Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 1973, 1, 3, pp. 2 9 2 - 3 0 7
Self-Control as a Correlate of an Internalizing-Externalizing Symptom Dimension 1 SHELDON A. WEINTRAUB 2
State University ol'New York at Stony Brook The construct of self-control was explored as a correlate of the Internalizing-Externalizing symptom dimension. Ss were l l-13-year-old boys including 26 Internalizers with neurotic-like behavior problems, 40 Externalizers with acting-out behavior problems, and 26 normals. Each group was equally divided on the l~asis of social-class status. Results of measures on delay of gratification, reflection-impulsivity, and foresight and planning indicated that the normals exhibited the ~eatest degree of self-control and the Externalizers the least, while the Internalizers maintained an intermediate position. Consistent social-class differences were not found, but the factor of social class did heighten the differences within the Internalizers and Extemalizers.
A recent study of over 1,200 child psychiatric clinics revealed that 32% of their patients went without any diagnosis and another 40% were diagnosed simply as "adjustment reaction," without further elaboration or specification (Rosen, Balm, & Kramer, 1964). Classification methods based on empirical, nonimpressionistic attributes are an absolute necessity to the development of a meaningful system of nosology useful in planning treatment, in understanding etiological factors, and in generating systematic research. Exemplifying this approach is the multivariate, factor-analytic study by Achenbach (1966) of the symptoms of child psychiatric patients. This study yielded a bipolar, principal factor labeled "Internalizing versus Externalizing," consisting of neurotic behaviors and antisocial behaviors, and a unipolar principle factor tagged "Severe and Diffuse Psychopathology." These factors characterized symptom expression in both sexes. 1This study is based on a doctoral dissertation submitted to the Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota. Norman Garmezy ~ v e invaluable advice and guidance at every stage of the project. The research was supported by National Institute of Mental Health Grants MH-06170 and MH-14914 to N. Garmezy, and MH-21154 to S. Weintraub. 2Requests for reprints should be sent to Sheldon A. Weintraub. Depaxtment of Psychology, State University of New York at Stony Brook, New York 11790.
292 Copyright ~-~ 1973 by V. H. Winston & Sons, Inc.
INTERNALIZING-EXTERNALIZING AND SELF.CONTROL
293
The types of symptoms comprising the Internalizing-Externalizing dimension are strikingly consistent with those found in several other investigations, using not only similar factor analytic methods (Jenkins, 1966; Patterson, 1964; Peterson, 1961; Quay, Sprague, Shulman, & Miller, 1966), but also more clinically oriented descriptions (Cummings & Carson, 1967; Rexford, 1966). Populations used to elicit this dimensaon of Internalization-Externalization have varied from children seen in normal school situations, child guidance clinics, and inpatient hospital settings. Methods, in turn, have included clinical description, ratings from case history records, and behavior rating scales. A similar dassitication system has also been found for adult patients (Phillips & Rabinovitch, 1958), thus providing some evidence for the developmental consistency of psychopathology and a rationale for using the system as a research tool. This symptom dimension need not be interpreted as indicative of a disease entity or internal trait disposition. It is merely a descriptive device that requires a search for those situational determinants that influence such behavior. The theoretical foundation for the Internalizing-Externalizing dimension may be best understood by considering the "action-thought" continuum described by Phillips and Zigler (1961). Action-oriented behavior is presumed to reflect immaturity and lack of self-control; thought-oriented behavior, on the other hand, is seen as characteristic of higher levels of developmental maturity. Such higher levels are reflected behaviorally in self-control, which is seen as a crucial index of the dimension. The purpose of this study was to investigate the construct of self-control-specifically, delay of gratification, reflectionimpuisivity, and foresight and planning-as a partial network of experimental correlates of the Internalizing-Externalizing symptom dimension. SCOPE OF STUDY
Delay of Gran'fication The concept of delay of gratification has its origins in Freud's formulation that "delayed discharge" was an essential element in the shift from nonadaptive, primary process thinking, governed by the pleasure principle, to secondary process thinking governed by the reality principle. According to Freud, only when the individual is able to delay gratification of his impulses can he satisfy the requirements of external reality. The cognitive theorists Piaget (1951) ahd Werner (1948) had a somewhat similar view, maintaining that the development of cognitive functioning largely depends on the interiorization of motor responses that must be inhibited from overt expression to permit cognitive activity.
294
SHELDON A. WEINTRAUB
The concept of delay behavior has been an imprecise and vague one in which delay of gratification typically is viewed as a trait, some hypothetical, internal agent like "ego strength" that controls the behavior of the individual. This approach has yielded little systematic behavioral observation or substantive empirical research. By contrast, social.learning theorists such as Mischel have proceeded directly, using a noninferential, operational measure of delay of gratification in which subjects must choose between a small immediate reward and a larger reward available only after a time delay. Previous studies of delay of gratification have demonstrated relationships between willingness to delay and age and IQ (Mischel & Metzner, 1962) cheating behavior (Mischel & Gilligan, 1964), and social disorganization of the family (DePree, 1966).
R eflectio n-Irnpulsivi ty Since learning to delay is seen to require a shift from impulsively instigated, motoric behavior to more reflective thinking, the relationship between delay and cognitive styles should provide interesting and relevant theoretical implications. Cognitive styles refer to "stable individual preferences in the mode of perceptual organization and conceptual categorization of the external environment [Kagan, Moss, & Sigel, 1963, p. 74] ." Their heuristic quality for the study of disordered individuals has been discussed by Garmezy (1967), who notes the pervasive integrative quality of such styles when applied to the study of personality, cognition, perception, intelligence, and social processes. Although a variety of cognitive styles has been described, the research of Kagan and his associates on cognitive or conceptual impulsivity appears to be particularly relevant to the construct of self-control. According to Kagan (1965a), reflection-impulsivity is primarily a conceptual tempo or decision-time variable, in which the speed and the accuracy with which a subject considers alternative solutions before committing himself to one in an array of potential choices constitutes the core of the stylistic disposition. Those children who tend to respond rapidly and incorrectly are classified as "impulsive"; those who tend to scan carefully, delay before responding, and make few errors are classified as "reflective." Reflection.impulsivity has been shown to have moderate stability over periods as tong as 20 months and marked generality not only across a variety of perceptual recognition tasks, but also among tasks requiring very different kinds of performance (Kagan, 1965a). The construct validity of reflection-impulsivity has developed from a growing nomological network of correlations provided by Kagan and other investigators. Briefly, tile relevant literature on the reflection-impulsivity construct reveals the following: the reflective child is viewed as (1) Chronologically older (Kagan. 1965a. 1066a)
I N T E R N A L I Z I N G - E X T E R N A L I Z I N G A N D SELF-CONTROL
295
(2) More persistent (Kagan, 1965a) (3) More confident in his approach to intellectual tasks (Kagan, 1965a) (4) More highly motivated toward achievement-related goals (Kagan et al., 1963) (5) Less likely to commit errors on serial learning tasks (Kagan, 1966b) (6) More likely to respond to form rather than color on color-form sorting tasks (Katz, 1971) (7) A better reader (Kagan, 1965b) (8) Having a longer attention span and being less distractible (Kagan et al., 1963; Kagan, Rosman, Day, Albert, & Phillips, 1964) (9) Preferring solitary tasks and avoiding physically dangerous activities (Kagan, 1966a) (10) Having more regular, nonvariable respiratory rhythms (Kagan & Rosman, 1964) (11) Choosing more difficult tasks (Kagan, 1965a) (I 2) Less motorically active (Kagan et al., 1964) The impulsive child is viewed as (I) More labile in his attention deployment and in his autonomic reactivity (2) Less capable of sustained attention to visual inputs (3) More likely to commit errors on a match-to-sample task (4) More prone to adopt a strategy of giving the first reasonable hypothesis (Nelson, 1968; Siegetman, 1966). In discussing the theoretical significance of an analytic attitude, Kagan et al. (1963) speculated: One of the possible antecedents of an analytic attitude (reflective style) is the ability to inhibit motor discharge; the ability to modulate behavior in the face of irrelevant stimulation that tempts reactivity; the ability to reflect in situations that elicit alternative response tendencies. Thus the cognitive style of reflection-impulsivity appears to be one that may be intimately tied to the construct of self-control.
Foresight and Planning Porteus developed the Maze Test in 1913 as an adjunct to other intelligence tests which he believed tended to ignore the crucial practical aspects of intelligence. The test yields two relatively independent scores: TQ, determined by the number of mazes correctly completed and presumed to be a measure of foresight and planning; and Q score, concerned with drawing and execution and presumed to be a measure of "impulse-control" (Porteus, 1965). Porteus Maze Test performance has been related to various aspects of personality and
296
SHELDON A. WEINTRAUB
adjustment such as antisocial behavior (Purcell, 1956); anxious, neurotic behavior (Anthony, 1963); behavioral adjustment of children in institutional settings (Roberts & Erickson, 1968); and delay of gratification (Kainer, 1965; Roberts & Erickson, 1968). Kainer (1965) concluded that foresight, planning ability, and delay of gratification are "essentially reflections of the same basic p r o c e s s . . , commonly referred to as 'stopping and thinking' and is the process of using reason to momentarily inhibit action [p. 40] ." METHOD
Sub/ects The Ss were ninety.two 11.13-year-old white boys. The experimental group of 66 Ss was selected from three child guidance clinics by the following criteria: full scale IQ greater than 80; no evidence of organic involvement or severe physical disability, and the presence of at least three recordable symptoms in the case record. "Symptom" referred to deviant behaviors which are objective, minimally inferential, and generally accepted as reason for psychiatric concern. The procedure for recording and categorizing symptoms was devised by Achenbach (1966) and involved checking off the child's symptoms against Achenbach's 91.item symptom checklist. The symptoms checked were restricted to presenting complaints relevant to the child's referral, with as little contamination as possible from the data of diagnostic tests or behavioral changes that occurred in treatment. A single presenting complaint was not checked in more than one symptom category. For the case to be included in either the Externalizing or Internalizing group, it was necessary that 60% of the total number o f symptoms checked be categorized either in Achenbach's Externalizing or Internalizing category. A total of 161 case records were examined, either by one of two senior psychology majors or by the investigator, but only 98 met the selection criteria, and of these only 66 Ss (40 Externalizers and 26 Internalizers) were available for the project. The primary reason for a potential subject being unavailable was a change of residence; only in four cases was there a refusal to cooperate. No tendency was noted for a subject group to be selectively unavailable. To provide a reliability check on the symptom ratings, 27 cases were randomly selected from the pool of experimental cases and independently rated by a psychologist with a diplomate in clinical psychology. The average percentages agreement on the total number of symptoms rated including zero entries (i.e., agreement that a symptom was absent) was 96.3; if zero entries are not included in the ratio, the average percentages of agreement was 70.3. The former ratio is probably unrealistically high since there was a large number of zero entries, but the latter may be unrealistically low since zero entries did not indicate that no judgment
INTERNALIZING-EXTERNALIZING AND SELF-CONTROL
297
was involved. No S was classified as an Internalizer by one rater and as an Externalizer by the other, and vice versa. Two of the 27 cases included in the study (as Externalizers) were classified as "Neither" by the second rater (they failed to meet the minimum requirement of three symptoms); therefore, the percent agreement in subject classification was 92.6. The normal control group consisted of 26 seventh-grade boys selected from schools in both middle and lower social-class neighborhoods on the basis of teacher and school social worker ratings of "normal adaptation." All three subject groups (normals, Internalizers, and Externalizers) were equally divided into lower and middle social class groups as determined by the occupation and educational level of the head of each household (Hollingshead, 1957). The social-class standing was not significantly different among normals, Internalizers, and Externalizers. Estimates of intellectual level (WlSC, Stanford-BLuet, or Lorge-Thorndike) indicated that the mean IQ score of the normal Ss was higher than that of the clinic Ss (F = 5.94); dr= 1, 86, p < .05), but there was no difference in mean IQ scores between Externalizers and Internalizers. See Table 1 for mean age, IQ, and social class of Ss.
Procedures Three measures were employed in the study: a delay-of-gratification task, a visual-discrimination task of refiection-impulsivity, and the Porteus Maze Test. TABLE I MEAN AGE, IQ, AND SOCIAL CLASS Group Normals Middle class Low class Internalizers Middle class I Low class Externalizers Middle class Low class
IQa
Social ctass b
115.31 105.69
29.62 64.31
12.08 112.15 11.92 I 99.77
32.85 64.85
11.60 i 1.90
38.65 67.20
Age
12o 15 12.31
105.65 100.70
aStanford-Binet or WISC for clinic Ss; LorgeThorndike for normal Ss. bSource: Hollingshead, A. B. Two Factor Index of Social Position. Unpublished manuscript (mimeographed), Yale University, 1957.
298
SHELDON A. WEINTRAUB
Delay of gratification was measured by an experimental procedure described by DePree (1966). This task required the child to choose between pairs of toys he had previously rated and ranked for preference value. The pairs varied in terms of the separation in each child's preference value as derived from his rank.order assignments of the two toys. Sixteen pairs of toys were presented; for each pair S chose either the less preferred toy, which could be obtained immediately, or the more preferred toy, which could only be obtained after 2 weeks' delay. Reflection-impulsivity was measured by a modification of the Matching Familiar Figures (MFF) test, devised by Kagan et al. (1964). This test consists of a set of line drawings of familiar stimulus objects (e.g., house, tree, airplane) in the form of a standard and six to eight highly similar alternatives. S's task was to select from the array of alternatives that stimulus that was identical to the standard. Two forms of the MFF test were included in this study. The MFF form containing only six alternatives was modified by duplicating two of the incorrect alternatives, thus providing a total of eight response alternatives in a given array. This easier form was combined with a more difficult version that contained eight alternatives to create a test with 23 test items and two practice items. Successive items tended to increase in difficulty except for the last two items, which were deliberately made easy to insure that all Ss would finish the test with a success experience. The MFF has typically been administered in notebook form and timed by E with a stopwatch. The procedure called for praising Ss if his first answer was correct; if in error, he was informed of this and requested to respond again. This procedure unfortunately introduced an ambiguous and confounding factor of failure-frustration with the attendant problem of a differential responsiveness by Ss to praise and censure. By contrast, in the present investigation, the original MFF pictures were photographed and then converted to slides that could be projected onto a viewing screen designed to obtain and insure S's attention, interest, and cooperation through the use of lights and buttons that S could manipulate. Only one response to a trial was permitted, and after the practice trials no information about correctness was available. The MFF apparatus consisted of a viewing screen enclosed in a wooden panel, 24 x 24-in., that sloped slightly away from the subject. Two window screens of ground (etched) lucite were cut into the panel. The first screen, 5 x 5-in., was centered at the top of the panel, onto which the standard was projected. The second screen, 13 x 7.in., was centered at the bottom of the panel, onto which the array of alternatives was projected. At the top of the panel was a red signal light that lighted 2 see. before the slide appeared. Its purpose was to orient S and to prepare him for the appearance of the test item. Two rows of four buttons each, one at the top, the other at the bottom of the screen, were mounted as response keys for the various response alternatives. Each of these eight buttons corresponded to one of the eight alternative responses to a test item. These
I N T E R N A L I Z I N G - E X T E R N A L I Z I N G AND SELF-CONTROL
299
buttons provided a means for S to record which alternative he perceived as identical to the standard stimulus. Depression of a button ended the trial, erased the slide from the screen, flashed S's answer on a box of eight lights situated in front of E, and initiated a 10-see. intertrial interval. A Standard Electric timer used to record the response latency in seconds was activated automatically as the slide was projected on the screen and was stopped automatically when S pushed a button to signal his response. The Porteus Maze Test was administered according to the standard instructions (Porteus, 1965), and TQ and Q scores were obtained. Interrater reliability was determined by an experienced psychometrist who independently scored 30 randomly selected protocols. TQ was scored with perfect agreement; the interrater reliability coefficient for Q score was +.98. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The basic statistical analysis of the data involved a series of analyses of variance among the six subject groups using five a priori, orthogonal, planned comparisons (Hays, 1963, pp. 459-489): (1) normal versus clinic Ss; (2) Internalizing versus Externalizing clinic Ss; middle versus lower social-class contrasts within each of the (3) normal; (4) Internalizing; and (5) Externalizing groups. Using this statistical comparison, each of the five dependent variables (Delay of gratification, MFF response times, MFF errors, Porteus TQ, and Porteus Q score) was analyzed separately. Mean scores for each variable are shown in Table 2; results of the analyses of variance are presented in Table 3. The comparisons between normal Ss and clinic Ss revealed marked differences (p < .001) for all five dependent variables. The clinic Ss were less willing to delay gratification, were more impulsive responders on the MFF test in terms of both speed and accuracy, and were more impulsive responders on the Porteus Maze Test as determined by TQ and Q score. Differences between Externalizing Ss and Internalizing Ss were equally marked, revealing the former to be the more impulsive on all experimental tasks (p < .002). Lower class Ss tended to be more impulsive than did middle-class Ss, but contrasts within the different symptom patterns revealed significant social class differences only witilin Externalizing Ss for delay of gratification, Porteus TQ, and Porteus Q score, and within Internalizing Ss for MFF speed and accuracy and Porteus TQ. There were no significant social-class differences on any of the variables within normal Ss. The MFF as given to the Ss gradually increased in difficulty over the 23 items. In the course of administering the test, E observed that the normal children apparently spent considerably more time in problem solving when confronted with the later, more difficult items in contrast to the earlier and easier ones. Such a work pattern did not appear to characterize the clinic groups of children. To test this observation, change scores were computed for both time
300
SHELDON A. WEINTRAUB
TABLE 2 MEAN SCORES FOR ALL SUBJECTS
Group
Normals Middle ctass Lower class Internalizers Middle class Lower class Externalizers Middle class Lower class
Delay of gratification (number of "today" choices)
Matching Familiar Figure Test
Porteus Maze Test
Total response times (in seconds)
Errors
TQ
Q
2.08 3.23
978.54 880.46
5.54 7.23
129.38 121.38
17.62 17.85
2.92 3.77
1016.38 800.15
7.46 10.38
127.85 113.31
25.46 34.46
5.10 6.45
581.20 513.10
12.80 14.00
116.00 104.85
54.45 62.95
and error scores by subtracting the score obtained on the first block of easy items (1-7) from the block of seven more difficult items (15-21). Since this analysis was post hoc, alpha was set at .01, rather than .05, and a two-tailed rather than a one-tailed test was run, to reduce the probability of making a Type I error. There were no significant differences among the groups in terms of change scores for errors (all groups made more errors on the more difficult block of trials), but there were differences in change scores for time. Normal S s responded more slowly on the last block of trials, relative to the first block, than did clinic S (t = 5.23; d f = 90; p < .001); Externalizers were significantly different from I nternalizers (t = 4 . 1 2 ; d r = 64; p < .001), revealing a minus mean change score. That is, on the average, the Externalizers responded even more rapidly to the difficult items than they did to the easier ones (see Figure 1), which clearly results in an ineffective problem solving strategy. There were no significant social-class differences. A correlation matrix (Table 4) was computed for the dependent variables and subject variables. All intercorrelations between the dependent variables proved highly significant (p < .001). Social class significantly correlated with all five dependent variables as well as with IQ; children of middle social-class standing tended to be less impulsive, more likely to delay, and intellectually brighter. There was a tendency for older children, even within the limited age range of his study, to be less impulsive, but intelligence seemed to be largely independent of these measures.
t.~
Note.-EXT = E• *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Symptom pattern Normal vs. clinic EXT vs. INT Social class withinsymptom pattern LC EXT vs. MC EXT LC INT vs. MC INT LC NORM vs. MC NORM Error
Source
18.23 4.65 8.65 6.39
87.37 92.96
MS
2.85* .73 1.36
13.68"** 14.56"**
F
Delay of gratification
46.38 303.91 62.52 78.48
1075.18 2054.90
.59 3.87* .80
13.70"** 26.18"**
MS
TQ F
14.40 55.54 18.62 9.04
1.59 6.15"* 2.06
124.32 137.39 41.60 21.29
1.95
5.84** 6.45**
72.25 52.65 .04 25.06
1639.54 1301.42
MS
Porteus Maze Test
514.44 56.94*** 224.07 10.52"** 315.83 34.95*** ~162.40 7.63***
F
MS
MS
F
Error (scores)
Responses (times)
Matching Famil!ar Figures Test
Variables
INT = Internalizers NORM = Normals; LC = lower class; MC = middle class.
[ 86
I ] 3
TABLE 3 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF DEPENDENT VARIABLES
Q
2.88* 2.10
65.42*** 51.93"**
F
302
SHELDON A. WEINTRAUB
140
,,:~
9
I00
,~
80
g~ ra
|
t-
40 2O
Slowerl Faster
0
-20
MC LC MC LC
MC LC
Normals
Internalizers
Externolizers
FIG. 1. Mean changes in Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFF) response time; block II (trials 15-21) minus block I (trials 1-7). MC = middle class; LC = lower class.
Of the two independent variables, symptom pattern (normals, Internalizers, Externalizers) and social class (middle and lower), symptom pattern appeared to be the more powerful determiner of response as suggested by the larger differences and smaller overlap among the symptom groups in contrast to the social.class component. In addition, a review of the data for lower and middle class normal Ss revealed no significant differences between these groups on any of the dependent variables. Social class as a factor, however, cannot be ignored since it dearly served to heighten the differences among the groups of clinic Ss. Since lower social-class membership in and of itself did not appear to be a primary requisite for impulsive behavioral patterns, what other subject-related factors may account for the striking differences evidenced among the subject groups? A variable suggested by the findings of DePree (1966) and Achenbach (1966) is that of family organization or stability. To compare the quality of adaptation of the families within each subject group, a family was rated as "disorganized" if there was evidence either indicating divorce or separation or showing marked and multiple parental or sibling problems.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
-.39***
*p < .05 (two-tailed test). **p < .01 (two-tailed test). ***p "( .001 (two-tailed test).
Delay of gratification MFF time MFF error Porteus Maze Test TQ Porteus Q Social class Age IQ
Measure .50***
-.76***
-.39*** .39*** -.55***
~ -.56*** .63"** -.55***
.32** -.27** .38*** -.43*** .24*
8
-.20 .10 -.19 .41"** -.22 .44"** .20
7 -o12 .28** -.25* -.07 -.23* .02
INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG DEPENDENT VARIABLES AND SUBJECT VARIABLES FOR THE TOTAL SAMPLE
TABLE 4
304
SHELDON A. WEI NTRAUB
Because some of the information necessary for the rating of family pathology was frequently missing from the school cumulative records of normal Ss, the measure was applied solely to a comparison of the clinic groups, since in all cases the case-history folder provided this information. A chi-square comparing this index of family disorganization within Internalizers versus Externalizers revealed more family pathology within the Externalizing group (X2 = 5.14; df = 1; p < .025). There was no differences, however, between the lower and middle class subjects. This analysis of potentially disorganizing factors in the home as a correlate of symptom expression is a superficial, albeit suggestive, one. Future research into this seemingly important factor must involve greater attention to the varied and complex components of family patterns. Maturity and competence might serve as potential explanatory factors of the finding that patterns of delay of gratification, reflection-impulsivity, and foresight and planning were all consistent in following a particular sequence: normal Ss demonstrated the greatest degree of self-control, Externalizing Ss demonstrated the most impulsivity, and Internalizing Ss maintained an intermediate position. With increasing maturity, an individual presumably becomes more likely to defer gratification, to reflect on a problem more extensively and successfully, to plan ahead, and to internalize his problems. This integrative formulation is consistent with Werner's (1957)developmental theory and with the findings of Zigler and Phillips (1960) and Achenbach (1966). Zigler and Phillips found their adult internalizing patients, who manifested symptoms of self-deprivation and turning against the self, to be more socially effective, mature, and competent during the premorbid period than did those externalizing patients whose symptoms reflected patterns of self-indulgence and turning against others. Achenbach's findings with child patients were similar; Externalizers tended to be less socially competent than did Internalizers. The behavioral pattern demonstrated by the Externalizers, in comparison with the Internalizers, may be seen as a manifestation of a less mature, less competent orientation, as well as a more impulsive style of life. In turn, the Internalizers may be conceptualized as less mature and less competent than the normals (but operating at a higher developmental level than are the Externalizers); and this relative immaturity more than stylistic considerations may explain their reduced degree of self-control. The importance of the Internalizing-Externalizing dimensions is highlighted by its prognostic potential. There is strong evidence that externalizing behavior in childhood frequently results in behavior problems in adulthood (Kohlberg, LaCrosse, & Ricks, 1972; Robins, 1966), whereas the outcome for Internalizers is much more benign. Externalizing behaviors also have been implicated within the "spectrum of schizophrenia" in studies of children of schizophrenics (Heston, 1966). Externalizers are indeed a vulnerable, high-risk group; further research into the identification of these children and into variables predictive of
I N T E R N A L I Z I N G - E X T E R N A L I Z I N G A N D SELF.CONTROL
305
adult psychopathology may finally permit the development of long-sought preventive measures. REFERENCES Achenbach, R. T. The classification of children's psychiatric symptoms: A factor analytic study. Psychological Monographs, 1966, 80(7, Whole No. 615). Anthony, A. A. The relationship between neuroticism, stress, and qualitative Porteus Maze performance. Journal o.f Consulting Psychology, 1963, 27, 513-519. Cummings, S. T., & Carson, R. L. Maternal personality and the externalizing-internalizing symptom dimension in neurotic children. Proceedings of the 75th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 1967, 2, 181-182. DePree, S. Time perspective, frustration-failure, and delay of gratification in middle-class and lower-class children from organized and disorganized families. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1966. Garmezy, No Contributions of experimental psychology to understanding the origins of schizophrenia. Excerpta Medical International, Congress Series No. 151, 1967. Hays, W. L Statistics for psychologistx New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1963. Heston, L. Psychiatric disorders in foster home-reared children of schizophrenic mothers. British Journal of Psychiatry, 1966, 112, 819-825. Hollingshead, A. B. Two factor index of social position. Unpublished manuscript (mimeographed), Yale University, 1957. Jenkins, R. L. Psychiatric syndromes in children and their relation to family background. A merican Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1966, 36,450-457. Kagan, J. Impulsive and reflective children: Significance of conceptual tempo. In J. D. Krumboltz (Ed.), Learning and the educational process. Chicago: Rand McNaUy, 1965. (a) Kagan, J. Reflection-impulsivity and reading ability in primary grade children. Child Development, 1965, 36, 609-628. (b) Kagan, J. Developmental studies in reflection and analysis. In A. H. Kidd & J. H. Rivoire (Eds.), Perceptual and conceptual development in children. New York: International Universities Press, 1966. (a) Kagan, J. Reflection-impulsivity: The generality and dynamics of conceptual tempo. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1966, 71, 17-24. (b) Kagan, J., Moss, H. A., & Siget, I. E. Psychological significance of style of conceptualization. In J. C. Wright & J. Kagan (Eds.), Basic cognitive processes in children. Monograph of Social Research in Child Development, 1963, 28(Serial No. 86),, 73-124. Kagan, J., & Rosman, B. Cardiac and respiratory correlates of attention and an analytic attitude. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1964, 21, 50-63. Kagan, J., Rosman, B. L., Day, D., Albert, J., & Phillips, W. Information processing in the child: Significance of analytic and reflective attitudes. Psychological Monographs. 1964, 78(1, Whole No. 578).
306
SHELDON A. WEINTRUAB
Kainer, K. The Porteus Maze Test and the delay of gratification. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, 1965. Katz, J. M. Refleetion-impulsivity and color-form sorting. Child Development, 1971, 42, 745-754. Kohlberg, L., LaCrosse, J., & Ricks, D. The predictability of adult mental health from childhood behavior. In B. B. Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of childhood psychopathology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972. Mischel, W., & Gilligan, C. Delay of gratification motivation for the prohibited gratification, and responses to temptation. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1964, 69, 411--417. Mischel, W., & Metzner, R. Preference for delayed reward as a function of age, intelligence and length of delay interval. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1962, 64, 425--431. Nelson, R. F. The effects of training in attention deployment on observing behavior in reflective and impulsive children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1968. Patterson, G. R. An empirical approach to the classification of disturbed children. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1964, 20, 326-337. Peterson, D. R. Behavior problems of middle childhood. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1961, 25, 205-209. Phillips, L., & Rabinovitch, M. S. Social role and patterns of symptomatic behaviors. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1958, 57, 181-186. Phillips, L., & Zigler, E. Social competence: The action-thought parameter and vicariousness in normal and pathological behaviors. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1961, 63, 137-146. Piaget, J. Principal factors in determining evolution from childhood to adutt life. In D. Rapaport (Ed.), Organization and pathology of thought. New York: Columbia University Press, 1951. Porteus, S. D. Porteus Maze Tests: Fifty years application. Pale Alto, Calif.: Pacific Books, 1965, Purcell, K. A note on Porteus Maze and Wechsler-Bellevue scores as related to anti-social behavior. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1956, 20, 361-364. Quay, H. C., Sprague, R. L., Shulman, H. S., & Mill.er, A. L. Some correlates of personality disorder and conduct disorder. Psychology in the Schools, 1966, 3, 44--47. Rexford, E. N. (Ed.) A developmental approach to problems of acting out. Monographs of the Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, No. 1. New York: International Universities Press, Inc., 1966. Roberts, A., & Erickson, R. Delay of gratification, Porteus Maze Test performance and behavioral adjustment in a delinquent group. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1968, 73,449--453. Robins, L. Deviant children grown up. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1966. Rosen, B. M., Bahn, A. K., & Kramer, M. Demographic and diagnostic characteristics of psychiatric outpatient clinics in the United States. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1964, 34, 455--468.
INTERNALIZING-EXTERNALIZING AND SELF-CONTROL
307
Siegelman, E. Y. Observing behavior in impulsive and reflective children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1966. Werner, H. Comparative psychology of mental development. (rev. ed.)Chicago: Follett, 1948. Werner, H. The concept of development from a comparative and organismic point of view. In D. B. Harris (Ed.), The concept of development. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1957. Zigler, E., & Phillips, L. Social effectiveness and symptomatic behaviors. Journal ofl Abnormal Psychology, 1960, 61,231-238.
Self-Control as a Correlate of an Internalizing-Externalizing Symptom Dimension 1 SHELDON A. WEINTRAUB 2
State University ol'New York at Stony Brook The construct of self-control was explored as a correlate of the Internalizing-Externalizing symptom dimension. Ss were l l-13-year-old boys including 26 Internalizers with neurotic-like behavior problems, 40 Externalizers with acting-out behavior problems, and 26 normals. Each group was equally divided on the l~asis of social-class status. Results of measures on delay of gratification, reflection-impulsivity, and foresight and planning indicated that the normals exhibited the ~eatest degree of self-control and the Externalizers the least, while the Internalizers maintained an intermediate position. Consistent social-class differences were not found, but the factor of social class did heighten the differences within the Internalizers and Extemalizers.
A recent study of over 1,200 child psychiatric clinics revealed that 32% of their patients went without any diagnosis and another 40% were diagnosed simply as "adjustment reaction," without further elaboration or specification (Rosen, Balm, & Kramer, 1964). Classification methods based on empirical, nonimpressionistic attributes are an absolute necessity to the development of a meaningful system of nosology useful in planning treatment, in understanding etiological factors, and in generating systematic research. Exemplifying this approach is the multivariate, factor-analytic study by Achenbach (1966) of the symptoms of child psychiatric patients. This study yielded a bipolar, principal factor labeled "Internalizing versus Externalizing," consisting of neurotic behaviors and antisocial behaviors, and a unipolar principle factor tagged "Severe and Diffuse Psychopathology." These factors characterized symptom expression in both sexes. 1This study is based on a doctoral dissertation submitted to the Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota. Norman Garmezy ~ v e invaluable advice and guidance at every stage of the project. The research was supported by National Institute of Mental Health Grants MH-06170 and MH-14914 to N. Garmezy, and MH-21154 to S. Weintraub. 2Requests for reprints should be sent to Sheldon A. Weintraub. Depaxtment of Psychology, State University of New York at Stony Brook, New York 11790.
292 Copyright ~-~ 1973 by V. H. Winston & Sons, Inc.
INTERNALIZING-EXTERNALIZING AND SELF.CONTROL
293
The types of symptoms comprising the Internalizing-Externalizing dimension are strikingly consistent with those found in several other investigations, using not only similar factor analytic methods (Jenkins, 1966; Patterson, 1964; Peterson, 1961; Quay, Sprague, Shulman, & Miller, 1966), but also more clinically oriented descriptions (Cummings & Carson, 1967; Rexford, 1966). Populations used to elicit this dimensaon of Internalization-Externalization have varied from children seen in normal school situations, child guidance clinics, and inpatient hospital settings. Methods, in turn, have included clinical description, ratings from case history records, and behavior rating scales. A similar dassitication system has also been found for adult patients (Phillips & Rabinovitch, 1958), thus providing some evidence for the developmental consistency of psychopathology and a rationale for using the system as a research tool. This symptom dimension need not be interpreted as indicative of a disease entity or internal trait disposition. It is merely a descriptive device that requires a search for those situational determinants that influence such behavior. The theoretical foundation for the Internalizing-Externalizing dimension may be best understood by considering the "action-thought" continuum described by Phillips and Zigler (1961). Action-oriented behavior is presumed to reflect immaturity and lack of self-control; thought-oriented behavior, on the other hand, is seen as characteristic of higher levels of developmental maturity. Such higher levels are reflected behaviorally in self-control, which is seen as a crucial index of the dimension. The purpose of this study was to investigate the construct of self-control-specifically, delay of gratification, reflectionimpuisivity, and foresight and planning-as a partial network of experimental correlates of the Internalizing-Externalizing symptom dimension. SCOPE OF STUDY
Delay of Gran'fication The concept of delay of gratification has its origins in Freud's formulation that "delayed discharge" was an essential element in the shift from nonadaptive, primary process thinking, governed by the pleasure principle, to secondary process thinking governed by the reality principle. According to Freud, only when the individual is able to delay gratification of his impulses can he satisfy the requirements of external reality. The cognitive theorists Piaget (1951) ahd Werner (1948) had a somewhat similar view, maintaining that the development of cognitive functioning largely depends on the interiorization of motor responses that must be inhibited from overt expression to permit cognitive activity.
294
SHELDON A. WEINTRAUB
The concept of delay behavior has been an imprecise and vague one in which delay of gratification typically is viewed as a trait, some hypothetical, internal agent like "ego strength" that controls the behavior of the individual. This approach has yielded little systematic behavioral observation or substantive empirical research. By contrast, social.learning theorists such as Mischel have proceeded directly, using a noninferential, operational measure of delay of gratification in which subjects must choose between a small immediate reward and a larger reward available only after a time delay. Previous studies of delay of gratification have demonstrated relationships between willingness to delay and age and IQ (Mischel & Metzner, 1962) cheating behavior (Mischel & Gilligan, 1964), and social disorganization of the family (DePree, 1966).
R eflectio n-Irnpulsivi ty Since learning to delay is seen to require a shift from impulsively instigated, motoric behavior to more reflective thinking, the relationship between delay and cognitive styles should provide interesting and relevant theoretical implications. Cognitive styles refer to "stable individual preferences in the mode of perceptual organization and conceptual categorization of the external environment [Kagan, Moss, & Sigel, 1963, p. 74] ." Their heuristic quality for the study of disordered individuals has been discussed by Garmezy (1967), who notes the pervasive integrative quality of such styles when applied to the study of personality, cognition, perception, intelligence, and social processes. Although a variety of cognitive styles has been described, the research of Kagan and his associates on cognitive or conceptual impulsivity appears to be particularly relevant to the construct of self-control. According to Kagan (1965a), reflection-impulsivity is primarily a conceptual tempo or decision-time variable, in which the speed and the accuracy with which a subject considers alternative solutions before committing himself to one in an array of potential choices constitutes the core of the stylistic disposition. Those children who tend to respond rapidly and incorrectly are classified as "impulsive"; those who tend to scan carefully, delay before responding, and make few errors are classified as "reflective." Reflection.impulsivity has been shown to have moderate stability over periods as tong as 20 months and marked generality not only across a variety of perceptual recognition tasks, but also among tasks requiring very different kinds of performance (Kagan, 1965a). The construct validity of reflection-impulsivity has developed from a growing nomological network of correlations provided by Kagan and other investigators. Briefly, tile relevant literature on the reflection-impulsivity construct reveals the following: the reflective child is viewed as (1) Chronologically older (Kagan. 1965a. 1066a)
I N T E R N A L I Z I N G - E X T E R N A L I Z I N G A N D SELF-CONTROL
295
(2) More persistent (Kagan, 1965a) (3) More confident in his approach to intellectual tasks (Kagan, 1965a) (4) More highly motivated toward achievement-related goals (Kagan et al., 1963) (5) Less likely to commit errors on serial learning tasks (Kagan, 1966b) (6) More likely to respond to form rather than color on color-form sorting tasks (Katz, 1971) (7) A better reader (Kagan, 1965b) (8) Having a longer attention span and being less distractible (Kagan et al., 1963; Kagan, Rosman, Day, Albert, & Phillips, 1964) (9) Preferring solitary tasks and avoiding physically dangerous activities (Kagan, 1966a) (10) Having more regular, nonvariable respiratory rhythms (Kagan & Rosman, 1964) (11) Choosing more difficult tasks (Kagan, 1965a) (I 2) Less motorically active (Kagan et al., 1964) The impulsive child is viewed as (I) More labile in his attention deployment and in his autonomic reactivity (2) Less capable of sustained attention to visual inputs (3) More likely to commit errors on a match-to-sample task (4) More prone to adopt a strategy of giving the first reasonable hypothesis (Nelson, 1968; Siegetman, 1966). In discussing the theoretical significance of an analytic attitude, Kagan et al. (1963) speculated: One of the possible antecedents of an analytic attitude (reflective style) is the ability to inhibit motor discharge; the ability to modulate behavior in the face of irrelevant stimulation that tempts reactivity; the ability to reflect in situations that elicit alternative response tendencies. Thus the cognitive style of reflection-impulsivity appears to be one that may be intimately tied to the construct of self-control.
Foresight and Planning Porteus developed the Maze Test in 1913 as an adjunct to other intelligence tests which he believed tended to ignore the crucial practical aspects of intelligence. The test yields two relatively independent scores: TQ, determined by the number of mazes correctly completed and presumed to be a measure of foresight and planning; and Q score, concerned with drawing and execution and presumed to be a measure of "impulse-control" (Porteus, 1965). Porteus Maze Test performance has been related to various aspects of personality and
296
SHELDON A. WEINTRAUB
adjustment such as antisocial behavior (Purcell, 1956); anxious, neurotic behavior (Anthony, 1963); behavioral adjustment of children in institutional settings (Roberts & Erickson, 1968); and delay of gratification (Kainer, 1965; Roberts & Erickson, 1968). Kainer (1965) concluded that foresight, planning ability, and delay of gratification are "essentially reflections of the same basic p r o c e s s . . , commonly referred to as 'stopping and thinking' and is the process of using reason to momentarily inhibit action [p. 40] ." METHOD
Sub/ects The Ss were ninety.two 11.13-year-old white boys. The experimental group of 66 Ss was selected from three child guidance clinics by the following criteria: full scale IQ greater than 80; no evidence of organic involvement or severe physical disability, and the presence of at least three recordable symptoms in the case record. "Symptom" referred to deviant behaviors which are objective, minimally inferential, and generally accepted as reason for psychiatric concern. The procedure for recording and categorizing symptoms was devised by Achenbach (1966) and involved checking off the child's symptoms against Achenbach's 91.item symptom checklist. The symptoms checked were restricted to presenting complaints relevant to the child's referral, with as little contamination as possible from the data of diagnostic tests or behavioral changes that occurred in treatment. A single presenting complaint was not checked in more than one symptom category. For the case to be included in either the Externalizing or Internalizing group, it was necessary that 60% of the total number o f symptoms checked be categorized either in Achenbach's Externalizing or Internalizing category. A total of 161 case records were examined, either by one of two senior psychology majors or by the investigator, but only 98 met the selection criteria, and of these only 66 Ss (40 Externalizers and 26 Internalizers) were available for the project. The primary reason for a potential subject being unavailable was a change of residence; only in four cases was there a refusal to cooperate. No tendency was noted for a subject group to be selectively unavailable. To provide a reliability check on the symptom ratings, 27 cases were randomly selected from the pool of experimental cases and independently rated by a psychologist with a diplomate in clinical psychology. The average percentages agreement on the total number of symptoms rated including zero entries (i.e., agreement that a symptom was absent) was 96.3; if zero entries are not included in the ratio, the average percentages of agreement was 70.3. The former ratio is probably unrealistically high since there was a large number of zero entries, but the latter may be unrealistically low since zero entries did not indicate that no judgment
INTERNALIZING-EXTERNALIZING AND SELF-CONTROL
297
was involved. No S was classified as an Internalizer by one rater and as an Externalizer by the other, and vice versa. Two of the 27 cases included in the study (as Externalizers) were classified as "Neither" by the second rater (they failed to meet the minimum requirement of three symptoms); therefore, the percent agreement in subject classification was 92.6. The normal control group consisted of 26 seventh-grade boys selected from schools in both middle and lower social-class neighborhoods on the basis of teacher and school social worker ratings of "normal adaptation." All three subject groups (normals, Internalizers, and Externalizers) were equally divided into lower and middle social class groups as determined by the occupation and educational level of the head of each household (Hollingshead, 1957). The social-class standing was not significantly different among normals, Internalizers, and Externalizers. Estimates of intellectual level (WlSC, Stanford-BLuet, or Lorge-Thorndike) indicated that the mean IQ score of the normal Ss was higher than that of the clinic Ss (F = 5.94); dr= 1, 86, p < .05), but there was no difference in mean IQ scores between Externalizers and Internalizers. See Table 1 for mean age, IQ, and social class of Ss.
Procedures Three measures were employed in the study: a delay-of-gratification task, a visual-discrimination task of refiection-impulsivity, and the Porteus Maze Test. TABLE I MEAN AGE, IQ, AND SOCIAL CLASS Group Normals Middle class Low class Internalizers Middle class I Low class Externalizers Middle class Low class
IQa
Social ctass b
115.31 105.69
29.62 64.31
12.08 112.15 11.92 I 99.77
32.85 64.85
11.60 i 1.90
38.65 67.20
Age
12o 15 12.31
105.65 100.70
aStanford-Binet or WISC for clinic Ss; LorgeThorndike for normal Ss. bSource: Hollingshead, A. B. Two Factor Index of Social Position. Unpublished manuscript (mimeographed), Yale University, 1957.
298
SHELDON A. WEINTRAUB
Delay of gratification was measured by an experimental procedure described by DePree (1966). This task required the child to choose between pairs of toys he had previously rated and ranked for preference value. The pairs varied in terms of the separation in each child's preference value as derived from his rank.order assignments of the two toys. Sixteen pairs of toys were presented; for each pair S chose either the less preferred toy, which could be obtained immediately, or the more preferred toy, which could only be obtained after 2 weeks' delay. Reflection-impulsivity was measured by a modification of the Matching Familiar Figures (MFF) test, devised by Kagan et al. (1964). This test consists of a set of line drawings of familiar stimulus objects (e.g., house, tree, airplane) in the form of a standard and six to eight highly similar alternatives. S's task was to select from the array of alternatives that stimulus that was identical to the standard. Two forms of the MFF test were included in this study. The MFF form containing only six alternatives was modified by duplicating two of the incorrect alternatives, thus providing a total of eight response alternatives in a given array. This easier form was combined with a more difficult version that contained eight alternatives to create a test with 23 test items and two practice items. Successive items tended to increase in difficulty except for the last two items, which were deliberately made easy to insure that all Ss would finish the test with a success experience. The MFF has typically been administered in notebook form and timed by E with a stopwatch. The procedure called for praising Ss if his first answer was correct; if in error, he was informed of this and requested to respond again. This procedure unfortunately introduced an ambiguous and confounding factor of failure-frustration with the attendant problem of a differential responsiveness by Ss to praise and censure. By contrast, in the present investigation, the original MFF pictures were photographed and then converted to slides that could be projected onto a viewing screen designed to obtain and insure S's attention, interest, and cooperation through the use of lights and buttons that S could manipulate. Only one response to a trial was permitted, and after the practice trials no information about correctness was available. The MFF apparatus consisted of a viewing screen enclosed in a wooden panel, 24 x 24-in., that sloped slightly away from the subject. Two window screens of ground (etched) lucite were cut into the panel. The first screen, 5 x 5-in., was centered at the top of the panel, onto which the standard was projected. The second screen, 13 x 7.in., was centered at the bottom of the panel, onto which the array of alternatives was projected. At the top of the panel was a red signal light that lighted 2 see. before the slide appeared. Its purpose was to orient S and to prepare him for the appearance of the test item. Two rows of four buttons each, one at the top, the other at the bottom of the screen, were mounted as response keys for the various response alternatives. Each of these eight buttons corresponded to one of the eight alternative responses to a test item. These
I N T E R N A L I Z I N G - E X T E R N A L I Z I N G AND SELF-CONTROL
299
buttons provided a means for S to record which alternative he perceived as identical to the standard stimulus. Depression of a button ended the trial, erased the slide from the screen, flashed S's answer on a box of eight lights situated in front of E, and initiated a 10-see. intertrial interval. A Standard Electric timer used to record the response latency in seconds was activated automatically as the slide was projected on the screen and was stopped automatically when S pushed a button to signal his response. The Porteus Maze Test was administered according to the standard instructions (Porteus, 1965), and TQ and Q scores were obtained. Interrater reliability was determined by an experienced psychometrist who independently scored 30 randomly selected protocols. TQ was scored with perfect agreement; the interrater reliability coefficient for Q score was +.98. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The basic statistical analysis of the data involved a series of analyses of variance among the six subject groups using five a priori, orthogonal, planned comparisons (Hays, 1963, pp. 459-489): (1) normal versus clinic Ss; (2) Internalizing versus Externalizing clinic Ss; middle versus lower social-class contrasts within each of the (3) normal; (4) Internalizing; and (5) Externalizing groups. Using this statistical comparison, each of the five dependent variables (Delay of gratification, MFF response times, MFF errors, Porteus TQ, and Porteus Q score) was analyzed separately. Mean scores for each variable are shown in Table 2; results of the analyses of variance are presented in Table 3. The comparisons between normal Ss and clinic Ss revealed marked differences (p < .001) for all five dependent variables. The clinic Ss were less willing to delay gratification, were more impulsive responders on the MFF test in terms of both speed and accuracy, and were more impulsive responders on the Porteus Maze Test as determined by TQ and Q score. Differences between Externalizing Ss and Internalizing Ss were equally marked, revealing the former to be the more impulsive on all experimental tasks (p < .002). Lower class Ss tended to be more impulsive than did middle-class Ss, but contrasts within the different symptom patterns revealed significant social class differences only witilin Externalizing Ss for delay of gratification, Porteus TQ, and Porteus Q score, and within Internalizing Ss for MFF speed and accuracy and Porteus TQ. There were no significant social-class differences on any of the variables within normal Ss. The MFF as given to the Ss gradually increased in difficulty over the 23 items. In the course of administering the test, E observed that the normal children apparently spent considerably more time in problem solving when confronted with the later, more difficult items in contrast to the earlier and easier ones. Such a work pattern did not appear to characterize the clinic groups of children. To test this observation, change scores were computed for both time
300
SHELDON A. WEINTRAUB
TABLE 2 MEAN SCORES FOR ALL SUBJECTS
Group
Normals Middle ctass Lower class Internalizers Middle class Lower class Externalizers Middle class Lower class
Delay of gratification (number of "today" choices)
Matching Familiar Figure Test
Porteus Maze Test
Total response times (in seconds)
Errors
TQ
Q
2.08 3.23
978.54 880.46
5.54 7.23
129.38 121.38
17.62 17.85
2.92 3.77
1016.38 800.15
7.46 10.38
127.85 113.31
25.46 34.46
5.10 6.45
581.20 513.10
12.80 14.00
116.00 104.85
54.45 62.95
and error scores by subtracting the score obtained on the first block of easy items (1-7) from the block of seven more difficult items (15-21). Since this analysis was post hoc, alpha was set at .01, rather than .05, and a two-tailed rather than a one-tailed test was run, to reduce the probability of making a Type I error. There were no significant differences among the groups in terms of change scores for errors (all groups made more errors on the more difficult block of trials), but there were differences in change scores for time. Normal S s responded more slowly on the last block of trials, relative to the first block, than did clinic S (t = 5.23; d f = 90; p < .001); Externalizers were significantly different from I nternalizers (t = 4 . 1 2 ; d r = 64; p < .001), revealing a minus mean change score. That is, on the average, the Externalizers responded even more rapidly to the difficult items than they did to the easier ones (see Figure 1), which clearly results in an ineffective problem solving strategy. There were no significant social-class differences. A correlation matrix (Table 4) was computed for the dependent variables and subject variables. All intercorrelations between the dependent variables proved highly significant (p < .001). Social class significantly correlated with all five dependent variables as well as with IQ; children of middle social-class standing tended to be less impulsive, more likely to delay, and intellectually brighter. There was a tendency for older children, even within the limited age range of his study, to be less impulsive, but intelligence seemed to be largely independent of these measures.
t.~
Note.-EXT = E• *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Symptom pattern Normal vs. clinic EXT vs. INT Social class withinsymptom pattern LC EXT vs. MC EXT LC INT vs. MC INT LC NORM vs. MC NORM Error
Source
18.23 4.65 8.65 6.39
87.37 92.96
MS
2.85* .73 1.36
13.68"** 14.56"**
F
Delay of gratification
46.38 303.91 62.52 78.48
1075.18 2054.90
.59 3.87* .80
13.70"** 26.18"**
MS
TQ F
14.40 55.54 18.62 9.04
1.59 6.15"* 2.06
124.32 137.39 41.60 21.29
1.95
5.84** 6.45**
72.25 52.65 .04 25.06
1639.54 1301.42
MS
Porteus Maze Test
514.44 56.94*** 224.07 10.52"** 315.83 34.95*** ~162.40 7.63***
F
MS
MS
F
Error (scores)
Responses (times)
Matching Famil!ar Figures Test
Variables
INT = Internalizers NORM = Normals; LC = lower class; MC = middle class.
[ 86
I ] 3
TABLE 3 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF DEPENDENT VARIABLES
Q
2.88* 2.10
65.42*** 51.93"**
F
302
SHELDON A. WEINTRAUB
140
,,:~
9
I00
,~
80
g~ ra
|
t-
40 2O
Slowerl Faster
0
-20
MC LC MC LC
MC LC
Normals
Internalizers
Externolizers
FIG. 1. Mean changes in Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFF) response time; block II (trials 15-21) minus block I (trials 1-7). MC = middle class; LC = lower class.
Of the two independent variables, symptom pattern (normals, Internalizers, Externalizers) and social class (middle and lower), symptom pattern appeared to be the more powerful determiner of response as suggested by the larger differences and smaller overlap among the symptom groups in contrast to the social.class component. In addition, a review of the data for lower and middle class normal Ss revealed no significant differences between these groups on any of the dependent variables. Social class as a factor, however, cannot be ignored since it dearly served to heighten the differences among the groups of clinic Ss. Since lower social-class membership in and of itself did not appear to be a primary requisite for impulsive behavioral patterns, what other subject-related factors may account for the striking differences evidenced among the subject groups? A variable suggested by the findings of DePree (1966) and Achenbach (1966) is that of family organization or stability. To compare the quality of adaptation of the families within each subject group, a family was rated as "disorganized" if there was evidence either indicating divorce or separation or showing marked and multiple parental or sibling problems.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
-.39***
*p < .05 (two-tailed test). **p < .01 (two-tailed test). ***p "( .001 (two-tailed test).
Delay of gratification MFF time MFF error Porteus Maze Test TQ Porteus Q Social class Age IQ
Measure .50***
-.76***
-.39*** .39*** -.55***
~ -.56*** .63"** -.55***
.32** -.27** .38*** -.43*** .24*
8
-.20 .10 -.19 .41"** -.22 .44"** .20
7 -o12 .28** -.25* -.07 -.23* .02
INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG DEPENDENT VARIABLES AND SUBJECT VARIABLES FOR THE TOTAL SAMPLE
TABLE 4
304
SHELDON A. WEI NTRAUB
Because some of the information necessary for the rating of family pathology was frequently missing from the school cumulative records of normal Ss, the measure was applied solely to a comparison of the clinic groups, since in all cases the case-history folder provided this information. A chi-square comparing this index of family disorganization within Internalizers versus Externalizers revealed more family pathology within the Externalizing group (X2 = 5.14; df = 1; p < .025). There was no differences, however, between the lower and middle class subjects. This analysis of potentially disorganizing factors in the home as a correlate of symptom expression is a superficial, albeit suggestive, one. Future research into this seemingly important factor must involve greater attention to the varied and complex components of family patterns. Maturity and competence might serve as potential explanatory factors of the finding that patterns of delay of gratification, reflection-impulsivity, and foresight and planning were all consistent in following a particular sequence: normal Ss demonstrated the greatest degree of self-control, Externalizing Ss demonstrated the most impulsivity, and Internalizing Ss maintained an intermediate position. With increasing maturity, an individual presumably becomes more likely to defer gratification, to reflect on a problem more extensively and successfully, to plan ahead, and to internalize his problems. This integrative formulation is consistent with Werner's (1957)developmental theory and with the findings of Zigler and Phillips (1960) and Achenbach (1966). Zigler and Phillips found their adult internalizing patients, who manifested symptoms of self-deprivation and turning against the self, to be more socially effective, mature, and competent during the premorbid period than did those externalizing patients whose symptoms reflected patterns of self-indulgence and turning against others. Achenbach's findings with child patients were similar; Externalizers tended to be less socially competent than did Internalizers. The behavioral pattern demonstrated by the Externalizers, in comparison with the Internalizers, may be seen as a manifestation of a less mature, less competent orientation, as well as a more impulsive style of life. In turn, the Internalizers may be conceptualized as less mature and less competent than the normals (but operating at a higher developmental level than are the Externalizers); and this relative immaturity more than stylistic considerations may explain their reduced degree of self-control. The importance of the Internalizing-Externalizing dimensions is highlighted by its prognostic potential. There is strong evidence that externalizing behavior in childhood frequently results in behavior problems in adulthood (Kohlberg, LaCrosse, & Ricks, 1972; Robins, 1966), whereas the outcome for Internalizers is much more benign. Externalizing behaviors also have been implicated within the "spectrum of schizophrenia" in studies of children of schizophrenics (Heston, 1966). Externalizers are indeed a vulnerable, high-risk group; further research into the identification of these children and into variables predictive of
I N T E R N A L I Z I N G - E X T E R N A L I Z I N G A N D SELF.CONTROL
305
adult psychopathology may finally permit the development of long-sought preventive measures. REFERENCES Achenbach, R. T. The classification of children's psychiatric symptoms: A factor analytic study. Psychological Monographs, 1966, 80(7, Whole No. 615). Anthony, A. A. The relationship between neuroticism, stress, and qualitative Porteus Maze performance. Journal o.f Consulting Psychology, 1963, 27, 513-519. Cummings, S. T., & Carson, R. L. Maternal personality and the externalizing-internalizing symptom dimension in neurotic children. Proceedings of the 75th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 1967, 2, 181-182. DePree, S. Time perspective, frustration-failure, and delay of gratification in middle-class and lower-class children from organized and disorganized families. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1966. Garmezy, No Contributions of experimental psychology to understanding the origins of schizophrenia. Excerpta Medical International, Congress Series No. 151, 1967. Hays, W. L Statistics for psychologistx New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1963. Heston, L. Psychiatric disorders in foster home-reared children of schizophrenic mothers. British Journal of Psychiatry, 1966, 112, 819-825. Hollingshead, A. B. Two factor index of social position. Unpublished manuscript (mimeographed), Yale University, 1957. Jenkins, R. L. Psychiatric syndromes in children and their relation to family background. A merican Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1966, 36,450-457. Kagan, J. Impulsive and reflective children: Significance of conceptual tempo. In J. D. Krumboltz (Ed.), Learning and the educational process. Chicago: Rand McNaUy, 1965. (a) Kagan, J. Reflection-impulsivity and reading ability in primary grade children. Child Development, 1965, 36, 609-628. (b) Kagan, J. Developmental studies in reflection and analysis. In A. H. Kidd & J. H. Rivoire (Eds.), Perceptual and conceptual development in children. New York: International Universities Press, 1966. (a) Kagan, J. Reflection-impulsivity: The generality and dynamics of conceptual tempo. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1966, 71, 17-24. (b) Kagan, J., Moss, H. A., & Siget, I. E. Psychological significance of style of conceptualization. In J. C. Wright & J. Kagan (Eds.), Basic cognitive processes in children. Monograph of Social Research in Child Development, 1963, 28(Serial No. 86),, 73-124. Kagan, J., & Rosman, B. Cardiac and respiratory correlates of attention and an analytic attitude. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1964, 21, 50-63. Kagan, J., Rosman, B. L., Day, D., Albert, J., & Phillips, W. Information processing in the child: Significance of analytic and reflective attitudes. Psychological Monographs. 1964, 78(1, Whole No. 578).
306
SHELDON A. WEINTRUAB
Kainer, K. The Porteus Maze Test and the delay of gratification. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, 1965. Katz, J. M. Refleetion-impulsivity and color-form sorting. Child Development, 1971, 42, 745-754. Kohlberg, L., LaCrosse, J., & Ricks, D. The predictability of adult mental health from childhood behavior. In B. B. Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of childhood psychopathology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972. Mischel, W., & Gilligan, C. Delay of gratification motivation for the prohibited gratification, and responses to temptation. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1964, 69, 411--417. Mischel, W., & Metzner, R. Preference for delayed reward as a function of age, intelligence and length of delay interval. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1962, 64, 425--431. Nelson, R. F. The effects of training in attention deployment on observing behavior in reflective and impulsive children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1968. Patterson, G. R. An empirical approach to the classification of disturbed children. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1964, 20, 326-337. Peterson, D. R. Behavior problems of middle childhood. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1961, 25, 205-209. Phillips, L., & Rabinovitch, M. S. Social role and patterns of symptomatic behaviors. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1958, 57, 181-186. Phillips, L., & Zigler, E. Social competence: The action-thought parameter and vicariousness in normal and pathological behaviors. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1961, 63, 137-146. Piaget, J. Principal factors in determining evolution from childhood to adutt life. In D. Rapaport (Ed.), Organization and pathology of thought. New York: Columbia University Press, 1951. Porteus, S. D. Porteus Maze Tests: Fifty years application. Pale Alto, Calif.: Pacific Books, 1965, Purcell, K. A note on Porteus Maze and Wechsler-Bellevue scores as related to anti-social behavior. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1956, 20, 361-364. Quay, H. C., Sprague, R. L., Shulman, H. S., & Mill.er, A. L. Some correlates of personality disorder and conduct disorder. Psychology in the Schools, 1966, 3, 44--47. Rexford, E. N. (Ed.) A developmental approach to problems of acting out. Monographs of the Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, No. 1. New York: International Universities Press, Inc., 1966. Roberts, A., & Erickson, R. Delay of gratification, Porteus Maze Test performance and behavioral adjustment in a delinquent group. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1968, 73,449--453. Robins, L. Deviant children grown up. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1966. Rosen, B. M., Bahn, A. K., & Kramer, M. Demographic and diagnostic characteristics of psychiatric outpatient clinics in the United States. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1964, 34, 455--468.
INTERNALIZING-EXTERNALIZING AND SELF-CONTROL
307
Siegelman, E. Y. Observing behavior in impulsive and reflective children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1966. Werner, H. Comparative psychology of mental development. (rev. ed.)Chicago: Follett, 1948. Werner, H. The concept of development from a comparative and organismic point of view. In D. B. Harris (Ed.), The concept of development. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1957. Zigler, E., & Phillips, L. Social effectiveness and symptomatic behaviors. Journal ofl Abnormal Psychology, 1960, 61,231-238.
