(page 140)

CHAPTER IV

THE MEASUREMENT OF SELF ACTUALIZATION AND PSYCHEDELIA

4.1 INTRODUCTION

The supreme test of whether cognitive representation has passed from the parataxic to the syntaxic, from ideographic to nomothetic, from art to science in any developing area, lies in measurement. If and only if we can measure gradation and change in the discipline are we justified in calling it a science. Hence, the importance of this chapter, and the difficulty in writing it. It is the only one which has required the assistance of several able and dedicated graduate students - Marilyn Alkin, Beverly Curtis, Philip Ferguson, and Cora Grote, to whom thanks is extended - as well as professional advice and help from several other persons knowledgeable in the testing area.

The major problem is that it is enormously difficult to develop instruments to measure higher developmental stages (note the effort which has been expended on creativity tests, for example). Instrumentation in such new areas generally lags a decade or more behind the opening up of a new field. The reader, therefore, must expect this chapter to be rather primitive. Nevertheless, fortified with the idea that "whatever exists, exists in some quantity" we have made the decision that if ever good tests are to be developed, an initial effort, no matter how crude or premature, must here be made.

Our procedure will, therefore, be to make a short survey on what have been considered the chief attributes of self-actualization and psychedelia, and then detail various attempts to measure them. In this we hypothesize that measurement of self-actualization is tantamount to measuring psychedelia (in line with the Periodic Developmental Stage Theory). This is a calculated risk, probably only partly true; we shall probably find idiosyncratic aspects of psychedelia as we get a better fix on it. But the test which will do this has not yet been developed.


(page141)

In looking at the definition and characteristics of self-actualization, we can do no better than go to the business-like doctoral dissertation of Maul (1970:9-10):
 

Self-actualization is a term coined by Jung and used by Maslow to describe "Full Humanness" (1968:viii). Again Maslow declares: "Self-actualizing people have come to a high level of maturation, health and fulfillment" (1968:71). In another place he says: "Maturity or self-actualization . . means to transcend the deficiency needs and to behave to some larger extent in response to growth-needs (1968:202). But self-actualization is not to be confused with old age, for he also defines self-actualization as "A spurt in which the powers of the person come together in a particularly efficient or intensely enjoyable way, and in which he is more integrated (1968:97)."


Like Maslow, Rogers (1961:187-92) describes the characteristics of the "fully-functioning person" which is his term for self-actualization.

This person is in the process, moving in the direction of:

 
1. "An increased openness to experience" (with reduction in defensiveness).
2. Increasing the "here-and-now" aspects of living.
3. An increasing awareness of both external and internal aspects of each new experience.
Rogers (1961:193) sees creative behavior as one of the implications of functioning fully.

The self-actualizing person is described by Rogers (1961) as a fully functioning individual with an increasing openness to experience, an increasing amount of living in the here and now, an increasing trust in his organism, and an increasing awareness of all aspects of each new experience. Both Rogers and Maslow base their impressions of the self- actualizing person on personal and clinical observations rather than on the results of scientific research.

The following are objectively describable and measurable characteristics of the healthy (self-actualizing) human which would be common to both Rogers and Maslow (1968).
 

1. Clearer, more efficient perception of reality.
2. More openness to experience.
3. Increased integration, wholeness, and unity of the person.
4. Increased spontaneity, expressiveness; full functioning; aliveness.
5. A real self; a firm identity; autonomy, uniqueness.
6. Increased objectivity, detachment, transcendence of self
7. Recovery of creativeness.


(page 142)
 

8. Ability to fuse concreteness and abstractness.
9. Democratic character structure.
10. Ability to love.


Autonomy, inner-directedness, and self-evaluation are also characteristics.

Because the test literature on creativity is so voluminous, we shall leave it aside, and concentrate on the much more difficult, and much less understood area of testing for self-actualization and psychedelia. In doing so we shall pay selective attention to two tests which have gained some research prominence in the measurement of self-actualization - the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale, and especially the Shostrom Personal Orientation Index. The graduate assistant in this endeavor is Marilyn Alkin.

Because of our dissatisfaction with some of the aspects of the POI, we determined to construct ourselves a scale which might be better suited to the needs of testing in the area of high mental health and maturity, and self-actualization. Thus was created in 1972, the Northridge Developmental Scale.The development, validation,. reliability, and usage of this test is reported in the next section. The views of many self-actualized persons were used in this effort; the writer especially wishes to thank Dr. Norma Jean Groth, Dr. Sybil Richardson, and Dr. Lois Swanson for item suggestions. The graduate assistants in charge of research, statistical work, and write-up in this section are Phil Ferguson, Cora Grote, and Beverly Curtis.

Tart's Measurement of Psychedelia

One of the best initial attempts to measure psychedelia was the effort of Tart (1971) who conducted a questionnaire among 150 marijuana users; fortunately he included in his lengthy questionnaire a number of questions relating the psychic and psychedelic phenomena. While Tart's study has the disadvantage for us that all of his respondents were on drugs, and most of them were in their twenties (a bit young for normal psychedelic experience), some of his data are of interest. In one side study he compared meditators (16%) with nonmeditators (84%), and found (Tart 1971:262) the following significant (.01) differences in favor of meditators:
 

More OOB experiences before using marijuana
more aware of chakra centers
more frequently merge with object or person contemplated
more at one with the world
more in touch with a higher power
more spiritual experiences while intoxicated
more religious significance in getting intoxicated.


(page 143)

Tart also inquired into psychic and psychedelic effects in his general users census. He found the following percent of respondents who "sometimes" had the experience:
 

20% see auras around people sometimes (p. 65)
21% had had more than one OOB experience (p. 103)
4% had lost control and been taken over by an outside hostile force sometimes (possession) (p. 196)
9% had lost control and been taken over by an outside benign force sometimes (possession) (p. 196)
13% have had parts of their body move of their own volition without conscious will (p. 196)
35% report archetypal effects (p 209)
24% report contact with a higher power (p. 213)
13% can meditate more effectively (p. 213)
Tact concludes (p. 212) with the following summary of a "good trip":

Marijuana intoxication characteristically produces a childlike openness and a sense of wonder and awe, in contrast to the usual businesslike manner in which we classify events and people . . . At high levels of intoxication, the sense of separateness, of being an individual ego, is often replaced by feelings of oneness with the world, or actions and experiences becoming archetypal, and occasionally of merging with people or objects.

4.2 SURVEY OF LITERATURE ON MEASUREMENT
INSTRUMENTS INCLUDING THE PERSONAL
ORIENTATION INVENTORY

(by Marilyn Alkin)

This section is a review of some of the literature on the measurement of self-actualization. Included will be tests such as the Personal Orientation Inventory, the Tennessee Self-Concept, the Edwards Personal Preference Scale and the Eysenck Personality Inventory.

4.2.1 The Personal Orientation Inventory

Shostrom (1966) developed a test for the measurement of the values and behavior of the self-actualizing person. He called this test The Personal Orientation Inventory often referred to as the P.O.I. He was assisted by many experts in the field of human development, such as Maslow and Perls, in construction of this measurement instrument. Maslow (1967) gave The Personal Orientation Inventory a strong vote of confidence when he stated ". . . there is today a standardized test

(page144)

of self-actualization (P.O.I.). Self-actualization can now be defined quite operationally, as intelligence used to be defined, i.e., self-actualization is what the test (POI) tests."

The Personal Orientation Inventory consists of 150 two-choice items that ask the examinee to make comparative value judgments. It is a paper and pencil test and it takes from forty-five to sixty minutes to complete. In responding to the Personal Orientation Inventory the examinee is asked to select the one statement that is most true of himself.

The two choice items in The Personal Orientation Inventory are objectively scored to yield twelve scales. Most of the Personal Orientation Inventory items are used in more than one scale so an inter-correlation among the scales is built into the test. Some of the positive characteristics of the test are the non-threatening character of the items, the interpretations of the scales in terms of positive concepts of self-development, and the broad social and personal relevance of the value concepts measured. The Personal Orientation Inventory scales have been useful in assessing subjects of high school age and older. The norms are most extensive for college age students.

The Personal Orientation Inventory has two major scales and ten subscales. The two major scales define a time ratio and a support ratio. These scales are thought to assess areas important in personal development and interpersonal interaction. The time ratio assesses the degree to which an individual is reality oriented in the present, and if he is able to bring past experiences and future expectations into meaningful continuity. The development of these two ratios is based primarily on the Gestalt and Existential therapy with emphasis on the here and now. The remaining ten scales measure conceptually independent aspects of self-actualization. The twelve scales as described by Shostrom (1966) are as follows:
 

  r* - Name of Scale

.71 - Time Ratio (TR) - Time Incompetence/Time Competence: the degree to which one is present-oriented (23 items).
.84 -  Support Ratio (SR) - Other/Inner: orientation toward others vs. self (127 items).
.74 -  Self-Actualizing Value (SAV): agreement with a primary value of self-actualizing people (26 items).
.85 - Existentiality (EX): ability to react situationally or existentially without rigid adherence to principles (32 items).
.69 - Feeling Reactivity (Fr): sensitivity to one's own needs and feelings (23 items). .
.81 - Spontaneity (S): freedom to react spontaneously or to be one's own self (18 items).
 

(page 145)
 
.75 - Self-Regard (Sr): affirmation of self because of worth or strength (16items).
.80 - Self-Acceptance (Sa): acceptance of self in spite of weaknesses or deficiencies (26items).
.66 - Nature of Man (Nc): affirmation of constructive view of the nature of man (16items).
.72 - Synergy (Sy): ability to be synergistic, to transcend dichotomies (9items).
.55 - Acceptance of Aggression (A): ability to accept one's natural aggressiveness, as opposed to defensiveness, denial, and repression of aggression (25items).
.75 - Capacity for Intimate Contact (C): ability to develop intimate relationships with others, unencumbered by expectations and obligations (28 items).
House (1972) states that the time ratio score is used to show that the self-actualized person's use of time is still imperfect. He is to a degree "time incompetent". House further states that a person does not always react in a given way, but the balance (ratio) of time incompetence to time competence scores reflects his predominant or characteristic mode of reacting. The self-actualized person would have a time ratio score of one:eight and he could be said to be time incompetent one hour for every eight hours he is time competent. This can be contrasted to an "average person's" time ratio of one:five or with a "non-self-actualizing person" with a time ratio of one:three.

The support ratio is defined in two more of the Personal Orientation Inventory scales. This ratio defines relative autonomy by assessing a balance between other-directedness and inner-directedness. Other-directed persons tend to be dependent. They may be anxious and fearful about others' approval or disapproval of themselves. They tend to be oversensitive to others' opinions and are compulsive conformists. They often are manipulating in order to please others and insure constant acceptance and approval.

The inner directed person tends to be self-willed. He is usually guided by internal motivations and is oblivious to external influences. He is originally influenced by his parents and other authority figures, but later the source of his direction appears as an inner core of principles and character traits.

A self-actualized person is thought to transcend and integrate both orientations. His personal dependence lies between the extreme other and inner-directed person. He is other-directed to the degree that he is sensitive to people's approval, good-will, and affection, but the source of his action appears to be inner-directed. He may be characterized as transcending inner-directedness by critical evaluation.



*Test-retest reliability (Klavetter and Mogar 1967:423)

(page 146)

This would be reflected in a support ratio of one:three. A ratio above one:three would indicate excessive self-supportiveness and autonomy.

The general interpretation of the scores of an individual on the Personal Orientation Inventory would be as follows. If most or all of the scores are above the mean (based on a normal adult sample) then the individual is probably comparatively competent in his development toward self-actualization and he is functioning relatively effectively. If, on the other hand, most of the scores fall below the mean, the person is probably experiencing difficulty in his personal effectiveness.

Shostrom (1966) has suggested that only the inner-directed and time-competence scales could be scored for a quick estimate of the examinees level of self-actualization. Many researchers have found the scales of the Personal Orientation Inventory to be extremely repetitive and they too agree that adequate estimates can be made using fewer scores. For example, in a study done by Knapp (1965), the Inner-Directed scale was used as the best single estimate of self-actualization. Damm (1969) reported a study designed to evaluate various methods of combining Personal Orientation Inventory scores and indices from several other instruments in order to determine the relative effectiveness of the Personal Orientation Inventory scales. The highest average correlation between the overall indices and the Personal Orientation Inventory scales was attained by using the raw scores of the inner-directed and time competence scales.

Some researchers have directed criticisms at the Personal Orientation Inventory. Maul (1970) felt that the Personal Orientation Inventory questions appeared to be poorly constructed with regard to presenting alternatives. He also believed that presenting only two choices limited the variability in subjects' responses and also did not allow for measuring of degrees of self-actualizing behavior. A further criticism relates to the norms of the instrument. The Personal Orientation Inventory scales are used for assessing students of high school age, but the norms are more accurate and extensive for college age students.

The Personal Orientation Inventory is scored twice. The first scoring is on two basic ratio scales of personal orientation: the inner-directed support scale (127 items) and the time competence scale (23) items. The second scoring is for ten subscales consisting of from nine to thirty-two items. Each scale measures a conceptually relevant aspect of self-actualization.

Several validity studies have been reported on the Personal Orientation Inventory. Shostrom (1964) found that on all scales except one - nature of man - the Personal Orientation Inventory significantly discriminated in the expected direction at the .05 level or better between clinically judged self- actualizers and non self-actualizers.

(page 147)

Ilardi and May (1968) used three tests: the Eysenck Personality Inventory, the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule, and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, to obtain reliability coefficients for similar sample groups at approximately the same time interval. They then administered the Personal Orientation Inventory to forty-six student nurses over a one year period and obtained coefficients ranging from .32 to .74. The authors concluded that the reliability of the Personal Orientation Inventory scores was well within the range of the comparable test scores.

Klavetter and Mogar (1967) did an examination of the reliability of the Personal Orientation Inventory scales. This was done with the test-retest reliability coefficient. The reliability scores ranged from .55 to .85 with an average scale reliability of .74. The reliability of the Personal Orientation Inventory could be more accurately measured in some other way as the alternatives might allow for sensitization effects. These two researchers administered the Personal Orientation Inventory two times during a one week interval to forty-eight college students in order to determine the stability, independence, and utility of the scales. Stability co-efficients and inter-correlations showed that three of the twelve scales accounted for almost all the variance. Those three scales were: inner-direction, time competence, and self-actualization value. Their conclusion was that performance on the Personal Orientation Inventory could be more accurately and economically expressed in terms of fewer scales.

A number of criticisms have been leveled at the nature of the Personal Orientation Inventory scales. Shostrom has not presented any statistical support for the existence of his twelve different scales. He also does not defend his decision to include most of the Personal Orientation Inventory items in more than one scale. In a factor analysis of the Personal Orientation Inventory done by Zimmerman (1969) only eight separate factors were identified and they were factors other than those labelled by Shostrom.

Maul (1971) stated that only some of the Personal Orientation Inventoryscales measure processes that Maslow and Rogers use to define self-actualization. Maul further offers his opinion that some of the Personal Orientation Inventory scales measure something other than self-actualizing processes, and that many of the processes of self-actualization are not examined in any way in thePersonal Orientation Inventory.

A factor analysis of the Personal Orientation Inventory was done by Tosi and Hoffman (1972). The results of this research, while partially supportive of the general construct of the Personal Orientation Inventory, raises some questions about the necessity of, or the relevance of having so many scales in one inventory. The authors suggest that a reduction of scales into three or four would facilitate interpretation of the Personal Orientation Inventory to examinees and also meet the condition of parsimony.

(page148)

In the Personal Orientation Inventory manual, (Shostrom 1966) there is little evidence of content validity. Furthermore, there are very few references to Maslow's theories of self-actualization. Shostrom also does not discuss the way in which his items were developed and his reasons for including each item. Maul (1,970) stated that he believed that various Personal Orientation Inventory items could derive the same answer from respondents but for a variety of reasons. If that is so, then those items can not be considered as valid measures of a specific trait for all persons in the same manner.

Hundreds of research studies have been done using the Personal Orientation Inventory to assess an individual's self-actualization. In this section a number of these studies will be reviewed and summarized. This will be done in order to point out the various areas in which the Personal Orientation Inventory has been used as a measurement tool for self-actualization.

Braun (1969) used the Personal Orientation Inventory to measure self-actualization in a study in which those scores were correlated with the "Seashore Measures of Musical Talents", the "Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal" and the "Barron-Welsh Art Scale". His hypothesis was that self-actualized persons would be more accurate perceptually, would have superior ability to reason and be logical, and would have greater preference for ambiguous and unstructured stimuli. His hypotheses were not supported. Braus and Asta (1968) did another study using the Personal Orientation Inventory scores as a variable. They examined the correlation between the test scores and the Gordon Personal Inventory which is a forced choice instrument yielding scores on four personality characteristics. This study yielded nine correlations significantly greater than zero and also showed that the Gordon Personal Inventory "Original Thinking" scale was most consistently related to the Personal Orientation Inventory. A third study reported on by Braun (1966) showed the Personal Orientation Inventory to be highly transparent. Those persons taking the test could very easily deduce the correct response. He recommended that it should be used with caution in situations where persons may be motivated to make a good impression.

Foulds has done a great deal of research utilizing the Personal Orientation Inventory. In 1969 Foulds found that the Personal Orientation Inventory had discriminating power with respect to known correlates of therapeutic effectiveness. He stated that the Personal Orientation Inventory might be useful as a screening device for predicting potential facilitating ability for counselors, teachers, social workers, and persons in "helping" professions. He also felt that the Personal Orientation Inventory could be employed as a device for assessing progress in personal development and in identifying those

(page 149)

who need special attention in order to increase their personal development. In another study, Foulds (1969) reported that the Personal Orientation Inventory was a reasonably valid and reliable measure of psychological well-being, personal adjustment, and of freedom from neurotic symptoms.

In his dissertation research Foulds (1968) found a significant positive relationship between self-actualization and the ability of counselors to communicate empathic understanding and facilitative genuineness in counseling. He found the most effective predictors of those therapeutic skills to be the following Personal Orientation Inventory scales:
 

Inner-Directed,
Self-actualizing values,
Existentiality,
Feeling reactivity,
Acceptance of Aggression, and
The Capacity for Intimate Contact.


In this study he found the Time Competence ratio to be the least effective of the Personal Orientation Inventory. Foulds stated that the Personal Orientation Inventory purports to measure the following personality traits:
 

1. feelings or attitudes of personal freedom or independence and internal direction based upon inner motivation;
2. belief in the values associated with self-actualization;
3. flexibility in the application of values;
4. awareness of and sensitivity to one's own needs and feelings;
5. ability to accept one's natural aggressiveness;
6. ability to establish intimate and meaningful relationships with other human beings;
7. ability to be open and disclosing, to express feeling in spontaneous action;
8. high self-regard;
9. high self-acceptance and
10. ability to transcend dichotomies.
Foulds (1970) assessed positive changes in mean scores on several scales of the Personal Orientation Inventory for groups of college students following sensitivity training and marathon group experiences. He found that the Personal Orientation Inventory assessed a number of personality traits. One of these already mentioned was the feelings and attitudes of freedom and independence of the respondents. This dimension was based on inner motivations rather than external expectations and influences. It was derived using the inner-directed scale. Moreover, the subjects displayed flexibility in the application of values, reduced compulsivity and dogmatism, increased ability to situationally or existentially react without blind or rigid adherence to principles. For these dimensions the existentiality scale was used. The subjects showed an awareness of a sensitivity to their own needs and feelings on the feeling reactivity scale. They displayed an ability to be open and disclosing of one's authentic being and to express feelings in spontaneous action on the spontaneity scale. They showed an acceptance of themselves in spite of weaknesses and deficiencies on the self-acceptance scale. The subjects had the ability to transcend dichotomies and to see opposites in life as meaningfully related. For this the synergy scale was employed. They displayed the ability to accept their own natural aggressiveness as demonstrated on the

(page 150)

acceptance of aggression scale. The college students in the sample showed an increase in their ability to develop intimate relationships with other human beings which were not encumbered by expectations and obligations as measured on the capacity for intimate contact scale.

In a study done by Foulds and Warehime (1971), deliberate attempts to "fake good" responses did not produce profiles characteristic of self- actualizing individuals. The "fake good" responses depressed scores in ten of twelve Personal Orientation Inventory scales. It appears that students' conceptions of the "well adjusted person" in our society are not entirely congruent with the model of the self-actualizing person followed in the development of the Personal Orientation Inventory. This study increased the authors' confidence in the results of the Personal Orientation Inventory when used with college students. This apparently conflicts with the Braun (1966) finding which referred to the transparency of the items. Thus, even if the items are transparent, it is difficult to "fake good" responses because of the lack of a clear conception as to what are the considered dimensions of self-actualization as measured by the Personal Orientation Inventory.

Foulds and Warehime (1971) also did a study using the Personal Orientation Inventory to measure personal values and self-percepts believed to be associated with self-actualization, personal adjustment and positive mental health. These terms are used synonymously by Shostrom. The Personal Orientation Inventory in this study showed scores related to behavioral criteria and have established discriminating and predictive powers of the Personal Orientation Inventory.

The Personal Orientation Inventory was found to be at wide variance with cultural definitions of ideal behavior. Shostrom maintained that he keyed the Personal Orientation Inventory in the direction of the self-actualized model of personality from Maslow. Warehime and Foulds (1973) found that examinees who were familiar with the characteristics of the self-actualized person could distort their Personal Orientation Inventory scores. The Personal Orientation Inventory was most useful with naive undergraduate college students.

Martin L. Rogers (1968) used the Personal Orientation Inventory to measure time-competence and inner-directedness. He believed that most theorists assume that the gratification of deficiency needs permits the individual to move toward satisfaction of self-actualization needs. Some studies have shown the importance of love and affection to stimulate self-actualizing tendencies in the child who will compensate for deficient love. Other studies indicate that a lukewarm emotional climate and relatively little intimacy in the home have a liberating effect on the child, thus permitting him to be more aware of his inner life and to experiment with and develop his potentialities.

(page 151)

Rogers found the degree and variety of common participation among members of the family was significantly greater in the families of the self- actualizing. Parents of the self-actualizing child were slightly more approving, more trusting and more lenient than were parents of the non self- actualizing child.

Winborn and Rowe (1972) attempted to replicate a study by Foulds (1967) and they found that Foulds' study could not be confirmed. They stated that the Personal Orientation Inventory will not predict facilitative conditions nor will the ratings on the scales predict self-actualization.

Knapp (1965) demonstrated that clinically nominated groups of self-actualized individuals are higher on each of the Personal Orientation Inventory scales than a similarly nominated group of non self-actualized individuals. Cooper (1971) found that the Personal Orientation Inventory scales showed an increase in self-actualization for some subjects after a "group" experience where self-acceptance and self-regard were the aims of the group.

Culturally different youth were studied by Green (1969) to determine their level of occupational aspiration. The Personal Orientation Inventory was used to measure the self-actualizing values of the culturally different youth. The youth were selected for this study using Maslow and Rogers definitions of self-actualizing. Four Personal Orientation Inventory scales were found to be significantly related to the level of occupational aspiration. These were: time competence, self-actualizing value, synergy, and capacity for intimate contact.

Two groups of university students were given the Personal Orientation Inventory. The group that had lower than average scores at the beginning had significantly higher scores on four scales after a sensitivity training experience. The four scales on which they scored higher were: inner-directed, spontaneity, synergy, and capacity for intimate contact. Culbert, Clark, and Bobele (1968) concluded that sensitivity training supports and possibly promotes self-actualizing values, concepts, and percepts. The initial level of self-actualization as measured by the Personal Orientation Inventory would be an important consideration since those students with above average Personal Orientation Inventory scores at the first scoring did not show any significant changes on their second examination and scoring. These authors also administered the Problem Expression Scale which purports to measure self-awareness verbal behavior. No significant relationships resulted between the Personal Orientation Inventory and the Problem Expression Scale.

Pellegreno (1968) used the Personal Orientation Inventory and the Semantic Association Test to assess semantic habits and self-actualization. These two tests appeared to be assessing different personal constructs of counselors. The Personal Orientation Inventory

(page 152)

normative mean score was too low for the group tested in this study so this test was not useful for this group.

Vance (1967) attempted to ascertain the relationship of a measure of self-actualization to a measure of mental health. She used the Personal Orientation Inventory and the Mental Health Analysis tests and administered them to 218 college freshmen. The author concluded that there seemed to be little relationship between the Personal Orientation Inventory's measurement of self-actualization and the individual's measure of mental health.

Smith (1968) examined the relationship between two personality characteristics of teachers (self-actualization and open-mindedness) and the teachers' perceptions of their use of teaching behaviors related to the development of student self-directed learning. Three instruments were administered: the Personal Orientation Inventory, Rokeach'sDogmatism Scale, and the Teacher Facilitation of Self-Direction Inventory. From the first test, Personal Orientation Inventory, the author found that a significant relationship exists between teacher's levels of self-actualization, degrees of dogmatism, and perception of the use of teaching behavior relevant to the development of student self-directed learning.

A study was done by Seeman, Nidich and Banta (1972) to determine if transcendental meditation influences measures of self-actualization derived from the Personal Orientation Inventory. They found that after a two month period of transcendental meditation the subjects' psychological state as measured by the Personal Orientation Inventory's inner-directed scale was augmented. The authors quoted Shostrom's imagery when they stated that the meditation permitted the subjects to rely more confidently on their "psychic gyroscopes". The subjects also scored higher on the spontaneity, acceptance of aggression, and capacity for intimate contact scales of the Personal Orientation Inventory.

The Personal Orientation Inventory has been used a great deal in counseling settings. McClain (1970) demonstrated the effect of the counselor's level of self-actualization on the counseling process and the effect of this variable on the theory of counseling. He reported a study in which NDEA Guidance Institute counselors were rated by counseling staff members for self-actualization according to criteria developed from Maslow's definition of self-actualization. Correlations between this composite self-actualization rating and the Personal Orientation Inventory scales ranged from .23 to .69. Nine of the twelve Personal Orientation Inventory scale scores reached statistical significance at the .01 level. The highest correlation .69 was with the inner-directed scale. The next highest scales on the Personal Orientation Inventory were self-acceptance and spontaneity.

LeMay (1969) used the Personal Orientation Inventory inner directed scale as the index of self-actualization in his investigation of

(page 153)

the relationship of self-actualization to college achievement. He correlated the grade point average and the inner directed scale score for 411 undergraduate college students. The correlations were not significant for either the high or low intellectual groups. However, significant correlations were obtained for the middle ability students. From this study, the author noted that academic success of bright and dull students may be determined more by intellectual factors than is the case with average ability students.

A study done in the Maryland Psychiatric Research Center by Savage, McCabe, Olsson, Unger, and Kurland (1969) used the Personal Orientation Inventory in evaluating the therapeutic effects of clinically induced psychedelic experiences. In a controlled study pre- and post-treatment Personal Orientation Inventory scores were compared for a group receiving group therapy a group receiving low-dose LSD and a group receiving high-dose LSD. According to the bulletin of the Educational and Industrial Testing Service (1971) all treatment methods had an impact on self-actualization as measured by the Personal Orientation Inventory with results favoring the two LSD groups, especially the high-dose LSD Therapy group.

In addition Knapp (1971) reported that the Personal Orientation Inventory had been used in studies obtaining data from hospitalized psychiatric patients as well as outpatients in the process of undergoing psychotherapeutic treatment. Knapp (1971) reviewed a number of studies done in counseling situations. Some of these are:
Leib and Snyder (1967) dealing with college underachievers;
Pearson's (1966) administration of the Personal Orientation Inventory in a freshman orientation course;
LeMay and Damm (1968) used the Personal Orientation Inventory to study value orientations of college underachievers;
and Weber (1970) used the Personal Orientation Inventory scores to examine trends between self-actualization and ability levels in ninth to twelfth grade girls.

Sensitivity training and marathon group performance have also had their effects measured by the Personal Orientation Inventory. Guinan and Foulds (1970) and Flanders (1969) noted significant results on eight of the twelve Personal Orientation Inventory scales after the pre- and post- training administrations of the Personal Orientation Inventory. A consistent pattern of increased self-actualization scores following group training programs has been noted by Trueblood and McHolland (1971), Aubry (1970), and Ruevini, Swift and Bell (1969). They all found significant differences in most instances between pre- and post-treatment administrations of the Personal Orientation Inventory.

The Personal Orientation Inventory has also been used to measure self-actualization in special interest groups in the general population. Some of these include studies of clergymen, teachers, nurses, adolescents, delinquents, felons, and alcoholics. Reference is made to these

(page 154)

studies by Knapp (1971) when he states that the Personal Orientation Inventory scales have social relevance to the concepts of self-actualization.



4.2.2 Other Measures of Self-Actualization

The Styles of Living Preference Scale was developed by Maul, 1970 for his doctoral dissertation. Maul was dissatisfied with the way The Personal Orientation Inventory measured self-actualization, and adapted aspects of it to form his new scale. He wanted to measure some of the characteristics specifically found in the writings of Maslow and Rogers while avoiding some of the measurement problems which he found in the Personal Orientation Inventory. The questions have two poles, one of which illustrates one of the characteristics observed by Maslow or Rogers. The other pole was to be the opposite end of the same scale. An effort was made to avoid providing clues to value judgments. Each subject had a scale ranging from one to nine with a mid-point at five to allow for a more accurate representation of his position. There are twenty-one questions on this revised instrument.

This instrument purports to measure more homogeneously a single set of related processes. The questions are based on Maslow's and Roger's recorded observations of self-actualizing people. Thus, this scale is believed to represent the processes characteristic of self-actualizing people.

Maul states that further development of the Revised Styles of Living Scale can be considered an alternate instrument for measuring the self-actualization process. The range of one to nine in possible selection of answers to the questions in this scale does allow for greater variation in degrees of self-actualization on the subjects' estimate of himself.



In a study reported by Fitts (1971) dealing with the Tennessee Self Concept Scale, self-concept and self-actualization were highly related to each other. He stated that self-concept is a central construct or handle which facilitates the researcher's ability to understand individuals and to predict their behavior. He further hypothesized that the self-concept serves as an index or criterion of self-actualization. Then he raised the issue of what facilitates self-actualization?

Man's basic motivation to maintain and enhance self-esteem is a prerequisite for achieving self-actualization. This has been noted by Maslow (1954) in his hierarchy of needs and by Coopersmith (1967) and Rogers (1951, 1961). Self-perceptions focus primarily upon those

(page155)

characteristics of the Identity Self and those actions of the Behavioral Self that contribute to positive self-concept by adding to self-esteem and freeing man to move toward greater self-actualization. Fitts contends that self-esteem emanates from the self whenever the Behavioral Self engages in self-actualizing behavior.

The Tennessee Self Concept Scale developed by Fitts (1965) has five dimensions: the physical self, moral-ethical self, personal self, family self, and social self. The assumption was made that self-definition is accomplished in two ways: affirmation or confirmation of what one is, and denial or rejection of what one is not. The two Conflict scores on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale measure inconsistencies between these opposing methods of self-definition. The defensive positive scale of the Tennessee Self Concept Scale measures the degree of self-awareness and self-disclosure that the person possesses.

Fitts (1971) found with the Conflict score on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale that the amount of conflict or dissonance varies widely from one subself to another. This involves the internal dimensions of the Identity Self and the Behavioral Self and the Judging Self. It appears that when an individual's perceptions of himself are unclear, conflicted, and dissonant, his behavior reflects these conflicts. The Tennessee Self Concept Scale produces a multi-variable score. The current developmental work on this instrument is attempting to summarize the myriad of information provided by the Tennessee Self Concept Scale and portray this information as a self-actualization score. This would further emphasize the author's theory that self-concept is an index of self-actualization.

The Tennessee Self Concept Scale is a verbal pencil and paper test. It is applicable to a broad range of people. It yields a large number of scores and it is well standardized. It is widely used in self-concept research. The Tennessee Self Concept Scale consists of 100 self-descriptive statements to which the subject responds on a five point response scale ranging from "completely true" to "completely false". Ten of the items came from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory L- Scale and constitute the Self-Criticism score, a measure of overt defensiveness.

The reliability estimate for the Tennessee Self Concept Scale was based on test-retest with sixty college students in a two week period. Those estimates ranged from .60 to .92. Four types of validity procedures were reported: content validity, discrimination between groups, correlation with other personality measures, and personality changes under particular conditions. Nunnelly (1968) reported a reliability coefficient of .91 and a standard error of measurement of 3.30 using a Kuder-Richardson split halves technique in measuring the internal consistency of the Tennessee Self Concept Scale.

(page156)

Factor analytic studies reported by Fitts (1971) pertained to construct validity or validity as reflected in the relationship of the Tennessee Self Concept Scale to other tests or scales attempting to measure the same constructs. Response bias or response set in the Tennessee Self Concept Scale had been a difficulty until the Self-Criticism scale was included. This score was a measure of deceitfulness. When added to the information provided by the other scores on this test, it will demonstrate the operation of the response set and its relative influence on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale.

The Tennessee Self Concept Scale has been used in a large number and variety of measurement studies dealing with self-concept. The Tennessee Self Concept Scale is a standardized, objective test and the results can be interpreted with considerable confidence as long as the standardized administrative procedures are followed. The Tennessee Self Concept Scale has been translated into Spanish, French, Korean, and Hebrew and it has been used in the translated form in numerous studies.

Several studies have been done using the Tennessee Self Concept Scale as the measure of self-concept, since Fitts (1971) has taken the position that identifiable patterns of self-perception (self-concepts) reflect exceptional degrees of self-actualization. Several of these studies will be mentioned in this paper. Combs and Snygg (1959) found identification with others to be a criterion of personal adequacy. Ball (1969) and George (1970) used the Tennessee Self Concept and found a clear relationship between self-concept and identification. The Ball and George studies showed that subjects who identified with their parents had healthier scores in several self-concept dimensions. These studies also showed individuals with better self-concepts were functioning more effectively when their parents had healthy self-concepts. These studies suggested that the ability to identify with others, sometimes considered a criterion of self-actualization, is reflected in the individual's self-concept.

Fitts (1971) continues to propose self-concept as an index of self-actualization. He is currently working on developing two new scores for the Tennessee Self Concept Scale. The first is the NIS (number of integrative signs) and its opposite the NDS (number of deviant signs). The second score is called the SA (Self-Actualization) which is a difference score between the NIS and the NDS. These scores should be easy to compute and should add to the variables of self-actualization that can be measured by the Tennessee Self Concept Scale.



There are a number of other measurement instruments used by researchers to evaluate self-actualization. Some of these were used to study the reliability of the Personal Orientation Inventory. The usual method of doing this was when two different tests would be

(page157)

administered to subjects considered clinically similar. The scores from the two scales would then be inter-correlated and examined to see if the contentions of each test were reliable. Shostrom and Knapp (1966) did this kind of study, comparing the Personal Orientation Inventory and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory scales, after administering those two instruments to outpatients who were beginning therapy and those in advanced stages of psychotherapy. They found that the relationships supported their contention that the Personal Orientation Inventory scales are tapping areas of emotional morale and psychological well-being.

Ilardi and May (1968) used three separate tests in their attempt to check the reliability of the Personal Orientation Inventory in measuring specific aspects of self-actualization. They used the Eysenck Personality Inventory, (Eysenck and Eysenck1963), the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (Edwards 1959), and the Minnesota Multiphasic PersonalityInventory. They compared the reliability coefficients by comparing them with findings for comparable groups and time intervals.

Braun and Asta (1968) used the Gordon Personal Inventory (Gordon 1956). They found high correlations between the personal relations scale on the Gordon Personal Inventory and the nature of man and self-actualization scale of the Personal Orientation Inventory.They felt that their findings were consistent with the theory of Maslow that creativeness is an indication of a self-actualizing individual.

Grossack, Armstrong, and Lussiev (1966) used the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule to test for self-actualization. They compared the findings with the Personal Orientation Inventory and found positive correlations between the Personal Orientation Inventory  support scales and the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule scales of autonomy and heterosexuality. They found negative correlations between the Personal Orientation Inventory and the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule scales of abasement and order. LeMay and Damm (1969) replicated and extended this same study. They found similar negative and positive correlations.

Knapp (1965) administered the Personal Orientation Inventory and the Eysenck Personality Inventory to a group of college students to examine the relationship between conceptually different theories of personality. The Eysenck Personality Inventory dimension of neuroticism-stability was negatively correlated with all the Personal Orientation Inventory scales. Negative correlations between measures of self-actualization and neuroticism support Maslow's contention that he was describing mentally healthy people.

Many other tests have also been utilized to measure self-actualization, but it would be impossible to mention them all in this paper.

However, the Center for the Study of Evaluation at the University of California, Los Angeles has recently published a book of test

(page158)

evaluations (1972) that is worth mentioning here. This book evaluates tests of the higher-order cognitive and affective and interpersonal skills. The tests were evaluated by measurement experts and educators in terms of six major criteria: measurement validity, examinee appropriateness, normed excellence, teaching feedback, usability, and retest potential.

The Eysenck Personality Inventory has the greatest retest potential and it has slightly more usability than the other three tests. It appears that the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule has the greatest degree of teaching feedback and the Tennessee Self Concept Scale seems to be very poor in that category. The Eysenck Personality Inventory appears to have the highest rating in the normed excellence category and the Tennessee Self Concept Scale isthe lowest there. In examinee appropriateness it seems that the Edwards Personal Preference Scale ranks the highest, though all four tests have very little differentiation here. As for validity there appears to be a great deal of fluctuation within each test for each scale.

This taxonomy of test evaluations could be exceedingly useful to help a researcher consider criteria other than validity in the selection of a measure of self-actualization.

The Center for the Study of Evaluation test evaluations demonstrate that the Personal Orientation Inventory is not in terms of measurement criteria technically superior to the other tests reviewed. Nonetheless, the research evidence presented in this paper would seem to indicate that the Personal Orientation Inventory of all the tests examined most nearly provides a valid measure of self-actualization. However, there is a need for further refinement of all the instruments currently being used.


4.3 THE NORTHRIDGE DEVELOPMENTAL SCALE*
(J. C. Gowan)

In the fall of 1971 the Guidance Master of Arts Committee (Department of Psychological Foundations, School of Education, California State University, Northridge) commissioned the writer to develop an instrument to measure and select candidates on other than an intellectual basis. At this time, he was finishing the manuscript for Development of the Creative Individual which stresses developmental process and self-actualization in adults. It appeared to him that one test might be designed to satisfy both areas.

Turning to the Personal Orientation Inventory as a likely point of departure, the author carefully read the Zimmerman factor-analysis of it, and decided to avoid time competence/incompetence, and



*The writer acknowledges the help of Beverly Curtis, Philip Ferguson, and Cora Grote in the production of research or other material incorporated into this section.

(page159)

aggression, and concentrate on the self-actualizing value scale. He averted the problems inherent in the true-false POI response, by using five alternatives for each item,

1) a self-actualizing alternative,
2) an authoritarian-aggressive distractor,
3) a depression distractor,
4) a psychoneurotic distractor, and
5) a "free" alternative - "none of the previous".
The set of minitasks of the upper sixth (creativity) stage were hypothesized (see Table IX) from the descriptions of Maslow and others about self-actualizing people, and the self-actualizing scale constructed from this model.

In February 1972, a sixty item "Self Knowledge Test" emerged that would eventually be refined into the Northridge Developmental Scale. The "Self Knowledge Test" was given extensively during the 1972 Spring semester. From an item analysis, 45 valid items were selected and arranged in the order of validity to become the first 45 items of the scale.

For the last 45 items, the writer utilized the insights of colleagues, and the cooperation of about 20 people who he felt were self-actualized persons and would give self-actualizing responses to his inquiries. Eventually, the last 45 self-actualizing items were decided on, interspersed with suitable distractors, and incorporated into the developmental scale.

The major scale determines the development of self-actualization. Two validity scales are build into the total scale, a lie scale and an infrequency of response ("none of the previous") scale. Every fifth item includes a "lie" distractor, similar to those used on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. The infrequency scale is more subtle. An occasional item contains no self-actualized response with four negative distractors forcing most high self-actualized persons occasionally to take the free alternative, "none of the previous." Selecting too many free alternatives, however, trips the "invalidity" scale.

Three additional minor scales are included to indicate types of psychopathology, authoritarianism, depression, and psychoneurotic. A "bad body concern" scale that had been a minor psychopathology scale in the original form was combined with "weirdo" items to make up the psychoneurotic scale.

This test was given extensively, and normed when N = 100 to give a profile of the test. A split-half reliability study showed an r = .80. There were indications that the self-actualization means advanced in the expected direction, from low to high: 1) random classes, 2) guidance candidates, 3) guidance students, and 4) practicum students.

(page 160)

TABLE IX:  DEVELOPMENTAL MINITASKS OF THE 6TH AND 7TH STAGES

(page 161)

During the Summer of 1972, the scale was item analysed again by the means of eight groups of twenty tests:

1. High Self-Actualization (over 60)
2. Male normals S/A
3. Female normals S/A
4. Low Self-Actualization (under 30)
5. High Infrequency of response
6. High Authoritarian-Aggressive
7. High Depression
8. High Neuropsychiatric


No analysis of lie items was undertaken. As a result of the item analysis some self-actualization, authoritarian-aggressive, and infrequency items were eliminated, and a significant number of depression and neuropsychiatric items were added. The test form remains unchanged, but new answer stencils were cut, and a new profile sheet developed. This analysis and other basic statistical work on the Northridge Developmental Scale was carried out by graduate student Cora Grote. It should be noted that reliability and validity studies on this test concern only the main self-actualizing (S/A) scale. This scale contains 80 items, and is the main measure of the test. The authoritarian, depression, and neurotic scales are regarded as check indicators only to give a clue from what direction any pathology is indicated.

In the spring of 1973 two graduate students completed independent projects on the Northridge Developmental Scale. Beverly Curtis, using 31 test-retest transcendental meditation cases at six weeks intervals found a reliability coefficient of .68, comparing with the .80 reliability coefficient found for 75 guidance candidates on a split-half analysis by the writer. In defense of the lower test-retest figure it can be argued that a significant change was occurring to these initial meditators during the six weeks period between pre-test and post-test (see below). Beverly Curtis was also able to show (see Table X) that the critical ratio between control graduate students and students applying for classification was 10.3, and that between the classification students and the students in practicum (ending their studies) was 5.1 (both highly significant). In each case there was a stepwise elevation of the means on the S/A scale.

Phil Ferguson, in the other graduate project, was able to demonstrate a similar significant step-wise advance of the means on the S/A scale for pre-meditators, post-meditators, and long-time meditators of Transcendental Meditation in which the meditation training period was six weeks, and the long-time meditators had been doing so an average of 43 months - the critical ratios in these cases being respectively 2.1 and 3.97. At the same time equalized control groups were showing no change on the S/A scale. Since other TM studies have shown an increase in mental health and a decrease in anxiety as a result of TM, this study is an indication of the validity of the NorthridgeDevelopmental Scalein measuring mental health in mature adults. (See Table X).

(page 162)

TABLE X:  BASIC STATISTICS AND CRITICAL RATIO FOR VARIOUS GROUPS OF STUDENTS

(page 163)

It is our contention that the Northridge Developmental Scale is a reliable, valid, and sensitive instrument for the measurement of progress toward self-actualization represented by the kind of mental health, and an open, receptive, caring attitude that would be shown by an effective non-directive counselor who was maturely adult. Table IX shows the minitasks of the sixth and seventh cognitive stages (in a first drafting) and we believe that the Northridge Developmental Scale measures the affective components facilitating the minitasks in the upper part of the sixth cognitive stage (see Table IX). At least this area is well represented in a content validity check of the self-actualizing scale answers on the test.*



In this chapter, we have made an initial investigation of a very difficult subject - measurement of psychedelia and self-actualization. The writer is not more satisfied with the chapter than is the reader; but it is a beginning which must be made if satisfactory measurement devices are to be developed in the future. The two major tasks of this chapter have been to critique the Personal Orientation Inventory and to introduce a new test: The Northridge Developmental Scale, which may be found useful in this area. What is now required is extensive testing of this and other measures.

There are few conclusions to summarize in a chapter such as this, but one does stand out. The fact that the Northridge Developmental Scale and other similar tests can be used both as measures of self-actualization, and as measures of therapeutic or guidance competence is very comforting. It suggests that progress in developmental process is progress not toward dissociation, but toward its opposite, that one becomes more mentally healthy, not less mentally healthy in growth and in helping others. It suggests finally that the process of psychotherapy is an induction of growth and an assisted development out of dysplasia into fuller function. But for a further in-depth study of dysplasia, we turn to the next chapter.


*The NORTHRIDGE DEVELOPMENTAL SCALE is given in full in Appendix A, including keys and norms. In order to encourage research and use, the copyright restrictions otherwise in force in this book are relaxed in respect to Appendix A as follows: Any researcher or institution may copy and use the test, as long as neither the test, answer sheets, or keys, or service of same is sold, rented, or leased. Any use of money in connection with the test requires permission of the copyright owner.