Aggression, sex role measures, and Kohut's psychology of the self

Sex Roles, Vol. 25, Nos. 3/4, 1991

Aggression, Sex Role Measures, and Kohut's Psychology of the Self 1

Steve M. Sawrie, P. J. Watson, 2 and Michael D. Biderman University of Tennessee at Chattanooga

Recent controversies concerning the relationship between aggression and sex role development were evaluated in light of Heinz Kohut's psychoanalytic psychology of the self. Masculinity roughly corresponded to grandiose elements of Kohut's bipolar self while femininity was linked to its idealizing sector. As predicted, self-reported aggressiveness reflected an immature grandiosity; and associations of assertiveness with both masculine and grandiose personality styles supported Kohut's claim that adjustment can evolve out of more aggressive forms of self-functioning. Socially desirable forms of femininity had the advantage of being incompatible with aggressiveness, but they also failed to promote assertiveness. Androgynous, masculine, feminine, and undifferentiated sex roles displayed largely predictable parallels with synthetic, internal, external, and archaic narcissistic styles. As in previous research, therefore, Kohut's theory proved useful in examining the mental health implications of traditional sex roles.

Male and female personality have been treated in much recent research as social constructions in the need of social reconstruction. Wittig (1985), for example, notes that "propositions in the psychology of gender are both an attempt to understand the functioning of gender in the world as it is and an articulation of what it could be" (p. 804). This effort to articulate "what could be" begins with the operationalization of basic constructs. In opposition to stereotypes, investigators have assumed that "masculinity" and "femininity" need not always exist as extremes along a

1Data reported in this project were included in the master's thesis of the first author. 2"1"o whom correspondence should be addressed at Psychology Department, 350 Holt Hall, 615 McCallie Avenue, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, Chattanooga, TN 37403.

141

0360~025/91/0800~?141506.50/0 © 1991 Plenum Publishing Corporation

142 Sawrie, Watson, and Biderman

single continuum. Instead, qualities associated with traditional sex roles presumably can appear as multiple and separable dimensions defining both adaptive and maladaptive self-functioning.

In the extended version of the Personality Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ; Spence, Helmreich, & Holahan, 1979), for example, the M-F + Scale does in fact record a bipolar measure of traditional sex roles. High scores define a stereotypically masculine ideal while low scores describe a feminine ideal. With this instrument, therefore, movement toward one sex role does require movement away from the other. The M + Scale, however, monitors a healthy sense of agency typically associated with masculinity but deemed as valuable when present in anyone. Similarly, F ÷ captures a more feminine sense of communion presumed to be prosocial when displayed by either sex. M" points toward an antisocial arrogance and greediness in both sexes, but describes a trait thought more common in males. Stereotypically feminine liabilities are found in the Fc- and Fva scales. Fc- reflects an excessive selflessness and is illustrated by self-reports of being spineless, gullible, and servile. The verbal passive-aggressiveness of Fva- describes a nagging person who is whiny, fussy, and complaining.

The claim that both sex roles might have socially desirable features has also led to recommendations for the development of a more balanced personality. In some theoretical formulations, "androgyny" combines the two roles in equal proportion and should be associated with better adjustment (e.g., Bern, 1974). In actual fact, controversies exist over how to define this construct (e.g., Bern, 1981; Spence & Helmreich, 1981), and favorable evaluations of androgyny have been challenged on both empirical (e.g., Ray & Lovejoy, 1984; Taylor & Hall, 1982) and theoretical grounds (e.g., Lasch, 1981; Sampson, 1977). Nevertheless, when carefully defined as the conjoint occurrence of the desirable traits associated with both roles, androgyny does seem to predict relatively superior self-functioning (e.g., Flaherty & Dusek, 1980; Glazer & Dusek, 1985).

Finally, efforts to reconstruct sex roles have given rise to debates over how to reconfigure traits stereotypically assigned to one sex or the other. As only one illustration of this controversy, aggressiveness can be interpreted as a problematic feature of masculinity. Gilligan (1982) ex- emplifies this position when she sees "the prevalence of violence in men's fantasies, its odd location in the context of intimate relationships, and its association with betrayal and deceit as indicative of a problem with connection that leads relationships to become dangerous and safety to appear in separation" (pp. 43-44). Such a perspective leads naturally to the further suggestion that feminine forms of nurturance and inter- personal sensitivity are important in reducing the potential for masculine destructiveness. Because "aggression a p p e a r s . . , as a signal of a fracture

Aggression and Sex Roles 143

of connection, the sign of a failure of relationship," the "activities of care" traditionally tied to the role of women can be seen as a way to "make the world safe, by avoiding isolation and preventing aggression" (Gilligan, 1982, p. 43).

Other theorists also view aggression as a masculine trait, but with beneficial implications. Nadelson, Notman, Miller, and Zilbach (1982) de- fend this possibility when they argue that aggression can foster an individ- ual's "striving toward autonomous action and self-assertion" (p. 19) and that in males this striving "is deemed valuable and acceptable in itself" (p. 20). The traditional female personality, however, "does not usually contain a component of aggression that is perceived as clearly available and is understood as potentially creative" (p. 22). Female displays of aggression therefore may not receive the social approval that is essential for develop- ing an adaptive self-assertiveness. Furthermore, an internalization of social expectations may cause emotional distress when females do become aggressive; since "women often experience their aggressive wishes and strivings as evidence of their defectiveness or lack of worth, rather than a basis for positive self-esteem" (Nadelson et al., p. 24).

In summary, aggression has been identified both as a masculine liability ameliorable by the adaptive influences of femininity and as a force behind forms of adjustment often made available to males but not to females. The androgynous personality presumably would combine the advan- tages of both roles, avoiding the destructiveness of masculinity while maintaining its more mature consequences. The principal claim of the present project was that theoretical and empirical support for these suggestions can be developed within the psychoanalytic psychology of the self formu- lated by the late Heinz Kohut (e.g., 1971, 1977, 1984).

The Psychology of the Self and Aggression

Four aspects of Kohut's thought are most relevant for understanding sex roles and aggression. First, in some of his work, Kohut identified the self as forming a bipolar psychological configuration. One trajectory of self- development, he argued, stems from a grandiose exhibitionism that under- lies a person's literal and metaphorical abilities "to stand on one's own two feet." From this exhibitionism "emanate the basic strivings for power and success" (Kohut & Wolf, 1978/1986, p. 177), and under appropriate con- ditions, this grandiose pole of the self matures toward healthy forms of assertiveness and ambitiousness.

A self is not always strong and in control, of course, and during times of relative weakness, the self craves the comforting support of someone


who is more powerful. The second dimension of the bipolar self then develops as a suddenly vulnerable self seeks to merge and identify itself with more powerful and idealizable others. Such identifications establish the strengths of others within the self, and these strengths then can mature into worthwhile goals and ideals. Between these bipolar dimensions, there exists "an intermediate area of basic talents and skills that are activated by the tension-arc that establishes itself between ambitions and ideals" (Ko- hut & Wolf, 1978/1986, p. 177). "This notion of the bipolar self," as Ches- sick (1985, p. 158) points out, "is the crucial concept of the psychology of the self."

Second, maturation of the bipolar self proceeds as social supports available within the environment become psychological supports internalized within the self. Parents are especially important because even before birth a self has "its virtual beginnings with the formation of hopes, dreams, and expectations concerning the future child in the minds of the parents" (Kohut & Wolf, pp. 181-182). After the child is born, parents then help establish a child's nuclear self by meeting displays of grandiosity with a mirroring approval. "However grave the blows may be to which the child's grandiosity is exposed by the realities of life, the proud smile of the parents will keep alive a bit of the original omnipotence, to be retained as the nucleus of the self-confidence about one's worth that sustain the healthy person throughout his life" (Kohut & Wolf, p. 182).

Parents also allow themselves to become idealized as a source of calm and soothing strength during times of their child's distress. In these instances, "their self-confidence as they carried us when we were babies, their security when they allowed us to merge our anxious selves with their tranquility--via their calm voices or via our closeness with their relaxed bodies as they held us--will be retained by us as the nucleus of the strength of our leading ideals and of the calmness we experience as we live our lives under the guidance of our inner goals" (Kohut & Wolf, pp. 182-183).

Differential parental fulfillment of these two roles helps define a self's potential for ambitions, ideals, or both. Once parents help lay down this nuclear self, they continue as "selfobjects" influencing its maturation. "Self-objects are objects which we experienced as part of our self; the expected control over them is, therefore, closer to the concept of the control which a grown-up expects to have over his body and mind than to the concept of the control he expects to have over others" (Kohut & Wolf, p. 177). In other words, parents objectively are "objects" in the child's external world; but according to Kohut, children oftentimes experience parents as being within the psychological boundaries of their own self.


Neither wholly in the object world nor wholly within the child's self, parents are in both; they are selfobjects.

Parents, however, cannot approve all grandiosities, nor can they soothe all distress. Such parental failures, if not excessive, are important because they serve as occasions for children to assimilate into themselves what previously was done for them by their selfobjects. In other words, children, in response to "optimally frustrating" parents, can develop ca- pacities to applaud their own grandiosity and to soothe their own distress. Through such learning, grandiosities demanding the admiration of others gradually become more autonomous forms of ambitiousness, and identifications contingent upon idealizable selfobjects evolve into a more inde- pendent system of values. This process of converting selfobject functions maintained by the parents into self functions organized within the personality is what Kohut termed "transmuting internalization."

Third, Kohut (e.g., 1984, p. 77) argued that individuals never lose their need for selfobjects. Implied in this assumption is the idea that a self develops throughout life. Selves can be conceptualized as having a leading mature edge consisting of internalized structures of ambitions and/or ideals. Such "inner resources" presumably can be enlarged through new experi- ences of optimal frustration and transmuting internalization (Watson, Biderman, & Boyd, 1989). At the same time, a nuclear self will have laid down within it "specific forms o f . . . later vulnerability" (Kohut, 1972/1978, p. 624). In response to empathically cold social environments (Kohut, 1984, p. 18), a self can regress from the maturities of its leading edge to the immaturities of its trailing edge. In other words, more mature forms of ambitiousness can fall back into an arrogant exploitativeness; a submissiveness to appropriate ideals can collapse into demanding dependencies upon others who appear more powerful.

Fourth and finally, his analysis of aggression was one of Kohut's most controversial contributions (Chessick, 1985, p. 317). Briefly, narcissistic rage theoretically signals a breach between grandiose elements of the self and the sustaining approval of admiring selfobjects. When infantile presumptions of omnipotence are not mirrored, the weakened self lashes out. This immature anger lacks the rationality of an adult aggressiveness that removes obstacles in the way of legitimate ambitions. This rage, however, is not a "pathology" to be eliminated directly, since it serves as a precursor for the more rational and controlled aggression of adult ambitiousness. Hence, narcissistic rage reveals an underdeveloped grandiosity that "must be gradually transformed into aim-inhibited self-esteem and realistic ambitions" (Kohut, 1972/1978, p. 646-647).

Within the psychology of the self, therefore, narcissistic rage becomes a more reasonable assertiveness as nurturing selfobjects help the self


become less desperately dependent upon external mirroring. This process would not rest upon parental regimes of punishment that tried to eliminate aggression altogether. Instead, the destructive potential of rage reactions would be neutralized gradually as parents optimally rather than traumati- cally frustrated their child's presumptions of narcissistic omnipotence. The development of ideals also might help tame rage reactions as the self learns to appreciate its own "stamina in tolerating unpleasant aspects of reality" (Kohut, 1972/1978, p. 647).

Sex Role Measures, the Bipolar Self, and Aggression

In a previous study, Watson et al. (1989) supplied data supporting the hypothesis that measures of so-called masculinity and femininity roughly parallel the grandiose and idealizing sectors of Kohut's bipolar self, respectively. In addition, maladaptive features of traditional sex roles were associated predictably with immaturities of the bipolar self. For example, Lapan and Patton's (1986) Pseudoautonomy Scale records a pathological form of grandiosity and was directly related to the PAQ M- Scale, and the immature idealization of the Peer-Group Dependence Scale correlated positively with both Fc- and Fva-. Furthermore, socially desirable aspects of one sex role were inversely related to the narcissistic immaturities associated with the other. Specifically, M + correlated negatively with Peer-Group Dependence while a similar relationship appeared between F + and Pseudoautonomy. Thus, the "leading edge" strengths of one pole proved to be incompatible with the "trailing edge" weaknesses of the other.

That androgyny might have beneficial implications also was examined by comparing four sex roles with four narcissistic styles. Narcissistic styles were based on Westen's (1985) analysis of recent developments in psychoanalysis. In essence, Westen hypothesized the existence of an internal narcissism in which the self is organized around immature grandiosity and an external narcissism in which the self is based more upon an immature idealization. "The internally narcissistic person tries to incorporate others into his orbit; the externally narcissistic person has become a satellite in the orbit of significant others" (Westen, p. 172). He contrasted these less mature styles with a synthetic narcissism representing an adaptive integration of the other two self-potentials. Westen did not consider the possibility that a self might consist of immaturities within both sectors of the self, but the occurrence of this kind of archaic narcissism was posited by Watson et al. (1989).


In exploring associations between sex roles and narcisstic styles, Watson et al. (1989) used high M + and low F ÷ values to designate the masculine role, and the feminine role self-reported the opposite pattern. The androgynous had high scores on both instruments and undifferentiated subjects displayed low scores on both. At the same time, low levels of Pseudoautonomy and Peer-Group Dependence were presumed to reflect an internalization of structure along both dimensions of the bipolar self; so, low scores on both Lapan and Patton scales were utilized to define synthetic narcissists. Archaic narcissists were identified by the broadly dysfunctional pattern of high amounts of both Pseudoautonomy and Peer-Group Dependence. Finally, internal narcissists displayed high Pseudoautonomy and low Peer-Group Dependence values while the reverse was true of external narcissists.

Creation of these latter two narcissistic styles rested upon the assumption that maturation of one pole would work against immaturities along the other. Kohut (1977, p. 4) argued, "Most frequently a weakness in the area of exhibitionism and ambitions is compensated for by the self-esteem provided by the pursuit of ideals; but the reverse may also occur." Hence, an adaptive submissiveness associated with internalized ideals should "com- pensate" for or work against the arrogance of Pseudoautonomy, and a healthy ambitiousness should interfere with the insecure dependencies of the other dimension. Within this framework, the low Peer-Group Depend- ence of internal narcissists could not reflect a maturation of the idealizing pole because high levels of Pseudoautonomy would suggest a failure to in- ternalize the idealizing potential in the first place. Similarly, external narcissists were low in Pseudoautonomy because presumably ambitiousness was not established initially as a developmental possibility within the nuclear self.

Comparisons between these sex roles and narcissistic styles led to four most noteworthy observations. First, narcissistic styles conformed to sex roles in a manner largely predictable form Kohut's theory. Androgyny, masculine, feminine, and undifferentiated groups did tend to correspond to the synthetic, internal, external, and archaic narcissistic styles, respectively. Second, least likely associations between sex roles and narcissistic styles were largely confirmed. For example, masculine externals and feminine internals were observed only very infrequently. Third, sex role and narcissistic style groupings yielded parallel effects on various dependent measures of mental health. Where androgyny and masculinity were associated with better adjustment relative to the feminine and undifferentiated groups, synthetic and internal narcissists also tended to be superior relative to the external and archaic narcissistic styles.


Finally, associations between sex roles and narcissistic styles were not perfect. As only one illustration, androgynous subjects sometimes appeared as internal rather than synthetic narcissists. Watson et al. (1989) argued that this close but not perfect correspondence revealed that the bipolar self might have both a leading mature edge and a trailing immature edge. In other words, a self might have the healthy internalized structures described by the socially desirable sex role constructs and the potential for regression as operationalized in measures of "pathological" narcissism. Among other things, Watson et al. concluded that the exploration of such a self-in-depth model might help clarify issues of concern in the sex roles literature.

In the present study, this self-in-depth understanding of Kohut's theory was used to examine the problem of aggression and sex roles. Gil- ligan's (1982, p. 43) suggestion that "aggression a p p e a r s . . , as a signal of a fracture of connection" clearly fits within the Kohutian framework; and from the perspective of her claims, the validity of the psychology of the self would be confirmed if putative indices of immature grandiosity (M- and Pseudoautonomy) correlated directly and if measures of mature femininity (F +) correlated inversely with aggressiveness. The most obvious additional expectations would be for the masculine and internal categories to be more aggressive than the feminine and external groups. In addition, androgynous and synthetic personalities should include the ameliorating influences of femininity, so they too should be less aggressive.

Also compatible with Kohut's theory are the other feminist arguments that aggression reflects an adaptive potential traditionally made available to males but not to females. The clear implication is that measures of mature grandiosity, assertiveness for example, should correlate directly with desirable aspects of masculinity (i.e., M +) and inversely with vulnerable forms of femininity (e.g., Fc- and Fva-). Furthermore, assertiveness should be more prevalent in masculine and internal personalities, and in the androgynous and synthetic types as well.

M E T H O D

Subjects

Participating in this study were undergraduates enrolled in various psychology classes. Of these, 174 were males and 197 were females. The average age was 20.9 years old, with the range extending from 17 to 52 years. All students received extra course credit for making their voluntary contributions to the project.


Measures

Each participant was presented with a sequence of questionnaires that included the extended PAQ (Spence et al. 1979), the Pseudoautonomy and Peer-Group Dependence measures of Lapan and Patton (1986), the College Self-Expression Scale (CSES; Galassi, DeLo, Galassi, & Bastein, 1974), and the Buss and Durkee (1957) Inventory as adapted by Swimmer and Ramanaiah (1985).

Sex role and narcissism scales were described above, but two additional points about the narcissism measures require clarification. First, the Lapan and Patton instruments were developed for adolescent clinical popu- lations. Such clear indices of "pathology" were used in order to avoid the ambiguities associated with other measures of narcissism that appear to record some degree of healthy adjustment (e.g., Watson, McKinney, Hawkins, & Morris, 1988). One Pseudoautonomy item was revised, however, to make it more appropriate for undergraduates; this change was ac- complished according to the procedures of Watson et al. (1989). Second, the Lapan and Patton measures each contain 8 forced-choice items; and scores on these scales were expected to be low given the "normal" sample and the "pathological" nature of these constructs.

The CSES was used to assess assertiveness. This instrument was de- signed expressly to monitor adaptive forms of assertiveness in college students, and Galassi et al. (1974) report that a "nonsignificant correlation between Aggression and the CSES is of especial importance since aggressiveness is often mistaken for assertiveness" (p. 170). Higher CSES scores revealed relatively stronger assertiveness.

Finally, the Buss-Durkee Inventory presents research participants with questions that operationalize seven different forms of aggression: Physical Assault (e.g., "When I really lose my temper, I am capable of slapping someone"), Indirect Hostility (e.g, "When I am angry, I sometimes sulk"), Irritability (e.g., "Sometimes people bother me just by being around"), Negativism (e.g., "When somebody makes a rule I don't like, I am tempted to break it"), Resentment (e.g., "I don't seem to get what is coming to me"), Suspicion (e.g., "I know that people tend to talk about me behind my back"), and Verbal Hostility (e.g., "When I get mad, I say nasty things"). The 13 items dropped by Swimmer and Ramanaiah (1985) were also eliminated, and 5-point response options to each item were used to match the format of standardized answer sheets. With each of these seven scales, higher scores uncovered higher levels of the trait.


Procedure

Participant responses to all items were entered on the standardized answer sheets, and these sheets subsequently were read by optical scanning equipment into a computer data file. Analyses of the data proceeded in four basic stages. Intercorrelations among the sex, sex role, narcissism, assertiveness, and aggression variables were ascertained first. Next, the sex role and self-functioning measures were included in a principal components analysis, since Watson et al. (1989) found such constructs to display a factor structure revealing strong and meaningful interconnections. Because these scales were presumed to be highly intercorrelated, an oblique rotation was employed; and the analysis was conducted twice. Initially, identification of a component rested upon the more conventional criterion of obtaining an eigenvalue greater than 1.0, but in addition, these measures were forced into a two-factor solution in order to more closely approximate the hypothesized structure of the bipolar self.

Third, the association between sex roles and narcissistic styles was examined. Scores as close to the median as possible were used for defining what was "high" and "low" on the relevant scales; in conformity with the recommendations of Handal and Salit (1985, 1988), these values were de- termined for each sex separately. For males, the M ÷ median was 21 while the F ÷ value was 22. For females these medians were 20 and 25, respectively. Again, the androgynous were above the median on both instruments while the undifferentiated were below this score on both. Masculine participants scored high only on the M ÷ Scale and feminine subjects were high only on the F ÷ Scale. With these procedures, 53 androgynous, 40 masculine, 39 feminine, and 42 undifferentiated males were identified along with 43 androgynous, 63 masculine, 45 feminine, and 46 undifferentiated females.

Sex-specific midpoints for Pseudoautonomy and Peer-Group Depend- ence were also used to break out the four narcissistic styles (Watson et al., 1989). For males, Pseudoautonomy scores above one fell in the top part of the distribution while the comparable point for Peer-Group Dependence was above two. For females, each of these figures was above one. As noted previously, synthetic narcissists were low on both scales while archaic narcissists were "high" on both. Internal narcissists were high only in Pseudo- au tonomy while external narcissists were "high" only in Peer-Group Dependence. Overall, 61 synthetic, 40 internal, 28 external, and 45 archaic males were identified; there were 53 synthetic, 28 internal, 65 external, and 51 archaic females. The association between sex roles and narcissistic styles was then examined by using a chi-square test.


In the final stage of the analyses, sex role and narcissistic style influences on assertiveness, aggression, M-F +, M-, Fc', and Fva- were examined. Sex differences of course were a concern, and the most direct approach to the problem would have involved use of 2 x 4 x 4 (Sex x Sex Role x Nar- cissistic Style) analyses of variance (A_NOVAs). This procedure could not be employed, however, because so few subjects appeared in some cells of the matrix. For example, only two males proved to be masculine/externals and only one female was an undifferentiated/internal. To address this dif- ficulty, preliminary Sex x Sex Role and Sex x Narcissistic Style ANOVAs were conducted. The correlation analysis carried the burden of demonstrat- ing sex differences in the first place, but the 2 x 4 ANOVAs at least made it possible to identify sex-by-category interactions, which in fact did not appear.

Once these preliminary results were completed, 4 x 4 ANOVAs examined the effects associated with the sex roles and narcissistic styles. No interactions were observed between these two typologies, but with the observation of a significant main effect, the relevant four groups were exam- i n e d s e p a r a t e l y u s ing a o n e - w a y A N O V A f o l l o w e d by the Student-Newman-Keuls procedure (p < .05). This simplified approach to specifying group contrasts was deemed appropriate for the primary research objective, which was to determine if hypothesized parallels existed in the overall pattern of the sex role and narcissistic style data. As one last clari- fying analysis, one-way ANOVAs also were utilized to explore sex role differences in Pseudoautonomy and Peer-Group Dependence and narcissistic style contrasts in M + and F +.

RESULTS

As expected, males were higher on six of the seven highly intercorrelated aggression measures and on Pseudoautonomy as well (see Table I). No sex differences were observed in assertiveness or in Peer-Group Dependence, but assertiveness correlated negatively with narcissistic dependency and with four of the aggression scales. A direct CSES tie with Verbal Hostility also was observed. Linkages appeared between aggression and both forms of narcissism, but such relationships were more common with and tended to be more robust for Pseudoautonomy. The two Lapan and Patton scales covaried directly.

Correlations for the PAQ are presented in Table II and yielded four most noteworthy findings. First, where significant sex differences were ob- tained, they conformed with the PAQ descriptions of these constructs. For example, Fva- was in fact more typical of females. Second narcissistic

1 5 2 S a w r i e , W a t s o n , a n d B i d e r m a n

z "o

0

o

I"

I'

~0 7

~o

7

I"

I'

I"

>

I ' l . . . . . . I'

I . . . . . . . .

I . . . . .

] ° ° °

I"

o ' ~

o

• ~ ~

..~

z

o

o . •

" ~ V V V


Table II . Cor re l a t ions of P A Q wi th Sex and M e a s u r e s of Asser t iveness , Aggress ion , and Narciss ism

P A Q

Var iab les M + F + M-F + M F C FVA-

Sex a -.09 .31 a -.35 ̀ / - .24 a .08 .28 a

Asser t iveness and aggress ion

Asser t iveness .48 a .06 .38 d .18 a - .29 ̀ / .04

Assau l t .15 c - .20 a .23 ̀ / .31 ̀ / - .06 .17 a

Ind i rec t Host i l i ty - .06 -.194 -.01 .32 ̀/ .09 .37 a

I r r i tabi l i ty - .19 ̀ / - .30 a - .06 .33 a .08 .37 a Nega t iv i sm -.11 ° - .30 ̀ / .07 .294 - .02 .31 ̀ /

R e s e n t m e n t - .28 ̀ / --.14 c -.194 .23 ̀ / .18 a .24 a

Suspicion - .10 -.13 b - .02 .22 a .09 .22 a

V e r b a l host i l i ty .13 b --.18 a .194 .42 a - .10 .294

Narc iss i sm

P s e u d o a u t o n o m y -.08 - .37 a .17 c .33 a .04 .13 c

Peer group dependence -.48 d .00 -.41 d - .02 .29 a .15 c

a Posi t ive cor re la t ions po in t to a character is t ic m o r e p r o m i n e n t in females.

bp < .05. Cp < .01.

Up < .001.

dependency did predict feminine liabilities while remaining largely incompatible with masculinity. Expected associations between sex roles and immature grandiosity also were confirmed except that Pseudoautonomy was tied directly to Fva-. Third, assertiveness was identified as a masculine strength and as a missing element in more feminine character structures. Fourth, direct masculine (i.e., M-) and inverse feminine (i.e., F ÷) linkages with aggression were observed largely as hypothesized, although the Fva- data in particular demonstrated that traits more common in females could include aggressiveness.

A scree test and eigenvalues greater than 1.0 were used to define four factors describing 64.6% of the variance in the sex role, assertiveness, aggression, and narcissism measures. As Table III makes dear, the first component emerged as an Aggression factor while the fourth component seemed adequately described as a maladjusted Hostile Verbal Assertiveness factor. More interestingly, the second component suggested a Mature Ambitiousness "pole" characterized by masculine strengths and the avoidance of "pathological" dependencies. The third factor appeared as a


Table III. Principal Components Analyses of Sex Role, Assertiveness, Aggression, and Narcissism Measures

Loadings a

Four-factor solution Two-factor solution

Measures 1 2 3 4 1 2

PAQ sex roles

M + 82 .77 F + .90 -.43 M-F + .65 -.48 .79 M" -.57 .43 .58 F C -.56 F V A .76 .43

Assertiveness and aggression

Assertiveness .71 .44 Assault .75 .32 .71 Indirect Hostility .78 .79 Irritability .76 .83 Negativism .57 .71 Resentment .76 -.32 .68 Suspicion .84 .65 Verbal hostility .53 .34 .39 .72

Narcissism

Pseudoautonomy -.62 Peer group dependence -.75

.58

.71

-.43

-.69

a Only factor loadings greater than .30 are listed. Eigenvalues for the four components were in sequence 4.84, 3.07, 1.36, and 1.08, and the percentages of variance explained were 30.2%, 19.2%, 8.5%, and 6.7%, respectively.

Mature Idealization pole defined by feminine strengths and the avoidance of "pathological" grandiosities.

In the two-factor solution, the first factor, Immature Grandiosity/ Feminine Insufficiency, confirmed that aggression can be connected with masculine maladjustment and with a failure to develop healthy feminine potentials. On the other hand, the second factor, Healthy Masculinity/ Immature Dependency Avoidance, suggested that a development of assertiveness may indeed accompany actualization of masculine forms of in- dependence.

Aggression and Sex Roles

Table VI. Frequencies of Each Narcissistic Style as a Funciton of Various Sex Roles and Analyses of the Associations between the Two

155

Narcissistic style

Sex role type

Androgynous Masculine Feminine Undifferentiated ) ~

Synthetic 43 36 13 22 19.26 a Internal 13 37 8 10 32.12 a External 20 11 40 22 19.04 ̀/ Archaic 20 19 23 34 5.92

a Each ~2 represents a separate test of association between the narcissistic style and the four sex roles.

bp < .05. Cp < .01. Up < .001.

Strong and predictable associations appeared between the sex roles and na rc i s s i s t i c s tyles (Z2 = 73.54, df = 9, p < .0001). Table IV demonstrates that the androgynous, masculine, feminine, and undifferentiated roles most likely corresponded with the synthetic, internal, external, and archaic narcissistic styles, respectively. Least likely ties between the masculine role and the external style and between the feminine role and the internal style also were observed. Synthetics, however, were least likely to be feminine rather than undifferentiated, and archaics were least likely to be masculine rather than androgynous. When each narcissistic style was examined separately, only the archaic style failed to exhibit a significant association with the four sex roles.

Table V reviews the main effect results from the 4 x 4 ANOVAs, and these data first revealed that significant outcomes were less common for the sex roles than for the narcissistic styles. Significant sex role differences in M-F +, M-, and Fc- generally supported the PAQ sex typing of these constructs, and as predicted, assertiveness was isolated as an androgynous and masculine advantage. Aggressiveness was most typical of the undifferentiated; surprisingly, feminine participants joined the undifferentiated in displaying relatively higher levels of resentment. Also unpre- dicted was the general failure of the masculine group to be at the highest levels of aggression.

Although some differences did appear, the narcissistic styles nevertheless displayed rough similarities with the sex roles. Most obviously, per- haps, the sequencing of narcissistic style differences in M-F + predictably followed the sex role pattern. In addition, synthetics and internals were like the androgynous and masculine groups in being more assertive;


Table V. Differences in Psychological Traits as a Function of Androgynous (An), Masculine (M), Feminine (F), and Undifferentiated (U) Sex Roles and as a

Funct ion of Synthetic (S), Internal (I), External (E), and Archaic (Ar) Narcissistic Styles a

Sex role analyses Narcissistic style analyses

Dependen t variable F Post hoes F Post hocs

Sex Role measures

M-F + 21.47 a F < U < A n < M 17.96 a E < A r < S < I M 9.00 d F < ( A n , U ) < M 9.93 ̀ / E < S < A r < I F C 6.10 d M < U < F ; A n < l 6 4.17 c (S,I) < (Ar,E) F V A 2. i0 4.84 c S < (E,Ar)

Assertiveness and aggression !

Assertiveness 13.62 d (U,F) < (An,M) 6.01 c (E,Ar) < (I,S) Assault 0.54 11.98 d E < S < (Ar,l) Indirect Hostility 0.14 14.82 d (S,E) < I < A r Irritability 5.13 c ( A n , F , M ) < U 16.88 d S < I < A r ; E < A r Negativism 1.98 9.83 d E < (I,Ar); S < A r Resen tmen t 2.97 b (M,An) < (F,U) 18.24 d S < (E,I) < Ar Suspicion 2.65 b (M,F,An) < U 6.46 d (E,S) < A r Verbal hostility 1.74 12.64 d E < S < (Ar,I)

a All F 's are based on df = 3/355. In the post hoes, only the statistically significant contrasts are described Co < .05); groups within the same parenthesis failed to differ.

bp < .05. Cp < .01.

Up < .001.

archaics were like the undifferentiated in being more aggressive. Internals were closer than externals to the aggressiveness of the archaic style, and this result also helped confirm that aggression is associated more with immature grandiosity than with immature idealization.

Finally, one-way ANOVAs indicated that significant sex role differences did not appear in Pseudoautonomy, but the feminine and undiffer- ent ia ted roles were higher than the o ther two groups in Pee r -Group Dependence [F(3/367) = 5.17, p < ,01]. With the narcissistic styles, internals and synthetics were higher in M + than were the externals and archaics [F(3/367) = 10.90, p < .001]. At the same time, archaics and internals were lower than synthetics in F ÷, and these three styles in turn were lower than the externals [F(3/367) = 6.61, p < .001]. These significant outcomes, therefore, did not offer any fundamental violations of expectations based upon the psychology of the self.


DISCUSSION

Aggression is diagnosed by some contemporary theorists as a distur- bance symptomatic of a stereotypically masculine inability to maintain intimate relationships. From this perspective, an actualization of femininity represents a beneficial move toward adjustment (e.g., Gilligan). Others, however, argue that the development of adaptive traits like assertiveness requires an incorporation of aggression into the personality. Advocates of this position emphasize that aggression traditionally has been a male pre- rogative and that females consequently have been disadvantaged in their attempts to achieve adequate self-functioning (e.g., Nadelson et al.). Propensities toward aggressiveness therefore suggest both adjustment and maladjustment, a masculine advantage and a feminine disadvantage, and a weakness of males and a strength of females. A harmonious integration of these arguments presents a formidable theoretical challenge.

Most generally, the present project argued that Kohut's psychology of the self contains the conceptual resources necessary for synthesizing these apparently contradictory positions. This suggestion rested upon the further, more basic assumption that Kohut's bipolar self roughly describes research operationalizations of traditional sex roles. More specifically, the expectation was that masculinity would correspond to the grandiose sector of the bipolar self while femininity would reflect the idealization process. Indeed, M-F + and M- were associated with the grandiosity of Pseudoauton- omy while aspects of femininity (e.g., M-F +, Fc-, and Fva-) did correlate with the immature idealization of Peer-Group Dependence. Predictable associations of the four sex roles with the four narcissistic styles further supported the bipolar self model of sex roles. Also as expected, feminine subjects were higher in Peer-Group Dependence, internals were higher in M ÷, and externals were highest in F ÷.

With its general relevance established, the psychology of the self then proved useful in exploring relationships between aggression and gender. Suggestions that aggression represents a masculine immaturity con- form with Kohut 's claim that narcissistic rage arises through the frustration of grandiose presumptions of omnipotence. Not surprisingly, therefore, M- and Pseudoautonomy were strongly connected with aggression in both the correlations and in the principal components analyses. In addition, synthetic and external narcissists self-reported generally lower Buss and Durkee scores, and these findings also revealed that a diminished likelihood of aggressiveness accompanied the absence of immature grandiosities.

On the other hand, positive Fva- correlations with the Buss-Durkee scales may seem to challenge the bipolar self model, since this one aspect


of an "idealizing" femininity was linked to an aggressiveness putatively at- tributable to the breakdown of masculine grandiosity. Nevertheless, in the principal components analyses, Fva- loaded in the same direction on factors along with M- and Pseudoautonomy. Such outcomes confirmed that these supposedly feminine characteristics had a closer affinity with immature grandiosity than with immature idealization. Social constructions of traditional sex roles therefore may allow for the incorporation of certain forms of masculine grandiosity into so-called femininity.

That aggression may be a masculine liability leads to the associated argument that an actualization of femininity may help ameliorate male destructiveness. In other words, internalizations of the mature idealizing edge of the bipolar self should work against the display of an antisocial aggressiveness at the immature grandiose edge of the self. Indeed, F ÷ reliably predicted lower levels of aggressiveness and Pseudoautonomy; the principal components analyses even more clearly uncovered the oppositional ties between F + and indices of immature grandiosity.

Kohut's claim that early aggression contains a positive mental health potential finds a counterpoint in the sex roles literature in complaints that the acceptance of male but not female aggression can lead to the social construction of a disadvantaged femininity. Assertiveness is but one trait theoretically dependent upon the appropriate integration of aggression into the personality. Not surprisingly, therefore, masculinity was linked to greater assertiveness; measures of immature idealization (Fc- and Peer-Group Dependence) were inversely tied to the CSES. Further- more, groups with relatively greater grandiosity (the androgynous, masculine, synthetic, and internal participants) tended to be more assertive. Finally, while inversely related to several Buss-Durkee scales, the CSES nevertheless was linked to greater aggression in some of the data. Such outcomes may confirm the existence of complex connections between aggression and the development of assertiveness. That internal narcissists were both more aggressive and more assertive may offer additional support for this possibility.

Differences in self-functioning were more common in the narcissistic styles than in the sex roles. As expected, archaic narcissists were most dis- turbed, since along with one group or another, they tended to be highest in aggression and lowest in assertion. At the same time, an opposite pattern of traits confirmed that synthetics were relatively most mature in their development. Finally, as noted previously, internals were closer to archaics in their aggressiveness while externals were more similar to synthetics; such findings were in line with the hypothesis that narcissistic rage is a property typical of immature grandiosity.


Where significant differences in sex roles did appear, the undifferentiated were identified as the most dysfunctional. Hence, as expected this group roughly matched archaics in their greater degree of maladjustment. Predictably, the androgynous also were like synthetics in being most ad- justed. Both groups tended to be more assertive and less aggressive. While such data confirmed the suggested parallel between sex role measures and the bipolar self, they also demonstrated the importance of separating the androgynous from the undifferentiated. Definitions of androgyny in terms of equal rather than high levels of so-called masculinity and femininity (e.g., Bem, 1981) would confound the maturities of the bipolar self with its immaturities.

Based on the present data, androgyny thus remained a defensible mental health objective. As noted previously, this claim is controversial (e.g., Lasch, 1981; Sampson, 1977), and Bem (1979) has suggested that the androgyny concept may become obsolete as opportunities for whole- some personality development become less strictly segregated according to sex. Within the context of more open cultural arrangements, it may make less sense to talk about androgyny as the healthy combination of masculinity and femininity because masculinity and femininity may cease to exist as social constructions. Such changes may occur, of course; but from a Kohutian standpoint, concern with the meaning behind "androgyny" will not likely disappear. An optimal functioning of the bipolar self presumably will always require an internalization of both ambitions and ideals.

Controversies exist not only over sex roles. Within psychoanalysis itself, sympathetic (e.g., Stolorow, Branchaft, & Atwood, 1987) and unsym- pathetic (e.g., Kernberg, 1974/1986) commentators both find much to complain about in Kohut's theory. Translations of vague clinical concepts into more precise research operationalizations undoubtedly will present additional investigative challenges. The notion of optimal frustration, for example, appears tautological as the observation of this supposedly causal process seems dependent upon its presumed effects. Furthermore, not all outcomes from the present project conformed with the bipolar self-in-depth model. The masculine sex role, for example, was not relatively more aggressive, and feminine participants unexpectedly joined the undifferentiated in self-reporting higher levels of resentment.

Still, the predictive imprecisions encountered in the present extension of Kohut's theory to the sex roles literature were minor, and the existence of ambiguities should not obscure the otherwise overwhelming support ob- tained for the psychology of the self. Numerous conceptual difficulties ad- mittedly remain, but procedural refinements and theoretical innovations may prove successful in addressing such problems as they arise. Wittig


(1985) a r g u e s t ha t in the c o n t e m p o r a r y psychology of g e n d e r " t h e t r u t h of

a t h e o r y res ides in h o w well it r e p r e s e n t s t h e d o m a i n it a t t e m p t s to exp l a in" (p. 803). In t e r m s o f the p r e s e n t da t a at least , t he psychology o f the self

s e e m e d to c o n t a i n s u f f i c i e n t " t r u t h " to e n c o u r a g e a d d i t i o n a l r e s e a r c h

effort .

R E F E R E N C E S

Bern, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42 155-162.

Bem, S. L. (1979). Theory and measu remen t of androgyny: A reply to the Pedhazur-Tetenbaum and Locksley-Colten critiques. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1047-1054.

Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354-364.

Buss, A. H., & Durkee, A. (1957). An inventory for assessing different kinds of hostility. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 4, 343-349.

Chessick, R. D. (1985). Psychology of the self and the treatment of narcissism. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.

Flaherty, J. F., & Dusek, J. B. (1980). An investigation of the relationship between psychological androgyny and components of self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 984-992.

Galassi, J. P., DeLo, J. S., Galassi, M. D., & Bastien, S. (1974). The college self-expression scale. Behavior Therapy, 5, 165-171.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Glazer, C. A., & Dusek, J. B. (1985). The relationship between sex-role orientation and

resolution of Eriksonian developmental crises. Sex Roles, 13, 653-661. Handal, P. J., & Salit, E. D. (1985). Gender-role classification and demographic relationships:

A function of type of scoring procedures. Sex Roles, 12, 411-419. Handal, P. J., & Salit, E. D. (1988). The relationship of gender role to positive and negative

aspects of adjustment: A function of type of scoring method. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 3, 49-62.

Kernberg, O. F. (1986). Further contributions to the treatment of narcissistic personalities. In A. P. Morrison (Ed.), Essential papers on narcissism. New York: New York University Press. (Original work published 1974.)

Kohut, H. (1971). The analysis of the self New York: International Universities Press. Kohut, H. (1977). The restoration of the self New York: International Universities Press. Kohut, H. (1978). Thoughts on narcissism and narcissistic rage. In P. H. Ornstein (Ed.), The

search for the self Madison, CT: International Universities Press. (Original work published 1972.)

Kohut, H. (1984). How does analysis cure? (A. Goldberg & P. E. Stepansky, Eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984.

Kohut, H., & Wolf, E. S. (1986). The disorders of the self and their treatment: An outline. In A. P. Morrison (Ed.), Essential papers on narcissism. New York: New York University Press. (Original work published 1978.)

Lapan, R., & Patton, M. J. (1986). Self-psychology and the adolescent process: Measures of pseudoautonomy and peer-group dependence. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33, 136-142.

Lasch, C. (1981 September-October). The freudian left and cultural revolution. New Left Review, 129, 23-24.

Nadelson, C. C., Notman, M. T., Miller, J. B., & Zilbach, J. (1982). Aggression in women; Conceptual issues and clinical implications. In M. T. Norman & C. C. Nadelson (Eds.),


The woman patient, VoL 3: Aggression, adaptations, and psychotherapy. New York: Plenum Press.

Ray, J. J., & Lovejoy, F. H. (1984). The great androgyny myth: Sex roles and mental health in the community at large. Journal of Social Psychology, 124, 237-246.

Sampson, E. E. (1977). Psychology and the American ideal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 767-782.

Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1981). Androgyny versus gender schema: A comment on Bem's gender schema theory. Psychological Review, 88, 365-368.

Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R. L., & Holahan, C. K. (1979). Negative and positive components of psychological masculinity and femininity and their relationships to self-reports of neurotic and acting out behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1673-1682.

Stolorow, R. D., Brandchaft, B., & Atwood, G. E. (1987). Psychoanalytic treatment: An intersubjective approach. Hillside, NJ: The Analytic Press.

Swimmer, G. I., & Ramanaiah, N. V. (1985). Convergent and discriminant validity of selected assertiveness measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 243-249.

Taylor, M. C., & Hall, J. A. (1982). Psychological androgyny: Theories, methods, and conclusions. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 347-366.

Watson, P. J., Biderman, M. D., & Boyd, C. (1989). Androgyny as synthetic narcissism: Sex role measures and Kohut's psychology of the self. Sex Roles, 21, 175-207.

Watson, P. J., McKinney, J., Hawkins, C., & Morris, R. J. (1988). Assertiveness and narcissism. Psychotherapy, 25, 125-131.

Westen, D. (1985). Self and soc&ty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wittig, M. A. (1985). Metatheoretical dilemmas in the psychology of gender. American

Psychologist, 40, 800-811.

Aggression, sex role measures, and Kohut's psychology of the self

Documents

Transcript of Aggression, sex role measures, and Kohut's psychology of the self