71-12,204
DIELMAN, Teddy Emerson, 1939-A MULTIVARIATE INVESTIGATION OF CORRELATESOF CHILD BEHAVIOR IN A HAWAIIAN COMMUNITY.
University of Hawaii, Ph.D., 1970Psycho~ogy, experimental
University Microfilms, A XEROX Company I Ann Arbor, Michigan C
--------------------------- - ----~---~-~----
THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN_MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED
A MULTIVARIATE INVESTIGATION OF
CORRELATES OF CHILD BEHAVIOR
IN A HAWAIIAN COMMUNITY
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATEDIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII INPARTIAL FULFILL~ffiNT OF THE REQUIRENENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
IN PSYCHOLOGY
AUGUST 1970
By
Teddy Emerson Dielman
Dissertation Committee:
John M. Digman, ChairmanRonald GallimoreSetsu FurunoBarbara MoeleyErnst Reese
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE........................................... ii
ABSTRACT. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• iii
LI ST OF TABLES................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . vi
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELEVANT RESEARCHFamily Structure.................. 8Child Rearing Practices........... 8Rating Studies of Child
Personali ty. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 13Childhood Behavior Problems....... 16
CHAPTER III. PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH
CHAPTER IV. STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESESFamily Structure.................. 23Child Rearing Practices........... 24Ratings of Child Personality...... 24Behavior Problems................. 25Relationships among Domains....... 25
CHAPTER V. METHOD AND PROCEDURE
CHAPTER VI. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Household Demography Structure.... 46Child Rearing Practices structure. 51Child Personality Ratings
Structure. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 76Behavior Problems Ratings
Structure. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 86Interrelationships among the
Data Domains.................... 95
CHAPTER VII. CONCLUSIONS
CHAPTER VIII. SmfJN~RY
APPEIIDIX A. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • •. • • • • . . 216
APPENDIX B.... . • • . • . . . . . • . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
BIBLIOG·RAPHY. • • • • • •• • •• • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • 390
PREFACE
The author is indebted to the people of Nanakuli,
Hawaii and to Bishop Museum, Honolulu, for making this
study possible.
ii
iii
ABSTRACT
The investigation was concerned with the prediction of
child personality and behavior problem factors from anteced
ent data sets of household demography and parental reports
of child rearing practices. The sample tested consisted of
88 families in the Nanakuli, Hawaii homestead area.
The household demography and child rearing practice
data were collected from the parents by trained inter
viewers. The behavior problems data were checked by the
children's teachers on an adaptation of the Quay Behavior
Problem Checklist, and the child personality data were
collected from the teachers on the Hawaii Behavior Ratings
Scales. The child rearing practices data were first
subdivided into three sets--male, female, and general--and
the resulting six data sets were factor analyzed separ
ately, with oblique factor rotation by the Harris-Kaiser
method.
The factor analyses of the six data sets resulted in
the extraction of eight household demography factors, nine
male and nine female child rearing practice factors,
twelve general child rearing practice factors, six teacher
ratings of child personality factors, and seven teacher
ratings of child behavior problem factors.
The factors were interpreted on the basis of results
of earlier studies and their loading patterns in the
current study. The six teacher ratings factors corresponded
iv
considerably to those found in earlier work, as did many
of the child rearing practice factors. The behavior prob
lem factors were more numerous than have been extracted
in any but very recent work. There are no studies in the
demography area with which the current results can be
compared.
Factor scores were computed for each data set and
stepwise multiple linear regression analyses conducted,
predicting from antecedent to subsequent data sets. A
large number of significant relationships were noted, but
space limits discussion to the increase of prediction with
the addition of entire data sets. In the case of child
.... 'person~li't;'fl' '7~:'ediction '61' the factor "aggression-dominance"
was increased significantly by addition of child rearing
practice factors to household demography factors in the
regression equation. This factor exhibited a significant
negative relationship to the general child rearing practice
factor "warmth of parent-child relationship," a negative
relationship to the female child rearing practice factor
"dislike of non-feminine behavior," and a positive rela
tionship to the female factor "dislike of intrusive be
havior."
In the prediction of behavior problems, the addition
of child rearing practices to demography factors resulted
in a significant increase in the prediction of the "imma
turity" factor, which bore positive relationships to the
v
female "achievement oriented discipline" and male "task
oriented discipline" factors. When the child personality
factors were added to demography and child rearing in
prediction of behavior problems, all criteria exhibited
a significant increase in accountable variance. The
child personality factor "aggression-dominance" was posi
tively related to "psychopathic-unsocialized," "verbal
overactivity," and "immaturity." The personality factor
of "compliance" was negatively related to "social with
drawal" and "inferiority-irresponsible." The behavior
problems factor of "sluggish-disinterested" was negatively
related to "creativity-divergent thinking," and "neurotic
disturbed" was positively related to "emotionality."
TABLE I.
TABLE II.
TABLE III.
TABLE IV.
TABLE V.
TABLE VI.
TABLE VII.
TABLE VIII.
TABLE IX.
TABLE X.
TABLE XI.
TABLE XII.
TABLE XIII.
TABLE XIV.
TABLE XV.
TABLE XVI.
TABLE XVII.
vi
LIST OF TABLES
SUMlf~RY OF THE HYPOTHESIZED INTER-DOMAIN RELATIONSHIPS.... • . • • • • . . • • 30
HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY VARIABLE LIST.. 32
CHILD REARING PRACTICES VARIABLELI ST . . . • • • . . • • • • • • . . . • • . • • • • • • • . • • 34
TEACHER RATINGS VARIABLE LIST....... 42
BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS VARIABLE LIST..... 44
HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTOR ISTEPMOTHER, ORIGIN OFF OAHU.. ••••• 47
HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTOR IIHANAI. • • • • • . • • . • • • • . •• • • • . • • . . • . • • 48
HOUSEHOLD DEMOGP~PHY FACTOR IIISUBNUCLEAR, MOTHER ABSENT.... ••.•• 49
HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTOR IVNUCLEAR-LATERAL, CONSANGUINE...... 49
HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTOR VNANAKULI ORIGIN................... 50
HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTOR VINUCLEAR FAMILy........... • • • • . • • • • 50
HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTOR VIISUBNUCLEAR-EXTENDED, OLDER CHILD.. 51
HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTOR VIIISPOUSE'S LINEAL............. 52
CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR I WARMTH OF PARENT-CHILDRELATIONSHIP. . • • . • . . • . • • • • • • • • • • • • 53
CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GE~ffiRAL)FACTOR II OBEDIENCE TRAINING...... 54
CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR III PERMISSIVENESS.... ••.•• 56
CHILD REARING PP~CTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR IV STRICTNESS OFDISCIPLINE ••••••••••..•••.••••.• • . 57
vii
TABLE XVIII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR V ACHIEVE~lliNT TRAINING ...••• 58
TABLE XIX. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR VI PREFERENCE FOR YOUNGERCHILDREN ••.•••••...•.•.••.•.......• 60
TABLE XX. CHILD REARING PP~CTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR VII DEfrJANDS FOR CO~i:PLIANCE .. 61
TABLE XXI. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR VIII RESPONSIBILITYTRAI r~I I\IG ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 62
TABLE XXII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR IX UNINTERPRETED •.••.••.•••• 64
TABLE XXIII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR X UNINTERPRETED .•.•.••.••••• 65
TABLE XXIV. CHILD REARING PP~CTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR XI UNINTERPRETED ••...•.•..•• 66
TABLE XXV. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR XII UNINTERPRETED •••••••.••• 67
TABLE XXVI. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (MALEANALYSIS) FACTOR I ACHIEVE1lliNT-ORIENTED DI SCI PLI NE ..•..••.••••.•.• 68
TABLE XXVII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (MALEANALYSIS) FACTOR II COMPLIANCE-ORIENTED DISCIPLINE •.•..••••••••••• 69
TABLE XXVIII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (h~LE
ANALYSIS) FACTOR III DISCIPLINEFOR PARENTAL AGGRESSION •••..••••••• 70
TABLE XXIX. CHILD REARING PRACTICE (N~LE
ANALYSIS) FACTOR IV PHYSICALPUNISHfJIENT . • . • • • • • • . • . •. • . •. • • • • . •• 71
TABLE XXX. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (fMLEANALYSIS) FACTOR V TASK-ORIENTEDDISCIPLINE •••••••.•••.•••.•.••.•••• 72
TABLE XXXI. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (fMLEANALYSIS) FACTOR VI PUNISH~ffiNTFOR AGGRESSION •••••.•••.•••••.•.••• 72
viii
TABLE XXXII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (MALEANALYSIS) FACTOR VII UNINTERPRETED. 73
TABLE XXXIII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (1~LEANALYSIS) FACTOR VIII STRICTNESSOF DISCIPLINE ••..•.••....•••••••••. 74
TABLE XXXIV. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (VALEANALYSIS) FACTOR IX UNINTERPRETED •• 74
TABLE XXXV. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FEWALEANALYSIS) FACTOR I LOW PHYSICALPUNI SHNIEN'r •••..•..•••..••.••••.•••• 75
TABLE XXXVI. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FEMALEANALYSIS) FACTOR II DISLIKE OFINTRUSIVE BEHAVIOR ••••.••..•••••••• 75
TABLE XXXVII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FEr~LEANALYSIS) FACTOR III DISCIPLINEFOR PARENTAL AGGRESSION .••.•••••••• 77
TABLE XXXVIII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FE~~LEANALYSIS) FACTOR IV ACHIEVElf~NT-ORIENTED DISCIPLINE ••..••••••••••.• 78
TABLE XXXIX. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FElf~LE
ANALYSIS FACTOR V LATER AGE OFWORK ASSIGNMENTS •••.•••••..•••••••• 78
TABLE XL. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FEW~LE
ANALYSIS) FACTOR VI DISLIKE OFNON-FEMININE BEHAVIOR •••••.•••••••• 79
TABLE XLI. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FEMALEANALYSIS) FACTOR VII COMPLIANCE-ORIENTED DISCIPLINE ••••.••••••••••• 79
TABLE XLII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FEW~LE
ANALYSIS) FACTOR VIII LESSINDEPENDENCE ••••••••..•.••••••••••• 80
TABLE XLIII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FEMALEANALYSIS) FACTOR IX TASK-ORIENTEDDISCIPLINE •••.•••.••.•••.•.•••••••• 80
TABLE XLIV. TEACHER RATINGS FACTOR I M••.•••••••• 81
TABLE XLV. TEACHER RATINGS FACTOR II A-E ••.••••• 82
TABLE XLVI.
TABLE XLVII.
TABLE XLVIII.
TABLE XLIX.
TABLE L.
TABLE LI.
TABLE LII.
TABLE LIII.
TABLE LIV.
TABLE LV.
TABLE LVI.
TABLE LVII.
TABLE LVIII.
TABLE LIX.
TABLE LX.
TABLE LXI.
TABLE LXII.
ix
TEACHER RATINGS FACTOR III T••..•.••• 84
TEACHER RATINGS FACTOR IV K•••••••••. 85
TEACHER RATINGS FACTOR V C-D-H ••••••• 87
TEACHER RATINGS FACTOR VI I ••..••.••. 88
BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS FACTOR I SOCIALWITHDRAWAL (QUAy).................. 89
BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS FACTOR II SLUGGISH,DISINTERESTED (QUAy)............... 89
BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS FACTOR IIINEUROTIC-DISTURBED (QUAy) ••.••••••• 91
BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS FACTOR IVINFERIORITy-IRRESPONSIBLE .••...•••• 91
BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS FACTOR VPSYCHOPATHIC-UNSOCIALIZED (QUAY) ..• 92
BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS FACTOR VI VERBALOVERACTIVITY (QUAy)................ 93
BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS FACTOR VIIIlv11V'lATURrrl'Y (QUAy).................. 94
INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG FACTORSCORES. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 96
LISTING OF VARIABLES EMPLOYED INREGRESSION ANALySES •••.•.•••••••••• 107
LIST OF PREDICTORS AND CRITERIA FORTHE STEPWISE MULTIPLE LINEARREGRESSION ANALYSES ••••.•••••••.••• III
PREDICTION OF NALE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACrrORS.. • . • • • • • • • • • • • •• 115
PREDICTION OF lf~LE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •••••.••.•••••.•• 115
PREDICTION OF MALE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR III FROM HOUSE-HOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •..•••••..•• 116
x
TABLE LXIII. PREDICrrION OF l'.'JALE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS ........••...•••. 116
TABLE LXIV. PREDICTION OF ~~LE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS ................. 117
TABLE LXV. PREDICTION OF ~~LE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR VI FROm HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •..••.•.••..••••• 117
TABLE LXVI. PREDICTION OF 1~LE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR VII FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS ................. 118
TABLE LXVII. PREDICTION OF ~~LE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR VIII FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •..•.••••••..•••• 118
TABLE LXVIII. PREDICTION OF N~LE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR IX FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS .•................ 119
TABLE LXIX. PREDICTION OF FE~~LE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS ..............•.. 119
TABLE LXX. PREDICTION OF FErMLE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR II FROM HOUSRBOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS ••••••.•.•••.•••• 120
TABLE LXXI. PREDICTION OF FEDMLE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •••••••.••••.•.•• 120
TABLE LXXII. PREDICTION OF FE1~LE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS ................. 121
TABLE LXXIII. PREDICTION OF FEW~LE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •• •••..•••••.•..• 121
TABLE LXXIV. PREDICTION OF FEt~LE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR VI FROM HOUSRBOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS ••.•••.•••••..... 122
xi
TABLE LXXV. PREDICTION OF FE~~LE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR VII FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS .•..••.••.••••..• 122
TABLE LXXVI. PREDICTION OF FE~~LE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR VIII FROM HOUSEHOLDDEfl10GRAPHY FACTORS •••••....•.•.••.. 123
TABLE LXXVII. PREDICTION OF FE~~LE CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR IX FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •.•.•.••...••.•.• 123
TABLE LXXVIII. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLDDEIiiOGRAPHY FACTORS •.•••.•.•.•.•.••• 124
TABLE LXXIX. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •.••.•.••.•••.••• 124
TABLE LXXX. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •••••..•••••.•... 125
TABLE LXXXI. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •••.••.••.•.•••.• 125
TABLE LXXXII. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS ••••.••••••.••••• 126
TABLE LXXXIII. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS ••.•.•••••••• ',' •• 126
TABLE LXXXIV. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR VII FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •.••.•.••.•••.••• 127
TABLE LXXXV. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR VIII FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •••••••.•.••••.•• 127
TABLE LXXXVI. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •••.•.•••.•••.•.• 128
TABLE LXXXVII. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR X FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS •••••.••••••.•••• 128
xii
TABLE LXXXVIII. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR XI FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS........... . • • • .• 129
TABLE LXXXIX. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR XII FROW HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS 129
TABLE XC. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATING FACTORI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYFACTORS ••••••••••.••••••••••••••••• 1.38
TABLE XCI. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATING FACTORII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGP~PHY
F\ACFJ.'ORS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1.38
TABLE XCII. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATING FACTORIII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYFACTORS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1.39
TABLE XCIII. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATING FACTORIV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYFACTORS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1.39
TABLE XCIV. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATING FACTORV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYFACTORS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 140
TABLE XCV. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATING FACTORVI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYFACTORS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 140
TABLE XCVI. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYFACTORS. . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . •• 142
TABLE XCVII.
TABLE XCVIII.
TABLE XCIX.
TABLE C.
PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYFACTORS. • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • •• 142
PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOG-RAPHY FACTORS.. • . • • • • • • • • • • • . . • • • •• 14.3
PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYFACTORS. . . • • . • • • • . • • • • • . • • • • . • . • . •. 14.3
PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOIJD DEMOGRAPHYFAC'I'ORS. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• 144
xiii
TABLE CIa PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYFACTORS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 144
TABLE CII. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR VII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOG-RAPHY FACTORS .•....•.•..•••..•••••• 145
TABLE CIII. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATING FACTORI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY ANDCHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS .•.•• 146
TABLE CIV. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATING FACTORII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY ArIDCHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS .•.•. 148
TABLE CV. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATING FACTORIII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY ANDCHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS .•••• 150
TABLE CVI. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATING FACTORIV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY ANDCHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS .•.•. 152
TABLE CVII. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATING FACTORV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY ANDCHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS .•••• 154
~eABLE CVIII. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATING FACTORVI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY ANDCHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS ••••• 156
TABLE CIX. COMPARISON OF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCEIN TEACHER RATING FACTORS WHENPREDICTING FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY FACTORS ALONE VERSUSHOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY PLUS CHILDREARING PRACTICES ••••.•.•.•••..•••• 160
TABLE CX. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYAND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS. 161
TABLE CXI. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYAND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS. 163
TABLE CXII. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOG-RAPHY AND CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTORS •••.••••••••••••••••.••••••• 165
xiv
TABLE CXIII. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYAND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS. 167
TABLE CXIV. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR V FROl\1 HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYAND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS. 169
TABLE CXV. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEmOGP~PHY
AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS. 171
TABLE CXVI. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR VII FR01\1 HOUSEHOLD DEMOG-RAPHY AND CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTORS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 173
TABLE CXVII. CON~ARISON OF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCEIN BEHAVIOR PROBLEM FACTORS WHENPREDICTING FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOG-RAPHY FACTORS ALONE VERSUSHOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY PLUS CHILDREARING PP~CTICES •.••••••..••..•... 178
TABLE CXVIII. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,CHILD REARING PRACTICES ANDTEACHER RATING FACTORS ............. 179
TABLE CXIX. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY, CHILD REARINGPP~CTICES AND TEACHER RATINGFACTORS •••••• "••••••••••••••••••••• 181
TABLE CXX. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLDDEr~OGRAPHY , CHILD REARINGPP~CTICES AND TEACHER RATINGFACTORS •••.•••.•••••••.•••••••••••• 183
TABLE CXXI. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY, CHILD REARINGPRACTICES AND TEACHER RATINGFACTORS ••••••••.••••••••••••••••••• 18.5
TABLE CXXII.
TABLE CXXIII.
TABLE CXXIV.
TABLE CXXV.
xv
PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY, CHILD REARINGPRACTICES AND TEACHER RATINGFACTORS. • . . . . • . . . . . . . . • . . . . • • . . . . .. 187
PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY, CHILD REARINGPRACTICES AND TEACHER RATINGFACTORS. . . . . . . . . • . . . • . • • • . . . . • . . . .. 189
PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR VII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYCHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHERRATING FAC~ORS...... . • . . . • • • . . • . • •• 191
COMPARISON OF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCEIN BEHAVIOR PROBLEM FACTORS WHENPREDICTING FROM TEACHER RATINGFACTORS IN ADDITION TO HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY AND CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTORS................... 194
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The research to be reported in the ensuing pages is
perhaps best described as a multivariate study of familial
antecedents of behavioral outcomes in children of a
Hawaiian homestead community. In this description, the
biases of the author are clear. The substantive biases
lie in the phrase "familial antecedents of behavioral
outcomes." It was the author's intent to study the eco
logical and child rearing factors of the families in this
community, their relationship to each other, and their
relationships to the factors which emerged in the analysis
of the behavior of the children of these families. The
methodological biases are evident in the term "multivar
iate." The current investigation is based on the factor
model, in which the focus is centered upon the variance
which several variables in a given domain share in common.
The important point here is that any particular antecedent
or subsequent factor in a given domain of human behavior
is regarded as multiply determined and cannot be ade
quately measured by simply operationally defining that
factor by a certain single variable, rather the factor
must be multivariately operationally defined as the common
parts of multiple variables aimed at measurement of the
factor.
2
Specifically, the current investigation is concerned
with the prediction of child behavior in the context of
an interlocking variable system proposed by Howard and
Gallimore (1968). In this interlocking variable model,
it is hypothesized that specific behaviors are a result
of, among other factors to be discussed in Chapter III,
the personality, or strategic orientation as Howard and
Gallimore have chosen to label this link in their model,
of the child. The personality of the child, in the con
text of the current study, is conceived of as the multi
dimensional configuration arising from the analysis of
teacher ratings of the child's behavior, and is to be
defined through multivariate analytic techniques. Child
hood behavior problems are operationally defined as the
dimensions arising from the analysis of teachers' ratings
of problem behavior variables. Following the interlocki.~
model further, the child personality factors are hypoth
esized to be a function of child rearing factors, also
conceived of here as multidimensional in nature. The
final step in the chain of interest in the current investi
gation is the hypothesis that child rearing factors are a
function of a set of domestic group factors. The problem
then, is to arrive at an estimate of the factors involved
in each link of the chain and subsequently to predict
from link to link in order to test the hypotheses of
relations among antecedent and subsequent factors.
3
In the context of the current scientific model,
which has enjoyed to date a considerable life span, we
assume that each event is related to a finite number of
antecedent events. Working from this assumption, it is
natural that behavioral scientists have characteristi
cally investigated the personality dimensions of the
child, which, if causality operates in any systematic
and continuous fashion, can be regarded as the best pre
dictors of the personality dimensions of the adult.
Working bacbvards in the chain of events, it is equally
natural to seek the antecedents of child personality in
the context of the familial envirol~nent. The American
Zeitgeist in psychology has been primarily environmental
istic in character, stemming perhaps most recentl;y from
the Watsonian "behaviorist revolution," which may offer
some explanation for the search for ~nteccdents of child
personality in environmental stimuli, such as family
structure and child rearing practices. G. S. Hall in
1891 was, as far as the present writer is aware, the
first to initiate a systematic and large scale investiga
tion of the antecedents of child behavior in his endeavor
to dete~mine the relationships among prior experience,
personality characteristics, and adjustment problems
(see also the account of Hall's work in Mussen, et al.,
1963)1 although earlier attempts at systematic observation
4
were made by child biographers (e.g., Pestalozzi, 1774;
Darwin, 1877).
It is precisely Hall's question which the current
research is attempting to investigate. That is, what
are the salient factors which determine child personality
and behavior? Several important methodological advances
have occurred since 1891 and, although the science of
psychology, still in infancy relative to some of the
physical sciences, is yet admittedly imperfect in terms
of measurement devices and analytic techniques, a large
amount of work has been accomplished during the last
seventy-odd years toward developing sophisticated opera
tional techniques aimed at answering Hall's question.
In the area of a:lalytic methodology, the development of
factor analysis during the last half century (see
Thurstone, 1931; Burt, 1941) has contributed to the
parsimonious description of child personality and hypoth
esized determinants thereof.
Initial attempts to delineate the major factors of
child personality have been made in the rating realm
by Cattell and Gruen (1953), Cattell and Coan (1957),
Peterson and Cattell (1959), Cattell (1963), Digman
(1963, 1965, 1970), and Emmerich (1966); in the question
naire realm by Cattell and Gruen (1954), Cattell and
Coan (1958a), Coan and Cattell (1958b, 1959), Cattell
and Dreger (1969), Cattell and Schaie (1969) and Dielman
5
and Cattell (1970), and in the objective test realm by
Cattell and Gruen (1955), Cattell and Coan (1959),
Cattell and Peterson (1959), Schuerger, Dielman, and
Cattell (1970), Dielman, Schuerger, and Cattell (1970a),
and Cattell and Schuerger (1970).
These researchers have proceeded from the logical
premise that prior to investigating the antecedents of
child personality we are first obligated to arrive at
some reliable estimate of the salient dimensions of
child personality structure. On the other side of the
coin--taking cognizance now of the "predictor problem"
rather than the "criterion problem," we must ask our
selves what the salient dimensions of the antecedents
are. In the realm of child rearing practices, initial
work has been done by Sewell, et ale (1955), Milton (1958),
Minturn, et ale (1964), and Dielman, et ale (1970b),
with earlier investigations offered by Baldwin, et ale
(1945, 1949), and Schaefer (1959, 1961), Schaefer and
Bayley (1960, 1963), Schaefer and Bell (1955, 1958),
and Schaefer, et ale (1959). In the area of adjustment
problems, the recent work has been done by Peterson
(1961), Quay (1965), Quay, et ale (1966a, 1966b), Quay
(1966), Pimm, et ale (1967), and Dielman, et ale (1970c).
In the area of family structure, no multivariate struc
tural investigations, which are of primary concern to
the present writer, have been accomplished, although
6
theories and bivariate analyses have been offered by a
number of investigators, including Glick (1957), and
Bell (1960, 1967).
Arriving now at the interrelationships among the
various hypothesized sets of antecedents and resultants,
we have much less work. In fact, there is of date no
investigation attempting to relate family structure
factors, child rearing practice factors, and child per
sonality and behavior problem factors. The work of
Sears and his associates (1957, 1965) should be mentioned
as the most intensive investigation into child rearing
antecedents of child personality. Here, however, the
researchers were working with a set of variables which
defined £ priori the personality and child rearing
factors thought to be viable. The present research was
intended to utilize a large number of variables within
each domain and determine the structural properties of
these variables prior to relating the various structured
sets of variables. In doing so, the investigator has
interested himself in, primarily, two sources of evidence.
The first is concerned with studies of the structure of
families, child rearing practices, child personaJity,
and behavior problems. The second is concerned with the
interrelationships among these structured variables,
where such evidence exists. A number of structural
7
studies were discovered in the domains of child rearing
practices, child personality, and behavior problems.
None were found in the area of family relations. In
predicting from one area to another, no studies were
found if the task set was one of finding prediction of
structure from structure. Any causal hypotheses offered
in subsequent sections are based on the findings of
bivariate research or the occasional inclusion of a few
questions in one area (e.g., child rearing practices)
in an analysis primarily aimed at another (e.g., child
personality). A brief review of research into these
areas now preceeds a statement of the purpose of the
current investigation and hypotheses to be tested. The
review will proceed in a logical procession of antecedent
to consequent events.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELEVANT RESEARCH
A. Family Structure. As has been stated, no evidence
of a nultivariate nature has been discovered concerning
family structure. A number of hypotheses have been offered
(see Glick, 1957) and (Bell, 1960, 1967), but these are
regarded as limited inasmuch as the current investigation
is concerned with evidence of structure and the relation of
this body of evidence to other domains. Hypotheses,
although largely based on intuition or minimal evidence,
will follow a presentation of evidence in other domains.
B. Child Rearing Practices. A great deal more has
been done in this area than in the area of family struc
ture in the way of systematic data gathering, and the
ensuing hypotheses are richer as a consequence.
Early investigations of the dimensions of child rear-
ing practices were conducted through the administration
and subsequent factor analysis of the Pels Parent Behavior
Rating Scales and, due to the crudeness of early factor
analytic methods and lack of adequate electronic computing
facilities, reached a two-dimensional solution of the
structure of child care practices (Baldwin, Kalhorn, and
Breese, 1945, 1949). Subsequent analyses (Roff, 1949; Lorr
and Jenkins, 1953) and discussion (Bell, 1956) indicated
that the structure may be somewhat more complex, but inade
quate methodology again led to what most present invest~tors
9
would regard as an underdetermination. Following in the
tradition of these earlier studies, Schaefer and Bell
(1958, 1959) developed a parental attitude research
instrument (PARI), standardization data for which has
been presented by Zuckerman, et ale (1958). Schaefer
(1959) proposed a circumplex model (Guttman, 1954) for
maternal behavior which proposed two major bipolar dimen
sions, autonomy vs. control and love vs. hostility, about
which maternal behavior could be organized. Subsequent
analyses of the PARI have been in terms of Schaefer's
circumplex model (Schaefer and Bayley, 1960, 1963; Bayley
and Schaefer, 1960). Becker and Krug's (1965) review of
the PARI research concludes that the PARI scores are
strongly influenced by acquiescent-response set and edu
cational level and do not serve any predictive function.
A further conclusion offered by Becker and Krug's (1964)
review is that difficulties in the PARI design and
structure "suggest that it would be more profitable to
work toward new approaches."
Becker and Krug (1964) pursued the circumplex model
in structuring ratings of child behavior made by parents
and teachers. The two major bipolar dimension (emo
tional stability vs. conduct problem and extraversion vs.
introversion) of the Becker and Krug (1964) analysis
approximate two of the second order factors found by
other investigators whose research designs meet to a
10
greater extent the technical requirements of such multi
variate analyses (Digman, 1963, 1965; Cattell, 1963).
Becker, et al. (1959) and Peterson, et al. (1959)
conducted multivariate analyses of parental behavior of
children receiving clinical treatment and juvenile
delinquents, respectively. The factors in these studies
were primarily concerned with maladjusted behavior and,
further, the technical aspects of the analyses did not
meet the borderline requirements of sound multivariate
analysis. The results are consequently not reproduced
here.
Emmerich (1964) attempted to investigate the struc
ture of child personality via free-play observation
ratings. Data were gathered on 38 children and 31
variables, once again rendering the resulting six ex
tracted factors (three of which were interpreted) suspect.
Additional investigations concerned with child
rearing practices and child behavior and which have met
the minimum requirements of multivariate research design,
are presented in summary form in Table AI, Appendix A.
These investigations will now be discussed in turn,
considering studies concerned with child rearing practices
first.
Sewell, et al. (1955) interviewed the mothers of
162 rural Wisconsin children of 5-6 years of age on 39
variables. Eight factors were extracted by theoontroid
II
method and "a few rather obvious" plots of pairs of
factors were visually rotated. The resulting factor
pattern values for each of the eight factors as labelled
by Sewell, et ale (1955) are presented for inspection as
Table II, Appendix A.
Milton's (1958) study was based on the Sears, et ale
(1957) data. In this study 379 suburban New England
mothers were interviewed and their responses coded
according to the system presented in Sears, et ale (1957).
Milton (1958) selected 44 of the Sears variables and
factored the resulting intercorrelation matrix by the
centroid method. Seven factors were extracted on the
basis of the criterion proposed by McNemar (1942) and
rotated to orthogonal simple structure. Table AlII,
Appendix A, presents in summary form the factor pattern
values of the variables loading Milton's seven factors
and the labels which Milton attached to the factors.
Minturn, et ale (1964) have conducted a cross
cultural study utilizing some of the same variables
which appeared in the Milton (1958) study. Minturn and
his colleagues collected data on 28 variables from 133
mothers of six cultures. The factoring was again carried
out by the centroid method and, although oblique rota
tions were conducted, Minturn, et' a1. favored the,
orthogonal solution and discussed their factors in terms
of an orthogonal seven factor solution. The factor
12
pattern values of the variables on the seven factors and
the associated factor labels are presented as Table AIV,
Appendix A.
Dielman, et ale (197Gb) have investigated the
structure of child rearing practices utilizing an en
larged set of the Sears, et ale (1957, 1965) variables,
including many of those analyzed by Milton (1958) and
Minturn, et ale (1964). In the Dielman, et ale study,
both fathers and mothers were interviewed. The two data
sets were separately intercorrelated and a decision
concerning the number of factors to extract arrived
at by the "scree test" (Cattell, 1966). Eighteen factors
were extracted from the matrix of intercorrelations
among the father variables and sixteen from the mothers'
intercorrelation matrix. Factor extraction was accom
plished by the principal axis method and factors rotated
by the Promax (Hendrickson and White, 1964) oblique
analytic method. The salient variables defining the
factors and their associated factor pattern values are
presented separately for the mothers and fathers as
Tables AV and AVI, Appendix A, respectively.
On the basis of the evidence provided by the studies
summarized above and in Tables All thru AVI of Appendix
A, it is concluded that at least seven first order
factors are to be expected in the child rearing practices
domain. It is possible that the number of factors is as
13
many as eighteen. These factors should include the
dimensions of parental strictness, faITily adjustment,
warmth of parent-child relationship, responsible child
training orientation, parental aggressiveness and puni
tiveness, patriarchal family structure, and mother's
concern for the child's well-being. As in any factor
analytic investigation, the replicability of the emergent
factors across samples and the usefulness of the factors
as predictors of behaviors of interest will determine
which are to be retained in the researcher's lexicon.
C. Rating Studies of Child Personality. Turning
from studies concerned with parental behavior to those
concerned with child behavior, Cattell and Gruen (1953)
analyzed the ratings on 30 variables by peers of 173
children 9-14 years of age. Six factors were extracted
by the centroid method and rotated to oblique simple
structure. The resulting factor loadings and the labels
attached by Cattell and Gruen (1953) are presented as
Table AVII, Appendix A.
Cattell and Coan (1957) analyzed teacher ratings of
198 children 6-10 years of age on 39 variables. Thirteen
factors were extracted by the centroid method and rotated
to oblique simple structure. The resulting reference
vector structure values and labels are presented as
Table AVIII, Appendix A.
14
Digman's (1965) reanalysis of the Peterson and Cattell
(1959) data (80 subjects and 36 variables), in which nine
factors were extracted, suggested, by the Kaiser (1965)
criterion, 7 factors. The eighth latent root was near
the Kaiser 1.0 cutoff value and, as previous studies
had implied 8 factors, 8 were extracted, initially ro
tated by the varimax method (Kaiser, 1959), and carried
to oblique simple structure by an adaptation of Cattell's
(1960) Rotoplot method. Hyperplane width was set at .20,
and reference vector structure values exceeding this
value, along with factor labels, are presented as Table
AIX, Appendix A.
In an earlier study, Digman (1963) utilizing the
variable list of Cattell and Coan (1957) consisting of
39 variables, and with an N=102 found, with principal
axis solution and oblique rotation, that the Kaiser
criterion suggested seven factors. The eighth and ninth
latent roots approached the 1.0 cutoff value (.95 and
.93, respectively) and, to allow comparison with the
Cattell and Coan (1957) investigation, eleven factors
were extracted and rotated to oblique simple structure
by Thurstone's (1947) criterion, taking the hyperplane
width as + .15. Digman's 1963 factors and the associated
reference vector structure values are presented as Table
AX, Appendix A.
15
Cattell (1963) reanalyzed the Digman (1963) data
(N=102, NVAR1=39) and extracted, on the basis of three
criteria for the number of factors to be extracted
(Tucker, 1938; Sokal, 1959; Kaiser, 1965), 12 factors
which were subsequently sUbjected to oblique rotation
to simple structure with the hyperplane width set at
± .10. Cattell's 12 factors and the primary factor
pattern values of the variables which were associated
with them are presented as Table AXI, Appendix A.
Emmerich's (1966) study focused upon teacher ratings
on 24 variables of the behavior of 53 nursery school
children. The correlation matrix was factored by the
principal axis method and the three extracted factors
were rotated to an oblique resolution by means of the
biquartimin method. The resulting factor pattern matrix
is presented as Table AXIl, Appendix A.
Slater (1962) notes that while there have been
several factor analytic studies of the parental behavior
and child behavior domains, few studies have been con
cerned with relationships between the child rearing
antecedent factors and the subsequent child behavior
factors. The few studies which have been concerned with
such relationships have either concentrated on abnormal
behavior or have been methodologically inadequate, or
INVAR= number of variables
16
both (Hewitt and Jenkins, 1946; Shoben, 1949; Peck,
1958). Slater (1962) aimed his investigation at a closing
of this research gap, but provided little conclusive
information due to the fact that his parental behavior
data were collected by means of administering a "parental
role patterns" questionnaire to 138 male college sopho
mores. The factors resulting from the questionnaire
responses were then related to factors resulting from
the scores of the subjects on 32 MMPI scales, many of
which had overlapping items.
The above studies indicate that six to twelve factors
are to be expected in the analysis of ratings of child
behavior. These factors should include those identified
most recently by Digman (1970) as intellect (creativity/
divergent thinking), sociality, aggression-dominance,
emotionali ty, industriousness, and compliance. There is in
adequate evidence relating child personality to child
rearing practices.
D. Childhood Behavior Problems. The principal
studies in this area stem from an early analysis and a
consequent checklist developed by Peterson (1961), which
has been tested on samples of normal, delinquent, and
counselling clinic children by Quay and his associates
(Quay and Quay, 1965; Quay, et al., 1966a, 1966b; Quay,
1966; Pimm, et al., 1967). Peterson's results (primary
factor pattern values) are presented as Table AXIII,
17
Appendix A. A summary of the results (primary factor
pattern values) of Quay and his associates are presented
as Table AXIV, Appendix A. Dielman, et ale (1970c)
have provided an oblique analysis of the behavior prob
lems variables, rather than the Varimax rotation provided
by Peterson and Quay and his associates. The analysis
in the Dielman, et ale study consisted of a principal
axis factor extraction of 8 factors, based on the scree
test (which indicated fewer factors in this case than
the Kaiser-Guttman unity rule) and a Promax rotation.
The results (primary factor pattern values) of the Dielman
et ale study are presented as Table AXV, Appendix A.
The studies just cited indicate that from four to
seven factors are to be expected in the analysis of
childhood behavior problems. These factors should
include those identified by Quay and his associates in
their several investigations as verbal activity, imma
turity, conduct problem, and personality problem.
Dielman, et ale (1970c) in a more recent analysis have
suggested the substitution of psychopathic-unsocialized
and neurotic-disturbed for the latter two terms, respec
tively.
CHAPTER III
PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH
The need in multivariate research concerning the
antecedents of child personality are seen by the writer
as:
1. The establishment of a theoretical model from
which to derive predictions, rather than relating avail
able scales which bear no theoretical relationship to
family practices.
2. Independent factoring of each data domain in
order to arrive at the best estimate of common factors
within each.
J. Systematic investigation of the predictive
efficiency of common factors in antecedent to sUbsequent
data domains.
The theoretical framework for the current investiga
tion has been provided by Sears, et ale (1957, 1965),
Milton (1958), Minturn, et ale (1964) and Dielman, et ale
(1970b) in the child rearing domain; by Digman (196J,
1965) and Cattell and his associates (1953, 1957, 196J)
in the child behavior domain; and by Peterson (1961),
Quay and his associates (e.g. 1965, 1966a, 1966b), and
Dielman, et ale (1970c) in the behavior problems domain.
An interlocking variable systom proposed by Howard and
Gallimore (1968), Howard (1967), and Gallimore, et ale
19
(1967), and recently revised (Gallimore, 1969) provides
the integrating model for the current investigation.
The most recent form of the Howard and Gallimore model iSI
ECOLOGICAL~DOMESTIC CHILD STRATEGIC XFACTORS --~ GROUP ---)~REARING---)~ORIENTATION
FACTORS FACTORS FACTORS
SITUATIONAL , BEHAVIORALFACTORS ----~7 TACTIC
FACTORS
The above model, in a more descriptive form, starting
with the extreme right term and working backwards, con
siders behavioral tactics, or specific behavioral out-
comes, to be a function of an interaction of situa'cional
and personality, or strategic orientation factors as the
Howard and Gallimore model has it, the latter of which
is a function of child rearing factors, which in turn
is a function of domestic group factors, which is in
turn a function of ecological factors. At the variable
level of description, ecological factors would be defined
by such things as family income, size of dwelling, size
of community, etc.; domestic group factors by variables
such as role of father in family, socialization group,
size of family, etc.; child rearing factors by variables
such as those in the list presented in Tables All thru
AVI; strategic orientation factors by variables such as
those in Tables AVII thru AXIl; situational factors by
variables such as types of models encountered outside the
20
home and types and frequencies of problems encountered;
and behavioral tactic factors by variables such as those
listed in Tables AXIII thru XV.
In terms of a factor model, the above theoretical
framework can be expressed aSI
BT j = bsolSOl + bso2S02 + ••• + bsonSOn,
where BTj is the factor score on behavior tactic j. SOl
thru SOn are factor scores on strategic orientation
factors and the bso's are the accompanying weights.
For the purpose of the present investigation the situa
tional factors are assumed to be constant and the model
is consequently a linear, non-interactive one.
The strategic orientation factor scores can in
the same manner be expressed as a weighted composite of
child rearing factorsl
SOj =bcrlCRI + bcrZCRZ + ••• + bcrnCRn ,
and the child rearing factor scores in terms of a weighted
composite of domestic group factorsl
CR j =bdglDGI + bdgZDGZ + ••• + bdgnDGn •
All of the above have omitted specific factors and
error variance which do not contribute to the prediction
of some criterion.
As the above model is still open to revision, the
current investigation will, in addition to testing the
21
above relationships, determine the predictive efficiency
of each antecedent set of factors in relation to subse-
quent sets of factors, whether immediately subsequent or
not. Tests of all of the above are amenable to standard
multiple regression procedures. The main emphasis in
the present study will be on child rearing practices
and behavior tactics. The other data domains, with the
exception of situational factors which must be regarded
as constant, will be included in order to assess the
degree of independent prediction of behavior tactics
which is possible from child rearing factors. As an
example of the hypothesis testing procedures to be
employed, omitting subscripts for the various factors
within each data domain, the criterion (Yl) of behavior
tactics would be predicted by the three antecedents:
Yl = blXl + b2X2 + bJXJ + el
Where the b's are the regression weights accompanying
the variables Xl thru XJ
' domestic group, child rearing,
and personality (strategic orientation). In practice,
each X term would be increased by the multiple of the
number of common factors within that domain, and separate
prediction equations would be calculated for each cri
terion factor.
The hypothesis that the ecological factor in the
example is not of significant predictive power to be
22
included in the model could then be posed: HI: bl = 0,
and the reduced model prediction equation is Y2 = b2X2 +
b3X3 + e2 - The increase in error variance (or decrease
in predicted variance) is then calculated by the ratio
F = (R2f - R2r ) / dfr - dfr , where(1 - R2 f ) 7 N - dff
R2 r = the full prediction model multiple correlation
of the dependent variable with all independent
variables considered
R2 r = the reduced prediction model multiple correla
tion of the dependent variable with all but
the eliminated independent variable or vari-
abIes considered
dff = the degrees of freedom in the full prediction
model
dfr = the degrees of freedom in the reduced predic
tion model
N = the number of observations;
detailed descriptions of the multiple regression model
in hypothesis testing may be found in Bottenberg and
Ward (1963) or Hays (1965)-
CHAPTER IV
STATE~ffiNT OF HYPOTHESES
The hypotheses to be examined in the current investi
gation are on two levels. The first level of hypotheses
consists of those which are concerned with the structure
of the various domains. An attempt is made to base
these hypotheses on existinG evidence when possible. The
second level consists of the interrelationships among
the various structural domains. Here again, an attempt
is made to utilize existing data, although here the writer
has been unable to find data relating structured sets of
data and has been forced to rely upon essentially bivar
iate data.
A. structural Hypotheses
1. Family Structure. Within the area of family
structure, no hypotheses can be offered concerning the
dimensionality on the basis of previous evidence. On
the basis of previous variables of interest to students
of household demography (e.g., Glick, 1957; Bell, 1960,
1967), some variables of importance might be postulated.
These are: family type (e.g., nuclear vs. lineal),
family size, family origin, educational level of parents,
relation of children to the head of the household (e.g.,
natural child, stepchild, adopted child, grandchild),
presence or absence of mother, presence or absence of
father, birth order of child, number of siblings of
24
same sex, and number of siblings of opposite sex. The
number of factors which may emerge from a structural
analysis of such variables is open to question and no
hypotheses are offered here.
2. Child Rearing Practices. On the basis of
existing evidence (Sewell, et al., 1955; Milton, 1958;
Minturn, et al., 1964; Dielman, et al., 1970b), it is
hypothesized that at least 7 factors will be identifi
able in the child rearing practices domain. These should
include factors identifying permissiveness, strictness
of discipline, warmth of parent-child relationship,
promotion of independence, high use of sanctions in
controlling child behavior, patriarchal family, and
aggression training.
3. Ratings of Child Personality. Prior work in
this area (Cattell and Gruen, 1953; Cattell and Coan,
1957; Peterson and Cattell, 1959; Cattell, 1963; Digman,
1963, 1965, 1970) indicates at least 6 factors and
possibly as many as 11. The current study utilized
variables focusing on the factors found by Digman (1963,
1965, and 1970). Digman's (1970) most recent evidence
is that 6 factors can be reliably reproduced across
samples, and such is the hypothesis here. The hypoth
esized factors include: intellect (creativity/divergent
thinking), sociality, aggression-dominance, emotionality,
industriousness, and complianceo
25
4. Behavior Problems. The evidence of Peterson
(1961), Quay and his associates (Quay and Quay, 1965;
Quay et al., 1966a, 1966b; Pimm, et al., 1967; Quay,
1966), and Dielman, et ale (1970c) suggests that perhaps
four to seven factors will emerge from the analysis of
the behavior problems data, including immaturity, verbal
overactivity, conduct problem, and personality problem.
B. Relationships Arnone Domains
Once again, a lack of evidence concerning the struc
ture of the family demography variables precludes any
systematic hypothesis formation. It might be postulated
that parental education is positively related to the
child rearing practice factar of permissiveness and
negatively related to the strictness of discipline factor.
A demographic factor primarily marked by size of family,
which would not necessarily be highly correlated with the
factor marked by parental education but may be positively
correlated to some extent, could be hypothesized to bear
a negative relationship to the parent-child warmth of
relationship factor and a negative relationship to the
independence training factor. The parental education
factor, if such emerges, could further be hypothesized
to relate positively to parental demands and praise for
achievement, as well as the use of sanctions in controlling
child behavior. A family-type factor (e.g., nuclear,
extended) could well be hypothesized to relate positively
26
to a family size factor, if a high score on the family
type factor indicates an extended family type, and con
sequently negatively to the child rearing factor of
independence training.
In the area of child rearing practices, Digman's
(1965) finding that teachers' ratings of parental per
missiveness added significantly to the prediction of
child personality factors D, E, and H, enables the
hypothesis to be posed here that the child rearing
practice permissiveness factor will bear a positive
relationship to these three child personality factors.
Further, also based on Digman's (1965) results, parental
acceptance, or the warmth of the parent-child relation
ship, is hypothesized to relate positively to child
personality factors A, I, and C, and negatively to factor
T. The child rearing practices factor of responsibility,
or independence, training and the child personality E
factor should exhibit a positive relationship, as negative
attention-seeking has been found by Sears, et ale (1965)
to be positively related to a lack of standards or demands
for mature behavior. The child rearing punitiveness,
or strictness of discipline factor is hypothesized to
relate positively to child personality factors A and K
and negatively to child personality factor H. This hypot~
esis is derived from the finding of Sears, et ale (1965)
that variables which were included in the Milton (1958)
27
punitiveness factor resulted in a greater degree of
feminine behavior for both male and female children,
coupled with Digman's (1963) finding that males tend to
obtain lower scores on the child personality factors A
and K and higher scores on H.
Relating the child personality dimensions to the
hypothesized behavior problems factors is once again
primarily a matter of speculation. Quay, et ale (1966b)
have found that, within a sample of children referred
to a child guidance clinic, female children were more
apt to exhibit higher scores on the personality problem
dimension than male children, while scores on the conduct
problem dimension were positively related to lower in
telligence, younger age, non-white race, and lower
socioeconomic status. This is of little aid in the
formulation of hypotheses concerning the relationships
among child personality dimensions and behavior problems
dimensions. On the basis of item content, the behavior
problems factor of immaturity is hypothesized to bear
a negative relationship to child personality factors E,
G, r, and a positive relationship to factor T. The be
havior problem factor of verbal overactivity should
relate positively to D and E, and negatively to K. The
conduct problems dimension should relate negatively to
A and K, and positively to D. The personality problem
dimension is hypothesized to bear a negative relation
ship to C, H, and I, and a positive relationship to T.
The above hypothesized relationships among the four
domains are presented in summary form in Table I.
28
CHAPTER V
I'.JETHOD AND PROCEDURE
All data were collected in the Nanakuli Homestead
area on the Waianae Coast of Oahu, Hawaii. The household
demography data were collected by a trained interviewer
during the summer of 1967. 'Ehere Vlere originally 35
variables in this set of data, three of which were elim
inated due to their exact or nearly exact correspondence
or inverse relationship to another variable (individual
female unit correlated -1.0 with individual male unit,
grandchild of household head correlated -1.0 with child
of household head, and age in years correlated .97 with
number of years of completed education). The remaining
32 variables are listed as Table II.
The child rearing practices data were gathered during
the same period, also by a trained interviewer. There
were originally 262 variables in this set of data. The
variables were first divided into three sets--those
having to do with general child rearing practices, those
having to do with practices in raising male children,
and those bearing on practices in the rearing of female
children. Variables were eliminated from each set which
did not show at least a 20~.0 response rate, leaving 53
variables in the general practices set, 29 in the male
practices set, and 27 in the female practices seto These
three sets of variables are presented as Table III.
30
TABLE I. SUMMARY OF THE HYPOTHESIZEDINTER-DOMAIN RELATIONSHIPS
Family Child Rearing Child BehaviorDemography Practices Personality Problems
Family Size Warmth of Parent A- High ConductChild Relation- Problem
(Greater) ship
(Lower) I- High Personal-ity Problem,High Immaturity
C- High Personal-ity Problem
T+ High Immatur-ity, HighPersonalityProblem
Independence E- Low VerbalTraining Activity,(Lower) High Immatur-
ityExtended IndependenceFamily Type Training E- Low Verbal
(Lower) ActivityHigh Immatur-ity
Parental Permissiveness D+ High ConductEducation (Greater) Problem, High(Greater) Verbal Activ-
ity
E+ High VerbalActivity, LowImmaturity
H+
Strictness of A- High ConductDiscipline Problem(Lower)
31
TABLE I. (Continued) SUMMARY OF THE HYPOTHESIZEDINTER-DOMAIN RELATIONSHIPS
FamilyDemography
ParentalEducation(Greater)
Child RearingPractices
Strictness o:fDiscipline(Lower)
Use o:f Sanctionsin Control o:fChild Behavior(Greater)
Demands :forAchievement(Greater)
Child BehaviorPersonality Problems
K- High VerbalActivity,High ConductProblem
H+
32
TABLE II. HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
VARIABLE LIST
VariableNumber Variable Description
1 Nuclear family type (l=yes, O=no)
2 Nuclear family type with lateral extensions(l=yes, O=no)
3 Lineal extended grandparental family type(l=yes, O=no)
4 Lineal extended superordinate family type(l=yes, O=no)
5 Subnuclear extended family type (l=yes, O=no)
6 Subnuclear unextended family type (l=yes, O=no)
7 Individual female unit (l=yes, O=no)
8 Origin in Nanakuli (l=yes, O=no)
9 Origin in other Waianae coast areas (l=yes, O=no)
10 Origin in Honolulu or immediate environs(l=yes, O=no)
11 Origin elsewhere on Oahu (l=yes, O=no)
12 Origin in other island in Hawaii (l=yes, O=no)
13 Origin on Mainland (l=yes, O=no)
14 Number of years of completed education
15 Lessee (l=yes, O=no)
16 Lineal relation to household head (l=yes, O=no)
17 Consanguinal relation to household head(l=yes, O=no)
18 Spouse's consanguine (l=yes, O=no)
19 Spouse's lineal (l=yes, O=no)
20 Other affinals (l=yes, O=no)
33
TABLE II. (Continued) HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYVARIABLE LIST
VariableNumber Variable Description
21 Hanai or adopted (l=yes, O=no)
22 Not related (l=yes, O=no)
23 Child of household head (l=yes, O=no)
24 Percentage Hawaiian ancestry
25 Presence of female sibling 8 years or older(l=yes, O=no)
26 Birth order among all siblings
27 Total number of all children belonging to parents
28 Total number of children under 21 living athome with no children of their own
29 Both parents natural in household (l=yes, O=no)
30 Natural father, stepmother in household(l=yes, O=no)
31 Natural mother, stepfather in household(l=yes, O=no)
32 Child is Hanai, foster, adopted child, includinggrandchild whose parent is not in the household
TABLE III. CHILD REARINGPRACTICES VARIABLE LIST
A. General Child Rearing Practices and Attitudes(NVAR=53)
Variable Description
1. Age at which things and privileges should be takenaway as punishment
2. Youngest age children should be spanked
3. Oldest age children should be spanked
4. Parental response to child's request for delay ofrequirement (l=will allow exceptions, O=will notallow exceptions)
Parental reasons for requiring chores
5. Teach responsibility, character building
6. Teach skills needed for life, prepares child foradulthood
7. Help family, share work, remove burden from others
8. Control of child
Parental response to child's request for change in job
9. Let them do it, no qualifications
10. Let them do it, depending on nature of request
11. Will not allow, but will explain
12. Will not allow, no explanation
13. Children never ask
Most important thing in raising children, first mentioned
14. Obedience, compliance, not spoiling, respect
15. Teach right and wrong
16. Help them make good life, get ahead
17. Give love and affection
TABLE III. (Continued) CHILD REARINGPRACTICES VARIABLE LIST
A. General Child Rearing Practices and Attitudes(NVAR=53) Continued
Variable Description
18. Teach to be responsible, independent, mature
19. Physical care
35
Most important thing in raising children, second mentioned
20. Obedience, compliance, Y'.ot spoiling, respect
21. Teach right and wrong
22. Help them make good life, get ahead
23· Give love and affection
24. Teach to be responsible, independent, mature
25. Physical care
What makes you proud of your children?
26. Obedience and compliance
27. Personal accomplishment, school sports, popularity,musical or artisttc talent
28. Vague reference to "being good"
29. Preferred age of children (youngest age given)
Reasons for preferred age of children
30. Less trouble
31. Learning things
32. More loving, an object of affection
33. Can talk with you
34. Need you more, more dependent
35. Cute, sweet, source of amusement
36. Least liked age of children (youngest age given)
TABLE III. (Continued) CHILD REARINGPRACTICES VARIABLE LIST
A. General Child Rearing Practices and Attitudes(NVAR=53) Continued
Variable Description
Reasons for least liked age of children
37. Too independent, don't need you
36
38. Gets into difficulty, unspecified trouble
39. Too headstrong, "hard headed," talks back, hard·tohandle
40. Fussy, nags, complains, intrusive
41. Unruliness, silly, wild play
42. Reaction to teenagers' arguments with parent(l=will allow, O=will not allow)
Preferred child's behavior
43. Does things on his own
44. Does what he is told
45. Both
Most important value in child's behavior
46. Learn a lot from books
47. Do what parents say
48. Both
49. Reaction to children staying at home (O=stay,l=leave)
Anything a teenager could do that would make you want himor her to leave your home
50~ Commit crime, disgrace family
51. Disrespect, defiance, disobedience, hits parent
37
TABLE III. (Continued) CHILD REARINGPRACTICES VARIABLE LIST
A. General Child Rearing Practices and Attitudes(NVAR=53) Continued
52. Drunkeness, dope, etc.
53. Nothing
B. Male Children (NVAR=29)
1. Age at which boys should be given a regular jobaround the house
2. Age at which boys should be given a really important job
Boy behavior which angers parent (first mentioned)
3. Doesn't complete tasks or does them in an unsatisfactory manner
4. Disobedience (unspecified)
5. Fights with siblings
6. Nagging, demanding attention, cry-baby, won't dothings for himself, intrusions, interruptions, etc.
7. Talks back, aggression against parents
Initial parental response to boy misbehavior
8. Threaten to take away privilege or freedom
9. Act to take away privilege or freedom
10. Threaten physical punishment
11. Physical punishment
12. Scold, lecture, nag, shame, ridicule
Ultimate parental response to boy misbehavior
13. Act to take away privilege or freedom
14. Physical punishment
TABLE III. (Continued) CHILD REARINGPRACTICES VARIABLE LIST
B. Male Children (NVAR=29)
15. Report to other parent for action
16. No need to do anything
17. Scold, lecture, naG' sJ:ta;lle, ridicule
Physical punishment of boys
18. Yes, all boys in family
19. Yes, some boys in family
20. No
Reasons for spanking boys
21. Doesn't complete tasks or does them in an unsatisfactory manner
22. Disobedience (unspecified)
23. Fights with siblings
Boy behavior which makes parent happy
24. Does work, does work without being told
25. Acts nice, shows affection, is sweet
26. Vague reference to being good, obedient
27. Does well in school or in an activity
28. Nothing
29. Age at which boys can go out pretty much as theylike
C. Female Children (NVAR=27)
1. Age at which girls should be given a regular jobaround the house
2. Age at which girls should be given a reallyimportant job
38
39
TABLE III. (Continued) CHILD REARINGPRACTICES VARIABLE LIST
C. Female Children (NVAR=27)
Girls' behavior which angers parent (first mentioned)
3. Doesn't complete tasks or does them in an unsatisfactory manner
4. Disobedience (unspecified)
5. Wil~ plaYt noisy, destructive, etc.
6. Nagging, demanding attention, cry-baby, won't dothings for herself, intrusions, interruptions, etc.
7. Talks back, aggression against parents
Initial parental response to girl misbehavior
8. Act to take away privilege or freedom
9. Physical punishment
10. Scold, lecture, nag, shame, ridicule
Ultimate parental response to girl misbehavior
11. Act to take away privilege or freedom
12. Physical punishment
13. Scold, lecture, nag, shame, ridicule
14. No need to do anything
Physical punishment of girls
15. Yes, all girls in family
16. Yes, some girls in family
17. No
18. Does work without being told
Girl behavior which makes parent happy
19. Acts nice, shows affection, is sweet
40
TABLE III. (Continued) CHILD REARINGPRACTICES VARIABLE LIST
Co Female Children (NVAR=27)
20. Vague reference to being good, obedient
21. Does well in school or in an activity
Method of letting girl know parents are happy with her
22. Tell, thank, praise
23. By expression, behavior; by smiling or joking
240 Never do anything
25. Age at which girls would be allowed to go out witha group of girls in the evening
26. Age at which girls would be allowed to go out witha mixed group of boys and girls in the evening
27. Age at which girl would be allowed to go out witha boy
41
The teacher ratings and behavior problems ratings
were collected during the 1967-68 school year. The 20
teacher rating variables were constructed in a seven
point scale format and are presented as Table IV. The
raw scores were subsequently converted to T-scores. The
behavior problems variables were dichotomous, as in the
analyses by Quay and his associates. Variables not re
ceiving at least a 20% response rate were eliminated. The
remaining 29 of the original 55 variables are presented
in Table V.
Each set of data was first intercorrelated and eigen
values were obtained from the resulting correlation
matrices. Subsequent to the decision of the number of
factors which were to be extracted, communalities were
obtained by an iterative procedure and inserted in the
diagonal elements: Factoring was completed by the prin
cipal axis method of extraction and each of the resulting
principal axis factor matrices rotated by the Harris
Kaiser (1964) oblique analytic method.
VariableNumber
1
2
:3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
42
IfABLE IV. TEACHER RATINGSVARIABLE LIST
Variable Description
Neat in appearance; careful about clothes andappearance; dislikes being dirty or disheveled;is usually well-groomed
Touchy; very sensitive to criticism; cries,pouts or sulks when criticized; does not takewell to jokes or pranks on him (her)
Seclusive: dislikes group activities and games,prefers to be by self or in company of one ortwo others; dislikes being in a crowd
Perservering: keeps at his (her) work until itis completed; sees a job through despite difficulties; painstaking and thorough
Assertive: bossy; usually attempts to directthe actions of others; is convinced his (her)way is the best way of doing things; showsothers "how things should be done"
Energetic: active; full of pep; vigorous;movements are quick, darting
Fearful: has many fears and worries, some ofwhich are unreasonHble; easily becomes alarmedor frightened
Spiteful: deliberately does or says thingswhich may annoy or hurt others; says hatefulthings about others; belittles others
Nervous Habits: has a great variety of nervoushabi ts (e .g., nailbi ting" grimacing, tics, hairtwisting, pencil chewing, etc.)
Imaginative: has an active, vivid imagination;very fanciful; sees poss~bilities overlook~d
by others
Careful of personal belongings: takes good careof things which belong to him (her); becomes concerned when possessions are missing and searchesfor them; keeps his (her) own things neat, clean,and in order
43
TABLE IV. (Continued) TEACHER RATINGSVARIABLE LIST
VariableNumber Variable Description
12 Concerned about acceptance: expresses concernabout real or imagined rebuffs and slights fromothers; unable to take his (her) relationshipwith others for granted; worries that he (she)may lose friends or that others will not likehim (her)
13 Gregarious: likes to be vlith others and seekstheir company; spends as much time with othersas possible; dislikes being alone
14 Fickle: changes frequently in interests, opinions, and pursuits; "flighty," starts one thingand shifts to another
15 Self-minimizing: tends to minimize own importance; humble; never brags or shows off; seeksout or is content with less important tasksor positions
16 Lethargic: slow moving; seldom or never runs orhurries; unresponsive or slow to react; worksslowly
17 Adaptable: copes easily and successfully withnew and strange situations; bravely faces up touncertainty
18 Considerate: thoughtful of others; sensitive toothers' feelings; cannot do things which hurtothers' feelings; sympathetic when others arein trouble and tries to help
19 Restless: constantly or frequently moves aboutthe room; unable to settle down after activityperiod or recess
20 Original: has remarkably novel and differentideas and/or solutions to problems; thinkingand behavior are characterized by unusualapproaches
VariableNumber
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 .
21
22
44TABLE V. BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS
VARIABLE LIST
Descriptionof Variable
Restlessness, inability to sit still~
Doesn't know how to have fun; behaves likelittle adult
Self-conscious; easily embarrassed
Disruptive; tendency to annoy other~
Feelings of inferiority
Steals in company with others
Boisterousness; rowdiness
Preoccupation; "in·a world of his own"
Social witpdrawal; preference for solitaryactivities
Lack. of self confidence
Inattentiveness to what others say
Easily flustered and confused
Loyal to delinquent friends
Reticence, secretiveness
Truancy from school
Laziness in school and in performance of othertasks
Irresponsibility; undependability
Excessive daydreaming
Has bad companions
Disobedience, difficulty in discipl~nary control
Uncooperativeness in group situations
Aloofness, social reserve
TABLE V. (Continued) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSVARIABLE LIST
Variable DescriptionNumber of Variable
45
23 Passivity, suggestibility, easily led by others
2L~ Clumsiness, awkwardness, poor muscular coordination
25 Destructiveness in regard to his own or others'property
26 Impertinence, sauciness
27 Sluggishness, lethargy
28 Profane language
29 Irritability, hot tempered, easily aroused toanger
CHAPTER VI
RESULTS ArID DISCUSSION
The correlation matrices resulting from the demog
raphy, child rearing practices, child personality, and
behavior problems are presented as Tables BI, 5II, BIII,
and BIV, respectively, in Appendix B. The resulting
eigenvalues and cumulative proportion of accountable vari
ance for the four data sets are presented, respectively,
as Tables BV thru BVIII in Appendix B, the unrotated
principal axis factor matrices as Tables BIX thru EXII,
the obliquely rotated (Harris-Kaiser) primary factor
pattern matrices as Tables BXIII thru BXVI, and the re
sulting primary factor intercorrelations as Tables BXVII
thru BXX.
A. Household Demography Structure. Sixteen of the
household demography eigenvalues exceeded unity. A plot
of the eigenvalues and the application of the "scree test"
(Cattell, 1966) recommended the extraction of eight
factors. As the dimensionality of this area is unexplored
and due to the difficulty of replication of factors across
samples when a greater number is extracted (Peterson, 1965)
the decision was made to extract the smaller number. The
first factor (see Table VI) receives its highest loadings
from the variables "natural father, stepmother in house
hold" and "origin on another island in Hawaii." There
are also moderate loadings from higher percentage of
47
Hawaiian ancestry, number of years of completed education,
presence of a female sibling 8 years or older, and, nat
urally enough, a negative loading from "both parents
in the household. II Thi s high score on thi s factor, con
sequently, would indicate a child who lives with his
father and stepmother in a family which is from an island
other than Oahu. The percentage of Hawaiian ancestry is
relatively high, as is the number of years of education
and the probability of having a sister over 8 years of
age living at home.
TABLE VI. HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYFACTOR I STEPMOTHER, ORIGIN OFF OAHU
Variable Loading Description
12 .61 Origin on other island in Hawaii
14 .24 Number of years of completed education
24 .38 Percentage of Hawaiian ancestry
25 .26 Presence of female sibling 8 yearsor older
29 -·32 Both parents natural in household
30 .67 Natural father, stepmother in house-hold
Factor II of the household demography analysis (see
Table VII) could be called the "Hanai" factor. The highest
loading here indicates that the child is either a foster
child or a grandchild whose parents are not in the home.
The family tends to be from another island in Hawaii,
although here the percentage of Hawaiian ancestry tends
48
to be lower. Birth order is relatively high, the prob-
ability of female siblings 8 years of age or older in
the household is relatively low, and there are relatively
few children under 21 living at home.
TABLE VII. HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
FACTOR II HANAI
Variable Loading
12 .25
18 .27
19 -.21
21 ·39
24 -.23
25 -.34
26 .27
28 -.29
Description
Origin on other island in Hawaii
Spouse's consanguine
Spouse's lineal
Hanai or adopted
Percentage Hawaiian ancestry
Presence of female sibling 8 yearsor older
Birth order among all siblings
Total number of children under 21living at home with no children oftheir own
29
32
-.37
.77
Both parents natural in household
Child is Hanai, foster, adopted child,including grandchild whose parent isnot in the household
Household demography factor III (see Table VIII) is
simply interpreted as a subnuclear family in which the
child's natural mother is not present. The family origin
tends to be from a Waianae coast area other than Nanakuli.
Factor IV of the house demography data (see Table IX)
is interpreted as one in which the child is relatively
49
likely to bear a consanguinal relationship to both parents.
The family tends to be nuclear with lateral extensions.
TABLE VIII. HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
FACTOR III SUBNUCLEAR, MOTHER ABSENT
Variable Loading
1 -.20
5 .23
6 .34
9 .22
29 -·59
31 -.82
Description
Nuclear family type
Subnuclear extended family type
Subnuclear unextended family type
Origin in other Waianae coast areas
Both parents natural in household
Natural mother, stepfather in household
TABLE IX. HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTOR IV
NUCLEAR-LATERAL, CONSANGUINE
Variable Loading Description
1 -·59 Nuclear family type
2 .68 Nuclear family type with lateralextensions
16 -·32 Lineal relation to household head
17 .44- Consanguinal relation to householdhead
18 • 2L~ Spouse's consanguine
Factor V is best interpreted as a "specific" and is of
little structural interpretative value, having two large
"origin" loadings and nothing else of importance. The
origin is Nanakuli, as indicated in Table X.
50
TABLE X. HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
FACTOR V NANAKULI ORIGIN
Variable
8
10
Loading
.92
-.89
Description
Origin in Nanakuli
Origin in Honolulu or immediateenvirons
Factor VI (see Table XI) is marked by nuclear family
type and the child of the household head. There tend to
be more children under 21 at home.
TABLE XI. HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
FACTOR VI NUCLEAR FAMILY
Variable Loading
1 .61
4 -.79
19 -.20
23 .68
28 .28
Description
Nuclear family type
Lineal extended superordinate familytype
Spouse's lineal
Child of household head
Total number of children under 21living at home with no children oftheir own
32 -.22 Child is Hanai, foster, adoptedchild, including grandchild whoseparent is not in the household
Factor VII (see Table XII) is marked by a large number
of children belonging to the parents, many of the children
being under 21 years of age, high birth order of the child,
subnuclear extended family type, relatively high percentage
51
of Hawaiian ancestry, and less likelihood of a female
sibling 8 years of age or older in the household.
TABLE XII. HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTOR VIISUBNUCLEAR-EXTENDED, OLDER CHILD
Birth order among all siblings
Total number of all children belonging to parents
Presence of female sibling 8 yearsor older
Percentage Hawaiian Ancestry
Nuclear family type
Subnuclear extended family type
Description
Total number of children under 21living at home with no children oftheir own
Variable Loading
1 -.34
5 .56
24 .37
25 -·50
26 ·75
27 .94
28 .68
The final factor to be considered in the household
demography analysis (see Table XIII) is marked primarily
by the child's lineal relationship to the spouse of the
household head rather than to the household head himself.
The family type tends to be nuclear, and there is a
tendency for one parent to be other than the natural
parent of the child.
B. Child Rearing Practices Structure
1. General Child Rearing Practices. Twenty-three
of the eigenvalues in the general child rearing practices
analysis exceeded unity. The "scree test" indicated 12
52
TABLE XIII. HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYFACTOR VIII SPOUSE'S LINEAL
Variable
1
5
12
16
19
29
Loading
.)6
-.26
-.20
-.8)
.81
-.21
Description
Nuclear family type
Subnuclear extended family type
Origin in other island in Hawaii
Lineal relation to household head
Spouse's lineal
Both parents natural in household
factors and, for the reasons discussed in the preceeding
section, 12 were extracted and rotated. The first factor
in this analysis (see Table XIV) is marked primarily by
an affectionate attitude on the part of the parents.
Love and affection are more important than helping the
child to "get ahead," and the parent willingly responds
to the childs' requests, but the child seems to make fewer
of them. There also appears to be a tendency for the
parent to prefer children as companions rather than sources
of amusement. This factor has been termed "warmth of
parent-child relationship.
The second general child rearing practices factor
(see Table XV) is marked by an unwillingness to allow
changes but a willingness to explain that unwillingness
to the child. The most important things in the raising
of children are physical care and moral instruction. The
child seems to be regarded as a necessary cog in the family
53
TABLE XIV. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR I WARMTH OF PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP
Variable
9
13
16
Loading
.64
-.28
Description
Parental response to child's requestfor change in job: let them do it,no qualifications
Parental response to child's requestfor change in job: they never ask
Most important thing in raisingchildren: help them make good life,get ahead
17 .44
25 ·30
33 ·32
35 -.21
LH - .. 22
53 .25
Most important thing in raisingchildren: give love and affection
Most important thing in ralsln~
children: physical care
Reasons for preferred age of children:they can talk with you
Reasons for preferred age of children:cute, source of amusement
Reasons for least liked age of children: unruliness, silly, wild play
Anything a teenager could do thatwould make you want him to leaveyour home: nothing
54
TABLE XV. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR II OBEDIENCE TRAINING
Variable
7
11
13
19
21
53
Loading
-.21
.21
.68
-.28
.J8
.21
.20
-.JO
Description
Parental response to child's requestfor delay of requirement (l=willallow exceptions, O=will not allowexceptions)
Parental reasons for requiringchores: help family, share work,remove burden from others
Parental response to child's requestfor change in job: will not allow,but will explain
Parental response to child's requestfor change in job: children neverask
Most important thing in raisingchildren, first mentioned: physicalcare
Most important thing in raisingchildren, second mentioned: teachright and wrong
Reaction to children staying at home(O=stay, l=leave)
Anything a teenager could do thatwould make you want him or her toleave your home: nothing
55
wheel ("help the family, share the work") but one which
should "get out on his own" sooner or later (variables
49 and 53). This factor has been termed "obedience train-
ing."
Factor III in the general analysis of child rearing
problems (see Table XVI) is marked primarily by the atti
tudes of preferring children as objects of affection and
regarding physical care, love, and affection, rather than
obedience training, as important in rearing children.
Intrusive behavior on the part of the child is not cared
for, although arguments may be allowed. Control of the
child, rather than sharing the burden, tends to be the
reason for requiring the child to perform some duties.
The parent seems not to become unduly ruffled if the child
gets into some difficulty or exhibits some aggression
toward them. This factor has been labelled "permissive-
ness."
The fourth factor in this analysis (see Table XVII) is
marked primarily by variables indicating a high value
placed on character and moral training as well as an un
willingness to reason with the child and a willingness to
administer harsh discipline at earlier ages. The factor
has been labelled "strictness of discipline."
Factor V (Table XVIII) is marked by a wish to see the
child "get ahead" and a pride in the child's accomplishments.
56
TABLE XVI. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR III PERMISSIVENESS
Variable
7
8
14
19
23
32
38
40
42
51
Loading
-.20
.27
-.29
.38
.35
.47
-.28
.48
.22
-.25
Description
Parental reasons for requ1r1ng chores:help family, share work, remove burdenfrom others
Parental reasons for requiring chores:control of child
Most important thing in ra1s1ng children, first mentioned: obedience,compliance, not spoiling, respect
Most important thing in raising children, first mentioned: physical care
Most important thing in raising children, second mentioned: give love andaffection
Reasons for preferred age of children:more loving, an object of affection
Reasons for least liked age of children: gets into difficulty, unspecified trouble
Reasons for least liked age of children: fUssy, nags, complains, intrusive
Reaction to teenagers' arguments withparent. (l=will allow, O=will notallow)
Anything a teenager could do thatwould make you want him or her toleave your home: disrespect, defiance, disobedience, hits parent
57
TABLE XVII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR IV STRICTNESS OF DISCIPLINE
Variable
1
2
5
7
12
18
28
50
53
Loading
-·39
-.22
.58
-·31
.46
.26
.27
.46
-.41
Description
Age at which things and privilegesshould be taken away as punishment
Youngest age children should bespanked
Parental reasons for requiring chores:teach responsibility, character building
Parental reasons for requiring chores:help family, share work, removeburden from others
Parental response to ohild's requestfor change in job: will not allow,no explanation
Most important thing in raising children, first mentioned: teach to beresponsible, independent, mature
What makes you proud of your children?:vague reference to "being good"
Anything a teenager could do thatwould make you want him or her toleave your home: commit crime,disgrace family
Anything a teenager could do thatwould make you want him or her toleave your home: nothing
58
TABLE XVIII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR V ACHIEVEMENT TRAINING
Variable
2
15
16
26
27
41
Loading
·31
-.20
.3.5
-.70
.62
.23
Description
Youngest age children should bespanked
Most important thing in raisingchildren, first mentioned: teachright and wrong
Most important thing in ralslngchildren, first mentioned: helpthem make good life, get ahead
What makes you proud of your children?: obedience and compliance
What makes you proud of your children?: personal accomplishment,school sports, popularity, musicalor artistic talent
Reasons for least liked age of children: unruliness, silly, wild play
59
as well as a tendency not to spank younger children and
a dislike of unruly, silly, or wild play. The label which
has been 2.ttached here is "achievement training."
Factor VI (Table XIX) is marked by a willingness to·
grant the requests of the child, coupled with a tendency
of the child not to ask, as in Factor I, along with the
attitude that obedience training is the most important
thing in child rearing and a preference for the age of the
child which is characterized by cuteness and learning new
things. Physical care is not regarded as an important
aspect of child rearing and there appear to be some things,
although there is no clear indication of what they are,
which would make the parent want the child to leave home.
This factor has very tentatively been labelled "preference
for younger children."
Factor VII (see Table XX) appears to be another speci
fic, marked primarily by the parent's desire that the
child do what he is told rather than do things on his own.
There are moderate loadings from variables indicating the
child is not a source of amusement and children are not
spanked at quite as young an age. This has been labelled
"demands for compliance."
Factor VIII (see Table XXI) is a difficult one to in
terpret. It could at once be either characteristic of the
parent who has no well defined attitudinal system guiding
his child training practices or of the parent who regards
60
TABLE XIX. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR VI PREFERENCE FOR YOUNGER CHILDREN
Variable
10
13
14
19
30
31
35
53
Loading
.67
-.47
.27
-.27
-.46
.22
.20
-.30
Description
Parental response to child's requestfor change in job: let them do it,depending on nature of request
Parental response to child's requestfor change in job: children neverask
Most important thing in raising children, first mentioned: obedience,compliance, not spoiling, respect
Most important thing in raising children, first mentioned: physical care
Reasons for preferred age of children:less trouble
Reasons for preferred age of children:learning things
Reasons for preferred age of children:cute, sweet, source of amusement
Anything a teenager could do thatwould make you want him or her toleave your home: nothing
61
TABLE XX. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR VII DEMANDS FOR COMPLIANCE
Variable
2
35
44
Loading
.28
-.23
-.94
.92
Description
Youngest age children should bespanked
Reasons for preferred age of children:cute, sweet, source of amusement
Preferred child's behavior: doesthings on his own
Preferred child's behavior: does whathe is told
child training as a complex endeavor which cannot readily
be compartmentalized. High loadings are received both
from the importance of love and affection and teaching
responsibility (variables 17 and 24), and also from valuing
the child's learning on his own as well as doing what the
parents say (variable 48) and a tendency not to subscribe
to either of these values alone (variables 46 and 47).
There is a slight loading from a preference for younger
children (variable 29). Moderate loadings from variables
52 and 53 indicate that the parent would prefer the child
to leave the household if problems with alcohol, drugs,
etc. ensued. This factor does not readily match any of
those identified by previous investigators and is conse-
quently tentatively interpreted as "responsibility train
ing" due to the highest loadings from variables 24 and 48.
62
TABLE XXI. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAIJ)FACTOR VIII RESPONSIBILITY TRAINING
Variable
17
24
Loading
.61
Description
Most important thing in ralslng children, first mentioned: give love andaffection
Most important thing in raising children, second mentioned: teach to beresponsible, indep~ndent, mature
29 -.26
45 .30
46 -·31
47 -.25
48 .63
52 ·37
Preferred age of children (youngestage given)
Preferred child's behavior: both
~ost important value in child'sbehavior: learn a lot from books
Most important value in child'sbehavior: do what parents say
Most important value in child'sbehavior: both
Anything a teenager could do thatwould make you want him or her toleave home: drunkeness, dope, etc.
53 -.34 Anything a teenager could do thatwould make you want him or her toleave your home: nothing
63
Factors IX thru XII are not interpreted in the current
investigation due to a lack of systematic relationship to
previously interpreted factors as well as a sometimes
confusing pattern of loadings. Replication will serve to
test the invariance of these factors, and upon consistent
appearance future investigators will be motivated to attach
labels. The factors are defined in terms of their salient
variables in Tables XXII thru XXV.
2. Male Child Rearing Practices. Twelve of the eigen
values in this domain exceeded unity. Nine factors were
indicated by the scree test and were extracted and rotated.
The variables in this domain and in the domain of female
child rearing practices, to follow, do not overlap with
the variables in previous factor analyses of child rearing
practices (e.g., Sewell, et al., 1955; Milton, 1958;
Minturn, et al., 1964), as do the general child rearing
practices variables. Consequently, interpretation of the
male and female child rearing practices factors are guided
by the structure emerging from the present study rather
than the results of previous structural studies.
The first male child rearing practice factor (see
Table XXVI) is marked primarily by variables indicating that
success in a task pleases the parent (variable 27) and non
completion of tasks displeases the parent (variables 3 and
21). Additional loadings indicate that the parent is
angered by aggression directed against the parents and
TABLE XXII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR IX UNINTERPRETED
64
Variable Loading
I .22
46 .83
47 -.87
50 ·35
Description
Age at which things and privilegesshould be taken away as punishment
Most important value in child'sbehavior: learn a lot from books
Most important value in child'sbehavior: do what parents say
Anything a teenager could do thatwould make you want him or her toleave your home: commit crime,disgrace family
53 -.20 Anything a teenager could do thatwould make you want him or her toleave your home: nothing
65
TABLE XXIII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR X UNINTERPRETED
Variable
3
12
19
22
29
30
33
34
36
37
38
39
Loading
.23
-.21
.24
.21
.63
-.24
.41
-.81
.48
.68
-.22
-.22
Description
Oldest age children should be spanked
Parental response to child's requestfor change in job: will not allow,no explanation
Most important thing in raising children, first mentioned: physical care
Most important thing in raising children, second mentioned: help themmake good life, get ahead
Preferred age of children (youngestage given)
Reasons for preferred age of children:less trouble
Reasons for preferred age of children:can talk with you
Reasons for preferred age of children:need you more, more dependent
Least liked age of children (youngestage given)
Reasons for least liked age of children: too independent, don't need you
Reasons for least liked age of children: gets into difficulty, unspecified trouble
Reasons for least liked age of children: too headstrong, "hard headed,"talks back, hard to handle
66
TABLE XXIV. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR XI UNINTERPRETED
Variable Loading
2 .32
3 -.36
4 .45
Description
Youngest age children should be spank~
Oldest age children should be spanked
Parental response to child's requestfor delay of requirement (l=willallow exceptions, O=will not allowexceptions)
8
22
28
37
51
-.30
.29
-.26
·32
.22
·35
-.25
Parental reasons for requiring chores:control of child
Most important thing in raising children, second mentioned: help themmake good life, get ahead
What makes you proud of your children?: vague reference to "being good"
Reasons for preferred age of children:need you more, more dependent
Reasons for least liked age of children: too independent, don't need you
Most important value in child'sbehavior: reaction to childrenstaying at home (O=stay, l=leave)
Anything a teenager could do thatwould make you want him or her toleave your home: disrespect, defiance, disobedience, hits parent
67
TABLE XXV. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (GENERAL)FACTOR XII UNINTERPRETED
Variable
6
7
8
12
20
36
38
39
Loading
.22
- .49
.31
.21
.24
.38
·39
-.51
.68
Description
Youngest age children should be spanked
Parental reasons for requiring chores:teach skills needed for life, prepareschild for adulthood
Parental reasons for requiring chores:help family, share work, remove burdenfrom others
Parental reasons for requiring chores:child control
Parental response to child's requestfor change in job: will not allow,no explanation
Most important thing in raising children, second mentioned: obedience,compliance, not spoiling, respect
Reasons for preferred age of children:least liked age of children (youngestage given)
Reasons for least liked age of children: gets into difficulty, unspecified trouble
Reasons for least liked age of children: too headstrong, "hard headed,"talks back, hard to handle
68
that the initial parental response to misbehavior is a
threat to deny privileges or freedom. This factor has been
labelled "achievement-oriented discipline."
TABLE XXVI. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (~MLE ANALYSIS)FACTOR I ACHIEVEMENT-ORIENTED DISCIPLINE
._- - _:~.
Variable
:3
7
8
21
27
Loading
.22
.26
.58
.42
Description
Boy behavior which angers parent,first mentioned: doesn't complete tasksor does them in an unsatisfactorymanner
Boy behavior which angers parent,first mention~d: talks back, aggression against parents
Initial parental response to boy misbehavior: threaten to take awayprivilege or freedom
Reasons for spanking boys: doesn'tcomplete tasks or does them in anunsatisfactory manner
Boy behavior which makes parenthappy: does well in school or in anactivity
Factor II in the male analysis (see Table XXVII)
receives its largest loading from the parental propensity
to respond to misbehavior by nagging, shaming, or ridicul-
ing (variable 12). Other loadings are small, however,
variables 25 and 27 provide some consistency in their indi-
cation of parental pleasure deriving from compliance.
This factor has consequently been labelled "compliance-
oriented discipline."
TABLE XXVII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (~~LE ANALYSIS)FACTOR II COMPLIANCE-ORIENTED DISCIPLINE
69
Variable
4
7
12
17
20
21
25
27
Loading
.25
-.22
.62
.24
.21
-.44
.24
.23
Description
Boy behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): disobedience(unspecified)
Boy behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): talks back,aggression against parents
Initial parental response to boymisbehavior: scold, lecture, nag,shame, ridicule
Ultimate parental response to boymisbehavior: scold, lecture, nag,shame, ridicule
Physical punishment of boys: no
Reasons for spanking boys: doesn'tcomplete tasks or does them in anunsatisfactory manner
Boy behavior which makes parenthappy: acts nice, shows affection,is sweet
Boy behavior which makes parenthappy: does well in school or inan activity
70
Factor III (see Table XXVIII) is marked primarily by
the initial parental response of threatening to deny
privileges or freedom, but an ultimate response of doing
nothing. The boy's behavior evoking these responses tends
to be aggression directed toward the parents. There is a
slight positive loading from the preference for the boy to
show affection and a negative loading from the preference
for the boy to work. This factor is tentatively labelled
"discipline for parental aggression."
TABLE XXVIII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (MALE ANALYSIS)FACTOR III DISCIPLINE FOR PARENTAL AGGRESSION
Variable
7
9
16
25
Loading
.25
·53
-·32
.20
Description
Boy behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): talks back,aggression against parents
Initial parental response to boymisbehavior: act to take awayprivilege or freedom
Ultimate parental response to boymisbehavior: no need to do anything
Boy behavior which makes parent happy:does work, does work without beingtold
Boy behavior which makes parent happy:acts nice, shows affection, is sweet
Factor IV (see Table XXIX) is primarily marked by the
physical punishment variable and has been labelled as sucho
Additional loadings are received from variables indicating
that the boy exhibits no behavior which pleases the parent,
71
and behaviors such as disobedience and parental aggression
which anger the parents.
TABLE XXIX. CHILD REARING PRACTICE (MALE ANALYSIS)FACTOR IV PHYSICAL PUNISHMENT
Variable
4
7
11
28
Loading
.22
.21
.90
Description
Boy behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): disobedience(unspecified)
Boy behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): talks back,aggression against parents
Initial parental response to boy misbehavior: physical punishment
Boy behavior which makes parenthappy: nothing
Factor V (see Table XXX) contains two markers being
concerned with parental pleasure and displeasure centered
about task completion. Additional markers indicate
that the initial parental response to misbehavior is to
threaten to deny privileges or freedom, while the ultimate
response is to report the misbehavior to the other parent
for action. Physical punishment is not the usual mode of
response.
Factor VI (see Table XXXI) contains primarily marker
variables which are concerned with displeasure for aggres
sion directed towards peers or parents and physical pun
ishment for such aggression, and has been labelled
"punishment for aggression."
72
TABLE XXX. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (W~LE ANALYSIS)FACTOR V TASK ORIENTED DISCIPLINE
Variable
3
Loading
.55
Description
Boy behavior which(first mentioned):tasks or does themtory manner
angers parentdoesn't complete
in an unsatisfac-
9
15
20
24
.33
.~·6
.69
Initial parental response to boy misbehavior: act to take away privilegeor freedom
Ultimate parental response to boymisbehavior: report to other parentfor action
Physical punishment of boys: no
Boy behavior which makes parent happy:does work, does work without beingtold
TABLE XXXI. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (MALE ANALYSIS)FACTOR VI PUNISHMENT FOR AGGRESSION
Variable
5
7
10
12
14
20
24
Loading
.33
.20
.33
.75
-.24
.47
Description
Boy behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): fights with siblings
Boy behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): talks back,aggression against parents
Initial parental response to boy misbehavior: threaten physical punishment
Initial parental response to boy misbehavior: scold, lecture, nag, shame,ridicule
Ultimate parental response to boy misbehavior: physical punishment
Physical punishment of boys: no
Boy behavior which makes parent happy:does work, does work without being told
73
Factors VII and IX (see Tables XXXII and XXXIV, re
spectively) have been left uninterpreted. Factor VIII
(see Table XXXIII) contains primarily disciplinary vari-
ables and has been labelled "strictness of discipline."
TABLE XXXII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (MALE ANALYSIS)FACTOR VII UNINTERPRETED
Variable Loading Description
1 .63 Age at which boys should be given aregular job around the house
2 .69 Age at which boys should be given areally important job
4 .20 Boy behavior which angers parent(first mentioned). talks back,aggression against parents
7 -021 Boy behavior which angers parent(first mentioned). talks back,aggression against parents
17 .22 Ultimate parental response to boymisbehavior. scold,lecture, nag,shame, ridicule
21 .24 Reasons for spanking boys. doesn'tcomplete tasks or does them in anunsatisfactory manner
3. Female Child Rearing Practices. In this domain
also 12 of the eigenvalues were equal to or greater than
1.0, and the "scree" test again indicated 9 factors, which
were extracted and rotated. Factor I (see Table XXXV)
has been labelled "low physical punishment" due to the
loadings from variables 9, 17, 22, and 24.
Factor II (see Table XXXVI) has been termed "dislike
of intrusive behavior," Factor III (see Table XXXVII)
"discipline for parental aggression," Factor IV (Table
74
TABLE XXXIII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (MALE ANALYSIS)FACTOR VIII STRICTNESS OF DISCIPLINE
Variable
9
13
16
17
18
20
22
25
Loading
.44
.38
-.26
.21
.59
-.23
.86
.23
Description
Initial parental response to boy misbehavior: act to take away privilegeor freedom
Ultimate parental response to boy misbehavior: act to take away privilegeor freedom
Ultimate parental response to boy misbehavior: no need to do anything
Ultimate parental response to boy misbehavior: scold, lecture, nag, shame,ridicule
Physical punishment of boys: yes, allboys in family
Physical punishment of boys: no
Reasons for spanking boys: disobedience (unspecified)
Boy behavior which makes parent happy:acts nice, shows affection, is sweet
TABLE XXXIV. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (MALE ANALYSIS)FACTOR IX UNINTERPRETED
Variable
4
19
23
24
Loading
.42
.61
.70
.26
Description
Boy behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): disobedience(unspecified)
Physical punishment of boys: yes,some boys in family
Reasons for spanking boys: fightswith siblings
Boy behavior which makes parent happy:does work, does work without being told
75
TABLE XXXV. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FErMLE ANALYSIS)FACTOR I LOW PHYSICAL PUNISHMENT
Variable
5
8
9
13
14
17
23
Loading
-.20
.22
-·51
·55
.24
.62
-.25
Description
Girls' behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): wild play, noisy,destructive, etc.
Initial parental response to girl misbehavior: act to take away privilegeor freedom
Initial parental response to girl misbehavior: physical punishment
Ultimate parental response to girl mi~
behavior:- scold, lecture, nag, shame,ridicule
Ultimate parental response to girl misbehavior: no need to do anything
Physical punishment of girls: no
Method of letting girl know parents arehappy with her: by expression, behavior; by smiling or joking
TABLE XXXVI. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FE~MLE ANALYSIS)FACTOR II DISLIKE OF INTRUSIVE BEHAVIOR
Variable
6
12
16
20
22
Loading
.61
·30
.48
.39
Description
Girls' behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): nagging, demanding,a~tention, cry-baby, won't do thingsfor herself, intrusions, interruptions,etc.
Ultimate parental response to girlmisbehavior: physical punishment
Physical punishment of girls: yes,some girls in family
Girl behavior which makes parent happy:vague reference to being good, obedient
Method of letting girl know parents arehappy with her: tell, thank, praise
76
XXXVIII) "achievement-oriented discipline," Factor V (Table
XXXIX) "later age of work assignments," Factor VI (rrable
XL) "dislike of non-feminine behavior," Factor VII (Table
XLI) "compliance-oriented discipline," Factor VIII (Table
XLII) "less independence," and Factor IX (Table XLIII
"task-oriented discipline." Factor I of the female child
rearing practices analysis corresponds to a large extent
to the reverse of factor IV in the male child rearing
practices analysis. Factor III of the female analysis
resembles factor III of the male analysis. Additional
factors bearing some resemblence between the two analyses
are factor IV in the female analysis and factor I in the
male analysis, factor VII in the female analysis and factor
II in the male analysis, and factor IX in the female
analysis and factor V in the male analysis. It could
reasonably be expected that, within the realm of parental
attitudes concerning child rearing practices, there are
some dimensions common to the rearing of both male and
female children and some which apply specifically to one
sex.
C. Child Personality Ratings structure
There were five eigenvalues exceeding 1.0 in this domain,
the sixth being .90. The "scree" indicated six factors
and, to be consistent with the criterion applied in pre
vious analyses, six factors were extracted and rotated.
77
TABLE XXXVII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FE~ALE ANALYSIS)FACTOR III DISCIPLINE FOR PARENTAL AGGRESSION
Variable
7
9
17
19
2J
24
Loading
.69
.40
.22
·39
.40
Description
Girls' behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): talks back,aggression against parents
Initial parental response to girlmisbehavior: physical punishment
Ultimate parental response to girlmisbehavior: no need to do anything
Physical punishment of girls: no
Girl behavior which makes parenthappy: acts nice, shows affection,is sweet
Method of letting girl know parentsare happy with her: by expression,behavior; by smiling or joking
Method of letting girl know parentsare happy with her: never do anything
78
TABLE XXXVIII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FE~~LE ANALYSIS)FACTOR IV ACHIEVE~ffiNT-ORIENTED DISCIPLINE
Variable
3
9
10
21
22
Loading
.61
.41
.32
·59
.52
Description
Girls' behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): doesn't completetasks or does them in an unsatisfactory manner
Initial parental response to girlmisbehavior: physical punishment
Initial parental response to girlmisbehavior: scold, lecture, nag,shame, ridicule
Girl behavior which makes parenthappy: does well in schooi or in anactivity
Method of letting girl know parentsare happy with her: tell, thank,praise
TABLE XXXIX. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FElf~LE ANALYSIS)FACTOR V LATER AGE OF WORK ASSIGNMENTS
Variable
1
2
15
Loading
.66
.21
Description
Age at which girls should be givena regular job around the house
Age at which girls should be givena really important job
Physical punishment of girls: yes,all girls in family
79
TABLE XL. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FEMALE ANALYSIS)FACTOR VI DISLIKE OF NON-FEMININE BEHAVIOR
Variable
5
9
10
12
23
Loading
.48
-.39
.86
.63
.25
Description
Girls' behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): wild play, noisy,destructive, etc.
Initial parental response to girlmisbehavior: physical punishment
Initial parental response to girlmisbehavior: scold, lecture, nag,shame, ridicule
Ultimate parental response to girlmisbehavior: physical punishment
Method of letting girl know parentsare happy with her: by expression,behavior; by smiling or _joking
TABLE XLI. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FEMALE ANALYSIS)FACTOR VII COMPLIANCE-ORIENTED DISCIPLINE
Variable
3
4
9
11
18
Loading
-.31
.86
.35
-.28
.25
Des~ription
Girls' behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): doesn't completetasks or does them in an unsatisfactory manner
Girls' behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): disobedience(unspecified)
Initial parental response to girlmisbehavior: physical punishment
Ultimate parental response to girlmisbehavior: act to take awayprivilege or freedom
Girl behavior which makes parenthappy: does work, does work withoutbeing told
80
TABLE XLII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FENALE ANALYSIS)FACTOR VIII LESS INDEPENDENCE
Variable
25
26
Loading
.6J
Description
Age at which girls would be allowedto go out with a group of girls inthe evening
Age at which girls would be allowedto go out with a mixed group of boysand girls in the evening
TABLE XLIII. CHILD REARING PRACTICES (FEN~LE ANALYSIS)FACTOR IX TASK-ORIENTED DISCIPLINE
Variable
J
8
10
11
16
18
2J
Loading
·51
.66
-.21
.66
.21
.61
.27
Description
Girls' behavior which angers parent(first mentioned): doesn't completetasks or does them in an unsatisfactory manner
Initial parental response to girlmisbehavior: act to take awayprivilege or freedom
Initial parental response to girlmisbehavior: scold, lecture, nag,shame, ridicule
Ultimate parental response to girlmisbehavior: act to take awayprivilege or freedom
Physical punishment of girls: yes,some girls in family
Girl behavior which makes parenthappy: does work, does work withoutbeing told
Method of letting girl know parentsare happy with her: by expression,behavior, by smiling or- joking
81
Factor I (see Table XLIV) was marked by variables 10
(imaginative) and 20 (originality), both of which were
employed as markers for the previously defined factor M
(creativity) in this area, as well as variable 17 (adapt-
able) which was a marker aimed at the previously defined
factor C (ego strength). The loadings by the M variables
far exceed the loading received from the C variables, and
the identification of this factor has been retained as M,
or "creativity."
TABLE XLIV. TEACHER RATINGSFACTOR I M
Variable
10
17
20
Loading
.87
·37
.91
Description
Imaginative: has an active, vividimagination; very fanciful; seespossibilities overlooked by others
Adaptable: copes easily and successfully with new and strange situations;bravely faces up to uncertainty
Original: has remarkably novel anddifferent ideas and/or solutions toproblems; thinking and behaviorare characterized by unusual approaches
Factor II (see Table XLV) receives its highest loadings
from variables intended to mark factors A (friendliness
hostility) and E (dominance-submissiveness). These are
variables 5 (assertive) and 15 (self-minimizing) for
dominance (note that the signs of the loadings are in the
hypothesized direction), and variables 8 (spiteful) and 18
(considerate) for the factor of friendliness. The ratings
82
TABLE XLV. TEACHER RATINGSFACTOR II A-E
Variable
1
5
8
10
13
15
18
Loading
022
.46
.83
.20
-.22
-.55
-.41
Description
Neat in appearance; careful aboutclothes and appearance; dislikesbeing dirty or disheveled; is usuallywell-groomed
Assertive: bossy; usually attemptsto direct the actions of others; isconvinced his (her) way is the bestway of doing things; shows others"how things should be done."
Spiteful: deliberately does or saysthings which may annoy or hurt others;says hateful things about others;belittles others
Imaginative: has an active, vividimagination; very fanciful; seespossibilities overlooked by others
Gregarious: likes to be with othersand seeks their company; spends asmuch time with others as possible;dislikes being alone.
Self-minimizing: tends to minimizeown importance; humble; never bragsor shows off; seeks out or is contentwith less important tasks or positions
Considerate: thoughtful of others;sensitive of others' feelings; cannotdo things which hurt others' feelings;sympathetic when others are in troubleand tries to help
83
by teachers, at this age, on higher assertiveness and spite
fulness, as well as lower self-minimization and consider
ateness, coupled with the moderate loadings from higher
neatness of appearance (variable 1) and imaginativeness
(variable 10), and lower gregariousness (variable 13)
tempts one to label this factor "dominance" or perhaps
"self-sufficiency." The temptation, however, will be
avoided in view of previous investigations in the area and
the factor will be labelled simply A-E.
Factor III (see Table XLVI) in the teacher ratings of
child personality domain does not readily correspond to
any of the previously discovered first-order factor of
"general emotionality," receiving loadings from the vari
ables of nervous habits, fearful, fickle, self-minimizing,
lethargic, and touchy. The writer is again tempted to
apply the label "personality problem," but defers to the
highest loading and will attach the label T to the factor.
Factor IV (see Table XLVII) receives its highest
loadings from variables 1 (neat in appearance) and 11
(careful of personal belongings), both of which have
previously defined factor K (compliance). A high loading
is also contributed by variable 4 (persevering) which was
included as a marker for factor G (work competence), as
well as moderate loadings from the variables of higher
self-minimization, considerateness and lower restlessness.
84
TABLE XLVI. TEACHER RATINGSFACTOR III T
Variable
2
7
9
14
15
16
Loading
- • 2L~
·57
.72
.JO
.25
Description
Touchy; very sensitive to criticism;cries, pouts or sulks when criticized;does not take well to jokes or prankson him (her)
Fearful: has many fears and worries,some of which are unreasonable;easily becomes alarmed or frightened
Nervous habits: has a great varietyof nervous habits (e.g., nailbiting,grimacing, tics, hairtwisting,pencil chewing, etc.)
Fickle: changes frequently ininterests, opinions, and pursuits;"flighty," starts one t:h.ing andshifts to another
Self-minimizing: tends to minimizeown importance; humble; never bragsor shows off; seeks out or is contentwith less important tasks or positions
Lethargic: slow moving; seldom ornever runs or hurries; unresponsiveor slow to react; works slowly
85
TABLE XLVII. TEACHER RATINGSFACTOR IV K
Variable
1
4
11
15
18
19
Loading
.79
.80
.25
.32
-.33
Description
Neat in appearance; careful aboutclothes and appearance; dislikesbeing dirty or disheveled; is usuallywell-groomed
Persevering: keeps at his (her)work until it is completed; seesa job through despite difficulties;painstaking and thorough
Careful of personal belongings:takes good care of things which belongto him (her); becomes concerned whenpossessions are missing and searchesfor them; keeps his (her) own thingsneat, clean, and in order
Self-minimizing: tends to minimizeown importance; humble; never bragsor shows off; seeks out or is content with less important tasks orpositions
Considerate: thoughtful of others;sensitive to others' feelings;cannot do things which hurt others'feelings; sympathetic when othersare in trouble and tries to help
Restless: constantly or frequentlymoves about the room; unable tosettle down after activity periodor recess
86
The factor has, in conju~ction with previous research and
the consistency of the two highest loadings, been labelled
K.
Factor V (see Table XLVIII) is characterized by load
ings from both variables which have previously marked low
H (low social confidence), variables 3 and 13, high D
(high activity level), variables 6 and 16, and moderately,
higher C (high ego strength). The factor has been labelled
as a combination of C-D-H, perhaps resembling the second
order factor of "freedom of movement vs. restraint" which
has previously been defined.
Factor VI (see Table XLIX) is primarily defined by the
previous markers of factor I (relational security)--vari
abIes 2 (touchy) and 12 (concerned about acceptance).
It is also marked moderately by higher assertiveness,
fickleness, restlessness, carefulness of personal belong
ings, and lower adaptability. The label attached is I.
D. Behavior Problems Ratings structure. Seven eigen
values were equal to or greater than 1.0 in this set of
data, and the "scree test" also indicated seven factors,
which were extracted and rotated. The first factor in
this domain (see Table L) is marked primarily by the vari
ables defining Quay's (1966) "social withdrawal" factor,
and has been so labelled. The second factor (see Table
LI) receives its largest loadings from the variables
marking Quay's (1966) factor of "sluggish-disinterested,"
87
TABLE XLVIII. TEACHER RATINGSFACTOR V C-D-H
Variable
3
5
6
7
13
14
16
17
19
Loading
-·75
·32
.70
-·33
.65
.25
-.54
.20
.20
Description
Seclusive: dislikes group activities and games, prefers to be by selfor in company of one or two others;dislikes being in a crowd
Assertive: bossy; usually attemptsto direct the actions of others; isconvinced his (her) way is the bestway of doing things; shows others"how things should be done"
Energetic: active; full of pep;vigorous; movements are quick, darting
Fearful: has many fears and worries,some of which are unreasonable; easilybecomes alarmed or frightened
Gregarious: likes to be with othersand seeks their company; spends asmuch time with others as possible;dislikes being alone
Fickle: changes frequently in interests, opinions, and pursuits; "flighty"starts one thing and shifts to another
Lethargic: slow moving; seldom ornever runs or hurries; unresponsiveor slow to react; works slowly
Adaptable: copes easily and successfully with new and strange situations;bravely faces up to uncertainty
Restless: constantly or frequentlymoves about the room; unable to settledown after activity period or recess
88
TABLE XLIX. TEACHER RATINGSFACTOR VI I
Variable
2
5
11
12
14
17
19
Loading
.30
.20
.64
.28
-.36
.26
Description
Touchy; very sensitive to criticism;cries, pouts or sulks when criticized;does not take well to jokes or prankson him (her)
Assertive: bossy; usually attemptsto direct the actions of others; isconvinced his (her) way is the bestway of doing things; shows others"how things should be done"
Careful of personal belongings: takesgood care of things which belong tohim (her); becomes concerned whenpossessions are missing and searchesfor them; keeps his (her) own thingsneat, clean, and in order
Concerned about acceptance: expressesconcern about real or imagined rebuffsand slights from others; unable totake his (her) relationship with othersfor granted; worries that he (she)may lose friends or that others willnot like him (her)
Fickle: changes frequently in interests, opinions, and pursuits; "flighty"starts one thing and shifts to another
Adaptable: copes easily and successfully with new and strange situations;bravely faces up to uncertainty
Restless: constantly or frequentlymoves about the room; unable to settledown after activity period or recess
89
TABLE L. BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR I SOCIAL WITHDRAWAL (QUAY)
Variable Loading
6 .23
9 .89
10 -.22
11 042
17 -.24
20 ·31
Description
Steals in company with others
Social withdrawal; preference forsolitary activities
Lack of self-confidence
Inattentiveness to what others say
Irresponsibility; undependability
Disobedience, difficulty in disciplinary control
TABLE LI. BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR II SLUGGISH, DISINTERESTED (QUAY)
Variable
4
5
10
14
15
18
19
20
22
23
25
27
Loading
-·30
-.20
.27
-.22
.54
·35
.22
-.24
.55
.41
-.21
.83
Description
Disruptive; tendency to annoy andbother others
Feelings of inferiority
Lack of self-confidence
Reticence, secretiveness
Truancy from school
Excessive daydreaming
Has bad companions
Disobedience, difficulty in disciplincontrol
Aloofness, social reserve
Passivity, suggestibility, easily ledby others
Destructivenss in regard to his ownor others' property
Sluggishness, lethargy
90
and has been labelled accordingly. The third factor in tm
behavior problems domain resembles Quay's (1966) "neurotic
disturbed" factor and has been labelled as such (see Table
LII) •
Factor IV (see Table LIII) in the domain of teacher
ratings of behavior problems is not readily aligned with
any of the factors previously identified by Quay and his
associates, and has, on the basis of high loadings from
variables 5, 6, and 17 ("feelings of inferiority;" "irre
sponsibility, undependability." "steals in company with
others") has been labelled as "inferiority-irresponsible."
Factor V (see Table LIV) bears a strong resemblance
to Quay's (1966) "psychopathic-unsocialized" as well as
the Pimm, et ale (1967) "conduct problem" factor--both
factors being marked essentially by the same variables.
The label of the earlier defined factor "has been applied
here.
Factor VI (see Table LV) is, with its primary markers
of "disruptiveness," "boisterousness," and "rowdiness,"
very similar to the factor termed by Pimm, Quay, and
Werry (1967) as elverbal overactivi ty," and has been label
led as such. Factor VII (see Table LVI) carries the high
est loadings from the factor which Pimm, et ale (1967) have
labelled "immaturity"--i.e., destructiveness, disobedience,
uncooperativeness, and irritability--and has been so termed.
91
TABLE LII. BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR III NEUROTIC-DISTURBED (QUAY)
Variable Loading
3 ·31
7 -·35
10 .85
11 .29
12 .86
16 .82
Description
Self-conscious; easily embarrassed
Boisterousness; rowdiness
Lack of self-confidence
Inattentiveness to what others say
Easily flustered and confused
Laziness in school and in performanceof other tasks
17 .26 Irresponsibility; undependability
18 -.35 Excessive daydreaming
22 -.22 Aloofness, social reserve
23 • 2L~ Passivity, suggestibility, easily ledby others
25 .23 Destructiveness in regard to his ownor others' property
TABLE LIII. BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR IV INFERIORITY-IRRESPONSIBLE
Variable
1
2
5
6
9
17
26
Loading
.42
·37
·71
.76
.28
Description
Restlessness, inability to sit still
Doesn't know how to have fun; behaveslike little adult
Feelings of inferiority
Steals in company with others
Social withdrawal; preference forsolitary activities
Irresponsibility; undependability
Impertinence, sauciness
92
TABLE LIV. BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR V PSYCHOPATHIC-UNSOCIALIZED (QUAY)
Variable
1
2
4
6
7
13
15
17
18
20
23
24
26
Loading
-·34
-.20
.28
-.22
-.21
.86
·55
.62
-.21
.77
Description
Restlessness, inability to sit still
Doesn't know how to have fun; behaveslike little adult
Disruptive; tendency to annoy andbother others
Steals in company with others
Boisterousness; rowdiness
Loyal to delinquent friends
Truancy from school
Irresponsibility; undependability
Excessive daydreaming
~~s~~iz~ce, difficulty in disciplinary control
Passivity, suggestibility, easilyled by others
Clumsiness, awkwardness, poor muscularcoordination
Impertinence, sauciness
93
TABLE LV. BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR VI VERBAL OVERACTIVITY (QUAY)
Variable Loading
1 .38
2 ·51
3 ·71
4 .90
7 .85
8 .74
Description
Restlessness, inability to sit still
Doesn't know how to have fun; behaveslike little adult
Self-conscious; easily embarrassed
Disruptive; tendency to annoy andbother others
Boisterousness; rowdiness
Preoccupation; "in a world of hisown"
TABLE LVI. BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSFACTOR VII IMN~TURITY (QUAY)
Variable
2
3
7
8
9
11
14
19
20
21
23
25
26
28
29
Loading
.21
-·39
.49
-·37
-.38
.31
.31
.47
.50
·77
·30
.82
·30
.88
.75
Description
DoesnOt know how to have fun; behaveslike little adult
Self-conscious; easily embarrassed
Boisterousness; rowdiness
Preoccupation; "in a world of his own"
Social withdrawal; preference forsolitary activities
Inattentiveness to what others say
Reticence, secretiveness
Has bad companions
Disobedience, difficulty in disciplinary control
Uncooperativeness in group situations
Passivity, suggestibility, easilyled by others
Destructiveness in regard to his ownor others' property
Impertinence, sauciness
Profane language
Irritability, hot tempered, easilyaroused to anger
95
E. Interrelationships among the Data Domains. The
factor scores from the 51 obliquely rotated factors which
resulted from the factor analyses of the four sets of data
were obtained by the formula Zf =ZvV'fe' where Zf is the
factor score matrix, Zv the standardized variable score
matrix, and V'fe the transpose of the factor estimation
matrix. In turn, Vfe =RfV'fpRv-l, where Rf is the matrix. ,
of primary factor correlations, V fp the transpose of the
primary factor pattern matrix, and Ry-l the inverse of the
matrix of intercorrelations among the variables.
The intercorrelations among these 51 scores were then
obtained. The 51 variable matrix of intercorrelations is
presented as Table LVII. The hypothesis testing phase
of the study was subsequently based on the scores on
these 51 variables, which are listed in Table LVIII, pre
dicting to each variable in a sUbsequent domain from all
variables in antecedent domains by stepwise multiple linear
regression analyses. In all, 63 such stepwise analyses
were carried out, with the predictors and the criterion
for each analysis specified in Table LIX.
1. Prediction of Male Child Rearing Practice Factors
from Household Demography Factors. In the first set of
analyses, the question of interest was whether factors
in the child rearing practices domain were predictable
from the household demography factors. The results of
these analyses are set forth in Tables LX thru LXXXIX.
TABLE LVII. INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG FACTOR SCORES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1
2 020
3 .,19 -.11
4 014 .76 .50
5 -.07 -.66 .08 -.53
6 .01 .02 -.89 -.60 - .. 04
7 -.15 -·50 .70 .07 .2J -.65
8 .22 .95 -.35 .55 -.62 .29 -.69
9 .29 -.OJ. -.OJ. -.04 .J.7 .09 -.00 .03
10 .12 -.09 .13 -.04 .06 -.11 .0.5 -.08 -.06
11 -.25 .13 .03 .22 -.02 -.16 .22 .04 .04 -.11
12 .04 -.05 -.18 -.14 .02 .18 -.09 .02 -.04 -.10 -.00
13 .02 .04 .11 .09 -.00 -.12 .09 .01 -.14 -.18 -.10 -.09
14 -.27 -.16 .17 .04 -.16 -.21 .47 -.26 .01 -.14 .25 -.07
15 .21 -.05 .0J -.07 .14 .01 .00 -.04 .18 .30 .05 .0J
'"0\
TABLE LVII. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG FACTOR SCORES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
16 -.03 -.03 -.16 -.10 .12 .09 -.07 .01 .27 .05 ·31 -.24
17 .24 .J.4 -.J.8 -.07 .07 .25 -.33 .22 ·37 -.24 -.27 .34
18 -.02 .02 -.26 -.12 .14 .22 -.15 .08 .19 -.19 .20 .15
19 -.11 -.04 .01 .00 -.17 -.00 .18 -.06 .06 -.10 .04 .12
20 .31 -.05 .10 -.05 .29 .02 -.04 .02 .62 .37 -.14 -.11
21 .07 -.02 .19 .06 .01 -.11 -.03 -.03 -.32 -.08 -.26 .08
22 -.15 .16 -$16 .03 -.21 .11 .01 .14 .12 -.25 .45 .17
23 -.32 -.05 .02 .05 -.33 -.10 .33 -.13 -·32 -.00 .05 -.10
24 .03 .13 .14 .17 .07 -.15 .08 .07 -.21 .05 -.00 -.13
25 .11 -.09 -.08 -.19 -.03 .15 -.16 .02 -.17 .34 -·30 -.07
26 .14 -.00 .05 -.00 .09 .OJ .01 .03 .13 -.09 -.29 .12
27 -.10 .01 -.17 -.13 -.21 .18 -.04 .02 -.13 -.08 -.16 .32
28 .21 -.03 .04 -.07 .14 .03 -.01 -.02 .41 .04 -.16 -.05
29 -.01 .15 -.13 .04 -.22 .08 -.13 .16 .15 -.15 .07 .20
30 .04 -.10 .23 .02 .24 -.15 .10 -.13 -.04 -.04 -.16 -.22
'"-..:J
TABLE LVII. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG FACTOR SCORES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
31 - .2l!· .10 -.11 .08 -.02 -.02 -.04 .06 -.52 -.25 .20 -.01
32 .20 -.15 -.11 -.25 .02 .25 -.08 -.04 .23 .20 -.39 -.15
33 .08 .02 .02 -.04 .24 -.06 -.10 -.03 .02 -.07 .04 .02
34 -.11 -.11 .15 .01 .02 -.12 .05 -.15 -.24 .16 .07 -.16
3.5 -.36 .02 .04 .12 -.29 -.16 .17 -.07 -.22 .07 .40 -.07
36 -.04 -.01 .07 .01 .08 -.ll -.04 -.05 .01 -.16 .14 .08
37 -.17 -.04 -.01 -.00 .18 -.08 .01 -.05 -.02 .05 .21 .15
38 .05 .25 -.00 ·30 -.34 -.10 -.05 .21 .02 -.15 .16 .10
39 -.21 -.23 -.05 -.20 .06 .05 .04 -.19 .05 .05 .09 .14
40 .11 .04 -.11 -.01 .05 .16 -.08 .09 .06 -.19 -.05 -.05
41 -.06 .11 -.19 -.13 .03 .19 -.14 .19 .13 -.10 .05 -.09
42 -.16 -.20 .04 -.12 .12 -.03 .08 -.17 .14 .10 .02 .15
43 ··.12 -.25 .10 -.12 .06 -.08 .22 -.26 .04 .03 -.04 -.01
44 -.05 -.01 -.18 -.14 .13 .21 -.10 .06 .03 -.09 -.07 -.20
4.5 -.09 -.37 .02 -.26 .01 .01 .15 -.37 -.02 -.16 .11 .35'0(Xl
TABLE LVII. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG FACTOR SCORES
J. 2 .3 4 5 6 7 8 9 J.o J.J. J.2
46 -.03 -.28 .01 -.28 .14 .04 .09 -.28 .05 -.07 .06 .06
47 -.19 .07 -.10 -.00 .07 .06 -.09 .07 -.02 -.26 .07 .05
48 -.04 -.36 -.05 -.32 .13 .10 .09 -.;4 -.12 -.07 .06 ·33
49 .00 -.25 -.11 -.30 .15 .15 .02 -.20 -.07 -.04 .07 .10
50 -.18 -.19 -.12 -.19 .12 .09 .04 -.15 -.11 -.14 -.08 .18
51 -.05 -.03 -.19 -.14 .11 .19 -.10 .05 -.11 -.13 -.10 -.00
\0\0
TABLE LVII. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG FACTOR SCORES
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
14 .09
15 -.37 .02
16 -.02 .15 .19
17 -.11 -.29 .21 .14
18 .05 -.10 -.07 ·39 .00
19 -.20 .49 -.19 -.17 -.12 -.12
20 -.19 -.28 .40 .09 .27 -.00 -.04
21 .40 -.35 -.14 -.37 .01 -.27 -.36 -.06
22 -.14 .07 .06 .21 .22 .26 -.03 -.23 -.15
23 -.18 .58 .04 -.16 -.19 -.32 .37 -.40 -.24 .22
24 .62 -.22 -.22 -.21 -.08 -.09 -.47 -.14 .35 .02 -.04
25 .08 -.20 -.17 .06 .08 .01 .14 .13 -.05 -.15 -.10 .02
26 .06 -.15 -.02 -.12 .44 -.23 .25 .32 -.04 -.17 -.03 .09
27 -.16 .02 -.17 -.21 .19 -.01 .20 -.25 -.06 .30 .24 .02
28 -.14 -.09 .49 -.10 .25 -.06 -.06 .62 .14 -.01 .02 -.09 .....00
TABLE LVII. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG FACTOR SCORES
13 14 1.5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
29 .21 .08 -.21 -.01 .13 .11 .02 -.12 .24 .37 .01 .01
30 .19 -.13 .11 -.32 -.0.5 -.10 -.14 .29 .44 -.16 -.0.5 .26
31 .22 .24 -.26 .19 -.11 .16 .06 -.58 -.06 .10 .20 .08
32 -.09 -.09 .06 .16 .27 -.18 .10 .25 -.15 -.17 .08 .02
33 .19 -.18 .10 -.24 -.04 .17 -.08 .07 .27 .08 -.17 .22
34 -.17 .01 .11 .07 -.12 -.16 -.03 -.16 .11 -.06 -.03 -.08
35 -.13 .37 -.17 .38 -.38 .15 .04 -.41 -.33 .19 .16 -.14
36 .09 -.00 .11 -.09 -.05 .09 -.14 -.03 .39 .14 -.12 -.05
37 -.23 -.20 .08 -.12 -.15 .24 -.17 .12 .09 .17 -.11 -.06
38 .26 -.23 -.20 .22 .10 .09 -.16 -.07 .19 .17 -.20 .08
39 -.07 .15 -.05 -.00 -.10 -.08 .09 -.03 -.10 -.09 -.06 -.22
40 -.00 .03 -.06 .16 .12 .16 .04 .13 -.00 -.05 -.15 .06
41 .18 .07 -.11 .19 .08 .13 .07 .17 -.01 .07 -.10 .08
42 -.06 .04 .09 -.14 -.01 -.03 .00 .07 -.03 -.01 -.00 -.23
43 -.09 .13 -.02 .08 -.03 .06 .06 .02 -.14 -.05 .04 -.04I-'0I-'
TABLE LVII. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG FACTOR SCORES
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
44 .04 .00 -.06 .21 .10 .01 .11 .20 .01 -.05 -.07 .02
45 .05 .22 -.07 -.15 -.09 -.02 -.06 -.24 .13 -.03 -.02 -.17
46 .14 .15 -.01 .00 -.06 .04 -.07 -.13 .08 .07 -.03 -.08
47 .21 .06 -.25 -.10 .07 -.09 -.02 -.10 .28 -.00 -.08 .11
48 .23 .24 -.03 -.00 -.14 .04 -.14 -.20 .24 -.07 -.11 -.03
49 .35 .23 -.02 .14 -.03 .06 -.19 -.05 .25 .05 -.07 .12
50 .32 .15 -.32 -.05 -.10 .01 .06 -.09 .29 -.11 .03 .05
51 .41 .17 -.15 .12 -.00 .08 -.06 .05 .32 -.06 -.06 .14
....ol\)
TABLE LVII. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG FACTOR SCORES
25 26 27 28 29 )0 )1 )2 )3 34 35 )6
26 .12
27 .19 -.02
28 -.32 .35 -.29
29 -.23 .02 .18 .22
30 -.20 .16 -.42 .56 .02
31 .08 -.15 -.09 -.47 -.04 -.14
32 040 .32 .26 .05 -.27 -.19 -.19
33 -014 -.02 -.23 .41 .24 .52 .03 -.40
34 ..17 -.:30 .28 -.4:3 -.28 -.08 .10 .18 -.20
35 - .. 08 -.44 .14 -.52 -.04 -.50 .24 -.25 -.31 .25
)6 -.35 -.04 -.29 .46 .49 .40 .05 -.51 .68 -.12 -.11
37 -.16 -.02 -.19 .30 .20 .21 -.17 -.54 .42 .2) .02 .49
38 -.01 .00 .07 -.2) .27 -.26 .11 .01 -.14 .11 .12 -.01
)9 -.04 -.08 .06 -.17 -.09 -.09 -.01 .08 -.21 .25 .22 -.00 ....,0
40 .12 .11 -.01 .07 -.12 .04 .02 .18 -.18 -.12 -.05 -.12 \N
TABLE LVII. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG FACTOR SCORES
25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
41 .05 .14 -.08 .12 .17 -.03 -.02 .00 -.05 -.25 -.06 -.05
42 -.17 -.09 -.06 .08 .11 .05 -.17 -.15 .09 .04 -.03 .15
43 .02 -.04 .20 -.12 -.20 .08 -.03 .27 -.22 .23 .13 -.18
44 .1S .20 -.01 .10 -.06 -.02 .06 .21 -.12 -.lS -.10 -.18
45 -.04 -.21 .07 -.13 .05 -.28 .03 -.20 -.10 .04 .14 .13
46 .11 -.16 .01 .04 .10 -.12 .00 -.10 .23 -.08 -.03 .22
47 -.14 -.0.5 .0.5 .0.5 .19 .06 .08 -.12 .11 .03 .07 .28
48 -.02 -.24 .10 -.17 .02 -.20 .1.5 -.13 -.14 .13 .1.5 .07
49 ..17 -.22 .07 .03 .17 -.02 .08 -.07 -.00 .01 .11 .17
50 .. 08 .06 .05 .10 .14 .04 .06 .08 -.01 -.14 -.07 .23
51 ..18 -.13 .02 .12 .12 .18 .14 .06 -.01 -.08 -.10 .09
f-'o~
TABLE LVII. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG FACTOR SCORES
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48
38 -.18
39 -.12 -.07
40 -.11 -.04 -.26
41 .09 .07 -.36 .52
42 .20 -.14 .60 -.62 -.36
43 -.29 -.06 .58 .18 -.41 .17
44 -.08 .01 -.40 .72 .75 -.58 -.18
45 -.03 .01 -.11 .18 .14 -.23 -.18 .11
46 -.04 -.10 -.33 .19 .36 -.35 -.36 .34 .73
47 .02 -.07 -.23 .30 .40 -.26 -.15 .33 .46 .60
48 -.09 .07 -.12 .32 .25 -.39 .00 .25 .84 ·70 .50
49 -.02 -.00 -.16 .48 .44 -.47 .01 .41 .61 .69 .56 .78
50 -.02 -.03 -.11 .49 .35 -.33 .16 .38 .45 .49 .66 .63
51 -.06 -.03 -.11 .62 .39 -.37 .27 .49 .16 .25 .49 .44
...,0\J\
TABLE LVII. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG FACTOR SCORES
49
50 ~67
51 .69
50
.72
51
....o
'"
107
TABLE LVIII. LISTING OF VARIABLESEMPLOYED IN REGRESSION ANALYSES
VARIABLENO. VARIABLE IDENTIFICATION
1 Household Demography Factor I - Stepmother,Origin off Oahu
2 Household Demography Factor II - Hanai
3 Household Demography Factor III - Subnuclear.Mother Absent
4 Household Demography Factor IV - Nuclear-Lateral. Consanguine
5 Household Demography Factor V - NanakuliOrigin
6 Household Demography Factor VI - NuclearFamily
7 Household Demography Factor VII - Subnuclear-Extended, Older Child
8 Household Demography Factor VIII - Spouse'sLineal
9 Child Rearing Practices (MALE) Factor I -Achievement-Oriented Discipline
10 Child Rearing Practices (MALE) Factor II -Compliance-Oriented Discipline
11 Child Rearing Practices (MALE) Factor III -Discipline for Parental Aggression
12 Child Rearing Practices (MALE) Factor IV -Physical Punishment
13 Child Rearing Practices (MALE) Factor V -Task-Oriented Discipline
14 Child Rearing Practices (MALE) Factor VI Punishment for Aggression
108
TABLE LVIII. (Continued) LISTING OF VARIABLESEMPLOYED IN REGRESSION ANALYSES
VARIABLENO. VARIABLE IDENTIFICATION
15 Child Rearing Practices (MALE) Factor VII -Uninterpreted
16 Child Rearing Practices (MALE) Factor VIII -Strictness of Discipline
17 Child Rearing Practices (MALE) Factor IX -Uninterpreted
18 Child Rearing Practices (FEMALE) Factor I -Low Physical Punishment
19 Child Rearing Practices (FEMALE) Factor II -Dislike of Intrusive Behavior
20 Child Rearing Practices (FEMALE) Factor III -Discipline for Parental Aggression
21 Child Rearing Practices (FEMALE) Factor IV -Achievement-Oriented Discipline
22 Child Rearing Practices (FEMALE) Factor V -Later Age of Work Assignments
23 Child Rearing Practices (FEMALE) Factor VI -Dislike of Non-feminine Behavior
24 Child Rearing Practices (FEMALE) Factor VII -Compliance-Oriented Discipline
25 Child Rearing Practices (FEMALE) Factor VIII -Less Independence
26 Child Rearing Practices (FEMALE) Factor IX -Task-Oriented Discipline
27 Child Rearing Practices (GENERAL) Factor I -Warmth of Parent-Child Relationship
28 Child Rearing Practices (GENERAL) Factor II -Obedience Training
29 Child Rearing Practices (GENERAL) Factor III -Permissiveness
109
TABLE LVIII. (Continued) LISTING OF VARIABLESEMPLOYED IN REGRESSION ANALYSES
VARIABLENO. VARIABLE IDENTIFICATION
30 Child Rearing Practices (GENERAL) Factor IV -Strictness of Discipline
31 Child Rearing Practices (GENERAL) Factor V -Achievement Training
32 Child Rearing Practices (GENERAL) Factor VI -Preference for Younger Children
33 Child Rearing Practices (GENERAL) Factor VII -Demands for Compliance
34 Child Rearing Practices (GENERAL) Factor VIII -Responsibility Training
35 Child Rearing Practices (GENERAL) Factor IX -Uninterpreted
36 Child Rearing Practices (GENERAL) Factor X -Uninterpreted
37 Child Rearing Practices (GENERAL) Factor XI -Uninterpreted
38 Child Rearing Practices (GENERAL) Factor XII -Uninterpreted
39 Teachers Ratings Factor I - M (Creativity!Divergent Thinking)
40 Teachers Ratings Factor II - A+E (Aggression-Dominance)
41 Teachers Ratings Factor III - T (Emotionality)
42 Teachers Ratings Factor IV - K (Compliance)
43 Teachers Ratings Factor V - C+D+H (Sociality)
44 Teachers Ratings Factor VI - !- (RelationalInsecurity)
45 Behavior Problems Factor I - Social Withdrawal
TABLE LVIII. (Continued) LISTING OF VARIABLESEMPLOYED IN REGRESSION ANALYSES
VARIABLENO. VARIABLE IDENTIFICATION
46 Behavior Problems Factor II - Sluggish,Disinterested
47 Behavior Problems Factor III - Neurotic-Disturbed
48 Behavior Problems Factor IV - Inferiority-Irresponsible
49 Behavior Problems Factor V - Psychopathic-Unsocialized
50 Behavior Problems Factor VI - VerbalOveractivity
51 Behavior Problems Factor VII - Immaturity
110
III
TABLE LIX. LIST OF PREDICTORS AND CRITERIAFOR THE STEPWISE MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSES
Analysis No. Predictors* Criterion*
1 HD(1-8) CRP (M) (9)
2 HD(1-8) CRP (M) (10)
3 HD(1-8) CRP (M) (11)
4 HD(1-8) CRP (M) (12)
5 HD(1-8) CRP (M) (13)
6 HD(1-8) CRP (M) (14)
7 HD(1-8) CRP (M) (15)
8 HD(1-8) CRP (M) (16)
9 HD(1-8) CRP (M) (17)
10 HD(1-8) CRP (F) (18)
11 HD(1-8) CRP (F) (19)
12 HD(1-8) CRP (F) (20)
13 HD(1-8) CRP (F) (21)
14 HD(1-8) CRP (F) (22)
15 HD(1-8) -"'> , CRP (F) (23)
16 HD(1-8) CRP (F) (24)
17 HD(1-8) CRP (F) (25)
18 HD(1-8) CRP (F) (26)
19 HD(1-8) CRP (G) (27)
20 HD{1-8) CRP (G) (28)
21 HD(1-8) CRP (G) (29)
22 HD(1-8) CRP (G) (30)
23 HD(1-8) CRP (G) (31)
112
TABLE LIX. (Continued) LIST OF PREDICTORS AND CRITERIAFOR THE STEPWISE MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSES
Analysis No. Predictors* Criterion*
24 HD(1-8) CRP (G) (32)
25 HD(1-8) CRP (G) (33)
26 HD(1-8) CRP (G) (34)
27 HD(1-8) CRP (G) (35)
28 HD(1-8) CRP (G) (36)
29 HD(1-8) CRP (G) (37)
30 HD(1-8) CRP (G) (38)
31 HD(1-8) TR (39)
32 HD(1-8) TR (40)
33 HD(1-8) TR (41)
34 HD(1-8) TR (42)
35 HD(1-8) TR (43)
36 HD(1-8) TR (44)
37 HD(1-8) BP (45)
38 HD(1-8) BP (46)
39 HD(1-8) BP (47)
40 HD(1-8) BP (48)
41 HD(1-8) BP (49)
42 HD(1-8) BP (50)
43 HD(1-8) BP (51)
44 HD(1-8) + CRP (00) TR (39)(9-17) + CRP (F)(18-26) + CRP (G)(27-38)
11.3
TABLE LIX. (Continued) LIST OF PREDICTORS AND CRITERIAFOR THE STEPWISE MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSES
Analysis No Predictors* Criterion*
4.5 HD(l-B) + CRP(M) (9-17) + TR (40)CRP(F)(IB-26) + CRP(G)(27-.3B)
46 HD(l-B) + CRP(M) (9-17) + TR (41)CRP(F) (lB-26) + CRP(G)(27-.38)
47 HD(I-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + TR (42)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-.38)
48 HD(1-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + TR (43)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-.38)
49 HD(I-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + TR (44)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-.38)
.50 HD(I-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + BP (4.5)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-38)
.51 HD(I-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + BP (46)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-.38)
.52 HD(I-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + BP (47)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-.38)
.5.3 HD(I-8) + CRP(M)(9-17) + BP (48)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-38)
54 HD(1-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + BP (49)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-.38)
.5.5 HD(I-8) + CRP(M)(9-17) + .BP (.50)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-.38)
114
TABLE LIX. (Continued) LIST OF PREDICTORS AND CRITERIAFOR THE STEPWISE MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSES
Analysis No. Predictors* Criterion*
56 HD(1-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + BP (51)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-38)
57 HD(1-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + BP (45)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-38) + TR(39-44)
58 HD(1-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + BP (46)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-38) + TR(39-44)
59 HD(1-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + BP (47)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-38) + TR(39-44)
60 HD(1-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + BP (48)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-38) + TR(39-44)
61 HD(1-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + BP (49)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-38) + TR(39-44)
62 HD(1-8) + CRP(M) (9-17) + BP (50)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-38) + TR(39-44)
63 HD(1-8) + CRP(M)(9-17) + BP (51)CRP(F)(18-26) + CRP(G)(27-38) + TR(39-44)
*HD = Household Demography; CRP(G) = Child RearingPractices (General Analysis); CRP(M) = Child RearingPractices (Male Analysis); CRP(F) = Child Rearing Practices (Female Analysis); TR = Teachers Ratings; BP =Behavior Problems; Numbers in parentheses refer tovariable numbers from the 51 x 51 matrix of intercorrelations.
TABLE LX. PREDICTION OF MALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
115
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
liD Factor I .2971 13.56**
HD Factor V •.3408 4•.39*
liD Factor VIII .3644 2.65
HD Factor VII •.3894 3.05
HD Factor VI .4228 4.48*
HD Factor II .4270 .60
liD Factor IV .4294 .33
HD Factor III .4323 .40
TABLE LXI. PREDICTION OF MALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
liD Factor III .1245 2.21
lID Factor IV .1647 1.66
lID Factor VIII .2069 2.26
HD Factor VI .2837 5.62*
HD Factor I .2907 ·59
HD Factor II .2980 .64
HD Factor V ·3055 .67
HD Factor VII .3109 .49
*p <.05**p <.01
116
TABLE LXII. PREDICTION OF MALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor IV .2745 11.41**
HD Factor I .3735 10.37**
HD Factor VII .4057 4.15*
HD Factor III .5192 19.68**
HD Factor V .5517 6.81**
lID Factor II .5553 .78
lID Factor VIII .5569 .35
HD Factor VI , .5569 .00
TABLE LXIII. PREDICTION OF MALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor III .1714 4.24*
HD Factor I .1937 1.18
lID Factor VII .2164 1.35
lID Factor IV .2223 ·38
lID Factor II .2441 1.47
HD Factor VIII .2508 .48
HD Factor V .2514 .04
HD Factor VI .2515 .00
*p <. .05**p <.01
117
TABLE LXIV. PREDICTION OF MALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
lID Factor VI .1296 2.39
HD Factor VIII .1468 .68
lID Factor VII .165.5 .83
HD Factor IV .218.5 2.92
HD Factor II .2214 .18
HD Factor V .2233 .13
HD Factor I .2236 .01
HD Factor III .2236 .00
TABLE LXV. PREDICTION OF MALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor VII .4619 37.97**
HD Factor V .5398 15·30**
HD Factor III .5926 12.73**
HD Factor I .6014 2.2.5
HD Factor VI .6022 .22
HD Factor II .602.5 .06
HD Factor VIII .6059 .87
HD Factor IV .6067 .21
*p <.05**p <. .01
118
TABLE LXVI. PREDICTION OF MALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR VII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor I .2241 7.40**
HD Factor V .2529 2.04
HD Factor II .2627 ·75
HD Factor VII .2688 .48
HD Factor IV .2789 .81
HD Factor VI .2807 .15
HD Factor III .2833 .22
HD Factor VIII .2833 .00
TABLE LXVII. PREDICTION OF MALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR VIII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor III .1609 3.72
HD Factor V .2108 2.70
HD Factor VI .2361 1.66
HD Factor I .2403 .29
HD Factor II .2415 .08
HD Factor VIII .2503 .62
HD Factor VII .2542 .28
HD Factor IV .2567 .18
*p < .05**p < .01
119
TABLE LXVIII. PREDICTION OF MALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR IX FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor VII .3167 15.61**
HD Factor I .3788 7·01**
HD Factor V .4036 3·19
HD Factor VIII .4232 2.71
HD Factor VI .4274 .59
HD Factor III .4304 .43
HD Factor II .4312 .11
HD Factor IV .4324 .17
TABLE LXIX. PREDICTION OF FEMALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor III .2665 10.70**
HD Factor V .3197 4.82*
HD Factor IV .3281 .85
HD Factor VII ·3295 .13
HD Factor I .3317 .22
HD Factor VI .3324 7.61**
HD Factor II .3325 .01
HD Factor VIII ·3328 .03
*p (.05**p <.01
120
TABLE LXX. PREDICTION OF FEMALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor VII .1800 4.69*
HD Factor V .2779 6.75*
HD Factor III .3371 5.68*
HD Factor VI .3411 .41
HD Factor I .3429 .19
HD Factor VIII .3430 .00
HD Factor IV .3431 .00
HD Factor II .3431 .00
TABLE LXXI. PREDICTION OF FEMALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor I .3102 14.90**
HD Factor V .4227 13·95**
HD Factor VIII .4602 5·80*
HD Factor III .4719 1.92
HD Factor II .5287 10.72**
HD Factor VII ·5393 2.17
HD Factor IV .5394 .00
HD Factor VI .5394 .00
*p <e05**p <.01
121
TABLE LXXII. PREDICTION OF FEMALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor III .1944 5·50*
HD Factor VII .2934 7.34**
HD Factor II .3079 1·32
HD Factor VI .3142 .60
HD Factor IV .3229 .84
HD Factor I .3286 .56
HD Factor V .3288 .00
HD Factor VIII .3288 .00
TABLE LXXIII. PREDICTION OF FEMALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction equation R F
HD Factor V .2240 7.39**
HD Factor I .2576 2.41
HD Factor II .2887 2.56
HD Factor VII .3165 2.56
HD Factor IV .4529 17.97**
HD Factor VI .4587 .90
HD Factor III .4713 2.02
HD Factor VIII .4714 .00
*p ~.0.5**p (001
122
TABLE LXXIV. PREDICTION OF FEMALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor V .3320 17.35**
HD Factor VII .. 5329 33.74**
HD Factor III .6241 23.84**
HD Factor I .6364 3.58
HD Factor VI .6407 1.26
HD Factor II .6409 .05
HD Factor VIII .6497 .19
TABLE LXXV. PREDICTION OF FEMALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR VII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor IV .2525 9.53**
HD Factor V .3169 5.67*
HD Factor II .3374 2.09
HD Factor VII .3923 6.48*
HD Factor VI .3949 .34
HD Factor VIII .3962 .17
HD Factor III ·3970 .09
HD Factor I .3970 .00
*p ( .05**p <. .01
123
TABLE LXXVI. PREDICTION OF FEMALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR VIII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor IV .2068 6.26*
HD Factor V .2534 3·18
HD Factor I .2866 2.69
HD Factor VII .2980 1.01
HD Factor III .3691 7.46**
HD Factor VIII ·3910 2.65
HD Factor II .4416 7.02**
HD Factor VI .4750 5.26*
TABLE LXXVII. PREDICTION OF FEMALE CHILD REARING PRACTICEFACTOR IX FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor I .1528 3.34
HD Factor V .1678 .69
HD Factor VIII .2055 2.03
HD Factor VII .2536 3·24
HD Factor II .2934 3.24
HD Factor III .3001 .59
HD Factor VI .3010 .08
HD Factor IV .3013 .03
*p (.05**p <.01
TABLE LXXVIII. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
124
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor II .2995 13·80**
HD Factor VIII .3154 1.51
HD Factor IV .3453 3·09
HD Factor V .3549 1.05
HD Factor VII .3575 .29
HD Factor III .3602 .29
HD Factor I .3652 .56
HD Factor VI .3662 .12
TABLE LXXIX. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor IV .2115 6.56*
HD Factor V .2892 5·90*
HD Factor VI .3377 4.73*
HD Factor VII .3912 6.31*
HD Factor I .4169 3.42
HD Factor VIII .4338 2.39
HD Factor II .4575 3·58
HD Factor III .4582 .11
*p <.05*'*p <.01
125
TABLE LXXX. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor II .3031 14.22**
HD Factor V ·3923 10.14**
HD Factor IV .3969 .60
HD Factor III .4429 6.57*
HD Factor VI .4472 .65
HD Factor VIII .4533 .93
HD Factor VII .4658 1.98
HD Factor I .4684 .41
TABLE LXXXI. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor IV .3693 22.10**
HD Factor V .4707 15·22**
HD Factor VI .4763 .94
HD Factor VIII .4969 3·64
HD Factor III .4997 •.51
HD Factor VII •.5002 .09
HD Factor II •.500.5 .0.5
HD Factor I '.5005 .00
*p <005**p <.01
TABLE LXXXII. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
126
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor IV .2009 5.89*
HD Factor V .2628 4.29*
HD Factor VI ·3131 4.43*
HD Factor I .3339 2.07
HD Factor VII .3516 1.89
HD Factor VIII .3786 3.10
HD Factor II ·3903 1.43
HD Factor III .3950 .58
TABLE LXXXIII. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor IV .2670 10.75**
HD Factor V .2810 1.16
HD Factor YI .3004 1.71
HD Factor II .3167 1.53
HD Factor I .3217 .48
HD Factor VII .3255 .37
HD Factor VIII .3305 .49
HD Factor III .3315 .10
*p (.05**p (.01
127
TABLE LXXXIV. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR VII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPractice Equation R F
HD Factor IV .3778 23.31**
HD Factor VII .4094 4.15*
HD Factor III .4262 2·37
HD Factor V .4274 .17
HD Factor VI .4282 .12
lID Factor VIII .4297 .20
HD Factor II .4303 .09
HD Factor I .4303 .00
TABLE LXXXV. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR VIII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor II .2232 7.34**
HD Factor V .2638 2.95
HD Factor VIII .2690 .41
HD Factor I .2713 .18
HD Factor III .2765 .42
HD Factor IV .2794 .24
HD Factor VI .2807 .10
HD Factor VII .2823 .13
*p <.05**p <.01
TABLE LXXXVI. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR IX FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor IV .3484 19.34**
HD Factor VII .3682 2.29
HD Factor VI .4110 5.53*
HD Factor V .4495 5.69*
HD Factor III .4577 1.27
HD Factor I .4668 1.46
HD Factor II .4670 .04
HD Factor VIII .4672 .02
TABLE LXXXVII. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR X FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction equation R F
HD Factor IV .2221 7.27**
HD Factor V .2527 2.15
HD Factor III .2962 3.61
HD Factor I .3°37 .68
HD Factor VIII .3054 .16
HD Factor VI .3096 ·38
HD Factor II .3129 .31
HD Factor VII .3147 .17
*p (.05**p <.01
128
TABLE LXXXVIII. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR XI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor II .1794 4.65*
HD Factor I .2002 1.14
HD Fsctor VIII .2102 .59
HD Factor III .2379 1.80
HD Factor IV .2578 1.44
HD Factor VII .2621 .32
HD Factor VI .2653 .25
HD Factor V .2670 .13
TABLE LXXXIX. PREDICTION OF GENERAL CHILD REARINGPRACTICE FACTOR XII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor VIII .1411 2.84
HD Factor V .2708 8.01**
HD Factor VII .3180 4.27*
HD Factor III .3266 .85
HD Factor I .3307 .42
HD Factor IV .3337 .3°
HD Factor VI .3388 ·52
HD Factor II ·3389 ,,00
*p <.05**p <.01
129
130
Tables LX thru LXVIII present the results of the multiple
linear regression analyses utilizing the eight household
demography factors as predictors and the nine male child
rearing factors, in turn, as criteria. In Tables LXIX
thru LXXVII, the eight household demography factors served
as predictors and the nine female child rearing practices
factors, in turn, as criteria. In Tables LXXVIII thru
LXXXIX, the household demography factors are again the
predictors and the twelve general child rearing practice
factors, in turn, are the criteria.
In the prediction of male child rearing practice
factor I, which has been labelled "achievement-oriented
discipline," the first household demography factor entering
the equation, that factor exhibiting the highest correla
tion with the criterion (.2971), was factor I, which has
been labelled "stepmother, origin off Oahu." This corre
lation was significant beyond the .01 level (F= 13.56).
Also making a significant independent contribution to the
accountable criterion variance were household demography
factors V "Nanakuli origin" (p (.05), and VI '!nuclear
family" (p <.05) • The second male child rearing practice
factor, "compliance-oriented discipline," received a signi
ficant contribution only from household demography factor
VI, "nuclear family," with a probability level of between
.05 and .01. Male child rearing practice factor III,
1)1
"discipline for parental aggression," received signifi
cant contributions from household demography factors IV,
"nuclear-lateral, consanguine" (p ( .01), I, "stepmother,
origin off Oahu" (p <.01), VII, "subnuclear-extended,
older child" (p <.05), III, "subnuclear, mother absent"
(p (.01), and V "Nanakuli origin" (p <.01) • The sole
significant predictor of male child rearing practice
factor IV, "physical punishment" was household demography
factor III, "subnuclear, mother absent" (r= .1714, p <.05).
Factor VI in the male child rearing practice domain,
"punishment for aggression," received significant inde
pendent contributions from household demography factors
VII, "subnuclear-extended, older child," V, "Nanakuli
origin," and III, "subnuclear, mother absent." All were
significant at or beyond the .01 level. The uninterpreted
male child rearing practice factors VII and IX each re
ceived a significant contribution from household demog
raphy factor I, "stepmother, origin off Oahu," with p <. .01
in each case. Factor IX also received a significant inde
pendent contribution from household demography factor VII,
"subnuclear-extended, older child" (p (.01). Male child
rearing practice factors V, "task-oriented discipline,"
and VIII, "strictness of discipline," were not predictable
at the .05 level of significance from any household demog
raphy factors. One could further ask the question of
132
which criterion factors are predictable from the entire
set of predictors. With eight predictors and 133 degrees
of freedom a multiple correlation of approximately .3
is necessary to meet the .05 significance level (for df=
7/125 r must equal .307; for df= 9/150 r must equal .310).
A glance at the final row of Tables LX thru LXVIII shows
that factors I, II, III, VI, and IX meet this level. Of
these, factors I, III, VI, and IX met the .01 level of
significance.
2. Prediction of Female Child Rearing Practice
Factors from Household Demography Factors. The second
set of regression analyses again involve variables 1-8 in
Table LVIII, the household demography factors, as pre
dictors, and variables 18-26 in Table LVIII, the female
child rearing practice factors, as criteria. The results
of these 9 analyses are set out in Tables LXIX thru LXXVI
for each criterion in turn. Of these 9 criterion variables,
all multiple correlations with the 8 predictors meet the
.05 level of significance. Five (factors III, V, VI, VII,
and VIII) met the .01 significance level. In the pre
diction of female child rearing factor I, "low physical
punishment," two of the household demography factors, III
("subnuclear, mother absent") and VI ("nuclear family")
made independent contributions to the accountable criter
ion variance which were significant beyond the .01 level.
133
A third household demography factor, V ("Nanakuli origin")
met the .05 level of significance. In predicting to
female child rearing factor II from the household demog
raphy factors, two predictors were significant, both beyond
the .05 level. These were III, "subnuclear, mother absent"
and VI, "nuclear family." The third female child rearing
practice factor, "discipline for parental aggression,"
received significant independent contributions from four
of the household demography factors--I, "stepmother, origin
off Oahu" (p< .01), V, "Nanakuli origin" (p (.01), VIII,
"spouse's lineal" (p< .05), and II, "Hanai" (p < .05). Fe
male child rearing practice factor IV, "achievement oriented
discipline" was significantly correlated with household
demography factor III, "subnuclear, mother absent" (p< .05),
with household demography factor VII, "subnuclear-
extended, older child" making an additional independent
contribution (p <.01) • The fifth factor in the female
child rearing practice domain, "later age of work assign
ments," received significant (p < .01) contributions from
two of the household demography factors--V, "Nanakuli
origin" and IV, "nuclear-lateral, consanguine," while
three of the household demography predictors entered
significantly, p <.01 in both cases, in the prediction of
female child rearing practice factor VI, "dislike of non
feminine behavior." These three were factor V, "Nanakuli
origin," factor VII, "subnuclear-extended, older child,
134
and factor III, "subnuclear, mother absent." Female child
rearing practice factor VII, "compliance oriented disci
pline." received significant independent contributions
from household demography factors IV, "nuclear-lateral,
consanguine" (p (.01), V, "Nanakuli origin" (P(.OS),
VII, "subnuclear-extended, older child" (p (.OS). The
eighth female child rearing factor, "less independence,"
received significant contributions from household demog
raphy factors IV, "nuclear-lateral, consanguine" (p <.OS),
III, "subnuclear, mother absent" (p (.01), II, "Hanai"
(p <.01), and VI, "nuclear family" (p <.OS). The final
factor in the female child rearing practice domain, "task
oriented discipline," did not receive a significant con
tribution to accountable criterion variance at the .OS
level of significance from any of the eight household
demography factors.
3. Prediction of General Child Rearing Practice
Factors from the Household Demography Factors. The vari
ables of interest in this third set of regression analyses
are again variables 1-8 in Table LVIII, the household
demography factors, as predictors, and 27-)8 in Table
LVIII, the general child rearing practice factors, as
criteria. The results of these 12 stepwise regression
analyses are presented in Tables LXXVIII thru LXXXIX for
each of the 12 criteria in turn. A glance at the last
row of each of these tables reveals that 10 of the 12
13.5
criteria, excluding factors VIII and XI, exhibited an R
with the full set of predictors significant beyond the
.05 level. Of these 10, all but factors VI, X, and XII
met the .01 level of significance with respect to the
"full model" multiple correlation.
In predicting to the first general child rearing
practice factor, "warmth of parent-child relationship,"
only the household demography factor given the label
"Hanai" (factor II) contributed a significant amount to
the accountable criterion variance. Factor II from the
general child rearing practice analysis, "obedience
training," received contributions significant at the .05
level from household demography factors IV thru VII, which
have been labelled "nuclear-lateral, consanguine,"
"Nanakuli origin," "nuclear family," and "subnuclear
extended, older child," respectively. Factor III of the
general child rearing practice analysis, which has been
given the label of "permissiveness," received contribu
tions significant at the .01 level from household demog
raphy factors IV and V, which bear the labels "nuclear
lateral, consanguine" and "Nanakuli origin," respectively.
The fifth general child rearing practice factor, "achieve
ment training," received contributions beyond the .05
level of significance from household demography factors
IV, V, and VI, or "nuclear-lateral, consanguine,"
1)6
"Nanakuli origin," and "nuclear family," respectively.
Factors VI and X of the general child rearing practice
domain, the former labelled "nuclear family" and the latter
uninterpreted, received a significant contribution, in
each case beyond the .01 level of significance, solely
from household. demography factor IV, "nuclear-lateral,
consanguine." Factor VII in the general child rearing
practice domain also received a significant contribution
(p <.01) from the "nuclear-lateral, consanguine" demog
raphy factor, in addition to an independent contribution
from factor VII in the demography realm, "subnuclear
extended, older child." General child rearing practice
factor IX, which was not interpreted, also received a
contribution from the demography "nuclear-lateral, con
sanguine" factor (p <.01) as well as from demography fac
tors VI, "nuclear family" (p<.05), and V, "Nanakuli
origin" (p< .05) • General child rearing practice factors
VIII and XI, the former labelled "responsibility training"
and the latter uninterpreted, both received a significant
contribution (p <.01 in the case of factor VIII and p< .05
in the case of factor XI) from demography factor II, which
has been labelled "Hanai." The final general child rear
ing practice factor, XII, which has not been interpreted,
received a significant contribution from demography factors
V, "Nanakuli origin," (p <.01), and VII, "subnuclear
extended, older child" (p(.05).
137
4. Prediction of Teacher Rating Factors from the
Household Demography Factors. In the fourth set of re
gression analyses, variables 1-8 in Table LVIII, the
household demography factors, again serve as the predic
tors, while the criterion variables are the teacher rating
factors, which are listed as variables 39 thru 44 in Table
LVIII. The results of these six analyses are presented
in Tables XC thru XCV for the six criteria in turn.
An examination of the last row of each of these
tables reveals that the full model prediction equation
did not meet the .05 level of significance in any of the
six analyses. In entering one variable at a time, sig
nificant relationships were found to obtain in the case
of three of the six criteria, factors III ("emotionality")
V, ("sociality"), and VI, ("relational insecurity"). The
predictors exhibiting these relationships (p (.05 in each
case) were demography factor III, "subnuclear, mother
absent" in the case of the teacher rating factor of "emo
tionality," demography factor VII, "subnuclear-extended,
older child" in the case of the teacher rating factor of
"sociality," and demography factor VI, "nuclear family,"
in the case of the teacher rating factor of "relational
insecurity."
5. Prediction of Behavior Problem Factors from the
Household Demography Factors. In the prediction of the
behavior problems factors from household demography
TABLE XC. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATING,FACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor I .1641 3.87
HD Factor II .1974 1.74
HD Factor V .2052 .45
HD Factor VII .2109 .34
HD Factor IV .2127 .11
HD Factor VI .2175 .29
HD Factor III .2183 .05
HD Factor VIII .2185 .02
TABLE XCI. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor VI .0856 1.03
HD Factor I .1152 .84
HD Factor IV .1292 .48
HD Factor II .1840 2.43
HD Factor V .2195 2.05
HD Factor VIII .2205 .06
lID Factor III .2212 .04
lID Factor VII .2221 .06
*p <.05**p <.01
138
TABLE XCII. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor III .1715 4.24*
HD Factor VIII 01876 .83
HD Factor V .2165 1.69
HD Factor VII .2462 2.00
HD Factor II .2659 1.49
HD Factor I .2718 .46
HD Factor IV .2727 .07
HD Factor VI .2737 .08
TABLE XCIII. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor II .1500 3·22
HD Factor I .1848 1.68
HD Factor III .1907 .32
HD Factor VIII .2271 2.20
HD Factor VII .2301 .20
HD Factor IV .2306 .03
HD Factor V .2306 .00
HD Factor VI .2306 .00
*p <.05**p ( .01
139
140
TABLE XCIV. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor VII .1736 4.35*
HD Factor II .1949 1.13
HD Factor V .2065 .68
HD Factor I .2113 .28
HD Factor VIII .2132 .12
HD Factor III .2166 .21
HD Factor IV .2175 .05
HD Factor VI .2187 .07
TABLE XCV. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor VI .1752 4.43*
HD Factor V .2055 1.68
HD Factor IV .2336 1.80
HD Factor VII .2462 .89
HD Factor I .2514 .37
HD Factor II .2518 .03
HD Factor VIII .2526 .06
HD Factor III .2528 .01
*p (.05**p (,,01
141
factors the variables of interest as criteria in Table
LVIII are variables 45 thru 51, with the household demog
raphy variables (1 thru 8) again serving as predictors.
The results of these seven stepwise multiple regression
analyses are set forth in Tables XCVI thru CII for each of
the seven criteria in turn. Inspection of these tables
revealed that the full model multiple correlation did not
reach the .05 level of significance in any instance. Four
of the seven behavior problems factors, however, exhibited
a significant (p <.05 in each case) correlation with one
of the household demography factors. Behavior problem
factor I, "social withdrawal," correlated with household
demography factor II, "Hanai," behavior problem factor II,
"sluggish, disinterested," correlated with household demog
raphy factor IV, ·'nuclear-lateral, consanguine," behavior
problem factor IV, "inferiority-irresponsible," correlated
with demography factor II, again "Hanai," and behavior
problem factor V, "psychopathic-unsocialized," again cor
related with demography factor IV, "nuclear-lateral."
6. Prediction of the Teacher Rating Factors from
Household Demography and Child Rearing Practices Factors
Combined. In this section the criterion variables of con
cern are variables 39 thru 44 in Table LVIII, while the
variables utilized as predictors are variables 1 thru 38
in Table LVIII. The results of each of the six stepwise
multiple regression analyses are presented in Tables ellI
TABLE XCVI. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor II .2023 5.97*
HD Factor V .2526 3.40
HD Factor VII .2555 .22
HD Factor VIII .2739 1.44
HD Factor VI .27.58 .15
HD Factor IV .2838 .66
HD Factor I .2838 .00
HD Factor III .2838 .00
TABLE XCVII. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor IV .1797 4.67*
HD Factor III .2038 1.34
HD Factor V .2116 .47
HD Factor II .2162 .29
HD Factor VIII .2386 1.47
HD Factor VI .2419 .23
HD Factor VII .2428 .06
HD Factor I .2438 .07
*p (,,05**p (.01
142
TABLE XCVIII. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor I .1151 1.88
HD Factor VII .1343 .68
HD Factor V .1437 .37
HD Factor III .1519 .34
HD Factor VI .1578 .26
HD Factor II .1666 ·39
HD Factor VIII .1721 .26
HD Factor IV .1745 .11
TABLE XCIX. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor II .1940 5.47*
HD Factor V .2070 .76
HD Factor VII .2149 .48
HD Factor VIII .2213 .40
HD Factor VI .2260 .3°HD Factor IV .2289 .18
HD Factor I .2306 .11
HD Factor III .2306 .00
*p ( .05**p <.01
143
TABLE C. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor IV .1645 3.91*
HD Factor III .1685 .18
HD Factor II .1729 .22
HD Factor VI .1764 .17
HD Factor V .1788 .12
HD Factor VII .1803 .07
HD Factor I .1810 .04
HD Factor VIII .1812 .01
TABLE CI. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor IV .1035 1.52
HD Factor I .1333 1.00
HD Factor VII .1341 .03
HD Factor VIII .1358 .06
HD Factor II .1411 .20
HD Factor VI .1452 .16
HD Factor III .1453 .00
HD Factor V .1453 .00
*p <.05**p <.01
144
145
TABLE CII. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMFACTOR VII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation
HD Factor VI
HD Factor V
HD Factor VIII
HD Factor II
HD Factor VII
HD Factor I
HD Factor IV
HD Factor III
*p <.05**p <.01
R
.0868
.1026
.1172
.1310
.1437
.1489
.1533
.1541
F
1.06
.42
.45
.47
.48
.21
.18
.03
thru CVIII for each of the six criteria in turn. The
question asked in each of these analyses concerns which
of the child rearing practice factors result in signifi-
cant increases in accountable criterion variance beyond
that accounted for by the household demography factors
alone.
It is discernible from inspection of the final row
of Tables CIII thru CVIII that the full model multiple
correlation meets the .01 level of significance in each
of the six analyses under consideration. In the case of
the first teacher rating factor, "creativity/divergent
thinking," none of the predictors was observed to make a
146
TABLE CIII. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND
CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor I .1641 3.87
CRP (F) Factor VII .2139 2.74
CRP (G) Factor III .2518 2.61
HD Factor II .2812 2·33
CRP (M) Factor IV .2997 1.61
CRP (F) Factor I .3184 1.73
CRP (G) Factor IX .3436 2.53
CRP (M) Factor I .3720 3.14
CRP (M) Factor IX .3947 2.72
CRP (M) Factor V .4021 .92
CRP (F) Factor IV .4096 .95
CRP (G) Factor VIII .4152 .72
CRP (M) Factor VIII .4201 .64
CRP (G) Factor X .4272 .93
CRP (F) Factor V .4342 .94
HD Factor V .4463 1.66
CRP (F) Factor VIII .4513 .70
CRP (F) Factor X .4561 .67
HD Factor III .4604 .61
CRP (G) Factor XII .4662 .84
CRP (G) Factor XI .4709 .68
CRP (M) Factor II .4759 .73
147
TABLE CIII. (Continued) PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND
CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (G) Factor V .4813 .79
CRP (F) Factor II .4863 .74
CRP (M) Factor VII .5017 2.36
CRP (F) Factor IX .5112 1.49
CRP (G) Factor II .5152 .64
CRP (G) Factor IV .5186 .54
CRP (M) Factor III .5737 .81
CRP (F) Factor VI .5260 .36
HD Factor IV .5269 .16
CRP (F) Factor III .5274 .07
HD Factor VII .5278 .06
CRP (G) Factor VI .5278 .00
HD Factor VI .5279 .00
HD Factor VIII ·5281 .02
CRP (G) Factor VII .5281 .00
CRP (M) Factor VI .5281 .00
*p <.05**p <.01
148
TABLE CIV. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND
CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (M) Factor II .1505 3.24
CRP (F) Factor III .. 2338 4.71*
CRP (F) Factor VIII .2760 3·22
CRP (G) Factor V .2971 1.82
CRP (G) Factor I .3400 4.20*
CRP (I~) Factor I •3611.l· 2.3L!-
CRP (G) Factor XII .3787 2.00
CRP (M) Factor VIII .3921 1.62
CRP (F) Factor VII .4002 1.02
CRP (ra) Factor V .4218 2.82
CRP (M) Factor VI .4369 2.09
CRP (F) Factor VI .4661 4.34*
CRP (G) Factor XI .4875 3.42
CRP (G) Factor VII .5089 3.67
HD Factor V .5206 2.07
CRP (F) Factor II ·5285 1.45
CRP (M) Factor VII .5344 1.08
CRP (F) Factor IX .5402 1.08
CRP (M) Factor III .5485 1.57
HD Factor III .5528 .82
HD Factor VII .5581 1.03
HD Factor IV .5639 1.15
149
TABLE CIV. (Continued) PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND
CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor I .5692 1.05
CRP (F) Factor IV .5757 1.29
HD Factor VIII .5806 1.00
CRP (F) Factor V .5835 .59
CRP (M) Factor IV .5867 .65
HD Factor VI .5900 .67
CRP (G) Factor VIII .5940 .83
CRP (F) Factor I .5959 .38
CRP (G) Factor IV .5965 .12
CRP (M) Factor IX .5971 .12
CRP (G) Factor IX .5976 .09
CRP (G) Factor VI .5983 .15
CRP (G) Factor III .5991 .16
CRP (G) Factor X .6005 .27
CRP (G) Factor II .6024 ·37
HD Factor II .6026 .03
*p <.05**p (.01
150
TABLE CV. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND
CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor III .1715 4 .24-l~
CRP(M) Factor V .2413 4.25*
CRP (F) Factor III ·3110 5.88*
CRP (M) Factor VI .3333 2.21
CRP (00) Factor VII .3639 3.3.5
CRP (F) Factor V .3774 1•.57
CRP (G) Factor VIII .3881 1.29
CRP (G) Factor III .3962 1~01
CRP (M) Factor I .4081 1•.51
CRP (G) Factor I .4185 1.36
CRP (M) Factor II .4269 1.13
CRP (G) Factor V .4234 .76
CRP (G) Factor IV .4387 .87
CRP (G) Factor XI .4472 1.19
CRP (G) Factor VI .4601 1.88
CRP (F) Factor II .4701 1.49
CRP (M) Factor IV .4778 1.18
CRP (F) Factor IV .4873 1.48
CRP (F) Factor VI .4905 .49
CRP (F) Factor VII .4977 1.15
CRP (G) Factor XII .5°3° .85
CRP (F) Factor VIII .. 5090 .98
151
TABLE CV. (Continued) PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND
CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (G) Factor X .5138 .79
CRP (M) Factor III .5170 .52
HD Factor V .5198 .46
HD Factor IV .5419 3·81
HD Factor VI .5453 .60
HD Factor II .5540 1.55
CRP (G) Factor II .5595 1.01
CRP (G) Factor IX .5611 .29
HD Factor VII .5624 .23
HD Factor VIII .5637 .24
CRP (M) Factor VIII .5643 .11
CRP (F) Factor I .5648 .08
CRP (G) Factor VII .5653 .10
CRP (M) Factor IX .5666 .22
HD Factor I .5667 .03
CRP (F) Factor IX .5667 .00
~~p <.05**p (.01
1.52
TABLE CVI. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND
CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (F) Factor VII .1747 4.41*
CRP (M) Factor VIII .2289 3.20
CRP (F) Factor II .2657 2.70
lID Factor I .3036 3.26
CRP (M) Factor I .363.5 6.26*
CRP (M) Factor V .3892 3.08
CRP (M) Factor II .4278 .5.17*
CRP (F) Factor III .4463 2.68
CRP (M) Factor III .460.5 2.16
CRP (M) Factor IX .4754 2·35
HD Factor V .4863 1.79
CRP (F) Factor VI .493.5 1.21
CRP (F) Factor IX .4977 .70
CRP (M) Factor VI •.5009 •.5.5
HD Factor III •.5045 .61
HD Factor VI .5122 1.34
HD Factor VII •.522.5 1.81
CRP (F) Factor IV ·5302 1.38
CRP (F) Factor VIII •.53.5.5 .96
CRP (G) Factor II •.5389 .63
CRP (G) Factor V .5474 1.58
HD Factor II ·.5537 1019
1.53
TABLE CVI. (Continued) PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND
CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor VIII •.5672 2.6.5
CRP (G) Factor I •.5731 1.16
CRP (M) Factor VII .5816 1.72
CRP (G) Factor IV •.5836 .41
CRP (F) Factor I •.5846 .21
CRP (M) Factor IV .5862 .31
CRP (F) Factor V •.5879 .3.5
CRP (G) Factor VIII .5893 .29
CRP (G) Factor VI •.5907 .28
CRP (G) Factor XII •.5914 .14
CRP (G) Factor X •.5924 .19
CRP (G) Factor IX •.5929 .10
CRP (G) Factor VII .5931 .03
CRP (G) Factor XI .5935 .07
CRP (G) Factor III •.5936 .02
HD Factor IV •.5936 .00
*p <.0.5**p <.01
154
TABLE CVII. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND
CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (G) Factor XII .2159 2.40
CRP (G) Factor VII .2844 5.15*
HD Factor V .2972 1.11
HD Factor VIII .3211 2.25
CRP (F) Factor VI ·3375 1.64
HD Factor I .3520 1·53
CRP (G) Factor VIII .3593 ·79
CRP (F) Factor II .3678 .94
CRP (G) Factor I .3780 1.17
CRP (F) Factor VIII .3879 1.15
CRP (M) Factor IX .3939 ·71
CRP (M) Factor II .3992 .65
CRP (lVI) Factor VII .4096 1.28
CRP (F) Factor I .4144 .60
CRP (G) Factor XI .4212 .86
CRP (G) Factor V .4304 1.19
HD Factor II .4395 1.21
CRP (M) Factor V .4468 .99
CRP (F) Factor VII .4516 .65
HD Factor VI .4563 .64
155
TABLE CVII. (Continued)PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND
CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
liD Factor IV .4728 2.34
CRP (F) Factor III .4777 .72
CRP (M) Factor IV .4804 .39
CRP (G) Factor X .4840 ·53
CRP (F) Factor IV .4882 .61
CRP (M) Factor III .4913 .46
CRP (G) Factor IX .4930 .25
CRP (G) Factor IV .4954 .35
CRP (F) Factor IX .4961 .10
CRP (F) Factor V .4969 .11
CRP (G) Factor II .4972 .05
CRP (G) Factor VI .4975 .03
CRP (M) Factor VIII .4976 .02
CRP (G) Factor III ..4978 .02
CRP (M) Factor I .4980 .03
HD Factor III .4980 .00
CRP (M) Factor VI .4980 .00
*p <.05**p <.01
156
TABLE CVIII. PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR VI FRom HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND
CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor VI .1752 4.43*
CRP (M) Factor IV .2573 5 .28o:l~
CRP (F) Factor IX .3230 5.87*
CRP (M) Factor VIII .3420 1.96
CRP (F) Factor IV .3578 1.73
CRP (F) Factor II .3884 3.63
HD Factor V .4023 1.75
liD Factor IV .4175 2.01
CRP (G) Factor XI .4303 1.76
CRP (G) Factor IX .4441 1.98
CRP (M) Factor I .4545 1.52
CRP (G) Factor X .4771 3.53
CRP (G) Factor V .4895 2.01
CRP (F) Factor V .4970 1.25
CRP (F) Factor III .5042 1.23
CRP (G) Factor VI .5132 1.55
CRP (lVI) Factor VII ·5239 1.89
HD Factor VIII ·5310 1.29
CRP (G) Factor IV .5369 1.06
CRP (G) Factor XII .5430 1.lJ
liD Factor III .5511 1.54
CRP (F) Factor VIII .5568 1.09
157
TABLE CVIII. (Continued) PREDICTION OF TEACHER RATINGFACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND
CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (G) Factor II .5640 1.38
CRP (M) Factor VI .5700 1.20
CRP (F) Factor VI .5726 .51
CRP (M) Factor V .5746 .39
CRP (G) Factor VII .5770 .46
HD Factor II .5788 ·35CRP (G) Factor VIII .5811 .47
HD Factor I .5823 .22
CRP (F) Factor VII .5830 .14
CRP (M) Factor II .5846 .30
CRP (M) Factor IX .5850 .09
CRP (F) Factor I .5854 .07
CRP (M) Factor III .5856 .05
CRP (G) Factor I .5858 .04
CRP (G) Factor XI .5859 .02
HD Factor VII .5861 .02
*p <.05**p (.01
158
significant independent contribution to the accountable
criterion variance, however. In the case of teacher rating
factor II, "aggression-dominance," three of the child rear
ing practice factors made a contribution to the accountable
criterion variance which was significant beyond the .05
level. These were female child rearing practice factors
II, "dislike of intrusive behavior," and VI, "dislike of
nonfeminine behavior," and general child rearing practice
factor I, "warmth of parent-child relationship." In the
prediction of teacher rating factor III, "emotionality,"
it is observed that male child rearing practice factor V,
"task-oriented discipline," and female child rearing prac
tice factor III, "discipline for parental aggression,"
each made contributions significant beyond the .05 level.
Teacher rating factor IV, "compliance," received signifi
cant (p(.05) contributions from male child rearing prac
tice factors I, "achievement-oriented discipline," and II,
"compliance-oriented discipline." The single child rearing
practice factor making a significant contribution (p <.05)
in the prediction of teacher rating factor V, "sociality,"
was the general child rearing practice factor VII, "demands
for compliance." The sixth teacher rating factor, "rela
tional insecurity," received significant contributions
(p (.05) from male child rearing practice factor IV,
"physical punishment," and female child rearing practice
factor IX, "task-oriented discipline."
159
A second alternative method of examining the relative
contributions of the household demography and child rear
ing practice factors to the accountable variance in each
of the teacher rating factors is to ask, for each of the
six criteria in turn, whether the full model multiple
correlation in predicting from household demography plus
child rearing practice factors is significantly greater
than that obtained in predicting from the eight household
demography factors alone. Such an hypothesis can be tested
by the ratio
F =(R2~ - R22~ fN - Ml - 1),~ - RZIMl - M2)
where R21 is the squared multiple correlation resulting
from the larger number of predictor variables, Ml is the
larger number of predictor variables, R22 is the squared
multiple correlation resulting from the smaller number of
predictor variables, and M2 is the smaller number of
predictor variables. The degrees of freedom for the num
erator is given by N - Ml - 1, and the denominator by
Ml - M2. These two values are 101 and 30, respectively,
in the current analysis. For these degrees of freedom
an F of 1.57 is required to meet the .05 level of signifi
cance. A glance at Table eIX reveals that the addition
of child rearing practice factors to household demography
factors as predictors of the six teacher rating factors
increased the full model R2 a significant (p(005) amount
160
only in the case of teacher rating factor II, "aggression-
dominance ."
TABLE CIX. COMPARISON OF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCE IN TEACHERRATING FACTORS WHEN PREDICTING FROM HOUSEHOLD
DEMOGRAPHY FACTORS ALONE VERSUS HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY PLUS CHILD REARING PRACTICES
Teacher Rating Household Household Demography FFactor Demography Plus Child Rearing
R2 M2Practices
R MI. Creativity/
Divergent1.06Thinking .05 8 .28 38
II. Aggression-Dominance .05 8 .36 38 1.61*
III. Emotionality .07 8 .32 38 1.23
IV. Compliance .05 8 .35 38 1.54
V. Sociality .05 8 .25 38 .89
VI. RelationalInsecuri ty .06 8 .35 38 1.49
*p .05
7. Prediction of the Behavior Problem Factors from
Household Demography and Child Rearing Practice Factors
Combined. The predictor variables of interest in this
section, as in the preceeding one, are variables 1 thru 38
in Table LVIII. The criterion variables to be examined in
this section are variables 45 thru 51 in Table LVIII. The
results of each of the seven stepwise multiple linear
regression analyses in this set are presented in Tables
CX thru CXVI for each of the seven criteria in turn. The
first question to be examined is the significance of the
161
TABLE CX. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEM FACTOR IFROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (M) Factor IV .2413 8.66*-1(·
HD Factor VIII .3225 7.10 i l-*
CRP (F) Factor IX .3721 5·53*
HD Factor V .3914 2.38
CRP (G) Factor IX .4096 2.38
CRP (G) Factor III .4290 2.69
CRP (fYI) Factor I .4470 2.64
CRP (M) Factor VIII .4656 2.89
CRP (M) Factor VI .4827 2.78
CRP (F) Factor II ·5001 3.00
CRP (M) Factor II ·5110 1.94
CRP (G) Factor II .5240 2.40
CRP (F) Factor V .5328 1.65
CRP (G) Factor VIII .5433 2.04
CRP (G) Factor V ·5535 2.04
CRP (M) Factor IX .5568 .67
CRP (F) Factor VIII .5610 .85
HD Factor II .5649 .80
HD Factor VII .5681 .65
CRP (F) Factor VII .5704 .47
CRP (F) Factor III .5733 ·59CRP (M) Factor III ·5772 .80
162
TABLE CX. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEM FACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY AND
CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (G) Factor VI .5790 .37
HD Factor IV ·5812 .47
HD Factor I .5831 .37
CRP (M) Factor VII .5859 ·57
CRP (F) Factor IV ·5870 .24
CRP (F) Factor I ·5893 .47
CRP (G) Factor X .5923 .61
CRP (G) Factor XII .5930 .14
CRP (G) Factor IV ·5935 .09
CRP (G) Factor XI .5941 .12
CRP (F) Factor VI .5945 .08
CRP (G) Factor I .5949 .08
HD Factor VI .5951 .04
CRP (G) Factor VII .5952 .02
HD Factor III .5953 .02
CRP (M) Factor V .5953 .00
*p <. .05*~.p <.01
163
TABLE CXI. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEM FACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (G) Factor IX .18.58 5.01*
HD Factor VIII .2319 2.83
CRP (G) Factor VIII .2494 1.24
CRP (G) Factor XII .2713 1.69
CRP (00) Factor V .2914 1.68
HD Factor IV .3060 1.30CRP (fYI) Factor VI .3177 1.09
CRP (G) Factor IV ·3351 1·70CRP (G) Factor VI .3437 .88
CRP (G) Factor V .3549 1.17
CRP (00) Factor II .36.55 1.14
CRP (F) Factor VIII .3762 1.19
HD Factor II .3857 1.09
CRP (Fa) Factor VII .3945 1.03
CRP (G) Factor XI .4004 .70
CRP (F) Factor V .4073 .84
CRP (00) Factor IV .4118 .55CRP (M) Factor IX .4191 .90CRP (M) Factor I .4270 1.00
CRP (F) Factor III .4335 .84
HD Factor III .4386 066
HD Factor I .4431 .58
164
TABLE CXI. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEI~VIOR
PROBLEM FACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYAND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor V .4454 .31
CRP (G) Factor X .4482 .36
CRP (F) Factor IV .4500 .23
CRP (G) Factor VII .4526 .35
CRP (G) Factor III .4541 .19
CRP (F) Factor VI .4554 .17
CRP (G) Factor II .4575 .27
CRP (F) Factor I .4605 ·39
CRP (F) Factor II .4632 .35
CRP (G) Factor I .4645 .16
HD Factor VI .4651 .09
CRP (F) Factor IX .4660 .11
CRP (F) Factor VII .4664 .06
CRP (M) Factor VIII .4667 .03
CRP (M) Factor III .4674 .09
HD Factor VII .4675 .00
~.p <.05';l-*p <.01
165
TABLE CXII. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEM FACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (rvI) Factor VII .1705 4 .19':l~
CRP (F) Factor IV .2070 2.01
CRP (0) Factor XI .2428 2.36
CRP (F) Factor VIII .2636 1·55CRP (0) Factor II .2805 1.36
CRP (0) Factor IX ·3231 3.88
CRP (M) Factor II .3542 3.23
CRP (0) Factor VIII .3710 1.88
CRP (M) Factor VI .3871 1.90
CRP (M) Factor IX .4054 2.27
HD Factor VII .4122 .87
CRP (0) Factor IV .4174 .67
CRP (0) Factor VI .4212 .49
CRP (F) Factor II .4248 .47
CRP (F) Factor VII .4339 1.21
CRP (0) Factor X .4393 ·73CRP (F) Factor IX .4448 .76
HD Factor VIII .4491 .59
HD Factor II .4522 .42
CRP (0) Factor V .4553 .43
CRP (0) Factor I .4599 .65
lID Factor I .4627 ·39
166
TABLE CXII. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEM FACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
~:.AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (G) Factor XII .4648 .30
CRP (F) Factor V .4678 .42
CRP (G) Factor VII .4699 .29
CRP (M) Factor III .4713 .20
CRP (G) Factor III .4728 .21-.,-
CRP (M) Factor VIII .4759 .42
CRP (F) Factor III .4772 .18
CRP (M) Factor V .4777 .08
CRP (m) Factor I .4786 .12
HD Factor V .4798 .16
CRP (F) Factor VI .4808 .1)
HD Factor IV .4812 .06
HD Factor VI .4849 .49
CRP (M) Factor IV .4857 .11
CRP (F) Factor I .4860 .04
HD Factor III .4862 .02
~,lop <.05**p <.01
167
TABLE CXIII. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEM FACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (M) Factor IV .2250 7.46**
CRP (G) Factor IX .3148 7.48**
CRP (M) Factor VI .2706 6.11-lr
CRP (F) Factor II .4161 5.93*
CRP (G) Factor VIII .4.352 2.73
CRP (F) Factor V .4606 3.90
CRP (F) Factor IV .47.32 2.04
CRP (F) Factor VI .4841 1.80
HD Factor IV .4918 1.31
CRP (M) Factor IX .4990 1.24
CRP (M) Factor II .5061 1.24
CRP (G) Factor V .5146 1.54
CRP (G) Factor X .5176 .53
CRP (G) Factor VI .5197 .38
CRP (G) Factor I .5214 ·32
CRP (G) Factor II .5231 .30
CRP (F) Factor VIII .5244 .23
CRP (M) Factor VIII .5254 .19
CRP (G) Factor IV .5271 ·30
HD Factor I .. 528.3 .21
HD Factor V ·5288 .08
HD Factor VIII .•5294 .11
168
TABLE CXIII. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEM FACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor II .5336 .74
HD Factor VII .5348 .21
HD Factor VI .5363 .25
CRP (G) Factor XI .5370 .14
CRP (rtr) Factor III .5374 .06
CRP (F) Factor IX .5376 .04
CRP (M) Factor VII ·5378 .04
CRP (G) Factor III .5383 .07
CRP (G) Factor XII .5396 .23
CRP (F) Factor VII .5418 .36
CRP (G) Factor VII .5435 .29
CRP (M) Factor I .5465 .49
HD Factor III .5469 .07
CRP (F) Factor I .5474 .08
CRP (F) Factor III .5474 .00
CRP (M) Factor V .5474 .00
*p <.05**p <.01
169
TABLE CXIV. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEM FACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (M) Factor V .1900 5.25*
HD Factor IV .2670 5.27*
CRP (F) Factor IX .3084 3.63
CRP (M) Factor VI .3216 1.28
CRP (G) Factor IX .3407 1.94
CRP (G) Factor V .3832 4.87*
CRP (F) Factor IV .4109 3.54
CRP (M) Factor IX .4275 2.27
CRP (F) Factor VIII .4420 2.07
CRP (M) Factor II .4594 2.60
CRP (F) Factor I .4659 .99
CRP (M) Factor VII .4718 .92
CRP (G) Factor VII .4774 .89
CRP (G) Factor IV .4879 1.68
HD Factor II .4930 .84
HD Factor VIII ·5005 1.25
HD Factor VII .5045 .67
CRP (M) Factor IV .5084 .65
CRP (F) Factor V .5099 .25
CRP (F) Factor VII .5120 .34
CRP (M) Factor VIII .5142 .38
CRP (G) Factor XII .5162 ·33
170
TABLE CXIV. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEM FACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (G) Factor XI .5192 .50
CRP (F) Factor II ·5218 .43
CRP (F) Factor III .5227 .15
CRP (M) Factor I .5245 .30
CRP (F) Factor VI .5262 .28
CRP (M) Factor III .5279 .28
CRP (G) Factor III .5310 .52
CRP (G) Factor II .5335 .41
HD Factor I .5352 .29
CRP (G) Factor VI .5364 .19
CRP (G) Factor X .5396 .53
CRP (G) Factor I .5418 .37
CRP (G) Factor VIII .5461 .71
HD Factor VI .5470 .14
HD Factor V .5474 007
HD Factor III .5475 .02
*p <.05**p ( .01
171
TABLE CXV. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEM FACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (M) Factor VII .1982 .5.72*
CRP (lVI ) Factor IV .2382 2•.57
CRP (M) Factor V .2664 2.11
HD Factor IV .2869 1.69
CRP (G) Factor II ·3120 2.27
CRP (G) Factor IX .3634 .5.39*CRP (M) Factor VI .39.56 3.89CRP On) Factor II .4089 1.70
CRP (G) Factor VIII .4210 1.61
CRP (G) Factor III .4386 2.4.5
CRP (G) Factor V .4.524 2.01
CRP (F) Factor V .4741 3·3.5CRP (G) Factor X .4874 2.14
CRP (G) Factor VI .49.50 1.26
CRP (F) Factor IV •.5014 1.08
CRP (G) Factor I •.5133 2.04
CRP (F) Factor VI .5218 1.51
CRP (G) Factor VII .5304 1.54
CRP (F) Factor II .53.55 .93CRP (G) Factor IV .5397 .76
CRP (M) Factor VIII •.5446 .92
172
TABLE CXV. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEM FACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor II .5470 .43
HD Factor VIII .5548 1.48
HD Factor VII .5571 .42
CRP (F) Factor IX .5584 .26
CRP (F) Factor VIII .5592 .14
HD Factor III .5601 .17
CRP (G) Factor XI .5609 .15
HD Factor VI .5615 .11
HD Factor V .5617 .04
HD Factor I .5618 .02
CRP (F) Factor I .5619 .02
CRP (F) Factor VII .5620 .01
CRP (G) Factor XII .5622 .03
CRP (M) Factor IX .5623 .01
CRP (M) Factor III. .5626 .05
CRP (M) Factor I .5629 .06
CRP (F) Factor III .5631 .03
*p <.05**p <.01
173
TABLE CXVI. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEM FACTOR VII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (M) Factor V .2395 8.52**
HD Factor VI .2673 2.11
CRP (M) Factor VI .2869 1.63
CRP (F) Factor IV .3294 4.03*
CRP (M) Factor VIII .3545 2.67
CRP (F) Factor VIII .3750 2.34
CRP (F) Factor III .3893 1.73
CRP (G) Factor XI .4013 1.50
CRP (G) Factor V .4163 1.96
CRP (G) Factor VI .4283 1.63
CRP (M) Factor I .4384 1.40
CRP (M) Factor II .4581 2.88
CRP (F) Factor IX .4803 3.46
CRP (G) Factor VII .4987 3.05
CRP (F) Factor II .5130 2.47
CRP (G) Factor IV .5254 2.22
CRP (G) Factor IX .5322 1.25
CRP (F) Factor VII .5385 1.17
CRP (M) Factor III .5489 1.97
CRP (G) Factor II .5566 1.49
CRP (G) Factor XII .5645 1.57
174
TABLE CXVI. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEM FACTOR VII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor VII .5702 1.13
CRP (G) Factor VIII ·5731 ·59
HD Factor I .5759 .55
CRP (G) Factor X ·5780 .43
HD Factor III ·5799 .38
CRP (G) Factor I .5811 .23
CRP (00) Factor VII .5829 ·37CRP (F) Factor VI .5842 .25
HD Factor IV .5853 .23
CRP (F) Factor I ·5859 .12
CRP (F) Factor V .5876 ·31
CRP (1'11) Factor IX .5892 .21
CRP (G) Factor III .5917 .50
CRP (00) Factor IV .5954 .72
HD Factor VIII ·5959 .09
HD Factor V .5963 .07
HD Factor II .5963 .00
*p <.05**p <.01
175
full model multiple correlation of each criterion variable
with all of the 38 predictors. A glance at the last row
in Tables ex thru eXVI reveals that the .01 significance
level was reached in each case. The second question to be
examined for each of the seven criteria is which of the
child rearing practice factors made a significant contribu
tion to accountable criterion variance.
Examination of Table ex reveals that in the case of
behavior problem factor I, "social withdrawal," male child
rearing practice IV, "physical punishment," made a contri
bution which was significant beyond the .01 level, and female
child rearing practice factor IX, "task-oriented discipline"
made an independent contribution which was significant
beyond the .05 level. The single significant (p <.05)
predictor in the case of behavior problem factor II, "slug
gish, disinterested," was general child rearing practice
factor IX, which has not been interpreted, but which had
as its primary salient loadings "learn a lot from books"
(in a positive direction) and "do what parents say" (in a
negative direction). This general child rearing practice
factor also made a significant (p <.01) contribution in the
prediction of behavior problem factors IV, "inferiority
irresponsible," and VI, "verbaloveractivity" (p(.OS).
One other child rearing practice factor made a significant
(p <.05) contribution to the "verbal overactivity" behavior
problem factor, and this was the male factor VII, which was
176
not interpreted, but which had as primary salients the
variables "age at which boys should be given a regular job
around the house," and "age at which boys should be given a
really important job around the house," both in a positive
direction. The other child rearing practice factors making
a significant contribution to the "inferiority-irresponsible"
behavior problem factor were male child rearing practice
factors IV, "physical punishment," (p <.01), and VI,
"punishment for aggression," (p (.05), and female child
rearing practice factor II "dislike of intrusive behavior"
(p (.01). The single child rearing practice factor making
a significant (p<.05) contribution to the accountable
criterion variance in behavior problem factor III,
"neurotic-disturbed," was again the uninterpreted male
child rearing practice factor VII. In the prediction of
behavior problem factor V, "psychopathic-unsocialized,"
significant (p (.05) contributions were rendered by male
child rearing practice factor V, "task-oriented disci
pline," and general child rearing practice factor V,
"achievement training." In the case of the final behav-
ior problem factor, "immaturity," a significant contribu
tion was made again by male child rearing practice factor
V, "task-oriented discipline," (p <.01), and by female
child rearing practice factor IV, "achievement-oriented
discipline" (p <,,05) "
177
In examining the relative contributions of the house
hold demography and the household demography plus the
child rearing practice factors to the accountable criter
ion variance in the behavior problem factors, a glance at
Table CXVII reveals that the accountable variance was
significantly (p <.05) increased when the child rearing
practice factors were added to the household demography
factors only in the case of the behavior problem factor
of "immaturity."
8. Prediction of the Behavior Problem Factors from
Household Demography, Child Rearing Practice, and Teacher
Rating Factors Combined. In this final set of regression
analyses the criteria of interest are again the behavior
problem factors, listed as variables 45 thru 51 in Table
LVIII, with variables 1 thru 44 in Table LVIII serving
as predictors. The results of these seven analyses are
presented in Tables CXVIII thru CXXIV for each of the
seven criteria in turn. A glance at the last row of each
of these tables again reveals that the full model multiple
correlation is significant beyond the .01 level in every
case.
In asking which of the teacher rating factors make a
significant contribution in the prediction of the behavior
problem factors, independent of the criterion variance
accounted for by household demography and child rearing
178
TABLE CXVII. COMPARISON OF ACCOUNTABLEVARIANCE IN BEHAVIOR PROBLEM FACTORS WHEN
PREDICTING FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY FACTORSALONE VERSUS HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY PLUS
CHILD REARING PRACTICES
Behavior Problem Household Household Demography FFactor Demography Plus Child Rearing
Practices
°R2 M R2 M
I. SocialWithdrawal .08 8 .36 38 1.46
II. Sluggish,Disinterested .06 8 .22 38 .ta
III. Neurotic-Disturbed .03 8 .24 38 .92
IV. Inferiority-Irresponsible .05 8 ·30 38 1.19
V. Psychopathic-Unsocialized .03 8 ·30 38 1.29
VI. Verbal Over-activity .02 8 .31 38 1.l.jQ
VII. Immaturity .02 8 .36 38 1.77*
*p< .05
179
TABLE CXVIII. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (00) Factor IV .2413 8.66**
HD Factor VIII ·3225 7.10-1:-*
TR Factor IV .3723 5.54*
CRP (F) Factor IX .4244 6.94**
CRP (G) Factor XII .4431 2.75
CRP (F) Factor I .4538 1.63
CRP (M) Factor II .4655 1.83
CRP (G) Factor II .4769 1.86
CRP (G) Factor IX ·5015 4.23*
CRP (G) Factor III .5185 3.11
HD Factor V .5384 3.85
CRP (G) Factor X .5522 2.81
CRP (M) Factor IX .5668 3.06
TR Factor V .5731 1.38
CRP (G) Factor VIII ·5797 1.44
CRP (00) Factor V ·5881 1.. 88
TR Factor II .5949 1.54
CRP (M) Factor I .5994 1.03
CRP (M) Factor VIII .6043 1.13
CRP (F) Factor IV .6116 1.72
CRP (F) Factor V .6172 1.32
CRP (G) Factor IV .6238 1.60
180
TABLE CXVIII. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR I FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
HD Factor I .6291 1.31
CRP (M) Factor VII .6352 1·51
CRP (F) Factor III .6412 1.50
CRP (G) Factor V .6459 1.20
CRP (M) Factor VI .6517 1.49
CRP (G) Factor VI .6552 .90
TR Factor I .6586 .89
CRP (F) Factor VIII .6617 .82
CRP (F) Factor II .6637 ·52
CRP (F) Factor VII .6710 1.94
HD Factor II .6741 .81
CRP (G) Factor XI .6761 ·53HD Factor IV .6780 ·50
HD Factor III .6809 .80
CRP (F) Factor VI .6837 .74
ED Factor VI .6856 .50
TR Factor III .6859 .09
CRP (G) Factor I .6862 .07
CRP (M) Factor III .6863 .03CRP (G) Factor VII .6864 .02
HD Factor VII .6864 .00
TR Factor VI .6864 .00
~.l-p <.05**p <.01
181
TABLE CXIX. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORSVariable Added toPrediction Equation R F
TR Factor I .2205 7.15**HD Factor IV .3034 6.65*
CRP (G) Factor XII .3367 3·32CRP (G) Factor VIII .3636 2.97CRP (00) Factor VI .3874 2.86
TR Factor VI .4066 2.47CRP (G) Factor IV .4209 1.92CRP (G) Factor IX .4499 4.22*CRP (00) Factor IV .4631 2.02
CRP (00) Factor I .4726 1.49CRP (G) Factor VII .4895 2.78CRP (F) Factor III .5005 1.87
CRP (F) Factor V .5151 2.59HD Factor III .5237 1·57HD Factor II .5311 1.36
HD Factor I .5388 1.46HD Factor VI .5426 .72CRP (00) Factor VIII .5465 .74CRP (F) Factor II ·5505 .77CRP (F) Factor VII .5560 1.06CRP (F) Factor VIII .5638 1.54CRP (F) Factor VI ·5771 .63CRP (M) Factor V .5830 1.21
182
TABLE CXIX. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR II FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
TR Factor IV .5884 1.13
CRP (F) Factor I .5903 .40
CRP (F) Factor IX .5926 .47
CRP (M) Factor VII .5939 .27
CRP (G) Factor V .5944 .11
HD Factor VIII .5949 .09
TR Factor III .5953 .09
CRP (M) Factor IX .5957 .07
CRP (M) Factor II .5961 .08
CRP (G) Factor III .5967 .12
CRP (G) Factor XI .5969 .05
CRP (G) Factor VI ·5972 .06
CRP (F) Factor IV .5973 .02
CRP (G) Factor II .5976 .06
HD Factor V ·5979 .05
CRP (G) Factor I .5980 .01
TR Factor V ·5980 .01
CRP (G) Factor X .5981 .01
HD Factor VII .5981 .00
TR Factor II ·5981 .00
*p <.05**p <. .01
183
TABLE CXX. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
TR Factor III .2239 7·39**
CRP (M) Factor VII .2686 3·30
CRP (F) Factor IV .2946 2.22
CRP (G) Factor XI ·3235 2.73
CRP (F) Factor VIII .3410 1·78
CRP (G) Factor VIII .3548 1.48
CRP (G) Factor IX .3747 2.26
CRP (G) Factor II .4097 4.39*
TR Factor I .4319 3.04
CRP (M) Factor VI .4509 2.75
CRP (M) Factor IX .4786 4.34*
TR Factor II .4894 1.77
CRP (F) Factor III .4974 1·34
CRP (G) Factor V .5034 1.02
CRP (G) Factor IV .5080 .79
CRP (G) Factor VII .5123 .74
CRP (F) Factor II ·5155 .55
CRP (M) Factor V .5230 1.33
HD Factor I .5265 .62
CRP (F) Factor V .5297 .57
CRP (M) Factor I .5333 .64CRP (G) Factor I .5386 .95
TR Factor V .5427 .75
184
TABLE CXX. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR III FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (G) Factor X .5475 .87
CRP (M) Factor VIII .5539 1.18
CRP (F) Factor IX .5557 .34
CRP (G) Factor XII ·5570 .24
CRP (F) Factor I .5582 .21
CRP (G) Factor VI ·5597 .29
TR Factor IV .5606 .15
CRP (M) Factor III ·5612 .12
HD Factor V .5618 .10
HD Factor VIII .5629 .19
HD Factor VII .5647 .33
HD Factor II .5664 .29
CRP (G) Factor III .5666 .04
CRP (M) Factor II .5672 .11
CRP (F) Factor VII .5691 .34
CRP (M) Factor IV ·5708 .29
CRP (F) Factor VI ·5713 .08
HD Factor IV .5716 .05
HD Factor VI .5777 1.04
HD Factor III .5785 .14
TR Factor VI .5887 .03
*p <.05**p <.01
185
TABLE CXXI. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGP~PHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
TR Factor IV .2363 8.28**
CRP (M) Factor IV .3459 100·78**
CRP (F) Factor IX .4196 9.45**
HD Factor II .LI·766 9.o6-lH }
CRP (M) Factor V .5035 4.79*
CRP (F) Factor VII .5176 2.66
CRP (F) Factor II .5290 2.22
CRP (F) Factor I .5446 3.16
CRP (M) Factor IX .5558 2.36
CRP (M) Factor VI .5662 2.25
CRP (G) Factor IX .5725 1.62
CRP (G) Factor VIII ·5920 4.28*
TR Factor II .6023 2.46
CRP (M) Factor I .6114 2.25
CRP (G) Factor IV .6200 2.17
CRP (M) Factor VIII .6265 1.66
CRP (G) Factor III .6290 .64
TR Fac"tor I .6305 ·39
TR Factor V .6339 .87
TR Factor III .6385 1.20
CRP (M) Factor II .6400 .38
CRP (G) Factor II .6419 ·51
CRP (F) Factor V .6437 .46
186
TABLE CXXI. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR IV FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (F) Factor III .6460 .59
CRP (G) Factor XI .6471 .29
CRP (G) Factor I .6490 .49
CRP (G) Factor VI .6509 ·50
CRP (G) Factor X .6.532 .58
HD Factor VII .6.542 .26
HD Factor VIII .6570 .71
HD Factor VI .6581 .27
HD Factor III .6613 .83
CRP (G) Factor VII .6632 .48
CRP (G) Factor XII .6647 .39
CRP (F) Factor IV .66.58 .27
CRP (M) Factor VII .6667 .23
CRP (F) Factor III .6690 .56
HD Factor I .6703 ·33
HD Factor IV .6709 .16
HD Factor V .6715 .15
CRP (G) Factor V .6718 .06
CRP (F) Factor VIII .6721 .07
CRP (F) Factor VI .6722 .02
TR Factor VI .6722 .00
*p <.05*-l~p <.01
187
TABLE CXXII. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
TR Factor II .3361 17.83-31-*
CRP (G) Factor IX .4037 8.31**
CRP (M) Factor V .4465 6.26*
CRP (G) Factor I .4787 5.30*
CRP (G) Factor VI ·5250 8.73**
CRP (G) Factor V .5474 4.62*
HD Factor IV .5576 2.20
CRP (G) Factor IV .5714 3.06
TR Factor IV .5861 3.44
CRP (G) Factor VII .5976 2.75
CRP (F) Factor VII .6067 2.27
CRP (G) Factor II .6146 1.99
CRP (F) Factor III .6194 1.24
CRP (M) Factor VIII .6229 .91
CRP (F) Factor II .6262 .84
TR Factor III .6280 .47
TR Factor V .6311 .81
CRP (F) Factor VIII .6329 .47
CRP (M) Factor II .6347 .46
CRP (G) Factor XII .6363 .42
CRP (F) Factor V .6382 .48
CRP (M) Factor VII .6409 068
CRP (M) Factor IX .6426 044
188
TABLE eXXII. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR V FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (G) Factor XI .64.50 .63
CRP (M) Factor IV .. 6466 ·39
HD Factor VII .647.5 .24
HD Factor III .6.513 .99
CRP (F) Factor I .6.524 .28
CRP (F) Factor VI .6.533 .22
CRP (G) Factor III .6547 .36
CRP (M) Factor III .6562 .40
HD Factor II .6.570 .18
HD Factor VIII .6578 .21
CRP (G) Factor VI .6587 .23
CRP (G) Factor X .6602 .37
CRP (M) Factor I .6626 •.59
CRP (F) Factor IV .6661 .85
CRP (G) Factor VIII .6676 .39
HD Factor VI .6686 .24
CRP (F) Factor IX .6694 .19
HD Factor V .6696 .06
HD Factor I .6698 .0.5
TR Factor I .6699 .01
TR Factor VI .6699 .00
*p <.05**p <.01
189
TABLE CXXIII. PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
TR Factor II .3291 17.00**
CRP (M) Factor VII .3767 5.44*
CRP (M) Factor IV .4024 3·29
CRP (M) Factor V .4206 2.50
CRP (F) Factor VII .4367 2.31
CRP (M) Factor IX .4495 1.92
CRP (G) Factor II .4619 1.92
CRP (G) Factor IX ·5157 9·53**
CRP (F) Factor VI .5401 4.80*
CRP (G) Factor VIII .5517 2.40
CRP (F) Factor VIII .5720 4.41*
CRP (G) Factor III .5848 2.90
CRP (F) Factor V .5902 1.25
CRP (G) Factor V .5957 1.27
CRP (G) Factor VI .6019 1.47
CRP (G) Factor X .6138 2.90
CRP (M) Factor I .6179 1.01
CRP (G) Factor IV .6233 1.35
TR Factor IV .6278 1.13
TR Factor V .6331 1.36
TR Factor I .6389 1.48
HD Factor I .6435 1.21
CRP (G) Factor I .6461 .67
190
TABLE eXIII. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR VI FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (F) Factor I .6505 1.17
CRP (G) Factor VII .6546 1.08
TR Factor III .6584 1.01
CRP (F) Factor III .6601 .47
CRP (F) Factor IX .6628 .71
CRP (1'11) Factor VIII .6643 .40
CRP (G) Factor XII .6654 .28
HD Factor VII .6663 .25
HD Factor VIII .6677 .35
HD Factor II .6716 1.05
HD Factor IV .6730 .35
CRP (00) Factor II .6751 .55
HD Factor III .6777 .71
CRP (F) Factor IV .6783 1.36
HD Factor VI .6787 .11
CRP (G) Factor XI .6788 .02
CRP (00) Factor III .6789 .03
CRP (F) Factor II .6789 .02
TR Factor VI .6790 .00
HD Factor V .6790 .00
CRP (M) Factor VI .6790 .00
*p < .05**p <~Ol
191
TABLE CXXIV. PREDICTION QF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR VII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
TR Factor II ••4686 39.40**
CRP (M) Factor V .5248 10.71**
CRP (F) Factor IX .5438 3.97*
TR Factor V .5527 1.94
CRP (F) Factor IV .5608 1.77
CRP (F) Factor VII .5711 2.34
CRP (F) Factor VI .5793 1.90
CRP (F) Factor III .5920 3.06
HD Factor III .6039 2.96
HD Factor V .6094 1.37
HD Factor VIII .6196 2.67
CRP (G) Factor IX .6281 2.24
CRP (G) Factor V .6451 4.76*
CRP (M) Factor VI .6497 1.30
TR Factor I .6562 1.89
CRP (F) Factor VIII .6629 1.95
CRP (G) Factor VI .6682 1·59
CRP (G) Factor IV .6739 1.72
CRP (G) Factor VIII .6770 .97
CRP (F) Factor II .6801 .94
CRP (M) Factor II .6829 .85
CRP (G) Factor X .6852 .72
CRP (G) Factor VII .6892 1.22
192
TABLE CXXIV. (Continued) PREDICTION OF BEHAVIORPROBLEMS FACTOR VII FROM HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY,
CHILD REARING PRACTICES AND TEACHER RATING FACTORS
Variable Added toPrediction Equation R F
CRP (M) Factor III .6910 .56
CRP (M) Factor I .6926 .49
CRP (M) Factor VIII .6942 ·50
CRP (G) Factor II .6960 .56
CRP (G) Factor XII .7009 1·52
CRP (F) Factor I .7027 .54
CRP (M) Factor IV ·7050 .74
TR Factor VI .7062 .35
HD Factor VII .7075 .40
CRP (M) Factor IX .7089 .43
CRP (M) Factor VII ·7115 .80
CRP (G) Factor III .7139 .73
CRP (F) Factor V .7186 1.48
HD Factor IV .7208 .68
CRP (G) Factor I .7216 .24
TR Factor IV .7219 .11
TR Factor III .7222 .09
HD Factor VI .7224 .07
HD Factor I .7225 .02
CRP (G) Factor XI .7225 .00
HD Factor II .7225 .00
*p <.05**p <,,01
193
practice factors, examination of Tables CXVIII thru CXXIV
reveals that teacher rating factor II, "aggression
dominance," made a significant (p <.01 in each case)
contribution to the accountable criterion variance in
behavior problem factors V, "psychopathic-unsocialized,"
VI, "verbal overactivity," and VII, "immaturity." Teacher
rating factor IV, "compliance," made a significant con
tribution to the behavior problem factors I, "social
withdrawal," (p(.05), and IV, "inferiority-irresponsible"
(p <.01). Behavior problem factor II, "sluggish
disinterested," received a significant (p <.01) contribu
tion from the teacher rating factor I, "creativity/
divergent thinking," and behavior problem factor III,
"neurotic-disturbed, " received a significant (p <.01)
contribution from the teacher rating factor III, "emotion
ality."
In examining the relative accountable criterion
variance in the behavior problem factors when prediction
from teacher ratings in addition to household demography
and child rearing practice factors versus prediction from
the two latter sets alone, Table CXXV reveals that a
significant (p (.01) increase in accountable criterion
variance was observed in every case except behavior
problem factor III, "neurotic-disturbed," in which case
the increase was significant beyond the .05 level.
194
TABLE CXXV. COMPARISON OF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCEIN BEHAVIOR PROBLEM FACTORS WHEN PREDICTING FROM
TEACHER RATING FACTORS IN ADDITION TO HOUSEHOLDDEMOGRAPHY AND CHILD REARING PRACTICE FACTORS
Teacher RatingsHousehold Added to House-
Behavior ProblemDemography Plus hold DemographyChild Rearing and Child Rear-
Factor Practices ing Practices F
R2 M R2 M
I. SocialWithdrawal .36 38 .48 44 3.6,**
II. Sluggish,Disinterested .22 38 .36 44 3.46**
III. Neurotic-Disturbed .24 38 ·3.5 44 2.68*
IV. Inferiority-Irresponsible ·30 38 .4.5 44 4.32**
V. Psychopathic-Unsocialized ·30 38 .45 44 4.32**
VI. VerbalOveractivity .31 38 .46 44 4.40**
VII. Immaturity .36 38 .,2 44 5.28**
*p <.05**p ~.Ol
CHAPTER VII
CONCLUSIONS
In drawing conclusions from the data presented in
the preceeding chapters it will be useful to restate the
interlocking variable model which was discussed in chapter
three. It will be recalled that the behavioral tactic
factors, herein defined by the common factors arising
from the behavior problem analyses, were proposed to be a
function of strategic orientation, or personality factors,
in combination with the situation. In the current study
the latter element (the situation) of the chain was regarded
as a constant. The personality, or strategic orientation
factors, defined by the factors arising from the teacher
ratings analysis, in turn, were proposed to be a function
of child rearing factors, defined in this study by the
parental interview factors. The child rearing factors were
proposed to be a function of domestic group factors, herein
defined as the factors arising from the household demog
raphy analyses. The first link in the chain, proposed as
the set of factors antecedent to the domestic group factors,
was the set of ecological factors, regarded as a constant
in the current investigation.
The hypotheses derived from the behavior chain model
(see Chapter Four) were of two sorts. First; on the basis
of previous evidence, where available, hypotheses concerning
196
the dimensionality of the various domains were presented.
Secondly, hypotheses of relations among the domains were
presented.
In the domestic group (household demography) domain,
no prior evidence concerning the dimensionality was avail
able, but speculative hypotheses were offered that the
emergent factors might include family type, family origin,
relation of the child to the head of the household and
birth order of the child. The analysis resulted in eight
factors in this domain, four of which were primarily family
type factors (subnuclear, mother absent; nuclear-lateral,
consanguine; nuclear; and subnuclear-extended, older child),
two of which dealt with family origin (Nanakuli origin and
stepmother--origin off Oahu), and two of which were dimen
sions primarily of the relation of the child to the head
of the household (Hanai and spouse's lineal). It is con
sequently concluded that the hypotheses concerning the
dimensions of family origin, family type, and relation ot
the child to the household head have received support
from the data, but at the same time it must be recognized
that the factors emerging in the current analysis are
very likely to be highly specific to the population being
studied.
In the child rearing practices domain, the structural
hypotheses were that the emerging factors would be at
least seven in number and would include permissiveness,
197
strictness of discipline, warmth of parent-child relation
ship, promotion of independence, high use of sanctions
in controlling child behavior, patriarchal family, and
aggression training. The analysis of the general child
rearing practice data resulted in twelve factors, eight
of which were labelled as warmth of parent-child relation
ship, obedience training, permissiveness, strictness of
discipline, achievement training, preference for younger
children, demands for compliance, and responsibility
training. It is concluded that this phase of the analysis
which is of greater similarity to previous studies than
the separate male and female analyses, provided support
for the hypothesized dimensions of warmth of parent-child
relationship, permissiveness, and strictness of discipline.
The preference for younger children factor is similar to
the reverse of the hypothesized promotion of independence
factor. In the separate analysis of male child rearing
practices one factor was identified as strictness of dis
cipline, and two factors emerged in place of the hypoth
esized aggression training factor. These were labelled
discipline for parental aggression and punishment for
aggression. The remaining factors were identified as
achievement-oriented discipline, compliance-oriented
discipline, physical punishment, and task-oriented dis
cipline. Two factors were not interpreted. The separate
analysis of the female child rearing practice data
198
resulted in five factors which were of sufficient similar
ity to factors in the male analysis to bear the same
labels, these being discipline for parental aggression,
achievement-oriented discipline, task-oriented discipline,
compliance-oriented discipline, and low physical punishment,
the latter being the reverse of the male physical punish
ment factor. In addition, four factors unique to female
child rearing practices were identified as dislike of
intrusive behavior, later age of work assignments, dislike
of non-feminine behavior, and less independence.
Six factors were hypothesized in the child personality
phase of the analysis. On the basis of previous investi
gations these hypothesized factors were labelled intellect
(creativity/divergent thinking), sociality, aggression
dominance, emotionality, industriousness, and compliance.
Five of these factors were identified in the analysis,
with the industriousness factor being replaced by the
relational insecurity factor which had been identified
in some of the earlier studies.
Previous investigations of childhood behavior prob
lems suggested from four to seven factors in this domain,
the most reliably demonstratab1e of which were immaturity,
verbal overactivity, conduct problem, and personality
problem. Seven factors were identified in the current
analysis including verbal overactivity, immaturity,
psychopathic-unsocialized (a label suggested in place of
199
conduct problem), neurotic-disturbed (suggested in place
of personality problem), and three additional factors
which were labelled social withdrawal, sluggish-disinter
ested, and inferiority-irresponsible.
Working backwards in the interlocking model proposed
by Howard and Gallimore (1968), it was hypothesized in
Chapter Four that the behavior problem factor termed
"conduct problem" by Quay and his associates and labelled
"psychopathic-unsocialized in the current investigation
would be negatively related to the child personality
factor A, identified in previous investigations as
"friendly disposition vs. hostile," but which has been
identified in the current study as A + E (aggression
dominance). In view of the fact that a high score on
this factor represents high aggression-dominance in the
current study rather than high friendliness, the opposite
reaction should be expected, i.e., A + E should be related
positively to the psychopathic-unsocialized dimension.
This was the outcome in the multiple regression analysis.
In fact, the aggression-dominance factor was a signifi
cant predictor of the behavior problem dimensions of
verbal overactivity and immaturity as well.
It was also hypothesized that the child personality
factor D (previously identified as "excitability") would
bear a significant positive relationship to the psychopathic
unsocialized dimension. In the current investigation, the
200
earlier factor D collapsed into the C-D-H "sociality"
factor most recently discussed by Digman (1970), and the
sociality factor was not a significant predictor of the
psychopathic-unsocialized dimension.
The final child personality factor hypothesized to
bear a significant relationship to the psychopathic
unsocialized dimension was K (compliance) in a negative
direction. Although a significant negative correlation
(-.47) did obtain between these two factors, the results
of the multiple regression analysis on this criterion
indicate that factor K did not possess sufficient common
variance with the criterion psychopathic-unsocialized
independent of the other predictor variables in the anal
ysis. If one were to study the two variables in isolation,
i.e. in a bivariate study, and assuming the relationship
found here is a stable one, the hypothesis would receive
support (or, rather, the null hypothesis of no relation
ship would be rejected). Factor K of the child personality
domain was further found to be a significant predictor of
the behavior problem factors of social withdrawal and
inferiority-irresponsible. These two factors were not
hypothesized in the structural hypotheses section and
consequently no relations with other factors were hypoth
esized. Factor K was related to both in a negative
direction.
201
The behavior problem which has previously been label
led personality problem by Quay and his co-workers, and
which has been termed "neurotic-disturbed" in the current
investigation, was hypothesized to bear a significant
negative relationship to the child personality factors
I (relational security) and C (ego strength), and a sig
nificant positive relationship to the child personality
factor T (emotionality). In the current investigation,
factor C combined with D and H in the "sociality" factor,
which correlated with the neurotic-disturbed dimension
in the appropriate direction but not significantly
(r= -.15). Factor T correlated .25 with neurotic
disturbed, which was of sufficient magnitude to be sig
nificant, and was a significant independent predictor of
the neurotic-disturbed factor in the multiple regression
analysis.
The behavior problem factor of immaturity was hypoth
esized to relate negatively to the child personality
factors I (relational security) and E (previously labelled
dominance), and positively to the child personality factor
T (emotionality). Again, factor E combined with A to form
the aggression-dominance factor which, although correlat
ing .62 with immaturity in isolation, did not add suffi
cient independent predictability of the criterion in the
multiple regression analysis to reach significance. The
child personality factor I also exhibited a significant
202
correlation with the immaturity dimension when examined
in isolation, but did not prove significant in the multiple
regression analysis. The correlation in this instance
was .49, and it will be recalled that the factor I emerged
as I-, relational insecurity, rather than I+, relational
security, which would lend support, in a bivariate analy
sis, to the hypothesis of a negative relationship between
I and the Immaturity factor. Factor T (emotionality) also
correlated significantly and in the hypothesized direction
with immaturity (r = .39), but again in the multiple re
gression analysis did not exhibit sufficient independent
predictability of the criterion to reach significance.
The behavior problem factor of verbal overactivity
was hypothesized to relate positively to the child person
ality factors D (previously labelled excitability) and
E (previously labelled dominance), and negatively to child
personality factor K (compliance). As has been noted
above, factor E combined with A in the aggression-dominance
factor and D combined with C and H in the sociality factor.
The former correlated .49 and the latter .16 with verbal
overactivity. Neither proved significant independent
predictors in the multiple regression analysis. Factor K
exhibited a significant correlation in the hypothesized
direction (r= -.33), but did not make a significant inde
pendent contribution in the multiple regression analysis.
203
One relationship emerged from the regression analyses
predicting behavior problems from the child personality
factors which was not hypothesized in Chapter Four, re
sUlting from the fact that the particular behavior problem
dimension was not one of those hypothesized. This was the
significant negative relationship between the child per-
.sonality factor M (creativity/divergent thinking) and the
behavior problem factor labelled sluggish-disinterested.
Working backwards another step in the interlocking
model, it will be noticed that the hypotheses presented
in Table I (Chapter Four) were that the child rearing
practice termed warmth of parent-child relationship would
relate positively to child personality factors A (friend
liness vs. hostility), I (relational security), and C
(ego strength), and negatively to factor T (emotionality).
In terms of the dimensions which emerged in the factor
analysis of the child personality domain, the hypotheses
would be of positive relationships between warmth of
parent-child relationship and the child personality factors
I (relational security) and C-D-H (sociality), and negative
relationships with A-E (aggression-dominance) and T (emo
tionality). None of these hypotheses received support
from the multiple regression analyses, although a signifi
cant bivariate correlation did obtain between warmth or
parent-child relationship and sociality (r = .20).
204
The strictness of discipline child rearing practice
factor was hypothesized to relate positively to the pre
viously identified child personality factors A (friendli
ness) and K (compliance), and negatively to H (social
confidence). In terms of the factors which emerged in
the current analyses, the hypotheses would be a positive
relationship to A-E (aggression-dominance) and K (com
pliance), and a negative relationship to C-D-H (sociality).
The two factors labelled "strictness of discipline" in
the current study (male factor VIII and general factor
IV) did not exhibit relationships which would support
these hypotheses. However, child personality factor K
(compliance) did correlate significantly and in a positive
direction with the male compliance-oriented discipline
and achievement-oriented discipline factors, both of which
made significant independent contributions to the account
able criterion variance in the multiple regression analyses.
The hypothesized relationships between the child
rearing factor of permissiveness and the child personality
factors were that permissiveness would be positively re
lated to D (previously excitability), H (previously social
confidence), and E (previously dominance). In terms of
the factors in the current study this translates into
hypothesized positive relationships with A-E (aggression
dominance) and C-D-H (sociality). These hypotheses did
not receive support from the data.
205
The final hypothesis of relationship between child
rearing practices and child personality was that of a
positive relationship between independence training and
child personality factor E (dominance). Translated into
terms of the factors which emerged in the present analy-
sis, the specified hypothesis would be that of a positive
relationship between general child rearing practices
factor VIII and the child personality factor A-E
(aggression-dominance). This ~ypothesis failed to receive
support from the data, although a significant positive
relationship did obtain between the female child rearing
factor labelled dislike of intrusive behavior and aggression-
dominance.
In tracing the interlocking variable model back to
the final set of antecedents of concern to this study, it
will be noticed that due to a dearth of information con-
cerning the str~cture in this domain, the sole hypothe-~
sized factor fn the demography domain which was identifiable
was that of extended family type, and this appeared in
combination with subnuclear and older child. The extended
family type factor was hypothesized in Chapter Four to
bear a positive relationship to the child rearing practice
factor of independence training. The hypothesis received
no direct support from the data, although the subnuclear
extended older child factor exhibited a significant negative
206
relationship to the general child rearing practice factor
of demands for compliance.
In narrative form, the major relationships which
emerged from the current investigation, in terms of the
interlocking model set forth in Chapter Four, are the
following.
If, at the personality organization, or strategic
orientation as Howard and Gallimore prefer to refer to it,
level the child was high on aggression-dominance, he was
more likely at the behavior problem level to be high on
the psychopathic-unsocialized, verbal overactivity, and
immaturity dimensions. The child rearing practices which
were associated with aggression-dominance were high dis
like of female intrusive behavior, low dislike of female
non-feminine behavior, and low general warmth of the
parent-child relationship. Hanai children were more
likely to enjoy a warm parent-child relationship. Fami
lies of Nanakuli origin were less likely to dislike non
feminine behavior, while subnuclear families in which the
mother was absent were more likely to do so.
If a child received a low score on the personality
factor of compliance, he was more likely to receive a
high score on the behavior problem factors of social
withdrawal and inferiority-irresponsible. The child
rearing factors associated with high compliance were high
male compliance-oriented discipline and achievement-oriented
207
discipline, and contrarily, low female compliance-oriented
discipline. The families which were of a nuclear-lateral,
consanguine type were more likely to employ less compliance
oriented discipline with female children.
A child receiving a high score on the personality
dimension of emotionality was more likely to score highly
on the behavior problem dimension of neurotic-disturbed.
The child rearing factors associated with high emotionality
were high male task-oriented discipline and high female
discipline for parental aggression. If the child lived
in a home which was characterized by the presence of a
stepmother and in which the family origin was off Oahu,
the females were more likely to receive greater discipline
for parental aggression.
The child personality dimensions of sociality and
relational insecurity did not exhibit any significant
relationships with behavior problem dimensions. However,
the former was positively related to high general demands
for compliance and the latter to low male physical punish
ment and high female task-oriented discipline. The family
demography factor of nuclear-lateral, consanguine was
negatively related to high general demands for compliance.
CHAPTER VIII
SUMMARY
The investigation was concerned with the dimension
ality of household demography, parental reports of child
rearing practices, and teachers' reports of child person
ality and behavior problems in a sample of children and
their families from the Nanakuli, Hawaii homestead area.
The factor analyses of the four separate data domains
resulted in the extraction of eight household demography
factors, nine male and nine female child rearing practice
factors, twelve general child rearing practice factors,
six teacher ratings of child personality factors, and seven
teacher ratings of child behavior problem factors. The
household demography factors were labelled "stepmother,
origin off Oahu," "Hanai," "subnuclear, mother absent,"
"nuclear-lateral, consanguine," "Nanakuli origin," "nuclear
family," "subnuclear-extended, older child," and "spouse's
lineal." The nine male child rearing practice factors were
labelled "achievement-oriented discipline," "compliance
oriented discipline," "di scipline for parental aggression,"
"physical punishment," "task-oriented discipline," "punish
ment for aggression," and "strictness of discipline." Two
of the nine male child rearing practice factors were unin
terpreted. The nine female child rearing practice factors
were labelled "low physical punishment," "dislike of in
trusive behavior," "discipline for parental aggression,"
209
"achievement-oriented discipline," "later age of work
assignments," "dislike of non-feminine behavior,"
"compliance-oriented discipline," "less independence,"
and "task-oriented discipline." Four of the twelve general
child rearing practice factors were uninterpreted. The
remaining eight were labelled "warmth of parent-child re-
lationship," "obedience training," "permissiveness,"
"strictness of discipline," "achievement training,"
"preference for younger children," "demands for compli
ance," and "responsibility training." The six teacher•
ratings of child personality factors were labelled
"creativity/divergent thinking," "aggression-dominance,"
"emotionality," "compliance," "sociality," and "relational
insecurity." The seven teacher ratings of child behavior
problems factors were labelled "social withdrawal,"
"sluggish, disinterested," "neurotic-disturbed,"
"inferiority-irresponsible," "psychopathic-unsocialized,"
"verbal overactivity," and "immaturity."
In the prediction of male child rearing practices,
the household demography factors which contributed to
"achievement-oriented discipline" were "stepmother, origin
off Oahu" (positively, p <'.01), "Nanakuli origin" (posi
tively, p (.05), and "nuclear family (positively, p (.05).
In predicting to compliance-oriented discipline" in the
male child rearing practice domain, the significant (p (.05)
household demography predictor was "nuclear family"
210
(negatively, p<.05). The significant family demography
predictors of "discipline for parental aggression" were
"nuclear-lateral, consanguine" (positively, p< .01), "step
mother, origin off Oahu" (negatively, p<.05), "subnuclear
extended, older child," (positively, p<.05), "subnuclear,
mother absent," (positively, p< .01). The significant
predictors of "punishment for aggression" were "subnuclear
extended, older child," (positively, p< .01), "Nanakuli
origin (negatively, p < .01), and "subnuclear, mother ab
sent" (positively, p < .01). The remaining male child
rearing factors were either uninterpreted or had no pre
dictor variables reading the .05 level of significance.
In the prediction of female child rearing practices
from the household demography factors, the significant
predictors of "physical punishment" were "subnuclear,
mother absent" (negatively, p <.01), "Nanakuli origin"
(negatively, p( .05), and "nuclear family" (positively,
p <.01). In predicting to "dislike of intrusive behavior"
the significant predictors were "Nanakuli origin" (nega
tively, p( .05) and "subnuclear, mother absent" (positively
p <..05). The significant predictors of "discipline for
parental aggression" were "stepmother, origin off Oahu"
(positively, p< .01), "Nanakuli origin" (positively, p< .01)
"spouse's lineal" (positively, p( .05), and "Hanai" (nega
tively, p(.Ol). The female child rearing practices factor
of "achievement-oriented discipline" had as significant
211
predictors the household demography factors "subnuclear,
mother absent" (positively, p( .05), and "subnuclear
extended, older child" (negatively, p<.Ol). The "later
age of work assignments" factor was primarily accounted
for by the demography factors "Nanakuli origin" (negative-
ly, p < .01), and "nuclear-lateral, consanguine," (posi tive
ly, p< .01). The significant predictors of "dislike of
non-feminine behavior" were "Nanakuli origin" (negatively,
p <.01, "subnuclear, mother absent" (posi tively, p< .01) •
In predicting "compliance-oriented discipline" the predictor
variables exhibiting significant contributions were
"nuclear-lateral, consanguine" (positively, p( .01,
"Nanakuli origin" (positively, p(.05), and "subnuclear
extended, older child" (positively, p< .05). The signifi
cant predictors of "less independence" were "nuclear
lateral, consanguine" (negatively, p <.05), "subnuclear,
mother absent" (negatively, p (.01), "Hanai" (negatively,
p<.Ol), and "nuclear family (positively, p<.05).
In the prediction of the general child rearing practice
factors from household demography, factor I, "warmth of
parent-Child relationship," bore a significant (p < .01)
positive relationship to the demography factor labelled
"Hanai." "Obedience training" had as significant predic
tors (p < .05 in each case) "nuclear-lateral, consanguine,"
(negatively), "Nanakuli origin," (positively), "nuclear
family" (positively), and "subnuclear-extended, older
212
child (negatively). The significant predictors of "permis
sivenes s" were "Banai" (positively J p<. 01), "Nanakuli
origin" (negatively, p <.01), and "subnuclear, mother
absent" (negatively, p <.05) • Two predictors were signifi
cant at the .01 level in the prediction of "strictness of
discipline "--"nuclear-lateral, consanguine," and "Nanakuli
origin"--both in a positive direction. The predictors
reaching significance (p-(.05 in each instance) in the case
of "achievement training" were "nuclear-lateral, consanguine"
"Nanakuli origin," and "nuclear family,'" the first in a
positive manner and the latter two in a negative manner.
The general child rearing practice factor "preference for
younger children" bore a significant (p< .05) negative
relationship to "nuclear-lateral, consanguine," while the
uninterpreted factor X was positively related. Demography
factor II, "Hanai," was significantly related to "respon
sibility training" (p< .01, negatively), and the uninter
preted factor XI. The predictors reaching significance
in the case of "demands for compliance" were "nuclear
lateral, consanguine" (p( .01, negatively and "subnuclear
extended, older child" (p<.05, negatively).
In the prediction of the teacher rating factors from
household demography alone, only three significant (p< .05)
relationships were observed. These were between "sub
nuclear, mother absent" and "emotionality" (negative),
"subnuclear-extended, older child" and "relational
213
insecurity" (positive). Addition of the child rearing
practice factors to the prediction equation resulted in a
significant (p~.05) increase in accountable variance in
the case of the teacher rating factor of "aggression
dominance." The child rearing factors which added signif
icantly to the accountable variance in teacher rating
factors were, in the case of "aggression-dominance," the
female factors labelled "dislike of intrusive behavior"
(p( .05, positively), and "dislike of non-feminine behav
ior" (p( .05, negatively), and the general factor "warmth
of parent-child relationship," (p< .05, negatively). The
child rearing practice factors making significant (p( .05)
contributions to the prediction of "emotionality" were
the male "task-oriented discipline" (positively) and the
female "discipline for parental aggression" (positively)
factors. In the prediction of "compliance," the male
child rearing factors "compliance-oriented discipline"
and "achievement-oriented discipline" were both positively
related and significant (p( .05), while the female factor
"compliance-oriented discipline" exhibited a significant
(p< .05) negative relationship. The sole child rearing
factor adding significantly (p< .05) to the criterion
variance in "sociality" was the general child rearing
factor "demands for compliance" (positively). Two child
rearing factors were significant (p< .05) contributors
to "relational insecurity," one being the male factor
"physical punishment," in a negative direction, and the
214
other the female factor "task-oriented discipline,"
in a positive direction.
In the prediction of behavior problems from the
demography factors alone, four significant (p <.05)
relationships obtained. "Hanai" was negatively related to
"social withdrawal" and "inferiority-irresponsible," while
"nuclear-lateral, consanguine" was negatively related to
"sluggish, disinterested" and "psychopathic-unsocialized."
The addition of the child rearing practice factors
to the regression equation in the prediction of behavior
problems resulted in a significant (p(.05) increase in
the accountable criterion variance, when the "full model"
prediction equations were tested, only in the case of
"immaturity." When the factors were entered singly into
the stepwise analyses, the child rearing practice factors
making significant contributions to the "immaturity"
factor were the male "task-oriented discipline" (p (.01)
and female "achievement-oriented discipline" (p ( .05),
both in a positive manner. The behavior problem "social
withdrawal" factor received significant contributions
from the male "task-oriented discipline" (p <. .01, posi-
tively) and female "task-oriented discipline" (p <.05,
negatively). The "inferiority-irresponsible" factor
received significant contributions from the male "physical
punishment" (p <.01, positively) and "punishment for
aggression" (p <.05, positively), as well as the female
215
"dislike of intrusive behavior" (p <.05, negatively) fac
tors. The significant (p(.OS) child rearing contributors
to the behavior problem "psychopathic-unsocialized"
factor were the male "task-oriented discipline" and
general "achievement training" factors, both in a positive
direction.
The addition of the teacher rating factors to the
demography and child rearing practice factors in the
prediction of the behavior problem factors significantly
increased the prediction of all criteria beyond the .01
level with the exception of the "neurotic-disturbed"
factor, in which case the p level was beyond .05. The
teacher rating factor of "aggression-dominance" was the
most consistently successful predictor, relating sig
nificantly (p <.01) and in a positive direction to the
behavior problem factors of "psychopathic-unsocialized,"
"verbal overactivity," and "immaturity." The teacher
rating "compliance" factor related significantly (p (.01),
in a negative direction, to "social withdrawal" and
"inferiority-irresponsible." The behavior problems factor
of "sluggish-disinterested" bore a significant (p <..01)
negative relationship to "creativity-divergent thinking,"
and "neurotic-disturbed" was significantly (p <.01)
related to "emotionality" in a positive direction.
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY OF THE RESULTSOF PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS
APPENDIX A
TABLE AI. INVESTIGATIONS OF CHILD REARING PRACTICESAND CHILD BEHAVIOR WHICH MEET THE MINIMUM
TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS OF MULTIVARIATE RESEARCH DESIGN
Investigation
Sewell et ale(1955)
Milton (1958)
Minturn et ala(1964)
Cattell & Gruen(1953)
Cattell & Coan(1957)
Behavior
Parent
Parent
Parent
Child
Child
DataSource
001
OOI
MI
PR
TR
Age ofChildren
5-6
5-6
3-10
9-14
6-10
AnalyticTechnique
C-OB
C-OR
C-OR*
C-OB
C-OB
N
162
379
133
173
198
n
38
44
28
30
39
k
8
7
7
6
13
Notel In Data Source column "MI" refers to mother interviews, "PR" to peer ratings,and "TR" to teacher ratings; in analytic technique column "PA" refers toprincipal axis, "c" to centroid, "OR" to orthogonal rotation and "OB" tooblique rotation; 'N" is number of subjects; "n" is number of variables;"k" is number of factors extracted.
* Oblique rotation also reported
NI-'-...J
APPENDIX A
TABLE AI. (Continued) INVESTIGATIONS OF CHILD REARING PRACTICESAND CHILD BEHAVIOR WHICH MEET THE MINIMUM
TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS OF MULTIVARIATE RESEARCH DESIGN
Data Age of AnalyticInvestigation Behavior Source Children Technique N n k
Peterson & Cattell(19.59) Child TR Pre-school C-OB 80 36 9
Digman (1963) Child TR 1st-2nd PA-OB 102 39 11Grade
Cattell (1963)** Child TR 1st-2nd PA-OB 102 39 11Grade
Digman (1965)*** Child TR Pre-school PA-OB 80 36 9
Emmerich (1966) Child TR Pre-school PA-OB .53 24 3
Notes In Data Source column "MI" refers to mother interviews, "PR" to peer ratingsand "TR" to teacher ratings; in analytic technique column "PA" refers toprincipal axis, "c" to centroid, "OR" to orthogonal rotation and "OB" tooblique rotation; "N" is number of subjects; "n" is number of variables;"k" is number of factors extracted.
** Reanalysis of Digman (1963) data*** Reanalysis of Peterson and Cattell (19.59) data
(\)
.....OJ
219
APPENDIX A
TABLE All. IDENTIFICATION OF THESEWELL, ET AL. (1955) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
I. Permissiveness inearly feeding
short duration of bottlefeeding .80
.77110 Permissiveness
in toilettraining
long duration of breastfeeding .76
infant usually held whenbottle fed .48
infant fed on demand .30
infant slept with mother .23
bladder training beganlate
bowel training beganlate .73
bowel training withoutschedule .37
much activity with mother .50
much activity with parents .50
success in bowel trainingrewarded .22
III. Parent-ChildInteraction
bladder training withoutschedule
much activity with father
.27
.61
short duration confinedto playpen -.33
IV. Nonpunitivetreatment
ignore child's neglectof jobs'
spanked few times
ignore masturbation
220
APPENDIX A
TABLE All. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF THESEWELL, ET AL. (1955) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
IV. NonpunitiveTreatment(Continued)
V. Promotion ofIndependence
ignore child'sdisobedience of mother
take child on picnics
.26
child has own spendingmoney .37
non-evasion of child'squestions about sex .32
ignore child's fighting .29
infant fed on demand -.40
night feeding stopped atlate age -.35
infant slept with mother -.33
VI. CasualTreatment
bowel training withoutschedule .44
bladder training withoutschedule .41
not insisting child takenap .37
not insisting child eateverything on plate .37
ignore mischievousness .35
ignore accidents in boweltraining .21
success in bowel trainingrewarded -.34
221
APPENDIX A
TABLE AII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF THESEWELL, ET AL. (1955) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
.29
VII. Noninsistence
VIII. Not Interpreted
mother does not insistchild mind without question .72
father does not insistchild mind without question .72
short duration confined toplaypen .28
child allowed to play alonein yard at early age .21
night feeding stopped atlate age
infant slept with mother .28
bowel training withoutschedule .22
child has own spendingmoney .20
ignore mischievousness -.24
child allowed to go toneighbors alone at earlyage -.21
ignore child's neglect ofjobs -.20
222
APPENDIX A
TABLE AlII. IDENTIFICATION OFMILTON'S (1958) FACTORS
Factor Identification
I. ParentalStrictness
Variable
house and furniturerestrictions
Loading
.48
punishment for aggressiontoward parents .43
noise restrictions .38
disapproval of dependency .38
demands for table manners .37
standards of neatness andorderliness .35
severity of toilet training .34
importance of doing wellin school .32
standards of obedience .32
use of physical punishment .31
severity of handlingfeeding problems .22
permissiveness for aggres-sion toward other children -.30
permissiveness for aggres-sion toward siblings -.31
permissiveness for aggres-sion toward parents -.51
modesty permissiveness -.66
masturbation permissive-ness -.70
sex play permissiveness -.71
223
APPENDIX A
TABLE AlII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFMILTON'S (1958) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
II. Family Adjustment mother's self esteem .59
mother's evaluation of thefather .56
affectionate interactionwith the baby .30
severity of weaning -.14
threaten punishment and notfollow through -.35
mother's displeasure whenshe discovered pregnancy -.42
dissatisfaction with thecurrent situation -.47
father's hostility towardchild -.48
father's displeasure whenhe learned of pregnancy -.51
mother's child rearinganxiety -.56
mother-father disagreement -.60
III. Warmth ofmother-childrelationship
mother's affectionatedemonstrativeness towardchild .41
extent to use of reasoning .37
mother's affectionate inter-action with child .34
mother's responsiveness toinfant's crying .27
fun taking care of smallbaby .26
224
APPENDIX A
TABLE AlII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFMILTON'S (1958) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
III. Warmth ofMother-ChildRelationship(Continued)
disapproval of dependency -.36
praise for good behaviorat table (high: none) -.38
time to play with the child -.50(high: little time)
IV. ResponsibleChild TrainingOrientation
deprivation of privileges
mother's standards ofobedience
.51
use of tangible rewards .40
standards of neatness andorderliness .38
mother's self esteem .34
demands for table manners .32
house and furniturerestrictions .32
praise for table manners(high: none) - .37
praise for playing nicely(high: none) -.38
V. Parental aggressiveness andpunitiveness
demands for aggressiontoward other children
use of physical punishment
.45
.44
permissiveness for aggres-sion toward other children .42
severity of punishment foraggression toward parents e41
permissiveness for aggres-sion toward parents -.35
225
APPENDIX A
TABLE AlII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFMILTON'S (1958) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
VI. Mother's Percep- permissiveness for aggres-tion of father as sion toward other children .35controlling agent
father's displeasure whenhe learned of pregnancy .34
father responsible for pol-icies .30
mother does most of thedisciplining .22
VII. Mother's concern rigidity of the feedingfor child's well- schedule .37being
demands for table manners .35
strictness about bedtime .33
mother's child rearinganxiety .33
physical mobilityrestrictions .32
praise for obedience .24
226
APPENDIX A
TABLE AIVI IDENTIFICATION OFMINTURN'S (1964) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loadirg
I. ResponsibilityTrainine
Age at which child beganto play away from the house .29
total frequency of chores .64
total number of chores .69
age of child .56
general hostility of mother -.69
mood variation of hostility -.20
II. Warmth ofMother
general warmth of mother .61
III. Aggression:Peer-DirectedAggression
degree that mother's warmthis contingent upon child'sactions -.21
amount of praise .52
frequency and intensity ofphysical punishment .58
degree to which mother isaggressive when child isangry or aggressive -.28
degree that mother's warmthis contingent upon child'sactions .25
amount of communication ofrules .24
consistency of aggressionrules .70
consistency of mother'sfollowthrough on nonroutinedemands for obedience .49
reward for retaliatory ag-gression to peers -.68
227APPENDIX A
TABLE AIV. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFMINTURN'S (1964) FACTORS
Factor Identification
III. AggressionlPeer-DirectedAggression(Continued)
IV. Proportion oftime MotherCared for Baby
Variable
degree to which motherexpects immediate obedience
degree that mother-·shostility is contingentupon child's actions
Loading
.37
-.22
amount of communication ofrules -.29
consistency of aggressionrules -.21
amount of praise -.31
degree to which mother isaggressive when child isangry or aggressive -.28
amount of time that themother cared for the childwhen child was a baby .72
amount of time adult otherthan mother cared for childwhen child was a baby -.46
V. Proportion ofTime Mother Caresfor Child
proportion of caretakingdone by mother
mood variation of mother'swarmth .27
degree that mother's hostility is contingent uponchild's actions -.29
amount of communication ofrules .21
228
APPENDIX A
TABLE AIV. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFMINTURN'S (1964) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
V. Proportion of timeMother Cares forChild (Continued)
degree to which privilegesand gifts are contingentupon child's behavior -.22
VI. AggressionTraining;Mother-DirectedAggression
VII. EmotionalInstability ofMother
reward for retaliatoryaggression to peers .24
amount of time that mothercares for child .54
degree to which mother ispositive or nonpunishingwhen child becomes angrywhen being scolded
amount of communication ofrules .22
consistency of mother'sfollowthrough on nonroutinedemands for obedience .36
frequency and intensityof physical punishment .33
degree to which privilegesand gifts are contingentupon child's behavior .39
degree to which mother isaggressive when child isangry or aggressive .64
age at which child beganto play away from the home .36
total frequency of chores .24
mood variation of mother'swarmth .74
general hostility of mother .34
229
APPENDIX A
TABLE AIV. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFMINTURN'S (1964) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
degree that mother's warmthis contingent upon child'sbehavior .26
VII. EmotionalInstability ofMother
mood variation ofhostility .91
degree the mother's hostilityis contingent upon child'sactions .21
230
APPENDIX A
TABLE V.* IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE MOTHERS' DATA
Factor Identification Variable Loading
I. Patriarchal Family my spouse decides theStructural rules concerning the
children
report that spouse is bestjudge in deciding childrearing practices .92
father does all of thediscipline -.83
husband takes large partin family life -.61
husband handles disciplineproblems very well -.55
father should decide therules concerning the child .52
.80II. High Use of
PhysicalPunishment
always agrees with spouse'sideas about child rearing -.50
believes father shouldalways punish .44
child requires physicalpunishment often
child may not go outside ofyard alone .60
parent was very strict intoilet training -.49
slaps are often good meansof punishing .46
like age 6-8 because child-ren are grown-up .41
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
231
APPENDIX A
TABLE V.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE MOTHERS' DATA
Factor Identification Variable Loading
II. High Use ofPhysicalPunishment
III. Mother's Lackof Self Confidence
praise and reward child forgood school work .39
child requires spanking daily.38
parent never reasons withchildren .36
prefer age 6-8 in children .36
child must be scolded forpoor table manners at everymeal .35
when told not to do somethingthe child goes ahead doingit; he has a mind of hisown -.35
relies on own judgment inchild rearing -.34
it never works to reasonwith a child .33
parent always uses threatsbut does not follow it up .27
mother rates herself poor asa mother -.78
feels husband would rateher poor as a wife -.73
feels methods of raisingchildren are insufficient .62
home life is not at allwhat I'd want it to be .51
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
232
APPENDIX A
TABLE V.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE MOTHERS' DATA
Factor Identification Variable Loading
III. Mother's Lack ofSelf Confidence(Continued)
mother thinks familywould rate her poor as amother .46
.88IV. Low Involvement
husband takes no part infamily life .37
it is not at all satisfyingto devote all of the timeto being a housewife andmother -.34
child weaned itself, refusedbreast or bottle .31
spouse often becomes angrywith children -.26
always permitted child toplay with his genitals
parent only steps in andends quarreling between hischildren when there is athreat of physical dangerto the children .61
always allowed sex play inchildren .49
permit children to talk backat parent .49
child is entirely free togo without clothes indoors .40
spend no time playing withchildren .37
behavior never requiresspanking -.35
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
233APPENDIX A
TABLE V.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE MOTHERS' DATA
Factor Identification
IV. Low Involvement(Continued)
Variable
it is not effective topunish children by takingaway their privileges
Loading
.32
dislike older children because they are tooindependent -.32
do not enjoy playing withchildren .31
children can be noisy almostany time .29
let children settle quarrelsthemselves -.27
babies are a great deal oftrouble to care for -.26
V. High Use ofReward in ChildRearing
rewards have great value,work well in trainingchildren .83
parent has a regular systemof rewards given for child-ren behaving correctly -.80
regularly reward good be-havior -.77
praise good table manners .41
feel it is normal for childto "hang on you" and followyou around .36
have a lot of problems withchild rearing methods andworry how to solve them .35
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
234APPENDIX A
TABLE V.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE MOTHERS' DATA
Factor Identification Variable Loading
Vo High Use of Reward parent forgets it whenin Child Rearing child shouts at him -.35(Continued)
believes privileges shouldbe taken away whenever achild annoys the parent -.32
parent takes no steps whenchild strikes him .30
praise or reward goodbehavior -.37
VI. StrictDiscipline
expect child to obey commands immediately
parent has several strictrules about marking on walls,climbing on furniture, etc. .58
very effective to punish bytaking away privileges 058
extremely important thatchild does exactly what heis told to do .53
praise and reward childrenfor good school work .41
child almost always stopsdoing something when toldto stop .38
husband handles disciplineproblems very well -.37
always agrees with spouse'sideas about child rearing -.35
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
235APPENDIX A
TABLE V.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE MOTHERS' DATA
Factor Identification Variable Loading
VI. StrictDiscipline(Continued)
VII. Lack ofAffection forChild
VIII. Low ChildOrientation
at bedtime, child must bequiet and fall asleep assoon as he goes to bed
child first pouts when he'sangry at parents .30
mother never kisses herchild .97
mother never hugs her child .95
mother feels it is neverright to kiss and hug thechild .46
mother plays with childbecause she feels she must .41
mother felt displeased whendiscovered she was pregnant .41
not important for a motherto demonstrate affectiontoward her child .46
spouse plays with childrenvery little if any -.65
spend no time playing withthe children .57
child cannot understandreasoning -.51
feel completely ineffectivein solving family lifeproblems .47
never tell child to "be likehis father" -.45
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings
236APPENDIX A
TABLE V.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE MOTHERS' DATA
Factor Identification
VIII. Low ChildOrientation(Continued)
Variable
often don't know who toturn to in solving childrearing problems
Loading
.43
IX. Low Use ofPraise
x. Low Preferencefor YoungerChildren
spouse places very littleimportance on giving affec-tion to the children -.37
do not comment when childdoes well in school -.36
it never works to reasonwith children .35
break up fights among child-ren immediately -.31
never praise child for goodbehavior, expect it .67
never praise child forobeying .65
give no praise for goodtable behavior -.58
feel child deserves praiserarely .54
give no praise if child hasgood table behavior at aguest's home -.48
dislike 2 year olds becausetoo much trouble to takecare of .97
like 2 year olds or youngerchildren least .72
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
237APPENDIX A
TABLE V.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE MOTHERS' DATA
Factor Identification Variables Loading
Xo Low Preferencefor YoungerChildren(Continued)
child does not keep thehouse orderly
spend no time playing withchild
.45
·33
allow child to stay up aslate as he wants .31
it is not effective topunish by taking away privi-leges -.31
children may never play onfurniture -.26
XI. Promotion ofIndependence
always let children settletheir fights .69
like age 6-8 best -.52
like age 6-8 because childis more grown-up -.46
parents ignore fights thathis child started and letthe children settle them .45
it spoils a child to pickhim up when he cries -.41
parent has taught child tonever take anything from abully, always fight back .38
never go to child when hecries .38
expect lots of fights inchildren because it's naturalfor them to fight .32
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
APPENDIX A
TABLE V.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE MOTHERS' DATA
238
Factor Identification Variable Loading
XI. Promotion ofIndependence(Continued)
XII. Low Use ofDiscipline
with a small baby mothershould give little timefor affection
child always talks back
permit quite a bit of talkingback from children .63
child discovered genitals andbegan to play with them atage 3-4 .37
it is not at all satisfyingto devote all of the time tobeing a housewife andmother -.37
child first reacts by strik-ing or kicking when angry -.35
child does not keep houseorderly .30
expect children to fightjust to be fighting .56
XIII. Low GoalsFeelings ofInadequacy
set no goals for child inschool, he sets his own .69
take no action when childrenfight just to be fighting .52
in methods of child rearing,much of what the mother doesis not enough .34
. child does not keep the houseorderly .31
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loading.
239
APPENDIX A
TABLE V.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE MOTHERS' DATA
Factor Identification Variable Loading
.67
XIII. Low GoalsFeelings ofInadequacy(Continued)
XIV. Easily Annoyedby Children
XV. Early Socialization Training
never works to threatenyour child and not followup with punishment -.27
it is not important to getpleasure out of playingwith your child .55
child should have privilegestaken away whenever he annoysthe parent -.47
never let children play inhouse with friends .41
children must be quietenough not to disturb others-.28
began teaching children tobe neat and clean at age 2or younger
began teaching table mannersat age 2 and younger -.54
mother used a complete feed-ing schedule--child was fedaccording to a clock andwakened for meals -.44
like age 6-8 because child-ren are more grown-up -.42
mother was strict in dealingwith feeding problems .37
very abrupt weaning, motherdoesn't give in if childwants to nurse .36
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
240
APPENDIX A
TABLE AV* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE MOTHERS' DATA
Factor Identification
XVI. Permissiveness
Variable
parent believes collegeeducation is unnecessaryfor his children
Loading
.60
young mothers -042
take no action when childfights just to be fighting .41
child most always stops doingsomething when told to stop .40
feels children should neverhave privileges taken away .37
expect young children to fightjust for sake of fighting .31
allows child to play in housewith friends -.30
share about equally withspouse in answering child-ren's questions .29
spouse places little importance on giving affectionto children -.28
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
241
APPENDIX A
TABLE AVI.* IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE FATHER '3 DATA
Factor Identification
I. High Use ofSanctions inDirectingChild'sBehavior
Variable
always praise for goodtable manners
always praise for goodbehavior
Loading
-.86
have a regular system ofrewards for good behavior -.68
always praise for goodmanners around guests .67
always praise child forobeying -.63
rewarding for good behaviorworks well in training .61
regularly reward child forgood behavior -.59
child does not help keephouse orderly .34
II. High PhysicalPunishment
it is very effective topunish child by taking awayprivileges .31
child requires spankingdaily
child's behavior requiressome kind of physicalpunishment quite often .81
a slap is very often a goodmeans of punishment in dealing with childrens' misbe-havior 065
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
242
APPENDIX A
TABLE AVI.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE FATHERS' DATA
Factor Identification Variable Loading
II. High PhysicalPunishment
child deserves praiseanytime he obeys -.31
children must be quietenough not to disturbothers -.30
children cannot go out ofthe yard alone 030
-.88III. Promotion of
Independence
child strikes or kicksparent when angry -.28
let child settle his ownquarrels
stop quarrels only whendanger of physical injury .55
child permitted to gowithout clothes indoors .50
would ignore a fight hischild started and let himsettle it .47
let child settle his ownfights .41
spouse places much importance to giving affectionto child .39
expect fights and quarrelsamong children .36
child allowed to go offalone -.34
permitted child's sex play .32
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
APPENDIX A
TABLE AVI.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE FATHERS' DATA
Factor Identification Variable Loading
IV. Preference forHigh ChildDependency
dislikes older childrenbecause they are tooindependent -.91
dislikes older children 6-8 -.88
prefers children less than2 years .36
do not permit child to talkback when angry -.30
v. StrictDiscipline
parent sets strict rulesabout marking on walls,climbing on furniture,jumping on beds, etc. .65
it is extremely importantthat the child does exactlywhat he is told to do .65
parent expects child toobey commands immediately .56
child almost always stopsdoing something when toldnot to do it .40
parent believes punishmentby taking away privilegesis highly effective .37
parent punishes strongly ifchild strikes him -.34
parent permits no talkingback from child -.31
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
244
APPENDIX A
TABLE AVI.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE FATHERS' DATA
Factor Identification Variable Loading
parent expects a child to standup for his brother or sisterif he is picked on -.65
child must be quiet enoughnot to disturb others -.43
VI. DefiniteExpectationsAbout ChildBehavior
parent teaches child tonever take anything froma bully, always fight back .82
parent sets "A" work asgoal for child's schoolperformance -.39
parent never reasons withhis child .38
never works to reasonwith child .56
never reasons with child .35
VII. PermissiveLow Expectations
parent does not believe ayoung child -.68
children are permitted toplay on furniture .31
children can be noisyalmost anytime .30
parent expects lots of fightsbecause children naturallyfight .30
VIII. High ChildOrientation
spouse never becomes angrywith children .84
felt pleased when discoveredwife was expecting -.40
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
245
APPENDIX A
TABLE AVI.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE FATHERS' DATA
Factor Identification Variable Loading
VIII. High ChildOrientation(Continued)
child never talks back
parent regularly rewardsgood behavior
-.36
-.32
spouse (wife) plays verylittle, if any, with child-ren everyday .31
parent sets "A" work asgoal for child's schoolperformance -.30
.90
.79
take no steps if child getsangry and strikes you .29
parent likes young childrenbecause they are fun tocuddle and take care of
prefers young children(less than 2 years)
Preference forYoung Children-Little Sharing ofChild RearingResponsibility
IX.
spouse never agrees withchild rearing practices .40
x. Belief thatChild Rearing isthe Mother's Duty
parent believes mothershould always be the one topunish the children -.78
mother does all of thedisciplining .68
allow children to play onthe furniture anytime .57
parent believes a collegeeducation is unnecessaryfor his child .57
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
246
APPENDIX A
TABLE AVI.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE FATHERS' DATA
Factor Identification
XI. Wife Responsiblefor all Areas ofChild Rearing
Variable
spouse always decides therules concerning thechildren
Loading
.86
believes mother should alwaysdecide the rules concerningchild rearing -.60
mother does all of thedisciplining .55
usually spouse answerschildren's questions -.31
XII. Dissatisfactionwith Home Life
home life is not at allwhat I want 082
parent has several strictrules for marking on walls,climbing on furniture,jumping on beds, etc. .38
child goes ahead when he istold to stop doing something-.35
outside demands cause bigproblems in home life .30
it is not at all satisfyingto devote all time to beinga father -.30
parent believes praise israrely deserved .35
XIII. Low PraiseHigh Punishmentfor ParentalAggression
child discovered genitalsand started to play withthem at 3-4 years .95
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
247
APPENDIX A
TABLE AVI.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET. AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE FATHERS' DATA
Factor Identification Variable Loading
XIII. Low PraiseHigh Punishmentfor ParentalAggression
children always settletheir own fights
began teaching cleanlinessand neatness at age 5 orolder
.29
-.29
XIV. Low FatherInvolvement
xv. Use of ThreatRather thanPhysical Punishment
parent would punish hischild strongly if he hithim - .25
spouse is usually the bestjUdge of rules to follow inchild rearing .88
usually spouse answers thechildren's questions -.54
caring for a baby is agreat deal of trouble -.35
began teaching standardsof neatness and cleanlinessat age 5 or older -.34
it nearly always works tojust threaten the child notpunish .78
always just threaten anddon't follow up with pun-ishment .61
takes no action when childfights just to be fighting .54
XVI. Dislike of Intrusive ChildBehavior
very satisfying to devoteall time to being father .89
*Wording of items has been changed to conform todirection of loadings.
248APPENDIX A
TABLE AVI.* (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES ANDROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS IN THE DIELMAN
ET AL. (1970) ANALYSIS OF THE FATHERS' DATA
Factor Identification Variable Loading
XVI. Dislike ofIntrusive ChildBehavior(Continued)
truly enjoy caring for ababy
never allow child to playin house with friends ·30
feels child should haveprivileges taken away whenhe is annoying parent -.28
XVII. Not Interpreted praise and reward child forgood school work .78
spouse places much importancein giving affection to thechildren .39
always just threatens anddoes not follow up withpunishment .35
child always talks back .34
XVIII. Not Interpreted
displeased at news wife wasexpecting .31
child must be scolded forpoor table manners at everymeal .81
forget it if child shoutsat parent -.30
if child is in a fight hestarted father would bringhim home immediately -.30
249
APPENDIX A
TABLE AVII. IDENTIFICATION OF THECATTELL AND GRUEN (1953) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variables Loading
I. Surgency vs.Desurgency
Likes to try many newthings vs. (is afraid todo new things) -.62
has fun doing anything vs.(is not sure of himself) .50
never worries about anything vs. (worries a lotabout himself 050
full of pep vs. (is slowabout things) -.50
is cheerful vs. (isoften very sad) -.49
cannot be fooled easilyvs. (always believes whatother people say) .47
is interested in otherpeople vs. (wants to be byhimself) -.44
always needs others tohelp him vs. (likes to dothings for himself .40
good at fixing things vs.(likes to imagine things) .39
is sure of himself vs.(not sure of himself .37
likes to be with otherpeople vs. (likes to beby himself) .35
is not worried about sickness vs. (worries aboutsickness) 035
250
APPENDIX A
TABLE AVII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF THECATTELL AND GRUEN (1953) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
II. Dominance vs.Submissiveness
is sure of himself vs.(not sure of himself) .53
is jealous vs. (is notjealous) .48
is selfish vs. (thinksof others .46
wants a lot of attentionvs. (does not need a lotof attention) -.40
is mean when others dobetter vs. (never getsmean) -.)6
talks a lot vs. (saysvery little) .)1
does not care what happensto his group vs. (wants todo his share for the group) .28
is only interested in himself vs. (is interested inwhat others think) -.26
does not always behave wellvs. (has good manners) .24
always wants others to helphim vs. (likes to do thingsfor himself) .22
III. Positive very particular about howCharacter vs. things look vs. (is easilyUnintegrated pleased .60Weak Character(Superego strength)
never gets mean vs. (ismean when others do better) .41
cooperates vs. (does notcooperate) .3)
251APPENDIX A
TABLE AVII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF THECATTELL AND GRUEN (1953) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
does what the others dovs. (acts differently fromother children) -.39
.24
.30
-.48
is interested in whatothers think vs. (is onlyinterested in himself) .22
keeps calm vs. (getsexcited)
does what he is told vs.(does not obey)
does the right thing vs.(is not always honest)
IV. EmotionalStability vs.Neurotic
III. PositiveCharacter vs.UnintegratedWeak Character(SuperegoStrength)
never gives up vs. (quitsbefore he is done) -.33
wants to do his share forthe group vs. (does not carewhat happens to his group) -020
V. Paranoia (?)Not clearlyIdentifiedr=.8 with
is jealous vs. (is notjealous) .44
does what other people sayvs. (has his own ideas aboutthings) .31
is sure of himself vs. (notsure of himself) .28
does what he is told vs.(does not obey) .23
is selfish vs. (thinks ofothers) .22
VI. Unidentified likes to be by himself vs.(likes to be with otherpeople) -.40
252
APPENDIX A
TABLE AVII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OF THECATTELL AND GRUEN (1953) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
VI. Unidentified(Continued)
never gets mean vs. (ismean when others dobetter)
wants to be by himselfvs. (is interested inother people) .22
does not trust peoplevs. (trusts people) .22
253
APPENDIX A
TABLE AVIII. IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND COAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
I. Superego Strengthvs. DependentCharacter
follows instructions easilyand accurately vs. hasdifficulty in followinginstructions .69
learns fast vs. learnsslowly 064
self-sufficient, prefers toavoid teacher's directionsvs. dependent on teacher -.53
persevering, determined vs.quitting, fickle .49
very attentive to class proceedings vs. inattentive,absentminded, prone to daydreaming, shows poor con-centration .43
confident (perhaps overconfident) of own abilityand ideas, vs. lacking inself-confidence, easilydiscouraged or defeated .42
conscientious, trustworthyvs. untrustworthy, dishonest-.4l
responsible vs. irresponsi-ble, frivolous -.39
aesthetically sensitive,aesthetically fastidiousvs. lacking in artisticfeeling .38
polished in manner vsclumsy, socially awkward 035
stable in interests,attitudes, opinions vschangeable .33
254APPENDIX A
TABLE AVIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND COAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
I. Superego Strengthvs. DependentCharacter(Continued)
careful with property ofothers vs. careless, destructive of property of others -.33
self-assertive, tends todominate other children vs.submissive, follows leadof other children 030
neat, tidy, orderly vs.unt:i.dy, careless with respectto appearance of self andbelongings -.30
alert, wide-awake, energetic vs. lethargic, apathetic, easily tired orfatigued .29
cooperative, compliant,courteous with children andadults vSo negativistic,stubborn, disobedient,discourteous, argumentative,"poor sport" .21
parents appear generallyaccepting toward child vs.parents appear rejectingtoward child -.18
adaptable, flexible vs.rigid, has difficulty adjusting to changes or new situ-ations -.17
aggressive, tends towardfighting, bullying, teasing,cruelty vSo non-aggressive,kind, considerate .42
II. Dominance vs.Submission
male vs. female .48
255
APPENDIX A
TABLE VIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND COAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
II. Dominance vsSubmission(Continued)
adventurous, bold, willingto take the chance ofpossible rejection orinjury vs. retiring,cautious .30
negativistic, stubborn,disobedient, discourteous,argumentative, "poor sport"vs. cooperative, compliant,courteous with children andadults -.29
talkative, distracting inclass vs. quiet
self-centered, conceited,boastful, "show-off" vs.self-abasive, deferent, min-imizes own importance .28
untidy, careless with respectto appearance of self andbelongings, vs. neat, tidy,orderly .25
clumsy, socially awkward vs.polished in manner -.24
lacking in artistic feelingvs. aesthetically sensitive,aesthetically fastidious -.24
demanding of teacher'sattention, vs. prefers notto be noticed .20
self-assertive, tends todominate other children vs.submissive, follows leadof other children .20
256
APPENDIX A
TABLE VIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND CGAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
II. Dominance vs.Submission(Continued)
careless, destructive ofproperty of others vs.careful with property ofothers .19
confident (perhaps overconfident) of own abilityand ideas vs. lacking inself-confidence, easilydiscouraged or defeated .14
.45
-.43cheerful vs. depressed
learns fast vs. learnsslowly .12
of generally good healthvs. poor health, prone toabsence by reason of illness, physical complaints
III. Surgency vs.Desurgency
alert, wide-awake, energetic vs. lethargic, apathetic, easily tired orfatigued .41
lacks nervous habits, vs.prone to "nervous habits"(e.g., thumbsucking, mailbiting, scratching, pullingand twisting hair, grimacing-.34
adaptable, flexible vs. rigidhas difficulty adjusting tochanges or new situations -.33
placid, free from distressvs. fearful, worrying,anxious -029
257
APPENDIX A
TABLE VIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND CGAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
III. Surgency vs.Desurgency(Continued)
IV. Parmia vs.Threctia
well poised, tough, sticksup for own rights whenthreatened vs. easily upset, overwhelmed by teasingof other children, yieldseasily to persuasion -.25
expressive, frank vs.secretive, reserved .23
stable in interests, attitudes, opinions vs change-able .16
adventurous, bold, willingto take the chance of possible rejection or injury vs.retiring, cautious .14
responsible vs. irrespon-sible, frivilous -.14
parents appear generallyaccepting toward child vs.parents appear rejectingtoward child -.14
very attentive to class proceedings, vs. inattentive,absent-minded, prone today-dreaming, shows poorconcentration .12
gregarious, prefers gamesinvolving many children vs.prefers solitary pursuits .58
outgoing, mixes freely withother children vs. shy,bashful, seclusive, aloof,remains fairly isolated fromother children .45
258
APPENDIX A
TABLE VIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND eOAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
IV. Parmia vs.Threctia(Continued)
V. Protension(Paranoid trend)
parents relatively permissive, allow child to makeindependent decisions vs.parents appear dominating,over-protective towardchild -.33
popular, generally likedby other children vs. unpopular, generally dislikedby other children .31
self-assertive, tends todominate other children vs.submissive, follows leadof other children .28
associates primarily withchildren of opposite sexvs. associates primarilywith children of own sex -.27
adventurous, bold, willingto take the chance ofpossible rejection orinjury vs. retiring, cau-tious .22
talkative, distracting inclass, vs. quiet -.20
suspicious, ungrateful, rejects affection or solicitude vs. trustful of others,readily accepts solicitudeof others as sincere .51
unpopular, generally dis-liked by other children vs.popular, generally likedby other children -.40
clumsy, socially awkwardvs. polished in manner -.32
259
APPENDIX A
TABLE VIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND COAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification
v. Protension(Paranoid trend)(Continued)
Variable
aggressive, tends towardsfighting, bullying, teasing, cruelty vs. nonaggressive, kind, considerate
Loading
.29
negativistic, stubborn,disobedient, discourteous,argumentative, "poorsport" vs. cooperative,compliant, courteous withchildren and adults -.28
untrustworthy, dishonestvs. conscientious, trust-worthy .25
shy, bashful, seclusive,aloof, remains fairly isolated from other childrenvs. outgoing, mixes freelywith other children -.23
self-sufficient, prefers toavoid teacher's directionsvs. dependent on teacher -.23
prone to jealousy vs. freeof jealousy, feels accepted .23
untidy, careless with re-spect to appearance of selfand belongings vs. neat,tidy, orderly .19
careless, destructive ofproperty of others vs.careful with property ofothers .18
adventurous, bold, willingto take the chance of possible rejection or injuryvs. retiring, cautious .16
260
APPENDIX A
TABLE VIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND COAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification
VI. Cyclothymia vs.Schizothymia
Variable
imaginative vs. practicalminded
Loading
.53
expressive, frank vs.secretive, reserved .44
cheerful vs. depressed -.36
associates primarily withchildren of opposite sexvs. associates primarilywith children of own sex -.31
free of jealousy, feelsaccepted vs. prone tojealousy -.29
trustful of others, readilyaccepts solicitude of othersas sincere vs. suspiciousof others, ungrateful, rejects affection or solici-tude -.27
adaptable, flexible vs.rigid, has difficulty adjusting to changes or newsituations -.22
confident (perhaps overconfident) of own abilityand ideas vs. lacking inself-confidence, easilydiscouraged or defeated .17
polished in manner vs.clumsy, socially awkward .16
aesthetically sensitive,aesthetically fastidiousvs. lacking in artisticfeeling .14
261
APPENDIX A
TABLE VIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND COAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
VI. Cyclothymia vs.Schizothymia
VII. Excitement vs.Deprivation
adventurous, bold, willingto take the chance of possible rejection or injuryvs. self-abasive, deferent,minimizes own importance .12
demanding of teacher'sattention vs. prefers notto be noticed .48
expressive, frank vs.secretive, reserved .29
trustful of others, readilyaccepts solicitude of othersas sincere vs. suspicious ofothers, ungrateful, rejectsaffection or solicitude -.25
talkative, distracting inclass vs. quiet -.23
dependent on teacher vs.selfsufficient, prefers toavoid teacher's directions .22
of generally good health vs.poor general health, proneto absence by reason of ill-ness, physical complaints .21
overactive, excitable, perhaps irritable vs. calm,relaxed .17
polished in manner vs.clumsy, socially awkward .17
prefers solitary pursuitsvs. gregarious, prefersgames involving many child-ren -.16
262
APPENDIX A
TABLE VIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND COAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
VII. Excitement vs.Deprivation
prone to jealousy vs. freeof jealousy, feels accepted .16
parents appear rejectingtoward child vs. parentsappear generally acceptingtoward child .14
self-centered, conceited,boastful, "show-off" vs.self-abasive, deferent,minimizes own importance .12
prone to jealousy vs. freeof jealousy, feels accepted .43
VIII. Premsia vs.Harria
female vs. male -.46
demanding of teacher'sattention, vs. prefers notto be noticed .30
unpopular, generally disliked by other children vs.popular, generally liked byother children -.25
polished in manner vs.clumsy, socially awkward .16
changeable vs. stable ininterests, attitudes,opinions -.15
easily upset, overwhelmedby teasing of other children, yields easily to persuasion vs. well poised,tough, sticks up for ownrights when threatened 013
263
APPENDIX A
TABLE VIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND COAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
VIII. Premsia vsHarria(Continued)
very attentive to class proceedings, vs. inattentive,absent-minded, prone today-dreaming, shows poorconcentration .12
self-assertive, tends todominate other children vs.submissive, follows leadof other children .11
suspicious of others, ungrateful, rejects affectionor solicitude vS o trustfulof others, readily acceptssolic~tude of others as sin-cere .11
aesthetically sensitive,aesthetically fastidious vs.lacking in artistic feeling 010
follows instructions easilyand accurately vs. has difficulty in following in-structions .10
IX. Guilt-Depressionor SuperegoProneness
fearful, worrying, anxiousvs. placid, free from distress .45
easily upset, overwhelmedby teasing of other children, yields easily to persuasion vs. well poised,tough, sticks up for ownrights when threatened .38
lacking in self-confidence,easily discouraged or defeated vs. confident(perhaps over-confident) ofown ability and ideas -.33
264APPENDIX A
TABLE VIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND COAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification
IX. Guilt-Depressionor SuperegoProneness
Variable
associates primarily withchildren of opposite sexvs. associates primarilywith children of own sex
Loading
-.23
X. Ego Strength vs.General Emotionality
parents appear generallyaccepting toward child vs.parents appear rejectingtoward child -.17
responsible vs. irrespon-sible, frivilous -.16
careful with property ofothers vs. careless, destructive of property ofothers -.16
self-abasive, deferent, minimizes own importance vs.self-centered, conceited,boastful, "show-off" -.15
parents relatively per-missive, allow child tomake independent decisions,vs. parents appear dominating,overprotective toward child -.41
calm, relaxed vs. overactive,excitable, perhaps irritable-.40
lack nervous habi is vs. proneto "nervous habits" (e.go,thumbsucking, nailbiting,scratching, pulling andtwisting hair, grimacing) -.34
lethargic, apathetic, easilytired or fatigued vs. alert,wide-awake, energetic -.27
265APPENDIX A
TABLE VIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND COAN (1957) FACTORS
LoadingFactor Identification Variable
Xo Ego Strength vs.General Emotionalality
placid, free from distressvs. fearful, worrying,anxious -.19
-.30
XI. Alaxia vs.Praxernia
untidy, careless withrespect to appearance ofself and belongings, vs.neat, tidy, orderly .16
quiet vs. talkative, dis-tracting in class .12
lacking in artistic feelingvs. aesthetically sensitive,aesthetically fastidious -.11
of generally good health vs.poor general health, proneto absence by reason of ill-ness, physical complaints .30
careful with property ofothers, vs. careless, destructive of property ofothers
neat, tidy, orderly vs. untidy, careless with respectto appearances of self andbelongings -.29
imaginative vs. practical-minded .27
aesthetically sensitive,aesthetically fastidious vs.lacking in artistic feeling .22
inattentive, absent-minded,prone to day-dreaming, showspoor concentration vs. veryattentive to class proceed-ings -.16
266APPENDIX A
TABLE VIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND COAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification
XI. Alaxia vs.Praxernia(Continued)
Variable
alert, wide-awake, energetic vs. lethargic, apathetic, easily tired orfatigued
Loading
.15
XII. Coasthenia
polished in manner vs.clumsy, socially awkward .13
expressive, frank vs. se-cretive, reserved .11
parents relatively permis-sive, allow child to makeindependent decisions, vs.parents appear dominating,overprotective toward child -.11
self-assertive, tends todominate other children vs.submissive, follows leadof other children .10
overactive, excitable,perhaps irritable vs. calm,relaxed .10
aggressive, tends towardfighting, bullying, teasing,cruelty vs. non-aggressive,kind, considerate .33
negativistic, stubborn, disobedient, discourteous,argumentative, "poor sport"vs. cooperative, compliant,courteous with children andadults -.28
self-centered, conceited,boastful, ltshow-off lt vs.self-abasive, deferent,minimizes own importance .25
267
APPENDIX A
TABLE VIII. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL AND COAN (1957) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
XII. Coasthenia(Continued)
easily upset, overwhelmedby teasing of other children, yields to persuasionvs. well poised, tough, sticksup for own rights whenthreatened .17
suspicious of others, ungrateful, rejects affectionor solicitude vs. trustfulof others, readily acceptssolicitude of others assincere .17
poor general health, proneto absence by reason ofillness, physical complaintsvs. of generally goodhealth -.15
fearful, worrying, anxiousvs. placid, free from dis-tress .14
self-assertive, tends todominate other children vs.submissive, follows leadof other children .13
quiet vs. talkative, dis-tracting in class .13
prone to jealousy vs. freeof jealousy, feels accepted .13
parents appear dominating,overprotective toward childvs. parents relatively permissive, allow child tomake independent decisions .13
depressed vs. cheerful .10
268
APPENDIX A
TABLE AIX. IDENTIFICATION OFTHE DIGMAN (1965) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loadirg
I. Friendly Disposi- tough, hard vs. tender .44tion vs. Hostility
inconsiderate, rude vs.considerate, polite .32
unconscientious vs con-scientious .31
irritable, spiteful vs.good natured, easygoing .27
reluctant to admit mistakevs. ready to admit mistake .27
II. Excitement vs.Deprivation
boisterous, noisy, rowdyvs. quiet, composed .46
inquisitive, curious, interested vs. uninquisitive,uninterested .48
energetic, alert, activevs. languid, slow .36
tense, high strung vs.relaxed .36
solemn vs. gay -.37
emotional vs. not emotional .26
III. Dominance vs.Submissiveness
not prone to daydream vs.prone to daydream ·39egotistical vs. self-effacing .27
assertive vs. submissive .29
cooperative vs. obstructive -.23
269
APPENDIX A
TABLE AIX. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE DIGMAN (1965) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
IV. Ego Strength vs.Neuroticism(Possibly Surgencyvs. Desurgency)
anxious, careful, worryingvs. happy-go-lucky
sad vs. happy
..41
034
cautious, tired, retiringvs. bold, adventurous .22
solemn vSo gay .39
V. Competence vs.Lack of Competence(Cattell'sSuperego Strength)
determined, perserveringvs. quitting
responsible, dependable vs.irresponsible, undependable
.43
resourceful vs. unresource-ful .28
VI. Social Confidencevs.Social Diffidence(Cattell's ParmiaThrectia)
conventional vs. unconventional, eccentric
gregarious, social vs.self-contained
·52
.45
unthinking, goes vigorouslywith group vs. thoughtful,pensive, original .40
interested in others vs.cool, reserved .28
easily distressed vs.tolerant of stress .43
VII. RelationalSecurity vs.RelationalInsecurity(Cattell'sPremsia)
attention seeking vs. notattention seeking
demanding, impatient vs.not demanding, patient
.48
.43
dependent vs. self-reliant,independent 038
270
APPENDIX A
TABLE AIX. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE DIGMAN (1965) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
VII. RelationalSecurity vs.RelationalInsecurity(Cattell'sPremsia)
VIII. Compliance vs.Non-compliance(Cattell'sComentionAbcultion)
prone to jealousy vs. notjealous .36
emotional vs. not emotional .35
suspicious vs. trusting .26
socially, culturally mature,vs. socially, culturallyimmature .54
insistently orderly vs.disorderly .35
mannerly, polished vs.crude .33
cooperative vs. obstructive .29
271
APPENDIX A
TABLE AX. IDENTIFICATION OFTHE DIGMAN (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification
I. Superego Strength
Variable
neat, tidy, orderly vs.untidy, careless withrespect to appearanqe ofself and belongings
Loading
.65
II. Hostility vs.Social Integration
responsible vs. irrespon-sible, frivilous .50
stable in interests, attitudes, and opinions vs.changeable in interests,attitudes, and opinions .44
careful with property ofothers vs. careless, destructive of property of others .41
persevering, determined vs.quitting, fickle .40
self-assertive, tends todominate other children vs.submissive, follows lead ofother children .37
very attentive to class proceedings vs. inattentive,absent-minded, shows poorconcentration .30
negativistic, stubborn, disobedient, argumentative vs.cooperative, compliant,obedient .46
untrustworthy, dishonest vs.conscientious, trustworthy .37
suspicious of others, ungrateful, rejects affectionor solicitude vs. trustfulof others, readily acceptsaffection or solicitude assincere .36
272
APPENDIX A
TABLE AX. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE DIGMAN (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
II. Hostility vs.Social Integration
aggressive, tends towardfighting, bullying, teasing,cruelty vs. nonaggressive,kind, considerate .35
of generally good health vs.poor general health, proneto absence by reason of illness or physical complaints .33
noisy, distracting in classvs. quiet .27
quitting, fickle vs. per-severing, determined .26
III. Surgent Excitement vs. Desurgent Apathy
cheerful vs. depressed
expressive, frank vs. secretive, reserved
.39
.39
IV. Autia
demanding of teacher'sattention vs. prefers not tobe noticed .38
alert, wide-awake, energeticvs. lethargic, apathetic,easily tired or fatigued .37
outgoing, mixes freely withother children vs. shy,bashful, seclusive, aloof,remains fairly isolated fromother children .36
noisy, distracting in classvs. quiet .25
aesthetically sensitive,aesthetically fastidious vs.lacking in artistic feel-ing .64
273APPENDIX A
TABLE AX. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE DIGMAN (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification
IV. Autia(Continued)
Variable
imaginative vs. unimaginative, practical-minded
Loading
.61
v. GeneralIntelligence
VI. Premsia vs.Harria
poor general health, proneto absence by reason of illness or physical complaintsvs. general good health .27
learns fast vs. learnsslowly
follows instructions easilyand accurately vs. followsinstructions with difficulty .51
self-centered, conceited,boastful, "show-off" vs.self-abasive, deferent, min-imizes own importance .31
easily upset, overwhelmed bythe teasing of other children, yields easily to persuasion vs. well poised,tough, sticks up for ownrights when threatened .39
prone to jealousy vs. freeof jealousy, feels accepted .35
unpopular, generally dis-liked by other children vs.popular, generally wellliked by other children .35
depressed vs. cheerful .29
demanding of teacher'sattention vs. prefers notto be noticed 025
APPENDIX A
TABLE AX. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE DIGMAN (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification
VII. Sex
Variable
male vs. female
Loading
VIII. SocialConfidence
IX. Neuroticism vs.Ego Strength
very attentive to classproceedings vs. inattentive,absent-minded, prone to day-dreaming .25
gregarious, prefers gamesinvolving many children vs.prefers solitary pursuits .43
confident (perhaps overconfident) of own ideas andabilities vs. lacking inself-confidence .32
adventurous, bold, willingto run the risk of possibleinjury or rejection vs.retiring, cautious .28
rigid, has difficulty adjusting to changes or newsituations vs. adaptable,flexible
dependent on teacher vs.self-sufficient, indepen-dent .24
poor general health, proneto absence by reason of illness or physical complaintsvSo of generally goodhealth .24
suspicious of others, rejectsaffection and solicitude vs.trustful of others, readilyaccepts affection and solici-tude as sincere .20
fearful, worrying, anxious vs.placid, free from distress .18
275APPENDIX A
TABLE AX. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE DIGMAN (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
X. UnidentifiedFactor
XI. ParentalAttitude:Harshness vs.Permissiveness
associates mostly withchildren of opposite sex vs.associates mostly with child-ren of own sex .49
polished in manners vs.,socially awkward, clumsy .25
parents appear dominating,overprotective toward childvs. parents appear relatively permissive, allowchild to make independentdecisions .38
parents appear generallyrejecting toward child vs.parents appear generallyaccepting toward child .34
prone to nervous habits (e.g.thumbsucking, nailbiting,pulling and twisting hair,grimacing) vs. lacks ner-vous habits .29
poor general health, proneto absence by reason of illness or physical complaintsvs. of generally good health .29
276
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXI. IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
I. Sizothymia vs.Affectothymia
negativistic, stubborn, disobedient, argumentative vs.cooperative, compliant,obedient .76
suspicious of others, ungrateful, rejects affectionor solicitude vs. trustfulof others, readily acceptssolicitude of others as sin-cere -.75
aggressive, tends towardfighting, bullying, teasing,cruelty vs. nonaggressive,kind, considerate -.67
untrustworthy, dishonest vs.conscientious, trustworthy -.67
self-assertive, tends to dominate other children vs.sUbmissive, follows lead ofother children -.51
rigid, has difficulty adjusting to changes or newsituations vs. adaptable,flexible -.50
prone to jealousy vs. freeof jealousy, feels accepted -.37
self-centered, conceited,boastful, "show-off" vs.self-abasive, deferent, min-imizes own importance -.29
II. Intelligence learns slowly vs. learnsfast .73
277
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXI. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
II. Intelligence(Continued)
has difficulty followinginstructions vs. followsinstructions easily andaccurately .70
III. GeneralEmotionalityvs. EgoStrength
self-abasive, deferent, minimizes own importance vs.self-centered, conceited,boastful, "show-off" .39
inattentive, absent-minded,prone to day-dreaming, showspoor concentration vs. veryattentive to class proceed-ings .34
lethargic, apathetic, easilytired or fatigued vs. ener-getic, alert, wide awake .34
dependent on teacher vs.self-sufficient, indepen-dent -.30
free of jealousy, feelsaccepted vs. prone to jeal-ousy .27
lacking in self-confidence,easily discouraged or defeatedvs. confident .21
quitting, fickle vs. perse-vering, determined .43
associates mostly withchildren of opposite sex vs.associates mostly withchildren of own sex .39
demanding of teacher'sattention vs. prefers notto be noticed -.38
278
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXI. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
III. GeneralEmotionalityvs. EgoStrength(Continued)
changeable in interests,attitudes, opinions vs.stable in interests,attitudes, opinions
overactive, excitable, perhaps irritable vs. calm,relaxed -.34
noisy, distracting inclass vs. quiet -.31
self-centered, conceited,boastful, "show-off" vs.self-abasive, deferent, min-imizes own importance -.22
parents appear relativelypermissive, allow child tomake independent decisionsvs. parents appear dominating, overprotective towardchild .22
negativistic, stubborn, disobedient, argumentative vs.cooperative, compliant,obedient .22
IV. Deprivation vs.Excitement
parents appear relativelypermissive, allow child tomake independent decisionsvs. parents appear dominating, overprotective towardchild .64
parents appear generallyaccepting toward child vs.parents appear generallyrejecting toward child .51
279
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXI. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
IV. Deprivation vsExcitement(Continued)
lacks nervous habits vs.prone to nervous habits(e.g., thumbsucking, nailbiting, pulling and twisting hair, grimacing .42
calm, relaxed vs. o~eractive,
excitable, perhaps irritable .37
adventurous, bold, willingto take the chance of pos-sible rejection or injuryvs. retiring, cautious -.25
lethargic, pathetic, easilytired or fatigued vs. alert,wide awake, energetic .19
lacking in self-confidence,easily discouraged or defeated vs. confident (perhapsover-confident) of own abil-ity and ideas .18
non-aggressive, kind, considerate vs. aggressive,tends toward fighting,bullying, teasing, cruelty .45
V. Submissivenessvs. Dominance
placid, free from distressvs. fearful, worrying,anxious
female vs. male
.15
.62
calm, relaxed vs. overactive,excitable, perhaps irritable .38
inattentive, absent-minded,prone to day-dreaming, showspoor concentration vs. veryattentive to class proceed-ings .33
280
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXI. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
V. Submissivenessvs. Dominance(Continued)
quiet vs. noisy, distracting in class .30
dependent on teacher vs.self-sufficient, independent-.30
practical minded vs. imagin-ative .25
polished in manner vs.socially awkward, clumsy -.22
VI. Desurgency vs.Surgency
VII. SuperegoStrength
unpopular, generally dislikedby other children vs. pop-ular, liked by other children
depressed vs. cheerful
associates mostly withchildren of opposite sexvs. associates mostly withchildren of own sex .46
lethargic, apathetic, easilytired or fatigued vs. ener-getic, alert, wide awake .43
prone to jealousy vs. freeof jealousy, feels accepted -.39
easily upset, overwhelmed byteasing of other children,yields easily to persuasionvs. well poised, tough,sticks up for own rightswhen threatened -.20
untidy, careless with respect to appearance of selfand belongings vs. neat,tidy, orderly -.89
281
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXI. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
careless, destructive ofproperty of others vs.careful with property ofothers -.68
VII. SuperegoStrength(Continued)
irresponsible, frivolousvs. responsible -.82
VIII. Threctia vs.Parmia
quitting, fickle vs. perse-vering, determined .59
changeable in interests,attitudes, opinions vs.stable in interests, atti-tudes, opinions .56
socially awkward, clumsyvs. polished in manner .48
inattentive, absent-minded,prone to day dreaming, showspoor concentration vs. veryattentive to class proceed-ings .38
untrustworthy, dishonest vs.conscientious, trustworthy -.32
prefers solitary pursuitsvs. gregarious, prefersgames involving many child-ren .80
retiring, cautious vs. adventurous, bold, willing totake the chance of possiblerejection or injury .75
secretive, reserved vs. ex-pressive, frank .61
282
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXI. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
VIII. Threctia vs.Parmia(Continued)
shy, bashful, seclusive,aloof, remains fairlyisolated from other children vs. mixes freely, outgoing with other children
associates mostly withchildren of own sex vs.associates mostly withchildren of opposite sex -.49
neat, tidy, orderly vs. untidy, careless with respectto appearance of self andbelongings .48
lacking in artistic feelingvs. aesthetically sensitive,aesthetically fastidious .47
.43
-.58male vs. female
lethargic, apathetic, easilytired or fatigued vs. alert,wide awake, energetic .45
socially awkward, clumsy vs.polished in manner
Harria vs.Premsia
IX.
prefers not to be noticedvs. demanding of teacher'sattention .41
practical minded vs. imagin-ative .40
submissive, follows lead ofother children vs. selfassertive, tends to dominateother children .40
secretive, reserved vs. ex-pressive, frank .39
283
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXI. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
IX. Harria vs.Premsia(Continued)
X. Coasthenia
well poised, tough, sticksup for own rights whenthreatened vs. easily upset,overwhelmed by teasing ofother children, yields easilyto persuasion .35
shy, bashful, seclusive,aloof, remains fairly isolated from other childrenvs. outgoing, mixes freelywith other children .35
free of jealousy, feelsaccepted vs. prone to jeal-ousy .34
poor general health, proneto absence by reason of illness, or physical complaintvs. generally good health .39
self-assertive, tends to dominate other children vs. submissive, follows lead ofother children -.32
popular, gener~ly liked byother children vs. unpopular,generally disliked by otherchildren -.28
inattentive, absent-minded,prone to day dreaming, showspoor concentration vs. veryattentive to class proceed-ings .18
follows instructions easilyand accurately vs. has difficulty following instruc-tions -.16
284
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXI. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
X. Coasthenia(Continued)
XI. Praxerniavs. Autia
trustful of others, readilyaccepts solicitude of othersas sincere vs. suspicious ofothers, ungrateful, rejectsaffection or solicitude .16
gregarious, prefers gamesinvolving many children vs.prefers solitary pursuits -.15
associates mostly withchildren of opposite sexvs. associates mostly withchildren of own sex .14
lacking in artistic feelingvs. aesthetically sensitive,aesthetically fastidious .63
practical minded vs. imagin-ative .56
gregarious, prefers gamesinvolving many children vs.prefers solitary pursuits -.35
of generally good health vs.poor general health, proneto absence by reason of illness or physical complaints -.35
lacks nervous habits vs.prone to nervous habits(e.g., thumbsucking, nailbiting, pulling and twist-ing hair, grimacing) .34
learns slowly vs. learns fast.30
neat, tidy, orderly vs. untidy, careless with respectto appearance of self andbelongings 026
285
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXI. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
XI. Praxerniavs. Autia(Continued)
XII. GuiltDepression orSuperegoProneness
associates most with children of own sex vs. associatesmostly with children ofopposite sex -.17
placid, free from distressvs. fearful, worrying,anxious .80
adaptable, flexible vs.rigid, has difficulty adjusting to changes or newsituations .65
confident (perhaps overconfident) of own abilityand ideas vs. lacking inself-confidence, easilydiscouraged or defeated -.62
of generally good healthvs. poor general health,prone to absence by reasonof illness or physicalcomplaints -.60
prefers not to be noticedvs. demanding of teacher'sattention .59
well poised, tough, sticksup for own rights whenthreatened vs. easily upset,overwhelmed by teasing ofother children, yieldseasily to persuasion .56
self-sufficient, independentvs. dependent on teacher .50
free of jealousy, feelsaccepted vs. prone to jeal-ousy .42
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXI. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE CATTELL (1963) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable
286
Loading
XII. Guilt Depression or SuperegoProneness(Continued)
lacks nervous habits vs.prone to nervous habits(e.g., thumbsucking, nailbiting, pulling and twisting hair, grimacing)
287
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXIl. IDENTIFICATION OFTHE EMMERICH (1966) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
bosses children .86
I. AggressionDominance
threatens children .88
derogates children .86
directs children .84
dominates children .80
attacks children physically .68
threatens teachers .72
insists on own ideas .77
destroys property of otherchildren .59
derogates teacher .76
seeks recognition fromchildren .53
submits to children whenchallenged -073
avoids rough activities -.57
follows teacher's direc-tions without resistance -.54
seeks to be near teacher -.23
asks teacher for specialprivileges .43
II. Dependency seeks recognition fromchildren .41
avoids rough activities .20
seeks to be near teacher .90
288
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXIl. (Continued) IDENTIFICATION OFTHE EMMERICH (1966) FACTORS
Factor Identification Variable Loading
II. Dependency(Continued)
seeks physical contactwith teacher .88
III. Autonomy
seeks recognition fromteacher .87
seeks attention fromteacher .77
asks teacher for specialprivileges .64
asks teacher to do whatteacher asks child to do .84
seeks help from teacher .66
overcomes obstacles by him-self -.21
attacks children physically -.44
destroys property of otherchildren -.55
follows teacher's directionswithout resistance .38
asks teacher for specialprivileges -.21
seeks help from teacher -.35
completes activities .88
gets intrinsic satisfactionfrom work .87
overcomes obstacles by him-self .76
289
APPENDIX A
TABLE XIII. RESULTS OF THE PETERSON(1961) STUDY ROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS
Conduct Problem Personality Problem
Variable/Grade K 1-2 3-4 5-6 K 1-2 3-4 5-6
Disobedience 74 77 69 86
Disruptiveness 73 67 66 76
Boisterousness 68 63 67 68
Fighting 54 73 61 77
Attention-Seeking 54 67 63 76
Restlessness 64 58 62 71
Negativism 56 64 60 70 27
Impertinence 57 57 53 76
Destructiveness 59 65 51 65 27
Irritability 53 59 57 69
Temper Tantrums 54 37 49 64
Hyperactivity 51 49 54 49
Profanity 30 42 64 60
Jealousy 50 41 56
Uncooperative-ness 67 67 53 71 31 38
Distractibility 56 57 61 72 29 42 32
Irresponsibility 60 65 49 65 47
Inattentiveness 54 61 36 69 39 30 57 28
Laziness inSchool 44 59 36 37 29 36 55 31
290APPENDIX A
TABLE XIII. (Continued) RESULTS OF THE PETERSON(1961) STUDY ROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS
Conduct Problem Personality Problem
Variable/Grade K 1-2 3-4 5-6 K 1-2 3-4 5-6
Shortness ofAttention Span 48 54 31 60 37 34 55 29
Dislike forSchool 38 40 32 41 26 54
Nervousness 25 46 50 40 44 26
Thumb-Sucking 29 36 28
Feelings of56 66 62Inferiority 25 59
Lack of Self-Confidence 26 60 61 60 58
Social With-drawal 50 64 61 60
Proneness to be-come Flustered 28 54 59 60 58
Self-Conscious-ness 55 60 47 63
Shyness 62 57 50 51
Anxiety 50 57 55 47
Lethargy 31 52 47 61 43
Inability toHave Fun 49 48 53 48
Depression 29 47 43 64 41
Reticence 45 43 64 41
Hypersensitivity 26 30 40 53 54 46
Drowsiness 29 39 48 45 41
291
APPENDIX A
TABLE XIII. (Continued) RESULTS OF THE PETERSON(1961) STUDY ROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS
Conduct Problem Personality Problem
Variable/Grade k 1-2 3-4 5-6 k 1-2 3-4 5-6
Aloofness 51 32 50 31
Preoccupation 37 47 57 64 41
Lack of interestin Environment 30 51 40 44 67 28
Clumsiness 36 43 54 34 36
Daydreaming 26 49 53 46 69 47
Tension 31 39 39 41 62 27 41
Suggestibility 29 31 52 41 42 48 30
Crying 59 27 48 32
Preference forYounger Play-mates 28 45 37 32
Specific Fears 47
Stuttering 27 35 29
Headaches 46 27
Nausea 38 37
Truancy fromSchool 27 39 37
Stomach-aches 30 38 29
Preference forOlder Playmates 26 38
Masturbation 26 40
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXIV. ROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS OF COMMONVARIABLES FROM STUDIES BY QUAY AND HIS ASSOCIATES
Factors
Emotionally8th Grade Disturbed Pre-Students Adolescent Preadolescent adolescents (Quay,
(Quay and Quay Delinquents Delinquents et al.,1965) (Quay, 1964) (Quay, 1966) 1966)
Variable P C I P C I P C I P C I
Restless 70 46 44 58
Attention Seeking 61 70 49 64
Inability to Have Fun 60
Self-Conscious 54 48 59 60
Disruptive 70 77 67
Feelings of Inferiority 57 47 65 64
Boisterousness 60 71 69 63
Preoccupation 62 60 48 51
Shyness 38 -42 54 59 42 -40
Withdrawal 67 41 40 N'-0N
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXIV. (Continued) ROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS OF COMMONVARIABLES FROM STUDIES BY QUAY AND HIS ASSOCIATES
Factors
8th Grade EmotionallyStudents Adolescent Preadolescent Disturbed Pre-
(Quay and Quay Delinquents Delinquents adolescents (Quay,1965) (Quay, 1964) (Quay, 1966) et al., 1966)
Variable P C I P C I P C I P C I
Short Attention Span 44 56 59 55
Lack of Confidence 63 66 57 57
Inattentive 46 58 64 50 52 42 46
Easily Flustered 34 55 46 60 52
Lack of Interest 48 49 49 47 57
Reticence 44
Laziness in School 59 55 66 52
Irresponsibility 51 75 53
Daydreaming 57 41 50 46
Disobedience 62 74 64 69I'V'-0VJ
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXIV. (Continued) ROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS OF COMMONVARIABLES FROM STUDIES BY QUAY AND HIS ASSOCIATES
Factors
8th GradeStudents
(Quay and Quay1965)
AdolescentDelinquents(Quay, 1964)
PreadolescentDelinquents(Quay, 1966)
EmotionallyDisturbed Pre
adolescents (Quay,et alo, 1966)
Variable
Uncooperativeness
Passive, Suggestible
P C I P C
74
47
I P C
59
I P C
65
I
Hyperactivity
Distractibility
54
59
53
62
60 59
46 53
Impertinence
Lethargy
Nervous, Jittery
62
42
62
43 40
57
58
68
45
Notea P stands for "Personality Problem," C for "Conduct Problem," and I for"Inadequacy-Immaturity."
N'!)-t:="
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXV. ROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS OF THEDIELMAN, ET AL. (1970c) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS STUDY
FactorVariable Identification 1 2 J 4 5 6 7 8
Easily fatigued -.03 -.07 .44 -.04 .14 -.1.5 -.19 -.0.5
Absence due to illness -.18 .09 .04 -.08 -.02 -.11 -.10 -.20
Unexplained absence -.19 .26 .09 -.28 .09 .1.5 -.36 -.22
Nervousness, jitteriness .48 .14 .18 -.19 -.04 -.08 -.14 -.17
Nervous habits (e.g. pencilchewing, nail biting, hairtwisting) .35 .02 .33 .00 -.06 -.11 -.10 -.11
Thumb sucking .41 .08 -.06 .07 .24 -.01 -.13 -.29
Extreme excitability .80 -.08 .05 -.01 .08 -.03 .12 -.06
Hyperactivity .89 -.07 .06 -.14 .05 .10 .11 .1.5
Showing off •.53 .12 D07 -.06 -.08 .09 -.12 .20
Stealing -.05 .27 .20 .20 -.16 .3.5 -.06 -.01
Bragging .26 .19 .09 .17 -.13 -.08 -.05 .26
Over talkativeness •.51 .01 .04 -.04 -.22 -.11 .04 .1.5('\)\,()
'"
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXV. (Continued) ROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS OF THEDIELMAN, ET AL. (1970c) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS STUDY
FactorVariable Identification 1 2 :3 4 5 6 7 8
Excessively loud or high-.06 .06pitched voice .70 -.02 -.05 .00 -.03 .04
Fighting .58 .11 -.00 -.13 .09 ·35 -.24 .09
Defiance .39 .40 .01 -.01 -.03 -.02 -.11 .07
Negative attitude -.03 .76 .06 .09 .17 -.05 -.18 -.00
Greediness -.24 .19 -.15 .73 .13 .25 -.03 -.01
Jealousy -.28 .20 -.03 .71 .07 -.00 -.15 .02
Suspicious attitudetoward people -.00 .0) .11 .65 .2) .18 .03 -.07
Belittling efforts ofothers .17 -.00 -.04 .58 -.01 .03 .02 .15
Lack of self-control .52 .2) -.01 .04 .15 .21 .04 -.12
Overaggressiveness .48 .10 -.06 .04 .04 .34 -.09 .14
Inability to abide by.48 .45rules and regulations ·-.08 -.14 .01 .25 -.12 .01
N'!)~
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXV. (Continued) ROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS OF THEDIELMAN, ET AL. (1970c) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS STUDY
FactorVariable Identification 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Quarrelsome attitude .37 .27 -.09 .19 .06 .24 -.27 -.00
Teasing and bullying of.41 -.14others .12 -.01 .03 .18 -.08 .20
Is teased and bullied ~.16 .24 -.06others -.22 .23 .27 .18 .10
"Fringe" membership in all-.04 -.16 .41groups .05 .26 .14 -.02 -.10
Lack of acceptance by.16 .14 .16others -.03 .18 .20 .29 .13
Stuttering .01 .13 .16 -.13 -.02 -.26 ·79 .1.5
Blames others for owninadequacies .04 .11 -.06 .62 -.06 .12 -.19 -.04
Blames things for own.06 .60 -.06 .06inadequacies -.03 .12 -.15 -.02
Oddness, bizarre behavior -.00 .33 .10 -.10 .30 -.14 .40 .12
Self consciousness; easilyNembarrassed -.00 -.20 .10 .07 •.56 -.1.5 -.07 .07 '-0
"
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXV. (Continued) ROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS OF THEDIELMAN, ET AL. (1970c) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS STUDY
FactorVariable Identification 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Fixed expression; lack ofemotional reactivity -.18 ·33 .16 -.20 ·39 -.16 -.00 .20
Disruptive; tendency to.14annoy and bother others ·39 .29 -.02 -.07 .02 .22 .29
Feelings of inferiority .09 -.11 .11 .22 .46 -.17 -.18 .11
Boisterousness; rowdiness .61 -.05 .01 -.15 -.03 .18 .16 .37
Repetitive speech .17 -.09 .05 .02 -.05 .02 .51 -.11
Short attention span .03 .04 .68 .09 -.10 .16 .25 -.15
Inattentiveness to whatothers say .05 -.02 .65 .19 -.14 .09 .04 .04
Easily flustered and con-.26 .16fused .11 -.05 .38 .02 -.08 -.15
Temper tantrums -.09 -.07 .05 -.16 .29 .27 .29 -.07
Reticence, secretiveness .03 .09 .10 .05 .42 -.11 .04 .09
Hypersensitivity; feelings.26 -.14 .41easily hurt -.09 .18 .10 .07 -.20 N
'-00:>
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXV. (Continued) ROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS OF THEDIEL~~N, ET AL. (1970c) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS STUDY
FactorVariable Identification 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Laziness in school and inperformance of tasks -.10 .28 .61 -.02 -.09 .12 .0) .02
Anxiety; general fearful-.04ness .29 .02 .25 .26 -.09 .01 -.28
Irresponsibility; inde-pendability -.03 .39 .53 .02 -.08 .12 .14 -.13
Sexual misbehavior unusualfor his or her age -.14 .17 .55 -.04 -.01 .02 .11 -.11
Disobedience; difficultyin disciplinary control .07 .55 .07 .04 -.14 .14 .21 -.01
Depression; unexplainedsadness .12 .18 -.05 .0] .6] -.11 -.06 .1]
Uncooperativeness in groupsituations .17 .72 -.07 .13 .22 -.07 .11 -.03
Aloofness; social reserve -.08 .21 -.04 -.10 .60 .08 .11 .05
Doesn't know how to havefun; behaves like a "littleadult" -.14 -.01 -.15 .13 .48 .03 -.08 .08 N
'0'0
APPENDIX A
TABLE AXV. (Continued) ROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS OF THEDIELMAN, ET AL. (1970c) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS STUDY
FactorVariable Identification 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Passivity; suggestibility;-.06 .42easily led by others -.11 .12 .2) -.09 .12 .1)
Belongs to a "gang" .25 -.0) -.16 .00 .18 -.21 .10 .69
Distractability .15 .24 .57 -.02 .01 .1) .22 -.09
Destructiveness in regard.)6 .46to others' property -.03 .15 .14 -.08 .01 -.09
Keeps bad company .21 .67 -.06 .22 -.05 -.05 .02 -.19
Impertinence, sauciness .6J ·55 -.11 .12 .00 -.J1 .17 .19
steals in company with-.06 .14others .15 .59 -.J2 .JO -.12 .02
Pro£ane language .01 -.OJ .26 .1J -.10 .79 -.17 -.22
Drowsiness -.08 -.24 ·57 -.06 .11 .20 -.16 .OJ
\.oJoo
APPENDIX B
CORRELATIONS, EIGENVALUES, UNROTATED PRINCIPALAXIS MATRICES, PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN MATRICES
AND PRIMARY FACTOR CORRELATIONSFOR THE FOUR FACTORED DATA SETS
APPENDIX BTABLE BI. INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG
HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY VARIABLES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II
1
2 -.41
3 -.26 -.09
4 -.44 -.15 -.09
5 -·35 -.12 -.07 -.13
6 -.25 -.08 -.05 -.09 -.07
7 -.10 -.08 -.07 -.11 -.05 -.06
8 -.12 .02 .03 .20 -.09 .02 .03
9 .17 -.07 -.04 -.08 -.06 -.04 .10 -.19
10 .04 .02 -.05 -.15 .12 .02 -.07 -.85 -.16
11 -.04 .01 .16 .00 -.05 -.03 .07 -.15 -.03 -.13
12 .10 -.04 -.03 -.05 -.04 -.03 -.11 -.11 -.02 -.10 -.02
13 -.01 -.03 -.12 -.03 .12 -.02 .00 -.08 -.02 -.07 -.01
14 .00 -.08 .18 -.03 -.02 .02 -.09 -.11 .04 .05 .02w0I\)
APPENDIX BTABLE BI. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG
HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY VARIABLES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
15 .05 -.04 .10 -.05 -.04 -.03 -.05 -.06 .13 -.04 .18
16 .04 -.11 .08 -.06 .08 -.01 -.12 .18 .07 -.22 .06
17 -.17 .27 -.04 -.06 -.05 .17 .12 -.11 -.03 .13 -.02
18 -.09 .22 -.02 -.03 -.03 -.02 -.08 .08 -.02 -.07 -.01
19 .07 -.07 -.06 .11 -.09 -.06 .07 -.15 -.05 .20 -.04
20 -.06 -.02 -.01 .14 -.02 -.01 .06 -.06 -.01 .07 -.01
21 .02 -.04 -.02 -.04 .08 . -.02 .04 -.10 -.02 .05 -.02
22 .05 -.02 -.01 -.02 -.02 -.01 .06 .06 -.01 -.05 -.01
23 .34 .04 -.11 -.51 -.00 .09 -.12 .02 .08 -.05 -.00
24 -.01 .09 -.10 .05 .11 -.15 .05 .06 -.04 -.06 -.00
25 .18 .08 .01 -.16 -.21 -.00 -.11 -.10 .12 .02 .03
26 -.14 -.06 -.06 .11 .31 -.09 .07 .02 -.02 .02 -.04
27 -.11 -.04 -.14 -.03 .49 -.13 .03 -.04 .01 .07 -.06
28 .02 .07 -.22 -.28 .49 -.14 -.00 -.03 .05 .06 -.11VJ
29 .04 .15 .14 -.11 -.10 -.15 .01 .07 -.09 -.02 .09 0VJ
APPENDIX B
TABLE BI. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONGHOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY'VARIABLES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
.30 .20 -.08 -.05 -.09 -.07 -.05 -.06 -.02 -.04 -.04 -.0.3
31 -.02 -.10 -.08 -.05 .11 .21 -.01 .01 .22 -.06 -.05
32 -.18 -.05 -.07 .29 .05 .03 .05 -.12 -.06 .1.3 -.05
wo+:-
APPENDIX B
TABLE BI. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONGHOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY VARIABLES
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
13 -.01
14 .15 -.01
15 -.01 -.01 .03
16 -.05 .03 -.06 .04
17 -.02 -.01 -.03 -.02 -.42
18 -.01 -.01 -.00 -.01 -.22 -.01
19 -.03 -.02 .06 -.03 -.76 -.04 -.02
20 -.01 -.00 -.00 -.01 -.16 -.01 -.00 -.02
21 .28 -.01 .04 -.01 -.27 -.02 -.01 -.03 -.01
22 -.01 -.00 -.00 -.01 -.16 -.01 -.00 -.02 -.00 -.01
23 .05 -.08 .14 .05 .20 -.19 .03 -.10 -.14 .04 -.14
24 .. 12 -.07 .08 .03 -.01 -.00 -.00 .01 -.00 -.00 -.00
25 009 -.02 .06 -.03 -.02 -.01 -.10 .09 .05 -.06 -.07
26 -007 .03 -.06 .03 .04 -.11 .06 -.01 -.07 .05 .02 \..>0V\
APPENDIX B
TABLE BI. (C-ontinued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONGHOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY VARIABLES
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
27 -.05 .02 .13 .03 -.01 -.16 .00 .10 -.10 .05 .01
28 -.06 -.03 -.10 .01 .02 -.13 -.03 .10 -.09 -.05 .01
29 -.20 -.05 -.01 -.07 .49 -.01 -.14 -.45 -.10 -.17 -.10
30 .37 -.02 .15 -.03 -.15 -.03 0.02 .23 -.01 -.02 -.01
31 -.04 -.03 -.02 .15 -.23 -.05 -.03 .35 -.02 -.03 -.02
32 .06 .11 -.08 -.04 -.37 .10 .25 .13 .18 .31 .18
\.JJo0'.
APPENDIX B
TABLE BI. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONGHOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY VARIABLES
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
24 .28
25 .- .04 -.01
26 .05 .16 -.68
27 .20 .39 -.46 .77
28 .35 .42 -.10 .32 .70
29 .15 -.12 -.02 -.05 -.16 -.12
30 .09 .27 .15 -.08 .05 .19 -.39
31 .11 .05 .17 -.12 -.06 .23 -.60 -.08
32 -.41 -.18 -.24 .25 .12 -.22 -.55 -.07 -.11
Iv.>o--J
APPENDIX B
TABLE Blla. CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 5J)
CORRELATION MATRIX
1 2 J 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1
2 .J6
J .05 -.00
4 -.02 .13 -.08
5 -.22 -.16 -.04 .09
6 -.15 -.01 -.10 .08 -.28
7 .19 .07 -.10 -.04 -.21 -.43
8 .16 .06 .18 -.08 -.15 -·30 -.24
9 -.10 .06 .09 -.11 -.06 .04 -.06 .08
10 .13 -.13 .12 .13 -.02 -.03 -.04 .14 -.20
11 .00 .11 -.07 -.07 -.07 .02 .16 -.08 -.10 -.08
12 -.16 -.10 -.06 -.05 .25 -.01 -.09 -.06 -.07 -.06 -.oJ
13 .01 .04 .07 .10 .13 .05 .00 -.03 -.44 -·37 -.18
u0OJ
APPENDIX B
TABLE Blla. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 53)
CORRELATION MATRIX
1 2 :3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
14 .11 .14 -.01 -.06 .00 .01 .00 -.09 -.00 .11 .05
15 .07 -.02 -.09 -.05 .01 -.02 .01 .06 -.11 -.01 -.07
16 .09 .11 .10 -.03 .02 .05 -.12 .11 -.11 -.01 -.09
17 -.10 -.11 .07 .07 -.05 .05 .11 -.14 .26 -.09 -.02
18 -.22 -.06 -.14 .01 .10 -.56 .00 -.01 -.12 -.01 .12
19 .01 -.01 -.01 .02 -.13 -.02 .01 .13 .07 -.15 .18
20 .17 -.11 .10 -.06 -.07 -.13 .20 .05 -.09 .18 -.04
21 .09 .07 -.07 -.08 -.08 .07 -.04 .12 -.01 -.09 .15
22 .00 .02 -.25 .18 .17 .02 -.02 -.08 .01 -.08 -.04
23 .06 -.01 -.01 -.04 -.04 -.03 -.07 .15 -.09 .01 .07
24 -.01 .10 .08 .05 -.07 -.06 .07 .03 .01 -.08 -.04
25 .00 .10 .07 -.05 .10 -.01 -.09 .08 .19 -.06 -.03
26 -.05 -.09 -.15 .18 -.01 .11 .02 -.04 -.09 .12 -.10
V..>0'-0
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIIa. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 53)
CORRELATION MATRIX
1 2 ) 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
27 -.02 .13 .18 -.05 -.0) .02 -.0) .0) .10 -.05 -.05
28 -.01 -.22 .16 -.02 .22 .00 -.11 .0) -.01 -.05 .08
29 .01 .20 .22 -.08 .01 -.15 .06 .11 .13 .01 -.04
)0 -.06 -.04 -.22 -.09 .05 .05 .07 -.09 -.03 -.18 -.05
31 .00 .07 .02 .0) -.05 .00 -.09 .07 .08 .14 -.07
)2 .02 -.05 .12 -.04 -.04 -.0) -.07 .08 .10 .08 -.07
)) .04 -.05 .16 -.07 .17 -.06 -.02 -.08 .20 -.08 -.04
34 .14 .22 -.14 .22 -.07 .05 .10 -.07 -.09 .05 -.04
35' .00 .12 .06 .03 -.04 .01 -.02 -.02 -.12 .09 -.01
36 .10 .22 .21 .01 -.03 -.25 .12 .03 -.05 .05 .05
37 .11 .20 .13 .07 .06 -.16 .07 -.04 .09 -.04 .04
38 .03 -.16 -.21 -.14 -.05 .36 -.12 -.18 -.03 .05 .12
39 -.05 .22 .01 .02 -.05 -.20 .08 .17 -.00 .02 -.11
VJI-'0
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIIa. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 53)
CORRELATION MATRIX
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
40 .08 -.08 .05 -.03 -.12 -.1) .00 .17 .05 .17 -.06
41 -.16 -.04 .00 -.06 .07 .15 -.10 -.07 -.09 -.07 -.04
42 -.02 -.01 .08 .01 .00 .01 -.07 -.01 .12 -.01 -.05
4) -.17 -.2) -.00 .06 .03 -.05 .10 -.05 .06 -.05 .01
44 .20 .24 .04 -.13 -.05 .04 -.09 .04 -.02 .08 -.07
45 -.07 -.00 -.09 .08 .07 .05 .00 -.07 -.09 -.07 .20
46 .18 -.04 .04 -.20 -.03 -.05 .01 .04 .04 -.09 -.19
47 -.18 .04 -.11 .12 .05 .12 -.08 -.05 -.09 .09 .26
48 .03 .02 .1) .07 -.01 -.06 .08 -.04 .09 .0) -.08
49 .01 -.02 -.12 .17 .11 -.11 .1) -.20 .12 -.10 .20
50 -.07 .05 .07 -.10 .27 -.01 -.16 -.03 .10 -.03 -.05
.51 -.04 -.17 .07 -.11 .07 .02 .00 -.0) -.08 .09 .11
.52 .11 .06 .07 -.06 -.07 -.04 .•00 .0.5 .03 .05 .20
.5) .0) .18 -.03 .08 -.14 -.04 .12 -.0) .80 -.16 -.22 \..oJI-'I-'
APPENDIX B
TABLE Blla. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 53)
CORRELATION MATRIX
12 13 14 1.5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
13 -.14
14 -.06 -.11
15 .11 .10 -.13
16 -.07 .20 -.17 -.16
17 .03 -.21 -.21 -.21 -.26
18 .17 .02 -.09 -.09 -.11 -.1.5
19 -.0.5 .01 -.1) -.13 -.16 -.21 -.09
20 -.03 .02 .07 .22 .04 -.10 -.04 -.06
21 co.O) .02 -.08 .04 .00 -.04 -.06 .27 -.04
22 -.03 .14 -.07 .0.5 -.09 -.02 .12 .0.5 -.04 -.04
23 .12 -.0.5 -.04 .04 -.08 -.07 .02 .28 -.06 -.07 -.07
24 -.03 -.10 -.07 -.07 -.09 .25 -.05 -.07 -~04 -.04 -.04
25 -.02 -.04 .10 -.05 -.07 .1.5 -.04 -.0.5 -.0) -.0) -.0)\.l.)
I-'N
APPENDIX B
TABLE Blla. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 53)
CORRELATION MATRIX
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
26 -.08 .16 .n.07 .22 -.22 -.07 -.05 .00 .02 -.11 .10
27 -.06 .02 .02 -.05 .17 -.03 .04 -.00 -.01 -.02 .02
28 .32 -.06 -.03 .06 -.06 .08 .04 .06 .11 .07 -.06
29 -.14 -.01 .04 -.09 .09 -.12 -.01 .16 .11 .17 -.01
30 .12 .18 -.05 .07 .14 -.16 .04 .02 -.02 .01 .04
31 -.05 -.12 .17 -.05 -.02 -.09 .02 .03 -.06 -.08 -.07
32 -.05 -.10 -.12 .04 .06 -.07 .02 .04 -.06 -.07 -.07
33 -.03 -.02 -.07 -.07 -.09 .16 -.05 .05 -.04 .15 .17
34 -.03 .02 .07 -.06 -.08 .20 -.04 -.06 -.03 .17 -.04
35 .04 .05 .02 .03 .00 .02 .01 -.08 .12 -.12 .08
)6 -.0) -.00 -.0) .09 -.07 -.05 -.08 .09 .1) .08 -.01
37 -.06 .04 -.08 -.07 .12 -.02 -.01 .14 -.07 .13 .15
38 -.10 -.02 .10 .02 -.04 -.16 .10 -.14 -.12 .09 .04\.JJ
.15 -.02 .01 .08 -.02 -.08 .08 -.04 .31 -.04I-'
39 -.02 \.JJ
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIIa. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR =53)
CORRELATION ~~TRIX
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
40 -.05 -.1) -.12 .05 -.07 .18 -.08 .14 -.06 -.07 -.06
41 -.03 .19 .07 -.06 .16 .00 -.04 -.06 -.03 -.04 -.04
42 -.04 -.04 .00 -.09 .06 -.15 -.06 .11 -.04 -.06 -.05
43 .13 -.09 -.02 .01 .01 .10 .02 -.08 -.03 -.04 -.07
44 -.12 .07 .04 .02 .03 -.13 -.00 .06 .04 .05 .01
45 -.03 .02 -.07 -.06 -.08 .10 -.04 .08 -.03 -.04 .20
46 .06 .07 .06 -.01 .06 -.13 .01 .14 .01 .08 -.0)
47 -.01 -.04 -.05 -.03 .04 .08 .07 -.03 -.04 -.02 .09
48 -.06 -.05 -.01 .07 -.12 .28 -.10 -.14 .06 -.09 -.08
49 .14 -.09 -.05 -.05 .02 .05 -.01 .13 -.01 -~05 .15
50 .16 -.07 .08 -.10 .04 .05 .06 -.10 -.05 .09 .10
51 -.07 .00 -.05 .02 .00 .00 .13 -.05 .03 -.10 .11
52 -.03 -.07 .07 -.06 -.08 .00 -.04 -.06 -.oJ -.04 -.04w
.04 -.06f-J
53 -.07 .13 -.05 .08 .03 .02 -.09 .03 .07 +:-
APPENDIX B
TABLE Blla. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 53)
CORRELATION ~~TRIX
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
24 -.07
25 -.05 -.03
26 -.10 -.10 -.08
27 .00 .10 .04 -.53
28 -.01 -.06 .14 -.15 -.33
29 -.05 -.08 -.01 -.05 .08 .01
30 -.11 -.05 .01 .08 -.13 -.02 -.16
31 .0.5 -.07 -.05 -.17 .07 ~.01 .21 ··.23
32 .15 -.07 -.05 .16 -.05 -.01 -.13 -.22 -.11
33 -.07 .17 .24 .00 .02 .08 .34 -.13 -.07 -.07
34 -.06 -.04 -.03 .02 .08 -.05 -.13 -.12 -.06 -.06 -.04
35 .06 -.01 .04 -.04 .14 -.10 -.03 -.36 -.19 -.18 -.11
36 .03 .20 -.05 .01 -.04 .05 .31 -.13 .06 -.13 .13'vJ
.36I-'
37 -.06 .04 -.06 -.03 .15 -.04 -.12 .08 .02 .15 \..r\
APPENDIX B
TABLE Blla. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 5)
CORRELATION ~~TRIX
2) 24 25 26 27 28 29 )0 )1 )2 ))
)8 -.06 -.1) .01 .12 -.0) -.02 -.17 -.06 -.02 -.00 -.05
)9 -.01 .07 .0) -.01 .0) -.04 -.0) .19 -.08 -.01 -.11
40 .07 .08 -.05 -.02 .03 .00 -.11 -.16 .06 .25 .08
41 -.06 -.04 -.0) -.09 .08 -.05 -.11 .17 -.06 -.06 -.04
42 .1) -.05 -.04 -.05 .11 .04 .12 .04 .02 .13 -.05
43 .02 .01 .03 -.08 -.01 .09 .07 -.10 .04 -.08 .01
44 .00 -.07 -.01 .05 .0) -.07 -.05 .12 -.02 .11 .01
45 -.06 .20 -.03 .02 -.01 -.05 -.07 -.02 -.06 -.06 -.04
46 -.06 -.19 -.15 .02 .00 .10 .10 .11 -.03 .09 -.03
47 .11 -.15 .09 .01 .02 -.06 -.05 -.11 .09 .01 .01
48 -.06 .38 .09 -.09 .01 -.04 -.07 .02 -.07 -.13 .04
49 .0) -.03 -.09 .01 .05 -.06 .01 .01 -.13 .03 -.03
50 -.09 -.05 -.04 .02 .01 .14 -.02 .08 -.09 .01 .10\....)
I-J
'"
APPENDIX B
TABLE Blla. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 53)
CORRELATION MATRIX
23 24 2,5 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
51 -.02 .01 .06 .06 -.08 .07 .08 -.06 .03 -.16 .11
,52 .09 .43 -.03 .02 -.01 -.05 -.08 -.02 -.06 .09 .20
53 .04 -.06 .03 -.13 .13 -.12 -.01 .03 .01 .04 -.14
v.>I--'
-.,J
APPENDIX B
TABLE Blla. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 53)
CORRELATION MATRIX
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
3.5 -.10
36 -.11 .07
37 -.07 .10 .40
38 .07 -.01 -.35 -.27
39 .00 .03 .22 -.22 -.38
40 -.06 .08 -.16 -.13 -.21 -.18
41 -.03 .01 -.13 -.07 -.11 -.10 -.06
42 -.04 .01 .14 .27 -.17 .00 .03 .14
43 -.03 .20 -.01 -.07 -.13 -.10 .11 .06 .02
44 .04 -.20 .00 .0,5 .18 .10 -.08 -.0,5 -.00 -.92
4.5 -.03 .01 .0.5 .06 -.12 .00 -.06 -.03 -.04 -.21 -.14
46 .01 -.0.5 -.0.5 .06 -.08 .10 .07 .01 .14 -.02 .10
47 -.04 .03 -.09 -.08 .20 -.11 -.08 -.04 -.13 .01 -.02\....)
I-'co
APPENDIX B
TABLE Blla. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 53)
CORRELATION MATRIX
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
48 .06 .05 .20 .04 -.12 -.02 .03 .06 -.01 .02 -.08
49 .10 .05 -.02 .01 -.05 -.02 -.01 -.01 -.01 .07 -.07
50 .13 -.07 -.04 .16 -.05 .06 -.09 .13 .06 -.08 .10
51 .03 .03 .18 -.02 .07 .01 -.15 .03 -.12 -.04 -.00
52 -.03 .01 -.OJ -.07 .07 .00 .10 -.OJ -.04 -.OJ .04
5J -.02 .01 -.04 -.05 .00 .00 .12 -.11 .10 .11 -.06
'u.>f-l'-0
APPENDIX B
TABLE Blla. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 53)
CORRELATION MATRIX
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53
46 -.17
47 .05 -.73
48 .19 -.38 -.31
49 .02 -.02 -.04 .11
50 -.05 .22 -.21 -.02 .11
51 .15 -.21 .17 .10 -.04 -.13
52 -.03 -.16 .05 .19 .10 -.05 -.08
53 -.11 .02 .05 -.09 -.01 -.30 -.53 -.20
~
No
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIIb. CHILD REARING PRACTICESMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 29)
CORRELATION MATRIX
1 2 J 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1
2 .49
3 -.08 -.03
4 .03 .14 -.16
5 .02 -.06 -.10 -.09
6 -.02 .06 -.11 -.10 -.06
7 -.17 -.14 -.12 -.11 -.07 -.08
8 -.03 .02 .22 -.06 -.04 -.04 .15
9 -.01 .06 .27 .10 -.08 .10 .09 -.05
10 -.00 -.08 -.07 -.07 .16 -.05 .12 -.03 -.06
11 .07 .05 .13 .13 .06 .11 .16 -.07 -.16 -.08
12 -.10 -.15 .03 .26 .16 .03 -.06 -.07 -.16 -.08 -.22
1; -.07 .04 .11 .14 -.05 .09 -.06 .21 .16 -.04 -.10\..J.)
Nf-I
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIIb. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 29)
CORRELATION MATRIX
1 2 3 4 .5 6 7 8 9 10 11
14 -.11 -.09 .04 .02 .26 .12 .10 -.07 .18 .28 -.21
15 -.02 -.05 .17 -.07 -.04 -.05 .12 -.03 .23 -.03 .03
16 .06 -.06 .18 .02 -.06 -.06 .06 -.04 .25 .16 -.11
17 .13 .09 .14 .17 -.0.5 .10 -.06 .24 .06 -.04 -.09
18 .06 .23 .05 .18 -.06 .0.5 -.08 -.04 .)0 -.05 -.1)
19 -.08 -.13 -.02 .16 .02 -.00 .08 .11 .03 -.06 -.17
20 -.03 -.12 .27 -.13 -.08 -.09 -.01 .11 .12 -.06 -.16
21 .12 .12 .0) -.07 -.05 -.05 .09 .24 .06 -.04 -.09
22 -.01 .04 .07 .19 .04 .11 -.09 -.05 .30 -.06 -.16
23 -.03 -.04 .06 .41 -.04 -.04 -.04 -.02 -.05 -.03 -.07
24 .11 .09 .30 .06 .18 .06 -.10 .03 .09 .11 .10
25 -.09 -.0.5 -.03 .08 -.06 .17 .04 -.04 .20 .13 -.13
26 -.07 .01 -.03 .1.5 .02 .18 .16 -.06 .10 .07 .13\..oJf\)N
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIIb. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 29)
CORRELATION MATRIX
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
27 -.12 -.26 .21 .03 .04 -.09 .19 .29 -.03 -.06 .11
28 .01 .12 .08 .10 -.04 -.04 .15 -.02 -.05 -.03 .32
29 .05 .14 -.02 .00 -.07 -.07 -.09 -.02 .09 -.07 .01
'vJN'vJ
APPENDIX B
TABLE Bllb. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 29)
CORRELATION MATRIX
12 I) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
13 .19
14 .28 -.10
15 .04 -.04 -.08
16 .16 -.05 -.11 -.04
17 .12 -.04 -.09 -.04 -.05
18 .0) .2) -.04 -.05 -.06 .10
19 .21 .27 -.10 -.06 .13 .05 -.10
20 .04 .04 -.15 .2) .25 .06 -.09 -.12
21 -.09 -.04 -.09 -.04 .1) -.04 .26 .18 -.07
22 .18 .42 -.01 -.06 -.08 .33 .52 .36 -.11 -.07
23 .20 .21 -.07 -.03 -.04 -.0) -.04 .4) -.05 -.0) -.0,5
24 .11 -.04 .22 .21 .02 .17 .13 .02 .09 .17 .05
2,5 .27 .09 .28 -.05 .07 .10 .05 .09 -.09 -.0,5 .21\...VN-t="
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIIb. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 29)
CORRELATION MATRIX
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
26 .01 .03 .15 -.07 ,,22 -.07 -.10 .16 -.05 -.07 -.04
27 .25 .17 -.08 -.06 .04 .07 .01 .12 .13 .07 .06
28 -.07 -.0) -.07 -.0) -.04 -.0) -.04 -.05 -.05 -.03 -.05
29 -.14 .01 -.20 -.02 .01 .07 -.09 .01 -.09 -.05 -.04
\JJN\..n
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIIb. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 29)
CORRELATION MATRIX
23 24 25 26 - . 27 28 29
24 003
25 -.04 -.15
26 010 -.21 -.10
27 .12 -.19 -.09 -.12
28 -002 -.09 -.04 -.06 -.05
29 .01 -.14 -.05 ,-.13 .00 -.05
'--'>l\)
0'.
APPENDIX B
TABLE Bllc. CHILD REARING PRACTICESFEMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 27)
CORRELATION MATRIX
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1
2 .54
3 .07 -.08
4 .00 -.00 -.17
5 -.11 -.03 -.07 -.08
6 .06 -.04 -.07 -.08 -.03
7 -.10 -.04 -.13 -.16 -.06 -.06
8 -.09 -.07 .25 .30 -.06 -.06 .03
9 .01 -.05 .10 .20 -.07 .17 .25 -.15
10 .05 -.04 .07 .16 .38 -.08 .09 -.16 -.19
11 .10 -.00 .49 -.03 .14 -.04 -.09 .32 -.11 .05
12 -.10 -.12 -.0) .25 .)0 .17 .05 .20 -.18 .42 -.11
1) .00 -.06 .08 .27 -.05 -.05 -.00 .)0 -.11 .0) -.07\...oJ
14 .04 .22 -.06 .38 -.04N
.13 .09 -.07 -.03 -.03 -.07 --..J
APPENDIX B
TABLE Bllc. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESFEMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 27)
CORRELATION r~TRIX
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
15 009 .13 .12 -.02 -.04 -.04 -.08 -.08 -.10 .07 .08
16 003 -.00 .19 .18 -.06 -.06 .04 .22 -.07 .12 .24
17 -.04 -.07 -.00 .06 -.07 -.07 .15 .16 -.16 .12 -.10
18 -.07 -.14 .24 .37 .12 .01 .09 .46 .17 .04 .32
19 (\01 .09 .03 .05 .09 -.06 .20 .05 .07 .12 .13
20 .02 .02 -.09 -.02 -.04 .35 .02 -.08 .09 -.02 -.06
21 -.02 -.07 .29 -.01 -.06 .10 .14 -.02 .23 .20 -.08
22 -.02 -.13 .24 .15 -.07 ·31 .06 .07 .25 .10 -.01
23 .15 .06 .20 .10 .15 .04 .15 .01 .14 .26 .22
24 -.04 -.06 -.12 .13 -.06 -.06 .30 .06 .09 .13 .03
25 .22 .30 -.11 .01 .06 -.04 .04 -.02 -.07 .01 .01
26 .10 .20 .02 .05 .06 -.16 -.09 .02 -.05 .03 -.03
27 .10 .24 .06 .07 .06 -.21 -.13 -.03 .01 .02 -.05\...VNex>
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIlc. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESFEMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 27)
CORRELATION MATRIX
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
13 -.11
14 -.07 -.05
15 -.10 .07 -.04
16 .00 .11 .09 -.08
17 ;-.16 .43 .20 -.09 -.13
18 .22 .21 .01 .03 .06 .06
19 .00 .11 .09 -.08 .23 .10 -.18
20 .09 -.06 -.04 .09 -.08 .01 -.13 -.08
21 .09 -.09 .10 .04 -.02 .04 -.17 -.10 -.07
22 .19 .15 .05 .00 .01 -.03 .19 -.14 .19 .32
23 .20 -.05 -.08 .07 .04 .00 .18 .25 -.02 .13 -.19
24 .01 .12 .10 -.07 .16 .19 .14 .16 .04 -.10 -.13
25 -.08 -.05 .10 .05 -.14 .24 -.04 -.03 .07 -.08 -.12
\....Jf\)'!)
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIlc. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESFEMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 27)
CORRELATION MATRIX
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
26 -.07 .00 .06 -.10 -.01 .19 .01 -.12 .05 -.07 -.03
27 -.12 .03 .00 -.09 -.04 .17 .08 -.11 -.07 -.07 -.11
'-'"'-'"o
APPENDIX B
TABLE Bllc. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESFEMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 27)
CORRELATION MATRIX
2) 24 2.5 26 27
24 -.15
25 -.03 .02
26 -.06 .01 .64
27 -.0.5 .07 .46 .79
VJ'vJI-'
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIll. INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG THE TEACHER RATINGVARIABLES RESCALED TO T-SCORES (NVAR = 20)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1
2 -·31
3 -.08 .14
4 ·57 -.34 -.05
5 -.07 .42 -.21 -.06
6 .13 -.03 -·50 ·30 .34
7 .00 .39 .40 -.11 .12 -.23
8 -.05 .45 -.01 -.27 ·55 .13 ·37
9 -.05 .18 .12 -.14 .27 .09 .43 .29
10 .19 -.15 -.13 .35 .16 .46 -.14 .03 -.09
11 ·57 -.20 -.04 .64 -.15 .24 -.10 -.22 -.11 .27
12 -.07 .52 .12 -.25 .34 -.04 .49 .23 .30 .03 -.04
13 -.09 -.05 -.36 -.04 .24 .36 -.22 .06 .02 .13 .01 -.02
14 -.17 -.45 -.03 -.19 .34 .18 .27 .36 -.28 -.05 -.21 .27 \..V\..Vl\)
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIll. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG THE TEACHER RATINGVARIABLES RESCALED TO T-SCORES (NVAR = 20)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
15 .18 -.13 .10 .38 -.27 -.15 .11 -.25 -.02 -.08 .28 .01
16 -.04 .16 .48 -.20 -.29 -.62 .42 -.01 .13 -.31 -.11 .16
17 .40 -.55 -.36 .50 -.16 .35 -.46 -.29 -.28 .45 .40 -.38
18 .40 -.39 -.08 .51 -.26 .11 -.26 -.51 -.28 .16 .42 -.20
19 -·33 .47 -.01 -.43 .39 .12 .23 .45 .18 -.08 -.38 .25
20 .27 -.19 -.18 .35 .13 .46 -.22 -.12 -.02 .68 .26 .01
VJVJVJ
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIII. (Continued) INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG THE TEACHER RATINGVARIABLES RESCALED TO T-SCORES (NVAR = 20)
1J 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
14 .14
15 -.OJ -.10
16 -.28 .05 .15
17 .19 -.29 .09 -.J5
18 .01 -.J6 .21 -.05 .55
19 .18 .J5 -.14 .09 -.J4 -.42
20 015 .07 .06 -.J4 .57 .J1 -.10
\...U\...U.{:""
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIV. BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS (NVAR = 29)CORRELATION MATRIX
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1
2 .04
3 -.06 .11
4 .59 .06 -.14
5 .26 .14 .53 -.00
6 .23 .14 .0.3 .16 .08
7 .45 -.02 -.10 .84 .13 .15
8 .14 .20 .52 .09 .41 .02 .14
9 -.12 .16 .39 -.25 .44 -.1.3 -.11 .36
10 .14 .0.3 •.32 -.02 .57 .31 .12 .36 .29
11 .55 .01 .05 .50 .28 .26 .50 .10 -.06 .21
12 .18 -.01 .64 .11 ·53 -.11 .16 .34 .26 .40 .29
1.3 .14 .0.3 -.10 .2.3 .00 .07 .17 -.02 -.16 -.02 .14\....J\....J\J\
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIV. (Continued) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS (NVAR = 29)CORRELATION MATRIX
1 2 ) 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
14 .22 .06 .08 .28 .12 -.02 .0) .10 .09 .04 .26
1.5 .)8 .12 .)1 .32 .66 .13 .46 .28 .16 .44 •.50
16 ·.53 .06 .22 •.5) .32 .14 .48 .32 .12 .22 .61
17 •.55 .29 .00 .52 .24 .23 •.52 .13 .02 ·30 .64
18 .14 .09 .43 .00 .41 .17 .0.5 •.57 .36 .36 .10
19 .48 .1.5 .01 .48 .24 .13 •.56 .06 -.1.5 .11 .47
20 .63 .12 -.15 .75 .08 .39 .64 .01 -.21 .01 .58
21 .40 -.08 .09 .49 .13 .14 .4.5 .35 -.06 .17 .68
22 -.04 .35 .1.5 -.21 .30 .07 -.18 .02 .39 .15 .13
23 •.5.5 .19 .00 •.52 .24 .23 .4.5 .13 .24 ·30 .42
24 .04 .03 .45 -.11 .36 -.09 -.08 .30 .40 .11 .10
25 ·51 -.05 -.06 .68 .19 .05 .64 .13 -.17 .05 .51
26 .03 -.11 -.07 .39 .02 .02 .43 -.05 -.06 -.03 .08'ul'ul0'\
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIV. (Continued) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS (NVAR = 29)CORRELATION MATRIX
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
27 .11 -.15 .31 .06 .29 .04 .03 .28 .11 .25 .07
28 .48 .11 -.20 .81 .03 .28 .66 -.06 -.28 -.02 .40
29 .41 -.05 .04 .58 .08 .21 .54 .02 -.17 .05 .61
\."J\."J---J
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIV. (Continued) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS (NVAR = 29)CORRELATION ~~TRIX
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
13 -.00
14 .11 .07
15 .50 .12 .10
16 .. 37 .08 .23 .51
17 .. 25 .14 .29 .45 .52
18 04; -.05 .0; .;7 .;2 .1;
19 .. 26 .18 ·33 .55 .41 .49 .14
20 013 .22 .30 .34 .43 .53 .01 .64
21 028 .13 .34 ·31 .46 ·37 .16 .37 ·51
22 .04 -.09 -.Ol .l7 .14 .19 .23 -.12 -.l5 -.01
23 .25 .14 .26 ·37 .52 .57 .05 .34 .53 .20 .00
24 .32 -.06 .44 .21 ·31 -.04 .17 .12 -.06 .25 .29
25 .25 .17 .03 .38 .41 .38 .02 .46 ·70 .44 -.09
26 .03 .10 .07 .34 .26 .06 .24 .35 .14 .10 -.09 VJVJco
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIV. (Continued) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS (NVAR = 29)CORRELATION MATRIX
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
27 .31 -.00 -.01 .43 .35 .17 .37 .03 -.10 -.05 .11
28 .13 .17 .23 .33 .39 .42 .02 .54 ·75 .)2 -.15
29 .36 .14 .)) .28 .41 .47 -.08 .46 .70 .67 -.09
\.0.)\.0.)\.()
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIV. (Continued) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS (NVAR = 29)CORRELATION MATRIX
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
24 .07
2.5 .38 -.16
26 .03 -.00 .17
27 .17 .1.5 .11 .22
28 .42 -.14 .61 ·3.5 -.01
29 .38 .14 .64 .17 -.09 •.51
U>.{:"o
341
APPENDIX B
TABLE BV. HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYFINAL REDUCED DATA SET (NVAR = 32)
EIGENVALUES AND CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGEOF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCE
Cumulative PercentageVariable Eigenvalue of Accountable Variance
1 3.28 10.26
2 3.08 19.88
3 2.69 28.30
4 2.01 34.58
5 1.76 40.08
6 1.64 45.22
7 1.44 49.73
8 1.43 54.21
9 1.36 58.46
10 1.21 62.26
11 1.14 65.82
12 1.09 69.24
13 1.02 72.41
14 1.01 75.56
15 1.00 78.68
16 .93 81 •.58
17 .84 84.21
18 .83 86.80
19 .72 89.06
20 .65 91.10
APPENDIX BTABLE BV. (Continued) HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHY
FINAL REDUCED DATA SET (NVAR = 32)EIGENVALUES AND CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
OF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCE
342
Cumulative PercentageVariable Eigenvalue of Accountable Variance
21 .58 92.92
22 .56 94.67
23 .47 96.15
24 ·39 97.38
25 .31 98.35
26 .25 99.14
27 .21 99.79
28 .06 99.98
29 .01 100.00
30 .00 100.00
31 .00 100.00
32 .00 100.00
APPENDIX B
TABLE BVIa. CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR =53)
EIGENVALUES AND CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGEOF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCE
Variable Eigenvalue Cumulative Percentageof Accountable Variance
1 3.12 5.90
2 2.87 11.32
3 2.52 16.08
4 2.44 20.69
5 2·31 25.05
6 2.24 29.27
7 2.22 33.46
8 2.03 37.30
9 1.81 40.72
10 1.78 44.07
11 1.72 47.32
12 1.63 50.39
13 1.50 53.22
14 1.45 55.96
15 1.34 58.49
16 1.33 61.00
17 1.28 63.41
18 1.25 65.75
19 1.20 68.02
20 1.14 70.18
344
APPENDIX B
TABLE BVIa. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 53)
EIGENVALUES AND CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGEOF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCE
Variable
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Cumulative PercentageEigenvalue of Accountable Variance
1.07 72.20
1.03 74.14
1.00 76.03
.94 77.79
.92 79.53
.88 81.20
.84 82.78
.75 84.20
.68 85.49
.67 86.76
.63 87.94
.58 89.04
.57 90.12
.56 91.18
.51 92.14
.47 93.03
.47 93.91
.45 94.75
841 95.52
.37 96021
APPENDIX B
TABLE BVIa. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESGENERAL ANALYSIS (NVAR = 53)
EIGENVALUES AND CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGEOF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCE
Variable Eigenvalue Cumulative Percentageof Accountable Variance
41 .34 96.85
42 .J2 97.46
43 .27 97.98
44 .22 98.39
45 .19 98.74
46 .16 99.05
47 014 99.30
48 .12 99.53
49 .11 99.73
50 .06 99.85
51 .05 99.95
52 .02 99.99
53 .00 100.00
346
APPENDIX B
TABLE BVIb. CHILD REARING PRACTICESMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR E: 29)
EIGENVALUES AND CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGEOF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCE
Cumulative PercentageVariable Eigenvalue of Accountable Variance
1 2.70 9.32
2 2.22 16.98
3 2.12 24.29
4 2.00 31.19
5 1.60 36.72
6 1.56 42.12
7 1.51 47.32
8 1.47 52.39
9 1.25 56.69
10 1.18 60.74
11 1.10 64.53
12 1.08 68.25
13 .98 71.64
14 .96 74.95
15 .93 78.15
16 .92 81.31
17 .83 84.16
18 .68 86.50
19 .66 88e77
20 063 90.95
APPENDIX B
TABLE BVIb. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 29)
EIGENVALUES AND CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGEOF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCE
Cumulative PercentageVariable Eigenvalue of Accountable Variance
21 .56 92.89
22 .47 94.52
2) .42 95.97
24 .37 97.25
25 ·31 98.33
26 .15 98.84
27 .13 99.28
28 .12 99.69
29 .09 100.00
348
APPENDIX B
TABLE EVIc. CHILD REARING PRACTICESFEMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 27)
EIGENVALUES AND CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGEOF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCE
Cumulative PercentageVariable Eigenvalue of Accountable Variance
1 2.81 10.40
2 2.60 20.05
3 2.00 27.46
4 1.98 34.78
5 1.92 41.88
6 1.75 48.35
7 1.50 53.89
8 1.44 59.23
9 1.25 63.87
10 1.20 68.33
11 1.09 72.37
12 1.00 76.06
13 .90 79.40
14 .79 82.31
15 .75 85.08
16 .64 87.46
17 .61 89.72
18 .55 91.78
19 .50 93.63
20 .38 95.02
APPENDIX B
TABLE BVIc. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICESFEMALE ANALYSIS (NVAR = 27)
EIGENVALUES AND CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGEOF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCE
Cumulative PercentageVariable Eigenvalue of Accountable Variance
21 .33 96.25
22 .29 97.32
23 .21 98.10
24 .18 98.75
25 .15 99.30
26 .12 99.73
27 .07 100.00
350
APPENDIX B
TABLE BVII. TEACHER RATING T-SCORE CORRELATIONSEIGENVALUES AND CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
OF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCE
Cumulative PercentageVariable Eigenvalue of Accountable Variance
1 5.31 26.56
2 3.34 43.28
3 2.19 54.23
4 1.11 59.80
5 1.04 64.99
6 .90 69.50
7 .80 73.51
8 .74 77.23
9 .69 80.68
10 .61 83.73
11 .57 86.56
12 .52 89.18
13 .42 91.30
14 .39 93.26
15 .33 94.93
16 .27 96.27
17 .25 97.49
18 .20 98.47
19 .17 99.34
20 .13 100.00
351
APPENDIX B
TABLE BVIII. BEHAVIOR PROBLEM CHECKLISTEIGENVALUES AND CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
OF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCE
Cumulative PercentageVariable Eigenvalue of Accountable Variance
1 8.83 30.43
2 4.72 46.72
3 2.80 56.38
4 1.69 62.21
5 1.44 67.18
6 1.34 71.79
7 1.05 75.42
8 .87 78.41
9 .77 81.06
10 ·73 83.59
11 .66 85.87
12 .65 88.10
13 .50 89.83
14 .47 91.45
15 ·39 92.79
16 .35 94.01
17 .30 95.66
18 .26 95.95
19 .21 96.68
20 .18 97.30
21 .16 97.86
APPENDIX B
TABLE BVIII. (Continued) BEHAVIOR PROBLEM CHECKLISTEIGENVALUES AND CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
OF ACCOUNTABLE VARIANCE
352
Cumulative PercentageVariable Eigenvalue of Accountable Variance
22 .15 98.36
23 .12 98.79
24 .11 99.17
25 .09 99.48
26 .08 99.75
27 .06 99.97
28 .04 100.00
29 .00 100.00
353APPENDIX B
TABLE BIX. HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 .17 .08 .67 -.01 .57 -.01 -.37 -.15
2 .05 -.01 -.12 -.11 -.48 .41 .04 - .1B
3 .19 -.03 -.13 -.03 -.03 -.04 .09 .Cf)
4 -.07 -.25 -.53 .23 .09 -.07 -.04 .44
5 -.43 .31 -.11 -.12 -.14 -.17 .23 .(Q
6 .04 -.13 -.01 .04 -.17 -.17 .16 - .21.
7 -.06 -.06 -.15 .02 -.08 .05 -.15 .d+
8 .20 .23 -.32 .77 -.05 .16 -.16 - .JD
9 .02 .03 .18 .06 .03 -.21 -.02 - .00
10 -.24 -.21 .20 -.80 -.07 -.09 .01 .13
11 .11 .00 -.03 -.04 .00 -.02 .03 .05
12 -.05 -.10 .20 .10 .28 .26 .42 .(Q
13 -.04 -.01 -.06 -.03 .07 -.07 .06 - .d+
14 -.02 -.01 .13 -.03 .06 .08 .13 .11
15 -.01 -.04 .07 .03 .01 -.14 .02 - .d+
16 .49 .69 -.13 .00 .16 -.32 .30 .JD
17 -.00 -.28 -.08 -.17 -.27 .23 -.01 - .17
18 -.10 -.09 -.10 .06 -.03 .17 .01 - .25
19 -.43 -.45 .28 .11 -.10 .03 -.38 025
20 -.02 -.19 -.08 -.02 .03 .01 .03 - ·W
21 -.17 -014 .00 -.06 .19 .11 .17 - .19
354
APPENDIX B
TABLE BIX. (Continued) HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
22 -.07 -.08 -.06 .05 .08 .0) -.07 -.08
2) -.01 .48 .47 .03 -.04 .10 .00 -.27
24 -.29 .29 .17 .16 -.09 .29 .10 .20
25 .37 -.27 .45 .08 -.19 -.01 .15 .16
26 -·59 .42 -.38 -.09 .22 -.01 -.15 -.07
27 -.78 .55 -.08 -.05 .04 .02 -.05 .08
28 -.55 ·5) .30 .04 -.25 .04 -.01 .06
29 .6) .50 -.19 -.39 -.09 .17 -.27 .10
)0 -.18 -.07 .39 .21 .20 .)6 .22 .24
)1 -.30 -.17 ·35 .38 -.36 -.51 .01 -.11
32 -.42 -.49 -.42 -.07 .35 -.02 .11 -.26
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXa. CHILD REARING PRACTICES - GENERAL ANALYSISUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1 .32 -.18 .20 -.16 .10 -.15 .09 .10 -.12 .21 .03 -.06
2 .35 -.14 .34 -.15 -.12 -.16 -.26 -.00 .11 .14 -.21 .02
3 .37 .15 .05 -.01 .08 .19 .11 -.30 -.12 -.12 .13 -.02
4 -.11 .11 .08 -.03 -.15 -.21 -.08 .10 -.16 -.15 -.37 -.04
5 -.13 .05 -.16 .42 -.16 .15 -.00 -.14 .06 -.14 -.24 .06
6 -.38 -.16 .01 -.08 .08 .15 -.25 -.06 -.17 .02 .07 -.03
'7 .16 .14 .06 -.03 -.07 -.38 .03 .29 .05 .28 .07 .06
8 .27 -.04 .03 -.17 .06 .08 .29 -.13 .10 -.19 .10 -.03
9 .19 .19 -.05 -.05 .32 .29 -.25 .11 .12 -.05 -.06 .30
10 -.02 .03 .19 -.14 .17 .05 .50 -.16 -.20 .11 -.29 -.08
11 -.17 .12 .27 .02 -.12 .13 .01 .32 ·30 .26 .17 -.27
12 -.12 .08 -.28 .23 -.01 .03 .11 -.04 .34 -.02 -.15 -.01\..tJ\J\\J\
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXa. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - GENERAL ANALYSISUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 -.03 -.31 -.10 .12 -.44 -.28 -.19 -.14 -.28 -.23 .24 -.06
14 .01 -.08 .06 -.05 .06 .05 .03 -.12 -.00 .37 -.10 .05
15 -.03 -.09 -.05 -.00 -.06 -.21 .22 .00 -.01 -.07 .08 .11
16 .10 -.18 -.08 -.09 -.22 .07 -.11 -·33 -.05 -.01 .05 -.16
17 -.04 .44 .01 .09 .40 -.08 -.26 .07 -.06 -.07 -.06 .14
18 -.16 -.04 -.05 .12 -.14 .07 .08 -.01 .17 .05 -.09 -.05
19 .20 -.09 .02 -.08 -.14 .19 .01 .46 .16 -.20 .18 -.15
20 .16 -.02 .03 .01 -.06 -.23 .31 -.12 .02 .13 .05 .14
21 .12 -.11 .03 -.01 -.07 .14 -.11 .21 .05 .09 .16 .06
22 -.11 -.04 .07 .21 -.19 -.02 -.13 .16 -.07 -.10 -.19 .01
23 .01 .01 .02 -.19 -.04 .08 .17 .09 .20 -.17 .02 -.21
24 .14 .35 .22 .12 .24 -.23 -.15 -.07 .02 -010 .15 -.13VJ\.T\0'\
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXa. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - GENERAL ANALYSISUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
25 -.02 .12 .06 .02 .08 .10 -.09 -.14 .07 -.03 .05 .29
26 -.23 -.19 .03 .19 .03 -.20 .27 .35 -.40 -.19 -.12 .14
27 .22 .06 .06 -.22 -.08 .11 -.34 -.33 .11 .07 -.07 -.18
28 -.02 .08 -.19 .24 .05 .21 .21 .02 .12 -.02 .10 .12
29 .46 .10 .09 .03 -.32 .33 .03 .07 -.15 .11 .06 .23
30 -.10 -.30 -.21 .25 -.05 -.25 -.14 -.02 .23 -.03 .20 .09
.31 .09 .05 .08 -.20 -.06 .22 .08 -.08 -.03 .09 -.08 .07
.32 .0.3 -.12 -.06 -.18 .21 .11 .15 .11 -.01 - •.30 -.12 -.14
.33 .16 .20 .13 .24 .06 .28 -.12 .09 -.13 -.09 .12 .23
34 -.05 -.05 .08 -.01 .12 -.15 -.16 .08 -.08 .21 -.21 -.02
35 .01 .20 .01 -.11 -.15 -.09 .05 -.13 -.12 .08 -.12 -.16
36 .47 .20 .26 .21 -.27 -.09 .17 .06 -.03 .00 .02 .07Iv.>\J1.--.:J
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXa. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - GENERAL ANALYSISUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
37 .45 .08 .16 .15 -.30 .22 -.18 .16 -.20 -.05 -.18 -.11
38 -.52 -.29 .13 -.15 .14 .21 -.08 .04 -.17 .28 .13 .08
39 .25 -.08 -.01 .14 -.04 -.36 .22 -.18 .40 -.00 -.12 .15
40 .09 .17 -D12 -.29 .29 .01 .13 .11 -.06 -.26 .00 -.17
41 -.09 -.04 -.16 .11 -.05 .01 -.18 -.25 -.05 -.01 .09 -.19
42 .24 -.02 -.13 -.04 -.07 .13 -.06 -.00 -.01 -.12 -.08 -.13
43 -.12 .65 -.55 -.20 -.23 .01 .08 .02 -.10 .20 .04 .01
44 .16 -.70 .45 .10 .27 .06 -.05 -.08 .11 -.12 -.05 .08
45 -.09 .14 .20 .20 -.06 -.12 -.11 .10 .02 -.11 .02 -.15
46 .42 -.44 - •.59 .10 .16 .09 .04 .17 -.11 .21 .01 -.11
47 - •.52 .11 .43 -.28 -.38 .21 .06 -.0.5 .21 -.17 -.11 .16
48 DI0 .39 .20 .20 .25 -.31 -.13 -.15 -.10 -.03 .11 -.06v)\J\OJ
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXa. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - GENERAL ANALYSISUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
49 -.03 .12 -.04 .10 -.02 -.07 -.14 .24 .14 .05 -.19 -.17
50 .10 -.12 -.17 .40 .15 .20 -.12 -.07 .05 .09 -.28 -.08
51 -.17 .13 .29 .33 -.13 .12 .23 -.11 -.11 .10 .18 -.01
52 -.01 .14 .24 .01 .25 -.05 .02 .02 .06 -.02 .13 -.19
53 .13 -.05 -.22 -.58 -.13 -.27 -.26 .06 .07 -.16 -.04 .32
'vJ\.J'l'0
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXo. CHILD REARING PRACTICES - MALE ANALYSISUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 .07 .45 -.16 .06 -.09 -.18 -.17 -.02 -.27
2 .01 .59 -.28 .09 -.04 -.07 -.18 -.06 -.25
3 -.16 .18 .49 -.26 -.14 .17 .04 .11 -.09
4 -.34 -.00 -.36 -.01 -.28 .12 -.20 .15 -.10
5 .01 -.11 .06 .24 -.21 -.06 .11 -.08 .01
6 -.09 .05 -.08 .18 .03 .15 .04 -.01 -.02
7 .09 -.22 .12 -.10 .03 .30 -.06 -.34 .00
8 -.09 .01 .19 -.36 -.04 -.11 .12 -.33 -.16
9 -.41 .27 .30 .06 .31 .39 -.29 .05 .10
10 .05 -.13 .12 .27 -.01 -.00 -.08 -.16 -.04
11 .40 .15 -.18 -.17 -.47 .61 .12 -.01 -.05
12 -.46 -.38 .03 .12 -.27 -.14 .07 .18 -.29VJ0'\0
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXb. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - MALE ANALYSISUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
I) -.46 -.02 -.11 -.21 .0) .06 .07 .01 .05
14 -.16 -.26 .25 .68 -.10 .11 .03 -.18 -.1)
15 .02 .09 .29 -.06 -.05 .08 -.06 .18 .17
16 -.10 -.07 .27 -.11 .09 .04 -.47 .0) -.24
17 -.28 .20 .02 -.07 -.06 -.06 .15 .05 -.20
18 -.4) .40 -.07 .05 .11 .06 .1) -.1) .05
19 -.46 -.26 -.18 -.2) -.12 -.07 -.2) -.18 .19
20 .00 .00 .46 -.28 .07 -.09 -.09 .)0 -.09
21 -.08 .21 .10 -.16 -.01 -.19 -.17 -.5) .0)
22 -.75 .20 -.17 .0) .1) .17 .)0 .02 .10
2) -.27 -.25 -.29 -.18 -.)2 -.12 -.)1 .09 .16
24 -.18 .38 .45 .24 -.64 -.14 -.04 -.02 .2)VJ0'!-'
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXb. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - MALE ANALYSISUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
25 -.30 -.14 -.01 .26 .18 .J.2 .05 .01 -.18
26 -.01 -.20 -.11 .08 .01 .29 -.36 -.06 -.06
27 -.17 -.27 .12 -.46 -.10 .06 .24 -.13 -.20
28 .15 .08 -.11 -.08 -.12 .25 .03 -.02 -.09
29 .07 .12 -.13 -.14 .13 -.05 -.04 .10 .01
\.....)0'.N
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXc. CHILD REARING PRACTICES - FEMALE ANALYSISUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 .28 -.04 -.04 -.33 .18 .23 -.38 .34 .02
2 .43 .03 -.01 -.28 .10 .18 -.41 .22 .0]
3 -.23 -.42 -.44 -.47 .21 .12 .36 .04 -.07
4 -.09 -.49 .05 .40 .08 -.13 -.46 .11 -.35
5 -.01 -.16 .31 -.21 -.05 -.22 .01 -.24 .08
6 -.23 .17 .03 .05 .36 -.11 -.10 .18 .36
7 -.12 -.05 .24 .21 .05 .50 .07 -.23 .27
8 -.18 -.54 -.31 .14 -.19 -.08 -.06 .06 .19
9 -.20 .07 -.18 .24 .61 .37 -.19 -.38 -.14
10 -.08 -.45 .79 -.29 .07 .03 .15 .08 -.16
11 -.14 -.39 -.32 -.44 -.13 .06 -.0] -.10 .18
12 -.30 -.28 .4] -.03 .12 -.4] -.14 -.07 .16\..JJ0'\
\..JJ
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXc. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - FEMALE ANALYSISUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
13 -.02 -.35 -.12 .32 -.18 .10 .08 .35 -.05
14 .09 -.12 .30 .01 .03 .27 .08 .16 -.02
15 -.01 .02 -.05 -.19 .02 -.01 -.03 018 -.03
16 -.13 -.26 -.06 -.08 -.14 .15 -.10 .02 -.09
17 .23 -.28 .09 .34 -.14 .25 .31 .24 .14
18 -.21 -.58 -.21 .16 .05 -.13 -.13 -.14 .12
19 -.07 -.lJ .1J -.07 -.20 .J7 -.14 -.09 .05
20 -.01 .14 .07 .08 .25 -.08 -.06 .14 .Jl
21 -.20 -.OJ .10 -.09 .40 .15 .27 .07 -.18
22 -.J2 -.14 -.05 .16 .55 -.10 .17 .29 .03
23 -.15 -.27 .11 -.29 .06 .15 -.19 -.17 .07
24 .02 -.18 .13 .27 -.14 .26 -.04 -.10 .09VJ0\.{:"
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXc. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - FEMALE ANALYSISUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
25 .65 -.16 .05 .00 .16 .01 -.02 -.01 .23
26 .80 -.31 -.04 .06 .25 -.16 .15 -.15 .04
27 .72 -.29 -.09 .05 .18 -.11 .10 -.20 -.13
\..oJCA\.l'\
366
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXI. TEACHER RATING T-SCORESUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6
1 .51 .03 -.46 -.24 -.19 .02
2 -.68 -.25 -.22 -.01 .26 .36
3 -.29 .47 .... 33 .26 -.12 .06
4 .69 -.01 -.44 -.20 -.00 .05
5 -.31 -.67 -.12 -.13 -.06 .10
6 .33 -.76 -.00 -.13 .07 -.07
7 -.54 .11 -.59 .01 -.06 -.16
8 -.52 -.45 -.17 -.16 -.37 .05
9 -.36 -.17 -·30 -.05 -.06 -.38
10 .43 -.48 -.22 .42 -.14 .11
11 .58 .02 -.46 -.22 .08 .14
12 -.44 -.18 -.40 .11 .23 .06
13 .10 -.42 .21 -.11 .21 -.18
14 -.42 -.36 -.14 .00 .12 -.11
15 .21 .28 -·30 -.09 .28 -.16
16 -.37 ·55 -.26 .13 .02 -.08
17 .81 -.18 .05 .09 -.06 -.07
18 .66 .18 -.12 .02 .17 .05
19 -.55 -.35 .06 .03 .08 -.04
20 .51 -.48 -.2] .46 .06 -.09
367APPENDIX B
TABLE BXII. BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS CHECKLISTUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 ) 4 5 6 7
1 .01 -.69 -.06 -.06 .07 .2) -.1)
2 -.00 -.78 -.02 -.10 -.16 .09 -.06
) .13 -.62 -.27 ·)5 .1) -.05 -.08
4 .01 -.72 -.25 .26 -.28 -.26 -.0)
5 -.20 -.49 -.16 -.45 .00 -.0) -.0)
6 -.16 -.49 -.07 -.06 .07 .19 .04
7 .00 -.69 -.05 .29 -.38 .24 -.09
8 .08 -.66 -.41 .26 .0) -.08 .03
9 -.3) -.51 -.)9 -.)1 .16 .01 .57
10 -.65 .04 -.04 .)0 .40 -.04 -.19
11 -.76 -.03 .12 -.00 -.00 -.17 .26
12 -.77 -.25 .21 .10 .34 -.18 .06
13 -.46 .)1 -.55 -.01 -.09 -.02 -.02
14 -.76 -.28 .29 -.0) .1) -.21 -.05
15 -.5) .22 -.50 .23 .01 .15 .02
16 -.66 -.29 .18 .05 .34 -.10 -.10
17 -.57 .08 -.42 -.)1 .15 -.01 -.32
18 -.26 .40 -.62 -.01 -.11 .08 .06
19 -.72 .12 .09 .0) -.04 .11 -.05
20 -.57 -.06 .00 .0) -.31 -.25 .18
21 -.80 .07 .20 -.05 -.21 .15 .01
368
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXII. (Continued) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS CHECKLISTUNROTATED PRINCIPAL AXIS
FACTOR MATRIX
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
22 -.44 .29 -.30 .03 -.03 .28 .11
23 -.70 -.10 .12 .11 .10 .21 .14
24 -.52 .24 -.30 .11 -.10 -.16 .04
25 -.78 -.09 .41 -.01 -.21 -.10 -.08
26 -.67 .17 -.33 -.20 -.18 -.18 -.27
27 -.59 .08 -.10 .23 .15 .50 -.03
28 -.73 .06 .24 -.10 -.29 .14 -.13
29 .66 -.07 .34 .08 -.21 .09 .13
369
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXIII. HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor
1 2 ) 4 5 6 7 8
1 -.02 .17 -.20 -.59 -.04 .61 -.34 .36
2 -.01 -.08 - .14 .68 .06 .18 -.01 .. 04
3 .01 -.08 -.02 .02 -.02 -.17 -.10 -.17
4 .02 -.11 .12 -.18 .19 -.79 .12 .08
5 .04 -.02 .2) .07 -.17 -.06 .56 -.26
6 -.09 .11 .)4 .16 -.01 .06 -.13 -.18
7 -.12 -.05 -.09 .06 .07 -.10 .06 .17
8 -.09 -.04 -.04 .05 .92 .02 .01 .07
9 -.08 .01 .22 -.15 -.01 .13 -.06 -.02
10 -.05 -.05 -.07 .04 -.89 -.05 .08 .07
11 .01 -.05 -.0) -.02 -.03 -.06 -.06 -.08
12 .61 .25 -.0) .01 .01 .03 -.11 -.20
13 -.01 .10 .05 -.04 -.04 -.03 .02 -.09
14 .24 -.04 -.0) -.0) -.09 -.03 -.01 -.05
15 -.03 .00 .14 -.08 -.01 .04 .01 -.05
16 .01 -.19 .04 -.)2 .07 .01 .09 -.83
17 -.07 .09 -.05 .44 -.09 .06 -.15 .12
18 -.03 .27 -.01 .24 .14 .17 -.01 .06
19 -.00 -.21 .0) -.10 -.08 -.20 .04 .81
20 .04 .04 .00 -.00 -.06 - .. 18 -.06 .02
21 .16 ·39 .01 .06 -.06 .10 -.01 -.06
370
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXIII. (Continued) HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor
1 2 J 4 5 6 7 8
22 -.05 .15 -.OJ -.01 .07 .02 -.01 .10
23 .07 -.05 .06 .04 .06 .68 .11 -.05
24 .J8 -.2J -.11 .10 .13 .04 .J7 .10
25 .26 -.J4 .18 .04 -.10 -.OJ -·50 .02
26 -.19 .27 .19 -.lJ .05 .02 ·75 .03
27 .05 .01 -.05 -.08 -.OJ .07 .94 .09
28 .1J -.29 .12 .07 -.02 .28 .68 .14
29 -.J2 -.J7 -.59 .04 -.07 .15 -.09 -.21
JO .67 -.04 -.IJ -.06 .07 -.02 -.00 .15
Jl -.14 -.19 -.82 -.05 .07 .05 .04 .19
J2 -.OJ .77 .05 .03 -.05 -.22 .05 .OJ
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXIVa. CHILD REARING PRACTICE - GENERAL ANALYSISHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1 -.08 .08 -.06 -.39 -.01 .17 .16 .01 .22 .05 .04 .11
2 .04 .02 -.12 -.22 .31 .04 .28 -.05 -.07 .14 .32 .22
3 .01 -.17 .10 -.03 .16 .13 .01 .16 .04 .23 -.36 .02
4 -.09 -.21 .11 .05 -.09 .10 -.06 .02 -.17 .10 .45 .02
5 -.00 -.16 -.04 .58 -.02 -.03 .00 -.05 -.06 .14 .06 .03
6 -.02 -.05 -.08 -.05 .04 -.04 .05 -.03 -.04 -.12 .01 -.49
7 .02 .21 -.20 -.31 -.14 -.07 -.18 .06 .11 -.01 .19 ·31
8 -.03 -.03 .27 -.06 .05 .08 .11 -.02 -.05 .00 -·30 .21
9 .64 -.03 .04 .03 .07 -.03 .05 -.04 .03 .09 -.02 -.06
10 -.14 -.11 .06 .00 -.13 .67 .06 -.05 -.00 -.07 -.02 .09
11 -.08 .68 -.04 -.01 .05 -.01 -.05 .07 -.10 -.02 .05 -.04
12 .08 .08 .04 .46 .02 -.05 -.08 -.08 .03 -.21 .03 .24VJ--.JI-'
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXIV. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - GENERAL ANALYSISHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 -.50 -.28 -.06 -.12 -.02 -.47 .01 .03 -.04 .19 -.04 -.13
14 .03 .05 -.29 -.05 .13 .27 .03 -.14 .12 -.09 .03 .02
15 - .. 09 -.09 -.01 -.07 -.20 -.07 -.01 -.06 -.05 -.10 -.09 .19
16 - .. 28 -.12 .00 .01 .35 -.05 .02 -.08 .02 .05 -.11 -.09
17 .. 44 -.13 -.01 .00 -.07 -.00 -.12 .40 .02 -.05 .13 -.10
18 - .. 08 .12 -.04 .26 .02 .01 -.01 -.11 -.06 -.07 .04 .06
19 .. 01 .38 .38 -.09 -.08 -.27 .04 -.10 .01 .24 -.01 -.00
20 - .. 09 -.06 -.18 -.11 -.11 .10 -.02 -.05 .01 -.06 -.15 .38
21 .. 10 .21 -.06 -.13 -.01 -.17 .05 -.12 .07 .15 -.04 -.07
22 - .. 05 -.03 -.01 .18 -.12 -.08 .06 -.02 -.09 .21 .29 -.07
23 -010 .20 .35 .02 .06 .02 -.00 -.04 -.12 -.08 -.05 .09
24 005 .01 .04 -.10 .08 -.07 .01 .61 -.01 -.01 -.02 .06U>-..JN
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXIV. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - GENERAL ANALYSISHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor1 2 J 4 .5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
2.5 .JO -.12 -.1.5 .04 .OJ -.0.5 .04 -.00 -.18 .01 -.1.5 .02
26 -011 -.19 .07 -.0.5 -.70 .0.5 .09 -.04 .OJ .11 .18 -.09
27 - .. OJ -.OJ .01 -.OJ .62 .04 .01 .06 -.04 .02 .05 -.06
28 .1.5 .08 -.01 .27 -.16 -.04 -.07 -.07 .07 .02 -.26 .08
29 .12 .02 -.14 -.10 .02 .04 -.08 -.26 -.00 .6J -.16 .07
JO -.05 .02 -.1.5 .11 -.OJ -.46 .1J -.01 .01 -.24 -.0.5 .1J
Jl .08 -.01 -.01 -.05 .11 .22 -.OJ -.20 -.10 .11 -.07 -.01
J2 .02 -.05 .47 .02 -.08 .11 .14 -.04 .04 -.08 .01 -.06
JJ .J2 -.OJ -.08 .05 -.lJ -.08 .04 .12 -.OJ 041 -.15 -.14
J4 .05 -.01 -.16 -.08 .02 .15 .06 .OJ .1J -.81 .J2 -.05
J5 -.21 -.07 -.00 -.OJ .13 .20 -.23 .06 -.04 004 .10 .03
36 -.07 .05 -.07 -.06 -.07 .03 -.00 .12 -.05 .48 -.04 .39
37 -.06 .. 01 .08 .04 .12 .04 .OJ -.01 .08 .68 .22 -.04\..U""'-J\..U
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXIV. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - GENERAL ANALYSISHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor
1 2 ) 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
38 .03 .13 -.28 -.19 -.12 .11 .11 -.20 -.05 -.22 -.06 -.51{
39 .01 -.06 -.09 .16 .05 -.06 .18 -.02 -.03 -.22 -.00 .68
40 .07 -.05 .48 -.14 -.05 .11 -.11 .14 .07 -.12 -.05 -.05
41 -.22 -.09 -.04 .14 .2) -.12 -.06 .14 .10 -.06 -.07 -.19
42 -.04 -.04 .22 .07 .16 -.01 -.02 -.06 .12 .17 .04 -.01
4) .02 -.01 -.05 .01 .0) .05 -.94 -.11 .04 -.02 -.04 .01
44 .05 -.0) .01 -.04 .01 .00 .92 -.04 .02 -.0) -.0) .01
45 -.11 .11 .04 ~.08 -.04 -.11 .04 .)0 -.12 .09 .14 -.02
46 -.04 .0) .06 -.01 -.02 -.05 -.01 -.)1 .8) .02 -.02 -.01
47 .01 .09 .02 .10 .0) .07 .05 -.25 -.87 -.01 .0) -.05
48 .04 -.12 -.11 -.09 .02 .00 -.04 .63 .02 -.01 -.01 .06
49 .0) .20 .07 .15 .04 -.02 -.08 .07 .08 -.01 ·)5 .05\..JJ--J.{::"
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXIV. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - GENERAL ANALYSISHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
50 .09 -.03 -.06 .46 .12 .11 .17 -.00 .35 .07 015 -.06
51 -.19 .13 -.25 .13 -.18 .12 .01 .19 -.15 .19 -.25 -.06
52 -.01 .18 .09 -.08 .03 .07 .09 .37 -.01 -.10 -.06 -.04
53 .25 -.30 .12 -.41 .13 -.30 -.15 -.34 -.20 -.14 .17 .17
\.JJ-...J\..t\
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXIVb. CHILD REARING PRACTICES - MALE ANALYSISHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 .02 .04- .01 .01 -.04 -.05 .63 -.09 -.03
2 -.04 -.03 .06 .09 -.10 -.08 .69 .09 -.04
3 .22 .12 .10 .12 .55 -.03 -.01 .08 -.13
4 -.14 .25 .09 .22 -.04 -.03 .20 .11 .42
5 -.01 .04 -.17 .01 -.01 .33 -.02 -.04 .02
6 -.11 .02 .06 .10 -.07 .10 .02 .18 -.07
7 .26 -.22 .25 .21 -.11 .20 -.21 -.03 -.01
8 .58 -.05 -.04 -.02 .01 .03 .08 .02 -.04
9 -.17 -.17 .54 -.03 .33 -.04 -.05 .44 -.07
10 .00 -.06 .10 -.06 -.08 ·33 .01 -.10 -.05
11 .01 -.05 -.06 .90 .11 .02 -.02 -.03 .01
12 .11 .62 -.02 -.08 .01 .24 .05 -.03 .17\.;J
"""-J0'\
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXIVb. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - MALE ANALYSISHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor
1 2 ] 4 5 6 7 8 9
I] .11 .09 .01 -.01 .01 -.14 -.10 .]8 .19
14 -.09 .1] .1] -.04 -.08 .75 -.0] .05 -.15
15 -.14 -.07 .02 -.01 .41 -.07 -.15 -.02 .00
16 .11 .11 ·5] -.11 .17 -.02 .19 -.26 .07
17 .16 .24 -.08 .00 .08 -.04 .22 .21 -.08
18 .04 -.12 -.0] -.04 .01 -.00 .15 .59 -.04
19 .15 -.10 .09 -.12 -.08 .01 -.1] .1] .61
20 .08 .21 .1] -.18 .46 -.24 -.04 -.2] -.14
21 .42 -.44 .05 -.17 -.05 .16 .24 .04 .16
22 -.02 .10 -.07 -.01 -.02 -.05 -.09 .86 .0]
2] -.09 .06 -.01 -.0] .01 -.09 -.0] -.1] .70
24 -.09 -.16 -.]2 -.02 .69 .47 .19 .05 .26\.....l
""
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXIVb. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - MALE ANALYSISHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
25 -.03 .24 .20 -.05 -.18 .18 -.01 .23 -.15
26 -.10 -.0) .43 .19 - .. 12 .10 -.01 -.10 .19
27 .56 .2) -.0) .15 -.00 -.05 -.16 .02 -.00
28 .0) .01 .04 .)6 -.0) -.0) .05 -.01 -.04
29 -.06 -.02 .00 -.04 -.04 -927 .06 -.01 -.02
\.0--:len
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXIVc. CHILD REARING PRACTICES - FEMALE ANALYSISHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 .00 .09 -.01 .04 .74 -.06 .05 .01 .01
2 -.07 .03 .02 -.12 .66 -.05 .05 .13 -.05
3 -.00 -.18 -.17 .61 .05 -.07 -.31 .05 ·51
4 .07 -.13 -.07 -.03 .10 .06 .86 -.02 .10
5 -.20 -.01 .02 -.11 -.12 .48 -.09 .12 .08
6 -.04 .61 -.00 .04 .09 .00 -.03 -.12 .06
7 .02 .13 .69 .06 -.12 -.00 -.14 -.01 .00
8 .22 .06 .01 -.14 -.07 -.05 .09 -.02 .66
9 -.51 .04 .40 .41 -.07 -.39 .35 .13 -.04
10 .16 -.16 .09 .32 .11 .86 .05 -.01 -.21
11 -.12 -.09 .02 .00 .16 .06 -.28 -.03 .66
12 -.13 .30 -.07 -.10 -.14 .63 .18 - .Ol~ .16
13 .55 -.05 -.00 .04 .02 -.15 .19 -.09 .15\..U
14 .24 -.04 .22 .16 .16 .15 -.01 .00 -.19 --J'-0
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXIVc. (Continued) CHILD REARING PRACTICES - FEMALE ANALYSISHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
15 .04 -.00 -.15 .07 .21 .00 -.05 -.10 .01
16 .04 -.20 .08 .03 .12 .03 .08 -.15 .21
17 .62 .05 .24 .06 -.07 -.06 -.10 .18 -.00
18 -.03 .08 .07 -.02 -.14 .05 .25 .12 .61
19 -.00 -.16 .39 -.08 .16 .06 -.04 -.18 .08
20 .02 .48 .03 -.04 .07 .01 -.05 .03 -.01
21 .00 -.01 -.01 .59 -.02 .05 -.01 -.0] -.19
22 .17 .39 -.16 .52 -.05 -.03 .17 -.0] .04
23 -.25 -.05 .22 .05 .18 .25 -.01 -.04 .27
24 .14 -.03 .40 -.11 -.07 -.01 .08 .03 .05
25 .07 .19 .11 -.12 .18 .04 -.10 .63 .02
26 .02 .02 -.05 .02 -.04 .04 -.01 .94 .02
27 -.04 -.18 -.07 .05 -.04 -.02 .08 .83 -.02 \....0
co0
381
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXV. TEACHER RATINGSHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4- 5 6
1 -.03 .22 .11 .78 -.07 -.19
2 -.09 .06 -.24 .06 -.03 .98
3 .18 .02 .08 -.00 -.75 .08
4 .04 -.06 .03 .79 .08 -.01
5 .05 .46 .02 .12 ·32 .30
6 .18 .09 .08 .16 .70 .06
7 .00 .10 ·57 .17 -·33 .16
8 -.05 .83 .13 .15 -.02 -.03
9 -.01 .07 .72 -.06 .13 -.19
10 .87 .20 -.11 .03 -.15 .06
11 -.04 -.11 -.07 .80 .06 .20
12 .14 -.13 .18 .03 ':.06 .64
13 -.05 -.22 .16 -.18 .65 .01
14 .04 .01 ·30 -.15 .25 .28
15 -.14 -.55 .30 .25 .08 .12
16 -.07 -.19 .25 -.07 -.54 .05
17 .37 -.10 -.06 .15 .20 -.36
18 .12 -.41 -.13 .32 .03 .03
19 -.00 .10 .14 -.33 .20 .26
20 .91 -.18 .14 -.11 .06 .05
382
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXVI. BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 -.09 .19 .07 .42 -.34 .38 -.02
2 .04 -.07 -.12 .37 -.20 .51 .21
3 -.07 .09 ·31 -.05 -.01 .71 -.39
4 .05 -.30 -.03 -.08 .28 .90 .09
5 -.05 -.20 .06 .71 .13 .05 .04
6 .23 .05 -.10 .76 -.22 -.16 .02
7 -.14 .17 -.35 .03 -.21 .85 .49
8 .10 .07 .13 .00 .13 .74 -.37
9 .89 .19 -.04 .28 .01 .03 -.38
10 -.22 .27 .85 -.11 .13 .05 -.19
11 .42 -.06 .29 -.15 .15 -.07 .31
12 .19 -.01 .86 -.06 -.06 .00 .01
13 .05 -.01 -.02 -.02 .86 .03 -.11.14 .09 -.22 .67 .08 .02 .01 .31
15 -.01 .54 -.02 -.11 .43 .17 -.06
16 -.02 .01 .82 .11 -~07 .03 .01
17 -.24 .11 .26 .56 .55 -.18 -.11
18 .07 .35 -.35 .01 .62 -.04 -.14
19 -.04 .22 .15 .02 .08 -.07 .47
20 .31 -.24 -007 -.18 .38 .19 .50
21 004 .16 -.05 006 .02 -.08 077
3.83
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXVI. (Continued) BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR PATTERN
Variable Factor
1 2 ) 4 5 6 7
22 .09 .55 -.22 .00 .17 -.10 .10
2) .18 .41 .24 -.04 -.21 .01 .)0
24 .08 .05 .05 -.17 .58 .07 .09
25 -.01 -.21 .2) -.02 .0) .02 .82
26 -.19 -.14 .05 .)0 .77 -.0) .)0
27 -.1) .8) .12 .01 -.22 .04 .18
28 -.12 .06 -.11 .14 .05 -.06 .88
29 .17 .08 -.00 -.15 -.16 .05 .75
384
APPENDIX B
TABLE EXVII. HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHYHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR CORRELATIONS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1
2 .02
3 .19 .05
4 -.11 .06 .00
5 -.05 -.09 -.03 -.05
6 .19 -.35 -.03 -.23 -.05
7 .02 .10 .04 -.00 .01 .09
8 .28 .24 .34 .08 -.17 -.10 .04
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXVIIIa. CHILD REARING PRACTICES - GENERAL ANALYSISHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR CORRELATIONS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1
2 ,,05
3 .11 -.02
4 -.02 .02 -.11
5 .10 -.07 .05 -.12
6 .09 .07 .05 -.07 -.02
7 -.11 .03 -.06 -.09 -.01 -.01
8 .16 .00 -.09 .03 -.03 .10 -.08
9 .07 -.12 .09 .01 .04 -.11 .07 -.08
10 .05 .06 .02 -.03 .15 .03 .02 .07 .06
11 -.03 .02 -.08 -.0'7 -.03 -.14 -.01 .05 -.07 -.05
12 -.03 -.04 .06 -.12 .07 .01 -.02 .09 .14 .18 -.04
\...Jco\.n
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXVIIIb. CHILD REARING PRACTICES - MALE ANALYSISHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR CORRELATIONS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1
2 .04
3 .02 .04
4 -.06 -.15 -.12
5 .17 -.03 .05 -.05
6 -.14 .12 .03 -.10 .06
7 -.16 -.21 -.14 .03 .09 -.07
8 .04 .19 .12 -.15 .07 .02 .15
9 .13 .28 .05 -.03 -.07 -.00 -.01 .18
\..UOJ0'\
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXVIIIc. CHILD REARING PRACTICES - FEMALE ANALYSISHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMP.RY FACTOR CORRELATIONS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1
2 -.14
3 .11 -.07
4 -.07 .14 .07
5 -.04 -.10 -.00 -.03
6 .07 -.05 .08 .08 .02
7 .12 .14 .13 .05 -.12 .08
8 .15 -.10 -.02 -.11 .22 -.02 .02
9 .10 -.17 -.02 .18 -.03 .07 .17 -.05
\.A>0)---J
388
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXIX. TEACHER RATINGSHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR CORRELATIONS
1 2 3 4 5 6
1
2 -.12
3 -.22 .45
4 .48 -.46 -.19
5 .51 .20 -.26 .13
6 -.24 .62 .65 -.42 -.10
389
APPENDIX B
TABLE BXX. BEHAVIOR PROBLEMSHARRIS-KAISER
PRIMARY FACTOR CORRELATIONS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1
2 .26
3 .47 .43
4 .41 .07 .25
5 .23 .58 .32 .03
6 .25 -.11 .08 .41 -.22
7 .41 .43 .67 .15 ·37 -.09
390
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Baldvlin, A. L., Kalhorn, J., & Breese, F. H. Patterns
of parent behavior. Psychological Monographs, 1945,
5§ (3, Whole No. 268).
Baldwin, A. L., Kalhorn, J., & Breese, F. H. The
appraisal of parental behavior. Psychological
MQno~raphs, 1949, Q1 (4, Whole No. 299).
Becker, W. C., & Krug, R. S. A circumplex model for
social behavior in children. Child Development, 1964,
15, 371-396.
Becker, W. C., & Krug, R. S. The parent attitude research
instrument--a research review. Child Development, 1965,
1£, 329-365.
Becker, W. C., Peterson, D. R., Hellmer, L. A., Shoemaker,
D. J., & Quay, H. C. Factors in parental behavior and
personality as related to problem behavior in children.
Journal of Consulting Psycho~, 1959, £2, 107-118.
Bell, R. R. Marriage and Family Interaction. Homewood,
Ill.: Dorsey Press, 1967.
Bell, N. W., & Vogel, E. F. (Eds.). The American Family.
Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1960.
Bell, R. Q. Retrospective attitude studies of parent
child relationships. Paper read at American Psycholog
ical Association, Chicago, September, 1956.
391
Bottenberg, R. A., & Ward, J. H., Jr. Applied multiple
linear regression. PRL-TDR-63-6, 6570th Personnel
Research Laboratory, Aerospace Medical Division,
Air Force Systems Command, Lackland AFB, Texas, 1963.
Burt, C. L. The factors of the mind: An introduction to
factor analysis in psychology. New Yorkz Macmillan,
1941.
Cattell, R. B. The scree test for the number of factors.
Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1966, I, 140-161. (d)
Cattell, R. B. Teachers' personality description of
six-year oldsz A check on structure. British Journal
of Educational Psychology, 1963, 11, 219-235.
Cattell, R. B., & Coan, R. A. Child personality structure
as revealed in teachers' ratings. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 1957, 11, 315-327.
Cattell, R. B., & Coan, R. A. Objective test assessment
of the primary personality dimensions in middle child
hood. British Journal of Psychology, 1959, jQ, 235-252.
Cattell, R. B., & Coan, R. A. Personality dimensions in
the questionnaire responses of six and seven-year olds.
British Journal of Educational Psychology, 1958, 28,
232-24-2.
Cattell, R. B., & Dreger, R. M. The development of the
pre-school personality questionnaire. In press.
392
Cattell, R. B., & Gruen, W. The personality factor struc
ture of II-year old children in terms of behavior
rating data. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1953,
2, 255-266.
Cattell, R. B., & Gruen, W. The primary personality
factors in II-year old children by objective tests.
Journal of Personality, 1955, £l, 460-478.
Cattell, R. B., & Gruen, W. Primary personality factors
in the questionnaire medium for children eleven to
fourteen years old. Educational and Psychological
Measurement. 1954, 14, 50-76.
Cattell, R. B., and Foster, M. J. The rotoplot program
for multiple single plane, visually guided rotation.
Behavioral Science, 1963, 8, 156-165.
Cattell, R. B., & Peterson, D. R. Personality structure
in four and five year olds in terms of objective tests.
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1959, 12, 355-369.
Cattell, R. B., & Schaie, K. W. Personality factors in
the questionnaire responses of four and five year old
children. In press.
Cattell, R. B., and Schuerger, J. M. Objective test
dimensions of personality in adolescence. In press.
Coan, R. A., & Cattell, R. B. Reproducibls personality
factors in middle childhood. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 1958, 14, 339-345.
393
Darwin, C. A biographical sketch of an infant. Mind,
1877, £, 285-294.
Dielman, T. E. Convergent and discriminant validity of
three measures of ability, aspiration-level, achievement,
adjustment, and dominance. Unpublished M.A. thesis;
University of Hawaii, Honolulu, 1965.
Dielman, T. E., & Cattell, R. B. The early school
personality questionnaire: Form B. In press.
Dielman, T. E., Cattell, R. B., Lepper, C. S., & Rhoades,
P. A. A check on the structure of parental reports of
child rearing practices. In press.
Dielman, T. E., Schuerger, J. M., & Cattell, R. B.
Prediction of junior high school achievement from IQ
and the objective-analytic personality factors U.I. 21,
r.I. 23, U.I.24, and U.I. 25. In press.
Dielman, T. E., Cattell, R. B., & Lepper, C. S. DimensiorB
of problem behavior in the early grades. In press.
Digman, J. M. Child behavior ratings: Further evidence
of a multiple-factor model of child personality.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1965, 25,
787-799.
Digman, J. M. Principal dimensions of child personality
as inferred from teachers' jUdgments. Child Development,
1963, ~, 43-60.
Digman, J. M. Reproducible personality factors in the
behavior rating domain. Unpublished manuscript,
University of Hawaii, 1970.
Emmerich, W. Continuity and stability in early social
development. Child Development, 1964, 12, 311-332.
Emmerich, W. Continuity and stability in early social
development: II. Teacher ratings. Child Development,
1966, 12, 17-27.
Gallimore, R. G., Howard, A., & Jordan, Cathy. Indepen
dence training among Hawaiians. Paper read at Western
Psychological Association Convention, San Francisco,
1967.
Glick, P. C. American families. New York: Wiley &
Sons, 1957.
Guttman, L. A new approach to factor analysis: The
Radex. In P. F. Lazarsfeld ~d.) Mathematical thinking
in the soc~l sciences. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press,
1954.
Hall, G. S. The contents of children's minds on entering
school. Pedagogical Seminary, 1891, 1, 139-173.
Harris, C. W., & Kaiser, H. F. Oblique factor analytic
solutions by orthogonal transformations. Psychometrika,
1964, £2, 347-362.
Hays, W. L. Statistics for psychologists. New York:
Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1965.
Hendrickson, A. E., & White, P. o. PRO~~X: A quick
method for rotation to oblique simple structure.
British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 1964,
11, 65-70.
Hev:ltt, L. H., & Jenkins, R. L. Fundamental patterns
of maladjustment: The dynamics of their origin.
State of Illinois, 1946.
Howard, A. Bishop Museum Community Research Program:
A progress report. Mimeographed paper, Bernice P.
Bishop Museum, Honolulu, 1967.
Howard, A., & Gallimore, R. G. Social and cultural
processes in a Hawaiian community. PHS Grant No.
S-R-ll-tlli01899, 1968.
Kaiser, H. F. The varimax criterion for analytic rota
tion in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 1958, £1,187-200.
Kaiser, H. F., & Caffrey, J. Alpha factor analysis.
Psychometrika, 1965, lQ, 1-14.
McNemar, Q. On the number of factors. Psychometrika,
1942, 2, 9-18.
Milton, G. A. A factor analytic study of child-rearing
behaviors. Child Development, 1958, £2, 381-392.
395
396
Minturn, L., Lambert, VI. VI., Fi scher, J., Fischer, A.,
Romney, K., Romney, R., Nydegger, W., Nydegger, C.,
Maretzki, T., Maretzki, H., Levine, R., & Levine, B.
Mothers of six cultures: Antecedents of child rearing.
New York: Wiley, 1964.
Mussen, P. H., Conger, J. J., & Kagan, J. Child Develop
ment and Personality. New York: Harper and Row, 1963.
Peck, R. F. Family patterns correlated with adolescent
personality structure. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 1958, ::il, 347-350.
Pestalozzi, G. A father's diary, 1774. Cited by R. de
Guimps, Pestalozzi, his life and work. New York:
Appleton, 1906.
Peterson, D. R. Behavior problems of middle childhood.
Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1961, ,gj" 205-209.
Peterson, D. R. The scope and generality of verbally
defined personality factors. Psychological Review,
1965, :z.g" 48-59.
Peterson, D. R., & Cattell, R. B. Personality factors
in nursery school children as derived from teacher
ratings. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1959,
£1, 562.
Peterson, D. R., Quay, H. C., & Cameron, G. B. Personality
and background factors in juvenile delinquency as infer
red from questionnaire responses. Journal of Consulting
Psychology, 1959, ~' 395-399.
397
Pimm, J. B., Quay, H. C., & Werry, J. S. Dimensions o£
problem behavior in first grade children. Psychology
in the Schools, 1967, 4, 155-157.
Quay, H. C. Personality patterns in pre-adolescent delin
quent boys. Educational and Psychological Measurement,
1966, 26, 99-110.
Quay, H. C., Morse, w. C., & Cutler, R. L. Personality
patterns of pupils in special classes for the emotion
ally disturbed. Exceptional Children, 1966, ]g,
297-301. (a)
Quay, H. c., Sprague, R. L., Shulman, H. S., & Miller,
A. L. Some correlates of personality disorder and
conduct disorder in a child guidance clinic sample.
Psychology in the Schools, 1966, 1, 44-47. (b)
Quay, H. C., & Quay, L. C. Behavior problems in early
adolescence. Child Development, 1965, 12, 215-220.
Schaefer, E. S. A circumplex model for maternal behavior.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1959, 22,226-235.
Schaefer, E. S. Converging conceptual models for maternal
behavior and for child behavior. In J. C. Glidewell
(Ed.) Parental attitudes and child behavior. Springfield,
Ill.: Thomas, 1961.
Schaefer, E. S., & Bayley, N. Consistency of maternal
behavior from infancy to preadolescence. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1960, 61, 1-6.
398
Schaefer, E. S., & Bayley, N. Maternal behavior, child
behavior, and their intercorrelations from infancy
through adolescence. Child Development Monographs,
1963, 28, (Whole No. 87).
Schaefer, E. S., & Bell, R. Q. Structure of attitudes
toward child rearing and the family. American
Psychologist, 1955, 10, 319-320.
Schaefer, E. S., & Bell, R. Q. Development of a parental
attitude research instrument. Child Development, 1958,
£2, 339-361.
Schaefer, E. S., Bell, R. Q., & Bayley, N. Development
of a maternal behavior research instrument. Journal of
Genetic Psychology, 1959, 22, 83-104.
Schuerger, J. M., Dielman, T. E., & Cattell, R. B.
Objective-analytic personality factors (U.I. 16, U.I. 17,
U.I. 19, and U.I. 20) as correlates of school achieve
ment. In press.
Sears, R. R., Maccoby, Eleanor E., & Levin, H. Patterns
of Child Rearing. Evanston, Ill.: Rowand Peterson,
1957.
Sears, R. R., Rau, Lucy, & Alpert, R. Identification and
child rearing. Stanford: Stanford University, 1965.
Sewell, W. H., Mussen, P. H., & Harris, C. W. Relation
ships among child training practices. American
Sociological Review, 1955, 20, 137-148.
399
Shoben, E. J., Jr. The assessment of parental attitudes
in relation to child adjustment. Genetic Psychology
Monographs, 1949, 39, 101-148.
Slater, R. E. Parent behavior and the personality of the
child. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1962, 101,
53-68.
Sokal, R. R. A comparison of five tests for completeness
of factor extraction. Transactions of the Kansas
Academy of Science, 1959, 141-152.
Thurstone, L. L. Multiple factor analysis. Psychological
Review, 1931, 1§, 416-427.
Thurstone, L. L. Multiple factor analysis. Chicago:
University of Chicago, 1947.
Tucker, L. R. A method of synthesis of factor analysis
studies. Personnel Research Section Research Report
No. 984, 1951.
Zuckerman, M., Ribback, B. B., IvIonashkin, I & Norton, J. A.
Normative data and factor analysis on the PARI. Journal
of Consulting Psychology, 1958, 22, 165-171.