24 .09 .24 .10
.15 .01 - ..10 .12 .21
IE -,44*-.48*-.19 .03 -.32 -.39*-.01 .14 .09 - -.24 -.20 .16 .08
.17 -
.20 .22
PI .64* .69*-.26 .06 .80* .34
.33 .11 .57* .47*
.18 .18
.03 .23 .42*
AL .25 .09 .37 .50* .16 .06 -.07 .26 .20 - ..28 -.1 5 .
-.19 - -.31 - -.38*
Am -.42 -.35* .43* .07 .23 .08 .30 .14 .32 .17 .03 .23 .42*
PO .39*-.17 -.12 - -.48*-.30 - -.18 -.03 - -.76*-.56*--.42*.-.52*.-. 62*
MF .14 .17 ■ -.28 -.16 .11 .32 - -.34 -.18 - -.05 - -.28 - -.34
RB
.55* .27 .06 .57* .44* .11 .07 - -.07 .04
.07
A .64* . 62* . 78* . 62*
.33 .29
.24
.38* .18
B .78* . 70* .48*
.51* .59* .38* . 60*
.51*
C . 60* . 62* .52* .47* .26 .50* .28
D • 66* .39* .42* .24 .54* .35
E .34 .34 .25 .32 .15
SA .80* .61* .87* .82*
SB
.73* .78* .80*
SC
.54* .59*
SD
.82*
*p < .05 LEGEND
A = Peer Rating for Flexibility SA = Supervisor Rating for Flexibility
B = " 1 1 1 1 Diversity SB = 1 1 1 1 1 1 Diversity
C = 1 1 M 1 1 Ambiguity SC = 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ambiguity
D = " 1 1 1 1 Tolerance SD = 1 1 1 1 1 1 Tolerance
E = 1 1 " 1 1 Non-Authoritarianism SE = 1 1 1 1 1 1 Non-Authoritarianism
TABLE 6
INTERCORRELATION MATRIX FOR USC
TI TO Es Co Au RO SE
RD
-.17 -.29 .20 -
-.31*-
- . 60*. -.50*--.34*
TI
.73* .59* .51* .57* .32* .07
TO .50* . 68* .52* .29 .07
Es
.39* .18 .09
.01
Co . 63* .38* .36*
Au
.77* .16
RO
.15
B E SA SB SC SD SE
-.19 -.2 9 -.13 -.2 7 .48* .07 -.23 -.1 2 -.15 .15 -.24 -.09 -.1 2 -.30*-.42*-.06 -.1 6
.50*-.08 -.19 .03 -.64*-.52* .14 -.0 2 .06 .27 .16 .12 .00 .04 . 31* .07 -.0 0
.45* .06 .03 .11 -.57*-.13 .47* .06 .09 .10 .14 .13 .03 -.05 .37* .05 -.17
. 36* .04 .01 .05 -.21 -.39* .26 -.11 -.0 6 .10 -.0 5 .26 -.0 6 -.1 7 .10 -.01 -.0 5
. 58* .04 .11 .17 -,70*-.37* .26 .08 .22 .15 .14 .13 .11 .16 .23 .12 -.11
.57*-.06 -.1 6 . 01 -, 77*_.40*-.09 .03 .03 .01 .22 .14 .13 .19 . 33* .08 -.1 0
. 69*— .11 -.27 -.11 -.42*-.25 -.23 .09 .01 -.09 .25 .12 .14 .23 .24 .11 -.07
. 30* . 68* . 66* . 65*-.28 -.07 .33* .51* . 60* .19 .29 .20 .12 . 36* .23 .16 .08
-.0 8 -.19 -.09 -. 42*-.26 -.14 .25 .33* .11 .17 .01 .27 .39* .34* . 36* .16
.76* . 63* .03 .23 . 60* .31* .27 -.04 .08 .11 -.1 0 .03 .09 -.21 -.15
. 62* .06 .27 .55* .21 .20 .04 .05 .19 -.08 .00 .05 -.12 -.14
-.14 -.10 . 61* .29 .35* .27 .26 .12 -.09 .11 .02 -.0 3 -.00
.61*-.01 -.11 -.26 -.28 -.24 -.23 -.06 -.25 -.38*-.26 .02
.20 .20 -.01 -.22 -.04 -.18 .20 -.03 .12 -.05 -.00
.08 .09 -.02 .06 .09 -.0 6 -.02 .21 -.12 -.0 6
. 80* . 52* . 78* . 35* .57* .59* .52* .44* . 36*
.59* .55* .24 .40* .61* .39* .52* .44*
. 56* .14 .27 .33* .25 .30 .26
.54* . 60* . 58* . 51* .48* . 39*
.20 .34* . 36* .29 .18
.69* .72* . 76* .67*
.69* .77* .74*
. 65* . 61*
.72*
SE
IE
PI
AL
Am
PO
MF
RB
A
B
C
D
E
SA
SB
SC
SD
*P <.05
LEGEND
A = Peer Rating for Flexibility
B = 1 1 " 1 1 Diversity
C = 1 1 " 1 1 Ambiguity
D = 1 1 1 1 1 1 Tolerance
E = 1 1 " 1 1 Non-Authoritarianism
SA = Supervisor Rating for Flexibility
SB = 1 1 1 1 1 1 Diversity
SC = 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ambiguity
SD = 1 1 1 1 1 1 Tolerance
SE = 1 1 1 1 1 1 Non-Authoritarianism
82
(B) correlated significantly with Dogma
tism, .38; Thinking Introversion, .35;
Theoretical Orientation, .42; Estheticism,
.62; and Practical Outlook, .48.
3. Peer ratings on the dimensions of toler
ance for ambiguity (C) correlated signi
ficantly with Estheticism, .46.
4. Peer ratings on the dimension of toler
ance (D) correlated significantly with
Religious Orientation, .53; Personal In
tegration, .57; and Response Bias, .57.
i
5. Peer ratings on the dimension of nonauthor
itarianism (E) were significantly correlated j
with Complexity, .39; Religious Orientation,
.62; Personal Integration, .47; and Response
Bias, .44.
Peer Ratings at USC
At USC, peer ratings correlated significantly with
the following variables reported by the experimental group:
1. Peer ratings on the dimension of flexi
bility (A) correlated significantly with
Social Extroversion, .51; and Personal
Integration, .31.
2. Peer ratings on the dimension of diversity
(B) correlated significantly with Social
Extroversion, .60; Impulse Expression, .33;
and Altruism, .35.
There were no other significant correlations among
the remaining peer ratings and fifteen self-report variables.
Supervisor Ratings at CSLA
At CSLA, supervisor ratings correlated significantly
t
with the following self-assessed variables as reported by
the experimental group:
83
1. Supervisor ratings on the flexibility (A)
dimension correlated significantly with
Dogmatism, .64; Thinking Introversion,
.62; Theoretical Orientation, .39; Esthe
ticism, .49; Autonomy, .60; and Practical
Outlook, .76.
2. Supervisor ratings for diversity (B) cor
related with Dogmatism, .67; Autonomy, .46;
and Practical Outlook, .56.
3. Supervisor ratings on tolerance for ambi
guity (C) yielded significant correlations
with Dogmatism, .53, and Practical Outlook,
.42.
4. Supervisor ratings on the tolerance (D)
dimension correlated significantly with
Dogmatism, .58; Thinking Introversion,
.38; Estheticism, .58; Autonomy, .58;
and Practical Outlook, .52.
5. Supervisor ratings for the nonauthoritarian
(E) dimension yielded significant correla
tions with Dogmatism, .59; Thinking Intro
version, .48; Estheticism, .38; Autonomy,
.38; Anxiety Level, .38; Altruism, .42;
Practical Outlook, .62; and Personal Inte
gration, .42.
Supervisor Ratings at USC
At USC, supervisor ratings correlated significantly
with the following self-assessed variables as reported by
the experimental group:
1. Supervisor ratings on the diversity (B)
dimension correlated significantly with
Dogmatism, .30; Social Extroversion, .36;
and Impulse Expression, .39.
2. Supervisor ratings on the dimension of
tolerance for ambiguity (C) correlated
significantly with Dogmatism, .42; Think
ing Introversion, .31; Theoretical Orien
tation, .37; Autonomy, .33; Impulse Ex
pression, .34; and Practical Outlook, .38.
3. Supervisor ratings for the tolerance CD)
dimension yielded a significant correla
tion with Impulse Expression, .36.
No other significant correlations were found using
supervisor ratings as the criterion.
Relationship between Peer and
Supervisor Ratings at CSLA
When peer and supervisor ratings at CSLA were corre
lated on each of the five dimension of the rating scale,
extremely high correlations (<-001) were found for the di
versity (B) and the tolerance (D) scales (Table 5 ).
Relationship between Peer and
Supervisor Ratings at USC
When peer and supervisor ratings at USC were correla
ted on each of the five dimensions of the rating scale,
extremely high correlations (<.001) were found for the flex
ibility (A), diversity (B), and tolerance (D) scales
(Table 6) .
Relationship of OPI Scales and
the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale
The correlational matrix yielded significant correla
tions between various OPI scales and the Rokeach Dogmatism
Scale.
For the CSLA sample the following OPI scales were
correlated significantly with the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale:
Thinking Introversion, .38
Autonomy, .57
Altruism, .49
Practical Outlook, .57
For the USC sample, the following OPI scales were c
correlated significantly with the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale:
Complexity, .31
Autonomy, .60
Religious Orientation, .50
Social Extroversion, .34
Practical Outlook, .48
Four of the seven OPI scales which were correlated
with the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale (Complexity, Autonomy, Re
ligious Orientation, and Practical Outlook) are defined in
the OPI Manual and described in Chapter III as scales which
purport to assess various aspects of the attitudinal var
iables under study, i.e., those related to flexibility, tol
erance, and nonauthoritarianism.
Summary
The findings reported in this chapter in effect ans
wer three questions proposed in Chapter I.
The nonparametric analysis of variance using the su
pervisor as a variable did not yield statistical evidence
that the group supervisor is a significant variable effect
ing intergroup differences between experimental and control
groups. Therefore, it was concluded that differences oc
curring on posttest scores of the treatment group were un
related to the supervisor variable.
86
There were many significant correlations among the
fifteen posttest variables and observer (peer and super
visor) ratings at CSLA. Specifically, in reference to the
question concerning the relationship between observer ra
tings and self-report scores on the dimensions of this
study, the significant correlations which were found for
Dogmatism, Complexity, Autonomy, Religious Orientation, and
Practical Outlook supported the hypothesis that there is a
direct relationship between self-assessment and observer
ratings on the dimensions of flexibility, tolerance, and
nonauthoritarianism.
The findings at USC on observer ratings (peer and
supervisor) yielded the following results:
1. Although there were significant correla
tions between peer ratings and several of
the fifteen variables, there were no sig
nificant correlations among peer ratings
and those self-assessment variables which
relate to the dimensions of flexibility,
tolerance, and nonauthoritarianism.
2. There were significant correlations among
supervisosr ratings and certain variables
on the fifteen posttest self-assessment
variables. Specifically, correlations for
Dogmatism, Autonomy, Practical Outlook, and
the dimensions of flexibility, tolerance,
and nonauthoritarianism were found.
These findings support the hypothesis that there is a
direct relationship between self-assessment and observer
ratings on the dimensions of flexibility, tolerance, and
nonauthoritarianism.
The question concerning the relationship of OPI
scales with the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale was answered from
the data in the correlation matrix.
Seven scales of the OPI appeared to be correlated
with the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale. Four of the seven OPI
scales held relevance for this study: Complexity, Autonomy
Religious Orientation, and Practical Outlook. These corre
lations help to explain some of the findings from the ex
perimental design among the subgroups studied.
CHAPTER VI
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS,
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of this study was to assess attitudinal
change occurring among counselor trainees as a result of
short-term group counseling. A review of the literature
revealed the importance of personality and attitudinal var
iables for effective counselor functioning and indicated
that group counseling in counselor education programs was
an appropriate vehicle for effecting change in attitudes
among counselor candidates. Specifically, therefore, this
study attempted to evaluate the effects of group counseling
for students in counselor training programs upon the dimen
sions of flexibility, tolerance, and nonauthoritarianism as
indicated by personality inventories. A further purpose
was to determine whether such self-reported expressions of
attitudes correlated with observer ratings for the same
nonintellective factors.
This chapter presents a summary of procedures and a
capsulated review of the findings. Conclusions and impli
cation drawn from the findings are discussed, followed by
recommendations for further study.
r . . . . . . ’ _ ~ 8 9
Summary of Procedures
The study utilized an experimental design to test
the hypothesis:
Short-term group counseling with trained su
pervisors does influence personal attitudinal
variables of flexibility, tolerance, and non
authoritarianism of the group participants, and
the experimental groups will show greater growth
in tolerance/flexibility/nonauthoritarian levels
than the control group with no group experience.
A correlational design was used to test the hypothe- ;
| sis:
| There is a direct relationship between self-
assessment and observer ratings on the dimen
sions of flexibility, tolerance, and nonau
thoritarian orientation.
The subjects of this study were graduate students en
rolled in counselor education departments at the University
of Southern California or at California State College at
Los Angeles.
A grand total of 187 students participated in a pre
test administration of the Omnibus Personality Inventory
and the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale. Eighty-seven students
were eliminated from statistical analysis since they had
some kind of prior group experience. Therefore, the test
scores of one hundred students were used in the statistical
analysis of the experimental hypothesis.
Two experimental groups were used, one group com
posed of thirty students from USC and another group of
twenty-two students from CSLA. All subjects in the USC
experimental group were enrolled in Counselor Education 541,
a course in counseling theory requiring participation in a
group experience. The thirty USC subjects (thirteen males,
seventeen females) were assigned to one of six groups led
by six different supervisors. The twenty-two CSLA subjects
were enrolled in three sections of Education 527A, a course
with a group counseling format. For the CSLA experimental
subgroups, two group supervisors were used: one leader
facilitated two separate groups and another leader super
vised the remaining group.
A USC control group of twenty-six graduate students
was obtained from four different courses (Counselor Educa
tion 500, 539, 544, 548), none of which required group
counseling as part of the course work. At CSLA, the control
group of twenty-two students was enrolled in Education 404A,
a course in developmental psychology. All subjects in the
control groups met the criterion of no prior group exper
ience nor intention of concomitant participation in a group
experience during the experimental period.
The experimental and control groups were both pre
tested at the beginning and posttested at the end of the
Fall, 1970, academic terms. The experimental groups met
weekly for a total of thirty hours of group counseling; the
control groups met weekly for didactic instruction. Tests
administered to obtain indices of the variables under study
91
were the Omnibus Personality Inventory and the Rokeach Dog
matism Scale. After posttesting, changes in attitude in
the experimental and control groups were compared for sig
nificant differences.
To determine the relationship between self-reported
inventory scores and observer ratings and to determine the
relationship between specific OPI scales and the R-D Scale,
correlational analyses were performed. Peer observation of
the group member's behavior was obtained by a five-point
scale containing operational definitions for flexibility,
tolerance, and nonauthoritariainism. The same scale was
used by supervisors to rate each group member's observed
behavior.
For the computer-obtained correlation matrix, four
teen scales of the OPI, the Rokeach Dogmatism score, and
the averaged scores from peer and supervisor ratings on
each of the five dimensions of the rating scale were used
as the dependent variables with short-term group counseling
the independent variable. Separate analyses were prepared
for each of the nine treatment subgroups in order to account
for the supervisor as a variable.
Summary of Findings
Analyses of data were obtained for three experimental
groups: USC, CSLA, and a combination of the two. Corres
ponding control groups were treated similarly. Analysis of
92
variance was used to test for differences which existed be
tween experimental and control groups in each subgrouping.
No significant pretest differences between the combined
USC-CSLA experimental and control groups were found on the
variables, which included one score from the Rokeach-Dogma-
tism Scale and the fourteen OPI scales. Pretest differences
did occur between the experimental and control groups at
USC on three variables and at CSLA on one variable.
Analysis of covariance was used to adjust for pretest
differences between groups in the posttest treatment of re
sults. The data from analysis of covariance yielded evi
dence that change did occur on specific, but different, var
iables among the groups. For the USC groups and for the
combined experimental and control groups, a significant
change from pretest to posttest scores on the Practical
Outlook scale of the OPI was found. For the CSLA groups,
significant changes from pretest to posttest scores on the
Rokeach Dogmatism Scale and the Complexity scale of the OPI
were found. Analysis of the correlation between OPI scales
and the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale revealed that seven scales
of the OPI appeared to be correlated with the Rokeach Dog
matism Scale. Rokeach Dogmatism, Practical Outlook and
Complexity scales did correlate, so that for purposes of
this study, the differences which occurred among the sub
groups perhaps were in part measures of the same dimensions.
As a result of the statistical analysis the following
hypothesis was supported.
Short-term group counseling with trained leaders
does influence personal attitudinal variables of
flexibility, tolerance, and nonauthoritarianism
of the group participants and the experimental
groups do show greater growth in tolerance, flex
ibility, nonauthoritarian levels than do the con
trol groups with no group experience.
An additional variable which did not have obvious
|relevance for this study appeared in the analyses of all
;groups: the Response Bias of the OPI. The importance of
this variable to the findings of this study is discussed
under the implications section of this chapter.
The findings from analysis of variance by rank on nine
treatment subgroups with eight different supervisors re
vealed that none of the intergroup differences which re
sulted from the treatment process could be attributed to
the supervisor. It was therefore concluded that the short
term group counseling experience effected the changes re
ported by group members.
Many significant correlations were found between ob
server ratings and self-reported scores on the attitudinal
dimensions under study. At CSLA, significant correlations
between peer and supervisor ratings and Dogmatism, Complex
ity, Autonomy, Religious Orientation, and Practical Outlook
supported the following hypothesis:
There is a direct relationship between self-
assessment and observer ratings on the dimensions
of flexibility, tolerance, and nonauthoritarianism.
At USC, significant correlations were found between
supervisor ratings and Dogmatism, Autonomy, and Practical
Outlook, although none was found for peer ratings. Evidence
from the USC supervisor ratings supported the hypothesis
of a relationship between self-assessment and observer
ratings.
Correlations between OPI scales and the Rokeach Dog
matism Scale were significant for seven scales of the OPI.
Four of the OPI scales had special relevance for this in
vestigation: Complexity, Autonomy, Religious Orientation,
and Practical Outlook. Apparently, these scales are mea
sures which tap the dimensions of flexibility, tolerance,
and nonauthoritarianism as previously outlined in the defi
nition of terms appearing in Chapter I.
Conclusions
Conclusions drawn from findings of this study support
the efficacy of group counseling in effecting changes in
counselor-trainee attitudes. The fact that group members
who experienced group counseling under the conditions of
this study did report changes toward more flexibility, more
tolerance, and more nonauthoritarian orientation leads to
the conclusion that such attitudes can be altered through a
group counseling experience.
' 9 5 ■
Peers’ and supervisors' ratings as a check on the sub
jective assessment was effective.
That the supervisor has no significant affect on the
outcomes of group counseling, measured by self-report in
ventories, can be concluded. It appears that the total
group interactional process effects the reported attitu-
dinal change.
Since specific scales of the Omnibus Personality In
ventory were correlated with the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale,
it can be concluded that the dimensions of flexibility, tol
erance, and nonauthoritarianism were measured by a variety
of scales utilized in this study.
Implications
Since short-term group counseling proved to be an ef
fective vehicle for promoting attitudinal changes among
group participants in this study, it can be inferred that
participation over an increased period of time might effect
more change on the attitudes under study. A concomitant
group experience for counselor candidates throughout the
entire counselor education curriculum might have a salutary
effect on the developing personality of the trainees.
Since there was a correlation between self-assessment
reports and observer reports, the implication is that
changes in attitudes are observable as changes in behavior.
Also implied is that supervisors are better observers of
96
of attitudinal change than are peer observers.
The findings also infer that didactic experiences may
have less effect upon attitudinal and behavioral change
than do experiences which are affective in nature, i.e.,
participation in short-term group counseling.
Because one variable which appeared to have no rele
vance to this study was found to be a significant one, it
was necessary to look at the Response Bias scale of the OPI.:
This scale purports to assess the test-taking attitude of
students. The findings showed that graduate students tend,
if only slightly, to respond in a way that favors making a
good impression. However, the OPI manual operationally de
fines such type responses as:
High scorers enjoy thinking about problems which
challenge experts, find the idea of doing research
appealing, and enjoy solving problems of the type
found in geometry, philosophy, or logic; they
feel close to people, and do not forget immediately
what people say to them. (p. 7)
Therefore, a favorable Response Bias score for grad
uate students in counselor education programs may be re
flecting an intellectual style rather than a desire to pro
vide acceptable answers. Great care should be exerted in
making inferences about this particular OPI scale.
Recommendations
Since short-term group counseling has been shown to
be effective in changing specific attitudinal variables,
continued and expanded provisions for such group experiences
:for counselor trainees enrolled in counselor education pro
grams is recommended. Early participation in group counsel
ing with provisions for periodic evaluation is further re
commended.
Another recommendation, supported by the findings, is;
:that the identified scales of the Omnibus Personality In-
;ventory and Rokeach Dogmatism Scale might be used in the j
i i
|counselor trainee selection process.
A further recommendation is that attitudinal changes
of counselor trainees be observed and reported by persons
:outside the group counseling experience in which they par
ticipate, i.e., counselees in the practicum experience.
Thus there can be certainty as to the transfer of learning
to actual counseling situations and to the permanency of
the changes.
Finally, it is recommended that this study be repli
cated in order to increase confidence in the findings.
t
I
I
! APPENDICES
98
APPENDIX A
99
TABLE 7
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
ROKEACH DOGMATISM SCALE - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 18240.50 53 344.16 0.01
Adjusted Means 6.48 1 6.48
Total 18246.98 54
TABLE 8
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD
ROKEACH DOGMATISM SCALE -
ERRORS
USC
Treatment Treatment Adjusted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adj us ted
Experimental 117.36 120.49 3.41
Control 124.80 121.20 3.66
101
TABLE 9
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
THINKING INTROVERSION ON OPI - USC
Source Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 994.23 53 18. 75 0.44
Adjusted Means 8.32 1 8.32
Total 1002.55 54
TABLE 10
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
THINKING INTROVERSION ON OPI - USC
Treatment Treatment Adjusted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adjusted
Experimental
Control
50.31
54.69
52. 26
53.07
0. 80
0 . 86
102
TABLE 11
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
THEORETICAL ORIENTATION ON OPI - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1086.19 53 20.49 4.29*
Adjusted Means 88.10 1 88.10
Total 1174.20 54
*p<.0 5=4.02
TABLE 12
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
THEORETICAL ORIENTATION ON OPI - USC
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Me an
Adj us ted
Mean
Standard Error
Adj us ted
Experimental
Control
44.60
53.50
47.44
50.22
0. 86
0.9
TABLE 13
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
ESTHETICISM ON OPI - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 910.99 53 17.18 2.02
Adjusted Means 34.88 1 34.88
Total 945.87 54
TABLE 14
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
ESTHETICISM ON OPI - USC
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adj usted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 52.60 54. 32 0. 76
Control 54.69 52.69 0. 82
104
TABLE 15
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
COMPLEXITY ON OPI - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 2219.60 53 41. 87 0.12
Adjusted Means 5 .38 1
Total 2224.99 54
TABLE 16
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
COMPLEXITY ON OPI - USC
Treatment Treatment Adjusted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adjusted
Experimental 50.60 53.03 1.20
Control 56.50 53.68 1.30
105 !
TABLE 17
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
AUTONOMY ON OPI - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Me an
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1475.58 53 27. 84 1.64 I
Adjusted Means 45.87 1 45.87
Total 1521.45 54
TABLE 18
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
AUTONOMY ON OPI - USC
Treatment Treatment Adjusted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adj us ted
Experimental 60.70 61.18 0.96
Control 59.92 59.36 1.03
106
TABLE 19
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
RELIGIOUS ORIENTATION ON OPI - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 831.92 53 15.69 2.00
Adjusted Means 31.52 1 31.52
Total 863.44 54
TABLE 20
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
RELIGIOUS ORIENTATION ON OPI - USC
Treatment Treatment Adjusted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adjusted
Experimental 57. 86 58.14 0. 72
Control 56.96 56.63 0. 77
TABLE 21
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
SOCIAL EXTROVERSION ON OPI - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1537.56 53 29.01 0.24 :
Adjusted Means 6.97 1 6.97
Total 1544.54 54
TABLE 2 2
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
SOCIAL EXTROVERSION ON OPI - USC
Treatment Treatment Adj us ted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adj us ted
Experimental 49.26 50.17 0.98
Control 50. 50 49.45 1.06
108 1
TABLE 23
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
IMPULSE EXPRESSION ON OPI - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 855 .16 53 16.13 0.05
Adjusted Means 0.80 1 0. 80
Total 855.97 54
TABLE 24
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
IMPULSE EXPRESSION ON OPI - USC
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adjusted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 48.60 49.74 0. 73
Control 50.80 49 .49 0.79
TABLE 25
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
PERSONAL INTEGRATION ON OPI - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1774.49 53 33.48 0.05
Adjusted Means 1. 72 1 1. 72
Total 1776.22 54
TABLE 26
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
PERSONAL INTEGRATION ON OPI - USC
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adjusted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental
Control
61.13
61.53
61.15
61. 51
1.05
1.13
TABLE 27
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
ANXIETY LEVEL ON OPI - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square FaRatio
Within Group 1365.28 53 25. 76 0.47
Adjusted Means 12. 32 1 12.32
Total 1377.61 54
TABLE 28
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
ANXIETY LEVEL ON OPI - USC
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adj usted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 55.56 56 .02 0.92
Control 57.50 56.96 0.99
TABLE 29
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
ALTRUISM ON OPI - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1179.60 53 22. 25 2.27
Adjusted Means 50. 72 1 50. 72
Total 1230.33 54
TABLE 30
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
ALTRUISM ON OPI - USC
Treatment Treatment Adjusted Standard Error
Source____________ Mean__________ Mean_______ Adjusted
Experimental
Control
56.13
59.03
56.59
58.50
0 . 86
0.92
TABLE 31
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
PRACTICAL OUTLOOK ON OPI - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of Mean
Freedom Square F Ratio:
Within Group 848.50 53 16.00 7.16**
Adjusted Means 114.70 1 114.70
Total 963.21 54
**p<.01=7.12
TABLE 32
ADJUSTED MEANS AND
PRACTICAL OUTLOOK
STANDARD ERRORS
ON OPI - USC
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adjusted Standard Error
Mean Adjusted
Experimental 41.13 40.51 0.73
Control 42.69 43.40 0.78
TABLE 33
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
MASCULINITY-FEMININITY ON OPI - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1632.97 53 30.81 6.71*
Adjusted Means 207.01 1 207.01
Total 1837.98 54
*p<.05=4.02
TABLE 34
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
MASCULINITY-FEMININITY ON OPI - USC
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adjusted
Mean
Standard Error
Adj usted
Experimental 44.53 45.30 1.01
Control 50.07 49.18 1.09
114 i
TABLE 35
ANALYSIS OF
RESPONSE BIAS
COVARIANCE
ON OPI - USC
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1554.49 53 29.33 5.53*
Adjusted Means 162.41 1 162.41
Total 1716.90 54
*p<. 0 5 = 4.0 2
TABLE 36
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
RESPONSE BIAS ON OPI - USC
Treatment Treatment Adjusted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adjusted
Experimental 49 .43 50.35 0.99
Control 54. 88 53.81 1.06
APPENDIX B
115
116
TABLE 37
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
ROKEACH DOGMATISM SCALE - CSLA
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 10834.80 41 264.26 7.89**
Adjusted Means 2087.42 1 2087.42
Total 12922.22 42
**p<.01=7.2 7
TABLE 38
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
ROKEACH DOGMATISM SCALE - CSLA
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adjusted
Mean
Standard Error
Adj us ted
Experimental 125.22 122.40 3.48
Control 133.50 136.32 3.48
TABLE 39
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
THINKING INTROVERSION ON OPI - CSLA
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 831.66 41 20. 28 1.58
Adjusted Means 32.05 1 32.05
Total 863.71 42
TABLE 40
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
THINKING INTROVERSION ON OPI - CSLA
Treatment Treatment Adjusted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adjusted
Experimental 53.00 53.12 0.96
Control 51.54 51.41 0.96
H ' 118
I
TABLE 41
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
THEORETICAL ORIENTATION ON OPI - CSLA
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 763.27 41 18.61 0. 31
Adjusted Means 5.82 1 5. 82
Total 769.10 42
TABLE 42
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD
THEORETICAL ORIENTATION ON OPI
ERRORS
- CSLA
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adjusted
Mean
Standard Error
Adj us ted
Experimental 50.72 49.75 0.92
Control 48.04 49.01 0.92
119
TABLE 43
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
ESTHETICISM ON OPI - CSLA
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 941.48 41 22.96 0.02
Adjusted Means 0.61 1 0.61
Total 941.09 42
TABLE 44
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
ESTHETICISM ON OPI - CSLA
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Me an
Adjusted
Mean
Standard Error
Adj us ted
Experimental 54.36 54.91 1.02
Control 55.22 54.67 1.02
TABLE 45
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
COMPLEXITY ON OPI - CSLA
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1133.92 41 27.65 4.56*
Adjusted Means 126.29 1 126.29
Total 1260.21 42
O
( I
LO
O
V
Q_
*
TABLE 46
ADJUSTED MEANS AND
COMPLEXITY ON
STANDARD ERRORS
OPI - CSLA
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adj us ted
Me an
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 53.31 53.35 1.12
Control 50 .00 49.96 1.12
TABLE 47
ANALYSIS
AUTONOMY
OF
ON
COVARIANCE
OPI - CSLA
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio |
Within Group 472.44 41 11. 52
i
0.06 !
i
Adjusted Means 0.68 1 0.68
i
Total 473.13 42
i
TABLE 48 •
ADJUSTED MEANS AND
AUTONOMY ON
STANDARD ERRORS
OPI - CSLA
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adj us ted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 59.04 60.11 0.72
Control 60.90 59 .84 0 .72
TABLE 49
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
RELIGIOUS ORIENTATION ON OPI - CSLA
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of Mean
Freedom Square F Ratio
Within Group 402.83 41 9.82 0.69
Adjusted Means 6.81 1 6.81
Total 409.64 42
TABLE 50
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
RELIGIOUS ORIENTATION ON OPI-CSLA
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Me an
Adjusted Standard Error
Mean Adjusted
Experimental
Control
55.54
57.54
56.94 0.67
56.14 0.67
123
TABLE 51
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
SOCIAL EXTROVERSION ON OPI - CSLA
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio 1
Within Group 475.68 41 11.60 1.69 !
Adjusted Means 19.66 1 19.66
Total 495.34 42
j
TABLE 52
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD
SOCIAL EXTROVERSION ON OPI
ERRORS
-CSLA
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adjusted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 51.95 50.62 0. 72
Control 47.95 49.28 0. 72
TABLE 53
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
IMPULSE EXPRESSION ON OPI - CSLA
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 989.83 41 24.14 2.53
Adjusted Means 61.18 1 61.18
Total 1051.01 42
TABLE 54
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD
IMPULSE EXPRESSION ON OPI
ERRORS
-CSLA
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adj us ted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 54.18 54.65 1.04
Control 52.77 52.29 1.04
125
TABLE 55
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
PERSONAL INTEGRATION ON OPI - CSLA
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 598.36 41 14.59 0.41
Adjusted Means 6.05 1 6.05
Total 604.41 42
;
TABLE 56
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
PERSONAL INTEGRATION ON OPI - CSLA
Treatment Treatment Adj us ted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adjusted
Experimental 59.13 58.10 0.81
Control 56.31 57.35 0.81
TABLE 5 7
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
ANXIETY LEVEL ON OPI - CSLA
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1047.66 41 25.55 0.10
Adjusted Means 2.76 1 2. 76
Total 1050 .43 42
TABLE 5 8
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
ANXIETY LEVEL ON OPI-CSLA
Treatment Treatment Adj us ted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adjusted
Experimental 53.04 52.06 1.08
Control 51.59 52.57 1.08
TABLE
. ANALYSIS OF
ALTRUISM ON
59
COVARIANCE
OPI - CSLA
Sum of Degrees of Mean
Source Squares Freedom Square F Ratio
Within Group 1414.78 41 34.50 3.40
Adjusted Means 117.51 1 117.51
Total 1532.30 42
TABLE 60
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
ALTRUISM ON OPI - CSLA
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adjusted
Mean
Standard Error
Adj us ted
Experimental 56.09 55.19 1. 25
Control 51.00 51.89 1.25
TABLE 61
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
PRACTICAL OUTLOOK ON OPI - CSLA
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degree of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 894.88 41 21.82 0. 75
Adjusted Means 16.41 1 16.41
Total 911.29 42
TABLE 62
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
PRACTICAL OUTLOOK ON OPI-CSLA
Treatment Treatment Adj usted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adjusted
Experimental 45.13 44.59 0.99
Control 45.27 45. 81 0.99
129
TABLE 63
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
MASCULINITY - FEMININITY ON OPI - CSLA
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 580.87 41 14.16 ' 4.17*
Adjusted Means 59 .10 1 59 .10
Total 639.98 42
*p< . 05=4.0 7
TABLE 64
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
MASCULINITY - FEMININITY ON OPI - CSLA
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adjusted
Mean
Standard Error
Adj usted
Experimental 46. 72 45.55 0. 80
Control 46. 72 47.90 0.80
TABLE 65
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
RESPONSE BIAS ON OPI - CSLA
Sum of Degrees of Mean
Source___________Squares______ Freedom_____Square F Ratio
i Within Group 896.79 41 21.87 7.64**
i
i Adjusted Means 167.13 1 167.13
Total 1063.92 42
**p<.01=7.27
TABLE 66
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
RESPONSE BIAS ON OPI - CSLA
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adjusted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 52.31 49.87 1.02
Control 51.54 53.99 1.02
A P P E N D I X C
131
132
TABLE 67
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
PRETEST SCORES FOR R-D AND OPI SCALES
COMBINED EXPERIMENTAL VERSUS COMBINED CONTROL GROUPS
Item
Mean
Experimental
Scores
Control F Ratio
R-D 123.44 125.37 0.13
TI 52.19 54.29 2.43
TO 47.30 50.60 3.37
Es 51.69 54.43 2. 79
Co 49.90 53.20 2.66
Au 58. 73 60.47 1.15
RO 54.98 56.68 0.98
SE 49.96 50.06 0.02
IE 48.67 50.83 1. 20
PI 60.71 59.66 0.51
AL 55. 26 54.93 0.03
Am 56.98 56.75 0.04
PO 43. 71 42.45 0.67
MF 46.57 46.52 0.02
RB 53.50 52.58 0.26
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
A P P E N D I X D
133
J
TABLE 68
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
ROKEACH DOGMATISM SCALE
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 30343.37 97 312.81 3.49
Adjusted Means 1091.74 1 1091.74
Total 31435.11 98
TABLE 69
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
ROKEACH DOGMATISM SCALE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adj us ted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 120.69 121.40 2.45
Control 128.79 128.02 2. 55
135
TABLE 70
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
THINKING INTROVERSION ON OPI
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1894.59 97 19 .53 0.16
Adjusted Means 3.23 1 3.23
Total 1897.83 98
TABLE 71
ADJUSTED FMEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
THINKING INTROVERSION ON OPI
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
Treatment Treatment Adjusted Standard Error
Source_____________ Mean__________ Mean________Adjusted
Experimental 51.76 52.65 0.61
Control 53.25 52.28 0.64
TABLE 72
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
THEORETICAL ORIENTATION ON OPI
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1958.75 97 20 .19 1.49
Adjusted Means 30.07 1 30.07
Total 1988.83 98
TABLE 73
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
THEORETICAL ORIENTATION ON OPI
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
Treatment Treatment Adjusted Standard Error
Source_____________ Me an__________ Mean________Adj usted
Experimental
Control
47.19
51.00
48.48
49 .60
0. 62
0.65
137
TABLE 74
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
ESTHETICISM ON OPI
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Squre F Ratio
Within Group 1984.08 97 20.45 0. 84
Adjusted Means 17.32 1 17.32
Total 2001.40 98
TABLE 75
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD
ESTHETICISM ON OPI
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
ERRORS
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Me an
Adj usted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 53.34 54.51 0.63
Control 54.93 53.66 0.65
138
TABLE 76
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
COMPLEXITY ON OPI
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 3556.87 97 36.66 0. 72
Adjusted Means 26.72 1 26.72
Total 3583.59 98
TABLE 77
ADJUSTED MEANS AND
USC AND CSLA
COMPLEXITY
STANDARD
COMBINED
ON OPI
ERRORS
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adjusted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 51.75 53.10 0.84
Control 53.52 52.05 0. 88
TABLE 78
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
AUTONOMY ON OPI
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 2051.25 97 21.14 1.48
Adjusted Means 31.35 1 31.35
Total 2082.60 98
TABLE 79
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
AUTONOMY ON OPI
ERRORS
Treatment Treatment Adj us ted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adjusted
Experimental 60.00 60. 72 0.63
Control 60.37 59 .59 0.66
TABLE 80
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
RELIGIOUS ORIENTATION ON OPI
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1314.96 97 13.55 2. 35
Adjusted Means 31. 87 1 31. 87
Total 1346.83 98
TABLE 81
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
RELIGIOUS ORIENTATION ON OPI
Treatment Treatment Adj usted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adj usted
Experimental 56.88 57.59 0. 51
Control 57.22 56.45 0.53
141
TABLE 82
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
SOCIAL EXTROVERSION ON OPI
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 2080.47 97 21.44 1.55
Adjusted Means 33.44 1 33.44
Total 2113.91 98
TABLE 89
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
SOCIAL EXTROVERSION ON OPI
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adj usted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 50.40 50.44 0.64
Control 49 .33 49.28 0.66
TABLE 84
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
IMPULSE EXPRESSION ON OPI
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1967.59 97 20. 28 1. 56
Adjusted Means 31.68 1 31.68
Total 1999.28 98
TABLE 85
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
IMPULSE EXPRESSION ON OPI
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adjusted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental
Control
50.96
51.70
51. 86
50.73
0.62
0.65
143 ]
TABLE 86
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
PERSONAL INTEGRATION ON OPI
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 2431.81 97 25.07 0.04
Adjusted Means 1.00 1 1.00
Total 2432.81 98
TABLE 87
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
PERSONAL INTEGRATION ON
ERRORS
OPI
Treatment Treatment Adjusted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adjus ted
Experimental 60.28 59.83 0.69
Control 59.14 59 .63 0.72
TABLE 8 8
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
ANXIETY LEVEL ON OPI
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 2611.64 97 26.92 0.27
Adjusted Means 7. 35 1 7.35
Total 2619.00 98
TABLE 89
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
ANXIETY LEVEL ON OPI
ERRORS
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adj us ted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 54.50 54.37 0. 71
Control 54. 79 54.92 0. 74
TABLE 90
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
ALTRUISM ON OPI
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 2943.08 97 30.34 0.28 ;
Adjusted Means 8.52 1 8.52
Total 2951.61 98
I
TABLE 91
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
ALTRUISM ON OPI
ERRORS
Treatment Treatment Adj us ted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adjusted
Experimental 56.11 56.03 0.76
Control 55.35 55.44 0. 79
TABLE 92
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
PRACTICAL OUTLOOK ON OPI
Source
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 1801.73 97 18.57 6.47*
Adjusted Means 120.23 1 120.23
Total 1921.97 98
*p<.0 5 = 3.94
TABLE 9 3
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
PRACTICAL OUTLOOK ON OPI
Treatment
Source
Treatment
Mean
Adj us ted
Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 42.82 42.27 0.59
Control 43.87 44.47 0. 62
147
TABLE 94
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
MASCULINITY-FEMININITY ON OPI
Source
Sum of Degrees of
Squares Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 2275.22 97 23.45 10.41*!
Adjusted Means 244.18 1 244.18
Total 2519.41 98
**p<.01-6.90
TABLE 95
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
MASCULINITY-FEMININITY ON OPI
Treatment
Source
Treatment Adjusted
Mean Mean
Standard Error
Adjusted
Experimental 45.46 45.43 0.67
Control 48.54 48.56 0.69
148
TABLE 96
ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
RESPONSE BIAS ON OPI
Sources
Sum of
Squares
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean
Square F Ratio
Within Group 2508.66 97. 25.86 10.96**;
Adjusted Means 283.45 1 283.45
Total 2792.11 98
**p<.01=6.90
TABLE 9 7
ADJUSTED MEANS AND STANDARD ERRORS
USC AND CSLA COMBINED
RESPONSE BIAS ON OPI
Treatment Treatment Adjusted Standard Error
Source Mean Mean Adjusted
Experimental 50.65 50.32 0.70
Control 53.35 53.70 0. 73
i
APPENDIX E
149
150 i
APPENDIX E
H STATISTICS FOR 15 VARIABLES - CSLA
Variable
H
Statistic
Degrees of
Freedom
Significance
Level
R-D 0.993 1 0.679
TI 1.491 1 0.221
TO 3.152 1 0.073
Es 0.049 1 0.819
Co -0.000 1 0.992
Au 0.662 1 0.576
RO 0.729 1 0.598
SE 0.001 1 0.969
IE 0.267 1 0 .612
PI 1. 769 1 0.181
AL 0.350 1 0.562
Am 0.110 1 0.739
PO 1.665 1 0 .194
MF 0.491 1 0.508
RB 2.417 1 0.117
I
1
APPENDIX F
151
152
APPENDIX F
H STATISTICS FOR 15 VARIABLES - USC
H Degrees of Significance
Variable Statistic Freedom Level
R-D 8.490 5 0.131
TI 9.705 5 0.085
TO 5.336 5 0.382
Es 7.190o 5 0. 210
Co 2.956 5 0.712
Au 10.325 5 0.067
RO 7.492 5 0.191
SE 3.613 5 0.610
IE 1.893 5 0.865
PI 5.265 5 0.390
AL 5.632 5 0.346
Am 4.635 5 0 .535
PO 8. 711 5 0.123
MF 3.648 5 0 .604
RB 3.785 5 0. 583
I
I
I
APPENDIX G
— • 40**
153
APPENDIX G
R-D SCALE - FORM E
The following is a study of what the general public thinks
and feels about a number of important social and personal
questions. The best answer to each statement below is your
personal opinion. We have tried to cover many different
and opposing points of view; you may find yourself agreeing
strongly with some of the statements, disagreeing just as
strongly with others, and perhaps uncertain about others;
whether you agree or disagree with any statement, you can
be sure that many people feel the same as you do.
Mark each statement in the left margin according to how
much you agree or disagree with it. Please mark every one.
Write +1, + 2, +3, or -1, -2, -3, depending on
how you feel in each case.
+1: I agree a little -1: I disagree a little
+2: I agree on the whole -2: I disagree on the
whole
+3: I agree very much -3: I disagree very much
1. The United States and Russia have just about nothing
in common.
2. The highest form of government is a democracy and the
highest form of democracy is a government run by those
who are the most intelligent.
3. Even though freedom of speech for all groups is a
worthwhile goal, it is unfortunately necessary to
restrict the freedom of certain political groups.
4. It is only natural that a person would have a much
better acquaintance with ideas he believes in than
with ideas he opposes.
5. Man on his own is a helpless and miserable creature.
6. Fundamentally, the world we live in is a pretty
lonesome place.
155
7. Most people just don’t give a "damn" for others.
8. I'd like it if I could find someone who would tell me
how to solve my personal problems.
9. It is only natural for a person to be rather fearful
of the future.
10. There is so much to be done and so little time to do
it in.
11. Once I get wound up in a heated discussion I just
can't stop.
12. In a discussion I often find it necessary to repeat
myself several times to make sure I am being under
stood.
13. In a heated discussion I generally become so absorbed
in what I am going to say that I forget to listen to
what others are saying.
14. It is better to be a dead hero than to be a live
coward.
15. While I don't like to admit this even to myself, my
secret ambition is to become a great man, like Ein
stein, or Beethoven, or Shakespeare.
16. The main thing in life is for a person to want to do
something important.
17. If given the chance I would do something of great
benefit to the world.
18. In the history of mankind there have probably been
just a handful of really great thinkers.
19. There are a number of people I have come to hate
because of the things they stand for.
20. A man who does not believe in some great cause has
not really lived.
21. It is only when a person devotes himself to an ideal
or cause that life becomes meaningful.
22. Of all the different philosophies which exist in this
world there is probably only one which is correct.
156
23. A person who gets enthusiastic about too many causes
is likely to be a pretty "wishy-washy" sort of person
24. To compromise with our political opponents is danger
ous because it usually leads to the betrayal of our
own side.
25. When it comes to differences of opinion in religion
we must be careful not to compromise with those who
believe differently from the way we do.
26. In times like these, a person must be pretty selfish
if he considers primarily his own happiness.
27. The worst crime a person could commit is to attack
publicly the people who believe in the same thing he
does .
28. In times like these it is often necessary to be more
on guard against ideas put out by people or groups
in one's own camp than by those in the opposing camp.
29. A group which tolerates too much difference of opin
ion among its own members cannot exist for long.
30. There are two kinds of people in this world: those
who are for the truth and those who are against the
truth.
31. My blood boils whenever a person stubbornly refuses
to admit he's wrong.
32. A person who thinks primarily of his own happiness
is beneath contempt.
33. Most of the ideas which get printed nowadays aren't
worth the paper they are printed on.
34. In this complicated world of ours the only way we can
know what's going on is to rely on leaders or experts
who can be trusted.
35. It is often desirable to reserve judgment about what'
going on until one has had a chance to hear the opin
ions of those one respects.
36. In the long run the best way to live is to pick
friends and associates whose tastes and beliefs are
the same as one's own.
The present is all too often full of unhappiness. It
is only the future that counts.
If a man is to accomplish his mission in life it is
sometimes necessary to gamble "all or nothing at
all."
Unfortunately, a good many people with whom I have
discussed important social and moral problems don't
really understand what's going on.
Most people just don't know what's good for them.
APPENDIX H
158
159
APPENDIX H
PEER RATING SCALE
RATED BY__________________
Group Member______________________________ Date_____________
Class_____________________________College___________________
A. Flexibility: How do you perceive this group member as
being able to tolerate differences in
others?
Totally Frequently Sometimes Most of consistently
inflexible inflexible flexible the time flexible
flexible
B. Diversity: How do you perceive this group member's
ability to enjoy diversity, that is, enjoy
novel situations and prefer complexity as
opposed to simplicity?
Totally in- F r e q u e n t l y Sometimes Frequently Totally tol-
tolerant of intolerant tolerant tolerant erant of di
diversity of diver- of diver- of diver- versity
sity sity sity
Ambiguity: How do you perceive this group member's
ability to tolerate ambiguity, that is,
his ability to tolerate uncertainty and
indefiniteness ?
Totally in- Frequently Sometimes Frequently Totally tol-
tolerant of intolerant tolerant tolerant erant of
ambiguity of ambi- of ambi- of ambi- ambiguity
guity guity guity
D. Tolerance: How do you perceive this group member’s
willingness to accept others with dif
fering viewpoints and behaviors?
Totally frequently Sometimes Frequently Totally
unwilling unwilling willing willing willing
E. Nonauthoritarianism: How do you perceive this group
member as exhibiting personal
autonomy and independence of
thought and judgment?
Totally au- Frequently Sometimes Frequently Totally non-
thoritarian authoritar- nonauthori-nonauthori-authoritarian
ian tarian tarian
I
i
BIBLIOGRAPHY
161
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Adorno, R., et al. The Authoritarian Personality.
New York: Harper and Bros., 1950.
2. Allport, G. W. "Attitudes," in C. Marchison (Ed.),
A Handbook of Social Psychology. Worcester,
MassTl Clark University Press, 1935, 798-884.
3. Association for Counselor Education and Supervision.
"Standards for the Preparation of School
Counselors." Personnel and Guidance Journal,
December 1961, 40, 402-407.
4. Bach, G. Intensive Group Psychotherapy. New York:
Ronald Press, 1954.
5. Bates, M. "A Test of Group Counseling." Personnel
and Guidance Journal, April 1968, 46” 749-753.
6. Bennett, M. Guidance and Counseling in Groups. 2nd
Ed., New York: McGraw Hill Book Co., T963.
7. Berman, L. "The Mental Health of the Educator."
Mental Hygiene, 1953, 38, 422-429.
8. Betz, R. L. "Effects of Group as an Adjunctive
Practicum Experience." Journal of Counseling
Psychology, November 1969, 16, 528-533.
9. Blocher, D. H. "A Multiple Regression Approach to
Predicting Success in a Counselor Education
Program." Counselor Education and Supervision,
Fall 1963, 3, 19-22.
10. Bonner, H. Group Dynamics: Principles and Applica
tions . New York: Ronald Press Co., 19 59.
11. Bonney, W. C., and Gazda, G. "Group Counseling Ex
periences: Reactions by Counselor Candidates."
Counselor Education and Supervision. Summer
1966, 5, 205-211.
12. Boy, A. V. , and Isaaksen, H. L. "Multiple Counsel
ing: A Catalyst for Individual Counseling."
The School Counselor, October 1963, 2, 8.
162
163
13. Brumbaugh, R. B., Hoedt, K. C., and Beisel, W. H.,
Jr. "Teacher Dogmatism and Perceptual Accur
acy." Journal of Teacher Education, Fall,
1966, 17, 332-335.
14. Cahoon, R. A. "Some Counselor Attitudes and Charac
teristics." Dissertation Abstracts, 1963, 23,
3473-74.
15. Caplan, S. W. "The Effects of Group Counseling on
Junior High School Boys' Concept of Themselves
in School." Journal of Counseling Psychology,
1957, 4, 124-28.
16. Carkhuff, R. "Counseling Research, Theory, and Prac-
tice--1965," Journal of Counseling Psychology,
Winter 1966, 13, 467-480.
17. Carkhuff, R., and Berenson, B. Beyond Counseling and
Therapy. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
Inc., 1967.
18. Cash, W. L., and Munger, P. F. "Counselors and Their
Preparation." Review of Educational Research,
April 1966, 36, 256-63.
19. Cohen, A. Attitude Change and Social Influence, New
York: Basic Books, Inc., 1964.
20. Cohn, B. (Ed.) Guidelines for Future Research on Group
Counseling in the Public School Setting. Wash
ington, d7 C.: American Personnel and Guidance
Association, 1967.
21. Cohn, B., Combs, C., Gibian, E., and Sniffen, A. M.
"Group Counseling: An Orientation." Personnel
and Guidance Journal, December 1963, 335-356.
22. Cohn, B., and Sniffen, A. M. "A School Report on
Group Counseling." Personnel and Guidance
Journal, October 1962, 41, 133-138.
23. Combs, A. W., and Snygg, D. Individual Behavior: A
Perceptual Approach to Behavior. New York:
Harper and Bros., 1956.
24. Combs, A. W., and Soper, D. "Perceptual Organization
of Effective Counselors." Journal of Counseling
Psychology, Fall 1963, 10, 222-226.
164
25. Cox, R. D. Counselors and Their Work. Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania: Archives Press, 1945.
26. Croft, J. Open- and Closed-Mindedness and Perceptions
of Leader Behavior. Washington, D~! C. : Office
of Education, Government Printing Office, 1964.
27. Demos, G., and Zuwaylif, F. "Counselor Attitudes in
Relation to the Theoretical Positions of Their
Supervisors." Counselor Education and Super
vision, Fall 1962, 2, 8-13.
28. Demos, G., and Zuwaylif, F. "Counselor Movement as
a Result of an Intensive Six-Week Training Pro
gram in Counseling." Personnel and Guidance
Journal, October 1963, 42, 125-128.
29. Driver, H. Multiple Counseling: A Small Group Dis
cussion Method for Personal Growth. Madison,
Wisconsin: Monona Publications, 1954.
30. Durkin, H. The Group in Depth. New York: Inter
national Universities Press, Inc., 1964.
31. Dye, H. A. Fundamental Group Procedures for School
Counselors. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.,
1968.
32. Egan, G. Encounter: Group Processes for Interpersonal
Growth. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Pub-
lishing Co., 1970.
33. Ehrlich, H. "Dogmatism and Intellectual Change."
Unpublished Master's Thesis, Ohio State Univer
sity Library, 1955.
34. Elton, C., and Rose, H. Differential Change in Male
Personality Test Scores." Journal of College
Student Personnel, November 1969, 373-377.
35. Elton, C., and Rose, H. "The Face of Change." Jour
nal of Counseling Psychology, 1968, 15, 372-375.
36. Elton, C., and Terry, T. R. "Factor Stability of the
O.P.I." Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1969,
16, 373-37T!
165
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
Gawrys, J., and Brown, 0. "Group Counseling." The
School Counselor, May 1965, 206-213.
Gazda, G. (Ed.) Basic Approaches to Group Psycho
therapy and Group Counseling" Illinois: Charles
Thomas, 1968.
Gazda, G. Innovations to Group Psychotherapy.
Illinois: Charles Thomas, 1968.
Gazda, G. Theories and Methods of Group Counseling
in the Schools"! Illinois: Charles Thomas, 1969.
Goldman, L. "Group Guidance: Content and Process."
Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1962, 11,
518-522.
Gowan, J., Demos, D., and Wakefield, R. "Group Coun
seling in the Development of Self-Concept."
California Personnel and Guidance Journal,
Summer 19 70, 2~ , 16- 21. ~
Gruberg, R. "A Significant Counselor Personality
Characteristic: Tolerance of Ambiguity."
Counselor Education and Supervision, Winter,
1969, 8, 119-124.
Guinan, J., and Foulds, M. "Marathon Group: Facilita
tor of Personal Growth?" Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 1970, 17, 145-149.
Guinan, J., and Wright, J. "Marathon Group: A Six-
Month Follow-Up." Journal of College Student
Personnel, November 1970, 11, 426-431.
Heist, P., and Yonge, G. Manual for Omnibus Person
ality Inventory, New York: Psychological Corpor-
ation, 1968.
Hewer, V. "Group Counseling." Vocational Guidance
Quarterly, June 1968, 16, 250-257.
Hinckley, R., and Hermann, L. Group Treatment in
Psychology. Minneapolis: University of Minne-
sota Press, 1951.
Hopke, W. "The Measurement of Counselor Attitudes."
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1955, 2,
212—216.
166
50. Horney, K. Our Inner Conflicts: A Constructive
Theory of Neurosis. New York: Norton, T945.
51. Hough, J. "The Dogmatism Factor in Human Relations
Training of Pre-Service Teachers." Paper pre
sented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, February
1965, 11.
52. Hunt, R., and Lichtman, C. "Counseling of Employees
by Work Supervisors: Concepts, Attitudes and
Practices in a White-Collar Organization."
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1969, 16,
81-86.
53. Jahoda, M., and Warren, N. (Eds.) Attitudes: Selec
ted Readings. Baltimore, Maryland: Penguin
Books , T966.
54. Johnson, D., Shertzer, B., Linden, J., and Stone, S.
"The Relationship of Counselor Candidate Char
acteristics and Counseling Effectiveness."
Counselor Education and Supervision, Summer
1967, 6, 297-304.
55. Johnson, J. "Dogmatism: A Variable in The Prediction
of Student Teaching Performance." Contemporary
Education, October 1969, 41, 14-18.
56. Jones, E. "Authoritarianism as a Determinant of First
Impression Formation." Journal of Personality,
1954, 23, 107-127.
57. Jones, V. "Attitude Changes in an NDEA Institute."
Personnel and Guidance Journal, December 1963,
42, 387-392.
58. Journal of Research and Development in Education.
Winter 1968, 1, 1-132.
59. Kagan, N. "Issues in Encounter." The Counseling Psy
chologist, 1970, 2, 43-49.
60. Kassera, W., and Sease, W. "Personal Change as a
Concomitant of Counselor Education." Counselor
Education and Supervision, Spring 1970, 9,
208-211.
61. Kemp, C. G. "Behaviors in Group Guidance (Socio
Process) and Group Counseling (Psyche Process)."
167
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1963, 10,
373-377.
62. Kemp, C. G. "Improvement of Critical Thinking in Re
lation to Open-Closed Belief Systems." Journal
of Experimental Education, March 1963, 31,
321-323.
63. Kemp, C. G. "Influence of Dogmatism on the Training
of Counselors." Journal of Counseling Psycho
logy;, 1962, 9, 155-157.
64. Kemp, C. G. "Influence of Dogmatism on Counseling."
Personnel and Guidance Journal, April, 1961,
39, 662-665.
65. Kemp, C. G. Perspectives on the Group Process.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 2nd Edition,1970.
66. Kemp, C. G., and Kohler, E. "Suitability of the Ro-
keach Dogmatism Scale for High School Use."
Journal of Experimental Education, Summer 1965,
33, 383-385.
67. Kerlinger, F. Foundations of Behavioral Research.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
1964.
68. Kiesler, C., Collins, B., and Miller, N. Attitude
Change: A Critical Analysis of Theoretical
Approaches. New York: John Wiley and Sons,
Inc., 1969.
69. Lifton, W. Working with Groups: Group Process and
Individual Growth. 2nd Edition, New York: John
Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1967.
70. Lipetz, M. "The Effects of Information on the Assess
ment of Attitudes by Authoritarians and Nonau
thoritarians." Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 1960^ 60 , 95-99.
71. Lodato, F., Sokoloff, M., and Schwartz, L. "Group
Counseling as a Method of Modifying Attitudes
in Slow Learners." The School Counselor,
October 1964, 12.
72. Mahler, C. Group Counseling in the Schools. Boston:
Hough ton Mifflin Co., 1969.
168
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
Melchiskey, S., and Wittmer, J. "Some Personality
Characteristics of Counselor Candidates Accept
ing and Rejecting Sensitivity Training."
Counselor Education and Supervision, Winter
XS7'0, 9, 132-135.-------------------
Meltzoff, J., and Kornreich, M. Research in Psycho
therapy . New York: Atherton Press, Inc., 1970.
Mezzano, J. "A Note on Dogmatism and Counselor Ef
fectiveness." Counselor Education and Super
vision, Fall 1969, 9, 64-65.
Milliken, R., and Paterson, J. "Relationship of
Dogmatism and Prejudice to Counseling Effective
ness." Counselor Education and Supervision,
Winter 1967, 6, 125-129.
Mouw, J. "Effect of Dogmatism on Levels of Cognitive
Processes." Journal of Educational Psychology,
October 1969, 60, 365-369.
Munger, P., and Johnson, C. "Changes in Attitudes
Associated with an NDEA Counseling and Guidance
Institute." Personnel and Guidance Journal,
1960, 38, 751-753.
Munger, P., Myers, R., and Brown, D. "Guidance
Institutes and the Persistence of Attitudes:
A Progress Report." Personnel and Guidance
Journal, 1963, 41, 415-419.
Muro, J. "Some Aspects of the Group Counseling Prac-
ticum." Counselor Education and Supervision,
Summer 1968, 8, 371-378.
Musella, D. "Open-Closed Mindedness as Related to
the Rating of Teachers by Elementary School
Principals," Journal of Experimental Education,
Spring 1967, 35, 75-79.
Nunnally, J. Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-
Hill Book Company, 1967.
O'Banion, T., and O'Connell, A. The Shared Journey:
An Introduction to Encounter. New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970.
169
84.
85.
86 .
87.
88.
89 .
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
Ofman, W. "Evaluation of a Group Counseling Proce
dure." Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1964,
2, 152-159.
Ohlsen, M. "Adapting Principles of Group Dynamics
for Group Counseling." The School Counselor,
March 1966, 13, 159-162.
Ohlsen, M. Group Counseling. New York: Holt, Rine
hart and Winston, Inc., 19 70.
Ohlsen, M., and Proff, F. "The Extent to Which Group
Counseling Improves the Academic and Personal
Adjustment of Underachieving Gifted Adoles
cents." Cooperative Research Project #623,
College of Education, University of Illinois,
Urbana, Illinois, 1960 (mimeographed).
Patterson, C. "Effects of Counselor Education on
Personality." Journal of Counseling Psychology,
September 1967, 14, 444-448.
Patterson, C. "Supervising Students in the Counsel
ing Practicum." Journal of Counseling Psycho
logy, 1964, 11, 47-53.
Porter, E. "A Simple Measure of Counselor Attitudes."
in E. G. Williamson (Ed.), Trends in Student
Personnel Work. Minneapolis! University of
Minnesota Press, 1949, 129-135.
Reeves, M., and Arbuckle, D. "The Counseling Atti
tudes of Deans of Women." Personnel and Gui
dance Journal, January 1963, 41, 438-441.
Renzaglia, G., Henry, D., and Rybolt, G. "Estimation
and Measurement of Personality Characteristics
and Correlates of Their Congruence." Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 1968, 9, 71-78.
Rochester, D. "Persistence of Attitudes and Values
of NDEA Counselor Trainees." Journal of Coun
seling Psychology, November 1967, 14, 535-537.
Rochester, D. "The Use of Porter's Test of Counselor
Attitudes to Discriminate between Adlerian and
Phenomenologically-Oriented Students." Journal
of Counseling Psychology, September 1968, 15,
427-429.
170
95. Rogal, R. "Group Counseling for Counselors: Its Ef
fect Upon the Growth of Behavior Cognition and
Its Relationship to Counselor Effectiveness."
Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of
Southern California 1970.
96. Rogers, C. On Becoming a Person. Boston: Houghton-
Mifflin Co., 1961.
97. Rogers. C. "The Interpersonal Relationship: The Core
of Guidance." in R. Mosher, R. Carle, and C.
Kehas, Guidance: An Examination. New York:
Harcourt, Brace, and World, 1965, 49-65.
98. Rokeach, M. The Open and Closed Mind: Investigation
Into The Nature of Belief Systems and Person-
ality Systems^ New York: Basic Books, 1960.
99. Ruesch, J. Disturbed Communication. New York:
Norton, 1957.
100. Russo, J., Kelz, J., and Hudson, G. "Are Good Coun
selors Open-Minded?" Counselor Education and
Supervision, Winter 1964, 3~ , 74- 77 .
101. Scheerer, E. "An Analysis of the Relationship Between
Acceptance of and Respect for Self and Acceptance
of and Respect for Others in Ten Counseling
Cases." Journal of Consulting Psychology, June
1949, 13, 169-175.
102. Scodel, A., and Freeman, M. "Additional Observations
on the Social Perceptions of Authoritarians and
Nonauthoritarians." Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology. 1956, 52, 92-95.
103. Scodel, A., and Mussen, P. "Social Perceptions of Au
thoritarians and Nonauthoritarians." Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1953, 48,
181-184.
104. Seamen, E., and Wurtz, R. "Evaluating the Practicum:
Whither and Wither?" Counselor Education and
Supervision, Spring 1968, 7, 282-285.
105. Second, P., and Backman, C. Social Psychology. New
York: McGraw Hill Book Co., 1964.
171
106. Seegars, J., and McDonald, R. "The Role of Interac
tion Groups in Counselor Education." Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 1963, 10, 165-172.
107. Shaw, M., and Wursten, R. "Research on Group Proce
dures in Schools: A Review of the Literature."
Personnel and Guidance Journal, September 1965,
27-34.
108. Singer, E. Key Concepts in Psychotherapy. New York:
Random House, 1965.
109. Sniffen, A. "Group Counseling: A School Counselor
Technique." Reprint of Speech given in Session
76 of American Personnel and Guidance Associa
tion, 1966.
110. Sprinthall, N., Whitely, J., and Mosher, R. "A Study
of Teacher Effectiveness." Journal of Teacher
Education, 1965, 17, 94-106.
111. Sprinthall, N. "Cognitive Flexibility: A Focus of
Research on Counselor Effectiveness." Counselor
Education and Supervision, Summer 1966, 5,
188-197.
112. Stefflre, B., King, P., and Leafgren, G. "Character
istics of Counselors Judged Effective by Their
Peers." Journal of Counseling Psychology,
Winter 1962, 9, 335-340.
113. Tosi, D. "Dogmatism Within the Counselor-Client Dyad."
Journal of Counseling Psychology, May 1970, 17,
284-288.
114. Tosi, D., and Carlson, W. "Client Dogmatism and Per
ceived Counselor Attitudes." Personnel and
Guidance Journal, April 1970, 48, 657-660.
115. Truax, C., and Carkhuff, R. Toward Effective Counsel-
ing and Psychotherapy. Chicago: Aldine Publish
ing Co., 1967.
116. Van Kaam, A. The Art of Existential Counseling.
Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania: Dimension Books,
1966.
172
117. Van Kaam, A. "Counseling from the Viewpoint of Exis
tential Psychology." In R. L. Mosher, R. F.
Carle, and C. D. Kehas, Guidance: An Examina-
tion. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World,
1965, 66-81.
118. Vingoe, F., and Antonoff, S. "Personality Character
istics of Good Judges of Others." Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 1968, 15, 91-93.
119. Warters, J. Group Guidance: Principles and Practices.
New YorFi McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1960.
120. Webb, A., and Harris, J. "A Semantic Differential
Study of Counselors in an NDEA Institute."
Personnel and Guidance Journal, November 1963,
42, 260-263.
121. Wiggins, N., and Blackburn, M. Prediction of First-
Year Graduate Success in Psychology." Journal
of Educational Research, October 1969, 63,
81-85.
122. Wilson, J., Robeck, M., and Michael, W. Psychological
Foundations of Learning and Teaching. New York:
McGraw Hill Book Co., 1969.
123. Winkley, R., Munger, P., Gust, C., and Tiegland, J.
"Changes in the Concept of Self and Others of
NDEA Guidance Institute Members." Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 1963, 10, 227-231.
124. Wittmer, J., and Webster, G. "The Relationship Between
Teaching Experience and Counselor Trainee Dog
matism." Journal of Counseling Psychology,
November 1969, 16, 449-504.
12 5. Wrenn, C. The Counselor in a Changing World. Wash
ington, D. C.: American Personnel and Guidance
Association, 1962.
126. Wrightsman, L., Richard W., and Noble, F. "Attitude
Changes of Guidance Institute Participants."
Counselor Education and Supervision, Supervision,
Summer 1966, 5"] 212- 220 .
127. Yamamoto, K., and Dizney, H. "Rejection of the Men
tally 111: A Study of Attitudes of Student
Teachers." Journal of Counseling Psychology,
1967, 14, 264-268.
173
128. Yonge, G., and Sassenroth, J. "Student Personality
Correlates of Teacher Ratings." Journal of
Educational Psychology, February 1968, 59,
44-52.
129. Young, E., and Jacobson, L. "Effects of Time Extended
Marathon Group Experience on Personality Char
acteristics." Journal of Counseling Psychology,
May 1970, 17, 247-251.
130. Zimpfer, D. "Expression of Feelings in Grou Counsel
ing." Personnel and Guidance Journal, March
1967, 703-708.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Correlates Of College Choice Satisfaction

PDF

Group Counseling With Under-Achievers In A Community College

PDF

Existential Frustration And Psychological Anomie Within Select College Student Subcultures

PDF

The Effects Of Group Centered Counseling On The Attitudes, Feelings, And Behavior Of Chicano Inner-City Emrt Students

PDF

Differences In School Behavior As Influenced By Counseling Pattern

PDF

An Analysis Of Perceptions Of The Role Of The California Junior College Faculty Senate In Academic Governance

PDF

An Experimental Study Of Two Moral Responses Of Two Socioeconomic Groups Based On Four Paradigms

PDF

Confirmation Of Expectancy And Changes In Teachers' Evaluations Of Student Behaviors

PDF

Effects Of Activity Oriented Group Counseling With Selected Outpatients

PDF

The Comparative Effects Of Tape-Led, Led, And Leaderless Groups

PDF

Effects Of Preschool Enrollment And Parent Participation On Academic Growth

PDF

Effects Of Integrated School Experience On Interaction In Small Bi-Racialgroups

PDF

Application Of The Micro-Counseling Method Using Video-Tape Recordings Tothe Training Of Teachers In Basic Counseling Techniques

PDF

Ethnicity And Measures Of Educability: Differences Among Navajo, Pueblo And Rural Spanish-American First Graders On Measures Of Learning Style, Hearing Vocabulary, Entry Skills, Motivation And H...

PDF

Development And Evaluation Of An Auto-Instructional Media Package For Teacher Education

PDF

The Effects Of Two Types Of Experimenter Intervention And Schedules Of Reinforcement On Verbal Operant Conditioning Of Affective Self-References

PDF

Criteria For Curriculum Development In The Public Universities And Colleges In California With Special Concern For The Religious Aspects Of The Cultural Heritage Of Man

PDF

Effects Of Associative And Category Cuing On Recall Of Items From Exhaustive And Nonexhaustive Lists

PDF

An Investigation Of Leader And Member Helpfulness In Group Counseling

PDF

Group Counseling For Counselors: Its Effect Upon The Growth Of Behavior Cognition And Its Relationship To Counselor Effectiveness

Asset Metadata

Creator Walker, Betty Ann (author)

Core Title Effects Of Short-Term Group Counseling On Changes In Attitudes Of Flexibility, Tolerance, And Nonauthoritarianism

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Education

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

Tag education, guidance and counseling,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Carnes, Earl F. (committee chair), McIntrye, Robert B. (committee member), Robb, J. Wesley (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-545258

Unique identifier UC11363235

Identifier 7203804.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-545258 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 7203804

Dmrecord 545258

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Walker, Betty Ann

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