University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Academic Specialization And The Construction Of Social Reality: Ideologies Regarding Deviance

(USC Thesis Other)

Academic Specialization And The Construction Of Social Reality: Ideologies Regarding Deviance

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content 71-12,377 CERESETO, Shirley, 1922- ACADEMIC SPECIALIZATION AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF SOCIAL REALITY: IDEOLOGIES REGARDING DEVIANCE. University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1970 Sociology, general University Microfilms, A X ERO X Company , Ann Arbor, Michigan © Copyright by Shirley Cereseto 1971 THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED ACADEMIC SPECIALIZATION AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF SOCIAL REALITY: IDEOLOGIES REGARDING DEVIANCE by Shirley Cereseto 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 (Sociology) August 1970 UNIVERSITY O F SO U TH ERN CALIFORNIA T H E GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY PARK LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 0 0 0 0 7 This dissertation, written by Shir l ex ® 9.— ......... under the direction of A.Dissertation C om mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by The G radu ate School, in partial fulfillment of require ments of the degree of D O C T O R OF P H IL O S O P H Y f f Dean Date Ausust_197_0 il ACKK0V/L3DGKENTS Grateful acknowledgment is made for the support provided by the John Randolph and Dora Haynes Foundation. The Haynes Dissertation Fellowship, awarded for the year 1966-67, enabled the writer to devote full time to this study during that year. The writer wishes to express her appreciation to the members of her committee, LaMar T. Empey, Thomas E. Lasswell, and '.'/illiam R. Larson. LaMar Empey consented to take over the chairmanship of the committee after the research nad already been completed. He generously offered a considerable amount of critical comment and helpful suggestion with regard to the writing of the report. Thomas Lasswell carefully and painstakingly edited the entire manuscript, and in the process, called to the attention of the writer numerous technical errors. '.Villiam Larson wrote the complex computer program used in the multiple-discriminant function analysis of the m semantic differential data, and was of great assistance in obtaining the large amount of computer output which was required. This study was made possible initially because Clarence Schrag, first chairman of the committee, iii permitted the writer to undertake what seemed, at that time, an offbeat, unlikely-sounding proposal. The writer is deeply indebted to Clarence Schrag for the unusual freedom which he accorded her in this work, and for other things which cannot easily be expressed in words. Walter Goldschmidt, Chairman of the UCLA Depart- i I I ment of Anthropology; Eliot Rodnick, Chairman of the UCLA i Department of Clinical Psychology, and Murray L. Schwartz, Dean of the UCLA School of Law graciously allowed me to conduct this investigation of students in their disciplines. I am especially indebted to Murray Schwartz for his help, at a critical point, in obtaining the graduate lav/ sample. J.A.C. Grant, Professor of Political Science and advisor to pre-law students, offered suggestions and help in securing the undergraduate law sample. Appreciation is extended to the following professors for their cooperation and assistance in obtaining the other samples which were required in this study: Depart ment of Anthropology: Professors Makarius, Philip L. Newman, Michael G. Smith; Department of Psychology: Professors Dowling, James C. Miller, Charles Y. Nakamura, Bernard Weiner; Department of Political Science: Douglas S. Hobbs; Department of Sociology: G. A. Miller; Department of French: Professors Miller, Yvone Lenard; Department of Spanish: Carroll B. Johnson. | iv To the many sociologists whom I ao not know personally, but whom I quoted extensively and assembled together under a sociocultural relativistic label, I am indebted for the way I presently perceive human nature, the world, and social phenomena. I have tried to describe some of the specific contributions made by the persons listed above. To my husband, son, and daughter, who lived with me the many years during which a painful transformation of conscious ness occurred, I have a general and unlimited indebtedness and gratitude for their continued acceptance, support, and frequent tangible assistance. Prom my husband, especially, there was scarcely a day during the years I worked on this project that he did not offer much-needed support, encouragement, and aid in innumerable ways. The study described herein was undertaken with humanistic goals and purposes in mind. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM..................... 1 Introduction......................... 1 The Conceptual Framework and Issues....... 4 Social ideology.......................... 5 Sociology of knowledge and related fields 15 Ways of defining deviance............. 20 The Research Design........................ 23 The samples.................... 23 Selection of the disciplines to be investigated.............................. 24 Data collection.......................... 26 General assumptions and hypotheses...... 28 Implications...................... 29 Summary ................ 31 Subsequent Organization of the Thesis 32 II. SOCIAL IDEOLOGY............................... 34 Two Approaches to the Study of Ideology: Personal and Sociocultural............... 34 The Authoritarian Personality Study 35 Criticism of the Authoritarian Study 39 Evidence for group and cultural determ inants.................................... 43 The Culture-personality Controversy....... 53 The distinction between ideology and personality............................... 53 The importance of ideology irrespective of personality............................... 56 Methodological suggestions............... 60 Education as a Determinant of Ideology 65 The general relationship between education and ideology.............................. 65 Variation in content of education....... 66 Summary and Implications................... 68 v vi Chapter Page III. THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OP REALITY: A SOCIO-CULTURAL RELATIVISTIC FRAME OF REFERENCE....................................... 70 Sociology of Knowledge and Ideology...........71 Reference Group and Role Theory.............. 97 Philosophy of Science.........................106 Perception Theory. ........ .....114 Sociolinguistics. ...........................119 Summary and Implications .............. 124 IV. DEVIANCE: THEORIES, ISSUES, AND IDEOLOGIES.... 127 Alternative Approaches to Deviance........... 129 Antecedents: The Value Conflict Theory of Social Problems............................. 132 The New Perspective on Deviance: The Societal Reaction Theory....................136 Evidence Supporting the Societal Reaction Theory of Deviance........ ....140 A Fifth Type of Evidence: Ideologies Regarding Deviance..........................173 Summary........................................203 V. THE THREE DISCIPLINES...........................207 Ideal Types...... 216 Historical use as methodological devices...216 Elements to be included in the analysis and the type of relationship postulated..219 Ideal Type Explanation Sketches............224 Clinical Psychology.... ..................... 230 Conceptual system.........................230 Existential base................... 246 Ideology.................................. 258 Law. •••••...... 260 Conceptual system and existential base...272 Ideology.................................. 273 Anthropology................ 279 Conceptual system.........................278 Existential base .................. .•••• 287 Ideology.................................. 288 Summary............... 292 vii Chapter Page VI. RESEARCH PROCEDURES............................. 294 Research Design*........... 294 Samples......... 297 The undergraduate anthropology sample.....303 The undergraduate psychology sample....... 304 The undergraduate law sample.............. 305 The undergraduate mixed-majors sample.....306 The graduate anthropology sample.......... 308 The graduate clinical psychology sample....309 The graduate law sample........ 310 The graduate mixed-majors sample.......... 313 Response rates............... 315 Composition of the Samples................... 315 Size of the samples........... 315 Class year.................................318 Age.................... 319 Sex..........................................321 Effects due to composition of the samples..323 Data Collection Techniques................... 323 Choice of research instrument.............. 323 The semantic differential and illustrative research......... 327 Construction of the Research Instrument.... 340 Preliminary instrument in pre-test operation............ 349 Field operations................ 349 Hypotheses and Operational Indicators........350 Procedures Utilized in Data Analysis.........358 Summary........................... 377 VII. THE FINDINGS.................................... 378 Hypothesis IA. ...... 383 Hypothesis IB............ 393 Hypothesis II................................ .402 Hypothesis IIA. Value-orientations Regard ing Social Issues.......................... 404 Hypothesis II-A-1.......................... 405 Hypothesis II-A-2.......................... 408 Hypothesis II-A-3...... .....411 Hypothesis IIA: Undergraduates .....414 Differences Within Disciplines.............419 Comparison of Pre-law and Graduate Law Samples.......... .424 Comparison of Undergraduate and Graduate Psychology Samples........................427 Comparison of Undergraduate and Graduate Anthropology Samples ..... 430 vlli Chapter Page Comparison of undergraduate and graduate mixed-majors samples................... 433 Value-orientations and scoring patterns of the graduate samples.......... 439 Hypothesis IIB. Types of Judgments with Regard to Deviant Groups.................443 Hypothesis II-B-1.........................446 Hypothesis II-B-2.......... 450 Hypothesis II-B-3.........................451 Hypothesis II-B-4.........................454 Hypothesis IIB: Undergraduates ....461 Differences Within Disciplines...........469 Judgment Data as Evidence Regarding Correlary Issues Not Stated in the Hypotheses. ......... 479 Hypothesis II-C. Selected Beliefs about Human Nature and the World............... 504 Hypothesis II-C-1.........................505 Summary and Discussion of the Findings.....514 VIII. SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS..........................538 Implications Concerning Determinants of Social Ideology.............................. 543 Selective choice of disciplines............. 548 Comparison of Graduate vs. undergraduate status and academic discipline as predictors of ideology....................550 Sociology of Knowledge Hypotheses and the Problem of Meaning........................551 Differential conceptions of reality......553 Systems of meaning. .....................554 Theories of Deviance.........................564 Academic Training in the Field of Deviance..566 Limitations of this Study and Suggestions for Future Research.......................571 APPENDIXES I. Copy of the Letter Mailed with the Research Instrument to Pre-law Students................ 577 II. Copy of the Letter Mailed with the Research Instrument to Graduate Anthropology Students...580 ix III. Copy of the Letter Mailed with the Research Instrument to Graduate Psychology Students....5&3 IV. The Research Instrument........................5&o BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................6l6 X LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Elements To Be Included in the Ideal Type Explanation Sketches..................... 223 2. Percentage of the Relevant Glass Population at UCLA which Is Included in Each of the Three Graduate Samples......................... 312 3. Response Rates.............................. 31b 4. Number and Per Cent of Students in Each Sample 317 5. Distribution by Class Year................. 320 6. Distribution by Age......................... 322 7. Distribution by Sex......................... 324 6. Hypothetical Ideal Types Based on Five Con ceptual Elements......................... 366 9. Value-orientations Regarding Social Issues Hypotheses (II-A) and Operational Indicators 370 10. Types of Judgments with Regard to Deviant Groups Hypotheses (II-B) and Operational Indicators 373 11. Beliefs about Human Nature and the World Hypothesis (II—C) and Operational Indicators 376 12. Social Issues Concepts, Abbreviations, and Scales........................................ 379 13. Deviant Group Concepts, Abbreviations, and Scales........................................ 360 14. Miscellaneous Concepts and Scales.............. 361 15. Multiple-discriminant Function Analysis of the 26 Concepts for the Four Graduate Samples....366 xi Table Page 16. Multiple-discriminant Function Analysis of the 26 Concepts for the Four Undergraduate Samples...................................... 3&7 17. Number of Significant Differences on Meaning of the 26 Concepts among Undergraduate Samples and among Graduate Samples................... 3^9 18. The Concepts on which the Groups Differ Signif icantly in Meaning (Six Types of Comparisons)391 19. Summary of the Multiple-discriminant Function Analysis. Number of Significant Differences for Each of the Six Comparisons............. 392 20. Chi Square Values for the Three General Scales on Each Concepts Comparison of the Four Graduate Samples............................. 393 21. Chi Square Values for the Three General Scales on Each Concept: Comparison of the Four Undergraduate Samples....................... 397 22. Comparison of the Concepts on which Under graduates and Graduates Differ Significantly on the Three General Scales................. 400 23. Number of Significant Differences on the Three General Scales among Undergraduate Samples and among Graduate Samples.................. 401 24. Results for Hypothesis II-A-1 Value-orientations Related to Focal Area of Discipline ......................... 407 25. Results for Hypothesis II-A-2 Value-orientations Related to Theory Associated with Role Procedures............. 410 26. Results for Hypothesis II-A-3 Value-orientations Related to Assumption of Free Will or Determinism......... 412 27. Summary of Results for Hypothesis IIA Value-orientations Regarding Social Issues.. 413 Xll 28. Value-orientations of the Four Undergraduate Samples with Regard to the Law Concepts 416 29. Value-orientations of the Four Undergraduate Samples with Regard to the Psychology and Anthropology Concepts....................... 418 30. Comparison of the Number of Predictions Confirmed on Value-orientations among Graduate Samples and among Undergraduate Samples 420 31. Approximate Relative Rank of the Social Issues Concepts in the Value Hierarchies of Each of the Eight Samples........................... 422 32. Summary of Significant Differences between Undergraduates and Graduates in Each of the Four Groups on Social Issues Concepts...... 33* Results for Hypothesis II-B-1 Judgments Reflecting Vocabulary of Motives and Type of Explanation..................... 448 34. Results for Hypothesis II-B-2 Judgments Reflecting Reality-orientation.... 452 35* Results for Hypothesis II-B-3 Policy Judgments Reflecting Theory and Role Procedures................................... 453 36. Results for Hypothesis II-B-4 Judgments Reflecting the Assumptions of Free Will or Determinism......................... 456 37* Summary of Results on Predictions Made for the Four Graduate Samples on Hypothesis IIB 457 38. Group Mean Label Scores for the Four Under graduate Samples with Regard to the Deviant Group Concepts............................... 463 39* Summary of Results of Judgments Regarding Deviant Groups Made by the Four Undergraduate Samples...................................... 466 xill 40. Comparison of the Per Cent of Predictions Confirmed among Graduate Samples and among Undergraduate Samples— Judgments Regarding Deviant Groups................................ 467 41. Judgments on which There are Significant Differences between Undergraduates and Graduates in Each of the Four Groups on the 39 Group Mean Label Scores................... 470 42. Per Cent of Students in Each Sample Who NEVER Use a Particular Negative Label (Score = 0 ).. 4o 1 43. Differences, in Per Cents, between Graduate and Undergraduate Samples in Each Group who NEVER Use a Particular Negative Label.............. 483 44. Vocabulary of Judgments of Graduate and Under graduate Students Regarding Deviant Groups... 48$ 45* Relative Rank of Each Deviant Group on Each Scale by Graduate Mean Ratings............... 490 46. Comparison of Responses of Graduate Anthro pology and Graduate Psychology Students on the Intelligent-dull Scale for Problems Associated with Low Socioeconomic Status 499 47. Percentage of Students in Each of the Graduate Samples Who Checked "Sick" with Regard to Each of the Deviant Groups................... 503 43. Results for Hypothesis II-C. Beliefs Regarding Human Nature and the World Reflecting Assump tions of Free Will or Determinism............ 508 49. Group Mean Scores for the Four Undergraduate Samples on Selected Beliefs Regarding Human Nature and the World......................... 510 50. Comparison of the Number of Predictions Confirmed on Beliefs Regarding Human Nature and the World among Graduate Samples and among Undergraduate Samples........................ 511 xlv 51. Summary of the Number of Predictions Substan tiated for Each of the Three Graduate Samples ................................ 522 52. Summary Comparison of Per Cent of Significant Differences Occurring among Graduate Samples and Those among Undergraduate Samples....... 532 XV LIST OF ILLUSTRATICHS Figure Pape 1. The Value Hierarchies of tnc Lav; Samples on Social Issues Concepts...................... 425 2. The Value Hierarchies of the Psychology Samples on the Social Issues Concepts...... 42o 3. The Value Hierarchies of the Anthropology Samples on the Social Issues Concepts...... . 431 4. The Value Hierarchies of the Taxed Majors Camples on the Social Issues Concepts...... 434 5. Summary Comparison of the Humber of Signif icant Differences between Samples on the 39 Group Mean Label Scores.................... 475 CHAPTER I STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM INTRODUCTION Traditionally, efforts to understand deviant behavior have focused largely upon the mental and emotional makeup of the offender. In the main, it has been assumed that he possesses personal defects which, if understood, could be corrected. A new frame of reference has emerged, however, which views the problem from another perspective. According to this viewpoint, deviance is created by the dominant groups in society who make the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance.^ This means that "... deviance is not a quality of the act the person commits, but rather a consequence of the application by others of 2 rules and sanctions to an 'offender'." There is nothing 1Howard S. Becker, Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, Inc., 1§63). 2Ibid., p. 9. 1 2 inherently bad or good in behavior per se. It does not become deviant until it is so labeled. Those who espouse this approach say that in order to understand the phenomena of deviance, it is as necessary to study those who make and enforce the rules as those who break them. In a pluralistic, heterogeneous society, however, various official agencies are involved in the making and enforcing of rules. Those representing the policy-making agencies often give divergent interpretations and explanations concerning the nature, cause, prevention, and treatment of deviance. There is not even agreement concerning what is to be considered deviant. There is evidence that judgments concerning what is deviant and what is normal follow from other more fundamental premises and assumptions concerning the nature of man, society, and reality.^ In Becker's words: It is easily observable that different groups judge different things to be deviant. This should alert us to the possibility that the person making the judgment of deviance, the process by which that judgment is arrived at, and the situation in which it is made may all be intimately involved in the phenomenon of deviance. To the degree that the common-sense view of the deviance and the scientific theories that begin with its premises assume that acts that break rules are inherently deviant and thus take for granted the Pitirim A. Sorokin, Social and Cultural Dynamics (New York: American Book Co., 1937}, Vol. II, Ch. 15, discussed in Albert K. Cohen, Deviance and Control (Engle wood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1966), pp. 33-34. 3 situations and processes of judgment, they may leave out an important variable. If scientists ignore the variable character of the process of judgment, they may by that omission limit the kinds of theories that can be developed.and the kind of understanding that can be achieved. What accounts for the different perspectives? Many factors have been suggested and investigated. The role played by various subcultural reference groups in the structuring of perception, cognition, and world-view has been the subject of intensive research, but strangely, the differential effect of academic specialization in this regard has been hardly investigated. In an age when science and technology are preeminent, increasingly it is the academic specialist who shapes conceptions of reality, formulating the standards, procedures, and patterns operative in his field. If one wishes to study the groups who make and enforce the rules, who supply the definitions, diagnostic categories, and interpretations concerning who and what is deviant, it would seem important to investigate the specialized training which prepares men for such work. The present study is an attempt to examine the effect of academic specialization upon social ideology. The extent and manner in which graduate training in a particular academic discipline influences perception, evaluation, judgments, and beliefs with regard to deviance ^Becker, op. cit., p. 4. 4 and related social issues is investigated. The Conceptual Framework and Issues Divergent interpretations and explanations of deviance by academic and professional groups trained to deal with such problems raise general questions concerning the nature of knowledge. Study of the determinants, conditions, and principles underlying differential perception of reality and world view is currently a matter of intense interest in many scientific fields. Prom the many researches carried out investigating such problems, there has emerged a set of propositions, which although phrased somewhat differently by various scientists, might be summarized in a single statement as follows: The manner in which men perceive and interpret reality depends upon the conceptual apparatus supplied by their major reference group, which in turn, is formed by the selective sociocultural and historical experiences of that group. Research guided by propositions of this type constitutes one mode of approach to the study of social phenomena. This mode of approach will be referred to as the sociocultural relativistic approach. It is the frame of reference guiding the present study. The manner in which this framework bears upon various aspects of this 5 study will be elaborated throughout the thesis. The problem investigated here is related to and bears upon issues in three general areas: (1) social ideology, (2) sociology of knowledge and related fields, and (3) deviance. The literature from each of the three areas will be presented in chapters II, III, and IV respectively. A brief discussion of the germane issues in each of these areas will be presented now. Social ideology.— Early in the formulation of this study, a review was undertaken of the literature in the area of social ideology with the following objectives: (1) to identify the types of ideological elements found to be prominent in ideologies toward deviants, (2) to learn which factors are considered to be significant, potential determinants of such ideological elements, and (3) to determine and be aware of any important issues in the field. No single body of literature was found which deals exclusively with ideologies toward deviants. Most of the references are part of an extensive body of literature having to do with intolerance, prejudice, ethnocentrism, and authoritarianism. 6 It was found that both theory and research have been couched in two general frameworks, personal and sociocultural. In the personal framework, perhaps the most important body of studies was that conducted by Adorno and his associates on the authoritarian 5 personality. Much of the investigation since then has followed Adorno's formulation. In these studies, two, major and basically different personal orientations toward deviants and outgroups were identified. In one, a value-orientation emphasizing authority, power, obedience, and will power was found to be linked to a generalized intolerance of outgroups and to moralistic, condemning, punitive judgments concerning deviants. The other orientation, in contrast, was democratic, tolerant, non-moralistic, non-condemnatory, and non-punitive toward deviants and outgroups. The distinctive ideologies encompassed in the two orientations were believed to represent manifestations of deep- 5 T. W. Adorno, Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel J. Levinson, and R. Nevitt Sanford, The Authoritarian Personality, (New York: Harper & Row, 1950j. seated personality trends formed as a result of particular kinds of experiences with parents in early childhood. Other researchers, using a sociocultural relativistic framework investigated these same ideological elements and found contradictory data. In studies l comparing subjects of differing educational, occupational, | I economic, and national backgrounds, evidence was j supplied which diverged from the pattern of relationships which had been found in the authoritarian personality studies. Moreover, the questions which arose as a result of the contradictory evidence were parallel to those raised by critics of the authoritarian personality studies, in particular, the criticism directed at the alleged inattention by Adorno to education and social factors, and to his insensitivity to possible differences 6 m meaning among various groups. Research indicated that ideological elements which have a negative value in one society may have a positive and different meaning in another society. What appears to be an unthinking, blind stress upon obedience to authority may represent for the working- ^Richard Christie and Marie Jahoda (eds.), Studies in the Scope and Method of "The Authoritarian Personality1 ' (Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1954). 8 class man a functional necessity to follow directions, to accord respect to authority, and to teach his 7 children to do so. Other data demonstrated that lower- class workers who gave authoritarian responses did not differ from equalitarian workers on "people-oriented" responses; whereas, in the middle class, those who gave authoritarian responses were much less likely to select people-oriented humanitarian characteristics.^ Data from Italy and Mexico indicated that authoritarian beliefs were correlated with affectionate, rather than hostile, relationships to children.^ Apparently the significance of authoritarian as well as other kinds of responses differs under diverse cultural conditions. Leonard I. Pearlin and Melvin L. Kohn, "Social Class, Occupation, and Parental Values: A Cross- National Study, American Sociological Review, Vol. 31, (August 1966), pp. 466-479, p. 471. Q Prank Riessman and S. M. Miller, "Social Class and Projective Tests," in Prank Riessman, Mental Health of the Poor (New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1964), p. 254. q Arnold M. Rose, "Prejudice, Anomie, and the Authoritarian Personality," Sociology and Social Research, Vol. 50 (January 1966), pp. 141-147. Noel F. McGinn, Ernest Harburg, and Gerald Ginsburg, "Dependency Relations with Parents and Affiliative Responses in Michigan and Guadalajara," Sociometry, Vol. 28 (September 1965), p. 313* 9 In a society where young people are taught that permissiveness and tolerance of deviants and outgroups are positive values, intolerance, punitive, and moralistic attitudes might be indicative of repressed hostility displaced to outsiders. However, in other types of societies, intolerance of deviation and authoritarian attitudes might simply be the typical normative beliefs valued and taught to group members. As such, they might not be related to any particular personality type. Personality traits or motives should not, therefore, be automatically Inferred from ideological statements.^ •^Samuel A. Stouffer, Social Research to Test Ideass Selected Writings of' Samuel'A. Stouffer TNew Yorks The Free Press of Glencoe, 19^2 p. 118. Bruno Bettelheim and Morris Janowitz, Social Change and Prejudice (New Yorks The Free Press of~Glencoe, 19357, pp7 512-13. Roger Brown, Social Psychology (New Yorks The Free Press of Glencoe, 19o5T, P. 510. 10 The literature from the area of social ideology which hears on these issues will be presented in detail in chapter II. At present, it may be sufficient to note the following points. The two opposing sets of values, judgments, and beliefs identified in the author itarian personality studies appear repeatedly in the literature and thus seem to constitute the most significant component elements of ideologies toward deviants and outgroups. Data regarding the determinants, correlates, and meanings of the ideological elements, however, are ambiguous and contradictory. Ideology may be heavily influenced by group or cultural standards, as well as by personality factors. Education, occupation, and language were most frequently implicated as potential sociocultural sources of ideological differences. One important question for research, then, would be to ascertain the kinds of education, occupation, or terminology which would produce the various ideological components noted above. Corollary 11 to that endeavor would be an attempt to understand the nature of the connecting link between the two. All of the sociocultural factors mentioned above can be taken into account, somewhat, by choice of academic discipline as the independent variable in the present investigation. Occupational or professional role is assumed to be a major role which determines much of the life experience of individuals. Differences among professional groups in terminology and meaning are, in part, learned during the intensive graduate training process in a particular academic discipline. The disciplines, then, can be viewed and treated as diverse occupational, linguistic, and educational subcultures. Several advantages may accrue from a comparative study of academic subcultures. First, studies on ideology which have used national samples or other samples of unrelated individuals rather than cultural groups have been criticized for creating some of the confusion mentioned earlier.^ Responses of individuals can best be evaluated in the context of the standards and norms of their own particular subculture. Study of individuals divorced from their cultural reference points precludes ^Bettelheim and Janowitz, 0£. cit., p. 29* 12 such assessment. What is judged to be an individual personality trait may, in fact, reflect the norms or values of the individual's group. If, on the other hand, one studies groups, then meaningful evaluations can be made in terms of conformity to or extent of deviation from the group norms. Treatment of each discipline as a subculture will enable us to evaluate the responses of students from the standpoint of their academic group culture. Second, many studies have shown that education plays an important role in ideology, and that it is 12 negatively related to intolerance. However, there is evidence that variation in ideology exists among those with equivalent lengths of formal education, for example, among those in different professions.^ Perhaps it is not 12 Samuel A. Stouffer, Communism, Conformity, and Civil Liberties:A Cross-Section of the Nation Speaks Its Mind (Carden City, N. Y.: boubleday & Co., T955T? A. A. Alonzo and J. W. Kinch, "Educational Level and Support of Civil Liberties," The Pacific Sociological Review (Pall, 1964), PP* 89-93. Srown, op. cit., pi 523. 1 3 Bernard Berelson and Gary A. Steiner, Human Behavior: An Inventory of Scientific Findings (New York: riarcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1964), pp. 43*-43l. Find ings regarding different professions and ideological beliefs are listed. See also Robert Bierstedt, "Social Science and Public Service," in Alvin W. Gouldner and S. M. Miller (eds.), Applied Sociology: Opportunities and Problems (New York: I?he tfree Press, 1^65), pp. 417-419* 13 years of education but kind of education, i.e., the conceptual system that is learned, which is the relevant factor. Thus, a comparative study of disciplines may enable us to specify or elaborate the general relationship known to exist between education and ideology with more precise statements about the particular relationships between specific disciplines and ideology.^ One issue is of concern at this point. It is the issue regarding selective choice of discipline. Should it be found that graduate students in the various disciplines studied here differ in ideology, the question would then arise as to whether they differed prior to academic specialization. That is, to what extent does selective choice of discipline account for differences in social ideology? Do students with particular ideologies enter a discipline which appears to be compatible with their pre existing ideologies? Ideally this type of problem would be investigated by means of a longitudinal study. Students would be questioned when they entered the university and again upon departure. Degree of change with regard to the 1^Paul F. Lazarsfield, "Evidence and Inference in Social Research," Bobbs-Merrill Reprint #S-441, pp. 11T- 124. Reprinted from Daedalus, Vol. 87, No. 4, 1958. 14 same material would be ascertained. Since it was not possible to carry out a longi tudinal design, a second research strategy was used. Cohorts of subjects at two stages of the educational cycle would be studied. These cohorts would consist of under graduate students intending to go on to graduate study in selected disciplines and graduate students in the same disciplines. If there are no significant differences in ideology among undergraduate students in the various disciplines, then there would be less reason to believe that the graduate students differed initially in this respect. Significant differences among graduate students on dependent variables could then be assumed to be a result of the different learning experiences provided by their respective disciplines. A further problem concerns the type of differences one should expect among graduate students in various disciplines. This raises some baffling questions. It is, perhaps, not too difficult to understand the relationship between certain economic or special interest groups and their typical ideologies. For groups which are being trained to deal with deviance in a scientific and professional manner, however, the problem becomes more obscure. Why would such groups diverge? If they did diverge, in what manner would they be expected to vary? 15 For clues regarding these questions we turned to other fields which study sociocultural conditioning in a broader framework— not only conditioning of ideology, but also of perception, of world-view, and even of scientific knowledge. Sociology of knowledge and related fields.— Theories and research findings in five fields were examined: (1) sociology of knowledge and ideology, (2) reference group and role theory, (3) philosophy of science, (4) perception theory, and (5) sociolinguistics. Principles which have emerged from research in these various fields are surprising in their similarity and coherence. The hypotheses tested in the present investigation were formulated on the basis of these principles. They imply that there is no knowledge, pure and uncontaminated by human assumptions, definitions, and 15 categorical systems. Rather, there appear to be different modes and styles of thought, each intimately related to place and era, to life experience and vantage point, to conceptual apparatus employed by particular groups. 1 5 Karl Mannheim, Ideology and Utopia (New York: A Harvest Book, Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., translated by Louis Wirth and Edward Shils in 1936, originally published in German in 1929), p. 297. 16 The evidence suggests that perception is always selective. Various groups apparently focus their attention upon segments of the social and physical environment which 16 are related to the enterprises in which they are engaged. Their generalizations, then, are derived from different sets of empirical data. Based on their diverse experience, they derive divergent assumptions and propositions con- 17 cerning the nature of the world. The way an individual perceives and interprets human behavior as well as physical objects seems to be primarily dependent upon the system of explanation available which is supplied by his major reference 18 groups. This explanatory or conceptual system consists of definitions, meanings, categories, assumptions, and beliefs which are both existential and evaluative. The 1 6 Jerome S. Bruner, "Social Psychology and Perception," in Eleanor E. Maccoby, Theodore M. Newcomb, and Eugene L. Hartley (eds.), Readings in Social Psychology (New York; Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1958), pp. 85-94. 17F. S. C. Northrup, Ch. XXI, "The Scientific Method for Determining the Normative Social Theory of the Ends of Human Action," in The Logic of the Sciences and the Humanities (New York: The MacMillan Co., 194?), pTTTT-------- 1 8 Tamotsu Shibutani, Society and Personality: An Interactionist Approach to Social Psychology (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1$6l). 17 conceptual system guides perception and interpretations by direction of attention to familiar objects and relationships, by definition of what these objects and relationships mean, by providing explanations concerning cause and effect, by definition of what is good or bad, appropriate or inappropriate, rational or irrational, etc. ^ In learning a role system (including deviant roles), Cohen suggests that group members learn a terminology, the socially recognized categories of people, the criteria that define them, "signs whereby they may be recognized, images of what these people are like, expectations about how they should behave, standards for 20 evaluating them," and appropriate responses to them. Within each group, there are, of course, individual differences in perception based upon other factors. Furthermore, individuals may become members of new groups, learn and accept new explanatory systems, and consequently interpret phenomena in a different manner. The studies which produced the general principles 1Q Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of faiowledge (harden City, N. 71.: tioubleday & Co., 196b), p. 62. ?0 Cohen, 0£. cit., pp. 97-98. 18 21 described above represent a shift in research emphasis. In the past, the general tendency had been to investigate the sources of distortion, illusion, and error in perception, in ideology, in world-view, and in other idea- systems. More and more, however, problems were defined simply as investigation of the manner in which all perception, cognition, and behavior are inevitably shaped and influenced by social, cultural, and historical factors. The 'Copernican revolution' in this area of inquiry consisted in the hypothesis that not only error or illusion or unauthenticated belief but also the discovery of truth was socially (historically) conditioned. As long as attention was focused on the social determinants of ideology, illusion, myth, and moral norms, the sociology of knowledge could not emerge....The sociology of knowledge came into being with the signal hypothesis that even truths were to be held socially accountable, were to be rela£gd to the historical society in which they emerged. The shift in research emphasis affected not only the study of perception, ideology, and knowledge, but also the study of deviant behavior. The parallel revolutionary development is noted in the following quotations 21 Bruner, 0£. cit., p. 85. ^Robert K. Merton, "The Sociology of Knowledge," in R. K. Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure (Glencoe, 111.: I?he ^ree Press, 1957), pp» 459-460. 19 ...I cannot help but be influenced by the revolution ary transformation in perspective that has occurred in the sociology of crime and deviance. The new outlook of this sociology has sensitized us to under stand that the structure of an inquiry implies a whole set of assumptions about what is 'normal' or reprehensible. Questions arose concerning the effect of socio cultural conditioning upon definitions of what is normal 24 or deviant, healthy or pathological, legal or criminal. Some social psychiatrists began to wonder to what extent their own particular training and assumptions affected their diagnosis, classification, theories, and treatment 2} JJerome H. Skolnick, "The Generation Gap," Trans-action November 1968, p. 5. Dr. Skolnick is Head of the Task Force on Violent Aspects of Demonstrations and Protest, The President's Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence. ^"A research function of the sociologist is to unravel and decipher the standards of judgment that different peoples use and have used in solving problems ....Frequently people make judgments without recognizing their symbolic basis. They may become so conditioned to a certain symbolic system that they are unaware of alternative possibilities. In this event people may assume that their own standards of conduct, belief, and morals are inherent properties of the human mind. The variety of standards accepted at different times and places indicates that standards grow out of group experience and that the individual acquires the standards of his group through processes of learning." George A. Lundberg, Clarence C. Schrag. Otto N. Larsen, Sociology (New York: Harper & Row, 1963;, p. 176. 20 25 procedures. More serious questions, yet, along these lines, are currently being raised in the sociological literature on deviance. The issues concern the way in which societal and professional policies, themselves, are P6 implicated in the production of deviance. Ways of defining deviance.— Traditionally, researchers studied deviants of various types: criminals, mentally ill, alcoholics, etc. and attempted to understand the supposedly defective processes or characteristics of these individuals which result in their deviant behavior. In this kind of research, the definition of who or what is deviant is accepted as a given. It is not questioned. The so-called, new perspective on deviance by contrast, asks questions about who and what is considered ^Daniel Offer and Melvin Sabshin, Normality: Theoretical and Clinical Concepts of Mental Health (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1966;. Thomas S. Szasz, The Myth of Mental Illness (New York: Harper & Row, 1961) • Pfi "Policy is not merely a reaction to an existing problem; rather, the relation between policy and problem is reciprocal. A specific policy may cause new problems, or make existing ones worse, and the sociologist must take this into account." Edwin M. Schur, Crimes Without Victims: Deviant Behavior and Public Policy (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: ~Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965), p. v. John R. Seeley, "Social Science? Some Probative Problems" in Sociology on Trial, Maurice Stein and Arthur Vidich (eds.), (Englewood dliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1963)* pp. 53-65. 21 deviant, by whom, under what circumstances, and in accordance with what criteria. Thus some researchers have shifted their attention to the variable character of the definition, labeling, and judgment of deviants. Once the focus shifts from the deviant to the definition, there is a concurrent tendency to move from a pathology- psychological to a social conflict-political frame of 27 reference. In place of the tendency to perceive deviance as pathological, there is a political conscious ness regarding the relativity of judgments and the impor tance of power. The two alternative approaches to the study of deviance are directed toward different aspects of the problem; therefore, both are necessary. Nevertheless, an almost exclusive emphasis upon the traditional mode severely limits our knowledge about other important aspects of the problem. Much of the evidence for the new perspective, the societal reaction theory, is concerned with demonstrating 27 John Horton, "Order and Conflict Theories of Social Problems as Competing Ideologies," American Journal of Sociology (May 1966), pp. 701-713. Austin i. Turk, "Conflict and Criminality," American Sociological Review, Vol. 31 (June 1966), pp. 338-352. Turk discusses two major conceptual orientations; "deviance-pathology" and "social-conflict-political," p. 340. Irving L. Horowitz and M. Liebowitz, "Social Deviance and Political Marginality" Social Problems, Vol. 15. No. 3 (Winter, 1968), pp. 283^96.--------- 22 the manner in which certain professional policies and societal reaction, themselves, serve to create or maintain deviance. Several types of evidence will be reviewed in chapter IV. Most studies bear upon the interactive process between offenders and those who react to them. One type of evidence, however, is concerned only with those who make and enforce the rules— and with the variation in their ideologies regarding deviance. The implication in evidence of this type is that, if there is considerable variation in definitions of what kind of behavior is immoral, pathological, or deviant, then who or what is labeled as deviant may depend as much upon the group which is formulating the policy, and the beliefs of that group, as upon the behavior or traits of the offenders. Moreover, the new perspective is more concerned, than traditional viewpoints, with the role which society plays in deviance and social problems. The entry of this perspective is noted in the report by the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. All of the past phases in the evolution of corrections accounted for criminal and delinquent behavior primarily on the basis of some form of defect within the individual offender. The idea of being possessed by devils was replaced with the idea of psychological disability. Until recently reformers have tended to ignore the evidence that crime and delinquency are symptoms of the disorganization of the community as well as of the individual personalities, and that 23 community institutions— through extending or denying their resources— have a critical influence in determining the success or failure of an individual offender. The present study was designed to gather evidence pertinent to these issues. How do such disciplines as law and psychology, which have the power to impose their definitions and labels upon others, react to them? The Research Design The samples.— Because of their extreme relevance for the different approaches just described, three academic disciplines were selected for investigation. The three disciplines are clinical psychology, law, and anthropology. The rationale for the selection of these particular disciplines will be outlined below. In addition to samples from the three disciplines, a fourth group of students with a variety of majors was included. The latter sample will be called the "mixed-majors group." Each of the four groups is composed of two sub groups, graduate students and undergraduate students. This constitutes a total of eight samples. p Q The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society. A Report by the President's Commission on taw Enforcement and Administration of Justice (Washington, D.Q.: U.S. Government Printing Office, Feb., 1967), p. 164. 24 The mixed-majors group can be considered, roughly, to represent the general university population in contrast to the other three groups, each of which has a single, homogeneous major. This enables us to compare specialized groups with a general group which has approximately the same amount of education in terms of class year at the university. Selection of the disciplines to be investigated.— Given the multidimensional nature of the problem investi gated here, the disciplines selected had to meet several requirements. The requirements are related to the issues which have been discussed in the areas of social ideology, sociology of knowledge, and deviance. Clinical psychology, law, and anthropology, the three disciplines chosen, best fit those requirements, and in addition, offer other advantages. Advocates of the new perspective on deviance have pointed to the importance of studying the variable character of the judgments of groups which make and enforce the rules. Because the three disciplines selected train students for professions which are potential policy making groups in the area of deviance and social problems, they are logical subjects for study. Lawyers and clinical psychologists, in particular, are influential 25 groups in making the rules and designating the criteria concerning what is deviant. Anthropologists, for the most part, have chosen the role of social scientist rather than that of applied practitioner. However, as students of human behavior, their findings reflect heavily upon the behavior of agencies that deal with social problems. The three disciplines vary in ways which also enable us to test certain propositions suggested by studies in sociology of knowledge and other fields. That is, they occupy different vantage points, and thus should differ in perspectives. The three are intensively and selectively focused upon different areas of human relationships. In addition, because of different functions and roles, it is postulated that their perceptions and knowledge of reality varies. Such differences may be of importance both theoretically and pragmatically. That is, in theoretical terms, the groups are likely to differ in significant ways, as suggested above in the propositions derived from sociology of knowledge. Pragmatically, these disciplines are currently involved in serious public controversies centered about major legal, psychological, and community- oriented problems. The public pronouncements of officials, for example, often reflect the opposing viewpoints of law enforcement officials and of behavioral scientists. 26 The reasons stated above explain the selection of clinical psychology, law, and anthropology for study, ideal type explanation sketches of the three disciplines will be provided in chapter V. For the present, however, suffice it to say that certain major differences may be hypothesized to exist. Students in clinical psychology, anthropology, and law are expected to manifest individual istic, group, law and order value-orientations respectively. Judgments regarding deviants are expected to reflect individual-psychological, social-relativistic, and legal-moral criteria respectively. The contrast between the deterministic position of psychology and anthropology (psychological and social determinism respectively) as scientific disciplines and the free-will position underlying the American legal system represents a further fundamental difference in belief concerning the nature and behavior of man. Data collection.— An instrument, utilizing the semantic differential technique, was submitted to the students in the samples. The subjects were asked to make judgments concerning deviant or "social problem" groups. Included were problems related to race, poverty, drugs, sex, riots, and violations of military draft. The judgments elicited concerned: (1) traits attributed to 27 the various deviant groups; and (2) what intervention approaches or policies, if any, the three groups advocated. With regard to the first, the following kinds of informa tion were sought: What characteristics are imputed to different types of deviants? What is perceived as sick, irrational, or normal? What is perceived as bad, dirty, dull, sinful, or dishonest and what is not? Is society or the individual held responsible? With regard to the second, concern was with what kinds of behavior are perceived as harmful to society? What kinds of behavior should be prohibited? Which offenses rate punishment, help, or no action at all? Subjects were also asked to evaluate related social issues concerning obedience to authority, power, internal control (use of will power), external control (legal restriction vs. permissive policy), and to indicate preferred modes of dealing with social problems (through individual means, group action, or legal processes). Responses to these items were then taken as an indication of the value-orientations of the students. A final set of items elicited beliefs regarding human nature and the world in which we live. The responses given by the students on the instrument are assumed to represent their social ideology. The type of data elicited was designed to reflect upon the 28 specific issues mentioned above. General assumptions and hypotheses.— Based upon the literature review, two basic assumptions emerged: (1) that intensive, concentrated, prolonged study in a particular discipline structures one's perception and judgments along lines consonant with the conceptual system of that discipline; (2) that the premises, assumptions, and theories concerning human behavior which are learned in the discipline then constitute the justifi cation and explanation for an individual's judgments regarding particular, concrete social problems, i.e., his social ideology. Based on these assumptions, then, three general overall hypotheses were established for examination: (1) Social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, anthropology, and those comprising a mixed-majors group will differ. (2) Social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthropology will reflect the unique conceptual systems of their respective 29 disciplines. 29 In chapter V, specific hypotheses will be out lined predicting the type of responses expected from graduate students in each of the three disciplines. 29 (3) Social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthropology will more clearly reflect the distinctive character of their respective disciplines than will the social ideologies of under graduate students in the same disciplines. Implications.— With regard to the general hypotheses, there are three major questions. First, will the graduate samples differ? Second, will the responses reflect the conceptual systems of the respective dis ciplines? Third, will the responses of graduate students differ from those of the undergraduate students in the expected manner? What would be the implications of alternative answers to these questions? Only major implications of several of the many possible outcomes will be considered at this point. First, will the graduate samples differ in social ideology? What would be the implications for the societal reaction theory of deviance? The respondents are all students in the same university and are all members of a highly educated elite. Furthermore, they are all potential members of agencies with a social control function. As such, they could be expected to hold a homogeneous view regarding deviance, in which case, the first hypothesis would fail to receive support. If, on the other hand, 30 graduate students, as representatives of three professional viewpoints, disagree on whether certain behavior is sick, immoral, or normal; on whether the offender should be punished, given psychotherapy, or neither, then the importance of the definitional process becomes obvious. Findings to this effect would supply additional strength to those who claim that what is harmful and who is deviant is not a self-evident property of an act or of an actor. The labeling and the consequent careers of deviants, whether they go to prisons, to asylums,^ or to neither, would then appear to depend upon which group is formu lating the policy, and the beliefs of that group, as much, perhaps, as upon the behavior of the offender. Second, what are the implications with regard to questions on determinants of social ideology? If the graduate samples differ, and the ideologies reflect the characteristics of the disciplines, but the differences already exist at the undergraduate level, such data might . imply that students selected majors which conformed to their pre-existing ideologies. If, on the other hand, there are affirmative results on all three hypotheses, such data would suggest that academic specialization may be ■^Erving Goffman, Asylums (Garden City, N. Y.: Anchor Books, Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1961). 31 an effective determinant of social ideology. More specifically, it would indicate that academic specializa tion should be considered one potential determinant of variable judgments and differential labeling of deviants. In a more general sense, confirmation of the three hypotheses would constitute support for propositions in sociology of knowledge which emphasize the importance of man-made definitions and conceptions as a crucial and active force in the shaping of human events. Summary In summary, the problem to be investigated concerns the effect of academic specialization upon conceptions of social reality, and in the main, upon ideologies regarding deviance. The three disciplines to be studied— clinical psychology, law, and anthropology— train students for professions which are potential policy-making groups in the area of deviance and social problems. In addition to the three disciplines, a fourth group, composed of mixed-majors, represents the general student population. Data were obtained showing the types of judgments potential policy-making groups form about deviants, the labels they endorse, as well as their beliefs and values 32 with regard to related issues. The data are expected to provide evidence regarding issues which have been raised in the literature in three areas: social ideology, sociology of knowledge and related fields, and deviance. In particular, propositions derived from work in sociology of knowledge will be tested. The data will be analyzed to ascertain whether or not academic specializa tion appears to be a significant determinant of social ideology, and in effect, of variable judgment and differ ential labeling of deviants. Subsequent Organization of the Thesis The problem investigated in this study is related to and bears upon issues and propositions in three general areas. In each of these areas, the issues have, in the past, been investigated by two alternative approaches, a traditional universalistic approach and a sociocultural relativistic approach. In chapters II, III, and IV, literature will be presented which both contrasts these two approaches and seeks to cl arify the sociocultural relativistic approach to the study of (1) social ideology, (2) perception, world-view, idea-systems or "knowledge," and (3) deviance. Issues, controversies, and ambiguities in the existing findings will be examined. 33 In chapter V, the sociocultural relativistic frame of reference will be applied to the analysis of clinical psychology, law, and anthropology. The disciplines will be treated as three separate socio cultural environments. Ideal-type explanation sketches will be provided in which the relevant characteristics of each discipline will be described and the expected modal ideological responses deduced. The rationale for the predicted ideologies will be discussed in detail. Research procedures will be described in chapter VI. The contents of the chapter will include a description of the research design, selection and composition of the samples, data collection techniques, hypotheses, operation al definitions, operational indicators, measurement procedures, and statistical tests. The data will be presented and analyzed in chapter VII. In the concluding chapter, the findings will be discussed in terms of their general implications, and in connection with certain controversies and questions reported in the review of literature. CHAPTER II SOCIAL IDEOLOGY A review of the literature was undertaken to determine the kind of ideologies— systems of beliefs, values, and attitudes— which exist with regard to deviants, and also to learn something about the formation of the various ideologies. No singular body of literature was found which deals exclusively and specifically with ideologies toward deviants. Most of the references are part of an extensive body of literature having to do with intolerance, prejudice, ethnocentrism, and authoritar ianism. TWO APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OP IDEOLOGY: PERSONAL AND SOCIOCULTURAL It was found that both theory and research have been couched in two general frameworks, personal and sociocultural. The former reflected the traditional concern of scholars with the human personality. Perhaps the most important body of studies was that conducted by 34 35 Adorno and his associates on the authoritarian person ality.^ The impact of this research on the study of ideology has been as great, if not greater, than any other single body of empirical work. Most of the subsequent studies in this general area, whether of the personal or sociocultural approach, continued to investigate the same ideological elements identified in the authoritarian personality studies. Consequently, the review will concentrate, first, upon Adorno's work and then upon the sociocultural frame of reference. The Authoritarian Personality Study.— In the opening paragraph of The Authoritarian Personality Adorno makes explicit the guiding hypothesis of the study: The research to be reported in this volume was guided by the following major hypothesis: that the political, economic, and social convictions of an individual often form a broad and coherent pattern, as if bound together by a 'mentality' or 'spirit,' and that this pattern is an expression of deep-lying trends in his personality. The major hypothesis was confirmed. Thus the T. W. Adorno, Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel Levinson, and R. Nevitt Sanford, The Authoritarian Personality, (New York: Harper & Row, 1950}. 2 Ibid., p. 1. 36 concluding chapter reports that the most crucial result of the study was the demonstration of the close correspondence in outlook a subject is likely to have in a great variety of areas ranging from intimate family life, sex adjust ment, relationships to others, to religious, social, and political philosophy.3 Basic outlook, Adorno suggested, will be a function largely of two basic personality types, both of which are formed in early parent-child relationships. Thus a basically hierarchical, authoritarian, exploitive-parent-child relationship is apt to carry over into a power-oriented, exploitively dependent attitude toward one's sex partner and one's God and may well culminate in a political philosophy and social outlook which has no room for anything but a desparate clinging to what appears to be strong and a disdainful rejection of whatever is relegated to the bottom....manifested especially in the formation of stereotypes and of ingroup-outgroup cleavages. Conventionality, rigidity, repressive denial, and the ensuing break-through of one's weakness, fear and dependency are but other aspects of the same funda mental personality pattern, and they can be observed in personal life as well as in attitudes toward religious and social issues. On the other hand, there is a pattern characterized chiefly by affectionate, basically equalitarian, and permissive interpersonal relationships. This pattern encompasses attitudes within the family and toward the opposite sex, as well as an internalization of religious and social values. Greater flexibility and the potential for more genuine satisfactions appear as results of this basic attitude. 3Ibid., p. 971. 4Ibid., p. 972. 37 Given these two basic personality types, the nature of the relationship among authoritarianism, intolerance, prejudice, ethnocentrism, and ideology toward deviants becomes clear. Attitudes toward outgroups of different types, ethnic and racial minorities, those in the lower socioeconomic class, those who deviate from conventional ingroup standards were found to be part of a single complex. Although there were variations, the two major forms were either tolerance or intolerance, generalized to all of these outgroups. Authoritarian personalities were found to tend toward a moralistic, punitive condemnation of deviants and outgroups, whereas democratic personalities tended to be permissive and tolerant. The findings, based on numerous scales, resulted in the formulation of a theory of ethnocentric ideology which stressed the generality of "the ethnocentric frame of mind." The theory is summed up in the concluding paragraph of the chapter on ethnocentric ideology: Ethnocentrism is based on a pervasive and rigid ingroup-outgroup distinction; it involves stereotyped positive imagery and submissive attitudes regarding ingroups, and a hierarchical, authoritarian view of group interaction in which ingroups are rightly dominant, outgroups subordinate. ^Ibid., p. 145. 6Ibid., p. 150. 38 The hierarchical conception of human relationships mentioned in the quotation was seen to constitute one of the central underlying features of the authoritarian 7 personality. People were divided into two categories: the weak and the strong. There was contempt for the weak; admiration for the powerful; submission, obedience, and respect for authority and power. Deviance from conven tional and legal rules should be curbed internally by use of will power and externally by strict law enforcement and punishment. The foregoing values are termed "authoritarian or conventional values" by the authors since they are based on conformity to external authority and ingroup standards.8 In contrast to external standards and the hierarchical conception, the democratic personality was guided by internal, equalitarian standards focused upon the development of the individual and self-expression. The ideological component is conceptualized in the following terms: ^Ibid., p. 413. 8Ibid., p. 598. 39 What is particularly important here is that recognition of one's own individuality is the basis for the recognition of the individuality of everyone, and for the democratic concept of the dignity of man. These values are expressed ideologically in terms of opposition to all social structures (military, religious, educational, politicoeconomic) which are based on the principle of absolute authority, which value power more than love, which engage in group suppression and exploitation, in short, which prevent man from developing his innate potentialities to a maximum degree. Once again we find anti-ethnocentrism as but one facet of a larger psychological framework. This larger psychological framework includes a scientific-naturalistic orientation toward social and psychological dynamics and realistic thinking in goal- behavior. In contrast, the authoritarian personality displays an antiscientific orientation and a somewhat unrealistic view of means-ends relationships.1® The attitudes, values, and beliefs noted above seem to constitute the most significant ideological elements toward deviants. They are the elements investi gated most frequently and appear in the literature repeatedly. Criticism of the Authoritarian Personality Study.- The vitality of the Authoritarian Personality project generated not only a huge amount of research, but also 9Ibid., pp. 597-598. 1°Ibid., p. 461. 40 numerous criticisms. The extensive criticism which was directed against the methodology need not be repeated here. Instead, criticisms dealing with substantive issues which are relevant to this study will be reviewed. Most of these criticisms are directed against the researchers' insufficient consideration of sociocultural factors, particularly group membership, economic class, education, language, and group meanings. With regard to these criticisms, Christie notes, It has been previously indicated that the meaning of the F scale items is not universal among geographically different samples equated in terms of socioeconomic criteria. It appears equally likely that their meaning would vary among populations of varying sophistication. For instance, for an item such as "There are two kinds of people in the world: the weak and the strong." Christie suggests that the implications would differ for those whose class membership places them among the weak or among the strong. 11 Richard Christie, "Authoritarianism Re-examined," in Richard Christie and Marie Jahoda (eds.), Studies in the Scope and Method of "The Authoritarian Personality” (Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1954), p.” 1747 41 ...those in a favorable hierarchical position are not as aware of the discrepancy in freedom of action or of their own privileges as those who are constantly faced with the reality of status differences. For those in the lower class, there may be realistic justification for the view that the world is junglelike and capricious. As a second example, Christie proposed that endorsement of an item concerning people prying into personal affairs may reflect paranoid tendencies among the middle class, but that it reflected reality for the lower class, who are the first to be questioned by police, 1 q social workers, and other functionaries. Analysis of membership in groupings other than socioeconomic class might also have produced other differences in the results. Christie explains that by separating the sample of middle class women into six meaningful face-to-face groups, the previous overall mean score of 3.62 on ethnocentrism, now shows great differences ranging from subgroup scores of $.23 to 1.20. This, he asserts, leads us to suspect a marked relation ship between membership in functional groups and the degree to which seemingly diverse attitudes are interrelated.^^ He concludes: 12Ibid., p. 175. 13Ibid.. p. 176. U Ibid., p. 177-179. 42 In evaluating data relevant to the relationship between group membership and ideology it appears reasonable to conclude that the generalizations made in The Authoritarian Personality fail to do justice to either the influence of broad social factors or membership in face to face groups upon ideology. What is illuminated, however, is the importance of individual personality characteristics in those instances in which selective identification with group occurs. Hyman and Sheatsley make similar criticisms. Regarding the inadequate consideration of the role of education, they say, "one is continually and vividly struck by the fact that some of the differences obtained, which are treated as determinants of ethnocentrism, seem actually mere reflections of formal education.This seems likely, they suggest, since it has been demonstrated in many representative samples of the adult population, that the traits studied do vary with education. The importance of variations in the "language" of different groups is also commented on by Hyman and Sheatsley: Again we do not deny that personality factors are involved. We are simply dubious of the interpreta tion when the very manifestation of these factors 15Ibid., p. 182. ■^Herbert H. Hyman and Paul B. Sheatsley, "The Authoritarian Personality— A Methodological Critique" in Christie and Jahoda (eds.), Studies in the Scope and Method of The Authoritarian Personality, p. 91. 17Ibid.. p. 93. 43 could easily be a function of education. We suspect that what is often being scored here are not person ality differences but simply the variations in the language of different social classes. The final point in their lengthy critique of The Authoritarian Personality refers to what Hyman and Sheatsley consider the inadequate derivation of causal inferences and the lack of consideration of social factors: Nowhere do the authors clearly illuminate the correlations they do find between ethnocentrism and personality traits....The authors* propensity for psychodynamic explanations leads them to ignore the widespread distribution of certain sentiments in the American population, their frequent correlation with formal education, and their obvious social determinants, and to attribute them instead to psychodynamic processes unique in the ethnocentric individual. Thus, the fact that prejudice is 'irrational* or 'contradictory' or 'highly generalized' is assumed to prove that personality factors are responsible. ^ Evidence for group and cultural determinants.— Criticism of the authoritarian personality project reviewed above was directed mainly at the alleged inattention to social factors and education and insensi tivity to possible differences in meaning among various groups. Some sociologists, while not denying that "authoritarian personalities" may be produced in the manner described by Adorno and his colleagues, believe 44 that ideology may be heavily influenced by group and cultural standards as well. For example, in his study comparing members of a Teamsters union local in Minneapolis with residents of two lower class communities in Rome, Italy, Rose found that the Italians scored higher 20 on the F scale. He concluded, however, that it seemed doubtful that F scale items were sufficiently "culture- free” to make them valid for use in a country like Italy. Hence he questioned their validity across subcultural 21 lines within the United States. Examining the individual items, only four out of 251 Italians answered "no” to the item: "The most important thing to teach children is absolute obedience to their parents." Rose suggests the following explanation for that near-unanimous response: 20 Arnold M. Rose, "Prejudice, Anomie, and the Authoritarian Personality," Sociology and Social Research, Vol. 50 (January, 1966), pp. 141-147. 21 Despite the serious criticism of the validity of the inferences drawn from responses to the F scale when not analyzed with reference to group membership and social factors, such studies continue to flourish. Cook's bibliography of literature relating to the authoritarian personality lists 230 studies on this subject by 1956. Peggy Cook and Richard Christie, "A Guide to Published Literature Relating to the Authoritarian Personality Through 1956," in The Journal of Psychology (195&)» 45» pp. 171-199. 45 Three factors in addition to authoritarianism can be adduced to account for this relatively and absolutely high proportion: (1) Italians have not been as much exposed as Americans to the child psychology which teaches that parents should not repress their children, although they seem to manifest more affec tion for children than do Americans. (2) The Italian experience has been that the extra-familial environ ment has generally been very dangerous to children, and that if children are not taught proper personal habits in the home, the chances are high that they will become delinquents or otherwise socially disorganized. (3) The Catholic Church teaches absolute obedience on the part of children, and parents 'believe' it evenpif they do not always demand it from children. In other words, Italians apparently believe that obedience is good for all concerned. Agreement with the item aoes not necessarily mean they are domineering and hostile to their children. Cultural factors also seem to influence the high affirmative response for two other items, according to Rose. "Any good leader should be strict with people under him in order to gain their respect." "There are two kinds of people in the world: the weak and the strong." Rose thinks that both of these items are factually supported by Italian political experience as compared with American political experience. Rose concludes that F scale items which are greatly influenced by local current history are not good 22 Rose, o£. cit., pp. 144, 145. 46 measures of what they are supposed to measure, since "authoritarianism refers to a condition of the personality— presumably as influenced by direct childhood 23 experiences." A second cross-cultural study presents more striking evidence that endorsement of authoritarian items may be a function of cultural norms and not necessarily related to a hostile personality syndrome. McGinn, Harburg, and Ginsburg studied the relationship between dependency relations with parents and affiliative responses of comparable male college students in Guadalajara, Mexico and in Michigan. Included in the study was an 11-item Attitude Toward Authority Questionnaire. Mexican students were significantly higher than American students on all of the 11 authority items. The following results were reported: Ninety-four per cent of the Guadalajara students compared with 59 per cent of the Michigan students agreed with the statement that "Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues a child should learn." Ninety-five per cent, compared to 6l per cent, agreed that "Facts like juvenile delinquency and sexual immorality show that most of the young people should be controlled more closely by their parents and the community." Eighty per cent in 23lbld.. p. 145 47 Mexico, compared to 52 per cent, agreed that "A well taught child is one who doesn't need to be told twice in order to do it." Only 34 per cent, compared to 76 per cent, agreed that "A person who doesn't feel love and respect for his parents is still able to be a good and moral person." Six other items also showed significant differences in the direction indicating greater acceptance by the Guadalajara group of the legitimacy9pf child-dependent beliefs toward parental authority. Other data obtained by the semantic differential technique showed that Mexican students, in comparison to the American students, saw their fathers as more stern, hard, severe, and critical, yet more close and under standing. A third set of data indicated that Mexican students, more frequently than American students, reacted to test conflict situations with a person-oriented or affiliative response, i.e., a response which would tend to maintain a positive relationship with the other. According to the authors, these results are in agreement with other available information indicating that although Mexican parents are more strict and severe with their children than North American parents, they are also more loving and demonstrative of affection. Juxtaposed to the strictness and to the greater belief in authority- o i Noel F. McGinn, Ernest Harburg, and Gerald P. Ginsburg, "Dependency Relations with Parents and Affiliative Responses in Michigan and Guadalajara," Sociometry, Vol. 28 (September, 1965), p. 313. 4 8 oriented relationships, however, there appears to be a greater emphasis upon maintaining male peer affiliative relationships. This cultural pattern is markedly different from the relationships suggested in the authoritarian 25 personality thesis. In addition to cross-cultural comparisons with other nations, the relationship between authoritarianism and social class has provoked a considerable amount of research and controversy. Adorno's formulation and several others2^ conceived of the authoritarian personality in the context of middle class, anti-democratic senti ments. However, numerous studies have since reported higher authoritarianism in the working class. Notable in this respect is the extensive data offered by Lipset to support the connection between authoritarianism and the 27 working class. Among the factors suggested as 2^Ibid., pp. 305-321. p/1 The following discussion is based on a research report by Lewis Lipsitz, "Working-Class Authoritarianism: A Re-evaluation." American Sociological Review, Vol. 30, (February, 1965)1 pp. 103-109. In addition to Adorno, Lipsitz lists Erich Fromm, Escape from Freedom (New York: Rinehart, 1941; Henry V. Dicks, "Some Psychological Studies of the German Character," in T. H. Pear (ed.), Psychological Factors of Peace and War, (London: Hutchin son, 1950), pp. 193-218. 2^Seymour M. Lipset, Political Man (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, i960). 49 contributing to this linkage are "low education, low participation in political or voluntary organizations, little reading, isolated occupations, economic insecurity, 2g and authoritarian family patterns." In evaluating the counter claims as to whether authoritarianism is higher in the working or in the middle class, Lewis Lipsitz concedes that three opinion surveys conducted in the early 1950's confirm Seymour Lipset's argument. However, when those data are reanalyzed with education controlled, the results are considerably revised. Most of the comparisons become non-significant, and many indicate lower authoritarianism in the working class than in the middle class. According to this inter pretation, the higher authoritarianism in the lower class appears to be a function of the low level of education. Other ambiguities regarding the relationship remain. For instance, Lipsitz says working class individuals seem to be less authoritarian on questions directly related to politics, but higher on items involving the problem of punitiveness. Riessman found no relationship for the working class group between authoritarianism and response to p $ Ibid.. p. 101. 50 leaders as “people oriented." That is, workers who were classified as authoritarian in terms of the A-E scale, showed just as many "people oriented" responses to 29 leadership as the equalitarian workers. In the middle class, on the other hand, the authoritarian individuals as measured by the A-E items were much less likely to select "people oriented" humanitarian characteristics. As a result, Riessman says: Although the lower-class individual scores in an authoritarian direction on the F-scale and its derivatives, the items probably have a very different meaning or referent in his sub-culture; consequently we should be very cautious about inferring anything about his personality, authoritarian tendencies, etc., from these scales. It is most striking that the scales are not predictive of authoritarian relevant attitudes (such as people oriented leadership and political apathy) in the lower-class, while they are predictive in the middle-class. Apparently the differences between working and middle class authoritarian responses vary considerably depending on the kind of question asked. Lipsitz suggested that the analyses should perhaps become more specific in antecedents, in consequent attitudes, and in criterion groups. 29 ^Frank Riessman and S. M. Miller, "Social Class and Projective Tests," in Frank Riessman, Mental Health of the Poor (New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1964), p. 254. 3°Ibid.. p. 256. 51 Perhaps discussion of authoritarianism in ’class' terms should give way to more specific analyses, focusing more directly on the variables thought to influence the development of authoritarianism, such as economic and status insecurity, work dissatisfaction, lack of education, autocratic family structure, and the like. Appropriate research would seek to relate these variables to particular occupations and in turn to political and social attitudes. Kohn and Pearlin take a step forward in this 32 direction. They provide an explanation in terms of occupation which seems to account for a large part of the difference between middle and working class parents' values, largely with regard to obedience and self-control. Their data, collected both in Turin, Italy and in Washington, D. G. show that "middle-class parents value self-direction more highly than do working-class parents; working-class parents emphasize, instead, conformity to 33 external proscription. The authors propose a very convincing explanation to the effect that parents of both social classes value for their children the characteristics that seem most appropriate to the conditions of the parents' lives. "Self-direction seems more possible and more necessary in 31 ^ Lipsitz, 0£. cit.. p. 105. 32 Leonard I. Pearlin and Melvin L. Kohn, "Social Class, Occupation, and Parental Values: A Cross-National Study, American Sociological Review. Vol. 31» (August 1966), pp. 466-479. 33Ibid.. p. 466. 52 middle-class occupations," they show, whereas "working- class occupations allow much less room for, and in fact may penalize, anything other than obedience to rules and directives set down by others....3^ It seems the lot of the worker that he must accord respect to authority, and 35 teach his children to do so."^' Dimensions of occupation were specified which should differentiate between jobs that require self- direction and jobs that require following the directions of someone in authority. The data collected demonstrate that those who had jobs requiring self-direction valued self-control highly, and those who had jobs requiring following directions valued obedience highly. Pearlin and Kohn believe that in a "general and profound way, fathers come to value these characteristics as virtues in their own right and not simply as means to occupational goals....Occupational experience...helps structure one's view not only of the occupational world, but of the social world generally.3^ 3^ * Tbid.. p. 466. 35Ibid., p. 471. 36Ibid.. p. 479. 53 The Culture-Personality Controversy The research cited above suggests that ideolog ical beliefs are not necessarily a function of a particular type of personality structure or motivation. That is, the two are not necessarily congruent. The available evidence, at present, demonstrates that sociocultural factors and personality variables may each account for part of the variance. However, inferences cannot be automatically transferred from one realm to the other. The distinction between ideology and personality. — Many scientists who have recognized the problem, have long cautioned against reductionism and have urged that the constructs on each level be kept distinct insofar as 37 possible. ' For instance, in an article analyzing the 37 ^'"Analytically, these frames of reference— the personality and the social— should be kept distinct." Neil J. Smelser and William T. Smelser (eds.), Person ality and Social Systems (New York: John Wiley and &ons, Inc., 1963), p. 2. "Operationally, culture and personality have been and still are two distinct bodies of phenomena; their description depends on different observations, and must in fact do so unless studies of their inter-relationships are to be entirely circular...." Anthony F. C. Wallace. "The Psychic Unity of Human Groups," in Bert Kaplan (ed.), Studying Personality Cross-Culturally (Evanston, 111.: Row, Peterson & Co., 1961), pp. 15&-139. 54 separate tasks and contributions of psychological and sociological models of human behavior, Devereux says: Yet, because social scientists and psychologists ask entirely different questions, they must, of necessity, construct different models of the •modal' personality, if they are to find meaningful answers within their own frames of reference....Actually these models belong to wholly different conceptual species, having different relevances and demanding to be used in wholly different ways. The distinction may seem strange, so accustomed are we to imputing motives to others, and analyzing behavior in terms of personality traits. Perhaps some of the examples which follow may make the distinction more comprehensible. Rokeach pointed out that among those who adhere to the various ideologies of Catholicism, aetheism, Judaism, Freudianism, behaviorism, liberalism, conservatism, etc., he had encountered dogmatics and non- 39 dogmatics, open and closed minds in each group. One of the major conclusions of his study was that belief systems are independent of personality.**- ® 3 $ ? George Devereux, ’ ’Two Types of Modal Person ality Models," in Kaplan, 0£. cit., p. 223. 39 ^Milton Rokeach, The Open and Closed Mind (New York: Basic Books, Ind., i 960), p. 4. 40Ibid., p. 395. 55 Wolfenstein documented the widespread shifts in ideology concerning proper child-rearing methods from strict to permissive and back to more discipline in the United States during the first half of the twentieth century.^ It is probably safe to assume that these shifts in ideological beliefs and practices do not mean that the personality traits of a large portion of the population changed back and forth. Studies by Pettigrew and others indicate that the pervasive anti-Negro ideology in southern United States is / o not correlated with authoritarian personality traits. In an incisive article, Bendix points out the pitfalls of analyzing cultural symbols in terms of psychological analogies. He makes the same point with regard to Nazi Germany that Pettigrew made about southern United States. Martha Wolfenstein, "Trends in Infant Care," American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, XXIII (1953), pp. 120-130. Thomas Pettigrew, "Regional Differences in Anti-Negro Prejudices," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, LIX (1959), pp. 28-36. "Perhaps the best evidence that social norms are an important factor in prejudice has been presented in a study of prejudice against Negroes in the southern U. S. and in the Union of South Africa." Cited from Paul F. Secord and Carl W. Backman, Social Psychology (New Yorks McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1964), p. 418. The reference is to Pettigrew's study. 56 There is no evidence to date that the ’proportion' of people with compulsive traits is significantly larger among Germans than among Americans. People may be compulsive in their adherence to various forms of conduct, whether the prevailing culture pattern is authoritarian or otherwise....It is purely a sophisticated ethnocentrism which ignores this situational difference and which applies to the people of one society standards of mental health pertaining to the people of another society. Hence we must guard carefully against the fallacy of attribut ing to character structure what may be a part of the social environment. And we must resist the tempta tion of attributing to the people of another culture a psychological uniformity which we are unable to discover in our own. In terms of the preceding discussion I believe it to be more in keeping with the observed incongruity between institutions and psychological habitus to assume that all cultures of Western civilization have the same range of personality types. The importance of ideology irrespective of personality.— The four diverse examples cited above Reinhard Bendix, "Compliant Behavior and Individual Personality," in Personality and Social Systems, Smelser and Smelser (eds.), op. cit., p. 6$. The validity of Bendix's keen observations appears to have gained support from an unwelcome and painful source. The many social scientists who see some parallels between United States' bombing of Vietnam and the Nazi phenomena are, at the same time, aware that the American population is not the epitome of a cruel, barbarous people. If anything, a more apt description, as noted by Etzioni, would be indifferent, unconcerned, or frivolous. In fact, it is obvious that there is considerable variety in the person ality traits of the United States population. Further more, the personality characteristics of the American people, and perhaps even those of the policy-making group, appear to be irrelevant. The consequences of the ideology of the policy-makers, and its implementation, however, are enormous. 57 support the assumption that endorsement of certain ideological beliefs does not necessarily indicate a particular type of personality structure. Nevertheless, it is probable that in each case there are important consequences attached to the various ideologies, irrespec tive of the personality traits of those who accept the beliefs. The populations of northern and southern United States may have consisted of persons with an equivalent range of personality types; however, despite any similarity of the latter, the consequences of the differ ing dominant racial ideologies were considerable. The personality characteristics of the German people as a whole may not have changed one iota from 1943 to 1953, but the consequences flowing from the reigning ideologies of the respective periods were significantly different. Scheff points out that Marx constructed a theory of history and of society in which the characteristics of individuals were irrelevant. Although the theory was independent of the psychology of individuals, Marx posited tremendous consequences for the individuals— one of the earliest formulations of alienation. For our purposes, the interesting feature of Marx's theory was the manner in which it disregarded the motivations of the individuals involved. For the capitalists, for example, it did not matter whether 58 they were humanitarian or not, for the development of the capitalist system. A capitalist, who, for humane reasons, refused to expropriate the workers,, , would himself be expropriated by other capitalists. Scheff quotes the following passage from Marx concerning the effects of the system on individuals: Accumulation of wealth at one pole is, therefore, at the same time accumulation of misery, agony of toil, slavery, ignorance,(.brutality, and mental degredation, at the other pole. The Marxian theory or ideology then, in turn, itself, generated tremendous effects over a large propor tion of the world's population, presumably independent of the personalities of those involved. Sorokin writes of the enormous practical impact which not only Marxian, but other ideologies such as Gandhian, Confucian, Taoist, Platonic, and Aristotelian social philosophies have had on the world.^ They have, he claims, "exerted and are exerting possibly a most important and momentous influence ^Thomas J. Scheff, Being Mentally 111: A Sociological Theory (Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co., 1966), p. 15. ^Karl Marx, Capital (New York: Modern Library, 1906), pp. 70B-709, quoted by Scheff, ibid., p. 16. ^Pitirim A. Sorokin, "Practical Influence of 'Impractical' Generalizing Sociological Theories," Sociology and Social Research. Vol. 47 (October, 1962), pp. 34-50. 59 upon the mentality and behavior of millions of persons and upon structural forms and processes of the historical Although they are too much a part of our lives and taken-for-granted to be consciously felt, current I g legal, anthropological, and psychological4" theories also have resounding impact upon our lives. Northrop has written extensively regarding the manifold interrelated effects of various legal philosophies upon entire civilizations.^ The eye-opening, shattering impact of the principle of cultural relativism, introduced mainly 50 by anthropologists, has been noted by Campbell. Laing Ibid., p. 34. See also for the importance of folk ideologies in British mobility, Ralph H. Turner, "Acceptance of Irregular Mobility in Britain and the United States," Sociometry, Vol. 29 (December, 1966), p. 337. Also see Robert Lane, Political Ideology: Why the American Common Man Believes What He boes (New York; The Free Press, 1962). I g The three conceptual systems which are being investigated in this study. AQ F. S. C. Northrop, The Complexity of Legal and Ethical Experience: Studies in the Method of Normative Subjects (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1959). ^Donald T. Campbell, "The Mutual Methodological Relevance of Anthropology and Psychology," in F. L. Hsu (ed.), Psychological Anthropology (Homewood, 111,: Dorsey, 1961). 60 and others comment upon the radical significance of shifts in psychological theory. In the following quotation, Laing is expressing his opinion about a current shift from the medical mouel to an existential viewpoint. We believe that the shift of point of view that these descriptions both embody and demand has an historical significance no less radical than the shift from a demonological to a clinical viewpoint three hundred years ago. In evaluating Laing's "brashly provocative challenge" to the traditional concept of individual psycho pathology, Ackerman has many reservations regarding Laing's new interpretation; however, he agrees about the signif icant effect of the changing conceptions themselves. He quotes from Fleming in this regard. Important as the objective problem of mental illness is, it is more important still for the unprecedented role it plays in shaping contemporary conceptions of human nature. It is a fair proposition that nothing is more diagnostic for the history of modern thought than the successive attitudes that have been taken toward mental illness. Methodological suggestions.— Even if we were to grant, then, that ideology may vary independently of personality type, and that it is important to study --------------------------------------------------------- J Ronald D. Laing and A. Esterson, "Families and Schizophrenia," International Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 4 (July, 1967), p. 71. Dr. Laing is Director of the Langham Clinic for Psychotherapy, London. 62 ^ Quoted from Donald Fleming by Nathan W. Ackerman, "Critical Evaluations: A Challenge to Traditionalism," in International Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 4 (July, 1967), pp. 71-72. 61 ideology itself, there is still a methodological problem. The problem is how to disentangle the effects of the two types of variables, how not to attribute to one that which is a consequence of the other. Suggestions from two eminent scientists, one, a psychologist, the other, a sociologist, are especially helpful in this respect. Bettelheim, a psychologist, has devoted many years to the study of prejudice. His publication, with Janowitsv in 1964 reassesses their earlier study (1950), along with an analysis of data and trends in prejudice since that 53 time. Bettelheim reviews seven studies by other authors which support his hypotheses in contradiction to those of The Authoritarian Personality.^ Whereas the latter locates the prejudiced among "those who accept society, approve its values, conform and are conventional;" the former works locate the prejudiced among "those who resist society, reject its fundamental values, and have no feeling of consensus with social institutions.^ The suggestion, however, which was pertinent with regard to the disentanglement problem, was a methodological 53 Bruno Bettelheim and Morris Janowitz, Social Change and Prejudice (New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1964). 54Ibid., p. 74. 55Ibid., p. 75. 62 one. Bettelheim and Janowitz start with the following assumption: We did not believe that the significance of these [personality] mechanisms could be understood without reference to the content of the social structure and social valuescgf the groups in which the veterans were members. The best way to handle this problem, they felt, would be to use homogeneous subcultural samples, to establish the norms of intolerance within a particular group, and then to study individuals with respect to their conformity or deviation from group norms. The variable under investigation, social mobility, they submitted, could not explain the genesis of ethnic prejudice in any particular group. Their aim was to explain the mobile person’s deviation from or conformity to group norms, and to find the correlates of high versus low ethnic prejudice in each group. The use of national samples or aggregates of unrelated individuals makes this task very difficult since "the norms of many social groups becomes much harder to identify.'*^ What is judged to be an individual personality trait may, in fact, reflect the norms or values of the individual's group. If, however, one studies ^6Ibid., pp. 512-513. 57Ibid., p. 29. 63 groups, then, they suggest, the responses of individuals can be evaluated in the context of the standards and norms of their own particular subculture. Another clue for ways in which to handle the problem of disentanglement was found in the work of Stouffer, a renowned sociologist. In a paper entitled eg ’ •Needed Research on the Tolerance of Nonconformity," Stouffer outlined alternative theoretical expectations as to why vertical and horizontal mobility might lead, on the one hand, to an increase in tolerance and, on the 59 other hand, to a decrease. 7 He examines the alternatives in connection with the empirical data presented in his study, Communism. Conformity, and Civil Liberties.^ First, he summarizes theoretical reasons for expecting that mobility "could generate strains and anxieties that could lead to intolerance, through the mechanisms of relative deprivation and conflict of values as they lead to projection of aggressions on others." ^Samuel A. Stouffer, Social Research to Test Ideas: Selected Writings of Samuel A. Stouffer (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1962), pp. 113-121. 59Ibid., p. 120. ^Samuel A. Stouffer, Communism, Conformity, and Civil Liberties (New York: Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1955). 64 Stouffer continues with an alternative proposal which at a "simple cognitive level of explanation" appears to account for the relationship found in the data between tolerance and mobility in a more satisfactory manner. Before presenting the statistical evidence, he describes the impressions he had after reading the questionnaires, containing masses of free comments, of the most intolerant people in the study. Most of these people seemed to be good, wholesome Americans who were drawing logical inferences from incorrect premises. Consider, for instance, an ardent Protestant fundamentalist or Catholic who has been told that freethinkers about religion are Communists or Communist dupes. If he believes— as is probably true— that secular colleges do weaken some religious certainties of students, it is not illogical for him to be as intolerant of the concept 'free-thinker* as of the concept 'Communist' and put them in the same box. One hardly needs to postulate deep personal anxiety to account for this kind of anti- intellectualism. Stouffer then discusses the ways in which education, the main mechanism of vertical mobility could operate to promote tolerance. The empirical data support this interpretation. In each type of community and in every region taken separately, tolerance increases with education. The evidence also supports the hypothesis ^"Stouffer, Social Research to Test Ideas, op. citw p. 118. 65 that the better educated and younger people are less authoritarian in attitudes and more likely to favor inde pendence training in child-rearing practices. Stouffer sees this as a result of the independence training of modern progressive education, as well as of the more per missive child-rearing practices prevalent today; i.e., a result of what the present generation has learned to be the proper procedures. In sum, although the forces outlined in both of the alternative explanations may be operating, Stouffer be lieves the simpler explanation at the cognitive level 62 accounts for the variation more adequately. This sug gestion, as well as Bettelheim's, is a methodological con sideration which reflects an assumption currently favored in science. Education as a Determinant of Ideology The general relationship between education and ideology.— Stouffer's essay, discussed above, also contains a substantive point which should be noted. — — ..... . — ---- A cognitive type of explanation, of course, does not imply that affect and emotion are not involved. Caucasians in the South who are taught that Negroes are inferior defend that belief with great intensity. Persons who have been inculcated with the fundamentalist doctrine from birth, hold those beliefs fervently. Some psychol ogists who learn that authoritarian attitudes are harmful, hold that belief with passionate conviction. 66 Education, once again, appears as a crucial variable. This is consistent with other data already cited. Age, also, is a significant factor in Stouffer’s data, but apparently as a function of education. Those who are younger received a different ’ ’type" of education. It seems, moreover, that more than formal education is implied. Independence training and permissive child-rearing practices are currently emphasized informally as well as being part of modern progressive education. Obedience, discipline, and restrictive practices were emphasized more in past generations— not only in formal education, but as part of the general cultural ethos. Variation in content of education.— What seems to be at stake is not simply number of years of education, nor much education as opposed to little education, but rather "what" is learned— the content. Such a distinction could account for other anomalies in data relating education and ideology. For instance, although amount of education appears to be negatively related to intolerance £ * 3 in general, ^ some differences are known to exist among ^A. A. Alonzo and J. W. Kinch, "Educational Level and Support of Civil Liberties," The Pacific Sociological Review (Eugene, Oregon: University of Oregon, Fall, 1964), pp. 69-93. 67 the highly educated. Members of certain professions are considered to be conservative while those in other professions are typically quite liberal.^ This suggests two tasks. First, the degree of intra-variation of ideology among those with equal amounts of formal education should be investigated. Second, the nature of the relationship between content or type of education and ideology should be analyzed. Although there is evidence that a relationship exists between content of education and ideology, the nature of the relationship is not clear. The connection becomes even more obscure at the higher levels of education. At lower levels, differences may be attributed perhaps to ignorance or misinformation. To what can differences in ideology among the highly educated be attributed? Given a particular type of professional or scientific training, what kind of ideological beliefs would one predict? On what basis? To find some guide lines or principles concerning the processes mediating between social or educational factors and ideology, literature dealing with sociocultural conditioning in a ^Bernard Berelson and Gary A. Steiner, Human Behavior: An Inventory of Scientific Findings (Hew York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1964), p. 4307 Robert Bierstedt, "Social Science and Public Service" in Applied Sociology: Opportunities and Problems. A. W. 68 broader context was examined. Chapter III provides a review of that literature. Summary and Implications A review of the literature was undertaken to de termine the kind of ideologies which exist with regard to deviants, and to learn something about the formative factors and processes which might account for differences in ideologies. Beliefs regarding deviance, however, can not be neatly isolated for study. They appear to be inex tricably interrelated with attitudes toward obedience and authority, toward permissiveness or strict discipline, toward ingroup-outgroup distinctions, etc. Two major patterns of such beliefs, judgments, and values were found to be frequently interrelated, at least in samples composed largely of young, middle class Americans. The ideological orientations were assumed to be indicative of different types of personality syndromes, explanable in terms of psychodynamic principles. Later, however, other studies comparing sociocultural groups presented contradictory or ambiguous data. Investigations of different socioeconomic classes, of groups with varying education and occupation, and of other societies, produced configurations different from those found in the studies utilizing a personal frame of Gouldner and S. M. Miller (eds.) (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1965). reference. The new findings suggested that ideological beliefs may have considerably different meanings for those with divergent experience. Thus, emphasis on strict obedience might indicate the presence of a domineering per sonality or a devoted parent eager to teach his child what he "knows" is necessary in a working-class world. Belief in strict discipline may mean a way of dominating and subjugat ing others or it may be what a parent believes will truly benefit a child. A statement to the effect that people are divided into two classes: the weak and the strong, may reflect an attitude of contempt for the unfortunate or a lifetime of experience as a member of a subjugated group. Belief that others are prying into one's affairs may represent paranoia or reality. Belief that a particular racial, ethnic, or deviant group is inferior or evil may represent an idea, however incorrect, which has been con tinuously and thoroughly inculcated in all group members since birth, or it may indicate repressed hostility dis placed upon vulnerable objects. The sets of alternative interpretations suggest that ideological beliefs in general, or regarding deviance in particular, may be incomprehensible if isolated from their cultural context. The implication is that meanings, determinants, correlates, and consequences of certain responses cannot be assumed to have universal relevance on the basis of relationships found in some groups. CHAPTER III THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF REALITY: A SOCIOCULTURAL RELATIVISTIC FRAME OF REFERENCE In chapter II, literature in the area of social ideology pertaining to authoritarianism, prejudice, intolerance of deviants and outgroups, was reviewed. Early studies using a personal frame of reference were successful in formulating and confirming a number of propositions in this area. However, when these studies were replicated for groups with different kinds of sociocultural experience, the findings were contradictory to the earlier evidence. To explain the contradictions, it was suggested that certain generalizations appear to be valid only for those sharing a common background of experience, meanings, and beliefs. Study of the role played by sociocultural conditioning in ideologies, in world-view, in differential perception of reality is assuming increasing importance. This dimension has traditionally been emphasized by theorists in the sociology of knowledge and by symbolic 70 71 interactionists. In recent years, however, this type of study has spread into many fields. Out of the many researches carried out investigating such problems, there has emerged a set of propositions, which although phrased somewhat differently by various scientists, are similar in nature, and which constitute one type of explanatory framework or mode of approach to the study of social phenomena. The hypotheses to be tested in this study are based upon, and were formulated in accordance with the suggestions found in this literature. In the present chapter, work contributing to the sociocultural relativistic frame of reference will be examined. Studies from the following fields will be presented: (1) sociology of knowledge and ideology, (2) reference group and role theory, (3) philosophy of science, (4) perception theory, and (5) sociolinguistics. Sociology of Knowledge and Ideology Works in the sociology of knowledge have attempted to demonstrate a functional relationship between conceptual and ideological forms of thought, on the one hand, and on the other, forms of collective group experience. Marx, Weber, Durkheim, and Mannheim were a few of the outstanding pioneers in this branch of sociology. 72 Marx was perhaps the first sociologist to outline a systematic theory embodying the proposition that man’s consciousness is determined by his social position. He was particularly concerned to demonstrate that man’s values, ideological rationalizations, and even scientific, aesthetic, and philosophical principles are a function of men's class position in society.^ Marx, however, did not locate the form of thought mechanistically by merely establishing the class position of the thinker. Ideologies were socially located by analyzing their perspectives and presuppositions and determining how problems are construed, from the standpoint of one or 2 another class. Weber stressed the primacy of the ideational factors, the importance of subjective meaning in action and social living. Using extensive historical data, Weber attempted to demonstrate the influence of Calvinist ethical beliefs upon the emergence of the capitalist Charles D. Bolton, "Sociological Relativism and the New Freedom" (mimeographed). o Pointed out by Robert K. Merton, "Sociology of Knowledge," in Robert K. Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure (Glencoe, The Free Press, 1957), p. 4&3. 73 economic system.^ In his sociology of religion, he showed how the same religion is variously experienced, and thus has different meaning for peasants, artisans, merchants, nobles, and intellectuals. These groups experienced the common religion according to their different contexts of life.4 Durkheim sought to show that the ways in which dif ferent societies symbolically represent their religious, moral, and even physical percepts are reflections of certain collective social experiences of the members of the society rather than the reflections of individual 5 experiences of or reactions to the environment. In his studies, with Mauss, of the Zuni, Chinese, and Greeks, he attempted to demonstrate that the logical classification by which the universe is understood by these societies %ax Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, translated by Talcott Parsons (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1958). Merton's work, followed in the same vein as Weber's, showing the influence of Puritan religious ideas upon the development of science. Merton, "Studies in the Sociology of Science," o£. cit•, pp. 531-629. 4Karl Mannheim, Ideology and Utopia, translated by Louis Wirth and Edward Shils (New York: Hareourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1936), pp. 7, 8. 5 ^Bolton, oj3. cit. 74 respectively is, in turn, the institutional system of these societies.^ The formulation of sociology of knowledge most familiar to Americans is probably that of Karl Mannheim, mainly through the English translation of Ideology and 7 Utopia. Mannheim attempted to define systematically the nature and scope of the sociology of knowledge, both as theory and as a method of research. In distinguishing the sociology of knowledge from the theory of ideology as traditionally conceived, Mannheim makes the distinction between a particular and a total conception of ideology. The particular conception of ideology refers to more or less conscious deceptions and disguises of interests taking place on a psychological level. The total conception of ideology refers to the total mental structure of the subject, as it appears in different currents of thought and historical-social groups. At this level, there is no ^Emile Durkheim and Marcel Mauss, L’Annee. Sociologique. 1901-1902, discussed in Stanley Taylor, Conceptions of Institutions and the Theory of Knowledge (New Yorks Bookman Associates, 1956)» p. 65. 7 Mannheim, 0£. cit. ^Ibid., p. 264. 75 moral or denunciatory intent. But because of the moral connotations implied in the traditional use of the term "ideology," Mannheim speaks of the "perspective" of a thinker;^ i.e., his whole mode of conceiving things as determined by his historical and social setting. 'Perspective' in this sense signifies the manner in which one views an object, what one perceives in it, and how one construes it in his thinking. Perspective, therefore, is something more than a merely formal determination of thinking. It refers also to qualitative elements in the structure of thought, elements which must necessarily be overlooked by a purely formal logic. It is precisely these factors which are responsible for the fact that two persons, even if they apply the same formal-logical rules, e.g., the law of contradiction or the formula of the syllogism, in an identical manner, may judge the same object very differently. The perspective of a thinker and the living experience from which it is derived, is not to be conceived of as of an individual nature. It does not have its origin in the individual's becoming aware of his interests. Rather it arises "out of the collective purposes of a group which underlies the thought of the individual, and in the prescribed outlook of which he 1 1 merely participates." ^Ibid., pp. 265-266. 10Ibid., p. 272. 11Ibid.. p. 268. 76 Mannheim discusses the crises brought about by the shattering of a single traditional mode of thought, and by the confrontation of various viewpoints in a modern heterogeneous society to the point where our very conception of reality is brought into question. All the conflicting groups and classes in society seek this reality in their thoughts and deeds, and it is therefore no wonder that it appears to be different to each of them. If the problem of the nature of reality were a mere speculative product of the imagination, we could easily ignore it. But as we proceed, it becomes more and more evident that it is precisely the multiplicity of our conceptions of reality which produces the multiplicity of our modes of thought, and that every ontological judgment that we make leads inevitably to far-reaching consequences. If we examine the many types of ontological judgments with which different groups confront us, we begin to suspect that each group seems to move in a separate and distinct world of ideas and that these different systems of thought, which are often in conflict with one another, may in the last analysis be reduced to differentpmodes of experiencing the 'same' reality. The special cultural sciences in their particularity are confronted by the same problem as is everyday empir ical knowledge. These disciplines, too, "view the objects of knowledge and formulate their problems abstracted and tom from their concrete settings."^3 The limited treatment of a subject is 12Ibid.. pp. 98-99 13Ibid., p. 101. 77 necessary because of specialization and the academic division of labor. Mannheim continues the analogy between the cultural sciences and everyday knowledge. Empirical research is in the same position as common sense. It can continue undisturbed until there is a crisis, until the discrepancy between conflicting views becomes apparent and problematical. Facts are interpreted by means of a conceptual apparatus. "If the conceptual apparatus is the same for all members of a group, the presuppositions (i.e., the possible social and intellectual values) which underlie 14 the individual concepts, never become perceptible." Mannheim describes what occurs when unanimity is broken, and various conceptual systems confront one another. However, once the unanimity is broken, the fixed categories which used to give experience its reliable and coherent character undergo an inevitable disintegration. There arise divergent and conflict ing modes of thought which (unknown to the thinking subject) order the same facts of experience into different systems of thought, and cause them to be perceived through different logical categories. This results in the peculiar perspective which our concepts impose upon us, and which causes the same 14Ibid., p. 102. 73 object to appear differently, according to the set of concepts with which we view it. So wrote Mannheim in 1929. The description, however, might not be inadequate if applied to the present scene in the area of social problems and deviance. The traditional system of jurisprudence is being shaken up as it confronts the behavioral science system of psychology, with the latter increasingly invading the domain of the former.^ Clinical psychology, in turn, appears disturbed and uncertain upon confrontation with certain anthropological findings, and by divisions within 17 its own field. In the preface to Ideology and Utopia. Wirth foresaw the serious issues involved in the sociology of knowledge, not only for theory and for knowledge, but also 15Ibid., p. 103. 16 David L. Bazelon, "Justice Stumbles Over Science," Trans-action, (July/August 1967)» pp. 3-17. Judge Bazelon is chief judge of the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. 17 'Kenneth Soddy, Cross-Cultural Studies in Mental Health (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 196l); D. Campbell, op. cit. 79 for public policy, political propaganda, educational l8 systems, and for the social order. Another sociologist, who with Wirth, recognized the crucial pragmatic implication and devoted his life's work to empirical studies conceptualized in the theoretical framework of sociology of knowledge was G. W. Mills. Mills' work was strongly influenced by the four pioneers in sociology of knowledge discussed thus far. Mills' early belief in the worth of the study of ideas as an independent social variable, led him to be profoundly affected by Marx's concept of a general theory o.f ideology, Weber's work on the interconnec tions between religious movements and industrial values, and Mannheim's programming of the social sources of truth and error in general....Mills' positive commitment to a sociology of knowledge was corrollary to his beliefQin a greater need for knowledge of sociology. Starting with his doctoral dissertation nearly a 20 quarter of a century ago, Mills continued his work in the mode of sociology of knowledge by analyzing the 18 Louis Wirth, in Mannheim, o£. cit.. pp. xxvii- X X X . 19 Irving Louis Horowitz, "An Introduction to C. Wright Mills," pp. 17» 19 in Power, Politics and People: The Collected Essays of C. Wright Mills, edited by Horowitz (New York: Ballantine Books, 1962). Mills was also influenced by Durkheim, see "The Language and Ideas of Ancient China," Ibid., pp. 469-520. 20 C. W. Mills, Sociology and Pragmatism: The Higher Learning in America. Edited by Horowitz (NewYork: Paine-Whitman Publishers, 1964). Revision of author's thesis, University of Wisconsin. BO connections between the social structural context and the ideologies of various occupational, economic, and political groups. Among the groups he studied were trade union leaders, labor leaders, the power elite, the American business elite, the white collar worker, the political elite, conservatives, liberals, the new left, the middle classes, the intellectual, and professionals in 21 social pathology. Political positions, including implicit political philosophies, were examined in terms of four central components of political perspectives: the ideology used to justify or criticize institutions and attitudes; the ethic, i.e., ideals and beliefs; the agencies or instruments of maintenance or change; and the theory and pp assumptions about how man in society functions. Mills* dissection of modern liberalism, using this paradigm, is startling in its resemblance to assumptions and values implicit in clinical psychology, mainly in the premises central to individualism.2- ^ 21 These studies are all included in Power. Politics and People, op. cit. 22Ibid., pp. lg, lgg. 21 ^Ibid.. "Liberal Values in the Modern World," pp. 1B7-19T. 3l Another paper by Mills, "The Professional Ideology of Social Pathologists," although old, is also instructive pi with regard to our topic. Mills analyzes the social orientation of professionals in social pathology by examining their general perspective, concepts used, and 25 selection of problems. ' He raises questions regarding the definition of pathological behavior which they used. Such questions were not raised by the professionals themselves. Apparently, certain types of behavior traditionally viewed as deviant by respectable groups were "assumed" to be so. From the frame of reference of the professionals of that period, "pathological behavior was not discerned in a structural sense (i.e., as incommensurate with an existent structural type) or in a statistical sense pZl (i.e., as deviations from central tendencies)'.' The definition was not statistical since it was often asserted that pathology abounds in the city. If it "abounds," it 2^Ibid., "The Professional Ideology of Social Pathologists," pp. 525-552. 25Ibid., p. 523. 26Ibid., p. 540. 82 cannot be abnormal in the statistical sense, and is not likely to prevail in the structural sense. Therefore, it becomes necessary to tease out the hidden, implicit assumptions and values upon which the definition is based. Mills suggests that the definition of pathological behavior was based upon "humanitarian" ideals typically rural in orientation and extraction. The implicit values are homogeneity, stability, simplicity, family-orientation, adjustment and conformity to respectable institutions. Since "problems" and "disorganization" are defined in terms of deviation from certain societal norms, there is no attempt to examine problems in terms of the norms themselves. There is no "facing of the implications of the fact that social transformations would involve shifts in them [the norms]."27 Written in 1943, this analysis is a prelude to the great number of current sociological studies on diverse forms of deviancy offering the same 28 insight. Prior to the current studies, Kingsley Davis, investigating the ideology of the mental health movement, 27Ibid., p. 532. Studies in the so-called new perspective on deviance by Becker and others which will be examined later in the chapter. arrived at conclusions similar to those of Mills. Davis traced the roots of the mental health ideology to the 29 Protestant Ethic. Mills' empirical studies of variously situated groups, whether lay groups, specialized elites, or nations, were guided by a paradigm stressing the overwhelming importance and priority of culturally-given meanings and vocabularies— "the cultural apparatus." The quality of their [men's] lives is determined by the meanings they have received from others. Everyone lives in a world of such meanings. No man stands alone directly confronting a world of solid fact. No such world is available....their experience itself is selected by stereotyped meanings and shaped by ready made interpretations....They provide the clues to what men see, to how they respond to it, to how they feel about it, and to how they respond to these feelings.... Taken as a whole, the cultural apparatus is the lens of mankind through which men see; the medium by which they interpret and report what they see....It is the source of The Human Variety— of styles of living and of ways to die....In the end, what is 'established' are definitions of reality, judgments of value, canons of taste and of beauty. 29 Kingsley Davis, "Mental Hygiene and the Class Struggle," in A. Rose (ed.) Mental Health and Mental Disorder, op. cit.. pp. 573-598. Thomas D. Eliot remarks, "Kingsley Davis impugned the objectivity of the psychiatrists' own norms, tracing their axioms and criteria of therapy and sanity to norms absorbed from the ethos of the Protestant Cult; a salutary application of the sociology of knowledge to the sociology of a profession." p. 38, "Interactions of Psychiatric and Social Theory Prior to 1940" in Rose, ibid. Mills, ojc. cit. "The Cultural Apparatus," pp. 405-407, 410. Although elites and government officials manipulate and use the images for legitimation of power and for 31 justification of decisions, they, too, inherit the categories, terminology, and meanings in terms of which they perceive the world. Closely linked with such a view of categories is the social theory of perception. In acquiring a technical vocabulary with its terms and classifica tions, the thinker is acquiring, as it were, a set of colored spectacles. He sees a world of objects that are technically tinted and patternized. A specialized language constitutes a veritable a priori form of perception and cognition, which are certainly relevant to the results of inquiry....their concepts have conditioned what they have seen. Different technical elites possess different perceptual capacities. Mills urges sociologists to investigate the paradigms employed by various technical elites. The selective acceptance or rejection of various criteria, the choice of model, what is considered problematic, the concepts and categories employed all control, to some 33 extent, the results of scientific investigation. ^ The 31Ibid., p. 409. 32 Ibid., p. 459. "The Methodological Consequences of the Sociology of Knowledge," pp. 453-465. 33Ibid., pp. 457-460. 85 varying consequences of the different conceptual apparatus employed by professionals in the area of social problems, we believe, is a significant phenomenon. The work of C. W. Mills has had an instructive impact upon our study. Another pioneer in the sociology of knowledge, of a different sort, working on a grand scale, is Sorokin. His four-volume study, Social and Cultural Dynamics.^ is based upon the major premise that the "presuppositions of a culture determine its empirical manifestations and 35 institutions." ' That is, "at the core of each culture there is a set of fundamental premises which constitute that culture’s assumptions about the nature of reality, man, the good, and the source of truth.The empirical manifestations of each culture are logical implications from the premises or expressions of these meanings. 32, , . ^ Sorokin, 0£. ext. 35 'Discussed in David Bidney, "The Concept of Meta- Anthropology and Its Significance for Contemporary Anthropological Science," in F. S. C. Northrop (ed.) Ideological Differences and World Order: Studies in the Philosophy and Science oi the World^s Cultures (tfew Haven: Yale University Press, 1949), p. 337. Discussed in Albert Cohen, Deviance and Control. op. cit., p. 33. 36 In a section on the sociology of criminal law, Cohen presents Sorokin's theory as one attempt to account 37 for variation in normative rules. Sorokin's thesis is that the criminal law of a society will express values and beliefs consistent with its basic premises. Cohen gives the following account of Sorokin's test of his theory with regard to criminal law. He distinguished 104 main types of action which have been considered criminal at one time or another dur ing the history of Western legal systems. For each of five countries (France, Germany, Austria, Italy, and Russia) he determined which of these were present in the earliest code available (usually dating from the early Middle Ages), and examined each subsequent main code, noting offenses that have been dropped and added. (In addition, he analyzed changes in the range of behavior brought under the definition of each crime; variations in the intensity of punishment; and other data with which we shall not be concerned here.) The presumption is that the premises of the culture mentality will largely dictate what sorts of things will be considered offensive enough to be made criminal. Sorokin concludes, indeed, that his data demonstrate precisely this, and thus support what is not only a theory q£ the criminal law but a general theory of culture. According to Sorokin, then, what is considered criminal or wrong will depend upon a society's assumptions concerning the nature of reality, man, the good, and the 37Ibid., pp. 33-34. 3&Ibld.. pp. 33-3^. S7 source of truth. The last theorists in the sociology of knowledge who will be considered here are Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann. We will discuss their work at some length since their paradigm for a sociology of knowledge most closely matches our own. The reader may take what follows as indicative of assumptions guiding the present study. In an illuminating and profound treatise, The Social Construction of Reality. Berger and Luckmann seek to redefine the nature and scope of the sociology of 39 knowledge.They argue that the emphasis in the field in 39 Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge (Garden Citv. N. Y.: Doubleday & Co., i960). George Simpson in a review of their book says, "It is to the great credit of Berger and Luckmannthat they have taken hold of this field and brought it within the ken of all sociologists by showing that it is inextricably intertwined with the principles of social organization and with the fundamentals of sociological theory....Berger and Luckmann do in relatively short compass what has long been necessary — they place the sociology of knowledge foursquare in the center of the sociological stage....The entire discussion is worth reading, as is the entire book; the authors open up vistas which provide a major breakthrough in the sociology of knowledge and sociological theory generally, no matter what demurrers one might utter." American Sociological Review. Vol. 32 (February, 196717pp.' 137-13S. the past has tended to obscure the full significance of the sociology of knowledge, on the theoretical as well as on the empirical level. On the theoretical level, they criticize the past emphasis upon problems of epistemology and validity. These belong to the methodology of the social sciences, and are philosophical rather than sociological questions. The enterprise of the sociology of knowledge "is one of sociological theory, not of the methodology of sociology."40 On the empirical level, they criticize the exaggerated emphasis on the history of ideas. Instead, they argue, the sociology of knowledge should "concern itself with everything that passes for •knowledge* in society." The central focus should be upon commonsense "knowledge," upon what people "know" as "reality" in their everyday lives, rather than solely upon "ideas." It is commonsense knowledge "that constitutes the fabric of meaning without which no society could exist. "4^ 40Ibid., p. 13 41Ibid., p. 14 89 The sociologist is aware of the fact that men in various groups and societies take quite different "realities" for granted* "What is 'real' to a Tibetan monk may not be 'real' to an American businessman. The 'knowledge' of the criminal differs from the 'knowledge' of the criminologist."^2 Thus, the sociologist is obliged to study these different realities and to analyze the pro cesses which account for the variation. The sociolo .,ist describes these realities without regard to their validity or invalidity. The philosopher may ask whether man has freedom of will, and how this is related to responsibility. But the sociologist will instead ask "how it is that the notion of 'freedom' has come to be taken for granted in one l O society and not in another." These taken-for-granted notions, this commonsense knowledge guides man's conduct in his everyday life. It defines, for him, what is appropriate and what is inappropriate behavior. Deviance from what is "known" to be the "normal" mode of behavior may be considered depraved, pathological, or ignorant. ^2Ibid., pp. 2, 3. / O Ibid.. p. 2. Questions regarding "will power" and "determinism" are put to the subjects in this study. 90 Such knowledge constitutes the motivating dynamics of institutionalized conduct. It defines the institu tionalized areas of conduct and designates all situations falling within them. It defines and constructs the roles to be played in the context of the institutions in question. Ipso facto, it controls and predicts all such conduct. Since this knowledge is socially objectivated ajs knowledge, that is, as a body of generally valid truths about reality, radical deviance from the institutional order appears as a departure from reality. Such deviance may be designated as moral depravity, mental disease, or just plain ignorance. While these fine distinctions will have obvious consequences for the treatment of the deviant, they all share an inferior cognitive status within the particular social world. In this way, the, particular social world becomes the world tout court. If, however, a deviant version should congeal into a reality in its own right and challenge the official symbolic universe of reality, repressive measures must be taken to deal with such heresy. The crisis is greater yet upon confronting another society having a different history and an alternative symbolic universe. It is much less shocking to the reality status of one's own universe to have to deal with minority groups of deviants, whose contrariness is ipso facto defined as folly or wickedness, than to confront another society that views one's own definitions of reality as ignorant, mad, or downright evil.... The appearance of an alternative symbolic universe poses a threat because its very existence demonstrates 44Ibid.. p. 62. 45Ibid., pp. 93-99. 91 empirically that one's own universe is less than in evitable. The discussion above, taken from Berger and Luckmann is intended to intimate the linkage between knowledge, reality, deviance, relativity, and ethno- centrism. Four other concepts of substantial importance in Berger and Luckmann's thesis are: (1) the dialectical process, (2) legitimation, (3) reification, and (4) the realizing potency of definitions and theories. The first concept, the dialectical process, occurs in various contexts. The reference given here explicates the type of relationship posited between group perspective and social factors. ^ Each perspective, they say will be related to the concrete social interests of the group which holds it. The perspective should not be considered, however, as mere mechanical reflections of the Ibid., pp. 99-100. Garfinkel had his students experiment by behaving in a manner that challenged others' everyday reality. The account is illuminating and imaginative. See Harold Garfinkel, "Studies of the Routine Grounds of Everyday Activities," Social Problems, Vol. II (Winter, 1964), pp. 225-250. L. 7 In his review of past work in sociology of knowledge, Merton criticizes theorists for not making clear the type of linkage they were positing. Merton, "Sociology of Knowledge," o£. cit., pp. 476-4^3. 92 social interest. No single one-to-one relationship is functionally dictated. Variations are possible depending upon other factors. Furthermore, "a body of knowledge, once it is raised to the level of a relatively autonomous subuniverse of meaning, has the capacity to act back upon the collectivity that produced it.” The relationship is a dialectical one; "knowledge is a social product and i g knowledge is a factor in social change. The second concept, legitimation, refers to the process of explaining and justifying. Legitimation is not necessary when the institution is simply a fact; that is, when it is self-evident to all concerned. Legitimation is necessary in transmitting the institutional order to a new generation, for example, to students being indoctrinated in an academic discipline. Legitimation ’explains' the institutional order by ascribing cognitive validity to its objectivated meanings. Legitimation justifies the institutional order by giving a normative dignity to its practical imperatives. It is important to understand that legitimation has a cognitive as well as a normative element. In other words, legitimation is not just a matter of 'values.' It always implies 'knowledge' as well. For example, a kinship structure is not legitimated merely by the ethics of its particular • d Berger and Luckmann, 0£. cit., pp. BO-Bl 93 incest taboos. These must first be 'knowledge' of the roles that define both 'right' and 'wrong' actions within the structure....Legitimation not only tells the individual why he should perform one action and not another; it also tells him why things are what they are. In other words, 'knowledge' precedes 'values' in the legitimation of institutions. The third concept, reification, is intimately and negatively related to the title of the authors' book, The Social Construction of Reality. "Reification is the apprehension of human phenomena as if they were things," i.e., not as the human products which they are, but as inevitable facts of nature, of divine will, or of immutable cosmic forces. In a reified world, men are seen as puppets, as automatons, moved by forces over which they have no control. Men are, thus, unaware that they create the meanings and definitions which, in turn, create social reality. Instead, meanings are thought to be inherent properties of objects, so decreed by nature. Reification of institutions is accomplished by bestowing upon them "an ontological status independent of human activity and ^Ibid., pp. 86-87. 5°Ibid., p. 82. 94 signification.^ An example of reification of one's role is the statement: '"I have no choice in the matter, I have to act this way because of my position'— as husband, father, general, archbishop, chairman cf the board, gangster, or hangman, as the case may be." Even identity itself may be reified. There is then a total identification of the individual with his socially assigned typification. He is apprehended as nothing but that type. This appre hension may be positively or negatively accented in terms of values or emotions. The identification of 'Jew' may be equally reifying for the anti-Semite and the Jew himself, except that the latter will accent the identification positively and the former negatively.5 In the present study, conceptions regarding "deviants" are investigated. What represents perhaps a small portion of their behavior, often is regarded as the total characterization of a person. A person is thus apprehended as an "alcoholic," or as a "homosexual." The fourth concept refers to "the realizing potency" of definitions and of theories. Berger and Luckmann use psychological theories to illustrate this ^ Ibid.. p. £4. 52Ibid., p. £5. 95 principle. Psychological theories which become socially established tend to realize themselves in the phenomena 5-1 they purport to interpret. They produce a reality which may then serve to verify the theories. The rural Haitian who internalizes Voudun psychology will become possessed as soon as he discovers certain well-defined signs. Similarly, the New York intellectual who internalizes Freudian psychology will become neurotic as soon as he diagnoses certain well known symptoms. Indeed, it is possible that, given a certain biographical context, signs or symptoms will be produced by the individual himself. The Haitian will, in that case, produce not symptoms of neurosis but signs of possession, while the New Yorker will construct his neurosis in conformity with the recognized symptomatology. This has nothing to do with ’mass hysteria,' much less with malingering, but with the imprint of societal identity types upon the individual subjective reality of ordinary people with commonsense. A dialectical relationship between the theory and reality is thus established by virtue of the realizing potency of the theory. The terminology and the instances differ, but sociologists will recognize this principle as a variation of Thomas' famous theorem "If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences."^ ^ Ibid.. p. 163. 54Ibid., p. 164. 55 ^William I. Thomas and Florian Znaniecki, The Polish Peasant in Europe and America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1918-1920). 96 56 of Merton's "the self-fulfilling prophecy;" and of 57 Boulding's "the importance of the Image." Innumerable examples could be given. If devout Catholics believe it is the will of God that they have many children, this belief will be a potent determining factor in their having many children. Whether or not there is a God, and whether or not a God does, in fact, so desire is totally irrelevant 58 to the progeny-producing decision. Thomas' principle has relevance for one of the assumptions outlined earlier as basic to this study— the assumption that significant consequences are attached to various ideologies (and theories) irrespective of the personalities of the participating actors. •^Merton, "The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy," ojo. cit., pp. 421-436. 57 ^'Boulding, The Image, op. cit. 58 The paragraph above is mine, not from Berger and Luckmann. For another example: "From the viewpoint of the Ainus, therefore, their observations tend to confirm their beliefs. The assumption concerning evil spirits functions as a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy." Lundberg, Schrag, and Larsen, oja. cit., p. 44. 97 Reference Group and Role Theory If the sociology of knowledge gives us a broad view of the social construction of reality, reference group theory shows us the many little workshops in which cliques of universe builders hammer out their models of the cosmos. Thus, Berger draws the parallel between macro scopic and microscopic scenes, indicating that the processes in operation are presumably the same in both. The processes are those elucidated in role theory. In learning a role within a particular group, one assumes the cognitive orientation of that group, occupies their vantage point, and lives in their "world." Cohen notes the same parallel and connective link between the larger society and reference groups. In explicating the concept of cognitive and moral dependence, Cohen points out that in order to survive, infants and novitiates must "take the role of the other," see things through other people's eyes, and adopt their perspective. Their notions about what is, what is possible, and what is right are acquired from the knowledge, beliefs, and 59Peter L. Berger, Invitation to Sociology; A. Humanistic Perspective (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1963), p. 120. 9£ values of the society.^ Culture is not, however, homogeneous or shared by all within a society. There are subcultures and reference groups. Our reference groups play an especially decisive role in shaping our thinking.^ In learning a role system (including deviant roles) Cohen suggests that we learn a terminology, the socially recognized categories of people, the criteria that define them, "signs whereby they may be recognized, images of what these people are like, expectations about how they should behave, standards for evaluating them," and 62 appropriate responses to them. Cohen illuminates this process by describing the experience of a group of college students learning the "clinical role" from a reference group of clinicians. The experience took place at a summer camp for emotionally disturbed children. The students were training for work as teachers, social workers, psychologists, and 60 Cohen, o£. cit., p. 84. 6lIbid.. p. 85. Ibid.. pp. 97-93. Here Cohen is describing formulations of George Herbert Mead, Mind, Self and Society (Chicago: The University of Chicago, 1934). 99 sociologists, and initially did not know how they were supposed to respond to the children. These expectations were defined for them by the senior staff. They included the ways in which a clinician is supposed to define the behavior of his charges, how he is supposed to feel about it, and what he is supposed to do about it. They were expected to see the children as victims of uncontrol lable impulses somehow related to their harsh and depriving backgrounds, and in need of enormous doses of kindliness and indulgence in order to break down their images of the adult world as hateful and hostile. The clinician must never respond in anger or with intent to punish, although he might sometimes have to restrain or even isolate children in order to prevent them from hurting themselves or one another. Above all, the staff were expected to be warm and loving and always to be governed by a 'clinical attitude'— that is, to respond in terms of what was therapeutically appropriate rather than in terms of their own notions of morality or emotional needs. This demanded of the junior staff what would ordinarily be regarded as superhuman patience in the face of intolerable provocation. The students fulfilled these expectations to an extraordinary degree including, Cohen believes, "the expectation that they feel sympathy and tenderness and love toward their charges, despite their animal-like behavior. Ibid., p. 105. Cohen participated as a member of the senior clinical staff. 64 Ibid., p. 105. It should be noted that this account, informal as it is, relates also to the issue of adult socialization. 100 A most informative account of reference group theory from a symbolic-interactionist viewpoint, along with innumerable examples of diverse and wide-ranging phenomena in this field can be found in Shibutani*s textbook. Shibutani describes the divergent assumptions, premises, object-meanings, and values of groups in conflict, and depicts the manner in which these taken-for- granted definitions lead each group to believe the other group is vile and sinful, or simply strange and "irrational." Pertinent examples are given in politics, religion, industry, of different nationalities, and closer to home, even of professional groups. Behavioral scientists, he notes, trained in different intellectual traditions working with very diverse assumptions can hardly understand one another. Many psychiatrists are trained in medical schools, and a medical education often fortifies doctors against all explanations of behavior that are not biological....Many psychologists are apalled when 65 ^Tamotsu Shibutani, Society and Personality: An Interactionist Approach to Social Psychology (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1961). Shibutani defines a reference group as "any identifiable group whose supposed perspective is used by the actor as a frame of reference in the organization of his perceptual field." p. 258. 101 sociologists insist that a knowledge of social structure is essential for an understanding of human behavior. They are convinced that a group consists of nothing more than an aggregate of individuals; there is nothing to study other than the personalities of the component individuals. Anthropologists and sociologists...are shocked upon hearing psychologists and psychiatrists explaining behavior in terms of personality structure without reference to the social milieu....After interdisciplinary conferences each departs filled with regrets about the 'blind spots' of the othegg which prevents their seeing things so obvious. Besides not understanding each other, Shibutani suggests that many behavioral scientists are not acquainted with the life patterns of a wide variety of people, and consequently "display incredible naivete and ethnocentrism." Some apparently use American middle class values and standards as absolute criteria for judging behavior. ^ Shibutani's major contribution is his elucidation of the role of meaning as central to an understanding of social conduct. Men live in a symbolic environment, consisting of meanings, "ordered ways of acting which have 66Ibid., p. 255. ^ Ibid.. p. 6ll. 102 evolved through past experience and are constantly 6& affirmed in new experience." Meanings are not the property of objects, they are the characteristic ways in which we approach those objects. The meaning of anything is an organized orientation that can be identified as a configuration of behavioral tendencies, all predicated upon the assumption that the object has certain character istics. Thus, familiar objects are perceived in terms of expectations... Expectations are learned in social groups. Al though there are also private meanings, most are conventional meanings subject to social control. At the furthest extreme from private meanings are scientific concepts, which are the most conventionalized, especially 70 those which are operationally defined. Conventional meanings are patterns of accepted behavior from the standpoint of a particular group. Those who do not share such conventional meanings, whose repetoire consists ^Ibid., p. 136. ^ Ibid., p. 136. 70Ibid., p. 117. 103 mainly of private meanings, almost inevitably wind up in asylums. One who views the national flag as a piece of cloth suitable for wiping his running nose may wind up in jail and would certainly be greeted with outrage for not 71 entertaining the conventional meaning of a flag. The successful socialization of young children is mainly dependent upon their learning the appropriate ways of identifying and classifying objects and developing the 72 accepted ways oi acting toward them. Although objects, persons, and events consist of innumerable and changing attributes, it is necessary to classify and categorize them in terms of the attributes deemed relevant to one's cultural group. Differences in particulars are largely 73 ignored. In the evaluation of objects, there are accepted criteria for ascertaining what is wise or unwise, economical or extravagant, effective or futile. The category into which a person is placed is of n\ considerable importance.' Persons in given categories 71Ibid.. p. 117. 7^Ibid., p. 481. 7^Ibid., p. 108. 74Ibid., p. 113. 104 are assumed to have certain characteristics, and are expected to behave in certain ways. Thus, stereotypes concerning racial categories are accompanied by conse quences affecting the life chances of entire groups of people. Occupational categories are also of great importance. Merely by seeing someone in a judge's robe, a nurse's uniform, a policeman's uniform, or a janitor's overalls brings a host of expectations and imputations concerning that person, as well as guidelines concerning appropriate responses to him. Classification systems set up by professional groups may have extreme consequences. Once placed in one of the various legal categories subsumed under the classification of criminals, or in one of the categories of psychological disorder, numerous other attributes are immediately associated. Consequences following such placement are fairly well established. The classification system we learn to use, then, depends upon the groups to which we belong. Some are shared by an entire society, some are stereotypes held by particular lay groups, others are devised by and used mainly by professional and scientific groups. One approaches various objects, persons, and events with expectations based upon the meanings he has learned with regard to them. 105 Shibutani puts forth a major proposition and supports it with evidence from many experiments conducted in a variety of fields. As stated by Shibutani: ...the manner in which anyone perceives his environ ment depends upon the meanings that various objects have for him.... Since meanings are products of past experience, people from different cultural backgrounds should perceive identical situations in somewhat different ways. Those with different meanings will project different hypotheses; hence, they will be responsive to different cues and construct different perceptual objects. A man's conception of reality is largely a social product, constructed and learned as a participant in a social group. The manner in which a person customarily defines situations depends upon his perspective— an ordered view of the world.7^ A perspective, then, consists of premises concerning what is plausible and what is possible. What is called 'knowledge'.. .is an orientation toward a real or imaginary order of the possible— a scheme of space and time, of relations between objects, and order governed by rules....an outline scheme, which, running ahead of experience, defines and guides it. 75Ibid., p. 110. 76Ibid.. p. 119. 77Ibid., p. 120. 106 Scientific perspectives can be defined in similar terms: Each theoretical scheme, then, is a symbolic environment, a special way of looking at human conduct which, it is hoped, will prove more effective than the common sense view. Philosophy of Science Inquiries concerning the relationship between sociocultural factors and conceptual forms of thought have also been investigated by eminent philosophers of our day, among them, A. M. Whitehead, Ernest Cassirer, John Dewey, 79 and F. S. C. Northrop. 7 Addressing issues similar to those in the field of sociology of knowledge, Northrop arrived at a somewhat different formulation. His basic thesis is "that the philosophy of natural science which is presupposed by the adherents of a given culture determines largely, though not entirely the particular character of their cultural ideology, together with its practical and empirical gO manifestations." The distinctive feature here is that Ibid., p. 137. 79 '7Bidney. op. cit., p. 338. S0Ibid., p. 338. 107 Northrop posits the philosophy of natural science of a culture as the major determinant of its other manifesta tions. His conception of natural science, however, is not narrowed to the usual modern Western conception of science. The difference between a modern Western society and a society of natives in the South Sea islands is not that the ideology of the former is scientifically grounded, whereas that of the latter is nonsensical hocus pocus and illogical. The ideologies of both express logical thinking, once one discovers the conceptual standpoint of each. Furthermore, both conceptual standpoints are empirically and hence scientifically verified. The difference is that the native South Sea islanders pass to their generaliza tion with a particular group of observable factors in nature and the natural man attracting their atten tion, whereas modern Westerners have come upon different empirical natural facts and have achieved empirically verified generalizations which perhaps include a larger number of observable facts. Even so, as The Meeting of the East and West has demon strated, our traditional modern Western scientific and philosophical theories overlook or neglect certain facts of nature, especially those in the realm of aesthetic immediacy, which the empirically supported philosophies of the Orient and native South Sea islanders, such as the Balinese, take into account. SlF. S. C. Northrop, Ch. XXI, "The Scientific Method for Determining the Normative Social Theory of the Ends of Human Action," in The Logic of the Sciences and the Humanities (New York: The MacMillan Co., 1947)» p. 337, quoted in Bidney, ibid., p. 339. The following excerpt from Lundberg, Schrag, and Larsen, 0£. cit. voices the same view: "There is no conclusive evidence that non literate peoples characteristically employ fallacious reasoning. It appears, rather, that nonliterate and un sophisticated persons deduce consequences from assumptions in much the same manner as that employed by their more informed contemporaries." p. 44. 108 Since various societies direct their attention to different components of the environment, the scientific generalizations of each are derived from different sets of empirical data. Based on their diverse experience, they derive divergent assumptions and propositions concerning the nature of the world. Values, then, according to this analysis, reflect rather than define the philosophical premises. Northrop attempts to validate his theory by tracing in detail hosts of diverse cultural phenomena to the specific form of scientific system largely accepted in various societies and subcultural groups. His theory has been criticized, mainly on two points. First, the pre dominant role attributed to ideational factors, and specifically the heavy emphasis placed upon natural science has been challenged. Second, Northrop*s contention that "the good" is derived from "the true" reverses the more traditional view of "Neo-Kantians who would reduce 82 the category of the true to that of the good." On the other hand, Northrop receives vigorous support from Sorokin. In his review of current social philosophies, Sorokin finds Northrop’s thesis the most go Bidney, 0£. cit.. p. 341. 109 important and the closest to his own views.^ The real significance of Northrop's propositions is two-fold. By arriving at these conclusions inde pendently he additionally confirms their validity; he demonstrates the validity admirably, especially in the cases of the Mexican and the United States cultures....The elicidation, development, and demonstration of this proposition is brilliantly set forth^in one of the best passages of Northrop's book. The intense interest of the scientific community in the relationship between cultural values and scientific theories was demonstrated at a special conference on the "Validation of Scientific Theories" held in 1953, sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Several thousand specialists from all fields of the sciences participated.^^ Several of the papers presented there were published in The Scientific Monthly and later reprinted in a book, edited by Philipp G. Frank. In his introduction, Frank described the relation ship between values and theory in this manner: S3 ^Pitirim A. Sorokin, Social Philoshies of an Age of Crisis (Boston: The Beacon Press, 1 1), pp. 145, 259. ^Ibid., pp. 146, 150. Philipp G. Frank (ed.), The Validation of Scientific Theories (New York: Collier Books, 1961; Copyright 1954), pp. viii-x. 110 The conviction that science is independent of all moral and political influences arises when we regard science either as a collection of facts or as a picture of objective reality. But today, everyone who has attentively studied the logic of science will know that science actually is an instrument that serves the purpose of connecting present events with future events and deliberately utilizes this knowledge to shape future physical events as they are desired....In modern science, a theory is regarded as an ing^rument that serves toward some definite purpose. In the introduction to Symposium on Sociological Theory, Llewellyn Gross lists the following points as among the leading convergences of those contributing to the volume: (1) Values play a significant role in the B6 Ibid., pp. 21, 22. From an article by Robert S. Cohen in this book: "The standards for judging truths are social products..." p. 203. "It is notorious that the data did not prove the hypothesis of conservation of energy. The view that they did was based on arguments that would horrify an inductive statistician. The ways in which some scientific hypotheses and principles of high order and great importance have been brought to science and accepted by scientists should make a logical analyst shudder." p. 204, "Alternative Interpretations of the History of Science," pp. 198-207. On this point, see Arthur Stinchcombe's book review of David E. Apter's The Politics of Modernization, American Sociological Review, Vol. 31 (April, 1966) pp. 266-267: "This is an analysis of the political and scientific ideologies that legitimate authority and stratification on the basis of 'merit.' It requires great originality to observe that differentiation of privilege on the basis of intelligence and theoretical training needs to be legitimated, and that it is legiti mated by the vision of society's future that composes the ideology of science....[This is] the book's core contribution." Ill process of creating social science. (2) Theoretical and methodological analyses must be anchored to recognized human problems. (3) The basic character of a scientific theory is determined by the set of concepts or principles H7 that are chosen as central to its formulation. For instance, Werkmeister sees values as inter meshed throughout the social scientific process. He claims they appear as data or facts for study and as premises or explanatory categories attributable to the social group under investigation. Such statements, referring to the social sciences, have been heard often enough so as to be not surprising. The suggestion, however, that the knowledge of the physical sciences is dependent upon anything other than "what is out there" is still a novel idea. Kuhn's brilliant and illuminating analysis of the development of the physical sciences as a series of revolutions in $7 Llewellyn Gross (ed.), Sjonposium on Sociological Theory (New York: Harper & Row, 195V), PP* 4> 5, 7. In this book, Reinhard Bendix and Bennett Berger discuss the "construct" nature of our understanding of society. The constructs selected as central to a theory depend upon what seems "real" and significant to the theorist, p. 93 in "Images of Society and Problems of Objectivity," pp. 433-50$. $$ Gross, ibid.. p. 4, regarding W. H. Werkmeister, "Theory Construction and the Problem of Objectivity," pp. 4$3-50$. 112 concepts, paradigms, and in the very perception of reality deviates considerably from the usual view of the orderly, 89 accumulative development of science. But paradigms differ in more than substance, for they are directed not only to nature but also back upon the science that produced them. They are the sources of the methods, problem-field, and standards of solution accepted by any mature scientific community at any given time. As a result, the reception of a new paradigm often necessitates a redefinition of the corresponding science. Some old problems may be relegated to another science or declared entirely ’unscientific.' Others that were previously non existent or trivial may, with a new paradigm, become the very archtypes of significant scientific achieve ment. And as the problems change, so, often, does the standard that distinguishes a real scientific solution from a mere metaphysical speculation, word game, or mathematical play. The normal-scientific tradition that emerges from a scientific revolution is not only incompatible but often actuallyqincom- mensurable with that which has gone before. Paradigms, Kuhn declares, are not only constitutive 91 of science, they are constitutive of nature as well. In a chapter entitled "Revolutions as Changes of World View," he proposes that "when paradigms change, the world 89 'Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1962) . 9QIbid., p. 102. 91Ibid., p. 109. 113 92 itself changes with them'. Scientists see new and different things even while using the same instruments and looking in the same places, but they have to be trained to do so. Kuhn compares the experience to the transformation experienced by subjects in an anomalous playing-card experiment in psychology. Until taught by prolonged exposure that the universe contained anomalous cards they saw only the types of cards for which previous experience had equipped them. Yet once experience had provided the requisite additional categories, they were able to see all the anomalous cards on the first inspection...Still other experiments demonstrate that the perceived size, color, and so on, of experimentally displayed objects also varies with the subject's previous training and experience. Surveying the rich experimental literature from which these examples are drawn makes one suspect that something likeqa paradigm is pre requisite to perception itself. ^ Kuhn relates detailed accounts of revolutions in the physical sciences. After one of these revolutions, the one following Dalton's chemical atomic theory, "the very numerical data of chemistry began to shift." Chemists could not, therefore, simply accept Dalton's theory on the evidence, for much of that was still negative. Instead even after accepting the theory, they still had to beat nature into line, a process which, in the event, took almost another generation. 92Ibid.. p. 110. 93Ibid., p. 112. 114 When it was done, even the percentage composition of well-known compounds was different. The data them selves had changed. That is the last of the senses in which we may want to say that after,a revolution scientists work in a different world. ^ The evidence presented appears to support the contention that one's view of reality, physical or social, depends upon the conceptual apparatus supplied by past 95 experience and training.7 To the degree that this proposition is generalized across various types of phenomena and areas, it gains additional support and can be placed at a higher level of abstraction. Perception Theory Kuhn compared the experiences of scientists after paradigmatic revolutions to experiments in perception conducted by Jerome Bruner. We have relied heavily upon Bruner's theory of perception in the formulation of this project. It is highly interesting that Bruner describes a development in perception research which parallels the 94Ibid., p. 134. 95 77So Merton's definition of "serendipity" is the discovery through chance by a theoretically prepared mind of valid findings which were not sought for. In Merton, op. cit., p. 12. 115 shift, described earlier, which took place in the sociology of knowledge. Discussing the "several hundred experimental investigations of motivational and social determinants of perception," Bruner notes that the early studies were principally concerned with showing the nature of "distortion" in perception and the sources of perceptual inaccuracy and were, in the main, influenced by thinking 96 imported from clinical psychiatry. 7 In contrast, there is now "a steady flow of experimental studies on the manner in which social factors induce types of selectivity 97 in what a person perceives and how he interprets it." In the past ten or fifteen years, the role of perception and "selective registration" have come to be dominant in social psychological theory. Here, too, apparently, the shift was from an emphasis upon distortion to an attempt to understand the inevitable and positive role of socio cultural factors in perception. Selective perception is inevitable, says Bruner. 96 Jerome S. Bruner, "Social Psychology and Perception," in Eleanor E. Maccoby, Theodore M. Newcomb, and Eugene L. Hartley (eds.), Readings in Social Psychology (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1952), pp. 25-94. ^ Ibid.. p. 85. 116 It is not possible to pay attention to all the sensory stimuli present in the environment. Even when "the stimulus input is fairly simple, there are various ways Qg in which it can be ’looked at' or organized."7 We narrow our attention more or less "to those things that are somehow essential to the enterprises in which we are engaged." In social situations, whether we focus on the color of people’s skins, rather than on the textures, is a matter of cultural priorities. A second mechanism for economizing effort is to "recode" into simpler form the divergence of events. This is an obvious advantage of learning scientific formulas. In perception of human beings, we employ "stereotypes," making quick, necessary judgments on the basis of one or more clues or visual properties of the person. The ways in which we deal with environmental complexity "are deeply tinged with the hues of the society in which we live" and 99 result largely from social customs. On the basis of what has been learned in experimental research, Bruner outlines the major features 98Ibid., p. 86 " ibid.. p. 87 117 necessary for a theory of perception. A few of those major features which are relevant to our thesis follow. First, perceiving or registering an object or event involves an act of categorization. Stimulus output is sorted and placed into categories on the basis of certain clues that we learn how to use. The categories used "are learned on the basis of experience, by virtue of our membership in a culture or linguistic community, and by the nature of the needs we must fulfill.100 Furthermore, we learn to estimate the likelihood that placement of an event into a category will be accurate or predictive of other traits or events. In addition, "the categories of events with which we become accustomed to dealing are organized into systems or structures bound together in various ways," that is, bound together by some principle we have learned. "To understand the manner in which man responds to and copes with his social environment," says Bruner, "we must know what that environment means to him."101 100Ibid., p. 93. 101Ibid.. p. 94. Also see J. S. Bruner, D. Shapiro* R. Tagiuri, "The Meaning of Traits in Isolation and in Combination" in Renato Tagiuri and Luigi Petrullo (eds.), Person Perception and Interpersonal Behavior (Stanfords Stanford University Press, 1958), pp. 277-2£i£. Also Jerome S. Bruner, Jacqueline J. Goodnow, George A. Austin, A Study of Thinking (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1956). 118 In an experiment testing hypotheses implied in Bruner's theory, Foley and MacMillan asked five groups of subjects (first-year law students, second-year law, first-year medical, second-year medical, and a control group of non-professional students) to write down 102 associations to a list of 40 stimulus words. Each of 20 of the stimulus words (e.g. administer, complaint, cell) could be interpreted in legal, or medical, or non professional senses. Significant differences among the groups in the number of appropriate professional inter pretations were secured. For example, law students more frequently responded to the stimulus word "administer" with such words as govern, business, estate; medical students more frequently gave such associations as dosage, anesthetic, drugs. The consistency of professional inter pretation increased with more professional training. The 10? J. P. Foley, Jr. and F. L. MacMillan, "Mediated generalization and the interpretation of verbal behavior: V. Free Association as Related to Differences in Professional Training," J. ex. Psychol., 1943, 33, pp. 299-310, reported in David Kretch, Richard S. Crutch field, and Egerton L. Ballachey, Individual in Society (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1962), pp. 21-23. 119 authors conclude that mental sets acquired through selective sensitization may cause the same objects to have 103 different meanings for different perceivers. Sociolinguistics The study by Foley and MacMillan, as well as the principles cited earlier by Bruner, Cohen, Kuhn, and others make obvious the fact that investigations in perception, cognition, and sociolinguistics are inextricably bound together even though the interpene tration may not be recognized or made explicit. An extreme view of language as a determining force is exemplified in the following quotation: At any given time, an established language serves as the recorded deposit of the historical experience of its stream of speakers through time. Thus, it functions as a continuous determinant of the percep tual conceptual processes and the Weltanschauung or the members of the language community" , The language structure (vocabulary, grammar, semantics) as it stands at any given time operates as a ready-made metaphysical framework by means of which we do all our perceiving and conceptualizing. It determines what we, its users are aware [sic], what we believe, what our conceptions of time and space are, how we pattern our thought, and how we act and operate in 103Ibid., pp. 21-23 120 almost every, physical, social, or intellectual situation. Despite the critical implication of language usage in social behavior, and indeed, in research procedures and findings, sociologists, with the possible exception of 105 symbolic interactionists, have largely ignored it. ' Anthropologists, in their studies of widely-varying cul tures, apparently have found it necessary to be attentive to contrasting language usage in order to comprehend the behavior they observe. In turn, this effort brought them great rewards in insight into human behavior in general. As pointed out by Whorf, "If a rule has no exceptions, it is not recognized as a rule or as anything else; it is then part of the background of experience of which we tend ■^^■Joyce 0. Hertzler, "Social Uniformation and Language," Sociological Inquiry. Vol. 36 (Spring, 1966), p. 303. 105 ..."however, with the exception of the symbolic interactionist school of social psychology, there is no systematic collective effort on the part of sociologists to investigate the linguistic correlates of social behavior and, on the other hand, the influence of society on the nature of language," Stanley Lieberson, Editor of the issue devoted to "Explorations in Sociolinguistics," Sociological Inquiry. Vol. 36 (Spring, 1966), p. 131. 121 * i n A to remain unconscious. If there were no night, daytime would cease to exist for us, it would have no meaning as such. Similarly, lack of awareness of other modes of conceptualization and categorization blinds us from con sciousness of certain phenomena and from a realization that we are looking at data from a limited, specific viewpoint. We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages. The categories and types that we isolate from the world of phenomena we do not find there because they stare every observer in the face; on the contrary, the world is presented in a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds— and this means largeiybythe linguistic systems in our minds. We cut nature up, organize it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement to organize it in this way... The fact is very significant for modern science, for it means that no individual is free to describe nature with absolute impartiality but is constrained to certain modes of interpretation even while he thinks himself most free....We are thus introduced to a new principle of relativity, which holds that all observers are not led by the same physical evidence to the same picture of the universe, unless their linguistic backgrounds are similar, or can in some way be calibrated. ' ■^^Benjamin L. Whorf, "Science and Linguistics," in Maccoby, Newcomb, and Hartley (eds.) op. cit., p. 2. 1Q7Ibid.. p. 5. 122 Brown and Lennenberg report several experimental studies with English, Navaho, and Zuni communities, relating sensory discrimination to linguistic codability, 10B which support the Whorfian hypothesis. They suggest that these propositions should be tested among various occupational, professional, and scientific communities. These communities are engaged in searching for the categories relevant to their own respective enterprises. Waitresses concerned with the prediction of tips may categorize people as "cheap skates" or "good sports;" whereas physicians may classify these same persons as 109 diabetics or ulcer cases. 7 One psychologist may sort the population into "dominant" and "submissive" categories, while another may find the introvert-extrovert classifi cation more useful. A heuristic and illuminating directive related to such propositions is offered in a paper by C. W. Mills, wherein he outlines "an analytic model for the explanation of motives which is based on a sociological theory of 10B Roger W. Brown and Eric H. Lennenberg "Studies in Linguistic Relativity," ibid., pp. 9-lB. 1Q9Ibid.. p. IB. language and a sociological psychology."110 Mills suggests that we should study the conventional vocabularies of motive imputation and avowal used by various groups in specific situations. In this manner we may learn which motives are customarily used and accepted by the different groups in justifying or criticizing behavior. This supplants the quest for "real*' motives inferred to exist within the individual. In seeking the "real” motive rather than the "rationalization," we can only come up with another verbalization imputed by someone else. What is reason for one is rationalization for another. It is not possible to check inferences concerning what exists inside of an individual. Mills relates the story of a medieval monk who wrote that he gave food to a poor but pretty woman for religious reasons. The monk was avowing motives which would have been accepted at that time. Today, sexual motives would probably be imputed. Individualistic, sexual, hedonistic, and pecuniary motives are apparently the dominant motives now avowed in many sections of our country. 110C. W. Mills, "Situated Actions and Vocabularies of Motives," 0£. cit.. p. 439. 124 In constructing typical vocabularies of motives that are extant in various cultural or historical situations, Mills proposes that we should also endeavor to give sociological accounts of other theories (terminologies) of motivation. For instance, the Freudian terminology of motives "are those of an upper bourgois patriarchal group with strong sexual and individualistic orientation."111 The psychoanalytic vocabulary of motives was never popular in France where control of sexual behavior is not puritanical. A second example given is the Marxian terminology of power, struggle, and economic motives. Those who perceive the world through Marxian lenses believe all other avowed motives are due to hypoc risy or ignorance. Other vocabularies of motives, mentioned by Mills, are theological or ethical ones; hedonistic, pleasure-pain terminologies; and the economists' image of "the rational man." Summary and Implications Works in sociology of knowledge and in philosophy of science which were presented here suggest that there is 111Ibid., p. 450 125 no knowledge, pure and uncontaminated by human assumptions, definitions, and categorical systems. Rather, there appear to be different modes and styles of knowledge, each intimately related to place and era, to life experience and vantage point, to conceptual apparatus employed by particular groups. These findings are supported by studies of reference groups conducted on a more microscopic level. Views of special interest groups are often called ideologies, while those of scientific groups are usually considered to be theories or knowledge. Certain kinds of categorization by lay groups may be called stereotyping, other kinds by scientific groups are usually termed theo retical classification. Experimental studies in perception and socio linguistics, however, provide evidence that the same general principles are involved in each case. According to such evidence, perception is always selective. What is perceived, the manner in which it is organized, how it is interpreted seems to be dependent upon prior training, knowledge, assumptions, terminology, and categorical systems supplied by major reference groups. Innumerable studies from various fields have shown that groups of men respond to the same objects and events in different ways. Advocates of a sociocultural relativistic frame of reference believe that in order to 126 understand the variation it is necessary to study the reality order or Weltanschauung of each group, the premises, assumptions, definitions, and meanings, which guide its conduct. The response to objects, it is felt, is dependent in part, upon what the object means to the subject. Meanings are not inherent in objects or events; they are created by groups of men. Human beings create meanings, project them upon objects, and then respond to the meanings which they created. By this process, men construct their own reality. The sociocultural relativistic frame of reference described above, has been applied not only to the study of ideology, perception, world-view, and sociology of knowledge, but also to the study of deviance. The follow ing chapter explicates the manner in which the frame of reference utilized in research may direct study of a particular phenomena, deviance in this case, to very different aspects, posing new questions with serious implications. CHAPTER IV DEVIANCE: THEORIES, ISSUES, AND IDEOLOGIES In chapter III, studies were presented which indicated a whole new trend of thought occurring simul taneously in many fields. In the past, the general tendency had been to investigate the sources of distortion, illusion and error in perception, in ideology, in world view, and in other idea-systems. Repeated, continuous evidence of differential perception and interpretation of identical material, of group variations in style and modes of knowledge, however, gave rise to new kinds of questions. More and more, the emphasis has shifted to a study of the social, cultural, and historical conditioning of all idea- systems as inevitable processes and necessary referents.''" This type of question has spread even into the field of deviance and social problems. For the first time, many voices are asking to what extent sociocultural experience affects definitions of what is normal or "'"Robert K. Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure (Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1957)> pp. 459-460. 127 128 2 deviant, healthy or pathological, legal or criminal. Social scientists have even begun to wonder to what degree their own training and assumptions affect their diagnosis, classification, theories, and treatment procedures. More serious questions, yet, along these lines, are currently being raised in the sociological literature on deviance. The issues concern the degree to which certain professional policies and. societal actions, themselves, serve to create or maintain deviance. In the present chapter, these issues will be examined. First, we will briefly look at the more traditional mode of investigation of deviance and point out certain aspects of the problem which have been largely ignored or neglected. Then several types of evidence will be outlined which have contributed to the new perspective on deviance. The manner in which our own study is related to these issues will be explicated in the final section. 2 "Twenty years ago, it would have been decidedly abnormal for psychiatrists to write a book on the dimen sions of normal behavior....One measure of changing times is that, in the mid-1960's, it seems much less strange or deviant for the authors to attempt such a book." Daniel Offer and Melvin Sabshin, Normality (New York: Basic Books. Inc., 1966). Maurice Stein and Arthur Vidich (eds.), Sociology on Trial (Englewood Cliffs, N. J., 129 Alternative approaches to the study of deviance.— The traditional approach to the study of deviance has been addressed mainly to the etiology of deviant behavior. Most of the research is directed toward the identification 3 of factors which cause certain people to become deviant. What kinds of persons, it is asked, are likely to go astray, break down, or become anti-social? The questions revolve mainly around the deficiencies of individuals who deviate from certain standards assumed to be "normal.M For those conducting research in the traditional mode, the definition of deviance is not problematical. It is accepted as a given. Sociologists of knowledge, symbolic interaction- ists, and other cultural relativists knowing no absolute standards for normality and deviance, ask, instead, other questions. What are the conceptions of normality and deviance held by various groups in different places and periods? What labels and motives are imputed to certain acts under varying circumstances? What methods of control are advocated by different groups and agencies? How are these beliefs related to the sociocultural 3 Howard S. Becker, Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance (New York: The Free Press, 1963), p. 22. 1 3 0 position and selective past experience of each group? Several inquiries of this kind have already been cited. One, on a rather grand scale, was Sorokin’s investigations relating societal variation in criminal law to basic cultural premises. Closer to reference group magnitude was C. W. Mills' analysis of the assumptions, values, and background of professionals in social pathology. The traditional approach to deviance and the sociocultural relativistic approach represent alternative models. Obviously, however, more is involved than mere choice of alternative models to investigate a problem. Different questions are being asked, divergent assumptions concerning knowledge and reality are involved, and the implications of the two types of study will differ no matter what the findings are.**' Nevertheless, since the alternative approaches are addressed to different questions, it would seem that both are necessary for a more adequate view. An increasing ^Theories of social problems and deviant behavior are normative. They interpret facts within the context of ideological assumptions about the nature of man and society." Horton offers a paradigm for the analysis of conflict and order approaches to social problems. John Horton, "Order and Conflict Theories of Social Problems as Competing Ideologies," American Journal of Sociology (May 1966), pp. 701-713?““ 131 number of sociologists are expressing the concern that theory and research predicated almost exclusively upon official conceptions preclude comprehension of phenomena defined in other ways by other groups. Kitsuse voices such concern in this passage: The larger implications of these data are that a sociological theory of deviance must explicitly take into account the variety and range of conceptions held by persons, groups, and agencies within the society concerning any form of behavior. The in creasing differentiation of groups, institutions, and subcultures in modern society generates a continually changing range of alternatives and tolerance for the expression of sexual as well as other forms of behavior. Consequently, it is difficult if not impossible to derive theoretically a set of specific behavioral prescriptions which will in fact be normatively supported, uniformly practiced, and socially enforced by more than a segment of the total population.5 The works of some sociologists who have approached social problems and deviance from a sociocultural, relativistic stance will be reviewed now. This review may bring into focus certain contradictions encountered during the course of research which seemed to require a shift in perspectives. 5 'John I. Kitsuse, "Societal Reaction to Deviant Behavior: Problems of Theory and Method," in Howard S. Becker (ed.), The Other Side: Perspectives on Deviance (New York: The Free Press, 19&0, pp. ^7-102, p. 101. 132 Antecedents: The Value Conflict Theory of Social Problems A prominent, r.elativistic approach to social problems in American sociology is the value conflict theory. This approach is employed as the unifying frame work for the analysis of social problems in the Cuber, Harper, Kenkel textbook.^ The utility of this frame of reference, according to the authors, is fourfold: (l) It enables the sociologist to act as interpreter of values rather than as value advocate. (2) It serves as a vehicle for the study of value positions in regard to interest groups, classes, and points of view of various groups. (3) This frame of reference makes explicit that problems may emerge in a society as a result of changes in the value structure per se. (4) It assists in a socio logical treatment of social problems by enabling data to be understood from the point of view of their relation to 7 group-related values. The initial formulation of this ^John F. Cuber, Robert A. Harper, William F. Kenkel, Problems of American Society: Values in Conflict (New York! Henry Holt & Co., 1956)• 7 'Ibid., pp. xiv-xvii. 133 approach is attributed to Richard Fuller, Lawrence K. Frank, and Willard Waller. In an old but classic article describing the necessary implication of values in social problems, Waller writes that "there can be no social problem without a r ) value judgment." The one thing which all social problems have in common is that someone has passed a value judgment upon them. Thus the value judgment is the essential criterion by which social problems may be identified. In order to treat social problems scientifically, Waller insists, it is necessary to analyze our values to find why we consider certain phenomena problems. Many of the conditions which we customarily treat as social problems spring from the very nature of social organization, and not in any imaginable sense from disorganization. Poverty of the wage-earner, some times called the basic social problem, is necessi tated by facts which lie deep in the present economic system and in the relation of social classes to one another. Sub-standard housing, like wise, is the natural and inevitable result of institutions and practices of long standing, and cannot be explained in terms of social disorganiza tion. The same is true of many other problems. . _ _ _ _ _ _ , Willard Waller, "Social Problems and the Mores," American Sociological Review (December, 1936), p. 922. ^Ibid.. p. 924. 134 In analyzing one social problem after another, Waller points out that there are no technical obstacles to solution, but that the solution would somehow infringe upon the values of some group. For example, for an affluent government to simply build houses when there is a housing shortage would infringe upon the freedom of certain groups to make a profit."^ With regard to a different type of social problem, Waller notes that there are effective medical means to prevent venereal disease; however, to make them known and available might alter the mores of chastity, a value held by some groups in . * 11 society. Another sociologist, Richard Fuller, also sees value conflicts at the heart of all social problems: A common sociological orientation for the analysis of all social problems may be found in the conflict of values which characterizes every social problem. 10Ibid., p. 926. n Md., p. 927. ■^Richard G. Fuller and Richard R. Myers, "Social Problems in Relation to Values," in Alfred McGlung Lee and Elizabeth B. Lee (eds.) Social Problems in America: A Source Book (New York: Henry Holt & Co., 1949)» p. 12. 135 His definition of criminal law follows from the value conflict assumption: Sociologically speaking, however, a criminal statute is simply the formal embodiment of someone's moral values (usually the group dominant in political authority) in an official edict....The dominant group whose values are expressed in the law is only one of many groups which are integrated in the moral and political fabric of the community. When the moral values of one or more of these other groups are not in accord with the moral values of the dominant group we are likely to have a persistent problem of law enforcement. Thus viewed, the problem of the criminal law in action reduces to the problem of conflicting moral values hsld by different groups and classes in the community. ^ In a recent article, Turk summarizes the concep tual literature relating conflict and criminality, and attempts to untangle the confusion of two different sets of problems prior to presenting a set of theoretical propositions regarding one set of the problems. Turk lists four basic ways in which relations between conflict and crime have been conceptualized, and then further reduces the four to two major orientations: "deviance- pathology" and "social conflict - political." Regarding the latter orientation, he writes: From the latter viewpoint, that some people act contrary to statutes becomes less a problem than a 13 ^Richard C. Fuller, "Morals and the Criminal Law," The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. XXXII (March-April, 1942), p. 624. 136 fact with which analysis begins, and understanding crime becomes less a matter of unraveling social, psychological and biological processes resulting in pathological behavior than a matter of comprehending cultural diversity and patterns of social conflict.<4 Studies conducted from the social conflict- political orientation analyze "the violation of laws by essentially normal persons in the course of realistic 15 conflicts of interests. Whereas, from the deviance- pathology standpoint, criminal status is usually considered synonomous with pathological or maladaptive behavior. The problem in the latter case, then, would be to account for the pathology. As suggested earlier, the questions, assumptions, and implications of the two types of study differ considerably, and Turk performs a valuable service in making the distinction explicit and in his further formalization. The New Perspective on Deviance: The Societal Reaction Theory Similar in orientation to the value conflict Austin T. Turk, "Conflict and Criminality," American Sociological Review, Vol. 31 (June, 1966;, p. 340. 15Ibid., p. 339. school, is an approach which has come to be known as the "new perspective on deviance." In a critique, identifying and analyzing the changing conceptions of deviant behavior, Gibbs pinpoints the major distinction between the new perspective and two earlier conceptualizations of deviance.^ An early view of criminals, which has since been discarded, assumed that they were biologically or constitutionally inadequate or defective in some manner in comparison to non-criminals. When, after decades of research, this notion failed to be confirmed, it was superceded by an "analytic conception" of criminal acts. In the analytic conception, the locus of the defect shifted from criminal to crime, from person to act. Criminal acts were construed as acts which were inherently injurious to society. Finally, with the recognition that many acts, taboos and such, have been proclaimed criminal which are not, in themselves, harmful to society, the ground was fertile for a new perspective. Unable to find any common characteristics, inherently abnormal in all deviants or intrinsically injurious in all acts considered to be crimes, the focus 1 Jack P. Gibbs, "Conceptions of Deviant Behaviors The Old and the New," The Pacific Sociological Review, Vol. 9 (Spring, 1966), pp. 9-15. 138 shifted again, this time to a feature external to both act and actor. Gibbs cites the following quotations from Kitsuse, Becker, and Erikson identifying deviance by the nature of the societal reaction. Kitsuse: Forms of deviant behavior per se do not differ entiate deviants from non-deviants; it is the responses of the conventional and conforming members of the society who identify and interpret behavior as deviant which sociologically transform persons into deviants. ' Erikson: From a sociological standpoint, deviance can be defined as conduct which is generally thought to require the attention of social control agencies— that is conduct about which 'something should be done.’ Deviance is not a property inherent in certain forms of behavior; it is a property conferred upon these forms by the audiences which directly or indirectly witness them. Sociologically, then, the critical variable in the study of deviance is the social audience rather than individual person; since it is the audience which eventually decides whether or not any given action or-actions will become a visible case of deviation. Becker: From this point of view, deviance is not a quality of the act a person commits, but rather a consequence of the application by others of rules 17 'Kitsuse, "Societal Reaction to Deviant Behavior}’ op. cit., p. 253 in Gibbs, ojd. cit.. p. 11. 15 Erikson, "Notes on the Sociology of Deviance," op. cit., p. 308 in Gibbs, o£. cit.. p. 11. 139 and sanctions to an 'offender.' The deviant is one to whom that label has successfully been applied; deviant behavior is behavior that people so label. It is pertinent to this thesis to digress a moment to note that although Gibbs lists the three conceptions as sequential in time— in fact, the three co-exist today in slightly modified form. Lawyers, by and large, direct their major attention to the nature of the criminal act committed. Psychologists, for the most part, are concerned with understanding the deficiency within the deviant individual. And, somewhat predictably, all of the writers who have contributed to the discovery of the societal reaction theory happen to be sociologists. Anthropologists, who share common concepts with sociol ogists, and who selectively perceive fairly similar types of phenomena, have developed theories close in nature to the new perspective, only differently named. The new explanation still sounds strange when first encountered. It may aid in clarification to list the kinds of finding which led to the development of the societal reaction theory. An impressive amount of evidence covering a wide range of types of data began to 19 Becker, Outsiders, op. cit., p. 9 in Gibbs, 0£. f P* 11* 140 accumulate which seriously undermined the previous, entrenched belief that deviants were necessarily patho logical, maladjusted, perverted, or different than "non-deviants." Evidence supporting the societal reaction theory of deviance.— One of the first and most startling types of evidence to emerge concerned the widespread prevalence of deviance. An early survey conducted by Wallerstein and Wyle showed that ninety-one per cent of the 1,69$ subjects canvassed admitted committing one or more of the 49 20 criminal offenses listed* All of the offenses were sufficiently serious to draw a maximum sentence of not less than one year. Numerous other studies followed with results substantiating the earlier findings "that the law 21 violator is Everyman." Apparently only a small percentage of law violations are visible. An article by Stinchcombe systematically analyzed the vast gulf in the probability of being apprehended between those who have access to 20 James S. Wallerstein and Clement J. Wyle, "Our Law-abiding Law-breakers," Probation (March-April, 1947)» 25:107-112, 11$, reported in Cohen, op. cit., p. 25. Reported on the first page of The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society, p. v. 21 Cohen, ibid., p. 25. 141 22 privacy and those who do not. For example, one may collapse in a drunken state within the privacy of one’s home without fear of apprehension; whereas such behavior, in fact almost any behavior, will put a homeless man in jail. Other studies emphasized particular forms of deviance, but still logically fall into this same category of studies about persoms committing illegal acts who are not labeled, and who thus, do not become "deviants." One of the most famous of these was Sutherland's study of white-collar crime. This study, perhaps more than any other, brought an awareness of the critical, however capricious, function of societal reaction. Although financial fraud and other typical kinds of businessman's crime may cheat the public of millions of dollars, these offenders are rarely thought of as "criminals." Another investigation with similar implications also involved occupational or class status. Schwartz and Skolnick examined the effects of legal accusation on two 22 Arthur L. Stinchcombe, "Institutions of Privacy in the Determination of Police Administrative Practice," The American Journal of Sociology. Vol. LXIX (September, 1963)’ , PP. I5O-160. 2^Edwin H. Sutherland, White Collar Grime (New York: Dryden, 1949). 142 occupational positions: lower-class unskilled workers charged with assault, and medical doctors accused of malpractice. The investigation revealed that only one of 25 employers was willing to consider hiring an unskilled worker who had been tried and convicted for assault. Furthermore, only three of the 25 employers agreed to hire an applicant who had been accused but acquitted of assault. On the other hand, it was found that "malpractice actions— even when resulting in a judgment against the doctor— are not usually followed by negative consequences and sometimes have a favorable effect on the professional 0 A position of the defendant." In this case, occupational status appears to be of more import than behavior of offender in determining the effectiveness of the label. Physicians are, to some extent, protected from acquiring a deviant identity. The works of Suther land, Stinchcombe, Schwartz and Skolnick demonstrate that deviant behavior by members of higher social strata rarely results in their being seen as deviants. But class-correlated "life-chance" discrepancies come as no shock to sociologists. Evidence ^Richard D. Schwartz and Jerome H. Skolnick, "Two Studies of Legal Stigma," in Becker (ed.) The Other Side, op. cit., pp. 103-117, 116. 143 of variable reaction to the same acts of deviance within the same class setting may be more impressive. Albert Reiss presents data on boys who engage in fellatio as prostitutes for adult male homosexuals, but who do not themselves become homosexuals. As long as they adhere to certain group norms, and hustle only to make money, not for sexual gratification, they are not looked upon as homosexuals by their peers. As they get older, 25 they gradually discontinue this type of activity. ' In the above case, engaging in deviant behavior does not result in acquiring the identity or the label of homosexual. Perhaps this, also, does not seem exceptional since pecuniary motives are expressed, and pecuniary motives are so central to our vocabulary of motives as to make almost any kind of behavior comprehensible when couched in those terms. In turning to Scheff’s theory of mental illness, however, we are confronted by phenomena which are not explainable in terms of our current vocabulary of motives.^ Paradoxically, it is because assumptions regarding these phenomena are so central to a ^Albert J. Reiss, Jr., "The Social Integration of Queers and Peers," Social Problems, 9 (Fall, 1961), pp. 102-120. Reprinted in Becker (ed.) The Other Side, op. citi pp. 1&1-210. ^Thomas J. Scheff, 0£. cit. 144 given way of life that they are taken for granted. Scheff points out that there is a vocabulary of terms for categor izing many norm violations: crime, perversion, drunken ness, and bad manners are familiar examples. There is, however, a residue of diverse kinds of violations for which there are no explicit labels. Violations such as these, which transgress fundamental cultural assumptions, sometimes lead to the labeling of the offender as mentally ill. For example, although there is great cultural variation in what is defined as decent or real, each culture tends to reify its definition of decency and reality, and so provides no way of handling viola tions of its expectations in these areas. The typical norm governing decency or reality, therefore, literally 'goes without saying' and its violation is unthinkable for most of its members. For the con venience of the society in construing those instances of unnamable rule-breaking which are called to its attention, these violations may be lumped together into a residual category: witchcraft, spirit possession, or, in our own society,mental illness. In this discussion, the diverse kinds of rule-breaking for which our society provides no explicit label, and which, therefore, sometimes lead to the labeling of the violator as mentally ill, will be considered to be technically residual rule- breaking. 2' Violation of certain norms regarding "involve- ment,'1 for example, may be regarded as psychiatric 27Ibid.. p. 34. 145 symptoms of withdrawal, hallucinations, or delusions. This is particularly true of ’ ’occult involvements." If ever there was a type of behavior that in itself would be seen as abnormal, Scheff says it would be occult involve ments. Even with occult involvements, however, there is an element of cultural definition. There are societies in which conversation with a spirit not present is as acceptable when sustained by properly authorized persons as isQconversation over a telephone in American society. Furthermore, even in American society there are occasions in which occult involvement is not censured: Those who attend a seance would not consider it inappropriate for the medium to interact with 'someone on the other side,1 whether they believe this to be staged or a genuine interaction. And certainly we define praying as acceptable when done at proper occasions. Thus, as Scheff points out, talking to spirits or praying to God are not improper in themselves. They are Ibid., pp. 34-37. It is impossible to do justice to Scheff's theory in a short space. We must apologize for pulling a few examples out of context of a coherent, well-documented theory. In the present examples, Scheff draws on Goffman's work. ^Erving Goffman, Behavior in Public Places (New York: Free Press, 1964)* p. 79 > quoted in Scheff, ibid., p. 37. ^Idem. 146 acceptable forms of behavior when they occur in the proper circumstances and are conducted by persons recognized as 31 legitimately involved. The accumulation of data interpreted from this perspective explains the growing disenchantment with what Gibbs called the analytic conception, that there are certain kinds of acts which are in themselves, injurious to society or intrinsically abnormal. Scheff also presents various kinds of evidence which throw suspicion on what Gibbs described as the pathology conception. There is evidence that grossly deviant behavior is often not noticed or, if it is noticed, it is rationalized as eccentricity. Apparently, many persons who are extremely withdrawn, or who 'fly off the handle* for extended periods of time, who imagine fantastic events, or who hear voices or see visions, are not labeled as insane either by themselves or others. Their deviance, rather, is unrecognized, ignored, or rationalized. In addition to this kind of evidence, Scheff cites a number of epidemiological studies of total prevalence of -^Scheff, ibid., p. 37. ^^Thomas J. Scheff, "The Role of the Mentally 111 and the Dynamics of Mental Disorder: A Research Framework," Sociometry, Vol. 26 (December, 1963), pp. 436-453, p. 440. 147 33 mental illness. There are numerous problems involved in interpreting the results of these studies, mainly because definitions and methods differ in each study.Neverthe less, the studies present the best available information regarding prevalence of mental illness. Judging from the thirteen field studies reported, the ratio of treated to untreated cases is estimated to be approximately l/l4. That is, for every treated patient we should expect to 3 5 find 14 untreated cases in the community. ' Scheff interprets this data as suggesting that residual deviance is usually transitory rather than a permanent characteris tic of the individual. It is important to see that the assumptions and implications of Scheff's theory regarding "the social 33The following studies are discussed by Scheff: Richard J. Plunkett and John E. Gordon, Epidemiology and Mental Illness (New York: Basic Books, i960). This includes 11 field studies. Benjamin Pasamanick, "A Survey of Mental Disease in an Urban Population, IV, An Approach to Total Prevalence Rates," Archives of General Psychiatry. 5 (August, 1961), pp. 151-155• August B. Hollingshead and Frederick C. Redlich, Social Class and Mental Illness (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 195&), p. 199. In Scheff, Ibid., pp. 440-441. 3^See, for example, William A. Scott, "Research Definitions of Mental Health and Mental Illness," in Psychological Bulletin. Vol. 55 (Jan. 195&)> pp. 29-45. 35Scheff, Ibid.. pp. 440-441. 148 institution of insanity"^ run parallel to the other material discussed above. The common element in these studies is the evidence that most "normal" people engage, at some time or another, in rule-breaking behavior, which may be crime, sexual deviancy, or mental illness, depend ing on the cultural definition. The vast proportion of such behavior, however, is either not visible; is ignored, unrecognized, or rationalized; is not reported; is not labeled, or if labeled, ineffectively so. Thus, if acts such as these are performed by most people, then the behavior itself cannot be considered abnormal. Whether the act or the offender is so labeled seems to depend, therefore, on how others react. Each of.the studies mentioned thus far sub stantiates the proposition that many people who are not regarded as deviants engage in behavior which is labeled as deviant behavior when performed by other persons. A second type of evidence for the societal reaction theory concerns those who do_ become labeled and known as deviants. Evidence of this kind suggests that persons may be assigned to the deviant status irrespective of their own behavior. Under such circumstances, the ^dieff, Being Mentally 111, op. cit.. Ch. 3> "The Social Institution of Insanity," pp. 55-101. 149 37 status can be considered ascribed rather than achieved. In the area of mental illness, Scheff asked, "to what extent is entry to and exit from the status of mental patient independent of the behavior or 'condition* of the 3 8 patient?"7 Data from his own studies, as well as from studies of others, demonstrate that in many psychiatric commitment proceedings, the decision to commit anyone 39 referred is virtually automatic. 7 Typical of the data provided was the following: Our observations of 116 judicial hearings raised the question of the adequacy of the psychiatric examination. Eighty-six of the hearings failed to establish that the patients were 'mentally ill' (according to the criteria stated by the judges in interviews). Indeed, the behavior and responses of L+8 of the patients at the hearings seemed completely unexceptionable. Yet the psychiatric examiners had not recommended the release of a single one of these patients. Examining the court records of 80 additional cases, we found still not a single 37 7 Ibid., p. 129. Rinehart presents evidence of cases where the role appears to be "achieved," e.g. when persons voluntarily seek treatment. In such cases, he suggests, the explanatory power of the societal reaction model is reduced. On the other hand, "when the behavior to be explained is that of patients who have been involun tarily committed to institutions, the explanatory power of the societal reaction model is maximized." James ¥. Rinehart, "Mobility Aspiration-Achievement Discrepancies and Mental Illness," Social Problems. Vol. 15, No. 4 (Spring 1968), pp. 47^-488, p. 488. ^Scheff, Being Mentally 111, op. cit., p. 129. 39Ibid., p. 149. recommendation for release.... Interviews ranged in length from five minutes t^> 17 minutes, with the mean time being 10.2 minutes. I ' In some cases where an examination showed no signs of inappropriate behavior, physicians admitted it was better "to play it safe" to avoid any criticism which might result from releasing patients.^ Other physicians indicated that they assumed that anyone referred as M mentally ill must be mentally ill. Thus, despite legal rulings that there should be a presumption of sanity, existing studies suggest there is a presumption of illness. In a study investigating release of patients, the data indicated that the presence of 43 per cent of the patient population could not be accounted for in terms of their psychiatric condition.^ Instead, their retention ^QIbid.. pp. 139, 144. 41Ibid., p. 147. 42Ibid.. p. 149. 43Ibid., p. 132. 44Ibid., p. l6g. 151 as patients was more closely related to such social variables as type of hospital, age, length of continuous treatment, and willingness of community to accept the return of patients.^ Scheff concludes that social contingencies appear to be of greater importance than condition of patient in psychiatric and legal screening procedures.^ The role of the disabled is analyzed from the j 7 same perspective by Freidson. He describes those features of social life that are external to the handi capped, but which, nevertheless, limit and channel their responses. In this case, the rehabilitation agencies determine and shape the role which is considered appro priate for the handicapped. Even the identification of who is handicapped is more dependent upon social and cultural variables than upon psychological and biological variables. Blindness, ^Ibid., p. 168. 46Ibid., p. 169. ^Eliot Freidson, "Disability as Social Deviance," in Marvin B. Sussman (ed.), Sociology and Rehabilitation (Published by the American Sociological Assn., 1966, pp. 71-99). 152 drug addiction, and many other traits which are now believed to be undesirable, have not always been considered as such, Freidson notes. What is common to all acts of defining someone as handicapped and requiring rehabilitation, therefore, is not a set of physical attributes that always 'are' handicaps, but rather the act of definition itself, which can be an imputation rather than a statement of fact. Since this is the case, it follows that the activities of rehabilitation institutions are determined at least as much by their conceptions (and the public’s conceptions) of what a handicap is, as by the physical attributes they deal with.... What is a handicap in social terms? It is an imputation of difference from others; more particu larly, imputation of an undesirable difference. By definition, then, a person said to be handicapped is so defined because he deviates from what he himgelf or others believe to be normal or appropriate. Once identified and labeled as handicapped, individuals are segregated in sheltered workshops, and pressure is exerted on the incumbents to accept the role and to behave accordingly. The appropriate behavior for all "good deviants" is described by Goffman. The nature of a 'good adjustment' requires that the stigmatized individual cheerfully and unselfcon sciously accept himself as essentially the same as normals, while at the same time he voluntarily with holds himself from those situations in which normals find it difficult to give lip service to their similar acceptance of him....It means that the 4gIbid.. pp. 71-72. unfairness and pain of having to carry a stigma will never be presented to (normals)... The stigma and burden thus imposed upon the handi capped are not at all intended by the rehabilitation agencies. Trained workers consider it "unprofessional" to attach stigma to their clients and patients. They seek instead to "help" them. Freidson, as well as others who write from this perspective, believes it important to 50 examine the unintended consequences for the deviants. Further evidence for the societal reaction theory comes from an unexpected area. Taking an imaginative and unorthodox approach to the investigation of the mentally retarded, Mercer gathered data demonstrating that social syst'em variables are more significant than individual attributes in differentiating between those retained and 51 those released from the institution.J In analyzing LQ H7Erving Goffman, Stigma: Notes on the Manage- ment of Spoiled Identity (Englewood1 Spectrum Books, 1963), pp. 121-122, quoted by Freidson, ibid., p. 95* ^ Ibid., p. 96. ^Jane R. Mercer, "Social System Perspective and Clinical Perspective: Frames of Reference for Understand ing Career Patterns of Persons Labelled as Mentally Retarded," Social Problems. Vol. 13 (Summer, 1965), pp. lS-33. The institution is the Pacific State Hospital for the mentally retarded. 154 differential rates of entry and exit, Mercer adopts a social system perspective in lieu of the standard clinical frame of reference traditionally used in studying the mentally retarded. Looking at the social systems of the mentally retarded patients and of the professional clinicians, she observes that the latter represents the core values of dominant groups in society. The further the values, norms, and characteristics of other groups from those of dominant core groups, the less likely are they to hold similar definitions and labels. • Patients from backgrounds characterized by low educational achievement, high levels of dependency (welfare cases), and high concentrations of ethnic minorities (Negro and Mexican) represent social systems 52 which diverge most widely from official definitions. To these families, the mentally retarded child may not seem too different; he may be accepted as almost normal. Many of these children are labeled as retarded and placed in the hospital initially at the behest of police and 52 J For a related and perceptive analysis of the relationship between our implicit value system and our stratification system, see Lewis Anthony Dexter, "On the Politics and Sociology of Stupidity in our Society," in The Other Side: Perspectives On Deviance, Becker (ed.), op. cit.. pp. 37-49. 155 welfare agencies. Placement of the higher status patients 53 is mainly by medical recommendation. ^ Moreover, the person important in placement differentiates the low status released from the low status resident patient at the .01 level. The resident low status patient's path to the hospital is similar to that of the high status patient and markedly different from released low status persons. When authoritative figures such as police and welfare are primary forces in placement, the patient is more likely to return home. Mercer interprets the findings to mean that when medical personnel are important in placing the child, the families themselves first defined the child as retarded and sought professional counsel. When official defin itions reinforce their own, these families are more likely to leave the patient in the hospital. On the other hand, when police or governmental agencies recommend placement, the family frequently views the placement as punishment and rejects the official definition of the child as retarded. Many of these families withdraw the children 53 ^These findings are similar to those of Hollings- head and Redlich in their study of paths to the hospital for the mentally ill. August B. Hollingshead and Fred erick C. Redlich, Social Class and Mental Illness (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1958). ^Sdercer, 0£. cit., p. 30. 156 from the institution at the first opportunity, considering that the child had "served his time." A graphic example is given: For example, the mother of a Mexican-American, male, adult patient who had been released from the hospital after being committed following an incident in which he allegedly made sexual advances to a young girl, told the author, 'There is nothing wrong with Benny. He just can't read or write.' Since the mother spoke only broken English, had no formal schooling, and could not read or write, Benny did not appear deviant to her. From her perspective, he didn't have anything wrong with him. 5 In his own social system, he may be looked upon as "not much different from the rest of us." If picked up by the police or upon entering public school, he is judged by a new and different set of norms. In the new social location, he is labeled as mentally retarded. The impli cation of the study is that membership in groups with characteristics which differ from dominant groups greatly increases the risk of stigmatization. Youth in the lower social class apparently face other hazards as well. Tappan describes their lack of protection against vaguely-based delinquency charges. In many jurisdictions, under broad statutory defin ition of delinquency, it has become common practice to adjudicate as delinquent any child deemed to be anti-social or a behavior problem. Instead of requiring sound systematic proof of specific ^ Ibid.. p. 33. 157 reprehensible conduct, the courts can attach to children the odious label of delinquent through the evaluations and recommendations of over-worked, under-trained case investigators who convey to the judge their hearsay testimony of neighborhood gossip and personal predilection. Thus these vaunted 'socialized tribunals' sometimes become themselves a source of delinquent and criminal careers as they adjudge individuals who are innocent of proven wrong to a depraved offender's status through an adminis trative determination ofrsomething they know vaguely as anti-social conduct. The practices described by Tappan have become so flagrant that recently the Supreme Court handed down a 57 momentous decision"^ to grant juveniles some of the "rights" of criminal justice. Heretofore, it had been considered that the Juvenile Court system with its therapeutically-oriented program protected youth from the harsh procedures of criminal lav;. To summarize up to this point, there is an increasing awareness that assignment to a deviant status, whether it be that of criminal, delinquent, mental patient, physically handicapped, or mentally retarded, is not a simple matter, based solely upon the behavior or 56 Paul W. Tappan, "Who Is the Criminal?" Marvin E. Wolfgang, Leonard Savitz, Norman Johnston (eds.), The Sociology of Crime and Delinquency (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 19&2), pp. 28-34, p. 31. ^Gault v. United States, May 1967. 158 F r \ characteristics of deviant individuals. ° It has been shown that social reaction to the same type of norm violation often varies, and thus must be considered problematic and investigated. The studies presented thus far have converged in two basic types of evidence. Findings of the first kind indicate that although a large proportion of the population violates important norms, at one time or another, for most, this does not result in their being labeled as deviants. The second type of evidence shows that persons may become stigmatized as deviants for reasons largely independent of their own 59 behavior. ' A third point made by advocates of the new approach is that, typically, a small portion of behavior is abstracted and used to define the person as a whole. Erikson, among others, notes the selective attention to, and progressive magnification of, a small part of the subject's total behavior. The category of "bastard" is, of course, an outstanding example of ascribed deviant status, conferred upon individuals, wholly independent of their own behavior. 59 y'These two types of evidence conform roughly to the two cells of Becker's well-known cross-classification: (1) the secret deviant cell , and (2) the falsely accused. Becker, Outsiders, op. cit., p. 20. 159 When a community acts to control the behavior of one of its members, it is engaged in a very intricate process of selection. After all, even the worst miscreant in society conforms most of the time.... Thus it happens that a moment of deviation may become the measure of a person’s position in society. He may be jailed or hospitalized, certified as a full-time deviant, despite the fact that only a fraction of his behavior was in any way unusual or dangerous. The community has taken note of a few scattered particles of behavior and has decided £hat they reflect what kind of person he ’really' is. In Goffman's terms, "the nature of the patient's nature is redefined." The past history of the mental patient is analyzed in terms of the developing pathology. Seemingly normal conduct is seen as a mask or shield for the essential sickness behind it. The over-all categoriza tion, such as schizophrenia or psychopathic personality provides a new view of the patient's "essential" character.^ Protest on the part of the patient is / I /-v Erikson, ojd. cit., p. 11. Ai Goffman, Asylums, op. cit., p. 375* For a highly enlightening analysis of the process in general, whereby one's entire past is reinterpreted upon conversion to a new Weltanschauung, see Peter Berger, Invitation to Sociology, op. cit.. Ch. 3, "Excursus: Alternation and Biography (Or: How to Acquire a Prefabricated Past.)." For a discussion of "essences" and reification in clinical psychology, see Salvatore Russo, clinical psychologist, "Clinical Psychology as the Treatment of Symptoms," Etc.: A Review of General Semantics, Vol XIV (Winter, 195&-57), pp. 119-126. 160 called "denial,” and his story is easily "discredited." An analogous procedure is discussed by Garfinkel in his discussion of the "degradation" of officially recognized criminals.^ The new characterization takes on the elements of a master status, according to Becker. He compares the status of deviants to the status of Negroes. Membership in the Negro race in America overrides most other status considerations. The status of deviant tends to become this kind of master status. Once relegated to this category, the person is so identified, whether or not it is relevant to the situation. Furthermore, other negative consequences tend to follow: Treating a person as though he were generally rather than specifically deviant produces a self-fulfilling prophecy. It sets in motion several mechanisms which conspire to shape the person in the image people have of him. ^ This leads to a fourth, and probably the most important, point stressed in the societal reaction theory. It refers to the contingencies or sequence of processes whereby an individual is transformed into a "deviant." Many writers have described the vicious spiraling of events ^Garfinkel, 0£. cit. •'Becker, Outsiders, op. cit.. p. 34. l6i that cuts the deviant off from conventional groups, isolates him, and eventually forces him into full-time association with others sharing a similar problem. Lemert was one of the first to develop a systematic theory of the career of deviants, emphasizing the crucial significance of the societal reaction in the increasing differentiation Z i of the person from primary to secondary deviance. The progressive cycle, downward and outward, for homosexuals and for drug addicts has been documented by Schur in Crimes Without Victims. In the following passage, he describes the path of the drug addict: The gradual immersion of most American addicts in a world of their own is inextricably connected with the general process by which they have been cast out of respectable society. The social definition of the addict as a criminal not only vitally influences his behavior but also significantly affects his self- image. Certainly the knowledge that one has become fully addicted must in itself have a profound impact on this self-image. At the same time it is note worthy that although the physician-addict and the subcultural-type addict are addicted in precisely the same physiological sense, their self-images are likely to be strikingly different. Both may recognize themselves as addicts, yet the physician is most unlikely to consider himself a criminal. On the other hand, the addict who is driven to underworld connections and to crime in order to support his habit cannot help but begin to feel that he is an enemy of society (or at least .that society is his enemy). A self-fulfilling prophecy cycle is set in motion from which it is very difficult for such an addict to extricate himself. He is aware that ^^Edwin M. Lemert, Social Pathology (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1951). 162 respectable people view him as a criminal, and he sees that he is beginning to act like one. Increas ingly he must turn to the drug world for inter personal support as well as for drug supplies. As the need to finance his habit occupies more and more of his time and energy, and as other worlds (such as those of work, family, and so on) recede into the background or £§de away completely, addiction becomes a way of life. Schur presents data demonstrating the reciprocal relationship between public policy and three specific types of deviance: abortion, homosexuality, and drug addiction. Since the three are "crimes without victims," laws prohib iting such behavior can be considered to be attempts to 66 legislate morality for its own sake. Schur believes such legislation represents a type of unenforceable law, "an attempt to control by criminal law, the willing exchange of socially disapproved but widely demanded goods or services.The major effects of laws in these areas are to create secondary deviance, police corruption, and demoralization,^ 65 ^Schur, oj3. cit., p. 145- ^ Ibid.. p. 169. 6?Ibid.. p. 6. 6 $ Ibid., p. B. "Unrealistic criminal laws against such things as gambling, abortion, drinking and homosex uality are major causes of police frustration and assembly- line justice in the nation's courts, President Johnson's crime commission reported Sunday. State and local statutes against these and similar practices should be seriously reevaluated, the commission said, because they breed 163 The addict is unlikely to complain against his illicit provider, and hence the laws banning such transactions are highly unenforceable. As in the case of abortion, a powerful illegal traffic in the demanded commodity arises... The problem of drug addiction can be seen, then, as embodying— in perhaps even more extreme form— tendencies observed in the examples of abortion and homosexuality. The unenforceability of the law, the growth of a thriving and well-organized illicit traffic, the secondary deviance on the part of the offending individual, the development of criminal self-images, and the evolution of a^large-scale deviant subculture are all present. Most of the studies which emphasize the interactive process by which the subject is pushed ever further into the deviant underworld have implications for public policy, whether explicit or not. Schur suggests that sociologists should actively study and document the consequences of various criminal laws, make the informa tion available, and thus contribute to the future formula tion of laws. His investigation of drug addiction under British policy, for instance, makes it possible to compare and evaluate the effects of different governmental policies. cynicism and contempt for law enforcement at a time when just the opposite is needed." in The Los Angeles Times, May 8, 1967, p. 1. ^Schur, o£. cit.. p. 163. 164 This writer knows of no evidence, or common-sense argument, refuting the assertion that low-cost and legal provision of drugs (as in Britain) inevitably curtails illicit traffic. Conversely, it is clear that current American policy cannot achieve its stated aims.... The British data seem to indicate that certain aspects of addict behavior (notably addict-crime, involvement in trafficking, development of addict-subculture) cannot directly be attributed either to the effects of the drugs or to psychological characteristics of the individuals involved. Rather the presence or absence of such behavior appears to be determined largely by the nature of the societal reaction to the addict. As such, these features of a country’s addiction 'problem' are subject to intentional modification through changes in public policy. Other aspects of addict behavior (such as impairment of sexual and occupational functioning) seem to be primary and hence would almost always be incident to a state of addiction. The likelihood of nonproduc tivity by the addict does not ^however, imply any overtly anti-social behavior. When approached in the above manner, the analysis of societal reaction becomes, not simply a question of who labels whom when, but also a vital factor even in problems of etiology, for individual careers as well as for societies. The latter would pertain to questions regard ing variation in types of crime in different countries. For example, if Schur's data, assumptions, and conclusions are correct, then the existence of illicit traffic and 70 Edwin M. Schur, "Drug Addiction Under British Policy," in Becker, The Other Side, op. cit., pp. 67-83, p. 81. 165 organized crime in drugs and abortions in certain 71 countries can be traced to the laws of that society. Presumably, no amount of intensive study into the personal background of criminals would reveal this important causative factor. It should be emphasized again that the value of this approach is enhanced by virtue of the fact that it has been applied productively to various types of behavior. Important evidence regarding the effects of labeling on the career of the mentally ill comes from military psychiatrists. Glass reports that combat neurosis is often self-terminating if soldiers are kept with their units and given only the most superficial medical attention. On the other hand, those removed from their unit to a hospital, often became chronically impaired. Put in a neuropsy chiatric hospital, many soldiers accepted the idea that 72 they were mentally ill. This information appears to 71 Much earlier, Merton analyzed the "corrupt" political machine in terms of its providing illicit goods and services for which there was a demand. Merton suggested that such a functional analysis could make possible the deliberate enactment of social change, if desired; whereas, he believed, naive moral judgments and condemnation were doomed to failure. Merton 0£. cit., pp. 72-32. 72 Albert J. Glass, "Psychotherapy in the Combat Zone," in Symposium on Stress. (Washington, D. C.: Army Medical Service Graduate School, 1953) reported in Scheff, Sociometry. op. cit., pp. 442, 443; B. L. Bushard, "The 166 have modified current military psychiatric procedures. Current practice is to return the soldier to active duty 73 and to try to avoid the suggestion of mental illness. A new trend in psychotherapy is developing rapidly which attacks the concept of "mental illness." Advocates of this trend believe that application of the label results in the self-fulfilling prophecy. ...we advocate dispensing with the common psychiatric labels, such as neurosis and psychosis, which tend to categorize and stereotype people....Calling him psychotic or schizophrenic immediately places him in a mental illness category which separates him from most of us, the label thereby serving to compound his problem....Labeled with these anti-therapeutic terms, the patients did about what was expected of them.... Millions of dollars will continue to be spent to investigate the causes of a non-existent disease, U. S. Army’s Mental Hygiene Consultation Service," in Symposium on Preventive.and Social Psychiatry (Washington, D. C.: Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, 1957), pp. 431-443, reported in Scheff, Being Mentally 111, op. cit.. p. 152; Goffman, 0£. cit.. p. 356* ^"However, 70# of the men who see Dr. Price are returned to their line companies within a matter of days and that is the way Dr. Price thinks it should be. 'The farther a man is sent to the rear,' he explained, 'the greater the chance that his ultimate prognosis will be negative....The longer a man is under care, the greater the possibility that he will get the idea he is a mental case — which, of course, is not good.'" Los Angeles Times. July 30, 1967, Sec. F, p. 12. Dr. King G. Price, psychiatrist for the 3rd Marine Division. 167 mental illness, to find answers already graphically demonstrated in Building 206. Glasser and Mainord describe their therapeutic experiments as resulting in high rates in discharge of patients who had been confined to mental hospitals for many years. In their facilities, mental illness is denied. Therapy is looked upon as a method of teaching patients to handle their problems in living in a more responsible manner. Even psychiatrists who have not joined in the new radical trend, have spoken out on the dangers of accepting ^Stfilliam Glasser, Reality Therapy: A New Approach to Psychiatry (New Yorks Harper & Row, 1965), pp. 151 109, 116. Reality "therapy was used in Building 206, composed of four wards of the Veterans Administration Neuropsychiatric Hospital under the direction of Dr. G. L. Harrington. Dr. Glasser's work is at the Ventura School for Girls of the California Youth Authority. Dr. Mainord is a psychologist at Western State Hospital in Washington. W. A. Mainord, "A Therapy," Research Bulletin, Mental Health Research Institute, Ft. Steilacoom, Wash., (1062) 35-92, reported in Glasser, 0£. cit.. pp. 126-133. "...patients with much out-patient psychotherapy are going to be extremely difficult to reach in a short period of time; they usually have been successfully taught they are sick." p. 133* See also Thomas S. Szasz, The Myth of Mental Illness (New York: P. B. Hoeber, Inc., 19&1). Hans J. Eysenck, The Effects of Psychotherapy (New York: International Science Press, 1966. L. P. Ullmann and L. Krasner, Case Studies in Behavior Modification (New York: Holt, Rinehard and Winston, 1965). "Changing Behavior in the Psychiatric Ward," Trans-action. Sept./ Oct., 1964, pp. 13-20. 168 the role of mental patient once the subject is so defined and placed in an institution. We now know that a great deal of that behavior, the progressive deterioration aspect assumed then, was not a function of any inherent disease process but was due to the way in which the patient was allowed to live his life in the role and career of being a patient....We created pathology in the very act of trying to do something about it. We created illness in the very act of trying to heal it. 5 Realization that the deterioration of many mental patients is more a consequence of the role defined for them by society than of any disease process has resulted in changes in psychiatric concepts and beliefs along with modifications in policy. A record of the changing policies and practices is provided in a recent edition of the Statistical Bulletin: In the past twenty years new concepts of care for the mentally ill have been developed, based on a com munity-oriented system of various mental health services rather than on confinement in state mental institutions....Current thought among mental health authorities holds that, whenever possible, a patient should be treated in his home community on an out patient basis....The patient is not separated from his family and avoids the stigma associated with a 7*j "Edward Stainbrook, Chief of Psychiatry at Los Angeles County General Hospital, from transcript of television program "Conversations with a Psychiatrist," "The Past, Present, and Future of the Psychiatric Hospital," July 16, 1966. 169 nzl stay in a state mental institution.' In summary, evidence has been discussed which supports the thesis that societal reaction is an important factor which should be included in any comprehensive theory of deviance. Just as Sutherland’s work on the white-collar criminal pointed to an important gap and bias in criminological theory, the new perspective on deviance demonstrates an even larger gap. It is claimed that deviance cannot be understood by studying the offenders alone, that there are significant variables external to the deviants, which must be considered. The evidence has been classified into four categories which overlap somewhat. Studies of the first type demonstrate that a large proportion of the population engage in illegal and deviant behavior at one time or another, but that most of them are not labeled as deviants. Therefore, it is not the deviant behavior itself which necessarily determines who is a "deviant." The second kind of study shows that with regard to those who are labeled as deviants, factors other than their own behavior or traits may play a decisive role in their being ^ Statistical Bulletin, Vol. 4S (July, 1967, Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., One Madison Ave., New York), pp. S, 9« 170 so labeled. The third point is that a small portion of the offender's total behavior may be selectively per ceived, magnified, and used as the basis for a total identification. Fourth, and probably most important, are studies describing the process whereby negative social reaction, contrary to intention, often pushes offenders ever deeper into criminal subcultures and secondary deviance. The self-fulfilling prophecy takes effect, and the subject becomes what he is called. Evidence of this type has important implications, and in some cases, has been influential in effecting changes in policy and practice. The present study can probably best be classified under a fifth category. The processes involved are the furthest removed from the offenders— they concern the very definition and conceptions of deviance. Whereas all of the studies examined thus far have investigated the differential effects of societal reaction upon those who are labeled as deviants or those who escape the label, evidence in this fifth category is concerned only with the definers and their judgments. As pointed out by Gibbs, the failure to locate any common characteristics inherently pathological in all deviants or any acts intrinsically injurious to all societies forces us to examine and account for the 171 variation in the definitions of what and who is considered deviant. One aspect of this would involve the different ideologies or beliefs regarding deviance by various groups across time and space. Whether a deviant is judged to be a witch and burned at the stake, possessed of demons and thrown into a dungeon, a criminal and imprisoned, psychoneurotic and given great amounts of understanding and solicitous care, or "crazy*' and subjected to a brutal, harsh give-and-take therapy, ^ depends, at least, as much upon the place, 77W. A. Mainord describes his experimental therapy program as successful and as very rough and harsh on the hospital patients. Patients are told that they are "crazy" not mentally sick; that is, that they have been making crazy choices because it is easier that way, rather than choosing to act responsibly. In Glasser, 0£. cit.. p. 129. The practice of "attack therapy" appears to be increasing. Its use at Synanon by drug addicts has received considerable publicity, see Rita Volkman and Donald R. Cressey, "Differential Association and the Rehabilitation of Drug Addicts," The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. LXIX (Sept., 1963), pp. 129-142. Peter Collier, "The House of Synanon," Ramparts, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Oct., 1967), pp. 47-54. Despite this trend in psycho therapy, the "mental illness" view is still prevalent: "According to the present dynamic-psychiatric view, virtually every human event— from personal unhappiness and marital infidelity at one end of the spectrum to political misbehavior and deviant moral conviction at the other— is regarded as a facet of the problem of mental illness." Szasz, The Myth of Mental Illness, op. cit., p. 71. 172 time, agency, and current conceptions as it does upon the behavior of the subject. The following section, then, will present evidence of the fifth type. We will look at variations in ideol ogies regarding deviance by era, society, length of education, and profession. The material selected for this section, especially the studies reported after some intro ductory material, includes references to psychotherapeutic and legal viewpoints and controversies. These data will furnish some background for the next chapter which is devoted to a theoretical rationale regarding the ideolog ical responses expected from graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthropology. However, whereas the next chapter is mainly concerned with relationships which can be expected on theoretical grounds, the material in this section, as well as much of the data in this chapter, points out current public issues and pragmatic problems of considerable concern to our society. We were not able to find any empirical studies including samples of anthropologists. However, the cross- cultural data which will be presented represents the type of material with which anthropologists would be familiar and which presumably influences their beliefs. Further more, anthropologists have been foremost among those contributing to the sociocultural relativistic frame of 173 reference. Thus, although little mention has been made of the anthropological viewpoint, implicitly it has received the greatest attention. A Fifth Type of Evidence: Ideologies Regarding Deviance Cohen has suggested that the migration of certain acts from one deviant category to another, e.g., from "crime'' to "mental illness," represents one of the major cultural movements of the past 50 years or so. He decries the lack of investigation and documentation of such changes. Several of his recommendations were taken into consideration in the formulation of the present study. Briefly, he suggests the need for gathering data on: (1) subtle differences between roles which come to be considered as "deviant" and those merely "disvalued," (2) variability as reflected in public controversy over the social definition of certain acts, and over conflicting procedures for dealing with those acts, (3) changes over time in the categorization of certain acts, (4) the social 7B and cultural determinants of such changes. Homosexuality, in certain of its forms, has been ^Cohen, 0£. cit.. pp. 36, 37. 174 positively valued in some cultures, as in ancient Greece. In Christian countries, it has generally been regarded as a vice in the past, but presently, in many quarters, the 79 homosexual is looked upon as a sick person. The Wolfenden Report, prepared for the British Parliament, concluded that homosexuality was not a disease, and recommended that it should no longer be treated as a fin criminal offense. There are others, Cohen adds, "who regard homosexuality as neither sin, vice, nor sickness, but just ’the way some people are' and essentially a Bl private matter.” At the present time, abortion and the use of marijuana are the subjects of debate and controversy in the United States, which may be an indication that these acts are being conceptualized in different categories of deviance by different categories of the population. Several states have recently enacted laws which make 79Ibid., p. 36. 30 The Wolfenden Report: Report of the Committee on Homosexual Offenses and Prostitution (New York: Lancer Books, 1964), p. 30, reported in Cohen, Ibid., p. 37. SlIbid., p. 37. 175 abortion legal under a greater number of circumstances than heretofore. It has been estimated that there are perhaps a million induced abortions in the United States every year. Abortion is legal in Japan, the Soviet Union, Scandanavian countries, and in several countries in S3 eastern Europe. ? Whether or not abortion is a criminal act, then, depends upon the state or country in which it is performed and the year. With regard to marijuana, there have been an in creasing number of professional statements to the effect £>l that smoking marijuana is relatively harmless. Legally, it is a felony in the United States. On the other hand, there have been an increasing number of professional 82 For an excellent account of consequences result ing from the criminalization of abortion, see Schur, op. cit., pp. 11-66, p. 12. ^Kingsley Davis, "Sexual Behavior" in Contemp orary Social Problems. Robert K. Merton and Robert A. Nisbet (eds.), (New Yorks Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1966, 2nd ed.), p. 333. gi "Marijuana use is regulated by federal and state laws which call for very severe penalties if even a small quantity of the drug is found in a person’s possession, despite the fact that marijuana appears to entail less danger to life than tobacco and no more than does alcohol." John A. Clausen, "Drug Addiction" in Contemporary Social Problems, ibid.. p. 199. 176 statements to the effect that smoking tobacco is harmful, and that it leads to a marked shortening of life expect- gc ancy. y Thus it is conceivable that there may be a reciprocal exchange of legal statuses for the smoking of marijuana and of tobacco. That possibility is not as strange as it may sound to ears habituated to hearing the opposite. The smoking of tobacco was at one time or another a crime punishable by death in Russia, Persia, Turkey, and parts of Germany. Clausen remarks: Tobacco use was regarded by those who made the laws as a certain road to moral depravity, much as some contemporary legislatorsggnd custodians of morality have regarded marijuana. Institutionalized conceptions control the very existence of certain categories of deviance. For example, Cohen points out that there were no juvenile delinquents prior to 1399. The "delinquent child," he says, was invented in 1399 when the first juvenile court was estab- 37 lished in Cook County, Illinois. Before that time the ^See, for example, Smoking and Health: Report of the Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service (Washington, D. C.: U. S. Govern- ment Printing Office, 1964) reported in Clausen, ibid., p. 199. g6Ibid.. p. 193. g7Ibid.. p. 31. 177 distinction between "crime" and "delinquency" did not exist. Children were either believed to be too immature to be held responsible for their acts, and thus not judged by any court at all, or else they were treated in the same manner as adult criminals. There were many young criminals, Cohen says, but there were no delinquent children.00 Just as certain deviant categories are invented, other deviant roles may cease to exist as socially recognized categories. Cohen cites as an example the close-to-extinct case of heretics. Such for example is 'heretic,1 one who deliberately upholds a doctrine at variance with that of his church. Our world is full of people who fit this criterion, but rarely do we label them heretics, or see heretics when we look at them, or feel toward them the special abhorrence supposedly reserved for heretics. As a part of our mental equipment the categoryrtgheretic' is almost, although not altogether, extinct. * The two examples— the invention of the "delinquent" and the demise of the "heretic"— may reflect, among other 8gIbid., p. 31. ^ Ibid.. p. 32. "The Rt. Rev. James A. Pike Tuesday withdrew his demand for a heresy trial after the Episcopal Church voted to change canon law and make heresy, as a church crime virtually impossible to estab lish. ...Pike's repudiation of such traditional doctrines as the Trinity and the virgin birth of Jesus precipitated the controversy." In The Los Angeles Times. Sept. 27, 1967, p. 3. 173 things, changing power differentials. It suggests the 90 ability of the mental health movement to legitimate its categories and conceptions effectively and the diminishing 91 capacity of the church to do so. Several writers have, in fact, noted that the mental health movement seems to have moved into the power vacuum created by the loss of authority of the church. In the realm of value, or the ideal, the revolution is hardly well begun. Save for the obvious passing of the dominance of the one institution, the church, which formerly exerted almost undisputed sway in defining both what is and what ought to be the order of goods, nothing is clear....Into this new power vacuum the mental health movement has been drawn.... With one foot in humanism and the other in science, 90 7 Lemert attributes the initiation of the juve nile court system to the efforts of the mental hygiene movement. Edwin M. Lemert, "Juvenile Justice— Quest and Reality," Trans-Action, (Vol. 4, No. 3 (July/August, 1967), pp. 30-40, p. 31• See also Arthur E. Fink, Everett E. Wilson, Merrill B. Conover, The Field of Social Work (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1955)» Ch. 11. The Correctional Services, pp. 333-393. 91 The question of which groups have sufficient power to legitimate their views is a central issue of paramount importance for the sociology of knowledge, for the value conflict theory of social problems, and for the societal reaction theory of deviance. See Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann, "Sociology of Religion and Sociology of Knowledge," Sociology and Social Research, Vol. 47» No. 4 (July, 1963) t pp. 417-427. IS. Fuller, "Morals and the Criminal Law," 0£. cit. A. Turk, op. cit. Becker, Outsiders, op. cit., p. 17. 179 it seeks to perform, and to a degree does perform, many if not most of the functions of the relinquish ing institutions— plus, perhaps, some others.92 Although the mental health movement has had remarkable success in instilling and legitimating its views regarding normality and deviance in the United States,^ and to a lesser degree in the Western world, the same does not apply to other areas of the world. The multiplicity of beliefs, manifested through time in the Western world, exists at the present time, across space, among the various cultures of the world. This divergence poses serious problems for mental health professionals working for world health organizations. Such problems are investigated and documented by 94 Soddy in Cross-Cultural Studies in Mental Health. The 92 John R. Seeley, The Americanization of the Un conscious (New York: International Science tress, 1967), p. $4. ’ ’ ’ During cultural revolutions the dominant ideolo gists provide the rationalization for normalization. Psychology (broadly defined) is now, as before; a focal point of ideological controversy. Modern psychodynamic theories...share with medieval theology (the psychology of that era) the following characteristics..." Joe K. Adams, clinical psychologist, The Psychedelic Review, Vol. I., No. 2 (Pall 1963), pp. 121-144, p. 136. K7 Davis, op. cit. Q1 ^ .John R. Seeley, The Americanization of the Un conscious, op. cit., implicit in the title of the book. 94 ^ Kenneth Soddy, Cross-Cultural Studies in Mental Health (Chicago: Quadrangle kooks, 1961). studies represent an inquiry into the compatibility of contemporary mental health concepts with various religions and ideologies including Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Confucianism, Islam, Judaism, Russian Marxism, and some primitive animistic cultures. As might be expected, the views of right and wrong, of good and bad behavior, of vices and virtues, and of ideals of some of these ideologies seriously conflict with current mental health beliefs. ... it has been the apparent aim to bring to the people concerned a standard acceptable in the culture in which the workers themselves have been trained...In some countries the notion of mental health provokes such resistance that it is either not understood, or even conceived in terms of its opposite, as public attitudes often demonstrate.' Values of mental health professionals differ, for example, from certain religious values such as the Taoist desire for non-attachment and withdrawal; Confucianist emphasis on subduing of self in favor of strict adherence to prescribed systems of relationships and rites; Hindu teaching to abandon all desires and cravings; and the Eastern religious stress on acceptance of circumstances 97 as they are.'' 9^Ibid.. p. 60. 96Ibid.. pp. 64, 65. idi Views of professionals concerning psychiatric symptoms also conflict with certain religious practices. Thus, Franz Alexander regards Hindu mysticism as a form of artificial catatonic behavior. The usual psychiatric view of religious ecstatic experience is to place it in the gg order of hallucination.^ The general conclusion of the study is that the specific positions that people take toward mental abnorm ality are determined very largely by cultural and religious attitudes. For the special case of mental health pro fessionals, Soddy notes that in Western psychiatry, psychiatric symptoms have been interpreted in various frames of reference which have changed throughout history. Four successive perspectives are listed: transcendental- 99 metaphysical, experiential, social, and psychobiological. 7 Perhaps of more vital concern is the degree of congruence of conceptions within a single country at a specific time. Documentation of changing and diverse beliefs demonstrates that the meaning resides in the definition rather than in the act since similar acts are interpreted differently. However, the pragmatic "ibid.. p. 102. " ibid.. pp. 162, 163 132 consequences of inter-societal variation may be of small import for citizens of a particular nation. What is of consequence for them is the degree of intra-societal consensus or dissensus within their own nation. Several studies have attempted to determine how the public in the United States defines cases of deviant behavior and what it recommends as treatment. Fortunately, a few of these investigations include comparisons with samples of lawyers or psychotherapists. As mentioned earlier, these data will provide some background for the next chapter. In one survey of this kind, taken in 1950, a cross-sectional sample of 3971 Louisville residents 13 years of age and over was interviewed.^^ The sample included lawyers, doctors, teachers, and clergymen. Each of the professional groups contained between 100 and 135 subjects. Questions regarding mental illness, juvenile delinquency, and sex criminals were asked. Some major conclusions drawn by the author were as follows: ^\julian L. Woodward, "Changing Ideas on Mental Illness and Its Treatment," in A. Rose (ed.), Mental Health and Mental Disorder, op. cit.. pp. 432-500, p. 433. Reprinted from American Sociological Review. 16 (August, 1951), pp. 443-454. 183 1. A substantial number of respondents suggested some form of 'scientific' treatment, usually referral to psychiatrist or physician. 2. Somewhat overtopping the 'scientific' group was a group favoring what might be called a 'common- sense humanitarian' (but not scientific) approach. 3. There is still a gross failure, to recognize serious mental symptoms... 4. There is considerable loss of faith in repressive and punitive techniques, especially in dealing with juveniles.... 5. The lawyers represent a minor stronghold of reaction against psychiatry and against modern ideas of how to treat juvenile delinquency. Regarding the comparisons between responses of doctors, lawyers, teachers, and clergymen: The only clear-cut, over-all generalization that emerges after an examination of the Table is that the lawyers are the most conservative and, from the mental hygienist's point of view, the least enlight ened group. Lawyers are more likely to resort to repressive measures in dealing with juvenile delinquency and mental illness (there was not enough space to include all the evidence on this point), they show considerably less faith in psychiatry than the other professional groups, and they are not much Ibid., pp. 484-487. The conclusions are exact quotations, but are not listed and numbered in this manner by Woodward. 102Ibid.. pp. 499-500. 184 better informed on local facilities for care of mental patients than the population as a whole (again the evidence is omitted). Since the lawyers as a group occupy a position of great power in our govern mental structure, their opinions about psychiatry and the need for treatment facilities are of considerable importance. Neither their education nor their present contacts seem to be functioning^adequately to keep them up-to-date on current trends. Woodward states that the above judgments are made from the point of view of the mental hygienist which he apparently equates with the "scientific" viewpoint. Furthermore, it is "assumed" that the lawyers are not being kept up-to-date by their contacts or education on current trends. The latter assumption is questionable. Many lawyers do have contact with psychiatric procedures. There is evidence that some hold contrary views, despite the contact, because their perspective is different. Such an interpretation is supported by Mueller and Murphy's report. They analyze some of the conflicting assumptions and premises of lawyers and psychiatric workers which lead to problems in communication between the two professions.^^ The problems, they say, are not simply disputes over 103Ibid., p. 499. ^^Edward E. Mueller and Philip J. Murphy, "Communication Problems: Social Workers and Lawyers," Social Work. Vol. 10, No. 2 (April 1965), pp. 97-103. 185 semantics, but involve differences in goals, approach, attitudes, timing, and conflict of interests. It is suggested that often there is a lack of understanding of 105 the other person’s professional functions. Moreover, there appears to be some justification for skepticism on the part of lawyers regarding the effectiveness of mental health programs and treatment. In a report written for the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement, Lemert documents the general failure of juvenile delinquency prevention programs. An important rationale of state intervention is the faith that delinquency can be prevented and that the court can prevent it. The viability of this idea can be traced to a repressive Puritan psychology rein forced by the propaganda of the mental hygiene move ment of the early twentieth century, which helped produce child guidance clinics, school social work, and juvenile courts.... As yet, nothing has been isolated and shown to be a sure indicator of delinquency, nor is it likely that anything will be. Furthermore, things called ’’delinquency tendencies” often are found on close inspection to correspond not to any particularbdavlor, 105Ibid., p. 102. ^^Edwin M. Lemert, "Juvenile Justice— Quest and Reality,” Trans-Action (July/August 1967), pp. 30-40. This article was drawn from his longer report published by the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice for which he served as a con sultant on juvenile delinquency, p. 40. 186 but rather to arbitrary definitions by school author ities, parents, and police. The ideal of treatment found its way into juvenile court philosophy from social work and psychiatry.... A premise of therapeutic treatment of children is that scientific knowledge and techniques make possible specific solutions to problems. The evidence, thus far, fails to show that these "scientific" programs have been successful in their aims. The failure of the humanitarian-motivated, therapeutically- oriented juvenile court system presumably contributed to the recent Supreme Court decision to grant juveniles some of the rights of criminal justice and to assure them of 109 the presence of defense lawyers. With regard to "mental illness," the effectiveness of psychotherapy is also still in doubt. After assessing the results of nineteen studies reported in the litera ture, covering over seven thousand cases^^ plus several additional studies on children, Eysenck states the follow ing conclusions: 107Ibid.. p. 31. 1QgIbid.. p. 33. 1Q9Ibid.. pp. 38-40. ^^Hans J. Eysenck, The Effects of Psychotherapy. (New York: International Science Press, 1966), p. 29. 187 With the single exception of the psychotherapeutic methods based on learning theory, results of pub lished research with military and civilian neurotics, and with both adults and children, suggest that the therapeutic effects of psychotherapy are small or non-existent, and do not in any demonstrable way add to the non-specific effects of routine medical treatment, or to such events as occur in the patients' everyday experience. In addition to assuming that failure to recommend psychiatric treatment implies lack of knowledge concerning such treatment and its efficacy, Woodward also states: The myth that most hospitals for the mentally ill treat their patients very badly is also rejected by a plurality... 2 Woodward's taken-for-granted assumptions may reflect his reference group standpoint rather than empirical evidence. Sulzer documents a truly shocking case regarding the deprivation of civil rights of persons who are committed to psychiatric hospitals. He claims that criminals have considerably more rights and safe guards than do the mentally ill, and he supports his 113 assertion with a lengthy documentation. Involuntary 11:LIbid.. pp. 39-40. 112 Woodward, o£. cit., p. 484. 113 ^Edward S. Sulzer, "Involuntary Institutional ization: Some Legal, Ethical, and Social Implications," Etc.: A Review of General Semantics, Vol. XXIII, (Sept. 1966), pp. 331-345, p. 334. 188 commitment, rather than being based on scientifically- established consensual procedures, is instead a vague, slipshod affair. The "offense" is undesirable or strange behavior which does not conform to the proper standards. Besides questionable commitment procedures, there are other problems. Only eight states have statutory pro visions permitting a psychiatric patient to communicate with his attorney. In not a single state in the union "does the patient have an effective right to object if the staff of the institute wants him to submit to brain surgery, electroconvulsive therapy, insulin coma therapy, 115 or psychotherapy." y With regard to damage or deformity as a result of negligence during treatment, the American Bar Foundation states: No psychiatric patient has ever won a case of negligence against a physician because of electro- convulsive therapy or psychosurgery despite the frequent occurrence of death and injury. Only eleven states require that a patient be 117 examined periodically by the institution staff. 1 U Ibid., p. 340. 115Ibid., pp. 340, 341. ll6Ibid., p. 342. 117Ibid., p. 342. 189 Therefore, arranging to be released may sometimes be difficult since neither the offense nor the sentence is 118 specific or determinate, as it is in criminal law. Inadequate legal provisions, lack of social and financial support, are implicated as well as psychiatric procedures. Nevertheless, it is possible that professional knowledge of and contact with these conditions contribute to the "reactionary" views of lawyers toward mental health 11Q facilities. Further evidence regarding differing ideologies is 118Ibid., p. 343. 11 q vA partial list of 31 rights which are officially abridged when a person is declared mentally incompetent is given by Scheff, Being Mentally 111, op. cit.. pp. 188-89. "The issues underlying the concept of criminal responsibility [or mentally ill] are neither psychological nor scientific. They are moral, legal, and political.” Ronald Leifer, psychiatrist, "The Concept of Criminal Responsibility." Etc.: A Review of General Semantics. Vol. XXIV, (June, 1967}, pp. 1?7-190, p. 19O. ’ ‘ Most mental hospitals now hold at least 25 to 50 per cent more patients than they were designed to accommodate. The American Hospital Association reported that in 1953 the average daily cost of hospital care was $21.09. The average daily cost of mental hospital care was $2.83 per patient. Conditions are frequently unsanitary and person ally degrading. Patients are quartered in hallways and corridors, sit on the floors for lack of adequate furni ture, and occasionally are even without clothing." Paul B, Horton and Gerald R. Leslie (eds.), The Sociology of Social Problems, (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, T§65)* p. 552. E. Goffman, Asylums, op. cit. Albert Deutsch, The Shame of the States (New York: Harcourt, Brace & tio,, Inc., 1948;• 190 presented by Dohrenwend and Chin-Shong. Their article surveys and analyzes the literature on tolerance of 1 po deviance. Two conflicting empirical generalizations had emerged which seemed paradoxical. A considerable amount of data has accumulated which indicates that in attitudes toward non-conformity, high-status leaders and the well- 121 educated are most tolerant of deviance. On the other hand, the evidence seems just as compelling that there is greater tolerance in the lower classes of the kinds of 122 deviance involved in mental disorder. 120 Bruce P. Dohrenwend and Edwin Chin-Shong, •'Social Status and Attitudes Toward Psychological Disorder: The Problem of Tolerance of Deviance," American Sociologi cal Review. Vol. 32, No. 3 (June 1967), pp. 417-433. 121 Dohrenwend and Chin-Shong list the following: Stouffer, Communism, Conformity, and Civil Liberties, op. cit.; Lipset, Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics, op. cit.; H. J. Eysenck, The Psychology of Politics (London: Routledge and Kegan- Paul, 1954); Melvin L. Kohn, "Social Class and Parent-Child Relation ships: An Interpretation," American Journal of Sociology, LXVIII (January, 1963), pp. 471-480. 122 Dohrenwend and Chin-Shong list the following: Hollingshead and Redlich, Social Class and Mental Illness, op cit., pp. 172-173; Howard Freeman and Ozzie G. Simmons, The Mental Patient Comes Home (New York: Wiley, 1963); Shirley A. Star, The Public's Ideas About Mental Illness (National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago, 1955), mimeographed; Elaine Cumming and John Cumming, Closed Ranks (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 195771 191 Scrutiny of the available data led Dohrenwend and Chin-Shong to conclude that the appearance of greater tolerance of "pathological" behavior in low-status groups is an artifact of viewing their attitudes within a high- status frame of reference. Rather than being more tolerant of "pathological" behavior, the data support the notion that the lower classes simply do not define many things as mental disorder. Dohrenwend and Chin-Shong define the type of deviance they are concerned with in their study in the following manner: We are concerned with the kinds of deviance involved in what the 1952 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association defines as mental disorders, especially those that may be of psychogenic origin....In short, we are concerned with certain kinds of behavior which depart from psychia tric norms in such a wav as to be clinically .judged harmful to the individual displaying it or to others in social relationships....Thus the behaviors with whicn we are concerned are those officially defined by the mental health professions as deviant and within their jurisdiction. ^ Five separate studies of different populations were compared. All of the studies surveyed judgments regarding the same material: six fictitious case ■^Dohrenwend and Chin-Shong, 0£. cit., p. 420. 192 descriptions of mental disorder. ^2^ A sample of thirty- four psychiatrists, almost unanimously, saw all six case descriptions as illustrations of different types of mental disorder. The question is how widely the views and norms of the psychiatrists are shared. Star found in 1950 that, of the six case descriptions, only one, the paranoiac, was seen as mentally ill by the majority of a nationwide sample of adults in the United States. Similar results were obtained a year later by the Cummings. Three studies 10 to 15 years later got rather different results. Respondents in the studies in the 1960's were far more likely to see the cases as mentally ill.12' * Nevertheless, there were still important differences in the way psychia trists and the public viewed these cases. Therefore, 1 P L . ^Star, 0£. cit.; Cumming and Cumming, 0£. cit. { Paul V. Kemkau and Guido M. Crocetti, "An Urban Popula tion's Opinion and Knowledge about Mental Illness," American Journal of Psychiatry, lid (February, 1962), pp. 692-700; Jon K. Meyer, "Attitudes Towards Mental Illness in a Maryland Community," Public Health Reports. 79 (September, 1964), pp. 769-772; the fifth consists of their own research with community leaders and with a probability sample of Jewish, Irish, Negro and Puerto Rican adult residents of Washington Heights in New York City. 125 'Dohrenwend and Chin-Shong, ibid.. pp. 420, 421. 193 Dohrenwend and Chin-Shong believe the historical shift is more one of superficial labeling than of conviction. In the Dohrenwend-Chin-Shong study, the tendency of the public was to judge the alcoholic and juvenile character disorder as serious problems but not mentally ill, and to judge the simple schizophrenic, anxiety neurotic, and compulsive phobic as mentally ill but not serious problems. Only the case of the paranoiac was judged to be both serious and mental illness by a majority of the respondents. The description of the paranoid case, it should be noted, mentioned not only suspicion and distrust, but that the man had beaten up strangers^ hit and threatened to kill his wife. The comparison by ethnic groups revealed that Puerto Ricans, and then Negroes, departed most from the psychiatric frame of reference, showing the lowest tendencies to regard the disorders as serious. These two ethnic groups tended to judge the seriousness of the cases in terms of whether or not others were threatened. To a lesser degree, this appeared to be the criterion for most of the public, whereas the psychiatrists judged the cases largely by the seriousness of the intrapsychic pathology. The tendency to assess seriousness in terms of possible 194 threat to others was negatively related to degree of education. Leaders and the highly educated were closest 127 in views to those of the psychiatrist. ' The greatest convergence between the psychiatric viewpoint and the community frame of reference for defining seriously deviant behavior was with regard to a fictitious paranoid case. Dohrenwend and Chin-Shong then made a separate analysis of the tolerance of only those who agreed 1PR that the paranoid case describes serious mental illness. Tolerance was measured by responses to a social distance scale with respect to a hypothetical ex-mental-hospital- patient. Expressed social distance was inversely related to education and ethnic group. By this measure, leaders, the highly-educated, and the more advantaged ethnic 129 groups (Jewish and Irish) appeared to be more tolerant. There was, however, one paradoxical finding. Both the least educated and the psychiatrists recommended hospital ization for the paranoid case; whereas, leaders and the 127Ibid., p. 427 128Ibid., p. 427 129lbid., P. 430 195 highly-educated recommended out-patient help from a mental health professional. Hospitalization, implying isolation of the person from family and community, is considered a measure of extreme intolerance of deviance on the part of the lower- educated. Dohrenwend and Chin-Shong support this inter pretation with the corollary data of greater social 1 ^1 distance expressed by the less educated. The recommendation for hospitalization by psychiatrists, on the other hand, is considered a function of specialized psychiatric knowledge. No data are given for psychiatrists on the social distance scale. The recommendation for outpatient treatment by the higher-status groups is interpreted as a relatively tolerant attitude. However, since it differs from the psychiatric recommendation, the authors suggest that the higher-status groups may be accepting the humanistic.message of the mental health professions, but that this does not imply any psychiatric understanding of psychopathology. It is possible that while theories of psycho pathology are less than clear, the humanistic 13°Ibid., p. 428. 1^1Ibid., p. 428. message of the mental health professions has resonated with liberal political and social views. Such views are especially dominant among the highly educated in our society. Though compatible with aspects of the message of the mental health pro fessions, however, these liberal attitudes confer .no special psychiatric understanding of psychopathology. It may well be that not only our lower-status respondents, but most of our higher-status ones as well, do not yiew the cases from a psychiatric frame of reference. ' Several points should be made concerning the relevance of the Dohrenwend-Chin-Shong and the Woodward studies for the present investigation. Our study, it may be remembered, is investigating the effect of academic specialization in clinical psychology, law, and anthro pology upon ideologies toward deviance. First, with regard to substantive issues, the results of their studies show that different groups perceive, interpret, and judge the same case descriptions of deviant behavior in divergent ways. Those making the assessment varied in profession, education, ethnicity, and leader-non-leader status. These variables all suggest different learning and life experiences. Lawyers, psychiatrists, and the general public, as well as the higher as opposed to the less educated, differed in their judgments regarding treatment, diagnosis, and seriousness. Furthermore, it 197 appears that the groups employed different criteria as a basis for their evaluations. The differences seem to be logically related to the concerns, functions, and training or experience of the groups. Judgments of mental illness made by psychiatrists have been shown to be based on the nature and severity of the intrapsychic pathology described. Other respondents appear to have judged the seriousness of the cases in terms of whether or not the behavior threatens others. The tendency to give more weight to the latter criterion was most pronounced for the most disadvantaged groups. Life problems for the lowest-status groups are so severe that they can hardly be concerned with minor compulsive habits or anxieties. Furthermore, it is assumed that they have not ,,learned, , to perceive delinquency and alcoholism as mental illness. The above data support the conceptual framework and interpretation given in Mercer's study of the mentally retarded. She suggested that those groups departing most in values, norms, and characteristics from those of dominant and official groups are least likely to hold similar definitions. Although "pathological" behavior may occur in all segments of society, it may not be perceived as abnormal in lower-status groups. What is often considered "denial" by clinicians may, in fact, be 193 a function of different definitions, meanings, and beliefs. Behavior which is accepted in one social sphere may be differently defined and sanctioned in other social locations. A second point concerns methodological considera tions. The studies reported demonstrate that the assump tion that a particular response means the same thing for individuals with different reference groups, may lead to serious misunderstandings and may account for what appear to be anomalous findings. Despite difficulties, an effort must be made to analyze responses in relation to the frame of reference of the subject*s own reference group. Thus, the fact that both psychiatrists and low-status groups, in contrast to high-status groups, recommended hospital ization for the paranoid case would seem anomalous since psychiatric and low-status group responses differed in almost all other respects. Although recommendation for hospitalization is used as a measure of extreme intoler ance, it was assumed that it means something else for psychiatrists. Psychiatrists, it seems, were automatically redeemed (from the imputation of extreme intolerance) in this case, by virtue of their professional status. Lawyers were not as fortunate in the Woodward study because their responses were interpreted from a perspec tive contrary to their own. An attempt to analyze 199 lawyers* responses from a legal frame of reference might have been more productive than use of a simple "reaction ary vs. scientific" categorization. At any rate, it is obvious that length of educa tion as a variable may produce anomalous results unless further specified by type of education. There are differ ent perspectives among the highly educated which affect their view of deviance as well as of other matters. Lawyers, psychotherapists, and other highly educated persons manifested three separate orientations in the studies reported here. A final point concerns the issue of labeling and potential consequences thereof. Although an increasing number of psychotherapists have voiced the opinion that the mental-illness, medical model is hindering progress and understanding in this area, others have justified it in terms of humanitarian considerations. In fact, the question of whether so-called behavioral disorders— or, as I prefer to call thai, problems in living— should be regarded as and called ’illnesses,' has always been discussed as though it constituted a problem in ethics or power politics.... We have thus come to regard phobias, delinquencies, divorce, homocide, addiction, and so on almost ■^Szasz, The Myth of Mental Illness, op. cit.. p. 30. 200 without limit as psychiatric illness. This is a colossal and costly mistake....Immediately, the objection might be raised that this is not a mistake: Does it not benefit addicts, homosexuals, or so-called criminals that they are regarded as •sick?'134 Aside from logical and scientific demurrers, there is considerable doubt as to whether the "mental illness" label does, in fact, elicit a more compassionate response. The Dohrenwend-Chin-Shong data show that lower-status groups do not define many things as mental disorder, and therefore, are more tolerant or accepting of a great variety of behaviors. However, when the "mental patient" label was attached to case descriptions, lower-status groups then did express social distance and intolerance. Phillips also found that with hypothetical cases, fictitious persons showing identical behavior were more likely to be rejected on a social distance scale if they were said to be receiving help from a psychiatrist than if they were said to be receiving help from a physician or clergyman, or were not getting professional help. A series of researches by Nunnally, studying popular conceptions of mental illness, also resulted in 134Ibid.. p. 43. ' 43^Derek L. Phillips, "Rejection: A Possible Consequence of Seeking Help for Mental Disorders," American Sociological Review. 28 (December, 1963), pp. 963-972, quoted in Dohrenwend-Chin-Shong, 0£. cit., p.422. 201 the finding that the stigma of mental illness is pervasive; unfavorable attitudes are held by most in our culture, •j including physicians. Thus, actual consequences may diverge considerably from the humanistic intentions with regard to the mental illness label. A partial explanation for the divergence may be related to the different meanings and beliefs associated with "mental illness" by therapists and the public. We are,Mother words, in a period of transition in which the modern definition of mental illness has been rather widely disseminated without anything like equal acceptance of the point of view about the nature of mental illness and about the roots of human personality and behavior which lies back of this usage of the term. It is a definition which people simply cannot work with in practice within the context of-their fundamental beliefs about human behavior. ^ The above quotation seems to be an accurate assessment concerning the wide gap between the Weltan- schauungen of the public and of psychotherapists. Unfortunately, the problem is far more complex and serious than a gap in education. It is not simply a matter of further educating the public to a proper understanding -i q /1 Jim C. Nunnally, Jr., Popular Conceptions of Mental Health (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1961), p. 215. 137 -"Star, 0£. cit., quoted in Dohrenwend-Chin- Shong, 0£. cit.. p. 432. 202 concerning the fundamentals of human behavior. There is no agreement today, among professionals, as to the proper understanding of human behavior. Instead, the viewpoints appear to differ and to be intimately related to the particular experience of the various professions. On so fundamental a question as "what is normal and what is abnormal," dissensus prevails. In their research on adolescents in a psychiatric ward, Offer and Sabshin encountered difficult problems in attempting to - I - 3 g distinguish between normal and abnormal behavior. Consequently they investigated and published a book reviewing, analyzing, and classifying the numerous approaches to the concept of normality in the behavioral sciences alone. They found that conceptualizations of normality differ considerably depending upon discipline no and upon functional perspective. The viewpoints of the following five disciplines were examined: medical- psychiatry, psychoanalysis, psychology, anthropology and ■^^Daniel Offer and Melvin Sabshin, Normality: Theoretical and Clinical Concepts of Mental Health (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1966), p. x. See also Anselm Strauss, Leonard Schatzman, Rue Bucher, Danuta Ehrlich, and Melvin Sabshin, Psychiatric Ideologies and Institu tions, (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964). 1-^0ffer and Sabshin, o£. cit., p. 111. 203 sociology, and the biological sciences. Offer and Sabshin believe it is necessary to bring into the open and tackle the problems implicit in the conflicting perspectives in order to make any further progress at this time. There is no question but that studies in the behav ioral and social sciences have been impeded by the conflicting perspectives and the enormity of the value-laden problems* To move toward a new definition of normality is thus not only a complex task for the current generation but also one requiring true inter-disciplinary cooperation. This task cannot be avoided if the social and behavioral sciences seriously intend to understand.and deal with the full range of human behavior. Summary Literature in the area of deviance which is considered relevant to this study was reviewed in this chapter. Issues currently being raised by advocates of the new perspective on deviance were discussed. Mainly these concern the alleged lack of attention to the role U0Ibid„ p. 166. 141Ibid.. p. 165, 166. 204 of social policy and societal reaction in the production and maintenance of deviance. Studies were presented which lend support to the societal reaction theory of deviance. An effort was made to present evidence covering a large variety of forms of deviance; included were crime, delinquency, mental illness, sexual deviance, drug addiction, physical handicap, and mental retardation. As suggested earlier, the value of any theory or proposition is assumed to * 1 1 l? increase as its scope or generality increases. The studies were roughly classified into five different types of evidence although they overlap some what. Studies of the first type demonstrate that a large proportion of the population engage in illegal and deviant behavior at one time or another, but that most are not labeled as deviants. The implication being that it is not the deviant behavior itself which necessarily determines who is a "deviant." The second kind of evidence shows that with regard to those who are labeled as deviants, factors other than their own behavior or characteristics may play a decisive role in their being so i/o "Put differently, the higher the informative value of a proposition, the greater is the variety of events for which it can account." Hans L. Zetterberg, On Theory and Verification in Sociology (Totowa, N. J.: The Bedminister Press, 1963)» p. 21. On this point, see Merton, op. cit., pp. 97-93. labeled. In a third category are studies which demonstrate that a small portion of the offender's total behavior may be selectively perceived, magnified, and used as the basis for a total identification. There is, in that case, reification of social role. A fourth type are sequence studies describing the process whereby negative social reaction often pushes offenders deeper into criminal sub cultures and secondary deviance and produces other unin tended dysfunctions. The present study is considered to fall into a fifth category. Studies of this type are furthest removed from the offenders. Evidence of this order is concerned only with the definers— especially with those who make and enforce the rules— and with the variation in their ideologies regarding deviance. The implication in evidence of this type is that who or what is labeled as deviant may depend as much upon the group which is formu lating the policy and the beliefs of that group as upon the behavior or traits of the offender. Along with the studies in the fifth category, several surveys were discussed which included samples of lawyers and psychotherapists. In these studies, lawyers and psychotherapists differed from each other, from other professional groups, and from groups with a low level of education, in judgments regarding deviance. The type of 206 judgments made appeared to reflect the concerns, profes sional training, and life experiences of the various groups. In several cases, however, the data were ambiguous and paradoxical until certain assumptions concerning group meanings were made. The manner in which meaning poses crucial problems with regard to substantive, methodolog ical, and policy issues was discussed. In the chapter which follows, an analysis will be made of the concerns and professional training of lawyers, clinical psychologists, and anthropologists. An attempt will be made to predict the type of judgments, values, and beliefs regarding deviance and related issues which could be expected to result from each perspective. CHAPTER V THE THREE DISCIPLINES The present study was designed, in part, to gather data related to issues currently being discussed in the sociological literature on deviance. Despite the incredible amount of time, money, and effort expended on the study of deviants, no pattern of attributes has been found which characterizes all deviants. Nor has anyone been able to locate specific acts which are uniformly considered deviant by all societies. Thus, some research ers have shifted their attention to the variable character of the definition, labeling, and judgment of deviants.^- They ask, instead, what is considered to be deviant, by whom, and according to what criteria? What is perceived as cause, and what is recommended as treatment? Beyond these questions are yet more puzzling ones. Why should various groups, especially highly educated, professional, ^"Jack P. Gibbs, "Conceptions of Deviant Behaviors The Old and the New," The Pacific Sociological Review. Vol. 9 (Spring, 1966), pp. 9-15. 207 208 and scientific groups differ in their interpretations, evaluations, and judgments regarding deviance? Researchers who have approached the study of human behavior from a sociocultural relativistic frame of reference have suggested that in order to understand the judgments made by any group, it is necessary first to enter into their world of reality, to try to understand what they believe to be true about human nature, human interaction, cause and effect, what they perceive as good or bad, irrespective of the validity or invalidity of such beliefs. Samples of literature utilizing such an approach have been presented in chapters II, III, and IV. Several examples will be given to illustrate the manner in which theory and research of this type entered into the formulation of the present investigation. In chapter II, studies were presented which investigated ideologies toward deviants and outgroups, as well as other related attitudes. The traditional approach had been to conceptualize ideology as represent ing belief systems which are distorted or biased by unconscious psychological motives or by vested group interests. Thus, most research had been aimed at discovering the sources of such illusory and distorted views, whether religious, economic, or psychological. In the authoritarian personality studies, 209 value-orientations emphasizing authority and power, obedience, will power, repression, and punishment were found to be linked to intolerance, in general, and to moralistic, condemning, punitive judgments concerning deviants. Such values and judgments were considered to be manifestations of a hostile, repressive, fearful personality projecting his own distorted emotions outward. The syndrome was believed to have originated in early childhood relationships with hostile, repressive, punitive parents. Later, other researchers took a sociocultural relativistic approach to the problem of ideology. They attempted to learn what kind of beliefs various societies or subcultural groups held concerning deviants, outgroups, obedience, punishment, etc. irrespective of the validity o or invalidity of such beliefs. Thus, in analyzing his 2 "As already suggested, there are alternate ways of thinking about authoritarianism, intolerance, change and non-change, ingroup and outgroup. The particular way we think about such variables may involve implicit value judgments and may exert a profound influence upon the operational definitions employed, the nature of the hypotheses selected and omitted from investigation, the research findings, and their interpretations." Milton Rokeach, The Open and Closed Mind (New Yorks Basic Books, Inc., I960), p. 18. 210 data, Stouffer remarked that we could expect to find intolerance for freethinkers and communists among those reared as Fundamentalists. On the other hand, he suggested that we could expect to find greater tolerance and permissiveness among young, well-educated Americans who had been reared in an era of progressive education and had been taught that such attitudes were desirable and appropriate. Rose found that certain of the so-called author itarian attitudes were linked to affectionate, rather than to hostile, relationships with children in Italy. There fore, he suggested that authoritarian beliefs in this context apparently had a meaning different than that attributed to them in the authoritarian personality studies. Furthermore, he outlined cultural factors in Italian history which could be expected to lead to the positive valuation of authoritarian ideas. Similar types of evidence were also found in studies of Mexican culture. In research here and abroad, Kohn found that attitudes valuing obedience and conformity were more prevalent for those in lower class occupations than for those in middle class occupations. In addition, his findings demonstrated the functionality of obedience- oriented attitudes for lower class job requirements and their dysfunctionality for middle class occupations. 211 Riessman's studies demonstrated that attitudes valuing obedience and authority were not predictive of person- oriented items in the lower class although they were for the middle class. Therefore, he warned against making unsubstantiated inferences: Although the lower class individual scores in an authoritarian direction on the F-scale and its derivatives, the items probably have a very different meaning or referent in his sub-culture; consequently we should be very cautious about inferring anything about his personality, authoritarian tendencies, etc. from these scales. These and other findings suggested that certain types of educational, occupational, and linguistic backgrounds might, for functional reasons, lead to differential valuation of obedience and conformity, as opposed to deviance or tolerance of deviance. If so, perhaps other beliefs concerning deviance would also be affected in a similar manner. It was felt that this could be investigated by studying several academic disciplines, by treating them as diverse educational, occupational, and linguistic subcultures. Other literature from a variety of fields, which ^Frank Riessman and S. M. Miller, "Social Class and Projective Tests," in Frank Riessman, Mental Health of the Poor (New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1^64), p. 256. was reported in chapter III, furnished additional clues and more precise propositions concerning the nature of sociocultural influences upon ideology, perception, world view, and knowledge. For example, another clue regarding the relationships mentioned above came from Northrop. He cites evidence that various subcultural groups focus upon selected aspects of the environment which are relevant to their specialized position and role. Since the groups see different aspects of the environment, the "scientific" generalizations of each are derived from different sets of empirical data. Because of their diverse experience, they may derive divergent assumptions and propositions concerning the nature of the world. Their values, Northrop claims, vary logically in accord ance with their differing "philosophies of natural science." Exploring the potential implications of his thesis, let us assume that various professional groups, psychologists and lawyers in particular, held similar values in general relative to advancing the societal good. Could it be that they would advocate divergent policies because their "philosophies of natural science" differed? If, for example, the theories and clinical experience of psychologists led them to believe that repression was harmful to men, would they not, therefore, 213 value expression and permissiveness, and tend to disvalue strict obedience? On the other hand, if lawyers were selectively oriented by their professional experience to an understanding of the importance of legal and political authority in the maintenance of societal order, would they not place a higher value on obedience and respect for authority and upon strict law enforcement? If so, Northrop's assumption that values reflect scientific beliefs concerning empirical relationships would be valid. Bruner's theory of perception also was of assist ance in formulating hypotheses. According to that theory, perceiving an object or event involves an act of categor ization. Stimulus output is sorted and placed into categories on the basis of certain clues that we learn how to use. The categories used are learned on the basis of experience, by virtue of our membership in a culture or linguistic community, and are related to group functions. Furthermore, members of groups learn to estimate the likelihood that placement of an event into a category will be accurate or predictive of other traits or events. In addition, the categories with which we become accustomed to dealing are organized into systems, bound together by principles we have learned. In our study, then, it was assumed that members of various professions, and students training for those professions, learn to sort their clients into certain 214 professional diagnostic categories, to expect certain characteristics to be associated with certain other characteristics or traits, and to predict a whole host of events to occur in conjunction on the basis of the specialized theories which they have learned. Still other hypotheses were derived from the Brown-Lennenberg propositions relating sensory discrimina tion to linguistic codability, in particular, the Whorfianr- type proposition that the frequency with which a category is named by an individual is an indication of the frequency with which the category is used in perception and thought by a particular linguistic community. Our hypothesis is that students will more frequently endorse a term which is included in the professional terminology of the discipline; i.e., law students will check "guilty,” "prohibit by law," "punish" more often than other students will; psychology students will check "sick," "help," "need psychotherapy" more often than other students will. In contrast to clinical psychologists and lawyers, anthro pologists, for the most part, are not applied practitioners* Therefore, we assumed that graduate students in anthro pology would be least likely to endorse any intervention ist or treatment-related category. These few examples should suffice to demonstrate the manner in which the hypotheses in this study were derived from the literature presented earlier. Following the sociocultural relativistic model, graduate students of clinical psychology, law, and anthropology will be viewed as three diverse sociocultural groups, which as potential policy-making groups, may be influential in the process of defining deviance. We will examine the reality-worlds of the three disciplines and ask questions such as the following: Upon what part of the human environment is their study focused? Is the orientation universal or relativistic? What kind of categories and type of explanations are employed? What kind of theory is implied by the role procedures used with regard to devi ants? What assumption is held concerning determinism or free will? How are the above aspects related to the position and role of the disciplines in our society? How are they related to the area of control or facilities available to the professional groups? To their particular historical and cultural development and professional training? Finally, in view of the foregoing, what kind of values, judgments, and beliefs would we expect from each discipline with regard to deviant groups and related social issues? The procedure used to examine these questions was to construct ideal type explanation sketches of each discipline. 216 Ideal Types Historical use as methodological devices.— The ideal type, as described by Weber, is a mental construct, formed by exaggeration or accentuation of one or more characteristics or elements observable in reality. It is a tool for analysis of concrete historical events or situations.^ Ideal types have been formulated and used in 5 different ways. As used here, they are not purely arbitrary constructs, nor are they supposed to represent metaphysical entities, nor are they constructed merely to fit certain logical alternatives or sets. Rather they are based on concrete discoverable elements demonstrable in actual groups. In this sense, Mannheim's usage is followed.^ The constructed profiles of disciplines are ^Taken from Timasheff's discussion of the ideal type as used by Max Weber. Nicholas S. Timasheff, Sociological Theory: Its Nature and Growth (New York: Random house, 195/!)» p. lV^. ^J. W. N. Watkins, "Ideal Types and Historical Explanation," Readings in the Philosophy of Science. H. Feigl & M. Brodbeck (eds.) (New York: Appleton-Century Crofts, Inc., 1953), pp. 723-743. 6Karl Mannheim, Ideology and Utopia, translated by Louis Wirth and Edward Shils (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1936), p. 210. 217 considered to be ideal types in that no single individual is expected to represent a pure embodiment of the types outlined here. The ideal types are simply methodological devices intended to describe typical, significant charac teristics of each of the groups.^ They enable us to compare groups and to measure the degree to which members conform to or depart from the ideal type. Perhaps one example may clarify the procedure, the problems involved, and the advantages of the technique. The one element which is considered to be, perhaps, the most important in influencing the hypothesized variation in perspective of the three disciplines, is the major unit of study of each. The respective major units of study for psychology, anthropology, and law are the personality system of the individual, various sociocultural systems (societies) of the world, and the legal system of the United States. The three disciplines are involved in ^Ibid., p. 210. g It is interesting to note the fit between our three ideal types and those constructed in Taylor's brilliant theory of knowledge. Taylor describes three major theories of knowledge which have been formulated during the past several centuries. He demonstrates that these three theories regarding knowledge, validity, objectivity, and truth follow from the conceptions of institutions held by various theorists. The three different theories conceive of objectivity and rationality as grounded in (l) the individual, (2) the absolute moral authority of the society and its established rules, (3) the shifting social processes and institutional structure 218 intensive study of three different aspects of the environ ment. This selective focus determines the vantage point from which they view the world. Presumably what is seen from those three positions differs. Using the ideal type procedure, we abstract this element, the major unit of study, thus exaggerating and accentuating it. In doing so, we necessarily ignore the fact that all three of the disciplines have some knowledge of all three systems. The notable recent trend toward a greater use of group therapy by many clinical psychol ogists, for example, will not be taken into account here. However, this will not, in any way, violate or prejudice the findings in this study. In analyzing the data, the degree to which psychology students emphasize group factors rather than individual factors, as hypothesized, will be noted and analyzed. Rather than obscuring such evidence, a discrepancy between prediction and data would, in effect, put this element in the spotlight. of the society under examination, i.e., historical relativism. Taylor's three ideal-types bear a striking resemblance to the focal point for conceptions of reality postulated for psychology, law, and anthropology respec tively. Stanley Taylor, Conceptions of Institutions and the Theory of Knowledge (Hew York: bookman Associates, 1956) . 219 The differences, nuances, and variations within disciplines and the new trends currently taking place, then, will not be included in the ideal type explanation sketches. It is important to acknowledge the considerable amount of diversity and flux existing within each of the Q disciplines;7 however, the methodological principle of parsimony will be followed. Only a few elements were selected for analysis. Elements were selected which are considered fundamental to the disciplines, and which are necessary to explain the specific predictions which will be made regarding expected ideological responses. Elements to be included in the analysis and the type of relationship postulated.— Three main components will be described: (1) conceptual system, (2) existential base"^ (i.e., social characteristics*, and (3) predicted a 7None of the disciplines is represented by a single unitary frame of reference. Each is characterized by diversity and by several, clashing schools of thought. Each is beset by internal contradictions, ambivalence, and paradox. Furthermore, in each of the disciplines, noticeable shifts in orientation are currently taking place in response to changing conditions. ^Merton's paradigm for sociology of knowledge suggests this type of division of elements. Robert K. Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure (Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1957), p. 460. 220 social ideology. The ideal type explanation sketches will attempt to trace interconnections between selected ele ments of the conceptual system and of the existential base of each discipline, and to suggest the manner in which these interacting elements may shape the social ideology of graduate students. Empirical tests will be made of only one component, the social ideology of the students. The other parts of the explanation sketches will not be validated empirically. They are offered as the rationale for the predictions which will be made concerning ideology. Five elements of the conceptual system have been selected for analysis: (1) the main unit of study which determines focus of attention, (2) reality orientation: universal vs. relativistic, (3) vocabulary of motives: categories or type of explanation, (4) theory associated with professional role procedures, and (5) assumption regarding free will or determinism. The existential factors which are considered to be of major importance in accounting for the different frames of reference are the position and role of each discipline in our society. In addition, the discussion will also take into account the area of control or facilities available to practitioners, certain aspects of their professional experience, and the general cultural, philosophical background out of which each discipline emerged. The type of relationship postulated between the conceptual system and the existential base is a 11 dialectical one. Berger and Luckmann's formulation is used here: "Knowledge is a social product and knowledge 12 is a factor in social change. However, the relationships are not considered to be necessary ones. That is, the specific elements which come to be included in a system 13 depend upon historical context and many other factors. J The interrelated existential base and conceptual system represent the sociocultural system (i.e., the academic discipline) into which students enter. Incoming students must be socialized and assimilated into the group culture. They must be instructed in the proper ways of perceiving, categorizing, and responding to various objects, persons, and events. The major proposition to be tested in this thesis is that intensive, prolonged, Ibid., 476-483. Merton criticizes various theorists for not specifying the type of relationship which is assumed to exist among the elements being studied. 12 Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1966), p» 81. 222 concentrated exposure to a particular conceptual system will influence and shape the social ideology of the students. The responses given by the students on the research instrument will be considered to represent their social ideology. Elements of social ideology which were investigated are the following: (1) meanings (the overall configurative pattern of responses to a concept); (2) perception of what is beneficial or harmful, healthy or sick, rational or irrational; (3) value-orientation con cerning designated social issues; (4) judgments regarding specified deviant groups; (5) specified beliefs concerning human nature and the world. Ideology, in accordance with Mannheim's usage, justifies and legitimates the institutions and practices of each group.However, the term "ideology" is used here in the total, general, and non-evaluative sense. That is, it is not to be regarded as a conscious or deceptive attempt to promote self or group interests, but rather as the manner in which group members learn to perceive, interpret, and evaluate events as a result of 14Mannheim, op. cit. 223 TABLE 1 ELEMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE IDEAL TYPE EXPLANATION SKETCHES Conceptual System (1) Main unit of study (2) Reality- orientation (3) Vocabulary of motivess categories or type of explanation (4) Theory asso ciated with professional role procedures (5) Assumption regarding free will or determinism Existential Base Position of discipline Professional role Area of control or facilities available Certain aspects of professional experience General cultural and philosoph ical background Social Ideology1' * Meanings Perception of what is bene ficial or harm ful, healthy or sick, rational or irrational Value-orienta- tions concerning designated social issues Judgments regard ing specified deviant groups Specified beliefs concerning human nature and the world 15 'Operational definitions for each element of social ideology will be given in the chapter on research procedures. 224 their collective experience from a particular vantage point.^ IDEAL TYPE EXPLANATION SKETCHES Clinical Psychology A major factor influencing the perspective of the disciplines is the basic unit of study of each. It determines the area upon which each group is intensively and selectively focused. For psychology, this unit is the individual. Concern for the individual led some psycho therapists to view society as antagonist to man, rather 17 than as creator of man. The Freudian view of society as repressive left an indelible imprint upon psychological theory and 18 practice. The realizing potency of this image was l6Ibid., p. 80, pp. 124-125. 17 'Merton, o£. cit., p. 121. 18 "The emergence of clinical psychology during and following the Second World War awakened many psychologists to the utility of psychoanalytic theory. Called upon to function as diagnosticians and therapists, they found in Freud the kind of assumptions and conceptions which helped them to deal more effectively with their cases." Calvin S. Hall and Gardner Lindzey Theories of Personality (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1957), p. 68. "There is no question that the discipline of clinical psychology has 225 readily confirmed in clinical experience with patients found suffering from repression. The psychoanalytic 19 technique was designed to "liberate” the individual. Freud and his followers formulated their theories and procedures on the implicit faith that individual reason 20 could overcome the irrational in man and society. In retrospect, the birth of such a psychological system appears as a natural product of the Age of Enlightenment with its humanistic philosophy and its emphasis upon individual liberty in opposition to what was seen as the irrational and repressive authority of social 21 institutions. been strongly influenced by psychoanalytic psychology.” Daniel Offer and Melvin Sabshin, Normality: Theoretical and Clinical Concepts of Mental Health (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1966), p. 55. 19 "...a therapeutic method the aim of which is the independence and freedom of the individual.” Erich Fromm, "Individual and Social Origins of Neurosis,” in Personality in Nature. Society, and Culture. Clyde Kluckhohn, Henry A. Murray, and David M. Schneider (eds.), (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1956) pp. 515-521, p. 519. 20 ”...[Freud’s] one hope is the overcoming of the irrational in a society built on reason.” Else Frenkel- Brunswik, "Confirmation of Psychoanalytic Theories," in The Validation of Scientific Theories. Philipp G. Frank (ed.), (New tork: Collier Books, 1991), pp. 95-110, p. 109. 21 Thomas S. Szasz, "A Strategy of Freedom,” Trans- Action. May/June, 1965, pp. 14-19, p. 16; Stanley Taylor, Conceptions of Institutions and the Theory of Knowledge. (New York: Bookman Associates, 195&), pp. 31-32. 226 Western psychotherapy can also be viewed as a logical extension of the Protestant ethic and its deriva- 22 tive, the spirit of capitalism. Kingsley Davis and others have documented the manner in which the American mental hygiene movement is implicitly based upon a system 23 of premises derived from the Protestant Ethic. J The Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, trans. by Talcott Parsons (New Yorks Charles Scribner's Sons, 1953). ^See Kingsley Davis' thorough analysis of mental hygiene as a social movement based upon the Protestant Ethic. The first proposition of his study: "First, that mental hygiene, being a social movement and a source of advice concerning personal conduct, has inevitably taken over the Protestant Ethic inherent in our society, not simply as the basis for conscious preachment but also as the unconscious system of premises upon which its 'scien tific' analysis and its conception of mental health itself are based." p. 531. Davis lists the following as the major elements of the Protestant Ethic: (1) demo cratic (2) worldly (3) ascetic (4) individualistic (5) rationalistic and empirical (6) utilitarian and secular, p. 530. Davis' study was "based upon a systematic study of selected literature in the field, chosen from a list sent out by the National Committee for Mental Hygiene, Inc. All told, thirteen volumes were gone through, with the aid of a fixed questionnaire designed to discover certain things about each book." p. 531. Davis, "Mental Hygiene and the Class Structure," in Rose, Mental Health and Mental Disorder, op. cit. A more recent study utilizing similar techniques confirms Davis' position and brings it up to date. The conclusion was based upon a content analysis of the mental health "message" of 27 pamphlets from a New York mental health clinic: "Like Davis, we must conclude that the mental health movement is unwittingly propagating a middle class ethic under the guise of science." p. 63, Orville R. Gursslin, Raymond G. Hunt, and Jack L. Roach, "Social Class and the Mental Health Movement" in Frank Riessman, Jerome Cohen, Arthur Pearl (eds.) Mental Health of the Poor 227 congruence with the spirit of capitalism has been touched pi upon by other behavioral scientists. The keystone of capitalism, rationality, is as suggested above, an essential, even though little recognized, element of the psychotherapeutic apparatus. The deliberate, planned, efficient means employed in the economic system find a parallel in the optimum functioning of a balanced, integrated personality system. The ego, operating in accordance with the reality principle, should be able to maximize gains for the individual to fulfill his 25 potentialities. Action, mastery, and control of environ- 26 mental forces are guiding values. Yet, the individual (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964), pp. 57-67. ^^*David Riesman, ’ ’The Themes of Work and Play in the Structure of Freud's Thought,” in Selected Essays from Individualism Reconsidered. (Garden City: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1954), pp. 174-205. ^Walter J. Coville, Timothy W. Costello, Fabian L. Rouke, Abnormal Psychology. College Outline Series (New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc., i960), P. 27; David Riesman, "Authority and Liberty in the Structure of Freud's Thought" in Essays, 0£. cit.. pp. 206-245. ^Marie Jahoda, Current Concepts of Positive Mental Health. Joint Commission on Mental Illness and Health, Monograph Series, No. I, (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 195S)» p. xi. 228 must be able to recognize and accept all aspects of his self. Knowledge of one's capabilities and limitations are as knowledge of the assets and liabilities of a corpora tion. It would be irrational to deny either. The Protestant ethic, merged with features of capitalism, was modified by new conditions and elaborated 27 to include the "social ethic." For optimum functioning and to maximize potentialities, smooth social relation ships are required at home, at work, and at play. Among the criteria frequently mentioned by therapists as guide lines to determination of mental health, Jahoda cites: adequacy in love, work, and play; adequacy in inter personal relationships; efficiency in meeting situational requirements, capacity for adaptation and adjustment; and efficiency in problem-solving. Even in sexual relationships, one must be proficient and adequate; 28 included in the list is sexual genital orgastic potency. ^William H. Whyte, Jr., The Organization Man (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1956); David Riesman, Nathan Glazer, Reuel Denney, The Lonely Crowd (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1^ 557. 28 Jahoda, 0£. cit.. pp. 53-54. The manner in which modern psychotherapy blends in with the dominant cultural ethos of its surroundings seems apparent. The meaning to be attributed to this parallel phenomena, however, is ambiguous. Contradictory, ambivalent strains and implications co-exist in the psychotherapeutic philosophy as well as in the cultural ethos, and produce some of the ever-present critical dilemmas of therapy. 229 Problems in any of the areas listed above are viewed by the therapist as due to malfunctioning or 29 impairment of the intrapsychic system. 7 The client is not perceiving "reality accurately." His behavior is 30 inappropriate to the stimulus setting.' Usually this means the client is inaccurately generalizing to the present from early emotional experiences, or is projecting, evading, regressing, displacing, escaping, or refusing to accept "reality" by use of protective defense mechanisms. It is believed that problems can be solved by working with the individual, by working through his 31 underlying conflicts in the psychotherapeutic sessions. So from opposite perspectives, but evaluating this same convergence, Szasz can paint a glowing picture of liberal ism and humanism; Davis, a scorching critique of hidden premises and values, psychologism, scientism, and neglect of the invidious elements in the system. Szasz, Trans- Action. op. cit.; K. Davis, in Rose, 0£. cit. 29 'Strauss describing the psychotherapeutic ideology: "Impairment of intrapsychic systems by either internal or external psychological traumas constitutes the necessary and significant condition for development of mental illness." Anselm Strauss, Leonard Schatzman, Rue Bucher, Danata Ehrlich, Melvin Sabshin, Psychiatric Ideologies and Institutions (New York: The Free fress of Glencoe, 1964), P» 30 L. P. Ullman and L. Krasner, Case Studies in Behavior Modification (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965), p. 20. 31 'Strauss, 0£. cit. 230 If the patient gains insight (emotionally) into his underlying motivation and comes to understand the basis for his inappropriate behavior, he can learn to adjust in 32 a more realistic manner. Conceptual system.— What are the central and distinctive elements of such a perspective on social problems? First, the major concepts, theoretical propo sitions, values, judgments, diagnosis, and treatment procedures purportedly are based upon the individual rather than upon group, societal, moral, or legal criteria. Second, the vocabulary of motives or type of explanation employed are psychological in nature rather than socio logical, moral, or legal. Third, the philosophical position implied is universal rather than relativistic in orientation. To examine these three elements in context, let us first look at the major criteria for mental health put forth by clinical psychologists. In a report sponsored by the Joint Commission on Mental Illness and 32 "'Reality' is one of the basic concepts in psychiatric theory....It is the aim of therapy to bring to light these repressed feelings; thereby liberating the patient to deal more realistically with his environment." pp. 393»394. Claude C. Bowman, "Distortion of Reality as a Factor in Morale," in Rose, Mental Health and Mental Disorder, op. cit.. pp. 393-4071 231 Health, a digestion of current psychological thinking condenses and summarizes six major types of criteria for positive mental health: 1) Attitudes towards the self; they include the accessibility of the self to consciousness; the correctness of the self-concept; its relation to the sense of identity and the acceptance by the individual of his own self. 2) Growth, development, and self-actualization; the extent the individual utilizes his abilities; his orientation toward the future and his investment in living. 3) Integration; the extent to which the psychic forces are balanced; a unifying outlook on life and a resistance to stress. 4) Autonomy; the aim here is to ascertain whether the self-reliant person will be able to decide with relative ease and speed what suits his own needs best. 5) Perception of reality; a relative freedom from need-distortion, and the existence of empathy. _ 6) Environmental mastery; under this heading is listed: ability to love; adequacy in love, work, and play; adequacy in interpersonal relation ships; meeting situational requirements; adapta tion and-adjustment; and efficiency in problem solving. ^ Mental health, in all instances, is based upon criteria pertaining to the individual. Environmental mastery comes closest of those listed above to including ^Jahoda, op. cit.. p. 99, reported in Offer and Sabshin, 0£. cit.. pp. 62-o3. 232 societal criteria. Even this involves the assumption that environmental mastery and efficiency are social require ments. Neither the latter criterion nor the others, however, are stated in statistical terms. That is, the conceptions of positive mental health are not based upon what is "average" or "normal" in a population in statisti cal terms. Nor are the criteria stated in terms of what would be best for society. Nor are there any explicit references to moral or legal standards. Instead, the criteria are psychological in nature. This most clearly is seen, for example, in the third criterion, psychological integration and unity. The fifth criterion, adequate perception of reality, is also conceptualized in psycho logical terms; that is inaccurate perception is assumed to reflect inner need distortion. This contrasts, for example, with anthropological definitions which tend to equate adequate perception of reality with social consensus. The criteria imply a universal conception of mental health since no limiting concepts are introduced. No references are made to standards, values, or beliefs of particular groups or societies. That the psychological definition of positive mental health is not relative to community standards is stated explicitly by Adorno: It is true, as our results and others show, that ethnocentric individuals are frequently more conform- 233 ing and more 'adjusted' to the prevailing pressures and ideas of our culture. These individuals are thus more 'normal' in the sense of approximating the behavior- and ideology-demands of the culture. How ever, to see normality (in this external sense) as identical with psychic health (a concept involving inner integration, sublimation, and the like) is to maintain a thoroughly behavioristic, nondynamic conception of the individual.™ The potential divergence between mental health standards and social conventions is conveyed even more 35 succinctly by Fromm's phrase "the pathology of normalcy." If the criteria for mental health are not defined in statistical terms, nor in the normative terms of social, legal, or moral standards, what is the source of the criteria? One potential source which could be examined is the values, ideals, or goals which are explicitly stated by clinical psychologists. A survey of such expressions reveals that the goals enunciated usually refer to maxi mization of individual potentialities, to liberating the individual, or to increasing self-consciousness and awareness. Maslow stresses the importance of the creative ^ T. W. Adorno, Else Frenkel-Brunswik, D. J. Levinson, and R. N. Sanford, The Authoritarian Personality (New York: Harper, 1950), p. 9b8. 35 •"Fromm in Kluckhohn, Murray, and Schneider, op. cit.. p. 521. 234 aspects and potentials of the individual.-5 Goldstein defines self-actualization as the over-all, all- encompassing goal of life.^ Rogers sees the "fully functioning person" as the end product of optimal psycho therapy.^ Kubie formulates the goal of therapy as increasing the area of life which is dominated by conscious 39 forces and can thus be brought to awareness." Money- Kyrle also visualizes the aim of therapy as increasing insight or self-understanding.Fromm assumes "that freedom and spontaneity are the objective goals to be attained by every human being." For Szasz, "the purpose ^ Abraham H. Maslow, "Psychological Data and Human Values," in Radical Perspectives on Social Problems, Frank Lindenfeld (ed.), (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1963), pp. 21-34. ■^Kurt Goldstein, "Health as Value" in New Knowl edge in Human Values, Abraham H. Maslow (ed.), (New York: Harper & Bros., 1959). ^Carl R. Rogers, "A Theory of Therapy, Person ality, and Interpersonal Relationships, as Developed in Client-Centered Framework," in Vol. 3 of Sigmond Koch (ed.). PsvcholoEv: A Studv of a Science (New Yorks McGraw-Hill," 1959)':--- -------------- -^Lawrence S. Kubie, "The Essential Difference between Health and Neurosis" in Offer and Sabshin, op. cit., pp. 191-192. ^°Roger E. Money-Kyrle, "Psychoanalysis and Ethics" reprinted in Offer and Sabshin, 0£. cit.. p. 202. ^Fromm in Kluckkohn, Murray, and Schneider, op. cit.. p. 519. 235 of psychoanalysis is to give patients, constrained by their habitual patterns of action, greater freedom in their 42 personal conduct." The values, ideals, and goals expressed by clin ical psychologists reveal the same three central elements mentioned earlier. The values are stated in terms of the individual. They are psychological in nature, and imply universal relevance. The values are not seen by psychol ogists as originating from their own individual prefer ences, nor as shaped by Western ideals; rather they are usually seen as inherent in human nature.^ This belief is most evident in Hornets statement: You need not, and in fact cannot, teach an acorn to grow into an oak tree, but when given a chance, its intrinsic potentialities will develop. Similarly, the human individual, given a chance, tends to develop his particular human potentialities. He will develop then the unique alive forces of his real self.... The real self, which I have defined several times, is the 'original' force toward individual growth and fulfillment, with which we may again achieve full identification when freed of the crippling shackles of neurosis.^ Jo Szasz in Trans-Action, op. cit.. p. 16. i,o K. Davis in Rose, 0£. cit., p. 5^8. ^^Karen Horney, "The Neo-Freudian View: Man for Himself," in Sociology: A Book of Readings. Samuel Koenig, Rex D. Hopper, Feliks Gross (eds.), (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1953)» pp. 65-67. 236 The assumption of a universal value system in herent in the nature of human growth is acknowledged by Erikson in his report to the Midcentury White House Conference on Children and Youth: •In naming a series of basic balances,* Mr. Erikson states, 'on which the psycho-social health of a personality seems to depend, I found myself implying a latent universal value system which is based on the nature of human growth, the needs of the developing ego, and certain common elements in child training systems. From the survey of values expressed by psychol ogists, two additional distinctive conceptual elements emerge. The therapeutic goal usually considered most necessary in order to make possible actualization, real ization, fulfillment, or liberation of the individual is the reduction of repression and the increase of self- awareness. Two theoretical assumptions are involved. The first concerns the identification of repression as a major obstruction to self actualization and fulfillment. The second involves the emphasis placed on psychological determinism. Having reviewed mental health criteria and ideal values of psychologists, we turn to the diagnoses of ^Erik H. Erikson, "Growth and Crises of the 'Healthy Personality'" in Kluckhohn, Murray, and Schneider, o£. cit.. pp. 1&5-225, P» 1&5. problems and proposed treatment, and examine the role played there by the concepts of repression and psycho logical determinism. Alexander states unequivocally that "the central dynamic factor in neurosis is repression and those defense measures by which the ego attempts to keep i £ all the unacceptable impulses out of its territory." Alexander compares the dynamics of the neurotic and the healthy personalitys The neurotic personality is comparable to an auto cratic government which suppresses all opinions and aspirations that do not conform to its ruling prin ciples. .. .impoverished in initiative, governed by anxiety and coercion.... We have compared the healthy ego to democratic gov ernment which permits expression of private particu laristic needs. What is repressed, Alexander points out, is not amenable to education since this is a function of the unconscious mind. What the individual is not aware of, he t g cannot control. Kubie's diagnosis is similar to that of Alexander. He claims that the essential difference between an act that is healthy and an act that is neuro tic is that the latter is the product of processes that 4^Franz Alexander, "Viewpoint of a Clinician" in Offer and Sabshin, o£. cit., p. 170. 47Ibid., pp. 169, 171. 23S predetermine a tendency to its automatic repetition— behavior that results from a dominance of the unconscious system. The goal of therapy, therefore, is to increase the area of awareness.^ According to Szasz also, "the modern psychoanalytic idea of normality is somehow the same as freedom." In contrast, "neurotic behavior is automatic or habitual, whereas non-neurotic or normal 50 conduct is discriminating and selective."^ In a book describing and comparing thirty-six systems of psychotherapy, Harper offers a common defin ition of psychotherapy which he believes would be accept able to all of the systems. In summary, psychotherapy is a form of treatment of persons (patients) with disturbed thoughts, feelings, and/or actions, by other persons (therapists) largely through the process of verbal interchange with the specific goal of which they are mutually aware— reducing these disturbances and encouraging more desirable behavior. A similar definition of therapy is given by Lehner and Kube. They define psychotherapy as a process for treating an illness or problem by psychological methods.^ L9 Lawrence S. Kubie, "The Fundamental Nature of the Distinction Between Normality and Neurosis" in Offer and Sabshin, ojo. cit., pp. 190-191. 50 Szasz, Trans-Action, op. cit., p. 15. ^Robert A. Harper, Psychoanalysis and Psycho therapy: 36 Systems (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice- Hall, Inc., 1959), p. 9. 239 Successful psychotherapy^ helps the individual to alter his thoughts, feelings, and behavior, in other words, his 53 personality. In the understanding, permissive atmos- phe-re of therapy, repressed feelings can be exposed and identified. The patient is thus freed from the emotional distortion and anxiety-produced defenses of the past. This enables him to perceive objects, persons, or events more realistically and accurately.^ Frenkel-Brunswik sees the ethical content of traditional forms of ethics as similar to that of psycho analysis. The distinguishing factor concerns the methods of attaining the desired ethical behavior. The disagree ment focuses about the mechanism of repression. She describes the difference in the following passage: Most pre-psychoanalytic ethical systems stress such inhibitory devices as the looking away from evil, or its denial, or its mastery through strength of will. From psychoanalysis we have learned about the inef ficiency and dangers of these various forms of repression....From this viewpoint the mortal sin is self-deception and lack of insight rather than a lack of repression." 52 ^ George F. J. Lehner and Ella Kube, The Dynamics of Personal Adjustment (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1955), p. 441. ^ Ibid.. p. 442. 54Ibid., pp. 447, 454-455. 55 "Frenkel-Brunswik in Frank, 0£. cit.. p. 10S. 240 These few quotations may suffice to demonstrate the theoretical relationship between repression and dis turbed behavior and the therapeutic procedures designed to correct the problem, thus freeing the individual and enabling him to maximize his potentialities. The method focuses on psychological processes— those causing the disturbance, and those aimed at mitigating the disturb ance; that is, the alteration of feelings, thoughts, and personality structure. The concern is with processes psychologically determined. Brenner considers the prin ciple of psychic determinism to be the fundamental proposition in psychoanalytic theory. As in any scientific discipline, the various hypo theses of psychoanalytic theory are mutually related.... some are better established than others, and some have received so much confirmation and appear to be so fundamental in their significance that we are inclined to view them as established laws of the mind. Two such fundamental hypotheses, which have been abundantly confirmed, are the principle of psychic determinism, or causality, and the proposition... Every neurotic symptom, whatever its^nature, is caused by other mental processes... In examining psychological conceptions concerning 66 y Charles Brenner, An Elementary Textbook of Psychoanalysis (Garden City, N. If.: boubleday Anchor Books, Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1957), pp. 1-3. 241 the diagnosis and treatment of problems, two elements have been focused upon: the role played in psychological theory and procedures by the concepts of (1) repression, and (2) psychological determinism. The two elements are distinctive features of the psychological approach to problems. The other three distinctive elements mentioned earlier are also fundamental to the psychological con ception of problems, of abnormality, and of deviance. For example, the three elements: (1) a psychological explan ation, (2) based on the individual, (3) with universal implications, can be seen in Wegrocki's definition of abnormality: ...we could state the quintessence of abnormality as the tendency to choose a type of reaction which represents an escape from a conflict-producing,, situation instead of a facing of the problem. Mechanisms like the conviction of grandeur are ab normal not by virtue of unique abnormal qualia but by virtue of theig function in the total economy of the personality. Wegrocki’s criterion for identification of ab normality is considerably different from legal, moral, 57 Henry J. Wegrocki, "A Critique of Cultural and Statistical Concepts of Abnormality” in Kluckhohn, Murray, and Schneider, op. cit., pp. 691-701, p. 700. 5aibid., p. 695. 242 anthropological, or sociological definitions. Moral or ethical systems might prescribe facing a problem rather than escaping it; however, the basic consideration would probably be in terms of the consequences for others, rath er than the function for the personality. The difference between psychological and socio logical conceptions of deviance is put succinctly by Cohen. The sociological conception, as stated by Cohen, is similar to the general anthropological conception. The distinction he makes between psychological and sociolog ical conceptions of deviance is: First, we here define deviant behavior in terms of the relationship of action to institutionalized expectations, not in terms of its relationship to personality structure. Behavior which is psychotic, neurotic, maladjusted, or otherwise pathological from a psychiatric or mental-hygience point of view is defined in terms of its dependenceQupon or con sequences for personality structure.77 This does not mean, Cohen explains, that personality structure is irrelevant to sociology. It only means that pathology of personalities is not necessarily relevant to deviant behavior. He illustrates the point in the eg 7'Albert K. Cohen, "The Study of Social Disorgan ization and Deviant Behavior" in Sociology Today: Prob lems and Prospects, Robert K. Merton, Leonard Broom, and Leonard S. Cottrell, Jr. (eds.), (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1959), pp. 461-434, p. 463. 243 following manner: Much— probably most— -deviant behavior is produced by clinically normal people. This would be true, for example, of most illicit sexual behavior. On the other hand, many clinically abnormal people, con fronted by sexual temptation and opportunity to which many normal people would succumb, are incapable, in consequence of their pathologicai»anxieties concern ing sex, of anything but virtue. Cohen goes on to point out that the sociology of deviant behavior should not be the sociology of prostitu tion plus the sociology of drug addiction plus the sociol ogy of suicide, etc., in general. This is so "because no behavior is per se and universally deviant..."^1 Despite the caution, some texts in sociology of deviance are merely a series of chapters on the various forms of behavior generally considered immoral or illegal in middle class Western society. These same forms of behavior are usually included in textbooks in abnormal psychology under the category of sociopathic behavior, addiction, and sexual deviation. The rationale for considering these forms of behavior as abnormal is not clear. Using Wegrocki's formula, it may be that these types of behavior are all considered "unrealistic escapes" from problems. 6°Ibid.. p. 463. 6lIbid.. p. 463. 244 Deviant behavior, perhaps, is viewed as not in accord with Z O the reality principle. Here, of course, we are again faced with the question "whose reality?" Szasz suggests that psychotherapists have impli citly accepted legal, moral, and ethical criteria without realizing or acknowledging it. He gives examples to distinguish between the various types of criteria: For example, notions such as 'excessive repression' or 'acting out an unconscious impulse* illustrate the use of psychological concepts for judging (so-called) mental health and illness. The idea that chronic hostility, vengefulness, or divorce are indicative of mental illness would be illustrations of the use of ethical norms (that is, the desirability of love, kindness, and a stable marriage relationship). Finally, the widespread psychiatric opinion that only a mentally ill person would commit homicide illus trates the use of a legal concept as a norm of mental health. * Goffman implies that therapists apply medical labels to behavior which deviates from social norms in order to maintain a position of ethical neutrality. Since therapists maintain a non-moralistic stance, anti-social behavior must be redefined as sick behavior. "Now from the psychological point of view a vital criterion of normality is sensitiveness to the reality principle, or responsiveness to situational in fluences." Talcott Parsons, Essays in Sociological Theory (New York: The Free Press, 1954), p. 151. ^Thomas S. Szasz, "The Myth of Mental Illness," The American Psychologist. Vol. 15, I960, p. 113. Re printed in Oi’ fer and Sabshin, o j d . cit.. p. 215. 245 Psychiatric doctrine requires ethical neutrality in dealing with patients, for what others see as mis behavior the staff must see as pathology....In psy chiatry there is a formal effort to act as if the issue is treatment, not moral judgment, but this is not consistently maintained. Ethical neutrality is indeed difficult to sustain in psychiatry, because the patient's disorder is intrinsically related to ✓ , his acting in a way that causes offense to witnesses. It will be of interest in this study, to determine the extent to which what is considered realistic or "rational" reflects Western legal and moral standards. It will also be of interest to see to what extent the psycho logical vocabulary of motives has filtered through into other universes of discourse. Samples of psychological conceptions of mental health, neuroses, abnormality, diagnosis, treatment, therapeutic goals, and values have been presented. Five elements appear to be distinctive and fundamental in the conceptual apparatus of clinical psychologists: (1) the individual as major focus, (2) a universal reality- orientation, (3) a psychological vocabulary of motives or type of explanation, (4) theory relating repression to mental illness and deviance, (5) emphasis on the principle of psychological determinism. ^^Erving Goffman, Asylums (Garden City, N. Y.: Anchor Books, Doubleday & Co., 1961), p. 365. 246 Existential base.— It is postulated that the psy chological conceptual system is intimately related to: (1) the position of the discipline of psychology as a behavioral science, (2) the professional role of the clinical psychologist as a practitioner, (3) the area over which he has control; that is, conditions prevailing in American practice, (4) certain aspects of his professional experience, (5) the general cultural and philosophical background out of which psychology emerged. The manner in which the conceptual system and existential base appear to dovetail will be discussed now. According to a statement of basic principles formulated by the American Psychological Association: "Psychology is concerned with the application of the 65 methods of science to the problems of human behavior." This principle indicates the reciprocal nature of the discipline of psychology as a behavioral science and the professional role of clinical psychologists as practi tioners. Psychology is the study of the behavior of 65 'Reprinted from "Basic Principles to Guide the Relationships Between Psychology and Other Professions," Psychology and Its Relations with Other Professions. (Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association, 1954) (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966), p. 229. 247 living organisms, and, in particular, of the individual human organism. Like other sciences, psychology is attempting to construct general theories which apply universally. The major focus is upon the individual: individual processes of learning, perceiving, feeling; the structure, development, and dynamics of individual personality. The primary aim of clinical psychology is to help each individual client so to change his behavior that it 66 becomes more satisfying. In this endeavor, the clinical psychologist is guided by the scientific theories, assump tions, and diagnostic classification system of psychology as well as by the clinical experience of practitioners. The relationship is reciprocal. Much of the empirical evidence for psychological theories dealing with mental health, mental illness, and adjustment is derived from the clinical experience of practitioners in the field. On the other hand, it is necessary for the discipline to try to produce the type of knowledge which is needed by practi tioners. 66 C. M. Louttit, "Clinical Psychology," in Fields of Psychology, J. p. Guilford (ed.), (New York: D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc., 1940), pp. 367-397, p. 367. 24# The universal reality orientation implicit in psychological conceptions seems to be related to the fact that professional experience of psychologists is mostly 4 n limited to an upper-middle class Western clientele. It is not necessary to consider different realities be cause, by and large, clinical psychologists are dealing with one reality. Just as Freud’s supposedly universal theories reflected the atmosphere and problems of his culture, the somewhat revised American theoretical versions are appropriate for the American middle class scene. The theories reflect the predominant culture, but, in part, they also create it. The psychological goals and ideal values which were cited earlier represent one of a variety of possible Utopias. It is obvious, however, that the psychological Utopia is almost identical with Western middle class liberal democratic values. Furthermore, the psychological view of the "the highly individual determination of /I n 'John A. Clausen, "Mental Disorders," in Robert K. Merton and Robert A. Nisbet (eds.), Contemporary Social Problems. (New Yorks Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1966), pp. 26-B3, p. 4#. 249 personality development," illustrated in the following quotation, itself is a reflection of our own individual istic ethos.^ From psychoanalytic case histories in our culture we learn that every attempt simply to deduce attitudes or a basic personality structure from social deter minants is futile.... Under the microscope of psychoanalytic case studies the reason becomes evident: it is the highly indiv idual determination of personality development by the reaction of the child's inherited constitution to the immense range of individualities as represented by the different personalities of the parents in theigg relationships to each other and to their children. Alexander admits that the data referred to in the quotation are American only; nevertheless, he believes that American culture typifies modern social dynamics. The "primitive civilizations which serve as material" to demonstrate the cultural determination of personality are "not suitable for the study of social dynamics as they 70 manifest themselves in historical development." 6S As suggested by Taylor, individualism itself is an institutional complex. Individualism itself, says Taylor, is a socially formulated perspective, with an ontology which locates objectivity, validation, and rationality in individual cognition. Taylor, op. cit., p. 12B. 69 Alexander in Kluckhohn, Murray, and Schneider, op. cit., pp. 430-431. 70Ibid., p. 429-430. 250 Alexander explains why the "primitive civilizations" in anthropological studies are not suitable: The static nature of these cultures manifests itself in a stable structure which precisely defines the individual's social place, functions, and attitudes with a rigidity unknown in the dynamic societies of the Greek-Roman type or the European and American civilizations. Theory identifying repression as the central factor in neurosis seems to characterize middle class difficulties but not lower class problems. Thus, an epidemiological study of Midtown Manhattan describes the characteristic psychopathology of lower and upper socio- 72 economic classes in almost opposite terms. Our tentative hypothesis is that the anxiety found in the middle and upper levels may be due to the rela tively severe suppression and accompanying repression and redirection of sexual and aggressive instincts; a sort of 'oversocialization.' On the other hand, the lower class may be 'undersocialized' in certain areas, resulting in an acting-out of problems which we label 'character disorders.' Nevertheless, in accordance with psychological theory, the 71Ibid., p. 429-430. 1 7 Thomas S. Langner and Stanley T. Michael, Life Stress and Mental Health (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1963), pp. 4SS-4S9. 7^Ibid., p. 442. 251 different psychopathologies of the two socioeconomic classes are assumed to be a result of differences in per sonality structure rather than a result of different sociocultural factors. That is, the drift theory of social mobility is favored over the social causation theory of n\ social mobility. Social mobility allows the classes to select certain types which are best suited to rise or fall in the system. People tend to migrate toward the social^,, level that best fits their personality structure. Although there is no direct evidence to aid in the choice between '•drift” and "social causation” theories of social mobility, it is assumed from psychological theory that the personality pattern deviation preceded rather than followed downward mobility. The basis for the inter pretation is explained in this passage: ^ "A person's class position offers but the first (though necessary) index of social determinants in his life....an indispensable consideration is the sequence of his invidious experiences within limited circles of association....Our speculations suggest that the vertical structure and mentality are intimately related, and that a neglect of social factors is a vital neglect for the mental hygienist.” K. Davis in A. Rose, 0£. cit.. pp. 595-596. nr '^Langer and Michael, 0£. cit., p. 466. 252 It is highly unlikely that a personality pattern devi ation was caused by the downward mobility, since such deviations are presumed to have been established in early childhood. Similarly, the neurotic trends found in the upward-mobile are also theoretically established during the Freudian psychosexual stages of development in infancy. On the other hand, some psychoanalysts do recognize that psychoanalysis is pertinent and relevant only for the middle and upper classes, as suggested in the following candid statement: The poor need jobs and money, not psychoanalysis. The uneducated need knowledge and skills, not psychoanaly sis. furthermore, the poor and the uneducated are also often politically disenfranchised and socially oppressed; if this is the case, they need freedom from oppression. For the kind of personal freedom psycho analysis promises can have meaning only for persons who enjoy a large measure of economic, political, and social freedom. Just as the universal orientation appears to be a consequence of the limited type of clientele seen by ther apists, so also the particular type of procedure followed and the object to be manipulated seems to be partly dictated and limited by the facilities available to therapists; 76Ibid.t p. 490* 77 Szasz, Trans-Action, op. cit., p. 19. Bredemeir explains the failure and meaninglessness of psychotherapy for the lower-class: "Asked to trade impulsiveness for restraint, spontaneity for discipline, play for work— yields a profit in the long run....The benefits of their own patterns are clear and immediate. The rewards of mid dle-class patterns far in the future, and not guarantee- able, and really only benefits to people who look at the world through middle-class eyes." Harry C. Bredmeier, "The Socially Handicapped and the Agencies: A Market Analysis," in Riessman, Cohen, and Pearl, o£. cit., pp. 92-102, p. 92. that is, the area over which they have control. In the Western democracies, clinical psychologists are, to all in tents and purposes, limited to working with the individual rjQ in psychotherapeutic sessions. This is not an inevitable condition, but given this limitation, several assumptions must be accepted to legitimate and justify the role of the clinical psychologist. The problem must be seen to exist within the individual, to be capable of solution by the in dividual, and to be made possible by therapeutic sessions. It would be untenable, for example, to see the problem as residing within social institutions or as incapable of solution by the individual. Since problems are multidimen sional in nature and exist at various levels, wherever attention is directed, causes and potential methods for melioration can be found. Since the individual personality system is the major unit of study of the discipline of psychology, and since the clinical psychologist, in his professional role, is mainly limited to working with the individual in therapeutic sessions, the selective focus in this direction is intensified. As suggested earlier, the type of relationship rjQ "Society is beyond the reach of case work and has to be accepted as it is. The variables of case work are merely the individual himself and the conditions of his personal environment." Robert Waelder, "The Scientific Approach to Case Work: With Special Emphasis on Psycho analysis," in Kluckhohn, Murray, and Schneider, op. cit., pp. 671-679* p. 673. 254 postulated between conceptual system and existential base is not a necessary one. Rather it is assumed to be con tingent upon prevailing sociocultural conditions and histor ical context. It would, therefore, be instructive to find cases of psychotherapy, under alternate conditions, where theory and practice appear to vary as a consequence of the altered conditions. Three examples of this nature will be offered. First, we look at psychotherapy in the Soviet Union. Ziferstein points out that in the Soviet Union, therapists are able to manipulate environmental factors to benefit the client. Given the ability to control social factors to some degree, Soviet therapists tend to place more emphasis upon external factors as determinants than do American therapists. In working with patients, he tends to make active use of the facilities provided by society to manipulate the patient's environment, whether it be to arrange for a change of employment, or for vocational retraining, or for a change of residence.’ The Soviet psychiatrist calls upon various organizations like the local trade union, the Komsomol, the Young Pioneer organization, 7q to help in rehabilitating and reorienting the patient. Ziferstein further contrasts the permissive, n>n- judgmental approach typical of most American therapists with the more directive, interventionist role of the 79 '^Isidore Ziferstein, "Direct Observations of Psychotherapy in the U.S.S.R.," 6th Int. Congr. of Psycho therapy, London 1964; Selected Lectures, pp. 150-160 (S. Karger, Basel/New Ifork, 1965) , p. 159. 255 on Soviet therapist. Ziferstein suggests that the dif ference may derive, in part, from varying concepts of ideal relationships in the two societies. In Western individualistic society, the ideal of interpersonal relations between adults is as complete permissiveness as possible, a laissez-faire policy where no person tells any other person how to lead his life. Even when we find that this ideal often is not carried out in practice (and there are many who maintain that in practice 'laissez-faire' is as extinct as the dodo) its power as an ideal remains. It may be, then, that the psychoanalytic model of the patient-therapist relationship is based on this ideal, i.e., that the Western psychoanalyst carries over into the therapeutic relationship the ideals and values of Western culture, in the same way that the Soviet psychotherapist carries over0^he parental collectivist ideals of his society. The permissive, non-judgmental approach which Ziferstein says typifies American therapists is, in part, the procedural accompaniment of anti-repression theory. It also reflects the non-judgmental stance taken by the behav- Op ioral sciences in America. Another consideration is 80Ibid., p. 156. 81Ibid., p. 159. Q p "Conventional psychiatry does not directly concern itself with the issue of right and wrong. Rather, it con tends that once the patient is able to resolve his conflicts and get over his mental illness, he will be able to behave correctly," William Glasser, Reality Therapy (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), p. 56. 256 that the major portion of the American therapist's prac tice is private, and largely limited to upper middle class clientele. To retain such a clientele presumably requires a permissive, non-moralistic, non-punitive attitude. Such attitudes are not in evidence, for example, in public 83 state mental institutions. The latter represents an instance where therapists do have a much larger area of control, but is not typical of the general practice of therapists. In addition to the Soviet therapist and the public state mental hospital, a third contrast may be found by examining the beliefs and practices of psychiatrists. As in the prior two examples, the area of control and avail able facilities differ with a corresponding difference in theory and practice. Clinical psychologists are not licensed to prescribe drugs, and typically they tend to take a negative attitude toward drugs, viewing them as S3 •'"By the time Freud became a physician, two roles had been established for the psychiatrist. They are still well accepted. One is the role of society's agent; the state hospital psychiatrist, while appearing to minister to the patient, actually protects society from the patient." Szasz, Trans-Action, op. cit.. p. 16. "We began our observations with the finding that psychiatry, as practiced in the prison, was unlike psychiatric prac tice in any other context with which we are familiar." Harvey Powelson and Reinhard Bendix, "Psychiatry in Prison," in Rose, 0£. cit.. pp. 459-481, p. 477. 257 crutches; whereas, many psychiatrists utilize drugs as an important part of the treatment. In almost all of the material discussed, diagnosis was made by reference to the individual. That is, behavior is diagnosed as pathological by virtue of its function for the individual. However, a new trend based on the learn ing theory model does define maladjusted behavior as behavior which is considered inappropriate by the patient's social group. In this case, social norms are taken as the criteria. Nevertheless, as Scheff points out, even in this model, the target is behavior modification of the patient. It is assumed that the patient is not responding to "all di the stimuli actually present." ^ The techniques are oriented toward changing the patient's psychological S5 system rather than the interpersonal or social system. This example seems to be another indication that the pro- L. P. Ullmann and L. Krasner, Case Studies in Behavior Modification (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965) discussed in Thomas J. Scheff, Being Mentally 111: A Sociological Theory (Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co., 1966), p. 22. S5Ibid., p. 20-21. 258 cedures used and the target selected for modification are partly dictated by area of control or the working condi tions of a particular sociocultural group. The role of the clinical psychologist is to help troubled clients. Since psychologists have no control over the behavior of persons other than the client, nor over social institutions, since they have no medical back ground or license to prescribe drugs, since they are trained in scientific methods and thus do not utilize religious or mystical procedures, the problem must be capable of a rational solution by alteration of the client in therapeutic sessions. From this frame of reference, we must infer that social problems and deviance reside in irrational or inadequate behavior of "sick" or deficient individuals. The theories and terminology of clinical psychology support such an inference, and are generally assumed to precede and furnish the basis for this view. Ideology.— If intensive, extended study in a particular discipline influences perception and shapes ideology, what type of ideological responses could be expected from graduate psychology students? It is ex pected that their value-orientation will reflect the focus on the individual, and that their preferred solution to social problems will be in developing individual poten 259 tialities rather than through group action or legal processes. Policy valued and advocated should reflect the theory associated with role procedures; therefore it is expected that they will value permissiveness and expres sion of negative and hostile feelings, and will disvalue strict law enforcement and punishment. Reflecting the assumption of psychological determinism, they should see psychotherapy as a solution to problems, and should place a low value on the use of will power. In judging deviant groups, it is expected that deviant behavior will tend to be categorized and given the same meaning as in the context learned in intensive study. Clinical psychology has a specialized terminology and classification system wherein many types of deviant behav ior are considered pathological or as symptomatic of personality disorder. Therefore, it is expected that graduate psychology students will tend to label deviants as "sick." However, their judgments will be non-moral- istic. Lower class deviants may be labeled as "dull," thus locating the deficiency within the individual rather than within the social structure. As a consequence of the universal orientation of psychology, deviants may be seen as "irrational" and not behaving in accordance with the reality principle. Reflecting the assumption of psycho logical determinism, psychology students will tend not to 260 impute responsibility or guilt. It is expected that judgments will tend to characterize psychological theory and procedures. Therefore, graduate psychology students will tend to favor permissiveness, will advocate helping deviants, and will recommend therapy. Beliefs of psychology students about human nature and the world will reflect the assumptions of psycholog ical determinism and the importance of the individual. Responses such as those predicted here would legitimate and justify psychological institutions and procedures. More important, however, they would indicate beliefs regarding human behavior, deviance, and the proper mode of treatment and response. LAW Whereas the attention of psychologists is selec tively focused upon the individual, the major unit of investigation for the discipline of law is the legal system. The American legal system, however, had its roots in the same cultural base as Western psychotherapy and is also compounded of contradictory liberal and conservative strains. Both were nourished in the age of the Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism with rationalism and 261 individualism as guiding lights. In this sense, both partook of the special vintage of liberalism associated with the Enlightenment. Both were trapped in the same curious paradox. Psychotherapy sought to liberate the individual from the repressive grip of society, but at the 87 same time, aimed to help him face and adjust to reality. The American legal system, formulated after the American revolution, and in justification of that revolution, drew heavily upon the liberal, legal doctrine of the natural rights of man as against government; of reason, as opposed 88 to traditional institutions. Yet the main task of the 86 •'As the lawyers' philosophy of natural rights is now professed by American conservatives, it is well to remember that originally it was part of a movement of general enlightenment and liberation. In general morals, eighteenth century liberalism stood for a restoration of the rights of natural man against superstitions taboos, the fear of witchcraft, and the like." Morris R. Cohen, American Thought: A Critical Sketch, Felix S. Cohen (ed.), (New York: Collier Books, 1962), p. 151. 87 "...no sooner had Freud and the early Freudians staked out their moral claim to a type of psychiatric ac tivity than they turned their backs on it....This in three short paragraphs is the history of the miscarriage of a liberating idea." Szasz, Trans-Action, op. cit., p. 18. "It could be contended that, instead of acting as a judge and being above the mores, the psychotherapist actually is part of the mores and, thereby, creates conformist stand ards for society." Offer and Sabshin, o£. cit., p. 127. 88 M. R. Cohen, 0£. cit., p. 150. 262 legal profession was to judge the acts of men in terms of conformity to the law. Cohen describes the American resolution of the dilemma in favor of law, residing in the supreme power of the State, but cast in an individualistic, contractual, go free enterprise mold. 7 For lawyers, as psychotherapists, 90 were largely of upper-middle class backgrounds. ...the Blackstonian view of law— the confused com promise or conglomeration of law as eternal reason and law as the will ofgthe supreme power in the State-still prevails. What was novel in the modern form of it was the indi vidualistic or contractual emphasis used in the interest of free commercial enterprise.... In the old rationalistic philosophy and in the Scotch intuitionalism, which prevailed in America, "the principles of political ethics and justice were regarded g9Ibid.. p. 171. 90 7 Jerome E. Carlin, Lawyers* Ethics: A Survey of the New York City Bar. (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1966), p. 19; Jack Ladinsky, "Careers of Lawyers, Law Practice, and Legal Institutions," American Sociological Review. (February 1963), pp. 47-54; Richard A. Watson, "Lawyer Attitudes on Judicial Selection," The American Journal of Sociology. (January 1967), pp. 373-387. 91 M. R. Cohen, 0£. cit., p. 171. 92Ibid 263 like the principles of Euclidean geometry or Newtonian 93 physics— simple, self-evident, and forever unchanging."^ Thus the Constitution came to be viewed "as expressive of 9U eternal unchanging principles of public morality." Beliefs such as these made it possible to combine the rational and the imperative elements within a conception of law as dictated by eternal reason. Although nurtured in the same cultural ethos and wracked by similar internal contradictions, law and psy chology took separate paths for reasons arising mainly from their different function and position in society. A central concern of the discipline of law is the maintenance of societal order in accordance with legal prescriptions. The legal order is fundamentally an authoritative order 95 based upon the traditional moral code of society. Law may be seen as one of a variety of forms of social control. Llewellyn and Hoebel have identified four distinctive features of law as a form of social control: 93Ibid., p. 172. 94Ibid., p. 173. 95 yP. Selznick, "Sociology of Law," forthcoming article prepared for the International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, cited in Law and Society, A supplement to the summer issue of Social Problems. Social Problems (Summer, 1965), p. 29. 264 ...laws are part of the normative structure of a society, that is, they constitute one set of def initions of obligatory or forbidden actions. Laws involve sanctions, so they are accompanied by penal ties or punishments invoked in instances in which they are disobeyed. A third characteristic of laws is that in cases of conflict with other interests, laws must be followed....Finally laws are part of a larger legal system which includes a relatively explicit underlying rationale or philosophy, a set of procedures for applying and enforcing laws, and a body of recognized officials delegated thg respon sibility of carrying out legal procedures. Criminal law is- one of a number of legal systems. A crime is a violation of criminal law and an offense 97 against the state. The essential characteristics of criminal law, according to Sutherland and Cressey, are: (1) politicality, (2) specificity, (3) penal sanctions, and (4) uniformity. Politicality means that the ^ Karl N. Llewellyn and E. Adamson Hoebel, The Cheyenne Way (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1941) given in Don C. Gibbons, Society, Crime, and Crim- inal Careers (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 196d'), p. 19. 97 7'"A crime is any act or omission prohibited by public law for the protection of the public, and made punishable by the state in a judicial proceeding in its own name.” William L. Marshall and William L. Clark, MThe Legal Definition of Crime and Criminals," in The Sociol ogy of Crime and Delinquency. Marvin E. Wolfgang, Leonard Savitz, and Norman Johnston (eds.) (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1962), pp. 14-I9t p. 14. qg 7 Edwin H. Sutherland and Donald R. Cressey, Principles of Criminology (7th ed., Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1966), pp. 5-9; this description is taken from Gibbons, 0£. cit., p. 20. criminal laws originate through the actions of the State. Specificity means that criminal statutes provide strict definitions of particular acts which constitute crime. Penal sanctions refer to the specification of penalties for violation of the statutes. Uniformity refers to the effort to specify crimes and invoke sanctions against offenders in a uniform manner. In common parlance, uni formity means that all men are equal before the law or should have equal opportunities. Sociologically, it refers to a universalistic ethic in contrast to a particu laristic ethic. In this sense, then, one element of the conceptual system of law is a universal orientation. Given these characteristics of law, a major function of jurists is the determination of whether or not acts comply with or violate legal norms. In case of vio lation, it is necessary that appropriate punishment should be meted out for the purpose of deterrence and for the 99 protection of society. 7 This view of the function of law is expressed below: 99"But the guiding consideration for a court of law that deals with threatening conduct is nevertheless protection of the community." The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society. A Report by the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice (Wash ington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, Feb. 1967), p. 31. 266 An implicit assumption of this view is that the ex clusive function of law is to reinforce the mores and to provide a uniform and predictable procedure for the evaluation and punishment of deviance. That is to say, the function of law is social control and the major problem is ohe of designing legal sanctiog^ to minimize deviance and maintain social stability. Many would join with Evan in denying that the above constitute the "exclusive" function of law. Never theless, it must be granted that they do represent impor tant functions of law. Functions such as these vary con siderably from the goals expressed earlier by clinical psychologists. Some theorists— Parsons, for example, view psychotherapists and lawyers both as agents of social control, representing and upholding the established social order.Even in such an analysis, however, the methods and techniques of the two are necessarily different. 102 Psychotherapy holds out the carrot; law, the big stick. William M. Evan, "Law as an Instrument of Social Change," in Alvin W. Gouldner and S. M. Miller (eds^, Applied Sociology; Opportunities and Problems (New York: The Free Press, 19^5), pp. 285-293, p. 286. 101 Talcott Parsons, Ch. VII. Deviant Behavior and the Mechanisms of Social Control, The Social System (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1951> Paperback ed. 1964^ pp. 249-325» Ch. VIII, Propaganda and Social Control, pp. 142-176. Talcott Parsons, Ch. XVI. Psychoanalysis and the Social Structure, Ch. XVIII. A Sociologist Looks at the Legal Profession, Essays in Sociological Theory (New York: The Free Press, 1954), pp. 33^-347), 370-385. 102 "Legal sanctions are almost invariably negative in character, e.g., fines and/or imprisonment." Evan, op. cit.. p. 290. 267 Parsons describes how social control techniques of thera pists differ from those of the legal system. He suggests the following as benefits and costs of the therapeutic mode for the patient: On the one hand it relieves the patient of certain pressures to which he is subject in ordinary life, notably perhaps the pressure of moral responsibility, but also more broadly of the normal consequences of expressing himself with complete freedom, either in the form of moral blame or punishment or aggressive reactions, or the acceptance of responsibility for maintaining and living up to the obligations of an institutionally defined relation in the case of positive relations. The price he pays for this extraordinary freedom, which need not be pleasurable, is the acceptance of a status of dependency- the ad mission he is 'sick' and in need of help. ' The definition of the patient as sick makes the role an undesirable one to be escaped as rapidly as possible. Moreover, insofar as he is defined as patholog ical, he is prevented from influencing others to join him in deviance from or opposition to the social structure. Despite the undesirable features of the role for the patient, he does escape the moral blame for his condition, 105 which the criminal must bear. ' Furthermore, Parsons 103 Parsons, Essays.in Sociological Theory, op. cit., p. 15#. 104Ibid., p. 162. 105Ibid.. p. 162. points out that the permissive, understanding atmosphere, the offer of help extended by the therapist is attractive bait. The very fact that the therapist avoids expressing moral judgments about the patient’s conduct is "one * 1 n A primary source of his ability to 'get at' his patient. It is apparent in his elucidation of various types of institutionalized social control, that Parsons believes psychotherapy is a most effective mode. In fact, in another essay, Parsons formulates the conditions under which the legal profession might, and often does, utilize techniques similar to those used in therapy in order to 107 forestall deviance. 1 The lawyer, however, is limited in the degree to which he can take the permissive path. As Parsons points out, the lawyer is schooled in the great tradition of the law, and he accepts responsibility for its integrity. Thus, the lawyer is constrained by his position, role, and training. Parsons' analysis of psychotherapy functioning as a mechanism of social control can hardly be denied. 269 Nevertheless, it is doubtful that many therapists view psychotherapy in such a light. Parsons’ analysis is typical of the sociological perspective, focused as it is on the consequences of an institutional practice for the social system. Prom the point of view of sociology of knowledge, it is assumed that psychotherapists, as well as lawyers, perceive human relationships in terms of the typifications, assumptions, and propositions learned in their own discipline. In any event, there are practical as well as theoretical reasons why therapists encourage free expres sion in a permissive, understanding atmosphere. The legal system has the power of the state behind it to enforce its sanctions; whereas, therapists in private practice would probably lose many of their clients, should they become punitive and moralistic. Moreover, lawyers are concerned with the determination of guilt; therapists, with the 109 alleviation of guilt. Lawyers must base their decisions upon legal ^^"What is the function of this feeling of guilt? It serves to break the child's will and to drive it into submission.••.Guilt is reduced to disobedience and is not felt as that which it is in a more genuine sense, self- mutilation." Fromm in Kluckhohn, Murray and Schneider, op. cit., pp. 518-519. 270 criteria established by official statutes and precedent; psychologists base their judgments upon their own complex theoretical system. Ultimately, the function of law is the maintenance and preservation of the social order; the job of the clinical psychologist, to help his client. The separate paths taken by law and psychology can be traced not only to their different functions, but also to the diverse position of the two disciplines in our society: that of law as a representative of the moral code of society, that of psychology as a behavioral science. As we have seen, moral judgments are explicit and essen tial in law, but implicit and "ideally” to be avoided in the behavioral sciences. Psychologists try to be non- judgmental; or rather, their judgments are preferably not of a moralistic nature. Despite the flaming, recurrent polemics on the subject, it is assumed that in principle at least, all 110"^ lawyer, for example, is not trained to think like a scientist." Leonard S. Cottrell, Jr. and Eleanor B. Sheldon, "Relationship Expectations," in Howard M. Vollmer and Donald L. Mills (eds.), Professionalization, op. cit., p. 233* 271 sciences postulate determinism.'*''*''*' The deterministic framework of behavioral science contrasts with the doctrine of free will which is central to the legal system. Funda mental principles underlying the legal system assume indi vidual responsibility for one's own actions, the freedom to choose between good and evil, and the liability to be 112 punished should one prefer evil. The origins of the notion of free will in our religious and ethical background is traced by Holt in this interesting passage: It was, of course, heavily influenced by Judaism and Christianity. In both of these religions, ethics is formulated as a matter of individual choice of good or evil behavior: the individual is responsible for his acts because he is considered free to choose one course or another. Man fell from grace and had to leave his original earthly paradise because he ac quired the knowledge of good and evil— that is, be came able to foresee the consequences of his acts, to "In terms of social-scientific method, one is faced with a way of thinking that assumes a priori that the human world is a causally closed system....Freedom as a kind of cause is excluded from this system a priori." Peter L. Berger, Invitation to Sociology: A Humanistic Perspective (Garden City, N. Y.: Anchor books, Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1963), p. 123. Sidney Hook (ed.), Determinism and Freedom (New York: Collier Books, 1961). -1 - 1 0 Barbara Wooton, Crime and the Criminal (London: Stevens & Sons, 1963) quoted by Judge David L. Bazelon, Trans-Action, op. cit., July/August 1967> p» 17; "The legal system, which is based upon the doctrine of free will, must come to grips with a science of human behavior." C. Ray Jeffrey, book review of Paul W. Tappan, Crime. Justice, and Correction. American Sociological Review, Feb. 272 plan and guide his behavior by the affect signals deriving from a value system, and thus to choose. With the loss of his original passive innocence, man became like God in being an active force and thus himself a potential creator and initiator. With this freedom came responsibility; and our legal codifica tion of ethics still maintains a confused recognition that when a person does not ’know right from wrong’ and cannot actively choose what course of action to folloY^^he should not be held responsible for his acts. Conceptual system and existential base.— The distinctive and fundamental elements in the conceptual system of law which are of concern to us are the follow ing: (1) the major unit of study and related concepts are law, authority, and power, (2) a universal orientation, (3) the assumption of free will and individual responsi bility, (4) legal and moral categories of explanation, and (5) a theory of legal control and punishment to deter wrongdoing and to protect society. The foregoing discussion was intended to show the close interrelationship between the selected conceptual elements and the position and function of law, its 1963, p. 15^. Ill Robert Holt, ”Ego Autonomy Re-Evaluated,” International Journal of Psychiatry (June 1967)1 pp. 4&L- 503» "There is no tenable alternative to determinism for science...” p. 4#2. The quotation is from the same issue: Robert Holt, "On Freedom, Autonomy, and the Redirection of Psychoanalytic Theory, A Rejoinder," pp. 524-536, p. 526. cultural and philosophical background, the area of control and facilities available to the legal system. Conceptual apparatus and existential base are so intertwined that it was not feasible to try to discuss the two components separately. Furthermore, the discussion was brief. Many of the features are codified elements of legal theory and procedures and are established characteristics of the legal profession, and therefore did not require extensive documentation as in the case of psychology. Since the legal system is bound by precedent, tradition, and codified procedures, there is not the same degree of autonomy and freedom to construct and shift as exists in a relatively new profession such as clinical psychology. However, it is understood that what occurs in legal realms does not necessarily match official legal theory. Second, as suggested earlier, it is recognized that there is considerable dissent and philosophical differences among individuals within the legal profession. Third, the conceptual elements specified are not con sidered to indicate anything about the personality traits or personal motives of individual lawyers or law students. Ideology.— If intensive, extended study in a particular discipline influences perception and shapes ideology, what type of ideological responses could be 274 expected from graduate law students? It is expected that value-orientation will reflect focus of study. Therefore, law students would tend to place more emphasis on solving social problems through legal processes than would other students. They should place a higher value on power and obedience to authority. Policy valued and advocated should reflect theory associated with functions of the legal system. Therefore, it is expected that law students will prefer strict law enforcement and punishment to permis siveness. The free will assumption should be reflected by a higher evaluation of the use of will power than will be given by other students. Furthermore, it is expected that law students, to a greater degree than other students, will defend government policies, in this case, with regard to the Vietnam war and capital punishment. In judging deviant groups, it is expected that deviant behavior will tend to be categorized and given the same meaning as in the context learned in intensive study. In legal cases, deviant behavior is judged in moralistic terms using a traditional evaluative system based on legal prescriptions and the moral code of society. Therefore it is expected that graduate law students will impute negative moral traits to deviants, and will see them as irrational and harmful to society. The professional vocabulary and conceptual system should predispose its 275 practitioners and students to viewing deviant behavior in terms of guilt. Reflecting the legal premise of free will, law students should consider deviants as responsible for their conduct. It is expected that responses will tend to characterize functions of the legal system. Therefore law students should tend to advocate prohibiting deviance by law, and will recommend punishment. Beliefs of law students about human nature and the world should tend to reflect the legal assumption regard ing free will. Responses such as those predicted above would indicate beliefs concerning man and society which would justify and legitimate the function of the American legal system, its underlying assumptions, and its opera tional procedures. Anthropology Mannheim described the crisis that occurs when divergent and conflicting modes of thought arise in important areas of life which were previously governed by 1 - 1 J certainty and absolute beliefs. Today a crisis of this nature is taking place as new psychological theories ■^Sfennheim, 0£. cit.. p. 103. 276 confront the established legal-moral codes and procedures on questions regarding social problems and deviance where the role of the two professions overlap. In company with many others, Judge Bazelon voices the disturbing thoughts and problems provoked by the intro duction of "revolutionary new information about human 115 beings from the behavioral sciences." "If this new information is valid," he asks, "what happens to our notions of morality?"11^1 No answers or solutions appear in sight. Judge Bazelon sees fear and uncertainty regard ing the implications as contributing to the reluctance of lawyers to assimilate knowledge; of psychotherapists, to clarify the state of the developing body of knowledge about human nature; and the failure of both professions to 117 adapt to the new conditions. ' The problem is complex. The viewpoints are varied. The dialogue has been going on for many years. For more than a decade, Szasz has been advocating not assimilation, but a sharp demarcation between legal and psychiatric '^'’ Bazelon, op. cit.. p. S. ll6Ibid., p. 13. 117Ibid., p. 11. 277 areas. He has been sharply critical about the confusion among medical values and the values of social, ethical, 118 and legal concepts. Szasz accuses his fellow psycho therapists of implicitly assuming Western legal-moral standards as models of normality, and of viewing departure 119 from that model as "mental illness." As we have seen, the American legal system and Western psychotherapy emerged, in part, from a common cultural and philosophical background. Both professions have been accused of ethnocentrism, of constructing their models of "reality" in the upper-middle class American 120 image. Anthropology was included in this study as a discipline which might provide a contrast in this respect. Intensive study of diverse societies affords a different kind of cultural experience and background. Graduate ■'"'^Thomas S. Szasz, "The Myth of Mental Illness," American Psychol.. I960, 15 (2), pp. 113-118, discussed in Offer & Sabshin, ojd. cit.. p. 24. 119 ^Thomas S. Szasz, "Some Observations on the Relationship between Psychiatry and Law," American Med ical Assn. Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, 75:279, 195^« quoted in Federal Probation (Dec. 1961). p. 16. 120 Herbert A. Block, "Legal, Sociological, and Psychiatric Variations in the Interpretation of the Criminal Act," in Richard W. Nice (ed.), Crime and Insanity (New York: Philosophical Library, 195&), pp. 65-103, PP* 70, 93. 278 anthropology students spend years engaged in intensive study of varied patterns and ways of life. Their attention is selectively focused upon different realms than those viewed by psychology and law students. The conceptual system into which they are indoctrinated, the type of ex planation and vocabulary of motives provided, are dis tinctive in several aspects. Conceptual system.— From the anthropological per spective, "each culture defines its own version of reality, its own standards and ethical system, and imposes its own 121 distinctive patterns as normal." Such a conception does not refer merely to different values and norms. It refers instead to the assumed order of things embracing both subject and environment and conceived to be the objectively 122 real matrix within which events occur and have meaning. From the anthropological viewpoint, cultural realities differ from society to society. The definition of what is normal or deviant, mentally healthy or mentally 121 M. Brewster Smith, "Anthropology and Psychology," in For a Science of Social Man. John Gillin (ed.), (New Yorlc: tfhe Macmillan do., 19^4), pp. 32-66, p. 53. 122 Charles D. Bolton, "Behavior, Experience, and Relationships: A Symbolic Interactionist Point of View," (mimeo'd)• 279 ill, rational or irrational, desirable or undesirable, the very meaning of persons, objects, and behavior are all considered to be cultural creations. In this sense, then, some anthropologists believe that the cognitive organiza tion of human beings is culturally constituted. Hallowell expresses it this way: One assumption I have made is that cognitive organi zation and orientation in human beings is in part culturally constituted and to this extent a function of group membership.... If we do not take the qualitative aspects of their world into account, the behavior of the Ojibwa cannot be fully understood or explained. The cognitive processes of individuals— perceiving, remembering, imagining, conceiving, judging, and reasoning— are integrally related to the cognitive orientation that is derived from their culture. ' Hallowell’s view of cognitive orientation as relative to a particular cultural group and as socially determined differs from the emphasis by clinical psychol ogists on universal principles, and on individual and ^A. Irving Hallowell, "Ojibwa Metaphysics of Being and The Perception of Persons" in R. Tagiuri and L. Petrullo (eds.), Person Perception and Interpersonal Behavior (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 195#), pp. 63-^5, p. 79. See Anthony F. C. Wallace, "The Psychic Unity of Human Groups," in Bert Kaplan (ed.), Studying Personality Cross-Culturally, op. cit., pp. 129-103, Wallace makes assumptions similar to those stated here by Hallowell, and he contrasts them to universalistic propositions of psychoanalysts, pp. 145-146. 280 psychological determinants. Differences of the same type can be noted in relation to other phenomena. As we have seen, many clinical psychologists assume that development of individual potentialities, mastery of environment, and strivings for freedom are universal values somehow rooted in the nature of the human organism. In contrast, the typical anthropological assumption is that an individual istic, future-oriented, achievement value-orientation is relative to, culturally defined and valued by some, but not all societies and groups. Such a value-orientation is but one of several identified in research by Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck.^*4 ' The diverse types of value-orientations which Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck encountered appear to be based on fundamentally different normative and existential assumptions. Soddy's cross-cultural study, which was described in the last chapter, also identified value- orientations held by Eastern religions which diverge considerably from psychological value-orientations. Examination of clinical psychologists' and anthro pologists' differences in their views of cognitive orientation leads to a more basic question, one concerning definitions of normality. Several theorists have analyzed ^^S’ lorence Kluckhohn and Fred Strodtbeck, Varia tions in Value Orientations (Evanston, 111.'' Row, Peterson & Co., 196l). 281 the differences between anthropological, psychological, and legal conceptions of normality. First, it is of interest to observe the manner in which Freud distinguished between the structural or psychic meaning of normality and the social meaning of normality. In Freud's terms, if psycho analysis were able to result in a condition in which all the patient's repressions had been lifted and every memory gap filled, then the patient would have reached a level of 125 absolute psychic normality. Turning to the social meaning of normality, Freud distinguishes it from a clinical or scientific definition: Social meaning (schematic normality). Depending on society and particular goals, certain concepts of normality may be conceived, such as absence of con flicts or passions in a person. Such definitions certainly have no clinical validity and appear arbi trary from the scientific viewpoint, although the one who conceiyes of them may try to base them on objec tive data. In contrast to Freud, Block does not distinguish the social meaning of normality from a scientific meaning. Instead he tends to equate the social meaning with 125 'This discussion is taken from Kurt R. Eissler, ''The Efficient Soldier," in Warner Muensterburger and Sidney Axelrod (eds.). The Psychoanalytic Study of Society (New York: International Universities Press, I960), pp. 91-94, reprinted in Offer and Sabshin, 0£. cit.. pp. 177-181, p. 178, Freud, 1937, p. 320. 126Ibid., p. 179, Freud, 1937, p. 351 2&2 sociological and anthropological definitions of normality. He suggests that sociological conceptions of normalcy have largely depended on consensus and subscription to the common definition of the situation. What is normal in the social realm is a matter of selective awareness to an unstructured reality which has become reinforced by the similar perceptions of others. Block's view is congruous with the anthropological conception. In addition, however, anthropologists have underscored the enormous diversity of human conceptions of normality and the almost unlimited range of guiding social standards for human conduct. Block notes that from the anthropological view, virtually any type of behavior might be considered normal if enough people subscribe to it. Many standards of behavior, for example, previously regarded because of our own highly restrictive cultural vision as basic, innate, or instinctive, have now been disclosed as resulting from the effects of sociocultural conditioning. The researches of Ruth Benedict, Margaret Mead, Cora DuBois, and in numerable others, have indicated with unmistakable clarity that patterns of behavior, completely dia metric to conceptions entertained in the Western World, may be considered conventional, routine^ and ordinary to individuals of different cultures. 127 Herbert A. Block, "Legal, Sociological, and Psychiatric Variations in the Interpretation of the Criminal Act," in Richard A. Nice (ed.), Crime and .Insanity (New York: Philosophical Library, 1958), pp. 65-103, p. 72. l28Ibid., pp. 72-73. The psychological sense of normalcy is quite dif ferent from the anthropological view. The former connotes the integration of the individual into a unified whole, freedom from compulsive behavior, ability to make rational discriminations, and capacity to shift for oneself without 129 becoming a burden to others. Block contrasts the legal conception of normalcy to both anthropological and psychological versions. The legal conception reflects the moral views of the control ling groups in society. It is embodied in legal statutes, whose primary function, says Block, is to maintain the 130 status quo. J Block goes on to suggest that the present conflicts regarding criminal responsibility arise from the fact that the legal view and the socio-psychiatric view proceed from entirely different premises. ...as sciences with a strong naturalistic bent, both psychiatry and sociology, while recognizing a limited area in which freedom of volition may operate, nevertheless tend to regard the individual as con ditioned by an entire series of prior and present conditions which limit his sphere of operation and choice.... This is a far cry from the simple legal problem of determining innocence and guilt in terms of a given 284 act and the subsequent quantitative determination., of punishment as an effective means of deterrence. On the other hand, Block notes that there are similarities in the psychological and legal sense of normalcy with regard to criminal responsibility. Psycho logically, if one is under no serious compulsion to act, if one is free to exercise his own volitional capacity, then the individual is considered normal and subject to the penal code. Thus the legal counterpart of the psycho logical sense of normalcy "as conceived in terms of unimpaired volitional controls, is the legal concept of n o responsibility under the law." Here, Block is referring to legal codes which have adopted the Durham decision, superceding the McNaughten Rule. The former include criteria related to volition rather than merely to cog nitive processes. Cressey also notes the underlying similarity between what he calls the "mentalistic" approach of psychiatry and criminal law. 131Ibid., p. 80. 132Ibid.. p. 76. In criminal law, the 'right and wrong test' assumes the existence of a mind which, when normal and mature, operates in such a way that the human has conscious freedom to choose-, rationally whether or not a crime shall be committed. A diseased or immature mind is considered by both psychiatry and criminal law to be incapable of intelligent choice or of entertaining criminal intent. This assump tion, Cressey says, tends to equate rationality and sanity. J The psychological conception differs, however, in its assumption of "unconscious," deeply hidden emotional forces of the mind that compel and motivate the actor even if he knows the action is illegal.1- 3- 3 In this instance, Cressey is referring to the difference between the psycho logical conception and the legal conception which is still based on the McNaughten Rule. In contrast to psychological and legal conceptions, Cressey describes a sociological, "non-mentalistic" conception wherein individuals would be considered insane if illegal conduct were "not motivated," and thus not intended.1- 36 The latter conception differs 133 Donald Cressey, "The Differential Association Theory and Compulsive Crimes," in Nice, Crime and Insanity. 0£. cit., pp. 49-64, p. 52. 286 from the psychological conception in that motives are viewed as "linguistic constructs" which organize acts in particular situations; motives are not considered to be inner, biological mainsprings of action deeply hidden in 137 the unconscious. ^ In a detailed semantic analysis of the uses and meaning of the term "criminal responsibility," Leifer, a professor of psychiatry, demonstrates that, in all cases, criminal responsibility depends upon an "assessment" or evaluation of conduct which must be decided according to "conventions" or "rules." Therefore, the determination depends upon whose conventions and rules are being fol lowed. The determination of criminal responsibility, says Leifer, cannot be a scientific or psychological matter; the issues, instead, are moral, legal, and political. Comparisons have been made of differing beliefs concerning cognitive organization, value-orientations, normality, and criminal responsibility. The variation seems to arise from the different conceptual apparatus used by diverse groups— their assumptions regarding human 137Ibid., p. 54. ^^Ronald Leifer, "The Concept of Criminal Respon sibility," in Etc.. A Review of General Semantics. Vol. XXIV, No. 2 (June 1967), pp. 177-190, p. 190. 2&7 nature, the criteria, categories, and terminology employed. Most of the differences discussed thus far ap pear to be related to an intensive, selective focus on different aspects of the universe and human relationships. For example, the distinctive elements of the anthropolog ical conceptual apparatus include: (l) sociocultural units as major concepts, (2) a relativistic reality orientation, (3) emphasis upon the principle of social determination, and (4) a sociocultural relativistic vocab ulary of motives or type of explanation. Such a concep tual apparatus seems to be a consequence of the different kinds of data seen by anthropologists, both academically and professionally in field experience. Existential base.— The primary role of anthro pologists, generally, is the study and understanding of the cultures or ways of life of the various societies of the world. This characteristic distinguishes anthropology from law and clinical psychology. The major roles of the latter are primarily those of application; most lawyers 139 and clinical psychologists are practitioners. " This 13'3tj-^he lawyer] is interested primarily in decisions of practical policy and operating issues and in the manipulation of the factors affecting these issues and is much less concerned with the study of social processes simply to 'explain* them.” Cottrell and Sheldon in Vollmer & Mills, 0£. cit., p. 233. 288 distinction provides us with an opportunity to determine whether such a difference in basic role affects the ideological outlook of individuals. The job of anthro pologists is to observe and understand behavior in its own context. Anthropologists are generally not trained to think in terms of intervention, treatment, or control. Role procedures of anthropologists, in this sense, are permissive but non-interventionist in nature. Ideology.— Anthropology students were included in this study, in part, to test the proposition that inten sive, prolonged study of other societies would result in conceptions of reality different from those of most other American students; conceptions characterized by a relativ istic, rather than a universal or ethnocentric perspec tive. Of major interest in this respect is the notion of "rationality" as indicative of what the various disci plines take to be "reality-oriented," of what they tend to reify. Therefore, the students were asked to evaluate each of the test concepts in terms of rational vs. irrational. The prediction is that graduate anthropology students would tend to check neutral on this scale, to a far greater degree than would other students. The impli cation being that what is rational or irrational is dependent upon which world you are in, and the criteria, standards, norms, and values defined in that world. Since 289 this additional information is not given, it was expected that graduate anthropology students would be unwilling or feel unable to make any judgment concerning rationality. Many writers have pointed out that psychology students today are well acquainted with the principle of cultural relativity, but some have questioned whether there is more than surface acknowledgment of the principle. Our assumption is that principles learned in academic training will affect the type of judgments made only if those principles are basic to the categorial and assump tive framework of the student's major discipline and future professional role. In this case, the principle of cultural relativity is considered to be fundamental to anthropology, but only peripheral to clinical psychology. Furthermore, lacking intensive familiarity with other thoughtways and other patterns for living, psychology students, in general, as well as most other students, may know of only one reality. Following from the assumption made above, it is expected that graduate anthropology students will be the least conventional in their judgments concerning deviant lA-0„in terms of lip service, cultural relativism is almost as widely embraced in psychology as in anthro pology..." M. Brewster Smith, in Gillen, 0£. cit., p. 53. 290 groups. They will be considered least conventional if they differ most from the other seven samples in their responses. They will be considered least conventional, also, in a qualitative sense, if they least endorse American legal- moral stereotypes or typifications regarding social problem groups. The above prediction can be derived from the fol lowing general proposition which is compatible with learn ing and perception theory: Objects and behavior will tend to be categorized and to be given the same meaning as in the context learned in intensive study. Many types of behavior labeled as deviant in Western culture are familiar to anthropologists in a context where those behaviors are considered normal. To use an extreme example, a witch doctor, subject to epileptic seizures, trances, and delusional visions may be recognized as a leader and man of high social status in some countries, rather than as mentally ill or potentially harmful. This possibility would be more evident to graduate anthropology students than to other students. It is predicted, then, that graduate anthropology students will give a neutral response more frequently than will other students on each of the scales used to evaluate deviant groups. Furthermore, they are expected to give the smallest number of responses indicating negative 291 evaluation since they are expected to be least guided by United States moral-legal standards with regard to deviance; Anthropology students are expected to view prob lems associated with poverty and low economic status as socially-determined rather than a consequence of indi vidual moral or intellectual deficiency. Anthropology students should tend to consider society, rather than the individual, as responsible. Judgments are expected to reflect role procedures. Therefore, anthropology students should be the least likely to advocate any type of intervention or treatment, whether it be to help or to punish, to advocate or not to advocate psychotherapy, or to prohibit deviance by law. They should, however, endorse ’ 'permit." With regard to social issues, it is expected that value-orientation will reflect focus and major concepts used by the discipline. Therefore, anthropology students should tend to place more emphasis than other students on group control and support as a means of combatting deviance (e.g. by groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous) than on psychotherapy or on use of will power. They should tend to value group sentiments more highly than other students. Policy valued and advocated should reflect role procedures. Therefore, it is expected that anthro pology students will prefer a permissive policy to strict 292 law enforcement and punishment. Beliefs of anthropology students about human nature and the world should tend to reflect the assumption of social determinism. SUMMARY In chapters II, III, and IV, studies were cited which examined the influence of sociocultural factors upon ideology, perception, world-view, knowledge, and upon conceptions and definitions of deviance. Using proposi tions found in the literature as a guide, the socio cultural relativistic approach was applied to the study of clinical psychology, law, and anthropology. Ideal type explanation sketches were constructed for each discipline. Selected elements of the conceptual system and existential base, which are considered funda mental to the disciplines, were described. The modal type of ideological responses expected from graduate students in each discipline were also specified. The differences in ideological responses expected from the students in the three disciplines are assumed to be a consequence of the type of data and the learning experience to which they have been exposed. The selective focus on particular data and the meaning given to that data is assumed to be, in part, a consequence of the position, role, and historical background of each. 293 The disciplines have been treated as distinctive sociocultural groups, each possessing norms, values, terminology, and other conceptual apparatus suitable to its specialized role in society; each instructing its new members in the proper ways of perceiving, categorizing, and responding to various objects, persons, and events. The instruction is presumed to socialize newcomers, assimilate them into the group, to legitimate, justify, and perpetuate group institutions. In the following chapter, the hypotheses which were described discursively here, will be stated formally. Operational definitions and indicators will be specified. Procedures utilized for classification, measurement, and statistical analysis of the data will be described. CHAPTER VI RESEARCH PROCEDURES Research Design The present study was designed primarily to in vestigate the effect of academic specialization upon ideologies regarding deviance. Academic discipline and graduate-undergraduate status are the two independent variables investigated. Ideology, represented by responses of the subjects on the research instrument, is the depend ent variable. The research design called for samples of eight populations of students. Three of the populations con sisted of graduate students majoring in social or cultural anthropology, clinical psychology, and law. Another consisted of graduate students from a variety of other disciplines exclusive of psychology, anthropology, and law (graduate mixed-majors). Three of the populations consisted of undergraduates intending to work for ad vanced degrees in the three disciplines. The eighth population consisted of undergraduate students other than majors in each of the three specified disciplines (under graduate mixed-majors). 294 295 Three general hypotheses will be examined to enable us to assess whether or not academic specialization appears to influence social ideology: (1) Social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, anthropology, and those comprising a mixed-majors group will differ. (2) Social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthropology will reflect the unique conceptual systems of their respective dis ciplines. (3) Social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthropology will reflect more clearly the distinctive character of their respective disciplines than will the social ideologies of under graduate students in the same disciplines. Specific hypotheses were formulated predicting the content and direction of the ideological responses expected from graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthropology. The predicted responses were deduced from the conceptual systems of the respective disciplines. Specific predictions were not made for the mixed-majors samples nor for the undergraduate samples. The mixed-majors samples can be considered, roughly, to represent the general university student population. They can serve as a general reference point against which to compare responses of specialized groups. Although no specific predictions were made for undergraduate students, their responses will be compared with the corresponding graduate samples. The character istics of each discipline should be more apparent in responses of graduate samples than of undergraduate samples. If there were no difference among undergraduate samples, then there would be less reason to believe that hypothesized differences among graduate samples were due to selective characteristics which led them into the disciplines in the first place. Any differences among graduate samples would then be assumed to be a result of their different learning experiences at the university. On the other hand, if there are significant differences among undergraduate samples which reflect the character istics of the disciplines, such data might indicate that students were predisposed to select majors which weue congruous with pre-existing ideologies. In the latter case, the evidence would not support academic special ization as a determinant of the type of ideological responses tested here. The two outcomes represent the alternative processes of change as opposed to selectivity. Evidence regarding which of the two processes appears to be operating may be obtained, in part, by an examination and analysis of the variation within and among groups, 297 along two vectors, horizontally and vertically. If a discipline's conceptual system is an important determinant of ideology, then the learning of new conceptual systems should result in noticeable differences between graduate and undergraduate samples. Within each discipline, responses of the graduate students should be more homo geneous than those of the undergraduate students. The major proportion of variation should shift from within groups in undergraduate samples to among groups in the graduate samples. Six kinds of comparisons will be made, comparisons: (l) among the four graduate samples, (2) among the four undergraduate samples, (3-6) between the undergraduate and graduate samples of each of the four groups. SAMPLES A decision was made to obtain all of the eight samples from the same university, thus holding constant size of school, geographic area, university atmosphere, and any other factors characteristic of type of univer sity. Therefore, any differences which might occur would not be due to variables of this nature. A second decision was made to conduct the research at a university somewhere in the vicinity of Los Angeles, 29 6 the approximate area of the investigator’s residence. Since all arrangements and data collection were to be made by the investigator alone, frequent out-of-town trips would have been too costly and time-consuming. Use of a local university would make possible as many prior trips as necessary to assure proper preliminary preparation for the research and also post-research trips if necessary for any reason. These decisions immediately narrowed the choice of universities to the University of California at Los Angeles or to the University of Southern California, the only universities in the area which offered advanced degrees in all three disciplines. The University of Southern California was eliminated since there were only a handful of advanced candidates in anthropology. Further more, it was considered better not to conduct the research at the university where the investigator was studying. The student population at UCLA is very large, approximately 30,000. Many students from low or middle socioeconomic categories who cannot afford to attend private universities are enrolled at UCLA. Yet, because of its reputation as one of the leading universities in the country, there are also many students of higher socio economic status even though UCLA is a public university. Furthermore, UCLA has unusually large and outstanding 299 departments in all three of the disciplines under investi gation, an uncommon occurrence. Despite these advantages, however, the samples chosen at UCLA probably cannot be considered to be representative of any other larger population. Once the university had been selected, the next step was to secure the permission of the chairmen of the departments of anthropology and clinical psychology and the Associate Dean of the Law School. These officials kindly consented to permit the research to be carried out and offered assistance in several other ways. Subsequent arrangements were made directly with various professors within each department. Samples were obtained by several methods. At first it was hoped that most of the samples would be composed of whole classes and that the instrument could be administered during regular class periods. It was felt that use of classes would assure a higher degree of par ti cipation and might result in a more representative sample than would a mailed questionnaire with low response from a probability sample. The classes to be selected would be courses which are required for all majors in each of the three disciplines, so there would be no reason to believe that the students in these classes were non representative. For a variety of reasons, it was not 300 possible to carry out this plan for all groups. The instrument was administered to only two classes during regular class time. Most professors were reluctant to allow class time to be used to fill out the instrument. Instead they permitted the investigator to explain the purpose and nature of the research, to pass out the form to those students qualified and willing to participate, and then to return at a subsequent class period to pick up the completed forms. Two professors of anthropology offered to distribute the forms to several small graduate classes which they had. Due to the limited number of students working for the Ph.D. in anthropology and in clinical psychology, it was necessary to try to contact the entire population in these two fields and to attempt to obtain almost all members of the two groups for the sample. Many of these graduate students worked and came to the university only for occasional and diverse classes. Therefore, most of them had to be contacted by mail. A list of graduate students in anthropology and in clinical psychology was obtained from the departments with the consent of the chairmen. As mentioned above, two professors of anthro pology distributed forms to graduate students in several of their small seminars and returned the forms to the investigator. The professors then crossed out the names 301 of the 24 students who had turned in forms. One psychol ogy class, a required course for graduate majors in clinical psychology, was visited by the investigator. The 16 students in this class each crossed his name off the departmental list as having turned in a completed form. All other students on the two lists received mail ings consisting of a letter of explanation, the research instrument, one dollar as compensation, and a stamped, self-addressed return envelope. The letter of explanation made a strong plea for return of the form. Copies of the letters sent to each group are included in the appendixes. It was also necessary to secure part of the undergraduate law sample by mail. The reason will be explained below when a more detailed account of the methods used to obtain each of the samples will be described. Complete and precise instructions were given on pages one and two of the research instrument; therefore, instructions were standardized for the entire sample irrespective of whether contact was made by mail or in class. The research instrument was to be turned in anony mously by all respondents. It was felt that, given the condition of anonymity, there would be little reason for students to conceal or misrepresent their feelings and beliefs. 302 In most cases, students were each paid one dollar to reimburse them for their time. The payment, small as it was, proved to be effective in securing cooperation in returning the instrument. No payment was made to the undergraduate mixed-majors students who filled out the form during class time. The two anthropology professors who distributed and returned forms from their small graduate classes preferred not to pay the students. On the other hand, the graduate law students were each paid two dollars. In both the pre-test, conducted at the University of Southern California, and the main project at UCLA, considerable difficulty was encountered in making arrangements to obtain the law sample. Several persons, professors and others, explained that graduate law students had a heavy schedule, and that they, themselves, did not have to write dissertations, thus they would not be empathetic in this matter. Furthermore, the fact that they were not engaged in social research of this type, as were psychology and anthropology students, constituted another reason that law students allegedly would not be particularly sympathetic or responsive. One professor of law at USC asked his students whether they wished to par ticipate and the response was highly negative.^- ‘ '"The apparent attitude of law students to behav ioral research, in contrast to psychology and anthropology 303 In any event, the prospect of not being able to secure the law sample frightened the investigator to the state of offering two dollars in return for the approx imately half hour required to complete the form. The technique was overwhelmingly successful as will be explained presently. The undergraduate anthropology sample.— The under graduate sample consists of 46 students, all of whom were enrolled in a single, large anthropology class which is required for majors. Students who planned to work for a Ph.D. in social or cultural anthropology were requested to participate. Students majoring or planning to major in archeology and in physical anthropology were not included in the sample. Sixty-four students accepted forms, 46 (72$) were returned during three subsequent classes. This class was the first class visited. Initially there had been no intention to pay students for completing the form; however, on the first return trip, 2 the number of forms returned was quite low. It was at students, although not systematically verified, may con stitute an informal illustration supporting the thesis of differential influence of academic specialization. Other informal support of a very interesting type was revealed in some of the comments written in at the end of the re search instrument. 2 f ubjects in the pre-test were not paid; however, est forms were rilled out during class time. 304 this point that a decision was made to compensate the students for their time and cooperation. An announcement to that effect was made along with a plea to return the form at the next class session. Those who had already turned in their form were to be reimbursed upon request. However, it is probable that some students had already disposed of the instrument. It is also possible that some students who were not eligible accepted the forms out of curiosity with no intention of returning them. The number of students in this class who were actually eligible is not known. The undergraduate psychology sample.— Sixty-three completed forms were received from students who expressed an intention to work for doctoral degrees in clinical psychology. Ten additional forms received were eliminated because "experimental psychology" was written in as major despite the fact that only future clinical psychology majors were requested to participate. The 63 forms were obtained from two courses required for majors. Forms were passed out to eligible students. The students were asked to fill out the forms sometime during the next few hours and then to return them to the investigator at which time they would be paid one dollar. Eleven forms which were accepted were not returned. Response rate was 87 per cent of those accepted. 305 The undergraduate law sample.— Obtaining an under graduate law sample presented a new type of problem. There is no major in law for undergraduates at UCLA. Therefore, the sample is comprised of students who expressed an intention to go on to Law School and obtain a graduate degree in law, but who were not actually majors in law. In a sense, the undergraduate law sample is the only one of the three undergraduate groups which has not been "contaminated" by some academic specialization since they are not majors in law yet. Undergraduates in anthro pology and psychology, on the other hand, had already received some specialized training in their major fields at the time the research was conducted. The undergraduate law sample was obtained by two methods. A class offered by the Department of Political Science, as a core course for students who intend to specialize in Public Law, was visited. Students in this class who intended to become lawyers were requested to participate in the research. Thirty students took forms, and 21 (70$) returned them during two subsequent classes. Since it was considered desirable to have approximately 50 students in each of the eight samples, about 30 more students were needed. The political science professor who was head advisor to pre-law students was consulted. This professor kindly provided lists of students from various fields who had expressed an interest in attending meetings of the Prelegal Association because they were seriously contem plating the study of law. Nineteen separate lists of names secured from various classes and groups were sup plied to the investigator. A random sample of 40 students was chosen from these lists. Two names, and in two instances, three names, were selected at random from each of the lists. A letter of explanation along with the instrument, one dollar, and a stamped, addressed return envelope was mailed to each of the 40 students. Names were checked against the class list of the course which had already been solicited to see that no mailing was sent to any student in that class. Thirty-one (80$) completed forms were returned in the mail. One envelope was re turned from the post office, stamped "unknown at address." The resulting sample of 52 constituted an overall response rate of 75 per cent from the two sources. The undergraduate mixed-ma.iors sample.— The under graduate mixed-majors sample is comprised of 6l students enrolled in Principles of Sociology, a course which can be used to fulfill the social science general requirement, but which does not fulfill requirements for the major in 307 sociology. The professor of this class permitted the investigator to administer the research instrument during a regular class period. The 75 students who were in attendance that day all remained and completed the form. Fourteen forms were eliminated because the respondents were majors in the three disciplines under investigation: one in anthropology, five in clinical psychology, seven in experimental psychology, and one was a pre-law student. Nineteen different majors were represented by the 6l students in the mixed-majors sample. The list of major disciplines, along with frequencies of students within each discipline, is shown below: 3— Art 4— Economics 1— Engineering 4— English 1— Finance 1— General 2— Geography 9— History 1— Latin-American studies 3— Mathematics 1— Near East studies 1— Nursing 10— Political science 3oa 6— Social science for elementary education 2— Social science 7— Sociology 2— Spanish 2— Speech 1— Zoology The graduate anthropology sample.— The graduate anthropology sample consists of 45 students majoring in cultural or social anthropology. Students majoring in physical anthropology or in archeology were not included. The sample was obtained by two methods. Two professors of anthropology offered to distribute forms to graduate students in several of their small seminars. One profes sor returned 14 completed forms, the other returned 10. The investigator was permitted to go through the card file of graduate students, and to take the names and addresses of students identified as majors in cultural or social anthropology. Complete information was not avail able on all cards in the file, therefore the total number of students majoring in social or cultural anthropology could not be definitely established. Furthermore, some students were engaged in field work in foreign countries. Mailings were not sent to the latter. The names of students who had turned in forms were crossed off the list by the two professors. Twenty-seven names remained. A 309 letter of explanation, a research instrument, one dollar, and a stamped, self-addressed return envelope was sent to each of the 27 students. Twenty-two (#1$) forms were returned. One form was incomplete and was eliminated from the study. An additional form was returned blank. The head of the department estimated that approx imately kO fo (6S) of the 170 graduate anthropology students were majors in social and cultural anthropology. On the basis of this estimate, the obtained sample constituted approximately 66 per cent of the graduate students major ing in social and cultural anthropology at UCLA in the spring of 1967. The graduate clinical psychology sample.— The graduate clinical psychology sample consists of 67 students. One graduate class in clinical psychology was visited. All of the 16 students present completed and returned the forms. Eight students filled out the instru ment in the period directly following the class hour, eight could not stay, but returned the form by mail. The 16 students crossed their names off the list of graduate clinical psychology students which the investigator had obtained from the Graduate Office of Clinical Psychology. Sixty-four names remained on the list. Letters, forms, one dollar, and stamped, return envelopes were mailed to 310 each of the remaining 64 students. Fifty-two (30$) forms were returned. One of these was from a non-clinical psychology major and was eliminated. Two additional forms were returned blank. The sample constituted 85 per cent of all graduate clinical psychology students at UCLA in the spring of 1967. The graduate law sample.— As explained earlier, obstacles were encountered in the initial attempts to obtain a sample of graduate law students. Great appre ciation is due to the Associate Dean of the Law School who allowed the investigator to address his class. This class which is limited to third year graduate law students was the only course offered that semester which is required for graduation. In addressing the class, special pains were taken to explain why the viewpoint of the legal profession was especially pertinent to a thesis on deviance and contem porary social problems. Students were requested to pick up a form, to fill it out sometime during the next few hours, and to return it to the researcher who would be stationed in the recreation room of the Law Building all day. Two dollars would be paid to each student to com pensate him for his time and cooperation. This remark drew loud applause and cheers from the class. One hundred and ten students picked up forms on leaving the class and 311 10$ (95$) were returned during the day. The number of students present in class that day is not known. However, the total enrollment in the class was 116. Two hundred and sixty-five students were enrolled in their third year at the law school at UCLA in the spring of 1967. There fore, the graduate law sample constitutes 40 per cent of third year students and 16 per cent of all graduate law students enrolled at UCLA that year (665). Table 2 indicates the percentage of the relevant class population at UCLA which is included in each of the three graduate samples (anthropology, psychology, and law). The initial research plan had been to obtain samples of undergraduates in their first year of the major and graduate students in their final year. The law samples probably come closest to fulfilling the original plan inasmuch as the undergraduates have not yet enrolled in law courses, and the graduate sample is composed entirely of last-year students. The initial plan could not be implemented for the undergraduate psychology or anthropology samples because not many declared majors could be found in introductory courses as became evident during the pre-test. At that stage, most students have not yet decided upon their majors. The plan was changed with regard to the graduate samples because it was considered preferable to have a larger sample than would be available if only last-year 312 TABLE 2 PERCENTAGE OF THE RELEVANT CLASS POPULATION AT UCLA WHICH IS INCLUDED IN EACH OF THE THREE GRADUATE SAMPLES Total Population At Sample N UCLA Percentage GA** 45 68 (estimated) 66 GP*** 67 79 S5* GL**** 105 265 (3rd year) 40 665 (all GL) 16 *Of the three populations, clinical psychology is the only group whose entire membership was contacted. **GA = graduate anthropology sample. ***GP = graduate psychology sample. ****GL = graduate law sample. 313 students in clinical psychology and anthropology were eligible. The graduate mixed-majors sample.— The graduate mixed-majors sample was obtained from the foreign language classes which are designed to aid graduate students who are preparing to take the foreign language examinations required of Ph.D. candidates. These classes are composed of students with a variety of majors. The investigator visited three classes, explained the nature of the research, and passed out forms to students who were will ing to participate. Sixty-one of the 67 students present in the three classes accepted forms. Two students in the class were anthropology majors who had already received forms elsewhere. The remaining four students declined, saying they were too busy. Forty-four (72$) completed forms were returned during subsequent classes. The composition of Ph.D. language courses is quite fluid, and some of the students who accepted forms did not return to the classes again. Nineteen majors are represented in the graduate mixed majors sample. By coincidence, this is the same number of different kinds of majors which are included in the undergraduate mixed majors sample. The list of major disciplines along with frequencies of students within each discipline are shown below: 1— African studies 1— Astronomy 2— Business Administration 2— Chemistry 3— Education 6— Engineering 1— English 1— French 1— Geography A— History 1— Latin-American studies 3— Literature 3— Mat hematics 2— Medical Microbiology 1— Philosophy 4— Political science 1— Public administration 2— Physical education 5— Sociology Although the mixed-majors samples were not selected by random sampling technique, the large number of diverse majors represented in each of the two groups would suggest that they might be fairly representative of the general student population at UCLA. At least, there 315 seem to be no obvious reasons to believe that the samples are biased in any particular way. Response rates.— Table 3 indicates the rate of forms returned relative to those accepted in classes or to those mailed. It is assumed that all or most students who met the requirements accepted forms. However, it is not known whether or not this is so. In the three language classes for Ph.D. candidates, four of the 67 students present declined to accept forms. It is possible, how ever, that students in such classes are under unusual pressure. The overall response rate for forms distributed in classes is 86 per cent. The rate for one of the groups, the graduate anthropology sample, is not known. In this case only, two professors, rather than the inves tigator, distributed forms to graduate students in small seminars. The number distributed is not known. The response rate for mailed forms is 80 per cent. The com bined response rate for forms both mailed and distributed in classes for the entire sample is 85 per cent. Composition of the Samples Size of the samples.— Table k gives the number and 316 TABLE 3 Response Rates Number Per Accepted Number Cent Sample* In Class Returned Returned UA 64 46 72 UP 84 73 85 UL 30 21 70 UM 75 75 100 GA —— 24 — GP 16 16 100 GL 110 105 95 GM 61 44 72 440 404 86 Sample Number Number Per Mailed Returned Cent Returned UL 39 31 80 GA 27 22 81 GP 64 52 81 131 105 80 Combined Response Rate from Two Sources UL 75 GP 85 Combined Response Rate for Total Sample 571 485 85 24 • m m m *UA = undergraduate anthropology GA = graduate anthropology UP = undergraduate psychology GP = graduate psychology UL * undergraduate law GL = graduate law UM = undergraduate mixed-majors GM = graduate mixed-majors 317 TABLE 4 NUMBER AND PER CENT OF STUDENTS IN EACH SAMPLE A P L M 2 46(io/o) 63 (135^) 52(n/°) 6l(i3/0 222 (4695) - — (9/0 — (1^) i^(22^) ^(2£) — ($4#) 91(l9/0 130(27/0 137(33/) 105(22/) 4g3 318 per cent of students in each sample. Except for the graduate law sample of 105 students, the other seven samples vary in number from 44 to 67. Each of the latter seven samples comprises from nine to 14 per cent of the total number of respondents. Undergraduates make up 46 per cent and graduates 54 per cent of the total number of 483 respondents. Class year.— The undergraduate sample is composed of 15 per cent sophomores, 53 per cent juniors, and 32 per cent seniors. Sophomores represent the smallest propor tion and juniors the largest proportion of each of the four undergraduate groups. The mixed-majors sample has a more equal distribution than the other three groups. The graduate law sample, as explained earlier, is composed entirely of third year students, whereas the other three graduate groups are divided among first, second, third, and fourth year students. The psychology group has the highest proportion of fourth year students whereas the mixed group has the highest proportion of first year students. In both the undergraduate and the graduate samples, then, the mixed samples have somewhat more students in the lower class years, and the psychology samples are somewhat higher in advanced class years. Except for the graduate law sample, however, the distri- 319 bution by class year is not too uneven. Table 5 presents the distribution by class year for the eight samples. Age.— The data for age are divided into three categories: (l) 21 years of age and under, (2) 22 to 26 years, and (3) 27 years and over. Of the undergraduate students, 77 per cent are 21 years or under, lS per cent are between 22 and 26 years of age, and 5 per cent are 27 years or older. The breakdown by discipline does not vary much from the overall distribution. No group varies more than seven per cent from the overall percentage for a particular category. The mixed group has the highest pro portion in the youngest category. Anthropology has a somewhat larger proportion in the older categories. Law and psychology are in-between, and have a similar distri bution. Of the graduates, only two per cent are 21 years or under, 6l per cent are between 22 and 26 years of age, and 35 per cent are 27 years or older. The age distribu tion by discipline varies considerably from the overall distribution. Only the mixed-majors sample is similar to the total breakdown for graduate students. Eighty-five per cent of the law students are in the middle age category; whereas, more than half of the anthropology and psychology students are in the oldest category. 320 TABLE 5 DISTRIBUTION BY CLASS YEAR Class A P Year * Sophomore 17 6 Junior 57 60 Senior 26 33 100 "99 L M f o fo 12 28 15 (35) 54 41 53 (117) 35 31 32 ___ (70) 101 100 100 (222) G-l 20 13 32 12 G-2 20 22 25 13 G-3 27 24 100 23 55 G-4 33 40 21 20 i m “99 tou lOl 109 (32) (35) (143) (51) (261) 321 The breakdown by age is somewhat similar to the distribution by class year in that the mixed-majors samples are again higher in the younger categories, except for the graduate law sample which has the largest pro portion of young. Psychology and anthropology have a greater proportion of older graduate students, reflecting the fact that one-third or more of their students are in the fourth year; whereas the law degree is attained in three years. Table 6 presents the age distribution for the eight samples. Sex.— The undergraduate group is divided almost equally between male and female, whereas there are four times as many male as female graduate students in the sample. In both the undergraduate and the graduate law samples, there are only a handful of females, six and two respectively. Males and females are divided almost equally in both the psychology and mixed-majors under graduate samples, whereas there are more than three times as many females as males in the undergraduate anthropology sample. Among the graduates, the male to female ratio is approximately 3 to 3 for both the anthropology and the psychology samples, slightly higher for psychology, slightly lower for anthropology. For the mixed-majors 322 TABLE 6 DISTRIBUTION BY AGE* A P L M '' Age 7 7 7° 7 21 and under 70 75 79 82 77 (170) 22 to 26 years 22 19 15 15 18 (39) 27 and over 8 6 6 2 5 (221) T O T O 21 and under 4 2 1 5 2 (6) 22 to 26 years 38 43 85 57 61 (160) 27 and over 56 55 12 38 35 (92) T O (258) T O T O T O ■TO Under graduates Graduates #Four students did not give their age: one undergraduate mixed, one graduate anthropology, and two graduate law students. Therefore, these samples do not total to 100$. 323 sample, the male to female ratio is more than 5 to 2. The distribution by sex is shown in Table 7. Effects due to composition of the samples.— After the data are presented, the composition of the samples in terms of class year, age, and sex will be discussed again. It will be shown that disproportions in the distribution of these three variables do not appear to affect the findings. DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUES Choice of research instrument.— A rather unusual and felicitous happening in this research was to find a data collection technique and measuring instrument which is uniquely appropriate for this study on both theoretical and methodological grounds. That instrument is the semantic differential. The theoretical conception of meaning underlying the semantic differential is congruous with the frame of reference guiding this study. A common feature of those who use this frame of reference, as evident in chapter III, is the place of central importance accorded to components of the conceptual apparatus. Meaning, in particular, was emphasized by most of the writers. 324 TABLE 7 DISTRIBUTION BY SEX Sex A P f L f M * Male 24 49 69 44 52 Female 76 51 12 56 (115) 48 IBB tbb IDT IBS (107) IBB Male 62 63 98 73 (227) 79 Female 3^ 36 2 27 (205) 21 .. (55) IBB IBB IBB IBB (2S0) Under graduates Graduates *The sex of one graduate student is not known. 325 In this connection, Shibutani has pointed out the deficiencies of many scales which attempt to measure attitudes and orientations. Meaning, he claims, is dis cernible only in the pattern or configuration of responses 3 toward an object. This nominal definition of meaning corresponds closely to the operational definition or methodological procedure for measuring meaning with the semantic differential. A second advantage is that the semantic differ ential makes possible the collection and analyses of other elements of ideology which have been specified for inves tigation in this study, i.e., value-orientations, type of judgment, and beliefs. Operational definitions for these elements will be given later in the chapter. A third important consideration involved two con flicting requirements of the study. On one hand, a con siderable amount of data is required to test the hypotheses adequately; on the other hand, certain aspects of the plan made it likely that only a short period of time could be allotted for completion of the form. A large amount of data can be collected with the semantic differential technique in a brief period. 3 ^Tamotsu Shibutani, Society and Personality: An Interactional Approach to Social Psychology (fenglewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1961), p. 10S. 326 Finally, a host of researchers have spent years testing, refining, and improving the use of the semantic differential technique as a device for data collection, measurement, and analysis. Kerlinger gives the following appraisal of the merits of the semantic differential: The semantic differential can be applied to a variety of research problems. It has been shown to be stifficiently reliable and valid for many research purposes. It is also flexible and relatively easy to adapt to varying research demands, quick and economical to administer and to score.... The semantic differential yields a surprising amount of data, and with so many data, a number of analyses are possible. The semantic differential is included in Miller's 5 inventory of scales that have wide utility and validity. The following information is included in the description of the semantic differential: RELIABILITY: As given by authors: (meaning in general) test-retest r = .85 (attitudes) test-retest r = .91 Vred N. Kerlinger, Foundations of Behavioral Research (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965), pp. 573. 5 ^Delbert C. Miller, Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement (New York: David McKay Co., Inc., 1964), p. viii. 327 VALIDITY Thurstone scale Guttman scale r = .74 to .82 r = .78 Bogardus Social Distance Scale (three factors) r = .72 to .80 UTILITY: A 100-item test can be administered in about ten to fifteen minutes. A 400-item test takes about one hour. The semantic differential may be adapted through choice of concepts and scales to the study of numerous phenomena. It may be use ful In constructing and analyzing sociometric scales. The semantic differential and illustrative research. The theoretical model and certain aspects of the measurement model of the semantic differential will be described now. Then several illustrative researches in psycholinguistics will be discussed. The semantic differ ential is a method of collecting data and of measuring meaning. It was developed and refined over a period of many years by Osgood and a group of colleagues at the University of Illinois. In their book, The Measurement 7 of Meaning. Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum describe in Ibid., pp. 268-269 7 'Charles E. Osgood, George J. Suci, Percy H. Tannenbaum, The Measurement of Meaning (Urbana, 111.: University of Illinois Press, 1957). 328 detail their complex theoretical conception of the nature of meaning, the development of the empirical techniques for measuring meaning, and the coordination between the two. The results of some fifty or so studies are reported in the book. Meaning is defined by the authors, in learning- theory terms, as a representational mediation process. It is the process or cognitive state within a person inter mediate to his reception of stimuli and his production of a response. Thus, the usual S R paradigm is divided into two stages. The first stage, decoding, is the association of stimuli with representational mediators, i.e., interpretation. The second stage, encoding, is the association of mediated self-stimulation with the overt Q response. In simpler terms, in between the time during which a subject perceives an object and responds to it, a process of interpretation is occurring within the subject. The meaning which the object has for him is being regis tered. The meaning is assumed to be a function of his past experience with that object. This is a behavioristic conception of meaning which is consistent with George H. SIbid., p. 9. 9Ibid., p. 8. 329 Mead’s formulation and that of the symbolic interactionist school.^® Osgood points out that, "according to this view, the meanings which different individuals have for the same signs will vary to the extent that their behav iors toward the things signified have varied."^ Given stability of learning experiences within a particular society, however, the meanings of common objects should be 12 highly similar for the constituents of that society. Meaning, according to Osgood, is considered by social scientists, to be one of the most important deter- 1 ^ minants of human behavior. Therefore, it was important, they felt, to attempt to find some kind of objective index of meaning. That is, it was necessary to find a measurable activity that would best indicate the media- tional process taking place within the person. The instru ment finally devised, the semantic differential, provides a linguistic index. It measures the connotative 10 George Herbert Mead on Social Psychology, Selected Papers Edited and with an Introduction by Anselm Strauss, (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Phoenix Books, 1934, Revised edition published 1964;. 11 Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum, ojd. cit., p. 9. 12Ibid., p. 9. 1^Ibid., p. 10. 330 meanings of concepts as points in multidimensional semantic space. The authors give the following descrip tion of the semantic differential; The semantic differential is essentially a combina tion of controlled association and scaling procedures. We provide the subject with a concept to be differentiated and a set of bipolar adjectival scales against which to do it, his only task being to in dicate, for each item (pairing of a concept with a scale), the direction of his association and its intensity on a seven-step scale. The crux of the method, of course, lies in selecting the sample of descriptive polar terms. Ideally, the sample should be as representative as possible of all the ways in which meaningful judgments can vary, and yet,be small enough in size to be efficient in practice. To illustrate the procedure graphically, the following example is given. A subject is asked to judge the concept (object or stimulus) "father” against a series of scales and to place a check mark in the position representing his judgment (response).. ^ FATHER happy :____ :____ :____ :____ ;____ ;_____ sad "l 2 3 I 5 5 7 hard soft -1----2-- 5-----1-- 5-----5-- 7--- slow fast, etc. 1 ------2----3-------1 ----5-------5----7— On the first scale, a check mark placed in position (l) would describe father as extremely happy, U Ibid., p. 20 15Ibid., p. 26 331 position (7) would mean extremely sad. The center position (4) indicates a response of "neutral," "neither," or "irrelevant." Therefore, the distance of the check mark from the center position is assumed to correspond to the "intensity" of the reaction elicited in the subject. The direction chosen (i.e., happy or sad) is assumed to correspond to the subject’s qualitative reaction to the 1 6 concept. Thus, the behavioral response recorded in the empirical procedure is assumed to correspond to the theoretical definition of the representational mediation process. Since the positions checked on the scales constitute the coordinates of the concept's location in semantic space, we assume that the coordinates in the measure ment space are functionally equivalent with the components of the representational mediation process associated with this concept. The operational definition of meaning, then, is "that point in the semantic space specified by a series IS of differentiating judgments." Semantic differentiation is described in this manner: l6Ibid., p. 27. 17Ibid.. p. 30. lgIbid.. p. 26. 332 By semantic differentiation, then, we mean the successive allocation of a concept to a point in the multidimensional semantic space by selection from among a set of given scaled semantic alternatives. Difference in the meaning between two concepts is then merely a function of the differences in the respective allocations within the same space, i.e., it is a function of the. multi-dimensional distance between the two points. Each investigator chooses the concepts which are relevant to his research problem, those concepts which he believes will elicit varied responses from his subjects or groups. The scales chosen should be relevant to the kind of judgment which is desired relative to the concepts being rated. In addition, the scales should be repre sentative of the major dimensions along which meaningful 20 processes vary. Three major factors or dimensions were identified in a series of factor analytic studies which, when combined, were found to account for most of the variance. These factors are evaluation, potency, and activity. That is, certain scales were repeatedly found to cluster together in these three groupings. Osgood points out that attitudes (measured by the evaluative dimension) are only one of the dimensions of meaning. Information which could increase predictability ^ Ibid., p. 26. 20Ibid., p. 31. 333 of behavior toward an object is lost by the usual exclusive concentration upon attitude scores. For example, two persons might be equally unfavorable in their attitudes toward a black person, yet differ in their rating of him as strong and active as opposed to weak and passive. It seems very likely that, as a result, the two subjects would behave quite differently toward the black 21 person in a real life situation. Osgood describes a study which showed that the predictability of social distance ratings was significantly enhanced by the addition of information about other factors, collected 2? by the semantic differential. Meaning, Osgood asserts, is richer by far than what is revealed on an attitude score. Other factors, in addition to evaluation, potency, and activity have also been identified. Since the publication of The Measurement of Meaning, there has been a great amount of experimentation and imaginative novel uses of the semantic differential.2^ 21Ibid.. pp. 193-199. 22 Ibid., p. 199 (Osgood et al). 23 ^For example, Nunally found a factor of "under- standability*' which proved to be very important in attitudes toward mental illness. Jim C. Nunnally, Jr., Popular Conceptions of Mental Health (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1961).In the Mexican study, 334 The semantic differential has been used for a wide variety of research in several fields due to its unusual characteristics. Kerlinger describes three psychological studies, which made use of the semantic differential, as examples of highly significant, unusual work and remarkable p J findings. All three are of interest here. One of the studies based on Morris' thirteen "ways of life," values, or philosophic viewpoints, measured the connotative 25 meanings of values for different subjects. A second study by Block investigated the question of whether the "concept" was a situation designed to measure a variety of opposing reactions. Noel F. McGinn, Gerald P. Gins- burg, and Ernest Harburg, "Dependency Relations with Parents and Affiliative Responses in Michigan and Guadalajara," Sociometry, Vol. 2d, No. 3 (Sept., 1965), pp. 305-321, p. 314. 24Fred N. Kerlinger, Foundations of Behavioral Research (New Yorks Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 19^5), p p. 576-573. 25 ^C. Osgood, E. Ward, and C. Morris, "Analysis of the Connotative Meanings of a Variety of Human Values as Expressed by American College Students," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology LXII (1961), pp. 62-73. 335 26 emotions of different national groups differ in meaning. Kerlinger remarks that Block’s ’ ’highly significant and competent study" shows that it is possible to study emotions scientifically, and that the results "indicate the appropriateness of the semantic differential for 27 cross-cultural study. ' The third study by Staats and Staats asked whether attitudes elicited by significant 2S words could be changed by conditioning. Kerlinger describes the positive results of the study as a remarkable finding. Kerlinger offers the following suggestions for significant kinds of research which could be conducted using the semantic differential: (1) exploration of meaning structures of children at different ages; (2) attitude learning and change studies of stereotypes and prejudice; (3) comparative studies of meaning structures of groups holding progressive and traditional viewpoints toward education; (4) studies of different meanings put /I J. Block, "Studies in the Phenomenology of Emotions," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. LIV (1957), pp. 353-363. ^Kerlinger, ojc. cit.. p. 573. A. Staats and C. Staats, "Attitudes Established by Classical Conditioning," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, LVII (1953), pp. 37-40. 336 upon educational concepts in different countries; (5) studies of the effect of teacher-training programs upon 29 teacher trainees. ' Many of these suggestions are closely related to the questions asked in the present study. Kumata and Schramm conducted a study of Japanese and Korean exchange students which produced predominantly negative results for Whorf's hypothesis that different 30 language codes would create different Weltanschauungen. The Asiatic exchange students were found to use the same major factors in their judgments as American students. Certain individual scales, however, were used in clearly 31 different ways by the three groups. Osgood discusses the appropriateness of the semantic differential for both cross-cultural and person ality type studies. In chapter II, the difficult problem of how to distinguish between cultural and personality constructs was examined. Osgood’s advice for handling this problem with semantic differential data is similar 2^Kerlinger, o£. cit.. pp. 57^-579. 30 H. Kumata and W. Schramm, "A Pilot Study of Cross-Cultural Meaning," Public Opinion Quarterly (in press, 1956), cited in Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum, op. cit., p. 171. 31 Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum, 0£. cit., p. 175. 337 to Bettelheim's suggestion. When the members of a society share a common representational process to a common set of signs, it seems legitimate to speak of a culture trait....Or closer to home, when members of our culture agree in perceiving FATHERS as strongminded, MOTHERS as warm, COMMUNISM as evil, etc., we are dealing with similar phenomena.... How does semantic measurement apply to this situation? The semantic differential is designed to tap variations in representational mediation processes (meanings, significances)....when subjects differ in their meanings of concepts like MYSELF, LOVE, MOTHER, ATHLETICS, and PUNCTUALITY we assume that personality differences of some sort are being tapped. Another problem discussed in chapter II, differ ences between high and low ethnocentrics, was studied 33 with the semantic differential by Suci. ^ The hypothesis, based on Adorno's work, was that these two groups would differ markedly in their use of the evaluative factor, that the high ethnocentrics would show more variance on evaluation than on other dimensions. The hypothesis was not confirmed.^ 32Ibid.. p. 219. 33 G. J. Suci, A Multidimensional Analysis of Social Attitudes with Special Reference to Ethnocentrism. Unpublished doctor's dissertation, tJniversity of Illinois, 1952, in Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum. Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum, op. cit.. pp. 222-223. 333 Stagner and Osgood used the semantic differential to record the changing structures of social stereotypes during the period of the United States' gradual involve ment in World War II.33 A set of scales was used to determine the profiles of various social stereotypes, such as PACIFIST, RUSSIAN, DICTATOR, AND NEUTRALITY.36 In this study, marked differences in scale-checking styles were noted. In later studies, theoretically derived hypotheses were tested concerning scale-checking styles These studies will not be described here since they pertain 37 to research in personality theory. However, they have been mentioned here because one of the major hypotheses in the present study will be tested by evidence on differences in scale-checking styles. The studies which have been presented represent only a tiny sample of a large number of studies, showing tremendous interest in variations in the conceptual 35 •^R. Stagner and C. E. Osgood, "Impact of War on a Nationalistic Frame of Refereice: I. Changes in General Approval and Qualitative Patterning of Certain Stereo types," Journal of Social Psychology..24 (1946), pp. 137-215. ' Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum, 0£. cit.. p. 24. 3^Ibid., pp. 226-236. 339 structures of different groups, in differences in under lying dimensions of judgment, in the nature of the factors used in judgment, and in the scale-checking style of 3 B subjects. Many years ago, Mannheim criticized the prevailing belief that differences in viewpoints were always merely differences in content or in values, rather than potential fundamental differences in modes of thought, in the 39 categorical structure of thought, and in meaning. 7 In Mannheim's words: ...it becomes necessary also to remember that the fact that we speak about social and cultural life in terms of values is itself an attitude peculiar to our time.... Slowly it dawns upon us that not only does the content of thought change but also its categorical structure.... 3SIbid., p. 222. 39 "To study the organization of belief systems, we find it necessary to concern ourselves with the structure rather than the content of beliefs, (p. 6) Social scientists have also been attracted to the structur al inseparability between thought and belief. This is seen in the sociologists interest in the sociology of knowledge (Mannheim, 1946) and in references to such phenomena as ethnocentric thinking (Adorno et al., 1950: Levinson, 1949), stereotyped thinking (Katz and Braly, 1952; Maslow, 194&), "narrow-minded" thinking (Rokeach, 1951a, 1951b), and middle-class thinking (Mills, 1951)." In Milton Rokeach, The Open and Closed Mind (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 19&0), p. 18. 340 For thought is a particularly sensitive index of social and cultural change. The variation in the meaning of words and the multiple connotations of every concept reflect polarities of mutually antagonistic schemes of life implicit in these nuances of meaning • • • • The word and the meaning that attaches to it is truly a collective reality. Nothing that we could say could better illustrate the relationship between the types of studies being conducted with the semantic differential and problems in sociology of knowledge and ideology. Construction of the Research Instrument The construction of the research instrument evolved from a review of the literature and from the results of an exploratory pretest. The instrument was designed to obtain data to test the specific hypotheses discussed in the last chapter. As explained above, the data obtained by the semantic differential technique consist of a series of judgments made by each subject about various concepts. Each concept is rated on a set of seven-point bipolar scales. ^°Mannheim, o£. cit.. pp. Sl-83. 341 Concepts and scales are selected by investigators to fit the particular problem they are investigating. Three main considerations dictated the choice of concepts and scales which were included on the instrument in the present study. First, concepts and scales were selected which represented values, judgments, and beliefs identi fied as significant in research on authoritarian ideology. Second, concepts and scales were selected which were presumed to reflect elements of the conceptual systems of the disciplines as suggested by works in the sociology of knowledge. Third, most concepts and scales represents (a) alternative types of methods, solutions, or policies currently being suggested with regard to social problems, and (b) deviant groups which are presently the topic of controversy. Such data can provide evidence relevant to controversial issues raised by advocates of the labeling approach to deviance. Twenty-six concepts were included on the research instrument. In most cases, there were either ten or thirteen scales to each concept, yielding a total of 292 items. The 26 concepts are categorized into three groups: (A) 12 social issues concepts, (B) 9 deviant group concepts, and (C) 5 miscellaneous concepts. The 12 social issues concepts in group A were selected mainly to discern value-orientations with regard 342 to social issues and preferred methods of dealing with social problems. Each of the 12 concepts was to be judged on the same set of 10 scales. The scales include bipolar adjectival pairs commonly used to judge evaluative, potency, and activity dimensions of concepts or stimuli. The social issues concepts which were presented to the subjects for evaluation will be listed below. The ten scales will be shown once with the first concept. In only one case, three concepts were posed as alternatives to a problem. Otherwise, each was presented as a separate issue. The problem, the ten scales, and the twelve concepts are as follows: In the past few years there has been an increasing amount of organized political action such as demonstrations, protests, publicity campaigns, etc. by various minority and civil rights groups. There are many different ways in which members of minority groups can try to alleviate their situation. Three possibilities are: (1) Organize and engage in various types of collec tive group action to promote their cause (as mentioned above). (2) Work mainly to effect changes in laws and legal processes through the courts and legislatures. (3) The individual can concentrate upon developing his own potentialities in order to advance. In general, how do you feel about each of these three ways? The three methods are listed on this page and the next page. Please rate each one. 343 1. TO ORGANIZE AND ENGAGE IN GROUP ACTION OF VARIOUS TYPES is: beneficial, passive, meaningful, free, destructive, rational, potent, sick, important, ineffective 1 2 3 • • 4 • • 5 6 7 1 2 3 • • k • • 5 b : 1 2 3 • • 4 • • 5 6 7 1 2 3 • • 4 • • 5 6 7 1 2 3 • • 4 • • 5 6 7 1 2 3 • • 4 • • 5 6 7 1 2 3 • • 4 • • 5 6 7 i 2 3 • • i f • • 5 6 7 l 2 3 • • 4 • • 5 6 7 2 harmful active _meaningless constraining productive ,irrational impotent healthy _un important effective T 2 3 4 5 o 7 The ten scales listed above accompanied each of the following eleven concepts on the research instrument. 2. To work mainly to effect changes in laws and legal processes 3. To concentrate upon developing one*s own individual potentialities 4. Groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous, Synanon, and Gamblers Anonymous^ A description preceded this concept. See the research instrument in the appendix, page 597. Concept #4 may be thought of as a contrast to "psychotherapy" ("help" for the "individual") or "use will power" (internal control). However, the three concepts were not explicitly 344 5. To use will power 6. P sy c ho t he rapy 7. Group sentiments 8. To obey and respect authority 9. To be powerful 10. To be able to express and accept hostile and negative feelings 11. To deter wrongdoing by strict law enforcement and punishment of violations 12. To be permissive The second group of concepts to be evaluated names nine categories of people representing different kinds of deviance. Included were problems related to race, poverty, drugs, sex, and violation of military U ' Z draft. The major interest for this second group of concepts lies in the type of judgm onts which are made offered as alternatives. I o Erickson's definition of deviance is employed here: "From a sociological standpoint, deviance can be defined as conduct which is generally thought to require the attention of social control agencies— that is, conduct about which 'something should be done.'" Kai T. Erickson, "Notes on the Sociology of Deviance," in Howard S. Becker (ed.), The Other Side: Perspectives on Deviance (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964)$ pp. 10-11. 345 concerning deviant groups* i.e., in the responses made on each scale. The 13 scales used to rate each concept elicit judgments concerning designation as a problem, traits imputed to out-groups, assessment of responsi bility, guilt, legal prohibition, and treatment. The following are the nine deviant group concepts which were submitted to the subjects. The 13 scales will be shown only once with the first concept. 1. I feel that HOMOSEXUALS are: good — — ■■L— i _ sick 1 T intelli gent dirty. rational. sinful. honest. beneficial to society. guilty. society is responsible. punish them 1 T 2 5 T 6 6 T T T T T T T 7 T 7 T bad healthy dull clean irrational virtuous dishonest harmful to society innocent individual is .responsible help them 346 permit T 2----5----1----5----5----7 prohibit by law they need psycho- therapy_ do not need psycho therapy 2. Adult groups which use marijuana 3. Men in poverty areas who are on welfare 4. People who marry inter-racially 5. Pacifists who burn their draft cards 6. Prostitutes 7. Adult groups which use LSD 8. Women on welfare who have illegitimate children 9. Those who participated in the Watts riots The remaining five concepts constitute a miscel laneous group, each of which required a slightly different set of scales. One of them, "abortion,” would have been included with the second group of concepts; however, since it is worded as an act rather than as a category of people, somewhat different scales were necessary. Two other concepts, "United States policy in Vietnam" and "capital punishment" represent instances of governmental action with regard to social problems. The last two concepts in the miscellaneous group are "human nature" and "the world we live in." Scales were chosen to reveal 347 relevant beliefs concerning human nature and the world. Scales used with the miscellaneous concepts can be seen in the Appendix, where the instrument is duplicated. Only three key scales were offered in conjunction with both the social issues concepts and the deviant group concepts. The three scales are beneficial vs. harmful, healthy vs. sick, and rational vs. irrational. Most scales were not appropriate for evaluation of both kinds of concepts. Although these three scales were considered appropriate for both sets of concepts, two of them could not be applied to all of the miscellaneous concepts. Healthy vs. sick was not given with the "human nature" concept. Beneficial vs. harmful was not provided with "human nature" or "the world." Also, the polar terms of this scale were lengthened to read "beneficial to society vs. harmful to society" when given with the deviant group concepts. There is reason for special interest in the three key scales. As to the first, what is perceived as beneficial or harmful to society is considered especially pertinent to a study of ideologies regarding deviance. As to the second scale, what is perceived as healthy or sick is of particular interest in this study because of a desire to assess the extent to which the psychological 34 a vocabulary of motives has been incorporated into other professional conceptual systems. The title of Seeley's recent book The Americanization of the Unconscious suggests that the psychological vocabulary of motives has seeped deeply into many segments of America's population. Cohen has spoken of the need to determine which type of deviant acts have "migrated" from one deviant category to another— which acts are now regarded as "sick" behavior. Szasz has complained that so many kinds of behavior are now regarded as symptoms of mental illness that the concept has become meaningless and perhaps ludicrous. The third general scale, rational vs. irrational, as explained in chapter V, is being used as an indicator of a universal or relativistic reality-orientation. What is perceived as rational or irrational depends, after all, upon normative and existential assumptions concerning the nature of the social and physical universe. Judgments, then, regarding what is rational or irrational, as well as what is healthy or sick, beneficial or harmful to society, are deemed pertinent to, and revealing of the conceptions of social reality held by the subjects. Approximately half of the scales under each concept were reversed. That is, the positive and negative poles were alternated in direction to counteract response bias tendencies. Reversing the positive and 349 negative poles is expected to prevent automatic checking of scales at the same point or same side. The order of the scales was also rotated on each successive concept. Preliminary instrument in pre-test operation.— During the month of November, 1966, a preliminary instru ment was administered by the researcher to 107 students enrolled in classes at the University of Southern Cali fornia. The students were registered in various anthro pology, psychology, law, and public administration courses. The purpose of the pre-test operation was to determine whether the instructions were clear and adequate, to check on the time required by subjects to fill out the instrument, to revise or eliminate items which were ambiguous or non-discriminative, and to uncover any other problems which might have been overlooked in the con struction of the instrument. Comments regarding the clarity or any other aspect of the instrument were requested on the last page. On the basis of the analysis of pre-test responses, a number of items were eliminated or revised, and several others added. Field operations.— Preliminary arrangements for the research project were completed in January of 1967. Data 350 collection at UCLA was carried out during the period of January 20th to February 15th. Mailings were sent out early in February. Return of the mailed forms was completed March 4, 1967. Three forms which straggled in some weeks later were not included since computer data- processing had already been initiated. Hypotheses and Operational Indicators The hypotheses along with their operational indi cators will be listed below. Then the procedures utilized to test the hypotheses will be explicated in detail. Rather than discussing operational definitions, classification, measurement procedures, and statistical tests in separate sections, these operations will be enumerated together for each section of the hypotheses in turn. HYPOTHESIS I: Social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, anthropology, and those comprising a mixed-majors group will differ. A. The four graduate samples will differ in their per ception of each of the 26 concepts; i.e., the overall 351 configurative pattern of meaning attributed to the same concept by the four samples will vary. B. The four graduate samples will differ in what they perceive as beneficial or harmful, healthy or sick, and rational or irrational. HYPOTHESIS II: Social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthropology will reflect the unique conceptual systems of their respective disciplines. A. VALUE-ORIENTATIONS WITH REGARD TO SOCIAL ISSUES: (1) Values will reflect the area upon which each discipline is primarily and selectively focused. (a) Graduate psychology students will place a higher value than will other students upon concepts emphasizing the individual. Indicator: To centrate upon developing one's own individual potentialities. (b) Graduate law students will place a higher value than will other students upon concepts emphasizing law, authority, power, and government policy. 352 Indicators: (1) To work mainly to effect changes in laws and legal processes (2) To obey and respect authority (3) To be powerful (4) United States' policy in Vietnam (5) Capital punishment (c) Graduate anthropology students will place a higher value than will other students upon group-related concepts. Indicators: (1) To organize and engage in group action of various types (2) Group sentiments (3) Groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous, Synanon, and Gamblers Anonymous (2) Policy valued and advocated will reflect the theory and procedures associated with the major role or function of a discipline. (a) Psychology students will place a higher value than will other students upon expression of feelings and therapeutic help. They will value permissiveness more than will law students. Indicators: (1) To be able to express and accept hostile and negative feelings (2) To be permissive (3) Psychotherapy (b) Graduate law students will place a higher value than will other students upon legal control and punishment. Indicator: To deter wrongdoing by strict law enforcement and punishment of violations (c) Graduate Anthropology students will value permissiveness more than will law students. Their responses will be non interventionist in nature. Indicator: To be permissive (3) Values will reflect group assumptions about the nature of human behavior, free will, and determinism. (a) Law students will place a higher value than will other students upon the use of will power, reflecting the legal premise of free will. Indicator: To use will power TYPES OF JUDGMENTS WITH REGARD TO DEVIANT GROUPS: (1) Judgments will reflect the vocabulary of motives or type of explanation learned in intensive study. (a) Judgments of graduate psychology students will indicate a psychological type of explanation and will be non-moralistic. Indicator: Sick Neutral on moral terms (b) Judgments of graduate law students will indicate the use of legal and moral stand ards as criteria. Indicators: Harmful, guilty Bad, sinful, dirty, dishonest, dull (c) Judgments of graduate anthropology students will tend to be relativistic and non-moralistic. Indicators: Neutral and low on negative imputations (2) Judgments will reflect the reality-orientation of a discipline based upon its focus, experience, and related assumptions. (a) Graduate psychology students will label deviant groups irrational more frequently than will anthropology students, indicat ing use of the psychological "reality principle." Indicator: Irrational (b) Graduate law students will label deviant 355 groups irrational more frequently than will anthropology students indicating use of American legal-moral universal standards of criteria for judgment. Indicator: Irrational (c) Graduate anthropology students will label deviant groups irrational less frequently than will other students since they will be less willing to apply standards of dominant groups to other groups, reflect ing the principle of cultural relativity. Indicator: Neutral and low on irrational (3) Judgments with regard to policy advocated will reflect the theory and procedures associated with the major role or function of a discipline. (a) Graduate psychology students will favor a permissive policy and will advocate therapy and help. Indicators: Permit, needs psychotherapy, help (b) Graduate law students will advocate a policy of legal control and punishment. Indicator: Punish, prohibit by law (c) Graduate anthropology students will favor a permissive but non-interventionist 356 policy. Indicator: Permit, neutral (4) Judgments regarding assessment of responsibility will reflect the discipline's assumptions about the nature of human behavior, free will, and determinism. (a) Judgments of graduate psychology students will reflect the assumption of psycho logical determinism. Indicator: Neutral (b) Judgments of graduate law students will reflect the legal premises of free will and individual responsibility. Indicator: Individual is responsible. (c) Judgments of graduate anthropology students will reflect the assumption of social determinism. Indicator: Society is responsible. C. BELIEFS ABOUT HUMAN NATURE AND THE WORLD: (1) Beliefs regarding human nature and the world will reflect the assumption of social determinism, psychological determinism, or of free will. (a) Beliefs of graduate psychology students will reflect the assumption of psycho logical determinism. 357 Indicators: (1) Human nature is determined. (2) Human nature is under standable . (3) Human nature is predictable. (4) The world is determined. (5) Human nature is self- determined. (6) Human nature is individual. (b) Beliefs of graduate law students will reflect the legal premise of free will. Indicators: (1) Human nature is free. (2) Human nature is mysterious. (3) Human nature is unpredictable. (4) The world is non-determined. (c) Beliefs of graduate anthropology students will reflect the assumption of social determinism. Indicators: (1) Human nature is determined. 353 (2) Human nature is understandable. (3) Human nature is predictable. (4) The world is determined. (5) Human nature is society- determined. (6) Human nature is social. HYPOTHESIS III: Social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthropology will more clearly reflect the distinctive character of their respective disciplines than will the social ideologies of under graduate students in the same disciplines. Procedures Utilized in Data Analysis The two sub-sections of Hypothesis I and the three sub-sections of Hypothesis II refer to the five elements of social ideology which are being examined in this study. Analysis of each of the five elements will involve either different operational procedures or will involve different parts of the data. 359 Hypothesis I predicts that the four graduate samples will differ significantly in ideology without regard to content or direction of response. Content and direction will be examined in Hypothesis II and are expected to conform to categories derived from the con ceptual characteristics of the disciplines. The assumption in Hypothesis III is that the effect of academic specialization will be demonstrated by greater variation among graduate samples than among undergraduate samples. With reference to Hypothesis I, the requirement is simply that there be a greater number of differences among graduate samples than among undergraduate samples. With reference to Hypothesis II, each of the three graduate samples must show a closer fit than its corres ponding undergraduate sample to the modal pattern pre dicted for the discipline. Procedures utilized to analyze the data and to test each of the five sub-hypotheses will now be enumer ated. Hypothesis IA involves a test of difference of meanings of each of the 26 concepts submitted to the samples. Osgood's operational definition of meaning is used here. The operational definition of meaning is "that point in the semantic space specified by a series 360 of differentiating judgments."4^ The meaning of a concept to a group is the central tendency of a "cloud of such individual points in the semantic space."44 The analysis technique selected for this problem was multiple-discriminant function analysis. This proce dure i s considered to be the most efficient and satis factory method of determining the separation of groups in multidimensional space. ^ Discriminant analysis is a procedure for estimating the position of an individual on a line that best separates groups. The estimated position is obtained as a linear function of the individual's test scores.4^1 The discriminant function provides the best ^Charles E. Osgood, George J. Suci, Percy H. Tannenbaum, The Measurement of Meaning (Urbana, 111.: University of Illinois Press, 1965), p. 26. 44Ibid.. p. 100. 4^Ibid., p. 101. M. M. Tatsuoka and D. V. Tiede- man, "Discriminant Analysis," Review of Educational Research. 1954, 24, pp. 402-420. 4^William W. Cooley and Paul R. Lohnes, Multi variate Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences (NewYork: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1962), p. 116. 361 (in a least-squares sense) linear combination for dis- in criminating the groups. ' It is such that the ratio of the sum of squares among groups to that within groups is maximized. The relative contributions of the original variables to the discrimant function can also be deter mined. More than one discriminant function may be fitted. The maximum number of discriminants which can be computed is equal to the lesser of the two numbers, m, the number of variables (scales), or g, the number of groups minus one.^ The development of analytic procedures necessary to generalize the discriminant function techniques to more than two groups of subjects is due primarily to work by Bryan.^ Bryan notes the following consequences of the ^Jim Nunnally, "The Analysis of Profile Data," Psychological Bulletin, 1962, Vol. 59, No. 4, pp. 311-319. Youth Studies Center/Behavioral Science Program Library Computer Program B7DIS written by William R. Larson, Computer Sciences Laboratory, University of Southern California. Cooley and Lohnes, op. cit., p. 116. 49 William R. Larson and Barbara G. Myerhoff, Intra- Family Relationships and Adolescent School Adjustment (Los Angeles: Youth Studies Center, University of Southern California, 1967), p. 65. 362 procedure: 1. The entire linear discriminative capacity of the test battery is exhausted by r linear functions of the test variables. 2. These functions turn out to be mutually uncor related. 3. They are independent of the origin of coordinates and the units of measurement. 4. They can be identified with the latent vectors of a certain matrix.5 The latent roots of the matrix containing the weighted ratios of the among group sum of squares to the within group sum of squares are shown as eigenvalues. The relative size of the eigenvalues indicates the extent to which the associated discriminant functions distinguish among the groups. Wilks Lambda provides a criterion for a test of the significance of the separation of groups. Fisher's F is considered appropriate and was used as the statistical test to determine whether the meaning space of the groups differs significantly with respect to each of the 26 concepts included on the instrument. Six separate multiple discriminant function analyses were computed for each of the 26 concepts. Comparative "^Joseph G. Bryan, "The Generalized Discriminant Functions Mathematical Foundation and Computational Routine," Harvard Educational Review, Vol. XXI, No. 2, Spring 1951» pp. 90-95, p. 90. 363 analyses were made: (1) among the four graduate samples, (2) among the four undergraduate samples, (3) between undergraduate and graduate anthropology samples, (4) between undergraduate and graduate psychology samples, (5) between undergraduate and graduate law samples, and (6) between undergraduate and graduate mixed-majors samples. The procedures discussed above were utilized to analyze the data for the test of Hypothesis IA: IA: The four graduate samples will differ in their per ception of each of the 26 concepts; i.e., the overall configurative pattern of meaning attributed to the same concept by the four samples will vary. Whereas Hypothesis IA is a test of the differences in semantic meaning space of each of the 26 concepts, Hypothesis IB refers to the three general scales. Only three scales, of special interest, were used with both the social issues concepts and the deviant group concepts. IB: The four graduate samples will differ in what they perceive as beneficial or harmful, healthy or sick, and rational or irrational. Perception is operationally indicated by the scale position (1 to 7) checked on each of the three scales. Since each of the scales is examined separately for each 364 of the concepts, a multivariate measure is not required for this problem. Chi square was employed to evaluate the univariate relationships between scales and group membership, to determine if the distribution could have been drawn from the same population. Turning to Hypothesis II, all of the data are now to be re-analyzed in terms of different criteria. To support the operationally defined hypotheses, graduate samples must not only differ, but must conform to the modal pattern predicted for each discipline on the basis of theoretically deduced expectations. Furthermore, with regard to Hypothesis III, the graduate samples in each discipline must show a closer fit to the predicted pattern than the corresponding undergraduate sample. Although no predictions are made for the mixed-majors samples, their responses will be analyzed and reported in the same manner as are the other samples. The mixed-majors samples, as explained earlier, can be used, in a rough sense, as a reference point comparable to the overall general student population at UCLA. The hypothetical ideal types representing each discipline which were described in detail in the last chap ter are diagrammed in Table 8 in the form of a multi dimensional attribute space. Abbreviated forms of the 365 following five conceptual elements will be shown along the vertical axis: (1) focus: main unit of study and related concepts, (2) policy: theory associated with role procedures, (3) assumption of free-will or determinism, (4) type of explanation or vocabulary of motives and traits imputed, and (5) reality-orientation. The horizon tal axes are subdivided into a trichotomous space corres ponding to the three disciplines. Some of the attributes, however, are singular and some multiple. Operational indicators of the attributes will be specified as the various sub-hypotheses are discussed. The three main sections of Hypothesis II refer to different portions of the data. For Hypothesis IIA, the 12 social issues concepts are examined. For Hypothesis IIB, the nine deviant groups concepts are analyzed. Hypothesis IIC refers to two of the five miscellaneous concepts: "human nature" and "the world we live in." Findings on each of the other three miscellaneous concepts have to be presented separately because different scales were required for each of them. However, logically, two belong to group A: social issues concepts; the other, with group B: deviant groups concepts. It is hypothesized in section IIA that value- orientations with regard to the 12 social issues concepts will reflect the conceptual system of the disciplines. 366 TABLE 8 HYPOTHETICAL IDEAL TYPES BASED ON FIVE CONCEPTUAL ELEMENTS 1 Conceptual j Elements [Anthropology i .............. i Psychology Law (1) Focus: Group Individual Law, (2) Policy: Permissive Non intervention Express feelings Permissive Help Psychotherapy authority, power, and government policy Legal control and Punishment (3) Free-will vs. Determinism. Social Determinism Psychological determinism Free-will (4) Type of Explanation: Relativistic Non- moralistic Psychological Non- mo rali stic Legal and moral (5) Reality- orientation: i i Relativistic Universal . J Universal 367 Value is operationally defined as the direction (favorable or unfavorable) and degree of intensity of feeling toward a concept as indicated by the mean score of the ratings 51 checked on the evaluative scales. Generally evaluative scales are identified by the factor analytic technique as scales which are found to cluster together. However, since 156 multiple-discrim inant function analyses were performed on computer time, 52 factor analyses were not computed in this study. In stead, five of the scales are considered to be evaluative scales on the basis of logical and semantic criteria. The five scales have been identified and used as evalu ative scales in other studies and appear to be so on a semantic basis. The five scales are: (l) important— unimportant, (2) beneficial— harmful, (3) meaningful— meaningless, (4) productive— destructive, and (5) healthy- sick. The scale positions checked on these five scales were summed and divided by five. The mean result was taken as the mean evaluative score for an individual with ^Osgood et al, op. cit.. p. 192. 52 ' Until recently, very few studies have been able to utilize the discriminant function technique because the amount of labor or computer time required has made it prohibitive. 36a respect to each of the 12 concepts. Group evaluative mean scores were then computed for each concept for each of the eight samples. Finally, to determine whether the groups differed significantly in their evaluative response to the social issues concepts, t-tests were applied to compare each group with every other group. The procedures described are the techniques commonly employed in studies using the semantic differential. Graduate law students were expected to place a higher value than other students upon the following five concepts: (1) to obey and respect authority, (2) to be powerful, (3) to work mainly to effect changes in laws and legal processes, (4) to use will power, and (5) to deter wrongdoing by strict law enforcement and punishment of violations. Graduate psychology students were expected to evaluate the following concepts more highly than other students: (1) to concentrate upon developing one's own individual potentialities, (2) psychotherapy, and (3) to be able to express and accept hostile and negative feelings. They were expected to place a higher value than law students upon (4) to be permissive. Graduate anthropology students were expected to evaluate more highly than other students the three group concepts: (1) to organize and engage in group actions of 369 various types, (2) groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous, Synanon, and Gamblers Anonymous, and (3) group sentiments. Along with psychology students, they were expected to place a higher value than law students upon (4) to be permissive. A summary form of the hypotheses and abbre viated operational indicators are shown in Table 9« The second section of Hypothesis II examines the nine deviant group concepts. Hypothesis IIA was concerned with the relative value placed upon various concepts. In contrast, the interest in Hypothesis IIB is upon the type of judgment made, the label endorsed or the trait imputed to a particular deviant group. Therefore, the primary focus is upon each of the 13 scales used with this set of concepts, rather than upon the concepts themselves. The first sub-hypothesis (II-B-1) postulates that judgments will reflect the vocabulary of motives or type of explanation learned in intensive study. Judgments of graduate law students are expected to indicate the use of legal and moral standards as criteria. Operationally, this means law students will check the following labels more frequently than will other students: harmful, guilty, bad, sinful, dirty, dishonest, and dull. A check mark in any of the three positions on the negative side of the scale indicates an endorsement. A check mark in any of the three positions of the positive side of the 370 TABLE 9 VALUE-ORIENTATIONS REGARDING SOCIAL ISSUES HYPOTHESES (II-A) AND OPERATIONAL INDICATORS Variable Anthropology I Psychology1Law (1) Focus: (2) Policy: Group action J Develop Groups such as AA individual Group sentiments Be permissive (3) Free-will vs. determinism potential ities Be per missive Psycho therapy Express feelings Obey authority Be powerful Legal processes Strict law and punishment Use will power 371 pole would mean the following labels are associated with the specified deviant groups beneficial, innocent, good, 53 virtuous, clean, honest, and intelligent. A check mark in the neutral or center position of the scale indicates a relativistic, or in the case of the five moral labels, a non-moralistic judgment. Endorsement of "sick" is taken as an indicator of a psychological type of explanation. The second sub-hypothesis (II-B-2) suggests that judgments will reflect the reality-orientation of a dis cipline. Judgments of graduate anthropology students are expected to be relativistic; those of psychology and law students universalistic. Labeling deviant groups as "irrational" is taken as the operational indicator of a universal reality-orientation since the norms of the specified deviant group are apparently not used as the criteria for judgment. Instead, the official or dominant reality-orientation is apparently applied universally. The third sub-hypothesis (II-B-3) deals with judgments concerning policy advocated for deviant groups. Three types of judgment are in question with the following alternatives offered: (1) permit vs. prohibit by law, (2) help them vs. punish them, and (3) they need psycho- 53 ^No hypotheses were made with respect to the positive pole of the scales. 372 therapy vs. they do not need psychotherapy. The fourth sub-hypothesis (II-B-4) suggests that the assumption of free-will vs. determinism will affect judgments assessing responsibility of deviant groups. The legal premise of free-will would be indicated by checking "individual is responsible." Emphasis on the assumption of social determinism would be indicated by checking "society is responsible." Psychology students are expected to check the middle position on this scale. The hypotheses and operational indicators are shown in Table 10. Label scores were computed for each subject to represent the number of times a particular label or category was checked. Since there are nine deviant group concepts, the possible range of the score is zero to nine. Thirty-nine label scores were computed for each individual, three for each scale, corresponding to the two polar categories plus the neutral category. For example, the graduate anthropology sample is expected to have a higher "neutral" (relativistic) label score than any of the other seven samples on all scales except the "society is responsible vs. individual is responsible" scale. Graduate psychology students are expected to be high on neutral on the latter scale, and almost as high on the moral scales. The group score is the mean of the frequency scores of all group members. To determine whether groups differed in type of judgments made regarding deviant 373 TABLE 10 TYPES OF JUDGMENTS WITH REGARD TO DEVIANT GROUPS: HYPOTHESES (II-B) AND OPERATIONAL INDICATORS Variable Anthropology Psychology 1 j Law i j - Relativistic Psychological 1 Legal Neutral and Sick Harmful to low on society negative Guilty Non- Non- moralistic moralistic Moral Neutral and Neutral and Bad, Sinful low on low on Dirty, Dull negative negative Dishonest Relativistic Universal Universal Neutral and 1 Irrational ! Irrational low on negative Permit Permit Prohibit by (Non Help law intervention) Needs Punish Neutral therapy and low Society is Neutral Individual responsible i responsible (1) Vocabulary of motives and traits imputed: (2) Reality- orienta tion: (3) Policy: (4) Free-will vs. determinism: 374 groups, t-tests were applied to compare each group with every other group. A label score represents a single cumulative frequency score on each scale for all nine deviant groups concepts. The label scores suffice to answer the questions raised in the hypotheses. However, they do not reveal judgments made regarding particular deviant groups. Other measures are available to analyze such issues. The samples were ranked from high to low on each scale of every concept on the basis of the group means of original scores. Some of the data were also analyzed in terms of percentages. The variety of measures and statistical tests inspire greater confidence that the results obtained are not due to the peculiarity of any particular technique. There is only one hypothesis under section three pertaining to beliefs about human nature and the world. It is hypothesized that such beliefs will reflect the assumptions of social determinism, of psychological determinism, or of free will. Six of the scales which were listed under the concepts "human nature" and "the world we live in" are used to test this hypothesis. The first four scales are as follows: (1) The world we live in is: "determined vs. non-determined;" (2) human nature is: "determined vs. free;" (3) human nature is: "understandable vs. mysterious;" and (4) human nature is: 375 "predictable vs. unpredictable." Psychology and anthro pology students are expected to check closer to the pole listing "determined," "understandable," and "predictable" than law students. The fifth and sixth scales are as follows: (5) Human nature is: "society-determined vs. self-determined;" and (6) human nature is "social vs. individual." Anthro pology students are expected to check closer to the pole listing "society-determined" and "social." Psychology students, on the other hand, are expected to check closer to the pole listing "self-determined" and "individual." To determine whether the samples differed significantly on these six scales, t-tests were applied to compare each sample with every other sample. The hypothesis and the operational indicators are shown in Table 11. The three other miscellaneous concepts belong in section A or section B of Hypothesis II. Different scales were required for these concepts; however, the measures and tests are the same as those described above. Graduate law students are expected to place a higher value than other students on the two miscellaneous concepts repre senting government policy: (l) United States' policy in Vietnam and (2) capital punishment. Judgments concerning (3) "abortion" are expected to conform to the same patterns predicted for judgments regarding the nine deviant group concepts. 376 TABLE 11 BELIEFS ABOUT HUMAN NATURE AND THE WORLD HYPOTHESIS (II-C) AND OPERATIONAL INDICATORS Variable Anthropology- Psychology Law (1) Free-will Determinism: Social Determinism Psychological Determinism Free-will Human natur Human natur standable Human natur predictab! The world i 5 is determined. 5 is under- • e is Le. s determined. Human nature is free, mysterious, unpredictable. The world is non determined. Human nature is society- determined. Human nature is social. Human nature is self- determined. Human nature is individual. 377 SUMMARY The research procedures utilized in this study have been discussed in this chapter. First, the research design was outlined. Next, the method for selecting the samples and the composition of the samples were described. Then, data collection techniques were enumerated. Finally, hypotheses, operational definitions, operational indicators, measurement procedures, and statistical tests were outlined. The findings will be reported in the next chapter. CHAPTER VII THE FINDINGS In the previous chapter, the hypotheses were stated and procedures were described which were used to analyze the data and to test each of the five sub hypotheses. In the present chapter, the findings will be presented following the same order as established in the preceding chapter. The relevant data for each of the sub hypotheses will be examined in turn. The data, as explained earlier, consist of a series of judgments made by the subjects about various concepts. Twenty-six concepts were included on the research instrument. The 26 concepts were categorized into three groups: (A) 12 social issues concepts, each rated on ten scales, (B) nine deviant group concepts, each judged on 13 scales, and (C) five miscellaneous concepts with differing numbers of scales. Abbreviated names will be used, from now on, to refer to each of the concepts. Tables 12, 13» and 14 present lists of the three groups of concepts, the corresponding abbreviated titles, and the scales on which the concepts were rated. For the benefit of the reader, the three general 373 379 TABLE 12 SOCIAL ISSUES CONCEPTS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SCALES Concepts" 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. a. 9. 10. ii. 12. To obey and respect authority To be powerful To organize and engage in group action of various types To work mainly to effect changes in laws and legal processes To concentrate upon developing one's own individual potentialities Psychotherapy To use will power Groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous, Synanon, and Gamblers Anonymous To be able to express and accept hostile and negative feelings Group sentiments To deter wrongdoing by strict law enforcement and punishment of violations To be permissive Abbreviations 1. Obey authority 2. Be powerful 3. Group action 4. Use legal processes 5. Individual potentialities 6. Psychotherapy 7. Use will power S. Groups such as A. A. 9. Express feelings 10. Group sentiments 11. Law enforce ment and punishment 12. Be permissive Scales 1* 7 1. important— unimportant 2. effective— ineffective 3. beneficial— harmful 4. active— passive 5* meaningful— meaningless 6. free— constraining 7. productive-destructive 8. rational— irrational 9. potent— impotent 10. healthy— sick "Scale values range from 1 to 7» from the polar term on left to the polar term on the right. However, approxi mately half of the terms and values were reversed on the instrument, and then flipped during computer processing. 380 TABLE 13 DEVIANT GROUP CONCEPTS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SCALES Concepts Abbreviations 1. Homosexuals 1. Homosexuals 2. Adult groups which use marijuana 2. Marijuana 3. Men in poverty areas who are on 3. Men on welfare welfare 4. People who marry inter-racially 4. Inter-racial marriage 5. Pacifists who burn their draft cards 5. Burn draft cards 6. Prostitutes 6. Prostitutes 7. Adult groups which use LSD 7. LSD S. Women on welfare who have 8. Welfare and illegitimate children illegitimate children 9. Those who participated in the 9. Watts Watts riots rioters Scales 1 7 1. good— bad 2. healthy— sick 3. intelligent— dull 4. clean— dirty 5. rational— irrational 6. virtuous— sinful 7. honest— dishonest S. beneficial to society— harmful to society 9. innocent— guilty 10. society is responsible— individual is responsible 11. help them— punish them 12. permit— prohibit by law 13. they do not need psychotherapy— they need psychotherapy TABLE 14 MISCELLANEOUS CONCEPTS AND SCALES Human Nature 1 7 1. Good— bad 2. Cooperative— competitive 3. Rational— irrational 4. Plastic— set 5. Predictable— unpredictable 6. Virtuous— sinful 7. Society-determined— self-determined S. Unselfish— selfish 9. Variable— universal 10. Determined— free 11. Learned— inherent 12. Active— passive 13. Understandable— mysterious 14. Social— individual The World We Live In 1. Safe— dangerous 7. Friendly— hostile 2. Determined— non-determined Reasonable absurd 3. Healthy sick 9. Productive— destructive 4. Big— small 10* Rational— irrational 5. Orderly— haphazard Good— bad 6. Free— constraining ^2. Meaningful— meaningless Capital Punishment 1. Necessary— unnecessary 5. Healthy— sick 2. Rational— irrational o. Effective deterrent— 3. Beneficial— harmful ineffective deterrent 4. Right— wrong 7. Permit it— prohibit it U.S. Policy in Vietnam 1. Right— wrong 2. Beneficial— harmful 3. Effective— ineffective 4. Healthy— sick 5. Soft— hard 382 TABLE 14— Continued 6. Necessary— unnecessary 7. Rational— irrational 8. Honest— dishonest 9. Innocent— guilty 10. Democratic— autocratic 11. World-minded— ethnocentric 12. Stay in Vietnam— leave Vietnam Abortion 1. Right— wrong 2. Healthy— sick 3. Clean— dirty 4. Rational— irrational $. Virtuous— sinful 6. Honest— dishonest 7. Beneficial to society— harmful to society 8. Permit— prohibit by law 9. Help— punish 10. Innocent— guilty 3$3 hypotheses will be briefly reviewed. Hypothesis I states, without regard to content, that the four graduate samples will differ in their responses on the instrument (their ideologies). Hypothesis II, in contrast, specifies the direction and content of the modal responses expected for graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthro pology. Expected modal responses were deduced from, and thus are assumed to reflect the conceptual systems of each of the three disciplines. Hypothesis III further specifies that the responses of graduate students should conform more closely to the postulated ideal patterns than the responses of undergraduates in the same disciplines. The findings for each of the five sub-hypotheses, IA, IB, IIA, IIB, IIC, will be presented in that order respectively. As each of the sub-hypotheses is discussed, the corresponding, appropriate data for the undergraduate samples will also be analyzed. The data on undergraduate students is pertinent only to Hypothesis III; however, presenting it in conjunction with the data for the graduate samples will facilitate the comparison between graduates and undergraduates and will eliminate having to repeat the entire discussion a second time. HYPOTHESIS IA The four graduate samples will differ in their 3S4 perception of each of the 26 concepts; i.e., the overall configurative pattern of meaning attributed to the same concept by the four samples will vary. Meaning was operationally defined as that point in the semantic space specified by a series of differentiat ing judgments. The meaning of a concept to a group is the central tendency of a cloud of such individual points in the semantic space.^ As discussed earlier, multiple- discriminant function analysis is considered to be the most efficient and satisfactory method to test the signif icance of the separation of groups in multidimensional space. The discriminant function provides the best linear combination for discriminating the groups. It is such that the ratio of the sum of squares among groups to that within groups is maximized. The computer program for discriminant analysis computes Wilks' lambda criterion. The value of lambda grows larger with decreasing signif icance. Degrees of freedom were calculated by the 2 following formulas ■^Charles E. Osgood, George J. Suci, Percy H. Tannenbaum, The Measurement of Meaning (Urbana, 111., University of Illinois Press, 1965)» pp. 26, 100. ^William R. Larson and Barbara G. Myerhoff, Intra-Family Relationships and Adolescent School Adjust ment (Los Aneeless Youth Studies Center. University of Southern California, 1967), p. 71. 385 For the greater mean square estimate: Df = (Number of variables) ‘(Number of groups - 1) For the lesser mean square: df=(N-l) - NV-NG 2 Where N is the total number of subjects NV is the number of variables NG is the number of groups Fisher's F was employed to evaluate Wilk's lambda for the null hypothesis that the four samples do not differ in the meaning attributed to a particular concept. Table 15 presents the following information regarding the four graduate samples for each of the 26 concepts: Wilk's lambda, the value obtained for Fisher's F, degrees of freedom, and p. The equivalent information for the four undergraduate samples is shown in Table 16. samples on 21 of the 26 concepts, 20 times at the .01 level and once at the .05 level. Thus, the null hypo thesis was rejected for Si per cent of the concepts. The graduate samples differed significantly in the manner in which they perceived nine of the 12 social issues concepts, all except: (l) organize group action, (2) group sentiments, and (3) be permissive. All nine of the The lambda was significant for the four graduate 386 TABLE 15 MULTIPLE-DISOOOANT FUNCTION ANALYSIS OF THE 26 CONCEPTS FOR THE FOUR GRADUATE SAMPLES Wilk's Lambda F DF df £ 1. Obey authority .737 2.651 30 728 .01 2. Be powerful .74 8 2.520 30 728 .01 3. Group action .872 1.150 30 72 8 4. Use legal processes.765 2.317 30 72 8 .01 5. Individual potentialities .773 2.220 30 72 8 .01 6. Psychotherapy .672 3.519 30 728 .01 7. Use will power .767 2.287 30 728 .01 8. Groups such as A.A.786 2.074 30 728 .01 9. Express feelings .757 2.410 30 728 .01 10. Group sentiments .850 1.376 30 728 11. Law enforcement and punishment .847 1.406 30 728 .05 12. Be permissive .867 1.207 30 728 13. Homosexuals .702 2.360 39 726 .01 14. Marijuana .749 1.908 39 726 .01 15. Men on welfare .694 2.444 39 726 .01 16. Inter-racial marriage .762 1.788 39 726 .01 17. Burn draft cards .728 2.099 39 726 .01 18. Prostitutes .713 2.199 39 726 .01 19. LSD .747 1.919 39 726 .01 20. Welfare and illeg• r * itimate children .752 1.875 39 726 .01 21. Watts rioters .69 8 2.400 39 726 .01 22. Human nature .618 3.275 39 726 .01 23. The world .670 2.692 39 726 .01 24. Abortion .861 1.266 30 728 25. Capital punishment .906 1.195 21 721 26. U.S. policy in Vietnam .724 2.331 36 727 .01 387 TABLE 16 MULTIPLE-DISCRIMINANT FUNCTION ANALYSIS OF THE 26 CONCEPTS FOR THE FOUR UNDERGRADUATE SAMPLES Wilk's Lambda F DF df £ 1. Obey authority .735 2.258 30 614 .01 2. Be powerful .799 1.617 30 614 .05 3. Group action .267 1.017 30 614 4. Use legal processes .S64 1.037 30 614 5. Individual potentialities .818 1.443 30 614 6. Psychotherapy .769 1.911 30 614 .01 7. Use will power .833 1.309 30 614 8. Groups such as A.A..852 1.147 30 614 9. Express feelings .848 1.178 30 614 10. Group sentiments .900 .743 30 614 11. Law enforcement and punishment .769 1.906 30 614 .01 12. Be permissive .832 1.320 30 614 13. Homosexuals .74 8 1.608 39 610 .05 14. Marijuana .799 1.227 39 610 15. Men on welfare .794 1.266 39 610 16. Inter-racial marriage .837 .968 39 610 17. Burn draft cards .857 .836 39 610 IS. Prostitutes .774 1.409 39 610 19. LSD .768 1.453 39 610 .05 20. Welfare and illeg itimate children .843 .925 39 610 21. Watts rioters .803 1.203 39 610 22. Human nature .825 1.050 39 610 23. The world .750 1.593 39 610 .05 24. Abortion .888 • 844 30 614 25. Capital punishment.852 1.662 21 609 .05 26. Vietnam .792 1.389 36 612 3 SB deviant group concepts discriminated among the graduate samples. Two miscellaneous concepts did not discriminate: (1) abortion, and (2) capital punishment. The four undergraduate samples, on the other hand, differed significantly on only eight (31 per cent) of the 26 concepts. Undergraduates differed on four of the twelve social issues concepts: (l) obey authority, (2) be powerful, (3) psychotherapy, (4) law enforcement and punishment; on two of the nine deviant group concepts: (1) homosexuals, (2) LSD; and on two miscellaneous concepts: (1) the world, and (2) capital punishment. Table 17 summarizes the number and per cent of significant differences on meaning of the 26 concepts among under graduate samples and among graduate samples. Multiple-discriminant function analyses were also conducted to test the significance of the group separa tions in meaning space between undergraduate and graduate students in the same disciplines. The following nine concepts discriminated between undergraduate and graduate psychology samples: (l) obey authority, (2) be power ful, (3) psychotherapy, (4) expeess feelings, (5) be permissive, (6) homosexuals, (7) interracial marriage, (8) human nature, and (9) the world. Undergraduate and graduate anthropology samples differed significantly on six concepts: (1) psycho- 389 TABLE 17 NUMBER OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES ON MEANING OF THE 26 CONCEPTS AMONG UNDERGRADUATE SAMPLES AND AMONG GRADUATE SAMPLES tJnder- graduates Graduates Concepts Group 1: Social issues Group 2: Deviant groups Group 3: Miscel laneous Number of Number Number Concepts Significant Significant 1 * < f o 4, 12 9 (33) (22) (40) ’(75) ' ( 100) ‘(60) 26 8 (31) 21 (81) 390 therapy, (2) group sentiments, (3) be permissive, (4) homosexuals, (5) men on welfare, and (6) interracial marriage. Pre-law and law students also differed signifi cantly on six concepts: (l) use legal processes, (2) individual potentialities, (3) interracial marriage, (4) prostitutes, (5) Watts rioters, and (6) abortion. The meaning space of the mixed-majors samples was significantly separated on only four concepts: (l) individual potentialities, (2) use will power, (3) groups such as A.A., and, (4) homosexuals. Graduate and undergraduate psychology samples, thus, show the greatest number of differences of the four groups in the manner in which they perceive the concepts in question. The mixed-majors samples differ the least in this respect. Interpretation of these differences will not be offered at this point, since they can be more adequately discussed after an analysis is made of the direction and content of group differences. Tables lS and 19 summarize the evidence for the significance of group differences in semantic meaning space for the 26 concepts. One hundred and fifty-six multiple-discriminant function analyses were conducted to make six separate comparisons for each of the 26 con cepts. In summary, the discriminant analysis supports TABLE 18 391 THE CONCEPTS ON WHICH THE GROUPS DIPPER SIGNIFICANTLY IN MEANING (SIX TYPES OF COMPARISONS) Concepts A P L M U G 1. Obey authority .05 .01 .01 2. Be powerful .01 .05 .01 3. Group action 4. Use legal processes .05 .01 5. Individual potentialities .05 .05 .01 6. Psychotherapy .05 .05 .01 .01 7. Use will power .01 .01 8. Groups such as A.A. .05 .01 9. Express feelings .05 .01 10. Group sentiments .05 11. Law enforce ment and puni shment .01 .05 12. Be permissive .05 .05 13. Homosexuals .05 .01 .01 .05 .01 14. Marijuana .01 15. Men on welfare .05 .01 16. Inter-racial marriage .05 .01 .05 .01 17. Bum draft cards .01 18. Prostitutes .01 .01 19. LSD .05 .01 20. Welfare and illegitimate children .01 21. Watts Rioters .05 .01 22. Human nature .01 .01 23. The world .01 in o . .01 24. Abortion .05 25. Capital punishment .05 26. U.S. policy in Vietnam .01 392 TABLE 19 SUMMARY OF THE MULTIPLE-DISCRIMINANT FUNCTION ANALYSIS. NUMBER OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES FOR EACH OF THE 6 COMPARISONS Group Of 12 Social Issues Concepts Of 9 Deviant Group Concepts Of 5 Miscel laneous Concepts Of the 26 Concepts G 9 9 3 21 U 4 2 2 a P 5 2 2 9 A 3 3 0 6 L 2 3 1 6 M 3 1 0 4 G U P A L M 393 Hypothesis IA that the four graduate samples differ in social ideology. The four groups differed significantly in their perception of 21 of the 26 concepts. The analysis also demonstrates that the differences among graduate samples are much greater than those among under graduate samples. The second part of Hypothesis I involves a consideration, not of concepts, but of several scales. HYPOTHESIS IB The four graduate samples will differ in what they perceive as beneficial or harmful, healthy or sick, and rational or irrational. The data pertinent to hypothesis IB consist of the ratings given by the subjects on the three general scales: (1) beneficial-harmful, (2) healthy-sick, and (3) rational-irrational. These three scales were offered in conjunction with 24> 25» and 26 concepts respectively. No scales, other than these three, were used with both the social issues and deviant group concepts. The data were analyzed separately for each of the three scales on each concept, therefore, a multivariate measure was not required. Chi square tests were used to determine the statistical significance of differences among the groups. Subjects judged each concept on 7-point 394 rating scales, resulting in a 7-cell frequency distribu tion for each sample. Comparison of the responses of four samples, then, required 7 x 4 chi square tables. The formula for degrees of freedom is as follows: df = (r-l) (c—1). If there were frequencies in all columns, there would be 1# df. However, in some instances, there was a frequency of zero in a particular column, resulting in fewer degrees of freedom. The computer program for chi square prints out frequency and percentage distributions, degrees of freedom, and chi-square values. Table 20 shows the chi square values obtained in the comparison of responses of the four graduate samples on the three general scales for each concept. The equiv alent information for the four undergraduate samples is given in Table 21. The frequency distribution of the four graduate samples differed significantly on the beneficial-harmful scales on l6 of the 24 concepts; on the healthy-sick scales on 15 of the 25 concepts; on the rational-irrational scale on 19 of the 26 concepts. In contrast, the frequency distribution of the four undergraduate samples differed significantly on the beneficial-harmful scales on 7 of the 24 concepts; on the healthy-sick scales on 9 of the 25 concepts; on the rational-irrational scales on 9 of the 26 concepts. 395 TABLE 20 CHI SQUARE VALUES FOR THE THREE GENERAL SCALES ON EACH CONCEPT. COMPARISON OF THE FOUR GRADUATE SAMPLES Concept B e n e f i c i a l - Harmful Healthy-' Sick df 1 df 1. Obey authority 59.188***2 37.004** 2. Be powerful 51.606*** 50.908*** 3. Group action 26.851 18.217 4. Use legal processes 15 62.712*** 15 37.064** 5. Individual potentiali ties 15 29.590* 15 44.366*** 6. Psycho therapy 15 61.488*** 15 47.097*** 7. Use will power 15 34.625** 33.455* 8. Groups such as A.A. 12 12.322 15 12.014 9. Express feelings 19.006 15 23.660 10. Group sentiments 22.195 26.149 11. Law enforce ment and punishment 44.305*** 31.925* 12. Be permissive 17.130 22.087 13. Homosexuals 54.162*** 65.120*** 14. Mari juana 27.739 40.033** 15. Men on welfare 49.103*** 15 29.385* 16. Inter-racial marriage 19.605 20.759 17. Bum draft cards 32.771* 36.900** 18. Prostitutes 30.205* 43.282*** 19. LSD 33.604* 31.007* Hational- Irrational df 40.034** 43.396*** 19.901 15 60.245*** 12 32.328** 42.326*** 39.594** 31.742* 36. 308** 18.106 46.142*** 17.070 52.098*** 16.122 34.504* 20.362 38.199** 35.123** 16.547 396 TABLE 20— Continued Concept 20. Welfare and illegit imate children 21. Watts Rioters 22. Human nature 23. The world 24. Abortion 25. Capital punishment 26. Vietnam Beneficial- Harmful df 1 9 70.055*** 47.979*** 23.731 31. 308* 42.769*** Healthy- Sick df 40.222** 26.686 27.962 27.147 15.372 29.070* Rational- Irrational df 40.278** 39.715** 28.530 44.464*** 30. 072* 31.413* 35.692** Degrees of freedom if other than 18 df. 2 *Significance at .05 level; **Significance at .01 level; ***significance at .001 level. 397 TABLE 21 CHI SQUARE VALUES FOR THE THREE GENERAL SCALES ON EACH CONCEPT. COMPARISON OF THE FOUR UNDERGRADUATE SAMPLES Beneficial- Healthy- Rational- Concept Harmful Sick Ir rational df1 df df 1. Obey authority 48.930***2 14.438 36.336** 2. Be powerful 20.548 29.707* 28.028 3. Group action 16.837 24.779 30.981* 4. Use legal processes 33.105* 15 30.363* 15 21.854 5. Individual poten tialities 15 16.145 12 18.268 22.629 6. Psycho therapy 24.212 31.136* 17.253 7. Use will power 15 28.174* 41.376** 25.214 8. Groups such as A.A. 9 13.768 15 15.468 12 21.414* 9. Express feelings 23.126 21.588 17.495 10. Group sentiments 9.023 10.945 11.908 11. Law enforce ment and punishment 25.216 32.455* 17.823 12. Be permissive 37.386** 21.760 38.973** 13. Homosexuals 26.179 34.383* 29.380* 14. Mari juana 23.897 11.868 23.105 15. Men on welfare 29.737* 15 14.705 10.226 16. Inter-racial marriage 21.917 18.008 31.102* 17. Burn draft cards 30.655* 32.713* 29.094* 18. Prostitutes 23.885 20.857 20.375 19. LSD 20.913 15.330 21.209 398 TABLE 21— Continued Concept Beneficial- Harmful df 1 20. Welfare and illegitimate children 9 12.045 21. Watts Rioters 22. Human nature 23. The world 24. Abortion 25. Capital punishment 26. Vietnam 28.229 19.327 22.645 32.032* df Healthy- Sick 19.254 33.166* 19.078 28.291 12.888 38.020** Rational- Irrational df 26.277 28.524 15.976 32.535* 24.565 19.979 29.769* 399 A comparison of the concepts on which under graduates and graduates differ significantly is shown in Table 22. Three would be the largest possible number of differences on each concept. A summary of the number of significant differences on the three general scales among undergraduate samples and among graduate samples is presented in Table 23. In summary, the evidence confirms Hypothesis I that the social ideologies of the four graduate samples differ significantly. The four samples attributed dif ferent meanings to 21 of the 26 concepts on the instru ment. They also differed in what they perceive as beneficial or harmful, healthy or sick, rational or irrational 50 times out of a possible 75* The data give some evidence in support of Hypotheses III with regard to the two elements of ideology which have been examined thus far. There were 2.6 times as many differences in the semantic meaning space of graduate samples as of undergraduate samples. There were twice as many significant differences in perception of the three general scales among graduate samples as among undergraduate samples. Thus far the analysis demonstrates that the four graduate samples differ in conceptions of social reality, and that they differ two to two and a half times more 400 TABLE 22 COMPARISON OF THE CONCEPTS ON WHICH UNDERGRADUATES AND GRADUATES DIFFER SIGNIFICANTLY ON THE THREE GENERAL SCALES Concepts Undergraduates Graduates 1. Obey authority 2 3 2. Be powerful 1 3 3. Group action 1 4. Use legal processes 2 3 5. Individual potentialities 3 6. Psychotherapy 1 - 3 7. Use will power 2 3 3. Groups such as A. A. 1 1 9. 10. 11. Express feelings Group sentiments Law enforcement and 1 punishment 1 3 12. Be permissive 2 13. Homosexuals 2 3 14. Marijuana 1 15. Men on welfare 1 3 16. Interracial marriage 1 17. Burn draft cards 3 3 13. Prostitutes 3 19. 20. LSD Welfare and illegitimate children 2 3 21. 22. Watts rioters Human nature 1 2 23. The World 1 1 24. Abortion 1 25. Capital punishment 2 26. Vietnam 2} 401 TABLE 23 NUMBER OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES ON THE THREE GENERAL SCALES AMONG UNDERGRADUATE SAMPLES AND AMONG GRADUATE SAMPLES Under graduates Graduates Number of Number Number Concepts Concepts Significant Significant Beneficial- * 1 o harmful 24 7 16 (29) (67) Healthy- 25 9 15 sick (36) (60) Rational- 26 9 19 irrational (35) (73) 75 25 5b (33) (66) 402 frequently than do the undergraduate samples. No atten tion, however, has been given to the nature or direction of the differences or to the content of the ideologies. Such questions will be examined in the tests of Hypothesis II. HYPOTHESIS II Social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthropology will reflect the unique conceptual systems of their respective disciplines. All of the data will now be reanalyzed to determine whether or not the social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthropology reflect the unique conceptual systems of their own disciplines. Ideology will be considered to reflect the conceptual system of the corresponding discipline if the responses of students conform more closely to the modal pattern predicted for their disciplines and are significantly different from the responses of other students in that respect. No predictions were made for the mixed-majors sample; however, their responses will be presented along with those of the other samples. As explained earlier, the mixed-majors group can serve as a general reference point against which the specialized groups may be compared. 403 After the graduate data have been analyzed with respect to the hypotheses in each of the three sections, the equivalent data for the undergraduate samples will be presented. Two kinds of evidence will be taken into con sideration in the graduate-undergraduate comparison. First, there should be more differences among graduate samples than among undergraduate samples. That is, there should be greater variance within groups in the under graduate samples, and greater variance among groups in the graduate samples. Evidence of this type was presented in the analysis of Hypothesis I. In addition, however, differences between undergraduates and graduates in each discipline will be examined, and the responses of graduate samples should conform more closely to the predicted modal patterns than those of undergraduates. Two elements of ideology were examined in Hypo thesis Is (1) meanings, and (2) perception of what is beneficial or harmful, healthy or sick, rational or irrational. Hypothesis II pertains to the remaining three elements of ideology which are to be analyzed in this study: (1) value-orientations regarding designated social issues, (2) type of judgments with regard to deviant groups, and (3) specified beliefs about human nature and the world. Each of the three elements refers to different segments of the data. The first involves the 12 social issues concepts plus two miscellaneous concepts (1) United States' policy in Vietnam, and (2) capital punishment. HYPOTHESIS IIA. VALUE-ORIENTATIONS REGARDING SOCIAL ISSUES The first section of Hypothesis II concerns value-orientations of the students with regard to social issues. Value is operationally defined as the direction (favorable or unfavorable) and degree of intensity of feeling toward a concept as indicated by the mean score of the ratings checked on the five evaluative scales: (l) important-unimportant, (2) beneficial-harmful, (3) meaningful-meaningless, (A) productive-destructive, and (5) healthy-sick. A score of one represents the highest or most favorable evaluation, seven indicates the lowest possible evaluation. T-tests were employed to determine whether or not the central tendency of each sample differs from that of every other sample. One-tailed tests were used since the direction of the outcome was predicted. The .05 level is used as the criterion of significance. The following rules will be followed to determine whether or not a hypothesis has been confirmed. A sample 405 will have to differ significantly, as predicted, from all other samples, unless exceptions are specified, in order for the hypothesis to be fully confirmed. If a sample differs significantly from the two other disciplines, but not from the mixed-majors samples, then the hypothesis will be considered to have been partially confirmed. A score which conforms to the prediction but is not significantly different from that of other samples will not support the hypothesis. There are three sub-sections for Hypothesis II-A which postulate respectively that value-orientations will reflect: (l) focal area of the discipline, (2) theory associated with role procedures, and (3) assumptions regarding free will or determinism. The first of the sub sections reads as follows: HYPOTHESIS II-A-1 Values will reflect the area upon which each discipline is primarily and selectively focused. Graduate psychology students were expected to place a higher value than other students upon concepts emphasizing the individual, namely, to develop individual potentialities. Graduate law students should place a higher value than other students upon concepts emphasizing 406 law, authority, power, and government policy, indicated by: (1) use legal processes, (2) obey authority, (3) be powerful, (4) United States' policy in Vietnam, and (5) 3 capital punishment. Graduate anthropology students were expected to evaluate group-related concepts more positively than other students. The group-related concepts are (l) group action, (2) group sentiments, and (3) groups such as A. A. The results for Hypothesis II-A-1 are shown in Table 24. The group mean evaluative scores are arranged from highest to lowest. Nine predictions were made in this- sub-section: one for psychology, five for law, and three for anthropology. The one expectation for psychology was not confirmed. Psychology was not highest in evaluating "develop individual potentialities;" however, psychology and law were approximately tied for first place, and were significantly higher than anthropology and the mixed majors. The graduate law sample was significantly higher 3 ^Evaluative scales used with these two miscel laneous concepts are as follows: For United States; policy in Vietnam: (a) right-wrong, (b) beneficial-harmful, (c) healthy-sick, (d) honest-dishonest, (e) innocent- guilty; for capital punishment: (a) right-wrong, (b) beneficial-harmful, and (c) healthy-sick. 407 TABLE 24 RESULTS FOR HYPOTHESIS II-A-1 VALUE-ORIENTATIONS RELATED TO FOCAL AREA OF DISCIPLINE Graduate Sample Group Mean Evaluation Score expected to High to Low_________________ score high Concept Psychology: (1) Develop L2 ^ M2 A2 individual 1.44 1.48 1.84 2.00 potentialities ^(l) Use legal processes I? 1.78 P3 1.99 A2 2.45 M2 2.62 *# (2) Obey authority L3 2.46 M2 2.89 A1 3.30 P2 3.34 ** (3) Be powerful L3 3.10 P2 3.29 M2 3.38 A3 3.73 *w (4) U.S. policyL3 in Vietnam 4.18 M2 4.73 P1 5.13 A2 5.33 (5) Capital punishment M1 4.74 L1 4.99 A1 5.00 P3 5.57 Anthropology: (1) Group p^ L* 3 tP action 2.32 2.52 2.56 2.66 (2) Group P° L° M° A0 sentiments 3.20 3.34 3.34 3*43 (3) Groups L1 P° A0 M1 such as A. A. 1.85 1.89 1.98 2.10 ^Indicates the number of graduate samples which differ significantly from this sample, p is less than .05. l**Indicates that the expectation was confirmed. The flFrtl 4M&§ifif#£&Yo^fferent from the three other samPles 408 than the other three graduate samples on four of the five concepts. Capital punishment was the only one of the five predictions for law students which was not substantiated. The scores of mixed-<na jors, law, and anthropology were very similar on this concept, whereas, psychology evaluated capital punishment significantly lower than the other three groups. The three predictions for anthropology were not confirmed. In fact, the three group-related concepts were the only concepts on which there were no evaluative differences between anthropology, psychology, and law. Only the mixed-majors group differed from psychology on group action, and from law on groups such as A. A. The relative place given to the various concepts in a hier archy of values will be described at the end of the section on value-orientations. We turn now to the second sub section of hypothesis II-A. HYPOTHESIS II-A-2 Policy valued and advocated will reflect the theory and procedures associated with the major role or function of a discipline. Graduate psychology students were expected to place a higher value than other students upon expression of feelings and upon psychotherapy. They were expected to 409 value permissiveness more highly than law students. Anthropology students were also expected to rate per missiveness higher than law students. On the other hand, law students should place a higher value upon legal control and punishment. Five predictions were made in this sub-section: three for psychology, one for anthropology, and one for law. The results are shown in Table 25. The three hypotheses regarding psychology were confirmed. Psychol ogy students evaluated expression of feelings and psychotherapy significantly higher than the other three samples. They rated "be permissive" significantly higher than law and mixed-majors. The mean score for anthropology on "be permissive" was higher than the scores of law and mixed-majors, but was not significantly different. Law was significantly higher than the other three samples, as expected, in the rating of law enforcement and punishment. One further prediction for law students was made in the final section of Hypothesis II-A. 410 TABLE 25 RESULTS FOR HYPOTHESIS II-A-2 VALUE-ORIENTATIONS RELATED TO THEORY ASSOCIATED WITH ROLE PROCEDURES Graduate Sample expected to score high Concept Group Mean evaluation score high to low Psychology: 1**(l) Express feelings **(2) Psycho therapy 2**(3) Be permissive ■}* i 1 p^ L Ax 1.99 2.30 2.49 p3 L3 M2 2.00 2.65 3.16 p2 A0 M1 M1 2.51 A2 3.1# L1 Anthropology: (1) fee permissive 3.20 3.51 3.76 3.76 Law: **(1) Law enforcement and punish L3 M1 P1 A1 ment 2.92 3.44 3.BO 3.92 ^Indicates the number of graduate samples which differ significantly from this sample, p is less than .05. l**Indicates that the expectation was confirmed. The sample is significantly different than the three other samples in the expected direction. 2 Indicates that the expectation was confirmed. In this case, GP was not expected to differ from GA. 411 HYPOTHESIS II-A-3 Values will reflect group assumptions about the nature of human behavior, free will, and determinism. Only one prediction is involved in Hypothesis II-A-3. The graduate law sample was expected to rate will power higher than other students, reflecting the legal premise of free will. The expectation was con firmed. The mean score for law on "use will power" was significantly higher than the mean scores of the three other samples. The scores of the three other samples were tied. Table 26 presents this finding. A summary of the results of Hypothesis II-A is shown in Table 27. Graduate value-orientations with reference to the 12 social issues concepts plus two miscellaneous concepts have been examined. Two separate predictions were made for "be permissive," one for anthropology and one for psychology, thus totaling to 15 predictions. Nine of the 15 predictions were sup ported; eight of the 12 social issues concepts, and one of the two miscellaneous concepts. In each of the con firmations, the graduate sample, in question, differed significantly from the three other graduate samples in the expected direction. 412 TABLE 26 RESULTS FOR HYPOTHESIS II-A-3 VALUE-ORIENTATIONS RELATED TO ASSUMPTION OF FREE WILL OR DETERMINISM Graduate Samples Group Mean Evaluation Score expected to High to Low score hifih------ Concept Law! *n (l) Use L3* pi M1 A1 will 2.17 2.72 2.73 2.74 power ^Indicates the number of graduate samples which differ significantly from this sample. l**Indicates the expectation was confirmed. The sample is significantly different than the three other samples in the expected direction. 413 TABLE 27 SUMMARY OP RESULTS FOR HYPOTHESIS IIA VALUE ORIENTATIONS REGARDING SOCIAL ISSUES Graduate Number of Sample Predictions Confirmed Not Confirmed Law 7 6 1 Psychology 4 3 1 Anthropology __4 0 4 15 9(60%) 6(40*) 414 The graduate law sample scored significantly higher than the three other samples on all five of the predicted social issues concepts, and on one of the miscellaneous concepts. On the other miscellaneous concept, "capital punishment," law was significantly higher than psychology, but tied with anthropology; mixed-majors were highest. The graduate psychology sample evaluated three of the four predicted concepts significantly higher than other students. On the fourth concept, "develop indivi dual potentialities," psychology was tied with law, and both were significantly higher than anthropology and mixed- majors. None of the four predictions for anthropology was confirmed. Anthropology was higher than law and mixed- majors on "be permissive," but not significantly different. On the three group-related concepts, there were no significant differences among anthropology, law, and psychology. HYPOTHESIS II-A: UNDERGRADUATES The equivalent data for the four undergraduate samples will now be presented. The data for under- 415 graduates, however, will not be analyzed by subsections of the hypothesis. An overall interpretation of the results with respect to Hypothesis III will be given after all the data have been analyzed. The reader is reminded, however, that findings supporting academic specialization as a determinant of social ideology would require that there be more significant differences in the predicted direction among graduate samples than among undergraduate samples. The concepts which are presumed to reflect the unique characteristics of the three disciplines will be referred to, hereafter, as the seven law concepts, the four psychology concepts, and the four anthropology concepts, respectively. Predictions were not made for the undergraduate samples; however, predictions which were made for the graduate samples will be applied to the corresponding undergraduate sample. The same standards for testing will be used; that is, one-tailed t-tests are employed. Table 28 shows the mean evaluative scores and number of significant differences among undergraduate samples on the seven law concepts. Pre-law students evaluated, "be powerful" and "United States' policy in Vietnam" significantly higher than the three other samples. In addition, they evaluated "obey authority" 416 TABLE 28 VALUE-OREENTATIONS OF THE FOUR UNDERGRADUATE SAMPLES WITH REGARD TO THE LAW CONCEPTS Under graduate Sample Concept Law: Group Mean Evaluation Score High to Low__________ (1) Use legal processes 2* M 2.13 L° 2.28 P1 2.33 A1 2.35 wl(2) Obey authority L2 2.22 M2 2.46 A2 3.06 P2 3.08 **2 (3) Be powerful I? 3.14 M3 3.36 P2 3.61 A2 3.72 * (4) Law enforcement and punishment L2 2.94 M2 3.-16 A 2 3.74 P2 3.S3 (5) Use will power L1 1.98 M1 2.15 A0 2.30 P2 2.54 ** (6) U.S. policy in Vietnam I? 3.98 M1 4.61 P1 4.99 A1 5.09 (7) Capital punishment L1 4* 64 M1 4.71 A0 5.13 P2 5.29 ^Indicates the number of undergraduate samples which differ significantly from this sample. l*Indicates that the prediction made for the graduate sample was partially confirmed for the corresponding under graduate sample. 2**Indicates that the prediction made for the graduate sample was fully confirmed for the corresponding under graduate sample. 417 and "law enforcement and punishment" significantly higher than psychology and anthropology, but not higher than mixed-majors. Therefore, the latter are considered as partial confirmations. Pre-law students did not differ from any other sample on "use legal processes." On "use will power" and "capital punishment," pre-law students scored significantly higher than psychology students only. Of the seven predictions made for the graduate law sample, six had been confirmed among graduate samples. In contrast, only two were fully confirmed and two more partially confirmed for the undergraduate law sample. However, pre-law students were highest in rank on all law concepts except "use legal processes." Mixed-majors were second in rank on all law concepts except "use legal processes" on which they were first. Mean evaluative scores for the undergraduate samples on psychology and anthropology concepts are given in Table 29. Undergraduate psychology students evaluated "psychotherapy" significantly higher than the other three samples. They also evaluated "be permissive" higher than mixed-majors and law students. Psychology students did not differ from other students on the remaining two con cepts. "Express feelings" did not discriminate among any of the undergraduate samples. Only mixed majors differed and were high on "develop individual potentialities." Of TABLE 29 VALUE-ORIENTATIONS OF THE FOUR UNDERGRADUATE SAMPLES WITH REGARD TO THE PSYCHOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY CONCEPTS Under graduate Sample Concept Group Mean evaluative score High to Low Psychology: (1) Develop individual potentialities M2* 1.37 P° 1.43 L1 1.62 A1 1.63 (2) Express feelings A0 2.35 P° 2.37 M° 2.41 L° 2.57 **1/ V (3) Psycho therapy P3 2.14 L1 2.61 2.62 M1 2.70 Anthropology: ‘*2U) Be permissive (1) Be permissive p2 3.27 A0 3.57 M1 3.91 L1 3.97 (2) Group action L° 2.53 M° 2.58 P° 2.60 A0 2.75 (3) Group sentiments L1 3.25 M° 3.40 P° 3.47 A1 3.61 (4) Groups suchM^ as A.A. 1.65 A1 1.68 P1 1.89 L2 1.96 ^Indicates the number of undergraduate samples which differ significantly from this sample. •j** Indicates that the prediction made for the graduate sample was f u 1 1 y confirmed for the corresponding undergraduate sample. 2 Psychology was not expected to differ from anthropology on this concept. 419 the four predictions made for the graduate psychology sample, then, three were confirmed for graduate students, and two for undergraduate students. The results on the four anthropology concepts were the aame for undergraduate as for graduate anthropology students. None of the predictions was supported. The undergraduate anthropology sample was tied with mixed majors for first place on "groups such as A. A." but on this concept, they were significantly different only from law. Anthropology students were higher than law and mixed majors on "be permissive," but not significantly different. Pre-law students were significantly higher than anthropology on "group sentiments." "Group action" did not discriminate among any of the undergraduate samples. In summary, whereas nine of the 15 hypotheses were confirmed for graduate samples on value-orientations, only four would have been fully confirmed for under graduate samples, using the same criteria. Two others would have been partially confirmed. This information is shown in Table 30. DIFFERENCES WITHIN DISCIPLINES The data on value-orientations will now be 420 TABLE 30 COMPARISON OF THE NUMBER OF PREDICTIONS CONFIRMED ON VALUE-ORIENTATIONS AMONG GRADUATE SAMPLES AND AMONG UNDERGRADUATES SAMPLES (Jnde rgraduate s (including predictions Group Confirmed Number of Under productions Graduate graduates partially confirmed) Law 7 6 2 4 Psychology 4 3 2 2 Anthropology _Jj. 0 0 0 15 9 4 6 (6096) (26.696) (4096) 421 reanalyzed once more to determine the extent and nature of differences between undergraduate and graduate students in the same discipline. These data for each of the four groups are shown graphically in figures 1, 2, 3, and 4. The graphs enable us to compare visually the direction and magnitude of the differences between undergraduates and graduates in each group on each concept. In addition, the graphs also allow us to see the relative place given to each concept in the value hierarchy of the groups. The concepts are arranged in order according to the value-hierarchy of each graduate sample. Therefore, higher values by the under graduates will project out to the left, and lower values to the right of the graduate line on the graphs. The relative rank of the concepts in the hierarchies of each of the eight samples is presented first in Table 31. The approximate ranks can be shown more clearly in table format. The rank numbers are not precise because of ties and near-ties. 422 TABLE 31 APPROXIMATE RELATIVE RANK OF THE SOCIAL ISSUES CONCEPTS IN THE VALUE HIERARCHIES OF EACH OF THE EIGHT SAMPLES LAW PSYCH. ANTHRO. MIXED 1. Individual potentialities 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.5 1»5 1.0 1.0 2. Groups such as A. A. 2.5 3.0 2.0 2.0 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 3. Use legal processes 4.5 2.0 4.0 3.3 4.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4. Express feelings 6.5 5.0 5.0 3.3 4.5 3.5 5.5 3.0 5. Psycho therapy 8.0 8.0 3.0 3*3 6.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 6. Group action 6.5 7.0 6.5 6.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 4.5 7. Use will power 2.5 4.0 6.5 7.0 3.0 6.0 3.5 6.0 8. Obey authority 4.5 6.0 8.0 10.5 $.0 8.0 5.5 7.0 9. Group sentiments 11.0 11.0 10.0 8.5 9.5 9.0 10.5 9.5 10. Be powerful 10.0 10.0 11.0 10.5 11.5 11.0 10.5 9.5 11. Be permissive 12.5 12.0 9.0 8.5 9.5 10.0 12.0 12.0 12. Law enforcement and punishment 9.0 9.0 12.0 12.0 11.5 12.0 9.0 11.0 423 TABLE 31— Continued LAW PSYCH. ANTHRO. MIXED 13. U.S. policy in Vietnam 12.5 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 14.0 13.0 13.0 14. Capital punishment 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 13.0 14.0 14.0 Three types of information will be presented to aid in the assessment of differences between undergraduates and graduates in each discipline. First, the sample mean scores compare the way the samples evaluate each concept. The higher the rating, the more favorable the evaluation. A score of one is the highest possible score. Second, the way in which each sample ranks the concepts in its own value hierarchy will be examined. The higher the concept is placed in the sample's hierarchy, the more favorable the evaluation. Place number one is equivalent to the highest or most favored value. The third piece of information will be a review of the findings from Hypothesis IA, the config- urative meanings on which undergraduates and graduates differed significantly. In this case, the comparison is not between higher or lower values, but rather on whether or not the samples perceive a concept differently. 424 COMPARISON OF PRE-LAW AND GRADUATE LAW SAMPLES Figure 1 presents the mean evaluative scores of undergraduate and graduate law students for the 12 social issues and the two miscellaneous concepts in graph form. Only one concept, "use legal processes," discriminates between undergraduates and graduates. Graduate law students place a significantly higher value than undergraduates on the use of legal processes to attempt to alleviate problems. On the other six law concepts, graduates are equal to or somewhat less favorable than undergraduates in their ratings. They evaluate the three psychology concepts: "express feelings," "be permissive," and "individual potentialities" somewhat higher than undergraduates. If we compare the value hierarchies of under graduate and graduate law students (see Table 31), the only concept on which they differ by at least two ranks is, again, "use legal processes." It is higher on the graduate value hierarchy. In the test of semantic meaning space for Hypothesis I-A, of the four groups, there were the fewest significant differences between undergraduate and graduate law students on the social issues concepts. Only "use legal processes" and "develop individual potentialities" ■ ' : ? 5 u L a l Fig. 1.— The value hierarchies of the G U (1) Individual potentialities 1.44 1.62 (2) Use legal processes 1.78 2.2H (3) Groups such as A. A. 1.85 1.96 (4) Use will power 2.17 1.9^ (5) Express feelings 2.30 2.57 (6) Obey authority 2.46 2.22 (7) Group action 2.50 2.53 (8) Psychotherapy 2.65 2.61 (9) Law enforcement and punisftnent 2.92 2.94 (10) Be powerful 3.10 3.14 (11) Group sentiments 3.34 3.25 (12) Be permissive 3.76 3.97 (13) U.S. policy in Vietnam , 4.18 3.98 (14) Capital punishment 4.99 4.64 i . 1.— The value hierarchies of the law samples on social issues concepts ialities 1.62 = Signifi< diff erei ant ice 1.96 1.96 2.57 2.22 2.53 2.61 nd punisftnent 2.94 3.14 3.97 Vietnam 3.9S ent 4.64 discriminated between the two samples. In summary, the graduate law students conformed closely to the value-orientation pattern predicted for them; however, prelegal students also conformed to the predicted pattern. There was only one significant dif ference between the two samples in value-orientation. The implication is that graduate training in law does not affect ideological values regarding social issues, at least not for these samples or for these concepts with the major exception of "use legal processes." The latter, by the way, is the one law concept which does not have "author itarian" connotations. Graduates placed more value on "use legal processes," and somewhat less value (not sig nificantly less) on the other law concepts than under graduates. Nevertheless, both undergraduates and graduates viewed law concepts more favorably than all other samples, and in fact, the graduate law sample differed more from other graduate samples in this respect than pre-law students did from other undergraduate samples. As for the other concepts, pre-law undergraduates were low on psychology concepts. Graduate law students were more favorable toward psychology concepts. Group concepts, as mentioned earlier, were generally not discriminating. 427 COMPARISON OF UNDERGRADUATE AND m m w >swh c m s r sump l e t 1 Figure 2 diagrams the mean evaluative scores of the psychology samples. Graduates score significantly higher than undergraduates on (l) express feelings, (2) use legal processes, (3) he powerful, and (4) group sentiments. Only one of the four, "express feelings," is a psychology concept. With regard to the other three psy chology concepts, graduates scored slightly higher than undergraduates on psychotherapy, and were about equal on the other two psychology concepts. Two of the discriminating concepts on which graduates scored higher are law concepts; "use legal processes" and "be powerful." The higher score by graduates on "be powerful" is contrary to our expecta tion.^" It was expected that psychology students would learn to associate negative connotations with all of the concepts involved in the authoritarian ideology complex. Graduates did evaluate "obey authority" and "use of will power" somewhat lower than undergraduates. Both under- ^"This expectation, however, was not formally included with the predictions. 423 GP Fig. 2— The value hierarchies of the psycholo UP______ G U (l.o) Individual potentialities 1.43 1.43 (2.0) Groups such as 1.39 A. A. 1.39 (3.3) Express feelings 1.99 2.37 (3*3) Use legal processes 1.99 2.23 (3.3) Psychotherapy 2.00 2.14 (6.0) Group action 2.32 2.60 (7.0) Use will power 2.72 2.54 (3.5) Be permissive 3.20 3.27 (3.5) Group sentiments 3.20 3.47 (10.5) Be powerful 3.29 3.61 (10.5) Obey authority 3.34 3.03 (12.0) Law enforcement and punishment 3.30 3.33 (13.0) U.S. policy in Vietnam 5.13 4.99 (14.0) Capital punishment 5.57 5.29 428 value hierarchies of the psychology samples on the social issues concepts U itialities 1.43 l • A» 1.89 ’2.37 ;ses 2.23 2.14 2.60 2.54 3.27 33.47 3.61 3.08 t and 3.S3 n Vietnam 4.99 hment 5.29 = Significant differences 429 graduates and graduates were equally low on "law enforce ment and punishment." Graduates gave a more negative rating to "United States' policy in Vietnam" and "capital punishment" although undergraduates were already low in this respect. As for the group concepts, graduates rated "group sentiments" significantly higher, "group action" somewhat higher than undergraduates and were tied on "groups such as A. A." If the relative standings given to various con cepts are compared (Table 31 ), the major difference is that "obey authority" is more than two ranks lower in the graduate value hierarchy than in the undergraduate hierarchy. With respect to the test on meanings, under graduates and graduates differed in perception of five concepts, more than any other group. The five concepts were (l) express feelings, (2) be permissive, (3) psycho therapy, (4) obey authority, and (5) be powerful. The first four were expected to discriminate between the groups. Three are psychology concepts. In summary, then, there were many significant differences between undergraduate and graduate psychology students. There were also similarities. Both evaluate "psychotherapy" and "be permissive" more favorably than other students. Both are generally low on "authoritarian" 430 or law concepts. Graduates, however, evaluate two law concepts more highly, and one "obey authority” less favorably. Graduates also rate "express feelings” higher and attribute different meanings to three psychology concepts than do undergraduates. COMPARISON OF UNDERGRADUATE AND GRADUATE ANTHROPOLOGY SAMPLES' The mean evaluative scores for the anthropology samples are illustrated in Figure 3. Undergraduates and graduates differed significantly on evaluation of four concepts. Graduate evaluative scores were significantly less favorable than undergraduates on: (l) use will power, (2) develop individual potentialities, (3) psycho therapy, and (4) groups such as A. A. The first three may indicate the expected negative trend toward concepts representing free will, intervention, and emphasis on the individual. Y/ith regard to the fourth concept, the lower graduate rating for "groups such as A. A.” is contrary to the expectation for graduates. However, although grad uates rate "groups such as A. A." less favorably than undergraduates, the concept is, nevertheless tied for first place in the graduate value hierarchy, (see Table 31). Furthermore, graduate scores are lower than under graduate scores on all concepts except the following 431 GA _____ Fig. 3— The value hierarchies of the anthrop UA G U (1.5) Groups such as A. A. 1.9$ 1.6$ (1.5) Individual potentialities 2.00 1.63 (3*5) Use legal processes 2.45 2.35 (3.5) Express feelings 2.49 2.35 (5.0) Group action 2.56 2.75 (6.0) Use will power 2.74 2.30 (7.0) Psychotherapy 3.1$ 2.62 ($.0) Obey authority 3.30 3.06 (9.0) Group sentiments 3.43 3.61 (10.0) Be permissive 3.51 3.57 (11.0) Be powerful 3.73 3.72 (12.0) Law enforcement and punishment 3.92 3.74 (13.0) Capital punishment 5.00 5.15 (14.0) U.S. policy in Vietnam 5.33 5.09 i value hierarchies of the anthropology samples on the social issues concepts J . A. L.68 tialities L.63 ses 2.35 2.35 2.75 2.30 2.62 3.06 s 3.61 3.57 3.72 it and 3.74 linen t 5.15 Vietnam 5.09 - Significant differences 432 four: group action, group sentiments, be permissive, and capital punishment. On the latter four, graduates are more favorable. Three of these are concepts on which graduates are expected to be more favorable. The low scoring pattern of graduate anthropology students will be discussed again later. In comparing value hierarchies of undergraduate and graduate anthropology samples, the major differences are that graduates place "group action" about two ranks higher than undergraduates and "will power” about three ranks lower than undergraduates (Table 31). In configurative meaning pattern, three concepts discriminated between undergraduates and graduates. Two differences in meaning were on anthropology concepts, the other was on "psychotherapy." There were notable differences and some similar ities for the anthropology samples also. Both samples tend to be low on the law concepts. The hypotheses regarding the anthropology concepts were not confirmed for either the graduate or the undergraduate samples. Never theless, the graduate anthropology students reflect some of the predicted trends in an indirect manner. Although they do not place higher value on the group-related con cepts, they do place significantly less value on concepts suggesting the deterrence or alleviation of problems by mechanisms emphasizing the individual. They place group 433 action higher on their own value hierarchy than under graduates do, and they perceive two other anthropology concepts in a different manner than undergraduates do. COMPARISON OF UNDERGRADUATE AND GRADUATE taixEb-taAJoks sAMptffT Figure 4 presents the graph ordering the mean evaluative scores of the two mixed-majors samples. Graduate students evaluate most concepts less favorably than undergraduates, a few, the same, and only one "be permissive'' slightly higher. In their less exuberant or perhaps more skeptical response, graduate mixed-majors are similar in pattern to graduate anthropology majors, and somewhat in contrast to graduate psychology and graduate law students. The graduate mixed-majors sample is significantly lower than undergraduate mixed-majors on the following six evaluative scores: (l) individual potentialities, (2) groups such as A. A., (3) use legal processes, (4) use will power, (5) obey authority, and (6) psychotherapy. In the test on meaning, undergraduates and graduates differed significantly on (l) will power, (2) individual potentialities, and (3) groups such as A. A. In value hierarchies, "express feelings" and "group action" are 434 GM UM Fig. 4— The value hierarchies of the i r issues concepts G U (1.0) Individual potentialities 1.34 1.37 (2.0) Groups such as A. A. 2.10 1.65 (3*0) Express feelings 2.51 2.41 (4.5) Use legal processes 2.62 (4.5) Group action 2.66 (6.0) Use will power 2.73 (7.0) Obey authority 2.39 (3.0) Psychotherapy 3.16 2.13 2.53 2.15 2.46 2.70 (9*5) Group sentiments 3.34 3.40 (9.5) Be powerful 3.33 3.36 (11) Law enforcement and punishment 3.44 3.16 (12) Be permissive 3.76 3.91 (13) U.S. policy in Vietnam 4.73 4.61 (14) Capital punishment 4.74 4.71 434 . 4— The value hierarchies of the mixed-majors samples on the social issues concepts U ntialities 1.37 A. A. 1.65 ;s 2.41 ssses 2.13 2.58 2.15 2.46 2.70 nts 3.40 3.36 it and 3.16 3.91 L n Vietnam 4.61 nent 4.71 = Sigiificant differences 435 more than two ranks higher on the graduates’ ladder; "use will power" and "law enforcement and punishment" are two or more places lower. The differences between the mixed-majors samples are difficult to evaluate. They are not clear and obvious; however, there are certain suggestive similar ities to patterns of other samples. The undergraduate mixed-majors sample most resembles the undergraduate law sample. Both are high on the six "authoritarian" con cepts, with law higher. All graduate samples tend to give a somewhat less favorable rating to authoritarian concepts, but the law sample differs least from its corresponding undergraduate sample. The graduate mixed- majors sample, then, despite some significantly lower evaluations, tends to remain second high on authoritarian concepts. In several respects the trend between mixed-majors samples resembles that between the anthropology samples. Some of the similarities can be readily seen in Table 32, which summarizes significant differences between under graduate and graduate samples. The lower value ratings by graduate mixed-majors and graduate anthropology students seem to indicate less confidence, particularly, in individual solutions to problems, either through internal control (use will power), external aid to the 436 TABLE 32 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN UNDERGRADUATES AND GRADUATES IN EACH OF THE FOUR GROUPS ON SOCIAL ISSUES CONCEPTS Cleaning of Concepts Group Mean Evaluative Score Ant hr a: 1 Psychotherapy - Group senti ments Be permissive Use will power Psycho therapy Develop individual potentialities Groups such as A. A. Mixed Majors: Comparison of U. & G. value hierarchies -Use will power +Group action Use will power -Use will power -Psychotherapy Develop -Develop individual individual potentialities potentialities Groups such as -Groups such as A.A. A.A. -Use legal processes -Obey authority -Law enforce ment and punishment -Use will power +Group action +Express feelings Law: Use legal processes Develop individual potentialities +Use legal processes +Use legal processes 437 TABLE 32— Continued Psych.: Meaning of Concepts Be powerful Express feelings Obey authority Psychotherapy Be permissive Group Mean Evaluative Score_____ +Use legal processes +Be powerful +Express feelings +Group sentiments Comparison of U. & G. value hierarchies -Obey authority - Indicates that the concept is rated less favorably by graduates than by undergraduates. + Indicates that the concept is rated more favorably by graduates than by undergraduates. 438 individual (psychotherapy), or "develop individual potentialities," and also in other control mechanisms (groups such as A. A.). For the graduate mixed-majors sample, the significantly lowered rating extends to legal mechanisms of control. The mixed-majors group moves from first to fourth place on "use legal processes." In contrast, the graduate psychology sample moves closer to the graduate law sample in some respects, although they remain significantly different on author itarian concepts. They are both high on "use legal processes," "develop individual potentialities," and "be powerful." Although they differ significantly on "psycho therapy" and "express feelings," on these two concepts, law is closer to psychology than anthropology or mixed- majors are. Graduates, as well as undergraduates, in law and psychology, however, diverge greatly in that psychol ogy favors permissiveness, whereas the law sample favors will power, authority, law enforcement and punishment. The trends described above seem to confirm certain characteristics suggested in the ideal type explanation sketches given in Chapter V. The ideal types noted the individualistic emphasis of both psychology and law and their mutual social control function. Also described were the considerably different methods and techniques used by clinical psychology and law to 439 implement the social control function, reflecting, in part, the distinctive philosophies of the two. In con trast, anthropology was described as having neither the emphasis upon the individual nor the social control function. The similarities between the trends for the anthropology and mixed-majors samples may be due, then, to the fact that neither one is characterized by a social control function, in counterdistinction to psychology and law. On the other hand, the similarities between the mixed-majors and law samples may be due to the fact that law is considered to represent the moral code of the general population, and the mixed majors sample is assumed to represent the general student population. VALUE-ORIENTATIONS AND SCORING PATTERNS ----- OP THE ShAmTfe' 3MME5'----- Before closing section II-A, a few general remarks will be made concerning the value-orientations and scoring patterns of the graduate samples. As noted earlier, in terms of the group means, graduate anthro pology students scored lower than undergraduate anthro pology students on most concepts. They also scored lower than graduate law on 13 of the 14 concepts, and lower than graduate psychology on 12 of the 14 concepts. The 440 lower scoring pattern of graduate anthropology students may account for the negative showing on the predictions for the graduate anthropology sample. Contrary to expectations, graduate anthropology mean scores were not higher than those of other samples on any of the three group-related concepts. However, if we examine the value hierarchies of each sample separately (Table 31), we find that anthropology is the only one of the graduate samples which puts "groups such as A. A." at the top of its hierarchy. A second anthropology concept, "group action," is fifth in the graduate anthropology hierarchy, sixth in the graduate psychology hierarchy, and seventh in the graduate law hierarchy. It is also seventh in the under graduate anthropology hierarchy. Another anthropology concept "be permissive" is tenth in the graduate anthro pology hierarchy, but 12th in the hierarchies of graduate law and graduate mixed majors. Therefore, although other samples score higher on anthropology concepts, the concepts are placed higher in the anthropology hierarchy than in the hierarchies of other samples. Another interesting piece of information which can be obtained from analyzing the data in this manner con cerns the one case in which three concepts were posed as alternatives to a problem. Subjects were asked to evaluate "develop individual potentialities," "use legal 441 processes," and "group action" as alternative ways to alleviate social problems. Although all samples ranked "individual potentialities" highest and "group action" lowest of the three, if we examine the three concepts in the value hierarchies of each group, we find that "legal processes" is higher in the graduate law hierarchy and "group action" is higher in the graduate anthropology hierarchy. This result, which supports the hypothesis, can be seen in the diagonal of the following 3 x 3 diagram: Value hierarchies of GP GL GA Develop individual potentialities 1 1 1.5 Use legal processes 3.3 2 3*5 Group action 6 7 5 A comparison of how graduate samples rank the concepts in their own hierarchies reveals that there are not many deviations of two ranks or more from a general pattern which gives the least differences (Table 31). The graduate law sample deviates most. It is high on: (l) use will power, (2) obey authority, (3) law enforce ment and punishment, and low on (4) group sentiments, and (5) psychotherapy. Graduate anthropology and graduate mixed majors deviate only in that each are low on psycho- 442 therapy. Graduate psychology is high on (l) permissive ness, (2) psychotherapy, and low on (3) obey authority. All samples, graduate as well as undergraduate, rated "develop individual potentialities" first or tied for first. At the other pole of the general hierarchy, all samples rated "United States' policy in Vietnam" and "capital punishment" lowest. With one exception, these two miscellaneous concepts were placed on the negative side of the rating scale by all samples, that is, below the neutral score of 4*00. The one exception is that the group mean evaluative score of the undergraduate law sample on "United States' policy in Vietnam" was 3.9&. In contrast, all 12 "social issues" concepts were placed by all samples on the positive side of the scale, above 4.00. Most of the "social issues" concepts represent, chiefly, methods of deterring or alleviating social problems and ways of treating deviant behavior. The ratings given to concepts representing deviant groups are in marked con trast to the positive ratings discussed above. The data pertaining to the second group of concepts, the "deviant group" concepts, will be presented next. 443 HYPOTHESIS II-B. TYPES OF JUDGMENTS — WifrH ftEgAM) TO' ' b ' m m 'gROUPS'---- The second section of Hypothesis II concerns the types of judgements which will be made with regard to deviant groups. Our interest in this section is focused upon the individual scales, and upon the degree to which various samples tend to check certain polar terms, or in other words, upon the typical labels or vocabulary of motives utilized by each sample. The focus upon scales in this section is in contrast to our interest, in Hypothesis II-A, in the overall value attributed to various concepts. In the latter case, scores on five evaluative scales were averaged, and the mean rating given to a concept was the datum to be analyzed. Now, instead, the score has been computed over concepts on a particular scale. Later, some attention will be given to the way various deviant group concepts were perceived and judged. First, however, we will try to ascertain whether or not there were significant differences in the overall use of particular labels by the samples. The nine deviant group concepts were deliberately selected to represent a wide variety of types of social problems, so that the judgments elicited would not be peculiar to, or limited by a particular kind of problem. 444 All deviant group concepts were rated on the same 13 scales. The scales elicited judgments concerning personal traits attributed to deviants. They further required an assessment regarding responsibility, guilt, degree of harm to society, and choices concerning inter vention and treatment. In order to determine the extent to which a particular trait or policy was endorsed by each sample, "label scores" were computed. The responses on each scale were classified into three categories. Attention was paid only to whether a respondent checked or endorsed (1) the positive term, (2) the negative term,'* or (3) neutral. In this procedure, then, degree or intensity of response was ignored. Three categories for each of the 13 scales amounts to a total of 39 labels. The number of times a respondent checked each of the 39 labels was added, and the sum represents his score for that particular label. Then, the mean average score for each sample for each of the 39 labels was computed. The potential range for any label score is zero to nine. A specific label could be checked 5 ^On two scales, the polar terms are not clearly positive and negative. "Individual is responsible" and "they need psychotherapy" were classified as negative labels since they imply that the individual is at fault or needs help to correct a deficiency. 445 for none of the nine concepts or for all of them. T-tests were applied to determine whether the mean average label score of a sample differed significantly from the scores of each of the other samples. One-tailed tests were used since direction was predicted. The five per cent level was established as the criterion for sig nificance. The rules for determining whether or not a hypothesis has been confirmed will be the same as those established in the preceding section. In presenting the data on label scores, the same procedure will also be followed as previously. First, the data for the graduate samples will be analyzed with respect to the hypotheses. Then the equivalent data for undergraduates will be given, and finally the under graduate to graduate comparison will be made for each discipline. Hypothesis II-B consists of four sub-sections. Each of the sub-sections postulate, respectively, that judgments regarding deviant groups will reflect the following characteristics of the disciplines: (1) vocabulary of motives or type of explanation used, (2) reality-orientation, (3) theory and procedures associated with function or role procedures, and (4) assumption regarding free will or determinism. The first sub hypothesis reads as follows: 446 HYPOTHESIS II-B-1 Judgments will reflect the vocabulary of motives or type of explanation learned in intensive study. Eight scales are used as operational indicators in the test of Hypothesis II-B-1. Five scales include moralistic terms, two reflect legal standards, and one, a psychological explanation. It was expected that judgments of graduate law students would reflect the use of legal and moral standards as criteria. The five labels which are considered to be moralistic in nature are: bad, sinful, dirty, dishonest, and dull. "Guilty" and "harmful to society" indicate the use of legal standards. Judgments of graduate psychology students were expected to reflect a psychological type of explanation as indicated by a high label score on "sick." Furthermore, their judgments were expected to be non-moralistic in character as indicated by a high score on neutral and a low score on the moralistic labels with the exception of "dull." There is a special hypothesis for graduate anthropology students which applies to all four sub sections of Hypothesis II-B. Judgments of graduate anthropology students were expected to be relativistic in 447 nature. Therefore, they were expected to have a higher score on neutral and a lower score on negative labels than all other samples on all scales with one exception. In some cases, however, they were not expected to be sig nificantly different than psychology. Those cases are the scales on which the predictions for psychology and anthro pology coincide. In the present sub-hypothesis, the responses of both were expected to be non-moralistic. The results for Hypothesis II-B-1 are shown in Table 33• Group mean label scores for the three cate gories on each scale are presented; however, in most cases, predictions were made only for the neutral and negative labels. Only one expectation was not confirmed. The graduate psychology sample was not high on "sick." Law and mixed-majors were slightly higher, although not significantly different than the psychology sample. Anthropology students, as expected, were significantly lower on "sick" and higher on neutral than the three other samples. Law students had the highest score on all moral and legal labels. They were significantly higher than the anthropology and psychology samples on each of the seven labels. They were not, however, significantly different from the mixed-majors on: (l) sinful, (2) dishonest, (3) harmful to society, and (4) guilty. 448 TABLE 33 RESULTS FOR HYPOTHESIS II-B-1. JUDCMENTS REFLECTING VOCABULARY OF MOTIVES AND TYPE OF EXPLANATION O* M 1.64 Ao 1.40 L 1.24 P° 1.09 Good M° 1.48 P° 1.43 L° 1.11 A° .96 Virtuous M° 1.14 L° 1.00 1.00 A0 .64 Clean M1 1.09 lJ 1.02 P° O . 84 A2 • 44 Honest L° 2.40 A° 2.22 P° 2.21 M° 2.02 Neutral 5.56 3.91 3.49 3.23 M Neutral l3 M i 7.02 5.97 4.9 8 4.41 Neutral m; 7.53 7.08 5.98 5.49 Neutral *3 m: 7.80 6.93 6.50 5.47 Neutral M i 6.02 4.94 4,84 3.86 Sick 1.02 Sinful 2.48 1.86 .93 .80 Dirty t 3 m: 2.50 1.39 1.24 .76 Dishonest T 2 M, 2.72 2.11 1.85 .76 449 Intelligent L° 2.23 P° 2.13 M° 1.36 A0 1.32 Beneficial to Society Po 2.61 A0 2.20 M? 2.16 L1 1.37 Innocent M° 1.96 P° 1.34 L° 1.71 A0 1.53 TABLE 33— Continued Neutral A3 6.00 M2 4.32 4.66 L 3.Si Neutral A3 4.27 P; 2.93 m; 2.27 L 2.14 Neutral A3 6.31 P* 5.45 Mi 4.71 L 4.41 Dull LI 2.93 M 2.30 P2 2.16 A3 1.13 Harmful to Society L2 4.96 M2 4.55 P3 3.46 A3 2.49 Guilty L2 2.35 JC 2.32 P2 1.72 A3 1.11 ^Indicates the number of graduate samples which differ significantly from this sample. ^50 Anthropology was high on neutral on all labels and low on moralistic and legal labels. On one label, "dirty," they did not differ significantly from mixed majors. Psychology was second highest on neutral and second lowest on moralistic labels. In four cases, however, they were not significantly different than the mixed-majors. The second section of Hypothesis II-B concerns the reality-orientation of the disciplines. HYPOTHESIS II-B-2 Judgments will reflect the reality-orientation of a discipline based upon its focus, experience, and related assumptions. Only one scale is involved in Hypothesis II-B-2, the rational-irrational scale. The rationale for this hypothesis has already been discussed several times. Psychology and law students were expected to label deviants as irrational more frequently than anthropology students, reflecting a universal reality-orientation. On the other hand, anthropology students were expected to check "irrational" least frequently, indicating a relativistic reality-orientation. The hypothesis was confirmed. The group mean score for the anthropology sample on "irrational" was significantly lower than the scores of the three other 451 samples. Anthropology’s neutral score was significantly higher than those of the three other samples. The results are shown in Table 34. HYPOTHESIS II-B-3 Judgments with regard to policy advocated will re flect the theory and procedures associated with the major role or function of a discipline. Hypothesis II-B-3 refers to the type of inter vention policy or treatment which will be advocated for deviant and social problem groups. Three scales were used: (l) help them vs. punish them, (2) permit vs. prohibit by law, and (3) they do not need psychotherapy vs. they need psychotherapy. Psychology students were expected to favor a permissive policy and to advocate therapy and help. Anthropology students were expected to favor a permissive but non-interventionist policy. The latter would be indicated by a high score on neutral and a low score on help, punish, prohibit, and needs psychotherapy. In contrast, law students were expected to favor legal control and punishment. The results for Hypothesis II-B-3 are shown in Table 35. Psychology students were high on advocating psychotherapy, but not significantly different than law 452 TABLE 34 RESULTS FOR HYPOTHESIS II-B-2. JUDGMENTS REFLECTING REALITY-ORIENTATION Rational Neutral Irrational O* A 2.04 A2 4.47 4.67 L° 1.87 P1 3.30 M* 4.36 M° 1.86 2.75 P3 4.30 P° 1.40 L2 2.45 2.44 *Indicates the number of graduate samples which differ significantly from this sample. 453 TABLE 35 RESULTS FOR HYPOTHESIS II-B-3. POLICY JUDGMENTS REFLECTING THEORY AND ROLE PROCEDURES Help them Neutral Punish them P3* 5.61 A? 4.H L3 1.66 M| 4.86 Mr 3.05 Mr 1.07 Lj 4,83 P; 2.91 A^ .60 A 4.24 L1 2.50 P2 .48 Permit Neutral Prohibit by law 5.30 A1 2.36 3.47 5.27 Mir 2.27 M2 2.52 4.18 P? 1.70 P A3 2.00 4.14 L2 1.36 1.33 Do not need Psychotherapy Neutral They need Psychotherapy 2.55 A1 5.89 pi 3.51 1.92 3.94 3.31 1.69 3.74 2.75 1.55 w- 3.6S A3 1.38 ^Indicates the number of graduate samples which differ significantly from this sample. 454 or mixed-majors. Psychology students were, however, significantly higher than the three other samples on •'help them" and significantly higher than law and mixed majors on "permit." In contrast, law students were significantly higher than the three other samples on "punish them" and "prohibit by law." Of the eight predictions for anthropology, five were confirmed, one was partial, and two were not con firmed. Anthropology students were higher than law and mixed-majors on "permit," and lower than all three samples on "prohibit" and "they need psychotherapy." They were lower than law and mixed-majors on "punish them" but not significantly lower than mixed-majors. This is the only one of the 13 scales on which graduate anthro pology students did not have the lowest score on the negative pole. Psychology students were slightly lower on "punish them." The anthropology sample had the lowest score on "help them," but only psychology was signifi cantly higher. On one of the three neutral scores, anthropology was not significantly higher than mixed- majors. HYPOTHESIS II-B-4 Judgments regarding assessment of responsibility will 455 reflect the discipline's assumptions about the nature of human behavior, free will, and determinism. Hypothesis II-B-4 pertains to the last of the 13 scales: "society is responsible vs. individual is responsible." Anthropology students were expected to check "society is responsible" most frequently, reflecting the assumption of social determinism. Law students were expected to check "individual is responsible" reflecting the legal premises concerning free will and individual responsibility. The assumption of psychological determinism by psychology students would be indicated by a high "neutral" score. This is the only scale on which anthropology was not expected to be high on neutral. The results are presented on Table 36. The three predictions on this scale were not confirmed. "Society is responsible" did not discriminate among any of the samples. Law was high on "individual is responsible" but significantly higher than anthropology only. Anthropology was significantly lower than all samples on "individual is responsible." Psychology was significantly higher than law and mixed-majors, but not higher than anthropology on "neutral.” A summary of the results for Hypothesis II-B is given in Table 37. Fifty-three predictions were made: 11 for law, 14 for psychology, and 28 for anthropology. 456 TABLE 36 RESULTS FOR HYPOTHESIS II-B-4. JUDGMENTS REFLECTING THE ASSUMPTIONS OF FREE WILL OR DETERMINISM Society is Individual is responsible Neutral Responsible A°* L° M° P° 2.76 A2 3.76 M1 4.09 2.74 P2 3.00 4.00 2.73 L 7 2.24 Po 3.51 2.49 M 2.16 A3 2.42 "Indicates the number of graduate samples which differ significantly from this sample. 457 TABLE 37 SUMMARY OF RESULTS ON PREDICTIONS MADE FOR THE FOUR GRADUATE SAMPLES ON HYPOTHESIS IIB Confirmed: GL 6 GP 7 GA 23 Total 36 (68*) Partial: 4 4 2 10 (19*) Not Confirmed: 1 3 3 7 (13*) Law: TT T7 78 53 Not confirmed: (l) Individual is responsible Partial: (1) Sinful (2) Dishonest (3) Harmful (4) Guilty Psychology: Not confirmed: (l) Sick (2) Need therapy (3) Neutral on responsible Partial: (1) Dirty (2; Neutral (3) Dishonest (4) Neutral Anthropology: Not confirmed: (l) Help (2) Punish them (3) Society is responsible Partial: (l) Dirty (2) Neutral on prohibit 45S Law was expected to score significantly higher than the other samples on the seven moral and legal labels, on •'prohibit by law,*' "punish them," and the "individual is responsible." They were expected to be higher than anthropology on "irrational." Only one of the 11 predic tions for law was not confirmed, the prediction for "individual is responsible." Four others, however, were only partially confirmed. On these, law was significantly higher than anthropology and psychology, but not than mixed-majors. Psychology was expected to have the highest score on "sick," "help," "needs psychotherapy," "neutral" on responsibility, and to be higher than law and mixed majors on "permit." They were expected to be higher than anthropology on "irrational." On the four moralistic scales, all except "dull," they were expected to be higher on neutral and lower on negative than law and mixed majors. Three of the 14 predictions for psychology were not confirmed: "sick," "need psychotherapy," and "neutral" on responsible; four others were only partially confirmed. Twenty-eight predictions were made for anthro pology. They were expected to be lowest on negative on all 13 scales, highest on neutral on 12 scales, high on "permit," "society is responsible," and lowest on "help." ^59 When the predictions for anthropology and psychology coincide, anthropology was not expected to be significantly different than psychology. Only three of the 28 predictions for anthropology were not confirmed: "help," "punish," and "society is responsible;" two others were only partially confirmed. Of the 53 predictions made for the three graduate samples, 36 (68 per cent) were fully con firmed, Ten (19 per cent) were partially confirmed, and seven (13 per cent) of the predictions were not confirmed. The statistics and details may be somewhat confusing. It is important to notice that there is a remarkable consistency in the order in which the samples are arrayed from high to low score. On the negative labels, the line-up from high to low is L-M-P-A on all scales except "needs therapy," and "individual is responsible." On the latter two scales, as well as on "sick" and "irrational," only anthropology is significantly different from the 1*60 other samples. Psychology diverges from anthropology on these four scales, as expected. It Is Interesting to learn, though, that law and mixed-majors do not differ from psychology on these scales. The three samples check ’ 'sick," "Irrational," "needs psychotherapy," and "Individual Is responsible" on an average of approximately three to five times for the nine deviant group concepts. Anthropology's score Is, roughly, two less in each case. On the legal and moral labels, and on "punish" and "prohibit," there Is a division with anthropology and psychology on one side, law and mixed-majors on the other side. Law students make the most moralistic and harsh Judgments, with mlxed-majors close behind. Anthropology students give an extraordinary number of neutral or relativistic responses. On most of the scales, they are followed by psychology, mlxed-majors, and law in that order. Except for "society is responsible," "help," and permit," predictions were not made for the "positive" terms. There was no basis for doing so. 461 Aside from the terms mentioned above, there were hardly any significant differences on positive terms. There were two on "clean," one on "beneficial," and one on "they do not need psychotherapy," The great bulk of responses were on negative terms or on neutral; therefore, the frequency of check marks on positive judgments regarding deviant groups was low. HYPOTHESIS II-B: UNDERGRADUATES The equivalent data for the four undergraduate samples will now be presented. The same procedure will be followed as in Hypothesis II-A. Although predictions were not made for the undergraduate samples, the predictions which were made for the graduate samples were applied to the corresponding undergraduate sample. The same standards and criteria were used in the tests. One-tailed t-tests were employed for the test of significance. The five per cent level was established as the criterion for significance. 462 Table 3# presents the group mean label scores of the four undergraduate samples for the 13 scales. Of the 11 predictions made for law, three were confirmed, three were not confirmed, and the others were partially supported Twice as many predictions were confirmed for graduate law as for undergraduate law. Only three of the 14 predictions for psychology were confirmed, seven were not, and the others were partially supported. Two and a half times as many expec tations were confirmed for graduate psychology as for undergraduate psychology. Seventeen of the 2$ predictions made for anthro pology were fulfilled. Eleven were not confirmed for the undergraduates, in contrast to three predictions which were not confirmed for graduate anthropology. Overall, 21 (40 per cent) of the predictions made for the three disciplines were not confirmed for the undergraduate samples. In comparison, seven (13 per cent) of the expectations were not fulfilled for the graduate samples. A detailed summary of the results for the undergraduate samples is given in Table 39. A comparison of the per cent of predictions confirmed among graduate samples and among undergraduate samples is shown in Table 40. The undergraduate mean label scores were, in many 463 TABLE 36 GROUP MEAN LABEL SCORES FOR THE FOUR UNDERGRADUATE SAMPLES WITH REGARD TO THE DEVIANT GROUP CONCEPTS Healthy p°* M° ,o Neutral Sick 1.65 MT 4.44 1-1 4.52 1.41 3.31 Mt" 4.2S 1.2S 3.27 P* 4.27 1.21 P1 3.0S A3 3.22 Good Neutral Bad Pu M° L° A° 1.37 A2 5.60 L1 3.65 1.25 P2 5.06 Mr- 3.23 .96 m ; 4.51 pi 2.56 .96 L2 4.14 A 2.13 Virtuous P° L° M° A° 1.03 .67 .65 .61 Neutral K 6.94 6.10 5.26 4.94 Sinful m; 3.19 2.67 1.67 1.39 Clean M° L° A 1.11 1.10 1.02 .65 Neutral M 7.00 6.22 5.96 5.72 Dirty 1 M: 2.IS 1.96 1.67 1.09 Honest M. 2.33 2.24 2.16 1.50 Neutral M 4.67 4.54 4.42 4.26 Dishonest T 2 A' 3.0S 2.56 2.22 1.74 464 Intelligent M° 2.05 P° 1.97 A0 1.78 L° 1.73 Beneficial to Society A* 2.00 P1 2.00 M? 1.67 L 1.40 Innocent P2 2.52 M? 1.87 L7 1.65 A1 1.55 Rational M° 2.16 Ao 1.96 L 1.81 P° 1.65 Help them P1 5.67 M° 5.18 A1 5.04 L1 4.87 Permit A* 4.44 Pi 4.32 M? 3.75 L 3.29 TABLE 38— Continued Neutral A? 5.57 4.52 h] 4.46 M1 4.30 Neutral aJ 3.07 PT 2.75 Mt 2.51 L 1.90 Neutral A? 5.61 p; 4.13 Mt 4.10 L1 3.60 Neutral 3.37 P? 2.70 Lt 2.48 M 2.39 Neutral A^ 3.41 Mr 2.59 p; 2.51 L 2.37 Neutral A?" 2.41 Pt 2.40 Mt 2.OB L 1.8l Dull 2.8l Mt 2.66 Pt 2.51 A- 5 1.63 Harmful to Society h i 5.67 Mt 4.82 Pt 4.25 A 3.89 Guilty L2 3.71 Mt 3.00 Pt 2.35 A l.BO Irrational h} 4.71 Pt 4.65 Mt 4.43 A^ 3.63 Punish them h i 1.77 M^ 1.21 .81 A^ .46 Prohibit by Law L2 3.89 m; 3.16 p, 2.29 A 2.07 465 TABLE 3$— Continued Do not need Psychotherapy LI P° Mj A Neutral They need Psychotherapy 2.43 A2 5.00 P^ i Ll 3.73 2.30 Mr 3.59 3.71 2.05 p 2.97 3.36 1.67 L2 2.70 A3 2.24 Society is Responsible M Neutral Individual is Responsible 3.49 A1 2.23 Lo 4.33 3.13 P° 1.33 •M 4.26 3.04 1.64 A° 3.65 3.04 M1 1.56 P° 3.65 ^Indicates the number of undergraduate samples which differ significantly from this sample. 466 TABLE 39 SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF JUDGMENTS REGARDING DEVIANT GROUPS MADE BY THE FOUR UNDERGRADUATE SAMPLES Confirmed: Partial: Law: UL UP UA Total 3 3 17 23 (43/0 5 4 0 9 (17/0 -J. JL 11 21 (40/) 11 14 28 53 (1) Harmful (2) Irrational (3) Punish Confirmed: Partial: (l) Bad (2) Sinful (3) Dishonest (4) Guilty (5) Prohibit Not Confirmed: (l) Dirty (2) Dull (3) Individual is responsible Psychology: Confirmed: Partial: (I) Sinful (2) Neutral on sinful (3) Irrational (l) Bad (2) Neutral on bad (3) Dishonest (4) Permit Not confirmed: (1) Sick (2) Dirty (3) Neutral on dirty (4) Neutral on dishonest (5) Help (6) Need therapy (7) Neutral on responsible Anthropology: Confirmed: (1) Sick (2) Neutral (3) Bad (4) Neutral (5) Sinful (6) Neutral (7) Dirty (8) Neutral (9) Dishonest (10) Dull (II) Neutral (12) Neutral on guilty (13) Irrational (14) Punish (13) Neutral (l6) Need therapy (17) Neutral Not confirmed: (l) Neutral on dishonest (2) Harmful (3) Neutral (4) Guilty (5) Neutral on irrational (6) Prohibit (7) Neutral (8) Society is responsible (9) Neutral (10) Permit (11) Help 467 TABLE 40 COMPARISON OF THE PER CENT OF PREDICTIONS CONFIRMED AMONG GRADUATE SAMPLES AND AMONG UNDERGRADUATE SAMPLES*JUDGMENTS REGARDING DEVIANT GROUPS GL UL GP UP GA UA Confirmed: 55 27 50 21 82 61 Partial: 36 45 29 29 7 0 Not confirmed: 9 2Z 21 -50 11 -22 100 (11) 99 100 (14) 100 100 (28) 100 G U Confirmed: 68 43 Partial: 19 17 Not confirmed: -12. 40 100 100 (53) 468 cases, arrayed in the same manner as those of the grad uates, that is, L-M-P-A. On five negative labels: sick, irrational, needs therapy, dull, and dirty, only anthro pology was significantly lower than the other three samples. Psychology did not differ significantly from law or mixed-majors on these labels. In comparison, graduate psychology converged in judgments with graduate law and mixed-majors on only the first three, and differed on "dull" and "dirty." Undergraduate law was more extreme, or significantly higher, than the three other samples on only three labels: harmful, guilty, and punish. In comparison, graduate law differed from the other three samples on five labels: bad, dirty, dull, punish, and prohibit. The order on "neutral" scores for undergraduates is similar to the graduate pattern, but not as consistent. Undergraduate anthropology is high again, although not as high as graduate anthropology. Psychology follows anthropology in most cases. Law and mixed-majors are each low on neutral on approximately half of the scales. Positive labels do not discriminate among the under graduate samples any more than among graduate samples. In summary, although the group mean label scores of both undergraduate and graduate samples are approximately in the same order for most scales, the differences are not 469 ] ! as frequent or as distinct among the undergraduates. The ! i four graduate samples are further apart than are the under-j graduate samples. It is not clear, at this point, which ! groups changed most, or in which direction they went. For I this information, we turn to an analysis of the differences; between undergraduate and graduate samples in each of the four groups. i DIFFERENCES WITHIN DISCIPLINES ! Table 41 presents a list of labels on which group mean scores of each graduate and corresponding undergrad uate sample differed significantly. There were virtually j no significant differences between undergraduate and grad- | uate mixed-majors samples in the frequency with which they endorsed various labels. The only significant difference i is graduates used "sinful" less often than undergraduates, j There were also very few differences between under-: graduate and graduate law students. They differed signif-j 6 ! icantly on only six of the 39 labels: two positive, two j neutral, and two negative. Graduates checked "harmful" and "guilty" less often, "permit" and "honest" j i . . . . . . . . . . . . . ■ ■ 1 ' ■ ■ ■ | | 1 11 ~ ~ ~ i 6 ' The differences on positive labels will be in- ; eluded even though no predictions were made with regard to | them. Altogether only five differences are involved for which there were no predictions made. j 470 TABLE 41 JUDGMENTS ON WHICH THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES BE TWEEN UNDERGRADUATES AND GRADUATES IN EACH OF THE FOUR GROUPS ON THE 39 GROUP MEAN LABEL SCORES M Negative Negative labels labels ■'■-sinful -harmful -guilty Neutral scores for: • +needs therapy -permit Positive labels +permit +honest Number of significant differences: 1 6 19 IS M L P A Negative labels -sinful -bad -harmful -guilty -punish Neutral scores for: +sinful +bad +dirty +guilty +responsible +sick +needs therapy -permit Positive labels: +permit +beneficial -innocent -society is responsible -healthy -do not need therapy Negative labels -bad -dishonest -harmful -guilty -sick -irrational -individual is responsible -prohibit -needs therapy Neutral scores for; +bad +dishonest +dirty +harmful +sick +irrational +responsible Positive labels +permit -help A minus sign (-) signifies Graduates use the term significantly less frequently than Undergraduates. A plus sign (+) signifies Graduates use the term significantly more often than Undergraduates. more often. The direction of the differences on "harmful," "guilty," and "permit" are contrary to expecta- tion. No prediction was made concerning "honest." The other two differences involved a greater use of "neutral" on the "needs therapy" scale, and a lower use of "neutral" on the "permit" scale by graduates. The few differences between the law samples, with the possible exception of "neutral" on "permit" which is ambiguous, are all in a more tolerant direction. Our earlier comparison of the differences among the four undergraduate samples against those among the four graduate samples would have led us to believe that graduate law students were more intolerant, legalistic, and prohibitive than undergraduate law students, but we see now that this is not the case. Although the graduate law sample differs more from other graduate samples than the undergraduate law sample diverges from other undergraduate samples, the more distinct separation cannot be attributed to differences within the law or mixed-majors groups. They must be due, then, to differences which occurred between undergraduates and graduates in anthropology and psychology. The analysis bears this out. There were 19 significant differences between undergraduate and graduate psychology samples on the label scores. Graduates checked "neutral" more often on the following seven scales: sinful, bad, dirty, guilty, responsible, sick, and needs therapy. Greater use of "neutral" is taken as an indication of a less judgmental stance and was expected. Graduates also checked five negative labels less frequently than undergraduates: sinful, bad, harmful, guilty, and punish. They checked "permit" more often. These responses reflect less moral istic, less legalistic, less punitive, and more permissive judgments, as expected. A lower score on "neutral for permit" is ambiguous and may be a function of the higher response on "permit." In addition, the psychology samples differed significantly on five positive terms for which predictions were not made. Graduates checked "beneficial" more often, and the following terms less often: innocent, society is responsible, healthy, and they do not need psychotherapy. The last three responses would be expected for graduate psychology students. Anthropology samples differed significantly on 1& group mean label scores. Graduates checked "neutral" significantly more often on the following seven scales: bad, dishonest, dirty, harmful, sick, irrational, and responsible. A high neutral response was predicted for graduate anthropology on all scales as an indication of a relativistic position. Graduates checked the following nine negative labels less frequently than undergraduates: 473 bad, dishonest, harmful, guilty, sick, irrational, individual is responsible, prohibit, and needs therapy. These responses also concur with the expectation that a relativistic perspective would lead graduate anthropology students to apply negative labels to deviant groups least frequently of all samples. Graduates also said "permit, , more often and "help" less often than undergraduates. Graduate anthropology is the only one of the four graduate samples to use "irrational" significantly less than undergraduates, thus supporting the hypothesis re garding reality-orientation. In this respect, as well as in the lower use of "sick," "needs therapy," and "help," graduate anthropology differs from graduate psychology. Thus, the separation of the graduate samples is not merely into a "liberal vs. conservative" or a "tolerant vs. intolerant" division, although it frequently takes on that appearance. Graduate anthropology students support the non-intervention hypothesis by endorsing less frequently "help," "needs therapy," "prohibit," and by checking "permit" more often. In view of the fact that the graduate samples did not differ, earlier, as expected, on the "responsible" scale, it is interesting to note that graduate anthro pology students check "individual is responsible" less often than undergraduate anthropology students, and graduate psychology students check "society is responsible" 474 less often than undergraduate psychology students. These differences are in the expected direction and reflect the major focus of anthropology on the study of society and of psychology on the study of the individual. Furthermore, the prediction which was not confirmed earlier for graduate psychology is now supported in that graduate psychology is significantly higher than undergraduate psychology on "neutral" on the "responsible" scale. Figure 5 presents a summary comparison of the number of significant differences between samples on the 39 group mean label scores. There were 87 significant differences among undergraduate samples and 115 among graduate samples. Each of the graduate samples differed more from other graduate samples than its corresponding undergraduate sample differed from other undergraduate samples. The anthropology samples differed most from other samples. Law samples were second high in number of differences, psychology samples third, and mixed-majors samples differed least from other samples. The same order holds for both undergraduates and graduates. Anthropology is shown at the bottom of Figure 5 and law at the top, since the two were furthest apart on most scales. Among the undergraduate samples, mixed-majors and psychology had the fewest number of differences from each 475 Fig.— Summary comparison of the number of significant differences between 5 samples on the 39 group mean label scores L U -»p ►M -»A z r 1 6 _5 48 -»A -»P 28 2 / 8. 5T M -»P ■*A 22 3 30 M ■»P ->L -»A 25 / 2 8 4 8 ►M * A -»L 3 1 4 J6 33 -*/Vf ->A / 2 2T 2/ 5 4 ■ p - VJ1 1 4 -»p AAi 2/ oc 475 -J A < -J A A -J A < O S * Q\ * % 8> % 58|Ri|!3 |fe _ «U u < sr 2 t Q •» I A Qi -J . O 4 VO o * > § k 476 other, but there were also few differences between mixed- majors and law. The greatest number of differences were between anthropology and law, and then between anthro pology and mixed-majors. This same set of relationships concerning relative number of differences holds for the graduate samples with one minor exception. Among graduate samples, mixed-majors and law differed least. Although psychology samples were intermediate in number of differences with other samples in terms of absolute num bers, the graduate psychology sample increased most in number of differences in relative terms. That is, the greatest change in number of differences for law, for anthropology, and for mixed-majors occurred with psy chology. Psychology also had the greatest number of differences in the comparisons between undergraduates and graduate samples in each of the four groups, Five of the 19 differences between undergraduate and graduate psychology samples, however, were on positive labels for which no predictions were made. All of the 18 significant differences between undergraduate and graduate anthro pology samples were predicted. In the ideal type explanation sketch in chapter V, a special general hypothesis was outlined with regard to the graduate anthropology sample. It was postulated that 477 judgments of graduate anthropology students would be the least conventional or ethnocentric of all students. The test conditions set up for this hypothesis were strongly supported in that the graduate anthropology sample differed most, quantitatively and qualitatively, from the seven other samples. On eight of the 13 negative labels, graduate anthropology was significantly lower than the seven other samples. On "bad," "dull," and "sinful," graduate anthropology differed from all samples except undergraduate anthropology and/or graduate psychology; on "dirty" graduate mixed-majors is added to the exceptions. On the last negative label, "punish," graduate anthro pology differed significantly from only three samples. The graduate anthropology sample was also signif icantly different from the seven other samples on six of the 13 neutral group mean scores. On four additional neu tral scores, graduate anthropology differed from all samples except undergraduate anthropology; on a fifth from all except undergraduate psychology; on a sixth from all but undergraduate anthropology and graduate psychology. On the last score, "neutral" on the "permit" scale, graduate anthropology differed significantly from only two samples. Whereas the graduate anthropology sample was at one end of the continuum, the law sample was usually at the other end of the continuum. As was pointed out earlier, scores for negative and neutral labels were most frequently ordered in the following manner: L-M-P-A. Among graduate samples, this order was altered in only nine of the 26 arrays. Seven of the nine alterations involved a change of place for the mixed-majors sample. The change in order for the mixed-majors samples, however, was sometimes in one direction, and sometimes in the other direction: thus, the mixed-majors are the least predict able of the graduate samples. Furthermore, graduate mixed-majors had the fewest number of significant differences both with their counterpart undergraduate sample, and also with other graduate samples. In con trast, graduate anthropology and graduate psychology samples had many significant differences from their counterpart undergraduate samples and from other graduate samples. Moreover, graduate anthropology and graduate psychology, with a few exceptions, scored in the predicted direction. A third pattern emerged for the graduate law sample. It was considerably different from other graduate samples, scored in the predicted direction, but had few differences from its counterpart undergraduate sample. This completes the analysis with regard to the four sub-sections of Hypothesis II-B. Before we turn to the final hypothesis contained in II-C, several additional analyses will be presented of the judgment data which are 479 not specifically pertinent to the hypotheses, but which are, nevertheless, relevant to issues raised in this thesis and in the literature. JUDGMENT DATA AS EVIDENCE REGARDING CORRELARY ISSUES NOT STATED IN THE HYP6TOg5ES The first issue concerns evidence from a number of studies showing that length of formal education is, in general, related to greater tolerance and to less stereotyping. Ordinarily, the literature on stereotyping concerns other national, racial, or ethnic groups. However, typifications and labels abstractly applied to various categories of social problem people can be, in a sense, regarded as stereotypes. The data in this study supply some weak evidence regarding a relationship between education, in general, and greater tolerance and less stereotyping. While the statistically significant differences in this regard occur mainly for students in psychology and anthropology, if one were to examine the overall direction of differ ences between undergraduate and graduate sample scores, including those which were not statistically significant, one would find that almost all differences are in the direction cited above. 480 Graduate samples used negative labels less frequently than their undergraduate counterparts, and they checked neutral more frequently. Differences on the positive labels were generally small and random and ran in both directions. Of the 52 comparisons between the four undergraduate and graduate mean scores on the 13 neutral labels, graduate samples were lower on neutral scores only six times. Five of the six differences were not significant. Four involved scores between law samples. Of the 52 comparisons on the 13 negative labels, graduate mean scores were higher on negative labels only three times. The three exceptions were small and insig nificant. Two of the three involved scores between law samples. The difference between graduate and undergraduate utilization of negative labels or stereotypes can be shown in a more dramatic form in another type of comparison. In this comparison, per cents will be used rather than group mean scores. Table 42 shows the per cent of students in each sample who never used a particular negative label. These students did not check the specific negative judg ment, in question, for any of the nine deviant group concepts. The per cent of graduates who never used a particular negative label is greater than the per cent of 481 TABLE 42 PER CENT OP STUDENTS IN EACH SAMPLE WHO "NEVER" USE A PARTICULAR NEGATIVE LABEL (SCORE = 0) Bad Sick Dull U 35 14 21 12 G 19 42 27 14 U 57 27 36 39 Dirty G 73 46 55 26 Dishonest TT 74 27 21 17 G 57 40 30 20 Individual is Responsible 5 33 18 16 14 w T5 13 7 6 They need Psychotherapy 72 74 10 13 15 25 6 11 U Ti 3 7 2 G 33 12 11 6 Irrational r 73 3 7 6 TT ?9 8 9 ^ 1 Harmful to Society 0 — — ~ 3 3 5 2 Punish them U G 33 79 A 10 18 P 21 25 M 19 ** 16 L Sinful U G 59 78 A 33 67 P 30 43 M 25 33 L u G 74 71 53 A 3 22 34 P 5 33 <- 30 M 0 12 27 L Prohibit tr -------7 r ~ t i 6 70 59 30 77 54 67 11 19 49 57 18 25 27 36 4 7 A P M L corresponding undergraduates in 44 of the 52 comparisons. Two comparisons involve a tie. The six decreases are all small. One difference is 13 per cent; the other five differences are 5 per cent or less. Four of the six decreases are for law students. Table 43 shows the increase in the per cent of graduate students over undergraduate students in each group who never checked specific negative labels. The per cent of change between undergraduates and graduates is much higher for anthropology than for any other group. With one exception, the increase in the per cent of graduate anthropology students who never use a given negative term ranges from 12 to 34 per cent. "Punish" is the only negative label on which graduate anthropology does not increase. The per cent of graduate anthropology students who never checked "punish," however, was already extremely high (69 per cent). Graduate psychology increased mainly in per cent of students who never checked moralistic labels; the increase on "dull" was not as high as on the other four labels. Other increases above 10 per cent for graduate psychology occurred with respect to "guilty" and "punish." On the other hand, graduate psychology had the smallest increase of the four groups on "needs therapy" and on "individual is responsible." The general mixed-majors sample ranks third, 483 TABLE 43 DIFFERENCES, IN PER CENTS, BETWEEN GRADUATE AND UNDER GRADUATE SAMPLES IN EACH GROUP WHO 'NEVER' USE A PARTICULAR NEGATIVE LABEL1 ’ A _— v .... TT -■— r 1. Bad 34 2S 6 2 2. Dishonest 23 13 9 3 3. Sinful 19 34 13 8 4. Dirty 16 19 19 -13 3. Dull 16 8 4 -3 6. Harmful 15 0 0 -2 7. Guilty 12 12 -3 15 8. Irrational 16 5 2 -5 9. Sick 22 9 4 4 10. Needs therapy 22 3 10 5 11. Individual is responsibJe IS 5 9 8 12. Punish -1 13 8 9 13. Prohibit 17 8 7 3 The numbers shown represent the increase in the per cent of Graduate students over Undergraduate students in each group who never use the negative label on that row. A minus sign signifies that there is a smaller per cent of Graduate students than Undergraduate students who never use the label. 4&4 generally, in size of increase of students who never applied the negative term to a category of deviants. Graduate mixed-majors increases above ten per cent took place on ’’dirty" and "sinful." The least amount of difference occurred between undergraduate and graduate law samples. The only dif ferences over ten per cent were on "dirty" and on "guilty" Graduate law decreased on "dirty." Contrary to expecta tion, a greater number of graduate law students never checked "guilty." The reader should notice, nevertheless, that the per cent of graduate law students who never endorsed "guilty" (27 per cent) is still less than that for any other graduate sample. The analysis given above blends into a second, closely related issue which is being discussed in the labeling approach to deviance. It concerns the type of labels and roles ascribed to various deviant groups in comparison to those ascribed in the past or by other societies. The analysis offered here, thus far, has been mainly concerned with the differential utilization of particular labels by each of our samples. Before leaving this section of the data, some general information will be summarized for the entire sample, divided only into two categories: graduates and undergraduates. Table 44 presents a compilation of a vocabulary of judgments 4^5 regarding deviant groups made by a sample of university students in the year 1967. The vocabulary of judgments is limited and biased, of course, by the conditions imposed by the research instrument. The table gives two mean label scores, graduate and undergraduate, for each of the 26 polar terms used to judge the nine deviant group concepts. Graduate scores are given in the first two columns; undergraduate scores in columns three and four. As a reminder, the scores represent the mean average of the number of times students checked a particular term (possible range: 0-9). The polar terms are paired and then presented in a hierarchy based upon the frequency of use of the negative label by graduate students. At the top of the list are the negative terms which graduate students checked most frequently with reference to deviant groups. At the bottom of the hierarchy are the negative terms which graduate students were most reluctant to use. By this arrangement, we see that the five moralistic labels are among the seven terms at the bottom of the hierarchy. Not surprisingly, ''sinful" is the least fashionable of the moralistic labels. In general, graduate students tend to perceive deviants less often in negative, moralistic terms. Instead, deviants are more frequently perceived as irrational and sick (ranks two and three). In terms of 486 TABLE 44 VOCABULARY OF JUDGMENTS OF GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS REGARDING DEVIANT GROUPS Graduate mean Undergraduate mean label scores label scores 1. Harmful *4.1 2.2* Beneficial 1.7 4.7 Harmful 2. Irrational4.1 1.8 Rational 1.9 4.4 Irrational 3. Sick 3.8 1.3 Healthy 1.4 4.1 Sick 4. Indiv. is resp. 3.6 2.7* Society is resp. 3.2 4.0 Indiv. is resp. 5. Need therapy 2.9 1.9 Do not need therapy 2.1 3.3 Need therapy 6. Prohibit 2.6 4.6* Permit 3.9 2.9 Prohibit 7. Bad *2.4 1.2 Good 1.2 3.0 Bad 8. Dull 2.3 2.1 Intelligent 1.9 2.4 Dull 9. Guilty *2.2 1.7 Innocent 1.9 2.7 Guilty 10. Dishonest2.1 2.2 Honest 2.1 2.4 Dishonest 11. Dirty 1.7 .9 Clean 1.0 1.8 Dirty 12. Sinful *1.6 1.0 Virtuous .9 2.4 Sinful 13. Punish 1.1 4.9 Help 5.2 1.1 Punish * Signifies a significant difference between Graduate and Undergraduate scores (t = 2.0 or higher). 437 policy and treatment, whereas, "punish" is at the bottom of the list (rank 13)» "they need psychotherapy" is in fifth place. Apparently, the psychological vocabulary of motives has infiltrated the vocabulary of this population, and predominates over moralistic terminology. Although graduate students tend to view deviants as sick, irrational, and in need of psychotherapy, never theless, they attribute responsibility to the individual more often than to society. The four terms just mentioned are high on the list, ranks two, three, four, and five in the hierarchy. The four terms (irrational, sick, indi vidual is responsible, they need psychotherapy) are the four judgments on which only the graduate anthropology sample differed from the three other graduate samples Apparently, only anthropology students, given their study of other patterns of living and their focus upon society, tend not to endorse the psychological vocabulary of motives. Although the labels are arranged according to frequency of use by graduate students, surprising order is maintained in the column of undergraduate negative label scores. Only three scores are out of order. Despite the similarity in ranking order, there is a disparity in frequency of utilization of labels. Undergraduates have a higher score on all negative labels except for a tie on "punish." Differences on positive labels go in both 4B3 directions. Undergraduates and graduates differ signifi cantly on utilization of seven terms. Graduates checked •'beneficial to society" and "permit" more often; "harmful," "bad,""guilty," "sinful," and "society is responsible" less often. A comparison may also be made of the difference in relative use of the positive and negative polar terms. Only two positive terms were checked more frequently than the negative polar terms. Both undergraduates and grad uates checked "help" and "permit" more often than "punish" and "prohibit." Graduates checked honest and dishonest, intelligent and dull, about equally. The most unfavorable ratio occurs on healthy-sick, rational-irrational, good- bad, and beneficial-harmful for both groups. Negative terms were checked two to three times more frequently on these scales than were positive terms. In addition to questions concerning typical vocabularies of motives, labels, and judgments used by groups in diverse places and eras, another problem concerns the further breakdown by type of deviance. In terms of the options offered in our research instrument, which types of deviants or problem groups would be perceived as sick, which as bad or sinful, which as dirty, etc.? For what type of problem is responsibility attributed to the indi vidual, when to society? Which deviance merits punishment, which requires help or therapy? Which roles are given dishonorable status, and which are merely disvalued? A differential analysis by type of deviance provides some of the most interesting information. Unfortunately, considerations regarding length of this report prevent inclusion of a thorough analysis of this kind here. One table will be presented and discussed which summarizes most of this data for graduate students. The breakdown for each sample will not be included, but a few of the most pertinent findings for particular samples will be described. The statistic which was used to test Hypothesis II-B was the group mean label score. That statistic provided information regarding the number of times a particular type of judgment was used over the nine deviant group concepts. Intensity of the judgment or evaluation was ignored. Adding or averaging evaluative ratings over nine concepts would not have given us a useful or meaning ful statistic. Intensity of rating is of great utility and interest, however, with regard to each social problem separately and for a comparative analysis of the various problems. Table 45 presents a summary table of graduate mean ratings on each scale for each of the nine deviant group concepts. The mean ratings are ordered from most 490 negative to most positive on each scale. Therefore, it can be quickly and easily determined, for example, which type of deviance is perceived by graduate students to be the most or the least harmful to society. The relative place of each type of deviance can be seen on each scale, as well as the intensity of the rating. Deviant groups which received the most negative ratings were women on welfare who have illegitimate children, those who participated in the Watts riots, prostitutes, and adult groups which use LSD. People who marry interracially received the fewest unfavorable ratings. All ratings were on the positive side of the 7 scales' for them except that they were seen as the group most responsible for their own behavior. They were con sidered least "guilty” of all groups. In contrast, and paradoxically, society was held most responsible for the Watts rioters; yet, this group was rated the most guilty, as well as the most irrational and dishonest. Pacifists who burn their draft cards received the second fewest unfavorable ratings; yet they were the only 7 'Ratings on the positive side of the scales refer here to ratings from 1 to 3.99» that is, ratings above the center point of the scale (4.00). However, ratings from 3.51 to 4.50 technically belong in the "neutral" cell. 491 TABLE 45 RELATIVE RANK OF EACH DEVIANT GROUP ON EACH SCA] 1. harmful Illeg. 5.51 Welfare 4.93 Watts 4.31 Homos. 4.62 LSD 4.61 Ma: 4.: 2. irrational Watts 5.03 Illeg. 4.93 LSD 4.70 Draft 4.65 Marij. 4.47 Hoi 4.: 3. sick Homos. 5.13 LSD 4.77 Prost. 4.71 Marij. 4.56 Illeg. 4.54 Wa- 4.1 4. indiv. is respons. I.R. 5.21 LSD 4.93 Marij. 4.33 Draft 4.63 Illeg. 4.33 Hoi 4.: 5. need therapy Prost. 5.00 Homos. 4.93 LSD 4.60 Illeg. 4.43 Watts 3.93 Ma: 3.( 6. prohibit Watts 5.42 Illeg. 3.93 Draft 3.96 LSD 3.33 Prost. 3.62 Ma: 3.. 7. dull Illeg. 4.97 Welfare 4.70 Watts 4.57 Prost. 4.55 Marij. 3.77 Hor 3.< 0. bad Illeg. 4.51 Watts 4.43 LSD 4.34 Marij. 4.31 Homos. 4.23 Pr( 4.: 9. guilty Watts 4.73 Illeg. 4.33 Draft 4.21 Prost. 4.12 LSD 4.11 Mai 3.< 10. dishonest Watts 4.35 Illeg. 4.35 Prost. 4.03 Marij. 4.05 Welfare 4.05 LSI 4.C 11. sinful Illeg. 4.42 Prost. 4.40 Watts 4.27 Homos. 4.23 Marij. 4.20 LSI 4.1 12. dirty Welfare 4.43 Prost. 4.37 Illeg. 4.29 Watts 4.23 Marij. 4.16 Hon 4.C 13. punish Draft 4.21 LSD 3.65 Marij. 3.43 I.R. 3.26 Watts 3.10 Prc 3.C *I.R. = inter-racial. 491 TABLE 45 IK OF EACH DEVIANT GROUP ON EACH SCALE BY GRADUATE MEAN RATINGS Lfare Watts Homos. LSD Marij. Draft Prost. I.R.* Beneficial ?3 4.31 4.62 4.61 4.54 3.93 3.30 3.03 Leg. LSD Draft Marij. Homos. Prost. ’ Welfare I.R. Rational 93 4.70 4.65 4.47 4.39 4.13 4.10 3.77 3 Prost. Marij. Illeg. Watts Welfare Draft I.R. Healthy 77 4.71 4.56 4.54 4.35 4.22 4.00 3.44 J Marij. Draft Illeg. Homos. Prost. Welfare Watts Society is 93 4.33 4.63 4.33 4.13 4.09 3.27 2.34 responsible nos. LSD Illeg. Watts Marij. Vie lfare Draft I.R. Does not 98 4.60 4.43 3.93 3.93 3.73 3.72 3.13 need therapj leg. Draft LSD Prost. Marij. Vie lfare Homos. I.R. Permit 98 3.96 3.33 3.62 3.34 2.91 2.53 1.59 lfare Watts Prost. Marij. Homos. LSD I.R. Draft Intelligent 70 4.57 4.55 3.77 3.69 3.44 3.44 3.34 tts LSD Marij. Homos. Prost. Welfare Draft I.R. Good 43 4.34 4.31 4.23 4.19 4.07 4.00 3.50 leg. Draft Prost. LSD Marij. Homos. Welfare I.R. Innocent 33 4.21 4.12 4.11 3.93 3.30 3.69 3.01 leg. Prost. Marij. Welfare LSD Homos. I.R. Draft Honest 35 4.03 4.05 4.05 4.04 3.30 3.30 3.14 •ost. Watts Homos. Marij. LSD Welfare Draft I.R. Virtuous 40 4.27 4.23 4.20 4.10 4.06 3.34 3.56 •ost. Illeg. Watts Marij. Homos. LSD Draft I.R. Clean 37 4.29 4.23 4.16 4.00 3.95 3.95 3.53 >D Marij. I.R. Watts Prost. Illeg. Homos. Welfare Help ,65 3.43 3.26 3.10 3.09 2.39 2.3 3 1.93 492 group which received a rating below 4.00 on "punish." Men in poverty areas who are on welfare come closest, perhaps, to a disvalued, but not dishonorable, role. They are seen, mainly, as dull, dirty, and harmful to society, but not in other negative terms. Prostitutes were perceived both in negative moralistic terms and as sick and in need of therapy. Nevertheless, they were seen as beneficial to society and to be permitted. Evidently, some forms of behavior which are considered sinful, dirty, sick, and dishonest are felt to be beneficial for society. The rank (1-9) of each deviant group on each scale is listed below. The list provides a characterization of how the deviant groups were perceived by graduate students in terms of the scales which were on the research instru ment. Scores which were on the positive side of the scale will be shown in parentheses. In these cases, the reader should realize that the opposite polar term was endorsed. 1. Women on welfare who have illegitimate children: 1st on: harmful to society, dull, bad, sinful 2nd on: irrational, dishonest, guilty, prohibit by law (3.93) 3rd on: dirty 493 4th on: needs therapy 5th on: sick, individual is responsible 7th on: punish (2.39) 2. Those who participated in the Watts riots:* 1st on: irrational, dishonest, guilty, prohibit by law 2nd on: bad 3rd on: harmful to society, dull, sinful 4th on: dirty 5th on: needs therapy (3.9$)» punish (3.10) 6th on: sick 9th on: individual is responsible (2.84) 3. Prostitutes: 1st on: needs therapy 2nd on: sinful, dirty 3rd on: sick, dishonest 4th on: dull, guilty 5th on: prohibit by law (3*62) 6th on: bad, punish (3*09) *The Watts riots occurred in August of 19&5* This data was collected in January and February of 1967 494 7th on: irrational, individual is responsible 8th on: harmful to society (3.30) 4. Adult groups which use LSD: 2nd on: individual is responsible, sick, punish (3*65) 3rd on: irrational, needs therapy, bad 4th on: prohibit by law (3.&S) 3th on: harmful to society, guilty 6th on: dishonest, sinful 7th on: dull (3.44), dirty (3.95) $. Adult groups which use marijuana: 3rd on: individual is responsible, punish (3.43) 4th on: sick, bad, dishonest 3th on: irrational, dull (3.77), sinful, dirty 6th on: harmful to society, needs therapy (3.93), prohibit by law (3.34), guilty (3.93) 6. Men in poverty areas who are on welfare: 1st on: dirty 2nd on: harmful to society, dull 5th on: dishonest 7th on: sick, needs therapy (3.73), prohibit (2.91), bad, sinful 495 8th on: irrational, individual is responsible (3*27)» guilty (3.69) 9th on: punish (1.93) 7. Homosexuals: 1st on: sick 2nd on: needs therapy 4th on: harmful to society, sinful 5th on: bad 6th on: irrational, individual is responsible, dull (3.69), dirty 7th on: guilty (3.SO), dishonest (3.SO), prohibit by law (2.5S), punish (2.3S) S. Pacifists who burn their draft cards: 1st on: punish 3rd on: guilty, prohibit by law (3.96) 4th on: irrational, individual is responsible 7th on: harmful to society (3*93) Sth on: sick, needs therapy (3*72), bad, sinful (3.84), dirty (3.95) 9th on: dull (3.34), dishonest (3.14) 496 9. People who marry interracially: 1st on: individual is responsible ^.th on: punish (3.26) 8th on: dishonest (3.30), dull (3.44) 9th on: harmful to society (3.08), irrational (3*77), sick (3.44), needs therapy (3.13), prohibit (1.59), bad (3.50), guilty (3.01), sinful (3.56), dirty (3.58) The characterizations given above are on the basis of the mean average of ratings by all graduate students. A further analysis was made to determine which types of deviance were viewed most or least sympatheti cally by each of the graduate samples. The graduate sample scores were ordered from highest to lowest rating on each scale for each concept. Graduate anthropology mean ratings were higher (least negative) than those of other graduate samples on almost all scales with respect to the following four deviant groups: (l) women on welfare who have illegiti mate children, (2) those who participated in the Watts riots, (3) men in poverty areas who are on welfare, and (4) prostitutes. The graduate anthropology hierarchy of concepts on which it had the highest to lowest ratings relative to other samples, was compared to its hierarchy based on percentage statistics. It was discovered that the four deviant groups mentioned above, to which anthro pology students were more sympathetic than were other samples, are the four on which the highest per cent of anthropology students checked "society is responsible." If we omit "prostitutes," which was fourth on "society is responsible," we find that the other three deviant groups are those for which the greatest number of graduate anthropology students checked "help." In general, anthro pology students checked "help" less frequently than other samples; however, the deviant groups which most anthro pology students did want to help were the three which they perceived as socially caused, rather than personally caused, problems. Fewer anthropology students checked "permit" for these three concepts than for any other concept. Therefore, we assume that anthropology students are opposed to these types of behavior; however, they are not quite as negative as other students, perhaps due to their greater understanding of the role of the social structure in contributing to these particular problems. Related to this analysis is a hypothesis which was suggested in the ideal type explanation sketches in chapter V. It was suggested that graduate psychology students are more likely than graduate anthropology students to attribute to personal deficiency, the four 493 problems which are most commonly associated with low socioeconomic status. Such a response would reflect the "drift" theory of social mobility theory in opposition to the "social causation" explanation to account for low socioeconomic status. The defect is located within the individual rather than within the social structure. The criterion used to examine this hypothesis is the response on the intelligent-dull scale. Graduate anthropology and graduate psychology responses on this scale for the four deviant groups, in question, are shown in Table 46. Two types of statistics are given: (l) the per cent of students in graduate anthropology and in graduate psychol ogy who checked "dull," (2) group mean scores for the two samples on the intelligent-dull scale. On each of the comparisons, more psychology students used "dull" with greater intensity than did anthropology students. Of the four deviant groups, the smallest difference occurred with regard to the Watts rioters. This may be due to the more obvious implication of social factors in race problems. Differences between the graduate anthropology and the graduate psychology samples are much more evident, and rather startling, when the comparison is in terms of the per cent of students who checked "dull." Differences by group mean ratings were not as great. 499 TABLE 46 COMPARISON OF RESPONSES OF GRADUATE ANTHROPOLOGY AND GRADUATE PSYCHOLOGY STUDENTS ON THE INTELLIGENT- DULL SCALE FOR PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH LOW SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS Per cent of students Group mean score on the who checked "dull*1 intelligent-dull scale GA GP GA GP 34 67 Women with illegitimate 4.5 5.0 children 29 64 Prostitutes 4.3 4.6 14 52 Men on welfare 4.1 4.7 20 31 Watts rioters 4.2 4.3 500 The discrepancy between the two types of statistics can be accounted for by the much greater use of the neutral response by anthropology students. No student who checked "neutral" is included in the percentage category of those endorsing the label "dull." The neutral response (score = 4.0) does not, however, greatly affect the mean scores, especially since all of the scores, in this case, are between 4.1 and 5*0. Since a major hypothesis in this study was that graduate anthropology students would give a neutral response more frequently than any other sample, this response category was analyzed in terms of per cents, as well as in terms of the group mean label scores which have already been discussed. The nine deviant group concepts multiplied by the 13 scales produce a total of 117 judg mental items. The graduate anthropology sample had the largest percentage of students who checked neutral on 100 of the 117 deviant group items. The analysis of differential ratings of various types of deviance by graduate students in the three disciplines was most productive in terms of the regular ities yielded for the graduate anthropology sample, which have been discussed above. The analysis did not produce many regularities which could be easily interpreted for the graduate psychology or graduate law samples. 501 Graduate psychology students perceived deviants involving sexual and drug violations (homosexuals, prostitutes, women with illegitimate children, use of LSD and marijuana) as those who were sick and in need of psychotherapy. The other deviant groups (Watts rioters, men on welfare, pacifists, and those marrying inter- racially) were less frequently characterized in such terms. The degree to which the psychological conception of deviance has infiltrated the consciousness of other groups can be seen in Table 47* The table gives the per cent of students in each of the graduate samples who checked "sick" with regard to each of the deviant groups. There is a surprising concurrence in these statistics for all samples except the anthropology sample. In many cases, the per cent of law and mixed majors students who checked "sick" is slightly greater than that of psychology students. The graduate law sample gave the most negative rating^ relative to other samples, to the following deviant groups: Y/atts rioters, pacifists who burn their draft cards, women on welfare who have illegitimate children, and homosexuals. These groups may appear to pose the greatest threats to societal institutions, namely to property, "patriotism" (traditional style), and to the family. Apparently sexual deviance or illegal acts, per se, were not the criteria. Graduate law students were 502 TABLE 47 PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS IN EACH OF THE GRADUATE SAMPLES WHO CHECKED "SICK" WITH REGARD TO EACH OF THE DEVIANT GROUPS A P L M 1. Homosexuals 42 72 77 73 2. Prostitutes 31 69 56 57 3. Use LSD 40 60 62 59 4. Use marijuana 33 46 53 63 5. Women with illegitimate children 17 46 44 47 6. Watts rioters 17 39 46 42 7. Men on welfare 9 26 33 26 S. Pacifists 11 24 42 32 9. Interracial marriage 2 15 15 11 503 not, for example, as negative with reference to prostitutes or abortion. These violations probably are not viewed as threats to the family. "Abortion" is the one concept representing deviant behavior which was classified with the miscellaneous concepts. Different scales were used to judge this concept; therefore, the responses could not be combined as were responses on the other deviant group concepts. "Abortion" received the most favorable ratings of all of the concepts relating to deviance. Except for "people who marry interracially," "abortion" was the only concept on which all ratings were on the positive side of Q the scale. Differences between the samples were generally small and insignificant. The only sample which differed significantly from other samples was the undergraduate law sample. Ratings of prelegal students were significantly lower (more negative) than those of undergraduate mixed- majors on eight of the ten scales used to rate abortion. Prelegal students were significantly lower than undergrad uate psychology students on four scales, and significantly lower than undergraduate anthropology students on one — All scores were on the positive side of the scales for abortion with two very minor exceptions: under graduate law scores on "sinful" and "guilty" were 4.02 and 4.04. All scores for those who marry interracially were on the positive side of the scales except on "individual is responsible." 504 scale. In addition, undergraduate law scores were signif icantly less favorable than those of graduate law scores on eight of the ten scales. An analysis of differential ratings of various types of deviance by graduate vs. undergraduate status produced findings similar to those discussed earlier. Graduate ratings were, generally, more tolerant and per missive. This order was reversed only with regard to one deviant group concept. Undergraduate ratings were, generally, more favorable concerning those who marry inter racially. This reversal may reflect the major atti- tudinal changes which seem to be occurring, especially among young students, toward racial minorities. This concludes the analysis of differential perception of various types of deviance. It also com pletes the presentation of findings on the data involving the second category of concepts, the deviant group concepts. V/e turn, next, to the third and final section of Hypothesis II. HYPOTHESIS II-C. SELECTED BELIEFS ABOUT TnmrTTAWKE i w the wtmr------- The third and final section of Hypothesis II pertains to selected beliefs about human nature and the 505 world. It was hypothesized that responses of the graduate students would reflect the fundamental assump tions of the three disciplines concerning determinism or free will. There is only one hypothesis in this final section. HYPOTHESIS II-C-1 Beliefs regarding human nature and the world will reflect the assumption of social determinism, psychological determinism, or of free will. Several predictions were made for graduate students in law, psychology, and anthropology as a test of the hypothesis. The predictions pertain to the following six scales which were interposed among other scales listed under the concepts "human nature" and "the o world we live in": The world we live in is: (1) (7) 1. determined— non-determined 9 '"Human nature" and "the world we live in" are the two remaining miscellaneous concepts which have not yet been discussed. 506 Human nature is: 2. determined-free 3. understandable— mysterious 4. predictable— unpredictable 5. society-determined— self-determined 6. social— individual (1) (7) The scale spaces next to the terms on the left are numbered one, the spaces next to the opposite terms on the right are numbered seven. Therefore, on the first four scales, a score of one represents the highest or most deterministic response, a score of seven stands for the lowest or least deterministic response. On the fifth and sixth scale, a high score indicates a belief in social determinism, whereas, a low score indicates a belief in psychological determinism. Graduate anthropology and graduate psychology students were expected to have significantly higher scores than graduate law students on the first four scales, thus reflecting deterministic assumptions in contrast to the free will premise implicit in legal philosophy. On the fifth and sixth scales, graduate anthropology students were expected to have significantly higher scores than graduate psychology students, reflecting a belief in social 507 determinism in counterdistinction to that of psycho logical determinism. The results for Hypothesis II-C-1 are shown in Table 43. All of the sample scores were ordered in the predicted direction; however, only eight of the 16 predicted differences were large enough to be considered statistically significant. Of the four predictions for graduate law students, only one was confirmed. Law students were significantly less inclined than graduate anthropology and graduate psychology students to believe that the world is determined. Law students were also significantly less inclined than psychology students to believe that human nature is understandable. However, they were not significantly different from anthropology students on this scale. The difference between law students and psychology students on "understandable vs. mysterious" was the only significant difference between the three graduate samples on the three determinism scales for human nature. The two social vs. individual scales successfully discriminated between the graduate anthropology and graduate psychology samples. Graduate anthropology was significantly more inclined than graduate psychology to suggest that "human nature is society-determined" in opposition to "self-determined" and that "human nature is TABLE 43 RESULTS FOR HYPOTHESIS II-C. BELIEFS REGARDING HUMAN NATURE AND THE WORLD REFLECTING ASSUMPTIONS OF FREE WILL OR DETERMINISM Graduate sample expected to score high The world is: Group mean score Anthropology and psychology (over law) Anthropology (over psychology) **(1) determined- non-determined Human nature is: (2) determined — free *(3) understand— able— mysterious (4) predictable- unpredictable **(5) society- determined— self- determined **(6) social— individual P3 A2 M1 L2 3.19 3.71 4.14 4.3S A0 P° M° L° 3.56 3.66 3.75 3.94 p2 A1 L1 M2 2.46 2.64 2.91 3.36 -P1 A0 L° M1 3.06 3.31 3.36 3.S9 A1 L1 M° P2 3.11 3.26 3.36 3.75 A1 M1 L° P2 3 .IS 3. i s 3.35 3.70 ^^Expectations were fully confirmed. ^Expectations confirmed only for psychology. 509 social" in opposition to "individual." In fact, the anthropology and psychology samples are on opposite ends of the array of mean scores on both scales. Thus, in sum, three of the six expectations were confirmed for graduate anthropology, and four of the six were supported for graduate psychology. The data for undergraduate samples on the same six scales are shown in Table 49. There was only one sig nificant difference among undergraduate samples on the predictions made. The undergraduate psychology sample was significantly more inclined than the three other under graduate samples to suggest that human nature is under standable. Differences on the other scales were small and insignificant. A comparison of the number of predictions confirmed among graduate samples and among undergraduate samples is summarized in Table 50. The comparison between undergraduates and graduates in each group was again most successful in the case of psychology and least successful for law. Graduate psychology and graduate anthropology students differed from their undergraduate counterparts in the expected direction on all six scales with the exception of one tied score for psychology. However, the only differences which were large enough to be considered statistically significant were three for psychology. Graduate psychology students were significantly more 510 TABLE 49 GROUP MEAN SCORES FOR THE FOUR UNDERGRADUATE SAMPLES ON SELECTED BELIEFS REGARDING HUMAN NATURE AND THE tfORLD Undergraduate sample________ Anthropology and psychology (over law) Anthropology (over psychology) The world is: riigh to low (l) determined— non-determined A0 3*39 M° 3.90 P° 3.91 L° 4.29 Human nature is: (2) determined — free M° 3.89 A° 3.89 P° 4.14 L° 4.19 (3) understand able— mysterious P3 2.44 A1 2.91 L1 3.06 M1 3.43 (4) predictable— unpredictable P1 3.29 A0 3.70 L° 3.81 M1 3.92 (5) society- determined— self- determined M° 3.02 A0 3.30 P° 3.32 L° 3.44 (6) social— individual M° 3.03 L° 3.25 A0 3.46 P° 3.54 ^Expectation was confirmed only for psychology. 511 TABLE 50 COMPARISON OF THE NUMBER OF PREDICTIONS CONFIRMED ON BELIEFS REGARDING HUMAN NATURE AND THE WORLD AMONG GRADUATE SAMPLES AND AMONG UNDERGRADUATE SAMPLES Confirmed Group Number of Predictions Graduate Undergraduate Law 4 1 (25/0 0 Anthropology 6 3 (50/) 0 Psychology 6 4 (67/) 1 (17/0 16 a (50/) 1 (6/0 512 inclined than the undergraduate psychology students to believe that: (1) the world is determined, (2) human nature is determined, (3) human nature is self-determined. Differences between the law samples were small and insig nificant. Three of the four differences were not in the expected direction. Differences between mixed-majors samples were random and insignificant. The graduate mixed-majors sample was closest to the graduate law sample on the arrays of scores for the six scales. To recapitulate, all of the graduate sample scores on the six scales were ordered in the predicted direction. However, only eight of the 16 predicted differences were large enough to be considered statistically significant; four of the six for psychology, three of the six for anthropology, and one of the four predictions for law. In contrast, there was only one significant difference among undergraduate samples on the 16 predictions made. Graduate anthropology and graduate psychology students differed from their undergraduate counterparts in the expected direction on all scales with the exception of one tied score. However, only three of the differences were statistically significant. They were between psychology samples. Differences between the law samples were not in the expected direction; however, the differences were small and insignificant. The multiple-discriminant function analysis, discussed at the beginning of this chapter, revealed that whereas undergraduate samples differed in their perception of "the world" at the .05 level of significance and did not differ significantly regarding "human nature," the graduate samples differed in semantic meaning space on both "human nature" and "the world" at the .01 level of significance. The multiple-discriminant function analysis further revealed that "determined vs. non-determined" is the scale which contributed most to the differentiation of "the world" and that "determined-free" and "self- determined vs. society-determined" were the third and fourth highest contributors to the differentiation of 10 "human nature" among graduate samples. Among under graduate samples, "determined vs. non-determined" was the fifth highest contributor to the differentiation of "the world." Of the four groups, only undergraduates and graduates in psychology were significantly differentiated in semantic meaning space on the two concepts, at the .01 level on both concepts. "Understandable-mysterious" was the highest and "free-determined" the fourth highest ■^Fourteen scales were used to rate "human nature" and twelve scales to rate "the world." 514 contributor to the differentiation on "human nature." "Determined vs. non-determined" was the third highest contributor to the separation of psychology samples on perception of "the world." The multiple discriminant function analysis findings on the test of semantic meaning space are similar to the findings for Hypothesis II-C-1, but more strongly supportive of the hypothesis. They give additional evidence that the determinism scales are influential in discriminating among graduate samples. They also demonstrate once more that the change in beliefs regarding determinism, as well as view of human nature and the world, is most pronounced for psychology students. This concludes the presentation of the data analysis. The chapter will close with a summary and discussion of the findings relative to the three major hypotheses. A more general interpretation regarding the implications of the findings will be given in the final chapter. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS For purposes of review, the three general hypotheses will now be restated, and then the findings will be summarized and discussed with regard to each hypothesis. 515 (1) Social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, anthropology, and those comprising a mixed-majors group will differ. (2) Social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthropology will reflect the unique conceptual systems of their respective disciplines. (3) Social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthropology will more clearly reflect the distinctive character of their respective disciplines than will the social ideologies of undergraduate students in the same disciplines. Two types of tests were conducted in order to furnish evidence to judge whether or not the ideologies of the four graduate samples differed. Multiple-discriminant function analyses were carried out to determine whether the graduate samples attributed different configurative patterns of meaning to each of the 26 concepts on the research instrument. The analysis revealed that the graduate samples differed significantly in multidimensional semantic meaning space on 21 of the 26 concepts. The second test sought to establish whether or not the graduate samples differed in what they perceive as beneficial or harmful, healthy or sick, rational or irrational. Students rated each of the concepts on these 516 three general scales. The frequency distributions on each of the 75 scales were evaluated by means of chi square tests. It was found that the graduate samples differed * significantly on 50, or two-thirds, of the general scales. The data, therefore, substantiate the hypothesis that students in the four graduate samples differ in their conceptions of reality and ideologies regarding deviance and related social issues. The second hypothesis was much more complex than the first. The aim was to determine not only whether the samples differ in ideologies, but whether the ideologies reflect the conceptual system of the respective disciplines. Three additional elements of ideology were examined for this purpose: (1) value-orientations regarding social issues, (2) judgments regarding deviants, and (3) selected beliefs concerning human nature and the world. Responses in these areas were expected to reflect the following conceptual characteristics of the disciplines: (l) focus, (2) theory associated with function or role procedures, (3) reality-orientation, (4) type of explanation and vocabulary of motives, and (5) assumption regarding determinism or free-will. A summary profile of the findings for each of the three graduate samples will be outlined now in terms of the ideological elements listed above. The profiles will 517 be followed by a brief comparative analysis of the three ideologies and their position relative to graduate mixed- majors, the sample representing the general graduate stu dent population. The comparative analysis will be made on the basis of each of the five conceptual characteristics of the disciplines. Statements regarding preferred values or favored policy should be interpreted as meaning that items received a higher or lower rating relative to rat ings of other samples. Ideology of the graduate law sample conformed closely to. what was predicted in the ideal type explana tion sketch. Value orientation was distinguished by a preferential emphasis upon legal processes, authority, power, use of will power, law enforcement and punishment, and government policy in Vietnam. Only one of the seven predictions was not confirmed in this area. Law students did not rate capital punishment higher than anthropology students. Judgments regarding deviants reflected the use of moral and legal criteria and standards and a universal- reality-orientation. Legal prohibition and punishment of deviance was favored as policy. Only one of 11 prediction in this set was not supported. Law students were not significantly higher than psychology students in attrib uting responsibility to the individual. This item, as well as three others which were not confirmed, were designated as indicators reflecting the free will premise. The other three items were assertions concerning human nature. On these items, responses of law students were all in the expected direction relative to other graduate samples, but were significantly different on only one of four scales. On the other hand, the higher value placed on use of will power did reflect the free will assumption. The only conceptual element, then, which was not clearly reflected, according to the designated criteria, was the assumption of free will, which received only partial support. In sum, the following number of predictions were substantiated: six of seven on values, ten of eleven on judgments, and one of four on beliefs. The ideology of the graduate psychology sample also conformed rather closely to the predicted profile, but not as closely as that of the graduate law sample. The value- orientation of psychology students was marked by prefer ence for expression of feelings, permissiveness, and psychotherapy. Although development of individual potentialities was placed at the top of their value hierarchy, psychology students were not higher than law students in this respect. They were, however, significantly higher than graduate anthropology and mixed-majors students on this concept. Judgments of deviants were, as expected, non- moralistic and indicated a universal reality orientation. A permissive, help-oriented policy was advocated. Three predictions regarding judgments, however, were not sub stantiated. Psychology students did not apply the term "sick" to deviants more frequently than law or mixed- majors students. Nor did they advocate psychotherapy significantly more often than law or mixed-majors students. As for the third item, psychology students did not have the highest "neutral" score on the responsibility scale. Anthropology students were higher. This was the only neutral scale on which anthropology students were not expected to be highest; however, the stance held for them even on this scale. The prediction on this scale was set up as an indicator of the assumption of psychological determinism. Although this particular prediction was not substantiated, responses of graduate psychology students on human nature and the world reflected deterministic assumptions to a greater degree than any other sample. In sum, the following number of predictions were confirmed for the graduate psychology sample: three of the four on values, 11 of the 14 on judgments, and four of the six on beliefs. The predictions for graduate anthropology were in some respects, the most successful, and in other respects the least successful. None of the four predictions made on value-orientations was borne out. Anthropology student rated "to be permissive" higher, but not significantly higher than graduate law and mixed majors. Anthropology students were not high on any of the three group-related concepts which were designed to reflect the focus of the discipline. Neverthele; , w.icn the value hierarchy of the graduate anthropology sample was examined by itself, it was found that "groups such as A. A." was first in its own hierarchy, and higher in that respect than it was for othe graduate samples. Furthermore, graduate anthropology placed "group action" higher in its own hierarchy than graduate law or graduate psychology put it in their hierarchies. The major hypothesis concerning graduate anthro pology received unusual support. It was postulated that the ideological responses of graduate anthropology students would reflect the relativistic orientation and type of explanation which characterizes their discipline. Therefore, it was expected that they would be reluctant to apply conventional standards of the dominant morality to other groups, albeit deviant groups, and would least frequently make blanket negative judgments about a category of people without further knowledge of their own cultural context and background. Instead, it was expected that they would check the "neutral" or "irrelevant" 521 response most frequently, indicating that the standards of one group were irrelevant for judging other groups. The graduate anthropology sample was highest on "neutral" on all 13 scales, and lowest on negative judgments on all scales except "punish" on which the graduate psychology score was slightly lower (.12). Responses of the graduate anthropology sample tended to be permissive and non-interventionist in nature, reflecting the major professional role of most anthro pologists. They were high on permit, and low on advocat ing psychotherapy, help, or punishment, but not all of these differences were statistically significant. The results on the scales indicating the assump tion of social determinism were partially supported. All scores were in the expected direction, but only half were statistically significant. In sum, none of the four value predictions were supported, but 25 of the 28 expectations on judgments, and three of the six predictions on beliefs were confirmed. A summary of the number of predictions substantiated for each of the three graduate samples is shown in Table 51. A summary comparison will be made now of the ideologies of the four graduate samples in terms of each of the five conceptual characteristics of the disciplines. The profile of the mixed-majors sample which emerged will 522 TABLE 51 SUMMARY OF THE NUMBER OF PREDICTIONS SUBSTANTIATED FOR EACH OF THE THREE GRADUATE SAMPLES IDEOLOGICAL ELEMENTS A. Value-orientations regarding social issues B. Types of judgments with regard to deviant groups C. Selected beliefs about human nature and the world Number of Substantiated predictions LAW 6 of 7 10 of 11 1 of 17 ( 73*) Jt 22 A. Value-orientations regarding social issues B. Types of judgments with regard to deviant groups C. Selected beliefs about human nature and the world A. Value-orientations regarding social issues B. Types of judgments with regard to deviant groups C. Selected beliefs about human nature and the world PSYCHOLOGY of 11 of 14 of (75%) ANTHROPOLOGY 0 of 25 of of (74*) 4 2d 6 33 be included in the general overall comparison. First, how did the samples line up in terms of the tri-value scheme postulated as deriving from a differential focus upon: (l) the individual, (2) sociocultural units, and (3) the legal system? The findings in this area were the least satisfactory or clear. The status of the group-related concepts in the value system of the graduate anthropology sample was ambiguous. It was pointed out that the low status may have been due to the lower rating pattern which characterized both the graduate anthropology and graduate mixed-majors samples. Although the data regarding group-related values were ambiguous, depending upon the type of comparison made, the findings indicated more clearly that both graduate anthropology and graduate mixed-majors showed less confidence in concepts suggesting individual solutions to problems. In contrast, the value pattern of graduate law and graduate psychology seemed to merge in a greater emphasis and confidence in the potential of the individual, in power, in the use of legal processes, and in other potential control mechanisms. It was suggested that this pattern of values might reflect the role of clinical psychologists and lawyers as agents of social control, as well as the distinctive foci of their 524 disciplines.^^ Graduate law and graduate psychology diverged sharply, however, in terras of policy (except in advocating therapy)» methods, and authoritarian concepts. In the latter areas, graduate law and graduate mixed-majors are close and in opposition to graduate psychology and graduate anthropology. The former samples placed a higher value upon obedience to authority, and upon law enforce ment and punishment to deter wrongdoing. The latter samples preferred, instead, permissive procedures. Graduate anthropology and graduate psychology separate, then,as expected, on the issue of intervention, with anthropology maintaining a non-interventionist stand, and psychology advocating help. These findings indicated that the ideologies do reflect the second conceptual element, theory associated with role procedures and function of the disciplines. The hypothesis regarding reality orientation was also borne out. Responses of graduate anthropology stu dents were least characterized by reification, i.e., they 11 Although the high value placed upon the develop ment of individual potentialities by the graduate law sample was not predicted in the hypotheses, the ideal type explanation sketch of law in chapter V did emphasize the individualistic cast of the American legal system. Also discussed in the ideal types were the diverse methods utilized by clinical psychology and law in carrying out their social control functions. 525 checked "irrational" for deviant groups least frequently, and thus did not assume that departures from Western official standards of reality are irrational. In this sense, anthropological ideology can be considered to be relativistic, whereas the ideologies of law and psychology match that of the general student group (GM), and appear to be based more upon an assumption of universal standards. The fourth conceptual characteristic is related to the third. It concerns the vocabulary of motives and type of explanation characteristic of the disciplines. Hypotheses in this area were also substantiated with the exception of the one on "sick" for psychology. Law students were most conventional or ethnocentric in that they applied moralistic labels and negative legal judg ments most frequently to groups which are considered deviant and problematic in the United States. This inter pretation is supported, in another way, in that the law sample was most similar to the general student group (GM) in this respect, only more extreme. At the other pole, graduate anthropology students were least conventional in that they applied moralistic labels and legal judgments least frequently. Their responses differed most, quanti tatively and qualitatively, from responses of the seven other samples. The ideology of graduate psychology students is in a mid-position on the dimension of conventionality from this frame of reference. Psychology students were low in use of moralistic labels and negative legal judgments. They were, however, similar to law students and the general group (GM), in that the three samples ten le i to view deviants as sick, irrational, in need of therapy, and to attribute responsibility to the individual. Only graduate anthropology students were significantly dif ferent in judgments on those scales. The hypothesis pertaining'to the fifth conceptual characteristic of the disciplines, the assumption of free will or determinism, received partial support. Responses of the graduate samples were all ordered in the predicted direction; however, differences attained statistical significance on only about half of the predictions. Responses of graduate students in psychology most fre quently reflected the expected deterministic assumption. In sum, despite the fact that a few predictions were not confirmed for each of the three graduate samples, the bulk of the findings support the hypothesis that the social ideologies of graduate students in clinical psychology, law, and anthropology reflect the unique conceptual characteristics of their respective disciplines. Hypothesis III will be considered now. This hypothesis is the most difficult of the three to evaluate, and yet it is of critical importance for the issues which are of concern in this investigation. A major question to be asked, at this juncture, is which of the ideological differences discussed above can be attributed to graduate training itself and which differences may have existed prior to graduate work, or more important yet, prior to entering the major discipline. The latter question cannot, of course, be answered, at least, not for anthropology or psychology students, since #3 per cent of the undergraduate anthro pology sample and 93 per cent of the undergraduate psychol ogy sample already were in their junior or senior y e a r. There is no way to subtract the effect of study in the major from the responses of these students. The same problem does not exist for prelegal students since they had no training in law. They were students who merely indicated the intention to enter law school after gradua tion. It is important, nevertheless, to try to establish, on the basis of the data, which ideological elements may have existed prior to academic specialization, even for anthropology and psychology students. First, the manner in which the four undergraduate samples were differentiated on the 12 social issues concepts will be reviewed. They differed significantly in meaning attributed to the following four concepts: (1) obey authority, (2) be powerful, (3) law enforcement and punishment, and (4) psychotherapy. Undergraduate samples also differed significantly in value preferences on these same four concepts. Prelegal students and the general student group (UM) were more favorably disposed toward the first three concepts (authoritarian concepts) than were students entering psychology and anthropology. Students going into psychology valued psychotherapy more highly than the other three samples. They also rated permissiveness higher and will power lower than under graduate law and undergraduate mixed-majors. On the basis of this evidence, it appears that prelegal students, and perhaps psychology students, entered their major dis cipline already oriented differently in the ways just mentioned. Turning to the graduate data, it can be seen that the graduate law sample remained highest on the four authoritarian concepts. In contrast, the general group (GM) decreased significantly in valuation of two of these concepts. Apparently, graduate study in law does not change values on these issues. The only significant difference in value-orientation between prelegal and graduate law students was that graduates valued "to work mainly to effect changes in laws and legal processes" 529 (use legal processes) more highly. Again in contrast, the general graduate group (GM) decreased significantly in valuation of this concept also. Thus graduate law students rated legal processes significantly higher than the three other graduate samples; whereas prelaw students did not differ in this respect from the three under graduate samples. In semantic meaning space, graduate and undergraduate law students differed significantly on per ception of two social issues concepts: "use legal processes" and "develop individual potentialities." Graduate psychology students remained highest on "psychotherapy" and "to be permissive." In addition, however, they placed a significantly higher value than both undergraduate psychology and the three other graduate samples on "to be able to express and accept hostile and negative feelings" (express feelings). They also differed significantly from their counterpart undergraduates in valuation of three other concepts. In semantic meaning space, the psychology samples differed significantly in the way they perceived three of the four psychology concepts and two law concepts. As already noted, no clear value-orientation pattern emerged for anthropology students with regard to the group-related concepts. However, graduate anthro pology students did rate individual and psychological 530 concepts less favorably than undergraduate anthropology students and differed from them in semantic meaning space on "psychotherapy" and on two anthropology concepts. A third anthropology concept "group action" was placed higher in the value hierarchy of graduates than in that of undergraduates. The same kind of analysis can be made with regard to the section on judgments of deviant group concepts. Prelegal students made negative legal and moral judgments and advocated prohibiting and punishing deviant behavior most frequently of the undergraduate samples. Again, the general group (UM) was most like the prelaw sample in these judgments. Graduate law and graduate mixed-majors samples remained first and second in this regard. Further more, there were very few significant differences between undergraduates and graduates in either law or the mixed- majors samples in their judgments of deviant groups. Undergraduate and graduate law students did differ sig nificantly in configurative meaning patterns attributed to three deviant group concepts. This suggests that there were some subtle differences in meanings concerning deviants, but in general, there were very few differences in the types of judgments which undergraduate and graduate law students made about deviant groups. In contrast, there were a considerable number of 531 significant differences between undergraduates and graduates in both psychology and anthropology on the judgment data. Those differences have already been dis cussed in detail several times. Although some of these differences existed at the undergraduate level, the differences not only increased in number and size in the predicted direction, but graduate anthropology and graduate psychology moved in separate directions, as expected, on certain items. The findings regarding the effect of deterministic vs. free will assumptions on beliefs concerning human nature and the world followed approximately the same pattern described above. Undergraduate samples were not differentiated on these scales, whereas graduate samples were separated. Undergraduate and graduate psychology samples differed significantly; anthropology samples differed in the expected direction but not significantly; law samples did not differ. In viewing the general overall pattern, the ideologies of the graduate samples are considerable more distinct and differentiated than are those of the under graduate samples. There were approximately twice as many significant differences among graduate samples as among undergraduate samples. The comparison for each of the five ideological elements is shown in Table 52. With 532 TABLE 52 SUMMARY COMPARISON OF PER CENT OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES OCCURRING AMONG GRADUATE SAMPLES AND THOSE AMONG UNDER GRADUATE SAMPLES IDEOLOGICAL ELEMENTS Hypothesis I Among graduate samples Significant Among undergraduate samples______ Significant Number {%) A. Meaning of concepts Si B. Perception of what is beneficial-harmful, healthy-sick, rational- irrational 66 31 33 26 concepts 75 scales Hypothesis II Per cent con- Per cent con firmed for firmed for three graduate three under- samples_______ graduate samples A. Value-orienta- tions regarding social issues B. Type of judg ments with regard to deviant groups 60 & 7 40 60 15 pre dictions 53 pre dictions C. Selected beliefs about human nature and the world 50 6 16 pre dictions the exception of a few items for each discipline, the ideologies of the graduate samples conform to the ideal types which were predicted for them. Furthermore, responses of graduate students in psychology and anthro pology differ frequently from those of their corresponding undergraduate samples, and the former more clearly reflect the distinctive characteristics of their own disciplines. A careful examination of the data, however, indicates that the same cannot be said for law students. The very large N of the graduate law sample (more than twice the size of graduate anthropology or of graduate mixed-majors) made it easier for differences between undergraduate and graduate law samples to attain statistical significance. Despite the nim erical boost and despite the lack of any common training in the discipline, there were still very few significant differences between undergraduate and graduate law samples. The additional fact that there were also few differences between the general student samples (M) strengthens the inference that the key to the different outcomes lies in the type of graduate study which the students received. That is, apparently, the intensive study of human behavior in which graduate anthropology and psychology students are engaged, affects ideological views regarding deviant behavior and related issues. Other types of study seem not to significantly affect ideology 534 12 on the issues studied here. In the ideal type explanation sketch drawn for the discipline of law, it was suggested that the legal system represents the moral code of society and hence of the general population. That description received some empirical support here in that the ideology of the law samples were more like those of the general samples (M) than like those of any other samples. The major difference was that scores of the lav/ samples v/ere more extreme; that is, they were at one end of the array of scores. Perhaps, we can say that students planning to enter the discipline of law resemble the general population in ideology, but have an intensified concern with legal control of behavior in moral areas. Then, apparently graduate study in law does not alter views much in this area since the legal conceptual system and the ideology of the students are similar with regard to deviance. The continued focus upon legal and moral issues may, in fact, prevent a change in this regard. The general graduate sample (GM) decreased in valuation of legal concepts in comparison to 12 Graduate mixed-majors did differ from under graduate mixed-majors in values on several social issues concepts, but not in any unitary fashion which would be relevant to the present discussion. 535 the general undergraduate sample (UK). Graduate law students did show a slight tendency toward "liberalization" but to a lesser degree than any of the other graduate samples. The findings, which have been discussed above, do not appear to have been biased by differences in the sex, age, or class year distribution of the various samples. In the previous chapter, when the composition of the samples was described, it was stated that the possible effect of these variables would be examined after the analysis of the data was completed. The sex ratio within a sample seems not to have influenced the outcome. All four graduate samples had a greater proportion of males than their corresponding undergraduate samples, yet this change in sex ratio in the same direction was not accompanied by a uniform change in the same direction in ideology. The two law samples were composed almost entirely of males (39 per cent and 9$ per cent). Their responses were the most highly oriented toward authority, punishment, prohibition of deviance, moralistic judgments, etc. None of the other three groups shifted in this ideological direction despite large increases in proportion of male students. The increase in males from undergraduate to graduate samples was from 44 to 73 per cent in the mixed-majors group, from 24 to 62 536 per cent in anthropology, and from 49 to 63 per cent in psychology. The overall ideological patterns of the latter three graduate samples moved in three diverse directions. The same kind of comments can be made with regard to class year and age which were roughly similar in distribution. The age and class year distributions for graduate anthropology and graduate psychology were quite similar, but ideologies differed. The age and class year distributions for graduate law and graduate mixed-majors differed considerably, but their ideologies were more alike than those of any other samples. All students in the graduate law sample were in their third year of graduate study. There were no first or second year graduate law students, but this was balanced by the fact that neither were there any fourth year students. On the whole, graduate students in law and mixed-majors were younger than those in anthropology and psychology. Yet younger age cannot account for the more moralistic, pro hibitive views of graduate students in law and mixed- majors, since young undergraduate students in psychology and anthropology did not hold such views. It seems safe to assume that the findings on ideology were not biased by differences in the sex, age, or class year distribution of the samples. The research methods and techniques which were used in this inquiry to collect and analyze the data and to derive the inferences which have been suggested above are in accordance with the premises, assumptions, values, and technology prevalent in the major branch of American sociology during the seventh decade of the twentieth century. In the next chapter which concludes this report, the findings will be discussed in a broader contest. The implications will be examined in terms of the theoretical and pragmatic issues raised in earlier chapters. CHAPTER VIII SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS The sociology of deviance is said to have under gone a revolutionary transformation in perspective. Radical changes in perspectives are generally character ized by the asking of a host of new and different questions which challenge the very structure of past frames of reference. In the study of deviance, traditional frameworks tended to reify the official body of rules and definitions regarding deviance. Accordingly, what was considered to be problematic and the object of investiga tion was the nature and etiology of the defect within individuals who violated established rules. Traditional models for investigating deviance were able to maintain a dominant and unchallenged status as long as the official definitions of deviance were accepted as legitimate and a reasonable amount of con sensus prevailed among professional groups. Those conditions no longer exist. Pressures from various sources have made explicit numerous conflicts, discrep ancies, and anomalies, which the traditional models had failed to resolve. It is at such times, says Kuhn, that revolutions in science are generated. Revolutions are 538 539 generated during periods of crises, when there is increas ing awareness of anomalies, and a persistent failure of the existing paradigms to solve problems in a particular field.1 In the field of deviance, the pressures and stresses which have forced a reformulation of inquiry have come from at least three sources. One was the accumula tion of large amounts of research evidence which made obvious certain discrepancies and failures of the tradi tional conceptualizations of deviance. In this connec tion, Gibbs has described how the persistent failure to substantiate either the analytic or the personal pathology conceptions of deviance forced a significant change in conceptualization. Inability to locate deviance in any feature intrinsic to deviants or to deviant acts shifted 2 the focus to societal reaction. A second source of stress arose from the inter disciplinary nature of the field. The number of pro fessional groups involved increased. The groups became 1Thomas 3. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, Phoenix Books, 1962. 2 Jack P» Gibbs, "Conceptions of Deviant Behavior: The Old and the New," The Pacific Sociological Review, Vol. 9» No. 1 (Spring, 1966), pp. 9-14. 540 more specialized, while jurisdictional boundaries became 3 more blurred and uncertain. Professionals with con flicting perspectives, in increasing contact with one another, interpreted similar phenomena in contradictory ways, thus bring into the open the perspectival and normative nature of deviance. A third source of pressure has come from the growing sophistication of numerous deviant and minority groups regarding the relativity of definitions of deviance and the political dimensions involved. Many of these groups are now rejecting the labels and stigma tradi tionally imposed upon them and are refusing to legitimate 5 the dominant standards. Once the very definition of who and what is deviant is challenged and rejected by increasing numbers of people within the society, when contradictory views are 3 'LaMar T. Empey, Studies in Delinquency: Alternatives to Incarceration, U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, (Washington, D.C.: U. S. Govern ment Printing Office, 1967)» p. 7. ^Daniel Offer and Melvin Sab shin, Normality: Theoretical and Clinical Concepts of Mental HealthTNew York: Basic Books, Inc., 1900;, p. l66. Anselm Strauss, Leonard Schatzman, Rue Bucher, Danuta Ehrlich, and Melvin Sabshin, Psychiatric Ideologies and Institutions. (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964. 5 'Irving L. Horowitz and M. Liebowitz, ’'Social Deviance and Political Marginality," Social Problems, Vol. 15, No. 3 (Winter, 1968), pp. 280-296. P. 282. held by professional groups working in close contact, and when the evidence fails to validate the traditional conceptualizations, a reformulation of the problem is required. The nature of these stresses and conflicts suggested that a clarification was needed first regarding the conception of deviance itself. A number of leading theorists and researchers called for the investigation of questions which had been neglected in past research. Among the questions raised were the following: Y/hich groups have the power to impose their definitions, rules, and labels upon others? What do they define as deviance and according to what criteria? 'What labels do they apply to various types of offenders? What are the values and beliefs of the groups making the judgments? To what extent is there consensus or dissensus among the policy making groups? To the extent that there is dissensus, what accounts for the variable character of the judg ments? To the extent that definitions, rules, and labels change, what are the social and historical determinants of such changes?^ ^Ibid., p. 281. Howard S. Becker, Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, Inc., 19&3). Albert K. Cohen. Deviance and Control (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice- Hall, 1966), pp. 36-37. 542 The present study was designed to gather data reflecting upon these questions. It is a comparative study of the beliefs, values, and judgments held by graduate students majoring in clinical psychology, anthropology, and law regarding deviance, and of the extent to which those ideologies were influenced by academic specializa tion. These three disciplines were selected for investi gation primarily because they train students for profes sions which are influential in making the rules and designating the criteria concerning who and what is deviant. The disciplines were treated as three distinctive educational, occupational, and linguistic subcultures. Using a sociocultural relativistic model as a guide, an attempt was made to enter into the reality world of each of the disciplines, to try to understand what each be lieves to be true about human nature and rationality, normality and deviance, cause and effect, etc., given its unique perspective and focus, based upon its position, functions, and historical background. Ideal type explana tion sketches were constructed for each discipline. Elements of the conceptual system and existential base which are fundamental and distinctive characteristics of each discipline were abstracted and described. Hypotheses were formulated based upon propositions pertaining to 543 sociocultural conditioning. The hypotheses predicted the type of ideological responses which would be expected from graduate students in each discipline as a result of inten sive, concentrated exposure to the respective conceptual systems. The rationale for the predicted responses was out lined in detail in the ideal type explanation sketches. In addition to the three samples of graduate students in psychology, anthropology, and law, a fourth group of graduate students with a variety of majors, and four corresponding undergraduate samples were included in the study. The samples of mixed-majors were included as a general reference point against which to compare responses of specialized groups. They were considered, roughly, to represent the general university student population. The undergraduate samples were included as pseudo-control groups in a simulated before-after research design. Responses of undergraduate students were used to estimate the position which graduate students with the same majors might have taken when they were undergraduates. An instrument, utilizing the semantic differential technique, was submitted to students in the eight samples. The subjects were asked to rate concepts representing various deviant groups and related social issues. The responses were assumed to represent the social ideologies of the students. The findings are recorded in the previous chapter. They provide material concerning the questions listed on page 541 and can serve as documentation of the values, judgments, and beliefs regarding deviance of partic ular groups at a certain time and place in history, and also of the extent and nature of the variation among these groups. In chapter VII, the data was analyzed, summarized, and interpreted in the light of the set of hypotheses form ulated for this study. In this concluding chapter, the findings will be discussed in terms of their general implications, and in connection with certain controversies -------------- 544 '"} and questions reported in the review of literature. | 1 ILIPLICATIONS CONCERNING DETERMINANTS OP SOCIAL IDEOLOGY First, what are the implications of the findings with respect to determinants of ideology? Does academic special-! ization appear to be significant in shaping ideology and j structuring judgmental processes? It appears that academic specialization can be an effective determinant of ideology if the type of training offered is relevant to the ideolog ical issues involved. In this study, graduate training in anthropology and clinical psychology seemed to be influen tial in shaping perception, evaluation, and judgments re- ! garding deviance and related issues. The same cannot be j said for graduate study in law. The evidence was ambiguous I with regard to legal training. j The inferences stated above are based upon the fol- i 1 lowing evidence, which summarizes the results of the three I i major hypotheses. First, the social ideologies of the grad-j uate samples were significantly different on each of the i | five elements: (1) meanings of concepts; (2) perception of j what is beneficial or harmful, healthy or sick, rational or j irrational; (3) value-orientations regarding social issues; [ (4) types of judgments made with regard to deviant groups; j and (5) selected beliefs concerning human nature and the i world. The percent of significant differences varied from J 8 7 per cent to 60 per cent of the concepts, scales, or pre- j dictions made on the first four elements, and was 50 per cent on the fifth element which involved only a few items. There were approximately twice as many significant differ ences among graduate samples as among undergraduate samples. Second, the social ideologies of the graduate | students in anthropology, psychology, and law reflected the j unique conceptual systems of their respective disciplines. That is, the content and direction of their responses conformed to the hypothetical expectations. Of 545 the many predictions made, only a few were not confirmed for each discipline. Finally, graduate students in anthropology and psychology differed frequently, in the predicted direction, from their undergraduate counterparts. That is, the responses of the graduate students more clearly reflected the distinctive characteristics of their disciplines. This was not the case for the law samples. There were very few significant differences between graduate and undergraduate law samples. However, both samples reflected, to a high degree, the designated character istics of the discipline of law. Law students were at the polar extreme in endorsing concepts and scales assumed to reflect the legal position and assumptions. The graduate law sample was separated more sharply, in these respects, from other graduate samples than the prelegal sample was from other undergraduate samples. The lack of differentiation between the law samples constituted the only aspect of the three major hypotheses which was not substantiated. If the under graduate samples are assumed to represent the position of the corresponding graduate samples prior to graduate study, the findings would mean that graduate training in law did not change the ideology of its students. There are three plausible explanations for the 546 mixed results attained in this study with regard to academic specialization as a determinant of ideology. First, the key to the potency of academic specialization may depend upon the content or type of graduate study and the degree of its relevance to the dependent variables. The greater the relevance, the more potent the discipline would be in influencing ideology. This explanation is 7 congruous with sociological propositions in many areas. Anthropology and psychology are disciplines which provide the most intensive study of human behavior, and therefore, according to this explanation, should be the most effective in influencing beliefs regarding deviant behavior. Second, perhaps graduate training in law does not appear to be influential in changing ideology because the ideological responses postulated for lav/ reflect general American beliefs. If this were true, and if incoming law students were representative of the general population, there would be no reason for a change. The two would already be consistent. Graduate study in law might be ^Hans Speier, "The Effect of Military Hank on Various Types of Attitudes," The Language of Social Research, Paul F. Lazarsfeld and Morris Rosenberg (eds.), (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1955), PP» 93-99, p. 96. Rita Volkman and Donald R. Cressey, "Differential Association and the Rehabilitation of Drug Addicts," The American Journal of Sociology. Vol. LXIX, No. 2, (Sept. 1963), pp. 129-142, p. 133. 547 effective in changing ideologies which were initially different. Furthermore, graduate study might be effective in keeping ideology the same, that is, in preventing change to a less moralistic and legalistic position. There are empirical and theoretical grounds for accepting this explanation also. Empirically, the data showed that the profile of the prelaw sample was closest to that of the general undergraduate sample (mixed- majors). There were only a few significant differences between the two. Then, although law students and mixed- majors changed the least of the four groups, a few of the differences which did occur indicate that graduate study in law may be effective in "maintaining" the same legal istic values. While graduate law students continued to rate the law concepts more highly than all other samples, graduate mixed-majors decreased significantly in value attributed to three of the law concepts. As mentioned earlier, the graduate law sample was more highly differ entiated from other graduate samples on legal and moral items than the prelaw sample was from the other under graduate samples. In theoretical terms, the congruity between the legal system and the ideology of the general population was suggested in the ideal type explanation sketch of law. The legal order is representative of, and is based 548 upon the traditional moral code of society. In comparison, as behavioral sciences, the explanatory systems of psychology and anthropology differ most from common sense or popular explanations. Therefore, the finding that graduate study in psychology and anthropology appears to be most influential in changing ideologies regarding deviance is plausible on these grounds also. A third plausible explanation is that the different outcomes may be due to self-selection on the part of law students. If this explanation were correct, it would mean that students who select law as a major come from a different population than the other students; that there was no change in ideology because the law students chose a discipline which was already compatible to their pre existing ideology. Although there were not many signif icant differences between the general undergraduate sample and the prelaw sample, the latter was slightly but con- sist'Uitly more extreme in its scores. Lav; students may be similar to the general undergraduate sample, but somewhat more concerned about conformity to official legal-moral prescriptions. The self-selection hypothesis is, of course, a major alternative to the basic hypothesis being tested in this study. Selective choice of disciplines.— The findings suggest that part of the variance which occurred among the graduate samples may have been due to selective choice of disciplines. There were some significant differences among undergraduate samples which already reflected the distinctive characteristics of the matching disciplines. More confidence can be placed in the inference that some self-selection occurred for the law sample than for the other samples, since the prelaw sample was the only sample which was not "contaminated" by undergraduate study in the major discipline. There is no way of determining to what extent the differentiation of undergraduate students in anthropology and psychology which did occur, was an effect of the undergraduate courses already taken in the major discipline. A third of the psychology students and a quarter of the anthropology students were seniors. Sixty per cent of the psychology students and 57 per cent of the anthropology students were juniors. If research is conducted on these questions in the future, it would be most helpful to attempt to study the ideologies of students before they have taken courses in their major disciplines. A longitudinal investigation would also be preferable to a simulated before-after design. In the present study, it is not known to what extent confidence can be placed in the assumption that the undergraduates represent the position graduate students would have taken prior to graduate training. 550 The effect of graduate vs. undergraduate status as a variable can be examined, and its usefulness as a predictor can be compared to academic discipline. Comparison of graduate vs. undergraduate status and academic discipline as predictors of ideology.— A small but consistent general relationship was found to exist between graduate-undergraduate status and type of judgments made about deviant groups. Graduates were generally and consistently more tolerant and less likely to apply negative stereotypes to deviant group concepts than were undergraduates. This finding is consistent with results of many other studies showing that length of education is positively related to tolerance. No rela tionship was found to exist between graduate-undergraduate status and the other ideological elements. Academic discipline was much more effective than graduate-undergraduate status in discriminating among the students on all ideological elements including type of judgments made about deviant groups. As has already been implied, academic discipline was highly effective in differentiating graduate students. It was less effective in discriminating among undergraduate students. Knowledge of the major academic discipline of the student made it possible to predict the content and direction of his responses relative to students in other disciplines. In comparison, without knowledge of academic discipline, there was no basis for estimating how students in the mixed-majors samples would respond, or where there would stand relative to other students. Even after examining the responses of mixed-majors, no clear, logical pattern of characteristics emerged. The position of the mixed-majors samples fluctuated more than any of the other groups. Within the limitations set in this study, •'what" was learned (i.e., a particular conceptual system) was more important than number of years of education. As such, the findings would constitute support for a general theory postulating cultural or conceptual factors as major determinants of perception, cognition, ideology, and world-view. SOCIOLOGY OF KNOWLEDGE HYPOTHESES AND THE PROBLEM OF LEANING The hypotheses which were formulated and tested in this study were derived from a set of principles pertain ing to sociocultural conditioning of perception, ideology, world-view, and knowledge. These principles were found scattered throughout works in the following fields: 552 | sociology of knowledge and ideology, reference group and role theory, philosophy of science, perception theory, and sociolinguistics. j A basic proposition underlying most of the work ; referred to above, is that the manner in which men perceive; and interpret reality depends upon the conceptual apparatus) supplied by their major or salient reference group. A j I major aspect of the conceptual apparatus is the symbolic j system or set of meanings shared by the group. The social world is a symbolic world, wherein men react to objects in terms of their meanings. Since meaning is not inherent in I any object, act, or response, the meaning of any particular] I object, act, or response may vary for groups with divergent cultural backgrounds and experience. ; This aspect, which is of central importance in the i i sociocultural relativistic framework, presents difficult methodological problems for researchers. However, j advocates of this frame of reference claim that if meaning j j is ignored, the interpretation of data may be misleading, i This is most apt to occur in studies using large samples | of unrelated subjects. In such research, a given response j is assumed to mean the same thing for all subjects. The : response cannot be analyzed in terms of its meaning from ! j the perspective of the subject's own reference group. ! i Examples were presented in the review of literature of 553 data which appeared ambiguous or paradoxical until the data was subdivided by cultural subsample and reanalyzed, after which the ambiguity was clarified. | The findings in this study lend support to this conclusion: (l) regarding the importance of a particular i conceptual system as a variable in predicting and under standing differential perception of reality, (2) regarding | i the divergence in systems of meaning among different groupsj, and (3) regarding the importance of interpreting individual; responses from the perspectives of the different reference i groups of which they are a part. i Differential conception of reality.— First, what ! were the results regarding the basic proposition that the * manner in which men perceive and interpret reality depends i upon the conceptual apparatus supplied by their major or salient reference group? Graduate samples, which pre sumably have had concentrated, intensive exposure to, and j use of conceptual systems of diverse disciplines, might be expected to perceive the same objects, concepts, and reality differently. As has already been discussed, the j | analysis of data demonstrated that knowledge of the conceptual systems of the three disciplines, guided by hypotheses derived from sociology of knowledge and ■ related fields, was most effective in differentiating 554 graduate students and in predicting their ideological responses. Systems of meaning.— With regard to meaning, the most direct piece of empirical evidence that the meaning or symbolic systems of the graduate samples were signif icantly different was provided by the multiple-discrim- inant function analysis. That analysis determined whether or not the configurative meaning patterns which various samples attributed to each of the 26 concepts on the research instrument were significantly separated in multidimensional semantic space. The results showed that the four graduate samples perceived 21 of the 26 (<3l$) concepts in significantly different ways. In contrast, the four undergraduate samples differed significantly on only eight of the 26 (31$) concepts. Findings which are more difficult to interpret, however, are those having to do with two controversial issues. The first has to do with the controversy regard ing the meaning of responses endorsing authoritarian ideas. The controversy was generated by contradictory findings produced by two different investigatory models: personal and sociocultural. The personal approach traditionally conceptualized ideologies as belief systems which are distorted or biased by unconscious psychological motives. Researchers using this approach usually sought I to discover the sources of the distortion. In studies j investigating authoritarian attitudes toward deviants and outgroups, value-orientations emphasizing authority and , i power, obedience, will power, repression, and punishment ! 1 were found to be linked to intolerance, in general, and toj moralistic, condemning, punitive judgments concerning j deviants. Such values and judgments were considered to be manifestations of a repressive, fearful personality pro jecting his own inner hostility upon vulnerable persons. | The authoritarian personality syndrome was believed to j have originated in early childhood relationships with j hostile, repressive, punitive parents. As time passed, many researchers began to assume, i without any other substantiation, that responses endorsing ideas associated with the authoritarian complex indicated | the determinants, correlates, and meanings linked to the authoritarian personality syndrome. The validity of such j assumptions, however, wa s questioned. Evidence supplied from studies comparing groups with divergent sociocultural! backgrounds demonstrated that the configurations, meanings,j and relationships cited above were not universal. These ; studies suggested that, in certain contexts, some of the ideological elements in question could be traced to social, cultural, or historical factors rather than to personality factors. In such cases, the ideological 556 elements sometimes appeared to have a different meaning than those ascribed to them in studies using the personal approach. Furthermore, the response patterns and correlates were not necessarily the same as those found in i the authoritarian personality studies. In this investigation, although graduate law J students evaluated concepts and scales associated with | authoritarian ideology more highly than other samples, they also evaluated "develop individual potentialities" and "work mainly to effect changes in laws and legal processes" as high or higher than other samples. "Indi vidual potentialities" was placed first, and "legal processes" second on the graduate law value hierarchy. i This pattern, like those found in other sociocultural comparative studies, contrasts with the configuration of responses expected from those endorsing authoritarian 8 items. Furthermore, when viewed from the perspective of i the discipline of law, authoritarian items may have different connotations from those associated with the ! g | "What this country needs most, more than laws and political programs, is a few courageous, tireless, ! devoted leaders in whom the people can put their faith." [ One of the items on the F-scale. authoritarian personality syndrome. The typical responses given by law students may be examined and understood from the perspective of the ideal type explanation sketch of law, which is briefly recapitulated below. The major unit of study of the discipline of law is the legal system which is an authoritative order and represents the moral code and standards of society. Major functions are the maintenance of societal order and the protection of society. Violation of prescriptions is assumed to be harmful to society. The role of the legal profession is to uphold legal prescriptions, to determine guilt, and to prescribe proper punishment if violation occurs. This system is backed up by the power and ultimate authority of the state. Fundamental premises of the American legal system include beliefs in individual responsibility and in free will to choose between good and evil. The ideal type described above suggests an altern ative explanation with potentially different meanings from that of the authoritarian personality syndrome. The latter implies a particular type of personality structure, molded by early family relationships, which is relatively fixed in nature. The alternative explanation suggests functional group-related beliefs concerning the most effective methods to maintain socially learned values. The 55&v meanings may derive, as Sorokin argued long ago, from a particular set of cultural assumptions about the nature of Q reality, man, the good, and the source of truth. In this study, the responses of the graduate law sample reflected to a very high degree the assumptions and conceptual characteristics of the legal system. The find ings are ambiguous, however, since prelaw students responded in the same manner as did the graduate law sample. Since personality was not studied, no data are available on the alternative explanation. Therefore, the findings in this study cannot cast any light on these ' problems. They do, however, add to the evidence which suggests that the many inferences which are being made on the basis of responses to authoritarian-type items are not necessarily valid. The inferences are based on the assumption that relationships which have been found in some studies are universal. In the face of contradictory evidence and alternative explanations, the assumed rela tionships require empirical verification in each case. g ^Pitirim A. Sorokin, Social and Cultural Dynamics. (New York: American Book Co., 1937)» Vol. II, Ch. 15, discussed in Albert K. Cohen, Deviance and Control (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1966), pp. 33-34. 559 Clarification of the problems discussed above is of considerable importance, in general, and also with regard to academic training in the field of deviance. For example, if it were deemed desirable to structure beliefs of future professionals along less authoritarian lines, the methods for implementation would depend upon an accurate assessment of the determinants of ideology. Each of the two alternative explanations would call for j different methods in attempting to shape or change ideology; In cases where the sources of the ideological orientation are mainly sociocultural in nature, intensive exposure to new types of information and conceptual systems might be an effective catalyst. In contrast, psychologists tend to believe that the authoritarian personality syndrome cannot be changed by formal education. A second issue pertains to the ambiguity regarding the meaning of responses concerning mental illness. In an article summarizing the literature on tolerance of deviance; ; and "pathological" behavior, Dohrenwend and Chin-Shong attempted to reconcile a number of paradoxical and con- ; flicting findings. The authors were faced with the problem of tracing what a particular response meant when viewed in the overall pattern of responses and in the context of the cultural background of the particular group i 560 in question.10 For example, with regard to one puzzling finding, the authors comment that the fact that both psychiatrists and low-status groups, in contrast to high- status groups, recommended hospitalization for a paranoid case would seem anomalous since psychiatric and low-status - 1 ^ group responses differed in almost all other respects.± Supporting their interpretation with corrolary data, they finally concluded that the recommendation for hospitaliza tion entailed almost opposite meanings for the two groups. The recommendation for hospitalization, implying isolation of the person from family and community, was considered to indicate extreme intolerance and rejection on the part of the low-status subjects. The recommenda tion for hospitalization by psychiatrists, on the other hand, was considered to reflect specialized psychiatric knowledge regarding the treatment which would be in the best interests of the patient. Tb seems likely that a J"°See chapter IV of this report, pages 190-196, Bruce P. Dohrenwend and Edwin Chin-Shong, "Social Status and Attitudes Toward Psychological Disorder: The Problem of Tolerance of Deviance," American Sociological Review. Vol. 32, No. 3 (June 1967), pp. 417-433- 11rbid., p. 432. similar phenomenon occurred in this study. On the one hand, the graduate law sample labeled deviant groups as "sick" and said "they need psychotherapy as frequently as did the graduate psychology sample. Yet the judgments of this same graduate law sample regarding deviant groups were the most negative, prohibitive, and punishment-oriented; whereas, judgments of the graduate psychology sample were non-moralistic, permissive, and help-oriented. The graduate law and the graduate psychol ogy sample differed significantly in their use of nine of 1 p the 13 negative labels.' If the responses "sick" and "they need psychotherapy" are examined in the context of the pattern of responses given by each group, a different interpretation is implied than if the responses had been taken out of context and evaluated as independent items. In the latter case, the same meaning would have been assumed for all who checked it. It is more reasonable to assume, however, that "sick" and "they need psychotherapy" in conjunction with negative, prohibitive, punishment- oriented judgments have a different connotation than when 12 The other two labels on which they did not differ significantly were "irrational" (as hypothesized) and "individual is responsible." Law students used the latter more frequently, but did not differ significantly from psychology students. 562 ] used alongside non-moralistic, permissive, help-oriented ! judgments. i i Gorrolary evidence supporting the inference that graduate psychology and graduate law students had different things in mind, can be seen in the evaluative rating given to the concept "psychotherapy." ’’Psychotherapy" I was approximately fourth highest of the 12 social issues concepts in the value hierarchy of graduate psychology but j eighth in the value hierarchy of graduate law. Again, I recommendations for psychotherapy apparently had different ; connotations for the two groups. i When considering the significant historical trend ' toward designating acts as "sick" which were formerly considered criminal, ^ it is desirable to inquire into the meaning and consequences of such designations. Merely j noting that new labels are now applied is not sufficient. , A number of scientists have begun to question the significance of the widespread infiltration into the public; consciousness of psychological labels and explanatory categories. If the conceptions of psychologists, lawyers, j and various other groups of the nature, definition, i identification, cause, and treatment of mental illness are| "^Cohen, op. cit., p. 36. 563 quite different, then what is intended and what results from such labeling may also vary considerably. Perhaps, as is suggested by our findings and other similar findings the historical trend represents, for many, only a super ficial change in which the negative attitude toward offenders remains unchanged. A new label is substituted, and a different form of coercive treatment is advocated. The consequences associated with the mental illness label may diverge considerably from the humanistic meaning and intentions of the founders and disseminators of the label. The correct assessment of the meaning associated with various labels may, therefore, have implications for policy as well as for theory. The assessment of meaning, however, presents formidable methodological difficulties, and is frequently ignored. It is perhaps taken for granted that researchers will examine survey responses in the context of the pattern of responses given. However, when samples consist of unrelated persons, as many large survey samples do, it is not possible to analyze the responses of subjects in the context of the symbolic systems of their own reference groups. For example, if the subjects in the present study had been selected as a single random sample of the entire student population, or even stratified by class year, but had not been identified 564 by academic major, most of the large number of significant differences found would have been obscured. The evidence which has been examined suggests that the ways in which reality and deviance are perceived, interpreted, and judged are very different, and that membership in particular, sociocultural groups and the conceptual apparatus of those groups, may be a significant influence in shaping those ways. This appears to be true for scientific and professional groups as well as for other kinds of sociocultural groups. Each way of looking at reality appears to justify, explain, and perpetuate the institutional aspects of the group. 7/hat are the implica tions with regard to theories of deviance? THEORIES OF DEVIANCE Questions raised concerning traditional models and theories of deviance pertain mainly to their adequacy. Critics say that in directing study almost exclusively toward offenders and their lives, the traditional models have been one-sided and have neglected the role of societal policy, itself, in the creation and maintenance of deviance. Advocates of the so-called, new perspective, the societal reaction theory, claim that deviance cannot be understood by studying only the offenders. There are, 565 j i they say, significant variables external to deviants, which| also must be considered. In chapter IV, illustrations were given of five I types of evidence which support that contention. Evidence ; of the first four types demonstrates the discriminatory and partial nature of the identification and labeling of j deviants as well as the process whereby negative societal 1 I reaction often pushes offenders ever deeper into criminal j subcultures and secondary deviance. Such research deals j j with interactive processes between offenders and those who > react to them. In contrast, studies of the .fifth type, i including this study, pertain to processes furthest ! removed from the offenders. This type of evidence is con cerned only with the definers of deviance, the nature of their judgments, and the degree of consensus or dissensus among them. j The finding,' in this study, that there were sig nificant differences among the graduate samples of j clinical psychology, anthropology, and lav; in their characterization, judgments, and recommendations concerning: various types of deviance demonstrates the profound sig nificance of the definitional process. If those who are ■ potential policy-makers in the area of deviance do not i agree on whether or not certain types of behavior are sick,| ! i irrational, or harmful to society; on whether they should ! be permitted or prohibited, on whether the offender should be punished, given psychotherapy, or neither, then obviously deviance is not a self-evident property of an act or of an actor. Further, it seems quite clear that the identification, classification, treatment, and future career of deviants will depend not only upon the behavior and characteristics of offenders, but also upon the partic ular agency which happens to gain jurisdiction over them, Responses will differ depending upon the belief system of that agency. This likelihood leads us, finally, to a discussion of the importance of academic specialization. ACADEMIC TRAINING IN THE FIELD OF DEVIANCE Three major implications emerge. First, the knowledge possessed by different specialties is fragmentary and segmental. Second, the knowledge bears the indelible ' imprint of the premises, assumptions, concerns, and goals ' of particular groups in society. Third, the systems of ; knowledge are, themselves, powerful forces in shaping the ! ideologies of students, and consequently, in affecting i the lives and destinies of persons who are identified and labeled as deviants. Each discipline or profession generates theories j j (i.e., legal, psychological, and social theories) reflect- 567 ing its own limited perspective and specialized concerns. Presumably no particular conception is inevitably repre sentative of the nature of reality or of deviance. Yet each discipline tends to reify its own definitions, con ceptions, and norms. Those of other subcultural groups in the community may not be taken into account or represented. Furthermore, the roles played by community, societal reaction, and professional policy as contributing ; factors to deviance have been largely ignored until recently. Deviants have been viewed as the problematic objects of study rather than as one part of a total mosaic. It is difficult in the face of such evidence to maintain a position that social scientists have studied, objectively and impartially, all of the factors associated with deviance without allowing their own views, concerns, and values to influence their choice of subject matter. The same might also be said of the responses of profes sional groups and action agencies to deviance. Conse quently, if the biases, the choices, and policy decisions of both groups are not included in the study of deviance, they will have an effect nonetheless. They will operate ! as unrecognized factors, and their effects misunderstood or mistakenly attributed to other factors. What general proposals might be suggested with regard to the features suggested above? First, with regard 568 to the fragmentary, segmental nature of the academic perspectives, the obvious and frequent proposal is for interdisciplinary work."^ It may be that the suggestion has to be taken one step further. Increased contact between specialists with conflicting perspectives is one source of the present crisis. It is highly doubtful that the existing contradictory outlooks can be either recon ciled or united. The difficulties involved in inter disciplinary research have been described by Henry: I have some experience, as Chairman of the UNH Resources Development Center, in trying to create truly interdisciplinary research— and the word create is correct in this case. It is extremely difficult. An interdisciplinary research apparatus, such as our Center, probably should be used first of all to propagate new and advanced interdisciplinary pro cesses; that is, to think in new categories about problem solving, because just bringing disciplines together under a common umbrella will not produce what we need.... Disciplines have been with us a long time, but maybe the march of world events is showing that we are incorrectly categorizing our modes of knowledge. There are problems that require elements of a number of different disciplines.... ■^Robert Stevens, "Aging Mistress: The Law School in America," Change in Higher Education, Vol. 2, No. 1 (Jan.-Feb. 1970), pp. 32-42, p. 37. IS ^William F. Henry, "The Issues in Campus Unrest," Phi Kappa Phi Journal, (Fall 1969), p. 27. Mr. Henry is professor of resource economics and chairman of the Resource Development Center, University of New Hampshire. “ " "569“ j A new more comprehensive discipline may be ' required; one wholly devoted to the study of deviance, encompassing as many aspects and segments of the problem | as possible, and based upon a freshly constructed conceptual system. As Empey puts it: ...we must develop theories which fit all the parts of| the delinquency picture and not just one facet of it. : Indeed, if our theories fail to keep in mind the whole, we are not likely., to find a satisfactory explanation of the part. With regard to the second feature, it should be j recognized and made explicit that knowledge cannot be pure ; and wholly objective in the sense of being unrelated to ; human concerns, goals, and purposes. This need not i produce despair or disdain for knowledge, but a recognition of the need to use it in the service of common, human endsr LaMar T. Empey, •'Contemporary Programs for Con- ; victed Juvenile Offenders: Problems of Theory, Practice and Research,” Mimeographed paper prepared for the President's Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence, (Nov. 196$), p. 27. "Youth deviance and rebel- I lion is not simply a problem of social control to be solved by police or court action, but must involve a wide range of social scientists and practitioners from a variety of fields.” p. 94. "Greater attention should be paid to preventive and rehabilitative efforts by community institutions and to means by which a more comprehensive and rational approach can be made.” p. 90. See also: Task Force Report: Science and Technology, A Report to the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administra- ; tion of Justice, (Washington, D. C.: U.S. Govt. Printing ; Office, 1967), p. 2. | 570 rather than for impersonal ends or for the goals of 17 particular dominant groups. The conception of a value-free directionless science has become sterile and cannot be defended on logical or empirical grounds. There is ample reason for the present attack from many directions upon such a conception. Accumulating evidence from studies in many different fields has resulted in an increasing sophistica tion on the part of many scientists today concerning the active role played by science, itself, in the affairs of men. Many leaders are calling for a critical and responsible policy wherein scientists would examine and be 1 < 3 aware of the consequences of their work. Within such an 17«Thus we come to the point where the false ideal of a detached, impersonal point of view must be replaced by the ideal of an essentially human point of view which is within the limits of a human perspective constantly striving to enlarge itself." Karl Mannheim, Ideology and Utopia, (New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World, Inc., A Harvest Book, 1936), p. 297. 1 3 A long list of questions of this type are sug gested under the theme "Social Constraints on Social Problems Research" in a mimeographed Special Memo from the Society for the Study of Social Problems, Jan. 1970. Also see: Edward M. Opton, Jr. and Nevitt Sanford, "Toward a Critical Social Science," Trans-Action, (March, 1970), pp. 4-7• Howard E. Freeman and 'Wyatt C. Jones, Social Problems: Causes and Controls, (Chicago: Rand McNally & Co., 1970), pp. 16-22. Thomas F. Hoult, "... Who shall prepare himself to the battle?" The American Sociologist, Vol. 3, No. 1, (Feb. 196B), pp. 3-7. ethos, scientists might investigate the ways in which j various types of sociocultural conditioning produce different definitions and conceptions of deviance, and the ! effect of those conceptions upon deviants. They might think deliberately about what is intended and what may result as a consequence of alternative plans. They might j think creatively about the ways in which deviance might be j j structured or influenced so as to be of minimal damage. i Knowledge, such as that about the self-fulfilling prophecy I could be utilized for constructive ends. Rather than 1 merely seeking to document what occurs under certain ! i inevitable, natural laws, scientists might think deliber ately about the kinds of social reality they wish to help construct. LIIIITATI0N3 OF THIS STUDY AND SUGGESTIONS j FOR FUTURE RESEARCH The present study was a preliminary endeavor to j investigate the ways in which several professional ideologies are presently being constructed. The limita tions and defects of this inquiry are nu fflerous. The ! study covered too large an area, resulting in inadequate 19 ' attention to each of the specific problems involved* 7 j - - - - - - - _ - - - — - - - | 19 i 7This particular defect reflects the author's mania j for looking at many aspects of a problem. j Future studies would be greatly improved, as mentioned earlier, by the use of a longitudinal research design, enabling the researcher to study the same students through-i out their academic career. It would be especially helpful j i if information could be obtained about ideologies of students before they take any courses in the academic j ! major, at various stages along the way, and at the end of ! graduate study. Such information would make possible a more accurate assessment of the amount of variance contrib-j uted by selective choice of discipline, by academic specialization, and by length of education. I Future research should attempt to determine which j type of ideological issues are most likely, and which are least likely to be affected by graduate training. Some 1 studies in the past have concluded that formal education does not have a significant effect upon the social orienta-j tion of individuals. Those studies have mainly investi gated personal life values, motives, and goals. Typically ; they have been of undergraduate rather than of graduate ! students. In contrast, the present study sought to | determine the degree to which the intensive, concentrated type of study required in graduate school would affect perception, evaluation, and judgments of matters poten tially related to the future professional role of students.! | These distinctions may account for the different results obtained. I 573 j In this study, it was assumed that only principles ! which are basic to the categorial and assumptive framework ; of the discipline would have a major impact upon the j cognitive and judgmental processes of students. For j example, it was hypothesized that the principle of cultural relativity would be reflected in the responses of anthro- i i pology students, but not in those of psychology students, even though the latter are familiar with the principle. The results indicated that this was the case. Of interest in connection with the same assumption 1 is the finding that although the general graduate students I (mixed-majors) decreased in value attributed to legal and ■ other concepts, their judgments of deviant groups were not ! ( significantly different from those of the general under- ' graduate students. Graduate and undergraduate mixed- j majors differed significantly on only one of the 39 label j scores. Apparently, although values of the general i students changed, the manner in which they perceived and j i judged deviant groups was not significantly altered. A few of the hypotheses which were not confirmed in! this study may have been due to poor choice of concepts i and scales as indicators. In particular, the three group- ! related concepts were probably not a good choice as indicators of values which would result from the particular focus of anthropology. Concepts related to institutions 574 j or to societal structure probably would have been closer to their lexicon than, for example, concepts pertaining to groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous. Concepts which were selected for the other disciplines were more closely j related to professional roles. Also, even though the determinism scales were partially successful in discrirn- j inating among graduate samples, some of the scales were probably not very good indicators of the assumption of j free will. In addition to comparing ideologies of students in various disciplines, it would be valuable to make a more intensive investigation of variation within each discipline.; The degree to which individual students conformed to, or i deviated from, obtained group norms (sample scores) could be determined, and an attempt made to find the factors accounting for the variation. Study of individual differ ences within disciplines would make it possible to inves tigate hypotheses involving personality variables. Further removed, but perhaps most important, is the need to study the interactive effects of differing i professional definitions, conceptions, and policies upon i the lives of deviants. The first rough outlines of this investigation were conceived in the fall of 1965. At that time, the first 9 j rumblings of the revolution in the sociology of crime and | 575 deviance were being heard faintly. In the few, long years which have since passed, works bearing the emblem of the new perspective have been pouring out in great quantity and great quality. These works have added new insights, have clarified, refined, and sharpened the statements contained in the initial manifesto. On the day in April 1970 when the writer is making | the final corrections on the last pages of this report, I Richard Quinney's book arrives in the mail— entitled i The Social Reality of Grime— outlining basic assumptions, propositions, and goals logically embodied in a theory seeking to understand the construction of social reality j and crime. The theory, states Quinney, is inspired by a 20 change currently altering our view of the world. The history of contemporary soc-iology is characterized by a progressive loss in faith— faith that anything exists beyond man’s imagination. V/e are led to new assumptions about our craft and the substance of our labors.... The theory that I will present— the theory of the social reality of crime— rests upon theoretical and methodological assumptions that reflect the happen ings of our time; it is meant to provide an under standing of crime that is relevant to our contemporary experiences. 20 Richard Quinney, The Social Reality of Crime. (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1970), p. 24. ^ Ibid., p. 3. 576 I seek a sociology of crime that fits into our own times. I am, also, explicitly interested in the ideals of justice and individual freedom. When we find ourselves able to examine crime as a human construct, then we can raise questions about the justice of criminal law. It is my hope that the theory of the social reality of crime has the power of forcing us to consider libertarian ideals. I contend that a relevant criminology can be attained only when we allow our personal values to provide a vision for the study of crime. It makes one want to weep to think how much better this study could have been with benefit of all the new insights recently acquired. 22 Ibid., pp. v-vi. 577 APPENDIX I Copy of the Letter Mailed with the Research Instrument to Pre-law Students 2019 Crone Avenue Anaheim, California 92$04 j I would like to ask for your assistance. I am j working on a research project for my doctoral dissertation j in sociology at the University of Southern California on a Haynes Foundation Fellowship. The project is a compara tive study of undergraduate and graduate students in each of three disciplines at UCLA regarding how they feel about issues related to current social problems. The three disciplines included in this study j represent potential policy-making agencies in the area of | social problems. Those studying our legal system are, of j course, of primary importance in such a study. I have j already obtained five of the six samples involved, includ- j ing advanced graduate lav/ students at UCLA. Because there ! is no major in law for undergraduate students, the sixth sample presented a problem. In response to this problem, I your department was kind enough to supply me with a list of students who signed a roster for a pre-law club. A systematic random sample was selected from this list, and your name is included on it. I do hope you will be willing to help me complete the required sample for my study by answering the enclosed questionnaire, and re- i turning it to me as soon as possible in the enclosed, stamped, self-addressed envelope. Your replies will be j anonymous. I am not asking for your name on the question-' naire. It is a very easy form to fill out. You simply check items on all the pages. It takes about a half-hour j to complete. \ I understand how rushed and pressed you are with numerous other requirements and obligations. However, as j a fellow student, I believe you can empathize with my need; to make this request in order to fulfill my research I requirements. I am enclosing a dollar bill to partially j compensate for your time and trouble, realizing that it isj a very small sum. j I would be most grateful for a quick respon May I thank you in advance for your assistance. Sincerely yours, /s/ Shirley Cereseto Shirley Cereseto 580 APPENDIX II Copy of the Letter Mailed with the Research Instrument to Graduate Anthropology Students 5ol 2019 Crone Avenue Anaheim, California 92&04 I would like to ask for your assistance. I am j working on a research project for my doctoral dissertation ; in sociology at the University of Southern California on a j Haynes Foundation Fellowship. The project is a comparative study of students at UCLA in several disciplines at different grade levels regarding how they feel about issues related to current social problems. j 1 The disciplines included in this study represent | potential policy-making agencies in the area of social | problems or are specialists in some aspect of human : behavior. Anthropology students are included because of ! their unique learning experience in studying societies and cultures other than their own. Because the number of I graduate students majoring in social or cultural anthro pology is small, it is necessary that I contact every student in this group. Your department was kind enough to ; supply me with the names and addresses of all graduate stu dents majoring in social or cultural anthropology. | Enclosed is a questionnaire which I hope you will be willing to answer and return to me as soon as possible in the enclosed, stamped, self-addressed envelope. Your replies will be anonymous. I am not asking for your name j on the questionnaire. It is a very easy form to fill out. ! You simply check items on all the pages. It takes about a half-hour to complete. As a fellow graduate student, I understand how rushed, hurried, harrassed, and pressed you are at this j time. Since you probably have or will have to fulfill research requirements, I believe you can empathize with my need to make this request. As suggested above, because of j the small number of graduate students majoring in your j field, it is necessary that I receive returns from almost j every person in the sample in order to complete my 53? Page 2 dissertation. I am enclosing a dollar bill to partially compensate for your time and trouble, realizing that it is a very small sum. I would be most grateful for a quick response. May I thank you in advance for your assistance. Sincerely yours, /s/ Shirley Cereseto Shirley Cereseto 583 APPENDIX III Copy of the Letter Mailed with the Research Instrument to Graduate Psychology Students I 584 2019 Crone Avenue Anaheim, California 92804 I would like to ask for your assistance. I am : working on a research project for my doctoral dissertation j in sociology at the University of Southern California on a j Haynes Foundation Fellowship. The project is a comparative study of students at UCLA in several disciplines at different grade levels regarding how they feel about issues related to current social problems. The disciplines included in this study represent ! potential policy-making agencies in the area of social problems or are specialists in some aspect of human behavior. Clinical psychologists, of course, are of | primary importance on both criteria. Because the number of graduate students majoring in clinical psychology is small, it is necessary that I contact every student in this; group. Your department was kind enough to supply me with i the names and addresses of all clinical psychology majors : at UCLA. I Enclosed is a questionnaire which I hope you will be willing to answer and return to me as soon as possible in the enclosed, stamped, self-addressed envelope. Your ' replies will be anonymous. I am not asking for your name I on the questionnaire. It is a very easy form to fill out. ; You simply check items on all the pages. It takes about a half-hour to complete. | As a fellow graduate student, I understand how rushed, hurried, harrassed, and pressed you are at this . j time. Since you probably have or will have to fulfill j research requirements, I believe you can empathize with my j need to make this request. As suggested above, because i of the small number of graduate majors in your field, it j is necessary that I receive returns from almost every j person in the sample in order to complete my dissertation. | I am enclosing a dollar bill to partially compensate for your time and trouble, realizing that it is a very small sum. I would be most grateful for a quick response. May I thank you in advance for your assistance. Sincerely yours, /s/ Shirley Cereseto Shirley Cereseto APPENDIX IV The Research Instrument 567 A STUDY OF MEANINGS CONCERNING SOCIAL PROBLEMS PLEASE 7/RITE YOUR MAJOR FIELD OF STUDY HERE: CHECK YOUR CLASS: Fr. Graduate Student: Soph. 1st year Jr. 2nd year Sr. 3rd year 4th year or higher 58S A STUDY OF MEANINGS The purpose of this study is to measure the mean- i ings of certain things to students in different disciplines! and in various grade levels. Many of these things concern current social problems and related matters. In recent ■ years, students have increasingly evidenced their concern j about social problems. Since the present generation of ! college students will be the leaders of our country in the : near future, it is important to know what these things mean to them, and whether there has been a change from j meanings held in the past. ! You will notice that the attached questionnaire is completely ANONYMOUS. V/e are not asking for your name. Several hundred students are participating in this research. There are, of course, no "right" or "wrong" answers. V/e are interested in your feelings about the ! matters presented here. Your frank and honest answers will be greatly appreciated. INSTRUCTIONS; In filling out this form, please mark each item according to what it means to you. On the following pages ! you will find a series of concepts. Beneath each of them is a set of scales. Here is how you are to use these scales: If you feel that what you are judging is very close to one or the other end of the scale, place your check mark in spaces 1 or 7 as follows: important X:___:____ :____ :____ :____ : unimportant 1 2 3 4 ^ 6 7 i or important : :____ :____ :____ :____ : X unimportant 1 2 3 4 '5 6 7 If you feel that what you are judging is quite close to one or the other end of the scale (but not very close), you should place your check-mark in spaces 2 or 6 as follows: ineffective^ : j :_____:_:______: _:__effective — 2 — ~ ~ T" — or ineffective : :_____:_:____: X :__effective “T 2 3 £ I C T~ If what you are judging seems only slightly related to one or the other end of the scale, you should place your check-mark in spaces 3 or 5 as follows: beneficial_____: : X :____:__:___:___ harrnful _ _ j - . j- or beneficial_____:_:___:____ : x :___:___ harmful 1 2 3 T 5 E T If you feel that what you are judging is as close to one end of the scale as to the other, or that the scale has nothing to do with what you are judging, then place your check-mark in the 4th space as follows: passive^ :___ :__: X_:__:___:____active 1 2 3 I 5 5 A few of the concepts or scales may seem to you to be meaningless or inapplicable. This may be annoying or puzzling, but your check-mark in the middle space (4), indicating irrelevance, is also important information. IMPORTANT 1. Please place your check-marks in the middle of the spaces, not on the boundaries. 590 2. Be sure to check every scale for every concept. Do not omit any. 3. Please do not put more than one check-mark on a single scale. 4. Each item should, be judged separately. Sometimes you may feel as though you have had the same item before. This will not be the case, so do not look back and forth through the items. Do not try to remember how you checked similar items earlier. 5. Do not spend too much time on any item. It is your first impressions, the immediate feelings about the items that we want. On the other hand, please do not be careless because we want your true impressions. I feel that TO OBEY AND RESPECT AUTHORITY is: important J T ’ - r W unimportant ineffective ~ ‘~ T “r ~T~ V i r V effective beneficial ~T 2~ T ~ ~ T harmful passive _ _ ~ T T " - r W active meaning!ul • • • • 0 0 0 0 I 5 5 T meaningless free destructive rational potent sick 1 T 2 T T T T "7’ T " - r :- r t J ~ r T " :n r t ' t T “ ~T~ T ~ ”3---5---T constraining productive irrational impotent healthy 591 I feel that TO BE POWERFUL is: ^ * • _ . • • • : : ineffective effective » . ♦ . i — 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 o t . . • • • : benelicxal harmful___ :___ •___• r— *-=— IT ~ 3 4 5 ^ 7 active_ meaningless constraining : : : : : : p ’ ~ "T“ *T" “T" T “ assxve meaningful free T 2 3 £ 5 6 7” productive : : : : : : destructive 1 2 3 £ 5 5 J" irrational rational 1 2 3 4 5 5 7” impotent : : :___ :___ :___ :__potent “1 2 3 2 + 5 5 7 healthy : : : :___:___ :__sick “l 2 3 I 5 5 7~ unimportant important In the past few years there has been an increasing amount of organized political action such as demonstra tions, protests, publicity campaigns, etc. by various minority and civil rights groups. There are many dif ferent ways in which members of minority groups can try to alleviate their situation. Three possibilities are: (1) Organize and engage in various types of collective group action to promote their cause (as mentioned above). (2) Work mainly to effect changes in laws and legal processes through the courts and legislatures. (3) The individual can concentrate upon developing his own potentialities in order to advance. In general, how do you feel about each of these 592 three ways? The three methods are listed on this page and the next page. Please rate each one. I feel that TO ORGANIZE AND ENGAGE IN GROUP ACTION OF VARIOUS TYPES is: beneficial :___:__: ___ • • : harmful ~ 2 3 3 ^ 7 passive active iveT - :— ' W W V meaningful : : : : meaningless 1 2 ^ S 5 o 7 rree • ; ; : : :___constraining — T T T T T T destructive___:_____: : i « » productive — ~ 3 4 5 £ 7 rational___:_____: :____ • ' • : irrational "1 2 T~ 4 T ^ T potent___:____ :__:____ • » : impotent sick : : :_____:_:____:__healthy 1 2 3 T V important : : : s : : unimportant ineffective ^ ^ : . : _ ^ : ^ ^effective 593 I feel that to V/GRK MAINLY TO EFF3CT CHANGES IN LAV/S AND LEGAL PROCESSES is: active : : : : : :___passive — 2----3 £ 5 E T meaningless____:___:___:__:____ :___:___meaningful 1 2 3 4 5 1 7” constraining____: :___:__:____ :___:___free T-TTTTT"T productive____:___:___:__:____ :___; destructive 2 3 4 T" 1 7“ - 1 irrational___:____:___:__ :___:___:__rational TTTTTTT impotent : : : : : : potent 1 2 3 4 5 5 healthy___:____:___ :___:___ :___ :___sick “I 2 3 4 5 5 7“ unimportant ___:____ :___:____:___ :___ :___important 1 2 3 4 1 5 T effective : : :____: : :___ineffective TTTTT1T harmful : : : : : : beneficial t t t t t t t 5% TO CONCENTRATE UPON DEVELOPING ONE'S OWN INDIVIDUAL POTENTIALITIES is: meaningful :___:___:___:___ :___:___meaningless “I 2 3 5 3 5 7~ free : : : : : :___constraining “I 2 3 £ 3 5 7“ destructive___ :___ : :___:___:___:___productive “l 2 3 I 3 ET “’ T rational : : : :___:___:___irrational TTTTTTT potent : : :___:___:___:___impotent "1 2 3 5 5 E 7~ s i c k— —*—* ■ —p“* t ”* T “ n r 2 r ^ 5 o 7 important : » *— i 2 3 n; 5 o 7 healthy unimportant effective ineffective___:____:___ :___ :___ :___:___ < “l 2 3 5 5 5 T benef icial__:____:___ : __:___:___ :___ harmful ~1 2 3 4 I 5 T passive : : : : : : active TTTTTTTT 595 I feel that PSYCHOTHERAPY is: constraining :___:___ :____: • : w /ree “I “ 3 .4 ^5 ^ productive : : : : : : destructive 1 2 "1 U 5 o 7 irrational :___:___:____' • ^ rational — " X ” ^ impotent____:___:____:__: :. . . potent TTTTTTT healthy 1 2 3 4 5 5 7” unimportant___ :___ : : : ; • important T " 2 "1 II 5 5 7 effective : : :___:___:___:__ineffective “I 2 3 E 5 5 7^ harmful : : : : :___ : beneficial “1 2 3 II 5 5 7^ active___ :___:___:___ :___ : : passive ~1 2 3 E 5 5 7 meaningless ___:____:___:___' • ___*___ ; meaningful “T 2 T 4 5 I feel that TO USE 7/ILL POWER is: destructive ; .................. , -g— '-y- ’ -J--* -y-• r 0 d u c 11 v e rational i ~2 ra orial potent T - T " T " ' T " ’ ~ 5 ~ ’ - E “ ’ - 7 “ sick u T" T “ important "T" ~ ■ - r --T ---r -^---r unxmportant ineffective : ; • . . . ^ g * * * ■ ■ ^ fi ective beneficial , - , t- T'-r, T - '- r ’ - E - - - 7 - h m , ^ , a passive :___; : ; . activ" 1 2 "i zr*T'*ir*T'ac 1V* meaningful , — ~ 1 ~ -T'*-T '*-l r *-T - meani^ less . f * 1*0 6 • 2 * • • • j_*. —j--- ^ ___constraining Groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous, Synanon (for drug addicts), and Gamblers Anonymous are composed of people with a similar problem, who have overcome that problem, and vino try to help others to do so. These organizations are run entirely by the people who have experienced the difficulty, not by professional people. In general, how do you feel about this type of method for solving such problems? GROUPS SUCH AS ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS, SYNANON, AMD GAKELSR3 AIJONYKOUS are: irrational___ :__:____: : :___:____rational "T 2 3 E 5 c 7~ impotent : :____ : :___:___: __potent 1 2 3 £ 5 C 7 healthy____:__: : : : _: sick 1 2 3 ~T 5 C T unimportant____:__:____:___:___:___:____important T “ 2 T " T “ 5 effective : : : : : : ineffective TTTTTTT harmful__: :____: :___:___:___beneficial ~ T 2 3 I 5 E T~ active : :___:___:___:___:___passive ~~1 2 3 I 3 5 7 meaningless ___:___:_____ :___: : __meaningful 1 ---2---^---£--- 1--- E--- T constraining__: ___:___s____:___:___:__free ~1 2 3 5 5 5 7" productive___:___ :__: : :__:__destructive “i 2 3 2 + 5 5 7” TO BS ABLE TC EXPRESS AND ACCEPT HOSTILE AND NEGATIVE FEELINGS is: potent ___:___:___:___: : impotent "1 2 3 4 5 C 7^ sick : : :___ : : : healthy "1 2 3 4 5 S 7^ important___ :__:____:___:__: •__unimportant 1 2 3 4 5 7 ineffective : :____ : : : :__effective 2 T " 4 5 ”5“ beneficial__:____:___:___ ; : : harmful T “ ~ ~ 4 5 ~"5 7^ pa ss ive__:____:___:___: : : a c t i ve 1 2 3 4 5 “5 7^ meaningful : : : : : : meaningless "1 2 3 4 5 S T free__:____:___:___: : :__constraining 1 2 3 4 5 “S” 7 destructive : : :___:___ :____:__productive rational : : : : :___:___irrational “I 2 3 5 3 5 T 599 I feel that GROUP SENTIMENTS are: healthy :___:____:___:___ ; j___ sick T*TTTTT-T unimportant t -5- - y - - - x - ' - r ' - T r ’^ r mp° r ta n t effective • : . ineffec 1 2 3 4 5 5 7^ harmful : : . . . v _. . T - — -T ---r --T ---r ---7_b“ eficlal active "1“ — ~T‘’T “*“T"*"T“‘"7~passive meaningles __ 1 “6~ ~7 constraining ;___:___ . . 1 ~ 3 4 5“ ~ T ~ productive : .......................... ~T~ — T"*— ' ' - T -*^-'-r aestructive irrational 1 “2 3---2p*-^*-^‘-y-ratl0nal impotent “T- — 60 0 TO DETER WRONGDOING BY STRICT LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PUNIS MENT OF VIOLATIONS is: important ineffective beneficial passive meaningful free destructive^ rational potent_ sick 2 T T T ~ r 3 ■ r 3 T T T T ~ 4 T ” 4 T T T 5 T 5 T T T 6 ~r~ 6 T T T unimportant effective harmful active ^meaningless constraining productive irrational 7 impotent 7 healthy 7 601 I feel that TO BE FERMI5SIVE is: effective : : : : : : ineffective “T 2 3 4 ! > 5 7~ harmful___:___:____:___:__: ___:__beneficial 1 2 3 4 5 7 active : : :___:___ :___ :__passive T T T T T T - meaningless : :___:____:___ :___ :__meaningful "1 2 3 I I 5 T constraining : :____: : : ^ :__free productive : : : : : :__destructive T 2 3 4 5 S f irrational___: : : : : : __rational “1 2 3 I 3 5 7” impotent___:___:____:___ :___ :___ :__potent 1 2 3 4 5 7 healthy : : : : : : sick T “ — ” ~ r — T - ~ T unimportant : :____:___:___ :___ :__important 2 4 ^ 5 T 602 I feel that HUMAN NATURE is: good___ : :___:___ : : :__bad ~ 2 3 4 5 T ~ 7 competitive .: :___:___:__:____:__cooperative ~1 2 3 4 5 5 7“ rational : :___:___:__:____:__irrational TTTTTTT plastic :___ : :____:__:____:__set 1 2 3 4 5 E 7“ predictable___ :___:___:___:__:____:__unpredictable “I 2 3 5 5 5 T sinful :___:___ : :_____ : virtuous “l 2 3 4 5 5 7" self-___ :___ : : : : : society- determined 1 2 “3 £ 3 5 7~determined selfish___ :___:___:___:__:____:__unselfish ~ 2 3 4 5 7 universal : : : :__:____ : variable ~1 2 3 5 5 E 7“ determined___ :___ : :___:__: :__free 1 2 3 4 5 7 inherent : :___:___:__:____:__learned TTTTTirr active : : : : : : passive TTTTTIT ~7 mysterious : : : : : : understandable *T 2 3 4 I 5 7" social : :___ : :__:____:__individual TTTTTT-T , ..... thK -JOKU) -E LIVE X « T ■f'.ipl tlltft O i l * - - . : safe dsr^rous “5 S 7“ . non-determined determined^*—j- ^ 0 . healthy small bie =-r V - i r !-r-^-'^' haphazard ^ constraining orderly j , 5 “5 7~ X * ; f ree_^i_j— jp*“3 E 7~ friendly h o s t i l e ^ ^ ^ V - r * ' ^ ' ' " 7 ' .___reasonable absurd. ^ * - -5 £“ “T “ X ; destructive product i v e ^ J _ _ J ^ — -^'-5 5 T . irrational rat ional — • -*-* -£-* “5 E 7“ . . good bad- r :^r **-r :- i r :- r ‘^ ' ‘' ^ meaningless meaningful^■ g- 5 "”E 7” 604 I feel that HOMOSEXUALS are: : : :___:___ :__:___ bad I 2 3 5 5 5 7” sick __:____:___ :___:___ :__: healthy — ~ T — — ~T~ ~T~ intelligent___:____ :____:___:___ :__dull “1 2 3 £ 5 5 T dirty :____:___ :___:___ :__s___ clean tt t t t t t rational :____:___ :___:___ :__:___ irrational TTTTTTT sinful :___:___:____ :___ :___virtuous ~1 2 3 4 5 5 7” honest : : : : : :___’ dishonest -TTTXTT-T beneficial___:____ : : : :__: harmful to society 1 — ~r nr ~ ~ i ~to society Kuilty : : : : :__: innocent nr tttttt society is :____ : : __: : : individual is responsible 1 2 ~ ~ 3 £ 5 S’ ” 7 responsible punish them : : :___:_______:__help them n 2 3 £ 5 5 7” permit___:____:___:___:___:__:___prohibit by law n 2 3 E 5 5 7 they need___:____ : :___:____: __: do not need psychotherapy 1 2 3 4 3 7”psychotherapy 605 I feel that ADULT GROUPS VJHIGH USE MARIJUANA are healthy___ :___: :___: : : sick “I 2 3 E 5 5 7” dull___ :___:___ :__:___: ____:__intelligent T “TTTTT-T clean___ :__ :___:__:___ : : dirty TTTTTTT irrational : : : : : : rational 1 2 3 4 5 : : sinful virtuous____• : . : honest d i sho ne s t_^__: _ : T :T T ^ “7“ ; beneficial harmful__^:_^:_— :-T— *--r-*"X 7" to society to society 1 2 2 :__^ood - r V society is individual is. :. : - r - * ---5---7“responsxble responsible 1 2 3 help 4 h e m _ : _ : ^ : ^ :__^_;__^;__^J)Unish them prohibit by law___ :___:___:___; . . permit ^ 2 3 T T T T"^ they do not need—s— —:____________need psychotherapy 1 2 3 4 5 D 7 psychothera innocent :_________________________guilty 1 2 ^ I I E--- ( .06 MEN IN POVERTY AREAS 7/HO ARE ON 7/ELF ARE are: intelligent : : : : : : dull T T T T T T - y dirty : : : : : : clean T T T T T T - y rational__: :_:__ :___:___:_irrational T T T T T T - T sinful : : : : : : virtuous T T T T T T T honest : : : :____: : dishonest “1 2 3 4 5 o 7~ benef icial :___ : : : : : harmful to society 1 2 T £ 5 £ 7"*to society good : : : :____: : bad T 2 3 I 5 Z T sick__:____:__:___:___ :___:_healthy T T T T T T T punish them : : : : : : help them T T T T T T T permit : : : : : : prohibit by lav/ l 2 3 £ 3 5 T they need :__;___: : : : do not need psychotherapy 1 " 2 j > 4 5 T Tpsychotherapy guilty:___ :_:___:____:___:_innocent "l 2 3 r T T T society i s :____: :___: : : individual is responsible 1 2 p A T £ Tresponsible 607 I feel that PEOPLE 7/KG PARRY IN T3R-R AC I ALL Y are clean :____________________:_ . dirty 1 2 ^ 5 5 5 7 irrational___:___:___:___:__s : rational 1 2 3 4 5 ~ 7 virtuous___: : » : :___^sinf ul ~ r — dishonest :---: : s nonest 2 3 4 5 o 7 harmful • • ? : : : beneficial to society 1 ' 2 1 5 5 E 7“to society 4a d___: -^J?0 0(3 healthy : : :_ _ :- T- :^7 -slck 1 2 ^ £ 5 G 7 dull ;_____: : ^ ^ intelligent prohibit by law__:____: •__— :_]?ermit r 12, 4 5 o 7 they do . . . . . • need not need-Y”*- C 7~psychotherapy psychotherapy innocent :____• _: . pi^^ty "T^ 2 ^ 3 1 5 t 7 individual is :___-soci®^ . responsible 1 2 ^ ^ T^responsibl help them__:____ s : : : s : punish them 1 2 ^ £ 5 o 7 60^ o I feel that PACIFISTS WHO BURK THEIR DRAFT CARDS are: rational :___: : : : : irrational 2~ “5 5 5 o 7 sinful____:___: : : = :_ virtuous "T^ 2 T T T © 7 honest ^ : _ : - r :-r :-r :-^-:-!rd:LSh0neSt trsocLi?yT“ V V V V :V ,^ rsocLty good :___: t - i_: _v— *r"kaC* T T T T 5 -■irk • : : : : :___healthy - T - ' - r T - - l rTT-T intelligent :____: _ : t—( 1 2 ^ t 5 o 7 dirty :___:____ :—r—: ~ 2 3 4 ^ dull clean , , „ ; : ao non rieeu psychotherapy-!-*“2~*“!T~ "T” T T " ^Tpsychotherapy ■-n-iit-v innocent kUllty-T-'— -T^--r -T- T - re c • • : : : : individual is SponsibU-I-'T'T- T T T “V- responsible punish them :___:___s them 1 2 3 ^ 5 o 7 p e c i y y y y y v y rohibit by law 609 I feel that PROSTITUTES are: virtuous____:___________________ :-«--sinrul 1 2 ^ 4 5 o 7 dishonest :___— :_*'lonest 2 ^ 4 5 6 T harmful :___: s * * ! ^iieficial to societyT" T T T T ^ T t o society 5!OOd : • : :___:___g< “2 3 4 5 5 7 healthy bad____________ “I 2 3 4 5 ^ Y sick - r - T - ’- r ’T T t t *t riull • : :___:___:___: intelligent T r ' " 5 “ “ 5 “ “ t " -r-tr-r clean :___d^ty “ 2 ^5 ZT ^ 6 7 irrational :_________________ :-rr-:-T -ratlonal 1 2 ^ 4 5 7 innocent____:____: ' • . . . •___ ~ ~ 3 4 5 ^ / individual is :___ responsibleTT “ 3 4 5 5 Tresponsible help them___ :___ : : : * S— P ™ 1®11 them 1 2 ^ 4 5 & 7 prohibit by permit they do ^ ^ need not need___:___i • ___:____:---:---psychotherapy psychotherapy p 2 3 4 5 6 7 610 I feel that ADULT GROUPS WHICH USE LSD are: honest : : :___ :___:___ ‘ . dishonest “I 2 3 £ 5 5 7^ beneficial____:___: : __• » : harmful to society 1 2 J 4 o f to society pood : : : :___:___J__bad & “I 2 3 E 5 5 7” sick____:__: : : : : healthy 1 2 ^3 E 5 o 7 intelligent :___:___:___ : : , - : M dull “l 2~ 3 4 ^ dirty___ :___:___:___ i__• ___• ___clean T “ ~ 3 4 5 ^ 7 rational___ :___: : : • : irrational "T" T " 3 4 ^ sinful :__: : : : virtuous society is : : ? « « : individual is responsible”T” 2 3 4 5 “5” 7 responsible punish them___:___: s ? i : help them p TTTTTTT permit : :___ : ? _ : : prohibit by law 1 ----T 3 T 5 ET 7 they need :__: : : _ : : , they do not need psychotherapy T 2 T ” 4 5 ° 7 psychotherapy guilty :__innocent • n r T TXT^T 6n WOMEN ON WELFARE WHO HAVE ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN are: harmful ..................... t to societyT- ^ n r ' ^ I T ' ^ T t o s^ie'ty “ t V t V t V t 3 ” 1 healthy : : s . . . , . ~ ~r ~r t -v- ^r dullT-: — W V ! -r-VintelIigent cleaW ! -r! T - W ! V lrty irratio„aV ! _ v v v v v r a t l o n a l v i r t u o u s ^ . _ . ^ ;^ :^ . ^ ;^ sinful dishonest : s . . . . honest i — - T - n r - j - - r - -7- help them « _ : _ > _ : _ _ s_ , _ p Unish them 1 prohibit by law____:___:____: : :___:__permit “I 2 3 5 5 5” r they do____:___:___ :___ :___ :___ :__need not need 1 2 ~~3 TT~ 5" 0 7 psychotherapy psychotherapy innocent :___:____: :___ :___ :___ guilty 2 3 4 5 individual is ...................... society is re spons ib le-j—* —— ’ *-j— * * -g—' * —~ r e spo ns ib le 6i? I feel that THOSE V/HO PARTICIPATED IN THE V/ATTS RIOTS are: good :_____:__: __:___:_____:__bad “I 2 3 4 5 5 7“ sick : : : : :___:__healthy "1 2 3 E 5 5 T intelligent___: :__ :____:_ :____:__dull i 2 3 n r 5 n; r dirty : : : : :___:__clean i 2 3 I 5 5 T rational__: :__:_____:_ :__irrational “I 2 3 £ 5 5 r sinful : : : : : :__virtuous “I 2 3 4 5 5 r honest : : : : : : dishonest ~T 2 3 ---m— 5---B— T beneficial : : : : : : harmful to society 1 2 3' 4 3 4 7 to society permit__:_____:__:_____:__:____ :__prohibit by law 2 3 E 3 5 7 they n e e d : : : : : : do not need psychotherapy 1 2 3 4 "5" 6' 7 psychotherapy guilty : : : : : : innocent ^ ---5 5 *----1-- 3 ---5 T 1 2 n society is individual is responsible----’--- *--- *--- *--- *--- *--responsible 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 punish them___ :___ :____: : : : help them “1 2 3“ 4 "3 6 T 6l I feel that ABGRTIOK is: wrong -;-^-ri6ht T T 2 3 T 5 6 7 healthy___ :____•___•_______________—sick 1 2 4 5 5 7 clean :___________________ r-;- - Tr-dirt,y 1 2 ^ E 5 o 7 irrational___ :____' • ’ __; : - _:__-rational ~ 2 ^ I 5 5 7 virtuous____ :__:___:____ T ” “ 3 4 ^ ^ dishonest____ :_: ? __• : ■ ■ honest : vvvvv to society 1 harmful_ :___: •___s___: :_t)enef icial 2 U 5 o 7 to society ermit prohibit by law ^ ^ he lp___:___: »___ : : __: __P un ^ s h 1 — ^ T 4 ^ ^ 7 innocent :___ 1 2 ^ £ 5 o 7 614 I feel that CAPITAL PUNISHMENT is: necessary : : •____;___;____•__unnecessary 1 2 "3 4 3 S T irrational :___: •____;___•____; rational T T T T T T T right_ :___:___; : : : wrone- T 2 3 £ 5 5 7~ harmful___:___: s : : s beneficial 1 2 j 4 y 6 “7“ sick :__:___:_____ _ healthy 1 2 3 4 T 5 T effective deterrent—5— __:w^ :^^.fneffective 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 deterrent permit it__:__: • ____: : prohibit it T ^ 2 4 T 5 7 615 I feel that UNITED STATES* POLICY IN VIETNAM is: :___right -r t -v t wrong_ harmful beneficial :________________________*- 2 4 5 o f i ineffective effective :___:___ :---:-7— ■ — 2 3 4 5 6 7 sick hard :____:___ •___•___ ‘ 2 . 3 4 5 :___ • - • . . . . . * —-— *-r—' * —71—' ■ T T T T ~ 7 healthy soft : : unnecessary n e c e s s a r y _ - g - -y- irrational :___:___ . — 1_ _ :—, — • . . ’ National 1 2 3 4 5 , dishonest honest :___ *-r— •-«- 2 ~ 4 5 6 ' : innocent guilty :_________________ ’-r- 1 2 3 4 5 6 autocratic • • • • c democratic world-minded e t hno cent ric_^_: -g-*-y- TT. . . . • • • : leave Vietnam stay in V i e t n a m y y y y ^ - - ^ - ^ - BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS Adorno, T. W., et al. The Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper & Row, 1950. Alexander, Franz. Fundamentals of Psychoanalysis. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., Inc., 1948 • Becker, Howard S. Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, Inc., 1963. Bendix, Reinhard. "Compliant Behavior and Individual Personality." Personality and Social Systems. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1963. Berelson, Bernard, and Steiner, Gary A. Human Behavior: An Inventory of Scientific Findings. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 19o4. Berger, Peter L. Invitation to Sociology: A Humanistic Perspective. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1963. Berger, Peter L. and Luckmann, Thomas. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1966. Bettelheim, Bruno, and Janowitz, Morris. Social Change and Prejudice. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964. Boulding, Kenneth E. The Image. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1956. Brenner, Charles. An Elementary Textbook of Psycho analysis. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1957. Brown, Roger. Social Psychology. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1965. 618 Bruner, Jerome S.; Goodnow, Jacqueline J.; and Austin, George A. A Study of Thinking. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1956. Carlin, Jerome E. Lawyers* Ethics: A Survey of the New York City Bar. New York: Russell Sage Founda tion, 1966. Cohen, Albert K. Deviance and Control. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1966. Cohen, Morris R. American Thought: A Critical Sketch. Edited by Felix S. Cohen. New York: Collier Books, 1962. Cohen, Yehudi A. Social Structure and Personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1961. Cooley, William W., and Lohnes, Paul R. Multivariate Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1962. Coville, Walter J.; Costello, Timothy W.; and Rouke, Fabian. Abnormal Psychology. College Outline Series. New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc., 1960. Cuber, John F.; Harper, Robert A.; and Kenkel, William F. Problems of American Society: Values in Conflict. New York: Henry Holt & Co., 1956. Cumming, Elaine, and Cumming, John. Closed Ranks. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1957. Dentler, Robert A. Major American Social Problems. Chicago: Rand McNally & Co., 1967. Deutsch, Albert. The Shame of the States. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co., 1948. Edel, May, and Edel, Abraham. Anthropology and Ethics. Springfield, 111.: Chas. C. Thomas Co., 1959. 619 Eiduson, Bernice T. Scientists: Their Psychological World. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 19627 Eysenck, Hans J. The Effects of Psychotherapy. New York: International Science Press, 1966. Pink, Arthur E.; Wilson, Everett E.; and Conover, Merrill B. The Field of Social Work. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1955. Prank, Philipp G. The Validation of Scientific Theories. New York: Collier Books, 1961. Freeman, Howard E., and Jones, Wyatt C. Social Problems: Causes and Controls. Chicago: Rand McNally & Co., 1970. Freeman, Howard, and Simmons, Ozzie G. The Mental Patient Comes Home. New York: John Wiley ana Sons, 1963. Gibbons, Don C. Society, Crime, and Criminal Careers. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968. Glad, Donald. D. Operational Values in Psychotherapy. New York: Oxford University Press, 1959. Glasser, William. Reality Therapy: A New Approach to Psychiatry. New York: Harper & Row, 1965. Goffmar Erving. Asylums. Anchor Books. Garden City, 1 N. Y.: Doubleday, Inc., 1961. Goffman, Erving. Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Spectrum Books, 1963. Goffman, Erving. Behavior in Public Places. New York: Free Press, 1964. Gross, Llewellyn, ed. Symposium on Sociological Theory. New York: Harper & Row, 1959. 620 Hall, Calvin S., and Lindzey, Gardner. Theories of Personality. Hew York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1957. Harper, Robert A. Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy: 36 Systems. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1959. Hollingshead, August B., and Redlich, Frederick C. Social Class and Mental Illness. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1958. Hook, Sidney, ed. Determinism and Freedom. New York: Collier Books, 1961. j ! Horton, Paul B., and Leslie, Gerald R. The Sociology of j Social Problems. New York: Appleton-Century- j Crofts, 1965. Jahoda, Marie. Current Concepts of Positive Mental Health. Joint Commission on Mental Illness and Health. Monograph Series, No. I. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1958. Kerlinger, Fred N. Foundations of Behavioral Research. New York: Rinehard and Winston, Inc., 1965. j Kluckhohn, Florence, and Strodtbeck, Fred. Variations in j Value Orientations. Evanston, 111.: Row, Peterson & Co., 1961. i Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, j Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1962. j Lane, Robert. Political Ideology: Why the American Common Man Believes What He Does. New York: The j Free Press of Glencoe, 1962. ! Langner, Thomas S., and Michael, Stanley T. Life Stress and Mental Health. New York: The Free Press of j Glencoe, 1963. Larson, William R., and Myerhoff, Barbara G. Intra- Family Relationships and Adolescent School Adjustment. Los Angeles: Youth Studies Center, University of Southern California, 1967. 621 Lehner, George P. J., and Kube, Ella. The Dynamics of Personal Adjustment. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1955. Lemert, Edwin M. Social Pathology. New Yorks McGraw- Hill, 1951. Lipset, Seymour M. Political Man. Garden City, N. Y.s Doubleday & Co., 1960. Llewellyn, Karl N., and Hoebel, E. Adamson. The Cheyenne Way. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1941. Lundberg, George A.; Schrag, Clarence C.; and Larsen, Otto N. Sociology. New Yorks Harper & Row, 1963. Mannheim, Karl. Ideology and Utopia. Translated by Louis Wirth and Edward Shils. A Harvest Book. New Yorks Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1936. Marx, Karl. Capital. New York: Modem Library, 1906. Mead* George Herbert. Mind, Self and Society. Chicago: The University of Chicago, 1934. Mead, George Herbert. George Herbert Mead on Social Psychology. Selected papers edited by Anselm Strauss. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1934. Revised edition 1964. Merton, Robert K. Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1957. Miller, Delbert C. Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement. New York: David McKay Co., Inc., 1964. Mills, C. Wright. Sociology and Pragnatism: The Higher Learning in America. Edited by Irving Louis Horowitz. New York: Paine-Whitman Publishers, 1964. Northrop, P. S. C. The Logic of the Sciences and the Humanities. New York: The MacMillan Co., 1947. 622 Northrop, F. S. C. The Complexity of Legal and Ethical Experiences: Studies in the Method of Normative Subjects. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1959* Nunnally, Jim C., Jr. Popular Conceptions of Mental Health. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, ' Inc., 1961. I Offer, Daniel, and Sabshin, Melvin. Normality: i Theoretical and Clinical Concepts of Mental Health. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1966. Osgood, Charles E.; Suci, George J.; Tannenbaum, Percy H. The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana, 111.: University of Illinois Press, 1957* Parsons, Talcott. The Social System. New York: The Free! Press of Glencoe, 1951. Parsons, Talcott. Essays in Sociological Theory. New York: The Free Press, 1954. | Quinney, Richard. The Social Reality of Crime. Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1970. Riesman, David; Glazer, Nathan; and Denney, Reuel. The Lonely Crowd. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1955. ; Rokeach, Milton. The Open and Closed Mind. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1960. Rose, Arnold M. Theory and Method in the Social Sciences. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, ! 1954. Scheff, Thomas J. Being Mentally 111: A Sociological Theory. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co., 1966. | Schur, Edwin M. Crimes Without Victims: Deviant Behavior and Public Policy. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965. i Secord, Paul F., and Backman, Carl W. Social Psychology. ! New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1964. j 623 Seeley, John R. The Americanization of the Unconscious. New York: International Science Press, 1967. Shibutani, Tamotsu. Society and Personality: An Inter- actionist Approach to Social Psychology. Englewood Gllffs, N. J.: Pren 11ce-Hall, Inc., 1961. Smelser, Neil J., and Smelser, William T., eds. Personality and Social Systems. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 19o3« Soddy, Kenneth. Cross-Cultural Studies in Mental Health. Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961. Sorokin, Pitirim. Social and Cultural Dynamics. Vol. II. New York: American Book Co., 1937. Sorokin, Pitirim A. Social Philosophies of an Age of Crisis. Boston: The Beacon Press, 195'17 Star, Shirley A. The Public * s Ideas About Mental Illness. National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago, 1955. Stein, Maurice, and Vidich, Arthur, eds. Sociology on Trial. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1963. Stouffer, Samuel A. Communism, Conformity, and Civil Liberties: A Cross-Section of tihe Nation Speaks Its MincT Garden dity, N. Y.: boubleday & Co., 1955. Stouffer, Samuel A. Social Research to Test Ideas: Selected Writings of Gamuel A. Stouffer. FJew York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1962. Strauss, Anselm, et al. Psychiatric Ideologies and Institutions. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964. Sutherland, Edwin H. White Collar Crime. New York: Dryden, 1949. Sutherland, Edwin H., and Cressey, Donald R. Principles of Criminology. 7th ed. Philadelphia! J. B. Lippincott Co., 1966. 624 Szasz, Thomas. The Myth of Mental Illness. New York: Harper & Row, 1961• Tappan, Paul W. Crime, Justice, and Correction. New York:; McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1960. Taylor, Stanley. Conceptions of Institutions and the Theory of Knowledge. New York: Bookman Asso ciate!, 1556. | Thomas, William I, and Znaniecki, Florian. The Polish Peasant in Europe and America. Chicago: Univer sity of Chicago Press, 1910. j j Timasheff, Nicholas S. Sociological Theory: Its Nature and Growth. New York: Random Mouse, 1557. i Ullman, L. P., and Krasner, L. Case Studies in Behavior Modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1565. Vollmer, Howard M., and Mills, Donald L., eds. Profes- j sionalization. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966. i Weber, Max. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, translated by Talcott Parsons. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1958. I Whyte, William H., Jr., The Organization Man. Garden ; City, N. Y.: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1956. i Wooton, Barbara. Crime and the Criminal. London: Stevens & Sons, 1963. Znaniecki, Florian. The Social Role of the Man of Knowledge. New York: Columbia University Press, ARTICLES AND PERIODICALS Adams, K. Joe. "Psychosis: 'Experimental' and Real." The Psychedelic Review, I, No. 2 (Fall, 1963). 1^1-144. 625 Ackerman, Nathan W. "Critical Evaluations: A Challenge to Traditionalism." International Journal of Psychiatry, IV, No. 1 (luly, 1967), 71-73* Alonzo, A. A., and Kinch, J. W. "Educational Level and Support of Civil Liberties," The Pacific Socio logical Review. (Pall, 1964), 89-93. Bazelon, David L. "Justice Stumbles Over Science." Trans-action (July/August, 1967), 8-17. Bendix, Reinhard, and Berger, Bennett. "Images of Society and Problems of Objectivity." Symposium on Sociological Theory. Edited by Llewellyn Gross. New York: Harper & Row, 1959, 483-508. Berger, Peter, and Luckmann, Thomas, "Sociology of Religion and Sociology of Knowledge." Sociology and Social Research, XLVII, No. 4 (July, 196317 417-427. Bernard, Jessie. "Some Current Conceptualizations in the Field of Conflict." The American Journal of Sociology, LXX, No. 4 (January, 1965), 442-454. Bidney, David. "The Concept of Meta-Anthropology and Its Significance for Contemporary Anthropological Science." Ideological Differences and World Order: Studies in the Philosophy and Science of the World*s CulturesJ Edited t>y F. S. C. Northrop, New haven: lale University Press, 1949. Bierstedt, Robert. "Social Science and Public Service." Applied Sociology: Opportunities and Problems. Edited by Alvin W. fiouldner and S. id. Miller. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1965, 412-420. Block, Herbert A. "Legal, Sociological, and Psychiatric Variations in the Interpretation of the Criminal Act." Crime and Insanity. Edited by Richard W. Nice. New York: Philosophical Library, 1958, 65-103. Block, J. "Studies in the Phenomenology of Emotions." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, LIV LTV'' 1 1 9 5 7 ), 358-363. ------------------- *--------- Blumer, Herbert. "What Is Wrong With Social Theory?" American Sociological Review, XIX (1954), 3-10. Blumer, Herbert. "Sociological Analysis and the 'Variable.'" American Sociological Review, XXI (1956), 683-690. Bowman, Claude C. "Distortion of Reality as a Factor in Morale." Mental Health and Mental Disorder. Edited by Arnold Rose. New Yorks V/. W. Norton & Co., 1955, 393-407. Bredemeier, Harry C. "The Socially Handicapped and the Agencies: A Market Analysis." Mental Health of the Poor. Edited by Frank Riessman, Jerome Cohen, New York: Arthur Pearl. Glencoe, 1964, 92-102. The Free Press of Brown, Roger W., and Lennenberg, Eric H. "Studies in Linguistic Relativity." Readings in Social Psychology. Edited by Eleanor E. Maccoby, j Theodore M. Newcomb, and Eugene L. Hartley. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 195$, 9-18. I j Bruner, Jerome S. "Social Psychology and Perception." Readings in Social Psychology. Edited by Eleanor E. Maccoby, Theodore M. Newcomb, and Eugene L. . Hartley. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1958, 85-94. i Bruner. Jerome S.; Shapiro, D.; and Tagiuri, R. "The i Meaning of Traits in Isolation and in Combination.’ ^ Person Perception and Interpersonal Behavior. I Edited by tenato Tagiuri and Luigi Petrullo, 1958, 277-288. Bryan, Joseph G. "The Generalized Discriminant Function: 1 Mathematical Foundation and Computational Routine.'’ Harvard Educational Review. XXI, No. 2 (Spring, j 1951), 90-^5. Bushard, B. L. "The U. S. Army's Mental Hygiene Consulta tion Service." Symposium on Preventive and Social 1 Psychiatry. Washington, D. C.: Walter Reed Army j Institute of Research, 1957, 431-443. Campbell, Donald T. "The Mutual Relevance of Anthropology and Psychology." Psychological Anthropology. Editedby F.L. Hsu. Htomewooa, Ill.:Dorsey, 1961. 627 Cereseto, Shirley. "Dialogue Between A Human Being And A Social Scientist." et al.. Vol. 2, No. 2 (Box j 77951, Los Angeles, Fall 1969). j "Changing Behavior in the Psychiatric Ward." Trans-action I (September/October, 1964), 18-20. j Clausen, John A. "Drug Addiction," Contemporary Social ; Problems. Edited by Robert K. Merton and Robert A. Nisbet. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1966. Clausen, John A. "Mental Disorders." Contemporary Social Problems. New York: Harcourt, ferace & World, Inc., 1966, 26-83. Cohen, Albert K. "The Study of Social Disorganization and Deviant Behavior." Sociology Today: Problems I and Prospects. Edited by Robert K. Merton, Leonard Broom, and Leonard S. Cottrell, Jr. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1959, 461-484. | Collier, Peter. "The House of Synanon." Ramparts. 1 VI, No. 3 (October, 1967), 47-54. ! Cook, Peggy, and Christie, Richard. "A Guide to Published; Literature Relating to the Authoritarian Person- j ality Through 1956." The Journal of Psychology, XLV (1958), 171-199. Cottrell, Leonard S., Jr., and Sheldon, Eleanor B. ! "Relationship Expectations." Professionalization.: Edited by Howard M. Vollmer and Donald L. Mills. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966, 232-237. Cressey, Donald. "The Differential Association Theory and Compulsive Crimes." Crime and Insanity. Edited by Richard W. Nice. New York: Philo sophical Library, 1958, 49-64. Davis, Kingsley. "Mental Hygiene and the Class Structure." Mental Health and Mental Disorder. Edited by Arnold Rose. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1955. 578-598. 628 Davis, Kingsley, "Sexual Behavior." Contemporary Social Problems. Edited by Robert K. Merton and Robert A. Nisbet. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1966. Devereux, George. "Two Types of Modal Personality Models." Studying Personality Cross-Culturally. Evanston, 111.: Row, Peterson & Co., 1961. 227-241. Dewey, John. "Philosophy." Research in the Social Sciences. Edited by Wilson dee. New York: The MacMillan Co., 1929, 241-268. Dexter, Lewis Anthony. "On the Politics and Sociology of Stupidity in our Society." The Other Side: Perspectives in Deviance. - Edited “ by Howard S. Becker. New York: ‘ The Free Press, 1964, 37-49. Dohrenwend, Bruce P., and Chin-Shong, Edwin. "Social Status and Attitudes Toward Psychological Disorder: The Problem of Tolerance of Deviance." American Sociological Review. XXXII, No. 3 (June, l9b7), 417-433. Dunham, H. Warren. "Comparison of Different Research Methods." Personality and Social Systems. Edited by Neil J. Smelser ana William T. Smelser. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1963» 100-110. Eissler, Kurt R. "The Efficient Soldier." The Psycho analytic Study of Society. Edited by Warner Muensterburger and Sidney Axelrod. New York: International Universities Press, I960, 91-94. Eliot, Thomas D. "Interactions of Psychiatric and Social Theory Prior to 1940." Mental Health and Mental Disorder. Edited by Arnold Rose. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1955, 18-41. Empey, LaMar T. "Delinquency Theory and Recent Research." Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, IV I January, i9 'S 7 ),' 2B-12'. Empey, LaMar T. "Social Reconstruction in the Reintegra tion of the Offender." Law Enforcement: Science and Technology. Edited by S. A. 'Yefsky. Thompson Book Co., 1967» 235-244. I Empey, LaMar T., and Rabow, Jerome. "The Provo Experiment in Delinquency Rehabilitation." American Sociological Review, XXVI (October, 1961), 679- 696. Erikson, Erik. "Growth and Crises of the "Healthy Personality.'" Personality in Nature, Society, and Culture. Edited by Clyde kluckhohn, Henry A. Murray, and David M. Schneider. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1956, 165-225. Erikson, Kai T. "Notes on the Sociology of Deviance." The Other Side: Perspectives on Deviance. Edited by Howard S. Becker, New Yorks ¥he FreePress, 1964, 9-21. Evan, William M. "Law as an Instrument of Social Change."| Applied Sociology: Opportunities and Problems. New York: The Free Press, 19&5» 295-298. Foley, J. P., and MacMillan F. L. "Mediated Generaliza- j tion and the Interpretation of Verbal Behavior: V. Free Association as Related to Differences in Professional Training." Journal of Experimental Psychology,XXXIII (1943), 299-316. 1 Freidson, Eliot. "Disability as Social Deviance." Sociology and Rehabilitation. Edited by Marvin B.i Sussman. Published by The American Sociological Assn., 1966, 71-99. | Frenkel-Brunswik, Else. "Confirmation of Psychoanalytic Theories." The Validation of Scientific Theories. Edited by Philipp G. !Frank. New York: j Collier Books, 1961, 95-110. Fromm, Erich. "Individual and Social Origins of Neurosis." Personality in Nature. Society, and Culture. Edited by Clyde Kluckhonn, Henry A. Murray, and David M. Schneider. New York: Alfred! A. Knopf, 1956, 515-521. j i Fuller, Richard C. "Morals and the Criminal Law." The i Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. XXXII (Marcli-April','" 1^277---------------- 630 | Richard C., and Myers, Richard R. "Sodal Problemsj in Relation to Values.” Social Problems in | America: A Source Book. New York : HenryHolt & j Co•, 1949 * j William A., and Modigliani, Andre. "Some Aspects j of Soviet-Western Conflict.” (Deriving Predictions from Belief Systems) Peace Research i Society (International) Papers. IX (1968) Tokyo, Japan: International Academic Printing Co., 9-24. Garfinkel, Harold. "Studies of the Routine Grounds of Everyday Activities.” Social Problems. XI (Winter, 1964), 225-250. Gibbs, Jack P. "Conceptions of Deviant Behavior: The 01d| and the New." The Pacific Sociological Review, IX (Spring, 196b), 9-15. ! I Glass, Albert J. "Psychotherapy in the Combat Zone." Symposium on Stress. Washington, D. C.: Army Medical Service (graduate School, 1953. j Goldstein, Kurt. "Health as Value." New Knowledge in 1 Human Values. Edited by Abraham h. Maslow. ITew York: Harper & Bros., 1959. ! Gouldner, Alvin W. "Anti-Minotaur: The Myth of a Value- j Free Sociology." Sociology on Trial. Edited by j Maurice Stein and Arthur Vidich. Englewood j Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1963, 35-52. j Gouldner, Alvin W. "The Sociologist as Partisan: j Sociology and the Welfare State." The American Sociologist. Ill, No. 2 (May, 1963), 103-116. Gursslin, Orville R.; Hunt, Raymond G.; and Roach, Jack L.' "Social Class and the Mental Health Movement." ] Mental Health of the Poor. Edited by Frank j Riessman, Jerome Cohen, and Arthur Pearl. New ! York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964, 57-67. ; i Hallowell, A. Irving. "Ojibwa Metaphysics of Being and | the Perception of Persons." Person Perception j and Interpersonal Behavior. Edited by R. Tagiuri j and L. Petrullo. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford i University Press, 195$» 63-B5. Henry, William F. "The Issues in Campus Unrest." Phi ________Kappa Phi Journal .(Fall-19691^_21_-M»-____________ I Fuller, Gamson, Hertzler, Joyce 0. "Social Uniformation and Language." Sociological Inquiry. XXXVI (Spring, 1966), 298-312. Holt, Robert. "Ego Autonomy Re-evaluated." International Journal of Psychiatry (June, 1967), 481-503. Holt, Robert. "On Freedom, Autonomy, and the Redirection of Psycho-analytic Theory, A Rejoinder," Inter national Journal of Psychiatry (June, 1967T, 524-536. Horney, Karen. "The Neo-Freudian Views Man for Himself." Sociology: A Book of Readings. Edited by Samuel Keonig, Rex D. Hopper, Feliks Gross. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1953, 65-67. Horowitz, Irving L., and Liebowitz, M. "Social Deviance and Political Marginality." Social Problems. XV, No. 3 (Winter, 1968), 280^59^ Horton, John. "Order and Conflict Theories of Social Problems as Competing Ideologies." American Journal of Sociology. LXXI, No. 6 (May', 1966), 701-713. Hoult, Thomas F. "...Who Shall Prepare Himself to the Battle?" The American Sociologist. Ill, No. 1 (February, 1968), 3-7. Hyman, Herbert H., and Sheatsley, Paul B. "The Authori tarian Personality — A Methodological Critique." Studies in the Scope and Method of The Authori tarian Personality. Edited by kichard Christie : and Marie Jahoda. Glencoe, 111.! The Free Press : of Glencoe, 1954. j Kallen, David J.; Miller, Dorothy; and Daniels, Arlene. "Sociology, Social Work, and Social Problems." The American Sociologist, III, No. 3 (August, j 190*2), 235-239. j Kemkau, Paul V., and Crocetti, Guido M. "An Urban Population’s Opinion and Knowledge about Mental Illness." American Journal of Psychiatry. (February, 1902), fc$'2-7<!>£>. ^32 Kitsuse, John I. "Societal Reaction to Deviant Behavior: Problems of Theory and Method." The Other Side: Perspectives on Deviance. Edited by Howard S. Becker. New York: The Free Press, 1964, 67-102. Kubie, Lawrence S. "The Fundamental Nature of the Distinction Between Normality and Neurosis." Psychoanalytic Quarterly, XXIII, 1954, 162-165. Kumata, H., and Schramm. "A Pilot Study of Cross- Cultural Meaning." Public Opinion Quarterly. XX, 1956. Ladinsky, Jack. "Careers of Lawyers, Law Practice, and j Legal Institutions." American Sociological Review. (February, 1963), 47-54* Laing, Ronald D., and Esterson, A. "Families and Schizophrenia." International Journal of Psychiatry, IV (July, 1967), 65-7l. Lazarsfeld, Paul F. "Evidence and Inference in Social Research." Daedalus. LXXXVII, No. 4, 1956. Leifer, Ronald. "The Concept of Criminal Responsibility." Etc.: A Review of General Semantics..XXIV (June, 1967), 177-1#). Lemert, Edwin M. "Juvenile Justice— Quest and Reality." : Trans-action, IV, No. 6 (July/August, 1967), 30-40. Lieberson, Stanley, ed. Issue devoted to "Explorations in Sociolinguistics." Sociological Inquiry, XXXVI (Spring, 1966). ; Lipsitz, Lewis. "Working-Class Authoritarianism: A Re- evaluation," American Sociological Review. XXX (February, 1963), l63-l£)9. Louttit, C. M. "Clinical Psychology." Fields of i Psychology. Edited by J. P. Guilford. New York: D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc., 1940, 367-397. Marshall, William L., and Clark, William L. "The Legal j Definition of Crime and Criminals." The Sociology: of Crime and Delinquency. Edited by Marvin E. j Wolfgang, Leonard Savitz, and Norman Johnston, Newj York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1962, 14-19. ! 633 Marx, John H. "A Multidimensional Conception of Ideologied in Professional Arenas: The Case of the Mental Health Field." Pacific Sociological Review, XII, No. 2 (Fall, 1969), 75-85. Maslow, Abraham H. "Psychological Data and Human Values." Radical Perspectives on Social Problems. Edited by Frank Lindenfeld. Mew York: The Macmillan Co., 1968, 21-34. McGinn, Noel F.j Harburg, Ernest; and Ginsburg, Gerald P. "Dependency Relations with Parents and Affiliative Responses in Michigan and Guadalajara." Sociometry, XXVIII (September, 1965), 305-321. Mercer, Jane R. "Social System Perspective and Clinical Perspective: Frames of Reference for Understand ing Career Patterns of Persons Labelled as Mentally Retarded." Social Problems, XIII (Sum mer, 1965), 18-33. Meyer, Jon K. "Attitudes Towards Mental Illness in a Maryland Community." Public Health Reports. LXXIX (September, 1964), 769-772. Mills, C. Wright. "Liberal Values in the Modern World." Power, Politics and People: The Collected Essays of C. Wright MillsI Edited by Irving Louis Horowitz, New York: Ballantine Books, 1962, 187-195. Mills, C. Wright. "The Cultural Apparatus." Power. Politics and People: The Collected Essays of C. Wright MillsT Edited by Irving Louis Horowitz. New York: Ballantine Books, 1962, 405-422. Mills, C. Wright. "Situated Actions and Vocabularies of Motives." Power, Politics and People: The Collected Essays of C. Wright Mills. Edited by Irving Louis Horowitz. New York: Ballantine Books, 1962, 439-452. Mills, C. Wright. "The Methodological Consequences of the Sociology of Knowledge." Power. Politics and People: The Collected Essays of C. Wright Mlills. Edited by Irving Louis Horowitz. New York: Ballantine Books, 1962, 453-468. 634 Mills, G. Y/right. "The Professional Ideology of Social Pathologists." Power, Politics and People: The Collected Essays of C. Wright MillsI Edited by Irving Louis Horowitz. New York:Ballantine Books, 1962, 525-552. Money-Kyrle, Roger E. "Psychoanalysis and Ethics." New Directions in Psycho-analysis. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1957, 43?-45o. Mueller, Edward E., and Murphy, Philip J. "Communication Problems: Social Workers and Lawyers." Social Work. X, No. 2 (April, 1965), 97-103. Murdock, George. "Sociology and Anthropology." For A Science Of Man. Edited by John Gillin, New York: The MacMillan Co., 1954, 3-31. Nettler, Gwynn. "Using Our Heads." The American Sociologist, III, No. 3 (August, 1908), 200-207. Nunnally, Jim. "The Analysis of Profile Data." Psycho logical Bulletin. LIX, No. 4 (1962), 311-319. Opton, Edward M., Jr., and Sanford, Nevitt. "Toward a Critical Social Science." Trans-action (March, 1970), 4-7. Osgood, C.; Ward, E.; and Morris, D. "Analysis of the Connotative Meanings of a Variety of Human Values as Expressed by American College Students." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. LXII (T5-6T)T'6T-73":------- ------------------- Pearlin, Leonard I., and Kohn, Melvin L. "Social Class, Occupation, and Parental Values: A Cross- National Study." American Sociological Review, XXXI (August, 1966), 466-479. Pettigrew, Thomas. "Regional Differences in Anti-Negro Prejudices." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. LIX (1^5$), 2^-36. Phillips, Derek L. "Rejection: A Possible Consequence of Seeking Help for Mental Disorders." American Sociological Review, XXVIII (December, 1903)* £ 63-9727 635 Pollack, Seymour. "Social Responsibility and Psychic Determinism." International Journal of Psychiatry, VI, No. 3 (September, l^bSJ, 20$'-2l3'. Powelson, Harvey, and Bendix, Reinhard. "Psychiatry in Prison." Mental Health and Mental Disorder. Edited by Arnold Rose. New York: W. W". Norton & Co., 1955, 459-431. Pratt, Steve, and Tooley, Jay. "Innovations in Mental Hospital Concepts and Practice." Major American Social Problems. Edited by Robert A. Dentler. Chicago: Rand McNally 2 c Co., 1967, 444-454. Reiss, Albert J., Jr. "The Social Integration of Queers and Peers." Social Problems, IX (Fall, 1961), 102-120. Riesman, David. "The Themes of Work and Play in the Structure of Freud's Thought." Selected Essays from Individualism Reconsidered. Garden City: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1954, 174-205. Riesman, David. "Authority and Liberty in the Structure of Freud's Thought." Selected Essays from Individualism Reconsidered. Garden City: Double day Anchor Books, 1954, 206-245. Riessman, Frank, and Miller, S. M. "Social Class and Projective Tests." Mental Health of the Poor. Edited by Frank Riessman. idew York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964. Rinehart, James W. "Mobility Aspiration-Achievement Discrepancies and Mental Illness." Social Problems. XV (Spring, 1963), 473-433. Rogers, Carl R. "A Theory of Therapy, Personality, and Interpersonal Relationships, as Developed in Client-Centered Framework." Psychology: A Study of a Science. Edited by Sigmund Koch. Vol. 3. New Yorks McGraw-Hill, 1959* Rose, Arnold M. "Prejudice, Anomie, and the Authoritarian Personality." Sociology and Social Research, L (January, 1966), 141-147. Rose, Arnold M. "Law and the Causation of Social Problems." Social Problems, XVI, No. 1 (Summer, 1965), 33-43. Russo, S. "Clinical Psychology as the Treatment of Symptoms." Etc.: A Review of General Semantics. (Winter 1956-57), 119-126. Scheff, Thomas J. "The Role of the Mentally 111 and the Dynamics of Mental Disorder: A Research Frame work." Sociometry, XXVI (December, 1963), 436-453. Scheff, Thomas J. "Negotiating Reality: Notes on Power in the Assessment of Responsibility." Social Problems, XVI, No. 1 (Summer, 1968), 3-17". Schon, Donald. "Psychiatry and the History of Ideas." International Journal of Psychiatry. V, No. A (April, 1968), 320-327. Schrag, Clarence. "Some Foundations for a Theory of Corrections." The Prison: Studies in Institu tional Organization and Change. Edited by Donald R. Cressey. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1961. Schur, Edwin M. "Drug Addiction Under British Policy." The Other Side: Perspectives on Deviance. Edited by Howard S. Becker. New York: The Free Press, 1964, 67-83. Schwartz, Richard D., and Skolnick, Jerome H. "Two Studies of Legal Stigma." The Other Side: Per spectives on Deviance. Edited by Howard S. Becker. New York: The Free Press, 1964, 103-117. Scott, William A. "Research Definitions of Mental Health and Mental Illness." Psychological Bulletin, LV (January, 1958), 29-45. Seeley, John R. "Social Values, the Mental Health Move ment, and Mental Health." Mental Health and Mental Disorder. Edited by Arnold Rose. Hew York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1955, 599-612. 637 Seeley, John R. "Social Science? Some Probative Problems." Sociology on Trial. Edited by Maurice Stein and Arthur Vidich. Englewood Cliffs, N. H.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1963, 53-65. Seward, Georgene H. "The Relation between Psychoanalytic School and Value Problems in Therapy." The American Journal of Psychoanalysis, XXII, 2. Skolnick, Jerome H. "The Sociology of Law in America: Overview and Trends." Law and Society. A Supple ment to the Summer, 1965 Issuecf Social Problems, 4-39. Skolnick, Jerome H. "The Generation Gap." Trans-action, November, 196S, pp. 4-6. Smith, M. Brewster. "Anthropology and Psychology." For a Science of Social Man. Edited by John Gillin. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1954, 32-66. Sorokin, Pitirim A. "Practical Influence of 'Impractical' Generalizing Sociological Theories." Sociology and Social Research. XLVII (October, 1962), 34-50. Speier, Hans. "The Effect of Military Rank on Various Types of Attitude s . ' - ' The Language of Social Research. Edited by Paul F. Lazarsfeld and Morris Rosenberg. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1955, 93-99. Staats, A., and Staats, C. "Attitudes Established by Classical Conditioning." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, LVII (1958), 37-66. Stagner, R., and Osgood, C. E. "Impact of War on a Nationalistic Frame of Reference: I. Changes in General Approval and Qualitative Patterning of Certain Stereotypes." Journal of Social Psychol ogy. XXIV (1946), 187-21TI Stevens, Robert. "Aging Mistress: The Law School in America." Change in Higher Education. II, No. 1 (Jan.-Feb., 1970), 32-42. 638 Stinchcombe, Arthur L. "Institutions of Privacy in the Determination of Police Administrative Practice." The American Journal of Sociology. LXIX (September, 1963) 150-160. Stinchcombe, Arthur. Review of The Politics of Moderniza- tion, by David E. Apter. American Sociological- Review, XXXI (April, 1966), 206-26?. Sulzer, Edward S. "Involuntary Institutionalization: Some Legal, Ethical, and Social Implications." Etc.: A Review of General Semantics, XXIII (Sept., 1966), 331-365. Szasz, Thomas S. "Some Observations on the Relationship between Psychiatry and Law." American Medical Assn. Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, LXXV, umr. Szasz, Thomas. "A Strategy of Freedom." Trans-action (May/June, 1965), 14-19. Tappan, Paul W. "Who Is The Criminal?" The Sociology of Crime and Delinquency . New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1962, 2o-34. Tatsuoka, M. M., and Tiedeman, D. V. "Discriminant Analysis," Review of Educational Research, XXIV (1954), 402-420. Turk, Austin T. "Conflict and Criminality." American Sociological Review, XXXI (June, 196b), 338-352. Turner, Ralph H. "Acceptance of Irregular Mobility in Britain and the United States." Sociometry. XXIX (December, I960), 334-352. Volkman, Rita, and Cressey, Donald R., "Differential Association and the Rehabilitation of Drug Addicts." American Journal of Sociology, LXIX (September, 1963), 129-142. Waelder, Robert. "The Scientific Approach to Case W'ork: With Special Emphasis on Psychoanalysis." Personality in Nature. Society, and Culture. Edited by Clyde Kluckhohn, Henry A. Murray, and David M. Schneider. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1956, 671-679. 639 1 i I Wallace, Anthony F. G. "The Psychic Unity of Human Groups." Studying; Personality Cross-Culturally. Edited by j Bert Kaplan. Evanston, 111.: Row, Peterson & Co., 1961, 129-163. Waller, Willard. "Social Problems and the Mores." American Sociological Review. (December, 1936). Wallerstein, James S., and Wyle, Clement J. "Our Law- Abiding Lawbreakers." Probation (March-April, 1917) 2$: 107-112. Walton, John. "Discipline, Method, and Community Power: A Note On the Sociology of Knowledge." American Sociological Review. XXXI, No. 5 (October^ I960), 684-6397 Watkins, J. W. N. "Ideal Types and Historical Explanation." Readings in the Philosophy of Science. Edited by H. Feigl .1 M. Brodbeck. New York: Eppleton- Century-Crofts, Inc., 1953 > 323-343. Watson, Richard A. "Lawyer Attitudes on Judicial Selection." The American Journal of Sociology (January, 1967)', "773-3 57.--- -------------- Wegrocki, Henry J. "A Critique of Cultural and Statistical Concepts of Abnormality." Personality in Nature, Society, and Culture. Edited by Clyde Kluckhohn, Henry A. Murray, and David M. Schneider. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1956, 691-701. Werkmeister, W. H. "Theory Construction and the Problem of Objectivity." Symposium on Sociological Theory. Edited by Llewellyn dross. New York: Harper & Row, 1959. Whorf, Benjamin L. "Science and Linguistics." Readings in Social Psychology. Edited by Eleanor E. Maccoby, Theodore M. Newcomb, and Eugene L. Hartley. Mew York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1956, 1-9. Wolfenstein, Martha. "Trends in Infant Care." American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, XXIII (1953)» 120- 1 3 1 5 7 640 Wolff, Kurt H. "The Sociology of Knowledge and Socio logical Theory." Symposium on Sociological Theory. Edited by Llewellyn Gross. New York: Harper S c Row, 1959, 567-602. Woodward, Julian L. "Changing Ideas on Mental Illness and Its Treatment." Mental Health and Mental Disorder. Edited by Arnold Rose. New York: W. W. Norton 3 c Co., 1955, 4^2-500. Zetterberg, Hans L. On Theory and Verification in Sociology. Totowa, FT. J.: The Bedminster Press, TWT. Ziferstein, Isidore. "Direct Observations of Psychother apy in the U.S.S.R." 6lnt. Congr. of Psycho therapy, London, 1964; Selected Lectures, 150-160 (S. Karger, Basel/New York, 1^65}. PUBLIC DOCUMENTS "Basic Principles to Guide the Relationships Between Psychology and Other Professions." Psychology and Its Relations With Other Professions. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association, 1954. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administra tion of Justice. Report of the Commission. The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967. Smoking and Health. Report of the Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service. 'Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1964. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Empey, LaMar T. Studies in Delinquency: Alterna tives to Incarceration. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967. The Wolfenden Report. A Report of the Committee on Homosexual Offenses and Prostitution. New York: Lancer Books, 1964. 641 UNPUBLISHED MATERIAL Bolton, Charles D. "Behavior, Experience, and Relation ships: A Symbolic Interactionist Point of View." (Mimeographed.) Empey, LaMar T. "Contemporary Programs for Convicted Juvenile Offenders: Problems of Theory, Practice and Research." Mimeographed paper prepared for the President's Commission on the Causes and Pre vention of Violence (November, 1968). "Social Constraints on Social Problems Research." A Special Memo from the Society for the Study of Social Problems. January, 1970. (Mimeographed.) Stainbrook, Edward. "The Past, Present, and Future of the Psychiatric Hospital." Transcript of the tele vision program "Conversations with a Psychiatrist." July 16, 1966. Suci, G. J. "A Multidimensional Analysis of Social Attitudes with Special Reference to Ethnocentrism." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Illinois, 1952.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A Comparison Of Perceptions Reported By Nondelinquents And Delinquents Regarding Their Identification With Selected Socialization Agents And Normative Prescriptions

PDF

S.T.P.: A Simulation Of Treatment Processes

PDF

Alienation, Structural Strain, And Political Deviancy: A Test Of Merton'Shypothesis

PDF

The Selfish Self: A Social Psychological Study Of Social Character

PDF

A Sociological Approach To The Etiology Of Female Homosexuality And The Lesbian Social Scene

PDF

A Study Of Group Development In Purposive Groups

PDF

An Analysis Of The Changing Focus Of Marriage Counseling

PDF

A Longitudinal Model Of Residence Change

PDF

An Exploratory Analysis Of Two Dimensions Of Family Separation

PDF

Adjustment In Special Residential Settings For The Aged: An Inquiry Basedon The Kleemeier Conceptualization

PDF

Group Factors And Individual Internalization Of A Value

PDF

Social Factors Related To Dentistry As A Career

PDF

Some Behavioral Consequences Of Career Success: A Synthesis Of Reward Andbalance Approaches

PDF

Power Struggle And Organizational Goals: A Case Study Of An Industrial Firm

PDF

Class Consciousness And Social Mobility In A Mexican-American Community

PDF

Some Characteristics Of A Selected Sample Of Free Methodist Pastoral Dropouts

PDF

Attitudes Toward Sex In Marriage And Patterns Of Erotic Behavior In Dating And Courtship Before Marriage

PDF

An Investigation Of Complementary Needs Between Marital Partners

PDF

Social Stratification In A Selected Community

PDF

A Critique Of The Concept Ethnocentrism As Set Forth In Selected Social Science Literature

Asset Metadata

Creator Cereseto, Shirley (author)

Core Title Academic Specialization And The Construction Of Social Reality: Ideologies Regarding Deviance

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Sociology

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

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,Sociology, general

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Empey, Lamar T. (committee chair), Larson, William R. (committee member), Lasswell, Thomas E. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-460038

Unique identifier UC11362020

Identifier 7112377.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-460038 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 7112377.pdf

Dmrecord 460038

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Cereseto, Shirley

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