Psychological Reports, 1979,44, 963-966. @ Psychological Reports 1979
AN ERIKSONIAN MEASURE OF PERSONALITY DEVELOPMENT IN CHILD-ABUSING MOTHERS1 ALAN L. EVANS
W. W. Knight Pamily Practice Center and University of Toledo Summary.-It was expected that 20 child-abusing mothers would score lower on a measure of Eriksonian developmental outcome than a carefully selected group of 20 nonabusing mothers. All mothers were administered a questionnaire designed to assess resolution of the first seven Eriksonian developmental stages. Multivariate analysis of covariance was used to test for significant differences while controlling for the effect of other factors which may have covaried with abusive or nonabusive status. Abusive mothers scored significantly lower on measures of the first six developmental stages. Implications and suggestions for research are discussed.
Research on child abuse suggests that child abusers have distinctive personality characteristics and have suffered developmental trauma as children (Melnick & Hurley, 1968; Kempe & Helfer, 1972; Steele, 1970). The characteristics and histories are similar to Erikson's (1963) description of those who have unsuccessfully resolved conflicts central to each of their developmental stages. It was expected, therefore, that abusive parents would manifest evidence of relatively poorer Eriksonian developmental conflict resolution than nonabusive parents. The goal was to gather evidence from child-abusing mothers and a comparison group of nonabusing mothers on a measure of Eriksonian developmental outcome.
METHOD Forty volunteers receiving Aid to Dependent Children participated. The 19 white and one black abusive mothers were clients of an urban county protective services unit. It was confirmed from case records that each mother termed abusive had, within 6 mo. prior to testing, been considered responsible for nonaccidental physical injury of at least one of her children. The nonabusive group included 12 white and 8 black randomly selected mothers who were clients of a special services unit which was within the same social services system as the unit above. The mothers were matched for socio-economic class by virtue of their receiving Aid to Dependent Children. Statistical controls for other actuarial attributes which may have covaried with abusive or nonabusive status are discussed below. Each mother was paid a small fee for participating; all were given identical information about the nature and purpose of the study. Table 1 contains means of relevant background data. 'Requests for reprints should be sent to Alan L Evans, W.W. Knight Family Practice Center, 2805 Oatis Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43606. Material is from the author's doctoral dissertation (1976), under the direction of Dr. John Hurley.
964
A. L. EVANS
TABLE 1 COVARIATE MEANSAND STANDARDDEVIATIONS Group Abusive Nonabusive
Age
Education
Children (n)
Age of Children
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
28.6 29.8
7.2 5.0
11.8 11.0
1.7 1.5
3.1 3.2
2.5 2.0
6.1 7.6
4.51 4.07
Wessman and Ricks (1966) constructed a Q-sort intended to measure developmental outcome of college males in terms of their degree of success in passing through the first six of Erikson's eight ages. Constantinople (1969) administered the items of Wessman and Ricks using a seven-point scale format to college undergraduates and found that the scale was partially successful in differentiating between those who had and had not successfully resolved developmental conflicts. The test-retest correlations for the measures with 6 wk. Letween administrations to 150 subjects ranged from .45 for Role Confusion to .81 for Intimacy, median r was .70. Little evidence for validity was presented. For present purposes, the test constructed by Wessman and Ricks was determined to be too abstract for administration to subjects of low educational status. There also were no items to reflect orientation towards stage seven. Some items were rewritten for simplification and items were added to indude a measure of generativity vs stagnation. For example an item reflective of basic mistrust, "Pessimistic, little hope," was changed ro "Have little hope." For a 'measure of guilt, "Inhibited and self-restricted" was changed to "Keep my feelings and desires to myself" and for inferiority, "Ineffective, don't amount to much" was changed to "Don't amount to much." The items created to measure generativity were: "Creative," "Enjoy teaching those younger than myself," "Productive," "Want to be needed," and "Determined that my children will live in a better world." Items used to reflect stagnation were: "Bored with life," "Believe children should be seen and not heard," "Used by others," "Believe children should take care of themselves," and "Believe most children are selfish." The revised test contained 70 items divided equally to represent developmental conflict resolution and failure. Scores for each stage represent the total scale values for developmental failure items subtracted from the total for items indicating positive outcome of that stage. Reliability of the revised test with 6 wk. between administration for 50 urban college undergraduate respondents ranged from .48 for intimacy vs isolation to .76 for trust vs basic mistrust; mean r was .61.
.
RESULTS A correlational analysis of the Eriksonian scores was performed on data from a pooled abuse/nonabuse group and separately on the data from the col-
DEVELOPMENT OF CHILD-ABUSING MOTHERS
965
lege undergraduates (Evans, 1976). For all subjects intercorrelations among the measures for each developmental stage ranged from .09 to .71; mean I. was .50. For the undergraduates, intercorrelations among the dependent measures were somewhat lower but generally positive, ranging from -.09 to .62; mean r was .37. Correlations of the Eriksonian scores with test scores from other psychological tests administered to the abusive and nonabusive mothers provide an indication of validity (Evans, 1976). For all the Eriksonian variables except Autonomy vs Shame and Doubc, the range of correlations with other measures were as follows: Family Concept Inventory, .36 to .64; Tryon's MMPI Depression, -.59 to -.83; Tryon's MMPI Aggression, -31 to -.66; California Personality Inventory Sense of Personal Worth, .52 to .70. Autonomy vs Shame and Doubc was only marginally associated with other non-Eriksonian measures. With the noted exception, positive developmental outcome is related in expected ways to other personality measures. To assess the effect of race and marital status, both were treated as dummy independent variables in separate analyses of variance. In addition to the previously described differences of racial composition, there were differences between the abuse and nonabuse group in terms of marital status. Of the abusive mothers, 5 were married, 3 were separated, 10 were divorced, and 2 were single. Two nonabusing mothers were married, 8 were separated, 6 divorced, and 4 single. There were no significant differences between the mothers of differing marital status or race on the Eriksonian measures. Multivariate analysis of covariance was used to ascertain significant differences between the abusive and nonabusive groups on the dependent measures. The procedure involved assessing the effects of the covariates (seen in Table 1 ) through regression analysis and removing their effect on the dependent variables before testing for significant differences. The F ratio for the multivariate test of equality of mean vectors indicated a significant difference between the means of the abusive and nonabusive groups ( F = 3.9, df = 6/28, p < ,005). SigTABLE 2 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSISOF COVARIANCE: ER~KSONIAN MEASURES Eriksonian
measures
Abusive SD
M
Trust versus Basic Mistrust Autonomy versus Shame and Doubt Initiative versus Guilt Industry versus Inferioriry identity versus Role Confusion Intimacy versus Isolation Generativity versus Stagnation
5.7 8.1 4.7 6.5 -2.6 6.1 11.0
10.1 6.6 8.1 8.5 8.2 8.5 8.5
Nonabusive M SD 13.0 10.9 12.0 14.8 5.1 15.0 14.5
7.6 6.3 5.9 8.0 9.2 6.5 7.3
FI,~ 12.2$: 5.1 13.9" 11.1" 6.6" 13.0:" 3.2
966
'
A. L.
EVANS
nificant differences were noted for the first six developmental measures. The results are presented in Table 2. Results have implications both methodological and substantive. The first six Eriksonian measures clearly differentiate between the abusive and nonabusive mothers in this study. Because of the substantial differentiation the measures have proven useful. The questionnaire as a whole might fruitfully be included in a battery of psychological tests for assessment of child abusers or indication of abusive potential. Beyond the over-all differentiation, conclusions regarding the meaning of the data for the developmental stages must be tentatlLre. Replication is needed to clarify the tentative interpretation. The significant relative "failures" of the abusive mothers suggest maladjustment through the first six stages of the mothers' personality development. The maladjusunent presumably results from consistent early trauma which retarded resolution of the full sequence of developmental conflicts. However, the abusive mothers' lower scores for these correlated measures at all developmental stages might result from the insuument being too insensitive to differentiate among discrete stages. Further refinement of the measures of Eriksonian developmental outcome might produce more independent subscales. Were the measures less correlated with each other and the consistent "failures" still evident, with more confidence might one infer that abusive mothers have not resolved critical issues throughout their own development. What is apparent is that abusive mothers were distinctly different from nonabusive mothers on the measures. REFERENCES CONSTANTINOPLE,A . , An Eriksonian measure of personality development in college students. Developmental Psychology, 1969, 1, 357-372. ERIKSON,E. Childhood and society. New York: Norton, 1963. EVANS,A. Personality characteristics of child-abusing mothers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State Univer., 1976. KEMPE, C., & HELPER,R. Helping t h e battered child and hi, family. Philadelphia: Lippincotc. 1972. -MELNICK,B., & HURLEY,J. Distinctive personality attributes of child-abusing mothers. Journal o f Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1969, 33, 746-749. STEELE,B. F. Parental abuse of infants and small children. In E. J. Anthony & T. Benedik (Eds.), Parenthood: its psychology and psychopathology. Boston: Little, 1970. PP. 449-477. WESSMAN, A., & RICKS,D. Mood and personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1966.
Accepted April 16, 1979.
AN ERIKSONIAN MEASURE OF PERSONALITY DEVELOPMENT IN CHILD-ABUSING MOTHERS1 ALAN L. EVANS
W. W. Knight Pamily Practice Center and University of Toledo Summary.-It was expected that 20 child-abusing mothers would score lower on a measure of Eriksonian developmental outcome than a carefully selected group of 20 nonabusing mothers. All mothers were administered a questionnaire designed to assess resolution of the first seven Eriksonian developmental stages. Multivariate analysis of covariance was used to test for significant differences while controlling for the effect of other factors which may have covaried with abusive or nonabusive status. Abusive mothers scored significantly lower on measures of the first six developmental stages. Implications and suggestions for research are discussed.
Research on child abuse suggests that child abusers have distinctive personality characteristics and have suffered developmental trauma as children (Melnick & Hurley, 1968; Kempe & Helfer, 1972; Steele, 1970). The characteristics and histories are similar to Erikson's (1963) description of those who have unsuccessfully resolved conflicts central to each of their developmental stages. It was expected, therefore, that abusive parents would manifest evidence of relatively poorer Eriksonian developmental conflict resolution than nonabusive parents. The goal was to gather evidence from child-abusing mothers and a comparison group of nonabusing mothers on a measure of Eriksonian developmental outcome.
METHOD Forty volunteers receiving Aid to Dependent Children participated. The 19 white and one black abusive mothers were clients of an urban county protective services unit. It was confirmed from case records that each mother termed abusive had, within 6 mo. prior to testing, been considered responsible for nonaccidental physical injury of at least one of her children. The nonabusive group included 12 white and 8 black randomly selected mothers who were clients of a special services unit which was within the same social services system as the unit above. The mothers were matched for socio-economic class by virtue of their receiving Aid to Dependent Children. Statistical controls for other actuarial attributes which may have covaried with abusive or nonabusive status are discussed below. Each mother was paid a small fee for participating; all were given identical information about the nature and purpose of the study. Table 1 contains means of relevant background data. 'Requests for reprints should be sent to Alan L Evans, W.W. Knight Family Practice Center, 2805 Oatis Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43606. Material is from the author's doctoral dissertation (1976), under the direction of Dr. John Hurley.
964
A. L. EVANS
TABLE 1 COVARIATE MEANSAND STANDARDDEVIATIONS Group Abusive Nonabusive
Age
Education
Children (n)
Age of Children
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
28.6 29.8
7.2 5.0
11.8 11.0
1.7 1.5
3.1 3.2
2.5 2.0
6.1 7.6
4.51 4.07
Wessman and Ricks (1966) constructed a Q-sort intended to measure developmental outcome of college males in terms of their degree of success in passing through the first six of Erikson's eight ages. Constantinople (1969) administered the items of Wessman and Ricks using a seven-point scale format to college undergraduates and found that the scale was partially successful in differentiating between those who had and had not successfully resolved developmental conflicts. The test-retest correlations for the measures with 6 wk. Letween administrations to 150 subjects ranged from .45 for Role Confusion to .81 for Intimacy, median r was .70. Little evidence for validity was presented. For present purposes, the test constructed by Wessman and Ricks was determined to be too abstract for administration to subjects of low educational status. There also were no items to reflect orientation towards stage seven. Some items were rewritten for simplification and items were added to indude a measure of generativity vs stagnation. For example an item reflective of basic mistrust, "Pessimistic, little hope," was changed ro "Have little hope." For a 'measure of guilt, "Inhibited and self-restricted" was changed to "Keep my feelings and desires to myself" and for inferiority, "Ineffective, don't amount to much" was changed to "Don't amount to much." The items created to measure generativity were: "Creative," "Enjoy teaching those younger than myself," "Productive," "Want to be needed," and "Determined that my children will live in a better world." Items used to reflect stagnation were: "Bored with life," "Believe children should be seen and not heard," "Used by others," "Believe children should take care of themselves," and "Believe most children are selfish." The revised test contained 70 items divided equally to represent developmental conflict resolution and failure. Scores for each stage represent the total scale values for developmental failure items subtracted from the total for items indicating positive outcome of that stage. Reliability of the revised test with 6 wk. between administration for 50 urban college undergraduate respondents ranged from .48 for intimacy vs isolation to .76 for trust vs basic mistrust; mean r was .61.
.
RESULTS A correlational analysis of the Eriksonian scores was performed on data from a pooled abuse/nonabuse group and separately on the data from the col-
DEVELOPMENT OF CHILD-ABUSING MOTHERS
965
lege undergraduates (Evans, 1976). For all subjects intercorrelations among the measures for each developmental stage ranged from .09 to .71; mean I. was .50. For the undergraduates, intercorrelations among the dependent measures were somewhat lower but generally positive, ranging from -.09 to .62; mean r was .37. Correlations of the Eriksonian scores with test scores from other psychological tests administered to the abusive and nonabusive mothers provide an indication of validity (Evans, 1976). For all the Eriksonian variables except Autonomy vs Shame and Doubc, the range of correlations with other measures were as follows: Family Concept Inventory, .36 to .64; Tryon's MMPI Depression, -.59 to -.83; Tryon's MMPI Aggression, -31 to -.66; California Personality Inventory Sense of Personal Worth, .52 to .70. Autonomy vs Shame and Doubc was only marginally associated with other non-Eriksonian measures. With the noted exception, positive developmental outcome is related in expected ways to other personality measures. To assess the effect of race and marital status, both were treated as dummy independent variables in separate analyses of variance. In addition to the previously described differences of racial composition, there were differences between the abuse and nonabuse group in terms of marital status. Of the abusive mothers, 5 were married, 3 were separated, 10 were divorced, and 2 were single. Two nonabusing mothers were married, 8 were separated, 6 divorced, and 4 single. There were no significant differences between the mothers of differing marital status or race on the Eriksonian measures. Multivariate analysis of covariance was used to ascertain significant differences between the abusive and nonabusive groups on the dependent measures. The procedure involved assessing the effects of the covariates (seen in Table 1 ) through regression analysis and removing their effect on the dependent variables before testing for significant differences. The F ratio for the multivariate test of equality of mean vectors indicated a significant difference between the means of the abusive and nonabusive groups ( F = 3.9, df = 6/28, p < ,005). SigTABLE 2 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSISOF COVARIANCE: ER~KSONIAN MEASURES Eriksonian
measures
Abusive SD
M
Trust versus Basic Mistrust Autonomy versus Shame and Doubt Initiative versus Guilt Industry versus Inferioriry identity versus Role Confusion Intimacy versus Isolation Generativity versus Stagnation
5.7 8.1 4.7 6.5 -2.6 6.1 11.0
10.1 6.6 8.1 8.5 8.2 8.5 8.5
Nonabusive M SD 13.0 10.9 12.0 14.8 5.1 15.0 14.5
7.6 6.3 5.9 8.0 9.2 6.5 7.3
FI,~ 12.2$: 5.1 13.9" 11.1" 6.6" 13.0:" 3.2
966
'
A. L.
EVANS
nificant differences were noted for the first six developmental measures. The results are presented in Table 2. Results have implications both methodological and substantive. The first six Eriksonian measures clearly differentiate between the abusive and nonabusive mothers in this study. Because of the substantial differentiation the measures have proven useful. The questionnaire as a whole might fruitfully be included in a battery of psychological tests for assessment of child abusers or indication of abusive potential. Beyond the over-all differentiation, conclusions regarding the meaning of the data for the developmental stages must be tentatlLre. Replication is needed to clarify the tentative interpretation. The significant relative "failures" of the abusive mothers suggest maladjustment through the first six stages of the mothers' personality development. The maladjusunent presumably results from consistent early trauma which retarded resolution of the full sequence of developmental conflicts. However, the abusive mothers' lower scores for these correlated measures at all developmental stages might result from the insuument being too insensitive to differentiate among discrete stages. Further refinement of the measures of Eriksonian developmental outcome might produce more independent subscales. Were the measures less correlated with each other and the consistent "failures" still evident, with more confidence might one infer that abusive mothers have not resolved critical issues throughout their own development. What is apparent is that abusive mothers were distinctly different from nonabusive mothers on the measures. REFERENCES CONSTANTINOPLE,A . , An Eriksonian measure of personality development in college students. Developmental Psychology, 1969, 1, 357-372. ERIKSON,E. Childhood and society. New York: Norton, 1963. EVANS,A. Personality characteristics of child-abusing mothers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State Univer., 1976. KEMPE, C., & HELPER,R. Helping t h e battered child and hi, family. Philadelphia: Lippincotc. 1972. -MELNICK,B., & HURLEY,J. Distinctive personality attributes of child-abusing mothers. Journal o f Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1969, 33, 746-749. STEELE,B. F. Parental abuse of infants and small children. In E. J. Anthony & T. Benedik (Eds.), Parenthood: its psychology and psychopathology. Boston: Little, 1970. PP. 449-477. WESSMAN, A., & RICKS,D. Mood and personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1966.
Accepted April 16, 1979.
