Alienation, Deviation-Proneness, and Perception of Two Types of Barriers among Rural Adolescents

Alienation, Deviation-Proneness, and Perception of Two Types of Barriers among RuralAdolescentsAuthor(s): Wan Sang HanSource: Social Forces, Vol. 49, No. 3 (Mar., 1971), pp. 398-413Published by: Oxford University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3005733 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 17:55

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Forces.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.12 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 17:55:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3005733?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


398 / SOCIAL FORCES

Negro American." Pp. 815-846 in K. Clark and T. Parsons (eds.), The Negro American. Cambridge: American Acad- emy of Arts and Sciences.

Glenn N. 1963 "Some Changes in the Relative Status

of American Nonwhites, 1940-60." Phy- Ion 24(Summer): 109-122.

Killingsworth, C. 1967 "Negroes in a Changing Labor Market."

Pp. 74-96 in A. M. Ross and H. Hill (eds.), Employment, Race and Poverty. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.

Marshall, R. 1965 The Negro and Organized Labor. New

York: Wiley. Miller, H. P.

1964 Rich Man, Poor Man: The Distribution of Income in America. New York: Crowell.

Rayack, E. 1961 "Discrimination and the Occupational

Progress of Negroes." Review of Eco- nomics and Statistics 43(May) :209-214.

Ross, A. 1967 "The Negro in the American Economy."

Pp. 1-24 in A. M. Ross and H. Hill (eds.), Employment, Race and Poverty. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.

Sorkin, A. 1969 "Education, Migration and Negro Un-

employment." Social Forces 47(March): 265-274.

U.S. Department of Commerce 1943 1940 Census of Population, Education. 1948 Current Population Reports, Consumer

Income Series P-60, Income of Families and Persons in the United States.

1953 1950 Census of Population. Occupa- tional Characteristics.

1960 1960 Census of Population. Occupational Characteristics.

1969 Current Population Reports, Consumer Income Series P-60. Income of Families and Persons in the United States.

U.S. Department of Labor 1969a Handbook of Women Workers, Wom-

en's Bureau Bulletin, 294. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

1969b Statistics on Manpower, A Supplement to the Manpower Report of the Pres- idetnt. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

Alienation, Deviation-Proneness, and Perception of Two Types of Barriers Among Rural Adolescents* WAN SANG HAN, Seoul National University

ABSTRACT

This paper accounts for rural adolescents' powerlessness, anomia, and deviation-proneness in terms of their perception of two barriers: limited opportunity and limited ability. Perception of limited opportunity was found to be a better predictor of powerlessness and anomia than family status. Those youths with a keen awareness of both barriers were most powerless. The mass society theory that the "powerless" tend to be more vulnerable to extreme behavior than the "powerful" was questioned. Anomia was most prevalent among those "able" youths with a keen awareness of limited opportunity. This tendency was more pronounced among lower-class youths, which supports the traditional anomie theory of Merton and Cloward-Ohlin. Finally,, two conflicting views on the function of perception of limited ability in generating deviation-proneness was discussed. The data were analyzed from the standpoint of statistical interaction and were interpreted in view of the typology developed from the combination of two perceived barriers.

* Revised version of a paper read at the annual meeting of Southern Sociological Society, Atlanta, Georgia, April 1970. The author wishes to express his profound thanks to Professor Richard Diemer

for his guidance in securing data and Professor Yoon H. Kim for his valuable suggestion for analysis.



Alienation and Deviation-Proneness / 399

In the past decade there has been considerable research on the influence of sociological or structural factors upon the attitudinal and behavioral deviation of adolescents. Most of these studies have focused on such structural deter- minants as socioeconomic status of origin, race, religion, residential community, etc. The authors of these studies explicitly or implicitly assumed that the causal factors reveal unequal distribution of opportunity. Their reasoning was based on the following somewhat syllogistic assumptions:

1. The structural variables provide unequal distribution of opportunity.

2. This arrangement of opportunity affects the vulnerability to attitudinal and/or behavioral deviation.

3. Therefore, the structural variables "determine" attitudinal and/or behavioral deviation.

In general, these assumptions were not explicitly made. Particularly, the first two proposi- tions have been taken as self-evident premises. Little empirical attention has been given to ascertaining adolescents' alienation and deviation-proneness in terms of perception of opportunity.' Opportunity has been considered an important factor in accounting for alienation and deviation-proneness mainly because it is equated with structural access to the means of important cultural goals. The present study uses explicitly this opportunity as a predictor of adolescents' alienation (powerlessness and anomia) and deviation-proneness. However, we do not use opportunity per se but perception of it. We will focus on perceived opportunity limitations in accounting for adolescents' alienation and their propensity toward deviation.2

The point of our argument can be expressed as follows. X is a

X

z

symbolic variable such as perception of opportunity and Z indicates a structural factor such as family status. Both X and Z affect Y which is alienation and deviation-proneness. Controlling the effect of Z in this scheme may result in several different patterns, depending on the strength of correlations among variables. First, it makes X and Y spuriously related. Second, it specifies in various degrees the original relationship between X and Y. Third, it does not affect the original relationship. The last pattern is highly likely when X and Y are relatively weakly associated with Z.3

Positing either an independent influence of X on Y or conditional relationship between X and Y, we shall rule out the possibility of the first outcome, i.e., a spurious relationship of Y with X. Rationale for this reasoning is based on earlier research (Han, 1966) and stems from others' works.4 Our contention is that unless

1 Several studies employed perception of opportunity as either a predictor or intervening variable of deviance (see Landis, Dintz, and Reckless, 1963; Landis and Scarpitti, 1965; Miz- ruchi, 1964; Clark and Wenninger, 1963; Short et al., 1965). Liu and Fahey (1963) found that perception of limited opportunity was more a consequence than a predictor of delinquency. Short and his associates (1965) also alluded to this possibility which will not be discussed in the present study.

2 We do not follow the traditional way of em- ploying structural variable(s) as predictor(s)

of alienation (powerlessness and anomia) and deviation-proneness by implicitly assuming that the structural factor is directly indicative of differential arrangement of opportunity. This should not mean that we call into question the validity of this assumption.

3 This implies that X and Y are connected to Z in the following two ways:

K (I) Z , X Y and (2) ~

At the zero-order level, however, both X and Y are related to Z. See footnote 22.

4 In my (1966) previous study, it was found that a positive correlation between occupational expectations and perception of opportunity was specified with race, sex, and SES alternately controlled. In a more recent study (Han, 1967), the introduction of SES in a restricted sample left the original relationship between perceived opportunity and "normlessness" practically intact. In his study on participation in the riot in Watts, Ransford (1968:587-588) contends that "It is under these subjective states of mind that a weak attachment to the majority group would seem to



400 / SOCIAL FORCES

adolescents are aware of restricted-unfavorable situations, they are less likely to feel anomic and powerless and are less likely to be susceptible to deviant gang activity, although structural factors are conducive to the dependent variables. This is why the independent influence is accorded to the variable of perceived opportunity limitations.

Our first hypothesis is that among rural high school seniors5 the perception of limited opportunity (hereafter, PLO) makes an independent contribution to the variations in powerlessness, anomia, and deviation-proneness.

In addition to PLO, we shall use perception of another barrier which is thought to be use- ful in understanding adolescents' powerlessness, anomia and their propensity toward deviation. This second predictor is perception of limited ability (hereafter, PLA). We are not dealing with ability or IQ per se but perception of it.6 The combination of these two types of restricted "reality" allows us to derive several hypotheses. For example, it is posited that the adolescents who perceive the limitations in opportunity but do not perceive the limitations in self-ability are more anomic and prone to deviation than other adolescents with other characteristics.

Basically we follow Merton's theory of anomie in our argument that perception of these two types of barriers jointly have some

effects on the problems of adolescents. It has often been noted by many authors that at least two conditions are to be met in American society in getting ahead: (1) one's ability to achieve, and (2) equal opportunity to achieve success-goals. American culture is characterized by its emphasis on these two conditions for success. Cultural accent on openness of opportunity and importance of ability, however, tends to frustrate certain individuals more than others. Such persons are assumed to be those youths who see the restriction in opportunity but do not see the limitations in their ability in the pursuit of success-goals. This is why we posit that the combination of high PLO with low PLA7 is a source of anomia and deviation-proneness among adolescents.8 Our position that a high PLO tends to lead to anomic feelings as well as to deviation-proneness and that this tendency increases when ac- companied by a low PLA indicates the pres- ence of statistical interaction effect between PLO and PLA in their impact upon the dependent variables.

Once we recognize that PLO and PLA are somehow interacting, we can then classify the subjects as follows:

be most important to extremism." His point is that structural factors per se are insufficient to account for attitudinal and/or behavioral deviation.

5 We concentrated on rural adolescents for the following reason. As Merton, and Cloward and Ohlin suggested, the impact of perceived opportunity-limitations upon alienation and deviation- proneness is more visible among urban adolescents than among rural adolescents. An attempt is made to ascertain the possibility that the rural youths living in a homogeneous poverty region might be vulnerable also to alienation and deviation when they have a certain level of perceived limitations in opportunity as well as in self-ability.

6A number of empirical studies explored the relationship between intelligence and delinquency. The most outspoken of those who believed that low intelligence was responsible for deviance was Goddard (1922). This view was rejected by many writers (see Merrill, 1947; Seeman and Evans, 1962).

7 I admit that the designations high PLO and low PLA are awkward and a bit confusing since high PLO means perceived low opportunity and low PLA means perceived high ability. How- ever, an emphasis is given to the limitations in opportunity and ability. Thus a high PLO means a keen awareness of opportunity limitations.

8 It is reasoned that these two types of barriers in access to means of success are associated with the way in which one takes a certain attitude toward society. Those who are keenly aware of limited opportunity tend to blame external source, i.e., the "system." The tendency to take a negative attitude toward the system may provide a propensity toward either withdrawal from or ag- gressive striking back at the system. On the other hand, those adolescents who find their ability limited are prone to place blame on internal source, i.e., their personal inadequacy. It is further reasoned that those adolescents who are keenly cognizant of the limitations in external arrangement of opportunity but are not aware of any personal inadequacy in the pursuit of success-goals are more likely to attribute their frustrations (or the causes of the frustrations) to external source. This point has been made by several sociologists (Lipset and Bendix, 1962; Merton, 1961; Cloward and Ohlin, 1960).




We assume that type 1 is composed of the "frustrated pessimists" who are keenly conscious of double barriers. An acute sense of powerlessness is assumed to prevail among them. Rotter et al. (1962) noted that the externally controlled persons feel powerless to do much of anything about world affairs and lack confidence in their ability to control what happens to them in particular situations. Youths in this type are assumed to be most powerless. This implies that the influence of PLO upon powerlessness is greater for those who see their inability than those who are unaware of it.

Youths of type II, called "masochistic quietists," are aware of their ability limitations but are unaware of opportunity barriers. Such persons are less likely to blame the system than their personal inadequacy. The source of their frustrations does not lie in the external arrangements but in their personal qualities. They are assumed to be less powerless, less anomic and less prone to deviation than type I subjects. From these two types of subjects, our second hypothesis can be derived:

The influence of PLO upon powerlessness is more pronounced among those youths who have a high PLA than among those with a low PLA. The first-order interaction effect of PLO and PLA upon powerlessness is tested.

Those of type 111, called "frustrated activ- ists," are expected to be most anomic and prone to deviation and tend to mobilize available resources in their effort either to deviate from or to change the "arbitrary" system since they tend to attribute their frustrations to the social order.

Our third hypothesis is that the influence of PLO upon anomia and deviation-proneness is more pronounced among those with a low

PLA than among those with a high PLA. The first-order interaction effect of PLO and PLA upon anomia and deviation-proneness is tested.

Type IV adolescents are designated "optimistic quietists." They are assumed to be least anomic, powerless, and prone to deviant gang acts.

The value of this typology is mainly two- fold: first, it clearly locates those youths who are relatively more susceptible to the dependent variables in the present inquiry and second it serves as a logical repertory of our hypotheses.9

It has been reported that our three dependent variables (powerlessness, anomia, and deviation-proneness) are systematically related to socioeconomic status of origin among adolescent population. It is feasible to assume, therefore, that there exists a second-order interaction effect between PLO-PLA and socioeconomic status of origin (hereafter, SESO).

Our fourth hypothesis is that the variations in the degree of PLO and PLA have difJerent eflects on the dependent variables depending on the levels SESO. The second-order interaction effect is tested. Statistical significance in testing the above hypotheses will be assessed in terms of one-tailed test.

PROCEDURE AND DATA

The hypotheses call for measures of PLO, PLA as independent variables and powerlessness, anomia, and deviation-proneness as dependent variables, and SESO as a test factor.

For the measurement of PLO, three statements were used (Han, 1969).10 The items were:

1. Sometimes I feel I shall be handicapped in the competition of getting ahead because of my family background.

PLO

PLA + -t

+ type I type II

- type III type IV

* + indicates awareness of the limitation. - indicates unawareness of the limitation.

9 Stinchcombe (1968) aptly noted that typolo- gies are commonly used for exploring interaction effects.

10 The following item was deleted from the present study because of lack of relevancy: this item was judged to indicate perception of edu- cational opportunity. The item is: "A guy like me has a pretty good chance of going to a regular four-year college and even post-college work if he plans."



402 / SOCIAL FORCES

2. In these days it is hard for a young man like me to get ahead fast unless he is from a finan- cially well-off family. 3. It seems to be true that when a man is born, the opportunity for success is already in the cards and so I often feel that I might be de- prived of the opportunity.

Two response categories, "agree" and "disagree," were given. The weight of 1 was as- signed to "agree" and 0 to "disagree." Those subjects whose scores were 3 to 2 were treated as those with a "high" PLO while those who had the scores of either 1 or 0 as having a "low" PLO. Fifty-eight percent of the sample falls in the high PLO group.

One item was used to gauge PLA: "Even though some people encourage me to become successful in the future, I often feel that I am not able and smart enough to become so." The response forms a simple dichotomy. Those who checked "agree" were interpreted to have a "high" PLA and those who checked "disagree" were viewed as having a "low" PLA. Sixty-two percent of the sample revealed a low PLA. These two perceptions of limitations were ascertained in the context of success-achievement.

For a measure of SESO, Turner's (1964) classification of occupations was used. Manual workers comprising both skilled and unskilled workers were considered a "low" SESO and nonmanual workers as a "high" SESO. It was found that 17 percent of the sample was characterized as white-collar occupations while 37 percent belonged to farm owners among the "high" SESO group. The proportion of skilled jobs and that of unskilled (including semi- skilled) occupations were comparable.

Following the conceptualization of Rotter (1966), powerlessness was defined as a lack of confidence in one's ability to control sociopolitical events. For a measure of this variable, we used eight of Neal-Rettig's (Neal and Rettig, 1963) factor analyzed items. The first eight items out of twelve powerlessness items which were arranged in rank order of orthogonal factors were selected. The following is an example: "It is only wishful thinking to believe that one can really influence what happens in society at large." Here again,

the weight of I was given to "agree" and 0 to "disagree." The score range of 0 through 4 was considered to indicate a "low" powerlessness and that of 5 to 8 to indicate a "high" powerlessness. Forty-four percent of the subjects showed a high powerlessness.

We used Srole's (1956) five-item anomia scale for a measure of anomie. The same weight system was applied. The score range between 0 and 2 was viewed as revealing a "low" anomia while that of 3 to 5 as showing a "high" anomia. Forty-four percent of the sample were classified as "high" anomic subjects.

Three items were used to assess the subjects' proneness to break socio-moral norms with peers.'1 The statements were:

1. Suppose when you and your friends were "messing around" one night, they decided to break into a place and steal some stuff, do you think you would go with them? 2. Suppose friends of yours called and asked you to do something your parents told you never to do, would you do this with your friends? 3. Suppose friends of yours wanted to do something you knew was wrong, would you do it with them?

This variable indicates peers' influence in norm-breaking acts. The response to the "no" category was taken to mean a "low" deviation-proneness and the responses to other categories such as "everytime," "most of the time," and "some of the time" were considered to indicate a "high" deviation-proneness. Fifty-five percent of the subjects came under the category of high proneness group.

Selected in 1968 were 550 subjects from ten senior high schools located in the Upper Cum- berland region of Tennessee, which is pri- marily an agricultural and cattle raising area. Our sample was drawn from ten counties within this region.12 This area is sparsely popu-

11 Empey and Lubeck (1968) constructed and examined by factor analysis the four areas of adolescents' attitude. One of these areas was called "deviancy" from which our measure of deviation-proneness was derived.

12 The ten counties are: Clay, Cumberland, Dekalb, Fentress, Jackson, Morgan, Overton, Pickett, Putnam, and White.




lated and economically impoverished.'3 In 1965, approximately half of the households in this area had an estimated effective buying income of less than $2,500. The effective per capita income for this region was $1,154. By comparison with per capita income for the state and nation, the figure for this region reflects 65 percent for the former and 49 percent for the latter. While all high school seniors in these ten counties were given question- naires, only male students were used in the present study. Ninety-one male seniors were excluded in an effort to secure homogeneous subjects on religion and race. The subjects were restricted to white, Protestant, male, seniors living in a poor rural area. By limiting the subjects, we could indirectly rule out the contaminating effects of such structural variables as religion, sex, race, and residential community on the dependent variables.

RESULTS It is hypothesized that adolescents' PLO ex- erts an independent influence on their powerlessness, anomia, and deviation-proneness. This hypothesis is tested by the data in Table 1 which reveal that among lower-class adolescents, powerlessness and anomia are more strongly associated with PLO than among their middle-class peers. A somewhat reversed pattern is observed in the case of deviation- proneness. From Table 1 we can derive several tentative conclusions.

First, the combination of a high PLO with a low SESO generates .the largest proportion of powerlessness, anomia, and deviation-proneness. Those adolescents from lower-class families feel most alienated and prone to deviation when they see keenly the restrictions in opportunity. On the other hand, those youths from middle-class backgrounds are least likely to have an acute feeling of powerlessness and of anomia and a high vulnerability to deviation when they define the situation favorably.

Second, partialling of SESO insignificantly specifies the initial relationship between PLO and the dependent variables. For example, anomia is associated with PLO with e of 31.9 but control for the effect of SESO produces

o of 36.7 for low SESO group and e of 28.2 for high SESO group. Our test of interaction effect (Goodman, 1961; 1965) shows that this much specification is statistically insignificant at the 5 percent level. The greatest e value is found in the bottom part of Table 1, which is 9.0. The probability that a difference of 9 percent would be observed by chance is .154.

Third, since the interaction effect turns out to be insignificant, the relative effect of PLO and SESO upon the dependent variables is compared. It is immediately obvious that PLO is a relatively stronger predictor than SESO as far as powerlessness and anomia are concerned.14 When the standardized e values are used in assessing the relative importance, it is observed that the averaged e (Rosenberg, 1962)

Table 1. High Level of the Dependent Variables, PLO and SESO

PLO

SESO High Low 0

Powerlessness

Low 77.9 (154 ) 48.9 ( 90) 29.0 (28.7)t

High 67.8 (152) 43.6 (133) 24.2

e 10.11t (13.2) 5.3t e

Anomia

Low 62.3 (154) 25.6 ( 90) 36.7 (31.9)

High 55.3 (152) 27.1 (133) 28.2

E 7.0t (7.07) -1.5t 6

Deviation-Proneness

Low 59.7 (154) 60.0 ( 90) -0.3t (8.4)

High 55.3 (152) 46.6 (133) 8.7

o 4.4t (-8.6) 13.4

'Numbers in parentheses indicate the base number from which percentage is computed.

tAll figures in parentheses in the marginals indicate the original association of each of PLO and SESO with the dependent variables.

tnot significant at the 5 per cent level.

13See U.S. Congress (1966).

14 This result may be due to the following two factors: (1) PLO is closer in the causal sequence to the dependent variables, or (2) measurement of SESO is so inaccurate that its influence becomes attenuated (Blalock, 1964).



404 / SOCIAL FORCES

is 26.4, with SESO standardized while standardization on PLO brings about e of 8.1 in dealing with powerlessness. A similar pattern is revealed in the case of anomia. PLO is a greater predictor of anomia than SESO.15 A quite different pattern is observed, however, in accounting for deviation-proneness. The averaged effect of SESO on deviation-proneness is e of 4.1 which is far smaller than that of the original e of 8.4, but standardization on PLO has little effect on the relationship between SESO and deviation-proneness. In this case, SESO is a better predictor than PLO.

Let us examine more closely the above findings from the angle of a multivariate analysis. As we posited previously, the possibility that SESO makes the relationship of the dependent variables with PLO spurious was rejected. In- stead, it is reasoned that the introduction of SESO would have little effect on the original relationship between PLO and the dependent variables and also it is assumed that the elaboration brought about by controlling SESO would take the form of so-called "P" type rather than M-type (Lazarsfeld and Rosenberg, 1955; Hyman, 1955). The original associations between PLO and the dependent variables are compared with two partial associations and with two marginal associations.

In the case of powerlessness, the following result is observed:

35 = 16.5 + 17.1 + 1.4 ...... (1)

The figure on the left in the above equation indicates the original association between PLO and powerlessness. The first term on the right indicates the partial association within low SESO group and the second term the partial relationship within high SESO group, and the last term the weighted product of two marginal associations ( Galtung, 1967). This equation clearly shows that the total association between PLO and powerlessness mainly con- sists of two partial associations. A spurious relationship is far from being the case. As predicted, our data fit the "P" type in which the

interaction effect is negligible (compare the first two terms on the right of the equation).

The result is more supportive when anomia is accounted for:

41.76 = 20.9 + 20.0 + 0.86 ...... (2)

The total relationship between PLO and anomia is composed of simply two partial associations. The introduction of SESO leaves the total association intact. Here again, PLO and SESO hardly interact. It is amply clear that PLO makes an independent contribution to powerlessness and anomia.

The following result is obtained with deviation-proneness as a dependent variable. As previously found, the partialling of SESO

7.1 = -0.14 + 6.13 + 1.11 ...... (3)

specifies more sharply than in the above two cases, although the interaction effect is statistically insignificant. Two partial associations are different in direction but still the "P" model holds. It is unmistakably clear from this evidence that SESO does not "explain away" the relationship of the dependent variables with PLO.16

In brief, in view of the foregoing analysis, our first hypothesis is affirmed. It is tenable especially in the case of alienation and is partly tenable for deviation-proneness.

Table 2 provides the data for a test of the second hypothesis. Contrary to our prediction, the difference between type I and type II in

15 In this case, the middle-class subjects with low PLO are slightly more likely to have a high level of anomia than lower-class subjects with low PLO, but the difference is negligible.

16 The above analysis, however, should not mean that SESO does not have its own influence on both PLO and the dependent variables. As our model indicates, SESO as a traditional structural variable retains an effect over and above the effect of PLO. The former's influence, however, is substantially reduced with the latter partialled out as far as alienation is concerned. When PLO is treated as a. test factor and SESO as a causal factor, the following results are observed:

14.1 = 7.8 + 2.8 + 3.5 (powerlessness) 8.8 = 5.4 - 0.8 + 4.2 (anomia)

11.3 = 3.4 + 7.2 + 0.7 (deviation-proneness) The marginal associations in the first two equa- tions remain visible. In the sense that the introduction of PLO substantially reduces the partial relationships between SESO and alienation, PLO is to be considered an "interpretative variable" in accounting for alienation. With deviation-proneness as a dependent variable, the marginal association is hardly visible.




powerlessness is not greater than that between type III and type IV. The influence of PLO upon powerlessness is more likely to be pronounced among those with low PLA than among those with high PLA although the two o values differ only slightly. An additive relationship between PLO and PLA is indicated. Our prediction that those youths with awareness of double barriers would feel far more powerless than others to such an extent that the 0 value for those with high PLA is greater than that for those with low PLA is not borne out. However, those with awareness of double barriers are largest in the proportion of high powerlessness. A comparison of two proportions in the major diagonal reveals that PLO is a slightly better predictor of powerlessness than PLA. Four partial associations in Table 2 are slightly smaller than two total associations (the total association of powerlessness with PLO is 0 of 28.7 and that between PLA and powerlessness is 23.8). It can be said, therefore, that PLO and PLA respec- tively make an independent influence upon powerlessness,'7 although the former is a better predictor than the latter.18

The data bearing on the partial relationships of PLO with anomia and deviation-proneness with PLA controlled are given in Tables 3A

and 3B. The adolescents with high PLO but low PLA (type III) are hypothesized to be more anomic and prone to deviation than others to such an extent that the difference betwen type III and type IV in anomia and deviation-proneness is greater than that between type I and type 11. It is clear from Table 3A that the variation in the degree of PLO has a different effect on anomia, depending on the relative degree of PLA. The difference between two partial 0 values is not significant at the S percent level, however. The probability that a difference of .109 would be observed by chance is about 11 percent. Although this is a bit larger than the customarily used alpha error of S percent level, it could be cautiously contended that a weak interaction effect is present. This result is not conclusive but it allows us to argue that those youths who are keenly aware of external obstacles in the pursuit of success goals are more likely to feel anomic with regard to others if they do not see their personal inadequacies in achieving the goals.

Our hypothesis is partly tenable in terms of the specification of partial association, although PLO and PLA do not significantly interact at

Table 2. High Degree of Powerlessness and Perception of Limitations

PLO

PLA High Low 0

High 67.2 41.5 25.7*

(137) (65)

Low 47.3 21.3 26.0* (184) (164)

e 19.9* 20.2* 'Significant at the 1 percent level.

Table 3A. High Degree of Anomia and Perception of Limitations

PLO

PLA High Low 0

High 65.7 44.6 21.1*

(137) (65)

Low 53.3 21.3 32.0* (184) (164)

e 12.4* 23.3* Significant at the 1 percent level.

Table 3B. High Degree of Deviation-Proneness and Perception of Limitations

PLO

PLA High Low 0

High 53.3 56.9 - 3.6 (137) (65)

Low 58.7 50.0 8.7 (184) (164)

-5.4 6.9

17 PLO and PLA are related to each other with o of 14.3. The degree of relationship between these two variables is weaker than that of any one of the independent variables with the dependent variables.

18 Using Coleman's (1964) method of obtain- ing the relative importance of variables, the proportion of the variation in powerlessness accounted for by PLO is 25.8 percent while PLA accounts for 20 percent of the variation in powerlessness.



406 / SOCIAL FORCES

the 5 percent level. The largest proportion of anomia, however, is not found in type III, i.e., among those with high PLO and low PLA. In- stead, type I subjects are most anomic.19

Table 3B supplies the data bearing on a test of the second part of our third hypothesis that PLO and PLA interact in their impact upon deviation-proneness. The direction of two partial associations is different. Among high PLA group, deviation-proneness is inversely related to PLO while it is positively related to PLO among low PLA group. Those adolescents who are well aware of opportunity limitations tend to be more vulnerable to deviant gang acts than those who do not perceive these external obstacles if they do not see their personal inadequacies. Our argument on this matter is shaky, however, since the differences in partial tables (two rows and/or two columns) are statistically insignificant at the S percent level.20

The direction in partial association indicates that PLO and PLA might interact in their impact upon deviation-proneness. The difference of differences of two proportions (.123) in Ta- ble 3B is significant at the 4.5 percent level. Thus, our hypothesis is affirmed.21

We are puzzled by a high proportion of deviation-proneness among adolescents charac-

terized under type II of our typology: adolescents who do not see the restrictions in opportunity are more likely to deviate than those who see these restrictions if they are conscious of their personal inadequacies. The full meaning of this finding needs further clarification.

The fourth hypothesis suggests a second- order interaction effect. SESO interacts with PLO-PLA in the effect upon the dependent variables. The possibility of the second-order interaction is based upon the works of many writers who reported that alienation and deviation-proneness were more prevalent among lower-class persons than persons in other classes. In the present study all variables ex- cept PLA are significantly related to SESO.22

Table 4 provides relevant data for a test of this hypothesis. It is predicted that the difference between type I and type 11 in powerlessness will be magnified among low SESO group. This prediction is borne out in the top part of Table 4. Among high SESO group, however, the difference between type III and type IV in powerlessness is greater than that betwen type I and type II. The first-order interaction between PLO and PLA within each SESO group is insignificant (p > .30). The direction of two differences (-4.2 for high SESO group and +5.5 for low SESO group) is opposite. This opposite direction indicates that a second-order interaction may be at work. The Z score for the proportion difference of .097 (5.5 + 4.2) is .38 indicating that the second-order interaction is significant at the 38 percent level.

Although the hypothesis concerning powerlessness is not tenable from the standpoint of the significant-second-order-interaction effect, three patterns are congruent with those shown in Table 2. First, the youths of type I have consistently the largest proportion of high powerlessness. Second, PLO is a better predictor of powerlessness than PLA in both SESO groups. Third, all eight partial associ-

'9Seeman (1959), and Neal and Rettig (1963) showed that the five dimensions of alienation as a global concept were analytically and empirically separable. I believe, however, that amomia anc powerlessness are more alike than separable ai least in that they reveal a pessimistic Weltans. chauung, i.e., fatalism, a sense of impotence, etc Let me say, in passing, that amonia seems morc remote from than close to Seeman's "normlessness" since the former, as Meier and Bell (1959) aptly said, describes a sense of hopelessness oi despair but the latter indicates proneness to take illegitimate-expedient means for a quick success

20 When we read down Table 3B, high PLA is a preventing factor of deviation for those whc are keenly perceptive to limited opportunity while it is a contributing factor for those without this perception.

21 The association between PLO and deviation- proneness is insignificant (e = 8.4) and deviation-proneness is not related to PLA at the zero- order level () = -0.1)

22 The zero-order associations between SESO and other variables are as follows:

Powerlessness Anomia Deviation-proneness PLO PLA

-13.2* -10. 1* -8.6* -9.8* -5.7

*Significant at the S percent level. The figures are percentage difference.




ations (four with PLA held constant and four with PLO held constant) are statistically significant.

Conditional relationships are much clearer in the case of anomia. The middle part of Ta- ble 4 shows that the predicted difference between high PLO and low PLO is far greater for those lower-class subjects with low PLA than that for those lower-class subjects with high PLA. Here again, the opposite pattern is observed among middle-class subjects. The first-order interaction effect between PLO and PLA is significant at the 2.7 percent level within lower-class subjects while it is insignificant within middle-class subjects. The second-order interaction is significant at the 4.4 percent level. This result strongly supports our theorizing that the students who perceive opportunity restrictions but have faith in their competence in the pursuit of success-goals tend to be more anomic when they are from lower-class families.

Among middle-class students PLO has no effect on deviation-proneness for those with awareness of ability limitations while it has some effect for those without that awareness (.10 > P > .05). The first-order interaction between PLO and PLA is not significant (P > .14). Among lower-class students deviation-proneness is inversely related to PLO in high PLA group but it is positively related to PLO in low PLA group. Here again, the first- order interaction effect is not significant. Re- gardless of the difference in SESO, type III adolescents are more likely to join with their friends in the norm-breaking acts than type IV youths. The second-order interaction effect is not significant (p > .40).

All partial associations regarding deviation- proneness as a dependent variable are not significant at the 5 percent level. This indicates a weak influence of both PLO and PLA upon deviation-proneness. Furthermore, it is be- wildering to observe that those adolescents without keen awareness of opportunity limitations tend to be more vulnerable to deviation than those with this awareness when they are from lower-class families and have a pessimistic definition of themselves. If this tendency is systematic, further clarifications of the implication of this result should be made.

In brief, Hypothesis 4 is confirmed in the case of anomia and partly confirmed in the case of powerlessness and rejected with deviation-proneness as a dependent variable.

DISCUSSION The foregoing tests of hypotheses indicate several important implications either for con- firmation, modification, or rejection of existing theories and/or empirical generalizations on alienation and deviation-proneness. We will discuss three implications.

First, the tenability of the first hypothesis implies that a "symbolic" variable such as PLO is a more powerful predictor of adolescents' alienation than a structural variable such as SESO. The multivariate analysis used in this paper clearly indicates that PLO is a more "interpretative-intervening" variable than a "specifying" variable while SESO is a more "specifying" variable than an "explaining away" factor as far as alienation is accounted

Table 4. High Degree of Alienation, Deviation-Prone- ness, and Perception of Limitations by Family Status

High SESO Low SESO

High Low 0 High Low 9 PLA PLO PLO PLO PLO

Powerlessness

High 68.3 44.7 23.6^ 73.9 41.7 32.2^

(60) (38) (69) (24)

Low 48.9 21.1 27.8^ 49.4 22.7 26.7^ (92) (95) (85) (66)

9 19.4^ 23.6^ 24.5^ 19.0^

Anomia

High 70.0 39.5 30.5^ 63.8 50.0 13.8 (60) (38) (69) (24)

Low 46.7 21.1 25.6^ 60.0 19.7 40.3^ (92) (95) (85) (66)

9 23.3^ 18.4^ 3.8 30.3^

Deviation-Proneness

High 50.0 50.0 0.0 59.4 66.7 -7.3

(60) (38) (69) (24)

Low 58.7 45.3 13.4 60.0 57.6 2.4 (92) (95) (85) (66)

9 -8.7 4.7 -0.6 9.1

'Significant at least at the 5 percent level.



408 / SOCIAL FORCES

for. This finding is viewed to be basically in line with the tradition of the symbolic interactionism.

It is argued that an adolescent's feeling of alienation is formed by his interpreting the situation and such an antecedent-structural condition as family status is helpful in understanding the feeling of alienation insofar as it enters into the interpretative process. An extreme extension of this view would indicate that unless an adolescent defines the situation in such a way that the opportunities are closed, he is less likely to feel an acute sense of alienation regardless of his family status. As Ransford (1968) aptly noted in his study of the riot in Watts, a structural variable per se is insufficient in accounting for vulnerability to extreme acts and alienated feelings. The data presented in Table 1 support the position of the symbolic interactionism: perception of limited opportunity as a definition of the situation operates as an "interpretative- intervening" variable in explaining alienation and the partialling of PLO results in substantial reduction in the influence of SESO upon alienation. It is believed that PLO can be accorded an independent influence apart from SESO in accounting for alienation.

Rhodes (1964) reported that adolescents' aspiration is a better predictor of anomie than their fathers' occupation.23 He called into question the validity of the inverse relationship between adolescents' anomie and their family status by arguing that a substantial proportion of lower-class adolescents is nonanomic. If it is justified in assuming that an adolescent's aspiration reflects his assessment of differential distribution of opportunity and his ability, then Rhodes' argument is consonant with ours.

It was found in my (1967) previous study that an adolescent's anticipated future status could explain more strongly his attitudes than his family status. If this status of destination can be considered as a kind of definition of the

situation, then this finding also lends support to our argument. For the adolescents who are on the threshold of either entering a job or going to college, a realistic anticipation toward their future position seems to be a most salient focus of concern. As Turner (1964) noted, it would be this anticipated (or expected) future standing that could determine an adolescent's social placement and self-conception as far as his behavior is considered as a preparation for his future career. Hence, defining the social class position of the adolescents in this stage exclusively in terms of their family connection might run the danger of misinterpreting their peculiar attitudes and behavior. Furthermore, when the social position of destination is considered as a positive reference group, the influence of this status of destination will be even greater.

The above evidence and its implications strengthen our position that perception of the situation is a strong interpretative variable in accounting for the attitudes and behavior of mid- or late-adolescents. More specifically, the subjective appraisal of opportunity distribution is an interpretative-intervening variable without which the structural variables can hardly ex- ert their influence on the alienation of adolescents.24

Second, the implication of powerlessness is discussed. The hypothesis that those adolescents who perceive both internal and external barriers in the pursuit of success-goals are most likely to feel powerless is borne out by the data in Table 2. When the powerlessness is defined as Rotter's (1966; Rotter, Seeman, and Liverant, 1962: Dean, 1961) concept of "external control" it is to be characterized by the following qualities among others: (1) fatalistic attitude towards events, (2) lack of

23 In my (1969) previous study, it was found that adolescents' wish tend to. transcend the influence of perception of "tough" realities while their expectation was sensitive to this perception. It is not known to me which measure of ambition Rhodes used.

24 Our position seems somewhat different from Williams' (1970) position that anomie as a structural condition should be defined independently of psychological states thought to accompany normlessness, and also different from Hyman's (1955:488-489) assertion that "It is certainly true at a given point in time that an individual frustrated in his goals because access to means is not open to him, will experience the incident as frus- trating whether or not lie realizes that the means are beyond his grasp." However, Hyman recog- nizes the impact of PLO upon frustration in the larger time perspective.




motivation to engage in certain activities aim- ing at the alteration of the system, and (3) lack of confidence in one's ability to control the occurrence of outcomes or reinforcements he seeks.25

A person with this powerlessness fits into type I who sees keenly the limitations in opportunity as well as in himself.26 It is reasoned that type I adolescents are least vulnerable to the radical movements which aim at the alteration of the system. We question the validity of the argument that such powerless people are more likely to hold resentful attitudes toward the system and thereby to engage in extreme behavior, since a logical jump is felt to exist between a state of powerlessness on the one hand and a readiness to involve in the radical movement on the other. If one possesses an acute feeling of powerlessness and thus sees himself as unable to change sociopolitical events or to join with others in an effort to change them, how can he be suddenly ready to be a radical? Mass society theorists (Kornhauser, 1961; Nisbet, 1953; Selznick, 1960; Neal and Seeman, 1964) argue that alienated and thereby powerless persons feel an inability to control social events and this powerless feeling may heighten the proneness to join extreme movements.27

It is reasoned in this study that type I persons are characterized by the external control

but are not so vulnerable as those of type III to the radical movement since the latter believe they are able (or powerful) but the system is unjust. Type I and type III tend to define the external situation in a similar way: the system is arbitrary and unjust because it "prom- ises them in principle what they are denied in reality" (Merton, 1964:218). However, they are sharply different in interpreting the internal or personal situation: type I sees personal inability while type III does not see such an inadequacy. This is why it is hypothesized that the influence of PLO upon powerlessness is more pronounced among high PLA group than among low PLA subjects. This hypothesis is, however, borne out only among lower-class adolescents (see the top right corner of Table 4).

This result may be interpreted in view of the external-internal attribution of frustrations. It is reasoned that unless a person blames society rather than himself by attributing the cause of his frustrations to the external system, he is less likely to take certain action against the system. This is congruent with the traditional position of anomie theory by Merton, and Cloward and Ohlin. Cloward and Ohlin (1960:111) noted on this matter as follows:

It is our view that the most significant step in the withdrawal of sentiments supporting the legitimacy of conventional norms is the attribution of the cause of failure to the social order rather than to oneself, for the way in which a person explains his failure largely determines what he will do about it. Some persons who have experienced a marked discrepancy between aspirations and achievements may look outward, attributing their failure to the existence of unjust or arbitrary institutional arrangements which keep men of ability and ambition from rising in the social structure. Such persons do not view their failure as reflection of personal inadequacy but instead blame the cultural and social system that en- courages everyone to reach for success while dif- ferentially restricting access to these success-goals (italics mine).

To the extent that the ideology of equal opportunity and of achievement by one's own ability is culturally extolled, it is reasoned, the frustrations of type 111 persons will be aggra- vated. Therefore, in non-Western societies which place less cultural emphasis on ability and equal opportunity as major factors in

25 We recognize a difference between fatalistic attitude and inability to control events. On this observation, see Gurin (1970).

26 A similar observation was made by Rosen (1956) and Strodtbeck (1958). Rosen noted that those who did not strive for success and had low achievement needs tended to feel externally controlled. Strodtbeck also found that a high powerlessness and pessimistic appraisal on rational mastery were related to each other.

27 Although Horton and Thompson (1960; 1962) did not use the powerlessness scale constructed by Rotter and others, they reported that those who had powerless feelings were more likely to convert their discontent into action through protesting voting. We do not argue in this paper whether or not the absence or weakness of inter- mediate groups is conducive to extreme movements, but we argue whether or not the powerlessness as defined as high PLO-PLA is conducive to extreme behavior (in respect to the first argument, see Gusfield, 1962; Pinard, 1968; Bell, 1962; Shils, 1960; Neal and Seeman, 1964; Nisbet, 1953; Kornhauser, 1961; Selznick, 1960).



410 / SOCIAL FORCES

advancement toward success, the adolescents in type 111 might be less likely to be frustrated (or anomic) and thereby less likely to be ac- tive in removing "unjust" elements in the system as compared with those in a mobile society like ours. This calls forth a cross-societal study in the future.28

Third, it is posited that, type 11 adolescents are less likely to deviate from social norms than type 1 and type 111 subjects since type II subjects have an optimistic view on opportunity structure but hold a pessimistic assessment of their ability. This position was not borne out by the data presented in the bottom part of Table 4 although the data are unrevealing and inconclusive. Surprisingly, the lower-class adolescents of type 11 show the largest proportion of "high" deviation-proneness. Why are those lower-class adolescents with low self-esteem more likely to join gang acts when they are not cognizant of the opportunity limitations? If the differences were systematic, then we call into question the validity of Cloward-Ohlin's argument that the lower-class youth who sees unjust institutional arrangements is more prone to gang acts if he sees his ability limited. The full meaning of this result needs to be explored by further studies. However, it might be ten- tatively argued that lower-class adolescents without cognition of unjust institutional barriers would be motivated to participate in gang acts mainly to improve their low self-esteem. For those lower-class adolescents who are self-conscious of their personal inadequacies and thus suffer from an inferiority complex, joining or "messing around" with delinquent

gangs would provide a kind of "opportunity" to prove their "ability" to handle certain tough jobs. According to Hewitt (1970), the adolescents thwarted in their quest for self-esteem in the company of adults turn exclusively to peers to bolster their self-esteem. The main point of his argument is that low self-estem is a more important causal factor than barrier to potential social success in accounting for the adolescents' frustrations and their vulnerability to joining gang activities.

It seems that there are two conflicting views on the importance of perceived self-ability in generating motivation to join with delinquent peers. As previously mentioned, Cloward and Ohlin suggest that the adolescents with keen awareness of their personal inadequacy tend to perceive the existing social order as legitimate and to support it. Such persons are not at odds with society but with themselves.

On the other hand, research by Reckless et al. (1957) suggests that "insulation" against delinquency appears to be a function of the acquisition and maintenance of a socially ap- propriate self-concept. Many early studies (Healy and Bronner, 1939; Burt, 1925; Slaw- son, 1926) and some contemporary works (McClosky and Schaar, 1965; Liu and Fahey, 1963) indicate a similar interpretation. We are not in a position to reconcile or clarify these conflicting views with our inconclusive data which, however, allow us to question the validity of Cloward-Ohlin's theorizing.

The preceding findings and arguments must be interpreted with caution because of the following limitations in the present inquiry. First, the generalizability is restricted by restricting the sample to white Protestant high school male seniors living in a poor rural area in the South. Second, the partialling of SESO would be less meaningful since "high" SESO is not homogeneous. To the extent that white-collor occupations and farm owners are uncomparable in terms of attitude, behavior pattern, and life style, the partial associations with SESO held constant could be more confusing than clarify- ing our argument on the second-order interaction effects. We must be cautious in interpreting interaction effect in the contingent tables such as shown in this paper since differential measurement error stemming from the fact that

28 Briefly it is contended that externally controlled and powerless persons are less motivated to engage in radical movements than "powerful" persons who are keenly aware of the limitations in the institutional access to success-goals, since the former are less likely to be at odds with society. Erbe (1964) reported that powerlessness as measured by Dean's scale was inversely related to political participation at the zero-order level and this initial negative association was almost wiped out when SES was partialled out. He identified powerlessness along two dimensions of alienation as "retreatistic" and "rebellious" alienation. Basically, I agree with him in that type I in our typology is retreatist rather than rebel. It is believed that type III tends to be an activist such as "true believer" while type I is a "quietist."




one of the independent variables has been more accurately measured in one category of test factor than in another may result in interaction (Blalock, 1964). Third, since the present study does not deal with concrete, specific behavioral deviation, the results in this paper should not be considered modifying or rejecting the theories and/or empirical generalizations regarding adolescents' actual involvement in deviation and radical movements. Fourth, the time sequence between PLO, PLA and the dependent variables is more theoretical than empirical. Thus, it could be the case in actuality that the dependent variables take place prior to PLO and PLA. Fifth, the single item was used for a measure of PLA. Further studies will be more fruitful and revealing on the problems which this paper has dealt with if they take into account these limitations of the present study.

SUMMARY

This paper accounts for rural adolescents' alienation and deviation-proneness in terms of their perception of two types of limited "reality." These perceived limitations are interpreted to be the main barriers in the pursuit of success-goals in a mobile society where the ideology of success and ability-based-achievement is culturally extolled.

The subjects are divided into four types in terms of two independent variables and these four types are comparatively analyzed in view of the hypotheses. First, the perception of opportunity limitations is treated as a symbolic variable and is assessed for its influence on powerlessness and anomia as compared with that of family status as a structural variable. PLO was found to be a better predictor of alienation than SESO. The multivariate analysis further suggests that PLO as a definition of the situation operates as an "interpretative-intervening" variable without which SESO has little effect on adolescents' alienation. The implication of this result was discussed in light of the symbolic interactionism and some addi- tional data were used to strengthen our argument.

Second, type I was most powerless as predicted, but the influence of PLO upon powerlessness was not greater among those with high PLA than among those with low PLA. Two in-

dependent variables were additive in their impact on powerlessness. The result of this second hypothesis was interpreted in view of the mass society theory that the powerless are more vulnerable than others to involvement in radical movements.

Third, the difference between type 111 and type IV in anomia was greater than that between type I and type II although PLO and PLA did not significantly interact. Anomia was significantly related to both PLO and PLA with the other variable held constant. This finding was interpreted to be in line with the tradition of anomie theory.

Fourth, PLA sharply specified the relationship of deviation-proneness with PLO. The interaction effect was more visible: the direction of the partial relationships was different.

Fifth, the introduction of SESO specified in the predicted way the relationship between PLO-PLA and alienation, but it specified in the opposite direction the relationship of PLO- PLA with deviation-proneness. It was bewilder- ing to find that type II subjects were more likely to join with deviant peers in violating social norms. This "anomaly" was related to two conflicting views on the function of PLA in generating deviation-proneness, although our data on this point were tantalizingly stingy in allow- ing us to challenge Cloward-Ohlin's theorizing that type III are most prone to delinquent gang acts.

REFERENCES Bell, D.

1962 The End of Ideology. Rev. ed. New York: Collier Books.

Blalock, H. M., Jr. 1964 Causal Inf erences in Non-Experimental

Research. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Burt, C. 1925 The Young Delinquent. New York: Ap-

pleton-Century-Crofts. Clark, J. P., and E. P. Wenninger

1963 "Goal Orientations and Illegal Behavior Among Juveniles." Social Forces 43(Oc- tober) :49-59.

Cloward, R. A., and L. E. Ohlin 1960 Delinquency and Opportunity: A Theory

of Delinquent Gangs. New York: Free Press.

Coleman, J. S. 1964 Introduction to Mathematical Sociology.

Glencoe: Free Press..



412 / SOCIAL FORCES

Dean, D. G. 1961 "Alienation: Its Meaning and Measure-

ment." Americani Sociological Review 26(October) :753-758.

Empey, L. T., and S. Lubeck 1968 "Conformity and Deviance in the 'Situa-

tion of Company,"' American Sociolog- ical Review 33 (October):760-774.

Erbe, W. W. 1964 "Social Involvement and Political Ac-

tivity: A Replication and Elaboration." American Sociological Review 29(April): 198-215.

Galtung, J. 1967 Theory and Methods of Social Research.

New York: Columbia University Press. Goddard, H. H.

1922 Human Efficiency and Levels of Intelli- gence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Goodman, L. A. 1961 "Modification of the Dorn-Stouffer-Tib-

bitts Method for 'Testing the Significance of Comparisons in Sociological Data.'" A merican Journal of Sociology 66(Jan- uary) :355-359.

1965 "On the Multivariate Analysis of Three Dichotomous Variables." American Jour- nal of Sociology 71 (November) :291- 301.

Gurin, P. 1970 "Motivation and Aspiration of Southern

Negro College Youth." American Jour- nal of Sociology 75(January):607-631.

Gusfield, J. R. 1962 "Mass Society and Extremist Politics."

American Sociological Review 27(Febru- ary): 19-30.

Han, W. S. 1966 "Levels of Aspiration and Perception of

Opportunity." Korean Journal of Sociol- ogy 2:110-119.

1967 "Discrepant Socio-Economic Status of Aspirations and Deviation-Proneness Among High School Seniors in a Large Southern City." Atlanta: Emory Univer- sity Library.

1969 "Two Conflicting Themes: Common Values Versus Class Differential Values." American Sociological Review 34(Oc- tober) :679-690.

Healy, W., and A. F. Bronner 1939 New Light on Delinquency and Its Treat-

ment. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Hewitt, J. P. 1970 Social Stratification and Deviant Be-

havior. New York: Random House. Horton, J. E., and W. E.. Thompson

1960 "Political Alienation as a Force in Po- litical Action." Social Forces 38(March): 190-195.

1962 "Powerlessness and Political Negativism." American Journal of Sociology 67 (March) :484-493.

Hyman, H. 1955 Survey Design and Analysis: Principles,

Cases and Procedures. New York: Free Press.

Kornhauser, W. 1961 The Politics of Mass Society. New York:

Free Press. Landis, J. R., and F. R. Scarpitti

1965 "Perceptions Regarding Value Orienta- tion and Legitimate Opportunity: Delin- quents and Non-Delinquents." Social Forces 44(September):83-91.

Landis, J. R., S. Dinitz, and W. C. Reckless 1963 "Implementing Two Theories of Delin-

quency: Value Orientation and Aware- ness of Limited Opportunity." Sociology and Social Research 47(July) :408-416.

Lazarsfeld, P. F., and M. Rosenberg (eds.) 1955 The Laniguage of Social Research: A

Reader in the Methodology of Social Researchl. New York: Free Press.

Lipset, S. M., and R. Bendix 1962 Social Mobility in Industrial Society.

Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Liu, W. T., and F. Fahey 1963 "Delinquency, Self-Esteem and Social

Control: A Retrospective Analysis." A inerican Catholic Sociological Review 24:3-12.

McClosky, H., and J. H. Schaar 1965 "Psychological Dimension of Anomy."

American Sociological Review 30(Feb- ruary): 14-40.

Meier, D. L., and W. Bell 1959 "Anomia and Differential Access to the

Achievement of Life Goals." American Sociological Review 24(April): 189-208.

Merrill, M. 1947 Problems of Child Delinquency. Boston:

Houghton Mifflin. Merton, R. K.

1961 Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Free Press.

1964 "Anomie, Anomia, and Social Interac- tion: Context of Deviant Behavior." Pp. 213-242 in M. B. Clinard (ed.), Anomie and Deviant Behavior: A Discussion and Critique. New York: Free Press.

Mizruchi, E. H. 1964 "Alienation and Anomie: Theoretical

and Empirical Perspectives." Pp. 253-267 in I. L. Horowitz (ed.), The New Sociol- ogy: Essays in Honor of C. Wright Mills. New York: Oxford University Press.

Neal, A. G., and S. Rettig 1963 "Dimensions of Alienation Among Man-




ual and Non-Manual Workers." Amer- icani Sociological Review 28 (August): 599-608.

Neal, A. G., and M. Seeman 1964 "Organizations and Powerlessness: A

Test of the Mediation Hypothesis." American Sociological Review 29(April): 216-226.

Nisbet, R. A. 1953 The Quest for Community. New York:

Oxford University Press. Pinard, M.

1968 "Mass Society and Political Movements: A New Formulation." American Journal of Sociology 73(May):682-690.

Ransford, H. E. 1968 "Isolation, Powerlessness, and Violence:

A Study of Attitudes and Participation in the Watts Riot." American Journal of Sociology 73(March) :581-591.

Reckless, W. C., S. Dinitz, and B. Kay 1957 "The Self Component in Potential De-

linquency and Potential Non-Delinquen- cy." American Sociological Review 22 (October) :566-570.

Rhodes, L. 1964 "Anomia, Aspiration and Status." So-

cial Forces 42(May) :433-440. Rosen, B. C.

1956 "The Achievement Syndrome: A Psy- chocultural Dimension of Social Stratifi- cation." American Sociological Review 21 (April): 203-211.

Rosenberg, M. 1962 "Test Factor Standardization as a Method

of Interpretation." Social Forces 41 (Oc- tober):53-61.

Rotter, J. B. 1966 "Generalized Expectancies for Internal

Versus External Control of Reinforce- ment." Psychological Monograph 80, No. 1.

Rotter, J. B., M. Seeman, and S. Liverant 1962 "Internal Versus External Control of

Reinforcements: A Major Variable in Behavior Theory." Pp. 473-516 in N. F. Washburne (ed.), Decisions, Values and Groups. New York: Pergamon Press.

Seeman, M. 1959 "On the Meaning of Alienation." Amer-

ican Sociological Review 24(December): 783-791.

Seeman, M., and J. W. Evans 1962 "Alienation and Learning in a Hospital

Setting." American Sociological Review 27(December) :772-782.

Selznick, P. 1960 Organizational Weapon. Glencoe: Free

Press. Shils, E. A.

1960 "Mass Society and Its Culture." Daedalus 89 (Spring):288-314.

Short, J. F., Jr., R. Rivera, and R. A. Tennyson 1965 "Perceived Opportunities, Gang Mem-

bership, and Delinquency." American Sociological Review 30 (February):56- 67.

Slawson, J. B. 1926 The Delinquent Boy. Boston: Badger.

Srole, L. 1956 "Social Integration and Certain Corol-

laries: An Explanatory Study." Amer- ican Sociological Review 21 (December): 709-716.

Stinchcombe, A. L. 1968 Constructing Social Theories. New York:

Harcourt, Brace & World. Strodtbeck, F. L.

1958 "Family Interaction, Values and Achieve- ment." Pp. 135-194 in D. C. McClelland, et al. (eds.), Talent and Society. Prince- ton: Van Nostrand.

rurner, R. H. 1964 The Social Context of Ambition: A Study

of High School Seniors in Los Angeles. San Francisco: Chandler.

U.S. Congress 1966 Demonstration Research Project on the

Identification of Community Needs. Ten- nessee Technological University, Title I of the Higher Education Act of 1965. Public Law 89-329, December.

Williams, R. M., Jr. 1970 American Society. 3d ed. New York:

Knopf.



Documents

Alienation, Deviation-Proneness, and Perception of Two Types of Barriers among Rural Adolescents