PROBLEM Fitts@) has operationalized the idea of self-concept by his development of the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale (TSCS). It is assumed to be a multidimensional description of the self that includes self-perception, self-acceptance, behavior, and several measures of external reference: physical, moral, ethical, personal, family and social self. An additional 10 items taken from the L-Scale of the MMPI are purported to index self-criticism. Although ad hoc theorizing about the dimensions of self-concept is a legitimate and useful procedure for item selection, any procedure for the identification and measurement of attitudinal dimensions must, in the final analysis, be put to an empirical test. Factor analysis appears to be the most appropriate method for empirical identification of attitudinal dimensions.This study reports a factor analysis of the TSCS based upon the responses of lower-class urban psychiatric patients. Although the TSCS assumes invariant dimensions of self-concept across populations, we recognize that the factor structure may vary with disparate samples. METHOD Subjects and ProcedureThe TSCS, which consists of 100 self-descriptive statements, was administered individually on admission to 135 female and 117 male psychiatric patients, of whom 219 were inpatients and the remaining 33 were outpatients, at New York Medical College-Metropolitan Hospital Center. The ethnic distribution was : 117 White, 79 Negro, 54 Puerto Rican, and 2 other. A comparable Spanish form was administered to 9 non-English-speaking 8s. The mean age of the subjects was 34.4 years, SD 13.2. Method of AnalysisTwenty principal component factors were extracted from the item correlation matrix with unities in the diagonals. Following the suggested break in latent roots, 6 factors were rotated by means of a Varimax solution and accounted for 35.6% of the variance. Assignment to factors proceeded on the basis of the highest loading (provided it exceeded .30) and low loadings on the other factors. Some few exceptions were made to this general 'rule after the manner of what Cattell calls "watch making". The items assigned to each factor and their loadings are presented in Table 1.' RESULTSFactor 1, which is composed of 27 items and accounts for 14.5% of the variance, clearly represents positive self-evaluation. It contains expressions of satisfaction with one's self across wide areas of functioning, including social, moral, religious and interpersonal behavior. Also included in this factor are reports of competence and responsibility in various areas of living. It might be expected that scores on this factor would be significantly related to the personality construct which is commonly called "ego strength", i.e., freedom from symptoms with fairly adequate defenses, socially appropriate behavior, adaptability under stress, and the capacity for forming close interpersonal relationships.

No abstract

Our findings support the view that there are characteristics in child-rearing practices which are related to class status, and that these differences become more pronounced with the extremes of class. In this sample of low-class mothers interviewed when tile child was 2½ years of age, we found some maternal rejection of the child, coldness, and physical punishment. There was lack of restrictiveness in regard to toilet training and training for manners. At 5 years there was much restrictiveness in regard to aggression against parents, and against sex play. There was great concern for education for the child, and a strong feeling that the child should fight back if molested. Some of these attitudes, we believe, came out of the mother's rejection of her own social situation and segregation into a lower caste. The maternal attitudes and child-rearing practices which we have described and which were related to class, undoubtedly helped mold the developing child. If we can speculate, we would say that certain things in his environment were helpful to the child. He was permitted to grow at his own speed. If he was unable to perform, he did not meet with criticism and pressure to do better. He learned how to work. He was encouraged to fight for his rights. On the other hand, there was confusion as to who had authority over him and what behavior was acceptable, since many persons with different expectations had a parental role. He was accustomed to extremes of adult authority, being very controlled at times, and not at all controlled in others. He early became used to corporal punishment. He was treated with relative coldness and he was not praised for achievement. The stimuli which are supplied by books, toys, and cultural experiences were often missing. There was little opportunity for a boy to identify with a male figure. There was lack of interest in the personality characteristics which differentiate one individual from the other and which contribute to a strong feeling of self-identification. Other elements in the environment were preparing the child to take over a lower class role. The inadequate incomes, crowded homes, lack of consistent familial ties, the mother's depression and helplessness in her own situation, were as important as her child-rearing practices in influencing the child's development and preparing him for an adult role. It was for us a sobering experience to watch a large group of newborn infants, plastic human beings of unknown potential, and to observe over a 5-year period their social preparation to enter the class of the least-skilled, least-educated, and most-rejected in our society.

No abstract

No abstract