A study was conducted to measure cross-situational consistency of the orthogonal dimensions of the two-factor model of social-emotional functioning. According to this model, large proportions of variance in social-emotional functioning can be accounted for by two orthogonal, highly replicable dimensions. The setting was Hawthorne-Cedar Knolls, a long-term institution for emotionally disturbed and delinquent youths; the subjects were 206 residents of varied ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds. Cross-situational correlations between school and cottage settings were found to be .52 for Factor II (Cooperation-Compliance versus Anger-Defiance) and .42 for Factor I (Interest-Participation versus Apathy-Withdrawal). The results confirm the consistency and discriminant validity hypotheses--specifically, correlations between the corresponding factors of different instruments measuring behavior in different settings were large, whereas correlations between noncorresponding factors were very low. The value of using broad, higher order factors in personality research on the trait versus situation issue is discussed.

Students in a class, but not those in a practicum, became more accepting of behavior modification. Attitudes toward social learning were unchanged.

No abstract

Two instruments derived from the field of social ecology—the Ward Atmosphere Scale (WAS) and the Community Oriented Programs Environment Scale (COPES)—were employed in the present project as “self-evaluation” tools. Assessing inpatient and day treatment “social climates,” the WAS and COPES are presented in this paper as linking process and outcome measures in mental health program evaluation. The project focused on patient-staff discrepancies in environmental perceptions as guiding and catalyzing programmatic changes. That these brief scales do not require highly trained evaluators makes them highly suited for incorporation into routine program evaluation.

A study was conducted to test the usefulness of the two-factor model in assessing social environments. Subjects were residents and staff at a residential treatment center for emotionally disturbed and/or delinquent boys and girls. Rating instruments consisted of (a) two parallel versions of Moos' Community-Oriented Programs Enivronment Scale (COPES), each worded so as to be appropriate to the setting being measured, and (b) global ratings of satisfaction with the environment. Principal component factor analyses, carried out separately on the youths' COPES-School and the youths' COPES-Cottage, yielded two orthogonal but similar factors in each environment. In a comparison with Moos' three-dimensional formulation of the social milieu, the two factors strongly resembled two of Moos' dimensions but were more independent, had greater validity, and discriminated between the two environments at a higher level of significance. The instruments derived from the factor analyses provide a simple procedure for assessing a variety of treatment programs and populations.