Examining the perceived world of 60 prison inmates in relation to need presence (the roots of behavior)

Assessing Need Presence

In December, 1949 (Commanger), The New York Times reported a study indicating that new methods for assessing needs presence was one of the greatest contributions to society in the first half of the 20th century. In relation to such other, of the greatest contributions to society, were Henry Ford, making every persona neighbor; Edison, giving us the electric lights; Einstein, relativity theory; Ghandi, passive resistance; Marconi, the radio; Reed, disease control; etc.

The greatest contribution in relation to "need presence", of course, was "free association", the basis of psychoanalysis. Here an individual is asked to talk about anything that comes to mind, and without being questioned. Typically, the individual under "free association" tends a reveal those areas of life where need presence is greatest. Later, at Stanford University, Leon festinger (1957), taught us how to develop tests to measure the degree of need presence in individuals. Festinger described how "cognitive dissonance" (feelings of general discontent) emerge when needs are not gratified, which is the technique used in assessing need presence. For example, if an individual is asked, "Is your home warm and friendly?", and he/she says "No", it is clear that there is cognitive dissonance", and which is interpreted as unfulfilled need presence.

The Need Gratification Test (NEEDS)

The Need Gratification Test (NEEDS) used in this study was developed making use of the Festinger "cognitive dissonance" tbeory. First it seeks to include eight different areas of one's life space; so that a good picture is obtained of total life; as compared to some small segment. These eight areas, each comprised of 25 true/false type items, are further divided into two parts: Part I dealing with areas that are internal and personal in nature: while Part II deals with areas that are external and impersonal in nature:

Part I-Internal/Personal:

1. Home & family--HOM

2. Religion & Inner Dev.--REL

3. Affiliation & Social--AFF

4. Survival & Pollution--SUR

Total-IPTOT

Part II-External/Impersonal:

5. School & Learning--SCH

6. Travel & Relaxation--TRA

7. Sports & Risk Taking--SPO

8. Money & Productivity--MON

Total-EITOT

Total Need Presence-NEETOT

Groups Used in Study

The focus for the study was on 60 male inmates attending an educational class that was a portion of a rehabilitation program. It included a second group of corresponding others not presently in prison for purposes of ascertaining significant differences for the planning of successful entry from prison back to society.

Male Prisoners

The prison inmate group was comprised of 60 males ranging in age from 16 61 years, with a mean e of 25.23 and with a standard deviation of 8.51 years. None of the individuals reported being married at the time of incarceration. All of them wee presently participating in the educational program, which was considered to be an important element in the rehabilitation offerings. It was designed to help make inmates productive members of society after completing their internment. Some of the control groups members were married, and as a group, they were significantly older. The mean age difference of 6.42 years was not believed to be sufficient to invalidate the findings.

Comparative Group

The group of individuals used for comparison was comprised of 64 male typical individuals who had been administered The Need Gratification Test (NEEDS) in connection with another study. They ranged in age t from 20 to 46 years, with a mean age of 31.55 and with a standard deviation of 6.40 years.

Purpose for Study

The main purpose for the study was to better understand the needs of such prison inmates, with view to prepare them better for success upon release from prison. It is based on the notion that all human behavior, including criminal activity for which people are imprisoned, is designed by the individual for the gratification of personal needs. To be sure, such need presence may be conscious or unconscious in nature, and where the focus is on higher level needs; as opposed to food, shelter, and health care. If, then, criminal activity derives from efforts to gratify personal needs, a better understanding of such need presence might serve as the basis for the more effective rehabilitation of our present offenders.

Important Differences

In Table 2 below a t-statistic was computed between the means far scores on the NEEDS test between the prison inmate group and others. First, it should be noted that there was a statistical significant different age difference between the prison group and others. This suggests that the element of age may be a factor related to other differences obtained.

Internal & Personal Differences

The first four scores on the NEEDS test are described as being "internal and personal" in relation persons involved, i.e., home, religion, social and survival. In three of the four such areas (HOM, REL and AFF) there was a statistically significant difference between test scores for the prison inmates and others at the 0.000 level of confidence. This was true, also, for the total score for the internal and personal need group, IPTOT. In all cases the significant difference depicted greater "need presence" (ungratified needs) for persons in the prison group. Since the fourth area, SUR, also, depicted greater need presence, but was not significant with the t-statistic, it was significant when the "sign" test was applied as well.

External and Personal

The second four scores on the NEEDS test are described as being "external and impersonal", i.e., SCH, SPO, TRA and MON. In all four scores there as significantly greater "need presence" for the prison population, and which included the total score EITOT.

Internal Vs. External

A kind of general universal condition tends to find external needs to be greater than internal ones. For both the prison inmate and other group, this was equally true. The IPTOT for prison group was 193.40; while the EITOT scare was 197.20. Thus, the need presence was greater for the external and impersonal areas of one's life space, i.e., SCH, TRA, SPO and MON. Similarly, for the other (non-prison group) the IPTOT score was 123.05; while the ET scare was 138.36. Again, the need presence was greater for the external and impersonal areas, i.e., SCH, TRA, SPO and MON. Even though the same condition prevails for both prison and other group (need presence greater in the external and impersonal areas) it has important implication for the planning of any prison rehabilitation program. (People provide for internal and personal needs better than for external impersonal needs).

Reliability of Test Scores

The reliability for all test scores was computed by use of a Pearson r, which was corrected by use of the Spearman/Brown correction formula. This, of course, was true because all part scores are only a portion of the total test. The Spearman (brown correction is designed for use when two parts of a test represent the whole. For NEEDS test each part score is only one eighth of the total, and, therefore, the reliability would be expected to be higher than the Spearman/Brown corrected shown. All eight part scores, except REL (religion and inner development) have satisfactory reliability.

Independence of NEEDS Scores

The independence of NEEDS scores far the prison population contained in this study was tested by use of principal component factor analysis. Varimax rotations were used to ascertain identify of the five factors extracted and their independence of organization. Based on the perceptions of the 60 inmates of this study, four of the eight part scores on NEEDS obtained independence of organization: SUR, MON, HOM and TRA. The part scores HOM and TRA each had significant distractors present; HOM had AFF as a major distractor, and TRA had SCH as a distractor. The fifth factor was organized primarily around REL, with AFF and SPO as major distractors. It is of interest to note that all factor identity loadings were positive.

References

Cassel, R.N. (1984). Need gratification and brain dominance: nucleus for transpersonal psychology and biofeedback. Psychology, 21(2), 48-54.

Cassel, R.N. (1990). Transpersonal psychology as the basis for health care. Psychology, 27(1), 33-38.

Cassel, R.N., and DeMoulin, D.F. (1995). The Need Gratification Test (NEEDS). Chula Vista, California: PROJEC INNOVATION.

Commager, H.S. (1949). 1900-19500: from Victorian to atomic Age. The New York Times Magazine. December 31, 3-9.

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, Caifornia: Stanford University Press.

Copyright Project Innovation Winter 1995
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved