A STUDY OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRIGUNA AND CATTELLIAN FACTORS OF PERSONALITY

A STUDY OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRIGUNA AND CATTELLIAN FACTORS

OF PERSONALITY

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO

KURUKSHETRA UNIVERSITY, KURUKSHETRA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT

OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY IN

PSYCHOLOGY

Supervised By: Submitted by: Dr. Umed Singh Lakhwinder Singh Reader Department of Psychology,

Kurukshetra University Kurukshetra

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY KURUKSHETRA UNIVERSITY

KURUKSHETRA-136119 DECEMBER-2008

A study of relationship between Triguna and Cattellian factors of Personality:Lakhwinder Singh; M.Phil. Dissertation-2008; Department of Psychology, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, Haryana, India.

2


3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all I must honour all great Yogis and Indian Philosophers who

have developed, preserved and passed on this knowledge throughout the

millennia. It is my great privilege to express my sincere indebtedness and

gratitude to my respected, esteemed and learned Supervisor Dr. Umed Singh,

Reader, Department of Psychology, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, for

his prudent planning, invaluable help, affectionate guidance and kindly

interest which he has always taken in my work.

My sincere thanks to Dr. J.S. Bidhlan, Professor and Chairperson,

Department of Psychology, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra for his

encouragement, motivation and providing necessary infrastructure research

facilities. With the same sense of gratification, I am highly thankful to Dr.

C.R. Darolia, Professor, Dr. Hardeep Joshi, Lecturer, Dr. Rohatas, Lecturer &

Dr. Ranjna, Lecturer, Department of Psychology Kurukshetra University,

Kurukshetra.

I owe special thanks to Dr. David B. Wolf (Florida) and Prof. George V.

Methew (University of Kerala) for providing me relevant material for the

research work. I highly appreciate the suggestion received from Prof. Usha

Ram (University of Pune), Prof. Kiran Kumar (Mysore University), and Prof.

Renu Sharma (M.S. University, Baroda). I highly appreciate the help of Prof.

Navratan Sharma, Deepti Hooda (Lecturer), & Mandeep Sharma (Research

Scholar) of Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak.

I am in the dearth of words to express my love and deep sense of

gratitude towards my Parents and family members, without those help and

constant inspiration, it would have not be possible for me to accomplish this

job. I am thankful to especially my sister Jasvir Kaur, who has helped me

throughout this work.


4

In the preparation of this work, I sought and received invaluable

assistance from number of friends, Desh Raj, Shafi, Ishu, Kavita, Veenu,

Baljeet, Sukhjinder, Mandeep, Satya, Rajesh, Amit, Lalit, Deepak Deep and

Parmod. I highly appreciate the suggestions received from Rajinder Kaur. She

clarified my thinking upon a number of points and made numerous

suggestions, which improved the manuscript.

I am greatful to Librarians and other staff of the library of Kurukshetra

University, Kurukshetra, Punjab University, Chandigarh, University of Delhi,

Delhi and MDU, Rohtak, for allowing me to access their holdings.

I wish to record my thanks to non-teaching staff members of our

Department of Psychology. In the end, I must express my gratitude to all

those person who have directly or indirectly helped me in brining the work to

its present final form.

Last, but not least I would like to show my gratitude to Tarun, for

typing the manuscript of my dissertation with such a great efficiency and also

thanks to Parveen.

Lakhwinder Singh


5

CONTENTS

Sr. No. Title Page No.

List of Tables 6

List of Abbreviations 7

List of Sanskrit Words 8-9

1. Chapter-I Introduction 10-28

2. Chapter-II Review of Related Literature 29-44

3. Chapter-III Method 45-52

4. Chapter-IV Results and Discussion 53-70

References 71-74


6

LIST OF TABLES

Table

No.

Description Page No.

1. Definitions and Manifestations of Triguna

in human nature as conceptualized by

human researchers

19

2. 16 Personality Factors 50

3. Second Order Factors 51

4. Variables Used in the Study 54

5. Frequency Distribution of Scores of Vedic

Personality Inventory

54

6. Frequency Distribution of Scores of 16 PF 55

7. Intercorrelation Matrix 56

8. Latent Roots for Principal Component

Analysis

58

9. Unrotated Factor Matrix 59

10. Rotate Factor Matrix 60


7

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BG : Srimad Bhagavad-Gita

K : Kārika

MB-AP : Aswamedha Parva of Mahabharata

SBP : Srimad Bhagavata Purana

SK : Sāmkhya Kārika


8


9


10

CHAPTER-I

INTRODUCTION

The term Indian Psychology refers to the psychologically relevant

material in ancient Indian thought. Usually this term does not cover modern

developments in psychology. Indian Psychology is embedded in Indian

Philosophy, and therefore, it stands on the strong foundations of deep and

everlasting fundamental truths regarding the nature of reality, the ultimate

goal of human endeavour, and such problems that have been baffling human

mind. No aspect of human life and the universe has been left unexamined

and unexplained by Indian Philosophers, which leads to a totality of vision in

both philosophical and psychological fields. Philosophy in India has been

named “Darśana”, which means, ‘vision’, ‘insight’, ‘intuition’ and thus the

word itself signifies that Indian philosophers pursued the quest of having a

total vision of life and universe based on personal experience, and not only on

a limited plane of modern methodology (Safaya, 1975).

The schools of Indian Philosophy are divided into two broad classes,

namely, orthodox (āstika) and heterodox (nāstika). To the first group, belong

the six chief philosophical systems (popularly known as sad-Darśana),

namely, Mimamsa, Vedanta, Sāmkhya, Yoga, Nyaya, and Vaisesika. These

are regarded as orthodox (āstika), not because they believe in God, but

because they accept the authority of the Vedas. The Mimamsa and the

Sāmkhya do not believe in God as the creator of the world, yet they are called

orthodox (āstika), because they believe in the authoritativeness of the Vedas.

Under the other class of heterodox system, the chief three are the schools of

the materialists like the Carvaks, the Bauddhas, and the Jainas. They are

called heterodox (nāstika) because they do not believe in the authority of the

Vedas. (Chatterjeet, & Datta, 1984).

With the increasing realization that many of the Western psychological

concepts and methods lack relevance to different cultural systems, the need

for developing indigenous psychologies was recognized all over the world. In

recent times, more and more researchers have taken active interest in

indigenizing and developing indigenous psychology. The structure, nature,

and evolution of human personality are elaborated in these sources with

special reference to the concept ‘Triguna’. The ‘Triguna’ concept of the Indian

tradition has attracted the attention of psychologists in India and they have

involved in the development of indigenous theories and models of human

behaviour, specifically personality (Kumar, 2007). The term ‘Trigunas’ is


11

composed to two words: Tri & Gunas. Tri means three and Gunas means

qualities, thus Trigunas determines the three qualities, a state of mind and

attitudes which determines people’s nature, belief and perception.

The concept of ‘Guna’ is mentioned in Sāmkhya system. The Sāmkhya

system is the work of great sage of the name of Kapila. The Sāmkhya must be

a very old system of thought. Its antiquity appears from the fact that the

Sāmkhya tendency of thought pervades all the literature of ancient India

including the Srutis, Smritis, and Puranas. (Chatterjee & Datta, 1984).

Sāmkhya is a dualistic philosophy, which postulates two interdependent, and

simultaneously existing realities— Purusha (consciousness) and Prakriti

(nature or matter).

The Purusha is an intelligent principle of which consciousness is not

only an attribute but the very essence. It is the self which is quite distinct

from the body, the senses and the mind (Manas). It is beyond the whole world

of objects, and is the eternal consciousness which witnesses the changes and

activities going on in the world, but does not itself act and change in any way.

Physical things like chairs, beds, etc. exist for the enjoyment of beings other

than themselves. Therefore, there must be the Purusha or the self which is

distinct from Prakriti or primary matter but is the enjoyer (Bhokta,) of the

products of Prakriti. There are many different selves related to different

bodies, for when some men are happy, others are unhappy, some die but

others live.

Prakrti and Triguna

Prakriti is the ultimate cause of the world of objects. All objects of the

world including our body and mind, the senses and the intellect, are limited

and dependent things produced by the combination of certain elements. So it

is assumed that the world is a series of effects and that it must have a cause.

This is the Prakriti of Sāmkhya system. It is the first cause of all things and,

therefore, has itself no cause (Chatterjee & Datta, 1984).

Prakriti is constituted by the three Gunas of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas.

Now the question is: what are these Gunas? By the word Guna here; we

should not understand what it is commonly taken to mean viz. a “quality’ it

means here rather a “component factor” or a “constituent” of Prakriti.

(Hiriyanna, 1995) In another words, Guna here means a constituent element

or component and not an attribute or quality.

According to Sāmkhya philosophy Guna constitutes Prakriti and Prakriti

(primal nature) is compared to a dancer (nartaki) in Sāmkhya Karikii (SK 59)

who exhibits herself to purusha (Spirit) (Shastri, 1930). In a similar way


12

Sāmkhya Philosophy considers Guna (Prakriti] as "subordinate" to purusha

and serve a purpose of something other than itself(SK, 17) (Shastri, 1930).

Amara Kosha also uses the term guna in the sense of "subordinate". Further,

guna has the meaning of thread and rope, in the sense of their function "to

bind", as derived from the root gun. In Bhagavd-Gita it is stated that triguna

bind (nibadhnati) the "owner of the body" or the "one who inheres in the body"

(dehi) (BG, 14,5). How this happens is described further in BG, 14,6-8. The

term guna is also used to refer to "quality" of a substance. But it is made

clear in the commentary of Shankaracharya on BG-14-5 that guna is Prakriti

itself and not the attribute of something else.

Considering these possibilities, it can be stated that the term guna

though has several meanings, refers to Prakriti itself and its usage in

Sāmkhya and Bhagavad Gita should form the basis for psychologists. From

operational point of view it is sattva, rajas and tamas that are important not

the term guna per se. It is just a super ordinate concept and when we have to

transact to understand human behaviour, it is the latter three concepts that

are more important for us. Hence, in psychological literature it may be more

appropriate to use triguna rather than just guna to avoid confusion in

meanings. The words “Triguna”, "Trigunas", and “three Gunas” are

interchangeably used in this study.

The Gunas are not perceived by us. They are inferred from the objects

of the world which are their effects. Since there is an essential identity

(tadatmya) between the effect and its cause, we know the nature of the Gunas

from the nature of their products. All objects of the world, from the intellect

down to the ordinary objects of perception (e.g. tables, pots, etc.) are found to

possess three characters capable of producing pleasure, pain, and

indifference respectively. The same things are pleasurable to some person,

painful to another, and a neutral to a third.

Now, as the cause must contain what is in the effect, it can be infered

that the ultimate cause of things must have been constituted also by the

three elements of pleasure, pain, and indifference. The Sāmkhya calls these

three as Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas respectively. These are constitutive of both

Prakriti, the ultimate substance, and the ordinary objects of the world.

On an individual levels Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas also correspond to

various psycho-physiological states and personality types. Sattva corresponds

to clarity of thought and purity of mind; Rajas denotes passionate, excitable,

and aggressive states of mind; and Tamas denotes indifference, confusion,

stability, and depression. (Richard King, 1999 p.178).


13

Moreover, just as external objects affect the mind of the individual one

brings one’s own predispositions and disturbed state of mind to the objects

that one perceives. In his commentary on the text Gaudapada gives the

example of a beautiful and virtuous woman. Such a woman exhibits the

qualities of Sattva and is said to be a delighted for all. However, she may also

be a source of pain for her fellow wives and source of delusion for those

consumed by passion. Similarly, a king exhibits Rājasic qualities but will

produce pleasure and contentment (Sāttvic qualities) in his subjects; and pain

and delusion (Tāmasic qualities) in the wicked (Gaudpada Bhasya on Karika

12). These examples reflect not only the ways in which each of the Gunas

produce each other but also the way in which our perception of the world and

of other beings is conditioned by our own psycho-physiological make up.

Chatterjee and Datta (1939) defines three Gunas as follows:

Sattva is that element of Prakriti which is of the nature of pleasure, and

is buoyant or light (laghu), and bright or illuminating (prakasaka). The

manifestation of objects in consciousness, the tendency towards conscious

manifestation in the senses, the mind and the intellect, the luminosity of

light, and the power of reflection in mirror or the crystal are all due to the

operation of the element of Sattva in the constitution of things. Similarly, all

sorts of lightness in the sense of upward motion like the blazing up of fire, the

upward course of vapour and the winding motion of air, are induced in things

by the element of Sattva. So also pleasure in its various forms, such as

satisfaction, joy, happiness, bliss, contentment, etc. is produced by things in

our minds through the operation of the power of Sattva inheriting in them

both.

Rajas is the principle of activity in things. It always moves and makes

other things move. That is, it is both mobile and stimulating. It is on account

of Rajas that fire spreads, the wind blows, the senses follow their objects, and

the mind becomes restless. On the affective side of our life, Rajas is the cause

of all painful experiences and is itself of the nature of pain. It helps the

elements of Sattva and Tamas, which are inactive and motionless in

themselves, to perform their functions.

Tamas is the principle of passivity and negativity in things. It is

opposed to Sattva in being heavy (guru) and in obstructing the manifestation

of objects. It also resists the principle of Rajas or activity in so far as it

restrains the motion of things. In counteracts, the power of manifestation in

the mind, the intellect and other things, and thereby produces ignorance and

darkness, and leads to confusion and bewilderment (moha). By obstructing

the principle of activity in us. it induces sleep, drowsiness, and laziness. It


14

also produces the state of apathy or indifference (visada). Hence, it is that

Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas which have been compared respectively to

whiteness, redness, and darkness.

With regard to the relation among the three Gunas constituting the

world, it is believed that it is one of constant conflict as well as co-operation.

They always go together and can never be separated from one another. Nor

can any one of them produce anything without the help and support of the

other two. Just as the oil, the wick and the flame which are relatively opposed

to one another, co-operate to produce the light of a lamp, so the Gunas co-

operate to produce the objects of the world, although they possess different

and opposed qualities. So, all the three Gunas are present in everything of the

world, great or small, fine or gross. But each of them tries to suppress and

dominate the others. The nature of things is determined by the predominant

Guna, while the others are there in a subordinate position. We cannot point

to anything of the world which does not contain within it all the three

elements, of course, in different proportions. The classification of objects into

good, bad, and indifferent; or into pure, impure, and neutral; or into

intelligent, active, and indolent has reference to the preponderance of Sattva,

Rajas, and Tamas respectively.

The three Gunas reciprocally involve one another and form a unity in

trinity. They are so interdependent that they can never be separated from

one another. These three not only co-exist but also cohere. They are in

inseparable complex. In some, at one time, one may be dominant and the

other two recessive. There is no human nature which is not a complex of

these three Gunas. Indian theory of human personality is based on the

concept of the three Gunas. The entire system of animate and inanimate

nature is woven out of these three strands—Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. These

three are present in diverse measure in all things. Thus, the Triguna Theory

functions as a classification scheme for psychological and physiological types.

Triguna In Psychology

Ayurveda has used Prakriti to denote personality (Dwivedi, 2002).

Prakriti comes from two Sanskrit roots, "Pra" means the beginning,

commencement, and source of origin; and "Kruthi" means to perform or to

form. It means nature or natural form or built and constitution of the human

body. Therefore, it means 'the initial creation’ or alternatively this interesting

word can also mean "to come forth into creation". It represents how one

initially comes into life form and further deviations take place (Singh, 2001).

The Prakriti remains unchanged during the course of one's life time and is

genetically determined.


15

The word personality or its Hindi equivalent ‘Vyaktitva’ are alien to

Indian tradition and the term is used to denote something which has

occurred or which has emerged, Vyakta. In the entire Sanskrit literature, one

text by the name, "Vyaktitva Pariksa" is found, which attempts a phonological

description of personality. Persona or the sheath approach does not clearly

explain the living entity with its cognitive, affective, and conative faculties. As

such, for describing personality, the Indian tradition used word like Jiva,

Pursa, Atman and Pudgala, Ksetryna, and it reveals that the Indian tradition

follows a pragmatic and reality-oriented approach. Living being is the Jiva

(Dwivedi, 2002). Similarly, that which lives in Puri or body is Purusha.

Sankhya has distinguished two basic but different sets of realities (Paranjpe,

1987). These two factors are consciousness (Purusha) and the unconscious

(Prakriti). There are twenty-four manifested form of Prakriti: Budhi (intellect),

Ahankar (ego), Manas (mind), Jnanendriyas (the five senses of knowledge),

Karmandriyas (the five senses of action), tanmatras (the five subtle matters),

and Bhutas (the five gross matters) (Daftuar & Sharma, 1997). The twenty

four evolutes or manifestations, of which the cosmos is constituted and which

form the psychophysical being/personality are called as Prakriti, matter

energy.

In Ayurvedic system of medicine, it is considered that a living system is

made of Panch-mahabuta, in the form of Pitta-Vatta-Kapha at the physical

level and Sattva-Rajas-Tamas at the mental level. This covers the

psychosomatic constitutions and is commonly known as the Tridoshas theory

(Tripathi, 2000). In fact, if one goes through the list of qualities of various

Prakritis, one finds a mixture of both physical and mental qualities. There is

no watertight classification at a purely mental or purely physical level.

According to Vedic concepts personality is composed of three elements

(Gunas). From a psychological standpoint, these three Gunas might be

considered as the three fundamental components of the human mind

(Kulkarni, 1972) or as the three aspects of human temperament and

personality (Boss, 1966; Parameswaran, 1969; Dwivedi 2002; Jain & Sharma,

2006).

Apart from the Purusha, which forms the inner core of the personality,

everything in the universe, physical and psychological, including the mind,

are regarded as originated from Prakriti, which is constituted of three Gunas

viz., Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas. These Gunas act together and never exist in

isolation. They interact and compete with each other resulting in the

preponderance of one over the others. The degree of predominance of our

Guna determines the individual’s personality type. Based on the above


16

understanding personalities are categorized into three viz., Sāttvic, Rājasic

and Tāmasic type (Rao, 1966; Murthy, & Kumar, 2007). The theoretical

expositions on Triguna and their manifestations in human nature have

attracted the attention of Indian psychologists. The concept has been

examined theoretically and empirically by different investigators. The

descriptions of Sāttvic, Rājasic, and Tāmasic personality types are given

below:-

Sāttvic Personality

In the Sāttvic personality, Sattva predominates and other two are not

absent but are recessive. Goodness prevails over all other qualities. In him,

intelligence dominates, passion and goodness shine forth in all its native

splendour. (Rao). The Sattva Guna stands for purity, stainlessness and

healthy habits. This type of people are free from attachment, are non-

egoistic, endowed with firmness, and are unaffected by failures and

successes. They remain same (unaffected) in pleasure and pain, forgiving,

ever-content, and have self-control (Daftuar, & Anjuli, 1997). According

Mathew (2008) Sattva (stability) is characterized by high self-awareness,

sensitivity, freedom, flexibility, and control. Sattva is stress tolerance and

freedom from fear and maladjustment tendencies. People having a high

degree of Sattva (stability) are present-centered, egoless, and non-

conventional. Person having a high degree of Sattva (stability) can be fast or

slow, can work or rest as they choose or as the situation demands. They can

be very sociable or be alone with equal ease. They can assert if they want to.

They show meta-motivation and are capable of detached action. They are

wise, mature, and intuitive. They are creative, self-actualizing, holistic,

balanced, even-tempered, and dispassionate. They are capable of the deepest

(at the same time detached) emotion and their predominant emotion is

altruistic love or compassion. They are relaxed, peaceful, self-sufficient,

democratic, fair, unselfish, tolerant, altruistic, transcending, and broad

minded. They have a natural moral sense based on mature love. Their

autonomy operates within their awareness of inherent morality. They believe

in the value of self-effort, which results from will, which in turn is regarded as

part of the pre-determined chain of events in nature. They are impunitive.

The pure Sāttvic person has a very well integrated personality. He may

be able to function differently in different situations, but with full control,

awareness, and memory. Sāttvic person is more in consciousness. He

cultivates awareness of himself, of others, of his surroundings and

environment. Sattva is referred to as 'potential consciousness'. Since he

knows who he is, he doesn't confuse himself with role. He plays each role


17

with detachment, never forgetting that he is really the self. Sāttvic person

enjoys food that is mild, tasty, and nourishing, food that promotes health,

strength, cheerfulness, and longevity.

Rājasic Personality

The Rājasic temper is ever active, restless, and passionate. He has his

desires centered in action, emotions of joy and grief. He is high-strung and

sentimental. He has an insatiable craving for continuous vigorous action.

Power is the dominant motive of his life. (Rao). Rājasic type is dominated by

such characteristic as activity and action. People who are passionate,

attached to fruits of actions, greedy, inspired, ambitious, egoistic, aggressive,

luxurious, selfish, less satisfied, etc., fall under this category. They have urge

to rule and greed for wielding power. (Daftuar, & Anjuli, 1997).

Rajas dominant person is always 'on the go' with plenty of energy but

with no direction. As his assets are large, so are his expenditures. He has

high vitality, show him match and he blazes. Rājasic person has mainly two

ways of responding: anger and greed. His desires are compulsive but will is

weak, so he becomes victim of his own desires. Everything in its state is

influenced by selfish attachment, 'I’, ‘me’, ‘mine’ etc. This selfish attachment

is felt with people too. It presents love and spoils relationships by ignoring

other person's needs and welfare. Rājasic person's desire for sense

gratification and sex is the strongest of all the senses. (Rastogi, 2005).

According to Chaturvedi (1991) Rājasic craves to get the best and all for

himself. He may adopt even illegal means to obtain his sense gratification.

Rājasic people like that is salty or bitter, hot, sour or spicy that promotes

pain, discomfort, and disease.

In the words of Mathew (2008) Rajas (activation) is characterized by

restless overactivity, uncontrolled energy, high drive, and inability to remain

alone or silent. Rajas (activation) is extraverted instability or proneness to

develop extraverted types of maladjustment under stress. Persons having

high Rajas are compulsive mixers, impatient, hasty, risk-taking, rash,

adventurous, analytical, efficient in planning practical things for the future,

competitive, go-getting, assertive, aggressive, maniacal, proud, egoistic,

rebellious, dominant, individualistic, greedy, possessive, dogmatic, etc. They

show considerable sportsman spirit. They recognize, admire, and encourage

excellence in others, and allow others to keep the benefits and earning of

rightful effort. Their predominant emotions are anger and passionate,

possessive love. They have a high degree of practical intelligence and

mechanical ability. They show organizational abilities and strong group

identifications. They show inability to be restful. They value power, are


18

autocratic, and need rigid external moral control, have moral conflicts, and so

on. They are ready to die to defend their honor or the group. They believe in

self-effort and freedom of the will (internal locus of control). To sum up in the

words of Rangacharya (1989), Rajas impels a person to be active, energetic,

aggressive and acquisitive. Both pleasure principle and achievement

syndrome are strong in them (Ranchan, 1987).

Tāmasic Personality

The Tāmasic temper is the worst of Gunas. It is dominant in many.

They are unintegrated, gross, inert, crafty, dilatory, sullen and deeply

revengeful. Tāmasic type personality is characterized by the principle of

inactivity, darkness, and delusions. The persons who are lazy, unsteady,

sadistic, crude, instinctive, devoid of religion, morality and benevolence can

be called Tamas. He is full of unconscious complexes and are of destructive

and harmful nature. (Daftuar, & Anjuli,1997). According to Mathew (2008)

Tamas (Inertia) is introverted instability or proneness to develop introverted

type of maladjustment under stress. Tamas (inertia) is characterized by

lethargy, laziness, fear, inhibition, anxiety, shallowness of emotions, low

initiative, low self-confidence, low self-respect etc. People having a large

degree of Tamas (inertia) lack energy; they are slow, late, not venturing, shy,

withdrawn, weak-willed, suggestible, submissive, masochistic, intropunitive,

and so on. They are unable to refuse, assert or argue individually; but are

collectivistic and show hysteric collective aggression. They show blind

conformity and inability to mix with strangers. They do not have strong

emotional ties. The strong emotion they show is fear. They believe in fate

and luck (external locus of control) and are superstitious. They have least

awareness and show poor moral control and they have simple sensuous

values only. Mentally characterized by high tamas is most susceptible to

dissociation. The person with high tamas has a loosely structured mind and

it may have more than one relatively independent component. He has least

control of his own mind and therefore may function like different persons

(multiple personality) in different situations with different patterns of memory

and action tendencies. He is also capable of having circumscribed amnesia

for events.

Infatuation (Moha) is another quality of Tamas as he has very low

discrimination. He likes over-cooked, state and impure food, food that has

lost its taste and nutritional value. Rastogi, (2005) & Eswarn, (1997) include

all canned foods in it. Tamas puts up weight also easily. His mind is heavy

and his body too. To sum in Paranjpe's (1997) words "a person dominated by


19

Tamas (i.e. inertia) is described as unbalanced, vulgar, obstinate, deceitful,

malicious, indolent, despondent and dull."

Table-1

Definitions and Manifestations of Triguna in human nature as

conceptualized by modern researchers

Author &

Year

Sattva Rajas Tamas

Uma, 1969 Good, self-control, generosity, intelligence, steadiness, humility, yearning for

liberation, guiltlessness, unselfishness, purity, contentment, truthfulness, faith, devotion

Impure, bad, active, lack of control on emotions, passionate, restlessness,

anxiety, desires, attachments, greed

Neutral, indifferent, stupidity, doubt, dullness, inadvertence, uncertainty, negligence, cynicism, delusions,

inaction, misunderstanding, lassitude, undisciplined, fear and sorrow

Pathak et al 1992

knowledge, illumine, light, peace

Activity Pain Inertia Darkness, Delusion

Mathew, 1995

Stability, High Self-awareness, Sensitivity, Freedom, Flexibility, Control, Stress, Tolerate & freedom from maladjustment tendencies

Activation, Restless, over activity, Uncontrolled energy, high drive, inability to remain silent or alone, Extraverted instability

Inertia, Introverted Instability, Lethargy, Fear, and inhibition, Anxiety, Shallowness of emotions, Low initiative, Low self-confidence, and Low self-respect.

Marutham et.al., 1998

Essence Purity, Harmony, Noble & Divine

Motion, Passion, Activity

Inertia Inactivity, Slath, Foolishness

Wolf, 1998 Cleanliness, truth, discipline, mental equilibrium, determination detachment

Desire for sense gratification, dissatisfaction, envy, materialistic mentality

Mental imbalance, anger, arrogance, depression, procrastination, feelings of helplessness


20

The investigators differ in their definitions of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. Each

investigator lists a number of attributes that are said to represent ā Sāttvic,

Rājasic or Tāmsic qualities. However, each description is a partial account

and covers only certain aspects of the manifestation of a particular Guna.

It is evident from Table 1 (on next page) that investigators have differed

in their conceptualizations of Triguna. The psychological attributes related to

Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas measured in different instruments developed by

them are not uniform, though there is some agreement with regard to their

essential nature. For instance, out of five investigators three characterize

Rajas as activity and Tamas as inertia. Regarding Sattva no such agreement

is found, and each one has characterized it in a different way and even the

attributes do not share much in common.

Similarly, even with respect to Rajas and Tamas, the behavioural

attributes addressed by investigators differ. Such differences render the

inventories non-comparable and conceptual dissimilarities lead to problems

of construct and criterion validation.

Cattellian Model of Personality

Personality research and personality concepts may be thought of

as having gone through three main phases : (1) a general literary and

observational stage, starting from antiquity until modem times; or a

philosophical or prescientific phase; (2) a clinical observational phase, in

which observations have been more systematic and disciplined than first

phase; and in which objectives have been scientific, not partly aesthetic. This

phase may be said to -have grown out of general medicine around the 18th

century and came to its finest fruition in the works of Freud, Jung, Adler and

others; and (3) the experimental phase which began in the first quarter of

20th century.

Personality psychology became an identifiable discipline in the social

sciences in 1930. Allport viewed Personality Psychology as the study of the

individual person. He defined personality as, "the dynamic organisation

within the individual of those psychological systems that determine his

unique adjustments to the environment." Allport later (1961) changed

"unique adjustments to the environments” to "characteristic behaviour and

thought”.

From the beginning, personality psychology has been a dissident field

in the context of American experimental psychology. Whereas American

psychology tended toward elementaristic, personality was holistic, taking

whole person as the primary unit of study. Whereas American learning theory


21

focused on S-R approach, personality concerned itself with the problem of

human motivation conceived interms of unobservable dynamics and

promptings from within. Whereas experimental psychologists searched for

universal laws applicable to all individuals, personality focused on how people

were different from each other as well as how they were alike. In addition,

personality psychology invited collaborations with a wide variety of disciplines

such as psychoanalysis and other depth psychologies, German

characterology, mental testing, and abnormal psychology. This historical

account affirms an identity for personality psychology as a discipline that has

its own distinguishing three features having emphasis on (l) the whole

person, (2) motivation and dynamics, and (3) individual differences. To tap al1

the above mentioned three features, Cattell has been amongst the foremost

stressing the experimental study of personality

Cattell considers that the detailed task of defining personality must

await a full specification of the concepts that the theoriest plans to employ in

his study of behaviour. Thus, he deliberately provides only a very general

definition: "Personality is that which permits a prediction of what a person

will do in a given situation.” The goal of psychological research in personality

is thus to establish laws about what different people will do in the all kinds of

social and general environmental situations .... Personality is..concerned with

all the behavior of the individual, both overt and under the skin (Cattell,

1950).

Cattell has presented the definition of personality as a formula

R=f(S,P)

it depicts that behavioural response (R) of a person is a function (f) of the

situation (S) confronted and the individual's personality (P) Although most

trait theoriests have emphasized the role of situational parameters in

determing behaviour. Cattell (1979,1980) has expanded his theoretical

account by including the ways in which situations, in conjunction with

personality traits, influence behaviour. To account for situational influences,

he has put forth a model (Econetic model) for classifying the situations and

assessing their impact on individual.

It is clear that this emphasis upon personality study including "all"

behavior is not an attack upon the necessary abstracting or segmenting that

takes place in the usual empirical study. Cattell views personality as a

complex of traits of various categories. The trait, is an inferred mental

structure that accounts for the consistency of observed behaviour, comes in

several varieties and accounts for both structural and dynamic aspects of


22

personality. According to Cattell, traits being relatively permanent and broad

reaction tendencies, serve as the building blocks of personality.

Some traits may be common to all people, others unique to an

individual some determined by heredity, others by environment, some relate

to motives (dynamic traits), and others to ability and to temperament An

important distinction among traits is that between surface traits and source

traits. Surface traits are expressive of behaviours that on a superficial level

may appear to go together but in fact do not always move up and down (vary)

together and do not necessarily have a common cause. A source trait, on the

other hand, expresses an association among behaviors that do vary together

to form a unitary, independent dimension of personality.

Cattell considers source traits more important than surface traits.

Surface traits are produced by the interaction of source traits and generally

can be expected to be less stable than factors. Cattell admits that surface

traits are likely to appeal to the common-sense observer as more valid and

meaningful than source traits because they correspond to the kinds of

generalizations that can be made on the basis of simple observation.

However, in the long-run it is the source traits, that prove to have the most

utility in accounting for the behavior.

Any single trait may represent the outcome of the operation of

environmental factors, hereditary factors, or some mixture of the two. While

surface traits must represent the outcome of a mixture of these factors it is at

least possible that source traits may be divided into those that reflect

heredity, or more broadly, constitutional factors. and those derived from

environmental factors The traits that result from the operation of

environmental conditions are called environmental mold traits: those that

reflect hereditary factors are called constitutional traits.

Traits may also be classified in terms of the modality through which

they are expressed If they are concerned with setting the individual into

action toward some goal they are dynamic traits; if they are concerned with

the effectiveness with which the individual reaches the goal they are ability

traits. Or they may be concerned largely with constitutional aspects of

response such as speed, energy, or emotional reactivity, they are referred to

as temperament traits. (Hall et.al., 1998).

How do we discover source traits that cover a variety of responses

across many situations? Where do we find our building blocks ? Cattell

contends that any attempt to discover major source traits of personality must

begin with an adequate inventory of all the personality traits that can be used


23

to describe individuals. He calls this total domain of personality traits the

personality sphere and suggests that the only practical source for such listing

is language. Cattell (1957) argued that over the countries, every aspect of

behaviour whereby one human being is likely to affect another has been

assigned some verbal symbol i.e. a trait name. Therefore, Cattell stated by

examining around 4500 adjectives found in English language. By eliminating

synonyms, he reduced the total of 171. Using observers' ratings, he then

identified 36 clusters of surface traits. Subsequently, he added ten more

surface traits--a few from Psychiatric literature. These 46 surface traits,

Cattell maintains comprise the whole personality sphere (Cattell and Kline,

1977)

According to Cattell these traits can be discovered through three

sources of data: life record data (L-data), questionnaire data (Q-data), and

objective test data (T-data). L-data relates to behavior in actual, everyday-life

situations such as school grades or ratings of an individual on traits such as

sociability, emotional stability, or conscientiousness. Q-data depends on

introspection by the subject. Subject responses to questionnaires can be

considered as accurate representations of the person or pieces or behavior

that do not necessarily represent accurate appraisals of the subject himself;

that is, if the subject says he is conscientious we can either consider him to

be so or just treat his response as a piece of behavior elicited by a question.

Because of self-deception and faking, Cattel1 suggests the latter approach to

Q-data. The third source of data used to get personality structure, T -data, is

for Cattell, the most desirable. Cattell considers an objective test to be a

behavioral miniature situation in which subjects are unaware of the

relationship between their response and the personality characteristic being

measured.

The second part of Cattell's research strategy in col1ecting data on the

personality sphere was to determine whether comparable factors could be

found in Q-data. The main result of work with Q-data is the Sixteen

Personality Factor (16 PF) Inventory. Some 35 personality factors tend to

emerge from L and Q data. Of these, 16 have been in incorporated into an

instrument called the 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire (16 PF). The 16

factors included in the questionnaire most are temperament traits, describing

the person's style to behavior. Factor B, intelligence, is considered an ability

factor; factors Q1-Q4 represent more dynamic qualities. Twelve show

considerable similarity with factors from L-data and four appear to be unique

to Q-data.


24

Although the source traits utilized in the 16 PF can distinguish between

normals and neurotics, they do not measure all aspects of deviant behaviour

and do not assess the characteristics of psychotics. Applying factor analysis

to surface traits in the normal and abnormal personality spheres, Cattell has

derived 12 further factors that measure psychopathology. These 12 factors

have been combined with those previously included in the 16 PF in the

construction of a new test, the Clinical Analysis Questionnaire (CAQ), which

"Should be of considerable interest and use to clinical psychologist. Thus,

Cattell believes that he has now identified the major source traits of both

normal and abnormal personality.

Traits are of ability, temperament, and dynamic "modalities". We

extract the ability aspect by asking how well the person is doing and the

dynamic aspect by asking why he is doing it. There are three basic types of

dynamic traits: the attitude, the sentiment (a kind of attitude structure), and

the erg (rhymes with berg). These three kinds of traits are interrelated with

each other through what Cattell calls chains of- subsidiation: ergs-roughly

drives- are served by attitudes and sentiments.

An attitude, as defined by Cattell (1965) is specific interest in particular

course of action toward certain objects in a given situation. Cattell views

attitudes as hypothetical constructs that intervene between environmental

stimuli and eventual external responses. It is also the observable expression

of underlying dynamic structure ergs and sentiments, and their interrelations

must be inferred from attitudes. Cattell, Radcliffe, and Sweney, (1963)

lntercorrelated some sixty or seventy different devices for measuring attitude

strength in a series of studies aimed at developing an efficient test battery for

measuring conscious and unconscious components of- attitudes.

The erg corresponds roughly to what other theorists have called "drive".

As erg is a constitutional, dynamic source trait, "an innate psychophysical

disposition which permits its possessor to acquire reactivity (attention,

recognition) to certain classes of objects more readily than others to

experience a specific emotion in regard to them, and to start on a course of

action which ceases more completely at a certain specific goal activity than at

any other. (Cattell, 1950). 1n short, an erg is an innate drive triggered by

stimuli in the environment that ceases when its goal is reached. Cattell

(Cattell and Child, 1975) considers ten ergs those have been reasonably well

established by his factor-analytic researches. These ergs are: hunger, sex,

gregariousness, parental-protectiveness, curiosity, escape (fear), pugnacity.

acquisitiveness, self-assertion, and narcissistic sex.


25

A sentiment is an environmental- mold, dynamic source trait. Thus, it

is parallel to the erg, except that it is the result of experimental or socio-

cultural factors, not constitutional determinants. In Cattell's (1950) words,

sentiments are "... major acquired dynamic trait structures which cause their

possessors to pay attention to certain objects or classes of object, and to feel

and react in a certain way with regard to them.”

To explain the structural relations of attitudes, sentiments, and drives,

Cattell put forth the concept of dynamic lattice. Cattell (1950) believed that

we must seek not only to describe .and measure a person's traits, but also to

show how they are interconnected. Thus, he postulated that the dynamic

traits were organized in complex ways within the cognitive and motivational

structure of the organism, and form a dynamic lattice. The various dynamic

trait are interrelated in a pattern of subsidation. Sentiments are dependent

on ergs, and attitudes depend on sentiments. The dynamic lattice describes a

complicated and often bewildering intertwining of interests, attitudes,

sentiments, goals, and drives. Only a fragment of a dynamic lattice to a

hypothetical person, involving attitude, sentiments, and innate goals.

Numerous ergs give expression to various sentiments that the' sentiments are

related to one another, that several attitudes converge on the same

sentiment, and that a few attitudes are common to different sentiments. In

addition, one sentiment may be subsidiary to another e.g., the sentiment

toward wife is built upon the expression of the ergs of sex, gregariousness,

protection, and self-assertion; the sentiment toward God expresses the ergs of

self-submission and appeal. Sentiments are less susceptible to change than

attitudes, according to Cattell, because sentiments are the deeper, underlying

structures in personality. Occasionally, though, changes in personality can

occur. A person may lose his family in a catastrophe, for instance, and this

traumatic event will trigger major changes in personality functioning (Cattell,

1950)

Cattell admits that because of the myriad connections that may exist

among attitudes, sentiments, and ergs, the analysis of a dynamic lattice

presents a considerable challenge. Changes in the dynamic lattice can also

occur as a result of the person's mood or emotional state and changes in the

person's environment.

A major criticism of trait theories has been that they neglect the role of

the environment in predicting behavior. The econetic model represents

Cattell's efforts to remedy this deficiency. It postulates that human behavior

is the result of a complex and subtle interplay between traits and situations

As a first step in trying to understand this complicated interaction, Cattell


26

proposes the construction of a taxonomy of situations or environments. To

map this vast environmental sphere, Cattell sampled situations mentioned on

every tenth page of encyclopedias of a given culture. This approach yielded

some encouraging consistencies in the kinds of situations found, but so far

investigators have not followed up on these pioneering efforts (Cattell, 1979).

Nevertheless, Cattell believes that econetics (the study of the ecology) is likely

to develop rapidly in the future, with the cooperation of investigators from

various disciplines in the social sciences, and that eventually a reliable and

objective taxonomic scheme will be constructed.

Regarding the impact of these situations on an individual, Cattell

contended that some situations have relevance for the individual, others do

not. Of the situations that do play a role in the person's life, some have

tremendous impact, others have only minimal impact. Some objects in

situations are accessible to the individual; others are not. What these

situations mean to the individual also depends on the person's moods In

brief, once the classification task is complete, the unique psychological

meaning of various situations for the individual must be established (Cattell,

1979). Obviously, these assessments of environmental effects on the

individual are complex. They involve measuring the effects of other people

and of the physical, social, and cultural environments on the individual. Each

of these components may be weighted differently and may contribute

definitely to the modulation of the person's traits and subsequent behavior.

Finally, the relative contributions of these factors change over time.

Rationale for the present study

It is very clear from the review of literature pertaining to personality

that personality psychology came into existence as an independent field of

research in the beginning of 20th century. Most of the psychometrically rich

personality models have emerged particularly after the establishment of

multivariate research society. Before Allport majority of personality theory

explained personality in terms of personality types. Allport initiated trait

approach which has been fully investigated in later research by Cattell,

Guilford, Eysenck, McCrae, Costa, and Kline etc. Another fact about these

models of personality is that these are basically based on Western population,

though these have been found applicable across the globe. There is one

characteristic feature in all trait approach that personality is the individual’s

unique pattern of traits-the pattern that distinguishes him as an individual


27

and accounts for his unique and relatively consistent ways of interacting with

his environment.

If we compare the Western and Eastern philosophies, it is fact, beyond

doubt that Indian Philosophy is very old, ancient and systematic. Vedas, are

considered to be document representing the God’s voice. Vedic literature

contains knowledge about all fields of human endeavour, from physical and

psychology to medicine, art and aeronautics. Empirical validation of Vedas

could therefore open storehouses of knowledge in many areas. According to

Vedas, all material elements are infused with the modes of nature, or Gunas-

Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. Basically Guna is central theoretical proposition of

Sāmkhya system of Indian philosophy. Ancient Indian scriptures like the

Upanishadas, Puranas, Yogasturas, Mahabharata, Sāmkhya Karika and

Bhagavadgita have also elaborated on this doctrine.

Recently some Indian Psychologist have attempted to recognize

acknowledge the relevant and importance of conceptualization and

explanation of personality mentioned in Sāmkhya system of Indian

Philosophy i.e. Trigunas Theory of Personality, which explained personality

structure in terms of three dimension i.e. Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. There is

paucity of research investigating the compatibility of Triguna theory with

Psychometric model of personality. A few studies have been conducted in

India examining the overlap between three dimensions of Triguna theory and

three

dimensions of Eysenckian model.

There is not even a single study which has investigated the

compatibility of Triguna model and Cattellian model of personality. The

present study is an empirical attempt to understand the structured overlap

between temperamental source traits identified by Q-data in Cattellian model

and those of three dimensions of Prakriti embodied in Triguna model by

applying multivariate methodology.

The Problem

The precise title of the problem is “A STUDY OF RELATIONSHIP

BETWEEN TRIGUNA AND CATTELLIAN FACTORS OF PERSONALITY."


28

Objectives

The main objectives of the study are:

1. To examine the relationship between measures to Triguna and those

of sixteen personality factors.

2. To examine the interrelationship among the measures of Triguna.

3. To examine the relationship among sixteen measures of personality.

4. To study the factor structure of measures of Triguna and those of

sixteen personality factors.

Specific Hypotheses

The present study is an exploratory investigation for understanding the

relationship between two models. Hence no specific hypotheses have been

formulated.


29

CHAPTER-II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Review of Literature particularly related to the compatibility of

Triguna and Cattellian models of personality is very scarce. Review of

literature presented in this chapter is based on the information available in

University Library and by no means be considered exhaustive. Review of

literature is presented in the following sections.

1. Textual and Interpretative analysis of the basic nature of three Gunas

2. Studies related to the measurements of Trigunas.

3. Studies related to the correlates of Trigunas.

4. Studies related to Triguna and Psychopathology.

1. Textual and Interpretative analysis of the basic nature of

three Gunas

Though the concept Triguna is believed to have originated in the Vedic

period, it is understood to have developed in clarity in the Sāmkhya system of

philosophy. Therefore, the textual and interpretative analysis is based on

authentic English translations of the following source books: Sāmkhya Karika

of Isvara Krishana and Kapila Sāmkhya, Aswamedha Parva of Mahabharata,

Shrimad Bhagavad-Gita, Srimad Bhagavatam, Purana.

Triguna in Samkya Karika

Isvarakrishan, the author of Sāmkhya Karika, the Scripture most

referred to by scholars due to its authority, describes the nature

and characteristics of Triguna, in verses 12 and 13. The 12th verse says:-

Shastri

(1930) translates this karika as follows. “The constituents are of the nature of

pleasure, pain and indifference; they serve to illumine, to actuate and to

restrain, each of these functions through suppression, co-operation,

transformation and intimate intercourse with and by the rest.” The author of

Sāmkhya Karika does not give any further explanation as to how the three

Gunas represent three kinds of human experience and how they are

responsible for three functions. But it is striking that the so called


30

fundamental constituents underlying the whole manifest universe are

described with reference to human feeling. (Murthy and Kumar, 2007). Even

the next verse, 13th, also does not help us much in understanding this

relation, but throws a little more light on the nature and functions of the

three Gunas,

Shastri (1930) translates this karika as follows. “Sattva is considered

to be buoyant and bright, Rajas to be stimulating and mobile; Tamas alone is

heavy and enveloping; their functioning for the goal (of the Spirit) is like (the

action of) a lamp” (p. 38).

Triguna in Srimad Bhagavata Purana

(a) Man’s character and Gunas

The 25th chapter of Shrimad Bhagvata Purana discusses the nature of

man, things and actions according the dominance of Gunas of Prakriti in their

pristine and uncombined nature as also in combination with one another. It

is described as follows: The verses 1,2,3 and 4 of chapter 25, of Skandha-XI

of Srimad Bhagvata Maha Purana explain how the nature of man is affected

by the three Gunas of Prakriti, when they are in their pristine condition,

uncombined with one another.

Verse 2 of chapter 25 of Skandha-XI of Srimad Bhagavata Purana

describe the characterstics of Sattva as follows:-

(SBP,XI,25,2)

“Control of the mind and senses, forbearance, discrimination, austerity,

truthfulness, compassion, memory, contentment, self-sacrifice,

desirelessness, faith, revulsion from evil, charity, absorption in the Self-these

are the signs of Sattva” (Tapasyananda, 2003).


31

The next verse, 3rd of Chapter 25 of Skandha-XI of Srimad Bhagavata

Purana explain the signs of Rajas as follows:-

(SBP,XI,25,3)

Swami Tapasyananda (2003) translates this verse as follows:-

“Desire, activity, pride, greed, haughtiness, longing for one's selfish

ends, sense of difference between man and things, sensuality, enthusiasm

arising from excitement, craving for name and fame, indulgence in ridicule of

others, demonstrativeness, and aggressiveness-these are the signs of Rajas.”

The verse 4th explain the qualities of Tamas. The 4th verse says:-

(SBP,XI,25,4)

Swami Tapasyananda translates it as follows:-

“Anger, greed, perfidy, cruelty, beggarliness, hypocrisy, langour,

quarrelsomeness, depression, delusion, despondency, wretchedness,

lassitude, vain expectations, fear, lack of initiative and vigour in work-these

are the characteristics of Tamas.

The 25th Chapter of Skandha XI also explain more about Guna. The above is a

description in successive order of the modes of mind generated by Sattva,

Rajas and Tamas individually. This chapter also explained about the qualities

produced by their combination. In the feeling of ‘I’ and ‘mine’, the Gunas of

Prakriti function in combination simultaneously (for example, all Gunas enter


32

in experiences like ‘I am clam’, ‘I want such and such a thing’, ‘I am angry’, ‘I

feel unhappy’ etc.) All the activities of the mind, Tanmatras, senses, and

Prana are the result of the combined functioning of the three

Gunas(SBP,XI,25,6)

(b) Dominance of a particular Guna

When Sattva, brilliant, pure and peaceful, dominates over the other two

Gunas, then man is happy and established in morality and knowledge (SBP,

XI, 25, 13).

When Rajas, characterized by attachment, sense of difference, and

consciousness of one's power, dominates over Sattva and Tamas, then man

becomes subject to suffering, following as he does the path of desire-

prompted actions seeking wealth and fame (SBP, XI, 25, 14).

When Tamas, characterized by lack of discriminative power by lethargy and

by inertia dominates over Rajas and Sattva, then man becomes subject to

pessimism, delusion sloth, cruelty and indulgence in vain expectations (SBP,

XI, 25, 15).

When the mind is serene and the senses are at rest, when the body is free

from dangers and diseases and the heart from attachments, then know there

is dominance of Sattva (SBP, XI, 25, 16).


33

When there is a plethora of activity- and a man becomes a confirmed

extrovert, when his mind and senses cease to have any rest, and when he

becomes subject to physical ailments and mental excitement and confusion,

know that Rajas has become dominant(SBP, XI, 25, 17). When the drooping

mind, unable to sustain consciousness, dissolves into sleep, when thought

ceases to function due to dominance of inertia and pessimism, then know

that Tamas is prevailing.

Triguna in Aswamedha Parva of Mahabharta

There is good interpretation of Guna is given in the Aswamedha Parva

of Mahabharta, Section 36,37 and 38 demonstrate the meaning of Three

Gunas. Verses 1 to 4 of section 36 of Aswamedha Parva of Mahabharta

explain about the relationship of three Gunas. Roy, P.C. translates these

verses as follows:

Tamas (Darkness), Rajas (Passion) and Sattva (Goodness) These are

called the three qualities. These are coupled with one another. They exist,

depending on one another. They take refuge in one another and follow one

another. They are also joined with one another (MB-AP, 36, 1-4). Tamas

should be known to have the night (or obscurity) for its essence. It has three

characteristics, and is (otherwise) called Delusion. It has unrighteousness (or

sin) also for its indication, and it is always present in all sinful acts. This is

the nature of Tamas and it appears also as confined with others (MB-AP, 36,

8). Rajas is said to have activity for its essence. It is the cause of successive

acts. When it prevails its indication, among all beings, is production (MB-AP,

36, 9). Splendour, lightness, and faith—these are the form that is light, of

Sattva among all creatures, as regarded by all good men (MB-AP, 36, 10).

Characteristics of Tamas Guna:

Verses 12 to 20 section 36 of Aswamedha Parva of Mahabharta

describe the basic nature of the Tamas Guna . Translation of these verses by

Roy, P. C. is given below-

Complete delusion, ignorance, illiberality, indecision in respect of

action, sleep, haughtiness, fear, cupidity, grief, censure of good acts, loss of

memory, unripeness of judgment, absence of faith, violation of all rules of

conduct, want of discrimination, blindness, vileness of behaviour, boastful


34

assertions of performance when there has been no performance, presumption

of knowledge in ignorance, unfriendliness (or hostility), evilness of disposition,

absence of faith, stupid reasoning, crookedness, incapacity for association,

sinful action, senselessness, stolidity, lassitude. absence of self-control,

degradation,--all these qualities are known as belonging to Tamas. Whatever

other states of mind connected with delusion, exist in the world, all appertain

to Tamas. Frequent ill-speaking of other people, censuring the deities and the

Brahmanas, illiberality, vanity, delusion, wrath, unforgiveness, hostility

towards all creatures, are regarded as the characteristics of Tamas. Whatever

undertakings exist that are unmeritorious (in consequence of their being vain

or useless), what gifts there are that are unmeritorious (in consequence of the

unworthiness of the donees, the unreasonableness of the time, the

impropriety of the object, etc.), vain eating,--these also appertain to Tamas.

Indulgence in calumny unforgiveness, animosity, vanity and absence of faith

are also said to be characteristics of Tamas (MB-AP, 36, 12-20) .

Characteristics of Rajas Guna:

Verses 2 to 14 section 37 of Aswamedha Parva of Mahabharta describe

the basic nature of the Rajas Guna Injuring (others), beauty, toil, pleasure

and pain, cold and heart, lordship (or power), war, peace, argument,

dissatisfaction, endurance, might, valour, pride, wrath, exertion, quarrel (or

collision), jealousy, desire, malice, battle, the sense of meum or mineness,

protection (of others), slaughter, bonds, and affection. buying and selling,

lopping off, cutting, piercing and cutting off the coat of mail that another has

worn, fierceness, cruelty, vilifying, pointing out the faults of others thoughts

entirely devoted to worldly affairs, anxiety, animosity, reviling of others, false

speech, false or vain gifts, hesitancy and doubt, boastfulness of speech,

dispraise and praise, laudation, prowess, defiance, attendance (as on the sick

and the weak), obedience (to the commands of preceptors and parents),

service or ministrations, harbouring of thirst or desire, cleverness or dexterity

of conduct, policy heedlessness, contumely, possessions, and diverse

decorations that prevail in the world among men, women, animals, inanimate

things, houses, grief, incredulousness, vows and regulations, actions with

expectation (of good result), diverse acts of public charity, the rites in respect

of Swaha salutations, rites of Swadha and Vashat, officiating at the sacrifices

of others, imparting of instruction, performance of sacrifices, study, making

of gifts, acceptance of gifts, rites' of expiation, auspicious acts, the wish to

have this and that, affection generated by the merits of the object for which or

whom it is felt, treachery, deception, disrespect and respect, theft, killing,

desire of concealment, vexation, wakefulness, ostentation, haughtiness,


35

attachment, devotion, contentment, exultation, gambling, indulgence in

scandal, all relations arising out of women, attachment to dancing,

instrumental music and songs—all these qualities have been said to belong to

Rajas (MB-AP, 37, 2-14). Those men on Earth who meditate on the past,

present, and the future, who are devoted to the aggregate of three, viz.,

Religion, WeaIth, and Pleasure, who acting from impulse of desire, exult on

attaining to affluence in respect of every desire, are said to be enveloped by

Rajas .

Characteristics of Sattva Guna:

According to the 38 chapter Sattva is excellent quality. Verses 1 to 8 of this

chapter explain the characteristics of Sattva Guna. Sattva is beneficial to all

creatures in the world, and unblamable, and constitutes the conduct of those

that are good. Joy, satisfaction, nobility, enlightenment, and happiness,

absence of stinginess (or liberality), absence of fear, contentment, disposition

for faith, forgiveness, courage, abstention from injuring any creature,

equability, truth, straightforwardness, absence of wrath, absence of malice,

purity, cleverness, prowess, (these appertain to the quality of Rajas) . He who

is devoted to the duty of Yoga, regarding knowledge to be vain, conduct to be

vain, service to be vain, and mode of life to be vain, attains to what is highest

in the world hereafter. Freedom from the idea of meum, freedom from egoism,

freedom from expectations, looking on all with an equal eye, and freedom

from desire,--these constitute the eternal religion of the good. Confidence,

modesty, forgiveness, renunciation, purity, absence of laziness, absence of

cruelty, absence of delusion, compassion to all creatures, absence of the

disposition to calumniate, exultation, satisfaction, rapture, humility, good

behaviour, purity in all acts having for their object the attainment of

tranquility, righteous understanding, emancipation (from attachments),

indifference, Brahmacharyya, complete renunciation, freedom from

expectations, unbroken observance of righteousness are said to be

characteristics of Sattva (MB-AP, 38, 1-8).

The Gita Typology of Personality

According to Das, R.C.(1987) the Gita view is that human nature

consists of three Gunas or qualities, viz., Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas. Each

individual has all the three quality’s in his nature. Sometimes one of these

qualities overpowers the other two and becomes predominant. Though the

three qualities vary at times in the same person, one of the qualities tends to


36

be usually more dominant in him. A person may be Sāttvic, Rājasic, or

Tāmasic according to pre dominance of the corresponding quality in his

nature. However, one may also go beyond all the three qualities by

unflinching effort, through a sort of gradual internal elevation and finally

attain a state of perfect liberation.

Sattva implies purity, wisdom, bliss; Rajas implies hankering,

attachment, and action; and Tamas implies bias, heedlessness, and inertia.

Essentially the Sāttvic are illuminous, the Rājasic are passionate, and the

Tāmasic are inert. He who goes beyond the three qualities does not get

affected by joys and sorrows, censure and praise, love and hatred. For him

there is no different between a piece of log and a piece of gold. He looks upon

honour and dishonour, friendship and enmity as the same, and shuns

initiative in all matters, for he has nothing to ask for. This state of perfect

liberation is hard to attain. It can be achieved only through long-sustained

endeavour and a strong sense of detachment.

Sāttvic worship gods, Rājasic gnomes and giants, and Tāmasic ghosts

and evil spirits. Sāttvic are fond of foods that are pure, soothing, and

delicious, and contribute to vitality, vigour, and health. Foods that are bitter

over-hot, sour, saline, pungent, dry and burning, i.e., foods which produce

pain, grief, and sickness are dear to Rājasic . On the other hand, Tāmasic

like foods which are state, unclean and putrid. They also like the remnants of

others' meals.

Sāttvic offer sacrifices from a sheer sense of duty without any desire for

fruit. Rājasic offer sacrifices for self-glorification, and fulfillment of specific

missions. The sacrifices offered by Tāmasic are devoid of faith. They are

offered in a manner not supported by the scriptures. Austerity is practiced by

Sāttvic not for any return, yet with utmost devotion; by Rājasic with a view to

commanding respect and honour; while by Tāmasic for causing self-torture,

or with a view to bringing about destruction of a particular person. Charity,

typical of Sāttvic, is done, as a duty, unto proper persons at proper moments;

that, typical of Tāmasic, is done grudgingly, with expectation of a profitable

return; while charity, typical of Tāmasic, is done unto unfit persons at unfit

moments, and, that again, with contempt and disrespect.

Sāttvic reasoning helps them distinguish between what tempts and

what refrains, what should be done and what should not be done, what

should be feared and what should not be feared, and what binds and what

liberates. Rājasic reasoning does not help them differentiate right from wrong,

things to be done from things not to be done. On the contrary, Tāmasic

reasoning is such that it induces them to take the wrong for the right and, in


37

all cases the bad for the good. Sāttvic are firm in self-control. They can

control their mind, respiration, and sense organs through yoga or practice.

Rājasic are firmly attached to duty, desire, and wealth. Tāmasic, on the other

hand. are firmly seized by sleep, fear, grief, despair, and vanity.

Things in which Sāttvic find pleasure first taste like poison but

ultimately turn into nectar-such pleasure is born of the bliss of self-

knowledge. Things which are dear to Rājasic initially taste like nectar as they

come in contact with the sense organs, but in fine they appear to be as

distasteful as poison. Tāmasic, on the other hand, find pleasure in things

which, though tasteful at the beginning, finally become objects of addiction,

and such pleasure is caused by sleep, lethargy, and illusion.

Versa 10th of chapter 14 of Srimad Bhagvadgita describes how three

gunas act, one over the other.

(BG, 14,10)

Swami Ramsukhdas explains this verse as follows:-

"Sattva prevails, over Rajas and Tamas. Rajas overpowers Sattva and

Tamas and Tamas predominates, Sattva and Rajas."

Sattva prevails, overpowering Rajas and Tamas. This mode develops

illumination, purity, dispassion, generosity and detachment etc.,

overpowering, Rajoguna viz., greed, activity, disquietude and craving for

worldly pleasure and prosperity and craving for worldly pleasure and

prosperity etc., and Tamoguna viz., heedlessness, indolence, unnecessary

sleep and delusion etc. Rajas prevails overpowering, Sattva and Tamas viz.,

greed, activity, disquietude and craving for worldly pleasure and prosperity

prevails over the propensities of Tamoguna and the quality of Sattva,

mentioned above. The mode of Tamas viz., heedlessness, indolence, excessive

sleep and delusion etc., Overpowering, the traits of Sattvaguna and Rajoguna.

This is, in brief, the Gita Typology of personality. It seems no significant

study has been so far made to evaluate the validity of this concept.

2. Studies Related to Measurement of Triguna

The concept of the Triguna as it was elucidated in classical Indian

literature seems to have implication to our understanding of human


38

behaviour. Attempts have been made in India in recent times to develop

personality inventories based on the Triguna.

One of the earliest available inventory was developed by Paramswarn

(1963) and Uma, Lakshmi and Parameswaran (1971) named as ‘Guna

Inventory” to assess the three Gunas. This inventory is based on the

descriptions of the characteristics of the three Gunas as outline in the

Sāmkhya Karika and The Bhagavadgita. It consists of 24 Sāttvic items, 27

Rājasic items and 29 Tāmasic items in the form of statements as in an

attitude scale. There are three response categories (‘agree’, ‘disagree’ and

‘doubtful’) for each item. The total score on each guna is the algebraic sum of

the scores on the items for that Guna. This scale considers the Gunas as

three independent dimensions in a similar manner as the Eysenckian

dimensions of personality (Parameswaran, 1969). Investigators do not

consider interaction among Gunas and their predominance. Though they

consider Triguna as three independent dimensions theoretically, the

correlation obtained shows significant relation for Rajas and Tamas and not

for Tamas and Sattva or Sattva and Rajas.

Mohan and Sandhu (1986, 1988) developed a Triguna personality

inventory based on the Gita tyopology of personality (TGPI) to measure the

three Guans as separate dimensions with one being predominant. They

found that Sattva was distinct from Rajas and Tamas.

Das (1987, 1991) also developed an inventory based on description of

the characteristics of the three Gunas as outlined in the Bhagavadgita and

envisaged of one guna as being predominant. He has found that Sattva,

Rajas and Tamas are negatively correlated at significant levels and Rajas is

closer to Sattva than Tamas in the hierarchy.

Another psychometric means to identity the type of personality on the

Guan system developed by Pathak, Bhatt and Sharma (1992) gives

categorized norms and percentiles by which a person’s relative position in a

hierarchy could be established. Sattva, Rajas and Tamas scales show low

correlation with each other, indicating independence among the three

dimensions.

Mathew (1995) developed IAS Rating Scale. This inventory was

standardized on Kerala population. The instrument measures three broad

behavioral tendencies: inertia, activation and stability. The IAS Rating Scale

has 35 sub-scales of personality or for “other rating” (rating the personality of

another person). IAS Rating Scale has high reliability and construct validity.


39

Kapur et al (1997) attempt to provide a throretical model of infant

temperament based on ancient Indian thought with special focus on the

resilient or competent child. Most of the items of the checklist are drawn from

the items of the inventory developed by Marutham (1992) for adult

population, along with some items from the standard checklist used in

studies on temperament in the west.

Marutham et al (1998) consider the three factors as independent of

each other. The inventory is constructed on views depicted in Sāmkhya

Karika and Bhagavadgita. However, correlations between Sattva and Rajas,

and Sattva and Tamas are significant though not high. This shows low

independence among the three factors.

Wolf (1998) developed Vedic Personality Inventory (VPI) to assesses the

validity of the Vedic concept of three Gunas- Sattva, Rajas and Tamas, or

modes of nature. The items of this inventory are derived from a Vaishnava

tests. Description of each Guna were compiled from the chapters 14, 17 and

18 of the Bhagavadgita. Inter sub-scale correlation shows positive association

between items of Tamas and Rajas sub-scales.

3. Studies Related to correlates of Triguna

Investigators have examined Triguna vis-à-vis psychological constructs

as measured by modern psychologists. For instance, attempts have been

made to relate Gunas to already established conventional personality types

(e.g. introversion-extraversion) and psychological processes (e.g., cognitions,

ESP etc.). The findings are summarized below.

Uma, Lakshmi and Parameswaran (1971) while validating their

inventory related it to the Neymann-Kohlastedt test of introversion-

extroversion and found that persons who scores high on Sāttvic dimension

tend to be introverts and those scoring high on Rājasic dimension more

extroverted.

Singh (1971) after examining the nature of the Gunas in various Indian

philosophical texts has presented the characteristics in relation to different

categories such as temperamental condition, beliefs, attitudes, values and

cognitions. With regard to cognitions the Sāttvic people manifest fully

developed awareness, very clear perceptions and cognitions, abstract

thinking, and intuition. Rājasic people show a developed awareness, sharp

perceptions, clear cognitions, factual and tangible thinking, with and

emphasis on direct knowledge. Tāmasic people show hazy awareness,

delusions, hallucinations, confabulations, feeble or defective memory and

poor attention.


40

Mohan and Sandhu (1988) conducted a study to examine the

relationship between Tri-Guna and Eysenck’s dimensions of personality. In

this study the sample of 53 male and 88 female college students were drawn

from Chandigarh. The obtained data for the total sample were analyzed by

mean, S.D, test and product moment correlation statistical analysis. Results

demonstrated that no significant sex differences were obtained on Sāttvic,

Rājasic, Tāmasic, psychoticism and Extraversion scales but female scored

significantly higher on neuroticism scale. Sāttvic Guna most on neuroticism

scale. Sāttvic guna most favoured one, followed by Rājasic and Tāmasic.

Sāttvic guna was negatively correlated with Rājasic and Tāmasic Gunas;

which were insignificantly related to each other. Sattva was negatively related

with extroversion (positively to introversion), while Rājasic was positively

related to extroversion. Tāmasic was significantly related to neuroticism.

Rao & Harigopal (1979) conducted a study to explore the relationship

between the Gunas and extrasensory perception (ESP). The sample consisted

of 112 postgraduate students of Andhra University to whom a personality

inventory based on the doctrine of three Gunas developed by Parameswaran

(1969) and Uma, Lakshmi and Parameswaran (1971) and a standard five run

ESP test were administered. The data were analysed using the Pearson

product-moment correlation to discern the relationship between the three

Gunas and ESP. Second order partial correlations were computed to

statistically control the influence of the other two Gunas while relating each

guna to ESP. The results showed that only Tamas is found to be significantly

negatively related to ESP scores (r = - .200, df =100, p <.05). When the

influence of Sattva and Rajas is partialled out, the r between Tamas and ESP

is marginally significant at .05 level (r = - .1856, df =110). The subjects were

also divided into high and low groups on each Guna, taking the group mean

as the cutting point and the two groups were compared on their ESP scores

by a two tailed t test. With the exception of the high group on Tamas, all other

groups scored close to mean chance expectation on the ESP test. The high

Tamas group obtained a significant negative deviation (Dev. = -70), CR = -

2.15, p <.05). The difference in the scoring rates of high and low groups is

significant only in the case of Tamas (t = 2.18, df =110, p <.05). The low

Tamas group tended to score positively while the high Tamas group psi-

missed.

Sitamma, Sridevi, and Rao (1995) conducted a study regarding the

three Gunas and cognitive characteristics. According to researchers “since the

concept of Gunas is equally applicable to cognitive characteristics such as

memory, intelligence, perceptual acuity, field dependence- independence to


41

mention a few, the present study, which is the first in a series of

investigations attempted to explore the relationship between the three Gunas,

field dependence- independence and perceptual acuity. The sample consisted

of 30 postgraduate students of Andhra University to whom a personality

inventory based on the three Gunas by Pathak, Bhatt and Sharma (1991), a

Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT) by Witkin et al, (1962) and a

Perceptual Acuity Test (PAT) by Gough & Mc Gurk (1967) were administered.

The results showed a significant negative correlation (r = -.41, p < .05)

between GEFT scores and Tamas. When the subjects were divided into high

and low groups on each Guna and their GEFT and PAT scores were

compared, only the high and low Tamas groups were found to differ

significantly in their field dependence-independence (t =3.13, p<.01).

Chittranjan, Daftuar & Anjuli (1997) in their study focussed on Indian

view of tridimensional approach to personality (i.e., Sattva, Rajas and Tamas)

in relation to occupational stress, organizational commitment and job

involvement. The data were collected by administering 4 different

tests/questionnaires to measure four variables on a sample of 50

respondents belonging to an engineering manufacturing organization located

in Western India. Significant negative correlation was found between job

involvement and occupational stress whereas organizational commitment

yielded significant positive correlation with Sattva personality types. In case

of organisational stress, Sattva gave only one positive correlation with

occupational stress whereas Tamas generated stress in several areas. No

positive significant correlation was obtained in case of Rajas Guna. It was

infect negatively correlated with role conflict.

A study was conducted by Sharma (1999) to ascertain relationship of

type of personality based on Guna with self-concept and job satisfaction. A

sample of 74 males and female of varying ages and jobs and with at least 3

years of experience, was administered the Self-Concept Inventory (Basvana,

1974), the scale of Job-Satisfaction (Daftuar, 1988) and a shorter version of

the Personality Inventory ( Pathak, Bhatt, & Sharma, 1992). The results

showed that Sattva personality was positively correlated with self-concept (r

= 0.56) but not with job satisfaction (r = 0.16). Rajas personality showed

significantly positive correlation with self-concept (r = 0.45), but had negative

correlation with job satisfaction (r = -0.29). Tamas personality was found not

significantly correlated to either self-concept or job satisfaction. Self-concept

and job satisfaction were found positively correlated (r = 0.23). Correlations

have been calculated for each item of job satisfaction in relation to the three

dimensions of personality. The results indicate how the three personalities


42

perceive the different aspects of job satisfaction. Job satisfaction inventory

was further divided into two sections segregating item of self- growth, and

items of rest of the facets of the job. Correlations were determined for both

groups of items with Sāttvic, Rājasic and Tāmasic personalities. The results

showed positive correlation between Sattva and self-growth items, but

nonsignificant correlation with rest of the items. Conversely, Rajas showed

nonsignificant correlation with self-growth items but significantly negative

correlation with rest of the facets of job satisfaction.

Sebastian, and Mathew (2002) conducted a study of PSI experience in

relation to Inertia, Activation and Stability (Three Gunas). The sample of the

study consisted of 200 males and 200 female graduate and post-graduate

students from Kerala University. Their age ranged between 19 and 25 years.

Inertial Activity Stability (IAS) Rating Scale measuring inertia, activation and

stability was administered to this sample. Correlations were computed to

determine the relationship between personality components and psi

experience. Psi experience was found to have a significant relationship to

personality variables of activation and stability in the case of women.

Relationships between Gunas, Karma-yoga, and transformational

leadership were studied using a sample of 105 pairs of managers and

subordinates of a large banking organization in India by Jayanth Narayanan

and Venkat R. Krishnan (2003). Each of the three Gunas- Sattva, Rajas, and

Tamas—was measured along 10 dimensions: attribution, leisure, interests,

food, praise and criticism, sympathy, right and wrong, motivation to work,

working with determination, and accepting pain. A scale was developed for

this study to measure Karma-yoga. Findings show that three Sattva

dimension (sympathy, motivation to work, and accepting pain) enhance

transformational leadership and two rajas dimensions (attribution, right and

wrong) reduce Karma-yoga. Karma- yoga is not related to transformational

leadership.

4. Studies Related to Trigunas and Psychopathology

A study based on Sankhya theory of human personality, conducted by

Lakshi Bai, Murthy and Nagalakshmi (1975), pointed out that Rajas and

Tamas were significantly higher in the patient group, especially the

psychotics, than in the normal.

In 1987, Chakraborty inducted top managers and MBA students of IIM-

Calcutta to take a course to improve quality of work life following Vedantic

Psycho-Philosophy. The key idea of the course was to encourage them to

strive for experimental growth from within. Although it took long time but


43

some of them could view a managerial problem or a conflict episode in an

illuminated perspective, with a greater detachment and objective clarity of

Sattva. He therefore commented “Strengthening of Sattva hastens our

approach towards a purer mind, taking it closer to the Purusha or Poorna or

Atman aspect of our being. Out idiosyncrasies and biases then being to be

reduced, for Sattva is the substance of purity and light itself….” This is the

crux of improvement of the quality of work life.

Kapur, Hirisava, Reddy, Barnabas and Singhal (1997) made a

courageous effort to explore temperamental difference based on Triguna

among 4 to 6 years old 50 normal and 30 psychologically disturbed children.

They were assessed on a checklist consisting of 17 items, describing Sāttvic,

Rājasic and Tāmasic temperamental traits. Majority of the normal children

had Sāttvic disposition. The normal and disturbed groups had distinct

temperamental profiles.

In the first decade of the current century, two researches have

appeared which relate Triguna to psychological well being. In the first study,

Zaidi and Singh (2001) have explored direct and stress moderating effects of

positive life events and Triguna on psychological well being. The findings of

the study obtain significant effect of Sattva and Rajas Gunas or depression,

the former leading to low depression, and latter to the high depression.

Further the moderating role of all three Gunas was found in the relationship

between negative life events and depression. High Sattva, low Rajas and high

Tamas groups reported higher psychological well being.

An illustrative study conducted at Florida State University by Wolf and

Abell (2003) has evidenced the effectiveness of Japam in bringing positive

human changes. It tried to determine the effect of changing the Mahamantra

or stress, depression and Trigunas. The results confirm the hypothesis of the

study that the Mahamantra group would increase Sattva and decrease stress,

depression, Rajas and Tamas except Rajas. The authors of the research

suggested that the Mahamantra be considered as one possible component of a

spiritual approach to social work practice.

In another research conducted by Rastogi (2004) an attempt was made

to seek gender and age differences in Triguna and to relate it to seven

constructs of psychological well being from western perspective. These seven

constructs included self acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy,

environmental mastery, purpose in life satisfaction with life and personal

growth. The results report gender and age were significant difference in only

Rajas where the interactive effect of the two variables has also emerged

significant. Besides, Sattva Guna is found to be most dominant, followed by


44

Rajas and then Tamas in the whole sample. A revealing observation of the

present research is that Tamas is found to be negatively and Sattva to be

positively correlated with all the seven constructs psychological well being.

The relationship of Rajas with these constructs vascillates from negative to

positive. Tamas has yielded significant relation with environmental mastery,

personal growth, self acceptance and satisfaction with life. Rajas is found to

be negatively correlated with all the dimensions of Psychological Well Being

Inventory i.e. self acceptance positive relation with others, autonomy,

environmental mastery, purpose in life and personal growth. Positive

relationship between Sattva and environmental mastery, purpose in life,

personal growth, self acceptance and satisfaction with life emerged

significant. The obtained findings are consistent with Sāmkhya Theory’s

explication of Sattva, Rajas and Triguna and conclude that psychological well

being is nested strongly in Sattva.

Rastogi (2005) observed that if one is alert or can watch as to which

mode is acting on him by observing the symptoms, then it is not difficult for

one to change that particular activity which is due to the influence of that

mode on him at that time.


45

CHAPTER-III

METHOD

The present study is mainly aimed at examining the compatibility of

Triguna model of personality (Prakriti) with Cattellian model of personality.

This chapter includes the description of sample, measure used, and

statistical analysis.

Sample

A sample of 178 graduate students (122 females and 56 males) were

randomly drawn from the various colleges of Kurukshetra with the age

ranging from 17 to 20 years with the mean age of 18.5 years. Each college

had many courses in the same grade but a group of randomly selected

students from these courses was formulated for the administration of the

tests. The selected colleges cater to the educational needs of lower middle to

higher middle income group of the students of the area with the assumption

that small town represent sample from all walks of life and from all

communities.

Measures/Tests

The following measures/tests were used in this study:-

1. Vedic Personality Inventory (VPI).

2. Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire- Form A.

Brief descriptions of these tests is as follows

Vedic Personality Inventory (VPI)

Vedic personality Inventory (VPI) was developed by David B. Wolf

(1998). An instrument, VPI, was devised to messes the validity of the Vedic

concept of the three Gunas-Sattava, Rajas, and Tamas, or modes of nature.

The items of this inventory are derived from a Vaishnava, or Personalist,

understanding of Vedic philosophy.


46

Description of each guna were compiled from the Bhagavad-gita As It Is

(Prabhupada, 1986), Chapters 14, 17 and 18, as well as Dasgupta (1961).

Sattva Guna is characterized by qualities such as cleanliness, truthfulness,

gravity, dutifulness, detachment, discipline, mental equilibrium, respect for

superiors, contentment, sharp intelligence, sense control, and staunch

determination. Dasgupta describes the Sāttvic quality as being “free from

attachment and vanity and absolutely unruffled in success and failure” (p.

470). The speech of a person predominantly in Sattva Guna is “truthful,

pleasing, beneficial, and not agitating to others” and that a Sāttvic person is

characterized by “satisfaction, simplicity, gravity, self-control and

purification? [17:16, p. 784].

Attributes of Rajas Guna include intense activity, desire for sense

gratification, little interest in spiritual elevation, dissatisfaction with one's

position, envy of others, and a materialistic mentality. Bhagavad-gita [18:24,

p. 815] describes Rājasic activity as “action performed with great effort by one

seeking to gratify his desires, and enacted from a sense of false ego,” and a

person predominated by Rajas Guna is described as “greedy, always envious,

impure, and moved by joy and sorrow” [18:27, p. 817].

Qualities associated with Tamas Guna include mental imbalance, anger,

ignorance, arrogance, depression, laziness, procrastination, and a feeling of

helplessness. Dasgupta (1961) explains that “the quality of Tamas overcomes

the illumination of knowledge and leads to many errors. Tamas, being a

product of ignorance, blinds all living beings and binds them down with

carelessness, idleness and sleep” (p. 462).

From the descriptions of the Bhagavad-gita (Prabhupada, 1986) and

Dasgupta (1961), fifty statements were formulated for each Guna. These took

the form of sentences with which someone who is predominated by that mode

would strongly agree. Utilizing feedback from a team of five Vedic scholars,

each of whom had more than twenty years experience studying and teaching

the Vedas, the item sample was reduced to ninety items that were considered

most representatives of the Gunas, and that would best differentiate between

the guna constructs. According to the Vedic experts, these ninety items,

comprised of 30 for Sattva Guna, 28 for Rajas Guna, and 32 for Tamas Guna,

adequately covered the domain of attributes for each mode. A seven-point

scale was chosen as a balance between convenience, for the participant and

researcher, and statistical power.


47

For convergent construct validity, two existing scales, the Verbal

Aggressiveness Scale (VAS) (Infante & Wigley, 1986) and the Satisfaction With

Life Scale (SWLS) (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985), were included

at the end of the VPI. Existing personality inventories based on the Gunas

were not used for convergent validity because there are no reliability studies

for these instruments. Also, it would have been impractical to administer two

lengthy surveys with similar questions. The scores on the VAS were

hypothesized, based on Vedic theory, to correlate positively with Rajas and

negatively with Sattva, and the scores on the SWLS were expected to correlate

positively with scores on the Sattva scale and negatively with the Tamas

scale. Also, a single-item indicator, hours of sleep per day, was included at

the end of the survey. This indicator was hypothesized to correlate positively

with Tamas, as excessive sleep is a characteristic of one in Tamas.

Additionally, six demographic questions, pertaining to gender, age, years of

education, ethnicity, religion practiced and religion of parents, were asked.

Gender was included as a measure of discriminant validity, as it was not

expected to correlate with any of the modes, and the other demographic

questions were included for possible use in future analysis of the instrument.

Based on assessment of Cronbach's alpha reliability, content validity, and

confirmatory, multiple groups centroid factorial analysis (Nunnally &

Bernstein, 1994), each item was evaluated and the 90-item scale was reduced

to an 80-item scale, consisting of 28 Sattva items, 24 Rajas items, and 28

Tamas items. In the version of the 80-item VPI that was distributed to

subjects, two additional questions, regarding height and number of siblings,

were added to more thoroughly evaluate discriminant construct validity.

After statistical analysis of all 619 surveys, a final 56-item scale was

created. Scores for the Gunas were obtained by adding the responses for the

items for each scale corresponding to a Guna and then dividing by the

number of items (Wolf, 1999).

Reliability of VPI:

Each Guna constitutes a subscale, and internal reliability for each

subscale was measured using Cronbach's alpha. The Sattva subscale

retained 15 items and had an alpha of .93. The Rajas subscale retained 19

items and had an alpha of .94, and the Tamas subscale retained 22 items

and had an alpha of .94. This resulted in a final VPI with 56 items, with each

item having a Corrected Item-Total Correlation greater than .50, and each


48

item adding to the reliability of its subscale, as measured by Cronbach's

alpha.

Construct Validity of VPI:

Correlations of the subscales with the VAS and SWLS, as well as with

hours of sleep per day, were calculated as measures of convergent validity. All

correlations in this analysis are Pearson product-moment (r)

correlations. Vedic theory predicts that verbal aggressiveness is positively

correlated with Rajas and negatively correlated with Sattva, and that life

satisfaction correlates positively with Sattva and negatively with Tamas

(Dasgupta, 1961). Hours of sleep was predicted to be positively correlated

with Tamas. For Sattva, the mean r2 for convergent validity was .34,

while r2 for discriminant validity was .02. For Rajas, r2 for convergent validity

was .50, and for discriminant validity it was .04. For Tamas, mean r2 was .26

for convergent validity and .03 for discriminant validity measures. Nunnally

and Bernstein (1994) explain that r2 is a measure of the proportion of

variance explained. The low average r2 values, ranging from .02 to .04,

indicate that the discriminant measures account for only a trivial percentage

of the variance, as predicted by Vedic theory. Rosenthal (1997) states that r

values about .50 indicate strong association, and r values about .7 indicate

very strong association. This means that the convergent indicators for Sattva

have a strong to very strong association with Sattva (average r = .58), the

indicators for Rajas have a very strong association with Rajas (average r =

.71), and the indicators for Tamas have a strong association with Tamas

(average r = .51).

Factorial Validity of VPI:

Factorial validity for the VPI was assessed using the confirmatory,

multiple groups centroid method. Loadings for each item of the 56-item VPI

were computed for each of the three subscales. Factorial validity indicates the

extent to which an item correlates with the subscale with which it is

intended, as compared to other subscales (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). For

the 15 items in the Sattva subscale, correlations between the items and the

Sattva subscale ranged from +.62 to +.87. Absolute values of the correlations

of the Rajas subscale with individual items in the Sattva subscale ranged

from .04 to .51, with only 3 of 15 items having a correlation with an absolute

value greater than .23. Absolute values of the correlations of the Tamas

subscale with individual items in the Sattva subscale ranged from .43 to .67.

All 15 of these correlations had negative values, and two of them had


49

absolute values greater than .62 (the lowest value for Sattva subscale

correlations with Sattva items). For these two items, however, the correlation

with the Sattva subscale was stronger than the correlation with the Tamas

subscale.

For the 19 items in the Rajas subscale, correlations between the items

and the Rajas subscale ranged from +.57 to +.80. Absolute values for the

correlations of the Sattva subscale with individual items in the Rajas

subscale ranged from .02 to .47, with only 3 of 19 correlations having a

correlation with an absolute value greater than .30. Absolute values of the

correlations of the Tamas subscale with individual items in the Rajas

subscale ranged from .01 to .52. Only 1 of these 19 correlations (-.01) had a

negative value, and 18 had positive values.

For the 22 items in the Tamas subscale, correlations between the

individual items and the Tamas subscale ranged from +.55 to +.76. Absolute

values for the correlations of the Rajas subscale with individual items in the

Tamas subscale ranged from .01 to .53. Two of these correlations had

negative values (-.01 and -.06), and 20 had positive values. Absolute values of

the correlations of the Sattva subscale with individual items in the Tamas

subscale ranged from .35 to .74, with all 22 items possessing negative values.

Although some items in the Tamas subscale had correlations with the Sattva

subscale with an absolute value greater than .55, every item in the Tamas

subscale had a correlation with the Tamas subscale that was higher than its

correlation with the Sattva subscale.

Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF-Form A)

The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire was originally developed

by Cattell, Saunders and Stice (1956). This test is an objectively- scorable test

devised by basic research in psychology to give the most complete coverage of

personality possible in a brief time. Planned for the age seventeen through the

mature adult age range (Cattell and Eber, 1962). It has been established to

measure sixteen functionally independent and psychologically meaningful

personality dimensions. The reading level of this test varies for different

forms. The 16PF Form-A and B, are two out of six possible Forms (A, B, C, D,

E and F) and are most appropriate for the fully literate person, the person

whose educational level is equivalent to that of the normal college going

students. These two forms are parallel to each and anyone may be used to

measure the personality factors. In this study, Form A of the 16 PF has been

used for all the subjects. This personality questionnaire is composed of 187

non-innocuous statements with three alternative answers to each. The

subject is expected to choose the answer which best describes his feelings


50

about the statements. The factors measured by each of the items of Cattell’s

Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire are as follows:-

Table-2

16 Personality Factors

Factors Low Score Description High Score Description

A Reserved, Detached, Critical, Cool (Sizothymia, Previously Schizothymia)

Outgoing, Warmhearted, Easy-going, Participating (Affectothymia, Previously

Cyctothymia)

B Less Intelligent, Concrete-Thinking (Lower Scholastic mental capacity)

More intelligent, Abstract-thinking, Bright (Higher

Scholastic mental capacity)

C Affected by Feelings, Emotionally Less Stable, Easily Upset (Lower ego strength)

Emotionally stable, Faces, Reality, Calm, Mature (Higher ego strength)

E Humble, Mild, Accommodating Conforming (Submissiveness)

Assertive, Independent, Aggressive, Stubborn

(Dominance)

F Sober, Prudent, Serious, Tacitum (Desurgency)

Happy-go-lucky, Impulsive lively, Gay-Enthusiastic

(Surgency)

G Expedient, Evades, Rules, Feels Few Obligations (Weak super ego strength)

Conscientious, Perservering Staid, Rulebound (Stronger

super ego strength)

H Shy, Restrained, Diffident, Timid (Threctia) Venturesome, Socially-bold,

Uninhibited, Spontaneous (Parmia)

I Tough-minded, Self-reliant, Realistic, Non-nonsense (Harria)

Tender-minded, Dependent, Over protected, Sensitive

(Premsia)

L Trusting, Adaptable, Free of Jealousy, Easy to Get on With (Alaxia)

Suspicious, Self-opinionated. Hard to Fool

(Protension)

M Practical, Careful, Conventional, Regulated by External Realities Proper (Praxernia)

Imaginative, Wrapped up in Inner Urgencies, Careless of

Practical Matters, Bohemian (Autia)

N Fortnight Natural, Artless, Sentimental (Artlessness)

Apprehensive, Worrying, Depressive, Troubled (Guilt

proneness)

O Placid, Self-assured, Confident, Serene (Untroubled adequacy)

Apprehensive, Worrying, Depressive, Troubled (Guilt

proneness)

Q1 Conservative, Respecting Established ideas, Tolerant of Traditional Difficulties

(Conservatism)

Experimenting, Critical, Liberal, Analytical, Free-

thinking (Radicalism)

Q2 Group-dependent, A "Joiner" and Sound

Follower (Group adherence)

Self-sufficient, Prefers Own

Decisions Resourceful (Self sufficiency)

Q3 Undisciplined Self-Conflict, Careless or Protocol, Follows own urges (Low integration)

Controlled, Socially-precise, Following Self-Image (High

Self-concept control)

Q4 Relaxed, Tranquil, Torpid, Unfrustrated (Low ergic tension)

Tense, Frustrated, Driven, Over wrought (High ergic

tension)


51

In addition to sixteen primary factors, the test can be used as a

measure of some secondary dimensions which are broader traits scorable

from the component primary factors. these are shown below:-

Table-3

Second Order Factors

Standard

Index

Low Description High Description

QI Invia Exvia

QII Adjustment Anxiety

QIII Pathemia (Tender minded

Emotionality)

Cortertia (Alert Poise

Independence

QIV Subduedness Independence

QV Naturalness Discreetness

QVI Cool Realism Prodigal Subjectivity

QVII Low Intelligence High Intelligence

QVIII Low Superego Strength High Superego

Strength

Satisfactory consistencies of 16 PF scales in all possible ways have

been reported; viz. (1) reliabilities i.e. short term test retest correlations for

Form A and B for all the factors range from. 76 to .93 and stability coefficient

i.e., test retest after a longer interval range from .63 to .88. (2) Equivalency

coefficients of forms, A and B on all factors range between .34 to .76. Direct

validities of the test range from .58 to .87. The circumstantial validities (as

rank-differences correlations between corresponding theoretical and actual

correlations of the factor with all fifteen other factors) were computed which

oscillate between .42 to .99.

This test has been translated into Hindi by Kapoor (1972). In this test,

though no time limit is imposed, yet it takes approximately 65 minutes for

the completion. It can be administered on a group as well as on individual

subjects. Adequate reliability coefficient of 16 PF (Hindi edition) has been

reported by Kapoor (1979). For instance, dependability coefficients i.e. test-

retest or after 11 days on all 16 Factors range from .58 to .86; trait stability

coefficients (i.e. test-retest after 8 weeks) range from .38 to .68; equivalence

coefficients on form, A and B, range from .38 to .68. Satisfactory validities

reported from correlation of two factor halves (A and B) on all the factors of 16

PF test range between. 70 to .93 .

Results of some other studies as Jalota (1957), Rao (1967), Singh

(1969), Kamlesh (1973), Vishal (1985), Methani (1987), Notra (1980) give the


52

evidence that it is fairly reliable and valid tool for measuring the personality

factors of Indian subjects.

Administration and Scoring

After ascertaining the willingness of the subjects to participate in the

study, all the two measuring instruments were administrated to them in

group setting. The measuring being group tests, they were administrated in

group of 20-25 subjects in each group. Testing was performed in two

sessions, in the first they were received Vedic Personality Inventory(VPI) and

in second session they were received 16PF. The testing sessions were held in

respective classrooms with adequate facilities for ventilation and proper

setting arrangement. The tests were administered strictly following the

instructions specified in the respective test manuals or as prescribed by the

test author.

Although there was no time limit to administer the tests, the subjects

were asked to complete test as early as possible. Attempts were made to get

the maximum cooperation of the subjects. They were told that results would

be kept confidential and that they would be informed in confidence on

demand, about their performance only after all of the subjects finished with

the final test. They were asked consequently to answer carefully and to

ensure that all the items are answered. The general testing conditions were

satisfactory and the procedure were uniform although.

Both the tests, namely VPI and 16PF Form-A, were scored following the

procedure described in respective test manual. The VPI is a seven point liker

type scale. The responses of which were awarded scores from one to seven for

three variable. Very strongly disagree responses were given a score of one,

strongly disagree-two, somewhat disagree-three, neutral-four, somewhat

agree-five, strongly agree-six and very strongly agree responses were given

seven score. 16PF was hand scored by using stencile scoring keys for sixteen

variables. This way, scoring of both the tests provided scores on 19 variables

(3 of VPI and 16 of 16PF) which were subjected to statistical analysis.

Statistical Analysis

The data obtained for the total sample were analysed for the under

mentioned informations-

1. Frequency distributions, Means, Standard Deviations, Skewnesses,

and Kurtoses.

2. Correlational Analysis (Product Moment Method).

3. Principal Component Factor Analysis.

The comprehensive description of the above mentioned analysis is given in

the respective section of next chapter (Chapter-IV—Results and Discussion).


53

CHAPTER-IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results have been reported and discussed under the following

headings:-

1. Frequency Distributions

Frequency distributions for all the 19 variables (3 of Vedic Personality

Inventory, and 16 of 16 PF) included in the present study (Table-4) were set

up for total group of 178 subjects. The distributions of scores of VPI and 16

PF along with their means, standard deviations, skewnesses, and kurtoses

are reported in Table-5 and Table-6. An inspection of these tables reveals that

these distributions are more or less normal. Despite minor discrepancies in

some of the distributions, it was felt that normalizing transformation is not

required and hence not under taken.

2. Correlational Analysis

After ascertaining that the obtained data more or less meet the

requirement of applying Product Moment Method of correlation, correlations

were computed among/between all the measures used in the study.

Intercorrelations are reported in Table-7. It may be noted that the degree of

freedom being 176 (N-2), the correlation coefficients of .149 and .195 are

significant at .05 and .01 levels of significance respectively. The obtained

correlations among/between the measures are reported and discussed under

the following sub-headings:-

(A) Intercorrelations among measures of three Gunas of Prakriti. (VPI)

(B) Correlations between three measures of Gunas of Prakriti and

sixteen of personality (VPI and 16 PF).

(C) Intercorrelations among sixteen measures of personality (16PF)

(A) Intercorrelations among measures of three Gunas of Prakriti (VPI)

Intercorrelations among measures of three Gunas of Prakriti (VPI) are in

general low ranging from -.341 to .490. Only two of the total three

correlations are significant, of which one is positive and one is negative.

Sattva Guna of VPI has correlated negatively with Tamas Guna (-.341, p<.01).

Rajas Guna corresponds positively with Tamas Guna (.490, p<.01). Obtained

pattern of correlations depict sharing of some amount of variance among

three Gunas of Prakriti. Similar pattern of correlations among three Gunas

have also been reported in some earlier studies (e.g. Das, 1987; Wolf, 1988;

Rao & Harigopal, 1979; Mohan & Sandhu, 1988; Sitamma et.al, 1995)

depicting negative correlation between Sattva and Tamas; positive between

Rajas and Tamas; and negative between Sattva and Rajas.


54

Table-4 Variables Used in the Study

Vedic Personality Inventory

1. Sattva A dimension of Prakriti (personality)

2. Rajas A dimension of Prakriti (personality)

3. Tamas A dimension of Prakriti (personality)

16 Personality Factor Questionnaire

4. A Reserved V/s Outgoing

5 B Low Scholastic Mental Capacity V/s High Scholastic

Mental Capacity

6 C Low Ego Strength V/s High Ego Strength

7 E Submissiveness V/s Dominance

8 F Desurgency V/s Surgency

9 G Weaker Superego Strength V/s Stronger Superego

Strength

10 H Shy V/s Venturesome

11 I Tough mindedness V/s Tendermindedness

12 L Trusting V/s Suspiciousness

13 M Practical V/s Imaginativeness

14 N Artlessnes V/s Shrewdness

15 O Untroubled Adequacy V/s Guilt Proneness

16 Q1 Conservatism V/s Radicalism

17 Q2 Group Adherence V/s Self-sufficiency

18 Q3 Low Integration V/s High Self-concept control

19 Q4 Low Ergic Tension V/s High Ergic Tension

Table-5

Frequency Distribution of Scores of Vedic Personality Inventory

(N = 178)

C.I Sattva

F

Rajas

F

Tamas

f

108-121 1 0 2

94-107 23 7 8

80-93 76 42 13

66-79 57 71 43

52-65 18 46 49

38-51 2 10 45

24-37 1 2 15

10-23 0 0 3

Mean 80.433 71.983 59.399

S.D. 13.126 13.357 18.386

Sk -.578 -.167 .413

Ku .868 .015 .190


55


56


57

(B) Correlations between measures of Trigunas of Prakriti and sixteen

of personality factors (VPI and 16 PF).

Correlations between measures of three Gunas of Prakriti and sixteen of

personality factors are in general low ranging from -.285 to .260. Only 13 of

48 correlations are significant at or above .05 level of significance, of which

six are positive and seven are negative. Sattva Guna has yielded positive

correlation with factor H (.216, p<.01) and Q3 (.205, p<.01), and negative with

factor Q4 (-.181, p<.05). Rajas Guna corresponds positively with factors O

(.201, p<.01), Q4 (.240, p<.01) and negatively with factors C (-.228, p<.01), G

(-.285, p<.01), and Q3 (-.209, p<.01). Tamas has marked positive relationship

with factors O (.194, p<.05), Q4 (.260, p<.01) and negative with C (-.245,

p<.01), G (-.215, p<.01) and Q3 (-.275, p<.01) Obtained correlations depict

that two types of measures have shared some amount of variance between

them.

(C) Intercorrelations among sixteen measures of personality (16PF).

In general, intercorrelations among sixteen measures of personality

(16PF) are low ranging from -.610 to .568. Only 35 of the total 120

correlations are significant at or above .05 level of significance, of which 19

are positive and remaining 16 are negative. Factor A of 16PF has correlated

positively with factors F (.172, p<.05), H (.234, p<.01) and negatively with Q4

(-.162, p<.05). Factor B has yielded positive relationship with G (.252, p<.01),

L (.156, p<.05), Q3 (.174, p<.05), and negative with E (-.157). Factor C

corresponds positively with factors F (.172, p<.05), G (.152, p<.05), H (.374,

p<.01), Q3 (.301, p<.01) and negatively with factors O (-.463, p<.01) and Q4 (-

.610, p<.01). Factor E has marked positive association with factors F (.239, ,

p<.01), H (.214, p<.01) & Q1 (.179, , p<.05) and negative with factors N (-.150,

p<.05), and O (-.187, p<.05). Factor F has marked positive relationship with

factor H (.296, p<.01) and negative with factors G (-.211, p<.01), and Q2 (-

.182, p<.05). Factor G has correlated positively with factors Q3 (.364, p<.01)

and negative with O (-.196, p<.01) and Q4 (-.221, p<.01). Factor H has yielded

positive relationship with factor Q3 (.160, p<.05) and negatively with factors O

(-.347, p<.01), Q2 (-.285, p<.01) and Q4 (-.429, p<.01). Factor I has not

marked significant association with any of the factors of personality in 16PF.

Factor L has positive association with factors O (.158, p<.05) and Q4 (.211,

p<.01). Factor N has positively correlated with factor Q3 (-.150, p<.05) and

negatively with factor Q2 (-.192, p<.05) Factor O corresponds positively with

factor Q4 (.568, p<.01) and negatively with Q3 (-.190, p<.05). Factor Q3 has

shared its variance only with factor Q4 (-.284, p<.01). Significant correlations


58

among some of the factors of 16PF may be because of their association with

some factors of personality at second order level. The obtained pattern of

interocrrelations among sixteen measures of personality in the present study

are almost comparable to those obtained and reported by Cattell and his

collogues in standardization studies of 16 PF.

3. Factor Analysis

Information yielded by the pattern of intercorrelations among different

variables as reported above, despite its significance, has to be considered

more or less suggestive and diffuse. Their true relationship in eclipsed

because of many unknown variables that tend to influence the magnitude of

correlations. Their influence needs, indeed to be partialled out. Principal

Component Method of Factor analysis was used to partial out, at least, to

some extent, the effect of these variables.

The factor analysis was performed by using unities in the diagonal of

intercorrelations matrix. (Hotelling, 1935). The criterion to decide the

number of factors to be extracted was Kaiser’s (1960) recommendation of

eigen values greater than 1.000. Thus, the Principal Component Analysis

with built-in-eigen values criterion yielded 7 factors with eigen values greater

that 1.00. The original factor matrix (unrotated) is presented in Table-9. The

eigen values which are also the characteristics roots of the corresponding

factors are reported in Table-8. It may be noted from the table that eigen

values of extracted factors range from 1.303 to 2.623.

Table-8

Latent Roots for Principal Component Analysis

Root No. Latent Roots* % of trace Cum% of trace

1 2.623 13.803 13.803

2 1.701 8.955 22.757

3 1.660 8.736 31.494

4 1.445 7.608 39.101

5 1.365 7.182 46.283

6 1.346 7.084 53.368

7 1.303 6.859 60.227

* These values are also the standard deviations for the corresponding factors using the principal factor patterns as the factor coefficient.


59

Table-9 Unrotated Factor Matrix

Variables I II III IV V VI VII h2

Sattva .376 -.096 .211 -.017 .490 -.338 .313 .647

Rajas -.463 .457 .071 .060 .152 .337 .378 .711

Tamas -.539 .384 -.101 .155 -.142 .397 .027 .651

A .165 .429 .215 .044 -.026 .274 -.033 .336

B .202 -.394 -.082 .332 .288 .464 -.145 .633

C .704 .172 -.283 -.098 -.098 .085 -.072 .637

E .105 .577 -.291 .143 .225 -.198 .056 .542

F .173 .550 .183 -.336 .287 .030 -.214 .607

G .448 -.393 .069 .477 -.029 .037 .080 .596

H .586 .462 .080 .079 .125 .067 -.137 .609

I .116 .161 .353 .455 -.253 .039 .364 .569

L -.259 -.058 -.238 .257 .676 .117 -.222 .714

M -.134 .060 -.352 .423 -.207 -.112 -.467 .598

N .189 -.120 .614 .023 -.036 .305 -.234 .576

O -.652 -.084 .378 .002 .163 -.137 -.106 .632

Q1 -.009 .294 -.094 .559 .014 -.270 .196 .519

Q2 -.239 -.288 -.499 -.244 .068 .285 .391 .686

Q3 .543 -.241 .086 .022 .198 .133 .156 .442

Q4 -.774 -.128 .239 .132 .143 -.148 -.071 .738

In order to have more meaningful and interpretable factor solutions, the

factors were rotated by employing Kaiser’s (1958) varimax criterion for

orthogonal rotation. The varimaxly rotated factors are reported in Table-10.

Since the varimax criterion of rotation is aimed at simplifying the

interpretation of columns of factor matrix, the present variance accounted for

by each of the factors is not the same, as in unrotated and rotated factor

solution. Thus, varimaxly rotated factors were re-arranged in descending

order of percent variance accounted for. The last row of rotated factor matrix

contain percent variance for each of the factors. It may be noted that all the

7 factors have accounted for 60.227 percent of total variance.

Communalities (h2), which give the proposition of variance for each of the

variable, are reported in the last column of the rotated matrix (Table-10).

Communalities are the sum of squared loadings across rows of factor pattern.


60

These values represent the proposition of variance in a variable shared by

common factors of structural solutions hence the communalities.

Table-10

Rotated Factor Matrix

Variables I II III IV V VI VII h2

Sattva .026 .103 -.291 .219 .697 .089 .099 .647

Rajas -.243 .010 .782 .169 .098 .057 -.018 .711

Tamas -.204 -.022 .673 .064 -.389 .019 .000 .651

A .185 .429 .327 -.041 -.002 .091 -.021 .336

B .147 -.072 -.040 -.222 -.016 .102 .738 .633

C .764 .155 -.142 .069 .006 -.060 .002 .637

E .183 .215 .162 .657 -2.005E-05 -.065 -.030 .542

F .117 .590 .183 .113 .186 -.390 -.108 .607

G .234 -.059 -.345 -.107 .075 .520 .362 .596

H .482 .573 .013 .176 .102 .047 .068 .609

I .014 .146 .174 .005 .077 .707 -.109 .569

L -.285 -.011 .072 .316 -.011 -.267 .676 .714

M -.028 .021 -.179 .260 -.686 .052 .154 .598

N -.056 .444 -.034 -.564 .084 .169 .143 .576

O -.781 .054 .072 -.084 -.002 -.074 -.027 .632

Q1 -.050 .064 .036 .551 -.085 .446 .020 .519

Q2 .100 -.717 .289 -.035 .099 -.236 .113 .686

Q3 .367 .029 -.187 -.156 .393 .141 .270 .442

Q4 -.839 -.096 .099 .014 -.112 -.018 .033 .738

The communality for different variables, in the present study range between

.336 to .738. As the varimax rotation does not alter the proportion of variance

explained for a variable, the values of h2 for each variable in rotated and

unrotated factor matrix are the same. Following the recommendation of


61

Hotelling (1935) regarding the standard error of factor loading, it was found

that loadings greater than .29 are significant at .05 levels. Here, in the

present study the loading greater than .200 have been considered toward the

interpretation of factors.

Description of factors

Factor-I

Variables Description Loadings

Q4(-) Relaxed, Tranquil, Torpid, Unfrustrated (Low ergic tension) .839

O (-) Placid, Self-Assured, Confident, Serene (Untroubled

adequacy)

.781

C (+) Emotionally stable, Faces Reality, Calm, Mature (Higher ego

strength)

.764

H (+) Venturesome, Socially bold, Uninhibited, Spontaneous

(Parmia)

.482

Q3(+) Controlled, Socially-Precise, Following Self Image (High self-

Concept Control)

.367

L (-) Trusting, Adaptable, Free of Jealousy, Easy to get on With

(Alaxia)

.285*

Rajas (-) A subscale of Vedic Personality Inventory .243*

G (+) Conscientious, Persevering, Staids Rulebound (Stronger

superego strength)

.234*

Tamas (-) A subscale of Vedic Personality Inventory .204*

*Approaching the level of significance.

This factor mainly loads on five factors of personality indexed by 16 PF

namely Q4, O, C, H, and Q3 with respective loadings of -.839, -.781, .764,

.482 and .367. Factors L and G of 16 PF and measures of Rajas and Tamas

Gunas of Vedic Personality Inventory also have some considerable loadings

here on this factor. Keeping in view the nature of variables having significant

loadings, this factor is named as Adjustment. It has accounted for 13.803

percent of total variance. It almost replicates one of the second order factors

of personality located and reported by Cattell and Ebber (1962), and Cattell

et.al. (1970) in the standardization studies of 16 PF.

Obtained structure hereby portrays the individuals characterized as

relaxed, tranquil, low in ergic tension, satisfied, placid, self-assured,

confident, adequate, emotionally stable, realistic, high in ego strength,


62

venturesome, socially bold, spontaneous, controlled, socially precise, high in

self-concept control, trusting and conscientious.

Some considerable negative loadings of two subscale of Vedic

Personality Inventory i.e., Rajas and Tamas on this factor depict the positive

association with each other. It suggests that persons characterized as above

tend to have low level of Rajas and Tamas Gunas. Unexpectedly, measure of

Sattva has not marked its association substantially with this factor.

Factor-II


Q2(-) Group-dependent, A “Joiner” and Sound Follower

(Group adherence)

.717

F (+) Happy-go-lucky, Impulsively Lively, Gay, Enthusiastic

(Surgency)

.590

H (+) Venturesome, Socially-bold, Uninhibited,

Spontaneous (Parmia)

.573

N (+) Shrewd, Calculating, Worldly, Penetrating

(Shrewdness)

.444

A (+) Outgoing, Warmhearted, Easy going, Participating

(Affectothymia, Previously cyclothymai)

.429

E (+) Assertive, Independent, Aggressive, Stubborn

(Dominance)

.215*


This factor highly loads on factor Q2 of 16 PF with the negative loading

of -.717 followed by factors F (.590), H (.573), N (.444), and A (.429). Factor E

has also marked some considerable positive loading on this factor. In view of

nature of primaries having significant loadings, this factor is apparently a

factor of Extraversion. It almost resembles with one of the second order

factors of personality (QI) located and reported by Cattell and Ebber (1962)

and Cattell et al (1970). It has accounted for 8.955 percent of total variance.

Obtained structure hereby portrays the individuals who are

characterized as group adherent, liking social approval and admiration,

happy-go-lucky, enthusiastic, cheerful, active, expressive, surgent,

venturesome, socially bold, spontaneous, polished, worldly, analytical,


63

outgoing, warmhearted, participating, assertive and dominant. It is worth

noting that three subscales of Vedic Personality Inventory i.e. Sattva, Rajas

and Tamas have not marked substantial association here on this factor

suggesting negligible amount of their variance sharing with markers of this

factor.

Factor-III


Rajas (+) A subscale of Vedic Personality Inventory .782

Tamas (+) A subscale of Vedic Personality Inventory .673

G (-) Expedient, Evades Rules, Feels Few Obligations

(Weaker superego strength)

.345

A (+) Outgoing, Warmhearted, Easygoing, Participating

(Affectothymia, previously Cyclothymia)

.327

Sattva (-) A subscale of Vedic Personality Inventory .291

Q2 Self-sufficient, Prefers Own Decision, Resourceful

(Self-sufficiency)

.289*


Two subscales of Vedic Personality Inventory namely Rajas and Tamas

have mainly defined this factor with respective loadings of .782 and .673.

Sattva, a third Guna has marked negative loading of -.291 on this factor

depicting negative association with Rajas and Tamas. Rajas and Tamas have

marked positive association with each other depicting the dominance of Rajas

over Tamas and Sattva. Factor G and A of 16 PF have also marked

contrasting significant loading of -.345 and .327 respectively, depicting

positive association of A with Rajas and Tamas, and negative of G with Rajas

and Tamas. Factor Q2 has also marked some considerable positive loading

(approaching significance level) on this factor. In view of the high loadings of

Rajas, this factor is named as a factor of Rājasic Personality. It has

accounted for 8.736% of total variance. Similar relationships among three

subscale of Vedic Personality Inventory (Trigunas) have also been reported in

some earlier studies (e.g., Das, 1987; Wolf, 1998; Rao and Harigopal, 1979;

Mohan and Sandhu, 1988; and Sitamma et.al. 1995). The obtained structure

hereby describes the subjects who tend to be (in terms of Triguna model)

intensely active, oriented to sensory gratification, less interested in spiritual

elevation, dissatisfied with one’s position, envious of others, mentally

materialistic, angry, arrogant, procrastinated, and careless. Such individuals

tend to be deficient in Sāttvic behavioural dispositions. The significant

loadings of factors G and A, of 16 PF hereby posit that persons described


64

above in terms of Triguna model (predominance of Rajas and Tamas) can be

portrayed interms of Cattellian model of personality as who tend to be

expedient, evading rules, weak in superego strength, casual and lacking in

effort for group undertakings and cultural demands, outgoing, warmhearted,

participating, easygoing, emotionally expressive, affectothymic and preferring

own decisions.

The present caricature of personality reflected here from factorial

combination of Trigunas and Cattellian personality dispositions are also

matching to the contextual descriptions of Rājasic and Tamsic person given in

the 14th Chapter of Shrimad Bhagavadgita, Ashawmedha Parva of Mahabarta

(Section-36 & 37), and Shrimad Bhagavada Purana (Skandha-XI, Chapter-25)

Hence, the present finding has provided significant informations about the

relationship among Triguna of Prakriti (Vedic Model) and their relationship

with factors of personality (G,A and Q2) indexed by 16 PF (Cattellian model).

Factor-IV


E (+) Assertive, Independent, Aggressive, Stubborn

(Dominance)

.657

N (-) Forthright, Natural, Artless, Sentimental

(Artlessness)

.564

Q1(+) Experimenting, Critical, Liberal, Analytical,

free thinking (Radicalism)

.551

L (+) Suspicious, Self-opinionated, Hard to Fool

(Protension)

.316

M (+) Imaginative, Wrapped up in Inner Urgencies,

Careless of Practical Matters, Bohemian (Autia)

.260*

B (-) Less intelligent, Concrete-thinking (Lower

scholastic mental capacity)

.222*

Sattva (+) A subscale of Vedic Personality Inventory .219*


This factor has been mainly defined by four factors of personality

indexed by 16 PF namely E, N, Q1, and L of 16 PF with respective loadings of

.657, -.564, .551 and .316. Two other factors of 16 PF i.e. M and B have also

marked some considerable contrasting loadings on this factor. Sattva Guna

of VPI have marked some considerable loadings on this factor.Keeping in view

the nature of primaries having significant loadings, this factor is labelled as a

factor of Independence. It has accounted for 7.608 percent of total variance.


65

Obtained structure is almost comparable to one of the second order factors of

personality (Independence V/s Sabduedness) located and reported by Cattell

and Ebber (1962), and Cattell et.al. (1970).

The obtained structure portrays the individuals characterized as

assertive, independent, aggressive, stubborn, dominant, self-assured,

forthright, natural, artless, sentimental, experimenting, critical, liberal,

analytical, free-thinking, skeptical, suspicious, self-opinionated, hard to fool,

imaginatively creative, and concrete thinking.

Some considerable positive loading of Sattva, one of Triguna here on

this factor depicts that temperamentally independent persons tend to be

somewhat high on Sāttvic dispositions.

FACTOR-V


Sattva (+) A subscale of Vedic Personality Inventory .697

M (-) Practical, Careful, Conventional, Regulated by

External realities, Proper (Praxemia)

.686

Q3 Controlled, Socially-precise, following self-image

(High self-concept control)

.393

Tamas (-) A subscale of Vedic Personality Inventory .389

This factor highly loads on Sattva Guna of Vedic Personality Inventory

with the loading of .697 followed by two factors of 16 PF i.e. M (-.686) and Q3

(.393). Tamas, another Guna of Vedic Personality Model has also borneout

significant negative loading of -.389 on this factor. Factorial combination of

markers hereby suggests it to be a factor of Sāttvic Personality. It has

accounted for 7.182% of total variance.

Obtained structure hereby depicts the inverse relationship between

Sattva and Tamas, hence the dominance of Sattva Guna of Prakriti. Similar

structured relationship between Sattva and Tamas has also been reported in

some earlier studies (e.g., Das, 1987; Wolf, 1998; Rao and Harigopal, 1979;

Mohan and Sandhu, 1988; and Sitamma et. al. 1995). It hereby portrays the

Sattva dominated individual characterized by qualities such as truthfulness,

dutifulness, wisdom, love for knowledge, spiritual excellence, nobility, self-

control, high self-awareness, detachment from excessive worldly lures, and

low level of tamisic dispositions. The significant loadings of factors M and Q3

of 16 PF hereby posit that Sāttvic individuals as depicted above tend to be

practical, careful, conventional, regulated by external realties, anxious to do


66

right things, controlled, socially precise following self-image, and high in self-

concept control in terms of Cattellian model of personality. Here in the

present finding factors M and Q2 have emerged significant Cattellian

personality correlates of Sāttvic Guna of Prakriti of Vedic Model of Personality.

Present psychometric description is very much comparable to that

mentioned in Shrimad Bhagavad Gita (Chapter 14th), Ashawmed Parva of

Mahabarta (Section, 38) and Shrimad Bhagavata Purana (Skandha-XI,

Chapter-25).

Factor-VI


I (+) Tender-minded, Dependent, Overprotected, Sensitive

(Premsia)

.707

G (+) Conscientious, Preserving, Staid, Rulebound (Stronger

superego strength)

.520

Q1 (+) Experimenting, Critical, Liberal, Analytical, Free-

thinking (Radicalism)

.446

F (-) Sober, Prudent, Serious, Taciturn (Desurgency) .390

L (-) Trusting, Adaptable, Free of Jealousy, Easy to Get on

With (Alaxia)

.267*

Q2(-) Group dependent, A “Joiner” and Sound Follower

(Group adherence)

.236*


This factor mainly loads on four factors of personality indexed by 16PF

namely I,G,Q1, and F with respective loadings of .707, .520, .446 and -.390.

Factor L and Q2 of 16 PF also have some considerable loading here on this

factors. In view of the characteristics tapped by these factors, this factor can

be labelled as Tender minded Emotionality Vs. Alert poise. It also

resembles with one of the second stratum factors of personality located and

reported by Cattell and Ebber (1962), and Cattell et al (1970). It has

accounted for 7.084% of total variance.

Obtained structure characterizes the individuals as tenderminded,

dependent, day-dreaming, fastidious, conscientious, persevering, strong in

superego strength, critical, analytical, interested in intellectual matters,

radical, sober, prudent, introspective, desurgent, trusting, and group

dependent. It worth noting that measures of three Gunas of Prakriti have


67

marked negligible loadings on this factor depicting no sharing of variance

with the markers of this factor.

Factor-VII


B (+) More Intelligent, Abstract thinking, Bright (Higher

scholastic mental capacity)

.738

L (+) Suspicious, Self-Opinionated, Hard to Fool

(Protension)

.676

G (+) Conscientious, persevering, Staid, Rulebound

(Stronger superego strength)

.362

Q3 (+) Controlled, Socially-precise, Following Self-Image

(High self-concept control)

.270*

*Approaching the level of significance

Factor B of 16 PF has borneout high positive loading of .738 on this

factor followed by L (.676), G (.362) and Q3 (.270). In view of nature of

markers, this factor is named as High Scholastic Mental Capacity. It

resembles with one of the second stratum factors reported by Cattell et al

(1970). It account for .6859% of total variance. It portrays the subjects

characterized as self-opinionated, doubtful, involved in own ego, interested in

internal mental life, conscientious, persevering, strong in superego strength,

and high in self concept. Such individuals tend to be fast learner, intelligent,

abstract thinking, and high in scholastic mental capacity. Here also the

measures of three Gunas of Prakriti have not shared their variane with the

markers of this factor depicting no overlap with them.

Main Findings

Main findings of this study are:-

1. Most of the frequency distributions are more or less normal

requiring no normalizing transformation.

2. Intercorrelations among measures of three Gunas of Prakriti indexed

by Vedic Personality Inventory are in general low ranging from -.341

to .490. Two of three correlations are significant at or above .05 level

of significance. Rajas and Tamas have correlated positively with

each other and negatively with Sattva. Obtained correlations

confirmatory to those reported in earlier studies (e.g., Das, 1987;

Wolf, 1998; Rao and Harigopal, 1979; Mohan and Sandhu, 1988;

and Sitamma et. al. 1995) and contextual descriptions given in


68

Shrimad Bhagavad Gita (Chapter 14th), Asawemedha Parva of

Mahabarta (Section, 38) and Shrimad Bhagavata Purana (Skandha-

XI, Chapter-25).

3. Correlations between three measures of Trigunas and sixteen of

Cattellian personality factors are in general low ranging from -.285

to .260. Only 13 of 48 correlations are significant at or above .05

level of significance of which six are positive and seven are negative.

Sattva has correlated positively with factors H, and Q3 and

negatively with Q4. Rajas has marked positive association with O, Q4

and negative with C, G and Q3. Tamas has corresponded positively

with O and Q4; and negatively with C, G and Q3. Present finding

depicts some amount of variance sharing between two types of

measures.

4. Intercorrelations among sixteen measures of personality are in

general low ranging from -.610 to .568. Only 35 of 120 correlations

are significant at or above .05 level of significance of which 19 are

positive and remaining 16 are negative. Obtained pattern of

interrelations among these is very much comparable to those

reported by Cattell and associated researchers with 16PF.

Significant correlations among some of the measures are because of

their association with some personality factors at second order level.

19x19 intercorrelations matrix was processed by applying Principal

Component Method of Factor Analysis. Seven factors were obtained

having the eigen values greater than 1.000. These factors have been

interpreted after varimax rotation.

5. Varimaxly rotated factors have been identified as Adjustment (Factor

I), Extraversion (Factor II), Rājasic Personality (Factor III),

Independence vs Subduedness (Factor IV), Sāttvic Personality

(Factor V) Tenderminded Emotionaity Vs Alert poise (Factor VI), and

High Scholastic Mental Capacity (Factor VII). All the seven factors

have accounted for 60.227% of total variance.

6. Factor I is identified as Adjustment on the basis of significant

loadings of factors Q4, O, C, H and Q3 of 16 PF. It replicates one of

the second order factors reported by Cattell et al (1970). Measures of

Rajas and Tamas have also marked some considerable negative

loadings on this factor.

7. Factor II is Extroversion on the basis of significant loadings of factors

Q2, F, H, N and A, replicating one of the second order factors of


69

personality in Cattellian model. Measures of three Gunas of Prakriti

have not marked their association with this factor.

8. Factor III is of Rājasic Personality. It depicts the dominance of Rajas

Guna over the remaining two Gunas. Factor G and A of 16 PF have

marked significant overlaps with Rajas and Tamas Gunas of Prakriti

of Vedic Model. Sattva has marked contrary relationship with the

combination of Rajas and Tamas. This finding is confirmatory to

those of earlier findings (e.g., Das, 1987; Wolf, 1998; Rao and

Harigopal, 1979; Mohan and Sandhu, 1988; and Sitamma et. al.

1995) and contextual descriptions given in Shrimad Bhagavad Gita

(Chapter 14th), Aswamedha Parva of Mahabarta (Section, 38) and

Shrimad Bhagavata Purana (Skandha-XI, Chapter-25).

9. Factor IV is identified as Independence V/s Subduedness in view of

significant loadings of factors E, N, Q1, and L of 16 PF. It replicates

one of the second order factors of personality as per Cattellian

Model. Sattva has marked some considerable positive association on

this factor.

10. Factor V is named as Sāttvic Personality. Here Sattva has marked

negative association with Tamas. Factors M and Q3 of 16 PF have

emerged significant Cattellian personality correlates of Sattva Guna

of Vedic Personality.

11. Factor VI is named as Tenderminded Emotionally V/s Alert poise

replicating one of the second order factors of personality of

Cattellian Model. Measures of Trigunas have not shared their

variance substantially with the markers of this factor.

12. Factor VII is of High Scholastic Mental Capacity and it replicates one

of the second stratum factors of personality reported by Cattell et al

(1970). Measures of Trigunia have not marked their association on

this factors.

13. Measures of Triguna are factorially complex and hence appeared on

different factors Factor-I, Factor-II, Factor- III and Factor-V of this

solution.

14. Sixteen measures of personality (16PF) are factorially complex, and

have appeared on all the seven factors.

15. Five of second order factors of Cattellian model of personality have

been replicated i.e. Adjustment vs Anxiety (Factor-I), Extraversion Vs

Introversion (Factor-II) Independence V/s Subduednes (Factor-IV),


70

Tender minded Emotionality V/s Alert poise (Factor-VI), and High

Scholastic Mental Capacity (Factor-VII).

16. Three Gunas of Prakriti of Vedic Model have marked some structured

overlaps with some of factors of personality of Cattellian Model.

17. Positive relationship between Rajas and Tamas, and their negative

relationship with Sattva have been established in the present finding

which are in conformation to the earlier findings and contextual

description of Shrimad Bhagavad Gita (Chapter 14th), Asawamedha

Parva of Mahabarta (Section, 38) and Shrimad Bhagavata Purana

(Skandha-XI, Chapter-25).


71

REFERENCES

Boss, M. (1966). A Psychiatrist discovers I (Henry A. Frey, Trans.). Calcutta:

Rupa & Co.

Cattell, R.B. and Child, D. (1975). Motivation and Dynamic Structure. London:

Holt-Biend.

Cattell, R.B. (1950). An Introduction to personality study. London:

Hutchinson’s University Library. (New York: Longmans, Green).

Cattell, R.B. (1950). Personality, a systematic theoretical and factual study.

New York: Mc Graw-Hill.

Cattell, R.B. (1957). Personality and Motivation Structure and Measurement.

New York: Harcourt World Book Co.

Cattell, R.B. (1965). The Scientific analysis of Personality. Harmondsworth,

Eng.: Pengwin.

Cattell, R.B. (1979). Personality, and learning theory, the structure of

personality in its environments (Vol.). New York: Springer.

Cattell, R.B. Kline, P. (1977). The scientific analysis of personality and

motivation. New York: Academic Press.

Chakraborty, S.K. (1987). Management Effectiveness and Quality of Work Life.

New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill.

Chatterjee, S. & Datta, D. (1968). An Introduction to Indian Philosophy.

Calcutta: Calcutta University Press.

Daftuar, C.N. (1998). A Scale of Job Satisfaction. In D.M. Pestonjee (Eds.).

Second Handbook of Psychological and Social Instrument. New Delhi:

Concept.

Daftuar, C.N., & Anjuli (1997). Occupational Stress, Organizational

Commitment and Job Involvement in Sattva, Rajas and Tamas

Personality Types. Journal of Indian Psychology, 15, (1&2), 42-52.

Das, R.C. (1987). The Gita Typology of Personality-An Inventory. Journal of

Indian Psychology, 6 (1&2), 7-12.

Das. R.C. (1991). Standardization of the Gita Inventory of Personality. Journal

of Indian Psychology, 9 (1&2), 47-54.

Dasgupta, S. (1961). A History of Indian Philosophy. Great Britain: Cambridge

University Press.


72

Diender, E., Emmons, R.A., Larsen, R.J.& Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction

with Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75.

Dwivedi, C.B. (2002). Ayurvedic Concepts of the Pursa, Dehaprakrti and

Sattvaprakrti. In G. Misra, and A.K. Mohanty, (Eds.), Perspective on

Indigenous Psychology (1st ed.) (305-325). New Delhi: Concept.

Eashwaran, E. (1997). The Bhagvadgeets (For Daily Living). Mumbai: Jaico

Publishing House.

Gough, H.G., & McGurk, E. (1967). A group test of Perceptual acuity,.

Perceptual and Motor Skills, 24, 1107-1115.

Hiriyanna, M. (1995). The Essentials of Indian Philosophy. Delhi: Motilal

Banarsidass.

Infante, D.A, & Wiegley, C.J., III. (1986). Verbal aggressiveness: An

Interpersonal Model and Measure. Communication Monographs, 53, 61-

69.

Jain, N., Sharma, N. & Yadava, A. (2006). Personality and Behaviour: A

Triguna Perspective. In Kumar, U., Mukherjee, S., & Parkash, V. (Eds.)

Recent Developments in Psychology. Delhi: DRDO.

Kapur, M., Hirisava, U., Reddy, M.V., Barnabas, I., & Singhal, D. (1997).

Study of Infant Temperament: An Indian Perspective. Indian Journal of

Clinical Psychology, 24 (2), 171-177.

Lakshi-Bai, A.J., Murthy, J., & Nagalakshmi, S. (1975). Rajas and Tamas in

Psychological Disturbance. Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology,2, 137-

138.

Marutham, P., (1992). ‘Sattva’, ‘Rajas’ and ‘Tamas’ factors among college

students. Unpublished M.Phil Dessertation, Banglore University.

Marutham, P., Balodhi, J.P., & Mishra, H. (1998). Sattva, Rajas, Tamas (SRT)

Inventory. NIHHANS Journal, 15-19.

Mathew, V.G. (1995). Mathew IAS Rating Scale Manual. University of Kerala,

Kerala.

Mathew, V.G. (2008) http://www.psychology4all.com

Mohan, V., & Sandhu, S. (1986). Development of scale to measure Sattvic,

Rajaic and Tamasic Guna. Journal of Indian Academy of Applied

Psychology, 12, 46-52.

Mohan, V., & Sandhu, S. (1988). Samkhya Tri-Guna and Eyesenck's

dimensions of personality. The Vedic Path, 23-28.

http://www.psychology4all.com/


73

Murthy, P.K., Kumar, S.K.K. (2007). The concept of Triguna A Critical

Analysis and Synthesis. Psychological Studies, 52 (2), 103-113.

Narayanan, J. & Krishnan (2003). Impact of Sattva and Rajas on

Transformation Leadership and Karma-Yoga. Journal of Indian

Psychology, 21 (2),1-11.

Nunnally, J.C., & Bernstein, I.H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3rd Ed.). New

York: McGraw-Hill.

Parameswaran, E.G. (1969). Indian Psychology-The Need for Break Through,

An Attempt. Research Bulletin, 5, 75-80.

Paranjpe, A.C. (1987). The self beyond Cognition Action, Pain and Pleasure:

An Eastern Perspective. In Yardely. K. & Hones, T. (Eds.) Self and

Identity: Psychological Perspectives (27-39). New York: John Wiley.

Pathak, N.S., Bhatt, I.D., & Sharma, R. (1992). Manual for Classifying

Personality on Tridimension of Gunas-an Indian Approach. Indian

Journal of Behaviour, 16 (4), 1-14.

Prabhupada, A.C.B.S. (1986). Bhagavad-Gita: As it is. Bhakthivedanta Book

Trust.

Rao, P.V.K. & Harigopal, K., (1979). The Three Gunas and ESP: An

Exploratory Investigation. Journal of Indian Psychology, 2 (1), 63-68.

Rastogi, M.R. (2004). Triguna and Psychological ‘Well-being’. Ph.D. Thesis,

Lucknow University, Lucknow.

Rastogi, M.R. (2005). Triguna and Psychological ‘Well-being’. Indian Journal of

Community Psychology, 1 (2), 115-124.

Richard King (2000). Indian Philosophy. New Delhi: Maya Bublishers Pvt. Ltd.

Rosenthal, J.A. (1996). Qualitative Descriptors of Strength of Association and

Effect Size. Journal of Social Service Research, 21 (4), 37-59.

Roy, P.C. The Mahabharata of Krishna-Dwaipayan Vyasa, (English

Translation): Vol-XII-Aswamedha Parva. (68-73). Calcutta: Oriental

Publishing Co.

Safaya, R. (1976). Indian Psychology. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.

Sharma, R. (1999). Self-concept and Job-satisfaction in Sattva. Rajas and

Tamas Personalities. Journal of Indian Psychology, 17(2), 9-17.

Shastri, S.S.S. (1930). The Samkhya Karika of Isvara Krishna. My lapore: The

Madras Law Journal Press.


74

Singh, R. (1971). An Inventory from Mahabharata. Indian Journal of

Psychiatry, 13, 149-161.

Singh, R. (2000). Vedic-Ayurvedic Construct of Well-being and Prakriti. In

C.P. Khokhar (Eds.), Trends in Clinical Diagnosis & Psychotherapy-

Modern and Vedic (9-16). Haridwar: Gurukul Kangri Vishwavidalaya.

Sitamma, M., Sridevi., & Rao, P.V.K. (1995). Three Gunas and Cognitive

Characteristics: A study of Field Dependence Independence and

Perceptual Acuity. Journal of Indian Psychology, 13 (2), 13-20.

Swami Tapasyananda (2003). Srimad Bhagaata-The holy book of God. (Vol.

IV). Madras: Sri Ramakrishna Math.

Tripathi, Y.B. (2000). Molecular Apprroach to Ayurveda. Indian Journal of

Experimental Biology, 38, 409-14.

Uma, K. (1969). To Develop a Personality Inventory based on the Doctrine of

Three Gunas for the use on student population. Unpublished

Dissertation, Osmania University, Hyderabad.

Uma, K., Lakshmi, Y.S., & Parameshwaran, E.G. (1971). Construction of a

Personality Inventory based on Doctrine of Three Gunas. Research

Bulletin, 6. 49-58.

Witkin, H.A., Dyk, R.B., Faterson, H.F., Goodenough, D.R., & Karp, S.A.

(1962). Psychological Differentiation. New York: Wiley.

Wolf, D.B. (1998). The Vedic Personality Inventory: A Study of Gunas. Journal

of Indian Psychology, 16 (1), 26-43.

Wolf, D.B. (1999). A Psychometric Analysis of the Three Gunas. Psychological

Reports, 84, 1379-1390.

Wolf, D.B. Abell, N. (2003). Examining the effects of Meditation Techniques on

Psychological Functioning. Research on Social Work Practice, 13 (1).

27-42.

Zaidi, F., & Singh, R.S. (2001). Direct and Stress Moderating effects of positive

life events and certain personality variable on psychological well-being.

Ph.D. Thesis, A.P.S. University, Rewa.

A STUDY OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRIGUNA AND CATTELLIAN FACTORS OF PERSONALITY

Documents

Transcript of A STUDY OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRIGUNA AND CATTELLIAN FACTORS OF PERSONALITY