Functional foibles and the analysis of social change

Functional analysis is the major theoretical perspective of contemporary sociology. Although many fruitful studies of social structure have resulted from the application of this perspective, it has been notably sterile in coping with questions of social change. Two major shortcomings of the functionalist view of change are here examined. The first type of shortcoming might be called ‘evolutionary hangovers’. Under this heading we may include ‘functional ahistoricism’ and a ‘commitment to progress’. The second major shortcoming refers to weaknesses of functional theory per se — namely, a confusion of causal analysis with functional analysis, a lack of a theory of deviance, and an over‐emphasis on stable equilibrium models.     

The Development of Children's Concepts of Hardness

This study was conducted for three purposes. First, we assessed the development of children's concepts of hardness as an intensive physical quantity. We hypothesized a U-shaped behavioral growth curve for children's judgments on tasks measuring intensive physical quantity, but the hypothesis was not confirmed. The justifications accompanying correct and incorrect judgments for hardness were similar to those where U-shaped behavioral growth was found for other intensive physical quantities (temperature and sweetness). The second purpose was to determine how children solve seriation and transitivity tasks where hardness was the content. More older than younger children solved these tasks, and the transitivity task was correctly solved after the seriation task was correctly solved. One pattern of solutions for transitivity and intensive physical quantity allowed for differentiation between younger and older children who solved the intensivity tasks correctly. The third purpose was to determine whether children think that objects' hardnesses are labile (i.e., hard objects can become soft and vice versa) by simply adding more of that substance. More younger than older children thought that this was true     

The Relationship Between Certain Examiner Personality Variables and Subjects' Rorschach Scores

A projective instrument entitled the "Kilmann Insight Test" (KIT) was devised to measure the Interpersonal Value Constructs (IVCs) of individuals, defined as: the mental categories through which an individual perceives and interprets the desirable and undesirable features of interpersonal behavior. The KIT requires an individual to differentiate on a seven-point scale, 18 IVCs according to how relevant they are to a series of six ambiguous pictures of interpersonal situations. A factor analysis of the KIT's values resulted in two comprehensive factors: (a) Good Fellowship versus Functional Task Activity, and (b) Interpersonal Restraint versus Boldness. Comparing the KIT with a self-report instrument containing the same value items as the KIT, suggested that the KIT is assessing value dimensions, but that the KIT seems to be tapping a different concept of values than the self-report assessment.     

Correlates of Rorschach Reality Adherence in the Assessment of Murderers who Plead Insanity

Reality adherence measured by Mayman's system of Rorschach form level scoring was applied to the protocols of 43 individuals all of whom were pleading insanity to a charge of murder. Reality adherence level correlated significantly with judgment of legal sanity, contributed importantly to a factor analysis dimension of reality functioning, and was extensively related to measures of primary process thought and impulse. Reality adherence further was related to intellectual functioning and areas of past history. These results suggest that Mayman's reality adherence measure has substantial validity and is importantly related to other personality variables.