Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Vol. 7, No. 3, 1978

Deviant Behavior and Self-Enhancement in Adolescence Howard B. Kaplan 1

Received March 6, 1978

The hypothesis that "among initially high self-derogation subjects deviant response patterns (alcohol and drug abuse, delinquent patterns, etc.) are related to subsequent decreases in self-derogation" was tested with data from a longitudinal survey study o f adolescents. Among higher and lower socioeconomic status (SES) males initially high self-derogation subjects who adopted (relative to those who dM not adopt) any o f several deviant patterns manifested significantly greater subsequent base-free decreases in self-deroga.tion. For higher SES females only narcotics use (and among lower SES females no deviant pattern) was significantly related to subsequent decrease in self-derogation. Together with collateral data, these results indicated that where the deviant patterns were compatible with valued social roles and the subjects were able to defend against negative responses by others (but not under mutually exclusive conditions), deviant patterns functioned to reduce self-rejecting feelings among initially highly self-derogating subjects.

INTRODUCTION

The following considers the thesis that the adoption o f deviant patterns by individuals who have self-rejecting attitudes will decrease their level o f self-rejection. Numerous reports have suggested that self-rejection is associated with the adoption of a broad range o f deviant patterns and/or that the adoption of such deviant patterns follows or accompanies the subjective expectation of outcomes

1Professor of Sociology, Department of Psychiatry, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. Received his Ph. D. in sociology from New York University in 1958. Current research interests are social psychiatry and, more specifically, the reciprocal relationship between self-attitudes and the adoption of deviant response patterns. 253 0 0 4 7 - 2 8 9 1 / 7 8 / 0 9 0 0 - 0 2 5 3 5 0 5 . 0 0 / 0 9 1978 Plenum Publishing Corl~oration

254

Kaplan

associated with self-enhancement whether the mode of deviance in question be drug abuse (Anhalt and Klein, 1976; Davis and Brehm, 1971; Davis, 1972; Sadava, 1973; Segal et al., 1975; Smith and Fogg, 1975;Stokes, 1974), alcoholism or alcohol abuse (Berg, 1971;Carroll and Fuller, 1969;Williams, 1965), dishonesty (Aronson and Mettee, 1968; Graf, 1971), delinquency or criminality (Gough and Peterson, 1952; Scarpitti, 1965 ; Wood, 1961), any of numerous functional psychiatric disorders (Arieti, 1967; Kaplan, 1977, 1978a; Wylie, 1961, pp. 205-218); violence (Miller, 1968; Leon, 1969; Toch, 1969), radical social protest (Isenberg et al., 1977) or suicide (Glaser, 1965; Hattem, 1964; Miller, 1968; Wilson et al., 1967). However, that deviant patterns in fact have self-enhancing consequences has not been demonstrated with any consistency. Although a few studies have suggested such self-enhancing consequences of deviant patterns, these investigations have either considered only one or a few (rather than a broad range of) modes of deviance and/or used questionable research procedures such as small unrepresentative and improperly controlled samples or designs that militate against conclusions regarding temporal relationships between self-attitudes and deviant behavior. Even in the few instances which established a temporal relationship between antecedent deviant responses and subsequent selfattitudes, other studies were observed to report conflicting findings, differences that could be attributed to variable research operations. A case in point is the observation by Berg (1971) of alcoholics' more favorable self-attitudes while intoxicated in contrast to the observation by Vanderpool (1969) of more negative self-attitudes while under the influence of alcohol. A detailed discussion of the literature relevant to a consideration of the hypothesized self-enhancing consequences of diverse modes of deviant behavior is presented elsewhere (Kaplan, 1972, 1975b). Unlike the studies referred to above, the present report considers the relationship between deviant behavior and self-enhancing consequences in the context of a prospective longitudinal research design that simultaneously considers the influence of diverse modes of deviance upon changes in self-attitudes among a large sample of adolescents. Earlier reports from this study have been concerned with testing other aspects of a general theory of deviant behavior including the postulate of the self-esteem motive (1975d), and hypothesized antecendents of negative self-attitudes (Kaplan, 1976a), relationships between antecedent level of (and increases in) self-derogation and subsequent adoption of deviant responses (Kaplan, 1975a, 1976b, 1977c, 1978b), and factors said to intervene between self-derogation and subsequent deviant response patterns (Kaplan, 1975c, 1977a). The analysis that follows is the first report of results concerning another major aspect of the general theory to be outlined below the hypothesized relationship in highly self-rejecting individuals between antecedent deviant response patterns and subsequent decreases in self-rejecting attitudes.

Deviant Behavior and Self-Enhancement

255

HYPOTHESIS

It was anticipated that diverse modes of deviant behavior by highly selfrejecting individuals would be generally associated with subsequent decreases in self-rejection - particularly under conditions that imply mitigation of adverse responses (that is, negative sanctions) by others to the subject occasioned by the adoption of the deviant pattern(s). Such mitigating circumstances might include approval by self and others of attributes of the act as consistent with roles to which the subject feels a commitment, although the act itself might be defined as deviant (as when the successful exercise of power, risk-taking behavior, and active manipulation of the environment associated with certain forms of delinquency are viewed as compatible with the masculine role). However, where the act is judged by valued others and self as incompatible with the requirements of roles to which the person feels a commitment, self-enhancement is less likely to follow adoption of the deviant pattern. Insofar as such circumstances in association with particular patterns of deviant behavior are concomitants of specified social positions (such as those based upon differentiations of gender) the self-enhancing consequences of particular deviant patterns should be a function of the deviant actor's various social positions. The hypothesis and more specific expectations regarding the self-enhancing consequences of particular deviant patterns were derived both from a recent statement of a general theory of deviant behavior and from empirical studies, some of which tested other aspects of this theory. Specifically, deviant behaviors were more likely to have self-enhancing consequences among males than among females, and males were more likely to experience self-enhancing consequences from modes of deviance associated with activity, power needs, and externalization of blame, while female subjects were expected to experience self-enhancing consequences of deviant responses - if any - as a consequence of more passive patterns of deviance and those that facilitate distortion of affective significance.

Theoretical Basis

The hypothesis was derived from a general theory of deviant behavior (Kaplan, 1975b). The theory is general in that it seeks to explain the common origins of multiple modes of deviance rather than the unique history leading to one deviant pattern. Deviant behaviors are defined as responses which do not conform to the normative expectations of the person's (predeviance) membership group(s) and which derive from the loss of a previous motivation to conform or from the development of a new motivation to deviate from normative expectations. The definition excludes behaviors which, although defined as

256

Kaplan

deviant by other groups, are compatible with the normative expectations of the subject's membership/reference groups, as well as behaviors to which the person was motivated to conform but was incapable of doing so because of conflicting expectations or physical incapacity. Briefly, the theoretical model is based upon the postulate of the selfesteem motive whereby, universally and characteristically, a person is said to behave so as to maximize the experience of positive, and to minimize the experience of negative, self-attitudes. Self-attitudes refer to the person's (more or less intense) positive and negative emotional experiences upon perceiving and evaluating his own attributes and behavior. Intense self-rejecting attitudes are said to be the end result of a history of membership group experiences in which the subject was unable to defend against, adapt to, or cope with circumstances having self-devaluing implications (that is, disvalued attributes and behaviors, and negative evaluations of the subject by valued others). By virtue of the (actual and subjective) association between past membership group experiences and the development of intensely distressful negative self-attitudes the person loses motivation to conform to, and becomes motivated to deviate from membership group patterns (those specifically associated with the genesis of negative self-attitudes and, by a process of generalization, other aspects of the membership groups' normative structures). Simultaneously, the unfulfilled self-esteem motive prompts the subject to seek alternative (that is, deviant) response patterns which offer hope of reducing the experience of negative (and increasing the experience of positive) self-attitudes. Thus, the person is motivated to seek and adopt deviant response patterns not only because of a loss of motivation to conform to the normative structure (which has an earlier association with the genesis of negative self-attitudes) but also because the deviant patterns represent the only motivationally acceptable alternatives that might effectively serve self-enhancing functions. Which of several deviant patterns is adopted, then, would be a function of the person's history of experiences influencing the visibility and subjective evaluation of the self-enhancing/self-devaluing potential of the pattern(s) in question. Adoption of the deviant response has self-enhancing consequences if it facilitates intrapsychic or interpersonal avoidance of self-devaluing experiences associated with the predeviance membership group, serves to attack (symbolically or otherwise) the perceived basis of the person's self-rejecting attitudes (that is, representations of the normative group structure), and/or offers substitute patterns with self-enhancing potential for behavior patterns associated with the genesis of self-rejecting attitudes. To the extent that the person experiences self-enhancing consequences and is able to defend against anticipated or unanticipated adverse consequences of the behavior, he will be confirmed in the deviant pattern. If self-devaluing consequences outweigh self-enhancing outcomes, the person is likely to experiment with alternative modes of deviance, since normative patterns would continue to be motivationally unacceptable.

Deviant Behaviorand Self-Enhancement

257

Empirical Basis

Numerous findings from the present study as well as from other investigations influenced expectations of the effects of gender upon self-enhancing consequences of deviant behavior in general or of particular deviant patterns. Several results suggested that general deviant patterns would be more likely to evoke adverse consequences that would mitigate otherwise self-enhancing consequences among females than among males. The greater sensitivity of females (especially those of lower socioeconomic status, or SES) to others' criticism was suggested by the observation in the present study that for both lower and higher socioeconomic status subjects, females were significantly more likely to score higher on a 12-item measure of defenselessness/vulnerability than males. Among lower socioeconomic status subjects 61% of the females (iV = 694) compared with 46% of the males (N = 630) scored high (6 or more) on this measure. The corresponding figures for higher socioeconomic status subjects were 52% (N = 2635) and 44% (N = 2522). Lower socioeconomic status females were significantly more likely to score high on the measure than higher socioeconomic status females. The items comprising this measure (reported in Kaplan, 1975c) were thought of as falling into two subsets: those indicating subjective distress (nervousness; feeling downcast and dejected; angry, annoyed, or upset) and those indicating extreme sensitivity to others' expression of negative attitudes - for example, affirmative responses to "Do you become deeply disturbed when someone laughs at you or blames you for something you have done wrong?" or "When my parents (my teachers, the kids at school) dislike something I do it bothers me very much." Thus a high score on this variable is said to indicate "Defenselessness/Vulnerability" in the sense that the individual is apparently unable to reduce the experience of subjective distress associated with sensitivity to other's negative attitudes toward him. The probability that deviant responses would be less likely to have selfenhancing consequences among females than males was also suggested by the observation of Tittle and Rowe (1973) that in a study of the relative effects of a moral appeal and a sanction threat on college classroom cheating, females were influenced far more by the sanction threat than were the males. Similarly, Gold and Mann (1972, p. 469) regarded data related to the hypothesized function of self-reported delinquent behavior of American adolescents (as a defense against a negative self-image) and concluded that the boys' data fit the defensive model better than the girls' data, since delinquency is a predominantly masculine defense and therefore does not function as well to raise girls' self-esteem. Consistent with these studies are reports that girls were more likely (1) to show emotional upset when they believed that they had deviated from adult expectations (Sears et al., 1965), (2) to manifest fantasy confessions to deviance (Rebelsky et al., 1963), (3) to show more highly developed and influential consciences (Sears et al., 1957; Rempel and Signoi, 1964), (4) to score lower on lie and defensiveness

258

Kaplan

scales (Maccoby and Jacklin, 1974), (5) to display a need for affiliation (Exline, 1962; Lansky et al., 1961;Spangler and Thomas, 1962), and (6) to show greater interest in and positive feeling for others (Maccoby, 1966). Furthermore, nondelinquent females scored significantly higher than nondelinquent males on a measure of vindication said to involve "an attempt to avoid blame and maintain the appearance of conformity to approved social norms" (Washburn, 1963). Findings from the present study also suggest gender-specific influences upon the self-enhancing potential of particular forms of deviance. The greater disposition of males to use aggressive responses to self-devaluing circumstances was suggested by the observation that among both lower and higher socioeconomic status subjects, males were significantly more likely than females to score high (three or more responses) on an index composed of the following six items: " I f someone insulted me I would p r o b a b l y . . , hit him (true) . . . . insult him back (true) . . . . try to understand why he did it (false) . . . . forgive him (false), 9 think about ways I could get even (true) . . . . feel very angry but not do anything about it (false)." Among lower socioeconomic status subjects 59% of the males (N = 234) 2 compared with only 34% of the females (N = 325) scored high on this measure. The corresponding figures for the higher socioeconomic status subjects were 52% (1065) and 29% (1357). On the other hand, among both higher and lower socioeconomic status subjects, females were significantly more likely than males to score high (10 or more) on a 12-item scale which appeared to reflect the redefinition of the affective significance of currently disvalued circumstances. The items with the highest loadings on this factor included "By the time I am 30 I will probably have a good job and a good future ahead of me." " I f someone insulted me I would probably figure, 'who cares what he thinks.'" If someone insulted me I would probably figure it was his own problems that made him do it." "When things aren't going too well for me I try to think that things will be better in the future." And " I f someone insulted me I would probably try to joke about it." Among lower socioeconomic status subjects 48% of the females (N = 325) compared to 40% of the males (N -- 233), and among higher socioeconomic status subjects 53% of the females (N = 1354) compared to 46% of the males (N = 1061) scored high on this measure. Thus subjects who had developed self-derogating attitudes might be expected to adopt deviant patterns that were not incompatible with particular gender-related predispositions to respond to self-devaluing circumstances. This assumes, of course, that the genesis of self-derogation was not associated with gender-related experiences. In that event the subject might well be motivated to employ mechanisms other than those associated with the genesis of self-rejecting

2Whereas the analysis of the defenselessness/vulnerabilityfactor presented earlier was based on all available scores of all subjects who were present for the first test administration, the analysis of this factor as well as one other to be considered below is based on responses (at the time of the f'trst testing) by subjects present for all three test administrations.

Deviant Behavior and Self-Enhancement

259

attitudes. In either case the probability of adverse consequences of the adopted patterns should be reduced. Numerous other studies have offered observations suggesting that specific deviant patterns are more likely to be associated with one or the other gender and are more or less likely to evoke adverse responses from subjects of a particular gender. Morris (1964) cites reports by Grosser (1951) which indicate that the types of offense committed by members of each sex are expressions of their own sex role. Boys are said to destroy property or steal because they are mainly concerned with "status" goals (i.e., power, prestige, and wealth), while girls become involved in illegitimate sexual relationships or in aggravated family relationships as an expression of their primary concern with "relational" goals. The concern of boys with power is suggested also by the greater tendency of males than females to use alcohol (Jessor et al., 1970 ; Smart and Whitehead, 1974), a pattern that has been said to increase power fantasies (McClelland, 1972). Washburn (1963) also cites a report (Fine, 1955) of gender-related tendencies to adopt specific deviant p a t t e r n s - with girls tending toward running away from home, truancy, and sex-related offenses; and males tending toward stealing, auto theft, injury to others, property damage, and burglary. Such observations might lead to the hypothesis that such preferences reflect compatibility with gender-related roles and therefore are more likely to be associated with self-enhancing, and less likely to be associated with self-devaluing, consequences. (Again we assume that the basis of self-rejecting feelings is not gender related.) That choice of pattern may be related to compatibility with desirable gender-prescribed characteristics may again be illustrated with reference to the use of alcohol, which has frequently been viewed as implying masculine virtues (McCord and McCord, 1960; Zucker, 1968). That alcohol use is more an extension of the masculine than feminine role is also suggested by a longitudinal study (Jones, 1968, 1971) of problem drinkers which found that females who were to become problem drinkers were more unlike female prenormal drinkers than their male counterparts were unlike male prenormal drinkers. On the basis of the frequency with which such responses were observed as well as the behavior of others evoked by such responses, aggressive modes of deviant response might also be expected to be more likely to eventuate in selfenhancing consequences and less likely to eventuate in self-devaluing outcomes when performed by males than when performed by females. Numerous studies (reviewed in greater detail by Kaplan, 1977b) have reported that males were more likely to display aggression than females. For example, McCandless and associates (1961) observed that boys initiated more conflicts than girls, and that girls were more likely to change the activity in which they were engaged following conflict. S. G. Moore (1964) reported that boys, following frustration, were more likely to display direct aggression with less displacement of aggression; and T. Moore and Ucko (1961) reported that anxious boys were more likely to give aggressive responses, while anxious girls were more likely to give passive responses or no response (that is, to avoid the problem). In the relatively few

260

Kaplan

instances in which females were observed to be higher on some index of aggression or hostility, they tended to be higher on prosocial aggression but lower on antisocial aggression (Sears, 1961) or higher on covert hostility but lower on overt hostility than males (Bennett and Cohen, 1959). Consistent with these observations are reports that males were more likely to manifest "turning against object" defenses or projection defenses, while females were more likely to display "turning against self" defenses (Gleser and Ihilevich, 1969; Bogo et al., 1970; DeFundia et al., 1971), and that am ong children brought to a clinic, males were more likely to manifest hyperaggression (among other symptoms), while females were reported to have more problems related to overdependence and emotional overcontrol (Belier and Neubauer, 1963). That aggression was less likely to be compatible with the female role and more likely to be associated with adverse consequences was congruent with observations of a tendency for females to experience greater anxiety or guilt over aggression (Buss and Brock, 1963; Rothaus and Worchel, 1964; Sears, 1961 ; Wyer et al., 1965), an association among subjects of each gender between feminine sex-role identity and anxiety about aggression cues (Consentino and Heilbrun, 1964), a tendency for boys' mothers to be more permissive of aggression toward parents and peers (Sears et al., 1957), and a tendency for teachers to express greater liking for dependent girls than for aggressive girls (Levitin and Chananie, 1972). The tendency for patterns of deviance to be associated with gender has been noted even within a narrow range of deviant patterns such as those related to substance abuse, as in the report by Smart and Whitehead (1974) that males consistently were more frequent users of alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, and hallucinogens, while tranquilizer use was more characteristic of females. The differentia/ use of response patterns by subjects of each gender, however, should not obscure the observations that the same pattern may be congruent with each gender's tendency to respond to stressi' and that the adoption of the same pattern may have different Consequences. Thus, Jessor and his associates (1973, p. 12) reported that the use of marijuana among females is associated with a relative increase in alienation (e.g., a sense of isolation from others, concern about identity), but among males marijuana use was associated with social criticism (a conviction about the inadequacy of policies, mores, and institutions of the larger American society). And Burke and Eichberg (1972) have reported that among drug-taking samples males indicated lower self-esteem than did females. Of course, if all the theoretical premises on which the prediction of selfenhancing consequences of deviant behavior was based in fact held for our subjects, then few adverse consequences should have been experienced and the adoption of any of the range of deviant responses regardless of subject characteristics should generally have been followed by a decrease in self-rejection. If

Deviant Behavior and Self-Enhancement

261

those who experienced high levels of self-rejection came to view normative patterns as motivationally unacceptable vehicles for self-enhancement and both sought and adopted the alternative deviant responses, such responses should lead to decreased self-rejection because of the associated consequences of avoiding or attacking the basis of the subjects' self-devaluation and/or, more affirmatively, providing new bases for positive self-attitudes. However, actual circumstances suggest that the theoretical conditions may not have been fulfilled. One such circumstance was the recognition that although the "high" self-rejecting subjects in the present study manifested more negative self-attitudes than the remainder of the subjects, the absolute level of intensity of this highly self-rejecting subgroup was problematic. Without certainty about the severity of self-rejecting attitudes, it cannot be assumed that the subject will lose motivation to conform to, and become motivated to deviate from, normative patterns. Nor can it be assumed that he will seek deviant alternatives to the normative patterns as a means to reduce his level of self-rejection. The relatively high, but by some absolute standard moderate, level of self-rejection is less likely to be the consequence of pervasive self-devaluation in the course of membership group experiences. Therefore, the self-rejection might not lead to a generalized disaffection with the normative structure, but to dissatisfaction with a more specific (if any) aspect of the normative structure. This narrower response might lead to the attempt to assauge self-rejecting feelings through alternative normative patterns or through deviant patterns particularly related to the blameworthy aspect of the normative structure. To the extent that the subject has not rejected the total normative structure of his membership groups, he remains vulnerable to self-reproach and negative sanctions by other group members as a consequence of the adoption of deviant patterns. A second circumstance concerns the characteristics of the subjects who continued or discontinued participation in the study. The research design required that the hypothesis be tested using students who remained in school during the high school years. The continued presence in school of relatively highly selfrejecting individuals implies that the subjects did not associate the normative structure (or at least its educational aspect) with the genesis of self-rejecting feelings, and did anticipate future self-enhancement in the context of the normative structure. Although they may have associated aspects of the normative structure with the development of negative self-attitudes, these students experienced positive emotional ties or feared anticipated negative sanctions, so that they were unwilling or unable to become totally disaffected from the normative structure (and from adverse consequences of adopting deviant patterns ) . In any case, it is highly problematic that the theoretical conditions of the hypothesis held universally. Indeed, as will be suggested below, it is perhaps more likely that the theoretical conditions held for those who discontinued (or did not commence) participation in the study, so that any observed relationship between antecedent

Kaplan

262

deviant patterns and subsequent reduction of negative self-attitudes may have been diluted by the exclusion from the study of those who were most likely to experience self-enhancing consequences of deviant behavior. Given the possible failure to fulfill the theoretical premises, we must consider the conditions under which they would have been most likely to be fulfilled. In this analysis, attention is paid particularly to the implications of gender for variability in the subjects' condemnation of their own deviance and the subjects' sensitivity to negative sanctions expressed by others.

METHOD The data were collected in the course of a longitudinal survey study of an adolescent population that was designed to test the series of hypotheses comprising the general theory of deviant behavior outlined above.

Sampling and Data Collection A 209-item structured self-administered questionnaire was presented to the seventh-grade students in 18 (randomly selected)of the 36 junior high schools in the Houston Independent School District. The questionnaire was administered for the first time in the spring of 1971 and twice thereafter at annual intervals

(TI, 7"2,T3). Of the 9459 seventh-grade students in the selected schools, 3148 responded to all three questionnaires. The data for the present analysis were provided by these students, who constitute 33.3% of all eligible students in the selected schools and 41.3% of the students who responded to the first questionnaire. The results of an examination of subject characteristics associated with sample attrition are reported elsewhere (Kaplan, 1976a, 1976b). Nevertheless, it should be emphasized here that subjects who discontinued participation in the study were disproportionately likely to have indicated early deviant responses. Thus any observed tendency for subjects to enjoy self-enhancing effects of deviant responses may be partly the result of the exclusion from the sample of subjects who suffered adverse consequences for their self-attitudes manifested in their discontinuance of participation in the study (in large measure because they dropped out of school). However, it may also be noted that those who discontinued participation in the study were not significantly more likely to manifest higher levels of self-rejection (Kaplan, 1976a). Or, as suggested above, the subjects who remained in the study may have been more closely tied to the normative environment and therefore more vulnerable to the adverse effects on self-attitudes of the negative sanctions administered by their membership groups in response to the deviant acts. Dropouts from the study may have been sub-

Deviant Behavior and Self-Enhancement

263

jects whose "deviant" acts were within tolerable limits from their own normative frames of reference and who therefore were not likely to experience adverse responses from significant others as consequences of the "deviant" acts. Thus, the subjects who remained in the study should be less likely than those who dropped out to experience self-enhancing consequences of deviant acts. In any case, resuits were obtained only for subjects who remained in school and agreed to participate in the study through the junior high school years. Operational Definitions

In order to consider the propostion that diverse modes of deviance have self-enhancing consequences among subjects with initially high levels of selfrejection, the following operational definitions were employed.

Self-Derogation Level Self-rejection was measured in terms of a 7-item self-derogation scale. The component items follow. The parenthetical entries indicate self-derogation responses. The numbers refer to the questionnaire items. 109 113 118 142 152 180 184

I wish I could have more respect for myself (true) On the whole, I am satisfied with myself (false) I feel I do not have much to be proud of(true) I'm inclined to feel I'm a failure (true) I take a positive attitude toward myself (false) At times I think I'm no good at all (true) I certainly feel useless at times (true)

The Self-Derogation Score was computed by assigning a weight o f " 2 " to self-derogating responses to items 109, 180, 184 and a weight of "1" to selfderogating responses to the remaining items. The weights were added, the sum divided by the total number of weights for which data were available, and the result multiplied by 100. The scores varied between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating greater self-derogation, or more negative self-attitudes. The weighting of the items resulted in a pattern of test-item correlations that was strikingly similar to the item loadings on the Self-Derogation factor derived in an earlier study (Kaplan and Pokorny, 1969). The derivation of the scale, as well as discussions of its validity and reliability, are prsentedin earlier reports (Kaplan, 1975a, 1975c, 1975d, 1976a, 1976b, 1976c, 1977c). Initial level of self-derogation was determined by arbitrary division of the distribution of self-derogation scores at the time of the first test administration into three score intervals: low (0-20), medium (21-50), and high (above 50).

264

Kaplan

Change in Self-Derogation Self-enhancing consequences were conceptualized in terms of the degree of reduction in self-derogation scores between the second and third test administrations. Change in self-derogation from the second to the third testing was measured by a residual gain score. A gain is said to be residualized "by expressing the posttest score as a deviation from posttest-on-pretest regression line" (Cronbach and Furby, 1970, p. 68). The raw residual change in self-derogation between the second and third testing (Rch SD 2-3) is defined as Rch SD 2-3 = Y - Y -/3y 9x (X - X ) , where Y = time 3 score, Y = mean time 3 score, X = time 2 score, ) ( = mean time 2 score,/3 y 9x = the regression coefficient [ryx(ay/ox)]. The effect of residualizing is to remove "from the posttest score, and hence from the gain, the portion that could have been predicted linearly from the pretest. The residualized score is primarily a way of singling out individuals who changed more or less than expected" (Cronbach and Furby, 1970, p. 74). The decision to use such a measure of self-attitude change was necessary, since the adoption of deviant response patterns is accompanied or preceded by increases in self-rejection (Kaplan, 1975a, 1976c, 1977c). Thus, although at T1 all of the subjects under consideration (high self-derogation subjects) were similar in having relatively high self-rejection scores, by T2 those who had adopted a deviant pattern could be expected to have relatively higher scores on selfrejection than their nondeviant counterparts. Since subjects with initially higher self-derogation scores are known to manifest greater subsequent decreases in self-rejection (Kaplan 1975d) it was necessary to extract the confounding influence of initial level of self-derogation in order to consider the relationship between deviant response patterns and subsequent decreases in self-derogation.

Deviant Response Patterns Deviant responses were defined operationally in terms of self-reports of the 28 acts listed in Table I. At the first test administration the students were asked to indicate whether or not they performed the defiant behavior during a specified period of prior to the test. The specified period in question was "within one month" for all of the items except the following, where the time period is as indicated parenthetically: items 5 (ever), 11 (ever), 26 (during the last nine weeks period), 28 (within the last week), 29 (during the last exam period), 56 (ever), 68 (within the last year). At the second and third testings the time reference was "within the last year" except for item 28, which retained the same ("within the last week") time reference. Six of these variables were not considered in earlier analyses, since the deviant nature of two of the variables (items 48, 84) was more questionable than that of the others and the occurrence of the four others (items 5, 11, 56, 68) depend in part upon the behavior of

Deviant Behavior and Self-Enhancement

265

others. In analyses in which subject characteristics were used to predict the adoption of deviant response patternS, it was advisable to exclude the items that were dependent for their occurrence upon others' responses. However, it is appropriate to consider such items in the present analysis, where the consequences of the deviant behavior (including coming to the attention of the authorities) are under investigation. The relatively brief time period reference at the first administration was employed in an attempt to differentiate between students who had already adopted deviant response patterns and those who had not done so and, thereby, to facilitate analyses of the relationship between antecedent self-derogation and subsequent initial adoption of motivationally relevant deviant responses (Kaplan, 1975a, 1976b). It was assumed that students who indicated nonperformance of the act relative to those who indicated recent performance of the act would probably not have adopted a motivationally relevant deviant response pattern. Use of a more extended time period would have increased the probability that subjects who only occasionally performed the deviant act (whether in experimentation or special circumstances) would have been excluded as well as those who had already adopted the deviant act as a motivationally relevant response pattern. The validity of the operational definitions of deviant behavior with regard both to the construct validity of the deviant definition of the acts and the external validation of the self-reports has been considered elsewhere (Kaplan, 1976b). Subjects were characterized as having adopted a deviant response pattern if they reported the deviant pattern at both T1 and /'2. Subjects who denied the deviant act at both T1 and T2 were said to have not adopted the pattern in question. Deviant patterns were defined in terms of affirmative responses at both T~ and T2, rather than in terms of initial affirmation at T2, for a number of reasons. Although both definitions would permit testing the temporal relationship between deviant patterns or subsequent decreases in self-rejection, the second definition increased the probability that those who initially adopted the deviant response pattern at 7"2 would include some of those who were coming to adopt what by that age is a more acceptable pattern. Thus, by defining earlier initiation of deviant behavior the former definition increases the probability of an act being truly deviant. Furthermore, initial reports of the deviant behavior at T2 increase the probability that a single experimental occasion, not an adopted pattern, is unlikely to be continued and therefore is not defined personally as a deviant response. Thus it could have no necessary theoretical relationship with subsequent change in self-attitudes (according to the theory under consideration). On the other hand, the definition in terms of affirmation of deviant behavior at both T1 and T2 increases the probability that the act is patterned rather than experimental behavior, and that either the absence of adverse con-

Took things worth less than

(7)

Thought about or threatened suicide

Contact with police, sheriff, or juvenile officers

Became angry and broke things

Carried a razor, switch blade, or gun as a weapon

Sold narcotic drugs (dope, heroin)

Received a failing grade in one or more school subjects

(10)

(11)

(14)

(17)

(24)

(26)

$2

Suspended or expelled from school

(5)

(3) a Took things worth between $2 and $50

5.7 b 22.3 10 -10.3 c 1.4 2 3.4 21.7 51 13.2 23.0 21 -2.1 12.9 12 3.0 24.0 56 -4.9 25.0 20 11.5 20.4 2 11.1 25.4 45

Reported deviant act at T 1 and T~

*

*

**

7.5 26.1 189 7.0 26.1 225 6.8 26.1 121 5.2 26.2 164 6.1 25.5 168 7.2 26.1 103 8.1 26.7 175 6.4 25.4 222 6.0 27.2 117

Denied deviant act at T l and T 2

Higher socioeconomic status males

-0.7 18.3 7 7.5 24.8 5 -8.8 19.8 15 -1.0 19.6 6 -20.9 21.7 5 -1.4 25.0 17 -3.0 16.2 7 -8.9 d 0.0 1 4.8 24.3 17

Reported deviant act at Tl and T 2

*

*

3.4 24.3 63 2.5 24.2 59 6.2 23.9 46 3.5 23.6 55 3.6 22.5 56 8.3 24.4 36 4.6 24.3 59 2.5 24.0 71 1.4 21.6 34

Denied deviant act at T~ and T 2

Lower socioeconomic status males

0.7 23.2 2 15.1 33.4 5 4.1 22.3 25 9.5 26.6 49 1.1 20.0 3 8.7 23.0 49 38.3 d 0.0 1 0.0 d 0.0 0 10.5 23.7 43

Reported deviant act at T t and T 2

**

4.4 24.5 319 4.9 24.7 308 5.4 24.5 251 3.6 24.1 209 4.8 24.6 320 4.9 24.6 199 4.4 24.1 330 5.3 24.5 338 1.4 23.4 216

Denied deviant act at T 1 and T 2

Higher socioeconomic status females

28.3 d 0.0 1 31.1 9.1 2 11.1 20.9 11 0.5 23.3 13 34.8 d 0.0 1 9.2 26.2 20 -24.3 d 0.0 1 0.0 d 0.0 0 10.7 19.2 25

Reported deviant act at T~ and T 2

**

6.6 25.6 92 5.5 27.1 92 6.9 26.5 70 4.8 28.0 59 6.1 25.6 96 4.9 26.0 62 6.5 25.9 98 6.5 25.8 99 2.3 29.0 44

Denied deviant act at T~ and T 2

Lower socioeconomic status females

Table I. Change in Self-Derogation (Mean Residual Gain Scores) T2-T3 by Adoption of Deviant Patterns and Gender X Socioeconomic Status Among Initially (Tt) High Self-Derogating Subjects 1o Os

Cheated on exams

Attempted suicide

Starteda fist fight

Took narcotic drugs

Skipped school without an

(29)

(31)

(33)

(38)

(44)

Partidpatedin social protest

Took part in gang fights

Sent to a psychiatrist, psychologist, or social worker

Used force to get money or valuables

Broke into and entered a home, store or building

Damaged or destroyed public or private property on purpose

(48)

(50)

(56)

(57)

(61)

(64)

excuse

Used wine, beer, or liquor more than two times

(28)

-10.8 19.8 21 0.6 18.6 30 17.7 10.6 5 1.9 25.4 36 26.0 30.5 3 -3.2 26.8 10 20.4 28.0 6 3.8 26.5 10 3.2 24.6 4 -12.7 23.6 6 -10.3 1.4 2 -1.5 16.6 14

7.4 25:1 153 5.8 26.7 119 4.9 25.3 202 7.0 24.7 147 6.9 25.5 194 7.8 25.7 183 6.0 25.6 196 7.6 25.5 202 6.8 26.2 199 -2.2 29.7 201 6.5 25.9 216 7.5 25.3 172

1.2 26.1 9 --8.6 21.5 4 1.8 13.4 4 7.9 14.6 7 0.0 d 0.0 0 --2.3 23.2 5 4.1 34.0 7 7.3 13.0 4 0.0 d 0.0 0 --40.0 0.0 2 --15.2 d 0.0 1 14.8 15.4 6 *

*

3.5 24.8 53 7.4 21.3 47 2.2 21.5 59 -0.5 22.0 50 2.2 23.0 67 1.6 20.8 60 2.8 23.5 55 3.3 23.2 60 4.8 22.4 64 -4.3 28.9 69 2.6 24.0 70 2.3 23.5 60 -3.3 13.9 15 4.4 25.3 67 5.2 24.7 21 1 1.6 14.7 7 -11.4 25.7 7 3.6 25.8 8 2.3 25.4 14 4.5 16.5 4 40.2 d 0.0 1 18.7 32.7 3 13.9 d 0.0 1 --5.0 30.0 4 *

4.9 24.4 254 5.0 23.5 142 4.1 24.1 286 5.1 24.3 300 5.7 24.3 305 5.0 24.5 287 5.0 24.1 280 5.3 24.2 320 5.7 24.4 323 -5.4 26.3 331 5.4 24.3 341 5.2 24.0 316

14.3 30.1 4 13.3 27.0 13 3.3 27.9 8 27.4 12.6 8 10.0 24.6 4 20.2 8.3 5 10.6 15.2 5 45.2 10.4 2 0.0 d 0.0 0 0.0 d 0.0 0 0.0 d 0.0 0 0.0 d 0.0 0

8.6 25.5 84 4.8 25.6 58 5.4 26.1 75 6.8 24.9 86 6.0 26.1 90 6.4 26.3 85 5.3 23.5 73 4.2 26.3 94 7.4 25.4 98 -6.9 29.8 95 5.7 26.2 103 5.3 26.8 96 bJ O~ ,.4

r

rn

rj~ r

5"

,r

Stole things f r o m s o m e o n e else's desk or locker

Used a car w i t h o u t the owner's per mission

Beat u p someone who did nothing to you

T o o k things worth $50 or more

S m o k e d marijuana

Participated in strike, riot, or demonstration

(69)

(72)

(75)

(78)

(82)

(84)

9.3 23.7 55 -1.2 23.0 20 -5.3 3.6 2 8.5 24.8 20 -8.9 d 0.0 1 -3.0 8.3 6 20.2 d 0.0 1 *

**

5.4 23.6 110 6.7 25.4 156 5.9 26.2 212 6.1 26.1 181 6.7 25.9 224 6.6 26.2 185 6.6 25.7 210

13.4 24.8 9 -5.3 19.4 9 0.0 d '0.0 0 -15.2 d 0.0 1 0.0 d 0.0 0 8.1 16.8 3 -11.2 4.1 2 *

*

-0.5 18.3 40 7.3 23.8 47 3.1 24.4 65 3.2 24.8 61 1.7 22.6 74 2.0 24.2 56 -0.2 22.8 61

11.2 20.9 35 8.6 21.2 8 0.0 d 0.0 0 25.7 d 0.0 1 12.0 d 0.0 1 -8.5 30.4 8 20.2 24.8 4

Reported deviant act at T1 and T~ *

4.7 24.0 233 6.2 23.9 293 5.3 24.4 333 5.0 24.4 322 5.3 24.3 348 6.1 24.1 296 4.8 24.1 333

Denied deviant act at T 1 and T 2

Higher socioeconomic status females

2.8 28.3 12 14.8 d 0.0 1 0.0 d 0.0 0 24.8 d 0.0 1 0.0 d 0.0 0 -0.5 36.2 4 31.1 d 0.0 1

Reported deviant act at T~ and T 2 2.9 26.4 68 5.8 25.5 96 5.0 25.7 99 6.2 26.2 104 6.6 26.2 105 5.6 25.3 88 7.4 25.5 97

Denied deviant act at TI and T 2

Lower socioeconomic status females

a N u m b e r s refer to questionnaire items. b T h e series o f three entries in each column indicates the m e a n o f t h e residual change score, the standard deviation a n d t h e N. T h e asterisks indicate significance level: * = p < 0.05, ** = p < 0.01, *** = p < 0.001, for difference between adjacent m e a n s by t test (one-tailed), a s s u m i n g unequal variances (Welch, 194 7). Cpositive signs indicate relative increases in self-derogation from T 2 to T 3. Negative signs indicate relative decreases in self-derogation f r o m T 2 to T 3. dDifferences between m e a n s could not be c o m p u t e d due to paucity of cases.

T a k e n to office for p u n i s h m e n t

(68)

Denied deviant act at T 1 and T~

Reported deviant act at T 1 and T 2

Reported deviant act at T 1 and T:

Denied deviant act at T 1 and T 2

Lower socioeconomic status males

Higher socioeconomic status males

Table I. C o n t i n u e d b~ O~ Oo

Deviant Behavior and Self-Enhancement

269

sequences and/or the absence of more motivationally acceptable alternative responses (theoretical conditions for self-enhancing consequences of the deviant behavior) permit continuity of the response. However, the early (T1) manifestation of deviant behavior, by virtue of its early adoption, could be seen as an expression of a normative, or at least acceptable, response among the individual's membership groups. Hence it could not constitute a legitimate test of the general theory of deviant behavior under consideration. Nevertheless, the tendency of the dropouts from the study to have more likely engaged in early deviant behavior (Kaplan, 1976b) suggests that the subjects who remained in the study and manifested early adoption of the pattern were more closely tied to the normative structure and,were more likely to define the acts as deviant. Therefore, it would be appropriate in the current theoretical context to anticipate that the early adoption of the patterns by highly self-derogating subjects would tend to eventuate in reduction of self-rejecting attitudes. Analysis

The relationship between deviant patterns and subsequent decreases in selfderogation among initially self-rejecting subjects was considered for each of four subgroupings. The subjects' self-reports were used to differentiate them in terms of gender and socioeconomic status (mother graduated from high school versus mother did not graduate from high school) into (1) higher socioeconomic status males, (2) lower socioeconomic status males, (3) higher socioeconomic status females, and (4) lower socioeconomic status females. The initially (T1) high self-derogation subjects in each subgrouping who adopted each of the 28 deviant patterns (that is, affirmed the deviant act at T1 and T2) were compared with the initially high self-derogation subjects who did not adopt the deviant pattern (that is, denied the deviant act at T1 and T2) with regard to mean residual change in self-derogation T2-T3. Significance of difference between means was determined by a t test (one-tailed) assuming unequal variances (Welch, 1947). These procedures permitted the establishment of a temporal relationship between deviant response patterns (defined as prior to T1 and between T~ and T2) and subsequent base-free decreases in self-derogation (between T2 and T3) among initially high self-derogation subjects. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

It was found that the hypothesized relationship between antecedent patterns of deviance and subsequent reduction in self-derogation was generally a function of the interaction between gender and mode of deviance, and that the observed interaction tended to be compatible with the more specific expectations reviewed above. The findings are summarized in Table I. The results will be considered for each of the four population subgroupings.

270

Kaplan

Among higher socioeconomic status males, as expected, initially high selfderogation subejcts who adopted several modes of deviance (that is, affirmed performing the behavior at both T1 and T2) relative to those who did not adopt the pattern (that is, denied performance at T1 and T2) manifested greater decreases in self-derogation between T2 and 7"3. In 18 of the 26 instances in which comparisons were possible those who adopted the deviant patterns tended to manifest more negative and less positive residual gain scores on the self-derogation measure than those who did not adopt the pattern. The comparisons were statistically significant for 8 of the deviant patterns. Significantly greater subsequent (T2-T3) decreases (smaller subsequent increases) in self-derogation were associated with antecedent (T1 and T2) reports of being suspended or expelled from school; having anything to do with police, sheriff, or juvenile officers for something the subject had done or was suspected of doing; carrying a razor, switchblade, or gun as a weapon; using wine, beer, or liquor more than two times during the preceding week; breaking into and entering a home, store, or building; purposely damaging or destroying public or private property; taking a car for a ride without the owner's knowledge; and smoking marijuana. Also noted was a nonsignificant (p = 0.08) tendency for initially high self-derogation subjects who stole from someone's desk or locker at school to display greater subsequent decreases in self-derogation. For only one item (attempted suicide) was the deviant response associated with a significant increase in self-derogation (p = 0.01). In this connection a nonsignificant tendency (p = 0.08) for subjects who thought about or threatened suicide to manifest subsequent increases in self-rejection was also noted. These findings suggest that unlike the other patterns for higher socioeconomic status males, suicidal responses are reflections of, rather than functional responses to, self-rejecting attitudes. Although the data are not presented here, deviant behavior was not associated with subsequent decreases in self-derogation among initially medium and low self-derogation subjects with the same consistency that it was among initially high self-derogation subjects. This observation provides support for the thesis that deviant behaviors are adopted in response to high levels of self-derogation and are more or less functional in reducing self-rejecting attitudes. Among initially medium self-derogation subjects none of the items significantly associated with subsequent decreases in self-derogation among initially high selfderogation subjects were similarly associated with subsequent decreases in selfrejection, and, indeed, only one of the 25 items for which comparisons could be made (took things worth $50 or more) was significantly associated with subsequent decreases in self-rejecting attitudes. On the other hand, several items (thought about or threatened suicide, became angry and broke things, carried a weapon, received a failing grade, took narcotic drugs, breaking and entering) were significantly associated with subsequent increases in self-derogation among initially medium self-derogation subjects. Similarly, among initially low selfderogation subjects only two of the 24 items for which comparisons could be

Deviant Behavior and Self-Enhancement

271

made (contact with police, sheriff, or juvenile officers; breaking and entering) were associated with subsequent decreases in self-derogation. However, only one pattern (social protest) was associated with a subsequent increase in self-derogation. Perhaps for low self-derogation subjects who adopted deviant patterns the "deviance" represents behavioral responses which the subjects learned in the course of their socialization. This would account for both the performance of the "deviant" responses by low self-derogation subjects as well as the paucity of significant changes in self-derogation subsequent to adoption of the pattern. Among lower socioeconomic status males, as among higher socioeconomic status males, initially high self-derogation subjects who adopted each of several modes of deviance relative to those who did not adopt the pattern manifested greater subsequent base-free decreases in self-derogation. For 13 of the 21 instances in which comparisons were possible, those who adopted the deviant patterns tended to manifest more negative and fewer positive residual gain scores on the self-derogation measure than those who did not adopt the pattern. The comparisons were statistically significant for 5 of the deviant patterns. Significantly greater subsequent (T2-Ta) decreases (smaller subsequent increases) in selfderogation were associated with antecedent (T1 and T2) reports of stealing things worth less than $2; having contact with police, sheriff, or juvenile officers; using force to get money or valuables; stealing things from someone else's desk or locker; and participating in a strike, riot, or demonstration. A tendency was also noted for initially high self-derogation subjects who became angry and broke things (p = 0.10), carried weapons (p = 0.15), and cheated on exams (p = 0.11) to display greater subsequent decreases in self-derogation. For only one item (purposely damaged or destroyed public property) was antecedent deviant response significantly associated with a subsequent increase in self-derogation. Although a relationship between antecedent deviant patterns and subsequent decreases in self-derogation was hypothesized only for initially high selfderogation subjects, it is noted again (as it was for higher socioeconomic status males) that this relationship was not consistently observed among initially low and medium self-derogation subjects. Among the initially medium self-derogation subjects only 2 of the 15 items for which comparisons could be made (stole things worth less than $2, stole things worth between $2 and $50) were significantly associated with subsequent decreases in self-derogation, and only one other item (took part in gang fights) was related at a nonsignificant level (p = 0.12). All of the remaining items were (nonsignificantly) associated with subsequent increases in self-derogation. Similarly, among the initially low self-derogation subjects only one item (skipped school without an excuse) was signifiantly associated with subsequent decreases in self-derogation. However, of the 17 items for which comparisons could be made, 12 deviant patterns were associated with subsequent increases in self-derogation, 3 of them significantly so (stole things worth between $2 and $50; used wine, beer, or liquor more than two times during the preceding week; was taken to the office for punishment).

272

Kaplan

The lower socioeconomic status males under consideration were those who remained in the study; perhaps they represented those for whom leaving the system would be particularly costly. By implication, they might also represent those vulnerable to adverse responses by system representatives evoked by deviant patterns; this could account for the more numerous instances among lower socioeconomic status males in which deviant patterns were associated with subsequent increases in self-derogation. In support of this reasoning, it is:again noted that among all the patterns, only for those skipping school without an excuse (suggesting loose affective ties to the school) was the deviant response associated with a subsequent decrease in self-rejection. In any case, the observation of a more consistent relationship between antecedent deviant responses and subsequent decreases in self-rejection among initially high (compared to initially medium or low) self-derogation subjects for lower socioeconomic status males once again supports the general position that deviant patterns are responses to self-derogation and are (under specifiable conditions) functional in reducing self-rejecting feelings. The deviant patterns observed to be associated with subsequent decreases in self-derogation generally might have been predicted on the basis of the literature cited above. The deviant patterns that tended to be associated with male deviants and that were interpretable as compatible with features of the masculine role (activity, aggressiveness, potency, etc.) tended to be associated with subsequent decreases in self-derogation. The findings for female subjects were also compatible with the theoretical issues and empirical reports reviewed above. On the basis of the female's greater vulnerability to interpersonal sanctions and her observed lesser tendency to adopt deviant responses, female subjects were expected to be less likely to experience self-enhancing consequences from the range of deviant responses. The particular deviant responses that had self-enhancing consequences were more likely to be passive, nonaggressive responses that facilitated reinterpretation of the affective significance of life events. Specifically, the expectation that drug abuse would have self-enhancing consequences among females was compatible with observations of a female-specific association of increase in alienation (e.g., sense of isolation from others) with adoption of marijuana use (Jessor et al., 1973); higher self-esteem among drug-taking females than among drug-taking males (Burke and Eichberg, 1972);a female-specific increase in perceived positive functions of marijuana associated with the adoption of marijuana use (Jessor et al., 1973); low denial of effects in combination with self-dissatisfaction as a predictor of females' inclination to drug use (Brehm and Back, 1968); and male drug users rejecting the culturally prescribed assertive male role and female users identifying with the unassertiveness of the traditional female role (Fitzgibbons eta/., 1973). As expected, among initially high self-derogating females, few deviant patterns were associated with subsequent decreases in self-derogation, and these

Deviant Behavior and Self-Enhancement

273

patterns related to drug abuse. Among higher socioeconomic status females, only one deviant pattern was significantly associated with subsequent decreases in self-derogation. High self-derogation females who reported using narcotics at T1 and 7'2, relative to those who denied use at those times, manifested significantly greater subsequent ( T 2 - / ' 3 ) decreases in self-derogation. One other pattern was appreciably but not significantly associated with subsequent decreases in selfderogation. High self-derogating females who reported marijuana use at TI and T2, relative to those who denied using marijuana at T1 and 7"2, manifested appreciably greater (p = 0.10) subsequent (?'2-T3) decreases in self-derogation. On the other hand, receiving failing grades and being taken to the office for punishment were associated with significant subsequent increases in self-derogation. This finding suggests a particular sensitivity to negative sanctions related to school failure (higher socioeconomic status females in the present study were least likely to receive high scores on a measure of perceived self-devaluing experiences in the school environment); and a number of other patterns were appreciably, if not significantly, related to subsequent increases in self-derogation. Among lower socioeconomic status females none of the deviant patterns was significantly related to subsequent decreases in self-derogation among initially high self-derogation subjects. These findings, again, are in accord with the expectations (based on the literature and findings reviewed above) that the related factors of more negative responses to female as opposed to male delinquency, the greater inhibition imposed on the expression of a broad range of delinquent patterns during the female socialization process, and - perhaps most significantly- the greater vulnerability of females to interpersonal sanctions would in large measure preclude the experience of self-enhancing consequences of the deviant response patterns under consideration. In this connection let us recall that the lower socioeconomic status females, who were just noted to be least likely to enjoy self-enhancing consequences of deviant pattems, were observed above to be most likely to receive high scores on the defenselessness/ vulnerability index. In general, then, the observed gender-related differences with regard to self-enhancing consequences of deviant responses (among initially high self-derogating subjects) were in accord with expectations. The major findings from this study, particularly with regard to the association between multiple modes of deviance and subsequent decreases in self-derogation among initially high self-derogating males (regardless of socioeconomic status) question the frequently drawn conclusions and assumptions concerning the adverse consequences on self-attitudes of repeated deviant behavior, institutionalization, and - more generally - coming to the attention of the authorities (Fitts and Hamner, 1969; J. R. Williams, 1976). Also called into question are the conclusions that apprehension has no consequences for level of selfesteem (Jensen, 1972), conclusions that are all too often drawn in the face of conflicting findings and are based on inappropriate research designs. In the present study it has been observed that under certain conditions deviant (including

274

Kaplan

delinquent) behavior - whether or not it is known to have attracted the attention o f the authorities - h a s self-enhancing consequences. Individuals who have developed relatively high levels of self-derogating attitudes in the course of their membership group experiences and who have adopted deviant patterns (relative to those who have not adopted such patterns) were observed to subsequently decrease their level of self-rejecting attitudes. This decrease occurred particularly under conditions in which the patterns could be assumed to be compatible with, or symbolic extensions of, valued social roles (presumably unrelated to the genesis of the self-rejecting attitudes) so that the subjects were therefore (or for other reasons) more protected from occasions for self-devaluation and from negative responses by valued others as a consequence of the deviant responses. These observations lend support to the general theory of deviant behavior from which the hypothesized relationships between antecedent deviant patterns and subsequent self-enhancement are derived.

REFERENCES Anhalt, H. S., and Klein, M. (1976). Drug abuse in junior high school populations. Am. J. Drug Alcohol Abuse 3 : 589-603. Arieti, S. (1967). Some elements of cognitive psychiatry. Am. J. Psychother. 124: 723-736. Aronson, E., and Mettee, D. R. (1968). Dishonest behavior as a function of differential levels of induced self-esteem.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 9: 121-127. Beller, E. K., and Neubauer, P. B. (1963). Sex differences and symptom patterns in early childhood. J.. Am. Acad. ChildPsychiat. 2: 414-433. Bennett, E. M., and Cohen, L. R. (1959). Men and women: Personality patterns and contrasts. Genet. Psychol. Monogr. 59: 101-155. Berg, N. L. (1971). Effects of alcohol intoxication on self-concept. Quart. J. Stud. Alcohol 32: 422-453. Bogo, N., Winget, C., and Gleser, G. (1970). Ego defenses and perceptual styles. Percept. Motor Skills 30: 599-604. Brehm, M. L, and Back, K. W. (1968). Self image and attitudes toward drugs. J. Personal. 36: 299-314. Burke, E. L., and Eichberg, R. H. (1972). Personality characteristics of adolescent users of dangerous drugs as indicated by the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. J. Nerv. Ment. Dis. 154: 291-298. Buss, A. H., and Brock, T. C. (1963). Repression and guilt in relation to aggression.J. Abnorm. Psychol. 66: 345-350. Carroll, J. L., and Fuller, G. B. (1969). The self and ideal self-concept of the alcoholic as influenced by length of sobriety and/or participation in Alcoholics Anonymous. J. Clin. Psychol. 25: 363-364. Cosentino, F., and Heilbrun, A. B. (1964). Anxiety correlates of sex-rule identity in college students. Psychol. Rep. 14: 729-730. Cronbach, L. J., and Furby, L. (1970). How we should measure "change" - or should we? Psychol. Bull. 74: 68-80. Davis, G. C., and Brehm, M. L. (1971). Juvenile prisoners: Motivational factors in drug use. Proc. Am. Psychol. Assoc. 6 (Part 1): 333-334. Davis, K. E. (1972). Drug effects and drug use. In Wrightsman, L. S. (ed.), SociaIPsychology in the Seventies, Brooks-Cole, Monterey, Calif. pp. 517-545.

Deviant Behavior and Self-Enhancement

275

DeFundia, T. A., Dragnus, J. G., and Phillips, L. (1971). Culture and psychiatric symptomatology: A comparison of Argentine and United States patients. Soc. Psychiat. 6: 11-20. Exline, R. V. (1962). Effects of need for affiliation, sex, and the sight of others upon initial communications in problem-solving groups. J. Personal. 30: 541-556. Fine, B. (1955). 1,000,O00Delinquents, World Publishing Company, New York. Fitts, W. H., and Hammer, W. T. (1969). The Self-Concept and Delinquency, Counselor Recordings and Tests, Nashville, Tenn. Fitzgibbons, D. J., Berry, D. F., and Shearn, C. R. (1973). MMPI and diagnosis among hospitalized drug abusers. s Commun. Psyehol. 1: 79-81. Glaser, K. (1965). Attempted suicide in children and adolescentS: psycho-dynamic observations. Am. J. Psychother. 19: 220-227. Gleser, G. C., and Ihilevich, D. (1969). An objective instrument for measuring defense mechanisms. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 33: 51-60. Gold, M., and Mann, D. (1972). Delinquency as defense. Am. J. Orthopsychiat. 42: 463479. Gough, H. G., and Peterson, D. R. (1952). The identification and measurement of predispositional factors in crime and delinquency. J. Consult. Psychol. 16: 207-212. Graf, R. G. (1971). Induced self-esteem as a determinant of behavior. J. Soc. Psychol. 85: 213-217. Grosser, G. H. (1951). Juvenile delinquency and contemporary American sex roles. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University. Hattem, J. V. (1964). The precipitating role of discordant interpersonal relationships in suicidal behavior. Diss. Abstr. 25 : 1135-1136. Isenberg, P., Schnitzer, R., and Rothman, S. (1977). Psychological variables in student activism: The radical triad and some religious differences. J. Youth Adoles. 6: 11-24. Jensen, G. F. (1972). Delinquency and adolescent self-conceptions: A study of the personal relevance of infraction. Soc. Probl. 20: 84-103. Jessor, R., Carman, R. S., and Grossman, P. H. (1970). Expectations for need satisfaction and patterns of alcohol use in college. In Maddox, G. (ed.), The Domesticated Drug: Drinking Among Collegians, College and University Press, New Haven, Conn. pp. 321-342. Jessor, R., Jessor, S. L., and Finney, J. (1973). A social psychology of marijuana use: Longitudinal studies of high school and college youth. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 26: 1-15. Jones, M. C. (1968). Personality correlates and antecedents of drinking patterns in adult males. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 32: 2-12. Jones, M. C. (1971). Personality antecendents and correlates of drinking patterns in women. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 36: 61-69. Kaplan, H. B. (1972). Toward a general theory of psychosocial deviance: The case of aggressive behavior. Soc. ScL Med. 6: 593-617. Kaplan, H. B. (1975a). Increase in self-rejection as an antecedent of deviant responses. J. Youth Adoles. 4: 281-292. Kaplan, H. B. (1975b). Self-Attitudes and Deviant Behavior, Goodyear Publishing Company, Pacific Palisades, Calif. Kaplan, H. B. (1975c). Sequelae of self-derogation: Predicting from a general theory of deviant behavior. Youth Soc. 7: 171-197. Kaplan, H. B. (1975d). The self-esteem motive and change in self-attitudes. J. Nerv. Ment. Dis. 161: 265-275. Kaplan, H. B, (1976a). Antecendents of negative self-attitudes: Membership group devaluation and defenselessness. Soe. Psychiat. 11: 15-25. Kaplan, H. B. (1976b). Self-attitudes and deviant response. Soc. Forces. 54: 788-801. Kaplan, H. B. (1976c). Self-attitude change and deviant behavior. Soc. Psychiat. 11: 59-67. Kaplan, H. B. (1977a). Antecendents of deviant responses: Predicting from a general theory of deviant behavior. J. Youth Adoles. 6: 89-101. Kaplan, H. B. (1977b). Gender and depression: A sociological analysis of a conditional relationship. In Fann, W. E., Karacan, I., Pokorny, A. D., and Williams, R. L. (eds.), Phenomenology and Treatment of Depression, Spectrum Publishing Company, New York, pp. 81-113.

276

Kaplan

Kaplan, H. B. (1977c). Increase in self-rejection and continuing/discontinued deviant response. J. Youth Adoles. 6: 77-87. Kaplan, H. B. (1978a). Self-attitudes and schizophrenia. In Fann, W. E., Karacan, I., Pokorny, A. D., and Williams, R. L. (eds.), Phenomenology and Treatment o f Schizophrenia, Spectrum Publishing Company, New York, pp. 241-292. Kaplan, H. B. (1978b). Social class, self-derogation and deviant response. Soc. Psychiat. 13: 19-28. Kaplan, H. B., and Pokorny, A. D. (1969). Self-derogation and psychosocial adjustment. J. Nerv. Men. Dis. 149: 421-434. Lansky, L. M., Crandall, V. J., Kagan, J., and Baker, C. T. (1961). Sex differences in aggression and its correlates in middle-class adolescents. Child Dev. 32: 45-58. Leon, C. A. (1969). Unusual patterns of crime during La Violencia in Colombia. Am. J. Psycyiat. 125: 1564-1575. Levitin, T. A., and Chananie, J. D. (1972). Responses of female primary school teachers to sex-typed behaviors in male and female children. ChildDev. 43: 1309-1316. Maecoby, E. E. (1966). The Development of Sex Differences, Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif. Maccoby, E. E., and Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The Psychology of Sex Differences, Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif. McCandless, B. R., Bilous, C. B., and Bennett, H. L. (1961). Peer popularity and dependence on adults in pre-school age socialization. Child Dev. 32: 511-518. McClelland, D. V. (1972). Examining the research basis for alternative explanations of alcoholism. In McClelland, D. C., Davis, W. N., Kalin, R., and Wanner, E. (eds.), The Drinking Man, Free Press, New York, pp. 276-315. McCord, W., and McCord, J. (1960). Origins of Alcoholism, Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif. Miller, D. (1968). Toward a symbolic interaction theory o f suicide. Diss. Abstr. 28: 4720A. Moore, S. G. (1964). Displaced aggression in relation to different frustrations. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 68: 200-204. Moore, T., and Ucko, L. E. (1961). Four to six: Constructiveness and conflict in meeting doll play problems. J. Child Psychol. Psychiat. 2: 21-47. Morris, R. R. (1964). Female delinquency and relational problems. Soc. Forces. 43: 82-89. Rebelsky, F. G., Alinsmith, W., and Grinder, R. E. (1963). Resistance to temptation and sex differences in children's use of fantasy confession. Child Dev. 34: 955-962. Rempel, H., and Signoi, E. I. (1964) Sex differences in self-relating of conscience as a determinant of behavior. Psychol. Rep. 15 : 277-278. Rothaus, P., and Worchel, P. (1964). Ego-support, communication, catharsis, and hostility. J. Personal. 32: 296-312. Sadava, S. W. (1973). Patterns of college student drug use: A longitudinal social learning study. Psychol. Rep. 33: 75-86. Scarpitti, F. R. (1965). Delinquent and non-delinquent perceptions of self, values and opportunity. Ment. Hyg. 49: 399-404. Sears, R. R. (1961). Relation of early socialization experiences to aggression in middle childhood. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 63: 466-492. Sears, R. R., Maccoby, E. E., and Levin, H. (1957). Patterns of Child Rearing, Row Peterson, Evanston, Ill. Sears, R. R., Ray, L., and Alpert, R. (1965). Identification and Child Rearing, Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif. Segal, B., Rhenberg, G., and Sterling, S. (1975). Self-concept and drug and alcohol use in female college students. J. Alcohol. Drug Educ. 20: 17-22. Smart, R. G., and Whitehead, P. C. (1974). The uses of an epidemiology of drug use: The Canadian scene. Int. J. Addict. 9: 373-388. Smith, G. M., and Fogg, C. P. (1975). Teenage drug use: A search for causes and consequences. In Lettieri, D. J. (ed.), Predicting Adolescent Drug Abuse: A Review o f Issues, Methods and Correlates, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Washington, D.C., pp. 279-298.

Deviant Behavior and Self-Enhancement

277

Spangler, D. P., and Thomas, C. W. (1962). The effects of age, sex, and physical disability upon manifested needs. J. Counsel. Psychol. 9: 313-319. Stokes, J. P. (1974). Personality traits and attitudes and their relationship to student drug using behavior. Int. J. Addict. 9: 267-287. Tittle, C. R., and Rowe, A. R. (1973). Moral appeal, sanction threat, and deviance: An experimental test. Soc. Probl. 20: 488-498. Toch, H. (1969). Violent Men, Aldine Press, Chicago. Vanderpool, J. A. (1969). Alcoholism and the self-concept. Quart. J. Stud. Alcohol 30: 59-77. Washburn, W. C. (1963). The effects of sex differences on protective attitudes in delinquents and non-delinquents. Except. Child 30:111-117. Welch, B. L. (1947). The generalization of "student's" problems when several different population variances are involved. Biometrika 34: 28-35. Williams, A. F. (1965). Self-concepts of college problem drinkers: (1) A comparison with alcoholics. Quart. J. Stud. Alcohol 26: 589-594. Williams, J. R. (1976). Effects of Labeling The "Drug Abuser": An Inquiry, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Rockville, Md. Wilson, L. T., Braucht, G. N., Miskimins R. W., and Berry, K. L. (1971). The severe suicide attempter and self-concept. s Clin. Psychol. 27: 307-309. Wood, A. L. (1961). A socio-structural analysis of murder, sucide, and economic crime in Ceylon. Am. Sociol. Rev. 26: 744-753. Wyer, R. S., Weatherley, D. A., and TerreU, G. (1965). Social role aggression and academic achievement. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1 : 645-649. Wylie, R. C. (1961). The Self Concept. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, Neb. Zucker, R. (1968). Sex-role identity patterns and drinking behavior among adolescents. Quart. J. Stud. Alcohol 22: 868-884.