- Email: [email protected]
COMMENTS ON DR. BARRATT'S PAPER
COMMENTS ON DR. BARRATFS PAPER Beeman N.
Phillips
There are three types of comments I'd like to make on Dr. Barratt's paper, although I am not really sure how much leeway we have as discussants at this symposium. I'd like first to talk about the things that most impressed me. Then I'd like to say something about the things I'd like more information on. And, third, I want to talk about some things which intrigue me. In passing, I want to add that I am impressed with my own lack of background to make judgments about this paper. As an educational, human-oriented psychologist, I do not have the best background to deal with this area. There are others here who are more competent to react to this paper, and I assume that Dr. Levitt will comment later. Things I am very much impressed with: First, I am impressed with the sophistication of the general research design and the collection of comparable classes of data at both the human and infrahuman level. I understand that the collection of such data is very difficult, and that it takes a great deal of time and skill.
224
Beeman Ν . Phillips
I am also impressed with the inclusion of the elaborate array of psychological and physiological measures, and the apparently high quality of the data obtained. Third, I am impressed with the extensiveness, and the logical coherency and continuity, of this series of studies, and with Dr. Barratt's obvious plans to continue this productive line of research. Things I would like more information on: First, I am interested in the possible implications of using only subjects with extreme scores on the anxiety and impulsiveness scales, as the research paradigm requires. The use of high and low groups is very common, as you know, in anxiety research. This is a very efficient way in which to proceed, at least in an exploratory phase. However, the use of extreme groups also contains several potential problems. There is the problem of a lack of precise knowledge of what "high" and " l o w " really mean in terms of the variable on which the selection of subjects occurs. What is a "high" anxious subject, for example, depends on the nature of the population sampled and upon the cut-off point used. Even if, for example, one used the top 10 percent of the scorers, the mean of the top 10 percent in one population which is sampled may not be the same as the mean of the top 10 percent in some other population. Therefore, in this approach, one needs a normative frame of reference, and I would like to know more, comparatively speaking, about the anxiety and impulsiveness levels of Barratt's high and low subgroups. Another problem with the use of extreme subgroups is that one implicitly assumes that the variable on which extreme subgroups are selected is linearly related to the other variables one is interested in. Yet it is frequently found that anxiety is not linearly related to performance, learning, and other measures. When this is the case, one is in danger of obtaining misleading results and making inappropriate generalizations about his findings. Second, I would like to know more about the possibility of whether or not sex is an important factor in the results obtained in Barratt's studies. I am reminded here of Seymour Sarason's early research at Yale University on anxiety where he somewhat belatedly discovered that sex did make a difference in anxiety research. As he reports, he did not think about this possibility at the outset because at that time there were only male students at Yale. This might turn out to be an important consideration in Barratt's research and some of his findings might be modified where females are used as subjects. Of course, I realize some of the problems that one runs into in gathering physiological data on females, and I am not being critical of Dr. Barratt's decision to use only males. (Parenthetically, I would like to add, somewhat facetiously, that while he used only males in the portion of his studies dealing with humans, I am not sure whether he applied this same restriction to that part
Comments on Dr. Barratt's Paper
225
of his research which dealt with infrahumans. However, sex differences perhaps are not as pronounced among infrahumans.) Also, with regard to the sex factor, the fact that only males were used may have some influence on the character of the impulsiveness scale which was developed. In the discussion of the results one might want to qualify interpretations in terms of the possibility that the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale is really an impulsiveness scale for males. Obviously, females are also impulsive, but they may not manifest impulsiveness in quite the same way, and it may be differently related to other variables. Things I am intrigued by: I am intrigued by several things, so let me briefly discuss these. First, I am surprised by the lack of relationships between anxiety tests and standardized achievement tests and teacher conduct ratings among the 12- to 15-year-old boys. Typically, we would expect significant correlations between anxiety and such measures in this age group, and I have to admit that I am really not able to account for this. I have reread parts of Barratt's paper and I still have no explanation except the possibility that sex may be involved. Nevertheless, it is sufficiently intriguing to raise questions about it. Second, I am intrigued by the lack of relationship between anxiety and peer ratings. Here again, there have been a number of studies of peer ratings, and correlations on the order of .3 to .4 have usually been obtained. I should add that Barratt's peer ratings were obtained in a fraternity, while peer ratings in the studies referred to ordinarily have been obtained in a public school setting. Perhaps peer status acquired in the context of a school setting differs from peer status acquired in the context of a fraternity setting, or any other setting in which people live together, in contrast to working together. In addition, school settings are much more achievement-oriented than fraternity settings, and this may be important. In any case, it would be interesting to look into these possibilities in relation to Barratt's results. I also would like to comment briefly on the fact that Mexican-American males were not significantly more anxious than Anglo males. We have been doing research on anxiety in elementary school children for a number of years at U. T., and we typically find that Mexican-American children are more anxious than Anglo children. I suspect that a selection factor may have operated in Barratt's high school sample of Mexican-Americans, in contrast to the studies done with younger subjects. The typical Mexican-American adult in Texas has about seven years of schooling, and has probably repeated at least one or two grades. This would mean that, in a high school sample, a significant number of Mexican-American males already has been lost. Also, it is probable that students who repeat grades and leave school early have higher anxiety. Thus selective attrition with respect to anxiety probably occurs, and this would serve to reduce the anxiety level of the high school age Mexican-American males in Barratt's research.
226
Beeman Ν . Phillips
I would like also to comment on Barratt's report that medical school students showed increases in anxiety during their first year in medical school. On this type of measurement, and with self-reports generally, a person typically "looks better" (e.g., less maladjusted or anxious) on the second administration than on the first. Therefore, my guess is that the increase in anxiety is actually larger than it appears to be. Consequently, I think that we might conclude that the medical school setting is very stressful, at least to first year students. This raises in my mind the possibility of further research, and I am, in this context, thinking particularly about Epstein's research. Briefly, Epstein in his studies of sport parachutists found certain patterns of change in anxiety levels, and in coping responses, as subjects approached the actual jump. Roy Martin, a student of mine, has done a similar study of a group of Ph.D. candidates preparing for qualifying examinations. He studied their level of anxiety, both state and trait I might add, and a number of other aspects of their behavior, in the month prior to qualifying examinations. The patterns of anxiety and coping responses he found are similar to those reported by Epstein. If I could put myself into Dr. Barratt's academic shoes, I would add the investigation of stress and anxiety in medical school, and how students cope with it, to the project. Also, I am very intrigued with the failure of anxiety and impulsivity to separate into factors for Barratt's 12- to 15-year-old male group. I am reminded of Kagan's research on reflectivity and impulsivity, as well as the work of others with subjects younger than Barratt's, where impulsivity apparently has been differentiated as a separate factor. Unfortunately, I have no ready explanation for why impulsivity does not show up as a separate trait in Barratt's 12- to 15-year-old group. These boys would be in the adolescent period, however, and at this time they are experiencing marked physiological and other changes which usually have profound psychological effects. Perhaps impulsivity (i.e., control of the expression of thoughts and actions), and anxiety (i.e., feelings about external and internal stimuli) coalesce during the adolescent period. Obviously, this is speculative thinking at this time, but research comparable to Barratt's, using younger subjects to see whether impulsivity and anxiety separate, would help to clarify this matter. In any case, it's an intriguing problem which may have important developmental implications. Finally, I am intrigued with the professors at the medical school in Galveston in that they were apparently deceived by the sociopathic subjects in Barratt's project more than fellow students were. I think he has probably explained what was going on but this does raise questions about the use of faculty, in contrast to using peers, in research like Barratt's. In conclusion, these are some of my reactions. I think I have probably exhausted my time and should turn the floor over to Dr. Levitt.
Phillips
There are three types of comments I'd like to make on Dr. Barratt's paper, although I am not really sure how much leeway we have as discussants at this symposium. I'd like first to talk about the things that most impressed me. Then I'd like to say something about the things I'd like more information on. And, third, I want to talk about some things which intrigue me. In passing, I want to add that I am impressed with my own lack of background to make judgments about this paper. As an educational, human-oriented psychologist, I do not have the best background to deal with this area. There are others here who are more competent to react to this paper, and I assume that Dr. Levitt will comment later. Things I am very much impressed with: First, I am impressed with the sophistication of the general research design and the collection of comparable classes of data at both the human and infrahuman level. I understand that the collection of such data is very difficult, and that it takes a great deal of time and skill.
224
Beeman Ν . Phillips
I am also impressed with the inclusion of the elaborate array of psychological and physiological measures, and the apparently high quality of the data obtained. Third, I am impressed with the extensiveness, and the logical coherency and continuity, of this series of studies, and with Dr. Barratt's obvious plans to continue this productive line of research. Things I would like more information on: First, I am interested in the possible implications of using only subjects with extreme scores on the anxiety and impulsiveness scales, as the research paradigm requires. The use of high and low groups is very common, as you know, in anxiety research. This is a very efficient way in which to proceed, at least in an exploratory phase. However, the use of extreme groups also contains several potential problems. There is the problem of a lack of precise knowledge of what "high" and " l o w " really mean in terms of the variable on which the selection of subjects occurs. What is a "high" anxious subject, for example, depends on the nature of the population sampled and upon the cut-off point used. Even if, for example, one used the top 10 percent of the scorers, the mean of the top 10 percent in one population which is sampled may not be the same as the mean of the top 10 percent in some other population. Therefore, in this approach, one needs a normative frame of reference, and I would like to know more, comparatively speaking, about the anxiety and impulsiveness levels of Barratt's high and low subgroups. Another problem with the use of extreme subgroups is that one implicitly assumes that the variable on which extreme subgroups are selected is linearly related to the other variables one is interested in. Yet it is frequently found that anxiety is not linearly related to performance, learning, and other measures. When this is the case, one is in danger of obtaining misleading results and making inappropriate generalizations about his findings. Second, I would like to know more about the possibility of whether or not sex is an important factor in the results obtained in Barratt's studies. I am reminded here of Seymour Sarason's early research at Yale University on anxiety where he somewhat belatedly discovered that sex did make a difference in anxiety research. As he reports, he did not think about this possibility at the outset because at that time there were only male students at Yale. This might turn out to be an important consideration in Barratt's research and some of his findings might be modified where females are used as subjects. Of course, I realize some of the problems that one runs into in gathering physiological data on females, and I am not being critical of Dr. Barratt's decision to use only males. (Parenthetically, I would like to add, somewhat facetiously, that while he used only males in the portion of his studies dealing with humans, I am not sure whether he applied this same restriction to that part
Comments on Dr. Barratt's Paper
225
of his research which dealt with infrahumans. However, sex differences perhaps are not as pronounced among infrahumans.) Also, with regard to the sex factor, the fact that only males were used may have some influence on the character of the impulsiveness scale which was developed. In the discussion of the results one might want to qualify interpretations in terms of the possibility that the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale is really an impulsiveness scale for males. Obviously, females are also impulsive, but they may not manifest impulsiveness in quite the same way, and it may be differently related to other variables. Things I am intrigued by: I am intrigued by several things, so let me briefly discuss these. First, I am surprised by the lack of relationships between anxiety tests and standardized achievement tests and teacher conduct ratings among the 12- to 15-year-old boys. Typically, we would expect significant correlations between anxiety and such measures in this age group, and I have to admit that I am really not able to account for this. I have reread parts of Barratt's paper and I still have no explanation except the possibility that sex may be involved. Nevertheless, it is sufficiently intriguing to raise questions about it. Second, I am intrigued by the lack of relationship between anxiety and peer ratings. Here again, there have been a number of studies of peer ratings, and correlations on the order of .3 to .4 have usually been obtained. I should add that Barratt's peer ratings were obtained in a fraternity, while peer ratings in the studies referred to ordinarily have been obtained in a public school setting. Perhaps peer status acquired in the context of a school setting differs from peer status acquired in the context of a fraternity setting, or any other setting in which people live together, in contrast to working together. In addition, school settings are much more achievement-oriented than fraternity settings, and this may be important. In any case, it would be interesting to look into these possibilities in relation to Barratt's results. I also would like to comment briefly on the fact that Mexican-American males were not significantly more anxious than Anglo males. We have been doing research on anxiety in elementary school children for a number of years at U. T., and we typically find that Mexican-American children are more anxious than Anglo children. I suspect that a selection factor may have operated in Barratt's high school sample of Mexican-Americans, in contrast to the studies done with younger subjects. The typical Mexican-American adult in Texas has about seven years of schooling, and has probably repeated at least one or two grades. This would mean that, in a high school sample, a significant number of Mexican-American males already has been lost. Also, it is probable that students who repeat grades and leave school early have higher anxiety. Thus selective attrition with respect to anxiety probably occurs, and this would serve to reduce the anxiety level of the high school age Mexican-American males in Barratt's research.
226
Beeman Ν . Phillips
I would like also to comment on Barratt's report that medical school students showed increases in anxiety during their first year in medical school. On this type of measurement, and with self-reports generally, a person typically "looks better" (e.g., less maladjusted or anxious) on the second administration than on the first. Therefore, my guess is that the increase in anxiety is actually larger than it appears to be. Consequently, I think that we might conclude that the medical school setting is very stressful, at least to first year students. This raises in my mind the possibility of further research, and I am, in this context, thinking particularly about Epstein's research. Briefly, Epstein in his studies of sport parachutists found certain patterns of change in anxiety levels, and in coping responses, as subjects approached the actual jump. Roy Martin, a student of mine, has done a similar study of a group of Ph.D. candidates preparing for qualifying examinations. He studied their level of anxiety, both state and trait I might add, and a number of other aspects of their behavior, in the month prior to qualifying examinations. The patterns of anxiety and coping responses he found are similar to those reported by Epstein. If I could put myself into Dr. Barratt's academic shoes, I would add the investigation of stress and anxiety in medical school, and how students cope with it, to the project. Also, I am very intrigued with the failure of anxiety and impulsivity to separate into factors for Barratt's 12- to 15-year-old male group. I am reminded of Kagan's research on reflectivity and impulsivity, as well as the work of others with subjects younger than Barratt's, where impulsivity apparently has been differentiated as a separate factor. Unfortunately, I have no ready explanation for why impulsivity does not show up as a separate trait in Barratt's 12- to 15-year-old group. These boys would be in the adolescent period, however, and at this time they are experiencing marked physiological and other changes which usually have profound psychological effects. Perhaps impulsivity (i.e., control of the expression of thoughts and actions), and anxiety (i.e., feelings about external and internal stimuli) coalesce during the adolescent period. Obviously, this is speculative thinking at this time, but research comparable to Barratt's, using younger subjects to see whether impulsivity and anxiety separate, would help to clarify this matter. In any case, it's an intriguing problem which may have important developmental implications. Finally, I am intrigued with the professors at the medical school in Galveston in that they were apparently deceived by the sociopathic subjects in Barratt's project more than fellow students were. I think he has probably explained what was going on but this does raise questions about the use of faculty, in contrast to using peers, in research like Barratt's. In conclusion, these are some of my reactions. I think I have probably exhausted my time and should turn the floor over to Dr. Levitt.