Journal of Scholastic Inquiry Behavioral Sciences, Volume 1, Issue 1

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 1

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry:

Behavioral Sciences

Behavioral Sciences Edition, Volume 1, Issue 1

Fall 2013

Published by: Center for Scholastic Inquiry, LLC ISSN: 2330-6742 (print) ISSN: 2330-2330-6750 (online)

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 2

ISSN: 2330-6742 (print) ISSN: 2330-6750 (online)

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Fall 2013

Volume 1, Issue 1

www.csiresearch.com

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 3Â

Â

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences The Center for Scholastic Inquiry (CSI) publishes the Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences (JOSI: BS) to recognize, celebrate, and highlight scholarly research, discovery, and evidence-based practice in the behavioral sciences field.

Academic research emphasizing leading edge inquiry, distinguishing and fostering best practice, and validating promising methods will be considered for publication. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method study designs representing diverse philosophical frameworks and perspectives are welcome. The JOSI: BS publishes papers that perpetuate thought leadership and represent critical enrichment in the behavioral sciences field.

The JOSI: BS is a rigorously juried journal. Relevant research may include topics in sociology, psychology, social work, addiction counseling, professional counseling and therapy, adolescence and youth, adult development, aging, applied psychology, clinical psychology, school psychology, developmental psychology, environmental psychology, clinical social work, school social work, human development, social movements, social structure, substance use and abuse, and related fields.

If you are interested in publishing in the JOSI: BS, feel free to contact our office or visit our website.

Sincerely,

Tanya Dr. Tanya McCoss-Yerigan Executive Director & Managing Editor Center for Scholastic Inquiry 4857 Hwy 67, Suite #2 Granite Falls, MN 56241

Web: www.csiresearch.com

Phone: 855-855-8764

Email: editor@csiresearch.com

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 4

JOURNAL OF SCHOLASTIC INQUIRY: BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Fall 2013, Volume 1, Issue 1 Managing Editor Dr. Tanya McCoss-Yerigan Editor-in-Chief Dr. Jamal Cooks General Editor Daniel J. O’Brien APA Editor Jay Meiners Editorial Advisory Board Shirley Barnes, Alabama State University Joan Berry, University of Mary Hardin-Baylor Brooke Burks, Auburn University at Montgomery Timothy Harrington, Chicago State University Mark Wesolowski, Practitioner-Chicago Public Schools Lucinda Woodward, Indiana University Southeast

Theodore Bell Dayo Diggs Margaret Kasimatis Betty Jane Fratzke Carolyn Gentle-Genitty

Peer Reviewers Denise Guastello Stephen Guastello Lindsey Liles Lizette Luevano Kay Mailander

Charity Perry Betsye Robinette Helen Shoemaker Anita Sunseri Kenneth Kohutek

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 5

    



Would you like to elevate your status as a scholar‐practitioner and develop your professional reputation and credentials through presentation and publication?

Would you enjoy stimulating professional rejuvenation and tranquil personal relaxation at the same time by combining meaningful professional development with a luxury getaway?

Would you enjoy tailored continuing education experiences by choosing the conference sessions that best suit your professional interests and vocational pursuits?

Would you appreciate collaborative collegiality with luminaries and pioneers conducting the most academically and scientifically meritorious research?

Are you interested in developing your thought leadership and contributing to the body of validated knowledge

in your academic or professional field?

Are you interested in diverse scholarship by learning with and from education, business and behavioral science

practitioners and professionals from around the world on a wide range of contemporary topics?

THEN PLAN TO CONFER AND PRESENT WITH THE CENTER FOR SCHOLASTIC INQUIRY

No matter your role in business, education, or behavioral science, there is something for everyone.

Professionals from the public and private sectors will learn about emerging trends, best practice and innovative

strategies.

For more information about attending, presenting and/or publishing, check out CSI’s website:

www.csiresearch.com

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS

7

Publication Agreement and Assurance of Integrity Ethical Standards in Publishing Disclaimer of Liability

8-95

Research Manuscripts The American Male and Female 35 Years Later: Bem Sex Role Inventory Revisited Denise D. Guastello, Carroll University Stephen J. Guastello, Marquette University

8

Attitudes Towards Poverty Revisited Charity Perry, California State University, Los Angeles Gretchen Peterson, California State University, Los Angeles K. William Wasson, California State University, Los Angeles Theodore S. Bell, California State University, Los Angeles

20

Brief Desensitization and Skills Training for Test Anxiety: A Pilot Program Margaret D. Kasimatis, Carroll University Rebecca Palmer, Carroll University Kathryn Rheingruber, Carroll University Rebecca Gillespie, Carroll University

36

Development of Empathy in Therapist Trainees Helen Shoemaker, Holy Names University Jessica Lee Shoemaker, California State University

46

Examining the Differences in Social Networking Behaviors Between an Older and Younger Age Cohort Lizette Luevano, California State University Martin S. Fiebert, California State University Christopher R. Warren, California State University

64

A Response to Student Theory Illiteracy in the Social and Behavioral Sciences: The S.A.L.T. Model Carolyn Gentle-Genitty, Indiana University Haiping Chen, Indiana University

73

Manuscript Submission Guide

96

Why Purchase Our Journals

98

Library Recommendation Form

99

Journal Purchase Form

100

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 7

PUBLICATION AGREEMENT AND ASSURANCE OF INTEGRITY By submitting a manuscript for publication, authors confirm that the research and writing is their exclusive, original, and unpublished work. Upon acceptance of the manuscript for publication, authors grant the Center for Scholastic Inquiry, LLC (CSI) the sole and permanent right to publish the manuscript, at its option, in one of its academic research journals, on the CSI's website, in other germane, academic publications; and/or on an alternate hosting site or database.

Authors retain copyright ownership of their research and writing for all other purposes.

ETHICAL STANDARDS IN PUBLISHING The CSI insists on and meets the most distinguished benchmarks for publication of academic journals to foster the advancement of accurate scientific knowledge and to defend intellectual property rights.

The CSI stipulates and expects that all practitioners and professionals submit original, unpublished manuscripts in accordance with its code of ethics and ethical principles of academic research and writing.

DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY The CSI does not endorse any of the ideas, concepts, and theories published within the JOSI: BS. Furthermore, we accept no responsibility or liability for outcomes based upon implementation of the individual author’s ideas, concepts, or theories. Each manuscript is the copyrighted property of the author.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 8

The American Male and Female 35 Years Later: Bem Sex Role Inventory Revisited Denise D. Guastello Carroll University Stephen J. Guastello Marquette University

Abstract This study reassessed the profiles of traits associated with stereotypic males and females in 20092010 35 years after the Bem (1974) Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) was introduced. Qualitative changes could have resulted from other cultural trends toward occupational and educational equality or growing public awareness of the nature of gender roles. The adjectives appearing in the BSRI, which produces a measure of androgyny, were rated as stereotypically male, female, or neutral by 1075 undergraduates. Chi-square tests, which assigned adjectives to genders, indicated that most of the traits formerly associated with males are now considered neutral. The characteristic “childlike,” which formerly characterized women, now characterizes men. The female’s stereotype was mostly unchanged although “theatrical” appears to be added to their repertoire. There was little disagreement between the genders on the assignment of adjectives to stereotypes. Implications for the identity of American males are discussed.

Keywords: androgyny, gender role, male stereotype, female stereotype

Bem (1974, 1975) introduced the concept of the androgynous personality as a contrast to the prevailing idea that masculinity and femininity were polar opposites. An androgynous personality exhibits many of the characteristics possessed by both stereotypic males and females.

Its opposite, the undifferentiated personality, does not exhibit many of either stereotype. In principle, androgynous personalities are not confined to activities, interests, and occupations that are consistent with gender stereotypes (Orlofsky, Cohen, & Ramsden, 1985), and androgynous personalities could potentially live more rewarding lives (Flaherty & Dusek, 1980; Green & Kendrick, 1994; Lombardo & Kemper, 1992; Major, Carnevale, & Deaux, 1981; MarkstromAdams, 1989; O’Heron & Orlofsky, 1990; Williams & D’Alessandro, 1994) although there was some disagreement on this point (Marsh & Byrne, 1991; Whitley, 1983; Woodhill & Samuels, 2004).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 9

There have been some significant transitions in Western society over the past 35 years regarding the nature of male and female stereotypes, however. Therefore, the objective of the present study was to revisit the traits that initially comprised the stereotypes as Bem (1974, 1975) had identified them and reconsider whether they contribute to notions of male and female stereotypes as young adults see them today. Although others have asked whether Bem’s list of characteristics really comprises the stereotypes and produces reliable measurements of the constructs (Ballard-Reisch & Elton, 1992; Hoffman & Borders, 2001), another decade has passed, and the psychological issue is not whether the traits really measure today’s stereotypes but whether the stereotypes that were once known to be socially controversial still exist at all.

The answer to this question will be informative in revealing whether the androgyny concept as a personality theory construct is still viable. The exposition that follows evaluates trends in the adoption of stereotypes and, specifically, trends in the changing content of male stereotypes.

Stereotype Adoption The traditional masculine stereotype is tough, strong, and independent, whereas the feminine stereotype is weak, fragile, and vulnerable (Gough & Peace, 2000, p. 386). The androgynous personality and the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI; Bem, 1974) that measures androgynous personality were conceptualized during a historical epoch characterized by widespread concern about gender stereotypes and their negative impact on women. Many of society’s norms, particularly in employment and expectations for raising children, changed as a result. Not surprisingly, a round of research questions was posed to examine whether and how people had changed. To some extent people become more androgynous as they get older, but the crossover is tempered by the historical epoch during which they formed their initial gender roles (Strough, Leszczynski, Neely, Flinn, & Margrett, 2007). If one were to consider just young adults, self-reports of masculine traits increased for both males and females after Bem’s original study, but there has been no indication that self-reports of feminine traits have changed (Twenge, 1997). In a two-generation study, Guastello and Guastello (2003) reported that college-age young adults were more likely to exhibit androgynous characteristics if their parents did also. In the same sample, interest and activity patterns for young men were becoming more androgynous, but young women were becoming more stereotypically male (relative to the 1970s definition).

According to Woodhill and Samuels (2004), the research results were actually mixed as to whether androgynous personalities were better off in any meaningful way. They identified part of the problem as being associated with the two stereotypes having both positive (socially desirable) and negative attributes; one may be androgynous in all the wrong ways. Another part of the problem is that, at the turn of the century, society had sounded the death knell for the stereotypic male. “The old framework, however, has not yet been replaced by an unambiguous, socially sanctioned, alternative notion of what it is to be male…” and that there is “an apparent confusion of identity for modern men" (p. 19). The next section of this paper elaborates on some

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 10

more specific features of the male stereotype that have been transitioning, according to gender theorists. Thenplausibly led to the “death knell” that Woodhill and Samuels described.

Content of Male Stereotypes According to Connell (1995), there are several types of expressions of hegemonic masculinity, and most of them serve the purpose of establishing a dominance hierarchy that feminists find offensive. The common stereotypes are the warriors, the athletes, laborers, and the breadwinners, which are espoused to varying extents by individuals. Developing skills is an accepted means of enhancing one’s long-term employability beyond that of a laborer and for moving up the hierarchy. In the Don Juan stereotype, masculinity is expressed through the sexual exploitation of women or treating women as sex objects.

The “average guy,” according to Wetherell and Edley (1999), typically does not identify with the extreme icons of masculinity, which he regards as absurd. More conventional levels of athletic behavior and risk tasking are closer to the norm, such as the competent technician or the executive who is “in control” of things. Others are willing to acknowledge some elements of gender unconventionality in interest patterns or apparel preferences, such as when men’s jewelry proliferated in the 1970s.

Connell (1995) extracted several themes from men’s discourse that explain their masculine proclivities. The biological explanation emphasizes physical differences between men and women, their evolutionary purpose, and, as a result, what might seem to be reasonable divisions of labor. The psychoanalytic explanation was rooted in Freud’s Oedipal complex where boys identify with men and no longer identify with their mothers; they maintain a psychological distance between masculine and feminine expressions often with the support and encouragement from other men in their environment. Hence, there are plausible origins for the marginalization of homosexuals and effeminate males.

There were other psychoanalytic writers who also contributed to the distancing interpretation of the male psyche where emotional flooding and feelings of vulnerability are not permitted (Gough, 2004). Yet others (Guastello & Guastello, 2003) observed that Jung’s (1959, 1960) theory of personality held that the personality contained a masculine component and a feminine component known as the animus and anima respectively. For men, the animus is closely aligned with the outer personality, the persona, whereas the anima is more closely aligned with the hidden portion of the personality, the shadow. The relationship was inverted for women; the anima is aligned with the persona, and the animus is aligned with the shadow.

Better-integrated personalities, however, allowed the expression of both the anima and animus, hence the concept of androgyny.

The gender roles explanation captures the arbitrary nature of many if not most divisions of interests and employment patterns between males and females. The problem with gender role explanations, according to Connell (1995), is that they rely on definitions of masculinity and femininity that invoke singular concordances between work roles, education, and social

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 11

expectations. Although social trends might have loosened some restrictions, role concepts still resultin unfair treatment of women and marginalized male groups; unfairness is bolstered by authoritarian personalities.

The fourth explanation arises in the themes of political feminism that seek to change societies in a new direction (Connell, 1995). Feminism brought political rights, equal employment, and equal educational opportunities for women. To do so required the support of men, which it received. Economic gender equality, however, is a complex problem that expands beyond the personality issues of concern here. The standing problem for men, nonetheless, is that men who verbally support feminist thinking in conversations, (e.g., university class discussions), found that they are shunned by the females. Men who support feminism are often regarded with suspicion as if anything they might try to contribute to the conversation is somehow wrong or an attempt to manipulate the situation back to the hegemonic state (Holmgren & Hearn, 2009). Thus, it has become an effective strategy for some men to remain silent, particularly in the company of other men whose views about women’s issues are not yet known (Gough, 2001).

In other narratives, some men regard themselves as victims of feminism (Gough & Peace, 2000). Men have been chided for treating women as sex objects, yet men have noticed growing numbers of advertisements where men are also treated as sex objects. Expressions of masculinity are censured, but alternative, effeminate masculinities are not socially acceptable, particularly to other men. The social role conflicts are stressful as the men in Gough and Peace’s study experienced greater responsibilities assigned to them and additional health risks due to stress as a result. Any objections they might express about their circumstances are regarded by feminists as “false arguments” to preserve gender inequality.

Hypothesis In light of the ongoing entropy in the composition of gender stereotypes, the present study investigated whether the traits that were once associated with stereotypic males and females are still regarded in the same way and to what extent. In particular, the trends reported by previous researchers strongly indicated that some erstwhile male characteristics would be shared by both genders, and the males would not have acquired any specific new characteristics.

New types of investigations of stereotypes or the renorming of the BSRI could be warranted by the results of the analysis.

Method Participants Participants were 1075 undergraduates from two U.S. Midwestern universities who were enrolled in psychology courses and volunteered for psychological research; 504 were male and

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 12

571 were female. The sample was 89% White, 4% Hispanic, 3% African-American, 3% Asian, and 1% Other. The region of the country is known to be relatively slow to uptake cultural changes compared to the coastal regions. Data were collected in 2009-2010.

Procedure Participants were contacted in class and offered extra credit points for their participation, and they were reminded that alternative opportunities for extra credit existed if they chose not to participate. They were handed a consent form and the data collection form that listed the 60 adjectives from the BSRI (Bem, 1974, p. 156). They were instructed to classify each item as typically male, typically female, or not gender-specific. The participants also reported their sex and ethnicity. The total participation time required not more than 15 minutes.

Results Table 1 shows the primary results for the classification of adjectives. All frequencies were found to deviate from equal thirds by 2 tests, which were significant at p < .001 for all adjectives. Column 1 of Table 1 lists the original position of the item in the BSRI preceded by whether the item was originally classified as male, female, or neutral. The most frequently assigned category based on the present sample is underlined. There was one genuine tie where exactly the same number of people classified “helpful” as neutral (its original category) or female.

For the female items, 16 out of the original 20 were still classified as typically female as based on the most frequently assigned category. Three items—loyal, shy, and yielding—were reclassified as gender neutral. The last previously female characteristic, childlike, has been reclassified as stereotypically male.

For the male items, only 9 of the original 20 were still classified as typically male. The other 11 items were recategorized as neutral: acts as a leader, ambitious, analytical, defends beliefs, displays leadership ability, independent, individualistic, self-reliant, self-sufficient, strong personality, and takes a stand. The current rendition of a stereotypic male is aggressive, assertive, athletic, competitive, dominant, forceful, makes decisions easily, masculine, risktaking, and childlike.

For the neutral items, 15 out of the original 20 were still classified as neutral. The remaining five items—conscientious, moody, secretive, sincere, and theatrical—were recategorized as stereotypically female.

The last column of Table 1 shows 2 tests for gender differences in the distribution of categorizations. There were nine significant differences although three of them could have occurred by chance. The nine pairs of distributions are compared in Table 2. In only two cases did males and females assign a trait to a different category. Women classified “conceited” as a

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 13

male characteristic, but men classified it as neutral. Women classified “helpful” as a female characteristic, but men also classified it as neutral.

Discussion Psychological researchers have been chided occasionally for succumbing to fads or popularity imperatives in their topic choices or perspectives at the expense of not getting closure on important matters . For that reason, among others expressed already, the concepts of stereotypes as depicted by Bem (1974, 1975) are regarded as a meaningful basis for a follow-up study in light of the social transitions that have occurred that would have impacted any generally shared stereotypes. The researchers are, of course, aware of the volume of social constructions that might have influenced the participants in this study and in other gender-related studies.

Psychological theory, however, must stand on firmer ground if it is going to present an accurate picture of the human psyche in any way similar to how natural scientists investigate their subject matter. A small step toward doing so is to mark a meaningful “time-0” point for assessing social change. Bem’s androgyny concept is very useful for this purpose, and an alternative has not yet been produced.

What changed?

So what has changed about gender stereotypes? The results indicated that the stereotypic female is substantially the same as she was 35 years ago although she dropped “loyal, shy, yielding, and childlike” and acquired “conscientious, moody, secretive, sincere, and theatrical.”

Following Woodhill and Samuel’s (2004) analysis, one can say the stereotypic female dropped one positive characteristic (loyal) but picked up two others (conscientious and sincere). She also exchanged three negatives for three different negatives.

The stereotypic male has been greatly reduced in scope. Most of his erstwhile characteristics are now regarded as gender neutral. He is now restricted to athletic demeanor and the classic characteristics of agency, which could be regarded positively as “getting things done” or as overbearing and boorish in other situations. The only new addition to his repertoire is “childlike,” which is generally negative for an adult.

The foregoing interpretation of the results did not invoke the rule used by previous researchers of assigning a trait to a gender only if there was a 75% agreement about the assignment. Rather the assignment was made on the basis of the highest frequency only. Had the researchers invoked the 75% rule, the female stereotype would simplify to “affectionate, compassionate, soothe hurt feelings, feminine, gentle, moody, sensitive to others, sympathetic, and tender.” Nine other characteristics would drop out. Also, if the rule were invoked, the male stereotype would simplify to “aggressive, dominant, forceful, and masculine.”

The present results offered some explanation for the earlier results (Guastello & Guastello, 2003): The increase in androgyny among males, which is a narrow gap between

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 14

identification with male and female traits, is as much a reduction in the identification with stereotypic male traits as an increase in the identification with female traits as defined by the 1974 inventory. The increase in the number of women identifying with typical male characteristics (Twenge, 1997) has rendered many of those characteristics as gender neutral.

Do the results justify defining new norms for what constitutes typical male, female, and androgynous personalities? An argument in favor of doing so would be that gender roles are social constructions and society has changed its views of what constitutes each stereotype. It might not be as meaningful in the future as it once was to compare people of the future with the way things were 35 years ago. An argument against it is that there is a vacuum in the male identity, and renorming the measurement of the stereotypes based on their content in 2010 as “normal” might be harmful in the long run, at least until the missing elements of the stereotype are replaced.

A related question that might make the previous one moot is whether the androgyny construct is still useful for characterizing personalities. If only little remains of the male stereotype, then there is not much point to describing people who endorse both stereotypes.

Perhaps a layer of complication arises from the concept of gender roles: people play a variety of roles in life as, employees and coworkers, teachers, parents, romantic partners, or members of a social enclave. If they act differently in each role, it would stand to reason that the gendered elements of the roles could vary as well.

Another point to consider before dropping the androgyny construct altogether is that the theoretical precedents from Jung and Bem regarding masculine and feminine parts of the personality do exist and coexist. Perhaps it was the masculine and feminine labels that were misleading all along, but something else remains. For instance, the adjectives that remain in the male category after applying the 75% rule all reflect the personality trait of dominance. The adjectives surviving in the female category reflect emotional sensitivity or empathy. It is possible, in principle, for people to score high on dominance, emotional sensitivity, both traits, or neither trait without invoking any particular assumptions about masculinity, femininity, hegemonic masculinity, or feminism.

Limitations and Future Research The limitations of the present study could provide another degree of flexibility for future research. The subject population for this study was localized to the U.S. Midwest, which is perhaps the slowest to reflect cultural change compared to the rest of the country. Future research on gender stereotypes should consider a broader spectrum of U.S. demographics, ethnicities, and non-U.S. cultures. Future research should also consider a broader range of characteristics that go beyond the ones used 35 years ago. It is very possible that both stereotypes have actually moved on to territory that has not yet been researched.

The questionnaire for the subjects in this study was not framed in the context of any particular social role such as work, family, or dating contexts. The omission was deliberate

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 15Â

Â

because the original androgyny concepts did not carry those restrictions either, and imposing such a frame would negate the viability of making the trans-historic comparisons that were the goal here. On the other hand, the role theory of personality would suggest that different roles could support different constellations of trait words, which could be informative.

Similarly, the present study did not apply any constraints regarding the sexual orientations of the targets of the adjectives or ask any such questions of the participants for essentially the same reasons; applying new frames could produce different answers. The impact of frames suggested by the multi-gender perspective might be investigated in an organized fashion in future research. Future researchers should continue to acknowledge the distinction between psychological and political theories of gender if either is to be studied effectively, either separately or together.

Author Biographies Denise D. Guastello received her Ph.D. in Applied Social Psychology at Loyola University of Chicago, Illinois. She teaches Personality: Theory and Assessment, Social Psychology, Industrial/Organizational Psychology, Research Seminar, and Consumer Behavior.

Her research interests include the changing stereotypes of the American male and female, the relationship of midlife womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work role with life satisfaction, generational and familial consistencies/inconsistencies in constructs such as authoritarianism, generativity, and cynicism, emotional intelligence and its relationship to androgyny; and the interrelationships between creativity and mental illness.

Stephen J. Guastello is a professor of psychology at Marquette University in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where he specializes in Industrial-Organizational Psychology and Human Factors.

He received his PhD in Industrial-Organizational Psychology from the Illinois Institute of Technology in 1982, his MA in Psychology from Washington University, St. Louis; and his BA in Psychology from The Johns Hopkins University. His research interests span a number of topics including team coordination, leadership emergence, cognitive workload and fatigue, applications of personality theory, and principles of mathematical modeling.

References Ballard-Reich, D., & Elton, M. (1992). Gender orientation and the Bem Sex Role Inventory: A psychological construct revisited. Sex Roles, 27, 291-306.

Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.

Bem, S. L. (1975). Sex role adaptability: One consequence of psychological androgyny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 634-643.

Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 16

Flaherty, J. F., & Dusek, J. B. (1980). An investigation of the relationship between psychological androgyny and components of self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 984-992.

Green, B. L., & Kendrick, D. T. (1994). The attractiveness of gender-typed traits at different relationship levels: Androgynous characteristics may be desirable after all. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 244-253.

Gough, B. (2001). “Biting your tongue”: Negotiating masculinities in contemporary Britain.

Journal of Gender Studies, 10, 169-185.

Gough, B. (2004). Psychoanalysis as a resource for understanding emotional ruptures in the text: The case of defensive masculinities. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 245-267.

Gough, B., & Peace, P. (2000). Reconstructing gender at university: Men as victims. Gender and Education, 12, 385-398.

Guastello, D. D. & Guastello, S. J. (2003). Emotional intelligence and gender role behavior. Sex Roles, 49, 663-673.

Hoffman, R. M., & Borders, L. D. (2001). Twenty-five years after the Bem Sex-Role Inventory: A reassessment and new issues regarding classification variability. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling & Development, 34, 39-55.

Jung, C. G. (1959). The structure and dynamics of the psyche (collected works, Vol. 7).

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Jung, C. G. (1960). Aion: Researches into the phenomenology of the self (collected works, Vol. 9). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Lombardo, J. P., & Kemper, T. R. (1992). Sex role and parental behaviors. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 153, 103-113.

Major, B., Carnevale, P. J. D., & Deaux, K. (1981). A different perspective on androgyny: Evaluations of masculine and feminine personality characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 988-1001.

Markstrom-Adams, C. (1989). Androgyny and its relations to adolescent psychosocial wellbeing: A review of the literature. Sex Roles, 21, 325-340.

Marsh, H. W., & Byrne, B. M. (1991). Differentiated additive androgyny model: Relations between masculinity, femininity, and multiple dimensions of self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 811-828.

O’Heron, C. A., & Orlofsky, J. L. (1990). Stereotypic and nonstereotypic sex role trait and behavior orientations, gender identity, and psychological adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 134-143.

Orlofsky, J. L., Cohen, R. S., & Ramsden, M. W. (1985). Relationship between sex role attitudes and personality traits and the Revised Sex Role Behavior Scale. Sex Roles, 12, 377-379.

Strough, J., Leszczynski, J. P., Neely, T. L., Flinn, J. A., & Margrett, J. (2007). From adolescence to later adulthood: Femininity, masculinity, and androgyny in six age groups.

Sex Roles, 57, 385-396.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 17

Twenge, J. M., (1997). Changes in masculine and feminine traits over time: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 36, 305-325.

Wetherell, M., & Edley, N. (1999). Negotiating hegemonic masculinity: Imaginary positions and psycho-discursive practices. Femininism & Psychology, 9, 335-356.

Whitley, B. E., Jr. (1988). Masculinity, femininity, and self-esteem: A multi-trait multi-method analysis. Sex Roles, 18, 419-431.

Williams, D. E., & D’Alessandro, J. D. (1994). A comparison of three measures of androgyny and their relationship to psychological adjustment. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 9, 469-480.

Woodhill, B. M., & Samuels, C. A. (2004). Desirable and undesirable androgyny: A prescription for the twenty-first century. Journal of Gender Studies, 13, 15-28.

Table 1 Classification of Traits by Gender Stereotypy Assignment and Tests for Gender Differences in Distributions _______________________________________________________________________ Item No. Item Percent Percent Percent 2 by Female Male Neutral Gender _______________________________________________________________________ M49 Acts as leader 03 46 51 0.246 6.901* N51 Adaptable 35 10 54 F11 Affectionate 90 01 09 2.329 N36 Conceited 19 40 41 7.286* M46 Aggressive 02 93 05 0.323 F5 Cheerful 58 01 40 1.164 4.026 M58 Ambitious 11 16 73 N9 Conscientious 59 03 38 3.852 35 1.811 F50 Childlike 09 57 N60 Conventional 23 15 62 2.886 M22 Analytical 27 29 44 9.620** F32 Compassionate 85 01 14 3.220 M13 Assertive 10 59 31 3.966 N45 Friendly 30 02 68 1.725 01 27 6.466* F53 No harsh language 72 N15 Happy 22 01 77 0.177 M10 Athletic 01 57 43 3.445 F35 Soothe hurt feelings 92 03 05 0.837 27 2.318 M55 Competitive 02 71 N36 Helpful 49 02 49 10.127** 01 02 1.251 F20 Feminine 97 N48 Inefficient 05 27 68 1.812 M4 Defends beliefs 09 14 77 0.084

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 18Â

Â

F14 Flatterable 65 06 29 9.264** M37 Dominant 02 88 10 1.083 3.407 N24 Jealous 30 24 46 F59 Gentle 88 02 09 1.799 N39 Likeable 18 03 79 4.465 M19 Forceful 01 88 11 0.716 F47 Gullible 56 04 40 1.044 3.014 M25 Leadership ability 03 24 72 N6 Moody 78 03 18 1.756 F56 Loves kids 69 01 30 0.704 N21 Reliable 30 05 65 2.081 M7 Independent 12 28 61 2.504 0.742 F17 Loyal 27 08 65 M52 Individual 10 20 70 0.094 N30 Secretive 42 19 39 1.646 00 10 0.790 F26 Sensitive to others 89 N33 Sincere 54 03 43 5.962 M31 Makes decisions easily 05 49 46 3.437 F8 Shy 41 05 54 0.133 M40 Masculine 01 96 03 1.316 0.107 N42 Solemn 14 19 67 F38 Softspoken 74 02 24 1.546 N57 Tactful 22 23 54 14.117*** M1 Self-reliant 11 40 49 8.736* F23 Sympathetic 85 02 14 9.490** 2.861 M34 Self-sufficient 11 31 58 N12 Theatrical 51 04 44 2.234 F44 Tender 86 02 12 0.441 N27 Truthful 24 06 70 5.012 4.193 M16 Strong personality 04 35 61 03 34 1.402 F29 Understanding 63 M43 Takes a stand 06 39 55 1.570 3.304 N18 Unpredictable 19 28 53 F41 Warm 71 03 26 3.490 N54 Unsystematic 09 26 66 3.971 M28 Takes risks 01 61 37 1.423 1.116 F2 Yielding 42 04 54 ________________________________________________________________________ Note. Underlined values reflect highest percentage scored for that question, indicating the category the trait is assigned. *p < .05, **p< .01, *** p< .001

Volume 1, Page 19Â

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences Â

Table 2 Gender Differences in Distributions of Classifications _____________________________________________________________ Item Gender of Percent of Ratings Assigned Respondent __________________________________________

Adaptable Conceited* Analytical No harsh language

F M F M F M F

Female ______ 38 33 19 20 25 29 75

Male _____ 08 13 43 35 33 25 01

Neutral ______ 54 55 38 45 42 46 24

M 69 01 31 Helpful* F 54 01 45 M 44 02 54 Flatterable F 68 04 27 M 61 07 32 Tactful F 24 27 48 M 20 20 60 Self-reliant F 09 43 48 M 13 37 50 Sympathetic F 88 01 11 M 81 02 17 _____________________________________________________________ Note. *Genders differed in their classification of the trait.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 20

Attitudes Towards Poverty Revisited Charity Perry California State University, Los Angeles Gretchen Peterson California State University, Los Angeles K. William Wasson California State University, Los Angeles Theodore S. Bell California State University, Los Angeles

Abstract Attitudes toward the poor can range from blaming an individual for his or her poverty to blaming the system (i.e., the economic and political milieu). Prior research has shown that attitudes in the United States toward the poor tend to be negative. This means Americans typically believe that persons in poverty are responsible for putting themselves in that situation. The general hypotheses in this study predict that age and gender affect a person’s attitudes toward people in poverty. The poverty scale of this study is drawn from previous work, and the individual factors are used as the measurement instrument to assess individual sources of blame and differences in gender and age. Data from a survey at a large university in the western United States are examined to assess the effects of gender and age on attitudes toward poverty. Confirmatory factor analysis provided support for a three-component model of poverty attitudes while structural equation modeling demonstrated that individual and corporate blame are independent of each other but are modulated by views on entitlements. Gender differences in views of entitlement then modify blame.

Keywords: poverty attitudes, structural equation modeling, gender

Historically, how have people in the United States viewed poverty? Initially, people treated an individual’s state or condition of poverty as his or her own fault or failure. This continued until the 1930s when the United States found itself in the midst of a worldwide depression where the free enterprise system of laissez-faire capitalism was inadequate (Patterson, 1982). Views of poverty are intrinsically intertwined with the evolution of our nation.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 21Â

Â

Immigration, population growth, and the development of a complex social structure due to industrialization, civil rights, and issues related to women and minorities bring many dimensions to understanding attitudes toward those in poverty.

After his election in 1932, President F. D. Roosevelt initiated a series of programs to alleviate or ameliorate the worst conditions of individual poverty and to begin addressing its root causes. Programs initiated under the New Deal put people to work and underwrote guarantees of living wages and conditions. More recently in 2002, Americans continued to favor increased government aid to the poor. At this same time, President Bush initiated his faith-based initiative that permits organizations designed to aid the poor to dispense aid (Faith Based Initiative, n.d.); this was a move away from dealing with the structural causes of poverty and an apparent return to an individualistic attribution for poverty. The 2012 election campaign rhetoric further highlights the importance of poverty attitudes as a social issue. The stark contrast between Republican and Democratic candidates in views of social welfare entitlements underlies a difference in attitudes toward those in poverty.

Poverty, as defined in this study, is the state or condition of having little or no money, goods, or means of support and, therefore, the condition of being poor by the standard guidelines of the government and the culture. People are said to be living in poverty if their income and resources are so inadequate as to preclude them from having a standard of living considered acceptable in the society in which they live. Governmental standards of poverty are typically based on a specific threshold that can be income based or consumption based. The Department of Health and Human Services set the 2012 poverty guideline for a family of four at $23,050 (HHS, 2012). The U.S. Census Bureau utilizes a slightly different set of poverty thresholds (the Census thresholds present a more nuanced set of guidelines although the difference in absolute number is small) to determine the number and percent of people living in poverty. According to the Census Bureau, the official poverty rate in 2011 was 15.0%, which is a total of 46.2 million people in poverty in the United States (DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, &Smith, 2012).

Poverty Attitudes Feagin (1972a) examined the scope of Americaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s attitudes toward the poor and specifically examined attitudes toward welfare programs by studying the stereotypical character of such attitudes and their reasons for being. (Feagin, 1972a). Feagin (1972b) assessed attitudes toward traditional welfare programs such as Aid to Families with Dependent Children and three newer (at the time) proposals: a guaranteed-job plan, a guaranteed-income plan, and an equalincome plan. The results of the opinion survey (1972a) showed that a majority of Americans in 1969 held poor people responsible for their poverty and were correspondingly reluctant to support new programs aimed at eradicating poverty. Caucasians over the age of 50 with more education were more likely to blame the poor individual for his or her state while ethnic minorities under the age of 30 with less education were more likely to blame societal structures for the plight of the poor (Feagin, 1972a).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 22

Whether Americans tend to blame the individual or society for poverty is of significance due to the strong relation between such attitudes and the likelihood of an individual to support or not support welfare and other structurally based aid programs aimed at combating poverty.

Those who blame society are generally inclined to support these programs while those who blame the individual are generally inclined not to support these programs (Bullock, 1999).

Similar to the findings in the Bullock study, Wagstaff (1983) also found that individuals with a more conservative political orientation tend to make dispositional attributions in accounting for poverty, and generally possess more negative attitudes toward the poor than those who are less conservative.

It stands to reason that if the poor themselves are not to blame, then by logical extension they are innocents stuck in an unjust situation that should be remedied by the well intentioned. If society is to blame, then the defective society should be corrected by the well intentioned in such a manner as to ensure a more level playing field. Those who blame poor people for their own situation naturally feel far less inclined to have their tax money put to use helping those who they believe to have sealed their own fate through negative characteristics and/or through freely made negative decisions.

The Feagin Poverty Scale, created by Feagin in 1972, conceptualizes three, exploratory, poverty indices as individualistic explanation (which places the responsibility for poverty primarily on the poor themselves), structural explanation (which blames poverty on external social and economic forces), and fatalistic explanations (which cite factors such as bad luck and illness as explanations for poverty). Much of the research on poverty attitudes has focused on individualistic versus structuralist explanations for poverty. Such research has typically found more support for individualistic views of poverty among Americans (Feagin, 1975; Kluegel & Smith, 1986). Kluegel and Smith (1986) further demonstrate that high-status individuals favor individualistic explanations while low-status individuals will use structuralist explanations (“but not necessarily with greatly diminished support for individualism”) (p.93). Thus, individual background and status plays a role in determining people’s attitudes towards poverty.

Demographic Indicators of Attitudes toward Poverty. One background characteristic related to status is age. Feagin (1972) found that those who were over 50 were more likely to make individualistic attributions for poverty than those in youth and early middle age (who were more likely to make external attributions for poverty). However, the research does not suggest a motivating factor for these age-related attitudes. Specifically, it does not suggest whether these age-related attitudes are a result of generational cultural differences or a shift in views that generally corresponds with aging.

The lack of recent research on the impact of age on attitudes toward the poor and on attributions is a particularly striking absence. Determining whether the attitudes common among the elderly are a product of generational influences or of age itself will be an important element for predicting future changes in attitudes toward the poor.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 23Â

Â

Another demographic characteristic related to status that may have an impact on personal attitudes towards poverty is gender. Previous research has often overlooked gender as a determinant of attitudes toward the poor although some research has been conducted. While Hunt (1996) found women were more likely to support structuralist explanations for poverty than men, Kluegel and Smith (1986) and Cozzarelli, Tagler and Wilkinson (2002) found no significant difference in attitudes toward poverty based on the gender of those surveyed.

However, those surveyed viewed the poor differently based on the gender of the poor individual generally having more sympathy for poor women than for poor men (Cozzarelli, Tagler, & Wilkinson, 2002). While gender differences may possibly be noted in other types of attributions, few gender differences in attributions for poverty were noted. Due to the current dearth of research regarding gender as a factor in attitudes toward poverty and the conflicting findings when it is included, it is important to reexamine gender in current research particularly as it connects to status-based explanations for poverty attitudes.

Research Questions The review of the literature leads to several research questions for the current study.

First, are poverty attitudes comprised of component factors that can be validated empirically?

Once the component factors of poverty attitudes are identified, then the second question is how demographic characteristics connected to status (age and gender) affect the components of poverty attitudes? Instead of looking at poverty attitudes as a single construct, this research will examine each of the components of poverty attitudes to explore how status affects those component beliefs. Thus, the theme of this paper is to revisit earlier work on attitudes towards poverty to better clarify differences in poverty attitudes.

Methods To answer these research questions, the authors utilize survey data collected from students at a large university on the West Coast. The sample used for the analysis, the procedures for administering the survey, and the survey instrument are all described in greater detail below.

Sample The sample size for this five-year compilation survey was 1,075 students enrolled in a lower-division, general education course titled Principles of Sociology. Respondents ranged in age from 13 to 52 years with an average age of 20.6 years. The gender breakdown of the sample was that 66% were women and 34% were men.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 24

Procedure Self-administered surveys of 17 questions related to the causes of poverty were distributed to college students. The survey was administered in classes over a five-year period March, 2002 through March, 2007. Students were informed that refusal to participate in the survey would not impact their grade and that their responses to the survey items would be confidential. The use of this data was reviewed and approved by the University Institutional Review Board.

Survey Instrument To examine the component factors of poverty, questions were selected from two early studies. Attitudes about the attribution of poverty to the individual come from a scale used in the reports God Helps Those Who Help Themselves (Feagin, 1972b) and America’s Welfare Stereotypes (Feagin, 1972a). This scale was derived from 1,017 adult participants from all parts of the United States that were randomly selected to represent a cross section of demographic groups. Attitudes about the workplace as a cause of poverty and attitudes towards governmental entitlements were assessed using items selected from Schwartz and Robinson (1991). The Feagin Poverty Scale was also used to measure social work students' and non-social work students' perceptions of the causes of poverty (Sun, 2001) and has been used in other studies since its inception.

Respondents were asked to indicate their degree of agreement with 16 statements (the set of survey questions is available in Appendix A). One set of statements reflects attitudes discussed by Feagin (1972a) and these statements include poverty only happens because people are too lazy to work, we should not concern ourselves about poor people, the Bible says we will always have them, poverty is natural, the government should not pay people not to work because it only encourages them to be lazy, welfare people have more children than other families in the United States, and we shouldn’t pay new undocumented immigrants welfare. These statements reflect attitudes toward poverty in terms of who is considered deserving of poverty assistance.

A second set of statements reflect attitudes discussed by Schwartz and Robinson (1991) and these include one reason for poverty is the low wages paid by companies, one reason for poverty is that corporations do not treat employees as stakeholders, companies treat employees as the cheapest and most easily replaced part of their corporation, it is hard to have employee loyalty to the company when companies treat them so badly, and poverty is created by the greed of the ‘owners of the means of production’ according to Karl Marx.

Schwartz and Robinson (1991) also include a dimension of fundamental rights or entitlements. These statements ‘everyone should have the right to decent housing for themselves and their family, everyone should have the right to a job, which gives them a sense of worth and self-respect; everyone should have the right to free medical care, everyone should

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 25

have the right to education to any level which they can achieve, and everyone has the right to a complete and balanced diet.’

For each statement, respondents were asked to rate their opinion on a six-point Likertscale that ranges from SA (strongly agree) to SD (strongly disagree). Some items were reverse coded so that the high score of the respondent would reflect the attribution of blame.

Results Confirmatory Factor Analysis A factor analysis of the survey questions provided a starting point for a measurement model using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) and also created uncorrelated dependent variables in a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) design that were used to discern gender and age effects. Three factors were extracted (eigen values > 1.0 criterion) using a Principal Components Analysis with a Varimax rotation that converged in five iterations.

Collectively, the three-factor solution captured 45.7% of the total variance. The factor loadings are presented in Table 1. Factor 1 was labeled “Entitlements” (e.g., “We should have the right to health care”) and it explained 23.46% of the variance. The statements relative to Factor 2, labeled “Individual,” explained 13.1 % of the variance and were indicative of attitudes toward individuals in poverty or their situation (e.g., “Poverty only happens because people are too lazy to work”). The statements relative to Factor 3, “Corporate,” which explained 9.2% of the variance, were indicative of causes of poverty from the workplace (e.g., “One reason for poverty is the low wages by companies”). The factor structure corresponded to the dimensions that were assumed a priori; thus, it supported the validity of the measurement instrument.

Analysis of Factor Scores Factor scores for each respondent were regressed onto the three factors as three dependent measures in a MANOVA design with two independent factors, gender and age (as a dichotomous variable). Results of the MANOVA are shown in Table 2. The multivariate test for gender was significant (Wilk’s Lambda = .92, F(3, 1047) = 6.23, p < .001). There was a significant difference in mean factor scores between men and women on the ratings on entitlements [F(1, 1029) = 11.91, p < .01]. There was a gender x age interaction on the regressed factor associated with individual blame [F(1, 1029) = 8.84, p < .01].

The profile across factors for men and women is displayed in Figure 1. The gender effect is evident in the ratings of entitlements (Factor 1) with men significantly more negative than women. The gender effect for individual blame (Factor 3) was only marginally significant (p < .10) in the analysis, but it shows the opposite pattern with men presenting more positive attitudes

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 26

than women on that dimension (which indicates men placing more blame on the individual for poverty).

Structural Equation Modeling A structural model is only an approximation; therefore, the chi-square statistic, especially with large numbers of observations, is not the best indicator of the goodness of the model’s fit.

In this application, the root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) is used to describe the amount of error in relation to the degrees of freedom. Practice suggests that when RMSEA < .05, the model is a good fit to the data; an RMSEA = .08 is a reasonable fit, and values greater than .10 are unacceptable (Browne & Cudeck, 1993). Differences in chi-square values were used to test specific model components among models starting with a three-dimensional factor analysis and adding links in sequence until the fit no longer improved.

SEM was used to replicate the factor analysis and then those factors formed the basic measurement model through which genders were compared. Three underlying dimensions (hidden variables) were assumed and tied to the individual questions that loaded on each (see Figure 2). The structural model replicated the rotated factor solution and provided a good fit for the data (RMSEA = .044, (χ2(311) = 101.0, p < .001)). The rays connecting the latent factors to the individual questions are accompanied by the standardized regression weights. The correlation between entitlement and individual blame is r = -.28 (χ2(1) = 50.7, p < .001), and the correlation between entitlement and corporate blame is r = .49 (χ2(1) = 155.5, p < .001).

However, the correlation between individual blame and corporate blame is nonsignificant at r = .07 (χ2(1) = 0.90, p > .05).

When men and women were fit separately to this factor structure to compare the strengths of the various model components, then the correlation between the entitlements and individual factors is r = -.263 for women and at r = -.293 for men. Between entitlements and corporate factors, the correlation coefficient is at r = .460 for women and at r = .541 for men. The correlation between personal blame and corporate blame is at r = -.047 for women and at r = .095 for men. In all cases, the correlations among the pairs of factors were stronger for the men in the study.

Proposed Path Model A stepwise regression model was fit to the data by replacing the correlation among the three latent variables with directional links driven by the rating of entitlements. The directional link between entitlements and individual factors and entitlements and corporate factors were each significant links and the RMSEA = .440, with (χ2(102) = 313.3, p < .001). The path between the personal and corporate dimensions of blame was not significant, so it was removed from the model.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 27

Adding gender as an exogenous predictor improved the fit slightly (RMSEA = .043).

The connection from gender to the individual blame factor was a significant linkage (χ2(1) = 5.2, p < .05). Other links with gender were not significant.

Age (as a continuous variable) generally did not affect the fit of the model. Although age did not predict the corporate or entitlement factors, the link between age and individual factors was significant (χ2(16) = 43.2, p < .001).

The final model with all of the observed variables (rectangular boxes) and the paths between them are shown in Figure 3. The numbers adjacent to the connecting links represent standardized regression coefficients. In these models, the latent factors (individual blame, entitlements, and corporate blame) predict the survey questions (q1, q2…) with error (e1, e2…).

Individual and corporate blame are independently predicted by attitudes about entitlements that are modulated by gender. The fit of the model is good, RMSEA = .043, although χ2(132) = 385.1.

Discussion/Conclusion The structural model that was derived captures the historical observations about attributions of the causes of poverty, and it has specified the precise nature of gender and age effects on the underlying endogenous variable structure. The proposed path model fits the data well and is consistent with other analyses. The model proposes that individual (personal) and structural (corporate) attributions to the cause of poverty are independent of each other although both are affected by attitudes toward entitlements. Differences in attitudes toward entitlements between men and women then predict blame. Age has a smaller effect by acting directly on personal blame.

The results in this study, in regard to age as a determining factor in attitudes toward the poor, are similar to those of Feagin (1972a) that older respondents were more likely to make individualistic attributions. These results differ from those of Kluegel and Smith (1986) who found no difference in attitudes toward the poor based on the respondents’ genders. These results also contradict Coryn’s (2007) study by demonstrating a statistically coherent model where age and gender were determining factors in attitudes toward the poor. Similarly, the results of this study contradict Schwartz and Robinson’s (1991) study that examined age and gender and concluded, as did Coryn, that the two factors were not statistically significant in predicting attitudes toward poverty. However, the results do partially support the work of Hunt (1996) that found gender differences in structuralist explanations for poverty. This study extends beyond the individualist/structuralist dichotomy to a three-factor model for poverty attitudes that includes individualist or personal blame, structuralist or corporate blame, and rights or entitlements. By incorporating rights or entitlements into the model, the study of poverty attitudes can be extended to look beyond the perceived causes for poverty to examine attitudes towards possible solutions for poverty.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 28Â

Â

For the purpose of this research, a validated measurement model has been established using SEM, which would explain why previous studies had alternative and conflicting results. In the future, this model can be used to further examine attitudes toward poverty. Understanding attitudes towards poverty is important for understanding how the public will view social service programs designed to aid the poor. Rather than focusing on whether people blame the individual or the social structure for poverty, the results demonstrate that beliefs about fundamental rights or entitlements form the basis for these individual or structural explanations for poverty. Thus, this study has important implications for policy makers working to ameliorate poverty in this country. Knowing the gender and age composition of a community can provide insight into the likelihood that a community will support programs to aid those in poverty. Communities that are predominately younger with a higher proportion of women are less likely to blame the individual for their poverty, and women are more likely to support fundamental entitlements.

Further research on attitudes towards poverty should focus on the entitlements component. One avenue for future research would be to break down the entitlements component to assess attitudes toward specific entitlements. In this research the authors were able to assess the entitlements component as a whole but does not specify the factors related to attitudes towards each specific entitlement. In addition, future research could incorporate more aspects of respondentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; backgrounds in the survey to see if characteristics other than gender and age impact poverty attitudes. Given the current political climate of ongoing disagreement between the political parties, it would be useful for future research to examine whether political affiliation is connected to poverty attitudes. Also, given the higher proportion of minorities who live in poverty in this country, it would be useful to break attitudes towards entitlements down by racial/ethnic background as well. This future research would provide insight into the direction policy makers should take in proposing new policies or legislation designed to address poverty.

Given the latest estimates of the poverty rate as 15%, public policies addressing poverty are going to continue to be an important focus of political and social debate.

Author Biographies Charity Perry is an Adjunct Professor at both California State University, Los Angeles, and California State University, Dominguez Hills and has childhood and adult teaching experience in private institutions. She earned her M.A. in Sociology at California State University, Los Angeles in 2008. She is currently a doctoral candidate at the University of Louisiana-Monroe. Her teaching interests include: research methods, gender roles, race and ethnic relations, violence in America, and critical thinking. Her research interests focus primarily on attitudes toward poverty and families in transition.

Gretchen Peterson is an Associate Professor of Sociology at California State University, Los Angeles. She earned her Ph.D. from the University of Arizona in 2000 and has been a professor at California State University, Los Angeles for 12 years. Professor Peterson studies social exchange, fairness, emotions, and, most recently, adult recreational softball. She

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 29

consistently takes a social psychological approach to these various topics. Her research utilizes multiple methodologies including experiments, surveys, and observational methods.

K. William Wasson received his Ph. D. in sociology from Iowa State University in 1984.

He has been a member of the faculty at California State University, Los Angeles for more than 20 years. His teaching and research interests include assisting working class neighborhoods in gaining community empowerment through organization and pride.

Theodore Bell is a Professor of Psychology at California State University, Los Angeles.

Formerly a member of the UCLA Department of Head and Neck Surgery, his research was funded by the National Institutes of Health (NICDS, NIA) and the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs. The research has produced a scale for measuring quality of life that is sensitive to sensory and neurologic pathology, and it has produced audiologic clinical assessment tools that isolate sensory and cognitive deficits associated with receptive communication problems.

Current projects, in collaboration with the National Alliance for Mental Illness, examine the effectiveness of court-ordered conservatorship programs for the mentally ill in Los Angeles.

References Browne, M. W. & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bolen and J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Bullock, H. (1999). Attributions for poverty: A comparison of middle-class and welfare attitudes.

Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(10), 2059-2082.

Coryn, C. L. (2002). Antecedents of attitudes toward the poor. Online Journal IUSB.edu.

Retrieved April 12, 2007.

Cozzarelli, C., Tagler, M. J., & Wilkinson, A. V. (2002). Do middle-class students perceive poor women and poor men differently? Sex Roles, 47(11/12), 519-529.

DeNavas-Walt, C., Proctor, B. D., & Smith, J. C. (2012). Income, poverty and health insurance coverage in the United States: 2011. Current Population Reports, September 2012.

Retrieved from: http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p60-243.pdf Department of Health and Human Services. (2012). 2012 HHS Poverty Guidelines. Federal Register, 77(17), 4034-4035.

Faith Based Initiative. (n.d.). Retrieved http://georgewbushwhitehouse.archives.gov/government/fbci/president-initiative.html.

Feagin, J. R. (1972a). America’s welfare stereotypes. Social Science Quarterly, 52, 921-933.

Feagin, J. R. (1972b). We still believe that God helps those who help themselves. Psychology Today, 6, 101-110, 192.

Hunt, M. O. (1996). The individual, society, or both? A comparison of Black, Latino, and White beliefs about the causes of poverty. Social Forces, 75(1), 293-322.

Kluegel, J. R. & Smith, E. R. (1986). Beliefs about inequality: Americans’ views of what is and what ought to be. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 30Â

Â

Patterson, J. T. (1982). America's struggle against poverty, 1900-1980. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Schwartz, S. & Robinson, M. R. (1991). Attitudes toward poverty during undergraduate education. Journal of Social Work Education, 27(3), 290-296.

Sun, A. P. (2001). Perceptions among social work and non-social work students concerning causes of poverty. Journal of Social Work Education, 37(1), 161-173.

Wagstaff, G. F. (1983). Attitudes to poverty, the Protestant ethic, and political affiliation: A preliminary investigation. Social Behavior and Personality, 11(1), 45-57.

Volume 1, Page 31

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Appendix A Poverty Attitudes Survey Questions There are no right or wrong answers. We only want your opinion Please provide one response to each question where the response sets mean: SA (Strongly Agree), A (Agree), AS (Somewhat Agree), DS (Disagree Somewhat), D (Disagree) and SD (Strongly Disagree) Poverty only happens because people are too lazy to work.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

We should not concern ourselves about poor people; the Bible says we will always have them.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

The government should not pay people not to work because it only encourages them to be lazy.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

Welfare people have more children than other families in the United States.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

We shouldn’t pay new undocumented immigrants welfare.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

One reason for poverty is the low wages paid by companies.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

One reason for poverty is that corporations do not treat employees as stakeholders.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

Companies treat employees as the cheapest and most easily replaced part of their corporation.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

It is hard to have employee loyalty to the company when companies treat them so badly.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

Volume 1, Page 32

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Poverty is natural.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

Poverty is created by the greed of the ‘owners of the means of production’ according to Karl Marx.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

Everyone should have the right to decent housing for themselves and their family.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

Everyone should have the right to a job, which gives them a sense of worth and self-respect.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

Everyone should have the right to free medical care.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

Everyone should have the right to education to any level to which they can achieve.

SA __

A ___

AS ___

DS ___

D ___

SD ___

Everyone has the right to a complete and balanced diet.

SA____ A____ AS____ DS_____ D___ SD____

Volume 1, Page 33

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Table 1 Factor Loadings on Entitlement (Factor 1), Corporate (Factor 2), and Individual (Factor 3) Factor Components Factor 1 “Entitlement” poverty is because people are too lazy to work Bible says we will always have poor welfare encourages laziness welfare recipients have more children no welfare for undocumented immigrants reason for poverty is low wages reason for poverty is that employees not stakeholders employees are cheap and replaceable no loyalty because companies treat people poorly poverty is natural poverty is greed of owners right to decent housing right to job right to medical care right to education right to food and nutrition

Factor 2 “Corporate” -.100 -.119 -.016 .063 -.156 .145 .114 .194 .187 -.058 .025 .684 .788 .661 .785 .723

-.016 -.078 .010 .069 -.062 .685 .750 .701 .565 .012 .596 .178 .152 .140 .126 .125

Factor 3 “Individual” .697 .587 .657 .652 .478 -.031 -.019 -.001 .039 .439 -.041 -.149 -.056 -.124 -.017 -.107

Volume 1, Page 34Â

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences Â

Table 2 MANOVA Results for Gender and Age on Factor Components of Poverty Attitudes Source Gender

Age

Gender * Age

Error

Dependent Variable Entitlements

Type III Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

11.878

1

11.878

11.906

Corporate

1.125

1

1.125

1.129

.288

Individual

2.634

1

2.634

2.724

.099

.038

1

.038

.038

.846

Corporate

1.572

1

1.572

1.578

.209

Individual

.010

1

.010

.010

.921

Entitlements

.003

1

.003

.003

.958

Corporate

.374

1

.374

.376

.540

Individual

8.843

1

8.843

9.146

Entitlements

1026.529

1029

.998

Corporate

1024.636

1029

.996

Individual

994.878

1029

.967

Entitlements

Figure 1. Gender Differences in Factor Loadings.

***

***

.001

.003

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 35

Figure 2. Correlated Factor Structure.

Figure 3. Proposed structural model to account for gender and age effects on attitudes toward the causes of poverty

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 36Â

Â

Brief Desensitization and Skills Training for Test Anxiety: A Pilot Program Margaret D. Kasimatis Carroll University Rebecca Palmer Carroll University Kathryn Rheingruber Carroll University Rebecca Gillespie Carroll University

Abstract In this study, the authors compared test anxiety levels of student participants in a test anxiety workshop with anxiety levels of students in a waitlist comparison group. Based on schedules, 79 self-referred undergraduates were directly assigned to either a four-week anxiety management workshop or to a four-week waitlist group before treatment. Workshop sessions included psychoeducational and systematic desensitization components. As hypothesized, paired t-tests demonstrated significant decreases in state anxiety and test anxiety for the treatment group when compared to the waitlist group. However, trait anxiety dropped significantly in both the treatment and waitlist groups and more so for the treatment group. These data support a brief, multimodal, treatment model in the management of test anxiety.

Keywords: test anxiety, systematic desensitization, trait anxiety, state anxiety, multimodal treatment, undergraduates

Most undergraduate students have learned to manage test-related anxiety, so that it is expressed adaptively in test preparation and performance. However, some studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; high anxiety levels have a disorganizing effect that impairs performance and leads to strong expectations of failing or underperforming. Debilitating test anxiety may be an issue for up to 20% of college students, and its impact is considered significant for high school and graduate students as well (Egbochuku & Obodo, 2005; Ergene, 2003; Powell, 2004; Raju, Misganaw & Alia, 2010).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 37Â

Â

Currently, few studies have evaluated the efficacy of brief interventions for test anxiety in controlled studies (Ergene, 2003; Ramirez & Beilock, 2011). In this study, the authors piloted a brief, multimodal intervention to reduce test anxiety symptoms and to build confidence in having strategies to manage anxiety. While cognitive manifestations of anxiety may impair test performance more than physiological symptoms, a treatment strategy that addresses multiple dimensions of anxiety is likely to build student confidence and reduce suffering from uncomfortable somatic symptoms (Huberty, 2010; Lang & Lang, 2010; Ramirez & Beilock, 2011).

A number of the early interventions for test-related anxiety focused on systematic desensitization. Systematic desensitization, with its focus on both physiological and cognitive facets of anxiety, has been shown to significantly reduce test anxiety (Ahgar, 2008; Gambles, 1995; Putwain, Connors, & Symes, 2010). Previous studies have shown that both state and trait anxiety contribute to test anxiety and that both can be decreased with desensitization techniques (Huberty, 2010; Trent & Maxwell, 1980; Zettle, 2003). While both respond to this intervention, trait anxiety has been shown to be more responsive to desensitization strategies than has state anxiety (Trent & Maxwell, 1980; Zettle, 2003). Intuitively it might seem that test anxiety is a form of state anxiety specific to an evaluative situation; in fact, a number of studies support that trait anxiety, with its more chronic and pervasive predisposition to anxiety, has the more stable association to test anxiety (Hong & Karstensson, 2002; Putwain, 2008; Trent & Maxwell, 1980).

Thus, the challenge is to provide a multimodal treatment strategy that targets both state and trait components of test anxiety in a time-efficient manner.

More recent studies have emphasized the cognitive component of test anxiety. Davis, DiStefano & Schutz (2008) identified patterns of cognitive coping strategies for test anxiety among undergraduate students including dimensions such as emotion regulation and problem solving. Ramirez & Beilock (2011) have had success in using expressive writing to prevent negative cognitions from interfering with working memory while taking a test, which resulted in higher test scores. A lack of confidence has also been shown to increase test anxiety (Lang & Lang, 2010; Putwain, 2008; Stoeber, Feast, & Hayward, 2009). Supporting perceptions of competence and self-efficacy have been shown to improve test performance (Lang & Lang, 2010; Steele, 1997). Given the potential for both physiological symptoms and negative cognitions to impede performance in testing situations, an eclectic approach to treatment is necessary (Blankenstein, Flett, & Watson, 1992; Onwuegbuzie & Daley, 1996; Ramirez & Beilock, 2011).

Currently, most treatment programs incorporate anxiety management, but few include test preparation or test-taking skills as part of their intervention (van der Ploeg, Schwarzer, & Spielberger, 1984; Onwuegbuzie & Daley, 1996; Powell, 2004). Powell (2004) found that the combination of progressive muscle relaxation, brief systematic desensitization, and test-taking skills training reduced test anxiety among medical students taking national board examinations.

Raffety, Smith, and Ptacek (1997) found that people with high trait anxiety had deficits in proactive test-taking and problem-solving skills and had lower examination scores. The added

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 38

psychoeducational component, i.e., study skills and test-taking skills, incorporated in this study creates a unique and more complete approach to reducing test anxiety (Powell, 2004).

It is hypothesized that a multimodal intervention that includes systematic desensitization and test-related skills training will decrease participants’ cognitive and somatic symptoms of test anxiety (Ahgar, 2008; Lang & Lang, 2010; Powell, 2004). Additionally, it is hypothesized, based on the results of Powell (2004), Trent and Maxwell (1980) and Zettle (2003), that both state and trait anxiety would be reduced by this combined strategy of skills training and relaxation training.

Method Participants Seventy-nine, self-referred undergraduate students volunteered to participate. Their ages ranged from 18 to 51 with a mean age of 20 (median 19). Twenty-six of these participants were on a four-week waitlist before receiving treatment. Consistent with women’s increased vulnerability to most forms of anxiety, including test anxiety, the majority (92.00%) of participants were female (Egbochuku & Obodo, 2005; Putwain, 2008; Steele, 1997). All participants were enrolled at the Midwestern university where the study was conducted.

Materials All subjects completed informed consent forms and provided demographic data for age and gender as part of the pretest assessment. Two validated self-report measures were used in the study: Sarason’s (1978) Test Anxiety Scale (TAS) and Spielberger’s (1983) State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Sarason's (1978) measure consists of 37 statements to which participants answer true/false such as "I usually get depressed after taking a test." The TAS shows test and retest reliability coefficients ranging from .55 to .78 and a split-half reliability of .91 (Raju et al., 2010). Raju et al. (2010) reported the internal consistency reliability to be .84.

They also noted that Sarason considered test anxiety to be a complex, multidimensional construct (Raju et al., 2010).

Speilberger's (1983) STAI is organized into two groups of 20 items each with items 1-20 assessing state anxiety and items 21-40 assessing trait anxiety. State anxiety is a response to a specific event, like taking a test or giving a speech. Trait anxiety is conceptualized as a stable, characterological predisposition to anxiety. A sample item for state anxiety would be "I am tense" while a sample item for trait anxiety would be "I wish I could be as happy as others seem to be." For all items participants rate the relevance for them on a scale of 1 (almost never) to 4 (almost always). Test-retest reliability of trait anxiety for college undergraduates showed values ranging from .73 to .86 whereas test-retest reliability was lower for state anxiety (r = 16 to .54)

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 39Â

Â

(Speilberger, 1983). The author also reported alpha coefficients above .93 for both state and trait anxiety (Speilberger, 1983). The STAI has shown concurrent validity with the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale and the Zuckerman Affect Adjective Checklist (Speilberger, 1983). Speilberger (1983) reported that factor analyses showed clear distinctions between state and trait anxiety, and that the STAI is an appropriate measure for evaluating the outcome of therapeutic interventions.

Procedure A paired pretest/posttest design was used. Seven four-week workshops were offered across three academic years for students who self-referred for test anxiety problems. The 26 students initially in the waitlist condition were not randomly assigned; instead, assignment was based on scheduling conflicts. All 79 participants completed pretest and posttest self-report measures: the TAS and the STAI. After completing posttest measures, all waitlist participants were invited to join a treatment workshop.

Weekly sessions ran approximately 75 minutes. The initial session focused on skills training in test preparation and introduced controlled breathing techniques. The second session included test-taking strategies, reviewed breathing techniques, and added progressive muscle relaxation. The last two sessions incorporated information on parasympathetic response and emphasized use of cognitive techniques including systematic desensitization and cognitive rehearsal. Participants received handouts and homework assignments to practice their skills in managing physical and cognitive symptoms of anxiety.

Results It was hypothesized that test anxiety, state anxiety, and trait anxiety scores would show significant reductions in workshop participants but not in waitlist participants. These predictions were supported although a smaller but significant reduction in trait anxiety in waitlist participants was also observed. A series of paired t-tests were conducted to analyze the data.

With workshop participants, reductions in test anxiety scores (t = 8.370) and trait anxiety scores (t = 4.066) were significant at p < .0001. State anxiety scores also dropped significantly (t = 3.119, p < .003; see Table 1).

With waitlist subjects, test anxiety actually showed a slight but nonsignificant increase during the four-week period (t = 0.203, p < .840), and state anxiety showed a similar slight but nonsignificant reduction (t = 0.642, p < .527). The significant reduction in trait anxiety scores within the waitlist group (t = 3.000, p < .006) was unexpected and inconsistent with the hypotheses (see Figure 1).

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 40

Discussion The authors’ findings supported the efficacy of a multimodal treatment approach for test anxiety. The combination of relaxation, study and test-taking skills training, and cognitivebehavioral strategies to reduce anxiety was effective for trait and state anxiety as well. The reduction in symptoms for the treatment group was significant whereas students on a waitlist showed only a significant change in trait anxiety, and that change was less than that of those students who had received treatment. The current findings strongly support a comprehensive approach to treat multiple manifestations of test anxiety (Blankestein, Flett, & Watson, 1992; Onwuegbuzie & Daley, 1996; Powell, 2004; Ramirez & Beilock, 2011).

Consistent with the hypotheses, test anxiety was significantly reduced only in treatment participants; however, contrary to the hypotheses, trait anxiety dropped significantly for both treatment and waitlist participants. Conceptually, test anxiety would likely be tied to state anxiety in that the anxiety symptoms are in response to a specific cue, i.e., the testing environment (Hong & Karstensson, 2002). Still, previous studies examining the relationship of test anxiety to state and trait anxiety have shown mixed results. DeVito and Kubis' (1983) study did not support Sarason's view of test anxiety as a form of trait anxiety; other studies found that test-anxious students did, in fact, show tendencies for strong trait, anxiety (Kondo, 1997; Speilberger &Vagg, 1995; Trent & Maxwell, 1980; Zettle, 2003). Trent and Maxwell (1980) and Spielberger and Vagg (1995) reported that trait anxiety scores changed more than state anxiety scores in test-anxious students. Possibly, students practicing desensitization and relaxation techniques in diverse settings as part of their homework learned to generalize these skills to broader manifestations of trait anxiety (Zettle, 2003). But that still does not address the drop in trait anxiety scores in the waitlist participants. Perhaps the expectation of soon receiving treatment lowered the dispositional anxiety of students on the waitlist.

A major limitation of this study is that over 90% of the participants were Caucasian women; thus, generalizations should be cautious. Steele (1997) argues that racial and gender stereotypes strongly impact students’ identification with school success and test performance.

While Egbochuku and Obodo (2005) note that women report more test anxiety, they also found no significant gender difference in treatment to response. This suggests that systematic desensitization can be an effective intervention for both men and women.

Also, the implications of these findings can only be generalized to undergraduate students; however, other studies have shown similar reductions in test anxiety with secondary school and graduate level students (Ahgar, 2008; Chapell et al., 2005; Egbochuku and Obodo, 2005; Paul, Elam, & Verhulst, 2007; Powell, 2004). While the majority of the participants were 19 or 20 years old, a number of midlife students attended these workshops. Additional research specific to this midlife population, whether in terms of test anxiety management or other supports required, would be a valuable extension of this preliminary investigation.

The other major limitation of this study was that assignment to a waitlist versus treatment was not random but based on conflicts with offered times for workshops. Because these

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 41Â

Â

workshops were offered as a service on campus, it was most ethical to try to accommodate students' schedules and minimize the number of students who had to wait for treatment. There was no obvious pattern to the schedules of students who were waitlisted before receiving treatment, so it is unlikely that there was systematic error variance attributable to the nonrandom assignment although it is possible. Random assignment would have been preferable in terms of clarifying sources of bias but would have been inconsistent with the priority of serving as many students as possible.

This study has strong practical implications for interventions in educational settings to help students increase their test performance. Previous studies have shown that test anxiety can have a negative, inverse relationship with academic performance (Chapell et. al., 2005; Ramirez & Beilock, 2011). Therefore, time-limited, in-house workshops like the one used in this study could provide skills that support students' overall academic performance and potentially raise their test scores. A growing body of evidence supports the importance of addressing underperformance on tests not simply in pursuit of higher grades but to address the diminished validity of the test scores and the sometimes high-stake consequences of underperforming (Huberty, 2010; Lang & Lang, 2010; Powell, 2004; Raju et al., 2010; Steele, 1997; Ramirez & Beilock, 2011).

In addition to improved test scores, an improved sense of confidence appears to be critical: confidence in being able to manage anxiety symptoms and confidence that a student can, in fact, adequately prepare and perform on examinations. By the time they have gotten to college, many test-anxious students have a long learning history of failing or underperforming on tests and have concluded that they just cannot take tests successfully (Lang & Lang, 2010; Steele, 1997). They suffer not just from uncomfortable anxiety symptoms but from their sense of helplessness in controlling them. Giving students a range of test-related skills broadens their coping repertoire and enhances their sense of academic confidence. The strength of this perceptual aspect has some evidence based research, but additional research is still needed (Huberty, 2010; Lang & Lang, 2010; Putwain, 2008; Steele, 1997).

Test anxiety is amenable to treatment. Participation in a relatively brief, multimodal intervention significantly decreases not just test anxiety but also state and trait anxiety in undergraduate students. A multi-method strategy that includes studying and test-taking tips, plus mastering the fundamentals of controlled breathing and muscle relaxation, helps college students keep their anxiety symptoms at more adaptive levels in testing situations (Kondo, 1997; Powell, 2004). Additionally, cognitive-behavioral strategies, such as systematic desensitization, help students approach tests with more confidence (Davis et al., 2008; Egbochuku & Obodo, 2005; Ergene, 2003; Putwain et al., 2010). Lessening the prevalence of underperformance on tests has important implications for studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; academic self-concepts, the validity of their test scores, and their future career paths (Huberty, 2010; Powell, 2005; Steele, 1997). Future research may want to tease apart the relative contributions of each component of a multimodal strategy, but the current data support modulating test-related anxiety with a multi-method approach including a distinct psychoeducational component.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 42Â

Â

Author Biographies Margaret D. Kasimatis, Department of Health & Medicine, Carroll University; Kathryn Rheingruber, Psychology Program, Carroll University.

Rebecca Palmer is now at the Chicago School of Professional Psychology; Rebecca Gillespie is now at the Wisconsin School of Professional Psychology.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Margaret D. Kasimatis, Department of Health and Medicine, Carroll University, Waukesha, WI 53186. E-mail: mkasim@carrollu.edu References Ahgar, G. (2008). Investigation into consulting group with a cognitive and behavioural approach on the reduction of test anxiety of female students in secondary school in Tehran City. The New Educational Review, 16(3/4), 77-87.

Blankenstein, K. R., Flett, G. L., & Watson, M. S. (1992). Coping and academic problem-solving ability in test anxiety. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 48(1), 37-46. doi:10.1002/10974679(199201)48:1 Chapell, M. S., Blanding, B. Z., Silverstein, M. E., Takahashi, M., Newman, B., Gubi, A., & McCann, N. (2005). Test anxiety and academic performance in undergraduate and graduate students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 268-274. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.268 Davis, H. A., DiStefano, C., & Schutz, P. A. (2008). Identifying patterns of appraising tests in first-year college students: Implications for anxiety and emotion regulation during test taking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 942-960. doi:10.1037/a0013096 Egbochuku, E. O., & Obodo, B. O. (2005). Effects of systematic desensitisation (SD) therapy on the reduction of test anxiety among adolescents in Nigerian schools. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 32(4), 298-304.

Ergene, T. (2003). Effective interventions on test anxiety reduction: A meta-analysis. School Psychology International, 24(3), 313-328. doi:10.1177/0143030243004 Gambles, D. H. (1995). Treatment outcome in test anxiety research: A review and metaanalysis. Dissertation Abstracts International, 55(8-B), 3587.

Hong, E. & Karstensson, L. Antecedents of state test anxiety. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 348-376. doi:10.1006/ceps.2001.1095 Huberty, T. J. (2010). Test and performance anxiety. The Education Digest, 75(9), 34-38.

Kondo, D. S. (1997). Strategies for coping with test anxiety. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 10, 203-215. doi:10.1080/10615809708249301 Lang, J. W. B. & Lang, J. (2010). Priming competence diminishes the link between cognitive

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 43Â

Â

test anxiety and test performance: Implications for the interpretation of test scores.

Psychological Science, 21(6), 811-819. doi:10.1177/0956797610369492 Onwuegbuzie, A. J. & Daley, C. E. (1996). The relative contributions of examination-taking coping strategies and study coping strategies to test anxiety: A concurrent analysis. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 20(3), 287-303. doi:10.1007/BF02229239 Paul, G., Elam, B., & Verholst, S. J. (2007). A longitudinal study of students' perceptions of using deep breathing meditation to reduce testing stresses. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 19(3), 287-292.

Powell, D. H. (2004). Behavioral treatment of debilitating test anxiety among medical students.

Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60(8), 853-865. doi:10.1002/jclp.20043 Putwain, D. W. (2008). Deconstructing test anxiety. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties,13(2), 141-155. doi:10.1080/13632750802027713 Putwain, D. W., Connors, L., & Symes, W. (2010). Do cognitive distortions mediate the test anxiety-examination performance relationship? Educational Psychology, 30(1), 11-26. doi:10.1080/01443410903328866 Raffety, B. D., Smith, R. E., & Ptacek, J. T. (1997). Facilitating and debilitating trait anxiety, situational anxiety, and coping with an anticipated stressor: A process analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(4), 892-906.

Raju, P. M., Misganaw, M., & Alia, E. (2010). Test Anxiety Scale: Reliability among Ethiopian students. Psychological Reports, 107(3), 939-948. doi:10.2466/03.11.17PRO.107.6.939948 Ramirez, G., & Beilock, S. L. (2011). Writing about testing worries boosts exam performance in the classroom. Science, 331, 211-213.

Spielberger, C. D. (1983). State-trait anxiety inventory for adults (Form Y). Menlo Park, CA. Mind Garden Inc. Spielberger, C. D., & Vagg, P. R. (1995). Test anxiety: Theory, assessment, treatment.

Washington, D.C.: Taylor & Francis.

Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52(6), 613-229. doi:00000487-199706000-00001 Stoeber, J., Feast, A. R., & Hayward, J. A. (2009). Self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism: Differential relationships with intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and test anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(5), 423-428.doi:10.1016/ j.paid.2009.04.014 Trent, J. T. & Maxwell, W. A. (1980). State and trait components of test anxiety and their implications for treatment. Psychological Reports, 47, 475-480. van der Ploeg, H. M., Schwarzer, R., & Spielberger, C. D. (1984). Advances in test anxiety research (Vol. 3). Hillsdale, N.J.: L.E.A., Inc. Zettle, R. D. (2003). Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) vs. systematic desensitization in treatment of math anxiety. The Psychological Record, 53(2), 197-215.

Volume 1, Page 44

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Table 1 Comparison of Test, State, and Trait Anxiety in Treatment and Waitlist Groups Pre Average

Post Average

Difference

SD

t-value

Significance

6.373

8.317

p < .0001

0.203

p < .840

3.199

p < .003

0.642

p < .527

4.066

p < .0001

3.000

p < .006

Test Anxiety Treatment

25.60

17.89

6.514

Waitlist

29.96

30.04

0.120

Treatment

39.88

35.86

9.660

Waitlist

57.65

56.58

1.185

Treatment

41.10

36.83

8.577

Waitlist

50.08

46.54

3.538

State Anxiety 7.777

Trait Anxiety 8.103

Volume 1, Page 45Â

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences Â

70

Average Anxiety Level

60 50 Treatment

40 30

Waitlist

20 10 0 Test Pre

Test Post

State Pre

State Post

Trait Pre

Trait Post

Figure 1. Mean differences in test, state, and trait anxiety scores for treatment and waitlist groups pre-test and post-test. With workshop participants, reductions in all anxiety scores were significant; with waitlist participants, trait anxiety scores dropped significantly.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 46

Development of Empathy in Therapist Trainees Helen Shoemaker Holy Names University Jessica Lee Shoemaker California State University

Abstract Therapeutic work focused on development of perspective taking and building awareness of self and others requires therapists who are able to engage empathically in meaningful human interaction with a diverse clientele. Successful therapy depends on therapists whose own perspective taking and frames of reference are unconditionally inclusive. In this paper, the author focuses on how therapist educators might better understand and influence the intellectual and ethical developmental positions of trainees regarding perspective taking and empathy. Fifty graduate trainees’ reflections on the nature of empathy were examined for how they understand their emphatic stance’s development. Using the methodology of phenomenology and a developmental-phenomenological method, themes emerged that suggest a correlation between student responses and the classic developmental work of William G. Perry, Jr. Student narratives indicating five themes and students’ current developmental positioning were analyzed according to the Perry Developmental Scheme. Findings suggest that empathy for many students is most often experienced toward certain groups who are most like themselves, and the findings also suggest that personal experience of having been understood by increases empathy. In addition, the development of self-understanding, along with observation of others’ suffering in difficult experiences, supports students’ growth of positive, empathic care in the presence of human difference.

Keywords: Counselor trainees, development, perspective taking, empathy, hermeneutics

For therapists, empathic presence is a personal and professional goal, and it is recognized in all human relationships. Teaching trainees affords educators the opportunity to see novice graduate students be surprised at how a therapist-client difference they were bothered by in the beginning of a therapeutic relationship eventually becomes deeply understood and helpful to client care. Those who work both as therapists and as educators of therapist trainees not only attempt to model a widened perspective taking, but they also seek out novel ways to help trainees achieve the developmental milestones of becoming more conscious of themselves and others;

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 47

these therapists help trainees become more curious about the different other instead of being judgmental. A main goal of graduate counseling education is to help students achieve greater clarity of their ongoing self-development as well as that of others. This leads to having more compassion in their understandings of the developmental journey as a whole.

Educators attempt to teach trainees to sit openly with engaged care and a not-knowing stance toward clients who can be very different from the trainee. A main goal of supervision is to help students learn to dwell together with their clients in a type of “sympathetic reverberation” (Lewis, Amini, & Lanon, 2000, p. 130; see also Arizmendi, 2011; Hunter, 2012) filled with patience, insight, and care. Gibbons (2011) suggests that this understanding of therapist empathy is similar to a musician’s understanding of music as “a whole-bodied process to be increasingly mastered, through dedicated training and practice” (p. 250). Applying research in their field, Kouprie and Visser (2009) state that “empathetic understanding goes beyond knowledge: when empathizing you do not judge, you relate and understand why certain experiences are meaningful to these people” (p.438).

When therapist educators model an “ethic of care”, students learn to generously consider the different other. Bohart and Greenberg (1997) deepen our understanding of the generous consideration process with the following: First, empathy includes the making of deep and sustained psychological contact with another. . . Second, empathic exploration includes deep sustained empathic exploration or immersing of oneself in the experience of the other. . . Third, empathic exploration includes a resonant grasping of the “edges” or implicit aspects of a client’s experience to help create new meanings. (p. 5) “Each one of us is (emphasis added) what he pursues and cares for. In everyday terms we understand ourselves and our existence by way of the activities we pursue and the things we take care of” (Heidegger, 1975, p. 158). Grasping Heidegger’s profound statement as it relates to the empathic counselor makes it clear that the development of empathy in counselors must be unpacked. If educators, both as therapists and as models for trainees, are to examine the structures of care that inform our practice, and more importantly our ethical core, a primary goal must be to continue helping trainees reflect on what they pursue and care for.

The Natural History of Empathy Historical studies of empathy’s nature (Baldwin, as cited in Selman, 1975) suggest that the young child (before four years of age) demonstrates an “organic” form of empathy.

Accompanying the advent of a notion of self, the child, with a slow-growing awareness of a separation from the different other, notices and occasionally entertains other perspectives different from their own. This increasingly requires a renegotiation of self and the other in a “safe enough” environment. Selman (1975) sees this as “the dialectical process of reflectively understanding relations between the self (ego) and other (alter)” (p. 36). This renegotiation is an

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 48

ongoing, lifelong engagement not without its complexities (see also Truax & Carkhuff, 1967; Clark, 2006).

Although its roots are innate, empathy is a learned behavior of the developing brain (Elliott, Bohart, Watson, & Greenberg, 2011). As Decety (2010) suggests, “empathy belongs to self-conscious emotions, which rely on complicated and distributed brain networks” (p. 206).

Clearly, reflection on action is an important piece of the puzzle. Trainees’ personal therapy helps them wade through the layers of thoughts and feelings that drive behavior; it can open the doors to becoming conscious of the cognitive and emotional “lay of the land” and their own “situatedness” out of which they choose to act. In supervision, therapist educators can help trainees understand that “others” also have layers of thoughts and feelings derived from a personal geography of the mind that may be completely dissimilar to theirs.

Exploring Development of Empathy It is necessary to better understand how skilled therapists develop an expanded ability to enter the experience of the other without judgment and without a sense of threat to the self and how educators might promote this developmental process in trainees. Supiano and VaughnCole’s (2011) study of students’ developing sense of self as empathic professionals found that students’ professional development of care is positively impacted by personal experience of grief and the direction and modeling of emotional regulation by their instructors when caring for the distressed other.

Qualitative findings suggest that grief and the students’ construction of the meaning of their loss can mediate the students’ developing sense of self as a professional helper.

Further, student narratives suggest that professional and personal growth can be enhanced by teacher-facilitator provision of emotional guidance and modeling in the care of suffering persons. (Supiano & Vaughn-Cole, 2011, p. 87) Development and integration of intellectual and ethical selves, with all the accompanying range of personal cognitions and emotions (Gerdes & Segal, 2011), goes through various processes and stages during which there is a building of more expanded schemata for comprehending oneself and others. This results in the fully developed self uniquely taking shape through life events and the evolving interpretations thereof.

Meaning Making Meaning making is an activity done by all humans (Kegan, 1986). The growth of empathy requires that we loosen our grip on our own epistemic structures while we entertain alternate perspectives. This is easier said than done because our identities are intimately connected with the products of our meaning making. Current perspectives are born out of one’s personal biology and natural setting, one’s developmental position (Kegan, 1986), and one’s “situatedness” in multifaceted environments (Gieser, 2008, p. 301). Hermeneutically speaking,

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 49

current “knowing,” or the “horizon”, points to influences (e.g., particular cultural, familial, historical contexts) that help determine the content of current meaning making. Of course, this personal developmental position has a direct effect on perspective. Shifting the lens requires engagement in the developmental process of assimilation and accommodation; this brings change and, hopefully, a broadened perspective. It also requires tolerating an experience of cognitive dissonance and resolution which is a circular process of reinterpretation by a meaning making person (Chang, 2010).

Hermeneutic researchers know this process as the recursive and ongoing engagement in the hermeneutic circle. Each exercise of empathy repeatedly requires entering the hermeneutic circle and becoming ever more comfortable with “not knowing.” With therapists, stories of development and the developments seen in clients reflect the shifts in cognition, affect, and ongoing meaning making that occur on the journey. This development process is always subject to the natural tendency for homeostasis, or remaining attached to one’s current lens until the cognitive and emotional capacity shift becomes available to the developing person. The goal of this research is to further trainee development in this manner.

That which is different usually causes a person to stop, notice, and make quick explanation so that sense can be made of the unfamiliar. This process’ natural goal is to ultimately make oneself and the world as safe as possible. Why one stops at a quick explanation becomes the real question. Explanation only amounts to an act of assimilation, which requires less cognitive effort to keep current positions and understandings. However, in the act of explanation, the most destructive disservice is often done to the object or human being observed.

Sense is made of the “different other” with the information already on hand; the schemata with which one functions and the constraints of current, contextual understandings provide ease for getting through life.

It is only when the discomfort of not knowing is allowed that the possibility of surpassing explanation and achieving a more complex understanding is opened. The key here is learning to stay open to the “different other” even when a person is out of their comfort zone. The path involves more than staying curious in the face of ambiguity even as preconceptions are lost. It requires more than recognizing worn-out ways of making sense of the world. Ultimately, it requires staying vulnerable in the knowledge of who one is and is not and accommodating to that which cannot be fully explained with the current schemata.

This demand is not a small one. Essentially, it means that one must give up the “sedimented” parts of who they are in order to grow into that which they will become. If trainees are encouraged to find alternate explanations as they try to make sense of their worlds, they can then practice this skill. At the same time, they can become accustomed to personal change in a secure environment. This allows a greater capacity for understanding the different other, the self, and the vulnerability of both. When this can be achieved, it may further the development of empathy (Selman, 1975, p. 36).

This metamorphic process requires, in geologists’ terms, time, heat, and pressure. This process is complex and unique to all humans in consideration of many variables. Development

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 50

requires time and the frustration of having to accommodate to new understandings with the accompanying, pressurizing inertia of attempting not to change. The ongoing, potentially transformational intersection of intellect, ethics, personal cognitions, and emotions provide an ever-changing possibility for an enriched learning and teaching environment focused, in part, on further empathy development. Research supports the idea that all learning environments can be enriched to provide this development. For example, researchers (Evans, Forney, & GuidoDiBrito, 1998; Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005) continue to explore the ways in which we develop both intellectually and ethically, particularly in learning environments.

Revisiting the classic research of Perry (1970) because it may apply to developing trainees seems useful here. Perry examined and described the complexities of intellectual and ethical growth in the college years, which is an important piece in the very kind of advancement needed for empathy progression in trainees. Perry’s scheme, while developmental and a stage theory of sorts, does clearly allow for the variations and interruptions that often occur when people experience the pressures of transformation. He labels these variants of temporizing, retreat or escape, and these are characterized by anxiety, passive resistance, rebellion, cynicism, intellectual games, and identity foreclosure (Perry, 1998, p. 198). Learning in a developmentally focused program goes beyond assimilation of facts and includes provocation of personal transformation in students. This research’s focus is to study if empathy development can be furthered by developing a graduate education curriculum that focuses on widened perspective taking and provides opportunities for increased self-awareness. Collected data will be shared with current educators in the program and others through publication.

Method Beginning counseling psychology graduate students were asked to complete a reflection paper on the topic of personal empathy and write how they believe it developed. Fifty students, who participated in two separate first-semester, mandatory Foundations of Counseling courses, completed papers, and each paper was assigned a coding number. Researchers examined themes, compared them to Perry’s developmental scheme and found correlation. Representative quotes from papers demonstrate particular schematic positioning. The lens of Perry’s nineposition, four-category scheme (1968; 1981; 1998) provides a template that helps explain the stances indicated in student trainees’ narratives. Of particular note were students’ reflections on their current availability to the different other. Students were between the ages of 22 and 51 and were comprised of 4 males and 46 females. While this sample may seem unbalanced in terms of gender, most graduate programs in counseling across the United States are comprised of females, so this study population is relevant for this study’s purpose. Students participating in the study were self-selected by virtue of signing up for a foundations course in a counseling, graduate program. Two different researchers using a phenomenological method (Giorgi, 1970; 2009) examined each set of data. The analysis focuses on identifying thematic constructs in the data.

Consistent themes across data are reported as follows.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 51

Results The study results are presented by listing the five themes that emerged from a phenomenological analysis of the collected student experiences. These are integrated at particular intersections with specific descriptions and applications of the four categories and nine positions found in Perry's classic study because they provide context for trainees’ development.

Trainee experiences highlight the stages found in Perry’s study.

Five Thematic Constructs Five themes emerged from the data as substantive themes. Several trainees noted that, for them, it was easy to feel empathy for certain groups, and it was equally easy to withhold empathy for those who were “not like us.” This stance involved the students having a judging attitude and having a tendency to withhold care from those found to be different from the students in “unacceptable” ways. However, if a trainee experienced being understood by someone and allowed a growing ability to relate to that “different other”, their capacity for empathy expanded. Trainees pointed out how strengthening personal self-awareness fostered an improvement in empathy toward different others.

Furthermore, while trainees entertained a growing knowledge about the many different others with whom they may form a therapeutic relationship, and developed an appreciation of the vicissitudes of empathy, trainees realized the level of accommodation that empathy can require.

Trainees reported that participating at an observational level in the difficult experiences and the emotional responses of others fully supported empathy development. The five themes emerged as:  Empathy is restricted to certain groups.  Personal experience of having been understood and the ability to relate to another improves empathy.  Self-understanding helps to improve empathy towards others.  Learning about the vastness of difference and the uncertainty and vicissitudes of empathy.  Observing others’ difficult experiences and emotions supports development of empathy.

Correlation of Thematic Constructs with Perry’s Explanatory Developmental Scheme The five themes correlated with developmental theory put forth by the classic developmental scheme of William G. Perry (1968; 1981; 1999) and demonstrate the four categories and nine positions as explicated by Perry. Perry’s nine theoretical positions are summarized here and categorized under four main categories: Dualism, Multiplicity, Relativism,

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 52

and Commitment in Relativism (Perry, 1968; Perry, 1981, pp. 76-116; Perry, 1998, pp. xxxxxxv).

Perry’s Four Categories and Nine Positions Perry’s first main category: Simple dualism.

Perry’s position 1: Basic duality. A simple, dualistic structure, or black-and-white frame of reference, includes the belief that some behaviors are bad and deserve penalty, while other behaviors are good and deserve positive recognition.

Perry’s second main category: Complex dualism/multiplicity.

Perry’s position 2: Multiplicity pre-legitimate. Multiple views are seen but considered personally alien and are incorrect products of error or confusion on the different others’ parts.

Wrong thinking can only be corrected if the thinker “sees the light” or learns to adhere to what truth the authority says is the right action. Similarly multiple views are seen but considered to be unreal, and these multiple (false) views are presented so that the true view (answer) that has not yet been ascertained will require being discovered. However, the therapist is still coming from a position that believes the client is struggling to find an existing, absolute truth. The point of this not knowing attitude is not to discover possible ways to cope but to wait for the right answer to emerge. The supporting theme that emerged from student reflections is personal experience of having been understood and the ability to relate to another improves empathy. Examination of reflections from trainees occupying this developmental position reveal statements supporting this theme (see Appendix A for presentation of these statements).

Perry’s third main category: Relativism.

Perry’s positions 4a and 4b: Multiplicity correlated, relativism subordinated. These positions represent a true shift in relationship to the idea of authorities holding keys to absolutes.

Both are questioned, are considered “inaccessible”, or are so difficult to understand that they are rendered useless. Empathy toward the way others think, which is different from the therapist’s truth, develops as the therapist lets go of the idea that they know what is most useful and helpful for the client. Multiplicity is recognized. Thus, possibilities for empathy toward the “different other” are expanded. However, it is also possible that relativism is subordinated, which means that some answers are better than others and the answers the authority (and the client, by choice) adhere to are better (Perry, 1998, pp. 105-120).

The trainee is empathically open to the idea that there may be many truths, which are accessible through the client’s personal self and the therapist’s personal self. In this process, some truths might emerge as stronger, more useful, and helpful to the therapy process.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 53

Nevertheless, examination of all frames of reference is done with empathy for the different other.

The supporting theme that emerged from student reflections is self-understanding helps to improve empathy towards others. Again, examination of reflections from trainees occupying this developmental position revealed statements supporting this theme (see Appendix A for presentation of these statements).

Perry’s position 5: Relativism correlate, competing or diffuse. Relativistic thinking provides a frame of reference whereby the student sees that there are some types of knowledge in which objective facts of the truth are there to be understood as absolute. This is opposed to other types of knowing where ideas are not objective but more subjective and, thus, relativistic or qualified (Perry, 1998, pp. 121-148).

Perry’s fourth main category: Commitment in relativism.

Perry’s position 6: Commitment foreseen. Relativistic thinking, or having several frames of reference, is considered acceptable for all secular purposes. Commitment to one particular viewpoint may be understood as a distinct and critical possibility, but a commitment may carry with it a variety of emotions when a relativistic position is trumped by a committed choice.

Perry’s position 7: Initial commitment. Commitments are seen as having originated in the self’s experiences and personal choices. With this recognition of self and personal choice can come a generous respect for others who make choices and commitments with loyalties to opposite frames of reference (Perry, 1998, pp. 150-169). The trainee realizes that within their own self there are many developed ways of knowing, which are constructed through experience, and he or she recognizes a growing acknowledgement that there are spaces of uncertainty in those constructions. “Not knowing” in a “generous way” does not produce anxiety in the trainee.

Instead, it becomes a familiar, expansive container for the many frames of reference they entertain as they carefully, and non-judgmentally see their clients’ points of view. The supporting theme that emerged from student reflections is learning about the vastness of difference and the uncertainty and vicissitudes of empathy. Examination of reflections from trainees occupying this developmental position again revealed statements supporting this theme (see Appendix A for presentation of these statements).

Perry’s position 8: Orientation in implications of commitment. Commitment creates certain tensions between “tentativeness and finality, expansion and narrowing, freedom and constraint, action and reflection” (Perry, 1998, pp. 150-169).

Identification with the commitment’s content is realized. Some people can be committed to an absolute and otherwise operate out of a relativistic frame of reference. In this case, the

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 54

absolute is set apart (dissociated) from the general advance of thinking and/or acceptance of uncertainty in knowing.

Perry’s position 9: Developing commitment. In this position, commitments that are no longer useful are released and replaced by new, more relevant commitments. With the change in frames of reference and/or attachment, there are losses with accompanying emotions as the person moves to new ways of knowing and understanding. There is a greater acceptance of the temporality of frames of reference as well as a sense of confidence in the abundant presence of little truth(s). Assuredness can only be found in acceptance of change’s constancy (Perry, 1998, pp. 150-169).

With generous listening and empathy, the therapist-in-training is able to take in and grasp the frames of reference through which the client experiences pain and negativity. They are able to begin to formulate other, more positive frames of reference, which come from or resonate with the client and are not directly linked to the therapist’s way of understanding. At the same time, they realize that other frames of reference may indeed be useful at other times, and a commitment to one way of seeing may undergo modification as therapy progresses. The supporting theme that emerged from student reflections is observing others’ difficult experiences and emotions supports development of empathy. Once again, examination of reflections from trainees occupying this developmental position revealed statements supporting this theme (see Appendix A for presentation of these statements).

Working at the Development of Empathy through Interaction: A Tool for SelfDevelopment Practicing interpersonal perspective taking (Selman, 1975) will expand one’s empathy toward the other. Trainees can be taught a developmental perspective that may be used to better understand the position occupied by their clients (and possibly themselves) and to strengthen their own understanding of perspective taking’s importance in empathy development. Reflection and discussions about empathy in personal loss and meaning in loss, personal psychotherapy prior to seeing clients, or assignments focusing on case studies of the “different other” that promote cognitive and emotional dissonance will all lead to a process of accommodating new empathy schemata. This new schemata is formed by the challenge of making sense of, or understanding, the different other. All of these experiences will promote the development of perspective taking and empathy. Trainees can be encouraged to help clients develop awareness of multiple frames of reference by asking them to think about diverse ways to interpret something or someone they are observing and by providing alternate views. This requires trainees and clients alike to temporarily step outside their current schemata as they forage around for new ways to understand the reality of their lives and for trainees to entertain the client’s creative reframing of a situation or problem. Before engaging in internships, trainees must know that they can understand the other without becoming the other and that they do not need to lose

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 55

themselves in the other to empathize. Eventually, they may learn to ‘cross over’ and return to themselves through a process of attempted suspension of their limited horizon.

Suggestions for Further Research Future research will examine advanced students’ reflections on empathy and counseling for a shift in category and/or position shortly after they start seeing clients and at the end of the program. At these points, students will have also completed 24 hours of personal psychotherapy.

It is hypothesized by this author that a developmental shift will occur after students begin developmentally working with clients and have experienced personal psychotherapy. Students will address the topic of empathy in a reflection paper at the end of the program with assignments examined again for changes in emerging themes from a developmental standpoint using Perry’s scheme. Future, recommended studies designed with the same methodology and methods, but controlled for equal numbers of male and female participants, could provide excellent information about possible gender differences in counseling students’ empathy development.

Conclusion Development expands the capacity to know the other in a new way and to gain access to a possible, new, intersubjective process of seeing and being seen, of knowing and being known accompanied by a slow, sure change of horizon. Working with trainees and clients from a developmental framework allows for better understanding of the position they occupy in Perry’s Scheme, which provides a lens with which to work toward enhancing developmental positions.

If the correlation is better understood between a student’s intellectual and ethical development and their ability to be empathic to the different other, pedagogical approaches can be designed that encourage growth in perspective taking, facilitate the ability to deal with uncertainty, and increase the student’s capacity to commit unconditionally to an empathic stance with the different other as a way of life.

There is so much of the human condition that is impossible to know directly. Yet, if there is no attempt to cross the barrier of personal frames of reference, one can never truly share with another. Whether in supervision with trainees, in therapy groups with clients, or individually, the ongoing growth of perspective taking is a necessary part furthering development in therapist educators, trainees, and clients. Therapists can create the therapeutic environment by helping trainees and clients be more at home and engaged with the empathy process by addressing with consciousness their own frame of reference, their own developmental position, and their own willingness to engage empathically with the different other.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 56

Author Biographies Helen Shoemaker is a licensed Marriage and Family Therapist. She is an Associate Professor of Counseling Psychology at Holy Names University. Her educational background includes a BA in Human Development, an MS in Clinical Counseling, an MA in Culture and Spirituality and a Ph.D. in Human Science from Saybrook Institute. Her research interests include higher education, counselor training, spirituality, and diversity.

Jessica Lee Shoemaker has a BA in Communicative Disorders from Long Beach State University and is currently a student in an MS degree program, Speech and Language Pathology.

Her current research interests are in understanding the importance of empathy in clinicians in human service fields.

References Arizmendi, T. G. (2011). Linking mechanisms: Emotional contagion, empathy, and imagery.

Psychoanalytic Psychology, 28(3), 405-419.

Bohart, A. C., & Greenberg, L. S. (Eds.). (1997). Empathy reconsidered: New directions in psychotherapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Chang, J. (2010). Hermeneutic inquiry: A research approach for postmodern therapists. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 29(1), 19–32.

Clark, A. (2006). Empathy in counseling and psychotherapy: Perspectives and practices.

New York, NY: Routledge.

Decety, J. (2010). To what extent is the experience of empathy mediated by shared neural circuits? Emotion Review, 2(3), 204–207.

Elliott, R., Bohart, A. C., Watson, J. C., & Greenberg, L. S. (2011). Empathy. Psychotherapy, 48(1), 43-49.

Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., & Guido-DiBrito, F. (1998). Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Gerdes, K. E., Lietz, C. A., & Segal, E. (2011). Measuring empathy in the 21st Century: Development of an empathy index rooted in social cognitive neuroscience and social justice. Social Work Research, 3(2), 83-93.

Gibbons, S. B. (2011). Understanding empathy as a complex construct. Clinical Social Work Journal, 39(3), 243-252.

Gieser, T. (2008). Embodiment, emotion and empathy: A phenomenological approach to apprenticeship learning. Anthropological Theory, 8(3), 299–318.

Giorgi, A. (1970). Psychology as a human science. New York, NY: Harper & Row. Giorgi, A. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 57

Heidegger, M. (1975). The basic problems of phenomenology. (V. Klostermann, Trans.)

Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Hunter, S. (2012). Walking in sacred spaces in the therapeutic bond: Therapists’ experiences of compassion satisfaction coupled with the potential for vicarious traumatization. Family Processes, (51)2, 179-192.

Kegan, R. (1986). The evolving self. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kouprie, M., & Visser, F. (2009). A framework for empathy in design: Stepping into and out of the user’s life. Journal of Engineering Design, 20(5), 437-448.

Lewis, T. L., Amini, F., & Lannon, R. (2000). A general theory of love. New York, NY: Random House.

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research (Vol. 2). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Perry, W. G., Jr. (1981). Cognitive and ethical growth: The making of meaning. In A. W. Chickering and Associates (Eds.), The modern American college, (76-116), San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Perry, W. G., Jr. (1998). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Selman, R. (1975). Level of social perspective-taking and the development of empathy in children: Speculations from a social-cognitive viewpoint. Journal of Moral Education, 5(1), 35–43.

Supiano, K. P., & Vaughn-Cole, B. (2011). The impact of personal loss on the experience of health professions: Graduate students in end-of-life and bereavement care. Death Studies, 35(1), 73–89.

Truax, C. B., & Carkhuff, R. R. (1967). Toward effective counseling and psychotherapy.

Chicago, IL: Aldine.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 58

Appendix A Student Statements Supporting Themes Empathy is Restricted to Certain Groups 1. I’ve recently learned how to incorporate a viewpoint from someone other than my own; but I’ve never been asked nor have I ever had to feel someone else’s emotions, to put myself in the feeling, thinking, and acting of another. Dealing with my own emotions, feelings, and actions in regular day to day life activities is enough for me to handle, excluding the random unexpected punches life throws at me from time to time. Therefore, just the thought of the transposition into someone else’s - not a family member, close friend, or peer - thinking, feeling, and acting is overwhelming. (Student 45, personal communication, Fall, 2012) 2. The types of clients I wouldn’t have empathy for are pedophiles and rapists. It would be hard to put myself in the shoes of someone who engages in such acts towards these individuals. I believe I can work with them to understand the reasons and logical of their actions, but it would be hard to try and have empathy and compassion for them. (Student 40, personal communication, Fall, 2012) 3. In my sophomore year at [university], my friends used to make fun of me because I am the type of person who will cry with a complete stranger…My mother hates it because she says that she raised me to be a lot tougher and all I do is cry with people. I am the type of person my friends call when somebody (mostly a guy) does them wrong—they call me and tell me about the scenario and I am already calling this guy mean and nasty names – a person I have never met, mind you—as if I personally know him. (Student 4, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 4. I have no compassion for those who always seem to be stuck in a rut or are unable to progress. I’ve been through so much in my life that at twenty five there isn’t a lot that phases me or that I couldn’t see myself getting through. Quitting anything has never been an option for me, but I’m definitely an extremely resilient person and I need to understand that not everyone shares that same resilience. I can be impatient and disgusted with people who I feel are too lazy to change their situation, or who are satisfied with menial lives…I do have empathy for those that have the will or are interested in changing their situation, but I need to work on developing empathy for those that don’t think highly enough of themselves to imagine a better life or who are so stuck in how their life is that they simply don’t see a way out. (Student 14, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 5. In my first semester, in class after discussing empathy and sympathy, the instructor asked us to think about what population we might have problems being empathetic towards. I was not the only one, many of my classmates identified pedophiles as individuals that we would have difficulty working with. I thought that being empathetic towards them might be justifying their behavior or minimizing the severity of their actions…Something I have noticed that what helps me to put my personal thoughts and feelings aside is looking at the person as separate from their behavior. (Student 16, personal communication, Fall 2011)

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 59

6. My empathetic growth is geared towards the victims and not the perpetrators, the enforcers and not the offenders…I therefore set out objectives to achieve my set goal in order to serve those whom are truly in need and have been, in my mind, taken for granted by society. The courses have so far reinforced my concept of empathy towards my target population and have also supported my non-empathetic beliefs in offenders, violators, and abusers. (Student 20, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 7. I counseled and provided direct supervision to a group of adolescents and one particular day two female clients ran away from the facility due to feeling frustrated…looking back I realize that my empathy for these clients no longer existed. I think this steamed from constantly dealing with their AWOL behavior, repeating encouragement for them to remain on the premises, and informing them of the potential consequences and all other interventions failing. (Student 19, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 8. As a young person, rationality was almost a defense mechanism for me. My view was that any situation, rightly interpreted, could be navigated with a minimum of emotion. When I encountered someone with a strong emotional experience, I would immediately analyze the situation and look for illogical thinking...perhaps I was simply developing the male gender stereotype of suppressing emotions. In one sense, I associated emotions with failure but I also recall having a deep fear of experiencing loss and grief. (Student 26, personal communication, Fall, 2012) Personal Experience of Having Been Understood and the Ability to Relate to Another Improves Empathy 1. …empathy is vital to a connection that allows me to bring in vulnerable and more private thoughts. When I feel that someone understands where I am coming from, and why, it makes me much more likely to be open with them. When I put fourth information that is more vulnerable and have it met with understanding and validation I am much more likely to continue to share with that person. I am also much more likely to share more, as each step is met with validation and acceptance. (Student 30, personal communication, Fall, 2012) 2. Although I continue to struggle with anxiety to this day, my experience with it has forced me to pay attention to, come to terms with, and accept my emotional experience. In its own way, anxiety has really opened me up to the possibility of empathy—not only for myself, but for all people…I’ve felt broken open and vulnerable by anxiety, but that openness has lead me to discover the healing power of empathy for myself and for others. By developing a better understanding of what I was going through and what other people go through, I was able to connect with myself and others in a way I had never been able to before. (Student 27, personal communication, Fall 2012) 3. There are times when we share our story with someone and a connection begins to bloom.

This person you connect with is somehow able to understand how you feel and what it was like to

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 60

be you through your communication of experiences. (Student 2, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 4. A major benefit of group therapy, like group assignments during school, is validation; being in a group with people struggling with the same problem gives me the feeling of not being alone in my struggles either school related or in my personal life. (Student 6, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 5. This is important to remember when working with people, that no matter how different someone may present from myself, in the end we want similar things; love, acceptance, community, validation, understanding, etc. These very basic desires make it easy to be empathetic to even the most bizarre or difficult clients, because despite presentation, they want the same things that most everyone in the human race wants. (Student 18, personal communication, Fall, 2011) Self-Understanding Helps to Improve Empathy Towards Others 1. When I started the program and was told that I would need to take my own therapy, I was taken aback by it a little. I had never considered taking therapy, even though I knew I had my own personal issues. Even with the apprehension, I decided to follow through with my personal therapy and I honestly feel like it was the best decision I could’ve ever made. It made me realize that although I want to have empathy for others, I needed self-empathy and self-care. Being able to see the impact that therapy had in my life and how much of a better person I could be because I was taking care of me, further inspired me to continue with this program. (Student 1, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 2. In our Foundations of Counseling course we were asked to reflect our feelings weekly on various topics. Through these moments of reflecting I found myself learning more about the process of developing empathy and was able to freely express and navigate through that process in my own reflection of topics. I think reflection, in any course is beneficial to developing empathy. (Student 3, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 3. Once we know what it feels like to love or be loved, and to hurt or be hurt, developing empathy skills comes easy; seeing and recognizing our own feelings helps us interpret the same feelings in other people. (Student 6, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 4. The field of Counseling requires one to be vigilant of one’s own biases, stereotypes, attitudes, and assumptions of self and others such that to allow an opportunity to establish a secure rapport with a client without fear that one’s counseling ability and integrity may be jeopardized for lack of self-awareness. (Student 7, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 5. Personal and professional experiences in the last few years have allowed me to grow in ways that I would’ve never expected. For the first time in my life, I’ve begun to give my emotional experience the attention it desperately needs and deserves. As I’ve become more self-aware and in touch with my own emotional experience, I’ve become more aware and in touch with the emotional experience of others, and vice versa. I’ve also come to develop a greater sense of and

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 61

appreciation for our shared humanity. As a therapist, the challenge for me will be to carry this awareness into a therapeutic setting by being fully present with my clients and their felt experience, no matter how challenging or scary that might sometimes be. Real therapy, effective therapy must begin and end with empathy, an empathy that has to infuse not only our professional life, but our personal life as well. Ultimately, our ability to empathize stems from the connection between our mind and body and between our self and others; as one grows stronger, so does the other. (Student 27, personal communication, Fall, 2012) Learning About the Vastness of Difference and the Uncertainty and Vicissitudes of Empathy 1. Monday night my son and I made it home around 8pm. When we got in the house we began preparing ourselves for the following day (work for me and school for him). We heard music playing loudly from the neighbor up stairs. I paid it little mind as my first thought was it’s the holidays…. I figured I was next, so I did all the things I do before I go to bed then I got down on my knees said my prayers and climbed into bed. At this point I figured the music would put me to sleep. I heard different genres of music. I heard music I like and play AND music I remembered my dad playing (for my mom) when he knew she was upset with him, lol! I was drifting off when a song called Stairway to Heaven came on when all of a sudden I heard these deep sobs. I thought to myself I sure hope she’s okay up there. As the song played the sobs became louder and deeper…The next thing I knew I’d thrown on a sweatshirt and shoes making my way up to her front door. I rang the doorbell. (Student 5, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 2. … I believe that this[experience of loss] broke and formulated by views of compassion, caring, and empathy …Three years ago my mother’s partner was diagnosed with stage three ovarian cancer …my family and I lacked the coping skills to deal with the stress brought about by this diagnosis … At first we were optimistic…. Then we lost her and that is when anything I possessed as far as caring, compassion, sympathy, any positive feeling was no longer existent. I felt like the world had turned against me and I could care less about the world … I know that it was a long journey to return to a sense self, to accept the person I had become and move forward into a more positive direction. There were many instances that began my redevelopment of empathy, the primary one I believe was one of my closest friend’s father was diagnosed with stage four colon cancer and I felt myself immediately overwhelmed with …the emotions felt from my own experience and I truly understood how this young man felt…I wanted to offer my support and love and do anything in my power to ease their pain...I really understood my progression, digression, and again progression with empathy with this single experience that deeply affected my life and changed me. (Student 28, personal communication, date) 3. …I spent [a year] in a poor town in Ecuador doing volunteer work. I went to Duran, Ecuador with a Catholic volunteer program with 10 other recent college graduates, whom I lived with in intentional community. Now you might expect that what helped me be able to

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 62

consciously be empathetic with people that I naturally tend to hold little empathy for would be the poor people I served. However, what actually tested me and pushed me to be more empathetic was my relationship with the people I lived with in community. There were moments when the people I lived with would judge other people quicker than I tend to like or would be hypocritical, which would make it hard for me to empathize with them... However, the purpose of living in an intentional community was that we had agreed to not just write each other off when we didn’t see eye to eye or got on each other’s nerves… I had to really listen to them and work out the disagreement because ... This experience of pushing myself beyond my comfort zone and having to listen to someone else’s point of view who I didn’t agree with helped me learn to empathize with people that I would normally write off or dismiss. (Student 31, personal communication, Fall, 2012) Observing Others’ Difficult Experiences and Emotions Supports Development of Empathy 1. A classmate was giving a class presentation and was very nervous. He was probably having a panic attack. While observing this, I was extremely uncomfortable and squirming in my seat.

More precisely, it felt like I was up there - embarrassed, exposed, like I was going to die. At the same time I felt a great compassion for that student. I wanted to tell him that he was undiminished in my eyes. Everything will be ok. (Student 26, personal communication, Fall, 2012) 2. In 2002, my brother-in-law was murdered and my sister and nieces were devastated. During that time, I wanted nothing but to be there for them because I knew that they needed me. I was there for my sister whenever she felt the need to cry, and I was there for my nieces when my sister was unable to get to tend to them because of her own trauma and grief. I felt their pain and knew that listening and being there physically and emotionally was what I needed to do.

(Student 1, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 3. However, there are many moments in time where I reminded myself that no matter where our differences lie, whether it is how we look or what we have been through, I can be empathetic and that is significant for many reasons. (Student 2, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 4. With reflection we are able to recognize differences, but also think more in depth about what someone may be experiencing and how we as therapists can recognize and value those differences, in order to be supportive of clients in the future. I think that developing empathy can happen with so many different experiences, and even thinking now about how the program is working to shape me to see the world as an empathetic and compassionate counselor. (Student 3, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 5. Through imagination, an observer, listener, or therapist puts himself into the speaker’s world.

This attention to the client’s words, thoughts, and feelings engulfs the observer enabling him to really experience what the speaker is experiencing. Obviously, the therapist never truly experiences what the client experiences, but the closer he comes to the actual experience, the better he understands his client. In order to achieve this level of empathy, the therapist must let

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 63

go of his own frame of reference, which includes values and experiences, to take up the client’s frame of reference. (Student 29, personal communication, Fall, 2012) 6. I could feel her deep sadness. I told her many reassuring things. She talked about her losing her husband around this time of year as well as her son who was shot and killed. She talked about her recent break up with her fiancé and the many losses she suffered as a child. She said she felt alone and that she was literally starting all over again. I told her I knew all about that, but that there is no set time to grieve a person and that all she could do was take one day at a time…I saw a little of my own sadness in this woman…(Student 5, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 7. In my Grief Counseling class the first night we were asked to introduce ourselves and talk a little about our experiences regarding grief. A young lady in our class talked about her son, daughter, and brother who were all murdered in short time frames apart from one another. As she spoke, I suddenly saw tears coming from her eyes. I quietly approached the young lady and sat next to her. I whispered “go ahead and cry it is healthy for the soul.” I did not know her but unconsciously my teachings [learnings] came alive as I embraced her in my arms. (Student 17, personal communication, Fall, 2011) 8. I will avidly make an effort to stay attuned with my client through the sharing of information to gain an understanding of my client’s experience, and express that through thoughtful responses that are indicative of the needs of client, expressed by he or she. I will look for implicit meanings, appreciate the client’s frame of reference, and I will maintain that I do not know everything. Furthermore, I will provide a safe space, in turn encouraging sharing and active exploration by the client. Lastly, therapy is not about me or my attitudes, biases, or beliefs; it’s about the client and what needs they may have. (Student 50, personal communication, Fall 2012)

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 64Â

Â

Examining the Differences in Social Networking Behaviors Between an Older and Younger Age Cohort Lizette Luevano California State University Martin S. Fiebert California State University Christopher R. Warren California State University

Abstract Worldwide use of the social networking site (SNS) has become increasingly popular and is currently capturing significant research attention. In the current study, the author evaluated 134 social networking pages in order to compare the behavior of 81 young adult users (ages 18-28) to that of 53 older adult users (ages 50 & above). Based on a previously developed typology of online behavior, SNS users were compared across five categories representing online behavior: Observer, Scrapbooker, Activist, Entrepreneur, and Social Butterfly. The last 10 social networking posts and activities were systematically coded and utilized to assess a userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s typology. Predictions were aimed at assessing whether older users exhibited significantly less active behavior when compared to young adult users, and older users were predicted to demonstrate more behavior categorized as Activist and Entrepreneur approaches to using social media while younger users were predicted to express more Observer and Social Butterfly oriented activities. Results partially supported the predictions with the older cohort of users actually demonstrating significantly more active behaviors on the SNS than younger users, the younger cohort showing significantly more Social Butterfly and Entrepreneur activities, and the older cohort demonstrating more Activist behavior. Furthermore, results indicated an unexpected similarity in Observer behavior between cohorts. This could have been a result of the difficulty in capturing these behaviors for either age cohort. A discussion of the robustness of the online typology utilized here is offered as well as the implications for age-related or other cohort-related differences in the use of social networking.

Keywords: social networking, personality, Facebook research

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 65

With over 800 million users (Eldon, 2012), Facebook has become the most popular social networking site (SNS) and is continuously capturing research attention. Facebook has created new ways to connect with others by allowing the exchange of photos, posts, and status updates.

With all the informal ways of communication offered by the SNS, many consider it useful in helping to maintain and rebuild new and old friendships while others feel its existence is ruining personal forms of communication (Carpenter, Green, & LaFlam, 2011). While this is no longer the case, Facebook’s original targeted audience was the college population, and its purpose was to allow communication within the students’ school network. For that reason, most of today’s published research has focused on that age group. Although research on the use of SNSs is expanding, there is a dearth of literature on the categorization of behaviors online especially among different age cohorts (Subrahmanyam, Reich, Waechter, & Espinoza, 2008). The current study was designed to investigate age differences based on social networking use through observations of activity online.

Individual Differences in Online Behavior Recently, researchers have turned to personality factors as major predictors of online behavior (Ryan & Xenos, 2011). Much of the research today involves the use of the Big Five Model to test such predictions since it evaluates an individual’s personality based on how they rank on five, bipolar factors: Extroversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Openness, and Neuroticism (McCrae & John, 1992). Ryan & Xenos (2011) conducted a study to examine how personality factors affect an individual’s usage on the site as well as their non-usage. They predicted that those who formed part of the SNS would be more active by posting on walls and having a large number of friends whereas nonusers would show the opposite behavior and be more introverted (Ryan & Xenos, 2011). Their results showed that individuals who formed part of the SNS did, in fact, score higher as extroverts and narcissists than those who refrained from using the website. This showed that certain personality types have greater interest and participate more in online activity.

A similar study done by Carpenter, Green, & LaFlam (2011) also examined the personality differences and the activity those differences led to on Facebook while using the Big Five Model. Those who scored as extroverts were predicted to participate more in direct interactions. Extroverts would use Facebook as a method of planning social events as well as understanding the perspectives of their friends on the website. Conversely, they expected introverts to be less open on Facebook and to maintain online-only friendships. Results showed that scoring high on extroversion could not actually foretell an individual’s online behavior; instead, openness to new experience was a better predictor (Carpenter et al., 2011). Such studies have provided valid inferences about how personality can be observed by studying an individual’s Facebook profile. Considering college students were Facebook’s original audience, however, these studies focused on observing the behavior among that age cohort.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 66

A more recent study acknowledged an older generation of Facebook users and compared their differences and commonalities in the site’s usage for information sharing and privacy control (Christofides, Muise, & Desmarais, 2012). A difference found between both age cohorts was that, although there were no significant differences in the number of friends, teens tend to add more people regardless of knowing them personally or not (Christofides et al., 2012). An explanation for this is that teens spend a large amount of time on the SNS in comparison to the older users. A possible implication of that conclusion may be due to grown adults having more responsibilities than youth. Studies like this conducted by Christofides, Muise, and Desmarais (2012) are among the few providing possible implications of older adult Facebook use. There is little existing evidence, however, that demonstrates a difference in younger and older adult SNS behavior or activity. Using this study the author will contribute to the research on social networking by examining the difference in online behavior between a younger adult and older adult cohort of SNS users.

The Current Study While previous researchers have examined personality in relation to behavior on SNSs, not many have explored the nature of an individual’s online character being unique to online behavior. Past researchers, as previously mentioned, have gathered their data through the use of the Big Five Method as well as self-reporting surveys. Conversely, in this study the author eliminates the bias of using surveys; instead, examining the self-built Facebook profiles of participants. Furthermore, the author utilizes the typology originally developed by Fiebert (2013) and further developed by Vaughn, Warren, and Fiebert (2012). This typology includes hypothesized dimensions of online behavior based on observed behaviors and activities on social networking, which is a validated way to categorize online personalities. A coding sheet was also developed and used to gather the same personal information, recent activity, and wall posts of every participant. Not only does the author suggest that online behaviors can be categorized into one of the five typologies based on the activity itself and how it relates to others, but also predicted older adult users will display less activity overall when compared to younger SNS users. Furthermore, it is hypothesized that the older cohort would demonstrate more Activist and Entrepreneur use whereas younger adult users would express more Observer and Social Butterfly activity.

Method Participants To compare the behavior on SNSs among different age cohorts, a total sample of N=134 (81 young adult, 53 older adult) Facebook profiles were observed in this study. Young adult Facebook users were between the ages of 18-28 and older adult users were grouped as age 50

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 67

and older. Coders randomly selected profiles alphabetically and coded only those with publicly available information. Attempts were made to collect equal samples for both age groups; however, omitted information in the profiles of the older cohort prevented equal sample sizes.

Materials Researchers used a specific coding sheet when observing each Facebook profile. This allowed researchers to obtain all the necessary information without having to further contact the participant. Vaughn et al. (2012) performed a training validation prior to the data collection where all raters were trained on how to accurately code Facebook profiles. Vaughn et al. (2012) coded a set of Facebook profiles to validate their coding system and found a significant interrater reliability among coders in their study (r = .95) and high agreement in categorization of individuals to typologies (kappa = .88). The same coding sheet and method were utilized in this study. The coding sheet was separated into four sections: personal information, friend information, last 10 posts, and last 10 activities. The ‘Personal Information’ section considered the age, sex, marital status, education level, religious beliefs, political beliefs, and picture count.

The ‘Friend Information’ section considered the number of friends each participant had as well as the percentage of male/female and organizations or businesses as friends. The ‘Last 10 Posts’ section consisted of a chart with spaces to fill the appropriate date of the post, who the post was posted by, the number of “Like’s” it had, and the typology (i.e., Observer, Scrapbooker, Activist, Entrepreneur, or Social Butterfly) that particular post fell under. Finally, the ‘Last 10 Activities’ section also consisted of a chart whose columns were separated by the observed activity. An observed activity could be commenting on activity or changing personal information. This allowed the researcher to see how active a participant was on the SNS and what type of activity that participant was engaging in. Coders were familiarized with the coding sheet and given definitions for each of the typologies. Coders were also walked through an example SNS until agreement was reached and all questions regarding coding were answered.

Procedure Researchers began by logging onto their personal SNS site and randomly choosing participants from their list of friends. To respect the participant’s privacy, names were omitted from the coding sheets and not recorded. Several demographics such as age and gender were collected; however, the coding’s main focus was the participants’ last ten posts and most recent activity. In order to separate each behavior and categorize it, the five typologies utilized for this study were developed by Vaughn et al. (2012). The coding descriptors of Observer, Scrapbooker, Activist, Entrepreneur, and Social Butterfly were designated based on the actual behaviors being exhibited. The Observer typology was defined by the user’s behavior of following others’ profiles by commenting on status updates, posts, and photos. The Scrapbooker was defined by behaviors such as posting photos and descriptions of daily activities or events

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 68

they participated in. The Activist typology was described by a participant who demonstrated support on political or environmental issues and/or organized events for associations. The Entrepreneur was indicated by business-related activities, sales, or entertainment. Lastly, the Social Butterfly typology was defined by the user’s behavior of using the SNS for mere communication purposes and participation in social events. When looking at SNS posts by users, the coding involved the categorization of that specific post into one of the typologies.

Results Each typology was compared to see if one age group significantly differed from the other in their SNS use or their activity types on the SNS. A One-Way Analysis of Variance was conducted to determine if a difference between the five typologies was a function of the poster’ age. To test the first hypothesis, the researcher compared the level of activity between younger and older adults by focusing on the amount of “Likes” a user engaged in, which represent an affirmation of someone else or their behavior or activity. Contrary to predictions, older adult users showed significantly higher SNS activity in this regard (M = 20.75, SD = .87) compared to the younger adult users (M = 12.49, SD = 15.34), F(1, 132) = 4.01, p = .047. The Scrapbooking dimension of the typology is also related to activity in many ways and was compared across cohorts. Scrapbooking behavior includes the amount of personal photos or shared events, and younger users (M = 2.35, SD = 2.30) showed no significant differences in the number compared to the older group (M = 2.90, SD = 2.87), F(1, 131) = 1.50, ns, with the trend slightly contradicting predictions and indicating older users were demonstrating slightly more Scrapbooking activity online. Therefore, both dimensions related to activity supported more use among older SNS users.

In the Activist typology, researchers tested their prediction that older SNS users would show more Activist behavior by comparing the number of posts supporting a specific environmental or political issue to that of the younger SNS cohort. Results showed a marginally significant difference between groups where older Facebook users demonstrated more Activist behavior (M =2.40, SD = 2.77) than the younger users (M =1.66, SD =1.92), F(1, 125) =3.15, p = .078. Although not at the traditional significance level, this trend indicated older users of the SNS to utilize it for more politically oriented types of activities. To test the prediction that older Facebook users would engage in more Entrepreneur behavior, the number of business or sales related posts between the younger and older cohorts were compared. Contrary to predictions, researchers found a significant difference in behavior between the younger group and older adult group with the younger cohort demonstrating more Entrepreneur behavior (M =.72, SD =1.30) in comparison to the older cohort (M = .31, SD = .54), F(1, 125) = 4.58, p = .034. Therefore, younger SNS users tended to utilize online posts for business more than older users.

Supporting our hypothesis, the younger SNS users showed significantly higher Social Butterfly activity (M = 5.20, SD = 2.65) in relation to the older cohort (M = 3.77, SD = 3.07), F(1, 133) = 8.15, p = .005. This supported researchers’ prediction that the younger cohort

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 69

would, in fact, demonstrate greater use of their SNS for the awareness of social events and communication purposes. However, results demonstrated that younger SNS users did not differ in the amount of Observer behavior (M = .23, SD = .60) when compared to the older SNS users (M =.32, SD =.98), F(1,131) = .46, ns. Demonstrating similar Observer behavior meant that both the younger and older cohorts engaged in similar amounts of following people’s Facebook profiles as well as commenting on others’ photos, posts, and statuses. However, the Observer behavior category was also the lowest in base rate, with the lowest average in behaviors observed.

Discussion Results supported some hypotheses related to SNS use although older users were significantly more involved online than predicted as compared to the cohort of younger SNS users. The author hypothesized that each age group would display different SNS activity. This would place each cohort into different typologies according to the previously validated set. The hypothesis was supported in the sense that both age groups showed different activity and fit into different categories. However, the behaviors differed in several important ways from predictions. Most notably, the activity of older users was significantly higher than younger users across several behaviors online including overall activity. Specifically, it was predicted that older adult Facebook users would participate in more Activist and Entrepreneur activity than the younger users. Results did not support this prediction, and, in fact, younger users showed more recent activity and posts supporting entrepreneurial or business-related issues than older adult users. This can be explained by life events that many young adults experience. Most young adults are trying to create their future and networking is very important in this regard. For that reason, younger Facebook users may see the purpose of their SNS as a way of connecting with businesses and companies that might relate to their future aspirations. Conversely, the older adult users are likely to have already passed that stage in their lives and may not be as intrigued by business or sales-related posts on SNSs. Although the older cohort of Facebook users may not be as drawn to entrepreneur-like posts, they have showed other uses for the SNS. Another prediction supported was the differences expected in Social Butterfly behaviors where young adult users would be significantly more active in their use of the SNS for communication and social event planning purposes in comparison to the older adult users. This finding indicates that, although older adult users like to share photos, comment, and observe profiles like the younger cohort, they do not find much importance in using the SNS for socializing as the younger users do. This may be due to the older cohort being less interested in meeting new people and only interacting with their offline SNS friends.

The Activist typology showed a trend that older adults engaged in somewhat more environmental and politically related activity than the younger cohort of users. This provides evidence that younger adults have more interest and awareness in environmental issues or political events than hypothesized. Similarly, younger users did not significantly show more Observer behavior as originally expected. Therefore, both groups participated in the same

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 70

amount of following other people’s profiles and commenting on the posts and statuses of others.

The unexpected overlap found in Observer behavior among both younger and older age cohorts may be due to the difficulty in coding this particular typology. The SNS has developed an increasing number of options for users to hide certain personal information or activity, which makes it difficult for researchers to gather as much activity data as the user might actually engage in. For instance, many users might hide their recent wall activity or friends they have recently added. Researchers attempted to code only the profiles of individuals who seemed to have most, if not all, their activity visible. Regardless, some profiles had to be eliminated due to missing data. Unlike the Observer typology, the behaviors that define the Scrapbooker typology were more overt for researchers to record and observe. Base-rates for behaviors categorized as Observer, however, were harder to capture with the current coding scheme.

The most unexpected finding was the older adult cohort engaged in more “liking” of their friends’ posts on the SNS overall in comparison to the younger Facebook users. The older users also demonstrated more Scrapbooking behavior. Contrary to the predictions, there was a significant difference between both age cohorts where younger users exhibiting less active behavior online when compared to the older Facebook users. At least across the two dimensions assessed in the current study, the activity of older SNS seems comparable or greater than younger users’ activity. However, although some statistical differences between the cohorts emerged, the relative mean differences between the cohorts were not very substantial. Similar activity or behavior between cohorts may mean that both younger and older adult users may share a similar purpose using SNSs and display similar online personalities; thus, social networking might be equally useful for each cohort. One interesting aspect of the results was the differences in variability between typologies for the cohorts with larger standard deviation scores for the older adult SNS users across some dimensions. This may indicate that there is a large amount of variability within that particular cohort or that steps may need to be been taken to prevent such variability and obtain more accurate results, such as increasing the sample size.

For future investigations and to eliminate such large variability within older adult Facebook users, the age group can be broken down even further. Instead of utilizing a group of participants’ ages 50 and older, smaller groups can be created to avoid losing true variability due to differences in age and to see any transitional life changes that may also impact online behavior. By diversifying and increasing the sample size, future research can yield more accurate results and perhaps find gender or cultural differences in online behavior. For instance, future studies should consider obtaining consent to further access the profiles of the participants being utilized for data collection. Many older adult SNS users conceal personal information, making it difficult to gather the same data across participants and access an equally large sample size for the older age cohort, which tended to have higher security settings on the SNS. Further getting access to more private, unshared behavior or activity may provide additional ways cohorts may differ in their SNS use. With either cohort, the more information that may be hidden on the SNS may produce less generalizable results, and more public posts may suffer from more bias related to social desirability. Although the current study followed the

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 71Â

Â

suggestions by Amichai-Hamburger and Vinitzky (2010) in looking at objective ratings of behaviors rather than relying on self-report, asking individuals information related to their personality or emotions as they experience the SNS would address additional questions concerning behavior online.

Finally, this study may be used as an example for examining a variety of other differences in online activity among younger and older users. The typology used to investigate the differences of age in the current sample could be extended to test the effects of numerous and varied demographic or cultural influences on the way individuals interact through social media.

Furthermore, individuals with developmental disabilities may benefit from a better understanding of how individuals with different abilities and needs interact online and in what ways they desire to utilize social networking. The activity level of older users indicated a much higher use of the SNS observed here than hypothesized while the type of activity showed equally surprising results. Comparative investigations into cohorts unique for cultural or developmental reasons may provide additional insight into social networkingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role.

Author Biographies Lizette Luevano is a student at California State University, Long Beach. She is currently working on obtaining a Bachelor of Arts degree in Psychology. Lizette has worked with both Dr. Fiebert and Dr. Warren over the last year on their Facebook study and continues to grow interest in behavior through the use of social networking sites. Lizette aspires to continue her education onto the graduate level where she plans to focus on Educational Psychology as well as Behavioral and Developmental Analysis.

Martin S. Fiebert received his Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from the University of Rochester in 1965. He has been a member of the Psychology department faculty since 1965 and currently teaches courses in the areas of Family Therapy, counseling techniques and Clinical Psychology. He has published over 50 articles in professional journals, most recently in the areas of Gestalt Counseling as well as a series of studies examining Facebook behavior Christopher Warren went to the University of South Florida for his undergraduate studies and to graduate school in New Orleans at Tulane University focusing on Industrial/Organizational Psychology for his Ph.D. Joining the California State University, Long Beach faculty in 2006, he has taught numerous courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels and has supervised numerous thesis projects. In addition, he has done program evaluation, teambuilding and development work for academic programs, research consortia, and local organizations References Amichai-Hamburger, Y. & Vinitzky, G. (2010). Social network use and personality. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1289-1295. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.018

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 72

Carpenter, J. M., Green, M. C., & LaFlam, J. (2011). People or profiles: Individual differences in online social networking use. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 538-541. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.11.006 Christofides, E., Muise, A., & Desmarais, S. (2012). Hey Mom, what’s on your Facebook?

Comparing Facebook disclosure and privacy in adolescents and adults. Social Psychological and Personality Science January, 3, 48-54. doi: 10.1177/1948550611408619 Eldon, E. (2012, Feb 1). Facebook’s S-1 reveals: 845 million users every month, more than half daily, half mobile. Retrieved from http://techcrunch.com/2012/02/01/facebooks-s-1-845million-users-every-month-more-than-half-daily-and-nearly-half-mobile/ Fiebert, M .S. (2013). The origins and development of a typology of Facebook users.

International Review of Social Sciences and Humanities, 5( 2).

Hargittai, E. (2007). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,13, 276-297. doi: 10.1111/j.10836101.2007.00396.x McCrae, R. R. & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the Five Factor Model and its applications (special edition). Journal of Personality, 60,175-215.

Ryan, T. & Xenos, S. (2011). Who uses Facebook? An investigation into the relationship between the Big Five, shyness, narcissism, loneliness, and Facebook usage. Computers In Human Behavior, 27, 1658-1664. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2011.02.004 Subrahmanyam, K., Reich, S. M., Waechter, N., & Espinoza, G. (2008). Online and offline social networks: Use of social networking sites by emerging adults. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29, 420-433. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.003 Vaughn, E. L., Warren, C. R., & Fiebert, M. (2012). Find me on Facebook: A new typology for online behavior. Paper presented to the annual meeting of the Western Psychological Association. San Francisco, CA.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 73

A Response to Student Theory Illiteracy in the Social and Behavioral Sciences: The S.A.L.T. Model Carolyn Gentle-Genitty Indiana University Haiping Chen Indiana University

Abstract Numerous articles identify the struggle with theory that students experience inside and outside the classroom. In the social and behavioral sciences, the impact of students struggling to transfer their knowledge of theory from classroom to practice continues to grow. The problem is that current teaching models undermine students’ understandings of theory and its application.

Because there is uncertainty and unclearness in theory teachings and writings, a knowledge gap inevitably exists about concepts, tools, and models needed for the transfer of theory to practice.

This fosters students’ theory illiteracy within field practice, which refers to students’ incapability to apply theoretical knowledge learned in the classroom to solve clients’ problems in practice.

With an emphasis on competency based education, there is an urgent need for developing effective models to respond to students’ theory illiteracy in practice. The S.A.L.T. model, developed by the primary author, is an attempt to respond to this need. The model identifies and examines the Strengths, Areas of focus, Limitations, and other Theories to redress for the shortcomings of any given theory. In this paper the authors present the S.A.L.T. model and its benefits, and reports on preliminary findings from an A-B-A experimental study involving 44 students. Using the findings, the authors suggest students overwhelmingly believed that social workers, when evaluating a theory, should consider a theory’s strengths, areas of focus, limitations, and other theories to fix the theory’s limitations in order to determine best use and effectiveness with client groups. However, many students reported having a model but could not name it, suggesting lack of a common language for theory learning, application, and discussions.

Key words: theoretical knowledge, teaching theory, theory evaluation, theory application, student theory illiteracy

The social and behavioral sciences encompass a wide range of disciplines and professions such as sociology, economics, anthropology, political science, psychology, social work, and

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 74

public health. The writings herein are informed by the social work profession. In the researchers’ opinion, the primary goals of social and behavioral sciences are to help students (1) understand the psychological, behavioral, political, economic, societal, and cultural influences on human well-being and social development; (2) develop multilevel solutions to address pressing social issues facing the general population, and (3) enhance human well-being, promote social justice, and create a harmonious society by transferring knowledge to practice. The result is a diverse field of science geared towards understanding, development, and enhancement of human beings, their well-being and behaviors.

In order to achieve these goals and improve students’ learning experience it is very critical for educators to develop or adopt teaching models that help students transfer their knowledge to practice. In spite of great efforts made by educators, students often still feel the disconnection between classroom and practice (Munro, 2002; Vayda & Bogo, 1991; Wrenn & Wrenn, 2009; Lam, 2004). In particular, students have often reported their difficulty in applying theoretical knowledge to practice because they cannot achieve real mastery of a variety of theories in a limited learning time (Walsh, 2010; Boisen & Syers, 2004). This leads to what we call theory illiteracy in practice. Theory illiteracy in practice is a term developed by the authors to describe students’ incapability to apply theoretical knowledge learned in the classroom to solve clients’ problems in practice. There is no doubt that educators have to respond to students’ theory illiteracy in practice, but educators themselves are faced with a set of challenges in teaching theory.

The first challenge facing educators is that what they teach is known to be a very abstract and complicated knowledge; thus, it cannot be easily learned and fully understood by students in a limited time (Gentle-Genitty, 2013; Robbins, Chatterjee, & Canda, 2006). Secondly, there is a lack of resources available to help educators teach theory. Writings about teaching theory are still very rare and inconsistent (Gentle-Genitty, et al., 2007; Raffoul & McNeece, 1996).

Thirdly, there is no uniformity in the teachings, writings, and practices of theory by practitioners in the social and behavioral sciences (Kolevzon & Maykranze, 1982; LeCroy, 1990; Osmond & O’Connor, 2004, 2006; Schilling, 1990). Adding to these challenges are two factors: (1) the characteristics of scientific theoretical knowledge and (2) lack of a common language to train students to assess and apply such knowledge. Reynolds (1971) writes that scientific knowledge is a language adopted for common use to explain the relationship of events to each other. Not surprisingly, scientific theoretical knowledge is complex, abstract, logical, universal, interpretable, and predictable. It is not easy for educators to assimilate this kind of knowledge using a simple language let alone transferring it to practice. More importantly, there is still lack of a common language to help educators effectively assimilate and transfer scientific theoretical knowledge and help students learn to assess and apply such knowledge. In social work, scholars and educators have always advocated a common language for professional training and education. For example, Fraser (1994) and Blythe (1992) suggest that universities should offer methods and models to train bachelor, master, and doctoral students to use and apply theoretical knowledge for practice. Such methods and models can be served as a common language for

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 75

teaching and learning. The main reason for students’ theory illiteracy in practice is because the current teaching models undermine students’ understandings of the tenets of theory and its application. With an emphasis on competency based education, there is an urgent need for developing effective models to respond to students’ theory illiteracy in practice. The S.A.L.T. model, developed by the primary author, is an attempt to respond to this need. The model identifies and examines a theory’s Strengths, Areas of focus, Limitations, and other Theories to redress for the shortcomings of any given theory. In this paper the authors present the S.A.L.T. model its benefits, and report on preliminary findings from an A-B-A experimental study involving 44 students.

Review of Literature Significance of Work Admittedly, in social and behavioral science education programs there are always compulsory theory courses, which are considered to be foundation courses. However, because of the controversy about theory’s role in practice, theory teaching and learning methods vary considerably. Holding the belief in theory-driven practice, educators are more likely to advocate and develop theory teaching methods and models (Fraser, 1994; Blythe, 1992). The benefits of applying theory to practice with a model are straightforward; it creates a common language. The modeloffers the use of scientific theoretical knowledge to inform an organized plan of work, and it helps to reduce the aimless wandering that can happen in practice (Gentle-Genitty, 2013).

Particularly in social work, theory can provide a starting point for social workers, present a framework in a chaotic situation, increase accountability in their work, and offer a perspective to conceptualize and respond to clients’ problems with appropriate interventions (Turner, 1996; Gilson & DePoy, 2002; Kendall, Adler, Adler, Cargan, & Ballantine, 2008; Royse, 2011).

Theories provide mental boxes of sorts and conceptual labels to assist in organizing the chaotic world in which one lives and works. Theories, however, are social constructions onto themselves (Berger & Luckmann, 1966), and they bring with them their own cultures, classes, stereotypes, and application biases (Robbins et al., 2006). Thus, the diversity in theory itself increases the complexity of how to teach theory, learn theory, apply theory, and, especially, how to integrate theory with the real world. Irrespective of these nuances, there is agreement that “integration of theory and practice is of great importance” (Lam, 2004, p. 317). The challenge is how to integrate theory with practice given that there are no common views, languages, definitions, and functions of theory in the social and behavioral sciences. Competent practice requires integration informed by theoretical knowledge especially for reflective practice, knowledge creation, and intervention effectiveness (Lam, 2004; Puolter, 2005; Sung-Chan & Yuen-Tsang, 2008). Yet in our current practices, practitioners have made many practice decisions that were rarely, if ever, informed by theoretical knowledge (Rosen, Proctor, MorrowHowell, & Staudt, 1995). This leaves one to believe, as social work scholar Thyer (1994) points

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 76

out, that there is no clear rationale for theory in the social and behavioral sciences. Rosen et al.

(1995) found that there were rarely any clear, theoretical reasons used by practitioners in their practice decisions. This is not the only opinion in the literature; however, Boisen and Syers (2004) assert that effective social work practice is grounded in intentional use of scientific theoretical knowledge.

Problem Statement There are numerous models currently in use to help students integrate theory and practice.

These models have been developed by scholars and educators in the social and behavioral sciences. For example, Lam (2004) introduces a Problem-Based Learning model, which aims to integrate theory and practice by paper cases, skill workshops, and field projects. In this model, students are taught practice theories, assigned cases, and allowed to engage in problem solving (Lam, 2004). Boisen and Syers (2004) develop an Integrative Case Analysis Model to offer students a structured format, which assists them in identifying problems, formulating hypotheses, developing interventions, and evaluating outcomes. Using this model, students are able to learn how human behavior in the social environment (HBSE) theories and practice theories influence their understanding of problems, work with clients, and intervention effectiveness (Boisen & Syers, 2004). Wrenn and Wrenn (2009) provide an integrative learning model which facilitates students’ ability to connect theory and practice through four processes: application, observation, reflection, and sharing. Students are required to play dual roles as a student and as an educator, which helps them actively participate in the learning process and critically integrate theory and practice by exploring and sharing their experiences (Wrenn & Wrenn, 2009). There is little doubt that the models mentioned above are beneficial attempts to help students transfer theory to practice. However, these models have been ineffective on two fronts. First, they do not provide a framework for educators to teach theory. Second, they do not provide a simple, sequential framework for students to remember and apply when they are in practice. This is largely due to educators’ cumbersome application of some models and tying a model’s usage only to assignments rather than to general knowledge for application in practice.

As discussed above, the disconnection between the classroom and the field is the major concern for students/practitioners as they integrate theoretical knowledge with their everyday practice (Munro, 2002; Vayda & Bogo, 1991). Munro (2002) adds that because of this disconnection, students/practitioners are more likely to… see theories as irrelevant to their practice and as merely some kind of game played by academics… as the teaching of formal theories in college is often so cursory that unless the practice supervisor uses a clear theoretical framework, the student is unable to apply any one theory in an explicit and systematic manner in their direct work with clients… Their academic tutors and practice supervisors often know about and collude with this cynical use of theory. This is pernicious because it promotes cultures that encourage students to see theories as irrelevant to their practice. (p.462)

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 77

The second problem is there is a language deficiency in theory teaching and application.

This is important given the fact that there is a known relationship between language and transmission (Pillari, 1988). For instance, for common language and intelligent behavior to be developed, Flavell (1963) writes that Piaget’s four cognitive learning periods - 1) systematic use of natural reflexes, 2) primary and 3) secondary circular reaction, and 4) intelligent behavior are essential. Because there is  a lack of a systematic method used in the classroom to encourage natural reflexes for theory application, and  consistent practice to foster circular (continuous and consistent) reactions, many students fail to reach the latter period of intelligence.  Regrettably, many of these students graduate and become practitioners and continue to be ill-informed on theory and in practice (Mackey, Burek, & Charkoudians, 1987; Osmond & O’Connor, 2006; Rosen, 1994).

The third problem is often presented when someone first examines the literature on this topic; there is not a clear or consistent definition of theory. For instance, Barker (1999) considers theory as a set of correlated concepts, hypotheses, and constructs grounded in observations and facts, which aim to explain a particular phenomenon. However, Tripodi, Fellin, and Meyer (1969) define theory as an interlocking set of logically related hypotheses, which “seek to explain the inter-relations among empirical generalizations” (p. 13). Lipsey (1993) goes on to add that theory is a framework of interrelated concepts, which provides meanings and explanations to particular events and helps to solve pertinent problems. The problem of theory application to practice is compounded when the line blurs in what educators teach. These two types of theories interlock and overlap because many definitions of theory in social work often include some functions of social work. HBSE theories are general theories and can be utilized to explain and predict a variety of human behaviors while offering a comprehensive understanding of clients and their environments (Thyer, 2001). Practice theories are focused primarily on how conceptual theories inform empirical practices while linking the clients’ problems and contexts to scientific knowledge for intervention (Simon, 1994).

The fourth problem is a number of problems authors have identified about the challenges in students’ knowledge transference. Six authors in particular share their perception of the problem. First, Osmond and O’Connor (2006), from their qualitative study of practitioners, propose that the problem of theory transference stems from the fact that “despite providing practitioners considerable opportunities to express what they know, they do not convincingly call upon empirical research and/or theory to inform their practice” (p. 6). A third author, Pillari (1988), suggests that the problem stems from how theory has been taught. For decades, there were only two approaches to teaching human behavior theories and its scientific base. The first was a topical approach and the second was a chronological approach. In the topical approach, students are taught about the lifespan stages by examining only one aspect of development, such as moral development from birth to old age. The chronological approach is the examination of

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 78

various aspects of development at multiple stages throughout the lifespan. However, this chronological approach does not offer tools for application, much less systematic methods for application and assessment.

A fourth author (Reynolds, 1971) offers a summary of five additional problem areas in using scientific knowledge. First, there are a large number of complexities of covert and interrelated processes when learning about and applying theory. The complexities are so numerous that they foster a second problem of people not being able to measure abstract concepts. The complexities foster a third problem that encourages the general public to misinterpret the phenomena. Resisting interpretation is the fourth problem of not being able to acquire ultimate objectivity in understanding a social phenomenon. The result is the fifth problem of practitioners not trusting its use and seeking out alternatives.

The fifth and sixth authors, Raffoul and McNeece (1996), warn that the latter problem is there is a lack of “detailed practice guidelines based on the best available scientific evidence and expert opinion” (p. 286). In fact, if there are more clear guidelines and consensus-based standards for theory application, more practitioners and students alike will be encouraged to utilize research.

The use of models to form a common language is old; in fact, they permeate the human behavior literature with theorists like Freud, Skinner, Brofenbrenner, Minuchin, Erikson, Kohlberg, and Piaget. As the social and behavioral sciences attempt to thrive in a scienceoriented arena and adapt an appetite for assessment, there has to be a purpose for means-end models of teaching (Eisner, 1990; Goldstein, 1990). Means-end models are often linear and sequential learning methods to ensure students master knowledge and assess application (Wells, 1989). They help to foster the underlying assumption that there is a way to validate knowledge, validate the transmission of knowledge (Eisner, 1990), and effectively help in increasing better student outcomes.

A Response—The S.A.L.T. Model In order to fill the gap and respond to growing student concerns. It identifies four steps or aspects that educators will focus on and that students will engage in as they are involved in the theory teaching and learning process. To be specific, every time students are prompted in the classroom to learn about theory, they are required to go through the four phases: examining the strengths of theory, identifying its area of focus, finding its limitations, and redressing for shortcomings. This is the same approach for educators to take when teaching theory (see suggested structure in Appendix A.) They can first present a simple list of three to five common theories from their profession and then guide students through the four phrases (see a sample attached list of theories in Appendix B and sample use of the S.A.L.T. with one theory in Appendix C.) Notably, educators should be familiar with any given theory chosen by the student and then teach students how to thoroughly explore its strengths and limitations, help them think through possible scenarios of the theory’s areas of focus, and inspire them to use creative and

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 79

critical thinking to find redress for that theory’s shortcomings. It is critical for educators to account for all these four phases in their course design and teaching process. In order to achieve the effective integration of theory and practice, case scenarios should also be provided.

Sometimes, it helps when students generate the case scenarios from their own experiences supported by one chosen by the educator from their practice or textbook. According to the S.A.L.T. model, educators and students can work together on these case scenarios and explore the following questions: (1) how the strengths of a certain theory help to address a certain case, (2) which areas should be focused on when the theory is applied to this case, (3) how its limitations can be found in the analysis of this case, and (4) how the theory can be redressed to adapt to new situations described in this case.

Besides helping students learn about and apply theory, educators should also be responsible for teaching them how to reflect on their theory application and critically evaluate theory. The S.A.L.T. model can still be used by educators and students to evaluate theory in a systematic, critical manner. Third, outline the major limitations of the theory under investigation. Fourth, conduct additional research to identify other theories that can be used to redress for the shortcomings of the theory under investigation. Most times, one theory alone cannot help students completely understand and effectively respond to a given problem. Finally, evaluate the student’s work. Students will be asked to examine all information gleaned from these steps and consider possible treatment options based on a thorough analysis. At this point, students have systematically evaluated multiple theories relevant to the problem. Thus, they will have a solid theoretical groundwork to conceptualize the problem, and they will develop effective interventions to solve the problem. At the end of this process, students should have the S.A.L.T. model in their minds to learn, apply, and, evaluate theory even in practice.

Strengths. The idea of evaluating the strengths of a theory to determine its effectiveness with target populations has been around for a long time (Turner, 1996). When examining the strengths of a theory in the S.A.L.T. model, students are asked:  to evaluate the general effectiveness of the theory  to evaluate its strengths in working with clients  to evaluate its strengths in application to the work of practitioners When evaluating strengths, Witkins and Gottschalk (1988) recommend that it is also effective to ascertain if the theory views clients as active agents, considers the self-determination of clients, accounts for clients’ life experiences, promotes social justice, and can be applied to practice.

These aspects are essential to the effectiveness of any theory, but, even more so, it helps in doing no harm and truly beginning where the client is from planning to intervention. In addition to assessing how theories view the client, each theory must be assessed for its strength in working with certain populations over others. Students are also encouraged to assess the group that a theory is best suited for, such as men, women, children, oppressed or minority groups,

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 80

low-income or high-income persons. In doing so, both the student and the practitioner can better define the theory’s focus and create a theory plan.

Areas of focus. As the strengths of theory are determined, devising areas of focus guides the student to key aspects of a theory, and this helps to guide practice. Often, there are so many aspects of a theory in a theory’s definition that trying to memorize the theory becomes burdensome. The more burdensome and value laden the theory is, the harder for it to make its way into practice. This is because practitioners simply do not remember the theory, or they do not want to consult a text with every case to determine if they should apply one theory over another. Thus, the idea of defining the areas of focus is to help practitioners develop single statement definitions for theories. This is to help determine a theory’s use. The one-statement looks at the theory’s principles while examining what areas the theory determines need focus.

The focus can be on defining the problem, outlining the situation, assessing the problem, distributing power, and planning work. It is through this step that students/practitioners begin to build their own knowledge base of theory and move it from the abstract to the active. Oddly enough, the sooner the student/practitioner engages in this process, the easier it is to identify where the theory has limitations and where it does not effectively fit in responding to clients’ needs.

Limitations. Often the theory under investigation (TUI) has undergone revisions in its past and present forms through theory progression. So as students/practitioners assess the TUI they are invited to be keenly aware that theories grow and historical data may not always be as accurate. Nonetheless, when a student/practitioner begins to examine a theory limitation, they first consider the theory strengths—general limitations, limitations for clients, and limitations for social work practice. The authors also consider the same aspects, as outlined by Witkins & Gottschalk (1988). Witkins and Gottschalk ask practitioners to consider the limitations of the theory when used to understand clients and how the client is viewed as active agents or selfdeterminants. In addition to these areas, one must determine, based on research and practice wisdom through consultation, what populations will not apply to this theory. This last step makes the process less harmful to client groups. The more there is a clear list of specific categories where the theory falls short, such as not taking action but offering only an understanding of behavior, the better the next section can assist in redressing shortcomings by doing a one-to-one match with limitations.

Theories to redress shortcomings. The last step, step 4, is the place where students engage in critical thinking and research. In it the student/practitioner is asked to evaluate what other theories can be brought into the theory case plan. This research, intensive stage, may be difficult at first, but is simplified overtime. First step is to list a one-to-one match of the limitations they have outlined with theories they think may address the limitation. Second,

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 81

research theories at least 2-3 of the theories they have jotted down to fill the gaps identified by the limitations. In researching ask the following question of each theory: 1. What is the area of focus of this new theory?

2. Why does it fit with the TUI? 3. What specific limitations does this new theory address, and can I do a one-to-one match?

4. What else do I need to know that can guide my creation of an effective theory case plan?

Methodology Sample Two pools of data were used to understand students’ theory illiteracy in practice and ascertain effectiveness of the S.A.L.T. model. The data were gathered in a social work program at a Midwestern university. In the first pool of data, the S.A.L.T. model was used in one course alongside six other course sections not using the S.A.L.T. model. The second pool of data was an online study. Overall, the sample size included 20 master of social work students enrolled in the course using the S.A.L.T. model and 44 students who completed a pretest and a posttest.

Data Collection A multi-method design was used with course evaluation analysis, text analysis of student comments, and the quantitative data from the online survey. SPSS and Excel were used as the analysis software. The course evaluation on the student ratings of the class and select comments are shared. The second dataset for this study was a pretest/posttest online survey with a control group and an experimental group of graduate level, social work students enrolled in an advanced social work theory course. Using an online randomization tool, students from three courses were automatically chosen to be in the control group. Only the experimental group received an online module on theory application. The control group received regular course content presented in their course’s context. Students completed the 15-item survey on social work theory and application to practice, and they were asked to apply theory to solve a case and reflect on their theoretical application. A total 67 students were invited to complete both the pre and posttest survey. Of this number 44 students completed the pretest and only 27 completed the posttest.

These students completed the survey on social work theory and application to practice. The key questions they answered were …

(1) what is theory?

(2) what are the common types of social work theory?

(3) how do social workers apply theory to practice?

(4) when evaluating theory social workers should …? and

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 82

(5) can lack of theoretical application and evaluation cause harm in practice?

Hypothesis/Study Aims The study aimed to learn about students’ knowledge and skills in applying and evaluating theory, and assess if a model for theory application was present. Students’ perspectives about the integration of theory to practice were important because advance social work students were preparing to enter practice. In this study, the researchers went through the formal research process and obtained Indiana University Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval. Students were informed that the information received would contribute to the body of knowledge on theory education, theory application, and theory evaluation. In addition to ascertaining their theory knowledge, the researchers wanted to know if students, when offered the choice of a systematic model, would choose that option as a simplistic way for evaluating theory. In the online survey, this item was number four (4).

Data Analysis and Results Once the data were received and prepared for analyses were derived from the survey software and Survey Monkey. Pretest and posttest results were separated out and combined by the control group and the experimental group. Sixty-seven students were targeted but only 44 completed the pretest and 27 completed the posttest. Those who completed the posttest were mainly from the experimental groups. Five points of information were anticipated for this study as noted above and stated here: (1) aim to learn about students’ knowledge and skills in applying and evaluating theory, (2) assess if students had a framework or model for theory application, (3) assess if students were exposed to a systematic model (intervention) would they apply it, (4) assess of students would choose the S.A.L.T. model when given the option in choosing how to evaluate theory, and (5) assess if students’ perspectives about the integration of theory to practice.

It was hoped that these points would shed light on the hypothesis that there is not an effective or consistent transfer of theory to practice because there is not a model taught to do so, and students do not know how to apply theory in the field even after being taught. A supplemental hypothesis was that students, if presented with an option for evaluating theory, would choose the S.A.L.T. model. This would demonstrate that students understand what should be included in an evaluation but lack a model. The results for each of the five analyses are presented along with the results of the hypotheses.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 83

Course Evaluation Nine objectives were evaluated in one S.A.L.T. and six non-S.A.L.T. courses. When compared, the effectiveness of the S.A.L.T. model was evident from student feedback.

Qualitatively, students shared comments that facilitated their achievement of the course objectives (see Table 1).

Quantitatively, the results showed that when compared to other courses in the same program, students rated the course with the S.A.L.T. model as being more effective in meeting course objectives. In fact, on a scale of 1-5 the S.A.L.T. course was rated 4.81 in comparison to the campus courses being rated a 4.22 (see Table 2). When comparing course content feedback on items the S.A.L.T. course generally outperformed the campus courses (see Table 3). Not surprisingly, the highest score on average for was a 4.58 and the S.A.L.T. was a 5.00 on critical thinking.

From this comparative evaluation, the S.A.L.T. model demonstrates the ability to offer sound learning outcomes and help students build critical thinking skills, apply theory to practice, evaluate credibility of information, and actively seek out and discover relevant knowledge and theories in practice.

Hypotheses Both hypotheses were proved to be somewhat correct despite some outlying observations.

It was found that, on average, there was not an effective or consistent transfer of theory to practice because students felt they did not have a model, or the students felt they were not taught a model of how to apply theory in the field and questioned their learning. However, item seven of the survey asked “Having read the case above do you think you have a model or method to respond using theory?” About 80% of the students in the pretest chose ‘Yes,’ and about 77% in the posttest said ‘Yes.’ This shows that about 20% of the respondents from the pretest and 23% from the posttest felt they did not have a model or were unsure in their answers. Some students who chose the option of ‘yes but’, or ‘no but’ readily admitted they used a theory as a model or simply needed more experience with this type of theory application.

The supplemental hypothesis was proven to be correct that if students were presented with an option for evaluating theory, they would choose the S.A.L.T. model. This demonstrated that they understood what should be included in an evaluation but lacked a systematically taught, formalized model. Item four of the survey accounted for this measure. Overwhelmingly, for those that responded in both the pretest and the posttest, 100% of students chose the option that described the steps of the S.A.L.T. model.

Students thought that, when evaluating theory, one should not only conduct research to determine theory effectiveness, only meet with focus groups to determine how best theories could be used, determine how the theory works with their clients and publish on theory effectiveness, but that they should “consider the theory strengths, area of focus, limitations, and

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 84

other theories to fix the limitations to determine best use and effectiveness for client groups” (from survey). Sadly however, immediately after being asked if lack of theory application and evaluation can cause harm in practice, over 75% said ‘yes’ and 25%, when combined, said ‘no, sometimes, and unsure responses’ in the pretest, and over 81% said yes while almost 18% were unsure or said sometimes in the posttest.

Aim to learn about students’ knowledge and skills in applying and evaluating theory. The results show that students’ knowledge and skills in applying and evaluating theory were inconsistent. Of the 13 items used for this portion of the analysis, there were only improvements in five questions after completing the intervention. Despite having right answers in the pretest, students changed their answers on the posttest. This suggests that they largely guessed on the pretest. There was, for instance, one student who got all answers correct on the pretest and completely failed the posttest. In general, the results show that, on average, students scored higher on the pretest than they did the posttest (see Table 4). The only items all the students scored consistently positive on the pretest and the posttest were item four (4) and the choosing of the S.A.L.T. model.

Ascertain if students had a framework or model for theory application. The results demonstrated that students felt they had a framework or model for theory application. This is evidenced by their choice of ‘yes’ when asked if they have a model. In the pretest, over 75% (n = 33) said ‘yes,’ and in the posttest, over 81% said ‘yes.’ Students were also given a comment box to share their rationale for ‘yes’, ‘yes/but’, and ‘no/but’ (see Table 5).

Evident from the comments, it seemed as if students did not understand what a model was and how to apply one to a case. Because they used some form of theory to guide the review, they thought that they were using a model. This may be an area for more exploration in a larger study.

If exposed to a systematic model (intervention), will they apply it? There are always the questions about whose responsibility it is to teach theory integration and what strategies work best. Boisen and Syers (2004) claim that “although [it is] commonly accepted that theory plays a central role in competent practice, social and behavioral science programs have struggled to identify the means to assist students in linking theory taught in the classroom to practice in the field” (p. 205). The results from the survey showed that even though students in the experimental group were allowed a preview of the S.A.L.T. model, they did not apply it or state its application in the posttest. In fact, on item number seven (7), which asked if they had a model, there was a 3% drop in average score when compared to the pretest. Thus, it suggested that exposure alone did not translate into application. On average, only four students scored higher on the pretest when compared to their scores on the posttest. This suggests that many who took the intervention showed little to no improvement.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 85

Would students choose the S.A.L.T. Model when given the option in choosing how to evaluate theory? In both the pretest and posttest, it was found that 100% of students chose the S.A.L.T. model as the best description of what to do when evaluating theory.

Students’ Perspectives about the Integration of Theory and Practice The pretests asked students to give feedback on theory application and evaluation. After a text analysis of the 11 comments, five themes emerged: Belief, Social Work, Clients, Knowledge, and Practice. In summary, students felt that theory classes should have more practice and application in an appropriate manner. They feel they are still learning how to apply theory and dislike the changing dynamic process of theory application. Some thought HBSE theory is helpful and very important for understanding clients and practicing in an appropriate manner. They thought that the process of a pretest and posttest is a simple way to see how much knowledge the student brings and leaves with them, but they felt the entry theory course was not effective.

Discussion There are strong benefits for applying theory to practice with a model. It creates a common language, offers the use of scientific knowledge to create an organized plan of work, and helps reduce the aimless wandering that can happen in practice.

The findings suggest that many of these concerns still linger for students. They report not understanding the structure they need on learning and applying theory, still struggling in choosing definitions for theory, having no common language to discuss or apply theory in class and practice, and lacking examples to make the information relevant. They called for a model or structure to apply theory. When given an option of choosing how to evaluate theory, they consistently chose the S.A.L.T. model. More so, they thought that having a systematic way to practice is effective in teaching students how to practice in an appropriate manner. In particular, students from the survey, reported that “Having better lectures that incorporate how to use the theories in practice and role playing those situations in class” would be effective. Another students also reiterated that “having a more structured [advance theory course] that helps us integrate each theory into a practice situation” would also help.

Many of these concerns can be effectively responded to by using the S.A.L.T. model. From the course evaluation, they suggest that the model works well to meet student needs and offered glimpses of effectiveness. The model offers 13 essential benefits to any scientific theory course and additional benefits to students.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 86

Effectiveness of the S.A.L.T. Model in General           

 

Proposes a “How to” user-friendly model for the classroom and field/practice.

Offers a guide to theory learning from basic knowledge building to comprehension and application.

It structures theory teaching and learning in a 4 step sequence for easy application.

It helps to pare down the number of theories taught through lecture and creates time for integrative dialogue.

It offers a routine lens and language to learn about, examine, and integrate theory.

It buttresses itself with scientific knowledge for effective theory/practice integration.

It creates a structure to theory teaching and learning.

It forces effective critical thinking based on amassed evidence.

It emphasizes active research while learning ethical decision making.

It calls for knowledge integration and self-reflection (professional use of self) through case-based learning.

It welcomes students’ life experiences in understanding the experiences of their clients through their own theory choice, but it pushes them to a) know why they believe their theory fits best [assessing strengths and area of focus], b) define and respond to the flaws of the theory they chose [limitations], and c) rectify and amend the flaws found through research of other theories [theories].

It teaches active implementation of research informed practice while simultaneously infusing practice informed research for evaluation, assessment, and intervention Rather than forcing students to regurgitate knowledge, it proposes a model to learn, filter, and apply theory to form a common language for practice and the profession.

The S.A.L.T. model is a simple, descriptive model that can yield multifaceted and competency-based outcomes for any program.

Benefits of Using the S.A.L.T. Model for Students     

Actively learn and be exposed to far more theories than ever could be encapsulated in any one course.

Learn to research theory effectiveness much faster and more comprehensively than in past years.

Learn to systematically communicate information gained with the rest of their colleagues.

Enable them to discuss the strengths, limitations, and areas of focus of theories in seconds.

Teach students how to prepare for continuous theory application and use in practice.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 87

  

     

Learn to use for undergraduate learning and for easy advance theory progression at the graduate levels.

Learn integrative and purposeful critical thinking and theory application.

Learn how to actively apply various theories to case examples (real-life scenarios if linked with practicum courses or a service learning component) to plan out work responsibility.

Learn to examine the strengths of theories.

Learn to examine the areas of focus of theories.

Learn to explore limitations of certain theories.

Learn to identify what other theories could be used to redress for the shortcomings of theories under investigation.

Foster knowledge retention even after one year.

Learn theory analysis, application, synthesis, and evaluation in everyday practice

Together the benefits respond to the literature’s lingering questions in teaching and applying theory. Practitioners lack a model to learn about, integrate, and assess scientific and theoretical knowledge. With an emphasis on competency based education, there is now a need for such a model—the S.A.L.T. model is one alternative.

Limitations The model is new. Granted a larger dataset may have been more effective. It would be worthwhile to have multiple universities and programs participate to allow for more generalizability and knowledge transference.

When asked if they have a model in item 7, it would have been good for the pretest and posttest to have asked the students to name the model. The question choice offered the option for a comment section if they chose ‘yes’ or ‘yes/but’, ‘no/but’. However, comments shared did not name the model.

Conclusion In the end, much of the application of theory to practice may rely on the practitioner. The problems that ail the social and behavioral sciences, in application of scientific knowledge and theory to practice, are the student/practitioner, our ignorance about what scientific knowledge looks like, and a lack of clarity about its use (Reynolds, 1971). The more one actively use a research informed, practice-centered approach to know why people do what they do, the more one will expand their understanding and use of scientific knowledge. However, if one consistently relies on only personal experiences to guide the exploration of ‘why people do what they do,’ their practice will be flawed. This is also true for teaching students how to conduct

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 88

explorations of “why people do what they do” without some model to form consistency or create a common language for applying scientific knowledge to practice. Failure to teach principles of a common concept in the profession is not the concern. The concern is having a common language to use in teaching and interpreting the scientific knowledge of theories for practice when it is known that every instructor and every university teach theory differently. The result is that students and practitioners alike cannot appropriately converse because there is not a common language. Theory discussions and writings lack the research and focus of a common language. A common language forces patterns, typifies experiences, aids in forming broad categories, and is essential for any understanding of knowledge use and reality (Berger & Luckman, 1966).

Teaching theory, either in introductory or advance courses, relies on students being consumers of theory. This may require a paradigm shift in the way practitioners currently teach, but it is a necessary shift that will enable them to overcome the age-old challenge of bridging theory to practice. As consumers of theory, students, would require knowledge and comprehension of theory at the introductory levels. At the advance levels, they would be expected to critically apply, analyze, synthesize, and evaluate theory. The S.A.L.T. model does not espouse to be the best or a solve-all. It simply provides a model for teaching HBSE theories, a framework for students to assess and use theories, and a tool to help students take their learning from the classroom to the field.

Author Biographies Dr. Carolyn Gentle-Genitty is a student-centered researcher, Translating Research into Practice scholar, and assistant professor at the Indiana University in the School of Social Work.

She is a budding educational model developer with several teaching models including a model for teaching, applying and evaluating theory–S.A.L.T. a Millennial Learner Comparison and Response model, a Truancy Assessment Model and worksheet, a TDPE (Teach, Demonstrate, Practice, and Evaluate) teaching framework, a PHEGS (Problem, History, Environment, Goals, and Strengths) analysis for solution-focused counseling, and an instrument developer (Perception of School Social Bonding PSSB). Her work can be found in peer reviewed journals, online in invited blogs, magazines, newspapers, books, and even in the app store. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Dr. Carolyn Gentle-Gentitty at cgentleg@iupui.edu.

Haiping Chen is a PhD student at Indiana University School of Social Work actively engaged in publishing and research -- translating student engagement research into assessment data through collaboration, and educating and engaging millennial students at the university and college. Her research interests include youth development and social gerontology. She received her Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees from Xiamen University in China where she worked on developing a volunteer support network in urban communities, exploring opportunities for community social workers, and developing a home-based community care program for older

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 89

adults. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Haiping Chen at haipchen@imail.iu.edu.

References Appelrouth, S. & Edles, L. D. (2008). Classical and contemporary sociological theory: Text and Readings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

Barker, R. L. (1999). The social work dictionary (3rd ed.). Washington, D. C.: NASW Press.

Bartlett, H. (1970). The common base of social work practice. Washington, D.C.: NASW. Berger, R. L. & Federico, R. C. (1982). Human behavior: A perspective for the helping professions. (2nd). New York, NY: Longman.

Berger, P. L. & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.

Blythe, B. (1992). Should undergraduate and graduate social work students be taught to conduct empirically-based practice? Yes! Journal of Social Work Education, 28(3), 260-263.

Boisen, L. & Syers, M. (2004). The integrative case analysis model for linking theory and practice. Journal of Social Work Education, 40(2), 205-217.

Eisner, W. E. (1990). The meaning of alternative paradigms for practice. In E. G. Guba (Ed.), The paradigm dialogue.(pp.88-102). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Erikson, E.H. (1968). Identity youth and crisis. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company Inc. Flavell, J. (1963). The development psychology of Piaget. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Fraser, M. W. (1994). Scholarship and research in social work: Emerging challenges. Journal of Social Work Education, 30(21), 252-266.

Gentle-Genitty, C., Gregory, V., Pfahler, C., Thomas, M., Lewis, L., Campbell, K., Ballard, K., Compton, K., & Daley, J. (2007). A critical review of theory in social work journals: A replication study. Advances in Social Work, 8(1), 62-80.

Gentle-Genitty, C. (2007). Book review: Bell Hooks’ 1994 Teaching to transgress – Education as the practice of freedom. Perspectives on Social Work 5(1), 31-34.

Gentle-Genitty, C. S. (2013). Building blocks for competency-based theory application: Applying and evaluating human behavior theory using the S.A.L.T. Model. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt Publishing. E-book.

Gilson, S. F., & DePoy, E. (2002). Theoretical approaches to disability content in social work education. Journal of Social Work Education, 38(1), 153-165.

Goldstein, H. (1990). The knowledge base of social work practice: Theory, wisdom analogue, or art? Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 71(1), 32-42.

Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York, NY: Routledge.

Kendall, Adler, Adler, Cargan, & Ballantine (2008). Sociology in our times with contemporary readings. (Custom Edition). Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 90

Klein, W. C. & Bloom, M. (1994). The ethical responsibility for using empirical evidence for efficacious practice methods. In W. Hudson & P. Nurius (eds.), Controversial Issues in Social Work Research. Boston, MA: Allyin & Bacon.

Kirk, S. A. (1990). Research utilization: The substructure of belief. In L. Videka-Sherman & W. J. Reid (Eds.), Advances in clinical social work research (pp. 223-250). Silver Springs, MD: National Association of Social Workers.

Kolevzon, M. & Maykranze, J. (1982). Theoretical orientation and clinical practice: Uniformity versus eclecticism? Social Service Review, 56(1), 120-129.

Lam, D. (2004). Problem-based learning: An integration of theory and field. Journal of Social Work Education, 40(3), 371-389.

LeCroy, C. W. (1990). Opening the door to knowledge utilization. In L. Videka-Sherman & W. J. Reid (Eds.), Advances in clinical social work research (pp. 261-264). Silver Springs, MD: National Association of Social Workers.

Lipsey, M. W. (1993). Theory as method: Small theories of treatments. In L. B. Sechrest & A. G. Scott (Eds.), Understanding causes and generalizing about them (pp. 5-38). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mackey, R. A., Burek, M., & Charkoudians, S. (1987). The relationship of theory to clinical practice. Clinical Social Work Journal, 15(4), 369-383.

Munro, E. (2002). The role of theory in social work research: A future contribution of the debate.

Journal of Social Work Education, 38(3), 461-470.

Osmond, J. L. & O’Connor, I. (2004). Formalizing the unformalized: Practitioners’ communication of knowledge in practice. British Journal of Social work, 34, 667-692.

Osmond, J. & O’Conner, I. (2006). Use of theory and research in social work practice: Implications for knowledge-based practice. Australian Social Work, 59(1), 5-19.

Pillari, V. (1988). Human behavior and the social environment. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

Poulter, J. ( 2005). Integrating theory and practice: A new heuristic paradigm for social work practice. Australian Social Work, 58(2), 199-212.

Raffoul, P. R. & McNeece, C. A. (1996). Future issues for social work practice. Needham Heights, MA: Simon and Schuster Company.

Reid, W. J. (1981). Mapping the knowledge base of social work. Social Work, 26(2), 124-133.

Reynolds, P. D. (1971). A primer in theory construction. New York, NY: Paul Davidson Reynolds and the Bobbs Merrill Company Inc. Robbins, S. P., Chatterjee, P., & Canda, E. R. (2006). Contemporary human behavior theory: A critical perspective for social work (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Rosen, A. (1994). Knowledge use in direct practice. Social Service Review, 68(4), 561-577.

Rosen, A., Proctor, E. E., Morrow-Howell, N., & Staudt, M. (1995). Rationales for practice decisions: Variations in knowledge used by decision task and social work service. Research on Social Work Practice, 5(4), 501-523.

Royse, D. (2011). Research methods in social work (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 91

Schilling, R. F. (1990). Making research usable. In L. Videka-Sherman & W. J. Reid (eds.), Advances in clinical social work research (pp. 256-260). Silver Springs, MD: National Association of Social Workers.

Schilling, R. F., Schinke, S. P., & Gilchrist, L. D. (1985). Utilization of social work research: Reaching the practitioner. Social Work, 30(6), 527-529.

Simon, B. L. (1994). Are theories for practice necessary? Yes! Journal of Social Work Education, 30(2), 144-148.

Sung-Chan, P. & Yuen-Tsang, A. (2008). Bridging the theory–practice gap in social work education: A reflection on an action research in China adopting action research as an approach to theory and practice integration. Social Work Education, 27(1), 51–69.

Thyer, B. A. (1994). Are theories for practice necessary? No! Journal of Social Work Education, 30(2), 148-151.

Thyer, B. A. (2001). What is the role of theory in research on social work practice? Journal of Social Work Education, 37(1), 9-25.

Trevillion, S. (2000). Social work research: What kind of knowledge/knowledges. An introduction to papers. British Journal of Social Work, 30(4), 429-432.

Tripodi, T., Fellin, P., & Meyer, H. J. (1969). The assessment of social research: Guidelines for the use of research in social work and social science. Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock.

Tsang, N. W. (1998). Beyond theory and practice integration in social work: Lessons from the west. International Social Work, 41, 169-180.

Turner, F. (1996). Social work treatment: Interlocking theoretical approaches (4th ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press.

Vayda, E. & Bogo, M. (1991). A teaching model to unite classroom and field. Journal of Social Work Education, 27(3), 271-278.

Walsh, J. (2010). Theories for direct social work practice (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Wells, C. C. (1989). 2nd Ed. Social work day to day: The experience of generalist social work practice. White Plains, NY: Logman.

Witkin, S. L. & Gottschalk, S. (1988). Alternative criteria for theory evaluation. Social Service Review, 62(2), 211-224.

Witkin, S. L. (1992). Should empirically-based practice be taught in BSW and MSW programs?

No! Journal of Social Work Education, 28(3), 265-268.

Wrenn, J. & Wrenn, B. (2009) Enhancing learning by integrating theory and practice.

International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 21(2), 258-265.

APPENDICES AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST

Volume 1, Page 92

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Table 1 Students’ Evaluation Comments

Students Student 1

Student 2 Student 3

This was, out of two years in the program, by far, the best class I have ever taken. It gave me more applicable knowledge than my other courses combined.

I enjoyed the group work, interacting with other social workers with diverse skill sets/specialized knowledge increased my ability to apply theory in multiple settings/populations.

SALT method and 5 theory assignment helped address how to apply theory to practice, therefore making it appear more relevant.

Student 4

Great theory textbook (Turner). Five theory paper and SALT model helped facilitate my achievement of the course objectives.

Student 5

I enjoyed the interactive learning experiences integrated in this theory class.

Student 6

The process of helping us to apply it directly to current practice.

Student 7

The in-class activities and home-work.

Student 8

Loved the interactive style of the class, in class exercises and home-work.

Student 9

Excellent classroom examples, great group projects, numerous readings provided outside of assigned readings for references.

Student 10 Student 11 Student 12

The interactive format and experiential learning.

All of them but I especially felt the group work and discussions within and after helped the most.

The lessons/assignments, and design of achieving the course objectives.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Table 2 S.A.L.T. Course Comparison on Objectives

Volume 1, Page 93

Volume 1, Page 94

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Table 3 S.A.L.T. Course Comparison on Course

Table 4 Comparison of Pretest and Posttest Questions (1) What is theory?

(2) What are the common types of social work theory?

(3) When someone applies theory to practice they…

(4) When evaluating theory social workers should…

(5) Can lack of theory application and evaluation cause harm in practice?

CASE (6) Based on the case above, using just various theories, how would you respond to the case and create a plan of work. Give a short rationale.

(7) Having read the case above do you think you have a model or method to respond using theory?

(8) From the options provided, which would be a general list of tasks to help you prepare to

Pretest Score/ #n 44

Posttest Score/ #n 27

1) 56.8 (25)

1) 65.4% (17)

2) 77.3% (34)

2) 61.5% (16)

3) 90.9 (40)

3) 81.5% (22)

4) 100% (44)

4) 100% (27)

5) 75%(33)

5) 81.5% (22)

6) 80% ‘YES’(20)

6) 77.8% ‘YES’ (14)

7) 88.5% (23)

7) 100% (19)

8) 15.4% (4)

8) 5.3% (1)

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 95

apply theory to practice?

(9) The next sets of questions aim to ascertain 9) 69.2% (18) 9) 42.1% (8) your knowledge of the phases of theory application. There are often 4 phases culminating with a plan. These phases mimic the social work casework relationship phases.

The first phase in the theory application should help you…

10) 19.2% (5) 10) 5.3% (1) (10) The second phase of theory application should help you…

(11) The third phase of theory application should help you…

11) 80.8% (21) 11) 84.2% (16) (12) In preparing to close a case, the fourth phase of theory application should help you… 12) 23.6% (6) 12) 26.3% (5) (13) What is the name given to the combined aspects of which a theory can help a worker respond to a case?

(14) Demographics (15) General thought/Comments Note. Underlined and bolded are the areas of improvements and italicized and un-bolded are the consistent item across both tests.

Table 5 - Comments on Student Rationale for Having a Model (1) More information is needed on an initial assessment to determine which theory should be used. A presenting problem is needed, besides just difficulty focusing and worse grades.

(2) She has support, she has skills that worked for her in the past, she could apply them to present situation (3) Using system's theory, strengths perspective, as well as person in environment we can begin to develop a course of action for Ginny.

(4) Strengths/Empowerment.

(5) I would use systems and ecological to show Ginny all of her strengths and supports at the different levels; micro, mezzo, and macro and collaborate with Ginny to strengthen some aspects of life that she feels needs strengthening, such as self-esteem (possibility).

(6) Strengths perspective, ecological theory, systems theory (7) Systems theory, strengths perspective, empowerment theory (8) I would need to continue to interview and get more information about presenting concerns for Ginny's case.

(9) Yes I have a method of using strengths and ecological perspectives so that the family can see how their system is working correlating with Ginny's system and seeing how their strengths can help the systems to become stronger.

(10) I would use strength based theory and Maslow hierarchy of needs.

Volume 1, Page 96

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION GUIDE

General Formatting:           

American Psychological Association (APA) Sixth Edition Publication Guidelines Microsoft Word or compatible format Letter-size (8.5 x 11 inches) format Single-spaced text Times New Roman, 12-point font One-inch margins Two spaces following end punctuation Left justification Single column Portrait orientation Third-person

Order of the Manuscript: 



 

 

Manuscript Title Page o Manuscript Title o Author name - First name, Middle initial(s), and Last name (omit titles and degrees) o Education affiliation – if no institutional affiliation, list city and state of author’s residence Abstract o The abstract (250-word maximum) should effectively summarize your completed research and findings.

Keywords o List 3 or 4 keywords or key phrases for use in an online search engine.

Body of paper (sections) o Introduction o Review of Literature o Methods o Results o Discussion Author Biography o 75-100 word maximum References APA Sixth Edition) o Manuscripts should be thoroughly cited and referenced using valid sources. o References should be arranged alphabetically and strictly follow APA Sixth Edition formatting rules. o Only references cited in the manuscript are to be included.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 97





Tables and figures o If tables and figures are deemed necessary for inclusion, they should be properly placed at the end of the text following the reference section. o All tables and figures should be numbered sequentially using Arabic numerals, titled, acknowledged, and cited according to APA guidelines. o Because CSI journals are printed in black-and-white, colored graphs, charts, and figures are only accepted if they are discernible in black-and-white print. o If graphs or tables are too wide for portrait orientation, they must be resized or reoriented to be included.

Appendices (if applicable) o Must be labeled alphabetically as they appear in the manuscript. o Title centered at the top.

General Instructions: 

 



Headings o Strictly follow APA Sixth Edition guidelines to format headings. Five levels of headings are allowed, per APA guidelines.

Abbreviations and/or Acronyms o Abbreviations and/or acronyms should be defined at first mention and used consistently thereafter.

Footnotes/Endnotes o A reference list must be included. o Do not use footnotes or endnotes.

English Language Support o If your native language is not English, you may want to use CSI’s in-house editing service to increase the quality of your paper. o The use of these services is elective and does not guarantee acceptance for publication.

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 98

WHY PURCHASE OR SUBSCRIBE TO OUR JOURNALS? Continuing Education: Each of the CSI's peer-reviewed journals focuses on contemporary issues, scholarly research, discovery, and evidence-based practices that will elevate readers' professional development.

Germane Reference: The CSI's journals are a vital resource for students, practitioners, and professionals in the fields of education, business, and behavioral sciences interested in relevant, leading-edge, academic research.

Diversity: The CSI’s peer-reviewed journals highlight a variety of study designs, scientific approaches, experimental strategies, methodologies, and analytical processes representing diverse philosophical frameworks and global perspectives Broad Applicability: The CSI's journals provide research in the fields of education, business and behavioral sciences specialties and dozens of related sub-specialties.

Academic Advantage: The CSI's academically and scientifically meritorious journal content significantly benefits faculty and students.

Scholarship: Subscribing to the CSI's journals provides a forum for and promotes faculty research, writing, and manuscript submission.

Choice of Format: Institutions can choose to subscribe to our journals in digital or print format.

Volume 1, Page 99

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

LIBRARY RECOMMENDATION FORM TO: LIBRARIAN/LIBRARIAN ACQUISITION COMMITTEE FROM: ______________________________________________________________________ Position: _______________________________

Department: ________________________

Email: _________________________________

Phone: _____________________________

I recommend that our library subscribe to the following journal:

JOURNAL OF SCHOLASTIC INQUIRY: BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

ISSN: 2330‐6742. Published Quarterly Please visit www.csiresearch.com for more information.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Important uses of Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences: (JOSI: BS) would include the following:

 REFERENCE: For current research articles as I find them through citations in related journals or books. 

STUDENT READING: I plan to review the contents of new issues regularly to add to student reading lists.



PUBLICATION OUTLET: Research conducted at our institution requires a publication outlet in this area.

Subscribing to JOSI: BS will keep faculty and staff up‐to‐date with its editorial direction and themes.



LIBRARY BENEFIT: This journal’s content and direction aligns with institutional goals. The publication is cited and/or well indexed. Including this journal in our library will help meet department, faculty, and student needs.



AFFILIATION & DISSEMINATION: I receive my own copy of this journal and will be recommending articles on a regular basis to administrators, students, and colleagues. The library’s support with availability is most appreciated.

The Center for Scholastic Inquiry, LLC 4857 Highway 67, Suite #2, Granite Falls, MN 56241

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 100

JOURNAL PURCHASE FORM PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM AND MAIL OR EMAIL IT TO CSI _____________________________________________________________________________________ PRINT VERSION  JOURNAL PURCHASE RATE: $50 Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Science _____________________________________________________________________________________ DIGITAL VERSION  JOURNAL INSTITUTION RATE: $30 Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Science ________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Street Address: _________________________________________________________________________________________ City: _________________________________________ State: ________ Country: _____________ Zip Code:_______ Phone: ______________________________ Fax: _______________________________ Email: ______________________

Mail‐in subscriptions may be paid by CHECK or CREDIT CARD.

Credit Card (circle one): VISA MASTERCARD

DISCOVER

Name on Credit Card: ___________________________________________________________________________________

CC Billing Address: ____________________________________________________________________________________

Credit Card Number: ___________________________________________________________________________________

Expiration Date (month and year):_________________Security Code (3 digits on back of card): __________________

Signature: _____________________________________________________________________________________________ UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY OF OUR MOST RECENT PRINTING

Center for Scholastic Inquiry, LLC 4857 Highway 67, Suite #2 Granite Falls, MN 56241 www.csiresearch.com

Journal of Scholastic Inquiry: Behavioral Sciences

Volume 1, Page 101

The American Male and Female 35 Years Later: Bem Sex Role Inventory Revisited Denise D. Guastello, Carroll University Stephen J. Guastello, Marquette University Attitudes Towards Poverty Revisited Charity Perry, California State University, Los Angeles Gretchen Peterson, California State University, Los Angeles K. William Wasson, California State University, Los Angeles Theodore S. Bell, California State University, Los Angeles Brief Desensitization and Skills Training for Test Anxiety: A Pilot Program Margaret D. Kasimatis, Carroll University Rebecca Palmer, Carroll University Kathryn Rheingruber, Carroll University Rebecca Gillespie, Carroll University Development of Empathy in Therapist Trainees Helen Shoemaker, Holy Names University Jessica Lee Shoemaker, California State University Examining the Differences in Social Networking Behaviors Between an Older and Younger Age Cohort Lizette Luevano, California State University Martin S. Fiebert, California State University Christopher R. Warren, California State University A Response to Student Theory Illiteracy in the Social and Behavioral Sciences: The S.A.L.T. Model Carolyn Gentle-Genitty, Indiana University Haiping Chen, Indiana University

Published by: Center for Scholastic Inquiry, LLC 4857 Hwy 67, Suite #2 Granite Falls, MN 56241 855‐855‐8764 ISSN: 2330-6742 (print) ISSN: 2330-6750 (online)