The Dimensionality Of The CPI Socialization Scale And An Empirically Derived Typology Among Delinquent And Nondelinquent Boys

Abstract

The 64 items of the CPI So scale were cluster analyzed in a sample of 318 males into 3 main dimensions: C-1-Stable home and school adjustment versus waywardness and dissatisfaction with family; C-2-Optimism and trust in others versus dysphoria, distrust and alienation; C-3-Observation of convention versus asocial role and attitude. The initial sample was comprised of 84 school disciplinary problems (DP), 75 institutionalized delinquents (D), and 169 nondelinquent (ND) boys. A cross-validational sample included 121 ND versus 121 D boys. Each of the 3 clusters differen- tiated significantly between D and ND subsamples. From an inverse cluster analysis of the initial 318 boys over the 3 cluster dimensions, 11 types were generated. Four of these were diagnostic of delinquency, 6 of nondelinquency, and 1 pertained primarily to the intermediate criterion group of school disciplinary problems.

A Behavioral Genetic Analysis of the Relationship Between the Socialization Scale and Self‐Reported Delinquency

“…Our principal components analysis of the So scale replicated the factor structure identified previously in the literature using earlier versions of the So scale (Butt, 1973;Stein et al, 1966). The 46-item So scale yielded three interpretable factors: The Optimism subscale (reflecting selfconcept and trust/distrust); the Family subscale (reflecting features of the home/family life); and the Control subscale (reflecting behavioral control and conduct problems).…”

“…The literature on the factor structure of the So scale consistently reveals three interpretable item clusters corresponding to a dimension of home/school adjustment and satisfaction, a dimension of trust/distrust and self-concept, and a dimension of conventionality of attitude and behavioral control. This factor structure has been demonstrated using the 54-item So scale (Stein, Gough, & Sarbin, 1966) and later versions (Butt, 1973;De Francesco & Taylor, 1986;Rosen, 1976). According to a recent review by Gough (1994), unpublished factor analytic work with the (newest) 46-item version generally yielded results similar to those found with earlier versions of the So scale.…”

“…The derived subscales were Optimism (a dimension of self-concept related to one's capacity for trust and optimism about the world), Family (a family/home environment dimension), and Control (a dimension of behavioral control). Scale names were adopted from previous research (Butt, 1973;Stein et al, 1966). Table 2 presents the means and standard deviations for the So scale, the So subscales, and the DBI for boys and girls.…”

A Factorial Facet Analysis of Gough's Socialization Scale

“…The So scale, which measures the degree to which an individual has internalized common social mores and values, is widely used as a diagnostic and research variable, including cross-cultural research (Gough, 1965(Gough, , 1966Gough & Sandhu, 1964;Gough et al, 1968) and yet few researchers have explored its internal structure. The two which have been carried out (Butt, 1972;Stein et al, 1966) have been directed towards the analysis and understanding of male and female delinquent groups, respectively. are listed in Table 1, were preselected on the basis of pilot results and theoretical speculation.…”

Personality and criminality: A review of the California Psychological Inventory

“…Combinations of CPI scales apparently can distinguish among certain kinds of offenders, when they are employed as rudimentary measures of "ego control" (Laufer, Johnson, & Hogan, 1981). Scales from this inventory also have been used to approximate levels of interpersonal maturity (Gottfredson & Ballard, 1963) and social maturity (Gough, 1966) within offender samples. Finally, portions of the CPI have proven to be moderately predictive of parole success (Gough, Wenk, & Rozynko, 1965), assault-proneness (Sarbin,Wenk,& Sherwood,196S), prisoners' grades in educational courses (Steuber, 1975), probationer/parolee employment stability (Gottfredson & Lipstein, 1975), and recidivism (Gendreau, Grant, Leipciger, & Collins, 1979).…”