USE OF THE PERSONAL HISTORY FORM AS A CLINICAL INSTRUMENT

176 Pages·08.25 MB·English

by  WORTHINGTON, RICHARD E

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
DATF. May 8 51
lQ
Worthington, Richard Ellis December 12, 1911
Author Birth Date
Use of the Personal History Form as a Clinical Instrument
Title of Dissertation
Human Development Ph.D* June, 1951
Department or School Degree Convocation
Permission is herewith granted to the University of Chicago to make copies of the above title, at its
discretion, upon the request of individuals or institutions and at their expense.
6 / 2 - 7 / 5- / /7JT /vfM/*lfa
-vt^vr,
Date filmed Number of pages Signature of'author
Extensive Quotation or Further Reproduction of This Material by Persons or
Agencies Other than the University of Chicago May Not Be Made without the Express
Permission of the Author.
SHORT TITLE :___Ihfi Prrannfll History Fo-rm HB P. OUniMl Instrument
IRREGULAR NUMBERING (3 OVERSIZED SHEETS \U\
_ \ By cash [5j
PAID - . . .__.
/ Jiy thesis deposit |_J
DATE BILLED
THE UNIVERSITY OP CHICAGO
USE OP THE PERSONAL HISTORY PORM
AS A CLINICAL INSTRUMENT
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO
THE FACULTY OP THE DIVISION OP THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
IN CANDIDACY POR THE DEGREE OP
DOCTOR OP PHILOSOPHY
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
BY
RICHARD ELLIS WORTHINGTON
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
JUNE, 1951
FOREWORD
, Each Individual will bring to this dissertation his
own knowledge and wisdom which can make a critical reading
the more valuable. Gaps and Inadequacies in the author's
presentation may be distinctly evident; and these, it is
hoped, will inspire the reader himself to do more fruitful
work. Much of what is written is not new, some little is.
And the little may not be stimulating; but if it does give
rise to one single new idea in the reader, then the writer
of this thesis will think of the effort that went into it
as having been worth while.
No whole man lives to himself, nor is he sufficient
unto himself. That real and vibrant component called wife
can make the difference between happiness and all the poor
substitutes that are the lot of incomplete man. In full
knowledge of the experience of happiness through my wife,
whose constant love and companionship, aid and encourage
ment led me on with this work, I take this opportunity to
bless her for finding in me the genesis of the man I am
become.
Friends, too, are an integral part of man's whole
ness; and among the many I have to thank for their support,
those adding most to my "totalness" by their actions are:
Professors Robert J. Havighurst, Hedda Bolgar, W. Lloyd
Warner,- Carl R. Rogers, J. Carson McGulre, William E. Henry,
William 0. Stephenson; Doctors James G. Miller, Burleigh B.
Gardner; and Clara Weimer, Douglas M. More, Robert F. Peck,
Gllmore J. Spencer, Mildred L. Schwartz, Cnarles M. Wharton,
and Harriett Moore. Of them all, to Harold C. Trownsell,
whose unshakeable belief in the outcome of the study was a
constant stimulation, is owed perhaps the place next to my
wife.
ii
Teachers, too, are to be thanked for the role they
played in the author's reaching that part of this study
that may prove a mature expression. Among them I would
particularly list Professors Helen L. Koch, Wilton M. Krog-
man, Nathan Kleltman, Prank S. Freeman, Louis Wlrth, Anton
J. Carlson, Robert Redfleld, Ernest W. Burgess; and Doctors
Karl A. Mennlnger, Mandel Sherman, and Dael Wolfle.
To my family go thanks for paving the way for a
reasonable amount of personal growth and development.
Ill
TABLE OP CONTENTS
Page
FOREWORD ii
LIST OP TABLES vi
LIST OP ILLUSTRATIONS viii
Chapter
I. STATEMENT OP THE PROBLEM 1
Historical Background 3
Some Operational Hypotheses and
Observations about Personality 7
Notes on Our Industrial Society and
Its Relationship to Personality
Structure 10
Our Industrial Society and Its Rela
tionship to Personality Structure . . .. 15
Personality as a Process 16
II. THE INSTRUMENT, SCORES AND PRINCIPLES OP
SCORING, THE PROFILE, AND TECHNIQUE OP
INTERPRETATION 25
Introduction 25
The Personal History Form 25
Administration 30
Accuracy of Responses 32
Scoring Categories 32
Scoring Principles and Assignment of
Scores 3^
Assessment of Defense Mechanisms and
Scoring HQ
Character Structure Indicators 51*
Facets of Personality 58
Scoring for School Subjects, Hobbies,
and Interests 62
The Profile and Technique of
Interpretation 73
iv
TABLE OP CONTENTS--Continued
Chapter Page
III. ASSUMPTIONS, TECHNIQUES, AND PROCEDURES
OP THE PERSONAL HISTORY METHOD AS DEMON
STRATED IN A SINGLE CASE 85
Behavior and Interpretation 86
Face Sheet Summary and Tentative
Conclusions 91
Physical Data Summary and Tentative
Conclusions 9^
Summary of Educational Area and
Tentative Conclusions 100
Summary of Activities Area and
Tentative Conclusions 102
Summary of Present Business Experience
and Tentative Conclusions 104
Summary of Job History and Tentative
Conclusions 110
Summary of Alms and Tentative Conclusions . 112
IV. DESIGN OP THE RESEARCH AND FINDINGS 128
General Procedure 129
Three Additional Cases 132
The Findings 133
V. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 155
Practical Implications of the Research . . . l6l
BIBLIOGRAPHY 164
i
v
LIST OP TABLES
Page
Tabulation of Clinicians* and Psychotherapists*
Ratings of Agreement for Group I Cases by
Descriptive Categories 135
Numbers of Items in Each Category of Agreement
for Each Clinician and Psychotherapist . . .. 138
Chl-Square Test of Differences Between
Clinicians and Psychotherapists on Columns
1, 2, 3, and 4 of Table 2 139
Numbers and Percentages of Agree, Disagree,
and Not Covered, by Categories for Eight
Cases in Group I 139
Total Ratings of Clinician and Psychotherapist
in Group I in which Inferred Agreement or Dis
agreement Has Been Eliminated from the Not
Covered Colums and Placed in the Agree-Disagree
Columns 1*11
Significance of the Difference Between Clini
cians and Psychotherapists in Rating Personal
ity Dynamics (Group I Cases) 142
Significance of the Difference Between Clini
cians and Psychotherapists in Rating Character
Structure (Group I Cases) 143
Significance of the Difference Between Clini
cians and Psychotherapists in Rating Intellec
tual Capacities (Group I Cases) 145
Significance of the Difference Between Clini
cians and Psychotherapists in Rating Behavior
al Picture (Group I Cases ) 146
Significance of the Difference Between Clini
cians and Psychotherapists in Rating Diagnosis
(Group I Cases) 148
Significance of the Difference Between Clini
cians and Psychotherapists in Rating Prognosis
(Group I Cases) 149
vi
LIST OP TABLES--Continued
Page
Differences Between Clinicians and Psycho
therapists for Group I Cases with respect
to Agree, Disagree, and Not Covered Cate
gories . . . .""" 150
Tabulation of Clinicians1 and Psychothera
pists' Ratings of Agreement for Group II
Cases by Descriptive Categories 151
Numbers and Percentages of Agree, Disagree,
and Not Covered for the Categories Over All
Eleven Cases 152
vii
LIST OP ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Page
1. Schema of Some Facts, Situations, and
Processes Basic to Differing Degrees
of Goodness of Prediction 22
2. Personal History Form 26
3. Personal History—Scoring Record 74
4. Profile 75
5. Profile of Lower Middle Class Woman 79
6. Profile of Upper Lower Class Man 80
7. Profile of Upper Middle Class Woman 81
8. Profile of Lower Middle Class Man 82
9. Profile of Upper Middle Class Man 83
10. Profile of Upper Middle Class Man 84
11. Completed Personal History Form 113
12. Completed Profile of Case History 117
13. Psychological Report 120
viii
CHAPTER I
STATEMENT OP THE PROBLEM
This dissertation will concern Itself with an In
tensive attempt to develop a methodological approach to the
use of an application blank as a projective instrument to
assess personality.
Broadly speaking, there are two main classes of in
struments for gaining insight into personality. These are
the outcomes of distinctive points of view. Differential
psychology has approached the problem in much the same way
as was found successful in measuring intelligence. Aspects
of personality have been defined which are ascertained
through pencil and paper scales made up of items calling
for the subject's reactions to situations of everyday life.
Norms have been determined which enable the tester to de
scribe personality as a degree of conformity to them.
Among criticisms of this approach, two of the more important
seem to be that the subject can consciously manipulate his
responses, and that the subject's scores may tell nothing
of the ways in which aspects of his personality are inte-
grated.
The other main group of measures have been developed
on the assumptions underlying clinical psychology and psy
chiatry in which aspects of personality have greatest mean
ing in their relationships to one another within the indi-
vidual. These measures, the so-called projective tech-
L. K. Prank, "Projective Methods for the Study of
Personality," Journal of Psychology. VIII (1939), 393.
2
Lee J. Cronbach, Essentials of Psychological Test
ing (New York: Harper and Brothers, 19^9)/ p. ^33.
3prank, OP. cit.. p. 392.
1