498 Journal of Clinical Psychology, July, 1983. Vol. 39, No . 4

RICKERS-OVSIANKINA, M. A., BERZINS. J . I., GELLER, J . D., & ROGERS, G. W. Patients’ role-cxpectancies in psychotherapy: A theoretical and measurement approach. Psychotherapy: Theory. Research and Practice, 1971, 8. 124-126.

SHANNON, G. The effect of three modes of preparation for therapy on duration of treatment. Dissertation Abstracts International. 1975, 36. 9228-9238.

WINSTON, A., PARDES, H., PAPERNIK, D. S. . & BRESLIN, L. Aftercare of psychiatric patients and its relation to rehospitalization. Hospital and Community Psychiatry. 1977, 28. 118-121.

WITKIN, M.. & BASS, R. Statistical Note 95: Inpatient treatment in federally funded community mental health centers--1971. National Institute of Mental Health, Biometry Branch, Survey and Reports Sec- tion, Rockvillc. Md., September 1973.

Effecting a continuum of care: An exploitation of the crisis of psychiatric hospital release. Community Mental Health Journal, 1968, 4 , 63-73.

WOLKON, G. H.

CLINICAL TYPES IN A NORMAL POPULATION: CONCURRENT AND CONSTRUCT VALIDITY

PHILIP SMITH

University of Maine

PETER MAGARO’

Ohio State University

SANDY PEDERSON

University of Maine

Examined the relationship between personality and psychopathology through the use of the Multivariate Personality Inventory (MPI) (N = 100). The concurrent validity study compared the factors of the MPI with those of the Lazare-Klerman Personality Inventory, which was developed for a pathological population. Factor analysis of these two inventories yielded three factors that correspond to the three predicted personality styles: Hysteric, Compulsive, and Character Disorder. In the second part of this study the construct validity of these scales was examined. Results showed significant differences among groups in the predicted directions, which in- dicates that the personality groups as defined by the MPI in a normal pop- ulation perform as would be predicted from work with pathological groups that bear the same label. Construct validity measures did not support the predictions with regard to the performance of the personality types.

Our past research has focused on the development of a multivariate theory of per- sonality types or “styles” (Magaro & Smith, 1981; Miller & Magaro, 1977; Pederson & Magaro, 1982; Pederson, Magaro, & Underwood, 1982). Our past research has involved operationalizing the characteristics of each style in terms of valid personality measures (e.g., Sensation-Seeking, Machiavellianism, Locus of Control). Factor analysis and cluster analysis of these scales have yielded clusters of traits consistent with our theoretical personality types (Magaro & Smith, 1981). A further step in our research has been the development of the Multivariate Personality Inventory, a 96-item scale that consists of 8 subscales. The subscales correspond to the personality types proposed by Miller and Magaro (1977), and the research has investigated and supported the reliability and validity of five subscales: The Hysteric, Compulsive, Character Disorder, Depressive and Manic (Magaro & Smith, 1981). In the present study the concurrent

‘Requests for reprints should be addressed to Peter A. Magaro, Department of Psychology, Ohio State University, 164 West 19th Avenue, Columbus, 0. 43210.

Clinical Types 499

validity and construct validity of three Multivariate subscales (Hysteric, Compulsive, and Character Disorder) are examined.

Concurrent Validity In a test of psychoanalytic theory, Lazare, Klerman, and Armor (1966) constructed

a 200-item self-report inventory that yielded 20 trait scores. Factor analysis of these 20 traits in a sample of 100 clinically depressed women yielded 3 factors, which the authors labeled Hysteric, Obsessive, and Oral (Lazare et al., 1970; Paykell & Prusoff, 1973). The traits that define the Hysteric, Obsessive and Oral factors are consistent with our theoretical conceptions of the Hysteric, Compulsive, and Character Disorder personality styles, respectively. Thus, it is predicted that a factor analysis of the Lazare-Klerman fac- tor together with the above-mentioned Multivariate subscales will yield a factor structure with the theoretically corresponding scales loading together.

Construct Validity Using factor scores from the analysis of the Lazare-Klerman and Multivariate sub-

scales, Ss who show a predominantly Hysteric, Compulsive, or Character Disorder per- sonality style will be selected to test construct validity in terms of other personality measures and performance measures. The Hysteric style is characterized by the use of the defense mechanism of repression, combined with global, impressionistic, cognitive, and affective processes (Horowitz, 1976; Shapiro, 1965). They are also noted for their suggestibility, romantic hopefulness, a tendency to be people-oriented, and to establish dependency relationships. Such traits are converted on self-report measures to predic- tions of scoring more altruistic on the Altruism subscale of the Philosophies of Human Nature Scale (Wrightsman, 1974), external on the Locus of Control Scale (Rotter, 1966) and sensation-seeking on the Sensation-Seeking Scale (Zuckerman, Kolin, Price, & Zoob, 1964). On laboratory tasks members of this style are predicted to be field- dependent on the Hidden Figures Test (Witkin, Lewis, Hertzman, Machover, Meissner, & Wapner, 1954), higher compared with other styles on the Performance subtests of the WAIS (Picture Arrangement, Object Assembly), more empathic than other styles in an experimental empathy situation, and more conforming than others in a conformity situa- tion.

The Compulsive style (Salzman, 1968; Shapiro, 1965) is characterized by a strong need for control and structure and a highly intense and focused attentional style. The Compulsive tends to overstructure incoming stimuli and to attend to the detailed and technical aspects of the environment. These individuals also tend to be introverted, self- doubting, and concerned with independence and self-sufficiency (Reed, 1977; Shapiro, 1965). Thus, on self-report measures, compulsives are predicted to be more internal on the Locus of Control Scale, and low sensation-seekers on the Sensation-Seeking Scale. On laboratory tasks members of this style are predicted to be high, compared to members of other styles, on the Verbal subtests of the WAIS (Vocabulary, Digit Span), less conforming than other groups in a conformity situation, more future-oriented on a Future Time Perspective measure, and more prone than other groups to overestimate a time interval.

The primary characteristic of the Charater Disorder Style is concerned primarily with a self-gratification achieved through interpersonal manipulation (Cleckley, 1964). This egocentric manipulation is complemented further by the qualities of inconsistency of behavior, poor delay of gratification, present-orientation, and highly developed social skills. In terms of the self-report measures, members of this group are predicted to be high on the Cynicism subscale of the Philosophies of Human Nature Scale, external on the Locus of Control Scale, and high sensation-seekers on the Sensation-Seeking Scale. On laboratory tasks this group is predicted to be lower than other groups on the Future

500 Journal of Clinical Psychology. July, 1983, Vol. 39, NO. 4

Time Perspective measure, more prone than other groups to underestimate a time inter- val, and less empathic than other groups.

METHOD Subjects

One hundred female college students at the University of Maine participated in the first testing session. In order to enhance construct validity, 40 Ss then were assigned to groups on the basis of their profile of factor scores on the three factors found in the factor analysis. Ss were assigned to either the Hysteric, Compulsive or Character Disorder group when their factor score on one of these factors was at least one-half a standard deviation unit above the mean of factor scores, and their factor scores on the two remain- ing factors were lower than this higher factor score by at least one-half a standard devia- tion unit. Ten Ss who met the above criteria were assigned to each group. Ten Ss who showed no significantly elevated factor scores were assigned to a control group.

After Ss had been selected they were scheduled for individual testing sessions. These sessions were approximately 1 hour in length and were conducted by the first and third authors, who were blind to the group membership of Ss.

Procedure Ss (N = 100) first were administered the following battery of tests: Lazare-Klerman

Inventory (Lazare et al., 1966), Multivariate Personality Inventory, Altruism and Cynicism subscales of the Philosophies of Human Nature Scale (Wrightsman, 1974), Mach V (Christie & Geis, 1970), a shortened form of the Hidden Figures Test (Witkin et al., 1954). Sensation-Seeking Scale (Form IV) (Zuckerman, 1975). the Locus of Control Scale (Rotter, 1966), and the Future Time Perspective Scale (Siegman, 1960). This testing session was approximately 1 Ih hours in duration and was performed in a large lec- ture hall.

The construct validity procedure involved conformity, time estimation, and em- pathy tasks. The conformity task involved Ss being seated facing a Crutchfield apparatus display panel. They were presented with a list of 13 past U. S. presidents and told that their task was to rate &he importance of these presidents on a scale from 1 to 5. Ss were told that in order to give them some idea of how others had responded, the judgments of four other students would be displayed on the panel. After it was clear that the S un- derstood the task, the S worked through the list, first observing the bogus responses on the display panel, and then indicating her own judgment. The importance judgments shown the Ss were determined by pilot research. Seven of these judgments were consis- tent with mean judgments given these presidents by the pilot sample, the other six were in the opposite direction of those given by the pilot sample.

After completing the conformity task Ss were told that their next task involved es- timating an interval of time. In the first condition Ss were instructed to press a telegraph key when they felt that 85 seconds had elapsed. The beginning of the 85-second period, it was explained, would be indicated when the red bulb on the panel in front of them lit up. Ss were instructed not to count or use watches. The S’s estimate of 85 seconds was recorded on a timer. The second condition again involved estimating 85 seconds. However, the S also was asked to report to the E each time a bulb lit up on the display panel. Three bulbs lit up during the first 50 seconds of the interval. The third condition was identical to the second condition except that Ss now were told that the lit bulbs appearing during the interval represented correct responses made by another female stu- dent who was taking a test. It was explained at length that the test this fictitious woman was taking was important and that the results indicated her chances of succeeding in college. It was explained further that the,girl would have to make four correct responses

Clinical Types 50 1

(within 85 seconds) in order to pass the test. As in condition 2, only 3 bulbs lit up, which indicated that the girl did not pass the test.

This third condition constituted the empathy manipulation. It was predicted that empathic Ss would be most distracted by the dilemma of the fictitious student and would therefore show a differential increase in their time estimates. As a check on this manipulation, Ss were asked at the conclusion of the testing session whether the student had passed the test. It was predicted that the Ss who were most empathic or most con- cerned with the success/failure of the fictitious student would be aware that the student had failed.

The WAIS subtests (Digit Span, Vocabulary, Picture Arrangement, Object Assembly) were administered after the time estimation task. WAIS scaled scores were used in all analyses.

RESULTS The Lazare-Klerman trait scores for our sample were factor-analyzed (principal

components analysis, Varimax rotation). This analysis yielded three factors that had patterns of trait loadings highly similar to the Hysteric, Obsessive and Oral Factors found by Lazare et al. (1966, 1970) and Paykell and Prusoff (1973). The rank order cor- relations between our factors and those of Lazare et al. (1966) were .73, .69 and .82 for the Obsessive, Hysteric, and Oral Factors, respectively. Factor scores were computed for Ss on each of these three factors. These factor scores together with scores on the Hysteric, Compulsive, and Character Disorder subscales of the Multivariate Inventory were factor analyzed (principal components analysis, Varimax rotation). The first three factors from this second analysis are shown in Table 1.

TABLE I

Results v/ the Facror Analysis of the Lazare-Klerman and Multivariate Subscales

Scales 1 Factors

I I

Multivariate Hysteric Compulsive Character Disorder

,2616

,8397

,0664

,2252

,2397

,7369

.7 185

. I294

,4191

LdZare-Klermdn Hysteric - 1775 - 0120 no02

Obsessive 8697 ~ 1078 0 4 5 5

Oral 0564 9264 0754

Compulsive Oral-manipuldtive Hysteric style style style

Aggressive Stubborn - 0269 0439 2598

Factor I , which accounted for 25.4% of the variance, was defined by the high loadings of the Multivariate Compulsive subscale and the Lazare-Klerman Obsessive Factor. This factor, then, reflects a personality style characterized by orderliness, par- simony, perseverance, rationality, and attention to detail. This factor was labeled the Compulsive Style. Factor 11, which accounted for 18.1% of the variance, was defined by the high loadings of the Multivariate Character Disorder subscale and the Lazare- Klerman Oral Factor. This factor indicates a personality style characterized by manipulativeness, cynicism, pessimism, passivity, egocentricity and dependency. This

3 2 G

roup

s %

(3

) B

Altr

uism

6.

6 -7

.2

-4.8

I .2

(1

)-[(

2)+(

3) [

p <.

005

E

Cyn

icism

-5

.8

-6.9

9.

I 3.2

(3

tw+

(2) 1

p

<.00

5 2

Mac

hiav

ellia

nism

76

.2

78.2

84

.7

77.7

(3

t[(1

)+(2

)1

p <.

005

5- H

idde

n Fi

gure

s Tes

t I .5

3.

3 3.

6 3.

3 (it[

1 p

<.02

5 s

Sens

atio

n-Se

ekin

g It 2

I. G

ener

al

12.5

9.

5 11

.5

12.8

(2

)-[(

1)+(

3)1

2. T

AS

10.7

7.

8 9.

6 10

.7

(2)-

[~+

(3)1

p

<.05

It

3. E

S 8.

0 5.

7 8.

0 10

.2

(2)-

1~

+(3

) 1 p

<.00

1

4. Dis.

6.0

3. I

6.0

6.3

-2

I. D

iffic

ult-E

asy

Wor

ld

23.6

26

.4

15.1

22

.5

%

TABL

E 2

Gro

up 2s f

or P

sych

omet

ric

and

Beha

vior

al M

earu

res

L: 0

=1

2.

(1)

(2)

Ora

l (4

) M

easu

re

Hys

teri

c C

ompu

lsive

M

anip

ulat

ive

Con

trol

s C

ompa

riso

ns

a

rr

0

09

p <.

05

4

Y) Y

Locus o

f Con

trol

(Tot

al)

-

-

-

-

G9-I

(1)+

(3)+

(4) 1

p

<.05

h

2. Ju

st-U

njus

t Wor

ld

13.8

13

.2

11.6

12

.8

Y) 2

Wor

ld

13.5

17

.1 10

.7

16.3

(2

)-[ (

1)+(

3) 1

p <.

05

P [(

1)+(

3)1-

[(2)

+(4)

1 P

c.05

Q

3. Pr

edic

tabl

e-U

npre

dict

able

Mea

sure

(3)

(1)

(2)

Ora

l (4

) H

yste

ric

Com

pulsi

ve

Man

ipul

ativ

e C

ontr

ols

Com

pari

sons

a

WA

IS

Voc

abul

ary

Dig

it Sp

an

Obj

ect A

ssem

bly

Pict

ure A

rran

gem

ent

Tim

e Es

timat

ion

(scc

s)

No

Dist

ract

ion

Dist

ract

ion

A

Dist

ract

ion

B Fu

ture

Tim

e Pe

rspe

ctiv

e (ye

ars)

C

onfo

rmity

H

igh

Fam

iliar

ity

Med

ium

Fam

iliar

ity

Low

Fam

iliar

ity

11.8

11.2

12.4

9.3

63.2

79.2

86.0

6. I .9

2.5 I .8

13.3

12.9

10.4

9.2

72.6

84.5

91.3

16.7

.I 2.3 I .4

11.7

11.6

10.6

9.8

52. I

68.8

76.5

7.8

I .25

2.25

I .62

504 Journal of Clinical Psychology, July, 1983, Vol. 39, No. 4

factor was labeled the Character Disorder style. Factor 111, which accounted for 14.6% of the variance, was defined by the high loadings of the Multivariate Hysteric subscale and the Lazare-Klerman Hysteric Factor. These loadings indicate a personality style characterized by emotionality, expression of feeling, an interest in other people, and romanticism. This factor was labeled the Hysteric Style. Hence, the factors found to comprise the Lazare-Klerman scale in our normal population corresponded to those found in a number of pathological populations by Lazare (Lazare et al., 1966) and Paykell and Prusoff (1973). Furthermore, the Lazare-Klerman factors paralleled the MPI measures of the same groups and indicated that the two tests are measuring similar factors. This suggests that indeed the personality styles we propose have considerable generality across normal and “abnormal” populations.

The groups derived from the factor analysis (Hysteric, Compulsive, Character Disorder, and Control) were compared on all the dependent measures listed in Table 2 by means of f-tests. The use of a priori comparisons was justified by the prior prediction of specific group differences on each dependent measure (Keppel, 1973).

Unidimensional Scales Compulsives scored significantly lower than Hysterics and Character Disorders on

the overall test and two subscales of the Sensation-Seeking Scale (General, f(33) = 1.92, p <.05), Thrill and Adventure Seeking (f(33) = 1.96, p <.05), Disinhibition (f(33) = 3.82, p <.001). Compulsives also scored more internal on the total Locus of Control Scale than all other groups combined (f(33) = 1.82, p <.05) and on the Predictable- Unpredictable World component of this scale (f(33) = 2.006, p <.05). Compulsives also tended to score higher than other groups combined on Digit Span (f(33) = 1.397, p <. 10) and significantly higher on Vocabulary (f(33) = 2.131, p <.025).

Hysterics scored significantly higher on the Altruism Scale than other personality groups combined (f(33) = 3 .149 ,~ <.005) and scored lower, more field dependent, than Compulsives and Character Disorders on the Hidden Figures Test (f(33) = 2.383, p <.025). They also scored significantly lower than Controls on this measure (f(33) = 1.915, p <.05). Hysterics tended to score higher on Object Assembly than other groups combined (f(33) = 1.659, p <.lo). Hysterics, as well as Character Disorders, scored in a significantly more external direction on the Predictable-Unpredictable World Items of the Locus of Control Scale than did Compulsives and Controls (p <.05).

Character Disorders scored significantly higher on the Cynicism Scale than Hysterics and Compulsives combined (f(33) = 3.189, p <.005) and also scored significantly higher on the Machiavellianism Scale than other personality groups com- bined (f(33) = 2.81 1, p <.005). In addition, Character Disorders scored significantly higher than Controls on Machiavellianism (r(33) = 2.227, p <.025).

Laboratory Measures The conformity score was defined as the number of intervals a S s response moved

away from the mean response and toward the bogus response summed for conformity items in each condition of familiarity. There were three levels of familiarity (High, Medium and Low) and two presidents in each condition. The maximum conformity score that a S could receive was 4. In the high familiarity condition Compulsives were significantly less conforming than all other groups combined (f(33) = 2.359, p <.025). Hysterics failed to show greater conformity than other groups at any level of familiarity.

Future Time Perspective was defined as the median of the differences between the S s present age and the ages indicated by the S for future events. Compulsives had significantly higher Future Time Perspective scores than other groups combined (p < .05). Contrary to prediction, Character Disorders did not differ significantly from Hysterics and Controls.

On the time estimation task all groups overestimated time in the first condition, which consisted of estimating the passage of 85 seconds. Overestimation in this context

Clinical Types 505

means that the time estimate given by the S was less than 85 seconds. For instance, if the S indicated after the passage of 50 seconds that 85 seconds had elapsed, the actual elapsed time has been overestimated. There were no differences among groups.

DISCUSSION Factor analysis of the Lazare-Klerman-Armor (LKA) factors with the Multivariate

Personality Inventory (MPI) subscales supported the concurrent validity of the MPI Hysteric, Compulsive, and Character Disorder subscales. The MPI Hysteric subscale and the LKA Hysteric factor defined a personality style in which intense emotion fre- quently is felt and expressed uninhibitedly. The MPI Hysteric items reflect romantic hopefulness, a global, impressionistic cognitive style, a concern with being fashionable and a high valuing of interpersonal relations. Thus, although there is some overlap (interpersonal dependence), the scales tend to complement one another (emotionality with global cognitive style) and in effect reflect the normal descriptions of pathological terms, for example, affiliation for dependency. Shapiro (1965) relates the emotive style of the hysteric to a paucity of cognitive integration in that emotion seems to come forth spontaneously in relatively unmodified form. Consequently, Hysterics sometimes become dependent to channel their emotionality. The dependency found in the Hysterics is consistent with their field-dependent cognitive style, which could be reflected in a tur- ning to others for cues in ambiguous situations or stressing affiliation as a value in society. As well as fielddependency, altruism also was found to be characteristic of Ss who scored high on this factor. The altruism of the Hysteric indicates a positive view of the world and others. The supposition that Hysterics employ a holistic, global cognitive style was given some additional support by the finding that this group tended to perform better on Object Assembly than other groups.

The second factor in our analysis was defined by the LKA Obsessive factor and the MPI Compulsive subscale. Thest scales show considerable overlap; both reflect orderliness, organization, cleanliness, emotional constriction, planning, and a strong sense of responsibility. This personality style appears to embody the principles of the Protestant Work ethic, and, as Paykell and Prusoff (1973) have noted, these traits could be used to characterize the model citizen. The above traits are understandable as a manifestation or implementation of the Compulsive’s internal locus of control. The Compulsive believes in a rational and orderly world in which events are predictable and controllable. The low sensation-seeking found among Ss who score high on this factor is understandable as an attempt to maintain an orderly world view in which actions are seen as leading to predictable outcomes that are internally determined. Interpersonally, the Compulsive strives to maintain a sense of independence and self-reliance. The lower conformity scores of compulsive Ss reflect this resistance to influence as well as the most accurate judgment of time.

The third factor was defined by the loadings of LKA Oral factor and the MPI Character Disorder subscale. The LKA Oral factor was defined by the traits of passivity, pessimism, egocentricity, rejection of others, and dependency. The items that comprise the MPI Character Disorder scale reflect manipulativencss, cynicism and selfishness. A theme that runs through both scales is cynicism, that is, others and the self are viewed as selfish and uncaring. Cynicism is a strong component in our characterization of the Character Disorder belief system. The LKA Oral factor and the MPI Character Disorder subscale both correlated positively and significantly with cynicism (r = .52, p <.001, and r = .39, p <.001, respectively). Another significant factor in the Character Disorder personality is manipulativeness, and, as predicted, Ss who scored high on this factor showed significantly elevated Machiavellianism scores. Also, because the Character Disorder is active in manipulating others to get what he wants, his locus of control is external. Thus, although the Character Disorder believes that he can get what

506 Journal of Clinical Psychology, July, 1983. Vol. 39, NO. 4

he wants from others, he does not see this as being a function of hard work, but rather a function of guile, opportunity, and luck.

The predictions with regard to time estimation, empathy, and conformity were not supported. It was our expectation that Character Disorder Ss would underestimate time, while Compulsive Ss would show high Future time perspective scores and a tendency to overestimate time intervals. Compulsives did exhibit the highest future time perspective scores as well as the least comformity, but Character Disorders did not show the greatest overestimation of time intervals and Hysterics the greatest degree of conformity as predicted. The expectation of greater empathy also was not supported with the present measure. In general, the construct validity results were disappointing, which may be due to problems with the measures themselves, expectations of the performance of our groups, or the actual construct validity of the personality types.

The concurrent validity results indicated that our personality types derived from studies of normals correspond to personality types found in pathological populations. This provides additional evidence for our hypothesis that these personality styles not only exist in the normal population, as presently shown, but that they also have a continuous relationship to pathological populations.

REFERENCES CHRISTIE, R., & GEIS, F. L. Studies in Machiovellianism. New York: Academic Press, 1970. CLECKLEY. H. HOROWITZ M. J. Stress response syndromes. New York: Jason Aronson. 1976. KEPPEL, G. Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall, 1973. LAZARE, A., KLERMAN, G. L., & ARMOR, D. J. Oral, obsessive and hysterical personality patterns; an in-

vestigation of psychoanalytic concepts by means of factor analysis. Archives of General Psychology, 1966,

LAZARE, A., KLERMAN, G. L., & ARMOR, D. J. Oral obsessive and hysterical personality patterns; replication of factor analysis in an independent sampling. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 1970. 7. 275-290.

MAGARO, P. A., & SMITH, P. The personality of clinical types: An empirically derived taxonomy. Journal of Clinical Psychology, I98 I , 37, 796-809.

MILLER, I . W., & MAGARO, P. A. Toward a multivariate theory of personality styles: Measurement and reliability. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1977. 33, 460-466.

PAYKEL, E. S., & PRUSOFF. B. A. Relationship between personality dimensions: Neuroticism and extraver- sion against obsessive, oral and hysterical personality. British Journa/ ojdocial and Clinical Psychology. 1973, 12, 309.

PEDERSON. S. L., & MAGARO, P. A. Personality styles and psychopathy. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 1982. 38. 320-324.

PEDERSON, S. L., MAGARO. P. A.. & UNDERWOOD, C. Personality styles, manifest needs. and the perception of time in college women. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 1982, 38, 346-351..

REED, G. F. Obsessional cognition: Performance on two numerical tasks. Brirish Journal of Psychiatry.

RO'ITER, J. Generalized expectancies for internal vs. external control of reinforcement. Psychological

SALZMAN, L. SEIGMAN. A. W. The relationship between future time perspective, time estimation and impulse control in a

SHAPIRO. D. Neurotic styles. New York: Farrar. Straus. and Giroux. 1965. WITKIN, H. A.. LEWIS, H. B.. HERTZMAN, M., MACHOVER, K., MEISSNER, P. B., & W A P N E R . ~ .

WRIGHTSMAN, L.

ZUCKERMAN. M. ZUCKERMAN. M., KOLIN, A., PRICE, L., & ZOOB, I .

Consulting Psychology. 1964. 28, 477-482.

The mask of sanity. St. Louis: Mosley, 1964.

14. 624-630.

1977, 130. 189-195.

Monogropb. 1966. 80. 1-28. The obsessive personality. New York: Science House, 1968.

group of young offenders. Journal of Consulting Psychology. 1960, 25, 470-475.

Personality

Assumptions about human nature: A sociol-psychological approach. Monterey, Calif.:

Manual and research report for the sensation-seeking scale. University of Delaware, 1975. Development of a sensation-seeking scale. Journal of

through perception. Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1972.

Brooks/Cole, 1974.