PERSONALITY PROFILES OF OVER-AND UNDER ... - CORE

PERSONALITY PROFILES OF OVER-AND UNDER-ACHIEVERS IN PROFESSIONAL COURSES

THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN

EDUCATION

BY

SHAMA RANI

Under the supervision of

Prof. Ramesh Chandra Deva

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY

ALIGARH

1994

,.^^r^2An/??^ . y^

J - / ^ — ^

20 FEB 1996

T4630

ill

I'/io'in: Fxi/ . 2J0A7 liifi . 8362

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY

ALIGARH. 202 002. U.P.

Dated c/^I^M

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the thesis entitled

"Personality Profiles of Over-and Under-achievers in

Professional Courses' submitted by Miss Shatna Rani for

Ph.D. (Education) Degree of Aligarh Muslim University,

Aligarh is her original contribution. This thesis has been

ccnn|>ie ed under my guidance and supervision. In my humble

judgement, the work is fit for submission for the degree

of Ph.D. in Education and can be considered a contribution

to our knowledge of the subject.

\c^~J>

(Prof. R.C. Deva)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I feel profound elation in recording my deep sense

of gratitude to my learned supervisor, Prof. Ramesh

Chandra Deva, Department of Education, Aligarh Muslim

University, Aligarh for his unreserved help, omniscient

guidance, constructive criticism, unflagging interest and

unflinching support.

I owe my sincere thanks to Prof. All Akhtar Khan,

Chairman, Department of Education, Aligarh Muslim

University for providing me necessary facilities.

I wish to express my thanks to Dr. Najmul Haq and

Dr. C.P.S. Chauhafi for their invaluable help in the

present task.

I wish to place on record my indebtedness to my

father, aunt and grandmother for their affectionate

inspiration and constant encouragement.

I am also thankful to all the authorities and

students under whose cooperation the study proceeded

smoothly.

Delighted I feel to convey my sincere thanks to all

ray friends for helping me during the completion of my

work.

I am grateful to the Librarian, Maulana Azad

Library, A.M.U. and the Librarian, B.H.U. for providing

all kinds of facilities during the collection of research

studies. I am also thankful to Mr. Haleem Khan, Librarian,

Department of Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

I am also indebted to University Grants Commission

for awarding me scholarship without which the work could

not have been accomplished.

VJords go deep into sorrow when I recall my mother

who left me at the stage of childhood but these are her

blessings which always remain guiding light of my career.

SHAMA RANI

LIST OF CONTENTS

List of Contents

List of Tables

List of Figures

CHAPTER I INTRDUCTION

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.5.1

1.5.2

1.5.3

1.5.4

1.6

1.7

CHAPTER II

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

Need and Importance of the Problem

Statement of the Problem

Objectives of the Study

Hypotheses of the Study

Definition of Terms

Personality

Profile

Over-and Under-achievement

Professional Courses

Delimitations

Procedure in Outline

REFERENCES

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Page No.

1

vitl

X

1 - 3 8

1

10

11

11

18

19

21

21

24

24

25

27

Studies on Intelligence and Academic Achievement

Studies on Intelligence and Professional Courses

Studies on Personality Traits and Academic Achievement

Studies on Anxiety and Academic Achievement

Studies on Personality Traits and Professional Courses.

REFERENCES

39 - 113

39

46

51

74

84

100

ii

CHAPTER III

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

3.10

3.11

3.11.1

3.11.2

3.11.3

3.12

CHAPTER IV

4.1

4.1.1

4.1.2

DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 114-134

The Sample 114

Tools of the Study 115

Measure of Intelligence 115

Reliability of the Intelligence Measure 117

Validity of Intelligence Measure 117

The Measure of Achievement 118

Measure of Personality 119

Reliability of the Inventory 121

Validity of the Inventory 122

Administration of the Tests and 123 Collection of Data

Identification of Over-and Under- 124 achievement

Variability in Achievement at Constant 124 Level of Intelligence

Discrepancy Between Achievement and 125 Intelligence

Discrepancy between Observed and 127 Predicted Achievement

Procedure for Determining Group 130 Differences on Personality Factors

REFERENCES 132

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION 135-218 AND DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS

Personality and Achievement in 142 Engineering Professional Courses

Factor I (Lively-Serious) 142

Factor II (Sociable-Reserved) 143

iii

4.1.3 Factor III (Impulsive-Stable) 144

4.1.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy) 145

4.1.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) 146

4.1.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive) 146

4.1.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient) 148

4.1.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) 149

4.1.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experiment) 149

4.1.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh) 150

4.1.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive) 151

4.1.12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle-minded) 152

4.2 Personality and Achievement in Teaching 154 Professional Courses

4.2.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious) 154

4.2.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved) 155


4.2.4 Factor IV ((Venturesome-Shy) 158





4.2.9 Factor IX ((Conservative-Experimenting) 162



4.2.12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle-minded) 165

iv

4.3 Personality and Achievement in Law 167 Professional Courses









4.3.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting) 175



4.3.12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle minded) 178

4.4 Personality and Achievement in Business 180 Administration Professional Courses











4.4.11 Factor XI (Coo|)craLlvc'-()l)sL rucLlve ) 188


4.5 Personality and Achievement in Medical 191 Professional Courses



4.5.3 Factor III(Impulsive-Stable) 193






4.5.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experiment) 198




4.6 Comparisons of Personality Character- 201 istics of Over acbieversL in the Professional Courses







vi

4.6.7 Factor VLL (ConscienLious-ExpodienL) 209






REFERENCES 215

CHAPTER V SUMMARY CONCLUSIONSAND SUGGESTIONS 219-237

5.1 Objectives of the Study 221

5.2 Hypotheses of the Study 222

5.3 Method 223

5.4 Sample 224 5.5 Tools 225 5.5.1 Measure of Intelligence 225

5.5.2 Measure of Achievement 225

5.5.3 Measure of Personality 225

5.6 Conclusions 226

5.6.1 Personality Characteristics of Over- 226 achievers in different Professional Courses.

5.6.2 Personality Characteristics of Under- 227 achievers in different Professional Courses.

5.6.3 Comparisons of Personality Characteristics 227 of Over-achievers in the Professional Courses.

5.7 Suggestions and Implications 230 «

5.8 Suggestions for Further Research 232

REFERENCES 236

vli

APPENDICES

Appendix I Test of "g" Culture Fair.

Appendix II Answer Sheet for Culture

Fair Test

Appendix III Vyaktitva Parakh Prashnavali

Appendix IV Answer Sheet for Vyaktitva

Parakh Prashanawali.

Appendix V 12 Personality Factors

Rating Scale.

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Description Page No,

1.1 Enrolment and Expenditure in Professional 2

Courses

1.2 Percentage of Ilird Divisioners and Failures. 3

A.l Significance of Difference between the Mean 141

Scores on Twelve Personality Factors obtained

by Over-and Under-achievers in Engineering

(B.Sc. Engineering) Professional Courses.

4.2 Significance of Difference between Mean 153

Scores on Twelve Personality Factors Obtained

by Over-and Under-achievers in Teaching

(B.Ed.) Professional Courses.

4.3 Significance of difference between Mean


by Over-and Under-achievers in Law (LL.B.)

Professional Courses.



by Over-and Under-achievers in Business

Administration (M.B.A.) Professional Courses.


Scores on Twelve Personality Factors obtained

by Over-and Under-achievers in Medical

(M.B.B.S.) Professional Courses.

ix

4.6 Comparisons of Mean Scores on Twelve 202

Personality Factors Obtained by Over-and

Under-achievers in Five Professional Courses

(Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business

Administration and Medical).

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No. Description Page No.

4.1 Personality Profiles of Over-and 142

Under-achiever in Engineering (B.Sc.

Engineering) Professional Courses.


Under-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.)


4.3 Personality Profilesof Over-and Under- 167

achievers in Law (LL.B.) Professional

Courses.


Under-achievers in Business

Administration (M.B.A.) Professional

courses.


Under-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.)


.4.6 Comparisons of Mean Scores on Twelve 203

Personality Factors obtained by Over-

achievers in Five Professional Courses

(Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business

Administration and Medical).

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER -I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Need and Importance of the Problem:

Economic growth, welfare and prosperity of a nation

depends on its natural resources and the talents of its

citizens. But the talent of the people is perhaps more

important than natural resources. Natural resources like

coal and minerals, precious stones like diamonds, rubies

and pearls and the precious metals like gold, silver and

platinum may be the proud possessions of a nation but

perhaps more important than this is the human genuis that

can explore, locate and exploit these treasures and add to

the country's material and cultural growth and

development. This human resource is of paramount

importance for progress of a nation. Professional

education is the principal means of developing the human

resource. Professional training includes education and

training of engineers, teachers, lawyers, business

administrators, doctors,etc.

The nation spends large sums of money on

professional education and training of its citizens. Table

1.1 presents the enrolment of students in different

professional courses and the expenditure incurred on them.

It would be seen that the enrolment of students in degree

engineering college was about 159949.

Table l .J

Enrolment and Expenditure in p.rofessional Courses in

1985-86

Engineering Teaching Law Business f-tedicine

Admin.

Enrolment

Per Capita Expenditure

Total Expenditure

159949

1 2300

fe 3678.8 (laWis)

65683 121501 5808

Rs 1250 N.A.

fe 821.1 flal<hs)

N.A-

81678

Rs 4760

fe 3887.9 (lakhs)

* Extrapolated from Table 3.3, Chauhan, C.P.S. "Higher

Education in India". Ashish Publishing House, New Delhi,

1990.

The per capita expenditure on these students was

fe 2300. Thus the total expenditure on engineering

professional courses comes to about fe 3678.8 lakhs. The

per capita expenditure on professional courses in teaching

and medicine is fe 1250 and Rs 4760 respectively. Thus, the

total amount comes to about fe 41497.8 lakhs. Figures

regarding expenditure on law and M.B.A. professional

courses could not be included in the table 1.1 because of

non-availability of the data.

The table 1.2 shows the percentage of lllrd

divisioners and failures in different professional

courses.

Table 1.2

Percentage of Illrd Divisioners and Unsuccessful Students-

Professional Courses Ilird Division Failures

Engineering 'B.Sc. Engg.)

Teaching (B.Ed.)

Law (LL.B)

Business Administration (M.B.A)

Medicine (M.B.B.S.)

9 . 6

3 2 . 8

1 8 . 0

N.A.

N.A.

2 0 . 4

1 5 . 4

4 5 . 1

N.A.

4 4 . 1

Adapted from tables 5.4 and 5.6, Chauhan, C.P.S. "Higher

Education in India". Ashish Publishing House, New Delhi,

1990.

Students in professional courses securing third

division are not better than a failure because their

chances of employment and efficient work are very bleak.

Therefore, for the purpose of estimating the drain on

expenditure the third divisioners have been bracketed with

failures. Thus, it would be seen from the table 1.2 that

30 percent (9.6+ 20.4) of the engineering students have

shown performance below the required standard. In terms of

financial loss, the total amount of Rs 1103.6 lakhs is

wasted in the professional training of engineers alone.

Thus, the nation suffers a loss of Rs 3212.5 lakhs in the

professional training of engineers, teachers, lawyers and

doctors. This amount would have further been increased if

the data regarding expenditure for M.B.A. professional

course and students securing Ilird division in the

professional courses of doctors were available. A

developing country like India can ill afford this

collossal wastage. This is perhaps due to the admission of

unsuitable persons in these professional courses.

Therefore, it is imperative that only those students

should be admitted to these courses who are likely to

succeed in them.

The efficiency of a person in any profession

depends not only on educ?ition and training imparted to him

but also on his personality characteristics. One can not make

excellent furniture out of bad timber. The character

istics required for success in different professional

courses may include cognitive characteristics like

creativity and intelligence, personal characteristics like

confidence, perseverance, sociability, conscientiousness,

etc. Therefore, there is a need to investigate the

specific characteristics responsible for over and under-

achievement in professional courses.

A large number of studies have been undertaken In

India and abroad to investigate the relationship between

intelligence and achievement in academic courses. Some of

the important studies are: Franzen, 1920; Monroe and

Buckingham, 1920; Jordan, 1923; Peters, 1926; Edds and

McCall, 1933; Burt, 1937; Hartson Sprow, 1941; Durflinger,

1943; Kulshreshtha, 1956; Wellman, 1957; Rao, 1963; Crow

and Crow, 1964; Baquer, 1965; Rao, 1965; Singh, 1965

Ausubel, 1968; Sharrna 1971; McCandless Roberts, 1972

Saxena, 1972; Dhaml, 1974; Ravindar, 1977; Mlshra, 1978

Crano, Messe and Rice, 1979; Glossop and Appleyard, 1979

Joseph, 1979; Katlyar, 1979; David, Watkln and Estella

Astilla, 1980; Rai, 1980; Roberge and Flexer, 1984; Yule

Lansdown, 1982; Sharrna, 1982; Saxena, 1984; Singh, 1986;

Knarr Jo Anne, 1988 and Slnha, 1989.

Attempts have also been made to investigate the

relationship between intelligence and success in

professional courses. Some of the important studies in the

area are: Fryer, 1922; Deva, 1966; Mathur, 1966;

Kumaraiah, 1976; Patil, 1984 and Kazmi, 1986.

It will be seen that the researches conducted in

this area are few and far between particularly when they

are compared with the number of research conducted to

investigate the relationship between intelligence and

achievement in academic courses.

A perusal of these investigations reveals that the

relationship between intelligence and achievement obtained

in academic and professional courses ranges from .4 to .6.

Although these coefficients are fairly significant but at

the same time indicate that large amount of variance in

the criterion measure remains unexplained indicating that

there are other variables in addition to intelligence

which determine achievement in these courses.

Success in academic and professional courses is

dependent upon intelligence as well as personality of a

student. Intelligence determines what the person can do

and the personality determines what the person will do.

Personality is surely a forceful determinant of human

activities including achievement in academic and

professsional courses. Generally, the students with high

intellectual endowment achieve high but sometimes inspite

of their high intellectual capabilities they fail to do

so. This perhaps is due to certain personality

characteristics of a student. For example, personality

characteristics like fickle-mindedness and nervousness may

pull down the students of higher ability to a louer level

and personality characteristics like perseverance and

confidence may push up students with low ability to a

higher level. Oklahoma studies (1952) have also concluded that the

intellectual variable can function effectively only when

the personality function is properly integrated. Barrett

(1958) has demonstrated the importance of personality in

academic achievement. He is of the opinion that only by

careful and thorough study of each individual personality

we can find the reasons for his/her under-achievement. He

also found that a student with fairly high level of

intelligence may not be able to achieve high because of

lack of perseverance. Bishton (1957) expresses the same

idea when he writes, "Intelligence is a significant

determiner of scholastic achievement but many other

social, psychological and emotional factors affect the

nature and extent of school achievement!' Srivastava

(1976) holds the view that some of the students who fail

in the school examination obtain better scores on test of

intelligence and some of good achievers in earlier classes

unexpectedly lag behind the standard of achievement. It

shows that primary operant factor in academic achievement

is not only the intelligence alone. Personality

characteristics may play a fairly important role in this

regard.

Quite a few investigations have been attempted to

study the predictive validity of personality factors for

achievement in academic courses. Some of the important

studies conducted in India and abroad are: Flemming, 1930;

8

Gebhart and Hoyt, 1958; Lynn, 1959; Krug, 1959; Angclo and

Hall, 1960; Astington, 1960; Eysenck, 1960; Ja.nuar, 1961,;

Mishra, 1962; Centi Paul, 1952; Ridding, 1966; Rushton

1966; Ahluwalia, 1967; Bhatnagar, 196 8; Abraham, 1969;

Pandit, 19^9; Dhaliwal, 1971; Sharma, 1971; Patel and

Joshi, 1972; Srivastava, 1976; Reddy. 1978; Vora, 1978;

Siddiqui, 1979; Jahan Qamar, 1985; Singh, 1986; Haq, 1987;

Tuli, 1988; Smriti, 1989 and Neog,1990.

Personality factors are also important for success

in different professional courses. Quite a few studies

establishing relationship between these variables have

been undertaken both in India and abroad. Some of such

well known studies are presented below: Waggon and

Zeigler, 1946; Cattell and Dravedahl, 1955; Cole, 1961;

Deb Maya, 1968; Pal, 1969; Walsh and Palmer, 1970; Mishra,

1971; Gopal, 1975; Kumaraiah, 1976; Arora, 1982; Maxwell,

1983; Pervin, 1984; Vyas, 1987 and Mishra, 1988. Few of

the studies have been presented in more details.

Deb Maya (1968) attempted to find out the

predictive validity of personality traits success in

engineering. It was found that personality traits:

extraversion, dominance, absence of neurosis, sociability,

self-sufficiency, self- confidence and intelligence are

necessary for success in engineering profession.

Pal (1969) found out that engineering students

obtained significantly higher scores on economic and

aesthelic scales while medical students scored

significantly higher on theoretical and social scales.

Walsh and Palmer (1970) found that dominance was

the characteristic of both undergraduate students in

pre-law and third year law students.

Gopal (1975) sought to find out certain

differentiating personality characteristics of creative

and non-creative engineering students. He found that

creative engineering students in comparison to their less

creative peers were more reserved, emotionally stable,

assertive, sober, expedient, venturesone , toughminded,

suspicious, imaginative experimenting and self-

sufficient.

Mishra (198A) investigated personality traits of

original teachers. They were found to be emotionally

mature, stable, realistic about life, assertive, self-

assured, austere, dependent minded, hostile,extrapunitive,

authoritarian, cheerful, active, talkative, carefree,

impulsive, dominated by sense of duty & plan, responsible,

moralistic, sociable, bold, ready to try new things,

spontaneous, day-Jreaming, artistic and doubtful.

10

The above mentioned review of related research

reveals that sufficient number of studies investigating

the relationship between personality characteristics and

success in academic courses have been conducted, the

number of studies investigating relationship between

personality and professional courses has been inadequate.

These studies have generally been restricted to a single

profession (Burgess, 1953; Gebhart and Hoyt, 1958; Hishra,

1962; Deb Maya, 1968; Walsh and Palmer, 1970; Kaul, 1973;

Kumariah, 1976; Nagpal, 1979; Pervin, 198A and Vyas, 1987),

and only to some dimensions of personality (Mishra, 1962;

VJalsh and Palmer, 1970; Kumaraiah, 1976 and Pervin, 1984).

Therefore, there is a need to undertake an exhaustive

study including a larger number of professions and

employing a comprehensive personality inventory. The

present study is an attempt in this direction. The present

investigator has included five professional courses,

namely, Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.), Law

(LL.B), Business Administration (M.B.A.) and Medical

(M.B.B.S.) and has employed a comprehensive 12 factor

inventory which was constructed by the investigator as a

part of her M.Phil, course.

1.2 Statement of the Problem:

The present research proposes to study the

11

personality characteristics and draw the personality

profiles of over and underachievers in different

professional courses.

1.3 Objectives of the Study:

In specific terms the present research proposes to:-

(1) identity over- and under- achievers in the

following professional, courses: Engineering (B.Sc.

Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.), Law (LL.B), Master of

Business Administration (M.B.A.) and Bachelor of

Medicine and Surgery (M.B.B.S.).

(2) study the personality characteristics of over and

underachievers in the above mentioned courses.

(3) draw personality profiles of overachievers in the

above mentioned courses.

(4) draw personality profiles of undarc-achievers in the


(5) Compare the personality patterns of over- and under

achievers in each of the aforementioned


(6) Compare the personality patterns of over-achievers

in the above mentioned five professional courses.

(7) give suggestions regarding selection of the

candidates for admission in these courses.

1.4 Hypotheses of the Study:

A hypothesis is an informed or intelligent guess

12

with a reasonable chance of being right, formulated and

tentatively adopted to explain observed facts or

conditions and to guide in further investigation. A well

framed hypothesis serves as 'eye' of the investigator for

seeking solutions to the problems encountered ih the

research. It helps in deciding the right direction in

which the researcher has to proceed and deriving

appropriate conclusions. Emphasizing the importance of a

hypothesis Good (1966) cites the example of Charles Darwin

who in a letter to his contemporary^ Alfred R. Wallace,

wrote, "Without speculation there is no good observation."

Speculation or intuitive contemplation guided by past

discoveries, led Darwin to his famous observation as set

forth in Origin of Species. Thus,, past research coupled

with intuitive contemplation is of great importance in the

context of any research. Batra (1991) also reports, "A

researcher should formulate his hypotheses after carrying

out a critical survey of related literature.... analysis

of existing knowledge, observation and experience." Good

and Hall (1952) have rightly observed, "Without hypothesis

the research is unfocussed random empirical wandering."

Hypothesis is necessary link between theory and

investigation which leads to discovery of additional

knowledge .

13

Some investigators write the hypotheses in null

form. Such hypotheses may be useful in certain statistical

techniques but have little value for the purpose of

educational research because they do not point to any

direction and thus are of no help in deriving conclusions.

Batra (1991) while reporting the proceedings of a seminar

on "Emerging Issues in the Methodology of Educational

Research" held under the auspices of the NCERT, New Delhi,

also observed that some of the researchers write them

(hypotheses) in null form.... This is due to lack, of

understanding of the rationale underlying the process of

hypothesis testing. He also points out that the practice

of null hypothesis is being over-used or misused.... Null

hypothesis is essentially a statistical technique ,certain

data are amendable to such inferential statistics in which

the use of null hypothesis is appropriate and helpful.

Hypotheses should be stated clearly and exhibit clarity of

thought of the researcher and the position he/she takes.

The present research aims to identify the

personality characteristics of persons in different

professional courses. Therefore, the investigator decided

to formulate directional hypotheses based on the review of

previous researches and theoretical rationale.

14

On the basis of previous researches in the area and

theoretical rationale the following hypotheses have been

formulated. The previous researches which support the

personality characteristics hypothesised have been

mentioned against each. Some personality characteristics

for which the support from previous research was not

available have been included on the basis of theoretical

rationale. The rationale for such characteristics has been

presented in Chapter IV.

1. Overachievers in Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.) professional

courses are likely to be:

I Serious (Taylor, 1964 and Gawronski,

1965).

li Reserved (Dhaliwal, 1971 and Gopal,

1975).

III Impulsive (For theoretical rationale

see page 144 Chapter IV).

IV Venturesome (Jayagopala, 1974 and Jahan,

1985).

V Confident (Taylor, 1964 and Grawronski,

1965).

VI Dominant (Riding 1966 and Gopal, 1975)

VII Expedient (For theoretical rationale

see page 143, chapter IV).

VIII Suspicious (Gopal, 1975 and Neog, 1990).

15

IX Experimenting

X Harsh

XI Obstructive

XII Persevering!

(Ghuman, 1976).

(For theoretical rationale

page 150-51 Chapter IV).

(For theoretical rationale see


(Gupta, 1970 and Menon,

1973).

2. Overachievers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional courses

are likely to be:

I Lively

II Reserved

III Stable

IV Venturesome

V Confident

VI Dominant

VII Conscientious

VIII Trusting

IX Conservative

X Kind

XI Cooperative

XII Persevering

(Fox, 1971 and Adaval, 1979).

(Dhaliwal, 1971 and Adaval,

1979).

(Deva, 1966 and tlishra,

1984).

(Rushfon,1966) .

(Deva,1966 and Rushton, 1966).


see page 160, chapter IV).

(Adaval, 1979 and Neog, 1990).

(Adaval, 1979).

(Mishra, 1988).

(Deva, 1966 and Neog, 1990).

(Fox, 1972 and Tutoo, 1975).

(Cook, 1972 and Wakefield,

1974).

16

3 . Overachievers in Law (LL.B)professional courses are l i k e l y to

be:

I Ser ious (For t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e

see page 1&7-C8 Chapter IV) .

(Dhal iwal , 1971) .

(For t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e

see page 169-70 Chapter IV) .

(Rushton, 1966) .

(Taylor,1964 and Somasundaran

1980).

(Ridding, 1966 and Rushton,

1966).


see page 173-74 Chaptar IV).

(For theoredtical rationale

see page 175 ChaTtor IV).


see page 175r76 Chapter IV).

(Neog, 1990).


see page 177-78 Chapter IV).

(Gupta, 1970 and Menon,

1973).

II Reserved

III Impulsive

IV Venturesome

V Confident

VI Dominant

VII Expedient

VIII Suspicious

IX Conservative

X Harsh

XI Obstructive

XII Persevering

17

4. Overachievers in Business Administration (M.B.A.)

professional courses are likely to be:

I Lively (Singh, 1972).

II Sociable

III Stable

IV Venturesome

V Confident

VI Dominant

VII Expedient

VIII Suspicious

IX 'Experimenting

X Harsh

XI Obstructive

XII Persevering


page 131-02 Chai:.t'jr IV).

(Gopal, 1975 and Pervin, 1984).

(Rushton, 1966).

(Pervin, 1984).

(Ridding, 1966 and Rushton,1966).





(Jayagopala, 1974 and Ghuman,

1976).

(Ghuman, 1976 and Srivastava,

1976).


page 188-89 c h a p t e r I V ) .

( G u p t a , 1 9 7 0 ) .

18

5. Overachievers in

courses are likely

I Serious

II Reserved

III Stable

IV Venturesome

V Confident

VI S u b m i s s i v e

VII E x p e d i e n t

V I I I T r u s t i n g

IX E x p e r i m e n t i n g

IX Kind

XI C o o p e r a t i v e

XII ' P e r s e v e r i n g

Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional

to be:

(Taylor, 1964 and Jensen, 1973).

(Srivastava, 1976).

(Ahluwalia & Narang, 1967).

(Rushton, 1966).

(Somasundaran, 1980).

(Haq, 1987)


page 197-90chap te r I V ) .


page 198 chapter IV).

(Ghuman, 1976).

(Jayagopala, 1974 '.


page 200 chapter IV).

(Astlngton, 1960 and Bhagirath,

1978).

1.5 Definition of Terms :

An attempt has been made in the following

paragraphs to present the meaning of the term employed in

the present study in as unambiguous form as possible.

19

1.5.1 Personality: Human personality is a very complex

phenomenon. The word personality has been derived from a

latin word 'persona' which means mask. Greek actors used

to wear masks during theaatrical performance for creating

special effect. Thus, personality implies the influence

that the mask exerts on other people. Hence, personality

is the sum total of effects made by an individual upon

others. Prince (1924, p. 4) defines personality as "the

sum total of all biological, innate and acquired

dispositions, impulses, tendencies of the individual."

Jalota (1952, p. 329) has emphasized the social aspects of

personality. According to him "Personality represents the

peculiar attitudes and behaviour of an individual within a

social context." This definition envisages social

interaction, therefore,this cannot explain the personality

of the social isolates. Guilford (1959) defines

personality as a unique pattern of traits. A trait is any

distinguishable relatively enduring way in which one

individual differs from another. Cattell (1965, p. 18)

defines personality as that which tells what a man will do

when placed in a given situation. According to Ryckman

(1971, p. 4), "Personality is the dynamic scientific study

of individual differences in thou ht and behaviour that

occur under situation and circumstances. According to

Pervin (1984, p. 4), "Personality represents those

20

characteristics of the person or of people generally that

account for consistent patterns of behaviour." The most

comprehensive definition of personality is given by

Allport (1937, p. 48), "Personality is the dynamic

organisations ot aii those psycho-physical systems that

determine his unique adjustment to the environiiient." In

this definition the word 'dynamic' implies that

personality is undergoing a constant change but is still

organised; the word 'within the individual' focusses on

the inner aspects rather than superficial menifestations;

the word 'psycho-physical systems' reminds that personality

is neither exclusively mental nor physical, but an

interaction of the two,internal and external environments;

the v;ord 'determine' denotes that personality is dynamic

because latent psycho-physical systems when called to

action motivate or direct specific activities and thought

and the word 'unique adjustment of the individual to his

environment' means that each individual employs different

methods resulting in unique adjustment. Later on,Allport

(1961, p. 28) revised this definition as: "Personality is

the dynamic organisation within the individual of those

psycho-physical systems that determine his characteristic

behaviour and thought."

A perusal of the definitions of Allport, Guilford

(1959), Allport (1961) and Cattell (1965) reveals that

21

they emphasize on traits of the person. Cattell used the

most scientific method, i.e. fnctor nnnlyfllR for

constructing personality inventory. The present

investigator also constructed the personality inventory

employed in the present study by the help of factor

analytic technique.

1.5.2 Profile: Graphic representation of set of

characteristics of an individual has been termed as

personality profile.

1.5.3 Over-and Underachlevement: The present study seeks

to identify the personality characteristics of over- and

underachievcrs in different professional courses. The

academic achievement is also influenced by such variables

as intelligence ,creativity, achievement motivation, study

habits, socio-economic status, etc. Previous researches

have sho\;n that of the above variables intelligence exerts

the most profound influence. Harris (1940) points out,

"The correlation of intelligence with grades reported in

various investigation range from 0.37 to 0.69. It was

noted that at a number of places intelligence scores were

found to be the best single predictor of grades." Rao

(19S5) obtained 66 percent predictability of scholastic

performance on the basis of intelligence alone. Ther^^f^re,

it was decided that intelligence should be employed as

control variable in the present study.

?:?

A variety of approaches have been adopted by the

researchers for the purposes of controlling intelligence.

Some of the investigators (Shaw, 1957; Frankel, 1960;

James and Elmore, 1962 and Eugence, 1964) have sought to

control the effectofintelligence in the relationship

between different predictor variables and achievement by

employing subjects at constant level of intelligence. This

technique, thus, requires selection of subjects at a

particular level of intelligence. Obviously in this

procedure, it will not be possible to obtain a fairly

large sample. Moreover, the relationship at a particular

level of intelligence may be different from that at

another level of intelligence. Therefore, this technique

was not considered suitable for the present research.

Franzen (1920), Peters (1926) and Burt (1937) have

attempted to control the effect of intelligence on the

relationship between different predictors and academic

achievement by suggesting the concept of Achievement

Quotient (A.Q) and Intelligence Quotient (I.Q). A.Q. was

supposed to indicate whether the subject was achieving

according to his mental ability or not. This proposal

involves the use of data on educational age and

chronological age, etc. which are difficult to obtain and

y^

even when obtained are not dependable. Moreover, the

sample employed for deriving norms for mental age and

educational achievement are different and , therefore , not

comparable. Due to these defects this procedure was not

considered suitable.

The present research has employed the concept of

over and under-achievement suggested by Thorndike(1963). He

formulated a detailed methodology of controlling _the

effect of regression while predicting achievement on the

basis of intelligence. This technique is knovjn as

regression equation. He also differentiated the concept of

over and underachievement and high and low achievement.

High and low achievement represents arbitrarily accepted

levels of performance. He defined over and under

achievement as the positive and negative discrepancy of

actual achievement from the predicted value obtained on

the basis of relationship between intelligence and

achievement of the v;hole group. Students whose actual

achievement was one SD^ more than the predicted

achievement were designated as overachievers and those

whose actual achievement was one SDQ belov\; the predicted

achievement v/ere called under-achievers . This method of

controlling the effect of intelligence was adopted in the

present study.

9il

1.5.4 Professional Courses: Professional education

according to Blauch (1965) consists of those forms of

education that prepare men and women for practice of that

profession. It incorporates many forms of specialized

education for v hich special educational and training

institutions are maintained by the society. This education

covers the most vital area of social life as it prepares

men and women for different types of professional

services.

1.8 Delimitations:

1) Tae present study seeks to identify the personality

characteristics of oveir and under-achievers in different

professional courses. There could be a variety of

professional courses for this purpose but the present

researcher has restricted her investigation to the

following professional courses: Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.),

Teaching (B.Ed.), Law (LL.B), Master of Business

Administration (M.B.A.) and Bachelor of Medicine and

Surgery (M.B.B.S.).

2) The competence of a person depends on many factors,

such as study habits, intelligence, socio-economic status,

motivational and personality factors. Personality

seems to be one of the important variablesin this regard.

Therefore, only this variable has been investigated in the

present research.

on

3) Relationship between porsoiiaLity and ochievotneiit in

different professional courses is influenced by such

factors as intelligence, study habits, environmental and

motivational factors. Therefore, in order to obtain true

relationship between personality and achievement in these

courses, the effect of these variables must be controlled.

It would be very difficult to control the effect of all

the above variables in a study like the present one.

Intelligence has been regarded as the most important

variable in this context. The present study has, therefore,

attempted to control only this variable.

4) A variety of methods of controlling the effect of

intelligence like analysis of variance, analysis of

convariance and partial correlation are available. The

present study has, however, employed Thorndike's

regression equation technique for the identification of

over-and under-achievers.

1.7 Procedure in Outline :

The present research is concerned with

investigating the relationship between personality

characteristics of over- and under-achievers in

professional courses of Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.),

Teaching (B.Ed.), Law (LL.B), Master of Business

Administration (M.B.A.) and Bachelor of Medicine and

Surgery (M.B.B.S.). The sample consisted of 532 students

26

studying in these professional courses. The over- and

underachievers were identified on the basis of the

procedure suggested by Thorndike (1963). In this procedure

predicted achievement of the students is computed on the

basis of regression equation between intelligence and

achievement of the sample under study. If the obtained

achievement is one SDe or more above the predicted

achievement, the student is designated as overachiever.

Conversely, if the obtained achievement is one SDe or

more below the predicted achievement, he/she is termed as

under-achievers.

After identification of over- and under-achievers

their personality characteristics were measured by the

help of personality inventory constructed by the

investigator as a part of her M.Phil, work. Profiles of

over and underachievers in each of the professional

courses were drawn. On the basis of these profiles the

personality of over- and under-achievers was compared

Comparisons were also made among overachievers of all the

professional groups.

27 REFERENCES

a" Abraham, PA. (1969). An Experimental Study of Certain Personality Traits and Achievement of Scondary School Pupils. Doctor Thesis, Psy., Karnataka University.

siAdaval, SB. (1979). Quality of Teachers. Amitabh Prakashan, Allahabad.

Ahluwalia SP and Narang, S. (1967). A Study of Some of the Personality Characteristics of Good and Poor achievers. Indian Psychological Abstracts, 1975, 7, 85-86.

x'-Ahluwalia, S.P. and Narang, S. (1967). A Study of Some of the Personality Characteristics of Good and Poor Achievers. Indian Psychological Abstracts, 1975, 7, 85-86.

Allport, G.VJ. (1937). Personality: A Psychological Interpretation. Henry Holt, New York, p. 48.

Allport, G.W. (1961). Pattern and Growth in Personality. Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York.

Angelo, H.A. and Hall, R.L. (1960). Temperamental Factors in the High School Seniors. Psychol. Report, 7,

, 518.

Arora, R.K. (1981). An Investigation into the Problems of Students in Professional Courses of Medicine, Law, Engineering and Education in Relation to Personality Factors. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

„Astington,E. (1960). Personality Assessment and Academic Performance in a Boy's Grammar School. British Journal of Educational Psychol., 30, 3, 225.

Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View: Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York.

Baquer, M.(1965). Differential Factors in Pupil Success in Science, Arts and Commerce Courses at the Higher Secondary Stage. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, A.M.U., Aligarh.

Barrett, Harry, Q. (1958). Intensive Study of 32 Gifted Children. Personal and Guidance Journal, 36, 3, 193-194.

28

Batra (Editor, 1991). Emerging Issues in the Methodology of Educational Research. N.C.E.R.T., New Delhi.

^vBhagirath, G.S. (1978). Correlates of Academic Achievement as Perceived by the Teachers and Students of High School. Doctoral Thesis. In Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83), Buch, M.B. (Editor) 1986, 658-59.

Bhatnagar,R.P. (1968). A Study of Same of the Personality Factors as Predictors of Academic Achievement CIE Studies, Pub. No. 63.

Bishton, R. (1957). A Study of Some Factors Related to Achievement of Intellectual Superiors VIII Grade Children. Journal of Educational Research, 51, 3, 203-208.

Blauch, . .Lloyed, E. (1955). Education for the Professions, United States Office of Education, Publications, Government Printing Office, Washington.

\ Burgess, Elva (1953). Personality Factors of Over and Under-achievers in Engineering. Pinnsylvannla State University Abstract of Dissertation, 16, 536-43.

o Burt, c. (1937). The Backward Child. University of London Press, London.

Cattell, R.B. (1965). The Scientific Analysis of Personality. Penguin, Baltimore.

Cattell, R.B. and Dravedahl, J.E. (1955). A Comparison of the Personality Profile (16 P.F)of Eminent Researchers with that of Eminent Teachers and Administrators of General Population. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 248-61.

<\->Centi, Paul. (1962). Personality Factors Related to College Success. Journal of Educational Research, 55, 4, 187.

Chauhan, C.P.S. (1990). Higher Education in India. Ashish Publishing House, New Delhi, pp. 42 & 100.

29

s^Chauhan, Poonam. (1993). Relative Contribution of Some Socio-cultural and Familial Variables to Over and Under-achievement in Science at Class VIII Level. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U.,

Cole

Aligarh.

D.L. (1961), Journal

The Prediction of Teaching Performance, of Edu. Research, 54, 345-348.

Cook, A.M. and Richards, H.C. (1972). Dimensions of Principal and Supervisor Rating of Teacher Behaviour. Journal of Experimental Education, 41, 2, 11-13.

v^Crano, W.D., Messe, S.R. and Rice, W. (1979). Evaluation of the Predictive Validity of Tests of Mental Ability, Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 2, 233-241.

v 'Crow, L.D. and Crow, A.E. (1964). Educational Eurasia Publishing House, Ram Nagar,

Psychology. New Delhi.

v.-vDavid, Watkin and Estella Astilla. (1980). Intellective and Non Intellective Predictors of Academic Achievement at Filipine University, 40, p.245.

-VDeb Maya. (1968). Personality Traits Engineers. Indian Journal of 6-10.

of Successful Psychology, 43,

vDeva, R.C. (1966). Prediction of Student Teaching Success. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

icDhaliwal, A.S. (1971). A Study of Some Factors Contributing to Academic Success and Failure Among High School Students : Personality Correlates of Academic Over-Under-Achievement. Doctoral Thesis Psychology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.

vvvDhara:i, G.S. (1974). Intelligence, Emotional Maturity and Socio-Economic Status as Factors Indicative of Success in Scholastic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Punjab University cited by Buch (Editor): Third Survey of Research in Education, 662-663,

vv Durflinger, G.V . (1943). Prediction of College Success. American Association of Collegiate Reeistr. 30, 251-264.

30

>v<«,Edcls, J.H., and McCall. (1933). Predicting the Scholastic Success of College Freshmen. JOurnal of educational Research, 27, 127-130.

i,<>> Eugence, S.E. (1964). A Normative Approach to the Measurement of Under-achievement. Journal of Experimental Education, 33, 2, 197-199.

Eysenck, H.J. and Cookson, D. (1964). Personality in Primary School Children. British Jour, of Edu. Psychol., 39, 109-121.

(." Franzen, R. (1920). The Accomplishment Quotient, A School Mark in Terms of Individual Capacity Trs. Col. Record 21, 432-440.

r -Fox, A.M.

vopFryer, D,

Brookshine. (1971). Defining Effective College Teaching Journal of Experimental Education, 42, 2, 37.

(1922). Occupational Intelligence Standards. School and Society, 16, 273-277.

tjGawronski, D.A. and Maths, C. (1965). Differences between Over-achieving normal - achieving and Underachieving high school students. Psychology in the Schools, 2, 152-155.

^Gebhart, G.G. and Hoyt, D.P. (1958). Personality Needs of Under and Over-achieving Freshmen. Journal of Appl. Psychol., 42, 2, 125-128.

^vGhuman, M.S. (1976). A Study of Aptitudes, Personality Traits and Achievement Motivation of Academic Over-achievers and Under-achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, Ravi Shankar University; In Third Survey of Research in Education 1978-83 : Buch, M.B. (Editor) N.C.E.R.T., pp. 664-66.

Glossop, J.A., Appleyard, R. and Roberts, S. (1979). Achievement Relative to Measure of General Intelligence. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 49, 249-257.

Good, C.V. (1966). Essentials of Educational Research Appleton Century-Crofts, New York, p. 112.

Good, W.J. and Hall, P.K. (1952). Methods Research. York.

Appleton-Century Crofts in Soqial Inc., New

31

, .Gopal,, A.K, (1975). Certain Differentiating Personality Variables of Creative and Non-Creative Science and Engineering Students. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kurukshetra University.

Guilford. (1959). Personality. Mc Graw Hill Book Company, New York.

T,Gupta, H.G. (1970). A Comparative Study of the Personality Characteristics of High and Low Achievers as Related to their Academic Achievement. Indian Psychological Abstract, 1975, 7, 87.

t^Harris, D. (1940). Factors Affecting College Grades: A Review of the Related Literature 1930-37, Psychological Bulletin, 37, 136-166.

.'ir'Hartson, L.D. and Sprow, A.J. (1941). The Value of Intelligence quotient obtained in Secondary School for Predicting College Education, Psychol. Measurement, 1, 387-98.

v^Haq, N. (1987). A Study of Certain Personality Correlates of Over-Under-Achievement in Different School Subjects. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

<iJahan, Q. (1985). Personality Profiles of Over and Under-achievers in Different Streams-Science, Arts and Commerce. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

Jalota, S. (1952). A Text-book of Psychology, Hind Arts Press, Benaras, p. 329.

k^James, A., Elmore, K. (1962). Problems and Academic Achievement. Bui. Nat. Ass. Sec. School, Princ; ILVI, 359, 470-473.

Jamuar, K.K. (1961). Investigation of Some Psychological Factors Underlying Study Habits of College Students. Doctoral Thesis, Patna University.

.y(,Jayagopala, R. (1974). Personality Profile of the Under and High Achievers of Some of the Schools in the City of Madras. Second Survey of Research in Education 1972-78; Buch, M.B.(Editor),p. 184.

32

-!>> Jensen, A.R. (1973). Personality and Scholastic Achievement in Three Ethnic Groups. British Journal of Edu. Psychol., 43, 115-125.

*- »Jordan, A.M. (1923). Correlation of Four Intelligence Test with Grades. Jour, of Edu. Psychol. 13, 419-429.

v^ Joseph, T.T. (1979). A Study of Some Predictors of Achievement in Chemistry at the Pre-degree Level. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., Kerala University.

v -i-Katiyar, P. (1979). A Study of Cognitive Functions in Relation to Achievement in Mathematics at High School Stage. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Gorakhpur University.

iKazmi, Q.S. (1986). A Study of Personality Profiles and Cognitive Factors of Academic Failures Amongst Science and Arts Students at various Levels. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

v>tlKharr, Jo Anne (1985). An investigation of the Relationship between Measures of Academic Achievement and Higher Cognitive Process in Sixth Grade Children. E.D.D. Temple University, Howard Blake, Dissertation Abstract International, Vol. 47, No. 5, Nov. 1986, p. 1601-A.

Krug, R.E. (1959). Over and Under Achievement and Edward Preference Schedule. Journal of Applied Psychology, 43, 133-136.

<<* Kulshreshtha, S.K. (1956). A Study of Intelligence and Scholastic Attainment of X and XI Class Students in Uttar Pradesh, Doctoral Thesis, Phil. Allahabad University.

•> Kumaraiah, V. (1976). Intellectual, Personal and Social Factors Realted to High and Low Achievement of Various Stages in Medical Education. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, B.H.U., Varanasi.

Lynn, R. (1959). Two Personality Characteristics Related to Academic Achievement. British Jour. of Educational Psychol. 29, 213-216.

33

»Mathur, M.B. (1966). A Comparative Study of Levels of Intelligence Among Professional Groups. Doctoral Thesis, A.M.U., Aligarh.

<v Maxwell,. H.C. (1983). A Study of Selected Personality Traits as Related to Self Paced Programme in Media Production Techniques. Doctoral Thesis', Georgia State University, Dissertation Abstract International, 44, 10.

M\ McCandless, B.R., Roberts, A. and Sterns (1972). Teachers' Marks, Achievement Test Scores and Aptitude Relations with Respect to Social Class, Race and Sex. Journal of Educational Psychol., 63, 153-159.

' '>Menon, S.K. (1973). A Comparative Study of the Personality Characteristics of Over-achievers and Under-achievers of High Ability. Doctoral Thesis, Educatioin, Kerala University.

Mishra, H.G. (1971). Non-Intellectual Factors and Success in Engineering Education, Contributions to Psychology, Patna Institute for Social and Psychological Research.

v» Mishra, H.K. (1962). Personality Factors in High and Low Achievers in Engineering Education, Doctoral Thesis, Education ,IIT, Kharagpur.

KN Mishra, K.S. (1984). Personality Traits of Original Teachers, Indian Educational Review, 19, 14, Oct. 1984, 72-77.

l.». Mishra, S.P. (1978). A Comparative Study of High and Low Achievers in Science, Commerce and Arts on Creativity, Intelligence and Anxiety. In Third Survey of Research in Education, Buch, M.B. (Editor), N.C.E.R.T., p. 677.

t-iMonroe, W.S. and Buckingham, B.R. (1920). The Illionois Examinations, Bloomington Public School Publishing Co. cited by Crane A. R. 1959, .-.A Historical and Critical Account of the Accomplishment Quotient Idea, British Journal of Edu. Psychology, 29, 252-259.

34

^1- Neog, S . (1990). A Study of Personality Characteristics of Under-Achievers Across Any Two School Subjects. M.Phil. Dissertation, Edu., A.M.U., Aligarh.

Oklahoma Studies. (1952). Non-Intellectual Determinants of College Achievement. A Longitudinal Predictive, and Descriptive Study of the Freshmen Class of 1952, pp. 129-134.

VM Pal, S.K. (1969). Personality Study of Engineering, Law, Medical and Teachers Training Students. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Allahabad University.

iN Pandit, (1969). The Role of Anxiety in Learning and Academic Achievement of Children, Doctoral Thesis, Edu. A Survey of Researches in Education, Buch, tl.B. (Editor), p. 337.

v' ' Patel, A.S. and Joshi, R.J. (1972). Some Personality Traits of High Achievers and Low Achievers. Education and Psychology Review, 12, 3-4, 114.

<v^Patil, G.G. (1984). Intelligence, Interest and Attitude of B.Ed. Students as Contributory Factor Towards Their Achievement in the Compulsory Subjects! A Differential Study. Indian Educational Review, April 23, 2, 109.

^r^Pervin, L.A. (1984). Personality: Theory and Research. John Wiley & Sons. Inc., New York, p. 4.

t^Peters, C.C. (1926). A Method for Computing Accomplishment Quotient in the High School and College Levels, Journal of Educational Research, 16, 99-101.

Prince, M.(1924). The Unconscious (2nd edition) Macmillan, New York cited by Stagner, R. ; 1965 , Psychology of Personality McGraw Hill Book Company, New York.

^^oRai, J.G. (1980). A Study of Relationship Between Intelligence and Scholastic Achievement in Compulsory School Subjects, Journal of Voc. Edu. Guidance, 1, 4, 35.

-^xRao, D.G. (1965). A Study of Some Factors Related to Scholastic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Delhi University.

\»i.Rao

35

S.N. (1963). Students Performance and Adjustment. Doctoral Thesis, Shri Venkateshwara University, Tirupati.

Ravindar. (1977). The Effects of State Trait Anxiety Psychological Stress and Intelligence on Learning and Academic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis ,Psychology, Punjab University.

^t»Reddy, I.V.R. (1978). Academic Adjustment in Relation to Scholastic Achievmeent in Secondary School Pupils - A Longitudinal Study, Sri Venkateshwara University, Indian Dissertation Abstracts, 4, 3, 235-237

Ridding, L.VJ. (1966). An Investigation of Personality Measures Associated with Over and Under-achievement in English and Arithmetics. Abstract of Thesis, Psychol. Feb. 1967, 37, 397-398.

^"^Roberge, J.J. Flexier, B.K. (1981). Covariation of Field Achievement. British Journal 51, 235-236.

Re-examination of Independence and of Edu. Psychol.,

u'^Rushton, J. (1966). The Relationship between Personality Characteristics and Scholastic Success in Eleven Year Old Children. British Journal of Edu. Psychol. 36, 178-184.

Ryckman, R.M. (1978). Theories of Personality. D.Van Nostrand Company, New York.

\«»« Sax en a P.C. (1972). A Study of Interest, and Adjustment Problems of Over achievers. D.Phil., Education, University.

Need, Pattern and Under-

Allahabad

viw Saxena, S. (1984). Intellectual and Personality Variables as Predictors of Vocational Maturity. Doctoral Thesis Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor, Directorate of Education, Delhi Administration,Delhi. In Indian Educational Review, October 1989, 24, 4, 81.

v^Sharma, K.G. (1971). A Comparative Study of Adjustment of Over and Under-achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.

36

\' '•Sharma, S. (1982). A Study of Intellectual Factors and Academic Achievement in Arts, Science and Commerce Courses at Higher Secondary Stage. Doctoral Thesis, Edu, A.M.U., Aligarh.

Shaw, M.C. and Brown, D.J. (1957). Scholastic Under-achievement in Bright College Students. Pers. & Guid. J., 36, 195-199.

\•v Siddiqui, B.B. (1979). Effects of Achievement Motivation and Personality on Academic Success Doctoral Thesis, Psychol., Gujarat Univ. cited by Buch (Editor), Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-1983), 691.

\^ Singh, B.N.K. (1965). Some Intellectual Correlates of Academic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Arts, Patna University.

rv' Singh, R. (1986). An investigation into the Relationship between Achievement Motivation, Intelligence (General Mental Efficiency) Introversion-Extraversion, Achievement in Mathematics and a Comparison thereof between Haryana and Delhi Students belonging to various Socio-Cultural Strata. Doctoral Thesis. Jamia Millia Islamia Delhi, Indian Dissertation Abstracts, 15, 2, 159.

-1. Singh, S.C.P. (1972). Personality Characteristics of Management Students. Journal of Edu. and

• Psychol., 30, 2, 167-69.

^oxSinha, S., Trivedi, J.K., Gupta, S.C. and Sinha, P.K. (1989). Scholastic Achievement : A Study of High and Low Achievers with special reference to their Intelligence and Family Variables. Psychological Abstracts, American Psychological Association Inc., 76, 11, 3653.

v^-Somasundar.in, M. (1980). A Coiiipn raL i vc Study of CcrLaln Personality Variables Related to Over Normal and Under-achievement in Secondary School Mathematics. Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83) Buch, M.B., 1983, 693.

^^Srivastava, G.P. (1976). A Study of Personality Factors as Predictors of Academic Achievement of High School Students. Doctoral Thesis, B.H.U., Varanasi.

37

I'lSwarup, Smriti. (1989). Personality Characteristics of (Jiiclcr niul Ovcr-McliicvcTH. Jourtial of Psychological Researches, 33, 2, 22.

«,vTaylor, R.G. (1964). Personality Traits and Discrepant Achievement : A Review. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 11, 76-82.

-i.cThorndike,R.L. (1963). The Concepts of Over and Under-achievement. Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York.

Tuli, M.R.(1988). Mathematical Creativity and Personality.' Edu. Kumaun University. In Indian Educational Review, 23, 4, 144.

Tuli, S.P.(1990). A Report : Education in India. Vol. 1(C) Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Education, New Delhi, p. 32, 34,36.

sj-vTutoo, D.N. (1972). Personality Characteristics of Some Higher Secondary School Teachers of a Metropolitan City. Education and Psychology Review, 12, 1-2, 9.

Verma, R.K. and Verma, G. (1989). Research Methodology Commonwealth Publishers, New Delhi, 137.

^^^Vora, I. A. (1978). A Study of Reading Achievement in Relation to Sex, Attitude and Anxiety. Jour, of Edu. and Psychol. 36(1&2), 41-53.

vSVyas, R.P. (1987). A Study of the Teaching Success of Prospective Teachers on Some Selected Variables. Educational Review, March, 3, 55-58.

ivi Waggon, R.V . and Zeigler, T.W. (1945). Psychiatric Factors in Medical Students Who Fail Americal Journal of Psychiatry, 103, 369-376 cited by Pal, S.K., Personality Study of Engineering, Law, Medical and Teacher Training Students, 1969.

•i Wakefield, W.M. and Crowl , T.K. (1974). Personality CharactGrlstics of Special Educators. Journal of Experimental Education, 43, 87.

38

'-Walsh, W.B. and Palmer, D.A. (1970). Difference between Law and Non-Law Oriented Students. The Vocational Guidance, Quarterly, 19, 11-15.

lie Wellman, F.E. (1957). Differential Prediction of High-School Achievement Using Sing Scores and Multiple Factors Test on 'Mental Maturity Personnel and Guidance Jour., 35, 512-517.

TjvYule, W. , Lansdown, R. and Urbanowicz, M.A. (1982). Predicting Educational Attainment from WISCR in a Primary School Sample British Journal of Clinical Psychol, 21, 43-46.

CHAPTER II

REVIEIJ OF RELATED LITERATURE

CHAPTER -II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

A review of previous researches in the area under

investigation helps the investigator to discover what Is already

known, what others have attempted to find out, what methods and

procedures have been promising and what problems remained

to be solved. Consequently, such a review is likely to be

of great help in designing the study avoiding the pitfalls

experienced by earlier investigators in the field.

1.1 Studies on Intelligence and Academic Achievement :

Intelligence plays a very significant role in

determining academic achievement. Dhaliwal (1971) also

writes, "Intelligence is the single most important factor

accounting for variation in academic achievement."

Therefore, it would not be out of place to give an account

of the studies investigating the relationship between

intelligence and academic achievement. Number of studies

conducted in this area are many. Some of such studies are

given below: Franzen, 1920; Monroe and Buckingham, 1920;

Jordon, 1923; Peters, 1926; Edds and McCall, 1933; Burt,

1937; Hartson and Sp row, 1941; Durflinger, 1943; Menon,

1949; Kulshreshtha, 1956; VJellman, 1957; Rao, 1963; Scott,

40

1963; Crow and Crow, 1964; Baquer, 1965; Ainsworth, 1967;

Ausubel, 1968; Roberts, 1972; Pathak, 1972; Sharma, 1972;

Saxena, 1972; Wlson and V atson, 1973; Reddy, 1973;

Chatterjee and Mukherjee, 1974; Dhami, 1974; Kumaraiah,

1976; Ravindar, 1977; Mishra, 1978; Crano, Messe and Rice,

1979; Joseph, 1979; Kevin, 1979; David VJatkin, and Estella

Astilla, 1980; Rai, 1980; Roberge and Flexer, 1981; Yule

Lansdown, 1982; Sharma, 1982; Saxena, 1984; Knarr Jo Anne,

1985 and Sinha Sanjay, 1989. It will not be possible to

mention the details of all the above studies. Details of

some of the important studies are being presented in the

following paragraphs.

Scott (1963) investigated the relationship between

intelligence and academic success in different subject

areas: Science, Arithmetic, Social Science and Reading.

The study revealed significant and positive correlation

between Intelligence and Arithmetic Reasoning, Social

sciences and Reading.

Ainsworth (1967) conducted a study to find out the

relationship between intelligence and school attainment

in different subjects. He selected 230 first year students

of mixed secondary modern school for the sample of the

study and obtained positive and significant (at .01 level)

41

coefficients of correlation between measures of

intelligence and academic achievement in different

subjects.

McCandless, Roberts and Sterns (1972) conducted a

valuable study of intelligence in relation to scholastic

achievement. The study was conducted on a large sample of

443 seventh grade school-children. California Test of

Mental Maturity was used as a measure of intelligence. The

correlation between intelligence and academic achievement

was found to be .56.

Chatterjee and Mukherjee (1974) conducted a study

to predict the achievement through the Differential

Aptitude Test Battery scores. The sample consisted of 1042

class VIII students. Highly significant relationship to

the extent of .01 level was found between the aptitude

scores and the total marks of the subjects.

Crano, Messe and Rice (1979) attempted to study the

validity of mental ability for predicting academic

achievement. The results showed a strong predictive

relationship between mental ability scores and class-room

performance.

42

Roberge and Flexer (1981) tried to find out the

relationship between intelligence and academic

achievement; The study revealed that both reading and

mathematics were correlated with intelligence. Mental

ability and scholastic performance were related with each

other. The coefficient of correlation thus obtained was

.58 to .61.

Yule, Lansdown and Urbanowicz (1982) conducted a

study to find out the prediction of educational attainment

through intelligence. The revised Weschler Intelligence

Scale for children was employed as a measure of

intelligence. The sample comprised of l&O children. The

study indicated high relationship between intelligence

scores and achievement scores. The dcoefficient of

correlation ranged from .475 to .911.

Knarr Jo Anne (1985) investigated the relationship

between measures of academic achievement and higher

cognitive processes. The purpose of this study was to

investigate and describe the relationship between academic

achievement as assessed by standardized group achievement

and test scores and teacher grades and the three highest

levels of cognitive skills, its analysis, synthesis and

evaluation as defined by Bloom (1956). Both the

comprehensive tests of basic skills, an achievement

43

measure and the Ross Test of Higher Cognitive processes, a

measure of higher level thinking skills, were administered

to two hundred and twenty sixth grade students. Analysis

of data revealed moderate correlation between the CTBS

academic subskills of language, Reading, Mathematics and

the higher cognitive functions of analysis.

The studies reported above were conducted in the

west. Some of the well known studies investigating

relationship between intelligence and academic achievement

were conducted in India also.

Ainsworth (1967) conducted a study to find out the

relationship between intelligence and school attainment in

different subjects. He selected 230 first year students of

mixed secondary modern school for the sample of the study

and obtained positive and significant (at .01 level)

coefficient of correlation between measures of

intelligence and academic achievement in different

subjects.

Pathak (1972) conducted a study on 105 high 100 low

achievers in Science. Jalota's Test of General Mental

Ability was employed as a measure of intelligence. It was

found that the high achievers had a significantly higher

mean I.Q., i.e. as compared to low achievers.

44

Thakur (1972) investigated the relationship between

intelligence and achievement. The sample consisted of 780

students studying in XI standard. The Bihar Verbal

Intelligence Test served as measuring tool for

intelligence. It was found out that intelligence and

academic achievement were significantly associated.

Chandra (1975) conducted a study to find out the

effects of intelligence on academic achievement. The

sample consisted of 1,107 students appearing at the High

School and Intermediate (U.P Board) examination. Hindi

version of Joshi's Intelligence test and achievement test

served as measuring tools. The study revealed that there

was positive correlation between intelligence and academic

achievement.

Lalithamma (1975) tried to find out the

relationship between intelligence and achievement in

Mathematics. The sample consisted of 732 pupils of

standard IX. Raven's Progressive Matrices and a standard

achievement test in Mathematics were employed as measures

of intelligence and academic achievement respectively.

Positive relationship was obtained between these two

variables.

4B

Ameer Jan Girja and Budra (1978) tried to find out

the relationship between general mental ability and

academic achievement. 224 freshmen of Agriculture and

Veterinary Science served as subjects. Raven's Progressive

Matrices was employed as a measure of mental ability. The

study revealed that academic achievement was significantly

related to general mental ability.

Mishra (1978) investigated the relationship of

intelligence and achievement in Science, Commerce and

Arts. It was found that the high achievers in Arts,

Science and Commerce were higher in their level of

intelligence.

Kevin (1979) examined relations between

intelligence and academic achievement scores at different

levels of socio-economic status and refined family

environment. The study revealed that at each environment

level increment in intelligence test scores are associated

with the increase in academic achievement.

Sharma (1982) attempted to find out the predictive

value of intelligence (verbal and non-verbal) and

creativity for success in Arts, Science and Commerce

courses at the higher secondary stage with anxiety, study

habits and socio-economic status as control variables. The

46

sample of the study comprised 750 male students studying

in class XI of nine Intermediate colleges in western Uttar

Pradesh. Analysis of covariance was employed to eliminate

the effects of intervening variables. The main findings

of the study were: (i) The students of the scientific

stream possessed a higher level of verbal intelligence

than those of the literary and commercial streams/iDTlie

students of the scientific and commercial streams

possessed a higher level of non-verbal intelligence.

Sinha, Trivedi and Gupta (1989) studied 50 high

achieving and 50 low achieving Mathematics undergraduates

and. administered the Raven Standard Progressive Matrices

and a semi structured interview on family and personal

variables was taken. Scholastic achievement was significantly

related to intelligence.

2.2 Studies on Intelligence and Professional Courses:

Attempts have also been made to study the

predictive validity of intellectual factors for success in

different professional courses. Some of the important

studies in this area are Fryer, 1922; HarveLl, 1945;

Steward, 1947; Johnson, 1948; Henoh, 1949; Venables,'

1955; Wilson and Watson, 1973; Kumaraiah, 1976; Patil,

1984 and Kazmi, 1986.

47 Menon (1949) mentions that in general the heads of

educational institution and other persons consider the

following qualities essential for success in teaching:

ability to maintain discipline, teaching skill,

intelligence, physical health, personality, resourceful

ness, scholarship, fiarness and cooperation.

Deva (1966) conducted a study on prediction of

student teaching success. The sample consisted of 546

student teachers preparing for the B.Ed, examination of

Agra University. Jalota's General Mental Ability,

VJashburne Scoail Adjustment Inventory, Saxena's Vyaktitva

Parakh Prashnwall served as a measure of intelligence and

personality. Pearson's Product Moment coefficient of

correlation between the predictor and criterion measure

were computed. Coefficient of correlation by the Fisher

Modification of Doolittle method was computed.

The contribution of different predictors in terms

of percentage of variance in the criterion were found to

be: Jalota's Test of General Mental Ability 1.8, Washburne

Social Adjustment Inventory 17.8, Saxena's Vyaktitva

Parakh Prashnawal, 5.8 Kuppuswamy's SES Scale 3.1 and

academic achievement 3.4.

Ilathur (1966) conducted a comparative study on

level of Intelligence among professional groups. The

sample comprised 1843 undergraduate students studying in

48

Arts, Science and Commerce Faculties of four teaching

university of Aligarh, Allahabad, Benaras and Lucknow.

Indian adaptation of psychological examination of American

Council of Education served as tool. It vi/as found out that

Engineering students were at the highest intellectual

levels. The group of Medicine received second position.

The other groups in descending order of their intellectual

levels were: Diploma in Engineering, Law and Teaching. The

difference between the performances at different

professional groups, except the difference between Law and

Teaching are statistically significant.

Wilson and Watson (1973) conducted a study on the

characteristics of effective college teachers as perceived

by their colleagues. Intellectual breadth was considered

one of the important characteristics of effective

teachers.

Kumaraiah (1976) investigated intellectual,

personal and social factors related to high and low

achievement of various stages in medical education. It was

found that intelligence, health adjustment, emotional

adjustment and overall general adjustment consistently

differentiated the high and low achievers at all the

stages in undergraduate medical education.

49

Patil (1984) conducted a study on

intelligence and attitude of B.Ed. students as

contributory factor towards their achievement in the

compulsory subjects. He found that intelligence and

achievement are positively and significantly related

(correlation : .28) with achievement.

Kazmi (1986) conducted a study on personality

profiles and cognitive factors of academic failure at

various levels. The sample consisted of 1000 failures (500

girls and 500 boys) of Arts and Science streams at High

School, Intermediate and Undergraduate levels.

Burnreuter's Personality Inventory (Hindi adaptation),

Raven's Progressive Matrices and some other tools were

used.' It was found that failures differ in their

personality characteristics and cognitive make-up. The

50

personality and cognitive factors were found to interact

on the failure's academic achievement.

A review of such studies revealed that the

researchers concerned with relationship between

intelligence and success in professional courses cited in

preceding paragraphs reveals that the measures of

relationship, though high, do not account for major

variance or the criterion variable. Therefore, variables

other than intelligence should be explored for

comprehensive prediction of success in these courses.

Personality seems to be an important factor in this

regard. While intelligence determines the degree to which

a person can be successful in these courses, personality

determines the degree to which the person will achieve.

51

Therefore, it was decided that attempts should be made to

investigate the relationship between different aspects of

personality and achievement in professional courses. Such

a study would necessitate a review of research

investisating the relationship between different aspects

of personality and achievement in professional courses.

Therefore, attempt has been made to review studies

concerned with the relationship between personality and

professional as well as academic courses. These reviews

have been presented in the paragraphs that follov;. ,

2.3 Studies on Personality Traits and Academic Achievement

Although Intelligence has been considered an

important correlate of academic achievement but empirical

evidences show that the relationship between the two is

not very high. In some studies insignificant relationship

between intelligence and academic achievement has been

obtained (VJedemeyer, 1955 and Porter, 1959).

Kundu (1988) has discussed intelligence and teacher

effectiveness in Indian Year Book on Teacher Education.

After review of studies he concluded, "The researches

reviewed above show that the relationship between teaching

success and intelligence is uncertain and inconclusive.

...~ -Tlierefore, it points to the need for further

investigation and research." This points out that

variables other than intelligence play a fairly important

52

role in determining achievement in academic and

professional courses. Personality, study habits and socio

economic status may play a significant role in this

direction. The present investigator is, however, mainly

concerned with the predictive validity of personality

dimensions, therefore, only those studies are proposed to

be reviewed which have attempted to investigate the

relationship between different dimensions of personality

and academic achievement. A large number of studies have

been undertaken in India artd abroad to investigate the

predictive validity of personality dimensions in academic

courses. Some such studies are reviewed below.

Astington (1960) conducted a study on personality

and academic performances in a Boy's Grammar School. He

found that at all levels, successful boys received

significantly higher ratings than unsuccessful boys for

persistence, independence and interest. Dominance seems to

have no consistent relatonship with academic achievement.

Successful boys showed a slight tendency to be nervous,

more emotionally stable, extraverted and sociable than

their unsucccjssfui class fellov s.

Centi Paul (1962) investigated personality factors

related to college success. The purpose of the

investigation v-jas to determine the differences between the

53

highest (H) and lowest (L) ranking students with respect

to their personality and adjustment as indicated by the

scores on the following two sets, (i) the Minnesota

Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) hypochondriasis

(HS), Psychopathic deviate (Pd), interest (MF), Paranoia

(Pa), Psychasthenia (Pt), Schezophrenia (Sc), hypomania

(Ha), depression (D) and hysteria (Hy).

On the College Inventory of Academic Adjustment the

subjects participating in this investigation were 64

full-time students enrolled during the 1955-56 school

year. The test scores of H and L students were tested for

significance by the analysis of variance technique and 't'

test of significance. Analysis of the scores on the

M.n.P.I. revealed that lowest ranking students in each

class in general, scored higher mean scores (indicating

poor adjustment) than the corresponding highest ranking

students. Tlie differences which were found to be

significant were those between the H and L. Juniors on the

following five scales: Hs (hypochondriasis), D

(depression), Hy (hysteria), Pt (Psychasthenia) and Sc

(Schezophrenia).

Rao (1953) investigated the role of certain aspects

of personality and academic adjustment for academic

performance of three hundred and five Arts and Science

54

students. He found that academic achievement and certain

aspects of personality like neurotic difficulties, morale

and sense of responsibility had a positive relationship.

Taylor (1964) conducted a study on the relationship

between personality traits and discrepant achievement. The

discrepant achievement, i.e. over-and under-achievement in

relation to the levels anticipated on the basis of

intelligence. The results revealed thatunder-achievers were

more likely to be characterized by positive self value,

self confidence, self acceptance, high self esteem,

acceptance of authority, conformity to expectation of

teachers and parents, positive interpersonal

relationships, higher power of self decision and

leadership, good study habits and high achievement

motivation and better control over anxiety. The

under-achievers were found to be characterized by negative

self concept, disrespect towards authority, poor

adjustment, excessive group dependence, interest in

pleasure seeking rather than academic activities,

unrealistic goal motivation or no goals.

Gawronski (1965) investigated differences between

overachieving, normal - achieving and underachieving high

school students (N=475). Students whose school achievement

5S

in English, Science, Mathematics and Social Science

exceeded the level expected on the basis of I.Qs. were

desij nated as oveti ahievers. Those whose performance was

around the expected level were termed as normal achievers

and those whose performance in these school subjects taken

together was below the expected level were considered as

under-achiever. The result revealed that overachievers had

better work habits and greater interest in school work.

They were also more persistent and more conscientious than

the normal and under-achiever Under-achiever on the other

hand, were more impulsive, more uninhibited more pleasure

seeking and interested in immediate results or rewards.y

Cattell, Sealey and Sweney (1966) investigated the

relationship between personality characteristics and

academic achievement. The sample of the study consisted of

563 students of VII and VIII grades. Cattell's 14 factor

personality questionnaire (H.S.P.Q.) and an achievement

test constructed by the investigator were employed as a

measure of personality and academic achievement

respectively. The study revealed that affectothymia,

superego strength, coasthenia, self-sufficiency, self-

sentiments are positively related to academic

achievement.

56

Ridding (1966) investigated personality

characteristics associated with over- and under- achievement

in English and Arithmetic. The sample consisted of 600

boys and girls, aged 12+, selected on the basis of test

results obtained from the total entry for one year in

Manchester schools. The sample was designed to prove for

comparisons between overachievers, under-achievers and

average achievers. The first two categories consisted of

pupils whose attainment scores deviated by at least half a

standard deviation from their verbal reasoning. Separate

groups were constituted for Arithmetic and English for

both sexes. The children completed From A and B of

Cattell's H.S.P.Q. yielding thirteen first-order and

second-order factors and also the children's questionnaire

adapted from Eysenck's M.P.I, which yields measures of

neuro'ticism and extraversion. He found that the

overachievers show more dominance, more surgency and

extraversion. No significant relationship was found

between anxiety and over or under-achievement.

Rushton (1966) attempted to investigate the

relationship between personality characteristics and

scholastic success. The sample of the study consisted of

458 students of elementary stage. The children Personality

Questionnaire and teachers' rating on 14 personality

57

factors and Moray House Test of Achievement were employed

as measure of personality and scholastic success. Ihe

study revealed that personality dimensions: sociability,

ego strength, dominance, surgency, conscientiousness,

adventurous, sensitivity, shrewdness and self-control are

positively related to academic achievement.

Ahluwalia and Narang (1967) attempted to

investigate the relationship between personality

characteristics and academic achievement. They found that

good achievers and poor achievers could be differentiated

on activity, hypomanic temperament and dominance. Good

achievers were found less unstable emotionally and marked

by less paranoid tendency, depressive tendency and

introversion and more of sensitiveness to moral values

than poor achievers.

Bhatnagar (1965) attempted to study the relation

ship between personality needs and academic achievement of

high school students. Age, sex and intelligence were

controlled. Personality needs were measured by Edward's

Personal Preference Schedule. It was found that need for

achievement, autonomy, intraception, succorance,

dominance, nurturance, endurance and aggression correlated

positively, and need for difference, affiliation and

abasement correlated negatively with academic achievement

of the students.

B8

, Abraham (1969) investigated the relationship

between certain personality traits and academic

achievement of secondary school pupils. The study

attempted to determine the influence of the personality

factors on academic achievement. The sample consisted of

pupils from standard X selected from twenty per cent

stratified randou sample of schools in the

Thiruvananthpuram, educational district. The personality

variaoles chosen were; intelligence introversion-

extraversion, neuroticism, adjustment and persistence,

level of aspiration, personal tempo and variability. The

scores obtained by the sample in Malayalam, English,Hindi,

Social Studies, General Science and General Mathematics

and on psychological tests of verbal intelligence,

non-verbal intelligence, introversion-extraversion and

neuroticism scales of senior M.P.I., persistence

inventory, personal tempo and school adjustment were taken

for the final investigation. It was found that the

influence at the temperamental dimensions of neuroticism

and introversion-extraversion on academic achievement

showed sex differences. The factor analysis of the

personality variables and academic achievement evolved a

factor pattern in which three factors could be

identified, viz., scholastic aptitude, neuroticism and

extraversioii-introversiou. lioys Vv/crc i DUIKI supcilor Lit

acadcniic achievciiiCMiL /IIKI doni 1 ii.inl pc r fionn i I I y i'nc\(>r<'..

59

Bachtold (1969) conducted a study of personality

characteristics of achieving and under-achieving bright

fifth grade students. Children Personality Questionnaire

was employed as the measure of personality

characteristics. Uner-. achievers were grouped on the basis

of low grades and low achievement test scores. Credulity,

self-confidence and self-control were related to

successful male achievement.Uhder-achieving female groups

differed in credulity, self-confidence, self-control and

excitability.

Gupta (1970) conducted a comparative study of the

personality characteristics of high and low achievers

(N=330) of class IX. Jalota's Group Test of Mental Ability

and Personality Traits Inventory was used for the

assessment of intelligence and personality

characteristics. Data was analysed with the help of a

't'test. Results showed that deference and persistence were

found to be determining factors in increasing one's

academic achievement. Paranoid tendency was found as a

deteriorating factor in academic achievement. Depressive

tendencies went a long way in adversely affecting the

students scholastic progress. Emotional male adjustment

and introversion contributed to lowering academic level.

60

^ Dhaliwal (1971) conducted a study on some of the

factors contributing to academic success and failure among

High School students. The study revealed that superior study

habits, rescrvedness, high verbal ability, home, emotional

and school adjustment and security feeling corresponded

with overachievement, i.e. academic success whereas

inferior study habits, outgoing tendencies, low verbal

ability, emotional stability, assertiveness, happy-go-

lucky temperament, poor adjustment in home, emotional and

school areas, good social adjustment and insecurity

feeling were associated with academic under-achievement,

i.e. academic failure.

Sharma (1971) conducted a comparative study of

adjustment of over and under-achievers. The study was

carried out in two phases:(l) The Preliminary Study, and

(2) Main Study.

1. Preliminary Study: I'he sample consisted of 98 students

of class VIII (aged 13 - 15 years). Regression equation

between marks obtained by the students on objective test

in 6 school subjects (Hindi, History, Geography,

Arithmetic, Algebra and Geometry) and scores on Prayag

Mehta's Verbal Intelligence Test was computed. The groups

of over-average and under-achievers were identified. These

groups were compared with regard to different areas of

61

adjustment. One-way analysis and 't' tests were employed

to see the significance of difference.

2. Main Study: The sample consisted of 525 students of

class VIII. The measures of expected academic achievement

were obtained by the help of regression equation between

measures of academic achievement and measures of

intelligence obtained through Prayag Mehta's Test of

Intelligence, Kuppuswamy'g S.E.S. Scale and past academic

achievement. Over and under-achievers were identified on

the basis of the method suggested by Thorndike. The data

was analysed with the help of two-way analysis of variance

and coefficient of correlation. The study revealed that

over and under-achievers are significantly different in

relation to school. Social, home and religious adjustment

areas, i.e. adjustment only in these areas tends to

influence over and under-achievement.

Patel and Joshi (1972) investigated some

personality traits of high achievers and low achievers.

The final sample consisted of 350 students of class IX, X

and XI. Personality Assessment Scale (P.A.S.) constructed

and standardized by the investigator was used to assess

personality traits such as extraversion vs.

introversion, reformist mind vs. conservative mind,

62

anxiety etc. It was found that on the whole low achievers

were more anxious than high achievers and high achievers

possessed leadership characteristics.

Saxena (1972) attempted an investigation into the

adjustment problems of over and under-achlevers. The

sample consisted of Science, Commerce and Arts stream

students of Higher Secondary Schools at Allahabad. The

over, normal and under-achievers were identified through

prediction by intelligence on the basis of regression

equation. Subjects showing positive discrepancy from the

predicted scores were overachievers and those closely

around the predicted scores were designated as normal

achievers. Mooney Problem Checklist served as the measure

of adjustment problem. The results clearly discriminated

between the over and under-achieving groups on adjustment

problems. The under-achicvers in all the streams showed

significantly greater number of adjustment problems than

the over-achievers.

y Tutoo (1972) conducted a study on personality

characteristics of some higher secondary school teachers

of metropolitan city. The study revealed that Indian male

and female teachers are somewhat more extravert than

British normals but more anxious than American and British

normals.

63

Jensen (1973) investigated the relationship between

extraversion, neuroticism and lie as personality factors

and academic achievement in the three ethnic group school

children, namely,White, Negro and Mexican American»Low but

significant correlations were found between all the three

personality variables and academic achievement for all the

three ethnic groups. Extraversion was found negatively

correlated with school achievement.

Menon (1973) conducted a comparative study of

personality characteristics of over and under-achievers of

high ability. The sample consisted of 1900 students. Over-

and under-achieving groups of students were selected

through stratified random sampling giving proportionate

weight to rural and urban boys, girls and co-educational

schools. The tools used were: (i) The General Mental

Ability Test, (ii) Personality Inventory, (iii) Motivat

ional Inventory, (iv) Interest Inventory, and (v) A

general data questionnaire. The results revealed that (i)

o\er- achieving groups of boys and girls of superior ability

as well as the general group were found to be less

extravert and maladjusted while overachieving boys of the

general groups were found to be less socially active and

masculinej (-'ii) over-achieving groups of boys and girls of

superior ability as well as the general group were found

64

to show greater academic interest and endurance; over-

achieving girls from general group and over-achieving boys

of both groups were also found to have greater general

ambition; overachieving boys and girls from high ability

and general group showed that their persistence was

greater; (iii) over-achieving girls of general group

showed strong interest than under-achievers in aesthetic,

social and mechanical activities and less interest in

outdoor, persuasive and clerical activities.

Abraham (1974) conducted a study on a certain non-

cognitive factors in relation to over-and under-

achievement in English at the secondary school level, the

results showed that the overachievers in English v;ere

superior to under-achievers on both social and personal

adjustment measures.

Jayagopala (1974) conducted a study on personality

profile of the lov\7 and high achievers. Cattell's 14

personality factor questionnaire, Form A, Tamil

translation (reliability .88 to .94), was administered to

275 students of standard IX from the high school

functioning in the lower socio-economic pockets of Madras

city. The results indicated that scholastic achievement

was related to personality characteristics (factor C:

affected by feeling D: Undemonstrative, F : Sober,

G : disregard rules, H : Shy, J : Zestful, 0 : Self-

65

assured, Q2 : Socially bold, Q3 : Uncontrolled and Q4 :

Relaxed. Low achievers were characterized by spontaneity,

vigour, spirit to associate with the group and

uninhibited.

Maria (1974) studied the case of a 15 year old boy

with poor scholastic achievement despite good intellectual

capacities. The investigator found that the boy was an

under-achiever as well as aggressive in his behaviour.

Further exploration yielded the findings that his

aggressive behaviour which emanated from certain socio-

psychological factors, was responsible for his lack of

concentration and persistence in studies rendering him

unable to achieve upto the level expected on the basis of

his intelligence.

Agrawal (1976) conducted a psycho-social study of

academic under-achievement. A random sample of 1408 rural

and urban students were administered Jalota's Verbal

Group of General Mental Ability and Hindi version of

Cattell's Jr., Sr. H.S.P.Q. by Kapoor and Mehrotra for

measurement of intelligence and personality, 't' test was

used for the analysis of results. It was found that two

groups differed on the eight factors; C (Affected by

feeling - emotionally stable) H (Shy - adventurous),

66

I (Tough minded - Tender minded), J (Zestful - circumspect

individualism), Q2 (Sociably group dependent - self

sufficient), Q3 (Uncontrolled - controlled) and Q4

(Relaxed - Tense) and did not differ significantly on

factors; A (Reserved - warmhearted), B (Less Intelligent -

tlore Intelligent), D (Undemonstrative - Excitable),

E (Obedient - Assertive), F (Sober - Enthusiastic) from

the normals.

Ghuman (1976) investigated aptitudes, personality

traits and achievement motivation of over and under-

achievers in academic courses. The sample of the study

consisted of 1948 students of both sexes studying in

grades IX, X and XI of the various higher secondary

schools of Raipur district of Madhya Pradesh opting for

different academic streams, namely, Humanities, Science,

and Commerce. The under or over-achievement of the

subjects was determined on the basis of the records of

their past three consecutive examinations. It was found

that male overachievers scored significantly higher than

the male under-achievers on factors; G (Disregard rules),

H (Shy) and I (Tough minded).

[lathew (1976) conducted a study on some personality

factors related to under-achievement in Science. The study

was conducted on 1076 secondary students of standard IX in

67

the district of Thiruvananthapuram in Kerala. The study

revealed that the mean scores of normal achievers for

variables like sense of personal worth, sense of personal

freedom, withdrawing tendencies and social standards, etc.

were significantly less than the mean scores of

under-achievers. In test anxiety and maladjustment, the

mean scores of overachievers significantly exceeded the

mean scores of under-achievers in cases of self-reliance,

sense of personal freedom, freedom from nervous symptoms,

social standard, social skills, freedom from antisocial

tendencies, family relations and community relations.

Srivastava (1976) investigated the predictive

validity of personality factors for academic achievement

of High School students. The sample consisted of 1,125

class tenth students. Jr. Sr. H.S.P.Q. (1968 edition)

translated into Hindi and standardized by the investigator

was used as a measure of personality factors.

It was found that (1) Rersonality factors, namely

A (Reserved) C (affected by feeling) and H (Shy) of

H.S.P.Q. were significantly and positively correlated at

.01 level with academic achievement in the Science group.

(2) Personality factors D (Undemonstrative), 0 (Self-

assured) and Q4 (Relaxed) were (significant at .05 level)

related with optional subjects in Science

68

group. (3) Personality factors A (Reserved), G (Disregard

rules), E (Obedient), J (Zestful) and q3 (Uncontrolled)

were negatively correlated with academic achievement in

Arts group. (4) Personality factors I (Tough minded) and

Q3 (Uncontrolled) were positively (significant at .01

level) correlated with academic achievement in Arts group

and factors A (Reserved), E (Obedient) and I (Tough

minded) were negatively correlated (significant at .05

level) in compulsory subjects of Arts group.

Iyer (1977) tried to investigate the factors

related to under-achievement in Mathematics of secondary

school subjects selected from standard IX of the

secondary schools of Thiruvananthapuram district of

Kerala. The study found that the following personality

factors: self-reliance, sense of personal freedom, feeling

of belongingness, withdrawing tendencies, nervous

symptoms, social skills, social relations, community

relations, general anxiety and test ability were most

effective in discriminating between all the achievement

pairs, viz., over-achievers(OA) and normal achievers (NA),

normal achievers and under-achievers and over-achievers and

under-achievers.

Bhagirath (1978) tried to find out the correlates

of academic achievement as perceived by the teachers and

69

students of High School. The study revealed that the

academic achievement correlated with intelligence,

character, emdotional adjustment, school and social

adjustment, punctuality, activeness, alertness, efficiency

and emotional adjustment.

Siddiqui (1979) investigated effects of Achievement

motivation and Personality on Academic Success. The sample

consisted of 450 student drawn randomly from various

colleges in the city of Ahmedabad. Data were collected

using Thematic Apperception Test, Mukherjee Choice Test of

Achievement Motivation, college examination marks of

students, Eysenck Personality Inventory and Progressive

Matrices Test. The data were analysed by recource to

frequency distribution, F-test and Chi-square test. It was

found that there was a mutual relationship between

intelligence J personality and achievement.

Datta (1930) investigated the relationship between

educational achievement and Ascendance-submission and

other variables. The sample consisted of 409 boys and 402

girls studying in class XI and XII of Intermediate college

in Lucknow. It was found that there was significant

relationship between ascendance-submission and educational

achievement.

70

Somasundaran (1980) conducted a comparative study

on certain personality variables related to over, normal

and under-achievement in secondary school mathematics. The

sample consisted of 123 over-achievers, 601 normal

achievers and 106 under-achievers. It was found that the

personality variables, namely, social standards,

introversion, family relations, social skills, self-

reliance, antisocial tendencies (freedom from) school

relations, nervous symptoms (freedom from), and community

relations had significant positive relationships with

achievement in mathematics while the variables of general

anxiety, test anxiety and masculinity had negative

relationship.

Kumari (1981) tried to identify the personality

characteristics of over-and under-achieving boys and girls

studying in science stream. Deva's 12 personality

factor inventory and examination marks were employed as a

measure of personality and academic achievement

respectively. The study revealed that over-achieving boys

were more shy, self-conscious, worried and sociable than

under-achieving boys. The over-achieving girls were more

sociable, jocular and lively, impulsive and more confident

than under-achieving girls.

71

Chopra (1982) investigated the relationship between

adjustment and academic achievement. A random stratified

sample consisting of 309 girls 598 boys (age range 15 to

16 years) studying in class X of twelve boys and five

girls schools were selected. Marks in High School

examination were taken as the criterion of academic

achievement. Home adjustment was found to be more related

to academic achievement than emotional health and social

adjustment.

Bunnell (1984) conducted a longitudinal study of

the personality traits of college students. The purpose of

the study was to determine the relationship between the

personality traits assessed by academic behaviour

inventory and the academic achievement and persistence of

college freshmen. Academic behaviour inventory produces a

profile of personality traits and is indicative of the

personal and social functioning of the individual. He

found out that students' academic achievement and

persistence in college can not be predicted safely by

means of the level of student academic ability.

Jahan (1985) attempted to draw personality profiles

of students studying in Pre-University classes in Science,

Arts and Commerce streams. Mehrotra's group test of

intelligence was employed as a measure o£ intelligence and

72

fourteen factors of H.SP.Q. prepared by CattelL served as

a measure of personality. Thorndlke's concept of over and

under-achievement was employed for controlling the effect

of intelligence on achievement. Over-achievers in general

were inclined towards the warm-heartedness. Over-achievers

in Science stream were more intelligent, emotionally

stable, excitable, obedient, sober, conscientious and shy

while under-ahievers were less intelligent affected by

feeling, undemonstrative, assertive, enthusiastic and

adventurous.

Singh (1986) attempted to investigate the relation

ship between introversion-extraverslon and achievement in

mathematics. The sample consisted of male students of

Class X studying in Governmment Secondary Schools. It was

found that relationship between introversion-extraverslon

and achievement in mathematics as expressed by Pearson's

Product Moment Coefficient of Correlation was significant.

Haq (1987) conducted a valuable study on

personality in relation to scholastic success. The study

was conducted on a large sample of 650 VIII and IX grade

73

school children from Aligarh Muslim University Boys' and

Girls' schools.

The investigator employed Cattell and Cattell's

Culture Fair Test (Scale 2, Form A) for testing

intelligence and for the achievement measure the

investigator had to depend upon the school records. The

Indian adaptation of Cattell and Beloff's H.S.P.Q. (Form

A) was employed for measuring personality. The results

showed that the male over-achievers in English were more

prone to be obedience, submissiveness and accommodating

temperament while the under-achievers in the same subject

were more inclined to be assertive competitive and

aggressive. Over-achieving boys in Hindi were found to be

more intelligent emotionally stable, adventurous and

individualistic Female over-achieverjp in Mathematics were

found to be more self sufficient than the under-achievers.

^Southward Paul (1989) conducted a study on

personality and performance in elementary mathematics. The

findings indicated that extraverted and stable boys and

girls achieve better than introverted and unstable

subjects.

Swarup (1989) investigated personality charact

eristics of under and over-achievers. The sample consisted

of 250 students of B.Sc. final class taken from the two

74

Associate Colleges of Allahabad University. 108 students

were taken from the Mathematics group and 142 belongs to

Biology group. The groups of under-achievers and over-

achievers differed significantly on factors; introversion

and extraversion, confidence in oneself and sociability.

Neog (1990) carried out a study on personality

characteristics of under-achievers across any two school

disciplines. The sample consisted of 302 students from X

class of boys and girls high and higher secondary schools

from Nagaon, Assam. The study revealed that over-achievers

in English were found more prone to be warmhearted, less

enthusiastic J less adventurous, less tenderminded,

socially group-dependent and less controlled than the

over-achievers in Mathematics. Over-achievers in English

were found to be emotionally less stable, assertive,

conscientious, less tenderminded, less apprehensive and

more controlled than the under-achievers in English.

2.4 Studies on Anxiety and Academic Achievement :

Freud (1933)regarded anxiety as a specific state of

unpleasure. It is the manifestation of some present and

future threats perceived by the individuals. Therefore, it

plays a very prominent role in all walks of life. An over

anxious student will show a low performance. Research

workers have dtherefore, regarded anxiety as an important

75

predictor of academic achievement. Anxiety as a clinical

phenomenon was first emphasized by Freud. Martin

emphasized that anxiety acts as one of the principal

causative agents for diverse behavioural consequences.

Quite a few studies have been conducted in this area. Some

of the well known studies are given below :

Stern, Stein and Bloom (1956) found that highly

anxious students ' tended to achieve low on measure of

academic achievement. The sample of their study comprised

of 138 students covering the age of elevent to fifteen

years. Saxena's General Anxiety Scale for children was

used as anxiety measure. The study revealed that students

possessing a high level of anxiety achieve less in

academic field than the students having low level of

anxiety.

Hallworth (1961) conducted a study on 900 children of

modern and grammar schools and measured their anxiety with

the help of eight self-rating questionnaires including

measure of self-blame, manifest anxiety scale, separation

anxiety etc. These eight type of self-rating

questionnaires possess high reliability indices. He

correlated the scores on the aforementioned measure with

76

attainment scores and obtained positive and significant

relationship.

Keller and Rowley (1964) conducted a study on the

relationship among anxiety, intelligence and scholastic

achievement in Junior High School children. Most of the

correlations between anxiety and school achievement were

negative.

Feldusen, Denny and Condon (1965) investigated the

relationship between anxiety and academic achievement. 100

high and 100 low anxiety male and female students studying

in class VII served as the sample. Sarason's General

Anxiety Scale and school and college achievement served as

a measure of anxiety and academic achievement respectively,

The results indicated that highly anxous males as well as

females were lower on the achievement test and the

students of low level of anxiety were high on achievement

tests.

Singh (1965) conducted a study on the effect of

anxiety on achievement. The sample comprised of 370 male

students of graduate courses. The academic achievement was

found to be negatively related with anxiety.

Sinha (1965) tried to Tind out the relationship

between anxiety and academic achievement at university

77

level. The sample consisted of 185 high achievers and 190

low achievers selected on the basis of last university

examination marks. Sinha's Anxiety Scale and examination

marks served as measure of anxiety and achievement

respectively. The study revealed that low achievers were

significantly more anxious than the high achievers.

Fatehpuria (1966) investigated the effect of

anxiety and academic achievement. The sample consisted of

70 children of Vllth grade of different Calcutta High

Schools. The results indicated that low anxiety children

tended to achieve comparatively more than the high

anxiety children because the former applied their mind to

the task more than the latter.

Sarason (1966) found that anxious students worked

faster and more with fewer errors and thus achieved higher

than low test anxiety students but failed to exhibit

higher retention scores.

Q. Reilly and Ripple (1967) attempted to find out

the relationship between anxiety and academic achievement.

The sample comprised sixth grade children. Correlation of

0.53 was found between tests of anxiety and academic

achievement.

78

Pandit (1969) investigated the role of anxiety in

learning and academic achievement of children. The sample

consisted of 145 grade V boys in one elementary school in

Delhi. The CIE Group Test of Intelligence (11 - 12) and

adaptation of four anxiety scales were used. The study

revealed that anxiety bore a negative relationship with

learning and academic achievement. Subjects having less

anxiety were found superior in learning and achievement,

irrespective of the task difficulty to those having more

anxiety.

Jha (1970) conducted a study to find out the

relationship between anxiety and academic achievement in

Science only. The manifest Anxiety Scale and average of

two preceding annual examination marks in Science were

employed to measure anxiety and achievement in Science

respectively. The researcher found negative relationship

between achievement in Science in case of boys and

combined sample, but not so in the case of girls.

Dhaliwal (1971) investigated personality correlates

of academic success and failure. The results revealed that

anxiety and need for achievement bore a curvilinear

relationship with over and under-ahievement, implying

thereby that both over-and under-achievement, go with a

79

higher need for achievement and a greater anxiety in

comparison to normal achievement.

Patel (1972) conducted a study of some personality

traits of high and low achievers. The sample consisted of

350 students from IX* , X*" and XI*"* class. The results

indicated that on the whole low achievers were more

anxious than high achievers.

Rai (1974) tried to find out the relationship between

anxiety and academic achievement on a large sample of 1000

Biology students. Sinha's Anxiety Scale was employed as a

measure of anxiety and the examination marks as

achievement measures. The results indicated a negative

relationship between anxiety and academic achievement.

High level of anxiety affected the subject's attainment

and the low level anxiety was related with high

achievement.

Chaudhari (1975) tried to investigate the factors

contributing to academic under-achievement of students.

Several measures including Sinha's Anxiety Scale were

80

administered. Negative correlation between anxiety and

achievement was obtained.

Mathew (1976) conducted a study on some personality

factors related to under-achievement. The sample consisted

of 1076 secondary students of standard IX in the district

of Thiruvananthapuram in Kerala. The results indicated that

mean scores of normal achievers were significantly less

than the mean scores of under-achievers in test anxiety.

Shankar and Brar (1976) conducted a study of the

relationship of anxiety with academic achievement. The

sample consisted of 85 post-graduate students. Anxiety

scale in intelligence tests were used as tools. For data

analysis Pearsonian Product Moment Coefficient of

Correlation was worked out. The results indicated that

there existed a negative relationship between anxiety and

academic achievment.

Ravindar (1977) investigated the effects of state

trait anxiety. Psychological stress and intelligence on

81

learning and academic achievement. He found that anxiety

as a main effect was not significantly related to academic

achievement except in the case of achievement in General

Science and Mathematics.

Soman (1977) conducted a study on some effective

correlates of Mathematics achievement of secondary school

students. It was found that personal adjustment variables

and anxiety variables had considerable influence on

Mathematics achievement.

Christian (1.978) attempted to find out the

relationship between anxiety and academic performance. The

sample consisted of 500 female students. The Self-Analysis

Scale by Badami was employed as a measuring tool of

anxiety. A significant negative correlation (r =-.1445)

between academic achievement and anxiety was obtained. It

means that if the anxiety was less, the achievement was

higher. On the other hand, highly anxious people were

found to be low achievers.

82

Vora (1978) attempted to investigate the relationship between

anxiety and academic achievement. The sample consisted of

200 students of class VIII. Patel's reading ability test

and test anxiety scale were used for obtaining relevant

data. The findings revealed that anxiety was negatively

correlated with reading achievement to a high statistical

significance.

Sharma and Ahuja (1979) tried to find out the

impact of anxiety on school performance. The sample

consisted of 116 X grade Science students of sixth english

medium higher secondary schools. He found that the low

anxiety students perform significantly better than the

high anxiety students.

Slddlqui and Akhtar (1983) studied the relationship

between anxiety and academic achievement. The study

revealed that there was a negative relationship between

anxiety and academic achievement.

George and Narayan (1989) conducted a study to find

the relationship between academic achievement and anxiety.

An anxiety self-analysis form administered to 30 high

school children. Subjects were classified into groups of

high, average and low achievers based on their previous

annual examination marks. Results of an analysis of

83

variance indicated no difference in the anxiety scores of

three groups.

A review of the studies investigating the

relationship between anxiety and academic achievement

presented in the preceding paragraphs reveals that most of

the researches that have been conducted, show that

anxiety exerts an adverse influence on academic

achievement (Stern, Stein and Bloom, 1956; Keller and

Rovjly, 1964; Feldusen, Denny and Condon, 1965; Singh,

1965; Sinha, 1965; Patel, 1972 and Siddiqui and Akhtar,

1983). However, some researchers have obtained positive

relationship between anxiety and academic achievement,

i.e. anxiety exerts a positive influence on achievement

Hallworth, 1961; and Sarason, 1966). The

diverse conclusions arrived at in the above two sets of

studies is perhaps due to the fact that while high level

of anxiety hampers academic achievement, a low level

anxiety motivates the learner to achieve high. Therefore,

it may be that the sample of the study in which the

anxiety was found to have a negative relationship was that

of highly anxious students, while the sample of the

studies which obtained positive relationship could be

possibly due because of comparatively less anxious

students. This conclusion finds supports in a study by

84

Dhaliwal (1971) in which he obtained a curvilinear

relationship that is upto a certain level the increase in

anxiety increases academic achievement but at a certain

level of anxiety the academic achievement starts

deteriorating.

2.5 Studies on Personality Traits and Professional Courses:

Professional institutions preparing engineers,

teachers, lawyers, business administrators, doctors etc.

play a vital role in national reconstruction and

development. They are perhaps more important for India

since our country is on its way to modern scientific and

technological advancement trying to match with ever

rising curve of scientific and technological progress on

the world graph. It is quite often that they have no real

aptitude for their profession. This feeling brings in

apathy, frustration and disappointment. Many of those who

take great interest during training later on find that

they can not meet the requirements of the profession for

which they have been trained. They feel that they lack the

personality structure suitable for dealing with human

problems in their respective vocations. Such feeling of

inadequacy which gives rise to the problems of wastage and

stagnation is quite acute in higher education and

professional courses like Engineering, Teaching, Law,

Business Administration and Medical.

85

A survey carried out by Planning Commission has

revealed that overall wastage is of the order of 25

per cent in Polytechnics. Studies conducted in foreign

countries also point out such talent loss. Hutchinson

(1966) found 9%, 40%, 51% drop out rates in the profession

of Medicine, Law and Engineering respectively. This

results in a colossal economic loss to the nation and

creates psychological problem for the students. The nation

spends large amounts of money for the professional

training of its citizens. Therefore, it is imperative that

only those students be admitted to such courses who

possess characteristics suitable for the respective

professional fields as to avoid failure or

underachievement.

In view of the importance of personality

characteristics for success in different vocational

courses, studies establishing relationship between these

variables have been undertaken both in India and abroad.

Some of such well-known studies are Lamke, 1951; Burgess,

1953; Ganesh, 1957; Gebhart and Hoyt, 1958; Cowan, 1967;

Flanagan, 1961; Marks Edmond and Zeigler Martin, 1962;

Torpey, 1964; Dutta, 1967; Deb Maya, 1968; Pal, 1969;

Walsh and Palmer, 1970; Cupta and Singhal, 1971; Kaul,

1972; Srivastava, 1972; Singh, 1972; Kaul, 1973;

86

Gopal, 1975; Kalra, 1975; Kumaraiah, 1976; Adaval, 1979;

Katiyar, 1979; Nagpal, 1979; Pines, 1981; Grewal, 1981;

Patnalk, 1982; Maxwell, 1983; Pervin, 1983; Mishra, 1984

and Vyas, 1987. Some of these studies have been described

in the following paragraphs.

Burgess (1953) conducted a study on personality

factors of over- and under-achievers in Engineering

courses. The tools employed in this study were Minnesota

Multiphasic Personality Inventory, Thematic Apperception

Test, Rosenweigh Picture Frustration Test and Burnreuter's

Personality Inventory. It was found that Rorschach

variables failed to discriminate significantly betv;een the

two groups. One the T.A.T. over-achievers scored

significantly higher on achievement, aggression status and

under-achievers scored significantly higher on dependency

needs and to be more free of restraints. No significant

differences were found when Rosenweigh, M.M.P.I. or

Bernreuter's Test were employed. As a group over-achievers

were found to be more intellectually adaptable less

labile, more constricted and inhibited, more cautious and

realistic in approach to problems with greater need for

achievement and self-improvement.

Gebhart and Hoyt (1958) designed a study to

investigate some personality correlates of over-under-

87

achievement. The samples of over and under-achievers were

drawn from the students of the school of Engineering and

Arts separately at the Kansas State College during the

year 1955-56. The study found that over-achievers scored

significantly higher on the scale of personality needs of

achievement order, intraception and consistency whereas

under-achievers scored significantly higher on the scales

of nurturance, affiliation and change, meaning thereby

that the former four personality needs correlated

positively with over under-achievement and the latter

three personality needs showed negative correlation with

the phenomenon.

Considering school-wise (as between Engineering

schools and Arts schools) differences the study found that

the students of Engineering school scored significantly

higher on dominance. As regards differences in personality

needs of the groups formed on the basis of ability levels

the study found that high ability groups scored

significantly higher on the achievement exhibition,

autonomy, dominance and consistency scales, whereas the

low ability groups scored consistently and significantly

higher on dominance.

Mishra (1962) conducted a study on personality

factors in high and low achievers in Engineering

88

education. The study revealed that personality patterns of

the two groups differed in traits like anxiety, judgement

and neuroticism.

Deva (1986) conducted a study on prediction of student

teaching success. The sample consisted of 546 students,

teachers preparing for the B.Ed, examination of Agra

University. Jalota's General Mental Ability, Washburne

Social Adjustment Inventory, Saxena's Vyaktitva Parakh

Prashnawali served as a measure of intelligence and

personality. Pearson Product Moment Coefficient of

correlation between the predictor and criterion measure

were computed. Coefficient of correlation by the Fisher

Modification of Dcolittle method was computed. The two

adjustment inventories were found to be the best predictor

of teaching success. The account for 23.6per cent of tha

variance in the criterion. He found the personal qualities

of teachers to be impressive, kind energetic, cheerful,

confident, emotionally stable and diligent.

Deb Maya (1968) conducted a study to find out

personality characteristics which contribute to success

in Engineering profession. Data were collected from 300

successful engineers It was found that personality traits:

extraversion, dominance, absence of neurosis, sociability,

self-sufficiency, self-confidence and intelligence are

necessary for success in Engineering profession.

89

Pal (1969) conducted a study to find out

personality characteristics of students studying in

Engineering, Law, Medicine and Teaching professional

courses. The sample of the study consisted of 250 students

in the final year of training in each of the professional

groups. The Allport Vernon Lindzey Study of Values, the

Rorschach Ink-blot Test of T.A.T. were employed as a

measure of personality characteristics of students

studying in the four professional groups, 't' test was

employed to test the significance of difference between

the various measures. The study revealed that engineering

students obtained significantly higher scores on economic

and aesthetic scales while medical students scored

significantly higher scores on theoretical and social

scales.

Walsh and Palmer (1970) compared personality traits

of 140 Law and non-Law oriented students. The aim of the

study was to investigate the differences between Pre-Law,

Law and Non-Law oriented students on 14 personality

variables as measured by Edward Personal Preference

Schedule. The findings showed significant differences on

four of the scales; intraceptton, dominance, abasement and

heterosexuality. The significant finding on the

90

intraception scale suggested that the undergraduate

students in Pre-Law were more concerned with feeling and

understanding other than the third year students. The

significant results on the dominance scale suggest that

both the undergraduate students in Pre-law and third year

law tend to have a higher level of dominance.

Fox'''(1971) found effective teachers to be friendly,

mature and enthusiastic.

Cook and Richards (1972) conducted a study on the

dimensions of principal and supervisor rating of teacher

behavi our. They found that degree of teaching competence

related with good daily planning.

Lomax (1972) reviewed British researches in teacher

education. He has cited the studies of the researches

concerned v ith characteristics of teachers. For example,

Getzel and Jackson (1963) found the personality of a

teacher a significant variable in the class-room. After

thoroughly analysing the studies he was forced to

recognize the truth in Vernon's (1953) much quoted comment

that 'teachers are as diverse in their psychological

traits as any other occupation.'

91

Singh (1972) investigated personally character

istics of Management students (N = 87) studying in Indian

Institute of Management, Calcutta and compared them with

University students and successful businessmen. Eysenck

Personality Inventory was employed to measure personality

characteristics. Information concerning the students

academic qualification, geographical background and

parental occupation were also obtained. The management

students when compared with successful businessmen were

found to be more neurotic and extraverted. Tate and Music

(1954) remarked that students become somewhat less

neurotic and more extravert when they enter into the

occupation.

Tutoo (1972) studied the personality patterns of

teachers of some higher secondary schools of Metropolitan

city. The study based on a sample of 128 male and female

teachers. Maudsley Personality Inventory was administered

to these teachers to study extraversion-introversion and

neurotic dimensions of their personalities. The results

revealed that Indian male and female teachers are somewhat

more extravert than British normals. Married female

teachers also tend to be slightly higher on neurotic

scale.

92

Kaul (1973) studied the personality characteristics

of effective teachers and found that effective teachers

were more intelligent emotionally stable, tenderminded,

apprehensive, experimenting controlled and tensed.

Wakefield and Crowl (1973) conducted a study on

personality characteristics of special educators. They

found the ideal teacher as one who has the desire to

analyze the behaviour and motives of others, to predict

how others will act, to assist others, to sympathise and

show affection for the sick, to put in long hours of work

without interruption, to accomplish tasks requiring skill

and effort and to do a difficult job well.

Gopal (1975) sought to find out certain

differentiating personality variables of creative and non-

creative Science and Engineering students. The Wallach

Kogan test of creativity was employed for locating

creative and non-creative students. The Cattell's P.F.

questionnaire was used to measure personality factors. He

found that creative Engineering students in comparison to

their less creative peers were more reserved, emotionally

stable, assertive, sober, expedient, venturesome, tough

minded, suspicious, imaginative, shrewd, experimenting and

self-sufficient.

p.*

Kumaraiah (1976) investigated intellectual,

personal and social factors related to high and low

achievement of various stages in Medical education. A total

of 101 high achievers (highest quarter) 101 low achievers

(lowest quarter) of various stages in undergraduate

Medical educationat St. John's Medical College formed the

sample. Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices, Cattell's

Sixteen Personality Factors Questionnaire, Edward's

Personal Preference Schedule, the Kuder Preference Record

and Bell's Adjustment Inventory were administered to the

sample. It was found that intelligence, health adjustment,

emotional adjustment and overall general adjustment

consistently differentiated the high and the low achievers

at all the stages in undergraduate Medical education.

Soman (1977) conducted a study on some effective

correlates of mathematics achievement on Secondary School

students. It was found that personal adjustment variables

had considerable influence on mathematics achievement.

Adaval (1979) conducted a study on qualities of

teacher. He found effective teachers to be alert, cheerful

enthusiastic, exhibit, self-control fair and impartial,

sympathetic, friendly democratic, commends efforts

gives generous praise for work well done and encourage

others to do their best, fearless, confident, considerate,

trusting, gentle, kind, reserved and diligent.

04

Nagpal (1979) investigated non-intellectual

characteristics of over and under-achieving Engineering

students. Sixty over-achievers and thirty-seven under-

achievers were selected from the students enrolled in the

basic Engineering courses at the undergraduate level in

1971 and 1972 in the IIT for comparing the over-achievers

and under-achievers on the psycho-social questionnaire,

Chi-square test and 't' test were used for analysis. The

principal component analysis and varimax rotation analysis

were also done. It was found that ability measures

accounted for a limited proportion of the total variance

in academic achievement. The prevailing academic

adjustment was an important correlate of over or under-

achievement. Under-achievers reported a greater number of

emotional problems typical to youth. Over-achievers had a

personal orientation indicating fuller functioning that

average students. As a result of which they went through

life more independently, had a better realization of the

desirable hierarchical order of goals, had a more

constructive nature of man and were more successful in

striking a balance between play and work. Students better

adjusted to academic and other aspects of college life

exhibited greater interest in the subject matter, had

positive attitude towards the requirements of the

curriculum.

95

Arora (1981) investigated the problem of students

in professional courses of Medicine, Law, Engineering and

Education in relation to personality factors 800 boys and

girls preparing for the first professional degree in

Medicine, Law, Engineering and Education served as sample.

A student's problem check-list consisting of 10 areas,

measures of personality adjustment, self-concept, level of

aspiration and creative potential were used as tools, 't'

and Chi-square tests were employed for analysis of the

data. The study revealed that high problem students, in

general were found to have lower personality adjustment.

Medical students were found to be highest on personality

adjustment, creative potentiality and lowest on self-

acceptance and level of aspiration. Law students were

found to be highest in self acceptance and level of

aspiration but lowest on personality adjustment.

Engineering and teaching groups were found to be placed in

the middle on all personality variables in the middle on

all personality variables except self acceptance.

Engineering group had higher percentage of high self

accepting students than the teaching group. It was also

found that problems were negatively correlated with

personality adjustment (r = .65).

Grewal and Bansal (1981) investigated the value of

the personality characteristics as predictors of teaching

96

effectiveness of higher secondary school teachers and

concluded that effective teaching is the sum total of

positive influence of the various factors of their

personality.

Maxwell (1983) tried to investigate the relation

ship between personality traits as assessed by Cattell's

Sixteen Personality Factors Questionnaire with achievement

in a self-modularized paced programme of media production

techniques. It was revealed that students who demonstrate

a high self-concept can be expected to show higher levels

of achievement in a modularized self-paced programme of

media production techniques. Personality traits may be

used as indicator of students success in a programme of

modularized self-paced instruction of media production

techniques.

Pervin (1984) reported a study on the

characteristics of successful business executives. In this

study it was found that most demanding occupations have

their own kind of right stuff; the personality

characteristics or traits that, in addition to skill, make

for success. The study revealed that their senior

executives and chief executives showed considerable talent

and have remarkable strength as well as few significant

weaknesses. Those who fall short of their ultimate goal

frequently are found to be insensitive to others, untrust-

97

worthy, cold, aloof, arrogant, ambitious, moody, volatile,

under pressure and defensive. In contrast, the successful

executives are characterized by the traits of integrity.

Mishra (1984) investigated personality traits of

original teachers. They are found to be emotionally

mature, stable, realistic about life, assertive, self-

assured, austers, dependent minded, hostile, extra-

punitive, authoritarian, cheerful, active, talkative,

care free,impulsive, dominated by sense of duty, plan,

responsible, moralistic, sociable, bold, ready to try new

things, spontaneous, day dreaming, artistic and doubtful.

Vyas (1987) conducted a study on teaching success

of prospective teachers. Three different colleges of

education under Statutory Jurisdiction of University of

Rajasthan during the session 1983-84 formed the sample of

the study. Jalota's Mental Ability and Raven's Non-Verbal

Intelligence tests, M.S.L. Saxena's Personality Adjustment

Inventory, B.N. Mukherji's self-insight translated in

Hindi by the investigator, Jaiprakash's Teaching Aptitude

Test and Kulshrestha's Socio-economic Status Tests were

used to obtain scores for predictive variables. It was

found that there is positive relationship between teaching

success and academic achievement. Determinants like

intelligence (both verbal and non-verbal) and attitude

towards teaching play an important role for success of

prospective teachers.

98

The review of researches presented in the preceding

paragraphs reveals that a large number of researches have

been conducted on the cognitive, personality and

environmental correlates of academic achievement. Most of

the investigators have attempted to explore the


achievement. Attempts have also been made to study, the

predictive validity of intellectual factors for success in

professional courses. But the number of these researches

is much less than the studies conducted ind the area of


achievement.

A fairly large number of studies have also been

conducted for investigating the relationship between

personality characteristics and achievement in academic

courses; bnut the studies concerned with the relationship

between personality and success in professional courses

have attracted the attention of only few researchers.

These studies however, relate only to single profession or

few personality characteristics.

Professional courses are not less important than

the academic courses and the nation spends large ainounts

of money on professional courses. A look at the table 1.1

(presented in Chapter I) reveals that per capita per year

99

expenditure on engineering students alone is fe 3226.70.

The amount will enormously increase if all the professiion

are included. Therefore, in view of importance of

professional courses, there is a need to conduct a

comprehensive study for investigating the relationship

between personality and success in most of the important


REFERENCES

Abraham,M.(1974). Some Factors Relating to Under-achievement in English of Secondary School Pupils. Doctoral Thesis Education, Kerala University.

Abraham, P.A. (1969). An Experimental Study of Certain Personality Traits and Achievement of Secondary School Pupils. Doctoral Thesis,.Psy. Karnataka University.

Adaval, S.B. (1979). Quality of Teachers. Amitabh Prakashan, Allahabad.

Agarwal, S.K. (1976). A Psychological Study of Academic Under-achievement. Indian Dissertation Abstract, 1981, Vol. IX No. 3,4, 311-315.

Ahluwalia, S.P. and Narang, S. (1967). A Study of Some of the Personality Characteristics of Good and Poor Achievers. Indian Psychological Abstracts. 1975, 7, 85-86.

Ainsworth, M.E. (1967). The Relationship between Motivation, Personality, Intelligence and School Attainment in a Secondary Modern School. British Journal of Edul. Psychol., 135, 37.

Ameerjan, M.S. et al. (1978). Academic Achievement and its Relation to General Mental Ability, Academic Adjustment and Neuroticism. Journal of Edu. and Psychol. 36, 3, 107-112.

Arora, R.K. (1981). An investigation Into the Problems of Students in Professional Courses of Medicine, Law, Engineering and Education in Relation to Personality Factors. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.H.U., Aligarh.

Astington, E. (1960). Personality Assessment and Academic Performance in a Boy's Grammar School. British Journal of Educational Psychol., 30, 3, 225.

Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational Psychology : A Cognitive View; Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York.

Bachtold, L.M. (1969). Personality Differences Among High Ability Under-achievers. Journal of Edul. Research, 63, 1, 16.

101

Baquer, M. (1965). Differential Factors in Pupil in Science, Arts and Commerce Courses Higher Secondary Stage. Psychology, A.M.U., Aligarh.

Doctoral

Success at the Thesis,

Bhagirath, G.S. (1978). Correlates of Academic Achievement as Perceived by the Teachers and Students of High School. Doctoral Thesis. In Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83), Buch, M.B. (Editor) 1986, 658-59.

Bhatnagar, R.P. (1966). Personality Needs and Achievement Alumus, I, 2 Aug, 19-22.

Bhatnagar, R.P. (1968). A Study of Some of the Personality Factors as Predictors of Academic Achievement CIE Studies, Pub. No. 63.

Bunnel, Paul Gene (1984). A Longitudinal Study of the Personality Traits of College Students, Identified By Academic Achievement and Persistence. Dissertation Abstract International (The Humanities and Social Sciences) , Vol. 45, No. 5.

Burgess, Elva. (1953). Personality Factors of Over and Under-achievers in Engineering. Pinsylvannia State University Abstract of Dissertation, 16, 536-43.

Burt, C. (1937). The Backward Child. University of London Press, London.

Cattell, R.B., Sealey, A.P. and Sweney, A.P. (1966). What can Personality and Motivation Source Traits Measurements Add to the Prediction of School Achievement. British Journal of Edul. Psvchol., 32, 2, 10.

Centi, Paul.(1962). Personality Factors Related to College Success. Journal of Educational Research, 55, 41 187.

Chandra, P. (1975). A Study of the Problems of High School students in the Varanasi Educational Region of Uttar Pradesh and their Relative Effect on Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Gorakhpur University.

102

Chatterji and Mukherji (1974). Predictive Validity of a Differential Aptitude Test Battery : A Follow-up Study. Journal of Edu. and Psychol., 33, 2.

Chaudhari, V.P. (1975). Factors Contributing to Academic Under-achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, Nagpur University. In Third Survey of Research in Education, Buch, M.B. (Editor), p. 660.

Chopra S.L. (1982). Correlates Education,

A Study of Some Non-Intellectual of Academic -Achievement. D.Litt, Lucknow University. In Third Survey

of Researches M.B. (Editor),

in Education (1978-1983), Buch, N.C.E.R.T., New Delhi.

Christian, J.A. (1978). A Study of Fear Failure, Hope f Success, Achievement Motivation, Anxiety and Concern in the Girl Students of Sardar Patel University in RelaTtion to Their Socio-Econoraic Status and Performance. J. Edu. & Psychol., 363, 163-169.

Cook, A.M.and Richards, H.C. (1972)22. Dimensions of Principal and Supervisor Rating of Teacher Behaviour, 41, 2

Journal 11-13.

of Experimental Education,

Crano, W.D., Messe,S.R. and Rice, W. (1979). Evaluation of the Predictive Validity of Tests of Mental Ability, Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 2, 233-241.

Crow, L.D. and Crow, A.E. (1964). Educational Psychology. Eurasia Publishing House, Ramnagar, New Delhi.

Datta, N.K. (1967). Extraversion, Neuroticism and Teaching Success. Teacher Education, 1, 4, 39-42.

Datta, V. (1980). A Sudy of Ascendance - Subnission in Intermediate Students : Boys and Girls. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Lucknow University.

David Watkin and Estella Astilla (1980). Intellective and Non-Intellective Predictors of Academic Achievement at Phillppino University, 40, p. 245

Deb, Maya (1968). Personality Traits of Successful Engineers. Indian Journal of Psychologv, 43, 6-10. ' =. ' '

103

Deva, R.C. (1966). Prediction of Student Teaching Success. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

Dhaliwal, A.S. (1971). A Study of Some Factors Contributing to Academic Success and Failure Among High School Students. Personality Correlates of Academic Over-Under Achievement. Doctoral Thesis Psychology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.

Dhami, G. S. (1974). Intelligence, Emotional Maturity and Socio-Economic Status as Factors Indicative of Success in Scholastic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Punjab University cited by Buch, M.B. (Editor) : Third Survey of Research in Education, 662-663.

Durflinger, G.W. (1943). Prediction of College Success. American Association of Collegiate Registr., 30, 251-264.

Edds, J.H. and McCall (1933). Predicting the Scholastic Success of College Freshmen. JOurnal of Educational Research, 27, 127-130.

Fatehpuria, B.S. (1966). Scholastic Backwardness in Calcutta High School (Class VIII). D.Phil, Edu. , Calcutta University.

Feldhusen, J.F. and Thurston, J.R. (1964). Personality and Adjustment of High and Low Anxious Children. The Journal of Educational Research, 57.

Flanagan, C.E. (1961). A Study of Relationship of Scores on the MMPI to success in Teaching as Indicated by Supervisory Rating. Journal of Experimental Education, 29, 329-354.

Fox, A.M. Brookshine (1971). Defining Effective College Teaching. Journal of Experimental Education, 42, 2, 37.

Franzen, R. (1920). The Accomplishment Quotient, A School Mark in Terms of Individual Capacity Trs. Col. Record 21, 432-440.

Freud (1933). New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, Norton, New York.

Fryer, D. (1922). Occupational In te l l igence School and Society, 16, 113-217.

104

Standards

Ganesh, G.A. (1957). Study of Personality Traits of Graduate Teacher Trainess in Madras State Masters Dissertation, University of Madras.

Gawronski, D.A. and Maths, C. (1965). Differences between Over-achieving, Normalachieving and Underachieving High School Students. Psychology in the Schools, 2, 152155.

Gobhart, G.G. and Hoyt, D.P. (1958). Personality Needs of Under and Over-achieving Freshmen. Journal of appl. Psychol., 42, 2, 125-128.

George, M. and Narayan, L. (1989). A Study on Academic Achievement in Relation to Anxiety. Psychological Abstracts, American Psychological association, 76, 8, 2631.

Ghuman, M.S. (1976). A Study of Aptitudes, Personality Traits and Achievement Motivation of Academic Over-achievers and Under-achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, Ravi Shankar University. In Third Survey of Research in Education 1978-83, Buch, M.B. (Editor) N.C.E.R.T., pp. 664-66.

Gopal, A.K. (1975). Certain Differentiating Personality Variables of Creative and Non-Creative Science and Engineering Students. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kurukshetra University.

Gowan, J.C. (1957). A Summary of the Intensive Study of Twenty Highly Selected Elementary Women Teachers. Journal of Experimental Edu., 26, 115-124.

Grewal, et al. (1981). Personality Characteristics as Predictors of Teaching Effectiveness of Higher Secondary School Teachers. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 5, 2.

Gupta, B.S. and Singhal, W.R. (1971). Personality Adjustment Patterns of Pupils Teachers. Journal of Edu. and Psychology, October 1971, 29, 3, 230.

105

Gupta, H.G. (1970. A Comparative Study of the Personality Characteristics of High and Low Achievers as Related to Their Academic Achievement. Indian Psychological Abstract, 1975, 7, 87.

Hallworth, H.J. (1961). Anxiety in Secondary School Children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 31, 281-291.

Harrell, T.W. and Harrell, M.S. (1945). A.G.C.T. Scores for Civilian Occupations. Educational Psychological Measurement, 5, 231-32.

Hartson, L.D. and Sprow, A.J. (1941). The Intelligence quotient obtained in School for Predicting College Psychol. Measurement, 1, 387-9.

value of Secondary Education.

Iyer, K.K.(1977). Some Factors Related to Under-achievement in Mathematics of Secondary School Students. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kerala University.

Jahan, Q. (1985). Personality Profiles of Over and (Jnder-achievers in Difference Streams Science, Arts and Commerce. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U. , Aligarh.

Jayagopala, R. (1974). Personality Profile of the Under and High Achievers of Some of the Schools in the City of Madras. Second Survey of Research in Education (1972-78), Buch, M.B. (Editor), p. 184.

Jensen, A.R. (1973). Personality and Scholastic Achievement in Three Ethnic Groups. British Journal of Edu. Psychol. 43, 115-125.

Jha, V. (1970). An Investigation into Some Factors Related to Achievement in Science by Students in Secondary Schools. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Patna University.

Johnson, D.M. (1948). to Social Psychology,

Applications of Standard Scores I.Q. Statistics. Journal of Social

27, 217-227.

Jordan, A.M. (1923). Correlation of Four Intelligence Test with Grades. Jour, of Edu. Psychol, 13, 419-429.

106

Joseph, T.T. (1979). A Study of Some Predictors of Achievement in Chemistry at the Pre-degree level. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., Kerala University.

Kalra, Satish (1975). A Study of High Achievers in an Industrial Organisation. Indian Dissertation Abstract, p. 61.

Katiyar, P. (1979). A Study of Cognitive Functions in Relation to Achievement in Mathematics at High School Stage. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Gorakhpur University.

Kaul, Lokesh (1973). Personality Traits of Effective Teachers. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kurukshetra University.

Kazmi, Q.S. (1986). A Study of Personality Profiles and Cognitive Factors of Academic Failures Amongst Science and Arts Students at various levels. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

Keller, E.D. and Rawley, V.N. (1964). The Relations Among Anxiety, Intelligence and Scholastic Achievement in Junior High School Children. Doctoral Thesis, University of Jowa. In Journal of Educational Research, 48, 4, 167.

Kevin M. (1979). Intelligence, Social Environment and Academic Achievement : A Regression Surface Analysis. Journal of Experimental Education, 47, 4, 362.

Knarr Jo Anne (1985). An Investigation of the Relationship Between Measures of Acaflemic Achievement and Higher Cognitive Process in Sixth Grade Children. Ed.D. Temple University, Howard Blake, Dissertation Abstract International, Vol. 47, No. 5, Nov. 1986, p. 1601-A.

Kulshreshtha, S.K. (1956). A Study of Intelligence and Scholastic Attainment of X and XI Class Students in Uttar Pradesh, Doctoral Thesis, Phil^ Allahabad University.

Kumaraiah, V. (1976). Intellectual, Personal and Social Factors Related to High and Low Achievement of Various Stages in Medical Education. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, B.H.U., Varanasi.

107

Kumari, V. (1981). Personality Patterns of Over and Underachieving Science students at P.U.C. level. M.Ed. Dissertation, A.M.U., Aligarh.

Kundu, C.L. (Editor 1988). Indian Year Book on Teacher Education. Sterling Publishers Private Limited, New Delhi, p. 353.

Lalithamma K.N. (1975). Some Factors Affecting Achievement of Secondary School Pupils in Mathematics. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., Karnataka University.

Lamke, T.A. (1951). Personality and Teaching Efficiency. Journal of Educational Research, 20, 217-59.

Lomax, D.E. (1972). A Review of British Research in Teacher Education. Review of Educational Research, 40, 3, 290.

Maria, N.B. (1974). The Disadvantages of Aggressive Children at School. Psychiatric, 23, 3, 99-102.

Marks Edmond et al. (1962). Scholastic Aptitude, Vocational Interest and Personality Characteristics of Journalism Students. The Pennsylvania State University. Journal of Educational Research, 56, 1, 37

'fvMathew, T. (1976). Some Personality Factors Related to Under-achievement in Science. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Karnataka University.

<b Mathur M.B. (1966). A Comparative Study of Levels of Intelligence Amono Professional Groups. Doctoral Thesis, A.M.U., Aligarh.

^Maxwell, H.C. (1983). A Study of Selected Personality Traits as Related to self Paced Programme in Media Production Techniques. Doctoral Thesis, Georgia State University. Dissertation Abstract International, 44, 10.

McCandless, B.R., Roberts, A. and Sterns. (1972). Teachers' Marks, Achievement Test Scores and Aptitude Relations with Respect to Social Class, Race and Sex. Journal of Educational Psychol, 63, 153-159.

1Q8

HoMenon, S.K. (1973). A Comparative Study of the Personality Characteristics of Over-achievers and Under-achievers of High Ability. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kerala University.

Menon, T.K.N. (1949). Teachers and Educational Reconstruction. Indian Journal of Psychology, 24, 1-4.

vMishra, H.K. (1962). Personality Factors in High and Low Achievers in Engineering Education, Doctoral Thesis, Education IIT, Kharagpur.

\ Mishra, K.S. (1984). Personality Traits of Original Teachers, Indian Educational Review, 19, 14, Oct. 1984, 72-77.

Mishra, S.P. (1973). A Comparative Study of High and Low Achievers in Science, Commerce and Arts on Creativity, Intelligence and Anxiety. In Third Survey of Research in Education, Buch, M.B. (Editor), N.C.E.R.T., p. 677.

• Monroe, W.S. and Buckingham, B.R. (1920). The Illionois Examination, Bloomington Public School Publishing Co. cited by crane A.R. 1959, An Historical and Critical Account of the Accomplishment Quoitient Idea, British Journal of Edu. Psychology, 29, 252-259.

vvNagpal, R. (1979). A Study of Non-Intellectual Characteristics of Over and Under-achieving Engineering Students. Doctoral Thesis, Human IIT, New Delhi. In Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-1983), Buch, M.B. (Editor), p. 677.

s>?'Neog, S. (1990). A Study of Personality Characteristics of Under-achievers Across Any Two School Subjects. M.Phil. Dissertation, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

Pal, S.K. (1969). Personality Study of Engineering, Law, Medical and Teachers Training Students. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Allahabad University.

Pandit (1969). The Role of Anxiety in Learning and Academic Achievement of Children. Doctoral Thesis, Edu. A Survey of Researches in Education, Buch, M.B. (Editor), p. 337.

109

Patel, A.S. and Joshi, R.J. (1972). Some Personality Traits of High Achievers and Low Achievers. Education and Psychology Review, 12, 3-4, 114.

Pathak, A.B. (1972). Factors Differentiating High and Low Achievers in Science^ Doctoral Thesis, Education, Udaipur University.

Patil, G.G. (1984). Intelligence, Interest and Attitude of B.Ed. Students as Contributory Factor Towards Their Achievement in the Compulsory Subjects* A Differential Study. Indian Educational Review, April, 23, 2, 109.

v.' Pervin, L.A. ((1984). Personality : Theory and Research. John Wiley & Sons. Inc., New York, p. 4.

c*Peters, C.C. (1926). A Method for Computing Accomplishment Quoitient in the High School and College Levels, Journal of Educational Research, 16, 99-101.

Pines, S.F. (1981). A Procedure for Predicting Under-achievement in Mathematics Among Female College Students. Educational and Psychological Measurement.

Porter, D. (1959). Some Effect of Year and Long Teaching Machines Instruction, Galeuter, E.(Ed.) Automatic Teaching, the State of Art, John Wiley and Sons, New York.

Q. Reilly, R.P. (1969). The Relationship of Anxiety, Creativity, Intelligence and Prior Knowledge of Programmed Instruction Material. Dissertation Abstract.

Rai, J.G. (1980). A Study of Relationship Between Intelligence and Scholastic Achievement in Compulsory School Subjects, Journal of Voc. Edu. Guidance, 1, 4, 35.

Rai, P.N. (1974). A Comparative Study of a Few Differential Personality Correlates of Low and High Achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Agra University.

Rao, S.N. (1963). Students Performance and Adjustment » Doctoral Thesis, Shri Venkateshwara University, Tirupati.

110

Ravindar (1977). The effects of State Trat Anxiety Psychological Stress and Intelligence on Learning and Academic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis Psychology, Punjab University.

Reddy, I.V.R. (1978). Academic Adjustment in Relation to Scholastic Achievement in Secondary School Pupils - A Longitudinal Study, Sri Venkateshwara University, Indian Dissertation Abstracts, 4, 3, 235-237.

Ridding, L.W. (1966). An Investigation of Personality Measures Associated with Over and Under-achievement in English and Arithmatics. Abstract of Thesis Psychol. Feb. 1967, 37, 397-398.

' 'Roberge J.J. and Flexer, Coveriation Achievement.

B.K. (1981)

51, 235-236

Re-examination of of Field Independence and

British Journal of Edu. Psychol,

«,sRushton, J. (1966). The Relationship Between Personality Characteristics and Scholastic Success in Eleven Year Old Children. British Journal of Edu. Psychol 36, 178-184.

Ryans (1960). D.G. Characteristics of Teachers - Their Description, Comparision and Appraisal. American Council on Education, Washington.

Sarason, S.B. et al. (1966). Relation of Test Intelligence and

A Longitudinal Anxiety to Achievement

Study of the Performance on Tests. Monoar.,

Soc. Res. Child Develop., 29, 28,

Saxena, P.C. (1972). A Study of Interest, Need Pattern and Adjustment Problems of Over and Under-achievers. D.Phil., Education, Allahabad University.

Saxena, S.(1984). Intellectual and Personality Variables as Predictors of Vocational Maturity. Doctoral Thesis Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor, Directorate of Education, Delhi Administration, Delhi.

Scott, CM. (1963). The Relationship Between Intelligence quotient and Gain in Reading Achievement with Arithmetic Reasoning, Social Studies. Journal of Edul. Res., 56 , 6 , 322-326.

in

Shankar, U. and Brar, J.S. (1976). Study into the Relationship of Anxiety with Academic Achievement. Journal of Education and Psychology, 30, 4, 254-259.

Sharma, H.C. and Ahuja, M. (1979). Anxiety and Step-size as Correlates of Performance Through Programmed Instruction. Journal of Educational Psvchology, 36, 4, 173-179.

^*Sharma, K.G. (1971). A Comparative Study of Adjustnient of Over and Under-achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.

Sharma, S. (1982). A Study of Intellectual Factors and Academic Achievement in Arts, Scier.ce and Commerce Courses at Higher Secondary Stage. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., A.M.U., Aligarh.

Siddiqui, B.B. (1979). Effects of Achievement Motivation and Personality on Academic Success. Doctoral Thesis, Psychol., Gujarat University.

Singh, B.N.K. (1965). Some Non-Intellectual Correlates of Academic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Arts, Patna University.

>^Singh, R. (1986). An Investigation into the Relicionship Between Achievement Motivation, Intelligence (General Mental Efficiency) Intrcversion-Extraversion, Achievement in Matheratizs and a Comparison thereof between Haryana a~.d Delhi Students belonging to Various Sccio-Cultural Strata. Doctoral Thesis. Jamia Milia Islamia Delhi. Indian Dissertation Abstract, 15. 2, 159.

0Singh, S.C.P. (1972). Personality Characteristics of Management Students. Journal of Zzu. and Psychol. 30, 2, 167-69.

Sinha, S., Trivedi, J.K., Gupta, S.C. and Sinha, P.K. (1989). Scholastic Achievement : A Studj of High and Low Achievers with special reference to their Intelligence and Family Variables, Psychological Abstracts, American Psychological Association Inc., 76, 11, 3653.

112

Soman, K. (1977). Affective Correlates of Mathematics Achievement of Secondary School Students, Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kerala University; Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83); Buch, M.B. (Editor), 692.

« Somasundaran, M. (1980). A Comparative Study of Certain Personality Variables Related to Over Normal and Under-achievement in Secondary School Mathematics. Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83), Buch, M.B. 1983, 693.

'^Southward, Paul (1989). Personality and Performance in Elementary Mathematics with special reference to Skill Area. Psychological Abstracts, 76, 11, 3653.

v» Srivastava, G.P. (1976). A Study of Personality Factors as Predictors of Academic Achievement of High School Students. Doctoral Thesis, B.H.U., Varanasi.

Starr, J.W. and Nlchol, C. (1975). Creativity and Achievement in Nuffield . Physics. British Journal of Educational Psychology 45, 322-326.

Stern, G.C. et al. (1956). Methods in Personality Assessment Illionois, The Free Press, Glence.

Swarup, Smriti (1989). Personality Characteristics of Under and Over-achievers. Journal of Psychological Researches, 33, 2, 22.

<,\Taylor, R.G. (1964). Personality Traits and Discrepant Achievement : A Review. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 11, 76-82.

Thakur, R.S. (1972). A Study of the Scholastic Achievement of Secondary School Pupils in Bihar. D. Litt., Education, Bihar University.

Torpey, M.S. (1964). Personality Factors in Teacher Trainee Selection. Journal of Educational Research, 58, 138-39. In Indian Year Book on Teacher Education, Kundu, C. (Editor), Sterling Publishers, 1988.

Tuli, M.R. (1981). Study Habits as Correlates of Achievement in Mathematics. Journal of Edu. and Psychol., 38, 137-14.

113

?. Tutoo, D.N. (1972). Personality Characteristics of Some Higher Secondary School Teachers of a Metropolitan City. Education and Psychology Review, 12, 1-2, 9.

Vora, I.A. (1978). A Study of Reading Achievement in Relation to Sex, Attitude and Anxiety. Jour, of Edu. and Psychol. 36(1&2), 41-53.

. -Vyas, R.P. (1987). A Study of the Teaching Success of Prospective Teachers on Some Selected Variables. Educational Review, 63, 3, 55-58

Waggon, R.W. and Zeigler, T.W. (1945). Psychiatric Factors in Medical Students Who Fail.Americal Journal of Psychiatry, 103, 369-376 cited by Pal, S.K., Personality Study of Engineering, Law, Medical and Teacher Training Students, 1969.

' Wakefield, W.M. and Crowl, T.K. (1974). Personality Characteristics of Special Educators. Journal of Experimental Education, 43, 2, 87.

V*. Walsh, W.B. and Palmer, D A. (1970). Difference between Law and Non-Law Oriented Students. The Vocational Guidance, Quarterly, 19, 11-15.

Wederaeyer, C.A. (1953). Gifted Achievers and Non-Achievers. Journal of Higher Education, 24, 25-30.

Wellman, F.E. (1957). Differential Prediction of High-School achievement Using Scores and Multiple Factor Test on 'Mental Maturity' , Personnel and Guidance Jour, 35, 512-517.

Wilson, R.C., Dienst, E.R. and Watson, N.L. (1976). Characteristics of Effective College Teachers as Perceived by Their Colleagues. Journal of Educational Measurement, 10, 1.

Yule, W., Lansdown, R. and Urbanowicz, M.A. (1982). Predicting Educational Attainment from WISCR in a Primary School Sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychol, 21,

CHAPTER III

DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

CHAPTER -III

DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

The present chapter is concerned with the

operational aspects of the investigation, the

methodological and procedural design of the study and

treatment of the data. In this chapter, a description of

the sample, tools and techniques adopted for the study has

been presented.

3.1 The Sample:

According to Ferguson (1976) it may be either

impractical or impossible for the investigator to produce

statistics based on all members because of large size of

many populations. A sample is any sub-group drawn by some

appropriate method from a population. A sample, thus is a

miniature population. To be true sample cust be

representative and adequate.

At the outset, the sample of 550 students was

collected for the present study from the different

professional courses,(Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business

Administration and Medical) of Aligarh Muslim University.

The number of cases however, was reduced to 53 2 (which

included 242 over-achievers and 290 under-achievers)due to the

115

occasional absence of the students on the days of

administration of the tests as well as due to the non

availability of achievement records of some of the

subjects who had missed exams. Since the subjects belonged

to the middle classes and were getting education under

similar circumstances, the sample was taken to be

reasonably homogenous from the socio-economic point of

view. It also caters students from the v ole country.

3.2 Tools of the Study;

The relevance and reliability of any research work

depends on the appropriateness, reliability and validity

of the tools and measures employed in the study. For

fulfilling this criteria the present study required the

follovjing tools and measures :

(i) a reliable test for measuring intelligence,

(ii) a comprehensive standard test of personality, and

(iii) dependable achievement scores of the students

involved in the study.

3.3 Measure of Intelligence:

For obtaining intelligence scores, the 'Culture

Fair' test of general ability constructed by Catell and

Catell (test of 'g' : Culture Fair, Scale 2, Form A) was

selected after a scrutiny of number of verbal and non

verbal tests of intelligence. This test was preferred

116

because it is a culture fair test. While emphasizing the

importance of this test the author claims that the test

measures individual intelligence in a manner designed to

reduce as much as possible, the influence of verbal

fluency cultural climate'. Another consideration for the

selection of this test was the ease of administration. The

test is so designed that it can be conveniently

administered in groups.

In order to avoid the influence of language the

tasks in the test are so structured that the subjects are

required only to perceive relationships in shapes and

figures.

Culture Fair Intelligence test consists of four

subtests. The first subtest has 12 series item and the

time allotted for it is three minutes. The second subtest

contains 14 classification items and the time allotted for

it is 4 minutes. The third subtest is constituted of 12

matrices and the allotted time is 3 minutes. The four

subtest has 8 topology items and the time allotted for it

is 2h minutes. Thus in all there are 46 items in four

subtests. It appears important to mention that both in the

arrangement of the four subtests and the order of items

within the subtests, psychological principle of moving

from easy to difficult operations is adhered to. Examples

117

are given before each subtests so that task requirements

are understood well by the subjects involved.

3.4 Reliability of the Intelligence Measure :

The reliability of a measuring instrument refers to

the stability of measure on repeated applications of the

instrument. In order to obtain dependability coefficient

and consistency coefficient of the Culture Fair Scale 2,

Form A, the test retest agreement method and split half

methods were employed by the author of the test. The

dependability coefficient ranged from .82 to .85 while the

odd even split half consistency coefficient ranged from

.95 to .97. (Technical Supplement for the Culture Fair

Intelligence Tests Scale 2 and 3, 1973, p. 2).

3.5 Validity of Intelligence Measure:

The validities of the four subtests in scale 2 have

been reported in the Technical supplement for the 12

series. The direct concept validity coefficient of first

subtest is .76, for the 14 classification items of the

second subtest the coefficient is .54, for the 12 matrices

of the third subtest it is .76 and for 8 topology items of

the fourth subtest .51. For the total test consistency of

46 items, the direct concept validity coefficient have

been reported to be .85. (Technical supplement, 1973).

118

The concrete validity coefficients for the scale 2

form A against 4 tests of intelligence namely Weschsler

Adler revised Beta, Otis Group Test and Coloured

Progressive Matrices was found to be .74, .75, .71 and .68

respectively (Technical supplement 1973, p. 18). The

average coefficient of concrete validity as determined

against these tests was found to be .70 (Manual, 1973,

p. 11).

3.6 The Measure of Achievement:

There are several possible means to obtain measure

of achievement such as standardized achievement tests or

records of examination marks. Due to the non-availability

of the standardized achievement tests, the investigator

had to depend on the records of examination of marks. The

achievement record of the final year have been taken for

the present purpose. It would have been, no doubt, for

better, if standardized achievement tests could have been

employed for this purpose, but no such tests were

available for the courses chosen for the study. The other

alternative was to construct an achievement test of one's

own and to standardize it to the extent that was possible.

In such case the reliability and validity of the

achievement was to be established. Due to paucity of time

and resources it was not possible to construct achievement

test for the present study. It was considered that since

119

the final examination theory and practical marks in all

the professional courses is the contribution of many

experienced and learned teachers and are awarded during

the academic session at different interval, therefore,

they are likely to be fairly valid measures and thus

suitable for a research study. Therefore, examination

marks records and results had to be employed for the

study.

In order to obtain better reliability of

achievement scores the result of final year examination

have been taken into account.

3.7 Measure of Personality:

For studying the personality characteristics of the

over and under achievers in the present study, the

personality inventory constructed by the investigator at

her M.Phil, level has been employed.

This inventory was found to be amply suited to the

purpose of this study. It was, in the first place,

suitable for the age group taken for study, secondly being

an Indian language, namely, Hindi, was easy to administer.

The inventory is also conveniently administrable to group

of students and can be completed within a class period.

120

This personality inventory was developed through

factor analysis technique. It consisted of 160 items

categorised in 12 factors. Each of the factors is

bi-polar, the high score representing one pole and the low

score the opposite of it. The poles are described

qualitatively in - terms of characteristics opposed

to each other and further explained with the help of

synonymous adjectives. However, none of the ends has a

necessary connotation of good or bad. A list of twelve

personality dimensions has been given below :

Lively

Sociable

Impulsive

Venturesome

Confident

Dominant

Conscientious

Trusting

Conservative

Kind

Cooperative

Persevering

- Serious

- Reserved

- Stable

- Shy

- Nervous

- Submissive

- Expedient

- Suspicious

- Experimenting

- Harsh

- Obstructive

- Fickle-minded

121

The number of items of these factors are given

below:

Factor Number of Items

I 17

II 17

III 15

IV 11

V 17

VI 17

VII 10

VIII 05

IX 15

X 15

XI 15

XII 06

3.8 Reliability of the Inventory:

There are different methods of establishing the

reliability of personality inventories. The reliability of

the present inventory was established through test and

retest method. Retesting was done after a gap of one month

and it was considered that a gap of month was neither too

small so that there was carry over from one administration

to the other and nor was too large so that changes in the

personality may occur. Pearson Product Moment coefficient

of correlation was computed between the scores of first

122

administration and second administration. The coefficient

of correlation for different factors ranged from .73 to

.96. Therefore, the reliability of the inventory can be

considered satisfactory.

3.9 Validity of the Inventory:

The personality inventory used for the present

study may be considered valid because the dimension were

evolved through the technique of factor analysis which

ensured construct validity. The index of concurrent

validity v as obtained by comparing the scores obtained on

the inventory with those obtained by the help of rating

scale. For this purpose rating scale was developed. The

dimension of this rating scale are bi-polar. Adequate

description of the two poles have been provided. The

description of the two poles of factor is presenuad

below:

Factor 1

Lively 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Serious

(High score description) (Low score description)

Carefree Cautious

Optimist Pessimist

Enthusiastic Indifferent

Warmhearted Apathetic

Humorous Mirthless

Happy go lucky Worrying

Cheerful Unhappy

123

Frank Secretive

Relaxing Thoughtful

Active Dull

Easy going Critical

For description of other factor see appendix V .

The validity indices obtained for different dimensions

ranged from .62 to .98. Therefore, the inventory .-nay be

considered fairly valid.

3.10 Administration of the Tests and Collection of Data:

The administration of the two tests i.e., Cattell's

Culture . Fair Intelligence Test and Personality Inventory

developed by the investigator herself took twelve days for

collection of data. Both the tests were administered to

the students of Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business

Administration and Medical. Strict adherence to the

instructions given by the authors of the tests was

maintained.

Scoring was done with the help of keys provided and

thus for each subject (case) scores on intelligence and

personality dimension were obtained. For achievement test

examinations marks were collected from the Registrar

office.

124

3.11 Identification of Over-and Under-Achievement:

The present research seeks to identify the

personality characteristics of over- and under-

achievers in different professional courses. Thus, one of

the most important problems concerned with the present

research was to identify over and under-achievers in

different professional courses. Achievement of a person in

academic and professional courses depends on a variety of

factors like intelligence, personality, socio-econoinic

status, home environment, school climate,, study, habits,

etc. Previous researches in the area have considered

intelligence as the most important variable in this regard

mainly because this variable yields high coefficient of

correlation with achievement (Harris, 1940; Rao, 1965;

Roberge and Flexer, 1981 and Singh, 198 6).

A review of previous researches reveals that the

approaches for identifying over-and under-achievers can be

classified into three groups.

3.11.1 Variability in Achievement at Constant Level of

Intelligence:

Some researchers have attempted to identify over

and under-achievers on the basis of their achievement at

constant level of intelligence. James and Elmore (1962)

tabulated achievement of students at constant levels of

intelligence. The students in the upper and lower 277, of

125

the dist;:ibution of achievement scores were designated as

over and under-achievers respectively.

Parsley (1967) computed mean of achievement scores

of 5 groups of students selected on the basis of

intelligence. 0.6 was added and substracted from each

group mean in order to locate the higher and lower limits.

The students falling above the upper limit, below the

lower limit and between these two limits were termed as

over, under and average-achievers respectively.

The above mentioned techniques require selection of

students at constant levels of intelligence. It will not

be possible to obtain sufficient number of subjects at a

particular level of intelligence. Therefore, number of the

subjects may be insufficient for a serious research.

3.11.2 Discrepancy between Achievement and Intelligence;

Franzen (1920) Pinter (1922), Peters (1926) and

Burt (1937) are some of the earliest researchers who

attempted to establish relationship between intelligence

and achievement. They advanced the concept of mental age

which represents the capacity to learn. Monroe and

Buckingham (1920) developed the concept of Achievement

Quotient (A.Q.) which is a ratio between achievement age

and mental age. Franzen (1920)came up with the concept of

Educational Quotient (E.Q.) which is a ratio between

12G

educational age and chronological age and the concept of

Achievement Quotient (A.Q.) & Intelligence Quotient

(I.Q.). This approach uses Mental Age for determining the

Educational Age, which is considered to be a more valid

index of learning capacity. Achievement Quotient indicated

whether the student was achieving upto his mental ability

or not. The following researchers have followed this

approach.

Frochlic and Hoyt (1959) and

Srivastava (196 7) computed means of the distribution of

intelligence and achievement scores. The students who were

below average intelligence but had achieved above average

in academic courses were designated over-achievers. On the

other hand, those students who were above average

intelligence but achieved below average in ac-TdGmic

courses ijcre called undcr-achievers inspite of being above average

intelligence.

The above procedures are not considered

satisfactory mainly because: (i) the population upon which

the educational achievement tests have been standardized

may not ho comparnblc wLth tliosc upon which Lhc norms of

intelligence tests have been used, (ii) examination marks

do not differentiate among pupils as does a sound test of

general intelligence. Due to this variability in the

distribution of scores the correlation between them is

127

attenuated. The above mentioned techniques also do not

take into account the regression effect on the

relationship between intelligence and achievement.

Torndike (1963, p. 35) writes, 'Failure to recognize this

regression effect has rendered questionable, if not

meaningless much of the research on achievement'.

3.11.3 Discrepancy between Observed and Predicted

Achievement:

Early researchers in the area designated high

achievers those who scored high on a test of achievement

and low achievers those who scored poor marks on the

test of achievement. This classification does not take

into account the potentiality and the consequent

achievement of the students. In order to obviate this

limitation Thorndike (1963) computed predicted achievement

scores on the basis of regression equation scores between

intelligence and achievement measures. He then calculated

the discrepancy between predicted and observed (actual)

scores. Accounting to him over and under-achievement is

the positive and negative discrepancy of actual

achievement from the predicted value obtained on the basis

of relationship between intelligence and achievement of

the whole group. Students whose actual achievement was

falling above the predicted achievement were designated as

128

over-achievers and those whose actual achievement was

below the predicted achievement were termed as

under-achievers. This concept of over and under-

achievement suggested by Thorndike is based on the fairly

high relationship between intelligence and achievement.

There are however, many other variables like aptitude,

study habits personality factors, socio-economic status

which influence the relationship between intelligence and

achievement. Therefore, for predicting achievement,

Thorndike later on suggested the use of group of factors

including intelligence, socio-economic status, past

achievement, sex and age) Chauhan, 1993, p. 40.

It may not be possible to employ all the above

factors for predicting achievement in professional courses

in an exhaustive study like the present one. Therefore,

intelligence which has been found to be highly correlated

with academic achievement, was employed for predicting

achievement.

In the present study optional prediction of

performance in professional courses is obtained of

performance in professional courses is obtained by

"regression equation" in which dthe measure of

intelligence has been employed as a predictor and the

degree of correlation between intelligence and the degree

of correlation between intelligence and achievement in

professional courses as dthe coefficient of predictive

validity of the measure of idntelligence. The formula for

129

Y = r ^^ (X - Mx) + My

(Garrett, 1981, p. 158)

in which

Y = the predicted value of criterion or dependent variable (achievement) •

r = the coefficient of correlation between the predictor

(Intelligence) and the criterion (achievement)

variables,

d* y = standard deviations of the criterion scores

(x = standard deviation of the predictor scores

X = Individual preidictor score

Y = Individual criterion scores

Mx = Mean of the predictor score

My = Mean of the criterion score y iZ. = regression coefficient O-x

For identifying the over and under-achievers more

precisely, i.e. unaffected by the statistical errors of

measurement, cases one SDc above their predicted

achievement scores were designated as over-achievers and

these one SDc below as under-achievers. The formula for

standard error of estimate is given below :

SDe = SD / 1 - ( r)2

(Garrett, 1981, p. 161)

130

Working along the above mentioned procedure, the

over-achievers and under-achievers were identified in the

five professional courses separately. These fell into the

following categories :

1. Over-achievers in Engineering professional courses.

2. Under-achievers in Engineering professional courses.

3. Over-achievers in Teaching professional courses.

4. Under-achievers in Teaching professional courses.

5. Over-achievers in Law professional courses.

6. Under-achievers in Law professional courses.

7. Over-achievers in Business Administration professional

courses.

8. Under-achievers in Business Administration professional

courses.

9. Over-achievers in Medical professional courses.

10. Under-achievers in Medical professional courses.

3.12 Procedure for Determining Group Differences on

Personality Factors:

In order to determine the differences between group

of over and under-achievers, in each of the five

professional courses on 12 personality dimensions the

't'test of significance of difference between means was

employed. For this, means and standard deviation were

worked out for each of the groups of over and

131

under-achievers in five professional courses (Engineering,

Teaching, Law, Business Administration and Medical) on

each of the twelve dimensions on personality. The 't'

values were obtained with the help of this formula :

M - M ^

(McNemar," 1962, p. 102)

The analysis of the results is discussed in the following

chapter (Chapter IV).

REFERENCES

Burt, C. (1937). The Backward Child. University of London Press, London.

Cattell, R.B. and Cattell, M.D. (1973). Measuring Intelligence with the Culture Fair Tests, Manual for Scale 2 & 3, The Psychology Centre, New Delhi.

Cattell, R.B. and » Cattell, M.D. (1973). Technical Supplement for the Culture Fair Intelligence Tests. Manual for Scale 2 & 3. The Psychology Centre, New Delhi.

Chauhan, Poonam (1973). Relative Contribution of Some Socio-Cultural and Famitial Variables to Over and Under-achievement in Science at Class VIII Level. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

Eugence, S.E. (1964). A Normative Approach to the Measurement of Under-achievement. Journal of Experimental Education, 33, 2, 197-199.

Ferguson, G.A. (1976). Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education. McGraw Hill, Kagakusha Ltd., pp. 9-10.

Franzen, R. (1920). The accomplishment Quotient, A School Mark in Terms of Individual Capacity. Trs. col. Record 21, 432-440.

Froehlick, C.P. and Hoyt, K.B. (1959). The Scatter Diagran as an Aid to Diagnosis Guid. Testing S.R.A., Inc. Chicago, Chapter 8.

Garrett, H.E. (1981). Statistics in Psychology and Education, Vakils, Feffor and Simons Ltd., Bombay.

Harris, D. (1940). Factors affecting College Grades : A Review of the Related Literature 1930-37, Psychological Bulletin, 37, 136-166.

James, A.and Elmore, K. (1962). Problems and Academic Achievement. Bui. Nat. Ass. Sec. School, Princ, ILVI, 359, 470-473.

133

McNemar, Q. (1962). Psychological Statistics. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York.

Monroe, W.S. and Buckingham, B.R. (1920). The Illionois Examination, Blooraington Public School Publishing Co. cited by Crane A.R., 1959, An Historical and Critical account of the Accomplishment Quotient Idea, British Journal of Edu. Psychology, 29, 252-259.

Parsley, K.M. and others (1967). Further Investigation of Sex and Difference in Achievement of Under Average and Over-achieving Students Within Five I.Q. Group in Grades Four Through Eight. Journal of Educational Research, 57, 5, 268-269.

Peters, C.C. (1926). A Method for Computing Accomplishment Quotient in the High School and College Level, Journal of Educational Research, 16, 99-101.

Pinter, R. and Marshall, H. (1921). A Combined Mental Educational Survey, Journal of Education, Psychol, 12, 32-43.

Rani, S. (1990). Development of Personality Inventory. M.Phil. Dissertation, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

Rao, D.G. (1965). A Study of Some Factors Related to Scholastic Achievement. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Delhi University.

Roberge, J.J. and Flexer, B.K. (1981). Re-examination of Covariation of Field Independence and Achievement. British Journal of Edu. Psvchol., 51, 225-236.

Singh, R. (1986). An Investigation into the Relationship between Achievement Motivation, Intelligence (general Mental Efficiency) Introversion-Extraversion, Achievement in Mathematics and a Comparison thereof between Haryana and Delhi Students belonging to various Socio-Cultural Strata. Doctoral Thesis. Jamia Milia Islamia Delhi. Indian Dissertation Abstract, 15, 2, 159.

Srivastava, A.K. (1967). An Investigation into the Factors Related to Under-achievement. Doctoral Thesis Psychol. Patna University.

1J4

Thorndike, R.L. (1963). The Concepts of Over and Under-achievement. Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York.

Thorndike, R.L. and Hagen, E. (1969). Measurement and Evaluation in Psychology and Education. John Wiley & Sons Inc.; New York.

CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION AND

DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS

CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION AND DISCUSSION OF

THE RESULTS

The next step in the process of research is

presentation, analysis, interpretation and discussion of

the data and derivation of conclusions and generalizations

to get meaningful information from the data collected.

Analyses and .interpretation of data forms the most

important part of the study. All the efforts are discussed

to discover something new which must have the support of

the scientific reasoning and comes through experimentation

or observation or through both.

Analyses of the data means studying the tabulated

material in order to determine meanings. It involves

breaking down the existing complex factors into simplest

parts and putting them together in new arrangements for

the interpretation. The process requires an alert,

flexible and open mind. No similarities, differences,

trends and outstanding factors should go unnoticed.

The present investigation is concerned with

exploring personality characteristics of over-and under-

achievers in different professional courses, namely,

13B

Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business Administration and

Medical.

Means and standard deviations of the distribution

of scores obtained by these over and under-achievers on 12

personality dimensions were calculated to obtain 't'

values for the differences between them. These values have

been reported in Table 4.1 to 4.6.

In the above mentioned tables the name of each

personality dimension includes the names of the two ends

(terminal anchors) of a personality continuum for example

Lively — Serious. The initial name of each personality

dimension indicates high score end of the continuum and

the last name of the personality dimension indicates the

low score end of the continuum. The 12 personality

continua, their two terminal names/anchors and further

elaboration of each are given below :

Factor, l:: LIVELY

Carefree

Optimist

Enthusiastic

Warmhearted

Humorous

Happy-go-lucky

Cheerful

SERIOUS

Cautious

Pessimist

Indifferent

Apathetic

Mirthless

Worrying

Unhappy

137

Frank

Relaxing

Active

Easy going

Factor II SOCIABLE

Participating

Socially Skillful

Socially Bold

Expressive

Wide Interest

Responsive

Talkative

Factor III

Gregarious

IMPULSIVE

Intuitive

Lack Introspection

Affected by Feeling

Uneasy

Impatient

Excitable

Vague

Acts on the Spur of the Moment

FactorlV VENTURESOME

Uninhibited

Daring

Secretive

Thoughtful

Dull

Critical

RESERVED

Detached

Socially Clumsy

Timid

Quiet

Narrow Interest

Aloof

Taciturn

Seclusive

STABLE

Logical

Introspective

Emotionally Stable

Calm

Deliberate

Phlegmatic

Exact

Prudent

SHY

Restrained

Easily Frightened

138

Factor V

Energetic

Vigorous

CONFIDENT

Self-possessed

Self-sufficient

Self-assured

Poised

Contended

Responsible

Serene

Languid

Innert

NERVOUS

Over-anxious

Group-dependent

Apprehensive

Diffident

Ruffled

Frivolous

Dissatisfied

Factor VI DOMINANT Boastful

Factor VII

Prefers own Decision

Forceful

Independent

Aggressive

Stubborn

Outspoken

Ascedent

CONSCIENTIOUS

Rule-bound

Dependable

Trustworthy

Fair-minded

SUBMISSIVE Modest

Sound Follower

Meek.

Conforming

Humble

Mild

Introvert

Submissive

EXPEDIENT

Evades Rules

Undependable

Untrustworthy

Partial

139

Factor VIII TRUSTING

Credulous

Agreeable

FactorIX CONSERVATIVE

Conventional

Conservative

Tolerant of Traditions

Respects Established Ideas

Staid

Rigid

Unenquiring

Factor X KIND

Tenderminded

Sensitive

Gentle

Generous

Compassionate

Factor XI COOPERATIVE

Tolerant

Caplaisant

Friendly

Understanding

Accommodating

SUSPICIOUS

Doubting

Fault-finding

EXPERIMENTING

Experimental

Radical

Free Thinking

Introduces New Ideas

Broad Minded

Flexible

Curious

HARSH

Tough-minded

Crude

Hostile

Hard

Inhuman

OBSTRUCTIVE

Intolerant

Pugnacious

Belligerent

Torpid

Bellicose

140

Factor XII PERSEVERING

Determined

Steady

Studious

Firm

FICKLE-MINDED

Indecisive

Quitting

Lacks Concentration

Volatile

Thus, the dimension Lively-Serious indicates that a

person scoring high on this dimension is lively, i.e.

he/she is carefree, optimistic, warmhearted, enthusiastic,

easy going, etc. and the person scoring low on this

dimension is serious, i.e. he/she is cautious, worrying,

unhappy, indifferent, secretive, thoughtful and critical.

In the same way, the dimension Sociable-Reserved indicates

that a person scoring high on this dimension is sociable,

i.e. he/she is participating, socially bold, talkative,

gregarious, expressive, has wide interests, etc. and the

person scoring low on this dimension is reserved, i.e.

he/she is detached, socially clumsy, timid, aloof taciturn

etc. Remaining dimensions may be interpreted similarly.

Table 4.1 presents the 't' values indicating the

differences between the mean scores of over and under-

achievers in Engineering courses on 12 personality

factors .Figure 4.ipresents the personality profiles of these

candidates.

>y Xi

X)

a c . f^ « (0 Q)

4J U 43 ^. O D

o to c j J-" 0 r H 4J CO O C cO O

Cn ' H W

>>» W 4J CU M-l t W

,-1 0 A >-• 1= a. 0 (0 - -^ >-• no (U C

O- - H V J

CU (u p> (U

r- l C (U - H 3 CO

E- C a

c 0 •

o en en OJ . J-" PQ

O —' o

CO 0 0

c ' C -H

CO U

0) -i

J2 0) >

(U CU CJ - H C JC (U 0 V-. CO

CU 1 V4-t V J

u-i M-t 0 I W

^ c CJO

T 4

 00 (U f - l

H J W

CU D

r - l CO

> -• u

-

in )-• 0)

> a

1-1 f *

0 CO 1 ^

1 3 0 !-< II CJ Z > c

Q CO

c CO CU

^

y3

\^ 0

0 r3 U*

> XJ T- l

r-* CO

c 0 tn

CX

• H 0

m i n

T H

<r

CO 0

m

f n CN

0 0 CM

i n rv.

CVJ

i n CT>

0 ^H

cn D 0

M-l

>-> CU

CO 1

>> 1—1

CU

> 1-1

J

^

•H 0

i n T H

0 0 cn

r^ i n

cn

0 0 0

r^ CM

0 r^

CN

T- t

<f

0 T H

-o CU

> CU cn CU CC 1 CU

1—1

Xi CO

• H 0 0

CO

CM

T H

0

0 0

• VO

0 • < ! •

CN

0 0

T - l

T - l

CN i n

• cn

0 c

c 0 0

a r—1

CO

• u

CO 1 CU

> •r-l cn

r - l

3 a E

l-H

cn

i -<

0

i n <f

o Csl

CO T - l

CN

vD

• 0 0

CN 0 0

CN

r^ t ^

0 0 T - l

CO 1 CU B 0 cn CU u d u c CU

>

"^

T H

0

r>. r^

0 cn

0 0 0 0

CM

i n <3^

0 T - l

i n 0 0

<

0 r^

r^ CN

01 3 0 > U CU 2 1

• U

c CU

T3 •r-l •4-1

c 0

CJ

i n

T - l

0

0 0

CM cn

T-H

VO

CM

<t T H

0 T H

i n

m

m

-<r CO

0 0 CN

CU

> ••-(

cn cn

T I

E

^ 3

CO 1

4J

c to

c 1-1

E 0 Q

vO

T H

0

T H

CM

cn CN

r^ 0 0

CM

CJ 0

v£> T H

cn 0 0

T - l

i n CJN

r>»

•u c CU

T-l XI CU

a X

1 cn 3 0

•i-< OJ C CU

1-4

0 cn c 0 0

r^

r-\

0

rv. 0 0

r«. T H

m <f

r-4

CJ cn

0 0

T - l

cn

T - l

r^ 0 0

^

cn 3 0

1-1

0 •r-l

a cn 3

CO 1 0 0

c 1-1

• U

cn 3 u

f -

0 0

T H

0

<r cn

m T H

0 vO

0 ^

r^ CN

r^ CM

C3 0 0

CM

v l -0

T - l T-4

cp c

1-1

c 0 E

• H >-•

1

^ 1-1 U CO

cn c cS <J^

T-<

0

0 m 0 0

CN 0 0

• T - l

CM r^

r>« CM

CO 0 0

CN

C3 <f

0 T H

x: cn u CO X

1 T3 C

•r-l &>!i

• 0 T-l

T H 0

0 0 C30

T-4 <f

CM 0 0

CN

v£) CN

CM

<f 0 0

0 T - l

^ 1-1 U

a E cn

J 3

? 1-1 OJ CO

>->

1 q CJ

T-i

T ^

0

0 0 <t

• CM CM

VO CN

•!-{

T-t

0 0

• < ! •

v f 0

CN

cn 0

0 T - l

1 1 * _

5 '^ •^^•B

CO

•1-1 V'

^ cn )-• CU

Ci.

CN T-l

141

LU > LiJ

I O UJ I O 

o d z UJ

I CO > - O) W

O.E 3 I- O

S - - " © O) C — C O

o ^ «

>, CO o

_ 0) Q. CO (1) ^ c .i^ o ^ so o >- <

• XJ "* ^ _ UJ ^ LU oc-o • ^ c o

- m u_ ^

0

c

c

in CO

o lo o 00 CM CM

142

4.1 Personality and Achievement in Engineering

Professional Courses:

4.1.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious).

The means of over- and under-achievers on this

factor are 10.95 and 28.23 respectively. The 't' value for

this difference is found to be 41.55 which is highly

significant. This shows that over-achievers in Engineering

are serious and under-achievers are lively.

A perusal of the sub-dimensions of factor I

indicates that over-achievers are serious, i.e. they are

cautious, thoughtful and critical. The under-achievers are

found to be lively, i.e. they are carefree, happy-go-lucky

relaxing and easy going. The above result may be justified

because thoughtfulness and cautiousness seems to be

essential for over-achievement. Under-achievement is well

known to be associated with happy-go-lucky type. The

present finding has been supported by Taylor (1964) and

Gawronski (1965). They also found under-achievers to be

pleasure-seeking rather than involved in academic activi

ties. However, Deb Maya's (1968) study seems to contradict the

findings of the present research. In this study extraversion and

sociability were found to be related to success in

Engineering profession. It may be pointed out that the

present study is concerned with personality

143

characteristics of over and under-achievers in Engineering

courses while Deb Maya's study was concerned with the

personality characteristics of successful engineers. The

personality of a person successful in a course of study is

quite likely to be different from that of a person

successful in the profession. Thus, the present research

corroborates the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in

Engineering (B.Sc. Engineering) professional courses are

likely to be serious' presented in chapter I which was

generated after a thorough review of previous research.

4.1.2 Factor II (Sociable - Reserved) :


factor are 10.41 and 27.80 respectively. The 't' value

showing the significance of difference between the two

means has been found to be 38.15 which is very

significant. This indicates that over-achieving

Engineering students are reserved i.e. they are quiet

socially clumsy, possess narrow interests and are

detached while under-achievers are sociable,i .e. they are

participating, socially skillful, expressive, responsive,

talkative and gregarious. The present finding seems to be

justified because it is well known that high achievement

requires continuous and involved studies for which a

reserved personality (aloof, quite, detached) is

144

imperative. This finding has been supported by Dhaliwal

(1971) and Gopal (1975) who found that reservedness is the

essential characteristic of over-achievers. The hypothesis

that over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc. Engineering)

professional courses are likely to be reserved is

supported by the present study.

4.1.3 Factor III (Impulsive - Stable):

The mean scores of over-achievers and under-

achievers on this factor are 30.00 and 11.06 respectively.

The 't' value is 6.08 which is significant at .01 level.

The result thus clearly shows that over-achievers are

impulsive, i.e. uneasy, impatient, affected by feeling and

act on the spur of the moment. On the other hand, under-

achievers are stable, i.e. introspective, exact

phlegmatic, prudent and emotionally stable. This is also

borne out of the evidence provided by the life histories

of eminent scientists. Sometimes, the behaviours of these

persons have been found unpredictable and unnatural. They

act on the spur of the moment. Stability is not found in

their behaviour. Thus,the hypothesis that 'over-achievers

in Engineering (B.Sc. Engineering) professional courses

are likely to be impulsive' is corroborated by the present

result.

145

4.1.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy):

The difference between over-and under-achievers is

highly significant (t = 29.45). The over-achievers have

obtained mean score of 18.77 and the mean score of under-

achievers is 8.56. This shows that over-achievers are

venturesome i.e. they are energetic and vigorous and the

under-achievers are shy, i.e. they are restrained and

ineit. The result seems to be quite logical. Energy and

vigour should be associated with over-achievement and

ineit and restrained dispositions can be logically

considered to be a characteristic of under-achievement.

Thus, the present research corroborates the hypothesis that

'over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc. Engineering)

professional courses are likely to be venturesome'.

However, this finding is not supported by Jayagopala

(1974), Ghuman (1976) and Jahan (1985). Jayagopala (1974-

found that scholastic achievement is related to shyness.

Ghuman (1976) also found that over-achievers are of shy

nature. Jahan (1985) found under-achievers in science to

be adventurous. The above mentioned studies are concerned

with achievement in academic courses. The personality

characteristics of over-achievers or under-achievers in

academic courses may be different from the students in


146

4.1.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) :

The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on this

factor are 27.70 and 10.95 respectively. The 't' value is

30.77 which is significant at .01 level. This shows that

over-achievers in Engineering courses are confident ,i.e.

self-sufficient self-possessed, contended, responsible and

serene while under-achievers are nervous, i.e. they are

over-anxious, group-dependent, apprehensive, diffident,

ruffled, frivolous and dissatisfied. It seems to be quite

obvious that personality characteristics,like confidence

and self-sufficiency are important in spurring achievement

and as such should be the characteristic of over-

achievers. Contrariwise , high level of anxiety and such

characteristics as diffidence and dependence should lead

to underachievement. The findings of the present research

and the theoretical rationale presented above are

supported by related studies (Taylor; 1964, Gawronski.

1965; Rushton, 1966; Jayagopala, 1974; and Agarwal, 1976).

Thus the hypothesis 'over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc.

Engineering) professional courses are likely to be

confident' has been supported by the present research.

4.1.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive):

The mean score of over-achievers on this factor is

28.85. This is significantly higher than the mean score of

147

under-achievers, i.e. 10.15. The 't' value is 32.00 which

is highly significant. This shows that the over-achievers

are dominant, i.e. they are forceful, independent,

outspoken, stubborn, ascendant, boastful and prefer their

own decision, while under-achievers are found to be

submissive, i.e. they are sound followers, modest, mild,

conforming, humble, meek and introverts. The present

•finding has been supported by Ridding (1966), Rushton

(1966) and Gopal (1975). Ridding (1966) found over-

achievers in Arithmetic, which is highly related to

Engineering, to be dominant, Gopal (1975) found creative

engineers who are likely to be over-achievers, to be

assertive. Rushton (1966) found over-achievers in

academic courses to be of dominant nature. Thus,the present resu

supports the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Engineering

(B.Sc. Engineering) professional courses are likely to be

dominant' presented in Chapter I. However, this finding

has been contradicted by Dhaliwal (1971) and Jahan (1985).

They found over-achievers to be obedient. It may, however,

be mentioned that these studies were concerned with

overall academic achievement. Therefore, these findings

may not be applicable to the Engineering profession. It

will also not be out of place to mention the conclusions

derived in the studies conducted by Gobhert and Hoyt

(1959) who found Engineering students to be fairly

dominant.

148

4.1.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient) :



23.21 which is significant at .01 level. It can be

inferred from the results that over-achievers are

expedient, i.e. they tend to do things that are likely to

be useful for a given purpose, though contrary to the

principles. On the other •'hand, under-achievers are found

to be conscientious, i.e. they are rule-bound, dependable,

trustworthy and fair-minded. Thus , the hypothesis that


professional courses are likely to be expedient' has been

supported by the present research. However, this result is

not in agreement with the findings of Rushton (1966) and

Jahan, Qamar (1985) who found over-achievers in academic

courses to be conscientious. It may be pointed out that

personality characteristics of over-achievers in academic

courses may be different from those of students in

professional courses like Engineering. Neog (1990) also

found over-achievers in Mathematics which is highly

related to Engineering courses to be of conscientious

type. The study by Neog (1990) ho\ ever, seems to positively refute the

results of the present research. Further research in the

area is needed.

149

4.1.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) :


factors are 4.87 and 8.39 respectively, 't' value is 17.87

which is very significant. Over-achievers are found to be

suspicious, doubting and fault-finding. Under-achievers,

on the other hand, are found to be trusting, i.e.

agreeable and credulous. This contention is supported by

Neog (1990). She found over-achievers in Mathematics to be

apprehensive. Gopal (1975) also supports this finding. He

found creative engineers to be of suspicious nature.

Personality characteristics necessary for success in

Mathematics and Engineering courses may be similar.

Therefore, these researches may be considered comparable.

The investigator could not find any study which did

not support the results of the present research. Thus the

hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc.


suspicious' stands accepted.

4.1.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting):



15.34 which is highly significant. The result thus clearly

indicates that under-achievers are conservative, i.e. they

150

are conventional, tolerant of traditions, respect,

established ideas and are rigid. On the other hand, over-

achievers are found to be experimenting, i.e. they are

radical, unconventional, broad-minded, flexible and

curiuous. The finding of the present study seems to be

justified because this course is based on experimentation.

It has also been observed in daily life that engineers are

found to be experimenting. It is on the basis of this

characteristic that they create new ideas, laws and

theories. This result is also In agreement with the

finding of Ghuman (1976) that over-achievers disregard

rules, i.e. they are not conservative. Thus, the

hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc.


experimenting' has been supported by the present research.

4.1.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh) :

The means of over-achievers and under-achievers or.

this factor are 10.49 and 27.72 respectively. The 't'

value is 8.50 which is significant at .01 level. The

result thus shows that over-achievers are harsh, i.e.

hard, crude and hostile. Contrariwise, under-achievers are

found to be kind, i.e. compassionate and sensitive. The

present finding has been contradicted by Neog (1990). She

found that under-achievers in mathematics are less

151

tenderminded. However,this contention may be justified by

the theoretical rationale. This type of course and later

on the related profession requires toughness in dealings,

that is, being harsh, crude and hard. Thus, the present

result corroborates the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in

Engineering (B.Sc. Engineering) professional courses are

likely to be harsh.'

4.1.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive) :



41.88 which is highly significant. It can therefore, be

interpreted that over-achievers are obstructive, i.e. they

are intolerant, pugnacious, belligerent, torpid and

bellicose. On the other hand under-achievers are found to

be cooperative i.e. they are tolerant, complaisant,

friendly, understanding and accommodating.

It may be that over-achievers in Engineering

courses have to devote so much time in their studies that

they do not get sufficient time for cultivating

friendship and tend to be obstructive whenever their

efforts for deep studies are thwarted. It is, perhaps, on

the grounds of theoretical rationale that the results of

the present research can be justified. Thus, the result of

152

the present research corroborates the hypothesis that


professional courses are likely to be obstructive*.

4.1.12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle-minded) :

The mean scores of over-achievers and under-


The 't' value is 22.48 which is highly significant. It can

thus be concluded that over-achievers are persevering^i.e.

they are determined, steady, studious and firm.

Contrariwise, under-achievers are found to be fickle-

minded, i.e. they are indecisive, volatile and lack

concentration. This result is corroborated by Gawronski

(1965), Gupta (1970) and Menon (1973). They found

over-achievers in academic courses to be of persistent

nature. The result seems to be justified on the ground

that this course requires constant mental preoccupation.

It has also been observed that perseverence spurs the

level of achievement more than the intelligence does.

Punctuality which is an important component of

perseverance has also been considered very important

correlate of over-achievers. Thus the present result


Engineering professional courses (B.Sc. Engineering) are

likely to be persevering' presented in Chapter I.

•w y 0

1-1

CO O

• H

a)u-i >

en (U P

t—1 CO

>

1, C/D

1

cn >-< (U > cu

•r-l

0 in CO

1 II

 0)

x: Or--CO -d"

O

w )-i o J_t o to

>,

CO c o

a.

01

CO

en

c CO

o o o o o o o o o o o o

O N T H v o i n o o v o i - i r ^ v O k O O O

<t f^ O^ <f 00 TH r^ CM 00 CM in 00

00

en o o O en 00 vt O TH o 00

C M 0 0 C M C M C N J C S I C M C M C O < f C O

v £ 5 0 0 v O O < N O C M < J - O v O C M o m > ; J • O v D ^ ^ o ^ v o c c M l n c M

in 0^ O O 0^ CNJ

i n CM VO

vO 0 0 CM CM C^ a ^ O <)• CT\ CM r-4 CM O O

a ^ T-( VJO T H vO in in in r^ r^

C ^ C M m C N ^ O C ^ T H - ^ C N - d -

o in ON vt vo CM O ^ 00 1-1 O TH

T-i vo <T> in CO o m o 00 vD a\ 00

0 0 T H

03

D O

• H U (U

CO 1

>. r - l

0)

> •r-l H J

0 0

1 3 0)

> )-. (U (A 0)

Qe: 1 0)

I - l

J 3 CO

•r-l o o

CO

CM CN

(U t—1 X I CO 4J CO

1 (U

> • H tfl

f - (

3 Q ,

e M

CT> T-4

>, X CO

1 (U E

o (0 (U

w 3 u c (U

>

r CM

(A 3 0 > >-> a 2

1 4J

c 0 ) TJ •i-l iw C o

CJ

0 0

0)

> 1-1 en en

f -<

e Xi 3

CO 1

XJ

c CO

c • H E

o Q

r

•U c cu

T-l

-a 0)

a X

u 1 U3

3 O

• H 4J

c -0. X u

1 (U

> •w 4 J CO

a) en e 6

ON

X (0

>-• CO

X 1

T3 C

1-1

:>:: •

o

<!• CM

•r-l U

g u en

X I

? 1-1 j - i CO

5 ,q

• T - l

CJ

<U TD r- l (U

^ -o CJ C 1-1 -H fc E

1

CO c

•1-1 I "

i en I-l

0)

cu •

CM

153

T - l C M c n < l • m v o ^ ^ o o c J ^

CO

111 > UJ X o LU

< 1

LLI >

q LU CD

O T3

> m

OcQ

to > (0

*- o a- C O >.' _ * - CO (0

«- o iJ ® < o

^?

2D

17 «J

154

4.2 Personality and Achievement in Teaching Professional

Courses:

Table 4.2 presents the means and standard

deviations of the distribution of scores of over and under-

achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional courses on

twelve personality dimensions. 't' values are also

presented for showing the difference between ithe means of

scores obtained by over and under-achievers.

4.2.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious) :

The means of over-and under-achievers are 18.00 and

11.00 respectively. The 't' value is 4.91 which is highly

significant at .01 level.- The result thus indicates that

over-achievers in B.Ed, course are lively, i.e. they are

optimist, carefree, enthusiastic, warmhearted, humorous,

cheerful, frank and relaxing. On the other hand, the

under-achievers are serious, i.e. they are pessimist,

apathetic, indifferent, mirthless, worrying and dull.

Quite a few studies have attempted to investigate

the personality characteristics of effective teachers.

Some such studies are: Deva (1966), Fox (1971), and Adaval

(1979). Deva (1966) found effective teachers as cheerful

and energetic. Fox (1971) and Adaval (1979) found teachers

to be energetic and enthusiastic. Tutoo (1972) found

155

teachers to be extraverted. Mishra (1984) also found them

to be carefree. These researches support the result of the

present investigation.

The finding of the present research can also be

justified on the grounds of theoretical rationale.

Effective teachers should be lively, i.e. warmhearted and

enthusiastic so that they can deal effectively with young

students. Such teachers create an atmosphere in the

classroom which is condusive to learnin3. Some studies

conducted on over and under-achievers in different

academic courses have found that over-achievement is

related with extraversion. Some of these studies are

Astington (1960), Taylor (1964), Gawronski (1965), Ridding

(1966), Jayagopala (1974), Mathew (1976), Jahan (1985) and

Southward (1989). Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-

achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional courses are

likely to be lively' stands accepted by the results of the

present research.

4.2.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved):

The means of over-and under-achievers on the factor

are 8.65 and 25.58. The 't' value is found to be 13.14

which is significant at .01 level. The result thus shows

that over-achievers are reserved, i.e. they are detached,

socially clumsy, timid, quiet, aloof, seclusive and

156

taciturn. On the other hand, under-achievers are

sociable, i.e. they are socially skillful, socially bold,

responsive, participating, talkative, expressive and

gregarious.

The result is supported by Adaval (1979) who also

found reservedness as an essential character of successful

teacher. However, Mishra (1984) found that effective

teachers are sociable.

The sample of the study consisted of teachers under

training which involves both academic^practice teaching

courses. Success in academic courses of this training

would perhaps require the same personality characteristics

as are needed for success in any other academic courses.

Therefore, the studies concerned with over-achievers in

academic courses may be cited here to support or

contradict the result. Dhaliwal (1971) who studied the

personality characteristics of over-achievers in academic

courses also found that they are 'reserved'. Thus, the

result of the present research corroborates the hypothesis

that 'over-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional

courses are likely to be reserved'.

157

4.2.3 Factor H I (Impulsive-Stable)

The means of over and under-achievers on this


15.63 which is highly significant. The result indicates

that over-achievers are impulsive, i.e. uneasy, intuitive,

impatient and act on the spur of the moment. On the other

hand, underachievers are stable, calm, phlegmatic and

prudent- Thus,the results of the present research are not

in agreement with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in

Teaching (B.Ed.) professional courses are likely to be

stable*' presented in Chapter I. The result of the present

study are also not supported by the previous researches

(Deva, 1966; Adaval, 1979 and Mishra, 1984). Deva's research

was concerned with pupil teachers but that of Adaval and

Mishra was concerned with the teachers in the profession.

The findings of Adaval and Mishra may therefore be

evaluated with this point of view in mind.

The findings that over-achieving student teachers

are impulsive does not seem to be justified when

considered superficially, but a careful observation of

high achievers in different fields reveals that most of

them have been impulsive and emotionally unstable. Terman

(1953) found that literary geniuses were mostly lov; in

emotional stability. Taylor (1963) also quotes examples of

scientists who had low ratings on emotional stability.

158

In view of this discussion it may safely be concluded that

overerachieving student teachers may also be impulsive.

4.2.4 FactorIV (Venturesome-Shy) :



22.56 which is highly significant. The result shows that

overachievers are venturesome, i.e. they are uninhibited,

daring, energetic and vigorous. On the other hand, the

under-achievers are of shy nature, i.e. they are

restrained, easily frightened, languid and inert. This

finding has been supported by Deva (1966), Wakefield

(1974) and Adaval (1979). Deva (1966) found effective

teachers to be energetic which is a related characteristic

of the dimension, i.e. venturesomeness. Wakefield (1974)

also found that ideal teachers readily make efforts to do

difficult jobs. Adaval (1979) found fearlessness an

important quality of teachers.

As pointed out earlier, the teachers' training

courses of the subjects under study had academic work as

an important component. Therefore, studies concerned with

the personality of high achievers in academic courses can

also be quoted to support or contradict the findings of

this research. In this connection it may be pointed out

that Rushton (1966) also found over-achievers in academic

159

courses as adventurous. Thus, the present result is in

agreement v;ith the hypothesis that 'overachievers in

Teaching (B.Ed. ) professional courses are likely to be

venturesome.'

4.2.5 Factor V (Confident-Nervous) ;

The means of over-and under-achievers on this


17.85 which is highly significant. Thus, it is evident

that over-achievers are confident, i.e. self-sufficient,

self-assured, poised, contended, responsible and serene

and the under-achievers are group-dependent, over-anxious,

ruffled, apprehensive and diffident. The result seems to

be quite reasonable because confidence does not only

provide background for intensive studies but is also

essential for facing the class and to become effective

teacher. Some of the researchers who conducted

investigation in the area of teaching competence have

confirmed the present finding (Deva, 1966; and Adaval,

1979). On the other hand, nervousness is likely to impede

high achievement. This result also finds support by the

researches concerned with academic achievement (Taylor,

1964; Gawronski, 1965; Rushton, 1966; Jayagopala, 1974;

and Agarwal, 1976). The present result corroborates the

hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.)

professional courses are likely to be confident^.

160

4.2.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive) :



5.61 which is significant at .01 level. The result

indicates that over-achievers are dominant i.e. they are

forceful, independent ascendant and prefer their own

decision. Under-achievers are found to be submissive i.e.

they are sound follower, meek, conforming humble, mild and

introvert.

This result seems to be reasonable because this

course as well as the concerned profession requires a

capacity to control the class effectively. The teacher

should therefore be dominant, submissiveness on the part

of the teacher is likely to breed indiscipline among the

students and consequently affect the efficiency adversely.

Mishra (1984) who specifically conducted investigation on

characteristics of original teachers, found them to be

assertive. The researchers concerned with over-achievement

in academic courses (Rushton, 1966 and Gopal, 1975) also

found over-achievers in English and Arithmetic to be

dominant. Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in


dominant' stands accepted.

161

4.2.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient).

The means of over-and under-achievers are 17.51 and

7.92 respectively. The 't' value is 21.10 which is

significant at .01 level. This indicates that

over-achievers are conscientious, i.e. they are rule-bound

dependable, trustworthy and fairminded. The under-

achievers are found to be expedient, i.e. they are

undependable, evade rules and are partial.

Adaval (1970) who specifically conducted an

investigation into the qualities of a successful teacher,

also found them to be impartial and just which is a

related characteristic of this dimension. Even in daily

life experiences effective teachers are regarded as the

most conscientious persons.

The result is also in consonance with the findings

of Rushton (1966), Jahan (1985) and Neog (1990). Jahan

(1985) found over-achievers in science to be conscientious.

Neog (1990) found over-achievers in mathematics to be of

conscientious type. Thus, the hypothesis that

'over-achi evers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional courses

are likely to be conscientious' has been supported by the

result of the present research.

162




5.75 which is quite significant. Thus^the over-achievers

are trusting, i.e. they are credulous and agreeable.

Contrariwise, the under-achievers are found to be

suspicious, i.e. doubting and fault finding. The results

find support in the studies of Adaval (1979) who found

successful teacher to be considerate which by implication

means that they are trusting. The present findings may

also be justified by theoretical rationale because the

student teachers in practice teaching and later on

effectiveness in this profession requires this

characteristic. They should have an agreeable attitude

towards the opinion and statements of the students. Thus,

the result of the present research corroborates the

hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.)

professional courses are likely to be trusting'.

4.2.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting)'.

The means of over—and under-achieirvers on this


found to be 17.65 which is highly significant. The result

indicates that over-achievers are conservative, i.e. they

163

are conventional and tolerant of traditions. On the other

hand, under-achievers are experimenting, i.e. they are

curious, flexible, broad-minded and introduce new ideas.

Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Teaching

(B.Ed.) professional courses are likely to be

conservative' has been supported by the result of the

present research.

However, the conclusions of the research conducted

by Mishra (1984) contradict the present conclusion. He

found original teachers to be ready to try new things.

It is, however, not surprising to find the student

teachers in trainings to be conservative. If we analyse

the role of a teacher, we will find that the very basic

responsibility of a teacher is acculturation, i.e. the

teacher transmits the vital elements of culture to its

young generation, thereby helps to conserve the culture

and therefore, he should be somewhat conservative.

4.2.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh) ;


factor are 9.65 and 24.26. The 't' value is 20.63 which is

highly significant. It can be inferred from the results

that over-achievers are harsh, i.e. they are toughminded,

hostile, hard and crude. Contrariwise, the under-achievers

are found to be kind,i.e. tenderminded, sensitive, gentle

164

and generous. These results are contrary to hypothesis

that 'over-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional

courses are likely to be kind' presented in chapter I and

does not find support by some previous researchers (Deva,

1966 and Adaval, 1979). Deva (1966) found teachers

training students to be kind and Adaval (1979) found

successful teachers as gentle and kind. However, some

previous researches support- the present conclusions.

Mishra (1984) found original teachers to be of hostile

nature. Neog (1990) found over-achievers in academic

courses to be less tenderminded.

The present investigator feels that effective

student teachers should be kind and considerate. The

present results that student teachers are harsh, hostile

and crude seem to have been obtained because the teaching

profession has become the last refuge and thus the person

entering this profession are highly frustrated resulting

in their hostile and crude behaviour.

4.2.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive):

The mean scores obtained by over- and under-



It thus clearly brings out that over-achievers are

co-operative, i.e. they are tolerant, complaisant,

165

friendly, understanding , and accommodating while under-

achievers are obstructive, i.e. intolerant, pugnacious,

torpid, belligerent and bellicose. The present finding is

supported by Fox (1971), Tutoo (1975), Adaval (1979) and

Ilishra (1984). All these researchers fourid co-operative-

ness, sociability and friendliness related to over-

achievers. Thus, the present result is in agreement with

the Vypothesis that 'over-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.)

professional courses are likely to be co-operative'.

4.2.12 (Factor XII (Persevering -Fickle minded) :

The mean scores obtained by over- and under-



The results clearly indicate that over-achievers are

perservering, i.e. they are determind, steady, studious

and firm. While the under-achievers are found to be

fickle-minded, i.e. indecisive, quitting, volatile and

lack concentration. This finding has been confir-ed by

Deva (1966), Cook (1972), Wakefield (1974), Adaval (1979)

and Mishra (1984). Deva (1966) found diligence as an

important characteristic for success in teaching. Cook

(1972) found good daily planning related with teaching

competence which by implication means that perseverance is

one of the important characteristic characteristic of

CO t

o 1-1

-O 4J O CO cn fa Q

o

o c CO

o

c 00

CO

u C CO

M-l O 0 - H

IW i - l T H

0) C > 00 0) -H iJ W

3 4J CO

- >

cn V' (U

• H X o coa^ 1 St U 11 0 ) 2 -o c D

3 /)

c CO 0

s

CO u (U > o

• H jcrv. c j in CO II 1 2

) - i

(U > o

3 Zl

c CO Q)

s

o j j o CO

a c o cfl

o

166

oooooooooooo

o ^ o ^ ^ ^ T H O ^ ^ ^ a ^ c ^ l O O ^ ^ c ^ J

0^0^<)•• lHCMO O O c n m ^ O C M

OOOCO<»CT>CO •rHonsJlOOOOO

or^oocxjvo^m-sj-rHCNJcncM • • • • • • • • • • • •

>>or • ' O O v o • 't— lO • OJCNJO>r^T- lT- l rHOOOOCvJCMin

CMro<t rOfO< l - C M T H C O C N P O T H

. • • • • • o o o » » » » T - I O i O t ^ O O l ^ • ' V O O O O TH,-ICNTHCMCMr^<tCNTHrHT-(

0) >

T3 tn 1-1 r- l > ^ O U)

m >-• JD j r > 1-1 3 0) CO W ) - S O CO XJ 1 0) J3

1-1 - Oi 1 E 1 CO (U 1 0) O -U 1

cn 0) > (fl C -U 1 ,-j -r-i oj a c >,Xi tfl vi -a CO

I—1 CO r - l 3 1-t C (u 1-1 3 - u y- i 1-1

> o a c c E •H O E J Cfl !-i

3 M Ci O p >

• H r n 1-1

C OO CO CU C >

£ C/] u CO

1-1 T-l I - X o 4J <y cn cn cfl C 3 C O t- 0

1 T3 C r-l

T3 (U

(UT3 > C

•r^ 1-1 • U E O 1 3 c •1-11-1

•U U CO OJ u > O Q C J H O i « J C J C L

• • •

iHCNJCO<fm<J3r>xOOONTH^,H

CO a: lU > LLj

I o <

Q: LU G

z D tn

CO IT LU > LU

X o o cd

c (0 I

o ^ > CQ O J H 1 CO O ^ <D ,n > W W CO »-0) I 13

.— o

^ > o

CO x : w

C O <D

o < o CO 1 Z

LL

167

competent teachers. Thus^ the result of the present

research corroborates the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in


persevering'.

4.3 Personality and Achievement in Law Professional

Courses:


deviations of the distribution of scores obtained by over-

and under-achievers in Law courses on the 12 personality

dimensions, 't' values are also presented for showing the

significance of the difference between the means of scores

obtained by them.

4.3.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious)




thus clearly shows that over-achievers in Law courses are

serious, i.e. they are cautious, pessimist, mirthless,

worrying, thoughtful and critical. On the other hand,

under-achievers are found to be lively, i.e. they are

humorous, warmhearted, cheerful, frank, relaxing active

and easy going. Thus, the hypothesis that'over-achievers

in Law (LL.B.) professional courses are likely to be

168

serious' is in agreement with the result of the present

research.

Sufficient researches have not been conducted en

over and under-achievement in Law courses that may be

quoted to support or contradict the result. It may also be

pointed out here that this course requires theoretical

background and deep knowledge and understanding of the

subject. One can excell in this profession only when

he/she is a voracious reader. This by implication requires

seriousness. Therefore, the characteristics which are

needed for success in theoretical (academic) courses may

be similar for success in Law courses. The present result

has been supported by Taylor (1964) and Gawronski (1965).

They found under-achievers Co be pleasure seeking rather

than involved in academic activities. However, the result

of some earlier researches (Astington, 1960; Mathew, 1976;

and Paul 1989) seem to contradict the present finding.

But a deeper understanding would reveal that this

professional course requires this characteristic.

Therefore, seriousness may be considered one of the

important characteristics of over-achievers in Law (LL.B.)

professiuonal courses.

4.3.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved)




thus shows that over-achievers are reserved, i.e. they are

169

detached, quiet, aloof, socially clumsy and seclusive. On

the other hand, under-achievers are found to be

participating, expressive, responsive, talkative and

gregarious. The present finding has been supported by

Dhaliwal (1971) who found reservedness related to over-

achievement in academic courses. The result may also be

justified on theoretical grounds because reservedness is

the characteristic which in turn provides more tine for

studies. Contrariwise, the social persons who are busy

mixing with the people, are unable to devote much time for

studies. Therefore, reservedness may be considered

characteristic of over-achievers in academic and

professional courses. Thus, the present result is in

consonance with the hypothesis that 'aver-achievers in Lav;

(LL.B.) professional courses are likely to be reserved'.

4.3.3 Factor III (Impulsive-Stable);

The mean scores of over- and under-achievers on this


23.47 which is highly significant. This shows that over-

achievers are impulsive, i.e. they are uneasy, impatient,

intuitive and act on the spur of the moment. On the other

hand, under-achievers are found to be stable, i.e. they

are exact, prudent, logical and emotionally stable. The

170

present result is in agreement with the hypothesis that

tover-achievers in Law (LL.B.) professional courses are

likely to be impulsive ..'

However, the present investigator could not find

any research study conducted on over and under-

achievement in Law courses on this dimension,

i.e.Impulsive-stable. The present investigator feels that

due to scant chances of job opportunities the over-

achievers in Law professional courses become uneasy and

impatient. Therefore, they are likely to become impulsive.

Further, research in the area on this dimension is

required.

4.3.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy) :



18.11 which is highly significant. It can thus be inferred

that over-achievers are venturesome, i.e. they are daring,

energetic and vigorous, and the under-achievers are shy,

i.e. they are languid, restrained, easily frightened and

inert. Thus, the result of the present research is in

agreement with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Law

(LL.B.) professional courses are likely to be

venturesome'.

171

The present result has also been supported by

Rushton (1966) who found adventuresomeness positively

related to academic achievement. The present result

appears to be justified because shyness is not likely to

help in achieving the success in the course and the

related profession.

It has already been mentioned that studies of

personality patterns of students in Lav? course and

practicing lawyers have not been conducted on this

dimension. Therefore, the support, or the otherwise, of

the present research has been attempted to be sought from

studies of success in academic courses. The studies by

Jayagopala (1974) and Ghuman (1976) have shown that

successful students in academic courses are shy. The

investigator feels that comparison of this characteristic

for students in Law course is not justified. A shy student

in purely academic course is likely to succeed. But the

nature of this course and the subsequent profession is

different. A shy person can never succeed at least in the

legal profession and therefore, such students are not to

seek admission in Law course.




172

29.29 which is significant at .01 level. This indicates

that over-achievers are confident, i.e. they are self-

sufficient, self-assured, poised, contended and serene. On

the other hand, under-achievers are found to be of nervous

type, i.e. they are over-anxious, group-dependent,

apprehensive, ruffled, frivolous and dissatisfied. Thus,

the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Law (LL.B.)

professional courses are likely to be confident' has been

corroborated by the result of the present study.

The present finding has been supported by investi

gation on academic achievement (Taylor, 1964; Cattell,

Sealey and Sweney, 1965 and Somasundaran, 1980). They

found over-achievers, self-confident, self-sufficient and

free from nervous symptoms.

The present finding that over-achievers are more

confident than under-achievers can be justified because

this professional course and related job demand sufficient

confidence on the part of the students who want to excel.

It is observed in daily life experiences that the

successful lawyers and advocates are confident, self-

sufficient and self-assured.


The means of over ~ and under-achievers on this

173



shows that over-achievers are dominant, i.e. they are

independent, outspoken, forceful and prefer their own

decision. Contrariwise, under-achievers are found to be

submissive, i.e. they are meek, conforming, sound

followers, introvert and modest. Thus,the hypothesis that

'over-achievers in Law (LL.B.) professional courses are

likely to be dominant' is in consonance with the result of

the present research.

The present finding is also in agreement with the

results of earlier investigators. Ridding (1966), Rushton

(1966), and Gopal (1975) found over-achievers in academic

courses to be dominant. This result may also be justified

because successful law 'ers are found to be outspoken,

forceful and they prefer their own decision. On the other

hand, if the lawyers are of submissive type, they will not

be able to argue the case. Therefore, this characteristic

may be considered essential for over-achievers in the

mentioned course.

4.3.7 Factor VII (Cpnscientious-Expedient) :

The mean scores of over—and under-achievers on this


21.89 which is highly significant. The result thus

174

indicates that over-achievers arc expedient, i.e. they arc

undependable, untrustworthy, partial and evade rules.

Contrariwise, under-achievers are found to be dependable,

trustworthy, fair-minded and rules-bound. The present

result is also in agreement with the hypothesis that


likely to be expedient' presented in chapter I.

However, the review of related literature

concerning over and under-achievers in academic courses

does not support this result (Gawronski, 1965 and Rushton,

1966). They found over-achievers to be conscientious. It

may be that since law courses attract only those who have

not been very successful in other walks of life. The

students entering this course try every possible method to

get through and therefore they tend to be expedient.

Success in the profession that follows the course, i.e.

the legal professions, perhaps also depends upon

expediency rather than conscientiousness. Students

entering this course of study are likely to become

practising lawyers after successfully complotini^ the

course, as such they are expected to possess personality

characteristics which makes a person suited to the

profession. Therefore, the present result may be

considered valid.

175


The mean scores of over- and under-achievers on this



thus indicates that over-achievers are of suspicious

nature, i.e. they are doubting and fault-finding.

Under-achievers J on the other hand, are found to be

trusting, i.e. they are credulous and agreeable. Thus, the

present result is in agreement with the the hypothesis

that 'over-achievers in Law (LL.B.) professional courses

are likely to be suspicious' presented in chapter I.

The present result may also be justified by

theoretical rationale because daily observation reveals

that a successful lawyer has to deal with the cases in the

court and reach the truth of the matter. In this way,

they are likely become suspicious.

4.3.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting) :




shows that over-achievers are conservative, i.e. they are

conventional, tolerant of traditions, staid and rigid.

Under-achievers, on the other hand, are found to be

experimenting, i.e. they are radical, broadninded,

176

flexible, curious and introduce new ideas. Thus, the

present result corroborates the hypothesis that 'over-

achievers in Law (LL.B.) professional courses are likely

to be conservative- presented in chapter I.

The present conclusion also seems to be realistic

as far as personality of students entering this course of

study is concerned. As pointed out earlier, the course of

study attracts students of average capabilities and as

such they are likely to be conservative, conventional and

conformist. Only the experimenting among then are,

perhaps, able to climb upper rungs of professional ladder

and others remain in the lower courts after joining the

profession.


The mean scores of overhand under-achievers on this


35.40 which is highly significant. The result thus shows

that over-achievers are harsh, i.e. they are toughninded,

crude, hostile and hard. On the other hand, under-

achievers are found to be kind, i.e. they are

tenderminded, sensitive, gentle, generous and

compassionate. Thus, the present result is in agreement

with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Law (LL.B.)

professional courses are likely to be harsh'.

177

The result is not in agreement with the finding

concerned with over-achievement in academic courses. Neog

(1990) found under-achievers less tender-minded. However,

in view of the conditions obtained in the legal

profession, personality characteristic of being tough-

minded seems to be essential for dealing with clients. If

a person is kind, it will create emotional and sentimental

problems and will affect the efficiency of the cases to be

discussed. Therefore, the present result that the over-

achievers in Law courses are harsh and tough -lay be

considered valid.

4.3.11 Factor XI (Cooperative-Obstructive) :

The mean scores over- and under-achievers on this



indicates that over-achievers are obstructive, i.e. they

are intolerant, torpid and bellicose. On the other hand,

under-achievers are found to be co-operative, i.e. they

are tolerant, friendly, understanding and accomraodaeing.

These conclusions do not find any support in the

investigations of over and under-achievers in academic

courses (Rushton, 1966; Mathew, 1976; Southward Paul, 1989

and Somasundaran, 1980). These conclusions, however,

appear appropriate for the aspirants of legal profession.

178

This course which leads to the legal profession itself has

become over-competitive with the result that the persons

concerned tend to cultivate the traits of obstructiveness

as opposed to co-operativeness, probably because they

think that persons with this trait have better chances of

survival in the profession. Thus, the hypothesis that


likely to be obstructive' stands accepted.


The mean scores of over- and under-achievers on

this factor are 10.00 and 5.12 respectively. The 't' value

is 18.22 which is highly significant. It can be inferred

from the result that over-achievers are persevering i.e.

they are determined, steady, studious and firni. On the

other hand, under-achievers are found to be of

fickle-minded type, i.e. they are indecisive, volatile,

quitting and lack concentration. Thus, the present result

is in consonance with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers

in Law (LL.B.) professional courses are likely to be

persevering'presented in chapter I.

The present finding has been supported by studies

of over and under-achievers in academic courses (Astington.

1960; Gawronski, 1965; Gupta, 1970; Menon, 1973 and

Bhagirath, 1978).

Xi CO

> JQ

"O (U c 1-1 CO

u j Q

O (0

(0 0) 01 M

3 o

>- O o

• U . -1

o cd (^

>^ u 1-1 r- l CO

c o en u (U a.

CO

c o

1-1 en en (U

iw o p a,

^ •

<

(U PQ

0)

• ^ O

O CO >-i

cn -u 0) cn M -T-l o c O -H

CO E

c CO 0) s

s: • u

C 0) OJ s • u (U

^

T3 < cn tn (U c

1-1 cn 3

CQ

C • H

cn u cu > (U

(U 1-1

o x: c 

o

CO

0) o c CO

o (M 1-1 O «4-l

.-m 00 c; 1-1

.-J CO



cn u Q)

i - (

x : ( N CJ (>J CO II

1 Z u (U

TD c s

Q CO

c CO (U s

cn )-4

(U > Q)

1-1

X o r ^ CO CN4

1 11 1- 2 CD >

O

Q CO

c CO (U

rr"

cn >-i

o u u

CO

>

CO C o in u 0)

Cu

O O O O O O O O O O O O

oo<t<fvocj>,Hrxcr>Ovom<j-<3N

cx) o >d->^ CO o CN o o CO on • C^4C^4CMT^r^CMCN^^C^JC^JC^JC3^

c o c v J > d ' c * i r o < T > r v . r o r ^ O v O ' r H

cgCMCMCMCMCM^T-HCMmCNCSJ

ro T-i o m r vo 1^ ô^nôcJôo^J<ô^^cn^ôo

•<3" ' l O ' 1 ^ • •v t • • • T - H O • O • O • r • vo ^ vo • T-^<3^•r^00r-^CT^1H00CMC^^CSlCJ^

m • r ^ m c 3 ^ c M n t ^ o o < X 3 o O T H ^ ^ moocn<^l^mvoc^JvovOT-lO^

( n c n C N J C M i n r O T H T - H C M r H C M O

or^LOOvoco vooon • < l • r ^ m O < 3 ^ 0 • ^ H C ^ ^ ^ £ ) ^ - ^ C O < t

• • • • • • T — I C S I * • • " ^ O^00^•^CT^^^CT^ • ' O O O • C s l C v j r N j T H ( N C M v O < t T - l ' r - l T - H > : t

1-4 • U

^ C c (y 0 S

• H ^ (U "O tn VJ > o 3 OJ

• O W 1-1 (X, O Q , cu cj 3 cn X -r^ X > r - i > > 0 c n u o t J

cn >-i x i j C > T H 1 . H . 3 c u t o c o i - ' 2 c n a , i O c n x j i C J , Q 3 c n u m 1 s 1 co-Hcoi- ix : O 1 O O U 1 J-l 1 U

c o c ; > c n c t j c o o c o l r - I . H ( U ( U C 

cn J-CO

> s . £ i in )-. - 3 CO . H T^ u -J: r - I C 0 r - l 3 . r - I C O 4 J a J o-r-i 3 u i i - i . F ^ <n tn cn > o a c c = c 3 c

1

-0 c • r ^ O C O J O O O J - l O l - *

J C O i - H > U Q C J H C J v ^

• r-l

T3 CU

tu -o > c

• H 1-1 XJ E

o ' 3 Q) J-i . - t

u ^ w o

, O . H O bn

1 1 OJ 0 0

> c • H 1 ^ XJ U CO 0) V- > 0) 0) Ci- cn o u O 0) u a.

• •

179

, - ^ C ^ I 0 O N ; l • m ^ O ^ ^ C » < 3 ^ 1 - l T - l T H

CO

cc o o if >-

O CO

cc LU

> Q.

CO LU CC O O CO

> LU

X

o UJ

X o <

cc LU >

O <

•o C I

Q>

^ E =3 ^ -D O

< o 0) w — = w 2 ' ^ 0) c: o c o ' - . _ —

CL (0 W 3 (0

— c o

W <D <

0) <D CD

^ : ^

Si-2 3

< 111

CO O CO

in Cvi

I

o CNI

lO 1 _ in

180

4.4 Personality and Achievement in Business Administration:


deviations of the distribution of scores on 12 factors

obtained by over - and under-achievers in Business

Administration course, 't' values are also presented for

the difference between the means of the scores. The means

and the 't' values for the different factors have been

discussed in the preceding paragraphs.

4.4.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious) ;

The means scores of over-achievers and under-



This clearly shows that over-achievers in Business

Administration courses are lively, i.e. they are

enthusiastic, warmhearted, humorous, cheerful, optimist,

active and frank. Contrariwise, the under-achievers are

found tp be serious, i.e. they are cautious, apathetic,

secretive, dull, mirthless, indifferent and pessimist. The

present finding has been supported by Singh

(1972). Ho found extraversion as one of

the personality characteristics of management students.

Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Business

Administration (M.B.A.) professional courses are likely to

181

be lively' has been supported by the result of the present

research.

Since Business Administration course is directly

related to the academic courses, therefore researches

showing the relationship between personality character

istics and over- and under-achievement in academic courses

have also been quoted here. Some such studies, have

supported the present finding (Astington, 1960; Taylor,

1964; Gawronski, 1965; Ridding, 1966: Jayagopal, 1974;

Mathew, 1976; Jahan, 1985 and Southward Paul, 1989). They

found extraversion and pleasure seeking activities related

to high achievement.

4.4.2 Factor II (Sociable-Reserved);



20.43 which is highly significant. The result clearly

indicates that over-achievers are sociable, i.e. they are

talkative, gregarious, responsive, expressive, socially

bold, participating and have wide interests. On the other

hand, under-achievers are taciturn, seclusive, timid,

quiet and detached. Thus, the present result is also in

agreement with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in

Business Administration (M.B.A.) professional courses are

likely to be sociable'.

182

As sociability is a related characteristic of

extraversion, therefore the justification mentioned in the

case of the personality dimensions lively-serious also

hold good for this dimension.

4.4.3 Factor III(Impulsive-Stable) :

The neans of over- and under-achievers on this


24.44 which is highly significant. Thus,over-achievers are

impulsive, i.e. they are uneasy, impatient, affected by

feeling and act on the spur of the moment. Contrariwise,

under-achievers are stable, i.e. they are calm,

phlegmatic, prudent and emotionally stable. This result is

not in agreement with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers

in Business Administration (M.B.A.) are likely to be

stable' presented in chapter I. The present investigator

could not find any research concerned with over-achievers

in Business Administration and the mentioned personality

dimension.

The hypothesis generated in chapter I was based on

the results of researches concerned with personality

characteristics of over-achievers in academic courses

(Gopal, 1975 and Neog, 1990). This was done on the

presumption that achievement in Business Administration

183

course i s similarly determined by the same personality character

i s t i c s . This presumption does not find support by the previous

researches. I t may be that students in Business Administration

courses are also frustrated because of rampant unemplojrment in the

country which has caused high level of frustration in the over-

achievers which has led to their impulsive and impatient nature.

4 . 4 . 4 F a c t o r IV (Venturesome-Shy):

The means of o v e r " and u n d e r - a c h i e v e r s on t h i s

f ac to r a r e 19.00 and 8.59 r e s p e c t i v e l y . The ' t ' va lue i s

14.64 which i's h igh ly s i g n i f i c a n t . The . r e s u l t i n d i c a t e s

t h a t o v e r - a c h i e v e r s a re venturesome, i . e . they are

e n e r g e t i c , d a r i n g , v igorous and u n i n h i b i t e d . On the o t h e r

hand, u n d e r - a c h i e v e r s a re found to be shy , i . e . they are

r e s t r a i n e d , l a n g u i d , i n e r t , and e a s i l y f r i g h t e n e d . Thus,

the p r e s e n t r e s u l t i s in consonance wi th the hypo thes i s

t ha t ' o v e r - a c h i e v e r s in Business Admin i s t r a t i on (M.B.A.)

p r o f e s s i o n a l courses a re l i k e l y to be ven tu re some . '

I t has a l ready been pointed out t h a t t h i s course

inc ludes academic work as an impor tan t component,

t he r e fo re the r e sea rches emphasizing the p e r s o n a l i t y

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of over - and unde r - ach i eve r s i n academic

courses may be quoted t o support or c o n t r a d i c t the p re sen t

f i nd ing . The p re sen t f ind ing seems t o be reasonab le

because adventurous persons are ready to try new things and want

184

to make news contracts, as a result of which the business

flourishes. Obviously, shy person will not be able to do

the same. Therefore, venturesomeness may be considered an

important characteristics of over-achievers in Business

Administration courses.




13.92 which is highly significant. This clearly indicates

that over-achievers in M.B.A. courses are confident, i.e.

they are self-sufficient, self-possessed, self-assured,

contended, responsible and serene. On the other hand,

under-achievers are found to be nervous, i.e. they are

over-anxious, group-dependent, apprehensive, diffident,

ruffled and frivolous. The present finding has been

supported by Pervin (1984). He found that unsuccessful

business executives work under pressure which is akin to

nervousness. It may also be pointed out that confidence

engenders qualities like good adjustment and

warmheartedness which may help them to be successful

business administrators. Thus, the present result is in

consonance with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in


likely to be confident'.

185

4.4.6 Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive) :




thus shows that over-achievers are dominant, i.e. they are

forceful, ascendant, outspoken and prefer their own

decision. Contrariwise, under-achievers are found to be

submissive, i.e. they are sound followers, meek,

conforming, humble and mild. Thus, the hypothesis that

'over-achievers in Business Administration (M.B.A.)

professional courses are likely to be dominant' is

corroborated by the result of the present research.

The present finding has been supported by Ridding

(1966), Rushton (1966) and Gopal (1975). They found over-

achievers in academic courses to be dominant. The present

result also seems justified because characteristics of

ascendence and forcefulness are likely to be associated

with success in business administration courses in which

such qualities may be very helpful.

4.4.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient) :



found to be 22.71 which is highly significant. It can thus

be concluded that over-achievers are expedient, i.e. they

186

prefer to adopt procedures that are likely to help in

achieving a given purpose, though contrary to the

principles. Under-achievers are found to be conscientious,

i.e. they are rule-bound and fair-minded. Thus, the

present result is in agreement with the hypothesis that

'over-achievers in Business Administration (M.B.A.)

professional courses are likely to be expedient.* Thus,

results is also in consonance with practical situations of

the profession. Successful business executives do adopt

procedures which are of help in achieving the purpose

irrespective of the fact that the procedure is contrary to

the established principles.




found to be 10.93 which is significant at .01 level. The

result thus clearly indicates that over-achievers are of

suspicious nature. On the other hand, under-achievers are

found to be of trusting nature, i.e. they are credulous

and agreeable. Thus, the result of the present research


Business Administration (M.B.A.) professiuonal courses are

likely to be suspicious .

187

The present result can be justified on rational

grounds. Successful business executives though feign to

be trusting, but in their heart of hearts, they do not

tend to believe people on the face values and their

suspicious nature compels them to always know the real

state of success in the organisation they are working.

4.4.9.Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting) :

The means of over-achievers and under-achievers on

this factor are 10.66 snd 26.77 respectively. The 't'

value is found to be 20.06 which is highly significant.

The result thus shows that over-achievers are

experimenting, i.e. they are radical, broad-minded,

flexible, curious and introduce new ideas. On the other

hand, under-achievers are found to be conservative, i.e.

they are conventional, tolerant of traditions, staid,

rigid and unenquiring. The present finding has been

supported by Jayagopala (1974) & Ghunan (1976). He found

that over-achievers in academic courses disregard rules,

i.e. they are not conservative. It also seems reasonable

because the success in the profession requires qualities

like flexibility, experimentation , curiosity, etc. Thus,

the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Business

Administration (M.B.A.) professional courses are likely to

be experimenting' stands accepted.

188

4.4.10 Factor X(Kind-Harsh);



found to be 23.68 which is highly significant. It can be

inferred from the result that over-achievers are harsh,

i.e. they are tough-minded, hard, crude and hostile. On

the other hand, under-achievers are found to be kind, i.e.

they are gentle, generous and compassionate. The result is

supported by Ghuman (1975) and Srivastava (1976) who found

over-achievers to be tough-minded. Neog (1990) also found

under-achievers in academic courses (Mathematics) less

tenderrainded.

This result can also be justified on rational

grounds. A successful administrator should be slightly

tough-minded. Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in


likely to be harsh' is supported by the result of the

present research.

4.4.11 Factor XI (Co-operative-Obstructive) :



found to be 23.55 which is highly significant. It can,

therefore, be concluded that over-achievers are

o b s t r u c t i v e , t o r p i d , i n t o l e r a n t , pugnacious and

b e l l i g e r e n t . Con t r a r iw i se , u n d e r - a c h i e v e r s are found to be

c o - o p e r a t i v e , i . e . they are t o l e r a n t , compla isan t ,

f r i e n d l y , unders tanding and accomodating.

The present finding has not been supported by the previous

studies. I t may be that the students in this course are so over

worked and because of the scant chances of job opportunities, after

passing the course, try to achieve as high as possible. Because of

high competition among them to get the best grade, they tend to be

obstructive i . e . intolerant, quarrelsome,belligerent, e tc . Thus, the

hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Business Administration ^M.B.A.)

professional courses are likely to be obstructive' stands accepted.

4 .4 .12 Factor XII (Persevering-Fickle-minded) :

The means of ove r - ach ieve r s and under -ach ieve r s are

4 .44 and 9.18 r e s p e c t i v e l y . The ' t ' va lue i s 9.94 which i s

s i g n i f i c a n t a t .01 l e v e l . The r e s u l t thus i n d i c a t e s t h a t

ove r - ach i eve r s are f i ck le -minded , i . e . they are

i n d e c i s i v e , q u i t t i n g and v o l a t i l e . On t h e o ther hand,

u n d e r - a c h i e v e r s are found to be p e r s e v e r i n g . The

hypo thes i s t h a t ' o v e r - a c h i e v e r s in Business Adminis t ra t ion

(M.B.A.) p r o f e s s i o n a l courses are l i k e l y to be

p e r s e v e r i n g ' i s not co r robora ted by the p r e s e n t r e s u l t .

This r e s u l t i s a l so not in consonance with the

previous s t u d i e s and t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e . Under-

ach ieve r s cannot be expected to be p r e s e r v i n g . I t may.

lO

<;f 0

i-i 43

>> J3

TJ (U

c T^ CO

U Xi

o (0 ) - i

0 4J O « fe

> 4J 1-1 i - l rt C o ( 0 CO

>-• ^

t—1 -< 5 M O tn

CO U- l 0 O

0 CU

o

c w to -J (U =3 E J

ca 

TH O w

(4-1

0) o c CO

u O -H

r- l 0) >

«4-l 1-1

c 00

a> 1-1 H J w

(U 3

I - l CO

>

CO

>-> (U > 0)

1-1 X <!• o m CO II

1 S >-> (U

"O c D

Q CO

c CO

»rÔcovo

• CMCXDI^CX)CO I T I T H V O O I N ^ k n T H i H i H T H T H T H ^ i - I C M C N l T H

r > j T H m c N j v o < f c o T H < f O v o c o

3^^DfOC^JÔ^n C S I T H C M en Ol -r-t

tM m t ^ CNi<f TH VO r>. CO KtCOOOOCVJvOCÔCOs^CXJvOvO

CO

)-• (U > (U

1-1

x; o o CO e n 1 II

u s (U > o

Q CO

c CO

0) ^

CO

o • u o CO

CO C O CO u (U

• v£> >m U-isOvO ' T H O V O • V C O I H • | r g C S I C ^ J O O T H C N j , H v f C M T - l T H L n

^Jcx^^^ô^noo^^vovococo<l •

L o v o O O O O cocncnvD [ ^ ^ v O < T ^ v O C 3 ^ c n C O f O l O V O O T H

O T - H * • • •

,H o w r^ ^ • • TH m vo o | r H T - l r - l T - I C N J , - H C : O O O i - I C M C > g T H

00

c •r-l

(U

> (0 M 3 >o

I - l CO

> o , H O Mco

t—I , Q CO u CO I

> • H (0

r - l

3

r

I -

> to 1-1 3 CO

> » 0 to x >1 - l c/2 I-l e I (UX) •r-l tn •H U I i J C 00 CO 0) C >

•r^ 1-1 I-l 0 4 - 1 0 to to to C S C O U

to u CO

a: I

T3 c

O •H O H CJ t^

0 0 T3 > c

1-11-1 4J B

3 d) I-" , - 1 u^ to o

XI 1-1 OClH 1 I 0 OO > c

1-11-1 4J U CO 0

>- > 0 0 Q, to O u O 0

CJ CL

190

O T - I CM T-icvjco>^m>i>r^cocT> TH^- IT-H

>

X o UJ

X o 

o CO CD

od

M- O O • - CO

^ > c ~ 0 O to ^ w C O CO O < 0) CO , '*r i_ i_ p CD 0) ; r Q. T3 °-

5 = 5 T3 CD

o

191

however, be possible that over-achievers may be of a

volatile temper and their indecisive nature may be

attributed to the prevailing circumstances i.e. acute

unemployment due to which more intelligent may feel the

pinch more acutely than to their less endowed counterparts

consequently J making them fickle-minded etc. Further study

is, however, needed to establish the validity of the

observation.

4.5 Personality and Achievement in Medical Professional

Courses #


deviations of the distribution of scores on twelve

personality dimensions obtained by over and under-

achievers in M.B.B.S. courses. 't' values are also

presented for showing the difference between the means of

scores obtained by them.

4.5.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious)

The mean scores of over and under-achievers on this


5.59 which is significant at .01 level. The result thus

clearly shows that over-achievers are serious, i.e. they

are cautious, thoughtful, secretive and critical. On the

other hand, under-achievers are found to be lively, i.e.

they are carefree, optimist and happy-go-lucky.

192

The present finding has been supported by Gawronski

(1965), Ahluwalia and Narang (1976) and Neog (1990) . They

found over-achievers in academic courses to be introvert

and less enthusiastic. Thus, the result is in agreement

with the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Medical

(M.B.B.S.) professional courses are likely to be serious.'

Studies by Taylor (1964) and Jensen (1973) also

support the present research. They found that under-

achievers were pleasure seeking which by implication means

that the over-achievers are serious. This can also be

justified on theoretical grounds because studious persons

are likely to be more serious and introspective. The

profession under investigation requires that the

practitioners should be thoughtful, cautious, critical and

serious so that they may be effective in their profession.





shows that over-achievers are reserved, i.e. they are

detached, clumsy, quite and seclusive. On the other hand,

under-achievers are sociable, i.e. they are participating,

socially skillful, socially bold, talkative and

gregarious. Thus, the present result also supports the

193

hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.)

professional courses are likely to be reserved'..

The investigator could not find sufficient

researches conducted in this area; therefore, the studies

related to over and under-achievement in academic courses

have been cited to support or contradict the results. The

following studies (Ahluwalia and Narang, 1967; Dhaliwal,

1971; Jensen, 1973 and Srivastava, 1976) have supported

the result. Srivastava (1976) found over achievers in

science courses to be of reserved nature. Dhaliwal (1971)

found reservedness related to over-achievement in academic

courses. However, Astington (1960) and Rushton (1966)

have contradicted the finding.

The justification for the results of present study

may also be sought from theoretical rationale also. It is

a coraraonday experience that persons who are sociable

generally do not find sufficient time for serious studies;

thus they are not over-achievers. It is quite reasonable

that the over-achievers in Medical courses are reserved.

4.5.3 Factor III (Impulsive-Stable) :


factor are 10.90 and 26.07 respectively. The '4:' value is

18.25 which is highly significant. The result thus

indicates that over-achievers are stable, i.e. they are

194

logical, introspective, calm, phlegmatic and prudent.

Contrariwise, under-achievers are impulsive, i.e. they are

uneasy, affected by feeling, impatient-excitable and act

on the spur of the moment.

The present result is in consonance with the

studies of Ahluwalia and Narang (1967), Dhaliwal (1971),

Bhagirath (1978), Jahan (1985), Haq (1987) and Southward

Paul (1989). They found over-achievers in academic courses

to be stable. This can also be justified by theoretical

rationale. A real understanding of the course and related

profession demand stability.

If a medical practitioner is not stable, he can not

diagnose the diseases effectively and suggest appropriate

remedial measures. Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-

achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses are

likely to be stable' has been accepted by the result of

the present research.

4.5.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy):

The mean scores of over-and under-achievers on the


17.91 which is highly significant. It can be inferred from

the result that over-achievers are venturesome, i.e. they

are uninhibited, daring, energetic and vigorous. On the

other hand, under-achievers are of shy nature, i.e. they

195

are restrained, easily frightened, languid and inert. The

present result has been supported by Rushton (1966). He

found adventuresomeness positively related to academic

achievement. This result also seems to be justified

because success in most of the professional courses

demands venturesomeness. A shy person can not achieve

success in his/her profession. It has been observed in

daily life experience that doctors have to attend their

pCitxe-ats aX. any -tjjiie. Energy and - vrgpuje

are also essential for courses leading to medical practice

in which they have to devote long hours attending

patients. Thus, the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in

Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses are likely to be

venturesome' has been supported by the present result.

4.5.5. Factor V (Confident-Nervous) :



18.26 which is highly significant. It can be inferred from

the results that over-achievers are confident, i.e. they

are self-possessed, self-sufficient poised, contended,

responsible and serene. On the other hand, under-

achievers are of nervous type, i.e. they are diffident

ruffled, group-dependent and over-anxious. The present

result is in agreement with the findings of earlier

196

investigator (Taylor, 1964; Cattell, Sealey and Sweney,

1965 and Somasundaran, 1980). They found over-achievers

and self-confident J self-sufficient and free from nervous

symptoms. It may also be argued that nervousness results

in poor written and oral expression and consequently

under-achievement. Thus, the present result has

corroborated the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in


confident' presented in chapter I.




13.87 which is highly significant. Thus,over-achievers are

submissive, i.e. they are sound followers, modest and

meek. On the other hand, under-achievers are found to be

dominant, i.e. they are outspoken, ascendant forceful and

agressive. Thus the hypothesis that 'over-achievers in


submissive' is in consonance with the result of the

present research.

The present finding has also been supported by

Taylor (1964), Dhaliwal (1971), Jahan (1985) and Haq

(1987). They found over-achievers in academic courses

obedient, which is a related characteristic of this

197

dimension. A close study of the persons engaged in this

course also reveals that they tend to be submissive in the

presence of the teachers and seniors. This is particularly

true of the successful persons in the profession. However,

some of the investigators (Ridding, 1966; Rushton, 1966;

and Gopal, 1975) have contradicted the result. These

researches are concerned with success in academic course.

These findings may, therefore, be attributed to the

differences in nature of the courses investigated in the

studies.

4.5.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient):



13.87 which is highly significant. This shows that over-

achievers are expedient, i.e. undependable, and evade

rules. Contrariwise, under-achievers are found to be

conscientious, i.e. trustworthy and fair-minded. Thus, the

hypothesis that 'over-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.)

professional courses are likely to be expedient' has been

corroborated by the result of the present research.

The review of related literature does not support

this result. The over-achievers in academic courses are

found to be conscientious (Rushton, 1966; Jahan, 1965 and

Neog, 1990). However, in view of the heavy load of work of

both theoretical and practical courses and keen

198 competition among the over-achievers, they tend to be expedient

and adopted shor t -cut methods of covering the course. Thus,

th i s personal i ty dimension of over-achievers in t h i s course can

be j u s t i f i ed on r a t i ona l grounds.

4.5.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious) ;

The mean scores of over- and under-achievers on th is

factor are 8.13 and 4.53 respect ively . The ' t ' value is

indicates that over-achievers are t r u s t i n g , i . e . they are

credulous and agreeable. On the other hand, under-achievers are

found to be suspic ious , i . e . doubting and f au l t f inding. This

resul t i s in consonance with the hypothesis tha t 'over-

achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses are

l ike ly to be t r u s t i n g .

Studies concerned with th i s personal i ty dimension and

professional courses were not avai lable to the present

inves t iga to r . However, i t may be that Medical student should

have agreeable and t r u s t i n g a t t i tude towards the pa t i en t in

order to e s t ab l i sh rappor t . This wi l l u l t imate ly help in

knowing the rea l causes of the i l l n e s s .

4.5.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting)';

The means of over- and under-achievers on th is

factor are 11.53 and 26.66 respect ively, ' t ' value i s 16,77

vMch is highly significant. I t can thus be inferred from the results that

over-achievers are experimenting, i .e . they are curious, flexible, broad-

minded and introduce new/contrariwise, under-achievers are conservative,

i . e . they are conventional , to le rant of t r a d i t i o n s , s t a id and

199

rigid. Thus, the present result has confirmed the

hypothesis that ' over-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.)

professional courses are likely to be experimenting'.

The present finding has also been supported by

Jayagopala (1974) and Ghuman (1976). They found that

over-achievers in academic courses disregard rules,

i.e.they are not conservative. This result may also seen

to be realistic because the success in any scientific area

depends on exploration of alternatives for which

experimenting nature is imperative.

4.5.10 Factor X (Kind-Harsh):

The mean scores of over- and under-achievers on

this factor are 25.63 and 10.87 respectively, 't' value is

20.10 which is highly significant. It can thus be inferred

that over-achievers are kind, i.e. tender-minded,

sensitive, gentle and generous. On the other hand,

under-achievers are found to be harsh, i.e. tough-minded,

hostile, hard and crude. The result of the present

research has confirmed the hypothesis that 'over-achievers

in Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses are likely to

be kind ' presented in chapter I.

The present result has also been supported by

Jayagopala (1974). He found . scholastic achievement

positively related to characteristic 'affected by feeling'

which by implication means kindness. The result also see::s

convincing because the successful persons in this course

and related profession should be sympathetic and kind so

200

that they are able to diagnose the diseases properly.



factor are 26.03 and 11.68 respectively, 't' value is

22.83 which is highly significant. The result clearly

shows that over-achievers are co-operative, i.e. they are

tolerant, friendly and understanding, while underachievers

are obstructive, i.e. intolerant, pugnacious, torpid

belligerent and bellicose.

Co-operativeness as an exclusive personality

dimension has not been investigated for success or

otherwise in any course or profession.Therefore, the

results of the present study could not be supported or

rejected on the basis of previous researches. It, however,

seem that co-operativeness is essential for success in this

course and the related profession. A medical practitioner,

if not co-operative, will not be able to establish rapport

with the patients for the purpose of diagnosis. Thus the

present result corroborates the hypothesis that

'over-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses

are likely to be co-operative.'

4.5.12 Factor XII (Persevering - Fickle-inded):

The mean scores of *over-and under- achievers on

this factor are 10.16 and 5.64 respectively, 't' value is

201

11.76 which is hlgnly significant. The result indicates

that over-achievers are persevering, i.e. they are

determined, steady, studious and firm, while the under-

achievers are found to be fickle-minded, i.e. indecisive,

volatile, quitting and lack concentration. Thus, the

present result is in consonance with the hypothesis that

'over-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional courses

are likely to be persevering' presented in chapter I.

The present finding is also in agreement with the

result of earlier investigators (Astington, 1960; Taylor,

1964; Gawronski, 1965; Gupta, 1970; Dhaliwal, 1971; Menon,

1973 and Bhagirath, 1978). It may also be pointed out here

that success in this course and the related profession

requires thorough knowledge and study of the subject which

will obviously demand perseverance on the part of the

students.

.6 Comparisons of Personality Characteristics of Over-

achievers in the Professional Courses :

After comparing over- and under-achievers in

different professional courses on the twelve personality

•dimensions presented in the preceding paragraph, attempts

have also been made to compare the personalitv

characteristics of over-achievers in these five

professional courses. Table 4.6 presents the mean scores

obtained by over and under-achievers in professional

vO

0)

X I

f-

1 1-1 Q)

-a c

D

'0 C

m

(/) tn (U

c • r ^

U)

:3 CQ

s;:5

X) . d

CO f-> •U

O „ 00 .

C ^ 1-c «

4-J 

o •u

w c

o

CU rt E s e x )

H O < • H W 10 QJ

U-l W O Q) ^ v-" a, o o

t ^ (U

> C -r-l CO ( i ,

z c

o

C o in

(/) 01

CO a x ; G O O CO

c« O

•r-l X3 (U

*«—<

tn 1

w en (U -rH C C

•r-l • H

cn e PX)

PQ <

C O

•H 4-1 CO

>-. 4J

3 CO

00 c

• H x; o CO OJ

H

0 0 c

•rl u QJ CU C

•r^ 00 C

W

tn >-> QJ > QJ

• i - l

QJ > QJ

•rH

o < : CO < CO • I • 1 O »^D )_ , -_ - a) ._^ CJ X I > c

o :D

tn y-> o u u

CO

> • r ^ , - 1 CO C O tn ^ < QJ

a.

-;l f ' l I -• c ) a^ o ^ vo o-> c J c) ^D o fxj TH in in OD VO CO O MD TH -<f

^ ^ • r H v O O v D C X ) C O r ^ T H T H v D O O v O C X 3 < t T H v O m O v D T H O l O • rHC^T- iCNiT- tcMT- i C N I T - I T H C N I •t- T-^<^^cN^,-tcNlT-^•^-^

OfOr^ inLOT- iOc r i vooncMT- i i ncN jo or--oo>X)c^r^<joo

202

c r ' O o o c h r ^ o t T > o o r - N O c r > c 3 ^ v . D r ^ - < ) - o o C N T - H C N | C N I T - H T H CMiHCM r-\

O v D O v O O v D < t C J ^ T-H C N T - l C M T-H CVJ

r^c30rs)nmcMcr>tnc» innrooooooro T-{a^r-\<tr-\aÔT^

rHvOOi^Loc r i r ^ r - ^ coo t ô t ^vo -c foo v o o o o r ^ o m o m T H C N I - I C N J O J T H C N | , H C M T - I ^ CM T H C M ^ C N I T H

O v £ > i O C O C r > v D < t O v O C N l C N O T H C M v X ) v : f C r > O l O v D m C N J O C N O O ' . 0 L O 0 0 < l " ' r H O O v 0 T - l t ^ i n 0 > O v D C O O > - O C N | C r \ i n o O O

C O r H O O m c M C r > C T i C T ' r - ^ < T > C X D C r i r ^ l ^ C O L r i < J • • r ^ C ^ < t < } • C T ^ C J ^ v O • r H T - l r s l C N j , H CNj -r^ r - l O l r - I CNlC-J

a^c^ l< toooor^mr •^ lnoOT^c7ôco^^ ocvi-cfrôovoocxD

O coorÔT-ioocOTôooor^v£)-<)-oo T - i r v l i H C N l n ^ r H C M T - I C S I ' T H •<-<

r^ O r^ O vO O <J-CNl ^ C M T - l C M T-H

< < < < < < < < < < < < ; < < : < < : < < < < < -l

QJ

cn 1

>^ r-< 0)

> •r^

^

X) QJ

> »•< 0)

cn QJ

c i 1 QJ

r - l X I CO

•iH O O

cn

QJ I - l r Q CO 4-1 CD

1 QJ

> •r-l in

>—1

P a e

I - l

>. x; CO 1 QJ E

o in QJ >-•

p 4-» C QJ

>

in :3

o > !-. QJ

IS 1

4-1

c CJ

X) •t-l "4-1

c o

u

QJ

> •r4 in in

•i-J E

XJ :3

cn 1

4J

c CO

c •H E O

Q

4J c QJ

•rH X3 QJ

a X

u 1 in :3

o •r-l 4J

c QJ

• H O in C

o o

in

D O

• H

o •r-l

a in

0 CO

1 CO

c •r-l 4J in

3 >-i

H

00 C

•r-l 4-1 c o

•H t-. CJ D H X

bJ 1 QJ

> • H 4J CO

> V-QJ in

c o o

x: in

u CD

X 1

X)

c •r4

• o

QJ >

•r4 4-1

o p >-• 4J in

X I

O 1 QJ

> • H 4J CO 1-. QJ CL,

o o

CJ)

•r-l

X3 QJ

X3 C

•rH E 1

QJ f—1

,i«:

o •r-l UH 1 00

c •r4

>-. QJ

> QJ in

>-. QJ

, • CM

CM CO i n v£) 0 0 CT>

2^ 0) >

n o O o

a E

30 M

25

M E

M

0) e o c

•o •»— c o O

c o c e o o

in 3 O

c o o

L E

" L

O) c 3

"5 2: Q> c o O

L T

•D C

>

0) a o o U

c

>

0) Q.

D T

20 M E

T D

15

10 L E P L

E T E

L M

D,D

]M

f^jY^. •^'^

M

3 q ®

CO

0 O

>» £ (O

(/) 3 O ^ a>

z

(i> >

'M (A

E 3

CO

c 0)

a X

w 3 O O

mmim

Q. in 3

CO

0) c c 0) E n X

i i in h_ O

0 > O 3

X3 O

•D 0 T3 c E 1

0 M O

Engineering=EJeaching=T,LciwsL, M.B.A=M & M.B.B.S.=D

FIGURE 4.6 Comparisons of Mean Scores on IWelve Personality Factors Obtained by over-Actiivers in Five Professional Courses (Engineering,

Teactiing,Law.Business Administration and Medical)

203

courses (Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business

Administration and Medical) on twelve personality

dimensions. Figure presents the relative position of the

over-achievers in different professional courses on each

of the twelve personality continua. The following

paragraphs present the comparison of the over-achievers in

different professional courses on these twelve personality

characteristics.

4.6.1 Factor I (Lively-Serious) ;

It will be seen from the table 4.6 and figure 4.5 that the

means of scores obtained by over-achievers of Engineering,

Teaching, Law, Business Administration and Medical on this

personality continua are 10.95, 18.00, 11.76, 29.40 and

11.46 respectively. It is , thus , evident that over-

achievers in Business Administration professional courses

are more lively than the members of all other professional

group. It also indicates that over-achievers in Teaching

are more lively than over-achievers in Law, Engineering

and Medical courses. The students in Engineering, Law and

Medical' have obtained nearly similar scores on this

dimension which is indicative of their seriousness.

The studies emphasizing the•importance of related

personality characteristics and achievement in different

courses have already been cited while justifying the

204

relationship of achievement with respective dimensions.

The present result may be justified on theoretical

grounds. Over-achievers in Business Administration and

related profession have to deal with people, i.e. their

success is dependent on good rapport with people. This

requires cheerfulness and frankness which is a related

characteristic of liveliness. In the same way, a teacher

who is^not cheerful and humorous, will be a less effective

teacher. Therefore, the teacher should be lively. On the

other hand, over-achievers in Engineering, Law and Medical

courses and in related profession, should be involved in

serious studies for success in respective professions.

Therefore, it appears that the average scores obtained by

over-achievers of these professional courses are very

much justified.


The means of over-achievers in Engineering,

Teaching, Law, Business Administration and Medical courses

are 10.41, 8.65, 10.28, 28.77 and 11.66 respectively.

This clearly shoves that over-achievers in Business

Administration courses on this factor are most sociable of

all the professional group taken into consideration.

Medical students occupy second. Engineering third, Law

205

fourth and teaching the last position. The over- achievers

of Engineering, Teaching, Law and M.B.B.S. courses are

clustered around low scoring pole of this dimension which

shows that over-achievers of all these groups are

reserved.

The present finding may be justified because the

nature ,,. of the profession related to Business

Administration course is such that sociability is

indispensable for success in the profession. The students

in Business Administration courses have to establish

rapport with the persons of different organizations.

Unless, they are sociable, they would not be able to

succeed in their professions. On the other hand, the over-

achievers of Engineering, Teaching, Lav; and Medical

courses have to be reserved because these courses demand

intensive studies which is possible for persons who are

reserved in nature.

4.6.3 Factor III (Impulsive-Stable):


Teaching, Law, M.B.A. and M.B.B.S. on this factor are

30.00, 22.89, 25.35, 27.55 and 10.90 respectively. It can

be inferred from the result that over-achievers in

Engineering professional course are most inpulsive in

206

comparison to other professional courses. It also

indicates that over-achievers in Engineering, Teaching,

Law and Business Administration are impulsive. The over-

achievers in Medical professional courses are found to be

stable.

This may be justified on the ground that the nature

of professional courses are such that it requires

characteristics like excitability, and impatience. It is

common day experience as well as the conclusion of

authentic research that eminent persons behave in

unpredictable and impulsive manner, i.e. they ace on the

spur of the moment. Therefore, the impulsive nacure of

over-achievers in Engineering, Teaching, Law and Business

Administration courses may be justified.

Over-achievers in Medical professional courses are

found to be stable which is quite justified. A doccor has

to be very serious and stable in the diagnosis of diseases

and prescribing remedies. They have also to be very stable

by performing delicate observations. Thus, stable

personality is an essential requirement of Medical

profession.

4.6.4 Factor IV (Venturesome-Shy) :

The mean scores of over-achievers in Engineering,

207


on this factor are 18.77, 19.14, 17.98, 17.00 and 18.60

respectively. These scores show that over-achievers in all

the professional courses are venturesome. The difference

among the scores obtained by the professional groups are

very small to warrant any differential inferences. All

these professional groups require interaction with other

persons; therefore, if a person is shy, he/she will not be

able to succeed in it. Therefore, the inference mentioned

above that over-achievers in these groups are venturesome

is well justified.


The means obtained by over-achievers in Engineering.


on this factor are 27.70, 27.06, 28.85, 27.96 and 27.90

respectively. The above figures show that over-achievers

in these professional courses are confident and their

level of confidence to succeed is almost at the same

level. This finding is also justified because the

components of confidence like self-sufficiency,

responsibility and serenity are essential for excelling in

the professional courses under study.

4.6.6. Factor VI (Dominant-Submissive) :


208

Teaching, Law, M.B.A. and M.B.B.S. on this factor are

28.84, 18.12, 27.35, 29.03 and 11.30 respectively. It can

be inferred from the result that over-achievers in

Engineering, Law and M.B.A. are very dominant and those in

teaching are also dominant but not to that extent. The

over-achievers in Medical courses are submissive. This is

borne out of every day observation that the engineers,

lawyers and business executives would not excel unless

they possess the characteristics of dominance. Over-

achievers in the teaching profession also require the

characteristics of dominance. But the dominance in the

case of teachers should not be as high as that required for

Engineering, Law and Business Administration courses

because they have to deal with very young person i.e. the

student of secondary level. The finding that the student

in the Medical professional course are submissive

apparently seems to be unconvincing but a close

observation of the condition obtained in the profession

reveals that if a doctor has a dominating attitude, he

will not be able to establish a rapport with his patients,

which is essential for valid diagnosis. Therefore, for the

sake of professional competence an attitude of

submissiveness seems essential.

209

4.6.7 Factor VII (Conscientious-Expedient):

The mean scores obtained by over-achievers in


Medical courses on this factor are 7.95, 17.51, 7.03, 6.11

and 8.03 respectively. These results clearly show that

over-achievers in Engineering, Law, Business Administration

and Medical courses are expedient and those in the

Teaching professional courses are conscientious. It is

also evident from every day observation that almost in all

the professions the people try to be expedient, i.e. they

adopt any method for success in the profession. Over-

achieving student teachers have been found to be

conscientious. This finding is highly justified on the

ground that it is the only profession where values are

given their due importance and conscientiousness is highly

valued; at least the over-achievers in this profession

should possess these characteristics.

4.6.8 Factor VIII (Trusting-Suspicious):



Medical on this factor are 4.87, 8.06, 4.82, 4.22 and

8.13 respectively. It is evident from these figures that

over-achievers of Engineering, Law and Business

210

Administration courses are of suspicious nature, i.e.they

do not trust others. Their professional requirements also

warrant such an attitude. For example, if a lawyer trusts

all what a client says about his case, he will not be able

to get the justice done. He will have to probe into the

circumstances to find out the true state of affairs.

Obviously, this would require suspicious nature. In the

same way, engineers and business executives should also be

suspicious if they want to excel in their professions.

Over-achievers in Teaching and Medical professional

courses have been found to be trusting. Success in these

professional courses depends on a good rapport with the

students/patients. This obviously requires a trusting

attitude. Therefore, the trusting nature of over-achievers

in these professional courses is very much justified.

4.6.9 Factor IX (Conservative-Experimenting) :



Medical courses on this factor are 11.04, 24.89, 26.10,

10.66 and 11.53 respectively. This indicates that over-

achievers in teaching and law courses are conservative.

This result may be justified because teachers and lawyers

have to conserve the culture and already established

theories and laws. On the other hand, over-achievers in

211

Engineering, Business Administration and Medical courses

have been found to be of experimenting nature. This result is

also justified because engineers, business administrators

and doctors can not be efficient in their professions if

they base their conclusions on the basis of conservative

ideas. They have to be experimenting, in order to ahead in

their own fields.




Medical courses on this factor are 10.42, 9.65, 10.17,

10.18 and 25.63 respectively. It can be inferred from this

data that over-achievers in all the professional courses,

except Medical courses are harsh. This result for

engineers, lawyers and business administrators seem

justified because these professions require toughness in

dealing for obtaining good performance in some situations.

But this result for the teachers does not seem convincing.

Quite a few researches have shown that effective teachers

should be kind (Deva, 1966 and Kaul 1973). However, in

view of the circumstances obtained now in the educational

institutions where students' indiscipline is the order of

the day, teachers may not remain kind.

212

The over-achievers of the Medical courses have very

rightly been found to be kind. A good doctor should be

kind with his/her patients. Unless one possess this

characteristic, he/she can not excel in the Medical

profession.



Engineering, Teaching, Business Administration and Medical

courses on this factor are 10.84, 24.93, 10.17, 10.3 and

26.03 respectively This shows that over-achievers in

Medical and Teaching professional courses are cooperative

i.e. they are friendly and accommodating.

This result is justified on the ground that

teachers have to deal with the students and create a

condusive and congenial environment in the class for which

co-operative nature is essential. This result for Medical

students is also convincing. A doctor should possess

friendly and understanding nature which will help him in

establishing rapport with the patients, so that he is able

to know about the real cause of the ailment and is able to

correctly diagnose the disease and suggest suitable

remedies.

213

The over-achievers in Engineering, Law and Business

Administration are found to be obstructive, i.e. they are

intolerant, belligerant and torpid. The over-achievers

Engineering, Law and Business Administration courses have

to operate in quite different situations from those

required for teachers and doctors. They have to get the

work done efficiently by whatever means it is possible.

Therefore,over-achievers of these professional courses can

not afford to be highly co-operative in all situations.

Sometimes they have to be intolerant and belligerent.



Engineering, Law, Business Administration and Medical

courses on this factor are 10.03, 9.80, 10.00, 4.44 and

10.16 respectively. This reveals that over-achievers in

all the professional courses except in Business

Administration courses, are persevering. The result is

justified because success in almost all walks of life

requires perseverance. History is replete with the

examples of successful persons who had been highly

persevering. The finding that over-achievers in Business

Administration courses are fickle-minded appears to be

apparently strange but the conditions obtained in most of

the business establishments warrant a tact and expediencv

214

rather perseverance. It may also be recalled that

over-achievers in Business Administration courses were

found to be expedient rather than conscientious on factor

VII of the present inventory.

REFERENCES

Adaval, S.B. (1977). Quality of Teachers. Amitabh Prakashan, Allahabad.

Agarwal, S.K. (1976). A Psychological Study of Academic Under-achievement.Indian Dissertation Abstract, 1981, Vol. X No. 3,4, 311-315.

Ahluwalia,S.P. and Narang, S. (1967). A Study of Some of the Personality Characteristics of Good and Poor Achievers. Indian Psychological Abstracts, 1975, 7, 85-86.

Astington, E. (1960). Personality Assessment and Academic Performance in a Boy's Grammar School. British Journal of Educational Psychol., 30, 3, 225.

Bhagirath, G.S. (1978). Correlates of Academic Achievement as Perceived by the Teachers and Students of High School. Doctoral Thesis. In Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83), Buch, M.B. (Editor) 1986, 658-59.

Cattell, R.B., Sealey, A.P. and Swenly, A.P. (1966). What can Personality and Motivation Source Traits Measurements Add to the Prediction of School Achievement. British Journal of Edul. Psychol., 33, 2, 10.

Cook, A.M and Richards, H.C. (1972). Dimensions of Principal and Supervisor Rating of Teacher Behaviour. Journal of Experimental Education, 41, 2, 11-13.

Deb, Maya (1968). Personality Traits of Successful Engineers. Indian Journal of Psychology, 43, 6-10.

Deva, R.C. (1966). Prediction of Student Teaching Success. Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

Dhaliwal, A.S. (1971). A Study of Some Factors Contributing to Academic Success and Failure Among High School Students^ Personality Correlates of Academic Over-Under-Achievement. Doctoral Thesis Psychology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.

Fox, A.M., Brookshine. (1971). Defining Effective College Teaching. Journal of Experimental Education, 42, 2, 37.

216

Gawronski, D.A. and Maths, C. (1965). Differences between Over-achieving, Normal achieving and Underachieving High School Students. Psychology in the Schools, 2, 152-155.

Gebhart, G.G. and Hoyt, D.P. (1958). Personality Needs of Under and Over-achieving Freshmen. Journal of appl. Psychol., 42, 2, 125-128.

Getzels, J.W. and Jackson, P.W. (1963). The Teachers's Personality and Characteristics. Hand-book of Research on Teaching (N.L. Gage, Editor). Rand McNally and Co., Chicago.

Ghuman, M.S. (1976). A Study of Aptitudes, Personality Traits and Achievement Motivation of Academic Over-achievers and Under-achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, Ravi Shankar University. In Third Survey of Research in Education 1978-83, Buch, M.B. (Editor) N.C.E.R.T., pp. 664-66.

Gopal, A.K. (1975). Certain Differentiating Personality Variables of Creative and Non-Creative Science and Engineering Students. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kurukshetra University.

Gupta, H.G. (1970). A Comparative Study of the Personality Characteristics of High and Low Achievers as Related to their Academic Achievement. Indian Psychological Abstract, 1975, 7, 87.

Haq, N. (1987). A Study of Certain Personality Correlates of Over-Under-achievement in Different School Subjects. Doctoral Thesis, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.

Jahan, Q. (1985). Personality Profiles of Over and Under-achievers in Different Streams - Science, Arts and Commerce, Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

Jayagopala, R. (1974). Personality Profile of the Under and High Achievers of Some of the Schools in the City of Madras. Second Survey of Research in Education (1972-78), Buch, M.B. (Editor), p.184.

Jensen, A.R. (1973). Personality and Scholastic Achievement in Three Ethnic Groups. British Journal of Edu. Psychol., 43, 115-125.

217

Kaul, L. (1973). Personality Traits of Effective Teachers. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kurukshetra University.

Mathew, T (1976). Some Personality Factors Related to Under-achievement in Science. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Karnataka University.

Menon, S.K. (1973). A Comparative Study of the Personality Characteristics of Over-achievers and Under-achievers of High Ability. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kerala University.

Mishra, K.S. (1984). Personality Traits of Original Teachers, Indian Educational Review, 19, 14, Oct. 1984, 72-77.

Neog, S. (1990). A Study of Personality Characteristics of Under-Achievers Across Any Two School Subjects. M.Phil. Dissertation, Edu., A.M.U., Aligarh.

Pervin, L.A. (1984). Personality : Theory and Research. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.

Ridding, L.W. (1966). An Investigation of Personality Measures Associated with Over and Under-achievement in English and Arithmetics. Abstract of Thesis, Psychol. Feb. 1967, 37, 397-398.

Rushton, J. (1966). The Relationship between Personality Characteristics and Scholastic Success in Eleven Year Old Children. British Journal of Edu. Psychol. 36, 178-184.

Singh, S.C.P. (1972). Personality Characteristics of Management Students. Journal of Edu. and Psychol., 30, 2, 167-69.

Somasundaran, M. (1980). A Comparative Study of Certain Personality Variables Related to Over Normal and Under-achievement in Secondary School Mathematics. Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-83) Buch, M.B., 1983, 693.

Southward, Paul (1989). Personality and Performance in Elementary Mathematics with Special Reference to Skill Area. Psychological Abstracts, 76, 11, 3653.

218

Srivastava,. G.P. (1976). A Study of Personality Factors as Predictors of Academic Achievement of High School Students, Doctoral Thesis, B.H.U., Varanasi.

Taylor (1963). Scientific Creativity : It's Recognition and Development. John Wiley & Sons Inc., pp. 121-122.

Taylor, R.G. (1964). Personality Traits and Discrepant Achievement : A Review. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 11, 76-82.

Terman, L.M. (1954). Scientist and Non-Scientist in Group of 800 Gifted Men. Psychol. Monog., 68, No. 7.

Tutoo, D.N. (1972). Personality Characteristics of Some Higher Secondary School Teachers of a Metropolitan City. Education and Psychology Review, 12, 1-2, 9.

Wakefield, W.M. and Crowl, T.K. (1974). Personality Characteristics of Special Educators. Journal of Experimental Education, 43, 2, 87.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONSAND SUGGESTIONS

CHAPTER -V

SUMMARY, CONCmSIONSAND SUGGESTIONS

Welfare and prosperity of a nation depends on its

natural and human resources. Human resource is perhaps

more important than the natural resources because the

latter can only be exploited if the former is efficient.

Thus, human resource is of paramount importance for

progress of a country. Professional courses like

Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.), Law (LL.B.),

Business Administration (tl.B.A.) and Medical (M.B.B.S.)

are organised for development of human resource. The

nation spends large amounts of money for this

purpose. It is estimated that the per capita per year

expenditure on Engineering student alone is fe 3226.70. It

has also been found that there is large scale failure and

poor achievement in most of the professional courses.

Thus, huge amounts of money go down the drain in the

organisation of the professional courses.

The above mentioned wastage is mainly due to

improper selection of students for admission to these

courses. Therefore, it is imperative that only those

students should be admitted to these courses v/ho are

220

likely to succeed in these courses and the related

professions.

Success of the students in any course depends on

his cognitive and personality characteristics and

environmental variables. A review of previous researches

has shown that some attempts have already been made to

identify the cognitive characteristics of successful

students in different professional courses. (Deva, 1966;

Mathur, 1967; Sharma, 1971; Kumaraiah, 1976; Patil, 1984

and Kazmi, 1986). It has also been observed that inspite

of having intellectual capabilities the students are

unable to achieve upto the mark. It indicates that there

are other variables in addition to intelligence which

determine achievement in academic and professional

courses. Personality characteristics may be considered

important in this connection. It may push up students with

low ability to a higher level. Few attempts have also been

made to identify the personality characteristics of over-

achievers in professional courses.Some of the attempts

made in this regard are: Burgess, 1953; Mishra, 1963; Pal

1969; Kaul, 1973; Arora, 1981; Maxwell, 1983; Pervin,

1984; Mishra, 1988 and Vyas, 1987.

A perusal of these studies reveals that these investigators

have restricted to only isolated personality characteristics (Mishra,

1962; Walsh and Palmer) and limited number of

221

professional courses (Burgess, 1953; Kaul 1973

and Pervin, .1984). Therefore, there is a need to

undertake a comprehensive study involving all the

personality characteristics and most of the professional

courses. The present study, therefore, seeks to identify

the personality characteristics of over and under-

achievers in different professional courses viz..

Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.), Law (LL.B.),

Master of Business Administration (M.B.A.) and Bachelor of

Medicine and Surgery (M.B.B.S.).

5.1 Objective of the Study :

In specific terms present study seek to :

1) identify over and under-achievers.

Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.}, Lav;

(LL.B.), Business Administration (M.B.A.! and

Medical (M.B.B.S.)•

2) draw personality profiles of over-achievers in the


3) draw personality profiles of under-achievers in the


4) compare the personality patterns of over and under-

achievers in each of the aforementioned


5) Compare the personality patterns of over-achievers

in the above mentioned five professional courses.

222

6) give suggestions regarding selection of the

candidates for admission in these courses.

5.2 Hypotheses of the Study :

The common tendency of researchers in education is

to present the hypothesis in null form. The present

investigator is of the view that a null hypothesis is

essentially a statistical technique and is applicable only

on certain data which are amendable to some inferential

statistics. Thus, it is not suitable as a hypothesis for

educational research. Research hypothesis should be stated

explicitly and exhibit clarity of thought of the

researcher and the position he/she takes regarding the

tentative conclusions of the research. The investigator

has, therefore ,formulated the hypotheses in directional

form based on previous research and theoretical rationale.

These hypotheses are :

1) The over-achievers in Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.)

professional courses are likely to be serious,

reserved, impulsive, venturesome, confident,

dominant, expedient, suspicious, experinenting,

harsh, obstructive and persevering.

2) The over-achievers in Teaching (B.Ed.) professional

courses are likely to be lively, reserved,

impulsive, venturesome, confident, dorinant,

223

conscientious, trusting, conservative, harsh,

cooperative and perserving.

3) The over-achievers in Law (LL.B.) courses are

likely to be serious, reserved, impulsive, venture

some, confident, dominant, expedient, suspicious,

conservative, harsh, obstructive and persevering.

4) Over-achievers in Business Administration (M.B.A.)

are likely to be lively, sociable, impulsive,

venturesome, confident, dominant, expedient,

suspicious, experimenting, harsh, obstructive and

fickle-minded.

5) Over-achievers in Medical (M.B.B.S.) professional

courses are likely to be serious, reserved, stable,

venturesome, confident, submissive, expedient,

..trusting, experimenting, kind, cooperative and

persevering.

5.3 Method :

The present study proposes to identify the

personality characteristics of over-and under-achievers in

different professional courses viz., Engineering 'B.Sc.

Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.), Law (LL.S.), Business

Administration (M.B.A.), and Medical (M.B.B.S.) . The over

and under-achievers in all the five professional courses

under study were identified with the help of procedure

suggested by Thorndike (1963). In this procedure

regression equation for relationship between intelligence

and achievement is computed. This equation helps to

predict achievement on the basis of intelligence. After

obtaining the predicted achievement scores discrepancies

between the actual and predicted achievement scores are

calculated. If the predicted achievement of a person was

one SDe (standard error of estimate) above the actual

achievement score, he was designated as over-achievers. On

the other hand whose actual achievement was one SDe

(standard error of estimate) belovj the predicted

achievement achievement were called under-achievers. In

this way, over and under-achievers in different

professional courses were identified. A personality

inventory based on factor analyses technique constructed

by the investigator as a part of her M.Phil, research was

administered to identify the personality characteristics

of over and under-achievers in the above mentioned

professional courses. Personality profiles of over and

under-achievers were constructed on the basis of the

scores obtained by under and over-achievers in these

courses.

5.4 Sample :

The present study was conducted on a representative

sample of 53 2 (242 over-achievers and 290 under-

achievers) students studying in different professional

225

courses viz., Engineering (B.Sc. Engg.), Teaching (B.Ed.),

Law (LL.B.), Business Administration (M.B.A.) and Medical

(M.B.B.S.).

5.5 Tools :

The following measures were employed in the present

study :

5.5.1 Measure of Intelligence :

Intelligence scores were obtained by the help of

'Culture Fair' test of general ability constructed by

Cattell and Cattell (test of 'g' Culture Fair, Scale 2

Form A). This test was preferred over others because it is

free from the influence of verbal ability and culture. It

can also be easily administered.

5.5.2. Measure of Achievement :

The present study employed final examination marks

which are a total of sessional, theory and practical

examination marks as measure of achievement. The measure

was considered fairly valid because it is a composite of

several components and is continuously evaluated by

several learned and experienced teachers who are well

acquainted with the subjects.

5.5.3 Measure of Personality :

A personality inventory constructed by the present

226

investigator as a part of her M.Phil, work was employed as

a measure of personality. It has been developed through a

scientific and objective technique of factor analysis. It

was found to be very reliable and valid.

5.6 Conclusions :

The study leads to the following conclusions :

5.6.1 Personality Characteristics of Over-achievers in

different Professional courses :

1) Engineering : serious,reserved, impulsive, venturesome,

confident, dominant, expedient, suspicious, experi

menting, harsh, obstructive and persevering.

2) Teaching : lively, reserved, impulsive, venturesome,

confident, dominant, conscientious, trusting,

conservative, harsh, cooperative and persevering.

3) Law :serious, reserved, impulsive, venturesome,

confident, expedient, suspicious, conservative, harsh,

obstructive and persevering.

4) Business Administration : lively, sociable, impulsive,

venturesome, confident, dominant, expedient,

suspicious, experimenting, harsh, obstructive and

fickle-minded.

5) Medical : serious, reserved, stable, venturesome,

confident, submissive, expedient, trusting,

experimenting, kind, cooperative and persevering.

227

5.6.2 Personality Characteristics of Under-achievers in

different Professional Courses :

1) Engineering : lively, sociable, stable, shy, nervous,

submissive, conscientious, trusting, conservative, kind

cooperative and fickle-minded.

2) Teaching : serious, sociable, stable, shy, nervous,

submissive, expedient, suspicious, experimenting, kind,

obstructive and fickle-minded.

3) Law : lively, sociable. stable, shy, nervous,

submissive, conscientious, trusting, experimenting,

kind, cooperative and fickle-minded.

4) Business Administration : serious, reserved, stable,

shy, nervous, submissive, conscientious, trusting,

conservative, kind, cooperative and persevering.

5) Medical : lively, sociable, impulsive, shy, nervous,

dominant, conscientious, suspicious, conservative,

harsh obstructive and fickle-minded.

5.6.3 Comparisons of Personality Characteristics of Over-

achievers in the Professional Courses :

Factor I Lively-Serious :

Over-achievers in Business Administration

professional course are most lively in comparison to all

other professional courses. Over-achievers in teaching are

less lively than over-achievers in Business Administration

228

professional course. Over-achievers in Engineering, Law

and Medical courses cluster around more or less the same

level on the low score pole of this continuum i.e.

serious.

Factor II Sociable-Reserved :

Over-achievers in M.B.A. professional courses are

most sociable. Over-achievers in Medical, Engineering, Law

and Teaching professional courses are found to be

reserved.

Factor III Impulsive-Stable :

Over-achievers in Engineering professional courses

are most impulsive. Over-achievers in Business

Administration, Law and Teaching are also found to be

impulsive but less than over-achievers in Engineering

courses. Over-achievers in Medical courses are stable.

Factor IV Venturesome-Shy :

Over-achievers in all the professional courses are

venturesome.

Factor V Confident-Nervous :

Over-achievers in all the professional courses are

confident.

Factor VI Dominant-Submissive :

Over-achievers in Engineering, Law and Business

229

Administration are very dominant. Over-achievers in

Teaching professional courses are also found to be

dominant but not to that extent. Over-achievers in Medical

professional courses are found to be submissive.

Factor VII Conscientious-Expedient :

Over-achievers in teaching professional

courses are consciencious. Over-achievers in

Engineering, Law, Business Administration and Medical

professional courses are found to be expedient.

Factor VIII Trusting-Suspicious :

Over-achievers in ' "Teaching " "and "Medical

professional courses are found to be trusting. Over-

achievers in Engineering, Lav; and Business Administration

are of suspicious nature.

Factor IX Conservative-Experimenting :

Over-achievers in Teaching and Law professional

courses are conservative. Over-achievers in Engineering,

Business Administration and Medical professional courses

are found to be experimenting.

Factor X Kind-Harsh:

Over-achievers in all the professional courses

except Medical courses are found to be harsh.

230

Factor XI Cooperative-Obstructive :

Over-achievers in Medical and Teaching courses are

cooperative. The mean scores of over-achievers in

Engineering, Law and Business Administration cluster

around the low scoring pole of this dimensions.

Factor XII Persevering-Fickle-minded :

Over-achievers in all the professional courses

except in Business Administration are found to be

persevering.

5.7 Suggestions and Implications :

Most of the tools employed for selecting students

to professional courses include cognitive measures only.

The selection interview has also a high loading of

cognitive factors. Cognitive factors determine what a

person will be able to do but what a person will actually

do depends on the personality factors. The present

research has identified personality characteristics of

over-achievers in different professional courses. If this

measure is also incorporated in the battery of selection,

it may help perhaps more effectively to identify persons

who are likely to succeed in their respective professions.

The present study reveals that there are some personality

dimensions which characterize successful person in all

231

the professional courses for example, confidence and

venturesomeness.

There are some personality characteristics which

are present in the over-achievers in most of the

professional courses. Such personality characteristics

and the courses are given below :

Personality characteristics Professional Courses

a) Reservedness Engineering, Teaching, Law

and Medical.

b) Impulsiveness Engineering, Teaching, Law

and Business Administration.

c) Dominance Engineering, Teaching, Law


d) Expediency Engineering, uaw, Business

Administration and Medical.

e) Harshness Engineering, Teaching, Law


f) Perseverance Engineering, Teaching, Law

and Medical.

There are also some personality characteristics

which are specific for the over-achievers in some

particular courses. Such personality characteristics and

courses for which they are specific are given below :

232

Personality characteristics Professional Courses

a) Conscientiousness Teaching

b) Sociability and Fickle- Business Administration

mindedness

c) Stability, Submissiveness Medical

and kindness.

5.8 Suggestions for Further Research :

(1) The present study has identified the over-and

under-achievers on the basis of procedure suggested by

Thorndike (1963). This is essentially a technique for

controlling the effect of intelligence. Variables other

than intelligence like study habits, achievement

motivation and environmental variables also affect

achievement. Therefore, for identifying personality

characteristics of over-and under-achievers the above

mentioned variables should have been included as control

variables. A design incorporating all these variables as

control variables would have become very complex and could

not be undertaken because of paucity of time and resources

available to the present investigator.

A comprehensive research project involving these

control variables may be undertaken for more depenodoie

results.

233

(2) The measure of achievement employed in the present

study are students' achievement scores at the final theory

and practical examination. Such measures are notorious for

their subjectivity. The present investigator is also of

the view that standardized theory and practical tests

would have served better. Construction of standardized

test for theory as well as practical examination would

have been a collssal task beyond the resources available

to the investigator. Since the final examination theory

and practical marks in all the professional courses are the

contribution of many learned and experienced teachers and

are awarded during the academic session at different

levels at different intervals therefore, they are likely to

be fairly valid measures and thus suitable for a research

study. It is suggested that a conprehensive research

project may be designed in which standardized achievement

test may be used for identifying over-and under-achievers.

(3) The sample of the study includes students studying

in five professional courses (Engineering, Teaching, Law,

Business Administration and Medical) of Aligarh Muslim

University. The conclusions arrived at are applicable to

similar situations only. Since A.M.U. caters students from

the whole country and the syllabi can also be favourably

compared with those of other universities, it may,

therefore, be safely assumed that the conclusions of the

234

present research are applicable Co students studying in

other universities. For more dependable results a

representative sample comprising of students from

different regions may be taken.

(4) The present study has employed five professional

courses (Engineering, Teaching, Law, Business Administra

tion & Medical ). Personalitycharacteristicsaf stufents in other

professional courses like veterinary and Agriculture may

also be explored.

(5) The present study has employed the personality

inventory constructed by the investigator as a part of her

M.Phil, course. This inventory is fairly comprehensive,

valid and reliable. It has been constructed on the basis

of factor analysis technique. However, the previous

researches have shown that sone personality variables like

perseverance, achievement motivation, level of aspiration

etc. appear very promising for predicting success. While

the personality characteristic perseverance is a component

of the personality inventory employed in the present

study, measures of achievement motivation, level of

aspiration should be incorporated in future research

design. It is also suggested that more comprehensive

measure of perseverance should be constructed and its

predictive validity be explored.

235

The investigator is conscious of the various

shortcomings and defects of the present scudy, but it is

being submitted with the hope that it will motivate others

to take up further research in the area which has not been

sufficiently explored.

REFERENCES

Burgess, Elva (1953). Personality Factors of Over and Under-achievers in Engineering. Pinnsylvannia State University Abstract of Dissertation, 16, 536-43.

Deb, Maya (1968). Personality Traits of Successful Engineers. Indian Journal of Psychology, 43, 6-10.

Deva, R.C. (1966). Prediction of Student Teaching Success. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.

Gebhart, G.G. and Hoyt, D.P. (1958). Personality Needs of Under and Over-achieving Freshmen. Journal of Applied Psychology, 42, 2, 125-128.

Kaul, Lokesh (1973). Personality Traits of Effective Teachers. Doctoral Thesis, Education, Kurukshetra University.

Kazrai, Q.S. (1986). A Study of Personality Profiles and Cognitive Factors of Academic Failures Amongst Science and Arts Students at Various Levels Doctoral Thesis, Education, A.M.U., Aligarh.

Kumaraiah, V. (1976). Intellectual, Personal and Social Factors Related to High and Low Achievement of Various Stages in Medical Education. Doctoral Thesis, Psychology, B.H.U., Varanasi.

Mathur, M.B. (1966). A Comparative Study of Levels of Intelligence Among Professional Groups. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., A.M.U., Aligarh.

Maxwell, H.C. (1983). A Study of Selected Personality Traits as Related to Self Paced Programme in Media Production Techniques. Doctoral Thesis, Georgia State University, Dissertation Abstract International,44, 10.

Mishra, H.K. (1962). Personality Factors in High and Low Achievers in Engineering Education, Doctoral Thesis, Education IIT, Kharagpur.

237

Mishra, K.S. (1984). Personality Traits of Original Teachers. Indian Educational Review, 19, 14, 72-77.

Nagpal, R. (1979). A Study of Non-Intellectual Characteristics of Over and Under-achieving Engineering Students. Doctoral Thesis, human IIT, New Delhi. In Third Survey of Research in Education (1978-1983), Buch, M.B. (Editor), p. 677.

Pervin, L.A. (1984). Personality : Theory and Research. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York.

Sharma, K.G. (1971). A Comparative Study of Adjustment of Over and Under-achievers. Doctoral Thesis, Edu., Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.

Vyas, R.P. (1987). A Study of the Teaching Success of Prospective Teachers on Some Selected Variables. Educational Review, March, 63 , 3, 55-58.

Walsh, W.B. and Palmer, D.A. (1970). Difference between Law and Non-Law Oriented Students. The Vocational Guidance, Quarterly, 19, 11-15.

APPENDIX I

D AT Test of "g'': CULTURE FAIR

Scale 2, Form A Pnpand fey R. S. Ca«t»// ond A. K. S. Coffe//

Name.

Name of School (or Address).

Sex. Last (Write M or F]

Today's Date. Class

Date of Birth. Month Day Year

Age. Years Months

Test

1

2

3

4

Score Remarks

Total Score

M..

Do n«r..turn Hw. p«9«. yntirtolcl^to' do so>'

TEST 1

::xamples

2

• • • • • •

2

K

o o—\

tt e o«

oO

Answers

LJ

•

D

D

An<rwe:

o 0 o

o • • \ >

(

1 1

o o o

oo o

1

a D n ^A

X X X

X X

t 1^

Pl V

1

• - I I

^Ud'-k-

Z) ^ £X / ii r \ • L

t t ^ (f 0 (X r c

E;H1 of R-s." /

2.

STOP! Oo nof >ur/j ffct pog* unW/ told to do MO.

Examp es 1

^ ^

1

#

2

M^n

2 •

O

3

m 3

o

4

4

O

5

f^SSM

5 o Answers

0

n

^ I

5.

6.

n

n

D

D

\

a

D

Co en to tha n»Kt pagm,

' 1

7.

1

J.

<«

J ( (

- \ ^ ( )

D

v\ /v V

I)

< >

ZJ(

End 01 Test J

l^'

( y

v_y

c I r'

) (

/ :

J

> ; ; <

AnsNv ers

D

a

STOPI Do not turn fh* pag, until told to tfe sa7

TEST 3 r . . x , ! i ; i ;

r 1 (

-, I T

I I . - J r

T 1

I <

© ®© ® (?

2 3

if 4

\

5

i 1 2

< - ' ' ^

3 f 4

*^&

5

Answer;

0

D

D

1 . I

Jl.

A

I ^ I

1 .

)

\

X:^-f' + r V!

2_

x J

X

1

SisM

2 3

11 4 5

1

A

2

A 3

A 4

A

5

A

1 2

-

3

/

4

\

5

\

+

a

D

n

D

a Go on to the next page.

TEH D

r 1

I I I I

7. •JO

1 r 1 • ; L I

8.

O r 1 I I I I I I 1 J

9.

11 J

10. 210 111 J

QBE •00 00LJ

12.

EM?.

o

1

1%]

It

0.

ffl ffi

D

^

Enrf o/" Test 3

• o

^ \ ^

ffi

5 Answers

B DB a s] ai

d]

101

5

•

5

5

5

0

C

n

D

D

n

o

X

w a, a, <

(J

'J o 0 1

o

t7i

r--i o

rj EH

0)

l )

n

I I

• )

o l )

p . r5 u u o

<n

u rT-;

o

at CO

o or

(A

ta r - l o

a

U ^N • H -o Q) r, ,ci n ftf U -H W

r-l (!) fS

u) c -H c: ,n I' p. n)

n

< 1 r- l 1 d

o

o

VD

i n

ro

CM

O O

o

n P I

n n. S o r i n

r i ;ji n H

3 H C1

' 1 1,1 11

r-l

s: ui cu w .p < ^ f

r, ''I ,;-< O t" >i

•cl "I -.-I O

(1) U) •

d w o r. ( ) O f j fl)

! l

n o H C)

• ifj

r-l <1) ' > ij

'('} O

o

tJ O

ri O 'o ;: c

Q) -

I) rO

rQ .C •(J

0) O .C ,Q

o ci : i o p I) 1.1

(IJ ' d W • r i c: U) (J t l n ('1 o ,r.

rH 1)

. I T i H ft)

C) i;-i .G •rl l l

C -r)

•H X

u -J

' I -H O J^

oj O .- CJ . 0 -V - . ,c;

<> -• p o -.ij CO a"; ^n

s ( > -rl n CM ,

FJ (M

0) M ^ n 0) C5 'rt a :• . 0 'II

M C O i-l

: . +j G w t-i d ::)£•: X

M-l 0) i-l

PH L.-I aj -P U

X C)

c o r: x:

r i i

u

o > 1

CO H a' 1 1

H

i U ' l')";

Fi C) ,

fr; Q £ : t/:

R O

u n

o

o

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^- ^ ^ ^ , 1

^,, ^ _ ^- , - , . - , ^ . .-. . - . K ) I (H J-

^ - ^ v _ ^ ^ ^ w - . _ ^ - _ - ^ ^

' J ' _ ^ . ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ i.T

r-;

-, _ ^ ^ ^ ^ ,--- ^ ^ ^ ^ _ _ y ^: ^ . . . ^ . - . , - . . ^ _ ^ .. ^ ^ ?

n r o _ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^'

,-1

ro -vf

1 r- ^ ^ ^ ^ X

Ss ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ tX l ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ - . ^ ^ ^ ,- . ^ , j .

rH oo n i-o i-o r-^ i D O'. '~i

PPENDIX I I I

^'^fcf ^ T % I ?fT Ji^^RfA ^ ^HV vJrf=f?FR'y jrii T ^Fi^ % f a ^ ^35 5T;^ | I STCT: 5 ^ sr ^ r ^r ^TTTT

î\ 3f|[T n m ^q^TSRT ^JiT 3Tiq% fg?r ^ I I ariq^t 5^ »w"li ^T ^XTK 3 ^ ? : q ^ q^ 5 ^ | 1 H r q ^ ^

r TJ r f 3TT11 q fT q f ? ^ JTH? w R ^ t ^xTX '51' ii ^î ^> eft §r % ^ i f i ^^x, ^^? a i iq^ i 3? .^ '?r' ^

cil '3rr^r?,?cT' % ^rf f 3TtT if)?rr # ^ ^'tr^r^ 1

( t ) 5 ^ f^Tf^ca: vft TfT q«?5r I 1

(^) 5 11?^ ^ q | q^^JTi q?rf^ ^TcTT 1 1

3TtT n!?fi (j1f^ rîrr I 5^t sr^TT ir^ f^^ SHJ T 570 (^) * r ^^^ '^' | 3?CT: ^ ^ T q ? H ^ÎIT'JT JT?^

(^) % ]^^ •^' % :Erfi f 3f\;[ ifi^fy gy=^ Hjai 1 ^t^ ffi^ 3 5 ^ ;to (^) ^FT ^J^T; arf^fji^n | 1 ar r:

^TTT q^ ^?rfTOT sr5?f ?fo (^) % ?Trq% arrfTf tT % ^ R f ^ T n>?rr ^ 1 ^ f rzir 1

gTê^ OT9T tffl fi d^T 91 AT T5?l Sfto r T TT ^ R ? r ^ ^ m fVTWI 5TR?T fjCÎiT

: ^ ' -

\. îff ?ÎTcT ^^\i]^ i\ csTRr JTg^ T ^ ; ^ I 1

'3. t | T 7 f "Y |.(3> ^^^x fq-ir "Y 5<sr> ^ srrcrr f i

?!(. Jj?? ^T frqrsr q?T?? 1 1

1^. r??TT m% ?rq^ ^]^ ^T^ & q i i ^rtr ST^HT f^qf simr 1 1

R». ^ f?rq? n r ? ^ -JTV sAf^q % ^rir qj^^f qg?^ ^:f^^^ | i

^H. ^ 3T%^ g> roTfit^TfTUt f-^WfTT q(T?^ - cTT | I

Rx. ni) ?=5i5f T cfV I fq? j f l^ ?fiq g t ^fcqôt ?riTH i

.ît ^ r ^ q n cTT q r qjtr'sq | fqi gf 1v^\ frq? q^ '> ^^^\ T | I

R^. ^ qftf ^qi qji^ ^r^ crqr ^ft ^m | ^ ^ rq? fq* 5 ^ ^^rqii nqr^^r "Pr ^^ fgr^qiq ^ ft 1

^ c . ?f q^cqôt sqfrR q ^ J q^T^ ^ fsr^r^ ^r^^^r qr cTT f 1

^ £ . ^ ^^^ ^ cf>TT?T q TcT tTq;"f ^ 5Tiqr ^ T^cTI ^ I

ô i] ilt rr^ q ^ q t q ^n qi iqi ari^qt Hq?tT ^Tl^T | 1

?9. 5?t qrvft-qr 'y ^qV qj VY% % ? H qg^ ^ I ^^ get q?t fq^ qqi% iry qgrr «»BiT TRffy ^ ,

3W. f 5fY ^ ^q i f l ^ q ^ 3{q^ aiiq 'Y ^> fjy g i

?x. ^ sTfcT fif>g-?Tq?T^T^frRi q?'"3r ^ !

^^ ^^t 2-?5r ^ p t I fqr J[ ^rqil^T'T v^tif % q;rq J?T^ I VS it^') ^fqqt OT?^ q PT CFlrf> ^ I

H . ^ q t !qrxfiq"> qr ^ Is rrq^r q^ niq "ftt^ - Vq? «ifTi $ i

Yo. ?T *| srrs qr^^ ^ 551 (T^>^ q|^ ?") i | ?fr| q^ ^^Îr <?;•) qrq«?? ^t 1

: ^ J

Y^. ^ mmUm ^mx\^ ir ^5?^ mxm T ^ " ; «PTCII | i

!<:?. ^?r 'i"'m1f ^ ^^r trîfir ^T^TI q*?;? n^^ ^[^^-fi ? J | ^ T I H I ^ I li. 3Tq% ^rrf'^qf % isfll- TT ie frrir ^ ^ ^ I T 5 ^ aiêir ?ificTr | 1

UK t F^?fr qT iT?iTt!T f i% qT 3^^î f ^ f t a ^ ^ a t 1 1

^^3. 53T^> 3TI5TT q i? r^ ?n> srftwT a r i^ t ^^\ a i f u ^ q n ? ? ^ T ^ T f 1

K^. ^ m x ^ f ^ tTH\ cTrcT ^ t^ ' t I 5T"I T^^l^ ^ q ^ ^ ^ m ^ x 1 1

^ o . # ?r^ ^ M q f%fl7 e?r5 9r> q f q ^ qry H ^ W ^^ ^ F ^ ^ T f ) 7 | ^ r q^T?? ^Tc i r i I

^^. If ?!??! ?i 3^^> ^qfirraff % ^t\ ^ sfis^^ ^x^j q??:5r îxm 1 1

^^. ^ m^ 3Tiq^"t r^q^ qrrq % ^rqqj ^gVirqsFai f 1 Vi'. t q^q iTfqqiq fT?r qi?T qqV qrcif?TFq"t q s? :^^ ^ r q ^rar ^ 1 î( ? fqqqr ? ^ q ^l ' aFqeri qTqFpsf* qqFT")g1f q ?rqq j s i R q r qe^^r ^ ^ ' q r 1 %% - i\^€\ iriTx^r ^-^^ it t ^^\ q |?i ^^cfi 1 1 \^. 5H qâTTFôT q^:5[ q^H 1 1 ^^. S' 3T?ffT qrH^ 3frr? q qq^K^rq^ci? % ^ q q ^qfipqci |1CTI | J \£. HTqqgVq aqft^qf % f T^ f ^ ^ T ^ ^ t t q^^ an^T Târ I ' l 'v3o. ^ q?% î«T q^Tî^ffT ^7qT q q j ^ 1 1 \5l ^ q ^ ^ r q ^-r "JTF fqîr firqF ^^ ^qTF ^ F q ^^ ^ T ICTI ^ 1 \ 3 ^ . ^ ^^n] ^ ^^?l1q ?5TT % ôtqqiTT ^ |«ift | ) TFcTT ^ 1 o ^ t qsrr-T qrr T^rqr r'Tqf?rfr f t r g'V arFqs^r gsiciF ^ i \3Y.. PfJ'Tf % r^T^q % ^ h giT q> q 3rq^ f ^ ^ i f ) q i sjzfi T^CTI g i •<iV ft fffr'A if: ^jqiQiff Pr;'^ k - i t T r j - i qriq h « * q ^ ^ T (iTcTf g I V 3 ^ i r f t ?^?5F X^€) ^ HF q ^ f q q ^ST q q ^ F q ^ q i qF4> qqfT I \3'3 ifxt s^sgr T cfy I fq? ^ t fqq ^T> qHf^ q ^.iq ^ t I vje: . 5?f ^qr qrrq qr^qr ar^sr crqar | Hqqq ^^f ^cT?qar ^t i \5E. »t ^q q iq ^ q^'^q T^qar g f gf^qr % WBFqr •q'> f^r?^! 1 1 CO, ^!T 4Fq^ u q % U'îxi ^ *if a ^ i^ ^ i

t;^. 5 ^ q^ 9T I % Jr^ fk^z fq^ if> qls q)^ Jrfr f r i f q T 11

t;e. t T' sTMr mff Tsr GTRT qe?? ^"^cii ^

£^. arqrTnqrcrl' i> ^\mi\ ^ vi'Y ;3fq*'> tfl*Ti7?iT> ^ x^ w?\ kit ^TQT ^â') | i

ê- ^ q^ ^^î) qi Tf i=r f^^t ^r^ ît fz^ qicri ^ i

To"i. t %6Tr ^t 3rr3rrqi5r'r arq rr ^TT'SIT ««5T5rr |" i I'?. ^ î^-fg?/? ir ?fErr ^ffff q^ gR"V T CTT g" i

ToH. i rfqrGg % F?r& | ^ qffr ^^r*^ T¥nf q^ '? ^Tcrr g' i

ôq. it ?TT5r n 3[qi?f> w>fiV «pr «rt ^rri »II?OJT jjfri g'' i loe- ? ^^V^^'y ^fs^ qft' TR f-* ^ FsTRr îq;^ ?râi f i ?*io ^ friry sfJT 7=?RT qff'? îi ^^'^Ti c3T> tTq> aTi?i?y fj ar^ri 5" 1

<1?«. J ij^qiT ^^ r ii'lt ^ ;jqîT 8f ^(^ ^^ ?raf f' 1 tn. '^'\f\ Hf« qiT <«iT% if g?T 3T ^r ar^qr^r ^^] 11

11^. 5 ?iminxr^ t s ^ if ^T ^ 3fr "5c vft arm #3% ^?TI ^riî ^ 1 11^. ^ ^T4 ^ T ^ " ^ ^ f Wqqf aiq^f^r T^^T ^ 1 '\H- 55T n m ^ arfti^ mfff qfy antifTr T^CTI § 1

( ^ )

n ? . nz^tqx qfr r^nr? qr^r^T f^^^r ff ^'^^ ^T.^ ir 5^ traTrsr qf y 11

W^. nit ^xe5,r TSci> t np f;Ôi ^ sr^sgr ûr ^^~ i !:?«. if 3T^HT 5cT?rr vratrlfcT "l ^nîr g" F^ n 'V ^ ' ) ^ g ^ ^ ?i;icf> | 1 t^^. 5 ^ ^^"T ^TT? STHI ^Î" 3T^m ?r^fi[ 3r^t Hrirqi £t ^ 'E I^T qri^r mx^j q-l 1 n ^ - ^ 3T3r F jff ^ 9ft£T 'rqsrq tr mfn^ g""i ÎFTT g' 1 , HV3. t F*?T) ^"ri^ qrsf qr) STT^TRI ^ ?T^?I ^^r ?CTI g' 1

^30. Jf sr^^? fTTcfr i F P F^^r FÎHV arqî^ %g> 55T ? a j Fîri ^srnr | 1 <i^!. FTfrrfrrT ir f; gr ^TZT ^^CT ^g?ri jar q^f; nft 11 l^R. Jf arq^ îT Tff qT srjjT 5i2fy 7gî g I 13? ^ srq^l 3TTJTT qffr ^f?f^?r îi ^^^ ^ T E^rfl ^ I

?3W. i=[ TtFcf-FT^R")' % Fi Piiq^ ^r^T ^^^ r FSTST^ ^^ 1 1

n ^ ^ 'V ?^t3r T??fV I F^ r T rV sr^jT ^'t^r^ n ^RFCT q^?;' 1

Ivo . t ?f\Tff (J Fq?!^ qT srH?^frr ^ i ar^^r^ ^^cfT ^ 1

?V^ t ÎIT ?PT JTîcTr T^rTJ f 3ffT ^T? if 3 ? ^ ^ iT^^cI ^ 1 % S ^ ^TI 'FTai |

?«y. t ^ i g ^^^ 3p\ si^m ^ ) ^ ^ \ ^T^\ sffu^ q^^gôt HfiSTcir ^ r ?«K. ni\ ^=5g[ Tât I F^ ^\ ^ ^ f #ffr C' H ^ ^ t' i \\i%. t îîTi I F^ 5 ^ «rf r q^ Fq^ i ?av9 ir?cf> 5t 3rr^ q i 5 ^ irg^fr gl^j | F-P I ;^ arq^m F^qi 1 1

?ye. ^ f t ^^^T. ^]m ^car f;T?r ^ t ?^c»r "Iffr ^ 1 ^Ko ^ ?TrqiF3iqi jce ailf IT îR" 'y 3? 5Tr ^^ q i ^t Tf^rr q^?^ ^TffT | 1

r-(9- ^'^ 'sTTR %) 3rr% qT Jr ' 3fq^ qiFqjfr ?> f u M??T f; ^ qft ?êiT TgcO ^ 1

'\X\ JJ^ r?rq ^ s r i qFr'STH ?T£r?r srft q^r g>ff) 1 n^3. ^^r "^rq ar^HT ?CTÎ ? ^ ? 5 I ft ^fcrr | f ^ ^ i ^ ^F^Î f ^ T ^ 3 T g 1

\ ^ o . t i r q i ^ qt> ^qi ^ q ^^ ^ {'m qqc^5T)?T T^crt ^ 1

1.

^ .

^

y-

X-

% •

^.

c-

e.

lo-

"W-

V.

\^.

iy.

n-

'\%

1^3

1= .

U .

Ro.

^"1.

^ ^ .

^ ^ .

' ^ V .

t

| f

?t

?r

f

?

t

^f

5

?L

r

?T

t

gr

^^

ir

?

5J

î

?f

5

ir

5t

qrwf

5

^

JT

fT

JT

^

^

^

^

fT

^

JT

^

H

J7

?T

^

^

?r

^

^

^

JT

^

f^cfc^

3ir^f5=5{c[

3Tf?inj=^cT

arr^rft^^cT

arf^ftâ-

3Tf^r5=^cT

3rr?irji=?^

arf^r^^cT

3Tf?rf!7=^cT

3Tr^r5=^cT

^T^Tw^î

3T r^r?^^?

sTr r?= cT 3Tr?Tn5=?

3?r?ir!?= cf

s^rfrnfêr

sTfi nj ^cf

srF r ^ cT

sTf^fsâr

arfRfif fr

STf rf ^ cT

arfTrnj cf

3Tn=fn< cr

arf^rft cT

airnfuqa

VI.

^ ^ .

R\3.

R^.

H.

^ 0

^?-

^9.

^^

?a.

^!(.

H-

^ ^

?'=.

H.

Vo.

e t

v^.

v^

vv.

y:<.

v^.

v\s.

vt;.

5f

r

t

fr

?t

t

gr

t

5t

| t

^t

§r

| t

5t

5r

?t

?t

V

T

^f

?f

?r

§t

?t

^

^

^

^

^

^

r?

^

^

^

H

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

M

^

^

^

JT

q>?

3 5T5^Mc5T

aif^fiRcT

arf fs cT

afHrnj cT

sTf r ^cT

arfirnj cT

arf^rti^^

3Tr^r?^ci

arf^ft^^cr

arr^fs'ia^

arfRf^^cr

arf^nj^cT

3fpTr9= fr

air^Tfy^cT

arf^ft^cT

aTftn?^^

arf^ft^cT

^^^f^^^Ki

3T r^rj^cT

3in^nj^cT

3ir^f5=^cT

arf^r^^cT

^M^'^n

arf^ft^cl

ainiro^cT

ye.

«.o.

n-^R-

U-

Vi-

XX.

'X\>

X.V3.

X'^.

x^.

^ 0 .

%v

^'^'

^ i

^v.

^'<-

\%

^"3.

S^.

\£.

V3o.

V5^

^ ^ .

r

?t

?t

^^

^f

?t

ir

r

5t

| i

r

?r

^^

t

§r

| t

?T

5f

5t

§f

^ j

^ j

5t

5t

T

fT

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

H

5T

^

JT

^

?l

?T

?r

^

^

JT

^

^

^

^

APPENDIX I V

3Tr?irq=qrcT

aif nj sfcT

a r fu^cT

sfr^fj^cT

sif^nj^^rT

arf^nJ^cT

3?^^^=^^!

3rr?rr? cT 3Tr r9^cT

1

STf rfi cT

3Tr r??cT

3Tf r?=qcT

arffrft cT

3<r?!r5^cT

3?n7r?^cr s^r^n?^?^

3?r^r7=3[^

3Tr?Tr"wcT 3Tf?(ft cT

s n r ^ cT arf'tr ^ fT

a{r?(r3 cT 3?r^r!jâ

V 9 ^ .

vsv.

\3V

V3^

V3\3.

| A ^

V95.-

C o .

z,'\.

q ^

c;^

c:y.

=;!<.

^ ^ .

t;\3.

C d .

ce.

£o .

e ' l .

^ ^ .

i^.

T£« .

S:(.

rv

£^-

£=:.

5.^.

«\<1Q»

ôV

X'R-

^t

^f

^ f

^ f

^t

^f

ft.

^t

^^

r

r

^t

^t

Q^

It

It

| t

It

|t

| t

It

1^

| t

|t

|t

It

|t

^^

| t

5t

5T

^

?r

^

?i

:T

JT

^

^

fT

^

?T

5T

^

^

JT

^

^

^

^

nT

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

ai f^ fT^^

ajf^n?^^

air^ft^cT

aif ru' TcT

ainTfuqff

arr rnq cT

arnrHf^cl

3?f^ft=jrci

astf^f?^^

arr^fifâ

aiPrfifqcT

arr^r^^cT

arr r ^cT

3?r^r7^cT

atf^ff^^r

arf fy^cT

sTnTfy^cT

arr^rf j^^

ajFi^fj^cT

aTfj^fT^cl

arfRff^cr

3Tr^r?^cr

arfRfirqcT

aTr n?^?^

3fr^r?^cT

arffrf^^^

ajfiiftqw

a^rôj^^

arf nf cT

arf^Hjâ

Xo\.

Toy.

?oK..

! o ^ .

1oV3.

t o q .

<ô^

no

W'^.

'\'\R.

n^.

"W^.

n^.

u\-

n^-

M«^.

'iH

IRo

\R\

l^^

n^

uy

?^^

t^^.

?R

n^

'\Ri

V->^

nt

n^

V

|t

| t

I t

| t

5t

I t

| t

^ ^ •

| t

. ^ ^

| t

I t

| t

| t

| t

| t

It

I t

| t

| t

It

I t

|t

. | t

• | t

| t

. ^ t

• | t

I t

^

?r

JT

^

'T

^

^

^

^

^

?r

JT

^

^

?T

^

^

JT

JT

^

fT

^

^

^

^

^

R

•T

^

fT

sirîf^^?!

3{r r?=5r

afr^f?^^!

air^fp^cT

aifiirDqcr

arnrOf^c!

aiftOi^^

sif^rsRci

atfrcfuêr

3?f^n?qcT

3{r n?gcT

ar f ^ r?^^

atf^f^^cf

arffiru^qa

a ffifs cT

3?rfif9â

3iffl:nRfr

orf^nj^cT

3{nTfFEr=T

3?rilf5^cT

3Tr?rr!?= cr

orf^r^^cT

arr^nr^cr

a^nrfT^cf

aff nj cT

ar f^ f^^

aif^fv^^

air^r?^^

arftOy^cT

SlRlft^Cl

n^-

i^y.

{Vl-

uv tô.

t?q .

\H.

^«o.

m.

l^R-

m-

!V«.

"in.

i'^\.

1«v3.

t«c;.

?y£.

n»

U'i.

u^.

IX?.

?!(».

tX^.

(X^-

?X.V9.

U^.

ue.

1 ^ 0 -

|t

| f

| t

| f

| f

| t

| t

| t

| t

|t

| t

| t

|t

| t

| t

|t

| t

| t

| t

|t

1^

| t

| t

| t

| t

|t

|t

It

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

JT

fT

^

^

^

^

^

^

H

^

^

^

^

JT

fT

^

JT

^

a^r^f'^T

a i r^Fw^

3Tf^n;q^

arrRf'^'i

a i r ^ f s^^

afffTrcq r

3Tr^r-^=T

3Tf f ^=T

3{r?Tn?^=T

STfRf i :^?

air^r:^^^

aff rfs^^T

aif^fa^^n

3?fqf'/ =r

3{r?(F!7^=T

aTfnryq^

3Tr^r?=^5

3Tr?rr?=3"=r

aif^fft^^T

3lf f5=^H

^fnf^^cT

arfîn?^?

3rf^r3=?cT

3T f f i f r ^ ?

3Tr?ff!7qrT

atrfTfj^qcT

air^fnîT

arrnfy^cT

PERSONALITY FACrOR<; RAriMG SCALE Appendix-V

LIVELY

C a r e f r e e

O p t i m i s t

E n t h u s i a G t i c

VIarrT\hearted

Huirorous

Happy go lucky-

c h e e r f u l

? r a n k

R e l a x i n g

A c t i v e

Easy g o i n g

^ ^ l A B L E 7

Participating

Socially skillful

Socially bold

Expressive

V/ide interests

-".SiDsponsivc

TrJkative

•gregarious

FACTOR - 1

5 4 3

FACTOR

IMPULSIVE 7 6 5 ^

Intuitive

Lacks introspection

Affected by feeling

Uneasy

l i n p a t i i i u t

E x c i t a b l e

Vague

Act s on t h e spur o f t h e uonvant

2JiillOUS_

C a u t i o u s

P e s s i n i i s t

I n d i f f e r e n t

A p a t h e l i c

M i r t h l e s s

W o r r y i n g

Unhappy

^ e c r o t i / G

T h o u g h t f u l

D u l l

C r i t i c a l

ilESS:i7ED

D e t a c h e'-J

S o c i a l l y c lu r r sy

r i m i d

Q u i e t

Narro' . / i n t e r e s t :

Alcbof

T a c i t u r n

S e c l u s i v G

Cr_A13LE

Lo j j c: a 1

In t ro . ' j pGCt i ' / o

E i . i o t i o n a l l y s t a b l '

Colin

D c l i b o r a t r

r h l c j M a L i c

E x a c t

p r u d e n t

FACrOR - 4

VElirU1E30r:E

uninhibited

Daring

Energetic

/igorous

Res t r a ined

Canily f r i g h t e n e d

Ir3nguid

I n n c r t

FACT011 - 5

S e l f p o s s e s s e d

Z~lf s u f f i c i e n t

•3elf a s s u r e d

Poised

Contended

i l e s p o n s i b l e

S e r e n e

pOI;2JJANT 7 t

B o a s t f u l

p r e f e r s own d e c i s i o n

i r 'orceful

I n d e p e n d e n t

A g g r e s s i v e

S t u b b o r n

O u t s p o k e e

A j c e n d a n t

CONSClENnOUS 7

, sUl-j bound

Oependnb le

r r u s t ' . ; o r t h y

F a i r minded

TiUrSTING

C r e d u l o u s

A g r e e a b l e

FACTOR - 6

FACTOR^

5 4

FAcrq:^

5 4

a

Cr/er a n x i o u s

Group d e p e n d e n t

A p p r e h e n s i v e

D i f f i d e n t

R u f f l e d

F r i ' ' ' o l o u s

D i s s a t i s f i e d

H o i e s t

•lound f o l l o v / e r

Me 2k

Conforming

Huirble

Hi Id

In t rovoSf t

".ubmis t^ivo

EvTides R u l e s

Undr>p3nJablo

Untru.iL'./orLhy

P n r t i - i l

GjJS£I£l£Up_

D o u b t i n g

r a u l t f i n d i n g

FAcroa - 9

COMSE. VAnVE 7 6 5

C o n v e n t i o n a l

C o n s e r v a t i v e

f o l c r a n t o f t r a d i t i o n s

?vespocts e s t a b l i s h e d i d e a s

S t a i d

R i g i d

Unen'-Luiring

KI:-ID

renderypdnded

S e n s i t i v e

G e n t l e

Generous

Compass iona te

COOPSilAfivs

T o l e r a n t

C o n p l a i s a n t

F r i end ly -

U n d e r s t a n d i n g

Accomodat ing

PE?.SEVSR1NG

De te rmined

S t e a d y

S t u d i o u s

F i rm

FACTOR - 10

5 4 3

FACTOR - 12

uxpERiricnniiG

U n c o n v e n t i o n a l

i l a d i c a l

Free thinking

I n t r o d u c e s IJew

Broad minded

F l c r . i b l c

C u r i o u s

H A ? ^

lou ' j h i i a n u e l

C rude

H o s t i l e

H£;rd

Inhuman

OB^TllUCTIVS

I n t o l e r a n t

p u g n a c i o u s

B e l l i g e r e n t

r o r p i i

B e l l i c o s e

FICKLZ MItlDED

I n d e c i s i v e

Q u i t t i n g

Lachn Concen t re

• / o l ' i t i i e

UAI'!:: 0 . ' i'llE CAtJDlDAL'li

ROLL l-JO.

CLASS

NAKE OF THE OBSERVER

DAIE

PERSONALITY PROFILES OF OVER-AND UNDER ... - CORE

Documents

Transcript of PERSONALITY PROFILES OF OVER-AND UNDER ... - CORE