- Email: [email protected]
A task analysis of assertive behavior revisited: Replication and extension
BEHAVIORTHERAPY12, 217--230(1981)
A Task Analysis of Assertive Behavior Revisited: Replication and Extension MONROE A. BRUCH State University o f New York at Albany
The study was designed to replicate and extend Schwartz and Gottman's (1976) task analysis of the deficits in nonassertive behavior. The study extended previous research by comparing groups differing in assertiveness on measures of positive assertion, information-processing style, and social problem-solving ability. Contrary to Schwartz and Gottman, only high assertive subjects demonstrated competence in content knowledge and informal delivery of refusal responses. Also, high assertive subjects performed better under direct delivery conditions and reported more positive self-statements replicating previous findings. Although groups did not differ on component measures of positive assertion and social problem solving, high compared to low assertives were more abstract in information-processing style. This relationship was replicated with a second sample. Overall, the findings suggest that training in assertive behavior should give equal attention to deficits in both cognitive and overt response skills. R e c e n t l y , M c F a l l (1976) a n d S c h w a r t z a n d G o t t m a n (1976) h a v e q u e s t i o n e d the v a l u e of i n t e r v e n t i o n studies for i n c r e a s i n g k n o w l e d g e a b o u t r e s p o n s e p r o b l e m s that c h a r a c t e r i z e n o n a s s e r t i v e i n d i v i d u a l s . T h e y a r g u e that i n f e r r i n g r e s p o n s e deficits f r o m t r e a t m e n t o u t c o m e s m a y lead to a n i n a c c u r a t e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a s s e r t i v e p r o b l e m s a n d r e l i a n c e o n less eff e c t i v e t r a i n i n g a p p r o a c h e s . C o n s e q u e n t l y , the u s e of a n i n d u c t i v e app r o a c h to i d e n t i f y c o m p o n e n t skills n e c e s s a r y for effective a s s e r t i v e beh a v i o r is in order. S c h w a r t z a n d G o t t m a n ' s (1976) s t u d y c o n s t i t u t e s the first a t t e m p t to a s s e s s the r e s p o n s e deficits directly. T h e i r r e s u l t s w e r e i n f o r m a t i v e in t w o r e s p e c t s . F i r s t , c o n t r a r y to a skills deficit a s s u m p t i o n , low a s s e r t i v e s u b j e c t s d e m o n s t r a t e d a n a d e q u a t e k n o w l e d g e of the c o n t e n t of a p p r o The author expresses appreciation to Thomas Krieshok for his assistance in conducting the study. Also, I am grateful to D. Fiedler, F. Gilner, R. McFall, R. Schwartz, and J. Platt for providing me with copies of their scales and measures as well as accompanying experimental protocols without which this study could not have been conducted. Requests for reprints should be sent to Monroe A. Bruch, Department of Counseling Psychology and Student Development, ED 215, State University of New York at Albany, 1400 Washington Avenue, Albany, NY 12222. 217 0005-7894/81/0217-023051.00/0 Copyright 1981 by Association for Advancement of Behavior Therapy All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
218
BRUCH
priate refusal responses. Assertive groups differed, however, when performing under conditions that simulated direct interaction, suggesting an inhibition hypothesis. Second, and relevant to this issue, their results pointed to inhibiting effects arising from differences in cognitive functioning rather than physiological arousal. Nonassertive subjects reported significantly fewer positive and more negative self-statements than did assertive subjects. In the context of subsequent research, Schwartz and Gottman's (1976) discovery of cognitive but not physiological differences is not surprising (Alden & Safran, 1978; Fiedler & Beach, 1978; Holroyd, Westbrook, Wolf, & Badhorn, 1978). What is surprising, however, is the fact that nonassertive subjects possessed appropriate content knowledge. Such an outcome was unexpected since assertive behavior appears to require an extensive repertoire of both verbal and nonverbal response skills (Rich & Schroeder, 1976). This raises the question of whether Schwartz and Gottman's analysis provides an adequate test of the content knowledge question. For example, constructing an effective refusal statement may be a simple task compared to formulating other types of assertive responses. It is necessary, therefore, to replicate their assessment of rights assertion components as well as to extend the task analysis by testing whether similar component skills are critical for successful execution of other classes of assertive expression. In addition, it is reasonable that other types of cognitive processes influence assertive actions. While their decision to examine the role of maladaptive self-statements was a logical choice based on the cognitivebehavioral literature (Meichenbaum, 1977), information-processing models of learning suggest other factors that should affect social performance (Bowers, 1978; Mahoney, 1977). Information-processing style and interpersonal problem solving ability were two additional cognitive variables examined in the present task analysis. Information-processing style was defined by the variable of cognitive complexity (Schroder, 1972; Schroder, Driver, & Streufert, 1967). These theorists postulate that high complexity persons make finer discriminations of social stimuli, possess internal standards for evaluating stimuli, possess comprehensive rules for integrating conflicting information, and are more tolerant of ambiguity. In contrast, social problem solving ability refers to a person's repertoire of response rules for dealing with interpersonal situations. Despite competence in overt response skills, failure to act assertively may result from a lack of strategies for selection and organization of discrete responses into a total assertive act. This cognitive dimension was defined using Spivack, Platt, and Shure's (1976) test of means-end thinking which evaluates a person's ability to generate and organize alternative plans of action for attaining a particular social goal. Thus, in the present research, groups varying in assertiveness were tested on these two cognitive measures and compared to determine if deficits in these skills are related to differential assertiveness.
TASK ANALYSIS OF ASSERTIVE BEHAVIOR
219
METHOD Subjects Students in introductory psychology classes were administered McFall and Lillesand's (1971) Conflict Resolution Inventory (CRI) along with other measures at the beginning of the semester. Following the procedure developed by McFall and Twentyman (1973) and used by Schwartz and Gottman (1976), subjects were classified as low, moderate, or high in selfreported assertiveness according to a bivariate criterion using both assertion and nonassertion scores. An equal number of potential male and female subjects were selected at random from each of the three resulting subject pools. Several weeks later, subjects were contacted and offered course credit for participating in a study involving self-expression in social situations. The final sample consisted of 54 subjects classified into equal groups of high, moderate, and low assertiveness. Of the 18 subjects within each group, half were males and the other half females. Dependent Measures Rights assertion measures. Subjects were evaluated on all of Schwartz and Gottman's (1976) measures except for monitoring of heart rate. Following their hierarchical model for assessing overt response skills, the Assertive Knowledge Inventory (AKI), the Hypothetical Behavioral Role Playing Assertion Test (HYPO), and the Reduced Behavioral Rehearsal Assertion Test (RBRAT) were used to compare groups on prerequisite as well as terminal skills. One item was eliminated from each to allow additional time for administering other measures. The criterion for eliminating items was that one which least affected the representative sampling of varying target persons. The following CRI items were dropped: item 24 from the AKI, item 35 from the HYPO, and item 12 from the RBRAT. Subjects' responses to the AKI, the HYPO, and the RBRAT were rated independently by two judges using McFall and Lillesand's (1971) 5-point scale of unambiguous refusal. The present study also assessed subjects' self-statement tendencies using the Assertiveness Self-Statement Test (ASST). The ASST includes an additional procedure that asks subjects to check one of four sequences that best describes the order of any positive and negative thoughts to evaluate whether assertive groups differ in their patterning of self-evaluative thoughts. Finally, subjects' reports of self-perceived tension when responding to the RBRAT situations were obtained. As in Schwartz and Gottman, subjects rated their degree of nervousness on a scale from 1 to 7 (1 = not at all nervous to 7 = extremely nervous) following the first and last RBRAT situations. Positive assertion measures. Since Schwartz and Gottman (1976, p. 911) found that CRI scores correlated .72 with scores on an assertiveness inventory that included positive assertion situations (see Galassi, DeLo, Galassi, & Bastien, 1974), it is likely that a subject's capacity to express
220
BRUCH
positive statements should parallel his or her ability to refuse unreasonable requests. Consequently, subjects' assertiveness level as reported on the CRI was also used to compare performance in positive assertion situations. Items from Warren and Gilner's (1978) Behavioral Test of Tenderness Expression (BTTE) were used to present positive assertion situations. Modeled after McFall and Lillesand's (1971) Behavioral Rehearsal Assertion Test, the B T T E is a behavior role play procedure designed to assess c o m p e t e n c e in expression of appreciation, affection, and empathy to a dating partner. Testing their instrument with college-aged couples, Warren and Gilner reported very adequate levels of reliability and validity for judges' scoring. In the present study, B T T E items 3, 5, 7, and 9 were combined to construct a written form (BTTE-W), while items 4, 10, 11, and 12 were combined to form a role play measure of oral responding (BTTE-O). These two sets of items were selected because their content was relevant to college student dating situations, and the items could be paired on the basis of topic similarity to construct parallel forms. Equal difficulty for the two forms was confirmed through pilot testing. The B T T E - W presented heterosexual situations calling for tenderness expression and, similar to the AKI, required the subject to write an appropriate response to test a subject's content knowledge. The BTTE-O, like the R B R A T , was used to assess subjects' ability to construct and deliver positive feeling messages under circumstances that simulated direct interaction. Responses to both measures were rated independently by two judges using Warren and Gilner's scoring procedures which ranged from 1 (punishing reply or no response) to 4 (elaborated disclosure of feelings and/or empathy toward partner's needs). Cognitive complexity and social problem solving measures. Subjects' cognitive complexity was tested using Hunt, Butler, Noy, and Rosser's (1978) form of the Paragraph Completion Method (PCM). The PCM contains six sentence stems to which the subject must add at least three sentences containing thoughts about the topic. Items in the PCM relate to constructs such as: (1) how one handles conflict or uncertainty (e.g., " W h e n I am not sure . . . . " " W h e n I am criticized . . .") and (2) how one thinks about rule structure and authority (e.g., " W h a t I think about rules . . . . " " W h e n I am told what to d o . . . " ) . Responses were scored on a seven step scale of half-point intervals yielding a scoring range of 0 to 3. A single cognitive complexity score was assigned to a subject based on the average of the individual's three highest scores (Hunt et al., 1978). These authors obtained a test-retest reliability of .67 for PCM scores over a 3-month interval. Platt and Spivack's (1975) Means-End Problem-Solving Procedure (MEPS) was used to assess social problem solving skills. The MEPS consisted of nine story stems which portray different situations in which a need is aroused in the main character at the beginning and satisfied by
TASK ANALYSIS OF ASSERTIVE BEHAVIOR
221
the end of the story. 1 Directions require making up a story that fills in the details of what the character did to get from the beginning dilemma to a successful resolution at the end. Using their scoring p r o c e d u r e s , subjects' protocols were scored for n u m b e r of (1) relevant means (e.g., a discrete p r o c e d u r e effective in enabling the character to reach the solution given at the end of the story), (2) ratio of relevant m e a n s to both irrevelant means and no-means responses, (3) enumerations of means (e.g., additional details about a particular means used in the story), (4) obstacles, (5) enumerations of obstacles, and (6) time awareness. These authors obtained a test-retest reliability of .64 on the relevant means score o v e r a 5-week interval.
Procedure Subjects attended two sessions. Initially, subjects met in small groups where they were told the p u r p o s e of the experiment, administered the M E P S , and scheduled individually for a second session. All subjects completed the PCM at an earlier date when they filled out the McFall CRI. Subjects were informed that the p u r p o s e of the research was to learn m o r e a b o u t how people express themselves in social situations c o m m o n to student life. In the second session subjects met individually with a male experimenter who was a graduate student in psychology. The e x p e r i m e n t e r had no knowledge of subjects' level of assertiveness. After reminding the subject of the p u r p o s e of the research, he administered a series of measures that involved both writing and role playing certain responses. During the first part of the session the rights assertion m e a s u r e s were administered in one of three orders: (1) H Y P O , A K I , R B R A T , (2) R B R A T , H Y P O , A K I , or (3) A K I , R B R A T , H Y P O . Within the high, moderate, and low assertive groups, subjects were assigned randomly to one of these orders with the constraint that an equal n u m b e r receive each order. Following the completion of these tasks, subjects were administered the ASST. Subsequently, the two B T T E m e a s u r e s were completed. Order of administration for the B T T E - W and B T T E - O was counterbalanced across subjects within each group.
RESULTS Inter-rater Agreement and Reliability As r e c o m m e n d e d by Tinsley and Weiss (1975), an index of inter-rater a g r e e m e n t (absolute a g r e e m e n t of j u d g e s ' ratings) and inter-rater reliability (whether j u d g e s ' ratings were proportional across subjects) was c o m p u t e d for assertive r e s p o n s e measures. Inter-rater a g r e e m e n t was calculated as agreements (identical scores) divided by a g r e e m e n t s plus 1 Story number 10, an optional item added by Platt and Spivack, was used in place of story number 5 because the latter story involves an unusual type of social conflict.
222
BRUCH
disagreements and then multiplied by 100 to form a percentage. H o w e v e r , because this index ignores the fact that agreement can occur by chance alone, Lawlis and L u ' s (1972) significance test for interval rating scales also was computed to determine whether the obtained agreement was greater than that expected by chance. Inter-rater agreement was 89% for the AKI, 90% for the H Y P O , and 88% for the RBRAT ratings. Agreement for judges' ratings of positive assertiveness responses was lower, however, with 63% for the B T T E - W and 79% for the BTTE-O. Individual application of Lawlis and L u ' s procedure to the measures resulted in significant Chi-Square values (p < .05) for all five measures indicating greater than chance levels of agreement. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation. Reliability coefficients of .93, .97, .92, .88, and .94 were found for the AKI, H Y P O , RBRAT, BTTE-W, and B T T E - O respectively. The reliability of judges' scoring of the two cognitive skill measures was also evaluated. Because a subject's cognitive complexity score on the PCM was based on an average of the three best responses, only interrater reliability was computed. An intraclass correlation coefficient of .83 was obtained indicating adequate reliability. In the case of the MEPS, response ratings yield nominal data. Since nominal data permit an analysis of only inter-rater agreement (Tinsley & Weiss, 1975), judges' level of agreement in coding MEPS responses was analyzed using Cohen's (1960) Kappa coefficient. This statistic is an indicator of the proportion of agreements between two raters after chance agreement has been removed with Kappa being calculated across all categories in a coding system. For judges' coding of MEPS responses, a K a p p a of .74 was obtained.
Sex Differences Point biserial correlations were computed between subject sex and scores on the assertiveness measures, self-perceived tension ratings, and the ASST positive and negative self-statement scores to evaluate whether sex of subject was a frequent covariate with these measures. Subject sex was significantly correlated [r(54) = .30, p < .05] only with performance on the BTTE-W. On this measure women attained higher ratings for written positive assertion responses, however, a similar relationship was not observed for B T T E - O responses. Since previous task analysis studies have not assessed for assertiveness differences in cognitive skill repertoires, sex of subject was included as a separate factor in the analysis of subjects' PCM and MEPS scores.
Replication of Rights Assertion Differences Content knowledge and delivery skills. Data for the AKI, H Y P O , and R B R A T measures were analyzed using a 3 (Assertive Groups) x 3 (Orders) analysis of variance (ANOVA). F o r the AKI, there was a significant main effect for groups [F(2,45) = 4.43, p < .05] and for order of administration [F(2,45) = 7.53, p < .01] but not for their interaction. Newman-
TASK ANALYSIS OF ASSERTIVE BEHAVIOR
223
Keuls multiple comparison tests showed that only the high and low assertive groups differed significantly (p < .05). Subjects high in self-reported assertiveness were more knowledgeable about the content of an effective refusal response than were low assertive subjects. Similar tests on order effects yielded a significant difference only between Order 3 and Order 1 suggesting poorer performance for subjects receiving the AKI first. Analysis of H Y P O data yielded a similar pattern of results. Significant main effects were found for assertive groups [F(2,45) = 7.89, p < .001] and for order of administration [F(2,45) -- 4.88, p < .05] but not for the interaction. On this measure, Newman-Keuls tests revealed that the high assertive group differed significantly from both the moderate and low assertive groups in their responses to H Y P O situations. In the case of the order effect, subjects administered the H Y P O last (Order 3) performed significantly better as a group than subjects assigned to either Order 1 or Order 2. Finally, when asked to respond under conditions simulating direct social interaction (RBRAT), the A N O V A yielded a significant main effect for groups [F(2,45) = 7.89, p < .001], a significant orders effect [F(2,45) = 4.98, p < .05], and a significant group by order interaction [F(4,45) = 3.07, p < .05]. Using the Newman-Keuls procedure, all pairwise comparisons among cell means on the RBRAT were made. Significant differences were found between high assertive subjects assigned to Order 1 and 3 (e.g., R B R A T given last or next to last) and low assertive subjects administered Order 2 and 3 (e.g., R B R A T given first or second). Thus, only high assertive subjects having prior experience with refusal situations were rated as delivering a more effective response than those low assertive subjects with little or no prior experience. Self-perceived tension. Unlike Schwartz and Gottman's (1976) findings, low, moderate, and high assertive subjects in this study evidenced no significant between-group differences in tension ratings for either the first or last R B R A T situation. Group means for both assessments varied within a narrow range between " a little n e r v o u s " to " s o m e w h a t nerv o u s . " Also, a 3 x 2 A N O V A with repeated measures on the second factor indicated that there was no significant groups by trials interaction on tension ratings following direct delivery of a refusal response. Positive and negative self-statements. Findings from the analysis of assertive group differences on the ASST provided a strong replication of Schwartz and Gottman's (1976) original data. A 3 (Assertive Groups) x 2 (Types of Self-Statement) A N O V A with repeated measures on the second factor yielded a highly significant groups by self-statement interaction [F(2,51) = 21.50, p < .0001]. Simple effects tests for the group factor under each self-statement category showed that there were significant group differences in frequency of positive statements [F(2,51) = 9.05, p < .0001] and frequency of negative statements [F(2,51) = 14.57, p < .0001]. As illustrated in Fig. 1, the group of high assertive subjects differed significantly in frequency of both positive and negative self-statements as compared to the moderate and low assertive groups which did
224
BRUCH 6O 58
•
Positive 7"22
-----} Negotive
(,,) 56 ,~ 5 4 E 52 o •L
5O
g~
48
->
46
~ z
44
x~ c
42
~0 >
40
o
~, o t3_
v//.
I
38 36
o
54
Low
FIG.
1.
range 17 to
Y/'Z
t
Moderate Assertive Group
High
Positive and negative self-statement scores as assessed by the A S S T (scoring 85).
not differ from each other. Within-group differences in the relative frequency of positive compared to negative self-statements was assessed using a t test for matched samples. Only high assertive subjects evidenced a significant within-group difference, reporting a greater number of positive than negative thoughts [t(17) = 8.23, p < .0001]. In contrast, subjects in the moderate and low assertive groups in both cases evidenced similar amounts of positive and negative thoughts since both t ratios were nonsignificant. As in Schwartz and Gottman (1976), subjects in the present study were asked to respond to an item on the ASST that asked them to select one of four sequences of positive and negative self-statements to describe the pattern of their evaluative thoughts. The four sequences included unshaken confidence (e.g., at first positive and later still positive), coping (e.g., at first negative but later positive), giving up (e.g., at first positive but later negative), and unshaken doubt (e.g., at first negative and later still negative). Assessment of group differences was designed to test whether persons of varying assertiveness were more or less prone toward sequences that facilitated or sequences that inhibited ability to refuse. Presence of a relationship between assertiveness level and subjects' choice of sequence was evaluated using a Chi-Square contingency table test. Because of the small sample size in some cells, the four sequence categories were collapsed into two categories--one involving adaptive
225
TASK A N A L Y S I S O F ASSERTIVE B E H A V I O R
TABLE 1 CHI-SQUARE CONTINGENCY TABLE OF PERCENTAGES AND ACTUAL NUMBER OF SUBJECTS CHOOSING EITHER OF T W O FACILITATIVE OR INHIBITING SELF-STATEMENT SEQUENCES
Self-statement sequences Assertive group
Unshaken confidence (++) or coping ( - + )
Unshaken doubt ( - - ) or giving up ( + - )
Low Moderate High
56% (10) 50% (9) 89% (16)
44% (8) 50% (9) 11% (2)
sequences (e.g., unshaken confidence or coping) and the other maladaptive (e.g., giving up or unshaken doubt). As evidenced in Table 1, a significant relationship was found between assertiveness level and sequencing of positive and negative thoughts [X2(2) = 7.01, p < .05]. This resulted from a greater percentage of individuals in the high assertive group checking either of the two adaptive sequences o v e r the maladaptive sequences. In particular, it was n o t e w o r t h y that out of the 16 high assertive subjects who checked either of the two adaptive sequences, 13 m a r k e d the category of unshaken confidence. Extension to Positive Assertion Differences Subjects' p e r f o r m a n c e on the two c o m p o n e n t measures of positive selfexpression was analyzed using a 3 (Assertive Groups) × 2 (Orders) A N OVA. On the m e a s u r e of content knowledge of positive feelings (BTTEW), the analysis showed that there was no significant effect for groups, for order, or for their interaction. A similar analysis on the m e a s u r e of direct delivery of positive assertive responses (BTTE-O) also failed to reveal any significant main or interaction effects. Since the preliminary analysis revealed that sex was significantly correlated with B T T E - W responses, data for both B T T E measures were reanalyzed using a 3 (Groups) × 2 (Sex) A N O V A to explore any differences within sex groups. In the case of the B T T E - W , there was no significant groups effect, but there was a significant main effect for sex [F(1,47) = 5.90, p < .05] and a significant groups by sex interaction [F(2,47) = 3.42, p < .05]. Using the N e w m a n - K e u l s procedure, all pairwise c o m p a r i s o n s a m o n g the means on the B T T E - W were made to evaluate the source of the o b s e r v e d interaction. It was found that the groups of high and m o d e r a t e assertive w o m e n attained significantly higher content knowledge ratings in c o m p a r i s o n to only the group of moderately assertive men and the group of low assertive women. Otherwise, no additional group c o m p a r i s o n s were significant. Evidence that high assertive w o m e n c o m p a r e d to groups of less assertive men and w o m e n also are m o r e c o m p e t e n t in their oral expression of positive feelings was not
226
BRUCH TABLE 2 ADJUSTED CELL MEANS FOR COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY AS MEASURED BY THE P C M Assertive group
Females
Males
High Moderate Low
2.05 1.84 1.24
1.93 1.46 1.70
Note: F o r c o v a r i a t e o f A C T V e r b a l s c o r e , F ( 1 , 4 7 ) = 2 . 4 3 , p = . 13.
found. The 3 x 2 A N O V A on the B T T E - O responses yielded no significant main or interaction effects. Extension to Other Cognitive Skills Since PCM scores and verbal ability have been found to correlate moderately (Schroder et al., 1967), assertive group differences in cognitive complexity were evaluated using a 3 (Groups) x 2 (Sex) analysis of covariance. Verbal ability scores f r o m the American College Test (ACT) were obtained f r o m subjects' college records and used as the covariate for the a s s e s s m e n t of both P C M and M E P S scores. The results f r o m a 3 x 2 analysis of covariance for cognitive complexity scores are presented in Table 2. The analysis revealed a significant groups effect [/7(2,47) = 4.19, p < .05], a significant groups by sex interaction [F(2,47) = 3.51, p < .05], but no effect for sex. N e w m a n - K e u l s c o m p a r i s o n s on the adjusted group means indicated that the interaction resulted f r o m the higher PCM scores (p < .05) of the high assertive male and female groups in relation to the lower score of the low assertive female group. H o w e v e r , no other paired comparisons were significant. A correlational analysis b e t w e e n subjects' PCM score and each M E P S category score produced no significant coefficients, indicating that these measures tapped independent cognitive dimensions. A similar 3 x 2 analysis of covariance design was used to test differences on each of the M E P S response categories. In all instances these tests failed to reveal any significant group effects or group by sex interactions. There were, h o w e v e r , several significant effects for subject sex. W o m e n c o m p a r e d to m e n achieved significantly higher scores on several of the M E P S response categories. Although sex differences were not expected, it was m o r e surprising that assertive groups failed to differ on both an index of quantity (e.g., n u m b e r of relevant means) and an index of the quality (e.g., ratio of relevant to irrevelant means) of their p r o b l e m solving skills. High and low assertive subjects might be expected to evidence similar amounts of strategies but differ in the quality of their strategies since low assertive subjects tend to possess a learning history which m a y foster acquisition of ineffective solution tactics. H o w e v e r , the present findings did not support this assumption. Extension of the task analysis to assertive group differences in cognitive complexity yielded some b e t w e e n group differences that suggest a
TASK ANALYSIS
OF ASSERTIVE BEHAVIOR
227
positive relationship between these variables. H o w e v e r , the limited number of group differences raises questions which can only be answered by further replication of the relationship. In this study, it was possible to conduct a replication because all the individuals in the original subject pool had completed both the CRI and the PCM. Thus, a sample of 90 subjects consisting of equal groups of high, moderate, and low assertive individuals and balanced for sex was selected at random from the original pool. Assertive group differences in cognitive complexity were analyzed via a 3 (Groups) x 2 (Sex) analysis of covariance of subjects' PCM scores. The analysis yielded a highly significant groups effect [F(2,83) = 36.77, p < .0001] but no significant effect for sex or the groups by sex interaction. Newman-Keuls tests revealed that the high assertive group adjusted mean of 2.28 differed significantly (p < .01) from both the moderate and low assertive groups means of 1.81 and 1.56 respectively, while the latter contrasts also differed significantly (p < .05). Thus, unlike the restricted differences found in the basic sample, assertive groups in the replication sample evidenced a progression from lows to highs of an increasingly more abstract style of information processing.
DISCUSSION The replication of Schwartz and Gottman's (1976) task analysis of the response deficits in nonassertive behavior failed to support their conclusion that less assertive individuals know the content of an effective refusal response. Only high assertive subjects were able to consistently construct effective responses compared to low assertive subjects on both the written (AKI) and the behavioral role play (HYPO) measure of content knowledge. On the AKI, 17 of 18 and on the H Y P O 18 of 18 subjects in the high assertive group obtained an average rating of 4 (qualified refusal) or above over all situations, while only 11 of 18 or 61% and 10 of 18 or 56% of the low assertive subjects attained similar ratings on these respective measures. Given the fact that assertive groups were not equivalent in their ability to formulate effective responses suggests that assertive problems result in part from a knowledge and/or informationprocessing deficit. Similar to Schwartz and Gottman (1976), the results from this study confirmed their finding that less assertive individuals have difficulty in the execution of an oral response under conditions that simulate direct interaction. Despite the observance of a groups by order interaction for the R B R A T situations, percentage differences reveal that only high assertive subjects performed successfully on this measure. Within the high group, 16 of 18 or 89% attained an average rating of 4 or above for all R B R A T situations, while only 7 of 18 or 39% of the moderates and 6 of 18 or 33% of the lows attained this criterion. Whether a deficit in the terminal skills necessary for the execution of an assertive message is related more to prerequisite skill problems (e.g., lack of knowledge) or to interference from negative self-statements remains open to conjecture. Regardless, results from the assessment of subjects' self-statements as
228
BRUCH
measured by the ASST replicated the finding that assertive individuals focus on positive thoughts while less assertive persons engage in more negative thinking about their actions. Extension of the task analysis to response components necessary for effective delivery of positive assertive responses was not successful. The lower percentages of inter-rater agreement for the BTTE measures suggest problems in judges' use of the rating categories perhaps limiting this measure's ability to discriminate real group differences. Also, the fact that most subjects performed poorly in their role play responses to the BTTE-O situations implies that a majority of subjects lacked experience with heterosexual situations calling for positive assertion. Extension of the task analysis to cognitive processes other than selfstatement tendencies proved enlightening. Specifically, high assertives received cognitive complexity scores that averaged 2 or higher while low assertives averaged scores between 1 and 1.5. According to Schroder and associates' (1967) formulations, persons with a score of 2 or above tend to view situations from multiple perspectives and use self-standards in decision-making while low scorers tend to engage in categorical judgments and rely on external authority when making decisions. Such differences carry several implications for how this cognitive factor may influence assertive responding. For example, the complex person's ability to examine situations from alternate perspectives may enable the person to formulate a response that is more appropriate to the needs of both parties in a situation. Mutual resolution of needs has been suggested as an important training goal by Rakos (1979) and Rakos and Schroeder (1979). Also, the tendency of the high complexity person to rely on internal standards rather than worrying about others' opinions may increase confidence in one's responses. Some support for this speculation was obtained from correlations between cognitive complexity scores and positive and negative self-statement scores on the ASST. A significant negative relationship was found between cognitive complexity and negative self-statements [r(54) = -.40, p < .001], although complexity and positive thoughts showed no association [r(54) = -.05]. The previous results suggest that the "empty repertoire" also may involve deficits in certain cognitive processes. Response acquisition approaches to assertion training have emphasized learning the "correct" response to a situation rather than how to generate effective responses suggesting why behavioral modeling procedures have failed to enhance outcomes (McFall & Twentymen, 1973). When modeling is used in training, cognitive modeling procedures may be more effective because emphasis is placed on a model's display of the tactics used to implement responses (Bruch, 1978; Meichenbaum, 1971; Sarason, 1973).
REFERENCES Alden, L., & Safran, J. Irrationalbeliefs and nonassertive behavior. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1978, 2, 357-364.
TASK ANALYSIS OF ASSERTIVE BEHAVIOR Bowers, G . H .
229
Contacts of cognitive psychology with social learning theory. Cognitive
Therapy and Research, 1978, 2, 123-146. Bruch, M . A . Type of cognitive modeling, imitation of modeled tactics, and modification of test anxiety. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1978, 2, 147-164. Cohen, J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Education and Psychological Measurement, 1960, 20, 37-46. Fiedler, D., & Beach, L . R . On the decision to be assertive. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978, 46, 537-546. Galassi, J. P., DeLo, J. S., Galassi, M. D., & Bastien, S. The college self-expression scale: A measure of assertiveness. Behavior Therapy, 1974, 5, 165-171. Holroyd, K., Westbrook, T., Wolf, M., & Badhorn, E. Performance, cognition, and physiological responding in test anxiety. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1978, 87, 442451. Hunt, D. E., Butler, L. F., Noy, J. E., & Rosser, M. E. Assessing conceptual level by the paragraph completion method. Toronto, Canada: The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Informal Series #3, 1978. Lawlis, G. F., & Lu, E. Judgment of counseling process: Reliability, agreement, and error. Psychological Bulletin, 1972, 78, 17-20. Mahoney, M . H . Reflections on the cognitive-learning trend in psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 1977, 32, 5-13. McFall, R. M. Behavioral training: A skill-acquisition approach to clinical problems. Morristown, N J: General Learning Press, 1976. McFall, R. M., & Lillesand, D. B. Behavior rehearsal with modeling and coaching in assertion training. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1971, 77, 313-323. McFall, R. M., & Twentyman, C. T. Four experiments on the relative contribution of rehearsal, modeling, and coaching to assertion training. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1973, 81, 199-218. Meichenbaum, D . H . Examination of model characteristics in reducing avoidance behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1971, 17, 298-307. Meichenbaum, D. Cognitive-behavior modification: An integrative approach. New York: Plenum, 1977. Platt, J. J., & Spivack, G. The means end problem solving manual. Philadelphia, PA: Hannemann Medical College and Hospital, 1975. Rakos, R. F. Content consideration in the distinction between assertive and aggressive behavior. Psychological Reports, 1979, 44, 767-773. Rakos, R. F., & Schroeder, H. E. Development and empirical evaluations of a self-administered assertiveness training program. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1979, 47, 991-993. Rich, A. R., & Schroeder, H . E . Research issues in assertiveness training. Psychological Bulletin, 1976, 83, 1081-1096. Sarason, 1. G. Test anxiety and cognitive modeling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1973, 23, 58-61. Schroder, H . M . Conceptual complexity and personality organization. In H. Schroder & P. Suedfeld (Eds.), Personality theory and information processing. New York: Ronald Press, 1972. Schroder, H. M., Driver, M. J., & Streufert, S. Human information processing. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1967. Schwartz, R. M., & Gottman, J . M . Toward a task analysis of assertive behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1976, 41, 910-920. Spivack, G., Platt, J. J., & Shure, M . B . The problem-solving approach to adjustment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1976.
230
BRUCH
Tinsley, H. E. A., & Weiss, D.J. Inter-rater reliability and agreement of subjective judgments. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1975, 22, 358-376. Warren, N. J., & Gilner, F . H . Measurement of positive assertive behaviors: The behavioral test of tenderness expression. Behavior Therapy, 1978, 9, 178-184. RECEIVED: August 28, 1979; REVISED: April 24, 1980 FINAL ACCEPTANCE: June 23, 1980
A Task Analysis of Assertive Behavior Revisited: Replication and Extension MONROE A. BRUCH State University o f New York at Albany
The study was designed to replicate and extend Schwartz and Gottman's (1976) task analysis of the deficits in nonassertive behavior. The study extended previous research by comparing groups differing in assertiveness on measures of positive assertion, information-processing style, and social problem-solving ability. Contrary to Schwartz and Gottman, only high assertive subjects demonstrated competence in content knowledge and informal delivery of refusal responses. Also, high assertive subjects performed better under direct delivery conditions and reported more positive self-statements replicating previous findings. Although groups did not differ on component measures of positive assertion and social problem solving, high compared to low assertives were more abstract in information-processing style. This relationship was replicated with a second sample. Overall, the findings suggest that training in assertive behavior should give equal attention to deficits in both cognitive and overt response skills. R e c e n t l y , M c F a l l (1976) a n d S c h w a r t z a n d G o t t m a n (1976) h a v e q u e s t i o n e d the v a l u e of i n t e r v e n t i o n studies for i n c r e a s i n g k n o w l e d g e a b o u t r e s p o n s e p r o b l e m s that c h a r a c t e r i z e n o n a s s e r t i v e i n d i v i d u a l s . T h e y a r g u e that i n f e r r i n g r e s p o n s e deficits f r o m t r e a t m e n t o u t c o m e s m a y lead to a n i n a c c u r a t e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a s s e r t i v e p r o b l e m s a n d r e l i a n c e o n less eff e c t i v e t r a i n i n g a p p r o a c h e s . C o n s e q u e n t l y , the u s e of a n i n d u c t i v e app r o a c h to i d e n t i f y c o m p o n e n t skills n e c e s s a r y for effective a s s e r t i v e beh a v i o r is in order. S c h w a r t z a n d G o t t m a n ' s (1976) s t u d y c o n s t i t u t e s the first a t t e m p t to a s s e s s the r e s p o n s e deficits directly. T h e i r r e s u l t s w e r e i n f o r m a t i v e in t w o r e s p e c t s . F i r s t , c o n t r a r y to a skills deficit a s s u m p t i o n , low a s s e r t i v e s u b j e c t s d e m o n s t r a t e d a n a d e q u a t e k n o w l e d g e of the c o n t e n t of a p p r o The author expresses appreciation to Thomas Krieshok for his assistance in conducting the study. Also, I am grateful to D. Fiedler, F. Gilner, R. McFall, R. Schwartz, and J. Platt for providing me with copies of their scales and measures as well as accompanying experimental protocols without which this study could not have been conducted. Requests for reprints should be sent to Monroe A. Bruch, Department of Counseling Psychology and Student Development, ED 215, State University of New York at Albany, 1400 Washington Avenue, Albany, NY 12222. 217 0005-7894/81/0217-023051.00/0 Copyright 1981 by Association for Advancement of Behavior Therapy All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
218
BRUCH
priate refusal responses. Assertive groups differed, however, when performing under conditions that simulated direct interaction, suggesting an inhibition hypothesis. Second, and relevant to this issue, their results pointed to inhibiting effects arising from differences in cognitive functioning rather than physiological arousal. Nonassertive subjects reported significantly fewer positive and more negative self-statements than did assertive subjects. In the context of subsequent research, Schwartz and Gottman's (1976) discovery of cognitive but not physiological differences is not surprising (Alden & Safran, 1978; Fiedler & Beach, 1978; Holroyd, Westbrook, Wolf, & Badhorn, 1978). What is surprising, however, is the fact that nonassertive subjects possessed appropriate content knowledge. Such an outcome was unexpected since assertive behavior appears to require an extensive repertoire of both verbal and nonverbal response skills (Rich & Schroeder, 1976). This raises the question of whether Schwartz and Gottman's analysis provides an adequate test of the content knowledge question. For example, constructing an effective refusal statement may be a simple task compared to formulating other types of assertive responses. It is necessary, therefore, to replicate their assessment of rights assertion components as well as to extend the task analysis by testing whether similar component skills are critical for successful execution of other classes of assertive expression. In addition, it is reasonable that other types of cognitive processes influence assertive actions. While their decision to examine the role of maladaptive self-statements was a logical choice based on the cognitivebehavioral literature (Meichenbaum, 1977), information-processing models of learning suggest other factors that should affect social performance (Bowers, 1978; Mahoney, 1977). Information-processing style and interpersonal problem solving ability were two additional cognitive variables examined in the present task analysis. Information-processing style was defined by the variable of cognitive complexity (Schroder, 1972; Schroder, Driver, & Streufert, 1967). These theorists postulate that high complexity persons make finer discriminations of social stimuli, possess internal standards for evaluating stimuli, possess comprehensive rules for integrating conflicting information, and are more tolerant of ambiguity. In contrast, social problem solving ability refers to a person's repertoire of response rules for dealing with interpersonal situations. Despite competence in overt response skills, failure to act assertively may result from a lack of strategies for selection and organization of discrete responses into a total assertive act. This cognitive dimension was defined using Spivack, Platt, and Shure's (1976) test of means-end thinking which evaluates a person's ability to generate and organize alternative plans of action for attaining a particular social goal. Thus, in the present research, groups varying in assertiveness were tested on these two cognitive measures and compared to determine if deficits in these skills are related to differential assertiveness.
TASK ANALYSIS OF ASSERTIVE BEHAVIOR
219
METHOD Subjects Students in introductory psychology classes were administered McFall and Lillesand's (1971) Conflict Resolution Inventory (CRI) along with other measures at the beginning of the semester. Following the procedure developed by McFall and Twentyman (1973) and used by Schwartz and Gottman (1976), subjects were classified as low, moderate, or high in selfreported assertiveness according to a bivariate criterion using both assertion and nonassertion scores. An equal number of potential male and female subjects were selected at random from each of the three resulting subject pools. Several weeks later, subjects were contacted and offered course credit for participating in a study involving self-expression in social situations. The final sample consisted of 54 subjects classified into equal groups of high, moderate, and low assertiveness. Of the 18 subjects within each group, half were males and the other half females. Dependent Measures Rights assertion measures. Subjects were evaluated on all of Schwartz and Gottman's (1976) measures except for monitoring of heart rate. Following their hierarchical model for assessing overt response skills, the Assertive Knowledge Inventory (AKI), the Hypothetical Behavioral Role Playing Assertion Test (HYPO), and the Reduced Behavioral Rehearsal Assertion Test (RBRAT) were used to compare groups on prerequisite as well as terminal skills. One item was eliminated from each to allow additional time for administering other measures. The criterion for eliminating items was that one which least affected the representative sampling of varying target persons. The following CRI items were dropped: item 24 from the AKI, item 35 from the HYPO, and item 12 from the RBRAT. Subjects' responses to the AKI, the HYPO, and the RBRAT were rated independently by two judges using McFall and Lillesand's (1971) 5-point scale of unambiguous refusal. The present study also assessed subjects' self-statement tendencies using the Assertiveness Self-Statement Test (ASST). The ASST includes an additional procedure that asks subjects to check one of four sequences that best describes the order of any positive and negative thoughts to evaluate whether assertive groups differ in their patterning of self-evaluative thoughts. Finally, subjects' reports of self-perceived tension when responding to the RBRAT situations were obtained. As in Schwartz and Gottman, subjects rated their degree of nervousness on a scale from 1 to 7 (1 = not at all nervous to 7 = extremely nervous) following the first and last RBRAT situations. Positive assertion measures. Since Schwartz and Gottman (1976, p. 911) found that CRI scores correlated .72 with scores on an assertiveness inventory that included positive assertion situations (see Galassi, DeLo, Galassi, & Bastien, 1974), it is likely that a subject's capacity to express
220
BRUCH
positive statements should parallel his or her ability to refuse unreasonable requests. Consequently, subjects' assertiveness level as reported on the CRI was also used to compare performance in positive assertion situations. Items from Warren and Gilner's (1978) Behavioral Test of Tenderness Expression (BTTE) were used to present positive assertion situations. Modeled after McFall and Lillesand's (1971) Behavioral Rehearsal Assertion Test, the B T T E is a behavior role play procedure designed to assess c o m p e t e n c e in expression of appreciation, affection, and empathy to a dating partner. Testing their instrument with college-aged couples, Warren and Gilner reported very adequate levels of reliability and validity for judges' scoring. In the present study, B T T E items 3, 5, 7, and 9 were combined to construct a written form (BTTE-W), while items 4, 10, 11, and 12 were combined to form a role play measure of oral responding (BTTE-O). These two sets of items were selected because their content was relevant to college student dating situations, and the items could be paired on the basis of topic similarity to construct parallel forms. Equal difficulty for the two forms was confirmed through pilot testing. The B T T E - W presented heterosexual situations calling for tenderness expression and, similar to the AKI, required the subject to write an appropriate response to test a subject's content knowledge. The BTTE-O, like the R B R A T , was used to assess subjects' ability to construct and deliver positive feeling messages under circumstances that simulated direct interaction. Responses to both measures were rated independently by two judges using Warren and Gilner's scoring procedures which ranged from 1 (punishing reply or no response) to 4 (elaborated disclosure of feelings and/or empathy toward partner's needs). Cognitive complexity and social problem solving measures. Subjects' cognitive complexity was tested using Hunt, Butler, Noy, and Rosser's (1978) form of the Paragraph Completion Method (PCM). The PCM contains six sentence stems to which the subject must add at least three sentences containing thoughts about the topic. Items in the PCM relate to constructs such as: (1) how one handles conflict or uncertainty (e.g., " W h e n I am not sure . . . . " " W h e n I am criticized . . .") and (2) how one thinks about rule structure and authority (e.g., " W h a t I think about rules . . . . " " W h e n I am told what to d o . . . " ) . Responses were scored on a seven step scale of half-point intervals yielding a scoring range of 0 to 3. A single cognitive complexity score was assigned to a subject based on the average of the individual's three highest scores (Hunt et al., 1978). These authors obtained a test-retest reliability of .67 for PCM scores over a 3-month interval. Platt and Spivack's (1975) Means-End Problem-Solving Procedure (MEPS) was used to assess social problem solving skills. The MEPS consisted of nine story stems which portray different situations in which a need is aroused in the main character at the beginning and satisfied by
TASK ANALYSIS OF ASSERTIVE BEHAVIOR
221
the end of the story. 1 Directions require making up a story that fills in the details of what the character did to get from the beginning dilemma to a successful resolution at the end. Using their scoring p r o c e d u r e s , subjects' protocols were scored for n u m b e r of (1) relevant means (e.g., a discrete p r o c e d u r e effective in enabling the character to reach the solution given at the end of the story), (2) ratio of relevant m e a n s to both irrevelant means and no-means responses, (3) enumerations of means (e.g., additional details about a particular means used in the story), (4) obstacles, (5) enumerations of obstacles, and (6) time awareness. These authors obtained a test-retest reliability of .64 on the relevant means score o v e r a 5-week interval.
Procedure Subjects attended two sessions. Initially, subjects met in small groups where they were told the p u r p o s e of the experiment, administered the M E P S , and scheduled individually for a second session. All subjects completed the PCM at an earlier date when they filled out the McFall CRI. Subjects were informed that the p u r p o s e of the research was to learn m o r e a b o u t how people express themselves in social situations c o m m o n to student life. In the second session subjects met individually with a male experimenter who was a graduate student in psychology. The e x p e r i m e n t e r had no knowledge of subjects' level of assertiveness. After reminding the subject of the p u r p o s e of the research, he administered a series of measures that involved both writing and role playing certain responses. During the first part of the session the rights assertion m e a s u r e s were administered in one of three orders: (1) H Y P O , A K I , R B R A T , (2) R B R A T , H Y P O , A K I , or (3) A K I , R B R A T , H Y P O . Within the high, moderate, and low assertive groups, subjects were assigned randomly to one of these orders with the constraint that an equal n u m b e r receive each order. Following the completion of these tasks, subjects were administered the ASST. Subsequently, the two B T T E m e a s u r e s were completed. Order of administration for the B T T E - W and B T T E - O was counterbalanced across subjects within each group.
RESULTS Inter-rater Agreement and Reliability As r e c o m m e n d e d by Tinsley and Weiss (1975), an index of inter-rater a g r e e m e n t (absolute a g r e e m e n t of j u d g e s ' ratings) and inter-rater reliability (whether j u d g e s ' ratings were proportional across subjects) was c o m p u t e d for assertive r e s p o n s e measures. Inter-rater a g r e e m e n t was calculated as agreements (identical scores) divided by a g r e e m e n t s plus 1 Story number 10, an optional item added by Platt and Spivack, was used in place of story number 5 because the latter story involves an unusual type of social conflict.
222
BRUCH
disagreements and then multiplied by 100 to form a percentage. H o w e v e r , because this index ignores the fact that agreement can occur by chance alone, Lawlis and L u ' s (1972) significance test for interval rating scales also was computed to determine whether the obtained agreement was greater than that expected by chance. Inter-rater agreement was 89% for the AKI, 90% for the H Y P O , and 88% for the RBRAT ratings. Agreement for judges' ratings of positive assertiveness responses was lower, however, with 63% for the B T T E - W and 79% for the BTTE-O. Individual application of Lawlis and L u ' s procedure to the measures resulted in significant Chi-Square values (p < .05) for all five measures indicating greater than chance levels of agreement. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation. Reliability coefficients of .93, .97, .92, .88, and .94 were found for the AKI, H Y P O , RBRAT, BTTE-W, and B T T E - O respectively. The reliability of judges' scoring of the two cognitive skill measures was also evaluated. Because a subject's cognitive complexity score on the PCM was based on an average of the three best responses, only interrater reliability was computed. An intraclass correlation coefficient of .83 was obtained indicating adequate reliability. In the case of the MEPS, response ratings yield nominal data. Since nominal data permit an analysis of only inter-rater agreement (Tinsley & Weiss, 1975), judges' level of agreement in coding MEPS responses was analyzed using Cohen's (1960) Kappa coefficient. This statistic is an indicator of the proportion of agreements between two raters after chance agreement has been removed with Kappa being calculated across all categories in a coding system. For judges' coding of MEPS responses, a K a p p a of .74 was obtained.
Sex Differences Point biserial correlations were computed between subject sex and scores on the assertiveness measures, self-perceived tension ratings, and the ASST positive and negative self-statement scores to evaluate whether sex of subject was a frequent covariate with these measures. Subject sex was significantly correlated [r(54) = .30, p < .05] only with performance on the BTTE-W. On this measure women attained higher ratings for written positive assertion responses, however, a similar relationship was not observed for B T T E - O responses. Since previous task analysis studies have not assessed for assertiveness differences in cognitive skill repertoires, sex of subject was included as a separate factor in the analysis of subjects' PCM and MEPS scores.
Replication of Rights Assertion Differences Content knowledge and delivery skills. Data for the AKI, H Y P O , and R B R A T measures were analyzed using a 3 (Assertive Groups) x 3 (Orders) analysis of variance (ANOVA). F o r the AKI, there was a significant main effect for groups [F(2,45) = 4.43, p < .05] and for order of administration [F(2,45) = 7.53, p < .01] but not for their interaction. Newman-
TASK ANALYSIS OF ASSERTIVE BEHAVIOR
223
Keuls multiple comparison tests showed that only the high and low assertive groups differed significantly (p < .05). Subjects high in self-reported assertiveness were more knowledgeable about the content of an effective refusal response than were low assertive subjects. Similar tests on order effects yielded a significant difference only between Order 3 and Order 1 suggesting poorer performance for subjects receiving the AKI first. Analysis of H Y P O data yielded a similar pattern of results. Significant main effects were found for assertive groups [F(2,45) = 7.89, p < .001] and for order of administration [F(2,45) -- 4.88, p < .05] but not for the interaction. On this measure, Newman-Keuls tests revealed that the high assertive group differed significantly from both the moderate and low assertive groups in their responses to H Y P O situations. In the case of the order effect, subjects administered the H Y P O last (Order 3) performed significantly better as a group than subjects assigned to either Order 1 or Order 2. Finally, when asked to respond under conditions simulating direct social interaction (RBRAT), the A N O V A yielded a significant main effect for groups [F(2,45) = 7.89, p < .001], a significant orders effect [F(2,45) = 4.98, p < .05], and a significant group by order interaction [F(4,45) = 3.07, p < .05]. Using the Newman-Keuls procedure, all pairwise comparisons among cell means on the RBRAT were made. Significant differences were found between high assertive subjects assigned to Order 1 and 3 (e.g., R B R A T given last or next to last) and low assertive subjects administered Order 2 and 3 (e.g., R B R A T given first or second). Thus, only high assertive subjects having prior experience with refusal situations were rated as delivering a more effective response than those low assertive subjects with little or no prior experience. Self-perceived tension. Unlike Schwartz and Gottman's (1976) findings, low, moderate, and high assertive subjects in this study evidenced no significant between-group differences in tension ratings for either the first or last R B R A T situation. Group means for both assessments varied within a narrow range between " a little n e r v o u s " to " s o m e w h a t nerv o u s . " Also, a 3 x 2 A N O V A with repeated measures on the second factor indicated that there was no significant groups by trials interaction on tension ratings following direct delivery of a refusal response. Positive and negative self-statements. Findings from the analysis of assertive group differences on the ASST provided a strong replication of Schwartz and Gottman's (1976) original data. A 3 (Assertive Groups) x 2 (Types of Self-Statement) A N O V A with repeated measures on the second factor yielded a highly significant groups by self-statement interaction [F(2,51) = 21.50, p < .0001]. Simple effects tests for the group factor under each self-statement category showed that there were significant group differences in frequency of positive statements [F(2,51) = 9.05, p < .0001] and frequency of negative statements [F(2,51) = 14.57, p < .0001]. As illustrated in Fig. 1, the group of high assertive subjects differed significantly in frequency of both positive and negative self-statements as compared to the moderate and low assertive groups which did
224
BRUCH 6O 58
•
Positive 7"22
-----} Negotive
(,,) 56 ,~ 5 4 E 52 o •L
5O
g~
48
->
46
~ z
44
x~ c
42
~0 >
40
o
~, o t3_
v//.
I
38 36
o
54
Low
FIG.
1.
range 17 to
Y/'Z
t
Moderate Assertive Group
High
Positive and negative self-statement scores as assessed by the A S S T (scoring 85).
not differ from each other. Within-group differences in the relative frequency of positive compared to negative self-statements was assessed using a t test for matched samples. Only high assertive subjects evidenced a significant within-group difference, reporting a greater number of positive than negative thoughts [t(17) = 8.23, p < .0001]. In contrast, subjects in the moderate and low assertive groups in both cases evidenced similar amounts of positive and negative thoughts since both t ratios were nonsignificant. As in Schwartz and Gottman (1976), subjects in the present study were asked to respond to an item on the ASST that asked them to select one of four sequences of positive and negative self-statements to describe the pattern of their evaluative thoughts. The four sequences included unshaken confidence (e.g., at first positive and later still positive), coping (e.g., at first negative but later positive), giving up (e.g., at first positive but later negative), and unshaken doubt (e.g., at first negative and later still negative). Assessment of group differences was designed to test whether persons of varying assertiveness were more or less prone toward sequences that facilitated or sequences that inhibited ability to refuse. Presence of a relationship between assertiveness level and subjects' choice of sequence was evaluated using a Chi-Square contingency table test. Because of the small sample size in some cells, the four sequence categories were collapsed into two categories--one involving adaptive
225
TASK A N A L Y S I S O F ASSERTIVE B E H A V I O R
TABLE 1 CHI-SQUARE CONTINGENCY TABLE OF PERCENTAGES AND ACTUAL NUMBER OF SUBJECTS CHOOSING EITHER OF T W O FACILITATIVE OR INHIBITING SELF-STATEMENT SEQUENCES
Self-statement sequences Assertive group
Unshaken confidence (++) or coping ( - + )
Unshaken doubt ( - - ) or giving up ( + - )
Low Moderate High
56% (10) 50% (9) 89% (16)
44% (8) 50% (9) 11% (2)
sequences (e.g., unshaken confidence or coping) and the other maladaptive (e.g., giving up or unshaken doubt). As evidenced in Table 1, a significant relationship was found between assertiveness level and sequencing of positive and negative thoughts [X2(2) = 7.01, p < .05]. This resulted from a greater percentage of individuals in the high assertive group checking either of the two adaptive sequences o v e r the maladaptive sequences. In particular, it was n o t e w o r t h y that out of the 16 high assertive subjects who checked either of the two adaptive sequences, 13 m a r k e d the category of unshaken confidence. Extension to Positive Assertion Differences Subjects' p e r f o r m a n c e on the two c o m p o n e n t measures of positive selfexpression was analyzed using a 3 (Assertive Groups) × 2 (Orders) A N OVA. On the m e a s u r e of content knowledge of positive feelings (BTTEW), the analysis showed that there was no significant effect for groups, for order, or for their interaction. A similar analysis on the m e a s u r e of direct delivery of positive assertive responses (BTTE-O) also failed to reveal any significant main or interaction effects. Since the preliminary analysis revealed that sex was significantly correlated with B T T E - W responses, data for both B T T E measures were reanalyzed using a 3 (Groups) × 2 (Sex) A N O V A to explore any differences within sex groups. In the case of the B T T E - W , there was no significant groups effect, but there was a significant main effect for sex [F(1,47) = 5.90, p < .05] and a significant groups by sex interaction [F(2,47) = 3.42, p < .05]. Using the N e w m a n - K e u l s procedure, all pairwise c o m p a r i s o n s a m o n g the means on the B T T E - W were made to evaluate the source of the o b s e r v e d interaction. It was found that the groups of high and m o d e r a t e assertive w o m e n attained significantly higher content knowledge ratings in c o m p a r i s o n to only the group of moderately assertive men and the group of low assertive women. Otherwise, no additional group c o m p a r i s o n s were significant. Evidence that high assertive w o m e n c o m p a r e d to groups of less assertive men and w o m e n also are m o r e c o m p e t e n t in their oral expression of positive feelings was not
226
BRUCH TABLE 2 ADJUSTED CELL MEANS FOR COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY AS MEASURED BY THE P C M Assertive group
Females
Males
High Moderate Low
2.05 1.84 1.24
1.93 1.46 1.70
Note: F o r c o v a r i a t e o f A C T V e r b a l s c o r e , F ( 1 , 4 7 ) = 2 . 4 3 , p = . 13.
found. The 3 x 2 A N O V A on the B T T E - O responses yielded no significant main or interaction effects. Extension to Other Cognitive Skills Since PCM scores and verbal ability have been found to correlate moderately (Schroder et al., 1967), assertive group differences in cognitive complexity were evaluated using a 3 (Groups) x 2 (Sex) analysis of covariance. Verbal ability scores f r o m the American College Test (ACT) were obtained f r o m subjects' college records and used as the covariate for the a s s e s s m e n t of both P C M and M E P S scores. The results f r o m a 3 x 2 analysis of covariance for cognitive complexity scores are presented in Table 2. The analysis revealed a significant groups effect [/7(2,47) = 4.19, p < .05], a significant groups by sex interaction [F(2,47) = 3.51, p < .05], but no effect for sex. N e w m a n - K e u l s c o m p a r i s o n s on the adjusted group means indicated that the interaction resulted f r o m the higher PCM scores (p < .05) of the high assertive male and female groups in relation to the lower score of the low assertive female group. H o w e v e r , no other paired comparisons were significant. A correlational analysis b e t w e e n subjects' PCM score and each M E P S category score produced no significant coefficients, indicating that these measures tapped independent cognitive dimensions. A similar 3 x 2 analysis of covariance design was used to test differences on each of the M E P S response categories. In all instances these tests failed to reveal any significant group effects or group by sex interactions. There were, h o w e v e r , several significant effects for subject sex. W o m e n c o m p a r e d to m e n achieved significantly higher scores on several of the M E P S response categories. Although sex differences were not expected, it was m o r e surprising that assertive groups failed to differ on both an index of quantity (e.g., n u m b e r of relevant means) and an index of the quality (e.g., ratio of relevant to irrevelant means) of their p r o b l e m solving skills. High and low assertive subjects might be expected to evidence similar amounts of strategies but differ in the quality of their strategies since low assertive subjects tend to possess a learning history which m a y foster acquisition of ineffective solution tactics. H o w e v e r , the present findings did not support this assumption. Extension of the task analysis to assertive group differences in cognitive complexity yielded some b e t w e e n group differences that suggest a
TASK ANALYSIS
OF ASSERTIVE BEHAVIOR
227
positive relationship between these variables. H o w e v e r , the limited number of group differences raises questions which can only be answered by further replication of the relationship. In this study, it was possible to conduct a replication because all the individuals in the original subject pool had completed both the CRI and the PCM. Thus, a sample of 90 subjects consisting of equal groups of high, moderate, and low assertive individuals and balanced for sex was selected at random from the original pool. Assertive group differences in cognitive complexity were analyzed via a 3 (Groups) x 2 (Sex) analysis of covariance of subjects' PCM scores. The analysis yielded a highly significant groups effect [F(2,83) = 36.77, p < .0001] but no significant effect for sex or the groups by sex interaction. Newman-Keuls tests revealed that the high assertive group adjusted mean of 2.28 differed significantly (p < .01) from both the moderate and low assertive groups means of 1.81 and 1.56 respectively, while the latter contrasts also differed significantly (p < .05). Thus, unlike the restricted differences found in the basic sample, assertive groups in the replication sample evidenced a progression from lows to highs of an increasingly more abstract style of information processing.
DISCUSSION The replication of Schwartz and Gottman's (1976) task analysis of the response deficits in nonassertive behavior failed to support their conclusion that less assertive individuals know the content of an effective refusal response. Only high assertive subjects were able to consistently construct effective responses compared to low assertive subjects on both the written (AKI) and the behavioral role play (HYPO) measure of content knowledge. On the AKI, 17 of 18 and on the H Y P O 18 of 18 subjects in the high assertive group obtained an average rating of 4 (qualified refusal) or above over all situations, while only 11 of 18 or 61% and 10 of 18 or 56% of the low assertive subjects attained similar ratings on these respective measures. Given the fact that assertive groups were not equivalent in their ability to formulate effective responses suggests that assertive problems result in part from a knowledge and/or informationprocessing deficit. Similar to Schwartz and Gottman (1976), the results from this study confirmed their finding that less assertive individuals have difficulty in the execution of an oral response under conditions that simulate direct interaction. Despite the observance of a groups by order interaction for the R B R A T situations, percentage differences reveal that only high assertive subjects performed successfully on this measure. Within the high group, 16 of 18 or 89% attained an average rating of 4 or above for all R B R A T situations, while only 7 of 18 or 39% of the moderates and 6 of 18 or 33% of the lows attained this criterion. Whether a deficit in the terminal skills necessary for the execution of an assertive message is related more to prerequisite skill problems (e.g., lack of knowledge) or to interference from negative self-statements remains open to conjecture. Regardless, results from the assessment of subjects' self-statements as
228
BRUCH
measured by the ASST replicated the finding that assertive individuals focus on positive thoughts while less assertive persons engage in more negative thinking about their actions. Extension of the task analysis to response components necessary for effective delivery of positive assertive responses was not successful. The lower percentages of inter-rater agreement for the BTTE measures suggest problems in judges' use of the rating categories perhaps limiting this measure's ability to discriminate real group differences. Also, the fact that most subjects performed poorly in their role play responses to the BTTE-O situations implies that a majority of subjects lacked experience with heterosexual situations calling for positive assertion. Extension of the task analysis to cognitive processes other than selfstatement tendencies proved enlightening. Specifically, high assertives received cognitive complexity scores that averaged 2 or higher while low assertives averaged scores between 1 and 1.5. According to Schroder and associates' (1967) formulations, persons with a score of 2 or above tend to view situations from multiple perspectives and use self-standards in decision-making while low scorers tend to engage in categorical judgments and rely on external authority when making decisions. Such differences carry several implications for how this cognitive factor may influence assertive responding. For example, the complex person's ability to examine situations from alternate perspectives may enable the person to formulate a response that is more appropriate to the needs of both parties in a situation. Mutual resolution of needs has been suggested as an important training goal by Rakos (1979) and Rakos and Schroeder (1979). Also, the tendency of the high complexity person to rely on internal standards rather than worrying about others' opinions may increase confidence in one's responses. Some support for this speculation was obtained from correlations between cognitive complexity scores and positive and negative self-statement scores on the ASST. A significant negative relationship was found between cognitive complexity and negative self-statements [r(54) = -.40, p < .001], although complexity and positive thoughts showed no association [r(54) = -.05]. The previous results suggest that the "empty repertoire" also may involve deficits in certain cognitive processes. Response acquisition approaches to assertion training have emphasized learning the "correct" response to a situation rather than how to generate effective responses suggesting why behavioral modeling procedures have failed to enhance outcomes (McFall & Twentymen, 1973). When modeling is used in training, cognitive modeling procedures may be more effective because emphasis is placed on a model's display of the tactics used to implement responses (Bruch, 1978; Meichenbaum, 1971; Sarason, 1973).
REFERENCES Alden, L., & Safran, J. Irrationalbeliefs and nonassertive behavior. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1978, 2, 357-364.
TASK ANALYSIS OF ASSERTIVE BEHAVIOR Bowers, G . H .
229
Contacts of cognitive psychology with social learning theory. Cognitive
Therapy and Research, 1978, 2, 123-146. Bruch, M . A . Type of cognitive modeling, imitation of modeled tactics, and modification of test anxiety. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1978, 2, 147-164. Cohen, J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Education and Psychological Measurement, 1960, 20, 37-46. Fiedler, D., & Beach, L . R . On the decision to be assertive. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978, 46, 537-546. Galassi, J. P., DeLo, J. S., Galassi, M. D., & Bastien, S. The college self-expression scale: A measure of assertiveness. Behavior Therapy, 1974, 5, 165-171. Holroyd, K., Westbrook, T., Wolf, M., & Badhorn, E. Performance, cognition, and physiological responding in test anxiety. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1978, 87, 442451. Hunt, D. E., Butler, L. F., Noy, J. E., & Rosser, M. E. Assessing conceptual level by the paragraph completion method. Toronto, Canada: The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Informal Series #3, 1978. Lawlis, G. F., & Lu, E. Judgment of counseling process: Reliability, agreement, and error. Psychological Bulletin, 1972, 78, 17-20. Mahoney, M . H . Reflections on the cognitive-learning trend in psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 1977, 32, 5-13. McFall, R. M. Behavioral training: A skill-acquisition approach to clinical problems. Morristown, N J: General Learning Press, 1976. McFall, R. M., & Lillesand, D. B. Behavior rehearsal with modeling and coaching in assertion training. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1971, 77, 313-323. McFall, R. M., & Twentyman, C. T. Four experiments on the relative contribution of rehearsal, modeling, and coaching to assertion training. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1973, 81, 199-218. Meichenbaum, D . H . Examination of model characteristics in reducing avoidance behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1971, 17, 298-307. Meichenbaum, D. Cognitive-behavior modification: An integrative approach. New York: Plenum, 1977. Platt, J. J., & Spivack, G. The means end problem solving manual. Philadelphia, PA: Hannemann Medical College and Hospital, 1975. Rakos, R. F. Content consideration in the distinction between assertive and aggressive behavior. Psychological Reports, 1979, 44, 767-773. Rakos, R. F., & Schroeder, H. E. Development and empirical evaluations of a self-administered assertiveness training program. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1979, 47, 991-993. Rich, A. R., & Schroeder, H . E . Research issues in assertiveness training. Psychological Bulletin, 1976, 83, 1081-1096. Sarason, 1. G. Test anxiety and cognitive modeling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1973, 23, 58-61. Schroder, H . M . Conceptual complexity and personality organization. In H. Schroder & P. Suedfeld (Eds.), Personality theory and information processing. New York: Ronald Press, 1972. Schroder, H. M., Driver, M. J., & Streufert, S. Human information processing. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1967. Schwartz, R. M., & Gottman, J . M . Toward a task analysis of assertive behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1976, 41, 910-920. Spivack, G., Platt, J. J., & Shure, M . B . The problem-solving approach to adjustment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1976.
230
BRUCH
Tinsley, H. E. A., & Weiss, D.J. Inter-rater reliability and agreement of subjective judgments. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1975, 22, 358-376. Warren, N. J., & Gilner, F . H . Measurement of positive assertive behaviors: The behavioral test of tenderness expression. Behavior Therapy, 1978, 9, 178-184. RECEIVED: August 28, 1979; REVISED: April 24, 1980 FINAL ACCEPTANCE: June 23, 1980