University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The Selfish Self: A Social Psychological Study Of Social Character

(USC Thesis Other)

The Selfish Self: A Social Psychological Study Of Social Character

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content T h is d is s e r ta tio n h as b een 62— 6082
m ic r o film e d e x a c tly a s r e c e iv e d
R IB A L , J o sep h E d w ard , 1931—
THE SE LFISH SE L F: A SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL
ST U D Y O F SOCIAL CH ARACTER.
U n iv e r sity of Sou thern C a lifo rn ia , P h .D ., 1962
S o c io lo g y , g e n e r a l
University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan
THE SELFISH SELF:
A SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL STUDY
OF SOCIAL CHARACTER
by
Joseph Edward Ribal
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)
June 1962
UNIVERSITY O F SO U TH ER N CALIFORNIA
G RA D U A TE SC H O O L
U N IV ER SIT Y PARK
LO S A N G E L E S 7 . CALI PO R N IA
This dissertation, •written by
....................J.Qs eph. Edward. .Ribal........................
under the direction of his Dissertation C o m
mittee, and a p p ro ved by all its members, has
been presented to and accepted by the D ean of
the Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of
requirements fo r the degree of
D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y
D ta it
Date June,. 196.2
DISSERTATION CO
u
MITTE
Chairman
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES.......................................... iv
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM . . 1
A Statement of the Problem
II. THE RESEARCH D E S I G N .......................... 13
The Research Setting and Research Sample
Types of Data
The Construction of a Research Typology
The Assessment of Data and Related Problems
The Research Sample Compared to the EPPS
Normative College Sample
III. THE ALTRUISTIC SELF . ................ 43
IV. THE SELFISH SELF............................... 74
V. THE RECEPTIVE-GIVING S E L F ..................... 109
VI. THE INNER-SUSTAINING S E L F .................... 140
VII. COMPARISONS AMONG THE FOUR PERSONALITY MODELS 180
The Need for Achievement
The Need for Deference
The Need for Order
The Need for Exhibition
The Need for Autonomy
The Need for Affiliation
The Need for Intraception
The Need for Dominance
The Need for Abasement
The Need for Change
The Need for Endurance
The Need for Heterosexuality
The Need for Aggression
ii
iii
Chapter Page
VIII. SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS, PROSPECTS FOR
FUTURE RESEARCH, AND CONCLUSION ........... 202
Prospects for Future Research
Conclusion
APPENDIXES
Appendix A: Illustrative List of Murray's Needs . . 215
Appendix B: Needs Associated with Variables of the
Edwards Personal Preference Schedule . 219
Appendix C: Student Evaluation of EPPS Variables—
Self Ratings Compared .................. 224
Appendix D: A Self Analysis........................ 226
Appendix E: Need Analysis Project ................. 229
Appendix F: Need Combinations for Nurturance and
Succorance ...................... 231
Appendix G: Male and Female Self Evaluations of
EPPS Scores............................. 233
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................ 2 36
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Means and Standard Deviations of EPPS Vari
ables for El Camino College Males and EPPS
Normative College Male Sample ................ 41
2. Means and Standard Deviations of EPPS Vari
ables for El Camino College Females and
EPPS Normative College Female Sample .... 42
3. Means for Altruistic Males and Females Com
pared to EPPS Normative College Sample . . . 54
4. Standard Deviations for Altruistic Males and
Females Compared to EPPS Normative College
S a m p l e ........................................ 55
5. EPPS Variable Intercorrelations for Altruistic
Males and Total ECC Male Sample............. 59
6. EPPS Variable Intercorrelations for Altruistic
Females and Total ECC Female Sample ......... 61
7. Means for Selfish Males and Females Compared
to EPPS Normative College Sample ........... 86
8. Standard Deviations for Selfish Males and
Females Compared to EPPS Normative College
S a m p l e ........................................ 87
9. EPPS Variable Intercorrelations for Selfish
Males and Total ECC Male Sample............. 95
10. EPPS Variable Intercorrelations for Selfish
Females and Total ECC Female Sample ......... 97
11. Means for Receptive-Giving Males and Females
Compared to EPPS Normative College Sample . . 120
12. Standard Deviations for Receptive-Giving Males
and Females Compared to EPPS Normative
College Sample ............................... 121
iv
V
Table Page
13. EPPS Variable Intercorrelations for Receptive-
Giving Males and Total ECC Male Sample . . . 129
14. EPPS Variable Intercorrelations for Receptive-
Giving Females and Total ECC Female Sample . 131
15. Means for Inner-Sustaining Males and Females
Compared to EPPS Normative College Sample . . 156
16. Standard Deviations for Inner-Sustaining Males
and Females Compared to EPPS Normative
College S a m p l e ............................... 157
17. EPPS Variable Intercorrelations for Inner-
Sustaining Males and Total ECC Male Sample . 168
18. EPPS Variable Intercorrelations for Inner-
Sustaining Females and Total ECC Female
S a m p l e ........................................ 170
19. Means for the Four Personality Models and the
EPPS Normative College Sample (Males) .... 198
20. Standard Deviations for the Four Personality
Models and the Normative College Sample
(Males)........................................ 199
21. Means for the Four Personality Models and the
EPPS Normative College Sample (Females) . . . 200
22. Standard Deviations for the Four Personality
Models and the Normative College Sample
(Females)..................................... 201
23. Self Evaluations of EPPS Scores for Males . . . 234
24. Self Evaluations of EPPS Scores for Females . . 2 35
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The expressions "selfish" and "altruistic" are fre
quently used to describe the motivational orientations of
people in their relations with others. Because these terms
almost always have a flavor of subjective bias and moral
prejudice, they are often found to be socially useful as a
means of symbolic reward or punishment. The moral connota
tions attributed to them are not of contemporary origin but
have a long semantic history which goes beyond humanistic
philosophical tradition. The theologian of every age has
tried to capture the essense of the moral order of man and
his God in terms of selfishness and altruism. Today,
whether man seeks a form of social or sacred salvation, he
nevertheless reflects the main currents of traditional be
lief that to be selfish is to be "bad" and to be altruistic
is to be "good." These words have come to have not only a
moral meaning but a spiritual one as well.
Although the modern sociologist does not flee from
the study of morals and values, he generally feels a reluc
tance to use terminology which has not been thoroughly
sterilized of both explicit and implicit value connotations.
The vocabulary of sociology makes room for word additions
only when terms can have an amoral meaning and also be use
ful conceptually to describe social phenomena. It is be
lieved that selfishness and altruism can be defined scien
tifically and are worthy of use for purposes of empirical
research. This report of a social research project will
make unashamed use of both terms, for they have been defined
non-moralistically as normal social psychological variables
of personality and social interaction.
This is not a study designed to evaluate the rela
tive morality of certain types of social character or an ex
amination of personality traits prejudged to be psychologi
cally either defective or healthy. This is an investigation
of reasonably normal men and women who have come to exhibit
four types of personality polarity in their attitudes toward
themselves and others which result in particular forms of
human relationships. One type of person is called the al
truistic self, a second the selfish self, another the recep-
tive-giving self, and the last the inner-sustaining self.
In some very important respects they are different from one
another, but generally speaking, they are really more alike
than dissimilar. Their basic social characteristics are
much alike. They usually share an identical cultural heri
tage, have many of the same interests, habits, goals, morals,
and so on down the list of possible cultural patterns and
sociological variables. Psychologically these individuals
seem to be within a range of good mental health. No one is
a mental patient, a sociopath, a hopeless neurotic, or is
likely to commit murder from reading Nietzsche. Neither
does the group contain individuals who wish to suffer for
the sins of man, or to give themselves to others without
good cause, or aspire to modern sainthood by means of burn
ing at one of the sacred stakes of what may be an exploitive
but appreciative society. The general social and psycho
logical picture of the people who served as subjects for
this social research is one of normality.
However, within this range of normality these indi
viduals indicate four basic motivational patterns which af
fect their relationships with others. These patterns will
be analyzed in terms of the concept of personality need.
Two personality needs are very important in defining these
patterns: the need to give and the need to receive. Both
of these qualities have been recast phraseologically as the
need for nurturance and the need for succorance. The four
motivation patterns identified earlier will be referred to
as personality models and are defined in terms of four pos
sible combinations of high and low needs for succorance and
nurturance. Schematically they look something like this:
The Altruistic Self The Selfish Self
Low in the need for High in the need for
succorance succorance
High in the need for Low in the need for
nurturance nurturance
The Receptive-Givincr Self The Inner-Sustainina Self
High in the need for Low in the need for
succorance succorance
High in the need for Low in the need for
nurturance nurturance
The creation of this typology marked the organized
beginning of investigation for this study. It established
formally the subject matter to be explored. This system of
classification has two sources. A considerable amount of
social research has been completed and is presently in prog
ress which has sought and is seeking to understand human
relationships from the standpoint of personality need theory.
The most recent work of Robert F. Winch and his associates
served as a prime mover in initiating interest in the func
tion of personality needs in the formation and maintenance
of social relationships. " * ■ Although some of the conclusions
derived from Winch's studies have been correctly criticized,
he has ably focused attention upon the factors of succorance
and nurturance as important variables of personality and
^■Robert F. Winch, Mate-Selection: A Study of Comple
mentary Needs (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1958).
social interaction as they affect the processes of mate-
selection. Although Winch does not suggest the four basic
orientations formulated here, he deserves credit for demon
strating the importance of the two variables in the context
of his own theory of complementary needs. The second source
of knowledge which has a bearing on the development of this
typology has been largely experimental. The use of a psy
chological test of manifest personality needs, the Test
Manual for the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule, in con
nection with the teaching and counseling of college students
over the years, contributed a great deal of insight and un
derstanding into the function of these two needs as they
were often seen combining with one another in interesting
patterns, and frequently playing a vital role in the order-
2
ing of other personality attributes. Curiosity naturally
directed attention toward the patterns of development and
socialization which seemed to be associated with various
outcomes of adult personality. In general this is the back
ground for the formulation of both the typology and the re
search project to be reported upon. Since the investigation
began, efforts have been made to become familiar with as
much theory and empirical research as energy and time would
permit. As suggested earlier, sociologists have not been
eager to approach studies of this type of subject matter,
^Allen L. Edwards, Test Manual for the Edwards Per
sonal Preference Schedule (New York: The Psychological Cor
poration^ 1959).
the only exception being Pitirm A. Sorokin and his associ
ates affiliated with the Center for the Study of Altruistic
Love, located at Harvard University. Unfortunately, the
outcomes of their efforts to explore altruism have not found
a use in either problems of theory or methodology as far as
this study is concerned. On the other hand, from the fields
of psychology and psychiatry have jcome many interesting and
helpful ideas. Erich Fromm and Abraham H. Maslow have not
only been a rich source for stimulating thought, but have
provided conceptualizations of personality and society use
ful for comparing and evaluating the findings of this re-
3
search. The work of David Riesman and William H. Whyte, Jr.
has also been of much value in explaining certain patterns
of personality development observed from a frame of refer
ence emphasizing cultural changes in contemporary American
4
society. The contributions of these gentlemen and those of
many others will become evident in Chapter III.
A Statement of the Problem
Every scientific treatise requires a statement of
the problem. The conventions of modern scientific investi
gation demand that the researcher have some definite purposes
3Erich Fromm, Man for Himself (New York: Rinehart
and Company, 1947); Abraham H. Maslow, Motivation and Person
ality (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1954).
^David Riesman, The Lonely Crowd (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1950); William H. Whyte, Jr., The Organi
sation Man (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1956).
7
in mind before he goes off to collect data. The formal,
"scientific” sociological method also requires that he think
in terms of stated hypotheses which he then proceeds to
"test" according to particular postulates and canons of sci
entific procedure. This latter mode of methodological logic
and practice appears to be in social ascendency within the
social sciences. It is especially characteristic of any
type of research attempting to study data capable of quanti
fication. Conversely, stated hypotheses are less urgent for
studies of subject matter which cannot be described statis
tically. This is not an appropriate place to kindle the
fires of controversy over the relative merits of formal em
piricism vs. the verstehen approach; however, certain points
need to be brought out to explain decisions made in the
course of conducting this research.
First, this is an exploratory study. If more were
known on the subject, it would not be exploratory. The for
mal empirical method assumes a level of understanding about
the phenomena it is dealing with to form intelligent and
testable propositions. One of the frequent criticisms about
much contemporary research is that such preconceptions
(which is what hypotheses really are) are based upon a lack
of familiarity with the realities and complexities of the
subject matter under study. Under such circumstances, it
seems advisable to refrain from constructing rigid and un
yielding statements which only provide yes-no answers to
kinds of questions which possibly should not have been asked
in the first place. This study has deliberately avoided
this approach despite the fact that the types of data uti
lized are largely of a quantitative nature.
Secondly, the absence of stated hypotheses in the
description of this research problem was one of practicality.
As will be seen shortly, hundreds and perhaps even thousands
of hypotheses would have been required as a result of the
broad scope of this investigation. Without considering all
of the various facets of socialization patterns revealed by
extensive autobiographical data supplied by the people who
served as subjects, hundreds of means and hundreds of corre
lation coefficients would have made the task of hypothesis
construction an impossible assignment. The statement of the
research problem in this case is in the form of general
questions.
This study was initiated with a growing collection
of psychometric and case history data from a "captive" group
of subjects. During the collection process a plan was
evolved to use this information to investigate some basic
and fundamental problems of a social psychological nature.
A statement of these questions in the form of a research
proposal was drawn together. This proposal contained the
following objectives:
1. Definition of the terms selfish and altruistic
without nonscientific moral connotations, implications, and
inferences.
2. Formation of the traditional conceptions of
these two qualities in the form of a new typology more fully
accounting for observed personality patterns of giving and
receiving personality orientations.
3. Development and utilization of this typology in
an empirical study by defining its types operationally.
4. Description of the motivational and behavioral
characteristics of individuals identified by the four types
of personality orientation.
5. Description of the socialization patterns which
may be causatively associated with the personality patterns
of each type.
6. Description of the kinds of social relationships
which tend to be associated with each personality model.
The empirical objectives of this study are approached
largely from a theoretical position embracing the fundamental
concepts of personality need theory and social behaviorism.
The description of personality in terms of social or psycho
logical needs represents an effort to account for the inner
motivational elements of human behavior. Although such a
need theory has often been criticized for its generality and
lack of usefulness in pursuing problems inductively, it can
be successfully defended as a means of describing subjective
10
facets of human behavior. In the course of socialization
every personality has developed certain predispositions to
act in particular ways. The perceptual processes of the
individual become tuned to the internal strivings developed
from the summation of social experience. The theory of per
sonality needs allows the researcher to identify these in
ternal states and to measure their relative intensity. What
is being measured is an abstract quality inferred from
either actual behavior or a subject's willingness to reveal
what he feels about himself. The selection of particular
need variables is an arbitrary and restrictive operation.
Many hold that every act has its own distinctive need, but
such a conceptualization would not be a useful analytic
point of view despite any logical validity of this. It is
necessary to generalize both needs and subsequent perception
and behavior in terms of a categorical nature. For example,
the need for achievement embraces a rather wide range of
types of achievement, all of which relate to the fundamental
ideas of striving, the quest for improved status, the spirit
of success, and the like. The inner life of the individual
is a dynamic set of internal conditions sensitive to the so
cial world. The social behaviorist has often ably plotted
the developmental patterns of personality formation with the
concepts of symbolic interaction. The importance of the
self concept, the significance of the process of "defining
the social situation," and the value of social role theory
11
have been demonstrated to be indispensible theoretical tools
in exploring the problems of this research. Personality
need theory is not only compatible with social behaviorism,
it is highly complementary to it.
The nature of this research project may further be
made clear by noting in a general way three of its outcomes:
First, the effort to redefine and expand the dimen
sions of selfishness and altruism in terms of the psycholog
ical needs of succorance and nurturance proved to be an im
portant advance in conceptualizing these qualities. It made
possible the opportunity to define them in operational terms
and permitted a means of measurement.
Secondly, the study disclosed that the various com
binations of succorance and nurturance are both related to
and influential in the development of other personality at
tributes. That is, the modal personality configuration for
each personality model exhibits substantive differences from
each other and the general population.
And finally, the patterns of social development for
each personality model are seen to vary because the patterns
of social relationships intrinsic to the processes of social
ization have been characteristically different.
The results of this study are presented in the four
remaining chapters. Chapter II presents the research design
of the investigation and discusses some of the crucial prob
lems encountered along the lines of methodology. In
12
Chapters III, IV, V, and VI the findings of the study and
the analysis and evaluation of data for each of the four
personality models are offered. Chapter VII is an effort to
compare the four personality models to each other. Chapter
VIII summarizes the study and indicates some implications
and inferences most appropriately reserved for a concluding
view. Some prospects for additional study are also sug
gested. The Appendixes contain tables and copies of materi
als which may often be useful in gaining a more complete
understanding of various points discussed. The Bibliography
offers a list of references which have a bearing on the re
search problem.
CHAPTER II
THE RESEARCH DESIGN
This chapter describes in some detail the conditions
and problems confronted by this research project and the ef
forts made to meet them. The first section discusses the
research setting and the research sample. The second sec
tion provides information on the types of data collected and
certain problems of data collection particular to this study.
The third section deals with the problem of making opera
tional the typology discussed earlier in the introduction.
The fourth section discusses some of the problems of statis
tical assessment encountered in the analysis of the data.
The fifth section presents some statistical data concerning
the research sample as it compares to a normative college
sample.
The Research Setting and Research Sample
A prominent sociologist once referred to his speci
ality of social psychology as the science of college sopho
mores, a reference to the frequency students have served as
"captive'' subjects for social psychological research. In a
great many instances it would appear that the use of college
students for this purpose is decided on the basis of purely
13
14
practical considerations. However, a number of significant
contributions to our knowledge of human relationships would
not have been possible if attempted with other types of pop
ulations or in different social settings. Certain types of
social research require the utmost of cooperation and effort
on the part of the persons being studied. Monetary reward
is occasionally offered to gain these ends; however, this
was not possible or necessitated by the nature of circum
stances in this research project. The structure of social
relationships in the classroom situation was utilized to
gain cooperation and insure a measure of required produc
tivity from the subjects of this study
The students who comprised the sample of this study
were drawn from El Camino College, located in Los Angeles
County, California. Some basic data describing the college
and its educational program may be useful in understanding
some of the social characteristics of its students. This
information may be important in making inferences concerning
the applicability of the research findings to other college
student populations or non-college populations.
The college is one of many public tuition free
junior colleges in the county. The El Camino College Dis
trict includes the cities of El Segundo, Inglewood, Torrance,
Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, Redondo Beach, Manhattan Beach,
and several smaller communities of the Centinela Valley.
These cities appear to exhibit most of the sociocultural
15
characteristics of other suburban Los Angeles areas, but
these characteristics may not necessarily typify other
metropolitan areas. Since the founding of the college in
1946, with several hundred students, it had grown to an en
rollment of over 11,500 full- and part-time students by the
fall of 1961, an increase which may reflect the factors of
population growth in the area as well as increased emphasis
upon obtaining additional general educational or vocational
training beyond high school.
In terms of purpose and function, the college oper
ates to meet a variety of educational needs, some of which
are not ordinarily met by four year colleges and/or univer
sities. An extensive program of vocational education and
terminal general education characterize the work of this
college. A college administrator has estimated from avail
able records and surveys that less than 10 percent of the
student body eventually transfer to four year colleges and
universities despite the fact that almost two-thirds indi
cate at registration a plan to transfer. The distinctive
character of an educational program oriented in this direc
tion may serve to create a public image of the college in
fluencing the enrollment of particular types of students,
one being the high-inspiration, low-ability type. The junior
college attempts to maintain an image of academic respecta
bility but finds this to be a rather tedious undertaking be
cause of its many nonacademic functions in the system of
16
higher education. According to Burton Clark, junior college
students are academically less successful than students at
four year colleges or universities.^ His analysis of a par
ticular junior college in California disclosed that high on
its list of social purposes is its function to "cool out"
from the system of higher education the academically inferi
or student. This process involves changing the occupational
aspirations of the student, encouraging a new course of
training compatible with more limited aptitudes. Clark
claims that this function of the junior college is effec
tively disguised. However, if it is not as hidden a func
tion as Clark believes it is, then there is the possibility
that awareness of this function influences particular social
types to enroll in a junior college, but fails to attract
others who presumably perceive this type of educational op
portunity as less desirable than enrollment in another type
of institution. Unfortunately, this possibility was not
measurable. The complexity of relationships between such
factors as the academic capacity of students, their social
characteristics, and the real and imagined functions of the
junior college as seen by Clark is found again reflected in
much of the autobiographical data collected in this study.
Burton Clark, The Open Door College: A Case Study
(New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1960); "The 'Cooling
Out* Function in Higher Education," American Journal of
Sociology. LXV (May, 1960), 569-576.
17
One last note on the structure of the research set
ting is relevant to the sampling technique employed in the
investigation. The college requires each student working
toward graduation to take a course in human relations. Stu
dents not working toward graduation are also advised by
counselors to also enroll in one of the "social adjustment"
courses offered by the sociology and psychology departments.
These courses are specialized academic type classes and
therefore tend to be representative of the college popula
tion as a whole. The sample was drawn from whole classes in
which everyone became a subject for this study. This tech
nique of sampling may be referred to as randomized cluster
sampling. All of these cases were obtained during the years
1958 through 1961.
The total research sample consisted of 572 students
drawn from the types of classes previously described. The
males in the sample numbered 32 5 and the females 247.
The initial sample size of 572 was reduced at the
time the data were analyzed because performance on a valid
ity scale of the test used to measure certain personality
variables suggested the likelihood of inaccurate test re-
2
suits in certain cases. These cases were discarded from
^The scale referred to here is actually called the
"consistency variable." Low scores are interpreted as in
dicative of attempts to "fake," lack of sharply defined at
titudes, irritation with the test, failure to read the test
items, and so on. See Allen L. Edwards, Test Manual for the
Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (New York: The Psycho-
logical Corporation, 1959), pp. 15-16.
18
the sample, reducing the total to 527, of which 299 were men
and 228 were women.
Types of Data
Two types of data are used in this investigation:
quantitative and qualitative. The quantitative data consist
of psychometric test results which serve the dual function
of establishing sub-classes within the research sample and
describing the personality needs of each individual. The
qualitative data consist of case history materials supplied
from several types of autobiographical material. A descrip
tion of both types of data follows.
Quantitative Data
The Edwards Personal Preference Schedule was the
test considered to be the most appropriate for measuring
personality needs of a psychologically normal group. This
test was designed for research and counseling purposes to
provide measures of a number of relatively independent nor
mal personality variables. It is based upon Henry A.
3
Murray's list of manifest personality needs. Appendix A
contains this list with a brief definition of each. The
EPPS provides a measure of most of these. Fifteen needs are
tested, and these are:
^Henry A. Murray, Explorations in Personality (New
York: Oxford Press, 1938).
19
1. Achievement (ach)
2. Deference (def)
3. Order (ord)
4. Exhibition (exh)
5. Autonomy (aut)
6. Affiliation (aff)
7. Intraception (int)
8. Succorance (sue)
9. Dominance (dom)
10. Abasement (aba)
11. Nurturance (nur)
12. Change (chg)
13. Endurance (end)
14. Heterosexuality (het)
15. Aggression (agg)
The EPPS differs from most other paper and pencil
personality tests in that it tends to minimize social desir
ability influencing responses to test statements.^ This de
fect characterizes most tests composed of true-false state
ments. Built-in lie detectors do not control the problem,
but only reveal information on the probable extent to which
a respondent may be manipulating his answers to conform to
some personal purpose. The EPPS format consists of 210
items in a forced-choice format with items from each of the
15 scales indicated above paired off twice against items
from the other 14. This technique has been viewed as an
^Social desirability was controlled in the EPPS by
pairing items of the same level of desirability as deter
mined by the ratings of judges. This effort was not com
pletely successful according to Barron because Edwards did
not ascertain whether the social desirability of an item
changed as a result of the changed context in which it was
presented. "Review" in Oscar K. Buros, The Fifth Mental
Measurements Yearbook. 1958, ed. Frank Barron (New Brunswick:
Rutgers University Press), pp. 114-117.
20
5
improvement over most other means of measurement. Fifteen
other items are repeated in order to obtain an estimate of
consistency of response to the other items. Two types of
reference may be used in interpreting the resulting scores.
First, the test yields an assessment of the relative
strength of competing needs within the person. Second,
scores are interpreted with reference to the relative
strength of such needs in one of several general populations.
In the case of this research project the published college
student norms found in the test manual were used as the
basic point of reference.
The EPPS is different from most other personality
tests in still another important respect. It does not pur
port to measure such traits as emotional stability, frustra
tion, anxiety, neurotic patterns, or problems of social ad
justment, being primarily designed to explore normal dimen
sions of personality which characterize all personalities at
one level or another. Extreme deviations from the mean have
no significance as valid inferences about the mental health
of the respondent. However, the EPPS has been used in an
interesting manner experimentally in a great variety of
^Robert E. Silverman, "The EPPS and Social Desira
bility," Journal of Consulting Psychology, XXI (October,
1957), 402-404; Bernard Borislow, "The EPPS and Fakability,"
Journal of Applied Psychology, XLII (February, 1958), 22-27;
Daniel Kelleher, "The Social Desirability Factor in EPPS,"
^Journal of Consulting Psychology. XXII (April, 1958), 100;
and M. J. Feldman and M. L. Corah, "Social Desirability and
the Forced Choice Method," Journal of Consulting Psychology,
XXIV (November, 1960), 480-482.
21
research studies as a companion to other methods of measure
ment. Certain relationships are found between scores on
some of the EPPS variables and a number of the scales on the
MMPI, which is used extensively in clinical settings.**
The decision to use the test in the college class
room for instructional purposes in developing self-under
standing was based upon experience gained in using the test
in counseling relationships with students at Long Beach
State College. Student feed-back indicated that the test
was a fairly reliable indicator of personality dimensions
which could be determined without threatening the individual
and producing subsequent defensiveness. The EPPS offers a
number of other advantages over other measuring devices. It
is a very convenient and uncomplicated test to administer,
score, and interpret. Perhaps one of the most obvious rea
sons for choosing the EPPS was the fact that it is the only
published test tied to the theoretical formulations of per
sonality needs which is capable of adequately describing
psychologically normal human beings.
The test is not without its critics, some of whom
have expressed rather strong objections concerning the test.
The principal objection of the EPPS revolves around the im
portant issue of its validity, i.e., whether the test
®R. M. Allen,' "An Analysis of Edwards Personal Pref
erence Schedule Variables and the Minnesota Multiphasic Per
sonality Inventory Scales," Journal of Applied Psychology.
XLI (1957), 307-311.
22
measures what it purports to measure, namely, the indicated
personality needs. Gustad compared the American Psychologi
cal Association's "Technical Recommendations for Psychologi
cal Tests and Diagnostic Techniques" with the EPPS. He
found that the EPPS conformed 54/60, or 90 percent, but un
fortunately the score did not tell the whole story. The
percentage of "hits" varied from 100 on recommendations re-
7
garding administration to 16 on validity. One of the com
mon operations for validating a personality test of this
variety is to test its variables with scores from other
tests having comparable scales. Such procedures rest upon
the assumption that preceding tests have proven validity,
an assumption which may not be warranted. Edwards went
through this psychometric tradition with the Taylor Manifest
Anxiety Scale and the Guilford-Martin Personnel Inventory
for a number of so-called comparable scales with results
Q
which are inconclusive. It has been suggested that the
test's control over the social desirability influencing re
sponses contributes to the validity of the test if the test
g
items themselves are sound. It is possible to see how this
could be the case to some extent. However, this is not an
unchallenged assumption.^
^ J o h n w. Gustad, "A Review" in the Journal of Con
sulting Psychology. XX (August, 1956), 322-324.
®Edwards, Manual, pp. 21-22.
Q 10
Gustad, op. cit. Borislow, op. cit.
23
One of the problems which has been left undiscussed
in the material reviewed concerns Murray's somewhat nebulous
definition of what constitutes a psychological need.
Thurstone is reported to have said, "Whatever exists, exists
in some quantity, and whatever exists in some quantity can
be measured." However, if what exists is an intangible con
cept in the mind of a social scientist, the problem of mea
surement is not a simple one to confront. This does not
mean that verstehen type categories should be discarded nor
should efforts to measure them quantitatively be necessarily
abandoned. It may mean that such qualities can be measured
with results that are only suggestive because of the diffi
culty of representing them qualitatively. A look at
Murray's definition of a need may clarify this position:
A Need is a construct (a convenient fiction or
hypothetical concept) which stands for a force . . .
a force which organizes perception, apperception,
intellection, conation and action in such a way as
to transform in a certain direction an existing, un
satisfying situation. A need is sometimes provoked
directly by internal processes of a certain kind . . .
but, more frequently by the occurrence of one of a
few commonly effective press (environmental forces).
. . . Thus, it manifests itself by leading the organ
ism to search for or to avoid encountering or, when
encountering, to attend and respond to certain kinds
of press. . . . Each need is characteristically ac
companied by a particular feeling or emotion and tends
to use certain modes . . . to further its trend. It
may be weak or intense, momentary or enduring. But
usually it persists and gives rise to a certain course
of overt behavior (or fantasy), which . . . changes
the initiating circumstance in such a way as to bring
24
about an end situation which stills (satisfies, ap
peases) the organism.11
This definition of a personality need is a useful
sensitizing concept which helps explain in a meaningful, in
terpretive way the inward workings of a functioning person
ality in interaction with the social world. However, the
concept is not readily amenable to rigid categories and
operations of mathematical expression without some loss of
essenae or the possibility of adding artificial numerical
flavor. The findings of this research project will probably
make this statement more meaningful.
Because the hoped-for values of this research proj
ect depend upon the adequacy of the tools which are used to
describe the subjects under study, the research included an
additional effort to investigate the validity of the test
from the viewpoint of the subjects who took it. A summary
of the procedure used follows:
1. Students were provided with both Edward’s and
Murray's lists and definitions of personality needs which
the EPPS purports to measure. They were requested to study
this material, and this was followed up with a 50-item test
which involved matching the needs with segments of the ap
propriate definition. (See Appendixes A and B.)
11Calvin S. Hall and Gardner Lindzey, Theories of
Personality (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1951), pT 172.
25
2. Students were then given their EPPS test results
whereupon they plotted their raw scores graphically on a
profile chart. The classes were instructed in the funda
mentals of test construction and the use of descriptive sta
tistical procedures which were relevant (mean, the concept
of the normal curve, standard deviation, T scores, and per
centiles). (See Appendix C.)
3. Following this activity, students were asked to
evaluate the validity of their scores. It is not known how
effectively the students were influenced to avoid confusing
objectivity with personal feelings of what constitutes a so
cially desirable score. However, a strong effort was made
to make this distinction clear in each class.
4. The rating was accomplished by means of forced
choice on the following three responses:
a. Score should have been higher.
b. Score should have been lower.
c. Score is approximately correct.
The size of the male and female samples used for
this validation research differs from the total research
sample because of the exclusion of cases having low consist
ency scores and the fact that some individuals did not com
plete the evaluation form. The male sample size is 283 and
the female sample 213. The complete results of this inquiry
are found tabulated in Appendix G.
26
The findings indicate that approximately one quarter
of the scores were evaluated as either too high or too low.
No particular variable was regarded as more questionable
than another, although it is obvious that some striking dif
ferences prevail when one examines the numerical differences
between judgments that indicate scores as "too high" or "too
low." For example, 26.5 percent of the males thought their
scores on achievement should have been higher, but only
4.2 percent thought their scores should have been lower.
This difference may be interpreted in the light of the com
mon observation that high achievement represents a socially
desirable trait. This pattern appears to repeat itself with
many of the variables with allowance for male and female
differences which may reflect different value references pe
culiar to each sex.
This research on the validation of the EPPS must be
interpreted in the light of another study dealing with self-
ratings on the test. Mann correlated EPPS scores with self-
ratings and ideal self-ratings on a much smaller sample of
12
graduate students in an education course. He found posi
tive correlations on all but one of the fifteen variables
for the self-ratings. Ten of the fifteen correlations were
significant at the .05 level. However, he found that the
EPPS did not correlate with the ideal self-ratings. The
^John H. Mann, "Self Ratings and the EPPS," Journal
of Applied Psycholoav. XXII (August, 1958), 267-268.
27
correlations were quite low, hence insignificant. As a re
sult of Mann's study of the influence of social desirability
upon self-rating, the moderately high percentage of students
evaluating the test scores as approximately correct offers
some evidence of the adequacy of the EPPS to measure what it
purports to measure if subjectivity may be considered an im
portant source of information. Furthermore, it may be in
ferred that the social desirability factor affects many of
the cases reporting a lack of accuracy in scores.
Qualitative Data
Each student was required to write an autobiography
which was to run along the lines of a self-analysis. This
assignment was given late in the semester after students had
the opportunity to apply some of the psychological and soci
ological understandings of the course to their own personal
lives. An outline was provided by the instructor to guide
the writing of the paper. (See Appendix D.) Three general
areas were expected to be covered by the student: First,
sociocultural influences considered by the student to have
had significance in personality development including a
general description of the social characteristics of his
family, community, and relevant institutional influences,
such as schools, churches, recreational groups, employers,
and so forth; secondly, significant patterns of socializa
tion considered by the student to be important in his social
and personality development— parent-child relationships and
28
peer group relationships during the periods of early child
hood, early adolescence, and the post high school period?
and third, a discussion of basic personality needs with em
phasis upon their etiology and implications for various so
cial relationships. For the bourse in marriage and family
living, students were requested to consider the relevancy of
their personality needs to the problem of mate-selection.
The outline as described above was the principal
means of obtaining data from the subjects concerning the
patterns of social development which were related to their
particular intensities of personal need. Not all of the
autobiographies proved to be useful for this purpose. Many
of them tended to be somewhat superficial treatments of the
assignment, but most of these papers proved to be productive
and illuminating for the purposes of this research. Fortu
nately, it was not necessary to be concerned with the con
tent of the total number of autobiographies submitted from
the research sample of 572 because only 194 cases were actu
ally involved in the study proper. This point will be dis
cussed later in the chapter.
Two other types of autobiographical data were con
tributed to the study by students. Each was asked to com
plete a "Need Analysis Project" form, a copy of which may be
found in Appendix E. This was completed for each need above
or below one standard deviation for which the student was in
subjective agreement as to the relative accuracy of the
29
score. This project was announced after the students had
submitted their subjective evaluations of their test scores.
Reference to Appendix D will show that this exercise compen
sates for some of the lack of specificity in the self-
analysis .
The data also consist of brief tape-recorded commen
taries by students on their personality needs. This mate
rial was more flexibly structured and was not conceived
originally as part of the formal data collection process.
It was primarily intended to stimulate student interest in
discussing patterns of socialization and implications of
varying personality needs, but in many instances it provided
more significant comprehension of certain personality fac
tors. Approximately sixty of these students have their re
marks preserved on tape for use in interpreting patterns of
socialization and problem areas related to their personality
needs.
The use of personal documents of the types described
has the distinctive purpose of noting individuals as they
see themselves. This is an appropriate place to begin an
investigation of human behavior. Material of this type pro
vides the opportunity to see significant total processes of
socialization which are usually missed by other forms of in
quiry. Complete reliance upon psychometric techniques to
study the individual and his mental life may result in an
unnatural interpretation of life as it is lived. Gordon W.
30
Allport defends the use of personal documents in social re
search by pointing out that all too often personality is
torn by psychometric tests into false fragments and cleav
ages that misrepresent the organizations and natural inte-
13
grations of a life. The use of a psychometric instrument
in this research was viewed as a supportive technique to
help identify certain attributes of personality which would
then be interpreted in the light of the total organization
of personality and experience as revealed by the autobio
graphical data. The combination of psychometric data and
autobiographical material appears to be a compatible combi
nation of research methodology in this investigation.
One of the criticisms of the use of personal docu
ments is that such data are rarely suited for treatment by
statistical techniques. Other objections concern the balid-
ity of what is reported, being very difficult to detect de
ception or even self-deception. Errors of memory and the
influence of passing moods may infrequently serve to create
14
distorted views of an individual. Despite these possible
deficiencies, the use of personal documents will continue to
^Gordon W. Allport, The Use of Personal Documents
in Psychological Science. Bulletin 49 (New York: Social
Science Research Council, 1942).
^Marie Jahoda, M. Deutsch, and S. W. Cook, Research
Methods in Social Relations (New York: Dryden Press, 1951),
pp. 244-250; and Herbert Blumer, An Appraisal of Thomas and
Znaniecki's "The Polish Peasant in Europe and America1 1 (New
York: Social Science Research Council,1939).
31
be a rewarding source for types of information and under
standing not obtainable from other methods of data collec
tion.
The autobiographical data used in this study were
not analyzed with any statistical procedure. Each type of
data was intensely studied and reviewed for each personality
model. The procedure characteristically employed involved
making notations concerning regular and deviating patterns
of social experience and emerging self-perceptions. The
summation of this material for each personality model com
bined with the EPPS data compose the findings of this re
search.
The Construction of a Research Typology
The four personality models investigated were oper
ationally defined by means of the EPPS scores on succorance
and nurturance. Using the published college population
norms, the upper and lower quartile scores served as arbi
trary cutting points to determine inclusion in one of the
15
four personality groupings. Separate groups were estab
lished for males and females. The direction of need
15
The variables of succorance and nurturance are de
fined by Edwards as follows:
Succorance: "To have others provide help when in
trouble, to seek encouragement from others, to have others
be kindly, to have others be sympathetic and understanding
about personal problems, to receive a great deal of affec
tion from others, to have others do favors cheerfully, to
be helped by others when depressed, to have others feel sor
ry when one is sick, to have a fuss made over one when hurt."
Nurturance: "To help friends when they are in
32
intensity for succorance and nurturance for each type is in
dicated below:
1.
Receptive-crivincr self:
upper
upper
quartile
quartile
succorance
nurturance
2. Selfish self:
upper
lower
quartile
quartile
succorance
nurturance
3. Altruistic self:
lower
upper
quartile
quartile
succorance
nurturance
4. Inner-sustainina self:
lower
lower
quartile
quartile
succorance
nurturance
The number of cases which met the quartile criteria
for selection is given in the table below:
Personality Model Males Females Total
Receptive-giving self 34 31 65
Selfish self 23 19 42
Altruistic self 10 16 * 26
Inner-sustaining self
21
30 61
Total 98 96 194
Approximately one-third of the total cases tested by
the EPPS in this study met the criteria for selection in one
of the four above categories. The selfish and altruistic
types have a lower incidence than the receptive-giving and
inner-sustaining types. This occurrence requires interpre
tation and will be discussed fully in the next chapter.
trouble, to assist others less fortunate, to treat others
with kindness and sympathy, to forgive others, to do small
favors for others, to be generous with others, to sympathize
with others who are hurt or sick, to show a great deal of
affection toward others, to have others confide in one about
personal problems." (See Edwards, Manual. p. lb)
33
However, it may be stated at this point that the differences
between the number of cases in each sub-class would appear
to be better explained by certain qualitative dynamic inter
relationships between succorance and nurturance than by as
suming the above distribution is a likely function of
"chance.
The small number of cases in several of the sub
classes necessitates caution in evaluating their observed
qualities. The results reported are intended as suggestive
and not definitive descriptions. It would have been desir
able to work with a larger number of cases. However, no
practical means or valid methodological procedure was found
to solve this problem. In order to add ten additional cases
to the male altruistic sub-class, another 570 students would
have been required for testing, assuming that the same dis
tributive proportion were to reoccur. Over three years were
taken to collect the present data, making the remedy of ad
ditional testing rather impractical. A methodological sug
gestion that the criteria for selection within sub-classes
be liberalized to create a larger number of cases for study
was considered. This research, being largely a study of
"ideal types," it was deemed unwise to dilute the nature of
^The intercorrelation of succorance and nurturance
for Edward's total normative sample provided only a slight
indication that differences of this size would occur between
several of the sub-classes. The correlation coefficient for
his sample was .16. (Edwards, Manual, p. 17.)
34
these "pure" types by dipping into the average range of
scores on succorance and nurturance. Also, it would have
been a questionable procedure to change the criteria for
some of the sub-classes and not others. Another suggestion
that data be combined for the male and female personality
models was also rejected. The study sought to analyze the
quantitative and qualitative differences assumed to exist
between the sexes.
The Assessment of Data and Related Problems
The following descriptive statistics were computed
for each of the eight sub-classes: means, standard devi
ations , and Pearsonian product-moment intercorrelations for
1 7
the EPPS variables. These data have been presented in ta
ble form. Mean scores have also been plotted on percentile
formats to provide a graphic image of differences among the
test variables for each sex within each personality model.
The reading of these statistical data is a formida
ble challenge. It is made difficult because of the variety
and quantity of measurements and the need to relate one
piece of statistical information to another. Comprehensive
understanding of these data is possible only after develop
ing proficiency in shuttling from one statistic to another
without becoming lost in the process. This task required the
l 7
'The WDCORR program of the Western Data Processing
Center (University of California at Los Angeles) was used to
compute these statistics.
35
development of a systematic procedure or an organized per
spective to keep the mind from becoming debilitatingly clut
tered in the midst of almost endless combinations of statis
tical values. This difficulty was partially resolved by two
decisions. The first was to make use of a test for statis
tical significance which would serve to reduce the total
number of numerical values which require interpretation.
The second was to devise a set of analytic procedures which
would make it possible to relate in a meaningful manner re
lationships which exist among the statistical data, e.g.,
means compared to means, means viewed in the light of corre
lations among the variables, and so forth. Both of these
decisions are discussed more fully below.
The selection of appropriate statistical tests to
apply to the data of each sub-class posed a very serious
problem. Unfortunately, no test of either a parametric or
nonparametric variety exists which is wholly adequate to the
task. It is evident that the sub-classes differ in sample
quality from the male and female samples as a whole. As
previously described, the sub-classes were formed on the
basis of four different combinations of high and low succor
ance and nurturance scores. The EPPS was used to distribute
the cases into sub-classes and also serve as the index to
whatever else is measured. This means that the scores on
thirteen of the fifteen variables are not derived independ
ently, as high and/or low scores on succorance and nurtur-
36
ance affect the distribution of scores on the other vari
ables. Given this condition in the nature of sub-class data,
it is obvious that statements about the probability of re
sults being a product of the "laws of chance" are not very
meaningful and may be misleading. The situation confronted
may be referred to as a "complex sample design." The satis
factory treatment of this problem is not in sight. Kish has
summarized the problem by stating:
In general, formulas are lacking for the analyti
cal treatment of data arising from complex sample de
signs. Present statistical theory fails to provide
confidence intervals and tests of hypotheses for ana
lytical statistics if the data arise from complex
samples.18
Kish offers two suggestions dealing with ways to
avoid the problems inherent in complex sample designs.
When an exact formula is not available, the re
searcher should look (or ask a statistician) for a
good approximation. One may construct from the avail
able statistics some model that will fit the situation
fairly well; perhaps much better than the simple ran
dom sample model. In choosing a model, judgment must
be based on statistical theory, on relevant statisti
cal experience, and on the substantive knowledge of
the nature of the data under treatment. . . .
The researcher may refrain from constructing con
fidence intervals and from making probability state
ments. He thus allows the inference from sample to
population value to remain indefinite. In these cases
reliance on the research result comes not through sta
tistical inference but through the successful repeti
tion of similar results in separate investigations.
In a sense, one may consider the separate investiga
tions as if they were so many different sampling units.
lft
Leslie Kish, "Confidence Intervals for Clustered
Samples," American Sociological Review, XXII (April, 1957),
160.
37
This approach may be quite acceptable in some situ
ations, especially if the conditions are forced on the
research, as is often the case in the social sciences.
. . . Perhaps most scientific advance has been made
in this way.^
Both of the above suggestions received serious at
tention. The search for an answer to the problem involved
consultation with a number of statisticians at the Western
Data Processing Center and the Division of Biostatistics
(School of Medicine), both of the University of California
at Los Angeles. The consensus of opinion was that if a test
for statistical significance was necessary, the t test would
be the closest approximation available at this time.
Another suggestion came from Dr. Robert T. Littrell,
Head of the Office of Testing and Institutional Research,
Long Beach State College. The following is an excerpt from
his letter of July 28, 1961:
I looked and looked and talked and talked and
still haven't discovered a method by which you may
test the significance of the difference between the
groups after you have mutilated the distribution.
The consensus of opinion still remains that it is
more important to understand the patterns of the peo
ple selected, thus, intercorrelation, than it is to
test the significance of the difference. You can al
ways find the means and standard deviations and pre
sent these for comparison purposes in discussing the
difference and present it graphically so that the pat
terns can be readily compared. . . .
The t test was utilized in analyzing differences be
tween the eight sub-classes and the published EPPS norms for
mean score data. Wallace and Snedecor tables were used to
19Ibid., pp. 160-165.
38
give an indication of statistical significance for the cor-
20
relation data within each sub-class. This final decision
was in part a product of the idea that statistical tests
should follow the researcher's interests and not become such
a preoccupation that it is leading the research. The use of
t test values serves the function of answering the question,
"Is there anything in the data which requires explanation or
interpretation?" Obviously, some basis was required to make
a judgment as to what values in the small mountain of data
output are worth interpretation. In conclusion, the t test
appears to have provided an appropriate basis upon which to
analyze substantive differences in the data. However, the
limitations under which the application of the test was made
2 1
should be kept in mind.
The procedure which evolved to interpret the statis
tical findings involved these general steps:
1. Surveying statistically significant differences
between the means of the sub-class and those of the norma
tive sample.
2 0
J. P. Guilford, Fundamental Statistics in Psychol
ogy and Education (3rd ed.; New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
JLnc. , 1956) , pp. 538-539, Table D# Appendix B.
21
See Hanan C. Selvin, "A Critique of Tests of Sig
nificance in Survey Research," American Sociological Review.
XXII (October, 1957), 519-527.
39
2. Noting standard deviations to indicate distribu
tive characteristics of the variable in both the sub-class
and the normative sample.
3. Examining statistically significant intercorre-
lation coefficients for each variable, noting how these com
pare to those of the total male or female sample.
4. Relating levels of association among variables
within the sub-class to mean scores which are indicative of
modal need intensity having substantive significance.
5. Noting comparisons for means and correlation
coefficients among the eight sub-classes.
6. Relating statistical information to autobio
graphical data.
The Research Sample Compared to the
EPPS Normative College Sample
It is important to consider the extent to which this
research sample is truly representative of the general col
lege population. A comparison of the El Camino College stu
dents to the norms established for the EPPS was made to per
mit an empirical evaluation of this factor. Also, it was
thought important to determine what test differences charac
terize males and females for the ECC research sample.
Edwards found statistically significant differences between
the sexes on a number of personality needs for the college
sample used to determine test norms. Men were significantly
higher than females for achievement, autonomy, dominance,
40
heterosexuality, and aggression; and women were higher for
deference, affiliation, intraception, succorance, abasement,
22
nurturance, and change. The same direction of need inten
sity prevailed for the El Camino College (ECC) sample, al
though these differences were not tested for statistical
significance. Means and standard deviations were computed
for the male and female groups (Tables 1 and 2); they pro
vide some descriptive information on the differences between
the sexes and comparisons between the ECC sample and the
EPPS normative sample. Inspection of the means suggested
that the ECC sample and the EPPS sample are not substan
tively different. Thus, it may be safely concluded that the
research sample tends to be representative of a general col
lege population, at least in terms of the qualities measured
by the EPPS.
The research design which has been presented here
was tailored to meet the needs of the investigation. It
tended to evolve as ideas and data accumulated, which is
often the direction taken by exploratory studies. In ap
proaching a new problem in a relatively uncharted area, it
is difficult to know with precision the best means for ex
ploration. This research not only should serve to provide
some substantive understanding about important facets of so
cial character, but provide some clues as to improved means
of studying this type of phenomenon.
22Edwards, Manual, p. 10.
41
TABLE 1
MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF EPPS VARIABLES
FOR EL CAMINO COLLEGE MALES AND EPPS
NORMATIVE COLLEGE MALE SAMPLE
Variable
Means Standard Deviations
ECC
Males
Normative
Males
ECC
Males
Normative
Males
Achievement 15.80 15.66 3.86 4.13
Deference 11.35 11.21 5.76 3.59
Order 10.55 10.23 4.46 4.31
Exhibition 15.37 14.40 3.61 3.53
Autonomy 14.75 14.34 4.09 4.45
Affiliation 13.83 15.00 4.13 4.32
Intraception 14.74 16.12 5.21 5.23
Succorance 10.95 10.74 4.97 4.70
Dominance 15.52 17.44 5.04 4.88
Abasement 12.81 12 .24 5.09 4.93
Nurturance 13.19 14.04 4.74 4.80
Change 16.50 15.51 4.87 4.74
Endurance 13.02 12 .66 5.45 5.30
Heterosexuality 17.27 17.65 5.45 5.48
Aggression 13.89 12.79 4.59 4.59
N = 299 760
42
TABLE 2
MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF EPPS VARIABLES
FOR EL CAMINO COLLEGE FEMALES AND EPPS
NORMATIVE COLLEGE FEMALE SAMPLE
Variable
Means Standard Deviations
ECC
Females
Normative
Females
ECC
Females
Normative
Females
Achievement 13.24 13.08 4.25 4.19
Deference 11.48 12.40 3.65 3.72
Order 10.68 10.24 4.34 4.37
Exhibition 14.75 14.28 3.90 3.65
Autonomy 13.43 12 .29 4.02 4.34
Affiliation 15.94 17.40 4.15 4.07
Intraception 16.80 17.32 4.55 4.70
Succorance 12.93 12 .53 5.06 4.42
Dominance 12.48 14.18 4.67 4.60
Abasement 15.18 15.11 5.00 4.94
Nurturance 15.97 16.42 4.59 4.41
Change 17.86 17.20 4.68 4.87
Endurance 11.49 12.63 5.41 5.19
Heterosexuality 15.75 14.34 5.55 5.39
Aggression 11.49 10.59 4.48 4.61
N = 228 749
*
i*
CHAPTER III
THE ALTRUISTIC SELF
The modal or configurational personality structure
of each of the four personality models employed in this
study is reported upon in this and the succeeding three
chapters. In the order in which they will be discussed,
these personality models are: the altruistic self (Chap
ter III), the selfish self (Chapter IV), the receptive-
giving self (Chapter V), and the inner-sustaining self
(Chapter VI).1
The notion of central tendency is fundamental to
the interpretation of these data. It is quite difficult to
conceive of a cohort of personality types except in terms of
the central tendencies in the variations of individual per
sonalities. However, the use of the concept of central
tendency in describing personality requires caution. The
principal problem is that there may be a disposition to
overgeneralize the attributes which the measure of central
Although there does not appear to be a precedent in
sociological literature for trying to develop a distinction
between the terms "personality model" and "personality type,"
it may be worthwhile to consider a model in terms of tenta
tive hypothesized attributes useful for initiating research
and reserve the term "type" or "ideal type" to apply to the
conclusions of research.
43
44
tendency describes. There is always the danger that the
range of variability which actually characterizes a modal
type may be lost in an attempt to envision a definitive
model. Accordingly, the individuals comprising each of the
four personality models may seem a good deal more similar
than they actually are. Autobiographical data are especi
ally useful in tempering observations of modal characteris
tics with the facts of individual variability, which, inci
dentally, have a normal distribution.
Ten men and sixteen women were identified as altru
istically motivated. The total male sample contained 299
cases and the female sample 228. A case was placed in this
category if the EPPS score for succorance was in the lower
quartile and the score for nurturance was in the upper quar-
tile. The published test norms for each sex were used as
the basis for selection. The difference between the number
of males and females which met these criteria is an inter
esting place to begin an analysis of these data.
First of all, differences in mean scores on succor
ance and nurturance for males and females in the normative
sample do not enter into consideration at this point.
Edwards reported females have statistically significantly
higher scores on both of these variables. Taking into con
sideration the difference in male and female sample size, it
would be expected that more men than women would have been
45
included in the altruistic classification. However, this
was not the case. Apparently, there is a tendency for men
who are either high on nurturance or low on succorance to
score within the more moderate range on the other variable
more often than is the case with women. This observation
indicates that not only do the intensities of succorance and
nurturance differ between the sexes, but the way these two
qualities hang together for each sex is also different.
An analysis of popular "common sense" on the rela
tionship between succorance and nurturance would probably
indicate that most people believe these two variables are
highly correlated with each other. However, in fact the
correlation is fairly low, it being .16 for Edwards' norma
tive college sample, but slightly higher for ECC males and
females, .22 and .26, respectively. High altruism may pos
sibly be regarded as a socially desirable quality by most
individuals in American culture. This idealization of the
quality of altruism is not very often realized by many indi
viduals, as seen by the general population. Hence, the
ideal appears to be compromised by real observations, and the
view develops that succorance and nurturance should be bal
anced at the same level of intensity. The psychological
mechanism of projection may also be operative on a mass
scale in American culture. Individuals may not be too com
fortable with their own nonaltruistic impulses, but feel
more secure with themselves if they can justify the belief
46
that altruistic persons do not actually exist, or, if they
do, that something is strikingly wrong with them. The ideal
of a balanced relationship between giving and taking fills
the void at this point.
Three popular beliefs are disputed by the findings
of this study. First, altruistic persons do exist in Ameri
can society in the respect that a limited number of individ
uals are highly motivated to want to support and aid others,
but have no need for a similar type of responsiveness from
others. Second, there does not appear to be anything abnor
mal in a social and psychological sense about their other
attributes. As a matter of fact, a rather high level of
personal adjustment has been achieved by almost all of the
individuals possessing high altruistic motivation. Third,
giving and taking needs are not even moderately correlated,
as demonstrated by the published EPPS data and the findings
of this study.
The autobiographical data collected in this study
suggest that the quality of altruism stems from a type of
social experience quite distinguishable from the forms of
socialization characteristic of the other three personality
models. The following patterns are suggested by these data:
Altruistic individuals often report that their fami
lies are quite large, and that they have been expected to
shoulder many of the adult responsibilities of child care
for the younger members of the family. Parental discipline
and the rewards of social approval played an important part
in developing an enduring and consistent need to be helpful
and supportive toward others. It is interesting that not
all children develop altruistic motivation under such simi
lar circumstances of family size and discipline, but instead
form hostile and evasive patterns of reaction to those re
quiring nurturance. Perhaps this difference may be ex
plained in part by the possibility that some parents do not
fully comprehend the necessity to reward the child for nur-
turant responsiveness in a manner which is significant and
meaningful to the child. Being placed in charge of younger
siblings often had some other consequences. The responsi
bilities of caring for younger brothers and sisters tended
to restrict opportunities for developing associations with
children of their own age, and many of these cases reveal a
decided preference in interacting with younger children,
having internalized to some extent facets of the parental
role. Coincidental with this development is the tendency to
identify with adult ego models, many of whom personify al
truistic qualities. This "social prematurity" also involves
the cultivation of self attitudes embracing the quality of
self-sufficiency. The social tasks of caring for others
serve a developmental function in severing the individual’s
dependency upon others— hence, the low need for succorance.
This does not mean that the altruistic person does not seek
compensation for his nurturance. A desire to be appreciated
48
and approved is quite common among these individuals. In
stead of seeking from others similar acts of nurturance,
they tend to be satisfied by symbolic rewards of one kind or
another. These are usually sufficient means of compensation
for sustaining the burdens of altruism. The social manipu
lation of this personality type is therefore a very economi
cal operation.
The following statements from autobiographies illus
trate the above points:
512F. "My high need for nurturance probably can be
explained by the arrival of my brother. Since he is so much
younger than I, I was expected to 'remember my age' and per
mit him to do as he pleased. My nurturance need was taught
to me by my relatives [this person reports no contact with
other children during the entire preschool period], and when
my brother was born, stressed a little more. I enjoyed
watching and playing with him and helping take care of him
in whatever little way I could. I learned to give to him
and enjoyed every minute of it."
511F. "My early childhood years were spent with my
grandmother since my mother was divorced and forced to work.
. . . They were quite strict and were not afraid to spank me.
I soon found that misbehaving in this house did not pay, so
I resorted to the model child angle. I attended my younger
sister and did many household duties. I liked this because
I gained parental approval and much needed attention; be
sides learning to be very nurturant. . . . In summary, one
thing I must try is to show my family what they have done
for me and prove I do love them."
308F. "I have trained myself to expect nothing, and
I am pleased that I am this way. It is most difficult to
expect and not receive. . . . I have reached the realization
that I have only one person in whom I can put complete trust;
and that is myself. This does not keep me from liking a
great many people. . . . While there was much love and se
curity at home, we had very little contact with outsiders.
This left me unequipped to cope with strangers, and for many
years, I was painfully shy. I was well disciplined, and
self-sufficient. . . . I did exactly as I was told, causing
no ripple of the surface which might bring attention to my
self. . . . During my early childhood, until I was almost
49
six years old, I was the only child. . . . When my brothers
began to arrive, I assumed the role of mother, since I had
been told that I was old enough, and that it was my duty to
help care for these children. I was pretty well walled in
. . . but I was a 'good kid'."
559M. "When very young it was advantageous to my
ego to be the model child and it gave me needed strength to
be considered the 'nicest and most well behaved' of the
three. I can remember being rewarded and showered with ap
proval for being a gentleman and not making any noise or
even moving a muscle while my uncouth brothers wiggled and
raved under the same strain. I think I assumed the image of
the model child to combat my brother's superior talents.
. . . My mother is a soft-spoken woman, possessing strong
character and endurance. She learned to work hard without
complaint and to be satisfied with the smallest reward.
. . . I learned to loathe my father."
505M. "I was left under the care of my very devoted
Grandmother who did her best in raising me according to her
Christian standards. I grew up in a big city apartment
house, where I would play in the back court, without too
much contact with the outside world. There was little so
cial life as such, no activity such as being 'sociable' or
'having good times' or even peer group relationships for
that matter. My big need for nurturance I tend to attribute
to my early Christian training, combined with later experi
ences which merely reaffirmed the merits of nurturant behav
ior. Furthermore, the everpresent necessity for self-reli
ance throughout my life enables me to relate to others from
the platform of a stable inner disposition. . . . As for
succorance, it only follows from my early need to learn to
rely upon myself, that the opportunity for succorant behav
ior never presented itself and therefore never became perti
nent. "
43F. "We had moved to California and both my par
ents had begun their war effort contribution by work in de
fense. This placed a great deal of dependence upon me as my
brother was not reliable, although older. I did many chores
and tasks most girls weren't capable of doing, but this was
more or less my contribution to the cause— 'cause it had to
be doneJ Probably the most outstanding of these chores was
the paying of utility and other bills. After cashing their
checks my parents would give me large sums (that is for
Someone my age) of money to do the family business. . . . My
father possessed a stormy temper which made all the rest of
us shudder. This, I imagine, was pretty hard on my mother’s
nerves, who is rather passive until she 'gets her fill'.
. . . In school I was a good student and this pleased my
50
parents very much because my brother before me had not and
did not do so well."
These six cases illustrate the following patterns of
interaction for the altruistic self: (1) containment of the
individual within the family, (2) preoccupation with learn
ing responsibility for oneself and others, (3) playing the
role of model child, sensitivity to social approval, and
(4) the importance of a nurturant parent image in the early
experiences of childhood who tends to be idealized and
serves as an effective ego model.
In some respects the altruistic women of this study
may bring to mind the fable of Cinderella and the men any
one of many historical suffering heroes. This type of per
son may even resemble a ragged plow horse strapped to a yoke,
pulling others through the toils of life. However, the
autobiographical data give little indication of individuals
searching for sympathy; they simply find gratification in
giving themselves to others. This does not take place be
cause of alienation toward oneself. They are not searching
for atonement. They do not wish to suffer because they give.
They are warm in their responsiveness toward others because
of having learned that such behavior has some beneficial re
sults— acceptance from others, positive recognition, avoid
ance of frustration, alleviation of anxiety, and possibly a
comfortable internal feeling of conformity to an accessible
social ideal of charitability and generosity. Their lack of
need for the same type of responsiveness from others stems
51
from a socialized attitude of self-sufficiency which is con
tinuously reinforced from the experience of helping those
incompetent or unwilling to manage for themselves. The al
truistic persons of this study are practical people. They
are not likely to he found cloistered in a social welfare
agency fulfilling their need to give to others. In all
probability they will continue to gratify their needs in
typical everyday relationships. It would appear that suf
ficient numbers of receptive personalities exist in American
society to engage this type in mutually satisfying human re
lationships. Few individuals are killed by human kindness,
and this may account for their social acceptance.
By the time the period of adulthood has arrived, it
appears that most of these individuals have made peace with
their childhood and no longer live in terms of an infantile
conscience which poses a threat of rejection. The habits
and attitudes of nurturance persist as a positive residual
producing an effective basis for building warm relationships
with others. Exceptions to this happy outcome are, of
course, to be expected. For example, a few of the women in
the study appear to be overly sensitive to the demands of
others and lack ego strength to resist. However, only a
small number of cases would be expected to occur in a group
of this size, which makes possible a wide band of variabil
ity. In these few instances there is a measure of signifi-
cant personal displeasure stemming from self-disapproval of
one's altruistic nature.
Altruistic motivation does not exist in a state of
isolation from other personality attributes. It tends to
have a reciprocal relationship with other qualities of per
sonality. The psychological concepts of personality inte
gration and personality configuration are appropriate means
of lending understanding to the nature of altruism and other
attributes found in altruistic people. The use of mean
scores from the EPPS is utilized to help indicate the type
of integration and the configurational patterns which pre
vail in a modal sense among the four groups of this study.
But before turning directly to the observed findings from
these psychometric data, an effort will be made to define
the meaning of these two concepts.
Personality integration refers to that dimension or
quality of personality make-up which holds together all of
the disparate parts of personality. It is the cohesive sub
stance which cements together each trait. Some attributes
fit together well because they are similar in some important
respect, and therefore compatible. Others fit together be
cause they are quite opposite and fulfill a function left
out by other attributes. Still others are part of the per
sonality because a situation of complementariness exists.
Perhaps some traits persist not because of having an inte
grated basis within the personality in a direct sense, but
53
purposefully serve to fit the individual into particular so
cial settings and situations. A person who is thought to
have a relatively well-integrated personality may have per
sonality attributes which work together harmoniously and do
not generate internal conflict which impedes effective so
cial functioning. An individual who faces conflicts within
himself indicates a problem of integration strain. A number
of social psychological variables enter into the problem,
but these do not seem essential to the definition.
A personality configuration refers to the totality
of attributes which provide a picture of the wholeness of
the individual, whereas integration refers to the dynamic
processes which relate personality parts to one another and
provide a functioning organization of traits. Generally, a
personality configuration is thought of as the end product
of heredity, culture, and unique experiences interacting to
form the social person. Of these two concepts, integration
is probably the most important in understanding these data.
It may provide some clues as to what accounts for stability
or instability of personality, adjustment problems for some
but not others, and relative happiness or discontent among
certain types of individuals.
Table 3, presenting mean scores on the EPPS for al
truistic males and females, suggests similarities and dif
ferences which may characterize this type of person.
Table 4 reports the standard deviations for these data.
54
TABLE 3
MEANS FOR ALTRUISTIC MALES AND FEMALES
COMPARED TO EPPS NORMATIVE
COLLEGE SAMPLE
Variable
Males
Normative
Males Females
Normative
Females
Achievement 14.70 15.66 9.88a 13.08
Deference 12 .10 11.21 11.50 12.40
Order 10.90 10.23 10.38 10.24
Exhibition 15.10 14.40 14.75 14.28
Autonomy 15.90 14.34 12.06 12 .29
Affiliation 14.70 15.00 19.63b 17.40
Intraception 17 .90 16.12 2 0.00b 17.32
Succorance 5.00 10.74 7.31 12.53
Dominance 14.00 17.44 11.44b 14.18
Abasement 11.80 12.24 16.56 15.11
Nurturance 19.40 14.04 21.88 16.42
Change 15.20 15.51 18.00 17.20
Endurance 16.20b 12.66 13.06 12 .63
Heterosexuality 16.00 17.65 14.19 14.34
Aggression 11.90 12.79 9.25 10.59
N = 10 760 16 749
Significant at the .01 level.
Significant at the .05 level.
55
TABLE 4
STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR ALTRUISTIC MALES
AND FEMALES COMPARED TO EPPS
NORMATIVE COLLEGE SAMPLE
Normative Normative
Males Males Females Females
Achievement 3.53 4.13 4.06 4.19
Deference 3.18 3.59 3.01 3.72
Order 3.75 4.31 3.76 4.37
Exhibition 3.07 3.53 3.41 3.65
Autonomy 3.00 4.45 4.42 4.34
Affiliation 3.47 4.32 3.36 4.07
Intraception 4.61 5.23 3.98 4.70
Succorance 1.41 4.70 1.66 4.42
Dominance 2 .91 4.88 5.80 4.60
Abasement 4.52 4.93 4.98 4.94
Nurturance 2 .91 4.80 1.78 4.41
Change 5.71 4.74 4.35 4.87
Endurance 4.94 5.30 5.21 5.19
Heterosexuality 4.50 5.48 5.83 5.39
Aggression 3.84 4.59 4.48 4.61
N = 10 760 16 749
56
For the male group, endurance was the only variable
which was found to be significantly different from the nor
mative sample. Autobiographical data indicate that most of
the ten grew up in home relationships which stressed the
ideal of "sticking to a job" and putting up with the demands
of responsibility-oriented adults. This need, combined with
high nurturance and low succorance, appears to be logically
compatible. Determination and persistence of character may
serve to preserve altruistic motivation from gradual erosion
in a type of society which stresses the advantages of non-
altruistic behavior. The score for deference for the female
group was only slightly elevated and not statistically sig
nificant .
Four personality needs for altruistic women were
found to be significantly different from the normative sam
ple. Achievement was lower. This outcome probably would
have been predicted by most students of human behavior.
Getting ahead and pushing oneself up the success ladder in
our culture is not usually compatible with a personality
orientation focused upon helping others. The altruistic fe
male appears to be especially sensitive to this contradic
tion; autobiographical detail supports this conclusion. The
need for affiliation is significantly higher. This might
have been predicted on the basis of the moderate correlation
between nurturance and affiliation reported for the norma
tive college sample (.46). But again, despite the possi-
bility that test items are weak on the EPPS in discriminat
ing between these two variables, there may be a natural as
sociation between them. This would be a stronger conclusion
if the male data supported this supposition. Actually, the
males are slightly below average on affiliation. The dif
ference between altruistic males and females is rather wide
and may be accounted for by the fact that altruism among
women is more highly rewarded in our culture, but regarded
as strangely atypical for the male. If the altruistic male
is thought of as not being quite "regular" he may possibly
develop fewer sociability skills and hence feel only an av
erage need to associate with others. The need for intracep
tion (understanding of others) is significantly higher for
altruistic women. The autobiographical data reveal in many
cases a high drive to seek explanation and understanding
about the behavior of others. The empathic tendencies of
these women is quite distinctive. The last need found to be
significantly different for this group is low dominance.
Popular thought and some psychoanalytic discussion has com
monly associated high nurturance with high dominance. The
overly indulgent (altruistic) parent is frequently identi-
fied as highly dominant. The suffering, always-forgiving
wife of the alcoholic is also frequently a dominant type.
2 *
David M. Levy, Maternal Overprotection (New York:
Columbia University Press'] 1943) .
■^Victor W. Eisenstein, Neurotic Interaction in Mar
riage (New York: Basic Books, 1956), pT 159.
58
The normal altruistic woman is quite opposite, however.
Dominance over others is customarily related to exploitation
of others, using people for personal purposes, and extract
ing from associates gratifications for one's own state of
physical and psychological need. If an individual has a low
need for succorance, there would be less seeking of gratifi
cation from others by any means. This then throws some in
teresting light on the problem personalities of overly in
dulgent, dominant parents and suffering, dominant wives of
alcoholics. Previous research on these types has failed to
take into account the succorance needs of such persons.
The problem of identifying forms of personality in
tegration and capturing the essence of a modal personality
configuration is partially resolved by making use of the
statistical technique of correlation. Pearsonian-product
moment correlations are reported for both male and female
altruistic groups on thirteen of the fifteen variables mea
sured by the EPPS. Succorance and nurturance are omitted
for reasons indicated in the footnote to Table 5. Included
in the presentation of these data are the correlation coef
ficients for the total ECC male and female samples. These
coefficients provide a point of reference in discussing sub
stantive differences between this personality type and the
modal character of a representative normal population.
Tables 5 and 6 contain these data:
TABLE 5
EPPS VARIABLE INTERCORRELATIONS FOR ALTRUISTIC MALES
AND TOTAL ECC MALE SAMPLE
2
Def
3
Ord
4
Exh
5
Aut
6
Aff
7
Int
8
Dom
9
Aba
10
Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
1 Ach -24
(14)
-74
(-03)
06
(14)
-49
(02)
-26
(-11)
-10
(-19)
57
(20)
42
(-20)
-57
(-08)
-10
(04)
13
(14)
24
(13)
2 Def -10
(14)
28
(-02)
-17
(05)
-16
(-03)
30
(04)
-10
(-01)
06
(-09)
26
(00)
-37
(10)
-19
(-18)
-47
(-04)
3 Ord -05
(-11)
04
(-09)
53
(-20)
20
(-10)
-04
(-15)
-68
(-06)
17
(-10)
26
(40)
-08
(-19)
-41
(-19)
4 Exh -42
(09)
-05
(-08)
20
(-21)
24
(15)
-18
(-10)
-28
(-06)
-42
(-09)
32
(01)
-51
(05)
5 Aut -10
(-23)
-38
(-12)
-78
(02)
07
(-08)
76
(20)
-11
(-15)
02
(-04)
53
(22)
6 Aff 40
(00)
29
(-06)
-34
(-05)
-25
(-06)
-12
(-24)
-10
(-06)
-47
(-32)
7 Int 42
(-06)
-23
(04)
-29
(-12)
-25
(06)
-73
(-15)
-46
(-07)
8 Dom -06
(-30)
-80
(-22)
-16
(-07)
03
(-04)
-22
(17)
U1
ID
TABLE 5— Continued
2
Def
3
Ord
4
Exh
5
Aut
6
Aff
7 8
Int Dom
9
Aba
10
Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
9 Aba -11
(-08)
-13
(-09)
18
(-17)
22
(-11)
10 Chg -19
(-06)
-13
(07)
13
(-07)
11 End -09
(-20)
22
(-09)
12 Het
N = 10
(N) = 299
08
(02)
Notes:
a. Coefficients within parentheses are those for the total ECC male sample.
b. Decimal points have been omitted in the presentation of coefficients to con
serve space.
c. Succorance and nurturance intercorrelation coefficients are omitted from the
table because their axes do not meet the assumptions of rectilinearity and homoscadastic-
ity required by the Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation. Trends of associ
ation for succorance and nurturance with other variables may be roughly inferred from com
parisons of means among sub-classes.
d. r's below .63 not significant at .05 level for altruistic males.
r's below .11 not significant at .05 level for total ECC male sample.
o
TABLE 6
EPPS VARIABLE INTERCORRELATIONS FOR ALTRUISTIC FEMALES
AND TOTAL ECC FEMALE SAMPLE
2
Def
3
Ord
4
Exh
5
Aut
6
Aff
7
Int
8
Dom
9
Aba
10
Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
1 Ach -36
(02)
21
(-02)
-44
(02)
01
(05)
-26
(-26)
53
(-01)
-46
(11)
09
(-24)
-27
(-11)
46
(02)
-32
(-09)
-38
(-07)
2 Def 45
(29)
43
(-07)
-56
(-27)
19
(-02)
-01
(11)
-18
(-21)
-04
(07)
23
(01)
-26
(13)
17
(-19)
-30
(-34)
3 Ord -13
(-18)
-36
(-12)
-18
(-21)
02
(-03)
-45
(-15)
28
(02)
-18
(-06)
40
(45)
-36
(-36)
-34
(-10)
4 Exh -28
(01)
-26
(-07)
-46
(-27)
39
(25)
-30
(-10)
07
(04)
-82
(-14)
64
(08)
32
(07)
5 Aut 05
(-16)
11
(-23)
09
(-02)
-26
(-17)
28
(22)
26
(-03)
-46
(04)
14
(18)
6 Aff 38
(06)
-17
(-19)
25
(01)
05
(04)
-03
(-19)
-25
(-09)
-51
(-16)
7 Int -51
(-12)
-14
(-01)
-08
(-08)
46
(15)
-38
(-13)
-51
(-18)
8 Dom -39
(-37)
-23
(-08)
-26
(02)
21
(01)
56
(24)
cti
TABLE 6— Continued
2 3 4 5 6
Def Ord Exh Aut Aff
7 8
Int Dom
9
Aba
10
Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
9 Aba -19
(-12)
04
(-05)
-23
(-12)
-42
(-19)
10 Chg -14
(-08)
07
(-03)
-12
(-10)
11 End -77
(-37)
-24
(-17)
12 Het
N
(N)
= 16
= 228
46
(12)
Notes:
a. Coefficients within parentheses are those for the total ECC female sample •
b. Decimal points have been omitted in the presentation of coefficients to con
serve space.
c. Succorance and nurturance intercorrelation coefficients are omitted from the
table because their axes do not meet the assumptions of rectilinearity and homoscadastic-
ity required by the Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation. Trends of associ
ation for succorance and nurturance with other variables may be roughly inferred from com
parisons of means among sub-classes.
d. r's below .47 not significant at .05 level for altruistic females.
r's below .12 not significant at .05 level for total ECC female sample. ov
63
The following correlation coefficients were found to
he substantively and statistically significant for altruis
tic males:
1. Achievement and Order (-.74)
2. Order and Abasement (-.68)
3. Autonomy and Dominance (-.78)
4. Autonomy and Change (.76)
5. Intraception and Heterosexuality (-.7 3)
6. Dominance and Change (-.80)
The above patterns of variable association may be
considered to be related to the trait of altruism, although
there is no method to establish this relationship empiri
cally in terms of causation. Some of these variables may be
correlated with each other because of a connection with suc
corance and/or nurturance. Perhaps still other factors may
be associated with the correlation pattern. Then, too, the
correlation may have no logical relationship to other fac
tors or, for that matter, the variables themselves are not
in any way meaningfully related to each other. The safest
position to take in regard to these findings is to let them
speak for themselves as suggestive of the nature of probable
relationships among variables for men who are altruistically
motivated. Nevertheless, some testable propositions for the
future may be born from speculation. Some of these rela
tionships are easier to comprehend than others. For example,
as altruistic men tend to be more motivated by a need for
64
autonomy and independence for themselves, the quality of al
truism may serve to inhibit the development of a need for
dominance, as such persons would possibly feel reluctance in
manipulating and exploiting others if they crave a kind of
freedom from such effects themselves. The positive correla
tion between autonomy and change can perhaps be explained by
noting that these qualities are logically compatible with
one another. Individuals frequently fulfill their need for
freedom by seeking out new experiences. Thus, a person low
in autonomy would indicate less of a desire for change, but
the inverse would be true for the person high in autonomy.
Altruism may function to keep these two qualities in balance
with one another. Intraception and heterosexuality, as
negatively correlated variables for the male, is found not
only on the basis of the correlation coefficient, but is
noted in the autobiographical data for a number of the cases.
There appears to be an absence of concern for relationships
with the opposite sex for individuals writing the most in
trospective and analytical autobiographical papers. The
last pattern of negative correlation of dominance and change
may be understood in the light of altruism. When an indi
vidual seeks changes and new experiences, he does not do so
by means of directly or indirectly ordering others, for this
would not be compatible with his altruistic needs.
As can be seen from the above relationships between
the key variables discussed, correlation coefficients
65
provide a measure of tentative understanding which cannot be
drawn from mean scores. What emerges from these last types
of data is an indication of personality integration.
The following correlation coefficients were found to
be substantively and statistically significant for altruis
tic females:
1. Achievement and Intraception (.53)
2. Deference and Autonomy (-.56)
3. Exhibition and Endurance (-.82)
4. Affiliation and Aggression (-.51)
5. Intraception and Dominance (-.51)
6. Dominance and Aggression (+.56)
7. Endurance and Heterosexuality (-.77)
The positive correlation between achievement and in
traception should be thought of in relation to the observed
mean scores for these two variables. Achievement was sig
nificantly below average (9.88f compared to an average score
of 13.08) and intraception was significantly above average
(20.00, compared to an average score of 17.32). The rela
tionship of these two variables is quite likely influenced
by altruism balancing levels of need intensity. Achievement
for this group is not seemingly intended for direct self
gratification, but rather for others. Thinking of achieve
ment with this point of view requires more intraceptive ac
tivity because one must not only take into account one's own
needs, but those of others toward whom the altruistic
66
responses are directed. It may be interesting to note that
no correlation exists for the total female sample on these
two variables.
Exhibition and endurance as negatively correlated
variables may be explained from autobiographical data. If
an altruistic female exhibits high endurance, the ability to
stay with tasks and situations when they become somewhat
less than pleasant, it is quite likely that a great deal of
social approval is lavished upon the person. Thus, there is
no particular need for the person to seek exhibition as an
isolated end. Also, the exhibition need for altruistic peo
ple tends to be primarily focused upon searching for one
particular type of attention— social and moral approval from
others. The usual range of behavioral manifestations of a
high need for exhibition frequently involves explicit compe
tition with others which the altruistic personality gener
ally seeks to avoid. These persons appear to be shy and re
tiring in secondary group relationships.
A moderate negative correlation between affiliation
and aggression was expected from studying case history mate
rial. As the desire to want to be with people increases, it
generally reflects a lack of success to successfully affili
ate with others. Among altruistic females, this could be
due to a lack of drive and aggressive response in pursuing
social relationships, especially those outside of primary
groups. Most of these women have been conditioned to a
67
state of contentment in passive social roles. Social ap
proval seldom accrued to the individual by being assertive.
They have found that affiliation does not materialize from
the active pursuit of friends. Seemingly, they play a wait
ing game, hoping to be discovered for their "real warmth" by
others who are more aggressive. On the other hand, altruis
tic females who are above average in aggression perhaps
reach a level of sufficiency in the number of friends and
associates they care to interact with without much diffi
culty. This would tend to lessen the need for affiliation
as a vital force within the personality.
The negative correlation between intraception and
dominance may possibly be explained by noting that both of
these needs are means of coping with problem situations. As
one is found to be effective, the other tends to diminish.
A comparison of means for these two variables offers a
clearer indication of this pattern. It should be mentioned
that the phrasing of dominance items on the EPPS are not in
any way indicative of altruistic impulses. Women tended to
be more sensitive to this condition than men, but altruistic
women even more so.
Dominance and aggression are moderately associated
with each other in a positive direction. This appears to
represent an instance of intensity compatibility which works
well with altruistic motivation. Lower dominance on the
68
part of these women tends to be matched in the individual by
a comparable intensity of aggression.
The remaining pattern of relationship is the nega
tive correlation of endurance and heterosexuality. This
fairly high negative correlation is especially interesting
because heterosexuality needs for altruistic women are not
indicated as different from those of the normative popula
tion. It is possible that within the altruistic group many
women view heterosexual activities as described by the EPPS
as less gratifying than seeking outlets for enduring expres
sions of altruism. A number of the autobiographies give
this impression. A fewer number of cases typified by a high
heterosexuality need indicate low endurance. To begin with,
such persons have apparently synthesized altruistic impulses
with conventional cultural expressions toward the opposite
sex. The dating practices of young people probably tend to
emphasize the desirability of frequent change in love ob
jects, not endurance with old ones. It would be expected
that altruistic individuals would internalize this prevail
ing cultural pattern. Also, the altruistic female's rela
tively high nurturant resources require expression and
therefore she usually needs more than a single enduring re
lationship to achieve a sense of contentment. This would be
especially true if such relationships frequently developed
with nonreceptive males.
69
So far the analysis of statistical data for this
type of personality has been a concern for types of differ
ences which exist between altruistic individuals and a nor
mative sample representative of college students. Attention
will now be focused upon selected findings which indicate
similarities between altruistic individuals and the norma
tive sample. These findings are especially interesting be
cause they question the validity of certain popular concep
tions about the nature of altruism.
The close primary relationships which altruistic
people tend to prefer and develop with relative effective
ness is sometimes interpreted as high deference and over
dependency. For example, it is occasionally asserted that
the expression of kindliness, support, and sacrifice which
generally typify altruistic persons is a product of intense
insecurity. People are "good" because they're afraid of
losing a loved one to someone who may be "better." Thus#
they do what they are told to do, and they learn to guide
their behavior by the wishes of another. Obviously, this
explanation fits many individuals who "appear" to be altru
istic simply on the basis of high nurturance generated and
sustained by fear. However, it is quite clear that such
types are not altruistic. The altruistic personality is
characterized not only by a relatively high need to give,
but a low need to seek support from others. It is difficult
sometimes for the "man on the street" to imagine this
70
combination of need in "anyone but a fool." But as noted
earlier, the altruistic individual, although atypical, is
not suffering many of the conflicts and problems of adjust
ment faced by his more "normal" associates in forming stable
and enduring human relationships.
This group tends to be average in the needs for def
erence and autonomy, which may be interpreted to mean that
the altruistic self is neither compliant to everyone's
wishes nor especially sensitive to authority. This suggests
that this personality type generally has a fairly healthy
drive for individualistic expression and does not wait help
lessly for suggestions and direction from others. Presum
ably, the expression of altruistic impulses follows a pat
tern compatible with these normal dimensions of deference
and autonomy.
Occasionally, it is inferred that altruistic indi
viduals generally have a need to "show off," call undue at
tention to their "good works," or behave in a manner de
signed to discredit the more limited altruistic strivings of
others. Exhibition scores on the EPPS do not appear to sup
port such an observation. Mean scores for altruistic groups
and the normative samples are almost identical.
One of the most common beliefs about altruistic peo
ple is that their behavior patterns are the products of
feelings of guilt, and consequently they are constantly
seeking out means for atonement. From this perspective, it
71
is guilt over being "bad" which makes them "good." If this
were a valid observation, it would have been supported by a
finding of high abasement on the EPPS. The men are only
slightly below average, and the women a little above. This
should be regarded as a rather significant finding. Not
only does this finding contradict a widely held point of
view among lay people, but it does not fit well with certain
psychoanalytic conceptions. Karen Horney's description of
the "self-effacing type of personality" involves the inter-
play of altruism with guilt. She states that this type of
person has a scorn of selfishness, an inability to face up
to hostility, a need to be exploited and humiliated, but
also a drive to emerge benevolent. This last factor appears
because of guilt. This characterization of a human type is
drawn from the study of emotionally disturbed clients, and
the more normal altruistic person should not necessarily be
identified with the same direction and intensity of person
ality attributes. Although the altruistic people of this
study have a need to be benevolent, it is not a need to be
exploited and humiliated. This difference may be one of
many which occurs when abnormal and normal populations are
compared. Perhaps extreme caution should apply to a great
many inferences about the psychodynamics of relatively
^Karen Horney, Neurosis and Human Growth (New York:
W. W. Norton and Co., 1950), pp. 214-238.
72
normal groups which are drawn from the study of disturbed
individuals.
Much of the writing of Erich Fromm is a plea for al
truistic development in a type of human society somewhat
lacking in this quality.5 In general, most of his concern
is with forms of personality which fail to meet his particu
lar humanistic criteria. However, he makes quite clear that
altruism is commonly energized by a sense of guilt, and ac
cordingly may be thought to be responsible for unhealthy so
cial functioning. According to Fromm, a feeling of uneasi
ness and discomfort with their conscience prevails for many
altruistic individuals. This condition develops typically
from parent-child relationships involving parental authori-
g
tarianism and domination. This parental pattern, it may be
recalled, characterizes most of the altruistic cases of this
study, but it has not resulted in the crippling psychologi
cal malady of a severe guilt complex.
Perhaps this discussion of the altruistic personal
ity should be concluded with a statement that some of the
findings associated with altruism in this study owe their
occurrence to the fact that altruism has been defined here
in terms which are not conventional to popular and behavior
al science thinking. So frequently, the attribute is
5Erich Fromm, The Sane Society (New York; Rinehart
and Co., 1955).
^Erich Fromm, Man for Himself (New York; Rinehart
and Co., 1947), pp. 158-172.
73
defined only in the sense of giving impulses without con
sidering the state of need to receive from others. The use
of opposite intensities of succorance and nurturance to de
fine altruism has resulted in a clearer conception of the
quality. The fact that altruism has for once been success
fully conceptualized in an operational definition, permit
ting empirical investigation without bringing into play
moralistic considerations, is an important contribution.
This same observation may apply to an evaluation of findings
for the remaining three personality models.
9
CHAPTER IV
THE SELFISH SELF
Twenty-three men and nineteen women were classified
as selfishly motivated on the basis of EPPS test scores on
succorance and nurturance variables. These individuals pos
sessed scores which fell in the opposite quartiles from
those identifying the altruistic personalities. Cases in
cluded in this category were in the upper quartile on suc
corance and the lower quartile on nurturance. Briefly
stated, these individuals have a high need to receive from
others but a low need to give.
The presentation of findings for this group of
forty-two individuals may be more meaningful if some initial
reference is made to certain modes of thought about the na
ture of selfishness. Unquestionably, Erich Fromm has done
the most extensive job of elaborating upon popular images of
the selfish personality. One of his most penetrating books,
Man for Himself, was devoted to the analysis of this person
ality type. He conceptualized the selfish personality in
these terms:
The selfish person is interested only in himself,
wants everything for himself, feels no pleasure in
giving, but only in taking. The world outside is
74
75
looked at only from the standpoint of what he can get
out of it; he lacks interest in the needs of others,
and respect for their dignity and integrity. He can
see nothing but himself; he judges everyone and every
thing from its usefulness to him; he is basically un
able to love.
Fromm recognized that selfishness rests upon related but
different foundations. He defined four types of basic ori
entation for selfish individuals: The receptive orientation,
the exploitative orientation, the hoarding orientation, and
the marketing orientation.
Speaking of the receptive orientation, he says:
In the receptive orientation a person feels "the
source of all good" to be outside, and he believes
that the only way to get what he wants— be it some
thing material, be it affection, love, knowledge,
pleasure— is to receive it from that outside source.
In this orientation the problem of love is almost ex
clusively that of "being loved" and not that of lov
ing. . . . They are dependent not only on authorities
for knowledge and help but on people in general for
any kind of support. They feel lost when alone be
cause they feel that they cannot do anything without
help.2
Continuing with the exploitative orientation, he
states:
The exploitative orientation, like the receptive,
has as its basic premise the feeling that the source
of all good is outside, that whatever one wants to get
must be sought there, and that one cannot produce any
thing oneself. The difference between the two, how
ever, is that the exploitative type does not expect to
receive things from others as gifts, but to take them
away from others by force or cunning. This orienta
tion extends to all spheres of activity. Their atti
tude is a mixture of hostility and manipulation.
1Erich Fromm, Man for Himself (New York: Rinehart
and Co., 1947).
2Ibid.., p. 62
76
Everyone is an object of exploitation and is judged
according to his usefulness.3
The hoarding orientation is described as follows:
They have surrounded themselves, as it were, by
a protective wall, and their main aim is to bring as
much as possible into this fortified position and let
as little as possible out of it. Their miserliness
refers to money and material things as well as to
feelings and thoughts. . . . The hoarder tends to be
suspicious and to have a particular sense of justice
which in effect says: "Mine is mine and yours is
yours."4
The fourth of Fromm's character orientations, the
marketing orientation, is almost in a separate category. It
alludes to a modern condition of the ways men relate to each
other for the purpose of finding personal gratifications.
According to Fromm, the individual "possessed" by this ori
entation places a value upon himself which he exchanges for
the values he derives from others. Succorance and nurtur
ance interact in various social contexts with a concern for
a kind of "balance of trade" among the participants of any
give-and-take situation. Fromm considers this a form of
selfishness because the main concern of the individual is
with his own aims and welfare and not a principles consider
ation for others. In some respects the marketing orienta-
rr
tion describes some facets of the receptive-giving self.
3Ibid., pp. 64-65.
4Ibid., pp. 65-67.
5Ibid., pp. 67-78, 115-116.
77
Fromm notes that these character orientations are by
no means separate from one another, but various blendings
are common. It may be of interest to compare the definition
of selfishness utilized in this study with the above con
ceptualizations. The receptive and exploitative orienta
tions blended together resemble the combination of succor-
ance and nurturance needs on a lower level of intensity.
The hoarding orientation has no counterpart in a psychologi
cal variable utilized in this research. Hoarding may be
thought of as one of the channels of response which charac
terize some individuals high in succorance and low in nur
turance who simply feel a high degree of insecurity and
anxiety about maintaining sufficient gratification for their
needs. Hoarding is not necessarily intrinsic to selfishness.
Saving and conservation may be associated with altruism in
that such efforts may be seen to benefit a social group or
collective, many times at the expense of the individual
"hoarder." Only one case was found in which "hoarding" was
a significant personality trend for the selfish group.
In summarizing Fromm's contribution to knowledge
about selfishness, it is necessary to again note that his
observations about human behavior rest heavily upon his
clinical experiences with patients and have not been derived
from the study of a representative general population. His
tendency to speak of modern western man as characterized by
the dynamics of selfishness is often criticized as an
78
exaggerated image. From a total sample of over 500 persons
only 42 met the fairly liberal criteria employed in this
study for selfishness. Of these, most individuals seemed
to operate with self-control over these impulses. It would
be an alarming distortion to suggest that a form of mental
pathology describes the selfish subjects of this study.
Having no concern for others and being anxiously concerned
with only one's own advantage are not modal characteristics
of the normal selfish self. The selfish self is not a so
ciopath. He simply has preferences for being supported by
others in his human relationships, but feels little inclina
tion to reciprocate. Obviously, the selfish individual is
capable of forming harmonious complementary relationships
with individuals who have a need to give but not to receive.
Such relationships are often mutually gratifying. Presum
ably, the altruistic type as described earlier would fulfill
this function. Robert Winch's study of complementary needs
in mate-selection is suggestive of this mode of adjustment.®
The selfish individuals studied here tend to exhibit
a fairly high degree of dependency upon nurturant others,
usually parents. Most of these students are still living at
home and avoid the hard facts of our non-nurturant culture
without a parental shield. It is difficult to comment on
the kinds of problems this group will face in moving from
^Robert F. Winch, Mate-Selection (New York: Harper
Brothers, 1958), pp. 64-134 contain an elaboration of this
theory.
79
the secure frustration-free and anxiety-controlling homes
which characterize most of this group. Of course, some of
them may never risk departure from the nest, and many of
them may simply wait for a duplication of home protection
and indulgence in the form of an ever-loving, always provid
ing, never thoughtless mate. This characteristic of depend
ency is not exploitative except in the most subtle sense.
These individuals do not actively strive for gratification;
they wait for it. This appears to be a function of life
long histories of parental indulgence. Emancipation from
parents is not an objective except in those instances in
which cultural pressures for independence and self-reliance
combine with guilt feelings and attitudes of self-inadequacy
to conspire a reviciou of living patterns.
None of the cases under scrutiny described them
selves with the term "selfish." However, there was a wil
lingness to talk about the variables of succorance and nur
turance. Very often individuals used the word "spoiled" to
label themselves. Perhaps the use of such a term performs
the psychological service of alleviating the individual of a
burdensome sense of self-responsibility for some attributes
not usually thought to be socially desirable. In this re
gard responsibility is shifted to overly indulgent parents.
Individuals did not seem to protest their high scores in
succorance as much as their low scores in nurturance. This
may have occurred because it is more difficult to deny to
80
oneself the facts of dependency, but easier to attribute to
oneself the socially desirable quality of wanting to do
things for others, especially since these individuals have
few demands made upon them for nurturance. Thus, this self
belief remains a fantasy unchallenged by reality.
The kinds of sentiments and feelings which selfish
men and women have about themselves may be exemplified by
the following excerpts from autobiographical materials:
19M. "My motives and drives are basically self-
centered. I can mix with a group, but I do not consider be- .
ing in a group the fulfillment of any great need. I place a
great emphasis on close friends. I have a strong need for
succorance, with which my close friends provide me. . . .1
am always ready to help my friends in any way. . . . My
basic personality traits are that I am a very likable per
son. I have respect for other people and their judgment. I
like to choose my friends carefully, but once I have chosen
them I maintain a close relationship with them. . . . I have
a good outlook on life."
216M. "I like myself more than I like to admit but
I feel everyone has this feeling to some extent. I am rath
er high on succorance and like to receive but I feel no pain
at not giving as much as I like to receive. It would prob
ably be more socially desirable to have a higher need for
nurturance but I am satisfied with my position."
126F. "I don't like the intensities of need as re
ported on the EPPS. I feel badly about it because I don't
feel that it is right for me to want people to do things for
me. I have been given things all my life to such an extent
that I feel at times that I am the luckiest person in the
world. As a child I was given everything that I wanted and
not just by my parents but by friends of the family."
264F. "I am very 'high' in succorance. When I am
depressed, I need help from others— the need to be loved,
forgiven, and cared for. Several years ago, I had surgery
and was in the hospital. I needed others when I was sick.
I needed their phone calls, their cards and their visits.
This did more for me than the medications. . . . I am 'low'
in nurturance. I had a grudge a long time. I do not for
give others easily. I do not seem to sympathize with others
who are hurt."
81
The patterns of socialization associated with this
personality model reveal the following trends for both males
and females:
1. A history of parental or adult indulgence has
characterized almost all of the cases, and this is generally
perceived by the individuals themselves, as the following
autobiographical excerpts illustrate:
276M. "My mother sacrificed herself so that I would
have good clothes, books, toys, etc. I had everything that
any other child had and sometimes more. She felt, for some
reason of her own, that she could not deny these requests.
. . . I have a high need for succorance. I believe that I
developed this attitude from my Mother who always made a
great effort to do everything possible for me."
303M. "Whenever company came I was the darling,
brilliant, little brother. Those poor people were probably
sickened by it but I enjoyed it. When any family outing was
planned, I was the main concern and so came to expect atten
tion as my right and not giving in return as my right also."
64F. "As a child, I was spoiled. My Dad showered
us with affection and displayed warm emotion. I could have
almost anything I wanted, if only I would smile. If I put
on a sour face, my Dad would ’baby' me and ask me what he
could do to make me smile."
310F. "At this time I would like to describe a
brief bit of philosophy employed by my parents and at the
same time link my high need for succorance to it. My par
ents have the philosophy that whatever they have is for the
benefit of their children. This includes their time, tal
ents, love, and possessions. They enjoyed doing everything
in their power for me at the expense of themselves. . . . My
mother loved me and always did things for me so that I soon
came to reason that if people didn't do things for me they
didn't love me; I enjoyed having things done for me. I got
favorable results whenever I asked for anything."
In five additional cases evidence was provided to
indicate that a conflict between parents existed concerning
parental indulgence. All five cases were women in whom a
82
negative cathexis toward one parent prevailed. Two of these
cases show the struggle at home rather vividly:
541F. "Dad is a pretty well-rounded person. He
gives my sisters and I a good portion of the things we want,
and he doesn't fuss over spending too much money. He's a
good sport and goes along with almost everything. When he's
his ever-loving self he is considered tops around our house.
My mother is completely different from dad . . . she likes
to make you feel as low as she can . . . she has you do all
the work around the house. When you get home from school
she tells you how hard she's worked as she sits in front of
the TV and sips her coffee in her nightgown."
22IF. "My father was very strict with his family
. . . he whipped us and scolded mother. He was a very im
patient man who insisted on strict obedience from his wife
and children. My mother, on the other hand, was very easy
on us, she was always cheerful and understanding. . . . She
used to visit the poor and sick in hospitals and, although
she didn't have much herself, she was always helping people
out. She would always get up early and have a nice break
fast for us when we got up. I sometimes think she spoiled
us by doing too much for us. Father was just the opposite;
he liked to have things done for him."
What appears to have developed in these particular
cases is an idealization of nurturance because of depriva
tion. However, this type of idealization is of behavior and
not the person. In these instances the nurturant parent was
not an effective ego model for the child. The children ap
parently sensed that the gratifying parent was being ex
ploited, preventing the development of motivation on the
part of the child to want to be nurturant toward others. A
suffering hero is not ordinarily an effective model for
children.
The function of parental overindulgence is not the
total explanation for the development of the selfish orien
tation. Inconsistent discipline, as reported by many of the
83
cases, very often reduced the effectiveness of the parent
who attempted to play an authority role. Tamotsu Shibutani
has summarized the psychoanalytic position on this problem
as follows:
When a child is thoroughly "spoiled," he remains
egocentric; he takes it for granted that everything
exists for his personal benefit. In psychoanalytic
terminology, in the absence of adequate authority fig
ures the superego does not develop, and the child's
object relations remain at the narcissistic level.
Such individuals encounter difficulties in cooperat
ing with others on equal terms and tend to withdraw
from the kinds of contacts in which they might learn
to appreciate altruistic orientations.7
2. The analysis of patterns of socialization of
this group revealed some rather interesting personal expla
nations of what "causes" parental overindulgence. Many in
dividuals cited such relational structural factors as family
size, birth order, age differences between siblings, and
differential role expectations based upon one sex or the
other. A concern for these sociological variables by these
selfish individuals is not shared by the persons described
under the other three personality models. Perhaps this is
so because there is less of a need to rationalize and seek
sympathy, but it is quite possible that a multiplicity of
causative factors of the above type may bring about an
overly indulgent form of parental response. Many of these
notions are quite popular explanations for the development
7Tamotsu Shibutani, Society and Personality (Engle
wood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1961), p. 551.
84
of selfishness. Unfortunately, the autobiographical data
are not sufficiently complete to offer a carefully drawn
statistical picture of differences which may exist for self
ish individuals and the other three personality models.
However, specific explanations were mentioned by this group
as being important in bringing about and reinforcing paren
tal overindulgence, and it is worthwhile to look at this
phenomenon through the eyes of those who have lived it. The
following relational factors were indicated by both men and
women:
a. Being an "only child."
b. Being an "only boy" or an "only girl."
c. Being the youngest child, the "family baby."
d. Being the first child with subsequent sib
lings arriving late in childhood.
This variability of position and role is a summation
of discernable patterns expressed by the selfish individuals.
Other forms of relationship and additional factors may be
important beyond those suggested by the autobiographical ma
terials. One of the interesting omissions from the list is
the absence of any reference to being a "middle child." If
it be true that the middle child faces comparatively greater
rejection and deprivation than his siblings, this may again
suggest that selfishness does not develop from personal
frustration and anxiety, but is more likely a product of
overprotection and overindulgence as inferred from the data
85
presented earlier. In only three cases does autobiographi
cal information clearly reveal a selfish personality which
rests upon perceptions of surrounding personal relationships
that are hostile and nongratifying. Of course, this does
not mean that these persons, and many more of this type, do
not view the wider social world with suspicion and contempt
because individuals outside their primary relationships usu
ally are unwilling to indulge them, an inference derived
from EPPS scores on the need for affiliation.
Table 7 reports the mean scores on the EPPS for this
personality model. Table 8 reports the standard deviations
for these scores.
For the selfish male a statistically significant
difference was found in the need for exhibition. This find
ing was not surprising as this need tends to be compatible
with a number of facets of the selfish orientation. Being
the center of attention in a variety of social situations
fits very well with strivings for support and aid from
others. Higher than average exhibition for this group may
also mean in some instances that the selfish individual has
learned that his social acceptance by others outside of his
family depends upon his capacity to draw attention away from
his socially extractive tendencies by emphasizing various
distinctive attributes. But perhaps the best explanation
takes account of the fact that the selfish person has usu
ally held the spotlight all of his life and cannot bear to
86
TABLE 7
MEANS FOR SELFISH MALES AND FEMALES
COMPARED TO EPPS NORMATIVE
COLLEGE SAMPLE
Variable
Males
Normative
Males Females
Normative
Females
Achievement 16.35 15.66 14.84 13.08
Deference 9.96 11.21 10.42a 12.40
Order 9.96 10.23 10.53 10.24
Exhibition 16.57b 14.40 16.95b 14.28
Autonomy 15.70 14.34 13.21 12 .29
Affiliation 9.74b 15.00 14.47b 17 .40
Intraception 14.35 16.12 15.58 17.32
Succorance 15.61 10.74 17.05 12 .53
Dominance 16.48 17.44 13.84 14.18
Abasement 13.74 12.24 13.32 15.11
Nurturance 7.30 14.04 11.26 16.42
Change 15 .70 15.51 18.05 17.20
Endurance 12.00 12 .66 10.05a 12 .63
Heterosexuality 19.96a 17.65 16.21 14.34
Aggression 14.26 12 .79 14.26b 10.59
N = 23 760 19 749
Significant at .05.
Significant at .01.
87
TABLE 8
STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR SELFISH MALES
AND FEMALES COMPARED TO EPPS
NORMATIVE COLLEGE SAMPLE
Variable
Males
Normative
Males Females
Normative
Females
Achievement 3.74 4.13 4.80 4.19
Deference 3.08 3.59 3.82 3.72
Order 3.97 4.31 4.97 4.37
Exhibition 4.17 3.53 4.68 3 .65
Autonomy 4.83 4.45 4.39 4.34
Affiliation 3.86 4.32 4.57 4.07
Intraception 4.77 5.23 5.25 4.70
Succorance 2 .86 4.70 2.59 4.42
Dominance 4.13 4.88 5.44 4.60
Abasement 5.57 4.93 6.14 4.94
Nurturance 2.55 4.80
1.88 4.41
Change 5.23 4.74 5.84 4.87
Endurance 4.46 5.30 5.04 5.19
Heterosexuality 5.04 5.48 5.89 5.39
Aggression 3.66 4.59 3.78 4.61
N = 23 760 19 749
88
lose it. The need for exhibition may be negatively corre
lated with the degree to which the need for succorance is
gratified, but it was not possible to offer conclusive evi
dence for this interpretation as no attempt was made to mea
sure levels of need satisfaction.
Whether the selfish self ever reaches a level of
satisfaction with respect to his need for succorance is
doubtful. Fromm's opinion on this question suggests that
gratification is never complete. "Selfishness is one kind
of greediness. Greed is a bottomless pit which exhausts the
person in an endless effort to satisfy the^need without ever
O
reaching satisfaction."
The low need for affiliation for the selfish male is
represented by a rather striking departure from the mean of
the normative sample. At first thought, it might seem that
selfish individuals would be strongly oriented toward affil
iation with others in order to gratify their high need for
succorance. However, as indicated in Table 7, this is not
the case. There appears to be a strong aversion toward
secondary group relationships, which is borne out quite
clearly in the autobiographical data. The feeling that no
one but a close friend is reliable and can be trusted fre
quently accompanies statements indicating a low interest in
wanting to join groups. The following three cases are good
Q
Erich Fromm, "Selfishness and Self Love," Journal
of Counseling Psychology, IV (April, 1939), 521.
89
examples of this fairly common point of view associated with
the selfish group.
113M. "When I entered the service I was a great be
liever in affiliation. I wanted to do things for people and
form new friendships. I lent to my friends quite liberally.
They never bothered to repay these loans. After this ex
perience, I began to keep more to myself. I realize that
this experience was just a chance thing and it might not
ever happen again. Nevertheless, it made it very difficult
for me to gain new friends, an attitude that I have even to
day, three years later."
89M. "I do not feel a true friendship exists in any
social group situation. True friends can usually be counted
on one hand. . . . I would rather spend my time cementing my
relationship with real friends than attempt to gain an in
sincere friendship with a large social group."
411M. "I would say my score on affiliation is half
right. I don't like to make new friends. And I don't like
to do things for friends. And, on the other hand, when I
make friends I don't reject them. When it comes to my
friends and parents to make friends they will usually reject
them."
It seems reasonable to suggest from such evidence
that the selfish male is either threatened by secondary af
filiation or fails to derive gratification for succorance
needs from such forms of human association.
The higher need for heterosexuality indicated by
this group is difficult to explain. Unfortunately, the*
autobiographical information does not throw much light on
the causative factors. The heterosexual items on the EPPS
tend to stress two themes: physical pleasures with the op
posite sex and being in love. It may be that high hetero
sexuality is compatible with indications of the somewhat
elevated pleasure-play orientation of the selfish self.
There may be an anticipation that single and close love
90
relationship with someone of the opposite sex is idealized
as a solution for one's high need for succorance. This type
of person may typically view marriage as the single source
of gratification for needs as there is little inclination to
seek gratification from secondary groups.
The analysis of high exhibition and low affiliation
for the selfish male is also applicable to the female group.
However, concerning affiliation, there is less of a tendency
for the women of this group to feel the intensity of nega
tivism toward secondary social relationships which charac
terized the men. Although the women were below the female
normative mean, a substantive difference was found between
selfish men and selfish women, the mean scores being 9.74
and 14.47, respectively. The receptive role played by these
women in social relationships is culturally sanctioned,
whereas in the case of men it is discouraged except in the
marital dyad. Selfish men therefore characteristically
withdraw from affiliation outside of the close primary rela
tionship because their demands for nurturance from the group
are more likely rejected. This may not apply to selfish
women in our culture, however.
The women of this group have a significantly lower
need for deference. This may be explained in part by the
fact that deference to others was not an essential step in
obtaining from others gratification for one’s own needs.
Autobiographical data indicate that parental indulgence of
91
the child was not often made conditional in this regard.
The reverse is true. The child commonly developed the need
for deference in her parents so they were sensitive to her
suggestions, instructions, and decisions. It is interesting
to note that the need for dominance for the selfish self
registered in the region of average scores. This type of
person does not derive much gratification from manipulating
others for its own sake.
A lower need for endurance characterizes the selfish
woman. Sticking to a job, putting in long hours of work,
and staying with a problem until a solution is reached is
anticipated by these individuals to be less rewarding than
giving up and possibly letting others lend their shoulder to
the wheel, especially if this does not result in any loss to
the person.
The need for aggression for these women is high in
comparison to the normative female sample. The mean score
for aggression represents the largest difference between the
selfish female self and the normative sample except, of
course, for succorance and nurturance. These women have a
need to attack others, to tell others off, to get revenge,
and to blame others when a person or circumstance interferes
with the proper flow of outside good works and high nurtur
ance required to sustain them. It would appear that this
type is low in frustration tolerance. Furthermore, the
temper-tantrum means of coping with problems has probably
92
been effective in most of the home relationships, and this
would tend to elevate this trait above the norm. This ag
gressiveness is different from dominance. These women are
slightly below the normative mean in dominance. Directing
others probably i? not particularly rewarding unless it re
sults in organizing the support of others for themselves.
Other needs for the male and female selfish self
fall close to the mean of the normative samples. Several of
these variables nevertheless deserve some comment. The need
for achievement for both sexes is slightly elevated above
the mean score for the normative samples. The autobio
graphical data disclose that these individuals do not con
ceive of the means of achievement in terms of hard work,
personal sacrifice, and individual industry. They tend to
be tantalized by the end products of achievement. In the
case of the women, there is a strong possibility that vi
carious gratification of achievement needs through a pro
ductive mate may someday be the means of satisfication,
whereas the men may find it necessary to modify this aspir-
ational motivation downward or discover low stress oppor
tunities which may accomodate their type of personality. It
might be mentioned in passing, that Erich Fromm indicates
that tiiere is no paucity of such opportunities in our cul-
9
ture.
^Erich Fromm, The Sane Society (New York: Rinehart
and Co., 1955), pp. 78-208.
93
A second variable falling into the average range is
abasement. It is not personal antipathy toward this type
Which suggests that these individuals should have a need to
feel guilty, but an awareness that they have had to confront
social pressures and negative evaluations from outside the
family concerning their apparent selfishness. However, the
test data failed to indicate that such social definition by
others affected persons strongly in this direction. The men
were only slightly above average and the women a little be
low average. The psychological dynamics of the need to feel
guilt are complex and difficult to generalize. However, in
the case of the selfish self, the need to feel guilt is not
part of the inner self. The autobiographies contained many
verbalized apologies for high succorance and low nurturance,
but few revealed a deep concern with themselves in this re
gard. Such statements as "I suppose this is bad," "maybe I
ought to change," and "you'll probably think I'm terrible"
are not very indicative of a real inner-directed striving
for atonement.
Erich Fromm has often made the point that the sel
fish individual does not in fact have a high degree of love
for himself. His impression of selfishness differs somewhat
from Freud's argument that this phenomenon is related to
narcissism. In the book, Man for Himself. Fromm states:
Selfishness and self-love, far from being identi
cal, are actually opposites. The selfish person does
not love himself too much but too little: in fact he
hates himself. This lack of fondness and care for
94
himself, which is only one expression of his lack of
productiveness, leaves him empty and frustrated. He
is necessarily unhappy and anxiously concerned to
snatch from life the satisfactions which he blocks
himself from attaining. He seems to care too much
for himself but actually he only makes an unsuccess
ful attempt to cover up and compensate for his fail
ure to care for his real self. Freud holds that the
selfish person is narcissistic, as if he had withdrawn
his love from others and turned it toward his own per
son. It is true that selfish persons are incapable of
loving others, but they are not capable of loving them
selves either.
In an earlier article Fromm expressed the viewpoint
that the narcissistic personality is not concerned with get
ting things for himself but simply is preoccupied with the
task of admiring himself.^
It is impossible to conclude from the data of this
study that either Fromm or Freud is correct. If the selfish
person actually harbors feelings of self-hate, it is pre
sumed that high scores in the need for abasement would have
been found for this group. Autobiographical data do not in
dicate a narcissistic theme for these individuals. Few
cases even suggest that the selfish individual thinks about
himself in narcissistic terms, and these data were combed
for obvious and subtle indications of such phenomena.
The interrelationship of personality attributes for
the selfish self may be further clarified by observing the
EPPS intercorrelation data for men and women. These data
are presented in Tables 9 and 10.
^Fromm, Man for Himself, p. 131.
^Fromm, "Selfishness and Self Love, " loc. cit.
TABLE 9
EPPS VARIABLE INTERCORRELATIONS FOR SELFISH MALES
AND TOTAL ECC MALE SAMPLE
2
Def
3
Ord
4
Exh
5
Aut
6
Aff
7
Int
8
Dom
9
Aba
10
Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
1 Ach 06
(14)
30
(-03)
28
(14)
-16
(02)
-35
(-11)
-07
(-19)
23
(20)
-33
(-20)
-32
(-08)
17
(04)
-21
(14)
32
(13)
2 Def 24
(14)
-35
(-02)
07
(05)
-13
(-03)
-04
(04)
-27
(-01)
-19
(-09)
-09
(00)
-07
(10)
-04
(-18)
-13
(-04)
3 Ord -03
(-11)
-21
(-09)
-48
(-20)
-16
(-10)
24
(-15)
-42
(-06)
-26
(-10)
21
(40)
02
(-19)
20
(-19)
4 Exh -35
(09)
04
(-08)
06
(-21)
19
(15)
-23
(-10)
-31
(-06)
06
(-09)
-30
(01)
13
(05)
5 Aut 16
(-23)
-26
(-12)
-09
(02)
-14
(-08)
33
(20)
-52
(-15)
-11
(-04)
-10
(22)
6 Aff 28
(00)
-20
(-06)
16
(-05)
-08
(-06)
-36
(-24)
00
(-06)
-33
(-32)
7 Int -03
(-06)
40
(04)
-64
(-12)
-11
(06)
00
(-15)
-32
(-07)
8 Dont -41
(-30)
-05
(-22)
36
(-07)
-43
(-04)
-01
(17)
VO
ui
TABLE 9— Continued
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Def Ord Exh Aut Aff Int Dom
9 10
Aba Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
9 Aba 08
(-08)
-16
(-09)
15
(-17)
-03
(-11)
10 Chg 19
(-06)
-07
(07)
-01
(-07)
11 End -22
(-20)
-18
(-09)
12 Het
N = 23
(N) = 299
-05
(02)
Notes s
a. Coefficients within parentheses are those for the total ECC male sample.
b. Decimal points have been omitted in the presentation of coefficients to con
serve space.
c. Succorance and nurturance intercorrelation coefficients are omitted from the
table because their axes do not meet the assumptions of rectilinearity and homoscadastic-
ity required by the Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation. Trends of associ
ation for succorance and nurturance with other variables may be roughly inferred from com
parisons of means among sub-classes.
d. r's below .41 not significant at .05 level for selfish males.
r's below .11 not significant at .05 level for total ECC male sample. ^
< n
TABLE 10
EPPS VARIABLE INTERCORRELATIONS FOR SELFISH FEMALES
AND TOTAL ECC FEMALE SAMPLE
2
Def
3
Ord
4
Exh
5
Aut
6
Aff
7
Int
8
Dom
9
Aba
10
Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
1 Ach 02
(02)
-32
(-02)
26
(02)
-03
(05)
01
(-26)
-22
(-01)
17
(11)
-09
(-24)
-32
(-11)
-11
(02)
08
(-09)
-40
(-07)
2 Def 14
(29)
-41
(-07)
-46
(-27)
42
(-02)
33
(11)
-28
(-21)
-10
(07)
-07
(01)
05
(13)
15
(-19)
-49
(-34)
3 Ord -50
(-18)
21
(-12)
-02
(-21)
-05
(-03)
-15
(-15)
-12
(02)
13
(-06)
40
(45)
-65
(-36)
22
(-10)
4 Exh -OP
(01)
05
(-07)
-55
(-27)
50
(25)
-14
(-10)
12
(04)
-44
(-14)
05
(08)
18
(07)
5 Aut -19
(-16)
-28
(-23)
-02
(-02)
-16
(-17)
22
(22)
01
(-03)
-24
(04)
24
(18)
6 Aff 00
(06)
-04
(-19)
-31
(01)
07
(04)
-49
(-19)
19
(-09)
10
(-16)
7 Int -64
(-12)
05
(-01)
-08
(-08)
29
(15)
15
(-13)
-28
(-18)
8 Dom -30
(-37)
01
(-08)
-18
(02)
-18
(01)
23
(24)
vo
i
TABLE 10— Continued
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Def Ord Exh Aut Aff Int Dom Aba Chg End Het Agg
9 Aba -34
(-12)
02
(-05)
26
(-12)
-08
(-19)
10 Chg 01
(-08)
-19
(-03)
-08
(-10)
11 End -40
(-37)
-23
(-17)
12 Het -39
(12)
N = 19
(N) = 228
Notes:
a. Coefficients within parentheses are those for the total ECC female sample.
b. Decimal points have been omitted in the presentation of coefficients to con
serve space.
c. Succorance and nurturance intercorrelation coefficients are omitted from the
table because their axes do not meet the assumptions of rectilinearity and homoscadastic-
ity required by the Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation. Trends of associ
ation for succorance and nurturance with other variables may be roughly inferred from com
parisons of means among sub-classes.
d. r's below .47 not significant at .05 level for selfish females.
r's below .12 not significant at .05 level for total ECC female sample. jg
99
Intercorrelations for selfish males which were found
to be statistically significant are*
1. Order and Affiliation (-.48)
2. Order and Abasement (-.42)
3. Autonomy and Endurance (-.52)
4. Intraception and Change (-.64)
5. Dominance and Abasement (-.41)
6. Dominance and Heterosexuality (-.43)
The fact that all of the above intercorrelations are
negative suggests that these variables tend to be incompat
ible with one another in the selfish self. Conclusive in
terpretations for all of these intercorrelations is not pos
sible, but a number of coefficients make some sense from the
study of autobiographical material.
Autonomy and independence may often conflict with a
need to stay at a task or face situations when the "going
becomes rough." The "average" mean scores for endurance and
autonomy for these selfish men indicate that there may be a
reciprocal influence of these factors upon each other which
may possibly be related to the general selfish orientation.
The negative relationship of intraception and change
may explain why the selfish male tends to be impatient with
others. He does not try to analyze the motivation of others
and work through trying human situations, but rather prefers
to end or change his involvement with non-nurturant rela-
100
tlonships. This observation is substantiated by a number of
autobiographical comments to that effect.
The dominance and abasement variable would be ex
pected to show this pattern of correlation. For some of
these men, dominating others has been extremely rewarding in
that a measure of control exists over sources of gratifica
tion. Having a source of gratification nearby at all times
is one thing, but being able to turn it on and off like a
faucet is still another social advantage. The development
of manipulation skills usually has its origin and reinforce
ment in the home situation. It is interesting that their
parents played the role of "servant," but not that of "mar
tyr." Seldom were children made to feel the "goodness" of
being indebted to parents for what they did for them. It
would also follow that if a selfish male was low in domi
nance but high in abasement, his parents combined indulgence
with martyrdom.
The relationship of dominance to heterosexuality ap
peared as somewhat o^f a surprise. "Common sense" would sug
gest that the selfish male with high heterosexual needs
would not always turn out to be a rake but at least would
think and act in terms of manipulating others for his own
sexual purposes. The evidence questions this belief. As
noted earlier, these individuals are not active exploiters of
others. Their socialization has been one long experience of
waiting and letting others provide for them. Passive sex
101
roles may represent a continuation of this life theme. The
selection of a mate may tend to be drawn from a field of
eligible "mother types."
Intercorrelations for selfish females which were
found to be statistically significant are:
1. Deference and Aggression (-.49)
2. Order and Exhibition (-.50)
3. Order and Heterosexuality (-.65)
4. Exhibition and Intraception (-.55)
5. Exhibition and Dominance (+.50)
6. Affiliation and Endurance (-.49)
7. Intraception and Dominance (-.64)
The above intercorrelations for selfish females pose
the same problems of interpretation discussed earlier. The
following analysis of a number of these relationships is of
fered for consideration:
The negative correlation between deference and ag
gression scores for this group probably reflects the fact
that these two needs are incompatible patterned alternatives
in obtaining gratifications. Some women within this group
have apparently discovered that gratification for personal
needs arrives more regularly as the result of playing pas
sive subordinate roles which emphasize dependency. On the
other hand, some selfish women have found that aggressive
responsiveness to others is the most effective means of
102
getting others to serve them. As noted previously, this
last pattern is more common of the two for the selfish fe
male .
The negative correlation between order and exhibi
tion may also suggest that orderliness and exhibitionism may
be alternative means of influencing others to respond to
them with high nurturance. Neatness, organization, and
careful planning may characterize those who feel some inse
curity about the likelihood of others gratifying their needs.
These same individuals may perceive self-limitations in be
ing able to effectively produce a flow of nurturance toward
themselves by exhibitionist techniques. By the same token,
individuals who manage to have their needs satisfied by ex
hibitionist behavior have little need to become concerned
with planning for the future. Also, order and exhibition
normally are negatively correlated to some extent. An ex
hibitionist is usually characterized as having some sponta
neity and irregularity which has connotations of low order
liness .
The negative correlation between exhibition and in
traception is more meaningful when related to the intensi
ties of succorance and nurturance. The selfish female tends
to have less of a need for understanding others than main
taining herself in the social spotlight. Obviously, this
last concern requires a certain amount of social intelli
gence in order to effectively arrange human associations so
103
they are productive for herself, but such "intraception"
tends to be somewhat shallow. She is not particularly in
terested in observing and analyzing others for its own sake.
People are not analyzed and evaluated from a sense of curi
osity of "why they do things," but rather from a purposeful
concern of "why they don't do things for me." This negative
correlation would suggest that the female with a selfish
orientation toward others and herself may not develop sharp
social sensitivities and understandings about "generalized
others." The primary concern is with being the star of cen
ter of attention, irrespective of the game which others may
be playing. Understanding and fitting into the nature of
the social situation is quite secondary to the expression of
this need. Personal adjustment has a flavor of egotism for
the selfish female. The socialization of these females
within the overindulgent home has seldom directed the child
to perceive wider social contexts. Understanding of others
has been unnecessary; exhibition has always worked— hence
the popular observation that selfish individuals frequently
fall to perceive correctly social situations involving them
selves may be partially explained by this analysis. It is
interesting that a negative correlation between exhibition
and intraception was not found for selfish men.
The positive correlation between exhibition and dom
inance is a natural relationship for the selfish female. It
may be explained by noting that when a woman has a high need
for the "center of the stage," the fulfillment of this ob
jective frequently requires manipulating others, especially
competitors for the same source of gratification. A high
need for exhibition is the key here. It may be noted that
selfish females in a modal sense are average in the need for
dominance, but for the female high in exhibition, dominance
tends to be high. Presumably, the female low in exhibition
would tend to be also low in dominance, simply passively re
ceptive. The more common pattern of high exhibition with
high dominance is probably associated with a type of social
ization occurring in the child—centered home already dis
cussed, which goes further in rewarding "child exhibition
ism" to such an extent that such behavior patterns came to
be recognized by the child as having manipulative powers
over others, which in turn were important in having others
gratify their needs.
The negative correlation between affiliation and en
durance for the selfish female is partially explained by the
fact that some of the affiliation test items carry a conno
tation of play and "fun," whereas the endurance items allude
to work, problems, and tasks. The correlation coefficient
may reflect a covariational relationship on the basis of
these pleasure-pain factors since affiliation and endurance
needs were both significantly below the mean for women in
this group. This correlation coefficient then indicates
that an inverse relationship tends to prevail between these
105
variables even though both are below average for the group
as a whole.
One of the most fascinating findings to come from
the correlation data for this personality model is the nega
tive correlation between intraception and dominance for the
women. The coefficient is reflective of two patterns for
these individuals: (1) the selfish female high in the need
for intraception tends to be low in dominance, and (2) the
individual low in intraception tends to be high in domi
nance. Taking account of the fact that mean scores for both
variables are not significantly different from the normative
sample, it seems reasonable to infer that both patterns de
scribe this group. It may be recalled that a similar signi
ficant negative correlation described the altruistic female.
However, the high need for intraception for the altruistic
woman suggests that the negative correlation in this case
reflects many more cases of the first pattern described
above. It is interesting that practically no correlation
exists between these two variables for the male. Various
caricatures of women in our culture have been drawn which
take into account the combined qualities of selfishness, low
intraception, and high dominance. Insatiable demands upon
others for support, disinterest in doing things for others,
inability or unwillingness to think, reason, understand, and
finally a determination to mold, direct, or force others to
conform to their purposes are commonly woven together to
106
form a popular negative stereotype which Thurber and other
commentators on modern sex roles have used to taunt the
sensibility and conscience of many women. Of course, this
stereotype does not account for all of the selfish women in
our culture. Although the correlation is the second highest
of seventy-eight, many exceptions to this pattern occurred.
It would also be a mistake to conclude that the selfish fe
male who is above average in dominance tends always to ex
hibit irrationality. Another possible explanation may be
that selfish women high in intraception and low in the need
for dominating others are clever in subtly manipulating
themselves into positions which bring about high nurturance
for themselves without much outward direction and control
over others. Seeking sympathy from others is frequently an
effective means of obtaining support from others.
In summarizing this discussion of the selfish self,
it is important to emphasize that the students who comprised
this group are relatively normal individuals. The fact that
they tend to manifest a selfish orientation does not imply
that there should be questions to answer concerning their
mental health or necessarily problems of social adjustment
to relate. Despite the fact that our culture tends to dis
courage extreme forms of selfish expression, individuals and
groups have developed accomodations to this type of individ
ual and used him to profitably serve societal ends. Fur
thermore, few individuals view this type of person as a
107
serious threat to on-going social processes. He can be
controlled fairly easily when the social group decides that
this is in its best interests. There is a general tendency
to perceive the selfish individual as a nonproductive member
of society, but in many respects this is not entirely true.
Few selfish individuals are so completely preoccupied with
their own ends that they fail to fit into some societal role
which has direct or indirect supportive outcomes for others.
The analysis of these data has largely focused at
tention upon high needs for succorance. Not much has been
said concerning low nurturance. This may be explained by
pointing out that the types of socialization resulting in
high nurturance have been lacking for almost all of the in
dividuals studied within this category.
It would be an exaggeration to suggest that the pat
terns of socialization predominant among these selfish cases
were in all respects a striking departure from typical child
raising norms. Home life as described by most of these in
dividuals appears to be quite normal except for the common
pattern of familial overindulgence. It is important to note
that this one factor has played a large role in the social
ization of the person. One of the most significant results
in the fact that the individual must come to the eventuality
of confronting the wider social world outside of his family.
The "reality shock" of discovering the impersonality and
lack of nurturance on the part of persons outside of his
108
family often provides a measure of stress and strain and may
bring about some adjustment problems. However, in a mental
health sense, this is not a substantial problem for the in
dividuals studied in this research. They usually learn to
accomodate themselves to these social conditions and also to
modify their demanding behavior. Many appear to manifest
more than sufficient productiveness in meeting their own
needs and sometimes the needs of others, although a selfish
attitude may continue to prevail as a personal preference.
The selfish men and women described here are not socially
incompetent from a behavioristic point of view. They often
are capable of being part of social relationships which are
primarily supportive of individuals of this type. It ap
pears that most of these cases are fairly well adjusted to
the human groups of which they are a part. The selfish self
generally does not reveal the extremes of social deficiency
popularly associated with this type of internal motivation.
CHAPTER V
THE RECEPTIVE-GIVING SELF
The receptive-giving personality orientation de
scribed thirty-four men and thirty-one women. All of these
cases had succorance and nurturance scores in the upper
quartile on the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule. The
men and women within this category tend to manifest a high
need to have others support and aid them, but also exhibit
high inner motivation to want to respond to others in a sim
ilar manner. They differ from the altruistic self in that
they tend to depend upon others rather than themselves for
maintaining physical, psychological, and social states of
well-being. Unlike the selfish self, this personality type
directs much energy toward the gratification of needs in
others. The findings of this study are suggestive of some
patterns of interrelationship between succorance and nurtur
ance for individuals who indicate these levels of need in
tensity. An analysis of mean scores and intercorrelation
coefficients for the EPPS test data has disclosed how other
personality attributes integrate with the receptive-giving
orientation. The autobiographical data also point to some
109
110
types of socialization which are associated with the forma
tion of this hasic orientation.
It would seem that this is the type of personality
wh ch a culture stressing “togetherness" would idealize. A
ra :her happy hypothetical situation of intense cooperation,
high productivity, and emotional closeness may be imagined
for interacting persons sharing these high intensities of
succorance and nurturance. The picture probably also looks
good philosophically to persons with a humanistic point of
view. No one appears to be exploited by others in the sense
that one contributes as he withdraws from the stock of "good
works." It would follow that human productivity would be
high as this orientation would stress achievement and be
sustained by the development of social conscience emphasiz
ing welfare for others. By the same token, high endurance
and persistence in tackling and solving problems would de
scribe such individuals. And finally, it might be thought
that such individuals would tend to derive a great deal of
satisfaction from friendship relationships. The findings of
this study for the receptive-giving person throw some inter
esting light upon such beliefs.
One of the most difficult factors to assess in all
of these data is the high intensity of nurturance reported
by the EPPS for these individuals. In contrast, the high
scores for succorance are readily substantiated from infor
mation derived from autobiographical materials from each
Ill
case. In the case of succorance, high motivation toward de
pendency relationships is indicated from the EPPS scores and
is supported by personal testimony citing concrete behavior
as evidence. The autobiographical data do not often make
clear for the variable of nurturance whether the high inten
sity represents a form of unrealized wishfulness to be able
to respond to others in a nurturant manner or is actually a
behavioral trait highly characteristic of the person. 1
Fromm noted that frequently the person dominated by the "re
ceptive orientation" has a desire to want to help others but
tends to be rather helpless in this respect. This certainly
appears to be the case for many of the men and women in this
research group as will be demonstrated later in this discus
sion. The autobiographical data do not always indicate the
extent to which the high need to give to others is actually
expressed in the form of overt nurturance, hence a degree of
caution prevails in making a solid judgment in evaluating
these data in connection with this problem. However, it ap
pears to be quite proper to accept as valid an inference
1This problem may be thought to apply to the EPPS
test data in general. However, one of the assumptions of
this study is that need intensities tend to be indicative of
related intensities of manifest behavior. This assumption
unfortunately lacks empirical validation because of the tau
tological character of need theory. But in the absence of
other well-developed theoretical constructs capable of mea
surement and appropriate for use in a study of this type,
the present tools had to suffice. When it has been con
sidered necessary to distinguish between need as an internal
psychological force and need as a behavioral characteristic,
this has been done by means of explicit statement of im
plicit inference.
112
that the receptive-giving self generally has at least an at
titude of nurturance toward others even though the predispo
sition to act in this direction may not be fully realized.
Although comparisons between the four personality
models is reserved for future discussion, some of the char
acteristics of the receptive-giving self may be made clearer
if reference is made to the two personality types previously
discussed. When the personality typology employed in this
study was discussed with interested lay people, there was a
tendency to judge the relative social merits of each. The
receptive-giving personality seemed to most of these people
to be the best combination of succorance and nurturance.
Others thought the altruistic personality carried disturbing
connotations of exploitation by others, the selfish self was
somewhat of a "louse,” and the remaining type, inner-sus
taining self, provoked an image of a cold withdrawn hermit.
Individuals generally prejudged the receptive-giving person
as having a warm and outgoing personality but was likely to
have a fairly careful eye on the control switch which regu
lates the flow of nurturance from him and to him. Fromm's
conceptualization of the "marketing orientation" as a guid
ing force in contemporary life probably explains some of the
positive feeling expressed toward this type of social char
acter. The favorable image of the receptive-giving self re
quires some qualification to bring it in line with reality,
however. The following observations are largely based upon
113
the study of autobiographical materials which provided in
sight into the personality dynamics of this type of individ
ual .
The men of this social type revealed some negative
attitudes toward their present social relationships which
the women of this study did not bring out in their autobio
graphical sketches. Many of the men appeared to be engaged
in a straining flight from involvement with their families.
Resentment toward a position of subservient dependency with
in the family tended to be a common reaction not shared by
the women of this group. It would appear that peer group
influences upon these men were having an impact in manifest
ing a certain amount of social independence from the family,
although psychologically there is a degree of inner conflict
in doing so. The "warm and outgoing" qualities popularly
associated with this type of person are more likely to be
found in the female than the male. Although the patterns of
socialization are not significantly different as far as
parent-child relationships are concerned, it is apparent
that cultural definitions concerning sex roles provide a
measure of strain and stress for the male which the female
may meet along traditional lines with greater ease.
Three factors important for understanding the pat
terns of socialization for the receptive-giving male became
identified in the process of studying the autobiographical
data: (1) He very often came from a large family, typically
a very closely knit social unit. All during childhood and
early adolescense the family served as the singular source
of social gratifactions. Interaction outside of the fam
ily was limited to rather casual secondary relationships.
He learned to depend upon the family for almost all of his
physical, social, and psychological needs. He also learned
a sense of responsibility and obligation to his parents and
siblings. (2) His family tended to be organized along tra
ditional lines. Fathers were very often high in dominance
over other members of the family. Mothers accepted a sub
missive role in relation to the father and also assumed a
very providing and supportive position in the eyes of their
children. As is often typical in the case of a harsh, puni
tive father, a fairly high degree of maternal overprotection
and overindulgence characterized these mother-son relation
ships. The formation of this dependency relationship seem
ingly is what produced the fairly durable psychological
product of high succorance. (3) His family often had a
strong religious orientation woven into the fabric of daily
life patterns. This factor has played a very significant
role in producing and reinforcing a high need for nurtur
ance .
It is important to view these three factors in the
way they usually worked together to bring about the develop
ment of the receptive-giving male. The strict discipline
demanded by the father initiated and sustained a high degree
115
of responsibility and service to the family, especially
younger siblings. Self-sacrifice for the family was a means
of avoiding punishment and obtaining paternal approval.
Successful fulfillment of these expectations resulted in
good adjustment within the family, and this social formula
for getting along was always made clear to the child at al
most every turn. The authority of the father in defining
proper conduct was seldom questioned. This pattern was
often further reinforced by a high level of religiousity
which tended to permeate the life of the family. Christian
ethics emphasizing the "goodness and glory" of self-sacri
fice promoted the development of high nurturance. Failure
to measure up to this ideal could mobilize the wrath of a
vindicative Jehovah producing the discomfortable inner sen
sations of guilt and fear. The role of the mother in this
family is also quite important. She served as an insulator
and provided a psychological refuge from the demands of her
husband upon their son. The patience and generosity of most
of these mothers cultivated a high degree of emotional iden
tification between the son and mother. The resemblance of
these dynamics to the rather well-worm Freudian theory of
the Oedipus complex is unmistakable. The final outcome of
an individual emerging in adult life with basic antagonisms
to authority and the traditional male role as personified by
his father is not a myth for these men. The following auto
biographical statements illustrate some of these findings:
116
532M. "I came from a very religious and close knit
family. Almost without exception we went to church togeth
er. .. . Everything I did, whether it was physical, social
or cultural was centered around the family. . . . My father
was overdomineering and my mother tried to counteract this
by being somewhat overprotective. I was taught strict re
spect for my parents and superiors. . . . Everyone that
knows me says that I'm easy to get along with, but I'm
afraid that if I say something it will either offend someone
or it will be inappropriate. I have unflinching loyalty to
ward friends. There is no limit to things I won't do for
someone once I'm convinced a person has my interests at
heart. . . . As a child I was able to get along with most
everybody but could never establish a close relationship.
. . . I do not have an inferiority complex, I really am in
ferior. "
188M. "I had a pretty normal childhood. I was a
quiet child. . . . I personally feel that I never measured
up to my father's expectations, and due to this was overpro
tected and in some ways spoiled by my mother. During high
school, my relationship at home was not happy. . . . I hated
my father even though everything he ever did was for my
good. I never did anything he told me to do. In fact, I
did very badly in school because he wanted me to go to col
lege. . . . I rated very high on abasement. I think this
reverts back again to my parents. I think my inferiority
stems from them telling me how much they did for me and my
not doing anything in return. My father was the final law,
and if things were not run according to his plan, things got
pretty rough. This, I think, explains my timidity in the
presence of superiors or supposed superiors. . . . Actually,
I do quite a bit for the family . . . more than my sister."
249M. "My experiences and relationships with my
parents were mostly influenced by an overprotective mother.
During my childhood, she directed my activities and routine
according to her own likings. During preadolescence, I be
gan to develop my own likes and dislikes, but was restricted
because of the inability to set out on my own. The adoles
cent period was much the same. I had the will to break away,
but because of my mother's wishes, both parents continued to
be my shadow. . . . Succorance was learned by me from my
mother's overprotection."
240M. "My attending of parochial school I have al
ways felt put me on a different level than the other people
in my age group. . . . It was against the teachings of the
church that I was a member of to dance and attend activities
of the like. . . . My father played a sort of semidomineer-
ing role in our family. Now that I am the head of a house-
117
hold myself, I do not like playing the domineering father.
. . . Things^ were always done for me by my mother.
498M. "Originating from traditional, Catholic par
ents, my destiny was to live and to become part of a very
large family. The social environment of my family, being
traditional, is patriarchal, but my mother does assert her
self some of the time. Sometimes one would think that it
was matriarchal, except that last-minute and important deci
sions are largely handled by my father. This could stem
mainly from the fact that although my mother is dominant to
some extent, her father was dominant and she possibly wishes
her husband to be this way also. . . . Early childhood for
me was a period of need satisfaction and probably over-in
dulgence. Being the only boy in the family one can easily
realize this, besides the fact that I had two older, nurtur-
ant sisters. The effects that this treatment left on me
were possibly my high need for succorance and, at the time
possibly caused me to become "spoiled" as a youngster and
retain this need untilthe present time."
The development of the receptive-giving orientation
for the women of this group seems to have been accomplished
with less psychological strain and conflict than marked the
men. This difference might possibly be accounted for in
Freudian terms, but undoubtedly part of the explanation is
sociological in that the female has tended to fulfill cul
tural expectations for her sex role, whereas the male exhib
its a degree of failure. The "natural nature" of women as
popularly conceived runs along the lines of high receptive
ness and "nurturant motherliness." Although this "helpless
but kind" image may be a somewhat fading conservative pic
ture of what the female is or ought to be in our culture,
many are socialized in a social psychological milieu in
which it serves as a prominent model. Sociologists have
gathered much evidence to indicate that this idealized image
has been undergoing a transition in contemporary American
118
culture and, accordingly, women now face problems of cul-
tural contradiction in their sex roles. That is, they are
often expected to fulfill the conservative image, but on
the other hand, they are also expected to be self-sustaining
in personal relationships and are thought to be socially in
competent or psychologically archaic if their only interest
is to play traditional home roles and be supportive of
others. The women of this sample are belatedly just begin
ning to confront this contradiction of social role. How*,
ever, in most instances the full impact of role ambiguity
and conflict may never be felt if they are able to indefi
nitely extend parent-child relationships or find a substi
tute in the form of a mate who has traditional expectations
concerning the wife-mother role. Many of the women look ap
provingly upon themselves as they evaluate this facet of
their personality, but the men indicate negative feelings
toward themselves for the same condition of temperament.
It is impossible to distinguish any basically dif
ferent patterns of total family life for the women and men.
The fathers in these families tended to be much more permis
sive toward their daughters than was the case for sons. The
means of obtaining conformity to parental wishes were less
severe, and resentment to authority is not characteristic.
A great deal of positive feeling toward the mother generally
Mirra Komarovsky, "Cultural Contradictions and Sex
Roles," American Journal of Sociology, LII (November, 1946),
184-189.
119
developed and resulted in the daughter feeling a strong
identification with her, this being constantly reinforced by
approval from the father who was usually eager to see her
follow in his wife's social and psychological pattern. Very
often the large families which tend to characterize this
group provided endless opportunities for taking care of sib
lings and learning the mother role, which appears to be one
of the principal means of forming the nurturant disposition.
The receptive-giving orientation for both men and
women may be further understood by noting the mean scores
and standard deviations for the EPPS test variables which
are presented in Tables 11 and 12.
Turning to this test data for the male, six vari
ables are seen as significantly different for the receptive-
giving self and the normative males: achievement is lower,
autonomy is lower, affiliation is higher, dominance is low
er, abasement is higher, and endurance is lower.
The lower need for achievement may be explained par
tially in terms of resentment and hostility to the father
and subsequent authority figures. It has already been
pointed out that the fathers demanded a high level of suc
cess from their sons. Self-imposed restricted productivity,
or "goldbricking," became one of the fairly safe ways of
counteracting parental wishes and demands. Psychologically,
the son usually felt he was punishing his father for failing
to achieve. This form of responsiveness to opportunity
120
TABLE 11
MEANS FOR RECEPTIVE-GIVING MALES AND FEMALES
COMPARED TO EPPS NORMATIVE
COLLEGE SAMPLE
Variable
Males
Normative
Males Females
Normative
Females
Achievement 14.03a 15.66 12 .39 13.08
Deference 10.71 1 1 .2 1 11.48 12 .40
Order 9.26 10.23 9.29 10.24
Exhibition 14.03 14.40 13.00 14.28
Autonomy 1 2.21b 14.34 12.45 12 .29
Affiliation 17.35b 15.00 15.68a 17.40
Intraception 15.48 16.12 16.35 17.32
Succorance 17.12 10.74 18.39 12 .53
Dominance 14.91b 17 .44 1 0.8 lb 14.18
Abasement 14.15a 12.24 16.19 15.11
Nurturance 19.38 14.04 21.74 16.42
Change 14.15 15.51 15.94 17 .20
Endurance 9.47b 1 2 .6 6 8 .77b 12 .63
Heterosexuality 16.62 17.65 16.16 14.34
Aggression 12.17 12 .79 10.77 10.59
N = 34 760 31 749
Significant at the .05 level.
Significant at the .01 level.
121
TABLE 12
STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR RECEPTIVE-GIVING
MALES AND FEMALES COMPARED TO EPPS
NORMATIVE COLLEGE SAMPLE
Variable
Males
Normative
Males Females
Normative
Females
Achievement 3.99 4.13 3.69 4.19
Deference 3.82 3.59 4.31 3.72
Order 4.80 4.31 3.83 4.37
Exhibition 3.75 3.53 4.14 3.65
Autonomy 3.92 4.45 4.95 4.34
Affiliation 4.21 4.32 3.82 4.07
Intraception 5.30 5.23 4.53 4.70
Succorance 3.07 4.70 3.12 4.42
Dominance 4.49 4.88 4.61 4.60
Abasement 6 .1 1 4.93 5.82 4.94
Nurturance 2 .37 4.80 1.55 4.41
Change 4.72 4.74 3.52 4.87
Endurance 4.33 5.30 4.96 5.19
Heterosexuality 5.31 5.48 5.56 5.39
Aggression 5.14 4.59 4.48 4.61
N = 34 760 31 749
122
continues as a psychological residual for many of the recep
tive-giving males, although some of them are trying to re
orient themselves to a more rational approach. It is gener
ally argued that parental indulgence influences a low level
of striving on the part of children. However, in the recep
tive-giving orientation lower achievement appears to be re
lated to the difficulties encountered between the father and
his son rather than a condition of overindulgence.
The lower need for autonomy reflects the problem of
psychological dependency. These men were very much bothered
by their inadequate capacity to get along effectively on
their own. Taking into consideration the average mean score
in deference for these men, along with the negative correla
tion of .35 for deference and autonomy, there is an indica
tion that for those who felt a need to depend upon others it
is less likely that they were critical of authority and de
sired independence.
A finding of high affiliation needs in these men is
partially a response to their problem of not being well-
integrated in secondary group relationships or, in many in
stances, primary relationships outside of the home. These
men have been almost exclusively preoccupied with their fam
ilies and their activities. Living a life of familial to
getherness has restricted them from opportunities to develop
socially in peer group relationships. A number of the men
lament this outcome; others rationalize it by citing the
12 3
advantages of a family which "works together, plays to
gether, and prays together." In any case, disadvantages of
this facet of their socialization have been mentioned fre
quently enough in the autobiographical materials to justify
their presentation here. The problem for these individuals
is basically twofold. First of all, they lack many of the
essential social skills required for successful integration
in secondary group association. Father has often forbidden
too much, and mother was never much for providing effective
direction in learning attitudes and skills prized by male
peer groups, her main role being one of protection. Second
ly, they often feel such social and psychological distance
from people outside of their family that they enter social
situations with feelings of rejection when no such rejection
has in fact taken place. Withdrawal from each new attempt
to find friends further magnifies the problem. Thus, the
high need for affiliation among these men, as reported by
the EPPS, is not indicative of a behavioral characteristic
of this group, but rather suggests an intense need in find
ing a solution to a problem of social acceptance.
The low need for dominance suggests that the recep
tive-giving male has identified more frequently with his
mother than his father. Although some men indicated a mea
sure of envy for the power and dominance their fathers dis
played over their family, few of the cases came to resemble
their fathers in this respect. The function of resentment
124
which many of these men shared toward their fathers seldom
permitted the fathers to act effectively as ego models with
respect to this trait. It is quite possible that domination
over other siblings occurred with some frequency? however,
the use of the displacement mechanism seldom resulted in any
habitual attitudes or actions in this direction and merely
served to release feelings of hostility toward the father
upon less dangerous objects.
The high need for abasement is one of the most in
teresting findings about the receptive-giving male. The
high moral order which prevailed with these families was
naturally impressed upon the child. In a great many in
stances, David Riesman would not be able to find better
examples for illustrating the "inner-directed" mode of
teaching conformity than the personal histories written by
3
some of these students. The moral direction of these cases
has only been slightly affected by maturity. They have a
need to feel guilty about matters which their classmates
would feel are largely irrelevant as moral issues. They
often pay a heavy psychological penalty for their occasional
transgressions. Their expressed feelings of inadequacy are
reflective in the high score for abasement for this group.
The two influences of home and church have conspired to pro
duce this outcome. Erich Fromm has done a fine job of
2
David Riesman, The Lonely Crowd (New Haven* Yale
University Press, 1950).
12 5
making clear the dynamics of guilt as they relate to domi
nance and dependency. He states:
Not only do guilt feelings result from one's de
pendence on an irrational authority and from the feel
ing that it is one's duty to please that authority
but the guilt feeling in its turn reinforces depend
ence. Guilt feelings have proved to be the most ef
fective means of forming and increasing dependency,
and herein lies one of the social functions of author
itarian ethics throughout history. The authority as
law giver makes its subjects feel guilty for their
many and unavoidable transgressions. The guilt of un
avoidable transgressions before authority and the need
for its forgiveness thus creates an endless chain of
offense, guilt feeling, and the need for absolution
which keeps the subject in bondage and grateful for
forgiveness rather than critical of the authority's
demands. It is this interaction between guilt feel
ing and dependency which makes for the solidarity of
the authoritarian relationships. . . . The most effec
tive method for weakening the child's will is to
arouse his sense of guilt.
The especially low need for endurance seems to be a
product of repeated failure on the part of these men to meet
parental expectations which were often set too high. When
an individual suffers repeated setbacks he has three avenues
of adjustment open to him: a hostile or aggressive mode of
counteraction, enlistment of aid or obtaining sympathy from
others, or withdrawal from the problem. Most receptive-
giving men tend to follow the latter pattern. This mode of
adjustment is the last resort. It is used when all effec
tive means for confronting a problem have been exhausted,
when there is no aid coming from any source, and finally
when no one cares and sympathy is not even forthcoming.
^Erich Fromm, Man for Himself (New York: Rinehart
and Co., 1947), p. 155.
126
This means a retreat into apathy. Psychologically this is
the direction in which these cases move. A voice cries from
within, "Give up. It's no ueei" Another explanation may be
that mother may have said too often, "Your father doesn't
understand, I'll do it for you." Thus, the need to desist
rather than persist becomes part of the basic personality of
the individual. The high need for succorance is its rela
tive in this family of personality traits.
Three means were found to be significantly different
from the normative sample for the receptive-giving women.
These were low affiliation, low dominance, and low endurance.
The low mean score for women on affiliation is es
pecially worthy of note because receptive-giving males had a
statistically significant high mean. There are several fac
tors which appear to be at work to produce this difference
of need intensity which seem rather clear from what these
people have had to say about themselves. First of all, life
within the social confines of their typical homes is quite
comfortable for the female in a physical, social, and psy
chological sense. There is little need to seek companion
ship outside of the home. "Father doesn't stand for much
nonsense, but he loves his darling daughter. Mother is so
kind and thoughtful. Brother and sister are so much fun to
be with. My family is the most wonderful in the world!"
The male did not usually perceive his home environment in
such rosy terms. He feels more of a need to seek out
127
gratifying secondary relationships or friendships outside of
his family.
The low need for dominance on the part of these
women is probably the result of recurrent conservative defi
nitions as to what role a wife should play in decision-mak
ing within the family. Most of these individuals grew up
with mothers who played passive and submissive parts in the
family scene. It is generally much easier for the female
child to model herself after her mother than it is for the
male child to do likewise after his father; this is especi
ally true in familial situations in which social distance
prevails between fathers and sons. The mothers in most of
these cases have been described as genuinely warm and con
cerned about their children. This factor of love has prob
ably been an important factor in causing these women to
model themselves so completely after their mothers with re
spect to the attribute of dominance.
The low endurance scores for women follow the male
pattern in this regard. Frustration is often overantici-
pated. Both parents have generally exhibited high tolerance
for "helplessness," and the mothers have generally expressed
their need for nurturance by rushing to aid their "stricken"
daughters. These women have learned that endurance is an
unnecessary trait for physical and social survival because
assistance is always waiting. When human resources are ex
hausted, they will become charter members of the God-Help-
128
Me-Out Club. Playing a subordinate role within the family
incurs some obligations for others occupying superordinate
roles. This includes responding to her calls for help when
ever a difficult situation presents itself. One woman de
scribed her relationship to her mother by means of the fol
lowing illustration:
263F. "My mother can sit down for hours and sew.
Now, I have big ideas about perhaps making a dress7 but
after two hours of concentrated work, I'm ready to quit. My
mother always ends up doing it for me. This is the story of
my life. My mother has always been there to do it for me,
and I usually let her."
The interrelationship of personality attributes for
the receptive-giving self may be further understood by ob
serving the EPPS intercorrelation data for men and women
as presented in Tables 13 and 14.
Intercorrelations which were considered both sub
stantively and statistically significant for the receptive-
giving male are:
1. Achievement and Change (-.54)
2. Deference and Aggression (-.70)
3. Order and Dominance (-.40)
4. Endurance and Heterosexuality (-.61)
The negative correlation between achievement and
change provides a clue that two variations of response to
parental stress upon high achievement have developed for
these men. In some cases parents were successful in incul
cating a high need for achievement. In such instances it is
likely that the individual exhibits a low need for change.
TABLE 13
EPPS VARIABLE INTERCORRELATIONS FOR RECEPTIVE-GIVING MALES
AND TOTAL ECC MALE SAMPLE
2
Def
3
Ord
4
Exh
5
Aut
6
Aff
7
Int
8
Dom
9
Aba
10
Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
1 Ach -2 3
(14)
-32
(-03)
-03
(14)
-05
(0 2)
31
(-1 1)
-16
(-19)
32
( 2 0)
-30
(-2 0)
-54
(-08)
06
(04)
-05
(14)
22
(13)
2 Def 27
(14)
00
(-0 2)
-35
(05)
06
(-03)
10
(04)
-19
(-0 1)
-08
(-09)
17
(0 0)
36
(1 0)
-26
(-18)
-70
(-04)
3 Ord -05
(-1 1)
07
(-09)
-2 0
(-2 0)
-06
(-1 0)
-40
(-15)
-18
(-06)
-03
(-1 0)
32
(40)
-1 1
(-19)
-22
(-19)
4 Exh 22
(09)
34
(-08)
-38
(-2 1)
09
(15)
-18
(-10)
-02
(-06)
-23
(-09)
02
(0 1)
-20
(05)
5 Aut -17
(-23)
-39
(-1 2)
-03
(0 2)
06
(-08)
01
( 2 0)
-38
(-15)
21
(-04)
22
( 2 2)
6 Aff -34
(0 0)
16
(-06)
-27
(-05)
-27
(-06)
07
(-24)
-0 1
(-06)
-21
(-32)
7 Int -30
(-06)
02
(04)
12
(-1 2)
13
(06)
-2 1
(-15)
05
(-07)
8 Dom -19
(-30)
-34
(-2 2)
00
(-07)
11
(-04)
17
(17)
h
K
129
TABLE 13— Continued
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Def Ord Exh Aut Aff Int Dom
9 10
Aba Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
9 Aba 04
(-08)
-09
(-09)
-26
(-17)
-05
(-1 1)
10 Chg -25
(-06)
25
(07)
-12
(-07)
11 End -61
(-2 0)
-2 1
(-09)
12 Het
N = 34
(N) = 299
03
(0 2)
Notesi
a. Coefficients within parentheses are those for the total ECC male sample.
b. Decimal points have been omitted in the presentation of coefficients to con
serve space.
c. Succorance and nurturance intercorrelation coefficients are omitted from the
table because their axes do not meet the assumptions of rectilinearity and homoscadastic-
ity required by the Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation. Trends of associ
ation for succorance and nurturance with other variables may be roughly inferred from com
parisons of means among sub—classes.
d. r's below .32 not significant at .05 level for receptive-giving males,
r's below .11 not significant at .05 level for total ECC male sample.
130
TABLE 14
EPPS VARIABLE INTERCORRELATIONS FOR RECEPTIVE-GIVING FEMALES
AND TOTAL ECC FEMALE SAMPLE
2
Def
3
Ord
4
Exh
5
Aut
6
Aff
7
Int
8
Dom
9
Aba
10
Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
1 Ach -1 1
(0 2)
06
(-0 2)
-37
(0 2)
15
(05)
-43
(-26)
14
(-0 1)
-04
(ID
-34
(-24)
10
(-1 1)
09
(0 2)
03
(-09)
-14
(-07)
2 Def 38
(29)
08
(-07)
-44
(-27)
-28
(-0 2)
16
(1 1)
-37
(-2 1)
55
(07)
-14
(0 1)
33
(13)
-41
(-19)
-38
(-34)
3 Ord -23
(-18)
-42
(-1 2)
-30
(-2 1)
-04
(-03)
-17
(-15)
17
(0 2)
-09
(-06)
61
(45)
-30
(-36)
-07
(-1 0)
4 Exh -17
(0 1)
35
(-07)
-26
(-27)
23
(25)
16
(-10)
-03
(04)
-04
(-14)
-14
(08)
-09
(07)
5 Aut -04
(-16)
-29
(-23)
-22
(-0 2)
—21
(-17)
27
( 2 2)
-36
(-03)
19
(04)
05
(18)
6 Aff -26
(06)
18
(-19)
-05
(01)
-02
(04)
10
(-19)
-0 1
(-09)
05
(-16)
7 Int 01
(-1 2)
-1 0
(-0 1)
-34
(-08)
29
(15)
-13
(-13)
-23
(-18)
8 Dom -55
(-37)
-18
(-08)
-26
(0 2)
34
(0 1)
29
(24)
131
TABLE 14— Continued
2
Def
3
Ord
4
Exh
5
Aut
6
Aff
7 8
Int Dom
9
Aba
10
Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
9 Aba -04
(-1 2)
27
(-05)
-40
(-1 2)
-40
(-19)
10 Chg -25
(-08)
-0 1
(-03)
-04
(-1 0)
11 End -59
(-37)
-38
(-17)
12 Het
N = 31
(N) = 228
03
(1 2)
Notes:
a. Coefficients within parentheses are those for the total ECC female sample.
b. Decimal points have been omitted in the presentation of coefficients to con
serve space.
c. Succorance and nurturance intercorrelation coefficients are omitted from the
table because their axes do not meet the assumptions of rectilinearity and homoscadastic-
ity required by the Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation. Trends of associ
ation for succorance and nurturance with other variables may be roughly inferred from com
parisons of means among sub-classes.
d. r's below .35 not significant at .05 level for receptive-giving females.
r's below .12 not significant at .05 level for total ECC female sample. uj
133
The traditional idea that success and achievement are real
ized by hard work, persistence, and staying with a task was
probably emphasized. It would appear that these persons
have more fear of change than a real drive for endurance,
however. This probably results in some internal psychologi
cal conflict. The second type of response to this parental
influence resulted in the person feeling resentment to the
high expectations set for him because of his frequent fail
ure to meet them. The individual then began a patterned use
of the mechanism of supplementation in which he sought many
partial successes. This form of adaptation to the demands
for achievement imposed by others may be described in terms
of a high need for change.
The moderately high correlation for the variables of
deference and aggression suggests that these particular men
often had a high degree of resentment about their dependency
relationships which increased with the extent to which they
felt they must rely upon others. Among those who were not
very dependent upon others for suggestions and direction,
there was less of a disposition to blame others when things
went wrong. The fact that this group had average scores in
both deference and aggression suggests that these two pat
terns are correct interpretations, and both are supported to
some extent by autobiographical data.
The relationship between the needs of endurance and
heterosexuality will have to be approached somewhat specu
134
latively. The autobiographies paint a rather dismal picture
of relationships with the opposite sex. When one person re
marked, "Girls don't go for me, so hell with them," he was
probably not speaking for all the men in the group; he was
reflecting their fairly common pattern of not pursuing love
relationships with the usual "spirit of the chase" charac
teristic of a great many men in our culture. Women who fail
to give prompt indications of everlasting devotion are cast
aside. Part of their problem is not clearly understood by
these men. It is true that they have a high desire to give
a great deal to a relationship, but they also have intense
demands upon their love objects which they are often unwill
ing or unable to meet. Most women within their field of
eligibles do not measure up to their mothers in this respect.
Intercorrelations which were considered both sub
stantively and statistically significant for the receptive-
giving female are:
1. Achievement and Affiliation (-.43)
2 . Deference and Autonomy (-.44)
3. Deference and Abasement (+.55)
4. Deference and Heterosexuality (-.41)
5. Order and Endurance (+.61)
6. Dominance and Abasement (-.55)
7. Abasement and Heterosexuality (-.40)
8. Abasement and Aggression (-.40)
9. Endurance and Heterosexuality (-.59)
135
The moderate positive correlation between deference
and abasement suggests that many of these women associated
a feeling of guilt with failure in the event that they had
neglected to consult with others before making decisions. A
number of autobiographies indicated that parents not only
questioned the capacity of the individual to make independ
ent decisions, but when things did in fact go wrong for the
person who was striving to act independently, parents often
made them "feel badly" for their failure to consult them
ahead of time. As one student put it, "My mother was never
terribly bothered by my mistakes . . . only by my not asking
her advice. She always managed to fix things up though so
dad wouldn’t know." The close mother-daughter relationships
very often imposed a requirement upon the daughter to con
sult with her. This was not a rule or a family regulation
spelled out clearly for the daughter in black and white? the
daughter came to feel this obligation which, when violated,
imposed a penalty in the form of guilt, for it implied re
jection of the mother.
The negative correlation between deference and het
erosexuality is also of interest in the light of the preced
ing discussion. Most of these women were socialized with
fairly traditional ideas concerning the expression of sexu
ality. Although communication between the daughter and
mother was generally open for most subjects, it is doubtful
that sexuality was one of these. It probably remained one of
136
the secret and tabooed interests of members of this type of
family. Perhaps the higher score in heterosexuality re
flects suppression and repression to some extent. But in
any case, for women high in heterosexuality there is a tend
ency for them to be low in deference. When problems present
themselves, there is less likelihood that suggestions and
advice are sought from others.
The meaning of the negative correlation between
abasement and heterosexuality is quite clear. It simply in
dicates that there is often a victor in the struggle between
the devil and his more noble adversary. Traditional influ
ences have drawn the battle line sharply for many of the
women in this group. The women high in heterosexuality have
less of a need to feel guilty, although the moralist may
suggest otherwise; women high in abasement have less of a
need for heterosexual relationships.
The negative correlation between endurance and het
erosexuality was discussed for the male. The basic points
mentioned may be considered applicable to many receptive-
giving women with exception to the matter of the male's sex
ual cathexis for his mother.
The positive correlation between order and endurance
is only partially understood in the light of the general
picture of family relationships already discussed. Since
mean scores for both of these variables were below the means
for the normative sample, it is necessary to point out that
137
several discernible personality patterns characterize the
receptive-giving female with respect to these qualities.
Many of these women tend to be very low in endurance. For
these cases a low need for order also characterizes them be
cause orderliness requires some capacity to work at tasks
which are either difficult or uninteresting. But for some
others who have developed a high need for endurance, there
is concomitant variation in the direction of a high need for
order. This latter pattern tends to be less typical for the
receptive-giving group than the first.
The negative correlation between dominance and
abasement is best understood with reference to the mean
scores for these two variables. The fact that this group is
low in dominance and moderately high in abasement suggests
that most of these women are held to their submissive and
passive roles in human relationships through the efficacy of
guilt feelings. The polarity of low dominance and high
abasement tends to harmonize with the over-all receptive-
giving orientation.
In summarizing this discussion of the receptive-
giving self certain commonalities among both sexes may be
noted. First of all, a similarity of family relationships
prevailed for both men and women. Large traditionally ori
ented homes with dominant fathers and permissive supportive
mothers were typical of the descriptions presented in auto
biographical papers by these subjects. Many of the mean
138
scores for the EPPS variables were the same for both sexes,
and of the statistically significant means only one, the
need for affiliation, was in an opposite direction of in
tensity for the sexes. The same pattern of similarity
exists for much of the intercorrelation data. The two sexes
appear to be different largely in terms of certain specific
parent-child relationships: the wide psychological chasm
between fathers and sons and the high degree of closeness
between mothers and daughters. These relationships operate
in conjunction with certain sociological variables: unique
role expectations for males and females in this setting, a
traditional value system, and the problematic conditions of
the wider cultural setting.
It has become apparent in studying what has been re
ported here about the receptive-giving self that a great
deal of emphasis has been placed upon the problems these in
dividuals have seemingly encountered in the course of their
development toward maturity. Concern for the issues raised
was a reflection of what these people had to say about them
selves. It has become especially obvious that many of the
receptive-giving individuals studied here have kinds of
problems not shared by the other three types. Their basic
difficulty is primarily a sociological one— our society is
no longer providing a place for individuals of this orienta
tion. For the male the problem of assuming proper male
roles has always been a difficult one, but the social costs
139
of failure may have been even higher in another era. Today
the receptive-giving female is beginning to face a similar
predicament as feminine social roles change from traditional
conceptions of the proper place for women in the social
order. It is not enough to be good, and helplessness is no
longer both a virtue and a means of aggrandizement for the
ego of the "superior" male.
One final concluding remark concerning the relation
ship of high succorance to high nurturance. It seems appar
ent that most of the cases studied indicate high nurturance
toward others not only because of a feeling of moral re
sponsibility, but because helping others often results in
securing the favor of others which insures an outside source
of gratification for their own needs.
CHAPTER VI
THE INNER-SUSTAINING SELF
The inner-sustaining personality model described
thirty-one men and thirty women of the total research sample
of 527. All of these individuals had succorance and nurtur
ance scores in the lower quartile on the Edwards Personal
Preference Schedule. Low test scores on these two scales
suggest that these particular persons make few requests or
demands upon others for support, nor are they motivated to
want to respond to the needs of others with support and aid.
The term inner-sustaining implies that the individ
ual possesses certain attributes or resources which cause
him to avoid dependency relationships in which he may be ex
pected to be a provider or a receiver. It thus appears on
the surface that such a person has an internal capacity to
sustain himself without social involvement with others, his
image to others often being one of self-sufficiency. This
type of person does not often require help from others, and
even when his circumstances indicate an objective need for
assistance, there is a tendency to accept aid only as a last
resort, and then with a great deal of reluctance because of
its threat to his self feelings of personal adequacy. It is
140
141
not to be inferred from this observation that inner-sustain
ing people do not gratify their social needs from interact
ing with other people. It simply means that the forms of
interaction in which alternatives are provided for the actor
move along the line of avoidance as far as expressions of
both succorance and nurturance are concerned. Aside from
usually conveying an impression of self-sufficiency, which
is commonly evaluated positively in terms of American cul
tural values which discourage dependency, the inner-sustain
ing self is frequently judged negatively by many of his as
sociates. His relative lack of interest in doing things for
others often modifies his socially desirable image of self-
sufficiency into less complementary terms. He is sometimes
viewed as selfish and self-centered. In many instances he
is judged more harshly and with greater disapproval than the
selfish self who is often perceived to be rather helpless.
Furthermore, the inner-sustaining person is usually thought
to possess resources and capacities lacking in the selfish
person, but he is unwilling or psychologically unable to
share his strengths with others. His ability to seemingly
take such good care of himself is often viewed with envy and
jealousy by those who unsuccessfully strive to reach his
level of mastery over their own conditions of life. One may
add to these antipathetic responses another form of reaction
to this type of person. Frequently, individuals make use of
the psychological defense mechanism of projection in their
142
responsiveness to the inner-sustaining self. They look for
ways to demonstrate that their own deficiencies with respect
to dependency also describe men and women motivated in the
direction of this personality model. Obviously, this is not
difficult to do. For even in the most extreme cases of low
succorance, social dependency characterizes the individual
to some extent because it is almost a universal condition of
human association. The infant could never survive except in
a state of dependency upon others agreeable to providing
basic physical and social gratifications. Only the hermit
suggests a relative absence of social dependency, but even
he owes much of his ability to live without others to earli
er dependency relationships. It is apparent that this qual
ity can only be understood in terms of relative variability.
Men and women who are motivated along the lines of
the inner-sustaining orientation are not evaluated by others
in the same way because of sex differences. It appears that
inner-sustaining men are often more readily accepted by
others, as such inclinations are frequently associated with
positive facets of masculinity. In some respects, common
stereotypes of men in American culture are built upon a per
ception of low succorance and nurturance. Women, on the
other hand, are generally idealized in terms of such traits
as high succorance and high nurturance. Thus the inner-
sustaining female is the most distant personality model from
this ideal. This difference between the sexes is important
143
for it throws some light on the quality of defensiveness of
many of the women within the inner-sustaining group. The
men often exhibit defensiveness in protecting their needs
for autonomy and independence, but it is generally directed
to specific individuals, mainly parents, who attempt to in
terfere with the gratification of this need. However, many
of the women exhibit a generalized condition of defensive
ness which is not simply aimed at a few specific individuals
who threaten their freedom; it is often directed at the
world in general— anyone, male or female, who plays a hand,
wittingly or unwittingly, in keeping women boxes in the tra
ditional female roles.
Two relatively recent explorations of social charac
ter resulted in the creation of two personality models which
may possibly be confused with the type of phenomenon associ
ated with the inner-sustaining orientation. These are
A. H. Maslow's conceptualization of a motivational type he
calls the self-actualizing person'*' and David Riesman1 s
inner-directed personality. Both of these theoretical con
structs are substantially different in some significant re
spects from the inner-sustaining self, although there are
some similarities among all three types. In the first
place, the inner-sustaining self as a theoretical model is
Abraham H. Mas low, Motivation and Personality (New
York* Harper and Brothers, 1954), pp. 199-260.
2
David Riesman, The Lonely Crowd (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1950), pp. 29-40.
144
fundamentally concerned with the relationship of the vari
ables of succorance and nurturance and the interplay of
other personality attributes related to these variables.
Maslow's formulation deals primarily with a broad range of
psychological traits which make up a very special type of
3
so-called mature personality. There would undoubtedly be a
tremendous amount of controversy over his idealization of
certain arbitrary judgments of what constitutes maturity if
more people became informed of his writing. It is Maslow's
claim that self-actualizing people have high needs for au
tonomy and independence. He explains this by making the
point that such individuals are not "deficiency motivated"
people.
This independency of environment means a relative
stability in the face of hard knocks, blows, depriva
tions, frustrations, and the like. These people can
maintain a relative serenity and happiness in the
midst of circumstances that would drive other people
to suicide; they have also been described as self-
contained. ^
He suggests that self-actualizing people are often
hampered by others who seek to contain them in forms of de
pendency relationships. He notes that his subjects exhibit
a "healthy selfishness, a great self-respect, a disinclina-
C
tion to make sacrifices without good reason." The sixty-
3
Maslow based his views on self-actualizing people
from a study of what he considered to be the healthiest one
percent of a college population, op. cit., p. 200.
4Ibid., p. 214.
5Ibid., p. 257.
145
one inner-sustaining individuals studied in this research
resemble to some extent the self-actualizing people as de
scribed above. However, development in this direction is
largely a matter of incipient growth or a matter of human
potential. Some of the avoidance for "sacrifice for others"
seems to be related to adolescent rebellion. Whether these
individuals will fully develop in the direction of self-
actualization poses an interesting question which perhaps
only a longitudinal study could answer. Maslow paints a
rather complete picture of a personality model containing
many facets of social character which the inner-sustaining
individuals of this study show little progress in develop
ing: "Becoming problem-centered rather than ego-centered,
freshness of appreciation, a desire for the mystic experi
ence, the dropping of defenses in love relationships, the
g
feeling of another's needs as if they were his own."
The character label of inner-directed personality is
often erroneously used to describe individuals high in the
need for autonomy and independence. Basically, inner-direc-
tion refers to a particular pattern of conformity in which
values are implanted and internalized in the personality of
the young child in the process of early training by parents
and enforced by means of the psychological mechanism of
guilt. There is nothing suggested by David Riesman and his
associates that inner directiveness has anything to do with
6Ibid. pp. 208-260.
146
autonomous "self-direction," although it does make the indi
vidual less responsive to influences of the social group
having schemes of means and ends different from those
learned early in life. Contemporary research utilizing
Riesman's typology of tradition-inner-other direction in
studying social character has often been elaborated to in-
7
elude a fourth type, an autonomous personality. Although
Riesman does not specifically discuss the factors of succor-
ance and nurturance in connection with his concern for the
broader issues of changing social character, What he has to
say in a general way about moral conformity is applicable to
these two variables for they are often popularly discussed
from a moral frame of reference. The inner-sustaining indi
viduals of this study cannot be distributed into Riesman's
categories on the basis of the data collected. However,
several interesting observations may be made concerning the
dynamics of inner- and other-direction as they apply to the
inner-sustaining self. In The Lonely Crowd, the author uses
the navigational instrument of a gyroscope to illustrate the
nature of internal conformity of the inner-directed person-
n
David Riesman, Faces in the Crowd (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1952); see also the following articles in
Seymour Martin Lipset and Leo Lowenthal (eds.), Culture and
Social Character (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1961):
Elaine Graham Sofer, "Inner-Direction, Other-Direction, and
Autonomy: A Study of College Students," pp. 316-348; Seymour
Martin Lipset, "A Changing American Character," pp. 136-171;
Robert Gutman and Dennis Wrong, "David Riesman's Typology of
Character," pp. 295-315; and Matilda White Riley, John W.
Riley, Jr., and Mary E. Moore, "Adolescent Values and the
Riesman Typology," pp. 370-386.
147
ality, a mechanism implanted in the personality during
childhood which always provides the right course of action
irrespective of changing social situations. It would appear
that many inner-sustaining individuals socialized by parents
striving to attain a high degree of inner-direction for
their offspring did not realize their goal. Most of these
cases seem to indicate that even within the period of child
hood the youngster had already put his gyroscope out of com
mission. Parental rewards, approval, punishment, and the
last stop on the organ, the mechanism of guilt, were not ef
fective in making it run. Overindulgence on the part of
parents was often rejected because it usually signaled an
anticipation of future guilt feelings. The rejection of
nurturance on the part of the child frequently resulted in
more intensive parental efforts to win the child's support,
which further intensified the youngster's flight from the
influence of the home because the anticipation of guilt be
came stronger.
The other-directed individual is typed in terms of
behavior which indicates a sensitivity to the preferences
and expectations of others, especially one's contemporaries.
This carries the implication that such persons are especi
ally sensitive to the collectivized social needs of a group
and not simply disparate individuals. Often this sensitiv
ity is generalized to rather large social groupings which
148
may be far beyond the immediate social environment in which
the individual has person contact.
The abandonment of inner-direction in favor of
other-direction is explained by the ineffectiveness of pa
rental efforts to make inner-direction a durable product/
changing "progressive" attitudes of child raising, and the
pull of peer groups upon the child for its own brand of con
formity. Although the role of peer groups in bringing about
a high degree of emancipation from the home is rather evi
dent for males and females who are typed as inner-sustaining,
it is also quite apparent that the effects of such associ
ation are not found to be measured in terms of submission to
the needs of one's contemporaries. Actually, the inner-
sustaining self appears to be substantially less directed by
peer groups than the other three types. He feels little
need to give or sacrifice himself for group ends, and he
also views with suspicion its short-lived efforts to nurture
him because of the fear of concomitant expectations develop
ing from the group which will obligate him. For the inner-
sustaining personality the peer group serves the psychologi
cal function of insuring his state of aloneness. It may be
mentioned that for many cases there is often an absence of
integration of the individual in conventional peer group be
havior of a sort the contemporary youth culture has popu
larly conceived. For many individuals, the emancipation
from the home has been accomplished by developing interests
149
in certain impersonal and nonassociative forms of behavior—
one-man hobby activities, such as stamp collecting, ham ra
dio operating, and model building; various solo fantasy out
lets, such as books, movies, and television; certain types
of sports, such as tennis, fencing, and gymnastics; and
other types of individualized activity which do not involve
a high degree of interrelatedness with groups. Some of
these recreational outlets may not be highly regarded by
parents or the person's contemporaries, but yet the individ
ual often persists in focusing a great deal of attention
upon such activities. The inner—sustaining self frequently
described interests along these lines. In some respects
these activities make possible further depersonalization
from the social world, or at least permit the individual to
form those types of human associations which make few de
mands upon him or place him in a receptive role with others.
The inner-sustaining individual appears to reflect
selectively some of the traditional ideological imprint of
American culture with respect to succorance and nurturance.
As Fromm has noted, the receptive orientation is discour
aged. The ideas and practices of our society encourage the
individual to look out for himself. He is impressed with
the social advantages of self-responsibility and learns that
if he is going to amount to anything, he will have to use
150
Q
his own initiative. It is now commonly thought that this
brand of ideology has become somewhat impotent as a source
of direction and thus affects fewer and fewer persons today.
Other forces are now playing more formidable roles in mold
ing social character, such as the influence of other-direc
tion as previously discussed or, perhaps, the same kind of
phenomena described by William H. Whyte, Jr., under the ban—
g
ner of the social ethic. But in any case, many individuals
give evidence of the fact that they are still not reflecting
the ideological shift frequently described by today's soci
ologist. The inner-sustaining self does not yet give the
impression of being "imprisoned by brotherhood," to borrow a
phrase from Whyte.
C. Wright Mills, in defining the qualities of the
"sociological imagination," has emphasized the need for
grasping the meaning of individual biography in the context
of the wider social realities of culture and society.^ The
work of Fromm, Riesman, and Whyte has provided some inter
esting insights into the nature of the inner-sustaining self
along the lines suggested by Mills. It is apparent that
characterological description and analysis require that the
®Erich Fromm, Man for Himself (New York: Rinehart
and Co., 1947), p. 79.
^William H. Whyte, Jr., The Organization Man (New
York: Simon and Schuster, Inc., 1956), pp. 3-15.
10C. Wright Mills, The Sociological Imagination (New
York* Oxford University Press, 1959), pp. 3-24.
151
inner-life and personal conduct of the individual be related
to the conditions and developments of culture and society.
Unfortunately, this rewarding objective is not to be totally
fulfilled by a study having a more modest goal of empirical
description of some limited factors relating to social char
acter. Although some of the preceding discussion of cultur
al and societal conditions and trends may be useful in il
luminating some facets of the inner-sustaining self, an ade
quate treatment of the relationship between this personality
type and American culture should be reserved for sociologi
cal imaginations of the future.
The course of socialization for the inner-sustaining
self is subject to the usual variability of the other three
personality models, but a number of distinctive conditions
and patterns emerge from the autobiographical data which are
especially important in understanding the development of
this orientation. It has been pointed out that this type of
individual is often admired for his lack of dependency upon
others. Furthermore, it has been suggested that within our
culture there is a tendency to encourage individuals to be
more concerned with their own personal^welfare than the well
being of others. It is only logical to expect that low needs
for succorance and nurturance would accordingly be developed
from parental efforts to inculcate this "nature" in the per
sonality of the child. However, few of the autobiographies
suggest that parents consciously sought to implant this type
152
of character in their offspring. This almost ends any at
tempt to treat these phenomena in terms of sociological ex
planations involving the family as an agency of accultura
tion. Generally speaking, individuals reveal a long history
of conflict with parents who have ineffectually tried to
amend the social character of their children with respect to
succorance and nurturance. Physical, social, and psycholog
ical flight from the home is almost a universal reaction for
these young people. Complete emancipation from parents is a
highly prized objective for many of these individuals. What
are they running from? The autobiographies suggest two very
common conditionst parental overprotection and parental
dominance. These are not often separate conditions. The
highly nurturant parent is often overly restrictive. In
some instances, compliance to parental wishes is the asking
price for high nurturance, but in very few of the sixty-one
cases are there individuals willing to pay this price. In
the first place, a large number of these men and women have
come to reject the excessive indulgence of protecting par
ents, for it symbolizes weakness and inadequacy as they have
come to perceive these qualities as the result of outside
influence. Furthermore, the price to be paid for nurturance
is much too high as it prevents independent behavior, which
for this group is a very meaningful social objective. This
is understandable partly in cultural terms. The young per
son today in our culture tends to equate maturity with
153
autonomy and Independence. In many cases maturity means
nothing more than freedom and the opportunity to "do what
ever I damn please." It is to be expected that many indi
viduals who have had to accomodate themselves to parental
domination for most of their lives would have a measure of
excited anticipation for escape and exhibit negative feel
ings toward the type of relationships which have attempted
to keep them "shackled" for so long. However, for this
group it is not only a matter of subculturally sanctioned
rebellion reinforced by the peer group and the mass media of
the youth culture, for rebellion against the home was not
confined to the preadolescent and adolescent years. It
characteristically began with early associations outside of
the home when the child began to form impressions concerning
opportunities available beyond the view and control of par
ents. The kinds of experiences found in peer group inter
action were not a substitute for parents as far as acquiring
average needs for succorance and nurturance. Few adult ob
servers of interacting children are impressed by their in
terest in exhibiting nurturance toward one another. Perhaps
the recollection of bloody noses, scratches, and bruises of
one's own childhood is not the most scientific way to make a
point clear, but in any case, children come to realize quite
early that their playmates are not a very dependable source
of support. The alternatives then become two in number;
retreat to the home, or form ways of sustaining oneself
154
without others. With maturity some individuals begin more
and more to take the second alternative. They do not neces
sarily develop more closeness with their peers to compensate
for the ever-widening gap between themselves and their par
ents. But by the same token, they do not become social iso
lates. However, this affiliation tends to be rather imper
sonal and it is not unusual for this type of person to re
port that he has no very close friends. The following auto
biographical comments illustrate some of these pointst
192M. "I don't remember too much, but the thing
which stands out the most of all is I wanted to go and come
like other children of my age. At the age of seven, I was
lucky to ever leave my backyard. . . . This may sound very
silly but my mother is one of the worrying type and she was
always telling me to be careful and don't get hurt. There
is a difference between a considerate mother and a ridicu
lous one, I have a ridiculous one. Always worrying. I be
lieve I just want to break away from her worrying, and get
away where I can be free from people telling me what to do
and what not to do. . . .It all boils down to the fact that
I should get away from home. I am tired of being told what
to do. . . .1 cannot stand to stay in the house at night, I
feel like I am closed in. My parents try to keep me in. I
lie or do anything to get out."
18QM. "I said earlier that my folks were pretty
old, and I feel they don't understand me the way they
should. My mother is nice and all that, but I think she
sometimes is too overprotective. Whenever I go some place,
no matter where it is, she wants to know where I am going,
what time I'll be home, who I am going with, what kind of
people they are, etc. In other words, she gives me the
third degree. My dad is pretty much the same way, although
he doesn't make a fuss over me the way my mother does. I
guess the reason my mother makes such a fuss over me is be
cause I am an only child. But this sort of thing gets on
your nerves. I just get sick and tired of my folks treating
me like I was a juvenile."
298M. "I have an overbearing mother who held me to
her as if I was never to return if I ever left her; she was
trying to hold me to her apron strings. At any rate, I was
definitely opposed to this treatment, and have been con-
155
stantly trying to pull away from this grip she has been try
ing to hold on me. Every time I wanted to do something on
my own, it was a major battle, and usually ended in my
storming out of the house only to return to a good tongue
lashing by my father, who has always been a little hen
pecked. "
Many of the women comment along similar lines in the
following examples *
539F. "In my early childhood my parents were very
protective. From what I can remember, it seems as though my
parents were always placing restrictions before me that the
other children regarded as foolish and senseless."
444F. "I know its a terrible thing to say, but I
just can't stand my parents. They try to give me the world,
and if I did get it, they would tell me how to run it. Ever
since I can remember I have been running from them. When I
am nice to them they think they have me in the palm of their
hand and it all starts all over again. . . . Thank God for
the fact that I can keep busy without people."
302F. "When will parents ever learn that they can't
go on forever treating their kids like infants. I am so
sick of being told what to do though I know it's sometimes
for my own good. . . . For as long as I can remember I would
do the exact opposite of just about everything they told me
to do. . . .1 would even pick bad friends just to spite
them. . . . I never did have too many friends. It wasn't
that people didn’t like me, it was because I would get tired
of them. All that stuff about conformity to the group when
you are a teen-ager hasn't happened to me. I can take them
or leave them."
The modal personality attributes of the inner-sus
taining self will become clearer by noting the mean scores
and standard deviations for the EPPS variables. These data
are presented in Tables 15 and 16.
156
TABLE 15
MEANS FOR INNER-SUSTAINING MALES AND FEMALES
COMPARED TO EPPS NORMATIVE
COLLEGE SAMPLE
Variable
Males
Normative
Males Females
Normative
Females
Achievement 16.58 15.66 15.50a 13.08
Deference 12 .06 11.21 11.80 12.40
Order 13.32a 10.23 11.77 10.24
Exhibition 15.26 14.40 15.9 3b 14.28
Autonomy 17.06a 14.34 15.30a 12.29
Affiliation 11.7la 15.00 13.16a 17.40
Intraception 14.32 16.12 18.50 17.32
Succorance 4.35 10.74 6.63 12.53
Dominance 17.16 17.44 14.17 14.18
Abasement 10.94 12 .24 13.87 15.11
Nurturance 7.16 14.04 10.40 16.42
Change 17.42b 15.51 17.63 17.20
Endurance 18.23a 12.66 14,67b 12 .63
Heterosexuality 16.97 17 .65 16.97a 14.34
Aggression 14.84b 12.79 13.73a 10.59
N a 31 760 30 749
aSignifleant at the .01 level.
^Significant at the .05 level.
157
TABLE 16
STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR INNER-SUSTAINING MALES
AND FEMALES COMPARED TO EPPS
NORMATIVE COLLEGE SAMPLE
Variable
Males
Normative
Males Females
Normative
Females
Achievement 3.95 4.13 4.24 4.19
Deference 3.42 3.59 4.13 3.72
Order 3.42 4.31 5.12 4.37
Exhibition 3.55 3.53 4.06 3.65
Autonomy 2 .50 4.45 3.43 4.34
Affiliation 3.60 4.32 4.09 4.07
Intraception 5.25 5.23 3.66 4.70
Succorance 2.01 4.70 2 .20 4.42
Dominance 5.73 4.88 4.23 4.60
Abasement 4.98 4.93 4.70 4.94
Nurturance 2 .58 4.80 1.94 4.41
Change 4.74 4.74 4.84 4.87
Endurance 5.02 5.30 5.02 5.19
Heterosexuality 4.47 5.48 5.89 5.39
Aggression 4.34 4.59 4.88 4.61
N = 31 760 30 749
158
Significant differences from the normative sample in
mean scores were indicated by inner-sustaining males on six
variables: the personality need for order was higher, au
tonomy was higher, affiliation was lower, change was higher,
endurance was higher, and aggression was higher.
The higher need for order for these men indicates
that they have a strong tendency to plan, to be systematic,
and to be well organized, although this does not make them
into anything resembling Whyte's "organization man." Of the
eight sub-classes of data analyzed, this group is the only
one to indicate a significant difference on the need for or
der. It may be inferred that this quality is a social asset
in the functioning of this type of individual, although it
cannot be regarded as a sociability skill. The inner-sus
taining male probably develops this need because he must be
sufficiently well organized to get along on his own. He
probably appears to others as rather methodical and calcu
lating, a person who lives by his wits, so to speak.
The higher need for autonomy is probably underesti
mated by the EPPS on the basis of autobiographical indica
tions. Considerable attention has already been focused upon
the part this need plays in the total personality configura
tion of the inner-sustaining self; however, some additional
observations and implications may be offered. Eric Larrabee
has stated that autonomy is not a place to arrive but a way
159
of traveling.11 This aptly describes most of these men al
though there are a number of exceptions. Some of the men of
this group who exhibit a high degree of personal commitment
to autonomy regard it almost as an end in itself, but this
is a matter of exaggerated expressiveness. Basically, what
is desired is freedom to pursue goals of one's own choosing
with whatever means appear appropriate to the individual.
This does not mean the individual wishes to violate basic
values, standards, and morality, or exhibit eccentricities
for the sake of being different, or remove himself from so
cial contact with other people. He simply wishes to take
advantage of the wide range of cultural alternatives already
available in the social milieu of which he is a part. Un
fortunately, from his point of view, he has had to face many
social obstacles in realizing progress in this direction.
These obstacles are often related to high intensities of
needs for succorance and nurturance in others.
The significantly lower mean score for affiliation
goes along with the inner-sustaining orientation. Involve
ment with others on the level of close friendship relation
ships is not typical. The meaning of "close friendship" in
our culture often carries connotations of dependency. Even
mutual dependency is resisted by the inner-sustaining self
because this does not lessen the obligations the individual
11Eric Larrabee, "David Riesman and His Readers," in
Culture and Social Character, p. 414.
160
is coerced into feeling. Indeed, mutual dependency is actu
ally the most intense form of dependency. Close friendships
are not cultivated by this type of person and, in fact, are
avoided. Some of the men express the feeling that this ab
sence is unfortunate, but perhaps such statements reflect an
internalization of a cultural ideal that such relationships
are essential to earn a judgment of social and psychological
normality from others rather than a real felt need for such
forms of association. The inner-sustaining self is not
without people he may legitimately refer to as his friends.
However, such associates frequently are of the same type as
themselves. Such friends neither have high dependency needs
nor do they wish to make the person dependent upon them.
Several of the men of this group who are married indicate
that their mates are much like themselves with respect to
this orientation. This is especially interesting because it
might be popularly thought that this type of person unequiv
ocally tends to reject marriage as a source of gratifica
tion. Such prejudgments rest on the fact that our culture
defines and idealizes the nature of the marital relationship
strictly in terms of the "beauty" of mutual interdependency.
From some of the descriptions of marital interaction sup
plied by these subjects, it is apparent that husbands and
wives who share the inner-sustaining orientation can find a
basis for a meaningful relationship with each other which is
not threatening to either party. The basic difficulty
161
encountered by these couples is that their relationships do
not fit the cultural ideal of "togetherness." Except to the
participants in these marriages, such relationships are not
comprehended by outsiders with any degree of understanding
and acceptance. For many outsiders the relationship is a
puzzle: "Why would anyone like that want to be married?"
Obviously, the answer lies in the explanation that other
personality needs are being gratified by the forms of social
interaction which take place between them. Love for these
people is not a matter of interdependency.
Although the autobiographical data do not provide an
adequate basis for exploring all facets of interpersonal re
lationships, Maslow has analyzed many of these for the self-
actualizing person and has arrived at some tentative conclu
sions which appear to be applicable to the inner-sustaining
self. However, some of his thinking with respect to affili
ation and the self-actualizing person is not an appropriate
description of this personality model. For example, few
inner-sustaining individuals desire greater fusion and iden
tification with others. They are not often described in
terms of "close and warm and beautiful relations" with
12
others. What appears to be a commonality between Maslow's
self-actualizing people and inner-sustaining individuals of
this study is suggested by the following summarization by
Maslow:
12
Maslow, Motivation and Personality, p. 218.
162
All the subjects for whom I have data show in com
mon another characteristic that is appropriate to men
tion here, namely, that they attract at least some ad
mirers, friends, or even disciples or worshippers.
The relation between the individual and his train of
admirers is apt to be rather one-sided. The admirers
are apt to demand more than our individual is willing
to give. And furthermore, these devotions are apt to
be rather embarrassing, distressing, and even dis
tasteful to the self-actualizing person, since they
often go beyond ordinary bounds. The usual picture
is of our subject being kind and pleasant when forced
into these relationships, but ordinarily trying to
avoid them as gracefully as possible.
The uniqueness of affiliation needs for the inner-
sustaining self poses complexities which are not fully un
derstood on the basis of the data collected in this study.
Unquestionably, the relationship between affiliation and the
variables of succorance and nurturance is an important one
which future investigations should explore more fully.
High needs for both change and endurance are fre
quently suggestive of problems of inner-conflict when this
pattern characterizes a single individual. In evaluating
the fact that both of these variables are significantly
higher for the inner-sustaining self, it is important to
take account of the intercorrelation coefficient to deter
mine whether these factors are associated with one another
in some pattern. Looking ahead to the intercorrelation ta
ble for inner-sustaining males (Table 17), a coefficient of
-.01 is indicated, which suggests an almost complete lack of
relationship between these two needs. Without this correla-
13Ibid., p. 219.
163
tion data the mean scores might have led to erroneous inter
pretations suggesting that the inner-sustaining self was
likely to be characterized by psychological conflict intrin
sic to the lack of compatibility between the variables. For
these males it would appear that the absence of correlation
on these two needs does not indicate a special problem of
this nature; however, it is not correct to assume that there
is an absence of conflict which a high negative correlation
would suggest. The most important observations to be made
concern the variable of endurance. High endurance may be
thought of as a self-winding main spring which keeps the
inner-sustaining self running. Without the personal quali
ties of high industry, perseverance, persistence, and in
tentness, the individual could not survive outside of de
pendency relationships.
The inner-sustaining male's low need for nurturance
may be partially explained by the fact that he often feels
quite positively about himself because of his high endur
ance. Self-feelings of adequacy protect him from the social
and psychological assaults of his social environment. He
maintains the rather compassionless attitude that others are
capable of achieving the same level of self-sufficiency if
they were willing to do what he drives himself to do. His
low nurturance is often interwoven with the sincere belief
that to help others lessens their chances for improvement in
the direction of self-sufficiency. This form of belief is
164
certainly not new, for we find in The Protestant Ethic a
rather rich historical heritage for such views.
The high need for aggression on the part of most of
these men may be partly explained by the supposition that
survival of the inner-sustaining orientation depends upon
the capacity of the person to resist efforts to mold him in
a personality form embracing more typical dimensions of suc
corance and nurturance. The autobiographical data reveal
that most of these individuals have a high need for counter
action. Psychologically, this may be referred to as defen
siveness. Generally speaking, defensiveness is thought of
primarily in negative terms. It infers a condition of in
flexibility and personality rigidity, an inability to adapt
to others and new and different social situations. However,
looking at aggressive phenomena through the eyes of the re
search group, the view is somewhat different and does not
seem to involve a psychological deficiency. It is evident
that a negative social viewpoint toward aggressiveness is to
some extent a matter of conflicting personal social values.
Actually, the inner-sustaining qualities as described have
^■^Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic, trans. Talcott
Parsons (new edition; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons,
1958); William H. Whyte, Jr., The Organization Man, pp. 3-
24. This material not only offers a concise definition of
the protestant ethic, but charts its decline in contemporary
American culture; Karl Mannheim, Ideology and Utopia (New
York: Harcourt Brace and Co., 1936),offers a most colorful
portrayal of the non-nurturant, successful entrepeneur who
rationalizes his lack of compassion for others with Calvin
ist ic theology.
165
personal value to these individuals, and what is observed
along the lines of negative psychological evaluation really
represents an effective means for defending the quality of
self-sufficiency, a meaningful social identity to this type
of person. They definitely are not compliant to the wishes
of people who desire that they change. Their resiliency in
the face of such efforts may cause them an endless amount of
difficulty in social relationships. Many of these men re
port especially trying times in getting along with parents.
Turning now to the women of this group, significant
differences from the normative sample in mean scores were
found for seven personality needs: achievement was higher,
exhibition was higher, autonomy was higher, affiliation was
lower, endurance was higher, heterosexuality was higher, and
aggression was higher. The men exhibited the same direction
of deviation from the male normative sample for each of the
above variables; however, the difference for achievement and
heterosexuality was not found to be statistically signifi
cant.
The higher need for achievement for this group of
women fits well in most cases with the inner-sustaining
orientation. Success, accomplishment, and attainment of
some sort of career objective are meaningful social aspira
tions for these young women. If they were more dependent
upon others, it is unlikely that they would develop motiva
tion in this direction. Other women with similar high needs
166
for achievement frequently find vicarious gratification
through the correct selection of a successful husband. How
ever, it is quite likely that most of the inner-sustaining
women will not follow this path but would prefer to develop
their own talents and gratify this need by their own ef
forts .
The higher need for exhibition for the inner-sus
taining self represents another difference between this type
and the self-actualizing people studied by Maslow. He
claims that his type is marked by simplicity and natural
ness , and by lack of artificiality or straining for ef
fect. The inner-sustaining female rather frequently
strives for recognition from others along less modest and
nonassuming lines. Her individuality is a prized possession
which requires advertisement. She is proud of herself. The
kinds of talents she exhibits have little to do with helping
others. Her associates probably recognize this as a frail
ty, and this results in her seeking some other basis for so
cial approval.
The high needs for autonomy, endurance, and agres
sion, as well as the low need for affiliation, have been
discussed for this personality model in the course of ana
lyzing similar data for the men. Nothing new may be added
to the content of this discussion for these women concerning
these variables, and it does not appear that the difference
^Maslow, op. cit. , pp. 206-208.
167
of sex should modify the basic points developed in the pre
ceding section.
The significantly higher need for heterosexuality
does not seem to have any logical relationship to the needs
of succorance and nurturance. It may be recalled from ear
lier discussion of the socialization patterns associated
with this personality model that parents tended to be rather
restrictive and dominating in a great many cases. Some of
this parental "protectiveness" undoubtedly was generalized
to the area of sexuality. A number of autobiographical ac
counts suggest that parents possessed a tremendous amount of
anxiety about their daughters becoming expressive in terms
of sexuality. This anxiety was handled primarily by with
holding information concerning sex, developing rules and
regulations concerning relationships with the opposite sex
which had the effect of limiting contact, and in general
maintaining a "sex is evil" attitude within the home. The
effect of all this appears to be registered in the EPPS
score for the group. Nothing is more pleasurable than what
is forbidden may be a trite way of describing the outcome,
but it is nevertheless a plausible explanation.
The intercorrelation data for the inner-sustaining
self presented in Tables 17 and 18 offer additional insight
into the interrelationships of personality needs.
TABLE 17
EPPS VARIABLE INTERCORRELATIONS FOR INNER-SUSTAINING MALES
AND TOTAL ECC MALE SAMPLE
2
Def
3
Ord
4
Exh
5
Aut
6
Aff
7
Int
8
Dora
9
Aba
10
Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
1 Ach -30
(14)
00
(-03)
29
(14)
03
(02)
-29
(-11)
-23
(-19)
29
(20)
-35
(-20)
21
(-08)
02
(04)
-08
(14)
27
(13)
2 Def 48
(14)
-34
(-02)
-31
(05)
-25
(-03)
02
(04)
-30
(-01)
29
(-09)
-18 k
(00)
28
(10)
-13
(-18)
-03
(-04)
3 Ord -46
(-11)
-10
(-09)
-15
(-20)
-31
(-10)
-32
(-15)
04
(-06)
11
(-10)
32
(40)
-05
(-19)
-11
(-19)
4 Exh -25
(09)
-06
(-08)
10
(-21)
33
(15)
02
(-10)
-13
(-06)
-06
(-09)
-38
(01)
12
(05)
5 Aut -16
(-23)
-25
(-12)
-17
(02)
-03
(-08)
41
(20)
-15
(-15)
38
(-04)
08
(22)
6 Aff 17
(00)
-05
(-06)
04
(-05)
-05
(-06)
-11
(-24)
03
(-06)
-38
(-32)
7 Int 09
(-06)
-15
(04)
-32
(-12)
26
(06)
-17
(-15)
-04
(-07)
8 Dorn -46
(-30)
-12
(-22)
-18
(-07)
-11
(-04)
34
(17)
168
TABLE 17— Continued
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 T 1 0
Def Ord Exh Aut Aff Int Dom Aba Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
9 Aba -16
(-08)
-20
(-09)
-19
(-17)
-11
(-11)
10 Chg -01
(-06)
34
(07)
-17
(-07)
11 End 13
(-20)
-03
(-09)
12 Het
N = 31
(N) = 299
-09
(02)
Notes:
a. Coefficients within parentheses are those for the total ECC male sample.
b. Decimal points have been omitted in the presentation of coefficients to con
serve space.
c. Succorance and nurturance intercorrelation coefficients are omitted from the
table because their axes do not meet the assumptions of rectilinearity and homoscadastic-
ity required by the Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation. Trends of associ
ation for succorance and nurturance with other variables may be roughly inferred from com
parisons of means among sub-classes.
d. r's below .35 not significant at .05 level for inner-sustaining males,
r's below .11 not significant at .05 level for total ECC male sample.
169
i
TABLE 18
EPPS VARIABLE INTERCORRELATIONS FOR INNER-SUSTAINING FEMALES
AND TOTAL ECC FEMALE SAMPLE
2
Def
3
Ord
4
Exh
5
Aut
6
Aff
7
Int
8
Dom
9
Aba
10
Chg
11
End
12
Het
13
Agg
1 Ach -10
(02)
-36
(-02)
10
(02)
-19
(05)
-19
(-26)
25
(-01)
30
(11)
-15
(-24)
-03
(-11)
02
(02)
-17
(-09)
-30
(-07)
2 Def 21
(29)
-22
(-07)
-2 0
(-27)
-06
(-02)
21
(11)
-12
(-21)
02
(07)
28
(01)
-06
(13)
-23
(-19)
-52
(-34)
3 Ord -20
(-18)
14
(-12)
-23
(-21)
-43
(-03)
-08
(-15)
-18
(02)
-13
(-06)
41
(45)
-23
(-36)
-04
(-10)
4 Exh -07
(01)
-18
(-07)
-20
(-27)
08
(25)
14
(-10)
-43
(04)
05
(-14)
-01
(08)
09
(07)
5 Aut 03
(-16)
-31
(-23)
-13
(-02)
-38
(-17)
00
(22)
-01
(-03)
14
(04)
25
(18)
6 Aff 13
(06)
-57
(-19)
13
(01)
42
(04)
-48
(-19)
-05
(-09)
-06
(-16)
7 Int -13
(-12)
03
(-01)
31
(-08)
-11
(15)
-15
(-13)
-42
(-18)
8 Dom -14
(-37)
-51
(-08)
30
(02)
-08
(01)
19
(24)
170
TABLE 18— Continued
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Def Ord Exh Aut Aff Int Dom Aba Chg End Het Agg
9 Aba -17
(-12)
-27
(-05)
-17
(-12)
00
(-19)
10 Chg -48
(-08)
-13
(-03)
-14
(-10)
11 End -14
(-37)
-16
(-17)
12 Het 06
(12)
N = 30
(N) = 228
Notes:
a. Coefficients within parentheses are those for the total ECC female sample.
b. Decimal points have been omitted in the presentation of coefficients to con
serve space.
c. Succorance and nurturance intercorrelation coefficients are omitted from the
table because their axes do not meet the assumptions of rectilinearity and homoscadastic-
ity required by the Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation. Trends of associ
ation for succorance and nurturance with other variables may be roughly inferred from com
parisons of means among sub-classes.
d. r's below .36 not significant at .05 level for inner-sustaining females.
r's below .12 not significant at .05 level for total ECC female sample. ^
172
Out of a total of seventy-eight intercorrelation co
efficients, four were found to be substantively and statis
tically significant for inner-sustaining malesj
1. Deference and Order (+.48)
2. Order and Exhibition (-.46)
3. Autonomy and Change (+.41)
4. Dominance and Abasement (-.46)
The association between deference and order does not
appear to have a direct relationship to the factors of low
succorance and nurturance, but it may be related to certain
facets of socialization already discussed. Autobiographical
data indicate that many of these men share a high degree of
hostility and resentment to authority (low deference). In
many of these cases parents failed to inculcate patterns of
neatness and orderliness in their offspring, largely because
the measures used to implant these qualities involved paren
tal dominance which was characteristically resisted by the
child. Of course, this can be only part of the total expla
nation because inner-sustaining men were above the normative
mean in both variables. It is quite likely that many of
these men have learned that being well-organized and system
atic involves taking into account the suggestions of others
if only for the purpose of becoming skillful in a "human
engineering" sense. High deference for this group of men
does not mean that there is a high degree of adherence to
the suggestions of others or those who seek to dominate them.
173
The negative correlation between order and exhibi
tion does not appear to be due to any relatedness of these
variables.
The positive correlation between autonomy and change
is especially interesting because significantly higher mean
scores were found for these men. It would appear that men
very high in autonomy derive a tremendous amount of satis
faction from new and varied social experiences. These two
variables are often interrelated along the lines suggested
by the correlation coefficient. Generally speaking, the
search for novel and different experience can best be accom
plished if a high degree of freedom exists to permit an ex
ploration of things outside of mundane routines. The high
need for autonomy is supportive of the need for change.
Change for the sake of change also tends to characterize
some of the cases. The exhibiting of high change may possi
bly be one of the means of communicating to others their
self-sufficiency.
The negative correlation coefficient between domi
nance and abasement suggests that these two needs are not
psychologically compatible with each other in the same per
sonality. It is not common to find individuals who feel
guilty about their capacity to manipulate others. The nor
mative sample indicates the same direction of association
for these two variables. The inner-sustaining self shows
only a little more association between these qualities.
174
Seven intercorrelation coefficients are considered
substantively and statistically significant for the inner-
sustaining females:
1. Deference and Aggression (-.52)
2. Order and Intraception (-.43)
3. Exhibition and Change (-.43)
4. Affiliation and Change (+.42)
5. Affiliation and Endurance (-.48)
6. Dominance and Change (-.51)
7. Change and Endurance (-.48)
The negative correlation between deference and ag
gression is a meaningful association for these two variables
(by the same token, it is very difficult to explain the co
efficient of -.03 for males). These individuals either tend
to be sensitive to suggestions of others or highly critical
of others, but they are not often characterized by both
forms of responsiveness. High aggression is the important
factor in the interplay of these two variables as suggested
by the relatively high mean score for this need. Autobiog
raphies reveal low deference to parents and a high degree of
counteraction to their efforts to manipulate the inner-sus
taining female.
The negative correlation between order and intracep
tion suggests that the inner-sustaining female maintains her
self-sufficiency in one of two ways, by being highly organ
ized and systematic in her interpersonal relationships or by
175
being fairly flexible and pragmatic in associating with oth
ers. The latter approach involves a high intensity of need
for intraception, the tendency to be analytical about the
motives and acts of others. Autobiographical data indicate
the presence of both of these approaches, although it is im
possible to determine the relative frequency of each from
the information available. It is apparent that some of
these women have become to completely self-sufficient that
they do not need to bother with the behavior of other peo
ple. Their high degree of inflexible personal organization,
which parents may have characterized as stubbornness, very
often serves to keep their personalities and social rela
tionships intact. The other type of woman is less rigid and
less organized in her relationships with others. She is
probably highly introspective and functionally more adapt
able to a wider range of social situations and problems.
The variable of change appears in four of the sig
nificant intercorrelations. The negative correlation be
tween exhibition and change probably reflects the fact that
individuals high in change often use the psychological mech
anism of supplementation only to convince themselves of
their capacity to be self-sustaining, but others must be im
pressed as well.
The positive correlation between affiliation and
change may mean, as suggested earlier in the discussion,
that the self-sustaining individual is likely to avoid
176
durable and long-lasting relationships with others. A quick
turnover in associates lessens the possibility of becoming
captive to dependency relationships. Of course, both of
these needs also operate separately and in other respects
that are not related to each other or the inner-sustaining
orientation.
The negative correlation between dominance and
change is suggestive of alternative patterns of maintaining
self-sufficiency. The inner-sustaining self may either try
to manipulate others to preserve this orientation or may
simply take up associations with individuals who give more
promise of not interfering with their preferences with re
spect to succorance and nurturance.
The negative correlation between change and endur
ance once again indicates that the women within the inner-
sustaining classification are likely to either exhibit the
qualities of perseverance and patience in maintaining their
self-sufficiency or give up and take flight in the face of
human relationships considered difficult by the person.
However, generally speaking, both patterns do not character
ize the same individual.
The meaning of the negative relationship between the
factors of affiliation and endurance has already been made
clear earlier. The only new inference to be added on the
basis of the correlation coefficient is that the variability
of intensity for these two variables is not a matter of
177
randomness. Thus, the more preoccupied the individual is
with the tasks of maintaining her self-sufficiency, the less
likely it is that she is interested in forming friendship
relations.
Zt is a very difficult task to summarize the find
ings of this research concerning the inner-sustaining self
because of the complexity of interrelationships which exist
among the various personality variables. However, it is ap
parent that the common attributes of low succorance and low
nurturance are inextricably often associated with a low need
for affiliation and a high need for autonomy. Perhaps the
trait of high autonomy has been thought of as the key vari
able of this personality type. Undoubtedly, it is a very
important factor as it describes most of the men and women
grouped under the inner-sustaining banner; however, it does
not describe all the cases. If this study had a primary in
terest in the variable of autonomy, statistical data would
have also indicated that not all individuals high in auton
omy who were drawn from the total research sample have the
patterns of low succorance and nurturance which describe the
inner-sustaining self. Thus, the inner-sustaining person is
characterologically something different from the autonomous
person. This point is brought to the foreground at this
time to make clear the definite boundaries of the inner-
sustaining self. The statistical data consisting of mean
scores and intercorrelation coefficients were presented to
178
provide some sort of picture of "modal personality" for
these individuals. Such data suggest tendencies of the
group and are not definitive for every individual within
the classification. The autobiographical data have served
to keep the research oriented to the basic facts of indi
viduality. However, this individuality does not consist of
a random collection of personality needs. Every personality
analyzed displays a form of integration. The use of a modal
personality construct in this research has permitted an ex
ploration of the nature of variables as they tend to be or
ganized in individuals of this type. For example, the high
need for endurance which characterizes the inner-sustaining
self has special meaning in connection with these individ
uals. It is not just a unique facet of human character.
High endurance has come to be understood as the "glue" which
holds together the whole motivational pattern of low succor
ance, nurturance, affiliation, and high autonomy. This per
sonality configuration cannot be well understood in terms of
its disparate parts alone.
The same general point may be made concerning the
patterns of socialization which have been found associated
with these individuals. Individuality is easy to describe,
but in addition to this, commonalities of experience also
become discernable. For the inner-sustaining self the de
sire to retreat from parental indulgence, protection, and
domination appears relatively early in the course of home
179
relationships. With maturity the parents generally become
increasingly ineffectual in getting the child to play the
reciprocal roles expected for the above parent-child rela
tionships. Hostility and resentment develop because of this
conflict and further widens the gap between the child and
his parents. This is a popular explanation for rebellion,
but it is also an explanation for the development of needs
aside from autonomy. The low needs of succorance and nur
turance are also born of these developments in a large num
ber of cases.
CHAPTER VII
COMPARISONS AMONG
THE FOUR PERSONALITY MODELS
The preceding chapters were primarily concerned with
a consideration of data for each personality model. Only
when it was considered helpful for general understanding of
the function of a particular variable were references made
to similarities and contrasts among the four personality
models. This chapter takes another look at these data from
a comparative perspective.
The analysis of the four personality models was han
dled with reference to the manifest personality needs mea
sured by the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule. One of
the ways of exploring the modal character of each of these
personality types is to compare them with each other with
respect to the test variables. The relative intensity of
these personality needs for each of the personality models
has already been interpreted with reference to the normative
samples. Comparisons among the models themselves will no
doubt enlarge the level of understanding for each of the
groups individually and also provide a more complete
180
181
conception of the functional character of succorance and
nurturance as key dimensions of personality organization.
Por each EPPS variable, excepting succorance and
nurturance, the male and female groups for each personality
model have been ranked on the basis of mean scores. The
EPPS male and female normative samples have been added to
the ranks in each instance. This procedure provides a fresh
perspective of the findings of this research. The use of
the ranking technique brings back to the data some of its
true relative character. Personality needs are basically
relative dimensions which can only be meaningful in terms of
comparisons to other needs. It also follows that they can
only be identified and evaluated with reference to some
standard or norm. Often this standard or norm consists of a
normal population or a representative sample of that popula
tion. Behavioral scientists are also interested in compar
ing groups to one another when they represent definite seg
ments of wider populations. Much of what constitutes pres
ent scientific social knowledge has come about from the
study of comparisons among particular groups distinctive
from each other and a normal population.
The Need for Achievement
The rank order of mean scores for the need for
achievement for men and women is as follows:
182
Rank Mean
1 Inner-sustaining males 16.58
2 Selfish males 16.35
3 Normative males1 15.66
4 Inner-sustaining females 15.50
5 Selfish females 14.84
6 Altruistic males 14.70
7 Receptive-giving males 14.03
8 Normative females 13.08
9 Receptive-giving females 12.39
10 Altruistic females 9.88
The variability of need for achievement among these
ten groups suggests that succorance and nurturance needs are
related to the degree of motivation an individual is likely
to exhibit in seeking success and striving for personal ac
complishment. As may be seen from the above data, the sex
of the individual is a very important factor. Presumably,
the male in our culture internalizes a greater need for
achievement than the female. The inner-sustaining female
surpasses both the altruistic and receptive-giving males in
this need and is almost equal to the average male. The test
items primarily measure the inner need for achievement for
at least the normative female group and the three lower per
sonality models.
The normative male and female groups refer to the
normative college samples used to standardize the EPPS. See
Manual for the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule, p. 10.
183
The Need for Deference
The rank order of mean scores for the need for def
erence for men and women is as followst
Rank Mean
1 Normative females
2 Altruistic males
3 Inner-sustaining males
4 Inner-sustaining females
5 Altruistic females
6 Receptive-giving females
7 Normative males
8 Receptive-giving males
9 Selfish females
10 Selfish males
12.40
12.10
12.06
11.80
11.50
11.48
11.21
10.71
10.42
9.96
Although the variability of group scores takes place
within a rather limited range, the ranking of these ten
groups combined with what was gleaned from autobiographical
data suggests that deference at different levels of inten
sity is sometimes related to particular combinations of suc
corance and nurturance. Considering that the inner-sustain
ing self tends to be somewhat defiant of domination, the
high rank of both men and women for this variable is strik
ing. It would appear that the test items are not a very
good measure of passivity to the direction of others, but
simply provide an indication of relative willingness to ap
praise the suggestions of others. The selfish self appears
to isolate itself from the suggestions of others. This may
indicate that the content of advice often has little to do
with the gratification of egoistic needs. Suggestions from
others may often discourage the high need for succorance and
184
uplift the level of nurturance, a threatening situation for
many selfishly oriented individuals.
The Need for Order
The rank order of mean scores for the need for order
for men and women is as followsi
Rank Mean
1 Inner-sustaining males 13.32
2 Inner-sustaining females 11.77
3 Altruistic males 10.90
•4 Selfish females 10.53
5 Altruistic females 10.53
6 Normative females 10.24
7 Normative males 10.23
8 Selfish males 9.96
9 Receptive-giving females 9.29
10 Receptive-giving males 9.26
The difference between the inner-sustaining self and
receptive-giving self undoubtedly reflects the opposite di
rections for succorance and nurturance. The relatively high
need for order among inner-sustaining males was explained in
the preceding chapter in terms of the fact that self-suffi
ciency is logically associated with a fairly high degree of
organization and planning. Without the presence of this at
tribute, the individual tends to be dependent upon others or
leaves himself to fate. The receptive-giving self does not
face problematic situations alone and usually depends upon
the organization and planning of others. Neatness, orderli
ness, and arrangement of need gratifications is left to
others. This appears to characterize also the other two
185
personality models to some extent. The fact that mean
scores for the bottom eight groups are so close to one
another suggests caution in interpreting this ranked data.
The Need for Exhibition
The rank order of mean scores for the need for exhi
bition for men and women is as follows:
Rank Mean
1 Selfish females 16.95
2 Selfish males 17.57
3 Inner-sustaining females 15.93
4 Inner-sustaining males 15.26
5 Altruistic males 15.10
6 Altruistic females 14.75
7 Normative males 14.40
8 Normative females 14.28
9 Receptive-giving males 14.03
10 Receptive-giving females 13.00
The differences of mean scores for the selfish and
receptive-giving groups may be interpreted in terms of rela
tive security and insecurity. As was pointed out in an
earlier discussion of the selfish self, there is some evi
dence to indicate that a measure of insecurity prevails
among many individuals described by this particular orienta
tion. These people are often very concerned about the pos
sibility of others losing sight of their needs. One way to
counteract neutrality or the avoidance of others is to
strive for more attention, to get people to notice whatever
personal assets can readily be displayed, and never to let
others lose sight of achievements. On the other hand, the
186
receptive-giving self is, the center of attention and does
not have the insecurity about his outside sources of grati
fication which the selfish individual so often exhibits.
These persons tend to be warm and outgoing in a more natural
way. They are frequently well-liked because of their gener
osity and willingness to help others and therefore do not
need to thrust themselves to the center of the social stage.
The Need for Autonomy
The rank order of mean scores for the need for au
tonomy for men and women is as follows:
Rank Mean
1 Inner-sustaining males 17.06
2 Altruistic males 15.90
3 Selfish males 15.70
4 Inner-sustaining females 15.30
5 Normative males 14.30
6 Selfish females 13.21
7 Receptive-giving females J.2.45
8 Normative females 12.29
9 Receptive-giving males 12.21
10 Altruistic females 12 .06
High needs for autonomy are largely associated with
the male. Cultural definition of proper sex roles usually
involves the element of autonomy. Men are expected to be
more independent than women. However, in the case of inner-
sustaining women, many even surpass the average male in this
regard. The receptive-giving male offers an interesting
contrast to the other three male personality models. He
generally sees little value in doing things which are
187
unconventional or behaving in any way which will threaten
his possibilities for acceptance by others. He apparently
does not feel real insecurity with others but is content to
fit into the status quo. He dislikes being on his own.
The Need for Affiliation
The rank order of mean scores for the need for af
filiation for men and women is as follows:
Rank Mean
1 Altruistic females 19.63
2 Normative females 17.40
3 Receptive-giving males 17.35
4 Receptive-giving females 15.68
5 Normative males 15.00
6 Altruistic males 14.70
7 Selfish females 14.47
8 Inner-sustaining females 13.16
9 Inner-sustaining males 11.71
10 Selfish males 9.74
Individuals high in the need for nurturance charac
teristically indicate a relatively higher need for affili
ation on the EPPS. Affiliation items on the test seem to
measure nurturant-affiliation rather than succorant-affili
ation. That is, the qualities of loyalty to friends, shar
ing things with friends, and doing things for friends are
emphasized for the affiliation scale. In the case of this
variable, Edwards has not based his items on Murray's origi
nal definition of affiliation or adhered to popular concep
tions of this factor. (See Appendixes A and B for Edwards'
and Murray's definitions of affiliation.) The low scores
188
for affiliation for the selfish and inner-sustaining groups
reflect the low need for nurturance. Por the selfish indi
viduals affiliation needs are probably much higher as sug
gested by the autobiographical data. However, people must
demonstrate to the selfish self that they are not going to
make demands upon them for nurturance. These same individ
uals must give some promise of offering kindness, sympathy,
and support to them. Altruistic women tend to be highly
motivated toward forming friendship relationships with
others and are quite anxious to express themselves in nur-
turant ways without necessarily expecting reciprocation.
The Need for Intraceotion
The rank order of mean scores for the need for in-
traception for men and women is as follows:
Rank Mean
1 Altruistic females 20.00
2 Inner-sustaining females 18.50
3 Altruistic men 17.90
4 Normative females 17.32
5 Receptive-giving females 16.35
6 Normative males 16.12
7 Selfish females 15.58
8 Receptive-giving males 15.48
9 Selfish males 14.35
10 Inner-sustaining males 14.32
The altruistic orientation tends to be associated
with a high need for intraception. Autobiographical data
suggest that these individuals $re not only highly motivated
to want to help and support others, but such efforts are
189
directed along fairly rational lines which involve sizing
people up and understanding the social situations in which
they interact. They also tend to be more introspective
about themselves than individuals of the other personality
models. Such persons probably would earn high scores on a
"social intelligence" test. The difference in mean scores
for inner-sustaining males and females is a rather interest
ing finding. It would suggest that the male and female have
possibly different approaches in their relationships with
others. The men tend to seal themselves off intellectually
from others. They are relatively uninterested in figuring
out the behavior of others and would prefer to act impul
sively and not bother with the effort of understanding them
selves and others. "Just let me alone. You take care of
yourself and I will take care of myself." On the other
hand, the women exhibit a strong desire to understand the
motivation of others and interpret their behavior even
though the inner-sustaining women do not like to respond to
others or have others respond to them in a manner different
from the men of this group. The selfish self tends to have
a lower need for intraception. This may go back to the
overprotection and overindulgence which typified their
parent-child relationships. The need for succorance was
gratified without any need on their part to grapple with so
cial complexities and problems of life. Everything was
solved and provided for them. As physiologically mature
190
adults, they now face relatively more situations they are
unable or uninterested in understanding, with the outcome
that their dependency upon others is often accentuated.
The Need for Dominance
The rank order of mean scores for the need for domi
nance for men and women is as follows:
Rank Mean
1 Normative males 17.44
2 Inner-sustaining males 17.16
3 Selfish males 16.48
4 Receptive-giving males 14.91
5 Normative females 14.18
6 Inner-sustaining females 14.17
7 Altruistic males 14.00
8 Selfish females 13.84
9 Altruistic females 11.44
10 Receptive-giving females 10.81
The above ranking for the need for dominance sug
gests that the sex of the individual is a crucial factor in
explaining high or low dominance. Males tend to be higher
than females on this need. The only exception to this gen-
a
eral pattern occurred for the male altruistic group, but it
can hardly be regarded as significant considering the actual
mean score in relation to others. Dominance may possibly be
associated with the extent to which needs for succorance are
satisfied. The receptive-giving females generally are fair
ly secure in their human relationships, which seem to main
tain a steady flow of support and affection. There is lit
tle necessity to dominate others in order to gratify the
191
need for succorance. The altruistic female, having a lower
need for succorance, also has less interest in manipulating
others for this purpose. Cultural expectations with regard
to sex roles play an important part in the socialization of
this need; however, within each sex a pattern of relative
intensity is discernable. It would appear that the inner-
sustaining orientation tends to be psychologically compat
ible with high dominance.
The Need for Abasement
The rank order of mean scores for the need for
abasement for men and women is as follows:
Rank Mean
1 Altruistic females 16.56
2 Receptive-giving females 16.19
3 Normative females 15.11
4 Receptive-giving males 14.15
5 Inner-sustaining females 13.87
6 Selfish males 13.74
7 Selfish females 13.32
8 Normative males 12.24
9 Altruistic males 11.80
10 Inner-sustaining males 10.94
Women generally have a higher need than men to feel
guilty when something goes wrong. The rather striking dif
ference between altruistic men and altruistic women for this
variable suggests that guilt was more commonly used in in
ducing positive nurturant responsiveness among females than
males. The altruistic males actually characterize them
selves as having a level of need for abasement slightly
192
below the normative male group. These data suggest that the
inner-sustaining male is the least likely of all types to be
troubled by feelings of guilt, excepting the inner-sustain
ing females. The autobiographies of the altruistic males
frequently disclosed that parents often attempted to make
them feel guilty for not fully measuring up to parental ex
pectations concerning nurturance toward others. Such par
ents seem to have cultivated an intense desire on the part
of these men to avoid the uncomfortable feelings of guilt,
hence the low need for abasement. Abasement may also be re
lated to the extent to which the individual interacts in
close primary relationships. If one characteristically
maintains a great deal of social distance from others, as is
the case of the inner-sustaining self, but not the recep
tive-giving self, the individual is less likely to feel per
sonal blame even when wrongdoing is objectively a conse
quence of his behavior.
The Need for Change
The rank order of mean scores for the need for
change for men and women is as follows:
193
Rank Mean
1 Selfish females 18.05
2 Altruistic females 18.00
3 Inner-sustaining females 17.63
4 Inner-sustaining males 17.42
5 Normative females 17.20
6 Receptive-giving females 15.94
7 Selfish males 15.70
8 Normative males 15.51
9 Altruistic males 15.20
10 Receptive-giving males 14.15
It would appear from the above ranking that sex is
the most important general factor in explaining the limited
modal variation observed. However, it is probably important
to note that within each sex the receptive-giving people
tend to have the low need for change. Once again, this sug
gests that the receptive-giving self may be the most secure
in terms of his present human relationships. This does not
mean that this type of individual is the most productive or
creative, or has the best potential for future adjustment.
The Need for Endurance
The rank order of mean scores for the need for en
durance for men and women is as follows:
194
Rank Mean
1 Inner-sustaining males 18.23
2 Altruistic males 16.20
3 Inner-sustaining females 14.67
4 Altruistic females 13.06
5 Normative males 12.66
6 Normative females 12.63
7 Selfish males 12.00
8 Selfish females 10.05
9 Receptive-giving males 9.47
10 Receptive-giving females 8.77
The variation o£ the need for endurance among the
four personality models suggests that this need is related
to the combinations of succorance and nurturance in a logi
cal and meaningful way. Autobiographical data have provided
considerable insight into the patterning of the endurance
variable with the four orientations. The inner-sustaining
self tends to be high in endurance because of the desire to
avoid dependency relationships which either make demands
upon the resources of the person or cause him to be placed
in a receptive role. This means that the person comes to
value a capacity for hard work, sticking at a task until it
is done, and perseverance. High endurance permits the indi
vidual to survive without support from others. The altruis
tic self also tends to be above average in endurance. Pre
sumably, this quality is generalized along the lines of pa
tience with others and ability to endure demands from others
for aid and support. Industry and sacrifice go hand in hand
for this type of person. The receptive-giving self exhibits
an especially low need for endurance. Psychologically, this
195
might be referred to as low frustration tolerance. When de
prived of support and aid, this type of person frequently
fails to function effectively. Nurturance from others is
always essential fuel to keep the individual operating. The
development of a need for endurance has not been a social
necessity for the receptive-giving self. His own nurturance
toward others maintains the good will of many individuals
able and willing to gratify the high need for succorance.
The selfish self tends to be higher in endurance than the
receptive-giving self because this type must often manage by
himself beyond the period of childhood as interaction out
side of his family becomes a social necessity. This person
ality type continues, however, to be characterized by a
lower than average need for endurance. The variable of en
durance is an important factor in the personality configur
ation for each personality model.
The Need for Heterosexuality
The rank order of mean scores for the need for
heterosexuality for men and women is as follows:
Rank Mean
1 Selfish males 19.96
2 Normative males 17.65
3 Inner-sustaining males 16.97
4 Inner-sustaining females 16.97
5 Receptive-giving males 16.62
6 Selfish females 16.21
7 Receptive-giving females 16.16
8 Altruistic males 16.00
9 Normative females 14.34
10 Altruistic females 14.19
196
The limited range of variability for the four per
sonality models seems to suggest that the most important
factor in explaining different intensities of need for het
erosexual responsiveness is whether an individual is male or
female. The above ranking offers only limited support to
some observations made earlier concerning heterosexuality
for the selfish males and inner-sustaining females. It is
possible that the below average means for the altruistic
self in heterosexuality can be explained in part by the fact
that these individuals were often socialized in a home char
acterized by rather traditional and conservative attitudes
and practices in sexuality, and these were internalized and
preserved as the moral guide posts of these young adults.
The Need for Aggression
The rank order of mean scores for the need for ag
gression for men and women is as follows:
Rank Mean
1 Inner-sustaining males 14.84
2 Selfish males 14.26
3 Selfish females 14.26
4 Inner-sustaining females 13.73
5 Normative males 12.79
6 Receptive-giving males 12.17
7 Altruistic males 11.90
8 Receptive-giving females 10.77
9 Normative females 10.59
10 Altruistic females 9.25
Above average needs for aggression tend to character
ize both the inner-sustaining self and the selfish self,
197
whereas the receptive-giving self and altruistic self are
more often described in terms of lower needs for aggression.
This variable may possibly serve as a clue to relative feel
ings of security and insecurity. The need for aggression
becomes a pattern only when the individual feels a measure
of threat. The inner-sustaining self is often threatened by
social relationships which provide indications that others
will extract or give support and aid which he does not wish
to give or receive. The selfish self is often anxious about
the I o b s of support and aid and has learned from his indul
gent and overprotective parents that he can keep them in
line by means of aggressive reaction. This type of respon
siveness is often generalized to relationships outside the
home. When attacking others for their failure to support
him fails, he is likely to revert to more covert means of
hostile expression. Neither the receptive-giving self nor
the altruistic self feels much threat. Anxiety and frustra
tion are generally controlled for the receptive-giving self
by a supporting social world of thoughtful providers. The
altruistic self desires very little from his associates and
thus is not threatened when support and aid are not offered.
In Tables 19, 20, 21, and 22 mean scores and stand
ard deviations may be inspected for the purpose of obtaining
a statistical overview of comparisons among the four person
ality models and the EPPS normative groups.
TABLE 19
MEANS FOR THE FOUR PERSONALITY MODELS AND THE
EPPS NORMATIVE COLLEGE SAMPLE
(Males)
Variable Altruistic Selfish
Receptive-
Giving
Inner-
Sustaining
EPPS
Normative
Males
Achievement 14.70 16.35 14.03a 16.58 15.66
Deference 12.10 9.96 10.71 12.06 11.21
Order 10.90 9.96 9.26 13.32b 10.23
Exhibition 15.10 16.57b 14.03 15.26 14.40
Autonomy 15.90 15.70 12.21? 17.06? 14.34
Affiliation 14.70 9.74b 17.35b 11.71 15.00
Intraception 17.90 14.35 15.48 14.32 16.12
Succorance 5.00 15.61 17.12 4.35 10.74
Dominance 14.00 16.48 14.91b 17.16 17.44
Abasement 11.80 13.74 14.15a 10.94 12.24
Nurturance 19.40 7.30 19.38 7.16 14.04
Change 15.20 15.70 14.15 17.42a 15.51
Endurance 16.20a 12.00 9.47 18.23 12.66
Heterosexuality 16.00 19.96a 16.62 16.97 17.65
Aggression 11.90 14.26 12.17 14.84a 12.79
N = 10 23 34 31 760
differences from normative sample significant at .05 level.
^Differences from normative sample significant at .01 level.
TABLE 20
STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR THE FOUR PERSONALITY MODELS
AND THE NORMATIVE COLLEGE SAMPLE
(Males)
Variable Altruistic Selfish
Receptive-
Giving
Inner-
Sustaining
Normative
Males
Achievement 3.53 3.74 3.99 3.95 4.13
Deference 3.18 3.08 3.82 3.42 3.59
Order 3.75 3.97 4.80 3.42 4.31
Esdiibition 3.07 4.17 3.75 3.55 3.53
Autonomy 3.00 4.83 3.92 2.50 4.45
Affiliation 3.47 3.86 4.21 3.60 4.32
Intraception 4.61 4.77 5.30 5.25 5.23
Succorance 1.41 2.86 3.07 2.01 4.70
Dominance 2.91 4.13 4.49 5.73 4.88
Abasement 4.52 5.57 6.11 4.98 4.93
Nurturance 2.91 2.55 2.37 2.58 4.80
Change 5.71 5.23 4.72 4.74 4.74
Endurance 4.94 4.46 4.33 5.02 5.30
Heterosexuality 4.50 5.04 5.31 4.47 5.48
Aggression 3.84 3.66 5.14 4.34 4.59
N = 10 23 34 31 760
199
TABLE 21
MEANS FOR THE FOUR PERSONALITY MODELS AND THE
EPPS NORMATIVE COLLEGE SAMPLE
(Females)
Variable Altruistic Selfish
Receptive-
Giving
Inner-
Sustaining
EPPS
Normative
Females
Achievement 9.88b 14.84 12.39 15.5(P 13.08
Deference 11.50 10.42a 11.48 11.80 12.40
Order 10.38 10.53 9.29 11.77 10.24
Exhibition 14.75 16,95b 13.00 15.93a 14.28
Autonomy 12.06 13.21 12.45 15.3015 12.29
Affiliation 19.63a 14.47 15,68a 13.16b 17.40
Intraception 20.00a 15.58 16.35 18.50 17.32
Succorance 7.31 17.05 i8.39 6.63 12.53
Dominance 11.44a 13.84 10.8115 14.17 14.18
Abasement 16.56 13.32 16.19 13.87 15.11
Nurturance 21.88 11.26 21.74 10.40 16.42
Change 18.00 18.05 15.94, 17.63 17.20
Endurance 13.06 10.05a 8.77 14.67® 12.63
Heterosexuality 14.19
16*21b
16.16 16.97b 14.34
Aggression 9.25 14.26 10.77 13.73 10.59
N = 16 19 31 30 749
differences from normative sample significant at .05 level.
^Differences from normative sample significant at .01 level.
2 00
TABLE 22
STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR THE FOUR PERSONALITY MODELS
AND THE NORMATIVE COLLEGE SAMPLE
(Females)
Variable Altruistic Selfish
Receptive-
Giving
Inner-
Sustaining
Normative
Females
Achievement 4.06 4.80 3.69 4.24 4.19
Deference 3.01 3.82 4.31 4.13 3.72
Order 3.76 4.97 3.83 5.12 4.37
Exhibition 3.41 4.68 4.14 4.06 3.65
Autonomy 4.42 4.39 4.95 3.43 4.34
Affiliation 3.36 4.57 3.82 4.09 4.07
Intraception 3.98 5.25 4.53 3.66 4.70
Succorance 1.66 2 .59 3.12 2.20 4.42
Dominance 5.80 5.44 4.61 4.23 4.60
Abasement 4.98 6.14 5.82 4.70 4.94
Nurturance 1.78 1.88 1.55 1.94 4.41
Change 4.35 5.84 3.52 4.84 4.87
Endurance 5.21 5.04 4.96 5.02 5.19
Heterosexuality 5.83 5.89 5.56 5.89 5.39
Aggression 4.48 3.78 4.48 4.88 4.61
N = 16 19 31 30 749
201
CHAPTER VIII
SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS,
PROSPECTS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH,
AND CONCLUSION
Findings and Implications
This exploratory study began with the hope that
something new might be learned about selfishness and altru
ism by approaching these phenomena from a social psychologi
cal point of view. The giving and taking forms of respon
siveness among human beings are considered to be important
facets of social interaction and deserve the attention of
the behavioral scientist. The research reported upon has
sought to make clear four dimensions of social character.
Four personality models were formulated to cover these di
mensions: the altruistic self, the selfish self, the recep
tive-giving self, and the inner-sustaining self. Each of
these may now be thought of as ideal types useful in under
standing certain important facets of personality.
Unfortunately, interest in the subject matter ex
plored in this research has been somewhat minimal among so
ciologists, largely because the theologian, the philosopher,
and the humanist have tended to define the qualities of
202
203
altruism and selfishness as moral issues not approachable by
means of scientific investigation. Even today, within the
field of sociology, the only well-known concerted effort to
explore these types of phenomena is carried on with the bur
den of a moralistic and sometimes mystical "ideational"
frame of reference. The work of Pitirim A. Sorokin in re
cent years has been largely directed at the study of altru
ism, but nothing particularly useful to this study was found
among his writings.^" His passionate involvement with his
subject made it difficult to establish scientific value for
2
his efforts to analyze these types of phenomena. The be
havioral sciences have traveled a pragmatic road too long to
permit their practitioners to combine scientific inquiry
with a crusade for personal values. Another study which
suffers from similar defects has been recently completed by
3
Robert F. Peck and Robert J. Havighurst. The study views
selfishness and altruism primarily as a variable of moral
Pitirim A. Sorokin, The Reconstruction of Humanity
(Boston: Beacon, 1948); Explorations in Altruistic Love and
Behavior (Boston: Beacon] 1952): Altruistic Love: A Study
of American Good Neighbors and Christian Saints (Boston:
Beacon, 1950): Social Philosophies of an Age of Crisis
(Boston: Beacon]] 1950): S.O.S.: The Meaning of our Crisis
(Boston: Beacon, 1951); Forms and Techniques of Altruistic
t
nd Spiritual Growth (Boston: Beacon, 1954): The Wavs and
over of Love (Boston: Beacon, 1954).
2
R, L. Simpson, "Pitirim Sorokin and His Sociology,"
Social Forces. XXXII (December, 1953), 120-131.
■^Robert F. Peck, with Robert J. Havighurst, The Psy
chology of Character Development (New York: John Wiley and
Sons, 1960).
2 04
character and does not approach the subject with an unbiased
valuational perspective compatible with acceptable tenets of
scientific objectivity.
This study sought to avoid injecting issues of per
sonal or even cultural moral judgment into the work of the
exploration. Once the typology of this study was formed, it
then became very important to define each personality model
in terms which carry amoral connotations. Murray's theoret
ical formulations of psychological need were evaluated for
this purpose and found to be useful. The variables of the
need for succorance and the need for nurturance were adopted
from his list of personality needs to define the four per
sonality models. The Edwards Personal Preference Schedule
provides a measurement of both of these needs and thirteen
others, and was used to test a sample of 572 college stu
dents enrolled in psychology and sociology courses at a pub
lic junior college. Scores in the upper and lower quartiles
for succorance and nurturance were used to identify individ
uals from the research sample who had motivational orienta
tions specified by the four personality models as they came
to be defined. These individuals were grouped with their
own sex within each of the personality classifications.
Following the establishment of these groups, two
types of data were analyzed: test data and autobiographical
data. The study of these data was guided by two objectives:
(1) to describe and understand the motivational and behav
205
ioral characteristics of individuals exhibiting each of the
four personality orientations of the typology, and (2) to
describe the patterns of socialization likely to be causa-
tively associated with the motivational orientations of each
model. This investigation resulted in the following general
findings:
1. The individuals classified under the four per
sonality models revealed integrated motivational patterns of
psychological need which are substantively and significantly
different from the modal attributes of a normative sample.
2. Intensities of psychological need also tended to
be different among the personality models for many personal
ity variables.
3. Intercorrelation data for EPPS variables were
often substantively different from those of a normal repre
sentative sample.
4. Intercorrelation data indicated that personality
configurational patterns often were quite different among
the four personality models.
5. The analysis of autobiographical data disclosed
that certain specific patterns of socialization could be
identified as influential in producing the various intensi
ties of succorance and nurturance.
6. The autobiographical data also indicated that
various socialization factors combine to produce particular
206
"need constellations" for each personality model.^ That is,
certain types of patterned social experience not only form
particular intensities of succorance and nurturance, but
form other needs which are functionally compatible with the
axes of succorance and nurturance. Accordingly, some needs
do not develop because they would not contribute to the in
tegration of the personality. The intercorrelation data
served as a helpful guide in initiating inquiry in this
problem.
These findings were presented to form two complemen
tary viewpoints for understanding the data. A rather inten
sive analysis of the data was presented for the purpose of
seeing the configurational image and modal characteristics
of personality and socialization for each personality model.
This material was followed by a shorter chapter in which the
four personality models were examined comparatively to es
tablish similarities and differences.
The results of this study may be considered signifi
cant for the following reasons:
1. The typology of altruistic, selfish, receptive-
giving, and inner-sustaining personality orientations has
^A need constellation may be defined as a set of in
terrelated and integrated needs which serve to maintain the
personality as a functional system. Particular intensities
of need are compatible with each other. They may be high,
low, average, the same, opposite, or complementary. They
must only have a relationship to each other which is harmo
nious and does not cause inner-conflict.
207
been demonstrated to be a valuable theoretical construct in
understanding normal dimensions of giving-receiving forms of
social interaction. The development of this multidimen
sional construct is one of the most important contributions
of this study. The common tendency to describe personality
simply in terms of a single scale having altruism at one end
and selfishness at the other is an obvious distortion of the
real character of man's variable needs both to receive and
to give. It is necessary to identify both types of inner-
impulse to fully account for his motivation and behavior.
The typology calls attention to the four basic modes of re
sponsiveness an individual may exhibit in his social rela
tionships. In the light of the semantic confusion which
prevails around the use of the terms selfish and altruistic,
the clarification of ideas on this subject should be reward
ing for not only the personality theorist and researcher,
but the individual who simply wishes to think more meaning
fully about himself and nis fellow man. It is perhaps im
portant to note that this theoretical construct has been
made operational for purposes of empirical research.
2. The study of personality and individual behavior
from a social psychological perspective appears to be gain
ing interest within the behavioral sciences. This research
has been guided by this frame of reference. The study of
inner-motivational factors requires a concern for sociologi
cal variables. The relationship of the individual to his
208
past and present associations with others is the proper
place to begin an effort to understand the nature of indi
vidual social character.
This study has not only produced some new descrip
tive data concerning the nature of four types of personality,
but has related these data to specific kinds of socializa
tion processes associated with particular forms of social
groups. A great deal of attention has been focused upon
early aspects of socialization for the individual in trying
to account for the various combinations of succorance and
nurturance needs. Parent-child relationships have been
found to be especially influential in causing the personal
ity patterns observed. The function of primary and second
ary group experiences has been spelled out in some detail
for each of the personality models. The importance of cul
tural expectations and definitions with regard to sex roles
in our culture has been an important factor of consideration
in studying these phenomena. The modal self-conceptions
characteristic of each personality model were an important
variable to consider. An important aspect of this study in
volves consideration of the individuals who served as sub
jects for the study in the light of the imagery they have of
themselves. The way people understand themselves and others,
the way they feel, the way they think they should feel, are
key perspectives in grappling with the task of understanding
human motivation. One of the conditions which makes social
209
research possible is the fact that people often share the
same feelings and somewhat similar patterns of behavior.
These patterns are not always inviolate, but somewhere be
tween complete sameness and random uniqueness there are com
monalities so general that they must be recognized as sig
nificant and useful for understanding. For each of the per
sonality models, certain patterns of this type have been
noted. In all instances these are based upon a considera
tion of quantitative and qualitative data. This study has
produced somewhat of an abundance of both. It is difficult
to evaluate the usefulness of these findings because inter
ests in theory and research tend to be so variable. In any
case, it would appear that subsequent efforts to explore the
subject matter approached in this research may have an addi
tional point of reference provided by this exploratory
study.
Prospects for Future Research
As this research progressed and especially as the
task of reporting the findings was under way, it became evi
dent that this study raised a great many questions which
could not be answered by the types of data collected. This
appears to be a common difficulty for most exploratory stud
ies focused upon fairly general problems. It might be ap
propriate to reaffirm at this point that the results of this
research are not intended to be definitive.
210
As noted in the chapter on methodology, some diffi
culties were encountered in the use of the autobiographical
data. Although students were requested to adhere to a
structured outline in the writing of these papers, many were
written along rather simple and abbreviated lines and were
quite useless in providing data useful to this research
project. It would appear that other sources of data and
means of collection might provide additional information
concerning the patterns of socialization and social develop
ment. It is possible that financial support, not available
for this present undertaking, would make possible a more in
tensive type of inquiry into the developmental aspects of
these motivational orientations.
A second shortcoming of the present study suggests
some new possibilities for research. Many students had very
little to say about their relationships outside of their
homes. The factors of succorance and nurturance, however,
must surely have some effects within nonfamilial relation
ships. The function of the four personality orientations
with respect to friendships, dating activities, and involve
ment with people on a more casual basis was not included in
much of the autobiographical data.
Another possibility for future investigation con
cerns the problems of mate-selection and marital interaction.
Although Robert F. Winch and his associates have found some
convincing evidence to support the contention that comple-
211
mentariness tends to describe the choice of mates with re
spect to the variables of succorance and nurturance, their
research was confined to the study of a very small sample
(twenty-five couples) and generalizations about personality
types of the kind explored in this research would be diffi
cult. It may be well to note that sixteen different high
and low combinations of succorance and nurturance are pos
sible (see Appendix F). The forms of interaction which pre
vail among such matches would be a challenging research
undertaking.
The relationship of social class variables to the
development of the four personality orientations poses still
another interesting problem. It has been impossible to sug
gest with confidence that socioeconomic factors are relevant
in explaining the forms of socialization which have given
rise to the various levels of succorance and nurturance of
the individuals studied. This does not mean that such fac
tors are not operating in the lives of these people in such
a way that they produce differential ways of feeling and
thinking about giving and receiving forms of behavior. Un
fortunately, the present data do not offer sufficient evi
dence with which to deal with this problem.
Perhaps this study might be repeated along similar
lines with another type of population, especially individ
uals having more maturity. It has been pointed out that the
inner-sustaining self tends to be characterized by a high
212
degree of rebellion to the home. Part of this felt need to
alienate himself from a dominance and indulgence may be ex
plained as a resultant of a difficult social situation
rather than intrinsic qualities of temperament. It has been
impossible to test the effects of autonomous social experi
ence in terms of their long-run results. The same problem
exists for the selfish self. Are these individuals likely
to continue to manifest dependency needs throughout their
lives, merely changing their sources of gratification as
circumstances compel, or do these types of people change in
the direction of self-sufficiency along with physical matur
ity and new social experience? These questions await fur
ther study.
Conclusion
This study has attempted to lift the qualities of
selfishness and altruism out of the realm of moral issues by
taking the point of view that individuals in our society are
morally and psychological normal in their expression of suc
corance and nurturance even when these patterns tend to be
well above or below common intensities of these needs. In a
society characterized by a great deal of variation in per
sonal values, it does not make sense to conceptualize dif
ferences of social character in terms of morality-immorality,
normality-abnormality, or good social adjustment, bad social
adjustment. Such conceptual compartments of the moralist or
mental hygienist obstruct the understanding of human
variations from a relativistic point of view. What is im
portant is to understand human variations in terms of the
kinds of social situations and forms of human interaction
which involve the person. The four personality types stud
ied in this research have been investigated from this social
psychological perspective. It is hoped that this study has
had the effect of revising traditional conceptions about
selfish and altruistic behavior, and subsequent research at
tempts will find these pioneering efforts useful in continu
ing scientific inquiry in the nature of social character.
A P P E N DI X ES
APPENDIX A
ILLUSTRATIVE LIST OF MURRAY'S NEEDS
216
ILLUSTRATIVE LIST OF MURRAY'S NEEDS
Need
♦Abasement
*Achievement
*Affiliation
♦Aggression
♦Autonomy
Counteraction
Brief Definition
To submit passively to external force. To
accept injury, blame, criticism, punish
ment. To surrender. To become resigned
to fate. To admit inferiority, error,
wrongdoing, or defeat. To confess and
atone. To blame, belittle, or mutilate
the self. To seek and enjoy pain, punish
ment, illness, and misfortune.
To accomplish something difficult. To
master, manipulate, or organize physical
objects, human beings, or ideas. To do
this as rapidly and as independently as
possible. To overcome obstacles and at
tain a high standard. To excel oneself.
To rival and surpass others. To increase
self-regard by the successful exercise of
talent.
To draw near and enjoyably co-operate or
reciprocate with an allied other (an other
who resembles the subject or who likes the
subject). To please and win affection of
a cathected object. To adhere and remain
loyal to a friend.
To overcome opposition forcefully. To
fight. To revenge an injury. To attack,
injure, or kill another. To oppose force
fully or punish another.
To get free, shake off restraint, break
out of confinement. To resist coercion
and restriction. To avoid or quite activ
ities prescribed by domineering authori
ties. To be independent and-free to act
according to impulse. To be unattached,
irresponsible. To defy convention.
To master or make up for a failure by re
striving. To obliterate a humiliation by
resumed action. To overcome weaknesses,
to repress fear. To efface a dishonor by
action. To search for obstacles and dif
ficulties to overcome. To maintain self-
respect and pride on a high level.
217
Defendance
♦Deference
♦Dominance
♦Exhibition
Harmavoidance
Infavoidance
♦Nurturance
♦Order
Play
To defend the self against assault, criti
cism, and blame. To conceal or justify a
misdeed, failure, or humiliation. To vin
dicate the ego.
To admire and support a superior. To
praise, honor, or eulogize. To yield ea
gerly to the influence of an allied other.
To emulate an exemplar. To conform to
custom.
To control one's human environment. To
influence or direct the behavior of others
by suggestion, seduction, persuasion, or
command. To dissuade, restrain or pro
hibit.
To make an impression. To be seen and
heard. To excite, amaze, fascinate, en
tertain, shock, intrigue, amuse, or entice
others.
To avoid pain, physical injury, illness,
and death. To escape from a dangerous
situation. To take precautionary measures.
To avoid humiliation. To quit embarras
sing situations or to avoid conditions
which may lead to belittlement: the
scorn, derision, or indifference of others.
To refrain from action because of the fear
of failure.
To give sympathy and gratify the needs of
a helpless object: an infant or any ob
ject that is weak, disabled, tired, inex
perienced, infirm, defeated, humiliated,
lonely, dejected, sick, mentally confused.
To assist an object in danger. To feed,
help, support, console, protect, comfort,
nurse, heal.
To put things in order. To achieve clean
liness, arrangement, organization, bal
ance, neatness, tidiness, and precision.
To act for "fun" without further purpose.
To like to laugh and make jokes. To seek
enjoyable relaxation of stress. To par
ticipate in games, sports, dancing, drink
ing parties, cards.
218
Rejection
Sentience
♦Sex
♦Succorance
♦Understanding
(Intraception)
To separate oneself from a negatively ca-
thected object. To exclude, abandon, ex
pel, or remain indifferent to an inferior
object. To snub or jilt an object.
To seek and enjoy sensuous impressions.
To form and further an erotic relation
ship. To have sexual intercourse.
To have one's needs gratified by the sym
pathetic aid of an allied object. To be
nursed, supported, sustained, surrounded,
protected, loved, advised, guided, in
dulged, forgiven, consoled. To remain
close to a devoted protector. To always
have a supporter.
To ask or answer general questions. To be
interested in theory. To speculate, for
mulate, analyze, and generalize.
(From Explorations in Personality by
Henry A. Murray.)
The asterisk (♦) denotes thirteen needs
which are variables measured by the
Edwards Personal Preference Schedule.
APPENDIX B
NEEDS ASSOCIATED WITH VARIABLES
THE EDWARDS PERSONAL PREFERENCE SCHEDULE
220
OF
Need
Achievement
Deference
Order
Exhibition
Autonomy
NEEDS ASSOCIATED WITH VARIABLES
THE EDWARDS PERSONAL PREFERENCE SCHEDULE
Brief Definition
To do one's best, to be successful, to ac
complish tasks requiring skill and effort,
to be a recognized authority, to accom
plish something of great significance, to
do a difficult job well, to solve diffi
cult problems and puzzles, to be able to
do things better than others, to write a
great novel or play.
To get suggestions from others, to find
out what others think, to follow instruc
tions and do what is expected, to praise
others, to tell others that they have done
a good job, to accept the leadership of
others, to read about great men, to con
form to custom and avoid the unconvention
al, to let others make decisions.
To have written work neat and organized,
to make plans before starting on a diffi
cult task, to have things organized, to
keep things neat and orderly, to make ad
vance plans when taking a trip, to organ
ize details of work, to keep letters and
files according to some system, to have
meals organized and a definite time for
eating, to have things arranged so that
they run smoothly without change.
To say witty and clever things, to tell
amusing jokes and stories, to talk about
personal adventures and experiences, to
have others notice and comment upon one's
appearance, to say things just to see what
effect it will have on others, to talk
about personal achievements, to be the
center of attention, to use words that
others do not know the meaning of, to ask
questions others cannot answer.
To be able to come and go as desired, to
say what one thinks about things, to be in
dependent of others in making decisions,
to feel free to do what one wants, to do
things that are unconventional, to avoid
221
Affiliation
Intraception
(Understanding)
Succorance
Dominance
Abasement
situations where one is expected to con
form, to do things without regard to what
others may think, to criticize those in
positions of authority, to avoid responsi
bilities and obligations.
To be loyal to friends, to participate in
friendly groups, to do things for friends,
to form new friendships, to make as many
friends as possible, to share things with
friends, to do things with friends rather
than alone, to form strong attachments, to
write letters to friends.
To analyze one's motives and feelings, to
observe others, to understand how others
feel about problems, to put one's self in
another's place, to judge people by why
they do things rather than by what they
do, to analyze the behavior of others, to
analyze the motives of others, to predict
how others will act.
To have others provide help when in trou
ble, to seek encouragement from others, to
have others be kindly, to have others be
sympathetic and understanding about per
sonal problems, to receive a great deal of
affection from others, to have others do
favors cheerfully, to be helped by others
when depressed, to have others feel sorry
when one is sick, to have a fuss made over
one when hurt.
To argue for one's point of view, to be a
leader in groups to which one belongs, to
be regarded by others as a leader, to be
elected or appointed chairman of commit
tees, to make group decisions, to settle
arguments and disputes between others, to
persuade and influence others to do what
one wants, to supervise and direct the ac
tions of others, to tell others how to do
their jobs.
To feel guilty when one does something
wrong, to accept blame when things do not
go right, to feel that personal pain and
misery suffered does more good than harm,
to feel the need for punishment for wrong
doing, to feel better when giving in and
avoiding a fight than when having one's
222
Nurturanee
Change
Endurance
Heterosexuality
Aggression
own way, to feel the need for confession
of errors, to feel depressed by inability
to handle situations, to feel timid in the
presence of superiors, to feel inferior to
others in most respects.
To help friends when they are in trouble,
to assist others less fortunate, to treat
others with kindness and sympathy, to for
give others, to do small favors for others,
to be generous with others, to sympathize
with others who are hurt or sick, to show
a great deal of affection toward others,
to have others confide in one about per
sonal problems.
To do new and different things, to travel,
to meet new people, to experience novelty
and change in daily routine, to experiment
and try new things, to eat in new and dif
ferent places, to try new and different
jobs, to move about the country and live
in different places, to participate in new
fads and fashions.
To keep at a job until it is finished, to
complete any job undertaken, to work hard
at a task, to keep at a puzzle or problem
until it is solved, to work at a single
job before taking on others, to stay up
late working in order to get a job done,
to put in long hours of work without dis
traction, to stick at a problem even
though it may seem as if no progress is
being made, to avoid being interrupted
while at work.
To go out with members of the opposite
sex, to engage in social activities with
the opposite sex, to be in love with some
one of the opposite sex, to kiss those of
the opposite sex, to be regarded as physi
cally attractive by those of the opposite
sex, to participate in discussions about
sex, to read books and plays involving
sex, to listen to or to tell jokes involv
ing sex, to become sexually excited.
To attack contrary points of view, to tell
others what one thinks about them, to
criticize others publicly, to make fun of
others, to tell others off when disagree
223
ing with them, to get revenge for insults,
to become angry, to blame others when
things go wrong, to read newspaper ac
counts of violence.
APPENDIX C
STUDENT EVALUATION OF EPPS VARIABLES
SELF RATINGS COMPARED
225
Name ______________________________________
Student Evaluation of EPPS Variables
Self Ratings Compared
EPPS Variable should have been "Higher" "Lower"
or "Approximately Correct"
EPPS
Variable Raw Score
Achievement: ___________________________________ ( )
Deference: ___________________________________________ ( )
Order: ________________________________________________ ( )
Exhibition: __________________________________________ ( )
Autonomy: _____________________________________________ ( )
Affiliation: _________________________________________ ( )
Intraception: ________________________________________ ( )
Succorance: __________________________________________ ( )
Dominance: ___________________________________________ ( )
Abasement: ____________________________________________ ( )
Nurturance: __________________________________________ ( )
Change: _______________________________________________ ( )
Endurance: ___________________________________________ ( )
Heterosexuality: _____________________________________ ( )
Aggression:____________________________________________ ( )
Consistency score was
APPENDIX D
SELF ANALYSIS
227
A SELF ANALYSIS
1. Introduction
A. Purpose of the paper.
B. Objectives to be covered.
C. Organization of the paper.
2. Sociocultural factors significant in understanding my
personality
A. General characteristics of family: the social en
vironment and the psychological environment.
B. General characteristics of the community: institu
tional influences such as schools, churches, recre
ational groups, etc.
3. Significant experiences and their influences
A. Parent-child relationships:
(1) Early childhood
(2) Childhood
(3) Early adolescence
(4) Adolescence
(5) Post high school
B. Peer group relationships:
(1) Early childhood
(2) Childhood
(3) Early adolescence
(4) Adolescence
(5) Post high school
4. What are your basic personality needs? (Use Edwards
Personal Preference Schedule.)
A. Compare your subjective impression of your needs
with that given by the EPPS.
B. Take note of some of your high or low needs. What
is responsible for that level of need intensity?
5. Influence of significant factors upon past, present, or
future choices of persons of the opposite sex for pur
poses of gratifying needs for companionship, etc. Con
sequences of past experience with various kinds of per
sonalities in dating or more formalized relationships—
going steady, getting engaged, etc.
228
6. On the basis of the above, speculate as to the kind of
person you need to produce a satisfying marriage.
7. What kinds of problems do you anticipate in the light
of finding such a person and/or compromising with re
ality?
8. What kind of persons should you not probably consider
for a happy marriage?
9. A general view of your readiness for marriage if appli
cable .
10. What are the unresolved problems in this connection,
and what are you going to do about them?
11. Summary.
APPENDIX E
NEED ANALYSIS PROJECT
230
NEED ANALYSIS PROJECT
Name Need
Evaluation of Score Raw Score— Con.Score
(OK, too high, too low)
1. How do you justify your evaluation of your score?
2. How do you feel about the intensity of need reported on
the EPPS? In what way do you feel good, bad, or indif
ferent?
3. What kinds of social experience with parents, siblings,
peer groups, friends, or other types of associates have
played a part in the development of this need?
4. Describe in detail two examples of the type of social
experience which you have noted in Item 3.
5. Indicate what kinds of efforts (and by whom) were made
to change your need or the behavior which emerged be
cause of it.
6. With what result?
APPENDIX F
NEED COMBINATIONS
FOR NURTURANCE AND SUCCORANCE
NEED COMBINATIONS FOR NURTURANCE AND SUCCORANCE
Male Female Male Female
NUR(H) 1 NUR(H) NUR(L) 2 NUR(L)
SUC(H) SUC(H) SUC(L) SUC(L)
Male Female Male Female
NUR(H) 5 NUR(H) NUR(L) 6 NUR(L)
SUC(L) SUC(L) SUC(H) SUC (H)
Male Female Male Female
NUR(H) 9 NUR(H) NUR(H) 10 NUR(L)
SUC(H) SUC(L) SUC(H) SUC(h )
Male Female Male Female
NUR(L) 13 NUR(H) NUR(L) 14 NUR(L)
SUC(L) SUC(L) SUC(L) SUC (H)
Male Female Male Female
NUR(H) 3 NUR(L) NUR(L) 4 NUR(H)
SUC(H) SUC(L) SUC(L) SUC(H)
Male Female Male Female
NUR(H) 7 NUR(L) NUR(L) 8 NUR(H)
SUC(L) SUC (h ) SUC(h) SUC (L)
Male Female Male Female
NUR(H) 11 NUR(H) NUR(L) 12 NUR(H)
SUC(L) SUC(h ) SUC(H) SUC(H)
Male Female Male Female
NUR(H) 15 NUR(L) NUR(L) 16 NUR(L)
SUC (L) SUC(L) SUC(H) SUC(L)
NUR = Nurturance (H) = High Need Intensity
SUC = Succorance * (L) = Low Need Intensity 2 32
APPENDIX G
MALE AND FEMALE
SELF EVALUATIONS OF EPPS SCORES
TABLE 23
SELF EVALUATIONS OF EPPS SCORES FOR MALES
A B C
Need
Score
(N)
Should
Have Been
Higher
(%)
Score
(N)
Should
Have Been
Lower
(%)
Score
(N)
Approxi
mately
Correct
{%)
Ach 75 26.5 12 4.2 196 69.3
Def 27 9.6 31 11.0 224 79.4
Ord 56 19.9 25 8.9 201 71.2
Exh 26 9.2 38 13.4 219 77.4
Aut 75 26.5 12 4.2 196 69.3
Aff 63 22.3 13 4.6 207 73.1
Int 72 25.4 15 5.3 196 69.3
Sue 31 11.0 57 20.1 195 68.9
Dorn 61 21.6 19 6.7 202 71.7
Aba 24 8.5 60 21.2 198 70.3
Nur 66 23.3 14 4.9 203 71.8
Chg 48 16.7 23 8.1 212 75.2
End 58 20.5 19 6.7 206 72.8
Het 58 20.5 21 7.4 204 72.1
Agg 34 12.0 38 13.4 211 74.6
Mean and
Total %
N = 283
51 18.0 26 9.2 206 72.8
234
TABLE 24
SELF EVALUATIONS OF EPPS SCORES FOR FEMALES
A B C
Need
Score
(N)
Should
Have Been
Higher
(%>
Score
(N)
Should
Have Been
Lower
(%)
Score
(N)
Approxi
mately
Correct
(%)
Ach 51 23.9 9 4.2 153 71.9
Def 25 11.7 14 6.6 174 81.7
Ord 43 20.2 6 2.8 164 77.0
Fxh 20 9.4 35 16.4 158 74.2
Aut 34 16.0 10 4.7 159 79.3
Aff 62 29.1 3 1.4 148 69.5
Int 46 21.6 9 4.2 158 74.2
Sue 23 10.8 22 10.3 168 78.9
Dom 27 12.7 10 4.7 176 82.6
Aba 10 4.7 30 14.1 173 81.2
Nur 44 20.7 9 4.2 160 75.1
Chg 38 17.8 10 4.7 165 77.5
End 49 23.0 9 4.2 155 72.8
Het 26 12.2 22 10.3 165 77.5
Agg 13 6.1 45 21.1 155 72.8
Mean and
Total %
N = 213
34 16.0 16 7.5 163 76.5
235
B I B L I O G R A P H Y
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ackerman, Nathan W. The Psvchodvnamics of Family Life. New
York: Basic Books, Inc., 1958.
Adorno, T. W., et al. The Authoritarian Personality. New
York: Harper and Brothers, 1950.
Allen, R. M. "An Analysis of Edwards Personal Preference
Schedule Variables and the Minnesota Multiphasic Person
ality Inventory Scales," Journal of Applied Psychology,
XLI (1957), 307-311.
Allport, Gordon W. "A Psychological Approach to the Study
of Love and Hate." Explorations in Altruistic Love and
Behavior. Edited by P. A. Sorokin. Boston: Beacon
Press, 1952.
_________. The Use of Personal Documents in Psychological
Science. Bulletin 49. New York: Social Science Re
search Council, 1942.
Bettelheim, Bruno. Love is not Enough. Glencoe, Illinois:
The Free Press, 1950.
Blumer, Herbert. An Appraisal of Thomas and Znaniecki*s
"The Polish Peasant in Europe and America". New York:
Social Science Research Council, 1939.
Bogardus, Emory S. Fundamentals of Social Psychology. New
York: Appleton Century Crofts, 1950.
Borislow, Bernard. "The EPPS and Fakability," Journal of
Applied Psychology. XLII (February, 1958), 22-27.
Budd, L. J, "Altruism Arrives in America," American Quar
terly (Spring, 1956), pp. 40-52.
Buros, Oscar K. "Review," The Fifth Mental Measurements
Yearbook, 1958. Edited by Frank Barron. New Brunswick:
Rutgers University Press, pp. 114-117.
Clark, Burton. The Open Door College: A Case Study. New
York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1960.
_________. "The 'Cooling-Out' Function in Higher Education,"
American Journal of Sociology. LXV (May, 1960), 569-576.
237
2 38
Combs, Arthur W., and Snygg, Donald. Individual Behavior.
New York: Harper and Brothers, 1959.
Cooley, Robert H. Human Nature and the Social Order. New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1922.
Cuber, John F. Sociology. New York: Appleton Century
Crofts, 1959.
Dewey, John. Human Nature and Conduct. New York: The
Modern Library, 1930.
Durkheim, Emile. Suicide. Translated by J. A. Spaulding
and George Simpson. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press,
1951.
Edwards, Allen L. Test Manual for the Edwards Personal
Preference Schedule. New York: The Psychological
Corp., 1959.
Eisenstein, Victor W. Neurotic Interaction in Marriage.
New York: Basic Books, 1956.
Erikson, Erik. Childhood and Society. New York: W. W.
Norton and Co., 1950.
Feldman, M. J., and Corah, M. L. "Social Desirability and
the Forced Choice Method," Journal of Consulting Psy
chology , XXIV (November, 1960), 480-482.
Foote, Nelson N. "Identification as the Basis for a Theory
of Motivation," American Sociological Review. XVI (1951),
14-21.
Freeman, Howard E., and Morris, Showel. "The Role of the
Family in the Socialization Process," Journal of Social
Psychology, XXXVII (1953), 97-101.
Friedrichs, R. W. "Alter versus Ego: An Explanatory As
sessment of Altruism," American Sociological Review.
XXV (August, 1960), 496-508.
Fromm, Ericn. Man for Himself. New York: Rinehart and
Co., 1947.
_________. The Sane Society. New York: Rinehart and Co.,
1955.
. "Selfishness and Self Love," Journal of Counsel
ing Psychology, IV (April, 1939), 521.
239
Frondizi, Risieri. The Nature of the Self. New Haven:
Yale University Press, 1953.
Goffman, Irving. "The Nature of Deference and Demeanor,"
American Anthropologist. LVIII (1956), 473-502.
Guilford, J. P. Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and
Education. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
Inc., 1956.
Gustad, John W. "A Review," Journal of Consulting Psychol
ogy . XX (August, 1956), 322-324.
Gutman, Robert. "David Riesman's Typology of Character,"
Culture and Social Character. Edited by Seymour Martin
Lipset and Leo Lowenthal. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free
Press, 196.1.
Hall, Calvin S., and Lindzey, Gardner. Theories of Person
ality. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1957.
Hallowell, A. Irving. Culture and Experience. Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press, 1955.
Harlow, Harry G. "The Nature of Love," American Psycholo
gist. XII (1958), 673 685.
Havighurst, Robert J., and Taba, Hilda. Adolescent Charac
ter and Personality. New York: John Wiley and Sons,
1949.
Homans, George C. Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms.
New York: Harcourt Brace and Co., 1961.
Horney, Karen. Neurosis and Human Growth. New York: W. W.
Norton and Co., 1950.
Jahoda, Marie, Deutsch, M., and Cook, S. W. Research Meth
ods in Social Relations. New York: Dryden Press, 1951.
Kaplan, Bert (ed.) Studying Personality Cross-Culturallv.
Evanston: Row, Peterson and Co., 1961.
Kelleher, Daniel. "The Social Desirability Factor in EPPS,"
Journal of Consulting Psychology, XXII (April, 1958),
100.
Kish, Leslie. "Confidence Intervals for Clustered Samples,"
American Sociological Review. XXII (April, 1957), 160.
240
Kluckhohn, Florence Rockwood, and Strodtbeck, Fred L. Vari
ations in Value Orientations. Evanston: Row, Peterson
and Co., 1961.
Komarovsky, Mirra. "Cultural Contradictions and Sex Roles,"
American Journal of Sociology. LII (November, 1946),
184-189.
Larrabee, Eric. "David Riesman and His Readers," Culture
and Social Character. Edited by Seymour Martin Lipset
and Leo Lowenthal. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press,
1961.
Levy, David M. Maternal Overprotection. New York:
Columbia University Press, 1943.
Lindner, Robert M. Rebel Without a Cause. New York: Grune
and Stratton, 1944.
Lipset, Seymour Martin. "A Changing American Character,"
Culture and Social Character. Edited by Seymour Martin
Lipset and Leo Lowenthal. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free
Press, 1961.
Lynd, Helen M. On Shame and the Search for Identity. New
York: Harcourt Brace and Co., 1958.
Mann, John H. "Self Ratings and the EPPS," Journal of Ap
plied Psychology, XXII (August, 1958), 267-268.
Mannheim, Karl. Ideology and Utopia. New York: Harcourt
Brace and Co., 1936.
Maslow, Abraham H. Motivation and Personality. New York:
Harper and Brothers, 1954.
Mead, George H. Mind, Self, and Society. Edited by
Charles W. Morris. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1934.
Miller, Daniel R., and Swanson, Guy E. The Changing Ameri
can Parent. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1958.
Mills, C. Wright. The Sociological Imagination. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1959.
Morris, Charles W. Paths of Life. New York: George
Braziller, 1956.
Murphy, Garner. Human Potentialities. New York: Basic
Books, 1958.
241
Murray, Henry A. Explorations in Personality. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1938.
Newcomb, Theodore M. Social Psychology. New York: Dryden
Press, 1950.
Nye, F. Ivan. Family Relationships and Delinquent Behavior.
New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1958.
Parsons, Talcott, and Bales, R. F. Family: Socialization
and Interaction Process. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free
Press, 1955.
Peck, Robert F., with Havighurst, Robert J. The Psychology
of Character Development. New York: John Wiley and
Sons, 1960.
Piaget, Jean. The Child's Conception of the World. Trans
lated by Joan and Andrew Tomlinson. New York: Harcourt
Brace and Co., 1929.
. The Moral Judgment of the Child. Translated by
Marjorie Gabain. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press,
1948.
Remmers, H. H., and Radler, D. H. The American Teenager.
Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1957.
Riesman, David. Faces in the Crowd. New Haven: Yale Uni
versity Press, 1952.
. Individualism Reconsidered. Glencoe, Illinois:
The Free Press, 1954.
_________. The Lonely Crowd. New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1950.
Riley, Matilda White, Riley, John W., Jr., and Moore, Mary E„
"Adolescent Values and the Riesman Typology," Culture
and Social Character. Edited by Seymour Martin Lipset
and Leo Lowenthal. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press,
1961.
Ruch, Floyd L. Psychology and Life. Chicago: Scott,
Foresman and Co., 1958.
Seabury, D. The Art of Selfishness. New York: J. Messner,
Inc., 1947.
Sears, Robert R., Maccoby, Eleanor E., and Levin, Harry.
Patterns of Child Rearing. Evanston: Row, Peterson and
Co., 1957.
242
Selvin, Hanan C. "A Critique of Tests of Significance in
Survey Research," American Sociological Review, XXII
(October, 1957), 519-527.
Shibutani, Tamotsu. Society and Personality. Englewood
Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1961.
Silverman, Robert E. "The EPPS and Social Desirability,"
Journal of Consulting Psychology. XXI (October, 1957),
402-404.
Simpson, R. L. "Pitirim Sorokin and His Sociology," Social
Forces. XXXII (December, 1953), 120-131.
Sofer, Elaine Graham. "Inner-Direction, Other-Direction,
and Autonomy: A Study of College Students," Culture and
Social Character. Edited by Seymour Martin Lipset and
Leo Lowenthal. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1961.
Sorokin, Pitirim. Altruistic Love: A Study of American
Good Neighbors and Christian Saints. Boston: Beacon
Press, 1950.
_________. (ed.) Explorations in Altruistic Love and Behav
ior. Boston: Beacon Press, 1950.
_________. Forms and Techniques of Altruistic and Spiritual
Growth. Boston: Beacon Press, 1954.
_________. S.O.S.r The Meaning of our Crisis. Boston:
Beacon Press, 1951.
_________. The Reconstruction of Humanity. Boston: Beacon
Press, 1948.
_________. Social Philosophies of an Age of Crisis. Boston:
Beacon Press, 1950.
_________. The Wavs and Power of Love. Boston: Beacon
Press, 1954.
Stagner, Ross. Psychology of Personality. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1961.
Steckle, Lynde C. Problems of Human Adjustment. New York:
Harper and Brothers, 1957.
Strauss, Anselm L. "The Development of Conceptions of Rules
in Children," Child Development. XXV (1954), 193-208.
_________. Mirrors and Masks: The Search for Identity.
Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1959.
243
Turner, Ralph H. "Role-Taking, Role Standpoint, and Refer
ence Group Behavior," American Journal of Sociology.
LXI (1956), 316-328.
Weber, Max. The Protestant Ethic. Translated by Talcott
Parsons. New edition. New York: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1958.
Whiting, John W. M., and Child, Irvin. Child Training and
Personality. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953.
Whyte, William H., Jr. The Organization Man. New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1956.
Winch, Robert F. Mate-Selection: A Study of Complementary
Needs. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1958.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A Study Of The Attitudes Of Mothers Of Mentally Retarded Children As Influenced By Socioeconomic Status

PDF

Class Consciousness And Social Mobility In A Mexican-American Community

PDF

Selected Social Psychological Factors Related To Viewers Of Television Programs

PDF

Delinquency And Rationalization: A Study Of The Delinquent Act

PDF

The Major League Professional Baseball Player: A Sociological Study

PDF

Social Class Membership And Ethnic Prejudice In Cedar City

PDF

Social Factors Related To Dentistry As A Career

PDF

Social Stratification In A Selected Community

PDF

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

PDF

Self-Worth, Future Goals, Mood And Time Perception

PDF

Some Characteristics Of A Selected Sample Of Free Methodist Pastoral Dropouts

PDF

The Career Business Executive As A Definitive Occupational Type

PDF

Normative values of selected law enforcement officers and adult male offenders

PDF

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

PDF

Reference Group Theory, Selection, And The Images Of Professions

PDF

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

PDF

Interpersonal Relations In Ethnically Mixed Small Work Groups

PDF

A Study Of The Relationships Between Religious Affiliation, Religious Practices And Marital Adjustment

PDF

The Influence Of The Control Of Personal Set Upon Prediction By Factored Tests Of Temperament And Interest

PDF

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

Asset Metadata

Creator Ribal, Joseph Edward (author)

Core Title The Selfish Self: A Social Psychological Study Of Social Character

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 Vincent, Melvin J. (committee chair), Lasswell, Thomas E. (committee member), Ruch, Floyd L. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-270150

Unique identifier UC11358803

Identifier 6206082.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-270150 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 6206082.pdf

Dmrecord 270150

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Ribal, Joseph Edward

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