On each of these
questions
approximately two-thirds or more of the total number of omissions were made by the high quartiles.
Adorno-T-Authoritarian-Personality-Harper-Bros-1950
.
. . . ,
~
? 82. 2 50. 0 53. 6 46. 4 50. 0 88. 9 58. 1 1021006)
2 0 3 2 1 0 9)16. 3%
83. 3 86. 7 83. 3 66. 7 93. 8 50. 0 77. 7 0101004)
3 0 3 1 1 0 8)13. 1%
82. 8 69. 0 69. 0 56. 8 . 70. 6 70. 6 67. 9
1 1 2 2 0 0 10) I'd
5 0 6
3 2 0
17 )14. 7% l:l:' 0
70. 6 82. 5 55. 9
70. 6 42. 3 88. 5
71. 3
~
10 1002003) c
3 0 3 4 1 1 12)12. 5% M
. . . . . 50. 0 94. 1 97. 1 58. 8 86. 4 81. 8 74. 5 z0 1 0 1 4 1 3 12) (/)
4 0 0 2 1 0 7)17. 0%
60. 3 88. 3 76. 5 64. 7 62. 5 85. 4 72. 8
2 0 1 6 1 3 15)
7 0 3 6 2 1 19)14. 7%
. . . . . . t"1 () . . . , . . . . .
. . . ,
"'
\Jo
00
'-)
? 5. Middle-Class Women Low quartile
High quartile
Total
6. Middle-Class Men Low quartile
High quartile
Total
34
36
L% 72. 1 60. 2 76. 5 60. 2 76. 5
Nb24202 Na-NHL 1 1 4 1 2
H% 82. 0 80. 5 56. 9 79. 2 76. 4
Nb812803 Na-NHL 1 0 5 1 4
69. 1
10) . . . ,
9)8. 9%! I: i. "l
75. 0 > c:
TABLE 2 (XV) (continued)
Na Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Meanb 70
v,
00 00
70 %A 77. 1 70. 7 66. 4 70. 0 76. 4 Nb 10 16 10 0 5
72. 1 41)
0
~ ~
65 33
32
65
43. 9 71. 2
>z
"d
M
~
en 0 z
> 20) t"" ~ 15)21. 2% . . . ,
Na-NHL 2
1 9
2
6
20 )17. 4% ~ ~
62. 1 Nb37316 Na-NHL 4 1 4 3 3
L% 69. 7
71. 2
63. 6
H% 81. 2 78. 1 81. 2 76. 6 75. 0
Nb 6 10 4 3 4 Na-NHL 0 0 6 1 8
%A 75. 4 60. 8 76. 1 69. 2 73. 1
Nb 9 17 7 4 10 Na-NHL 4 1 10 4 11
78. 4
27)
15 )26. 3%
70. 9
47)
30 )23. 7%
31) . . , 11)23. 3% ! I:
-<
? 7. All groups combined Low quartile
High quartile
Total
L% 76. 7 63. 0 75. 8 68. 4 65. 8 63. 0 57. 0 85. 9 69. 1
Nb 9 19 8 3 14 7 0 1 61 6. 6% Na-NHL 8 8 22 20 12 11 13 1 95 10. 3%
ER 146 146 155 155 155 73 64 32 926 116
m; 84. 0 79. 9 71. 3 84. 4 86. 0 7i. 3 85. 9 72. 7 80. 7
Nb 15 33 17 9 11 7 2 5 99 10. 6% Na-NHL 4 4 27 9 15 3 4 2 68 7. 3%
ER 144 144 157 157 157 77 64 33 933 117
%A 80. 3 71. 4 73. 6 76. 5 76. 0 69. 3 71. 5 79. 2 74. 9
Nb 24 52 25 12 25 14 2 6 160 8. 6% Na-NHL 12 12 49 29 27 14 17 3 163 8. 8%
ER 290 290 312 312 312 150 J 2 8 65 1859 232
Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total Mean
aFor Groups 2, 3, and 4 the number of subjects varies somewhat from item to item because two questionnaire forms were used. The number indicated in the "N" column is the total N in each group or quartile. The N in parenth~ses refers to those subjects who received the complete set of projective questions. Thus, in Group 2 all 51 subjects received items 1 - 5 (Forms 45 and 40); only 10 Low and 14 High received all 8 questions (Form 45), so that the N's on items 6, 7, and 8 are 10 and 14 respectively. as indicated in parentheses in the "N" column. Similarly,
of the 14 Lows in Group 3, only 9 received the full battery, the remaining 5 receiving a form which did not in? clude items 1, 2, 7, and 8. For the high quartile in Group 3, there is an Nof 8 on items 1, 2, 7, and 8. In Group 4, the N on these same items is 13 for Lows and 11 for Highs.
Group 1 received a form which did not include item 8 (see text). Groups 5 and 6 received Form 40 which contained items 1-5 only.
Thus, while there were 312 subjects in all, the N per item varied. This is shown in the table under ~All groups combined," where the row "ER" gives the number of subjects answering each item.
bin the computation of all means, the component values are weighted by N.
Key to questions: 1 (Moods), 2 (Desires), 3 (Great People), 4 (Drive Nuts), 5 (Crimes), 6 (Embarrassing), 7 (Last Six Months), 8 (A we-inspiring).
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
The average agreement varies among the six groups from 67? 9 per cent for the Psychiatric Clinic Men to S2. 6 per cent for the Employment Service Veteran Men. It appears that the scorers, try as they did to be unbiased, were systematically influenced by the fact that they knew the E-quartile standing of the Psychology Women and the Veteran Men. Thus, the %A for these two groups is about So per cent, whereas for the remaining four groups
(scored blindly) it averages slightly over 70 per cent. The relatively low %A for the Clinic Men is consistent with the low scoring reliability for this group (see Table I(XV)). The data for the Clinic Women and the Middle- Class Men and Women probably best represent what can be expected with the present Scoring Manual; the average agreement of about 72 per cent for these groups might have been slightly higher had all subjects received questions 6, 7, and S.
The over-all average agreement for the individual items varies from 69. 3 to So. 3 per cent. The poorest questions are 2 ("Desires"), 6 ("Embarrass- ing"), and 7 ("Last six months"). In all three of them the L% is particularly low (57-63 per cent), probably because of the brevity of the answers, as discussed above. Correction of this error should lead to considerably better results, particularly for Item 7? The agreements for the individual items re- veal again the great consistency of the highs. Thus, the L% varied within a range of 29 points (57-S6 per cent), whereas the H% covered a range of only 15 points (7I-S6 per cent). It is of some interest that the two most dif- ferentiating items, 1 ("Moods") and S ("Awe-inspiring"), deal with issues which, in their literal meanings, are completely removed from ideology about group interaction.
Table 2(XV) provides the empirical basis on which omissions (Nb) of Questions I, 2, 4, 7, and S were converted into H scores in the statistical treat- ment.
On each of these questions approximately two-thirds or more of the total number of omissions were made by the high quartiles. Moreover, it is consistent with the differential trends found that the highs should omit, more often than the lows, questions dealing with inner life (moods, desires, drive nuts) and with emotionally intense experiences (last six months, awe-inspir- ing). Question 3 might also have been scored in this way since some 70 per cent of the omissions were by highs. However, omissions on this item were not scored H because they did not appear to fulfill the requirement of theo- retical consistency. Should the highs continue, in future groups, to make most of the omissions, Nb would have to be scored H and a theoretical rationale found. The scoring of Nb as H would, in the present groups, have raised the over-all agreement several points.
Having considered the degree to which groups are distinguished with respect to the H and L categories, we may consider briefly how the scoring. scheme applies to the individual. It is possible to give each subject a total score which is the sum of his individual item scores. This total may be called
? PROJECTIVE QUESTIONS
the L-H score, and is computed as follows: One point is given for each H score, zero points for each L score, and one-half point for each Neutral score (except for Nb on Items I, 2, 4, 7, and 8 where, as noted above, Nb is con- verted to H). Thus, the L-H scores may range, for eight questions, between o (all L scores) and 8 (all H scores), with a mid-point of 4. 0. A subject receiving 4 H scores, 3 L's and I Na has an L-H score of 4. 5, i. e. , just on the high side of center. The over-all H% of 80. 7 for the high quartiles can be converted to an average L-H score of 6. 5 for the eight items. Similarly, the
over-all L% of 69. I for the low quartiles becomes an L-H score of 2. 5. The computing of L-H scores for each subject provides a means of deter- mining the amount of overlap between the low and high quartiles. This has been done in the case of the Middle-Class Men and Women, who have a combined N of 135, and who received a battery of five Projective Questions. The L-H scores of the low quartile ranged between o. o and 4? 5, those of the high quartile between 1. 0 and 5. 0, the mean for the total group being about 2. 7 (slightly more H than L scores were assigned). Using 2. 7 as a dividing point, we may then say that all L-H scores of 2. 5 and below will be called "low," all scores of 3. 0 and above will be called "high. " On the basis of this criterion, 2 2 per cent of the low quartile members would be considered high in terms of Projective Question score, while I4 per cent of the high quartile members have a low L-H score. These are the exceptions. Or, to put it posi-
tively, 78 per cent of the anti-ethnocentric group, and 86 per cent of the ethnocentric group, would be correctly diagnosed on the basis of total Pro- jective Question score. ?
The above data do not, of course, include the middle scorers on E. How- ever, it is not unlikely that a longer Projective Question Test of perhaps fifteen or twenty items, applied to all subjects and not merely to the extreme quartiles, might yield correlations in the neighborhood of ? 7 between L-H score and E. The Projective Questions might then be used, like the F scale, as an indirect measure of ethnocentrism-a measure in which no reference to current social issues need be made. They also, like the F scale, permit one to go beyond the immediate limits of the scoring scheme and to make numerQus inferences regarding individual dynamics. That the variables in the two techniques are so consistent is an important argument in favor of the validity of each.
In summary, the results indicate that the Projective Question Test meets current standards of reliability, under the most demanding of scoring conditions. It has also been demonstrated that the categories denoted as "high" are in fact characteristic of the high scorers on the Ethnocentrism scale, the "low" categories characteristic of the low quartile on E. There are, however, many highs who get L scores on single items, and many lows who get scores of H, the average PQ-E agreement being in the neighborhood of 75 per cent. In terms of individual L-H scores, the ethnocentrists and anti-
? Anger. (Na)
THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
ethnocentrists could, in the two groups considered, be diagnosed with ap- proximately 82 per cent accuracy.
The present results can probably be improved in the future by modifica- tions of the Scoring Manual, by an increase in the number of items (which, other things being equal, will improve the reliability of the L-H score), and by instructions which lay greater stress on full answers (two or three sen- tences would do). Moreover, in its practical application the test may be scored in a clinically more meaningful way, once the scorers have demon- strated their competence. If all the items for a given individual were scored at once, many apparently ambiguous responses might be interpreted in the light of the total pattern. This would not only improve the quantitative scor- ing but would also stimulate further differentiation and elaboration within the broad framework now conceived. There is also considerable research which needs to be done regarding additional categories, relative frequencies of specific categories, sex differences, various patterns among lows and among highs, differences among various religious, political, and other groupings, and so on.
3. VALIDATION BY MEANS OF CASE STUDIES: MACK AND LARRY
Throughout the present research the attempt has been made to develop techniques that would yield statistically significant relationships among numerous variables and that would, as well, provide clinically meaningful material regarding the individual. Accordingly, following the presentation of statistical (group) results for each technique, the protocols of the high man, Mack, and the low man, Larry, have been considered in relation to the group data. To the extent that their results on a given technique are consistent with those for the total sample, and to the exent that interpreta- tions based on the technique are congruent with those derived from other techniques, further evidence of validity appears to be indicated.
The Projective Question responses of Mack and Larry are as follows (the scores being given at the end of each response):
MACK (High)
LARRY (Low)
1. Moods
Physical weakness, perhaps due to A lonesome mood, or a feeling that ill health over the last 4 years. (H) I am not progressing toward my goal, or a feeling that I have hurt
2 .
someone. (L)
Desires
When someone is persecuted un- justly, or to see a Negro service- man endure unjust discrimination and prejudice. (L)
? It depends a lot on definition, but if crazy is meant, such a thing as losing my wife and children would most closely approximate it. (H)
A person might become insane over too much interest in love, re- ligion, money, etc. Any obsession carried too far might drive a person insane. (L)
Murder, rape. (H)
Not included in this form.
5? Worst crimes
Murder, rape and a person that will incite hate toward another people, and groups that incite wars. (Nhl)
6. Embarrassing
7? Last six months
PROJECTIVE QUESTIONS
593
3? Great people
Lincoln, Lee, Gen. Geo. C. Mar- Lincoln, Willkie, Washington, Sta-
shall, Edison. (H)
lin, Chiang Kai Shek, Churchill, MacArthur, Eisenhower, and the great scientists of past and present. (H)
4? Drive nuts
Seeing all of the world possible, Trying to enjoy life as I have al- with a particular person to see it ways wanted; travel, meet im- with me. (H) portant people, have lots of friends,
go to a lot of parties. All this with- out harming anyone. (L predomi- nantly, despite some H trends. )
8. Awe-inspiring
The viewing of great natural won- ders of the world, new scientific achievements, meeting really great men and women and the sight of rare jewels and metals. (H)
T o see American people practice true democracy. Such incidents as a member of one race protects a member of another race. True comradeship between races. (L)
The scoring, done blindly and with complete agreement between two independent judges, gives Mack an L-H score of 6. 5 out of 7 (or an H% of 93), Larry an L-H score of 1. 5 (or an L% of 79). Mack's responses are rela- tively typical of those given by the high men; if he shows no bizarre features, neither does he show much individuality. Given an opportunity to be emo- tionally expressive (Items 7 and 8), he responds in a shallow, conventional- ized manner; his concern with "looking," with a minimum of differentiation or focal affect, appears to be based on a deep but inhibited curiosity for which he has few constructive expressions. His tendency to align himself with power and success is expressed in Item 3 and again in Item 8 ("meeting really great men and women"). Item I reveals his anxiety over bodily harm and his conception of ill health as a form of weakness (rather than, for example,
? 594
THE AUTHORIT ARIAN PERSONALITY
a barrier in the way of achievement). The equation of sickness with weak- ness is particularly interesting in the light of his mother's and his own weakness during childhood (see Chapters II and XX). It suggests, as does the material from other techniques, that his surface identification with powerful figures and groups is at least in part a means of maintaining his sense of mastery and of allaying his anxiety over bodily harm. It is not clear from his Projective Question responses alone whether Mack's aggression is more a surface defense against the admission of passive dependency or, rather, a strong underlying need. That he has aggressive impulses which he cannot easily assimilate into the ego is suggested by his "Murder, rape" on Item 5 and "Anger" on 2. Moreover, that these impulses are partially directed against family (ingroup) members is suggested by his response to Item 4: his fear of "losing my wife and children" (particularly since he is not yet married) would seem to be based on unconscious hostility toward them-hostility which is projected onto the "threatening world. " (His fantasy, while he is still unmarried, of the death of wife and children may also be a projection of his own fear as a child that he might die when his mother did. ) However, the over-all impression given is that of a conventional, deferent, pseudo- independent fac,;ade, and that what lies beneath the surface is primarily anxiety
and dependency rather than active destructiveness.
Larry's responses, here as elsewhere, are less characteristically low than
Mack's are high. Like Mack, Larry is attracted to those who have power, but his conception of power is different from Mack's. Thus, Larry can admire foreign as well as American leaders (Item 5: in 1945 Chiang Kai Shek was still conceived as a democratic leader). And his relationship to power figures seems to be based more on the open expression of dependency and need for support than on defense against fear of his own weakness. Indeed, Larry is openly and intensely identified with the weak and the helpless, and he can therefore be opposed to social authority when it mistreats Negroes and others (Items 2, 5, and 8). He is also characteristically low in his intra- ception, intrapunitiveness, achievement values, conscious guilt, and the like.
Larry's "timid dependency" is clearly expressed in his response to Item 7: what he wants most is to be loved and protected-"all this without harming anyone. " The great fear of hurtng anyone, expressed also on Item 1, seems to imply deep-lying hostility which he must at all costs inhibit. Thus, his inhibition of aggression, combined with his tremendous love-seeking de- pendency, probably prevent Larry from fighting actively even for those things in which he believes most. He is disturbed by discrimination and he would be awe-inspired by the attaining of democratic group relations in America, but is not likely to be able militantly to oppose those who violate his basic values.
It cannot be said that the interpretations above were made in the absence of other clinical material on these two cases. However, the scoring was done
? PROJECTIVE QUESTIONS
595
in a controlled manner and many of the inferences follow fairly directly from the theory contained, in the Scoring Manual. The conclusions reached here . regarding Mack and Larry are in general agreement with those derived from other techniques, for example the F scale (Chapter VII) and the Thematic Apperception Test (Chapter XIV). It would seem, then, that the Projective Question technique may fruitfully be used not only for purposes of group research but also as an aid in the intensive study of the individual case.
E. CONCLUSIONS
It was apparent in the Scoring Manual that certain themes were repeated, with perhaps minor variations in form or content, in many of the Projective Question categories. There are, moreover, several instances in which two or more recurring' themes, taken together, permit inferences regarding deeper-lying trends and processes. The results and theoretical constructions derived from the application of this technique are similar to those obtained from the other techniques used in the present research. In some cases there is almost exact duplication of variables; in others there is a more complemen- tary or congruent relation, the variables from several techniques expressing diverse facets of a single, inclusive structure. Because the amount of duplica- tion is considerable, a very brief discussion of the theoretical implications of the present results will suffice. Differential trends for high and low scorers on the E scale seem to exist in the following areas.
1. General Ego Functioning. Highs and lows differ markedly in their man- ner of handling deep-level trends such as aggression, sex, dependency, anxiety, and the like. We are not yet in a position to say whether one group or the other shows a greater total amount of any given trend; what is clear is that both groups exhibit all of these trends to a significant degree. The primary difference seems to lie in the ego functioning, and particularly in the relation of the ego to the deeper levels of personality. In the lows, as other techniques have shown, the underlying trends are more ego-assimilated, in the highs more ego-alien.
The lows appear to differ from highs in at least the following respects. The relations between the various levels of personality are more fluid, the boundaries more permeable. The ego defenses of the lows are relatively more impulse-releasing: at best we find considerable sublimation, to perhaps a greater degree we find that impulses have been assimilated into the ego with- out being fully integrated-witness the recurring Projective Question cate- gory, "Conscious conflict and guilt. " In the highs, on the other hand-and the analysis of interviews led to the same conclusion-the ego defenses are characteristically more countercathectic; there is less sublimation and more use of defenses such as projection, denial, and reaction-formation, defenses which aid the individual in maintaining a moral fa<;:ade at the expense of self- expression and emotional release.
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
These formulations are supported by many of the Projective Question results. Compare, for example, the low category, "Conscious conflict and guilt," with the contrasting high category, "Rumbling from below" (Ques- tions I, "Moods," and 4, "Drive nuts"). The former category refers to im- pulses which, disturbing though they may be, the individual at least to some extent recognizes and tries to handle. If there is conflict, there is also an attempt to integrate; if there is much that remains unconscious, there is also a willingness to look within and an attempt to assimilate. For most highs, on the other hand, there are few focal conflicts but there is a deep sense of anxiety and distress. The conflict is covered over by a moral fac;ade or by symptomatic behavior; the disturbance is explained on the basis of a dis- tressing (overdemanding, boring) external situation or of poor bodily con- dition, and the conflict is never faced in psychological terms. The difficulty of the highs in assimilating many important needs is shown by several other categories. Thus, when asked about highly satisfying emotional experiences
("Last six months" and "Awe-inspiring") they show much less intensity and inner vitality than the lows, that is, much less ability to utilize their psychic energies for constructive and ego-satisfying purposes. When the highs refer more directly to needs such as dependency, sex, and aggression ("Desires" and "Worst crimes"), they are more crude, impersonal, primitive, object-less and ego-less.
2. Specific Properties of the Ego. These properties are, of course, inti- mately bound up with ego functioning as discussed above. As might be expected from their use of primarily countercathectic defenses, the highs have comparatively narrow, circumscribed egos. One manifestation of this narrowness is constriction of fantasy (particularly in Question 6, see also Chapter XIV); this is probably related to the highs' emphasis on "sticking to the facts," to their extraceptiveness, and to their rejection of "imagina- tion" and "emotion. "
The highs also diifer from the lows in their greater concreteness of think- ing and in their less differentiated emotional experience. Thus, the responses of the highs characteristically refer to specific behavioral acts or situations, while the lows tend, to a greater degree, to describe more subtle experiences and more abstract, generalized situations. On Question 3 ("Great people"), for example, the lows, more than the highs, give the qualities that they admire in a person, with or without specific examples. The same is true for Question 5 ("Worst crimes"). Evidence of the greater complexity and abstractness of the lows has been given in the interview chapters (Part II) and in Chapter VIII (showing negative correlations between ethnocentrism and intelli- gence). These results are consistent with those showing the highs to be more stereotyped in their ideology (Chapters III, IV, XVI, XVII), more rigidly concrete in their solutions of arithmetical and spatial probkms (Rokeach
(98)) 0
? PROJECTIVE QUESTIONS
597
The lows tend, in a frustrating situation, to blame themselves (intrapuni- tiveness), the highs to idealize themselves and to see the evil as existing in the external world (extrapunitiveness).
Finally, the greater intraception of the lows and the great anti-intracep- tion of the highs is apparent in their responses to the Projective Questions as well as in the material elicited by the interviews, the T. A. T. , and the F scale.
3? Achievement Values vs. Conventional Values. This distinction has been essential for the scoring of the Projective Questions. It is important not only because of the difference in the content of the values, but also because the values themselves express significant aspects of the personality dynamics of the two groups. It should be noted first that the two sets of values are not entirely mutually exclusive; few individuals will have only one set or the other. It is, rather, a matter of degree and of primacy. In most individuals one set of values is likely to be primary and most potent, the other to be of secondary importance. An individual who is struggling to decide between these two value orientations is, we believe, essentially struggling to decide, consciously or unconsciously, between conflicting needs and between con- flicting conceptions of himself as a total person.
Achievement values found predominantly in the lows place primary em- phasis on self-expression. Abstract and open-ended, they always leave room for further development and they can never be defined in terms of simple behavior formulae or rigid rules. Their main emphasis is on long-range goals, and the attainment of a given goal leads always to the formulation of new, higher goals expressing the same basic values. Examples of achievement values, taken from the Projective Question material as well as from the inter- views and other material, include the following: Value for scientific, intel- lectual, and aesthetic achievement, and for understanding for its own sake, regardless of immediate practical application. Creativity is valued above efficiency, constructiveness above practicality; productive living, even if it involves inner conflict, is preferred over good adjustment at the expense of
self-expression; richness and intensity of inner experience are valued more than "mere contentment. " In personal relationships, as other techniques have shown, there is concern with giving as well as taking, and with the exchange of love rather than the exchange of things. What is particularly important here is that recognition of one's own individuality is the basis for recognition of the individuality of everyone, and for the democratic concept of the dignity of man. 8 These values are expressed ideologically in terms of op- position to all social structures (milita1y, religious, educational, politico-
8 This point has also been made by Fromm (43). His distinction between "humanistic" and "authoritarian" ethics corresponds very closely to the present one between "achieve- ment" and "conventional" values, and is based on a similar attempt to distinguish two broad psychological approaches to man and society.
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
economic) which are based on the principle of absolute authority, which value power more than love, which engage in group suppression and ex- ploitation, in short, which prevent man from developing his innate poten- tialities to a maximum degree. Once again we find anti-ethnocentrism as but one facet of a larger psychological framework.
What has been called "conventional values" might also have been called "conditional values," since their main function is to place limitations or con- ditions on the expression of needs rather than to stimulate need-experience. They might also have been called "authoritarian values," since they are based on the assumption of conformity to external authority rather than on inner moral responsibility. Whatever the name given, both of the above meanings, as well as others, belong to its definition. The prototypic examples of this value system are the Emily Post book of etiquette, the military "rules of behavior," and certain custom-ridden cultures, literate and nonliterate. 9 The main content of these values, at least for individuals with a strong middle- class identification, deals with conformity and loyalty to ingroup standards.
The difference between achievement values based on inner authority (in- ternalized conscience), and conventional values based on external authority (and thus replaceable when the authority changes), results also in a difference in reaction to value-violations. This is the difference between guilt and shame. It would be an exaggeration to state that the lows feel no shame, the highs no guilt. Nevertheless, there is considerable evidence from the Projective Questions, as well as from the ratings of interviews, that guilt is most charac- teristic of lows, shame of highs. The low categories for Questions 1, z, 4, and 6 are for the most part concerned with personal violations of achievement values, with practically no reference to "being caught" or to external author- ity. For the same items there are high categories referring to violations of conventional values most of which require, almost by definition, an external observing and punishing agent. Indeed, the explicit idea of inner conflict in any form is practically lacking from the high responses. Moreover, it is much more common for the lows to refer to their own personal violations of values, whereas the highs refer either to violations by others, or, more often, to
events which have, explicitly, neither moral nor motivational significance. 10 These results are in keeping with the findings reported in earlier chapters that the highs, particularly those who are more conventional and "middle- class," have a punitive but poorly internalized superego. The ego, submitting
9 See Kardiner (;g, 6o) and Benedict (15) for nonliterate societies, and Reich (g6); these are but a few of many examples.
. . . ,
~
? 82. 2 50. 0 53. 6 46. 4 50. 0 88. 9 58. 1 1021006)
2 0 3 2 1 0 9)16. 3%
83. 3 86. 7 83. 3 66. 7 93. 8 50. 0 77. 7 0101004)
3 0 3 1 1 0 8)13. 1%
82. 8 69. 0 69. 0 56. 8 . 70. 6 70. 6 67. 9
1 1 2 2 0 0 10) I'd
5 0 6
3 2 0
17 )14. 7% l:l:' 0
70. 6 82. 5 55. 9
70. 6 42. 3 88. 5
71. 3
~
10 1002003) c
3 0 3 4 1 1 12)12. 5% M
. . . . . 50. 0 94. 1 97. 1 58. 8 86. 4 81. 8 74. 5 z0 1 0 1 4 1 3 12) (/)
4 0 0 2 1 0 7)17. 0%
60. 3 88. 3 76. 5 64. 7 62. 5 85. 4 72. 8
2 0 1 6 1 3 15)
7 0 3 6 2 1 19)14. 7%
. . . . . . t"1 () . . . , . . . . .
. . . ,
"'
\Jo
00
'-)
? 5. Middle-Class Women Low quartile
High quartile
Total
6. Middle-Class Men Low quartile
High quartile
Total
34
36
L% 72. 1 60. 2 76. 5 60. 2 76. 5
Nb24202 Na-NHL 1 1 4 1 2
H% 82. 0 80. 5 56. 9 79. 2 76. 4
Nb812803 Na-NHL 1 0 5 1 4
69. 1
10) . . . ,
9)8. 9%! I: i. "l
75. 0 > c:
TABLE 2 (XV) (continued)
Na Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Meanb 70
v,
00 00
70 %A 77. 1 70. 7 66. 4 70. 0 76. 4 Nb 10 16 10 0 5
72. 1 41)
0
~ ~
65 33
32
65
43. 9 71. 2
>z
"d
M
~
en 0 z
> 20) t"" ~ 15)21. 2% . . . ,
Na-NHL 2
1 9
2
6
20 )17. 4% ~ ~
62. 1 Nb37316 Na-NHL 4 1 4 3 3
L% 69. 7
71. 2
63. 6
H% 81. 2 78. 1 81. 2 76. 6 75. 0
Nb 6 10 4 3 4 Na-NHL 0 0 6 1 8
%A 75. 4 60. 8 76. 1 69. 2 73. 1
Nb 9 17 7 4 10 Na-NHL 4 1 10 4 11
78. 4
27)
15 )26. 3%
70. 9
47)
30 )23. 7%
31) . . , 11)23. 3% ! I:
-<
? 7. All groups combined Low quartile
High quartile
Total
L% 76. 7 63. 0 75. 8 68. 4 65. 8 63. 0 57. 0 85. 9 69. 1
Nb 9 19 8 3 14 7 0 1 61 6. 6% Na-NHL 8 8 22 20 12 11 13 1 95 10. 3%
ER 146 146 155 155 155 73 64 32 926 116
m; 84. 0 79. 9 71. 3 84. 4 86. 0 7i. 3 85. 9 72. 7 80. 7
Nb 15 33 17 9 11 7 2 5 99 10. 6% Na-NHL 4 4 27 9 15 3 4 2 68 7. 3%
ER 144 144 157 157 157 77 64 33 933 117
%A 80. 3 71. 4 73. 6 76. 5 76. 0 69. 3 71. 5 79. 2 74. 9
Nb 24 52 25 12 25 14 2 6 160 8. 6% Na-NHL 12 12 49 29 27 14 17 3 163 8. 8%
ER 290 290 312 312 312 150 J 2 8 65 1859 232
Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total Mean
aFor Groups 2, 3, and 4 the number of subjects varies somewhat from item to item because two questionnaire forms were used. The number indicated in the "N" column is the total N in each group or quartile. The N in parenth~ses refers to those subjects who received the complete set of projective questions. Thus, in Group 2 all 51 subjects received items 1 - 5 (Forms 45 and 40); only 10 Low and 14 High received all 8 questions (Form 45), so that the N's on items 6, 7, and 8 are 10 and 14 respectively. as indicated in parentheses in the "N" column. Similarly,
of the 14 Lows in Group 3, only 9 received the full battery, the remaining 5 receiving a form which did not in? clude items 1, 2, 7, and 8. For the high quartile in Group 3, there is an Nof 8 on items 1, 2, 7, and 8. In Group 4, the N on these same items is 13 for Lows and 11 for Highs.
Group 1 received a form which did not include item 8 (see text). Groups 5 and 6 received Form 40 which contained items 1-5 only.
Thus, while there were 312 subjects in all, the N per item varied. This is shown in the table under ~All groups combined," where the row "ER" gives the number of subjects answering each item.
bin the computation of all means, the component values are weighted by N.
Key to questions: 1 (Moods), 2 (Desires), 3 (Great People), 4 (Drive Nuts), 5 (Crimes), 6 (Embarrassing), 7 (Last Six Months), 8 (A we-inspiring).
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
The average agreement varies among the six groups from 67? 9 per cent for the Psychiatric Clinic Men to S2. 6 per cent for the Employment Service Veteran Men. It appears that the scorers, try as they did to be unbiased, were systematically influenced by the fact that they knew the E-quartile standing of the Psychology Women and the Veteran Men. Thus, the %A for these two groups is about So per cent, whereas for the remaining four groups
(scored blindly) it averages slightly over 70 per cent. The relatively low %A for the Clinic Men is consistent with the low scoring reliability for this group (see Table I(XV)). The data for the Clinic Women and the Middle- Class Men and Women probably best represent what can be expected with the present Scoring Manual; the average agreement of about 72 per cent for these groups might have been slightly higher had all subjects received questions 6, 7, and S.
The over-all average agreement for the individual items varies from 69. 3 to So. 3 per cent. The poorest questions are 2 ("Desires"), 6 ("Embarrass- ing"), and 7 ("Last six months"). In all three of them the L% is particularly low (57-63 per cent), probably because of the brevity of the answers, as discussed above. Correction of this error should lead to considerably better results, particularly for Item 7? The agreements for the individual items re- veal again the great consistency of the highs. Thus, the L% varied within a range of 29 points (57-S6 per cent), whereas the H% covered a range of only 15 points (7I-S6 per cent). It is of some interest that the two most dif- ferentiating items, 1 ("Moods") and S ("Awe-inspiring"), deal with issues which, in their literal meanings, are completely removed from ideology about group interaction.
Table 2(XV) provides the empirical basis on which omissions (Nb) of Questions I, 2, 4, 7, and S were converted into H scores in the statistical treat- ment.
On each of these questions approximately two-thirds or more of the total number of omissions were made by the high quartiles. Moreover, it is consistent with the differential trends found that the highs should omit, more often than the lows, questions dealing with inner life (moods, desires, drive nuts) and with emotionally intense experiences (last six months, awe-inspir- ing). Question 3 might also have been scored in this way since some 70 per cent of the omissions were by highs. However, omissions on this item were not scored H because they did not appear to fulfill the requirement of theo- retical consistency. Should the highs continue, in future groups, to make most of the omissions, Nb would have to be scored H and a theoretical rationale found. The scoring of Nb as H would, in the present groups, have raised the over-all agreement several points.
Having considered the degree to which groups are distinguished with respect to the H and L categories, we may consider briefly how the scoring. scheme applies to the individual. It is possible to give each subject a total score which is the sum of his individual item scores. This total may be called
? PROJECTIVE QUESTIONS
the L-H score, and is computed as follows: One point is given for each H score, zero points for each L score, and one-half point for each Neutral score (except for Nb on Items I, 2, 4, 7, and 8 where, as noted above, Nb is con- verted to H). Thus, the L-H scores may range, for eight questions, between o (all L scores) and 8 (all H scores), with a mid-point of 4. 0. A subject receiving 4 H scores, 3 L's and I Na has an L-H score of 4. 5, i. e. , just on the high side of center. The over-all H% of 80. 7 for the high quartiles can be converted to an average L-H score of 6. 5 for the eight items. Similarly, the
over-all L% of 69. I for the low quartiles becomes an L-H score of 2. 5. The computing of L-H scores for each subject provides a means of deter- mining the amount of overlap between the low and high quartiles. This has been done in the case of the Middle-Class Men and Women, who have a combined N of 135, and who received a battery of five Projective Questions. The L-H scores of the low quartile ranged between o. o and 4? 5, those of the high quartile between 1. 0 and 5. 0, the mean for the total group being about 2. 7 (slightly more H than L scores were assigned). Using 2. 7 as a dividing point, we may then say that all L-H scores of 2. 5 and below will be called "low," all scores of 3. 0 and above will be called "high. " On the basis of this criterion, 2 2 per cent of the low quartile members would be considered high in terms of Projective Question score, while I4 per cent of the high quartile members have a low L-H score. These are the exceptions. Or, to put it posi-
tively, 78 per cent of the anti-ethnocentric group, and 86 per cent of the ethnocentric group, would be correctly diagnosed on the basis of total Pro- jective Question score. ?
The above data do not, of course, include the middle scorers on E. How- ever, it is not unlikely that a longer Projective Question Test of perhaps fifteen or twenty items, applied to all subjects and not merely to the extreme quartiles, might yield correlations in the neighborhood of ? 7 between L-H score and E. The Projective Questions might then be used, like the F scale, as an indirect measure of ethnocentrism-a measure in which no reference to current social issues need be made. They also, like the F scale, permit one to go beyond the immediate limits of the scoring scheme and to make numerQus inferences regarding individual dynamics. That the variables in the two techniques are so consistent is an important argument in favor of the validity of each.
In summary, the results indicate that the Projective Question Test meets current standards of reliability, under the most demanding of scoring conditions. It has also been demonstrated that the categories denoted as "high" are in fact characteristic of the high scorers on the Ethnocentrism scale, the "low" categories characteristic of the low quartile on E. There are, however, many highs who get L scores on single items, and many lows who get scores of H, the average PQ-E agreement being in the neighborhood of 75 per cent. In terms of individual L-H scores, the ethnocentrists and anti-
? Anger. (Na)
THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
ethnocentrists could, in the two groups considered, be diagnosed with ap- proximately 82 per cent accuracy.
The present results can probably be improved in the future by modifica- tions of the Scoring Manual, by an increase in the number of items (which, other things being equal, will improve the reliability of the L-H score), and by instructions which lay greater stress on full answers (two or three sen- tences would do). Moreover, in its practical application the test may be scored in a clinically more meaningful way, once the scorers have demon- strated their competence. If all the items for a given individual were scored at once, many apparently ambiguous responses might be interpreted in the light of the total pattern. This would not only improve the quantitative scor- ing but would also stimulate further differentiation and elaboration within the broad framework now conceived. There is also considerable research which needs to be done regarding additional categories, relative frequencies of specific categories, sex differences, various patterns among lows and among highs, differences among various religious, political, and other groupings, and so on.
3. VALIDATION BY MEANS OF CASE STUDIES: MACK AND LARRY
Throughout the present research the attempt has been made to develop techniques that would yield statistically significant relationships among numerous variables and that would, as well, provide clinically meaningful material regarding the individual. Accordingly, following the presentation of statistical (group) results for each technique, the protocols of the high man, Mack, and the low man, Larry, have been considered in relation to the group data. To the extent that their results on a given technique are consistent with those for the total sample, and to the exent that interpreta- tions based on the technique are congruent with those derived from other techniques, further evidence of validity appears to be indicated.
The Projective Question responses of Mack and Larry are as follows (the scores being given at the end of each response):
MACK (High)
LARRY (Low)
1. Moods
Physical weakness, perhaps due to A lonesome mood, or a feeling that ill health over the last 4 years. (H) I am not progressing toward my goal, or a feeling that I have hurt
2 .
someone. (L)
Desires
When someone is persecuted un- justly, or to see a Negro service- man endure unjust discrimination and prejudice. (L)
? It depends a lot on definition, but if crazy is meant, such a thing as losing my wife and children would most closely approximate it. (H)
A person might become insane over too much interest in love, re- ligion, money, etc. Any obsession carried too far might drive a person insane. (L)
Murder, rape. (H)
Not included in this form.
5? Worst crimes
Murder, rape and a person that will incite hate toward another people, and groups that incite wars. (Nhl)
6. Embarrassing
7? Last six months
PROJECTIVE QUESTIONS
593
3? Great people
Lincoln, Lee, Gen. Geo. C. Mar- Lincoln, Willkie, Washington, Sta-
shall, Edison. (H)
lin, Chiang Kai Shek, Churchill, MacArthur, Eisenhower, and the great scientists of past and present. (H)
4? Drive nuts
Seeing all of the world possible, Trying to enjoy life as I have al- with a particular person to see it ways wanted; travel, meet im- with me. (H) portant people, have lots of friends,
go to a lot of parties. All this with- out harming anyone. (L predomi- nantly, despite some H trends. )
8. Awe-inspiring
The viewing of great natural won- ders of the world, new scientific achievements, meeting really great men and women and the sight of rare jewels and metals. (H)
T o see American people practice true democracy. Such incidents as a member of one race protects a member of another race. True comradeship between races. (L)
The scoring, done blindly and with complete agreement between two independent judges, gives Mack an L-H score of 6. 5 out of 7 (or an H% of 93), Larry an L-H score of 1. 5 (or an L% of 79). Mack's responses are rela- tively typical of those given by the high men; if he shows no bizarre features, neither does he show much individuality. Given an opportunity to be emo- tionally expressive (Items 7 and 8), he responds in a shallow, conventional- ized manner; his concern with "looking," with a minimum of differentiation or focal affect, appears to be based on a deep but inhibited curiosity for which he has few constructive expressions. His tendency to align himself with power and success is expressed in Item 3 and again in Item 8 ("meeting really great men and women"). Item I reveals his anxiety over bodily harm and his conception of ill health as a form of weakness (rather than, for example,
? 594
THE AUTHORIT ARIAN PERSONALITY
a barrier in the way of achievement). The equation of sickness with weak- ness is particularly interesting in the light of his mother's and his own weakness during childhood (see Chapters II and XX). It suggests, as does the material from other techniques, that his surface identification with powerful figures and groups is at least in part a means of maintaining his sense of mastery and of allaying his anxiety over bodily harm. It is not clear from his Projective Question responses alone whether Mack's aggression is more a surface defense against the admission of passive dependency or, rather, a strong underlying need. That he has aggressive impulses which he cannot easily assimilate into the ego is suggested by his "Murder, rape" on Item 5 and "Anger" on 2. Moreover, that these impulses are partially directed against family (ingroup) members is suggested by his response to Item 4: his fear of "losing my wife and children" (particularly since he is not yet married) would seem to be based on unconscious hostility toward them-hostility which is projected onto the "threatening world. " (His fantasy, while he is still unmarried, of the death of wife and children may also be a projection of his own fear as a child that he might die when his mother did. ) However, the over-all impression given is that of a conventional, deferent, pseudo- independent fac,;ade, and that what lies beneath the surface is primarily anxiety
and dependency rather than active destructiveness.
Larry's responses, here as elsewhere, are less characteristically low than
Mack's are high. Like Mack, Larry is attracted to those who have power, but his conception of power is different from Mack's. Thus, Larry can admire foreign as well as American leaders (Item 5: in 1945 Chiang Kai Shek was still conceived as a democratic leader). And his relationship to power figures seems to be based more on the open expression of dependency and need for support than on defense against fear of his own weakness. Indeed, Larry is openly and intensely identified with the weak and the helpless, and he can therefore be opposed to social authority when it mistreats Negroes and others (Items 2, 5, and 8). He is also characteristically low in his intra- ception, intrapunitiveness, achievement values, conscious guilt, and the like.
Larry's "timid dependency" is clearly expressed in his response to Item 7: what he wants most is to be loved and protected-"all this without harming anyone. " The great fear of hurtng anyone, expressed also on Item 1, seems to imply deep-lying hostility which he must at all costs inhibit. Thus, his inhibition of aggression, combined with his tremendous love-seeking de- pendency, probably prevent Larry from fighting actively even for those things in which he believes most. He is disturbed by discrimination and he would be awe-inspired by the attaining of democratic group relations in America, but is not likely to be able militantly to oppose those who violate his basic values.
It cannot be said that the interpretations above were made in the absence of other clinical material on these two cases. However, the scoring was done
? PROJECTIVE QUESTIONS
595
in a controlled manner and many of the inferences follow fairly directly from the theory contained, in the Scoring Manual. The conclusions reached here . regarding Mack and Larry are in general agreement with those derived from other techniques, for example the F scale (Chapter VII) and the Thematic Apperception Test (Chapter XIV). It would seem, then, that the Projective Question technique may fruitfully be used not only for purposes of group research but also as an aid in the intensive study of the individual case.
E. CONCLUSIONS
It was apparent in the Scoring Manual that certain themes were repeated, with perhaps minor variations in form or content, in many of the Projective Question categories. There are, moreover, several instances in which two or more recurring' themes, taken together, permit inferences regarding deeper-lying trends and processes. The results and theoretical constructions derived from the application of this technique are similar to those obtained from the other techniques used in the present research. In some cases there is almost exact duplication of variables; in others there is a more complemen- tary or congruent relation, the variables from several techniques expressing diverse facets of a single, inclusive structure. Because the amount of duplica- tion is considerable, a very brief discussion of the theoretical implications of the present results will suffice. Differential trends for high and low scorers on the E scale seem to exist in the following areas.
1. General Ego Functioning. Highs and lows differ markedly in their man- ner of handling deep-level trends such as aggression, sex, dependency, anxiety, and the like. We are not yet in a position to say whether one group or the other shows a greater total amount of any given trend; what is clear is that both groups exhibit all of these trends to a significant degree. The primary difference seems to lie in the ego functioning, and particularly in the relation of the ego to the deeper levels of personality. In the lows, as other techniques have shown, the underlying trends are more ego-assimilated, in the highs more ego-alien.
The lows appear to differ from highs in at least the following respects. The relations between the various levels of personality are more fluid, the boundaries more permeable. The ego defenses of the lows are relatively more impulse-releasing: at best we find considerable sublimation, to perhaps a greater degree we find that impulses have been assimilated into the ego with- out being fully integrated-witness the recurring Projective Question cate- gory, "Conscious conflict and guilt. " In the highs, on the other hand-and the analysis of interviews led to the same conclusion-the ego defenses are characteristically more countercathectic; there is less sublimation and more use of defenses such as projection, denial, and reaction-formation, defenses which aid the individual in maintaining a moral fa<;:ade at the expense of self- expression and emotional release.
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
These formulations are supported by many of the Projective Question results. Compare, for example, the low category, "Conscious conflict and guilt," with the contrasting high category, "Rumbling from below" (Ques- tions I, "Moods," and 4, "Drive nuts"). The former category refers to im- pulses which, disturbing though they may be, the individual at least to some extent recognizes and tries to handle. If there is conflict, there is also an attempt to integrate; if there is much that remains unconscious, there is also a willingness to look within and an attempt to assimilate. For most highs, on the other hand, there are few focal conflicts but there is a deep sense of anxiety and distress. The conflict is covered over by a moral fac;ade or by symptomatic behavior; the disturbance is explained on the basis of a dis- tressing (overdemanding, boring) external situation or of poor bodily con- dition, and the conflict is never faced in psychological terms. The difficulty of the highs in assimilating many important needs is shown by several other categories. Thus, when asked about highly satisfying emotional experiences
("Last six months" and "Awe-inspiring") they show much less intensity and inner vitality than the lows, that is, much less ability to utilize their psychic energies for constructive and ego-satisfying purposes. When the highs refer more directly to needs such as dependency, sex, and aggression ("Desires" and "Worst crimes"), they are more crude, impersonal, primitive, object-less and ego-less.
2. Specific Properties of the Ego. These properties are, of course, inti- mately bound up with ego functioning as discussed above. As might be expected from their use of primarily countercathectic defenses, the highs have comparatively narrow, circumscribed egos. One manifestation of this narrowness is constriction of fantasy (particularly in Question 6, see also Chapter XIV); this is probably related to the highs' emphasis on "sticking to the facts," to their extraceptiveness, and to their rejection of "imagina- tion" and "emotion. "
The highs also diifer from the lows in their greater concreteness of think- ing and in their less differentiated emotional experience. Thus, the responses of the highs characteristically refer to specific behavioral acts or situations, while the lows tend, to a greater degree, to describe more subtle experiences and more abstract, generalized situations. On Question 3 ("Great people"), for example, the lows, more than the highs, give the qualities that they admire in a person, with or without specific examples. The same is true for Question 5 ("Worst crimes"). Evidence of the greater complexity and abstractness of the lows has been given in the interview chapters (Part II) and in Chapter VIII (showing negative correlations between ethnocentrism and intelli- gence). These results are consistent with those showing the highs to be more stereotyped in their ideology (Chapters III, IV, XVI, XVII), more rigidly concrete in their solutions of arithmetical and spatial probkms (Rokeach
(98)) 0
? PROJECTIVE QUESTIONS
597
The lows tend, in a frustrating situation, to blame themselves (intrapuni- tiveness), the highs to idealize themselves and to see the evil as existing in the external world (extrapunitiveness).
Finally, the greater intraception of the lows and the great anti-intracep- tion of the highs is apparent in their responses to the Projective Questions as well as in the material elicited by the interviews, the T. A. T. , and the F scale.
3? Achievement Values vs. Conventional Values. This distinction has been essential for the scoring of the Projective Questions. It is important not only because of the difference in the content of the values, but also because the values themselves express significant aspects of the personality dynamics of the two groups. It should be noted first that the two sets of values are not entirely mutually exclusive; few individuals will have only one set or the other. It is, rather, a matter of degree and of primacy. In most individuals one set of values is likely to be primary and most potent, the other to be of secondary importance. An individual who is struggling to decide between these two value orientations is, we believe, essentially struggling to decide, consciously or unconsciously, between conflicting needs and between con- flicting conceptions of himself as a total person.
Achievement values found predominantly in the lows place primary em- phasis on self-expression. Abstract and open-ended, they always leave room for further development and they can never be defined in terms of simple behavior formulae or rigid rules. Their main emphasis is on long-range goals, and the attainment of a given goal leads always to the formulation of new, higher goals expressing the same basic values. Examples of achievement values, taken from the Projective Question material as well as from the inter- views and other material, include the following: Value for scientific, intel- lectual, and aesthetic achievement, and for understanding for its own sake, regardless of immediate practical application. Creativity is valued above efficiency, constructiveness above practicality; productive living, even if it involves inner conflict, is preferred over good adjustment at the expense of
self-expression; richness and intensity of inner experience are valued more than "mere contentment. " In personal relationships, as other techniques have shown, there is concern with giving as well as taking, and with the exchange of love rather than the exchange of things. What is particularly important here is that recognition of one's own individuality is the basis for recognition of the individuality of everyone, and for the democratic concept of the dignity of man. 8 These values are expressed ideologically in terms of op- position to all social structures (milita1y, religious, educational, politico-
8 This point has also been made by Fromm (43). His distinction between "humanistic" and "authoritarian" ethics corresponds very closely to the present one between "achieve- ment" and "conventional" values, and is based on a similar attempt to distinguish two broad psychological approaches to man and society.
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
economic) which are based on the principle of absolute authority, which value power more than love, which engage in group suppression and ex- ploitation, in short, which prevent man from developing his innate poten- tialities to a maximum degree. Once again we find anti-ethnocentrism as but one facet of a larger psychological framework.
What has been called "conventional values" might also have been called "conditional values," since their main function is to place limitations or con- ditions on the expression of needs rather than to stimulate need-experience. They might also have been called "authoritarian values," since they are based on the assumption of conformity to external authority rather than on inner moral responsibility. Whatever the name given, both of the above meanings, as well as others, belong to its definition. The prototypic examples of this value system are the Emily Post book of etiquette, the military "rules of behavior," and certain custom-ridden cultures, literate and nonliterate. 9 The main content of these values, at least for individuals with a strong middle- class identification, deals with conformity and loyalty to ingroup standards.
The difference between achievement values based on inner authority (in- ternalized conscience), and conventional values based on external authority (and thus replaceable when the authority changes), results also in a difference in reaction to value-violations. This is the difference between guilt and shame. It would be an exaggeration to state that the lows feel no shame, the highs no guilt. Nevertheless, there is considerable evidence from the Projective Questions, as well as from the ratings of interviews, that guilt is most charac- teristic of lows, shame of highs. The low categories for Questions 1, z, 4, and 6 are for the most part concerned with personal violations of achievement values, with practically no reference to "being caught" or to external author- ity. For the same items there are high categories referring to violations of conventional values most of which require, almost by definition, an external observing and punishing agent. Indeed, the explicit idea of inner conflict in any form is practically lacking from the high responses. Moreover, it is much more common for the lows to refer to their own personal violations of values, whereas the highs refer either to violations by others, or, more often, to
events which have, explicitly, neither moral nor motivational significance. 10 These results are in keeping with the findings reported in earlier chapters that the highs, particularly those who are more conventional and "middle- class," have a punitive but poorly internalized superego. The ego, submitting
9 See Kardiner (;g, 6o) and Benedict (15) for nonliterate societies, and Reich (g6); these are but a few of many examples.
