California
St~te
University, Northridge
ATTITUDINAL MODERNITY:
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MIDDLE EASTERN
UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
A Thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the
requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in
Education,
Educational Psychology,
Counseling and Guidance
by
Yervant A. Aghishian
August 1987
The Thesis of Yervant A. Aghishian is approved:
California State University, Northridge
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My sincerest thanks and appreciation go to the following
people for their support and patience throughout this
project:
I am greatly indebted to my adviser, Dr. Robert
Docter, £or his time, sound advice and creative
guidance.
It was a privilege for me to be one of
Dr. Docter's students and to learn the value of a
truly excellent education from him. He is a great
educator.
I am very-grateful to Dr. David Schwartz for all
his assistance, and for helping me with the extremely
difficult statistics.
I want to thank Dr. Don Dorsey for being my
first inspiration in the field of counseling. He is
a wonderful teacher.
I also extend my profound gratitude to Dr. Diane
Schwartz who gave me time from her "no-time schedule"
to assist me in the computational processes.
Finally, I wish to extend my appreciation and
thanks to my wife, Tanya, for her sacrifices and
support from the day I. launched into this Master's
degree program.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
...
...
.........
..........
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS • .
LIST OF TABLES •
LIST OF CHARTS •
LIST OF SCATTER DIAGRAMS
vi
vii
. viii
....
ABSTRACT
iii
ix
CHAPTER
1
....
Background Data . . .
Statement of the Problem
Null Hypothesis
....
Delimitations . . . . .
Definition of Terms
..
INTRODUCTION
Outline of the Remaining
2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
...
... ..
.
.
........
.
.Chapters
... ... ...
...
...
.
...
.
.
.
..
... ... ... ...
....
......
.
.
.the
. Samples
......
......
. . . ...
Overall Modernization
Cultural Patterns and Mannerisms
Hodernization as a Process
Group Affiliation
Summary
3
.....
r1ETHODOLOGY . . . . . . . .
Themes Explored
..
Subjects . . . . . . . .
Religions Persuasions of
Testing Instruments
The Questionnaire
Correlation Coefficient
Standard Deviation
T-Statistics
Null Hypothesis
Summary
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...
.
......
. . .. . . . . .. .. .. . .
....
iv
1
2
4
5
5
5
6
11
11
16'
20
25
30
32
32
35
37
38
39
40
43
43
44
44
4
RESULTS .
.
......
Analysis of Results
.
Analysis of Subfactors
Scatter Diagrams • • .
Summary
• . • . . . •
5
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
......
. • . . • .. . . •
•
• . • . • • . • •
. • . •
45
55
79
79
........
92
Summary of the Problem • . . .
Findings . • • .
. . •
Recommendations
. • • . • . •
Summary
. • .
BIBLIOGRAPHY •
45
92
94
...
..
96
96
98
101
APPENDICES • .
102
A.
Questionnaire •
B.
A Supplement to Questionnaire •
v
....
109
LIST.OF TABLES
Table
1
Page
Attitudinal Modernity Test Scores and
GPA's of Three Ethnic Groups
...
47
Modernity Test Scores and GPAs of
American Students . .
. • • •
49
Attitudinal Modernity Mean Scores of
Three Middle Eastern Ethnic Groups
Compared with American Control Group
51
4
Age Difference Among Three Groups •
52
5
Length of Stay in U.S.A. (in years)
2
3
6
54
The Means and Standard Deviations
of GPAs
7
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
.
.
I)
•
•
•
56
•
Mean Scores of Educational Levels
for Boys and Girls
• • • • . . . .
....
58
Mean Scores and Standard Deviations
of Family Orientation • • • • •
60
Percent Expressing Choice for a
Particular Gender Related Secondary
Schoo 1
. . . . . . . . . . . .
63
Willingness to Introduce Agricultural
Improvements
• • . . . . . . . . . •
64
Attitude Toward Working Women's Right
for Equal Pay
66
12
Attitude Toward Advancement of Science
68
13
Family Financial Status
14
Openness
15
Attitude Toward Rural or Urban Life
73
16
Impact of Attitudinal Hodernity on
School Achievement
. • . . . • . •
75
Comparison of Attitudinal Modernity Test
Scores Group vs. Group . . . . . • . . . .
77
8
9
10
11
17
.....
......
vi
......
.
.......
...
70
71
LIST OF CHARTS
Chart
1
2
Page
Major Themes Explored in Defining
Attitudinal Modernity • . . . • .
36
Code Designation and Evaluation of
Test Questions • . . . . .
40
vii
LIST OF SCATTER DIAGRAHS
Diagram
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Page
r4odernity Test Scores and Years Li Vt3d
in U.S.A. of Armenian Students
80
Hodernity Test Scores and Age of
Armenian Students
81
...
..
......
Hodernity Test Scores and GPA's of
Armenian Students
'
.
...
...
82
Hodernity Test Scores and Years Lived
in U.S.A. of Christian Arab Students
83
Modernity Test Scores and Age of
Christian Arab Students
. . .
84
Modernity Test Scores and GPA's of
Christian Arab Students
. . .
85
. . ..
. .. .
~1odernity
Test Scores and Years Lived
in u.s.A. of J\1oslem Students
86
Modernity Test Scores and Age of
Moslem Students
. . ..
87
Modernity Test Scores and GPA's of
Moslem Students
....
88
Hodernity Test Scores and Age of
American Students
. . ..
89
...
90
...
...
..
t~odernity Test Scores and GPA' s of
American Students
. .
viii
ABSTRACT
ATTITUDINAL MODERNITY:
A CGriJPARATIVE STUDY OF HIDDLE EASTERN
UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
by
Yervant A. Aghishian
Master of Arts in Education
This study was designed to investigate the stigmas
of attitudinal modernity among three Middle Eastern
ethnic groups, the degree of impact of background values
and traditions on the process of adaptation, and finally
the relationship of change in attitudes to school
achievement in Middle Eastern students at California
State University, Northridge.
Seventy-five engineering and computer science
students (25 Christian Arabs, 25 Moslem Arabs, and 25
Armenians) responded to a 36-item questionnaire which
was prepared to measure the attitudinal modernity among
the three ethnic groups.
Twenty-five students who were
born and raised in America served as a control group.
ix
The length of stay in the United States, the
socio-psychological background, religious affiliation,
education, economic status and ethnicity were explored
as factors influencing the process of attitudinal
modernity.
American students scored significantly higher than
Middle Eastern subjects on the attitudinal modernity
test.
The Middle Eastern students in general did better
in school performance, attaining higher GPAs.
This difference in school performance might be
attributed to the fact that Middle Eastern students are
on state funding from their government or are scholarship recipients.
Therefore, they should work harder to
obtain higher grades to maintain the required academic
standard for financial aid from their respective governments or scholarship foundations.
T-tests perrformed on the scores showed the
differences to be statistically significant, therefore
the null hypothesis could be rejected.
It seems that on the whole, religion, ethnicity,
economic status, or culturil background had no effect
on the results of the study.
X
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
This research is devoted to the study of attitudinal modernity of three ethnic groups raised in traditional Middle Eastern societies and currently living in
the United States.
The three ethnic groups encompassed
in this study are Moslem Arabs
1
Christian Arabs and
Armenians, who came from six Middle Eastern countries,
namely:
Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt and Armenia.
All persons in this study are currently students at
California State University, Northridge (CSUN), located
in a major metropolitan area.
While behavioral science involvement in Middle
Eastern countries is minimal, one major study of
important data will guide this research.
The study was
conducted by David H. Smith and Alex Inkeles (1966) who
explored the vital areas of attitudes, values, beliefs
and ways of feeling and acting in modern society.
These areas are the major investigational themes of
this study.
About 30,000 students pursue their higher education
at CSUN.
The student population represents over 200
different foreign countries with various ethnic back-
1
2
grounds and cultural differences.
These students have
brought with them a set of attitudes; beliefs and
behavioral modes which are different from what they
experience here in their new environment.
It is impor-
tant to explore the extent to which the new lifestyle
in this new society influences the school achievement
of the Middle Eastern students.
The assumption is that the difference in attitude
clearly influences school work.
The direction, either
positive or negative, depends on other variables.
I
believe that the question of attitudinal modernity
deserves close attention as one of the contributing
factors.
Therefore, the need to explore the attitudes
of individual students from this population on a wider
scale is essential.
I believe that the study of attitudes among these
traditional groups in a civilized world will be an
important contribution to educational knowledge and
practice.
Background Data
Investigators in educational research have explained
the concept of "modernity" in different ways.
Smith
and Inkeles (1966) have made a serious study attempting
to measure modernity.
They defined the concept of
modernity as follows:
"Attitudinal modernity may be
explained as a set of attitudes, beliefs, behaviors
3
especially characterizing persons in highly industrialized and highly educated social settings"
(p. 353).
In the 1960s the concept of modernity emerged as
one of the central themes of social analysis, not only
among psychologists and sociologists, but also in the
work of economists, historians and political scientists.
Studies indicated that a decade later modernity assumed
an even more prominent place in the thinking of behavioral scientists.
The term may refer to two quite different clusters
of behaviors.
Smith and Inkeles indicated that the
term "modernity" when used to describe a society
generally means a national state characterized by a
complex of traits, including urbanization, high rate of
social mobility, educational aspirations, high rate of
social mobility, educational aspirations, and work in
modern organizations such as the factory.
When applied
to individuals, Smith and Inkeles stated that it refers
to a set of attitudes, and ways of feeling and acting,
presumably of the sort either generated by or required
for effective participation in a modern society.
As
Smith and Inkeles, in their report published in 1966,
dealt only with individual modernity that is with a
socio-psychological rather than an exclusively sociological problem, the present study will follow the same
line of thought.
,,
'
4
Statement of the Problem
Old country attitudinal behaviors applied in new
world situations have placed barriers in the process of
adaptation.
Adaptation is attained through change.
Interaction among different groups generates that
change.
It was the purpose of this study to determine the
extent to which varying degrees of attitudinal modernity
among university students from relatively traditional
Hiddle Eastern backgrounds influenced values in a
university setting.
The enrollment records of 1986 for CSUN indicated
that a great number of students came from the Middle
Eastern countries and fall under the scope of this
study.
Consequently, findings of this research will
serve to assist the faculty and counseling staff when
helping Middle Eastern students in the process of
advisement and guidance.
Specifically, this study explored the following
questions:
1.
What are the signs of attitudinal modernity among
the three ethnic groups?
2.
What is the degree of impact of background values
and traditions on the process of adaptation?
3.
Hhat is the correlation between the attitudinal
modernity and school achievement?
5
Null Hypothesis
In comparing the test results of the three groups
it is hypothesized that no significant difference exists
between the three groups or between each group and the
native American control group.
It is hypothesized also that the attitudinal
modernity test scores and school performance (GPA) are
unrelated.
Delimitations
Using the technique of random sampling, 25 subjects
were selected for each experimental ethnic group, from
a population of 50 in each ethnic sample group.
The
subjects were majoring in Engineering and Computer
Science . . The fourth sample, composed of 25 Americanborn students, was formed as a control group in comparing Attitudinal Modernity test scores and school achievement results among the groups.
There is no intention
to generalize beyond the population of this study.
Definitions of Terms
A number of terms used throughout the study are
defined as follows:
Modern:
generally means a national state
characterized by a complex extensive modernization,
high rates of social mobility and adoption of industrialized ways and means.
6
Attitudinal Modernity:
may be defined as a set of
attitudes, beliefs and behaviors, especially characterizing persons in highly industrialized and highly
educated social settings.
Achievement:
is defined as success in test results
in scholastic or academic work.
Olfaction:
"The sense of smell, the receptors of
which are located in the nose and are made up of hair
cells in the olfactory epithelium" (Dictionary of
Behavioral Science, p. 261).
The Middle Eastern people
attach important value to smelling each other in a
group.
The Arabs take pleasure in good smells and they
view smelling as a way of involvement with each other .
.Breathing in a person's face is a sign of friendship in
the eyes of the Middle Eastern community.
Sensitization:
to put someone in a sensitive and
susceptible state of mind.
When the same act is being
repeated, the experience gained during the first act
stimulates the person to prepare himself to perform
better in the event of a repeated act.
"The process of
a receptor becoming more susceptible to a given stimulus"
(Dictionary of Behavioral Science, 1973).
Outline of the Remainder Chapters
In Chapter Two, literature pertinent to the thesis
topic was reviewed.
7
Among other studies, five major surveys were picked
up as related background material of my research.
The surveys by Smith and Inkeles and the research
by Daniel Lerner, both dealing with the issue of
modernization, motivated me and provided the incentive
to choose this topic for my thesis.
The themes Smith and Inkeles explored, the questionnaire items they derived to test individual modernity
and the scale they devised to measure modernity served
as guidelines to my survey.
They conducted their survey
in six developing countries and came up with a set of
items commonly accepted by all the respondents in the
sample.
Smith and Inkeles identified education, urban
experience and occupation as three of the most powerful
influences determining individual modernity.
The same
factors were utilized as basic forces in testing the
attitudinal modernity in my thesis.
Based on their
findings these researchers stated that men, wherever
they live, under what cultural variables they exist,
have the same structural mechanisms as far as their
socio-psychic functioning is concerned.
This stated
was a challenge for me.
Daniel Lerner's questionnaire survey was also
included in this chapter because his survey was conducted in six Middle Eastern countries to analyze
modernization.
He grouped his samples into three
8
types, such as the modern type, the traditional type
and the transitional type.
Lerner came up with some
significant findings in various areas of modernization.
He discovered that literacy 9perated as the single most
powerful discriminator factor between the types.
Educa-
tion played an important role in the determination.
The Middle Easterners demonstrated a positive
attitude toward modernization and felt no regret or
grief of loss in the modernizing process; on the·
contrary, these people who were modernized considered
themselves happier than those who stick to traditional
lifestyles.
This particular attitude demonstrated by
these people became another motivating force for me,
because the presumption was that the Middle Easterners
were more traditional type than modernizing.
Edward T. Hall (1966) studied the cultural patterns
and mannerisms of people in the Arab world.
Then he
picked up six cultural areas and within that framework
he compared American and Arab behavior in public and
physical privacy, olfactor zone, face-to-face communication involvement and participation, feelings about
enclosed space and concept of boundary.
After said comparison, and judging from a personal
experience, Hall expressed his own views indicating
that Westerners have been in contact over 2,000 years
with Arabs and still they do not understand each other.
9
Melikian and Diab (1959, 1974) conducted two
questionnaire surveys in Beirut, Lebanon having as a
sample university students, coming from different Middle
Eastern countries.
In the first survey they were
studying "group affiliation" and with the $econd research
they intended to determine the "hierarchy of group
affiliation."
The results of the two surveys revealed the findings
that showed group affiliation to family, religion and
ethnicity among the respondents, except for religion in
the second survey.
In the second survey political affiliation became
a powerful finding over religious affiliation.
It took
less than two decades to provide a significant difference
in intensity toward political affiliation.
Chapter Three presented the description of the
methodology and a discussion on how it was utilized in
this paper.
Chapter Four presented 17 tables summarizing the
results of the questionnaire administered to test
attitudinal modernity of Middle Eastern students enrolled
at the California State University, Northridge.
Chapter Five lists the results of the survey,
conclusion and recommendations.
In this chapter, mean scores and standard deviations
of groups tested on different themes were discussed
along with appropriate statistical interpretations.
In
10
@
other tables, the results of three ethnic groups were
compared with the results of the control group.
The three ethnic groups were also compared on a
number of different factors.
Finally, in Chapter Five some suggestions and
recommendations were offered for future investigations
in this field of knowledge.
•
CHAPTER 2
REVIEH OF THE LITERATURE
Overall Modernization
It seems to me that the part of the world referred
to as the Middle Eastern regions have not been adequately
explored by behavioral scientists.
However, some background material has provided
descriptions of the way of life people practice in this
area of the world, and some interesting interview
surveys by researchers, such as Daniel Lerner (1958),
Levon H. Melikian and Lutfy N. Diab (1959, 1974), Edward
T. Hall (1959, 1966) and David H. Smith and Alex Inkeles
(1966) shed light on the cultural patterns of this
area.
As noted earlier, a major contribution was the
study of Smith and Inkeles (1966) who made a comparative
socio-psychological study on Overall Modernization.
This survey was performed in six developing countries
with sample size as indicated:
Argentina, 817; Chile,
931; India, 1,300; Israel, 739; Nigeria, 21; and
Pakistan, 1,001; totalling 5,500 men that were interviewed.
11
12
Smith and Inkeles (1966) defined attitudinal
modernity as a set of attitudes, beliefs and behaviors
especially characterizing persons in highly urbanizedr
highly industrialized and highly educated social
settings.
Smith and Inkeles administered 150 interview
items to measure modernity so defined as part of a 4hour interview to 5,500 men from different developing
countries--Argentina, Chile, India, Pakistan, Israel
and Nigeria.
Using a subset of 119 strictly attitudinal
items, these researchers attempted to derive a simple
comparative, overall measure of the modernity of
individuals.
Smith and Inkeles called. the resulting
measure "Overall Modernity."
After reviewing the literature and defining their
own theoretical position, Smith and Inkeles identified
30 topics, themes, areas or issues which appeared to be
pertinent to a definition of modernity.
To measure each of these themes they devised a
questionnaire composed of 159 interview items.
Out of
these series, 119 items were considered to be measures
of attitudes, values and opinions.
Their attention was
focused mainly on attitudinal items, making very little
use of behavioral and information items (17 behavioral
and 23 information items).
Some of these items were
borrowed from prior and existing studies of modernization, but the majority were created by them.
13
Smith and Inkeles pretested their initial pool of
items over a 2-year period, first in Puerto Rico and
then in 3 out of 6 selected countries for the test.
Considering modernization as a process, they
conducted their research in developing countries, rather
than in fully developed, industrialized countries.
Education levels of the samples ranged between 12 to 14
years of schooling.
Five thousand five hundred men
between the ages of 18 and 32 were selected from
Argentina, Chile, India, Israel, Nigeria and Pakistan.
The 119 attitudinal test items were answered by
members of the samples.
Each subject was assigned a
modernity score based on answers to the entire set of
119 attitudinal questions.
Th~
individual scores were
then correlated with social factors, i.e., three criteria
variables--education, urban experience and industrial
work experience--presumed to be associated with modernity.
In review of the literature, Smith and Inkeles had
identified education, urban experience and occupation
(industrial experience) as three of the most powerful
influences determining individual modernity.
The result of the study demonstrated that the
three independent variables did correlate significantly
with the overall modernization score.
This result gave
the researchers the assurance that the devised set of
items definitely reflected what theory indicated it
14
should measure, namely the amount of modernizing
influences to which a man had been subjected.
In each of the 6 countries, for the same basic set
of 119 attitudinal items, Smith and Inkeles computed
the Pearsonian correlation of the item with each of the
3 independent variables in turn.
Then they selected in
each country the-top 50 items based on the average of
their correlations with the 3 variables--education,
urban experience and industrial work experience.
After
comparing the 6 lists of 50, there were 34 items which
survived this additional test and, taken together, they
constituted Short Form 3 of overall modernity scale.
Using the same methodology the researchers derived
Short Form 4 which contained a 33-item scale.
Finally,
they reviewed the content of each item, to identify
those which seemed to overlap in the area they dealt
with.
So, they worked toward a final list of not more
than 10 items which they designated Short Form 5.
After the derivation of Short Form 5, Smith and
Inkeles stated,
Since this brief attitudinal modernity scale is
the final distillate of our successive efforts,
and we hope it will be widely used, we present in
Chart II the exact wording of the questions, both
for their theoretical interest and as an encouragement to further use (p. 371).
Later on, however, 2 informational and 2 behavioral
items were added in the second part of Chart II to the
attitudinal items previously selected to make up Form
15
5, the result was a 14-item scale which they designated
Form 6.
In the concluding remarks of their paper, Smith
and Inkeles declared,
With the presentation of Short Form 6, we complete
our formal assignment to devise a theoretically
broad, empirically tight, administratively simple
measure of individual modernity which has been
widely tested cross-nationally and can be used
with little or no adaptations under all field
conditions in either research of practical work
which requires one to judge the modernity of
individuals or groups in developing countries (p.
376).
Continuing their concluding remarks, Smith and
Inkeles discussed some noteworthy observations which
they had discovered in the process of the study.
In
line with the derivation of a short scale to test
modernity, they described some fundamental observations
in their paper.
They have found outstanding similarity
in the trans-cultural nature of human psyche.
It was
considered notable in the highest degree that a pool of
119 attitude questions and 40 related informational and
behavioral items should show such extraordinary similar
structure in 6 such diverse countries.
In all six countries the same set of items cohered
psychologically and related to external criteria
variables in a strictly comparable fashion.
The
researchers believed that this was a finding of the
first importance.
Finally, Smith and Inkeles referring
to this finding, said, "It (finding) strongly suggests
16
I
that men everywhere have the same structural mechanisms
underlying their socio-psychic functioning, despite the
enormous variability of the culture content which they
embody"
(p. 177).
This study by Smith and Inkeles had the biggest
influence on me, and motivated me to choose such a
topic for research.
The measure of individual modernity they devised,
the items they used in their questionnaire and the
findings related to human nature inspired me, guided me
in my attempt to identify signs of attitudinal modernity
among three ethnic groups in a university setting.
Cultural Patterns and Mannerisms
Edward T. Hall (1966) described the cultural
patterns and mannerisms of people in the Arab world.
He compared American and Arab behaviors and attitudes
in such cultural areas as:
(1) behavior in public and
physical privacy, (2) olfactor zone,
(3) face-to-face
communication, (4) involvement and participation, (5)
feelings about enclosed space, and (6) concept of
boundary.
He said:
In spite of over 2,000 years of contact, Westerners
and Arabs still do not understand each other.
Research reveals some insight into this difficulty.
Americans in the Middle East are immediately struck
by two conflicting sensations.
(1) In public, they are compressed and overwhelmed
by smells, crowding and high noise levels; (2) in
•
17
Arab homes Americans are apt to rattle around
feeling exposed and often somewhat inadequate
because of too much space (Hall, 1966, p. 144).
Talking about behavior in public in a more detailed
way, Hall stated that pushing and shoving in public
places is characteristic of Middle Eastern culture.
Paradoxically, however, Arabs consider Northern Europeans
and Americans pushy, too.
This was very puzzling to
Hall when he started investigating these two views.
He
wondered how could Americans who stand aside and avoid
touching be considered pushy.
In the Arab culture the dissociation of the body
and the ego is an obvious phenomenon.
This may explain
why the public amputation of a thief's hand is tolerated
as standard punishment in Saud-i Arabia.
In order to illustrate how orientation toward self
is influenced by the language factor in Arab culture,
Hall described an instance.
One day an Arab colleague
who is the author of an Arab-English dictionary arrived
in his office and started complaining:
I have spent the entire afternoon trying to find
the Arab equivalent of the English word 'rape.'
There is no such word in Arabic.
I find the
approximation only, such as 'He took her against
her will.'
There is nothing in Arabic approaching
your meaning as it is expressed in that word"
(Hall, 1966, p. 147).
In dealing with the issue of "Arab personal
distances," Hall noted that olfaction occupies a
prominent place in the Arab life.
Not only is it one
of the distance-setting mechanisms, but it is a vital
18
part of complex systems of behavior.
Arabs consistently
breathe on people when they talk.
However, this habit is more than a matter of
different manners. To the Arab, good smells are
pleasing and a way of being involved with each
other. To smell one's friend is not only nice,
but desirable, for to deny him your breath is to
act ashamed (Hall, 1966, p. 149).
Ironically, Americans, trained not to breathe in people's
faces automatically communicate shame in trying to be
polite.
Who would expect that when your highest
diplomats are putting on their best manners they also
communicate shame.
"Yet this is what occurs constantly,
because diplomacy is not only eyeball to eyeball, but
breath to breath" (Hall, 1966, p. 149).
The conclusion
derived from his discussion was that olfactory boundary
constitutes for the Arabs an informal distance-setting
mechanism in contrast to the visual mechanism of the
American.
You must be involved when interacting with Arabs
who are friends.
Arabs frequently complain that
Americans are "cold" or aloof.
To support this attitude
of Arabs towards Americans, Hall (1966) mentioned an
incident which happened to an elderly Arab diplomat in
an American hospital.
The nurse helping him had used
"professional distance"; he thought he was being ignored.
Consequently, he exclaimed, "What's the matter?
smell bad?
150) •
Do I
Or are they afraid of me?" (Hall, 1966, p.
19
When offsprings of these families move to this
country it is most likely that they will fall in conflict
with Americans in the American society.
Differences in
attitudes will set up barriers in the process of
adjustment.
In another book, called The Silent Language,
Hall (1959) again compared American and Middle Eastern
values and beliefs, stating that in the Middle East,
Americans usually have a difficult time in communicating
with the Arabs.
He described an incident that actually
had happened in Egypt.
An American agriculturalist once asked an Egyptian
farmer about his expectations of the yield from his
field that year.
The farmer was very upset and angry.
The American agriculturalist did not know what was
happening.
Later, through his interpreter, he learned
that the farmer was mad because the Arabs regard anyone
who tries to look into the future as slightly insane.
The Egyptian was highly insulted when the American
asked him about his future yield, and thought the
American was crazy.
In the Arab culture only God knows
the future, and it is a sin even to talk about it (Hall,
1959).
The Arab student, born and raised in a religiously
bound culture, undoubtedly will have adaptation problems
in the United States of America where it is unlikely
that people will rely on God's goodwill to send rain to
water the corn fields.
20
In chapters "The Pervasive Set" and "The Organizing
Pattern," Hall (1959) discussed the value of "bargaining"
and how two different cultures view it differently.
Throughout the Middle East, for example, bargaining is
significantly different from the activity which goes
under the same name in American culture.
"Our first
mistake," he said, "is in the assessment of the value
of bargaining in the Middle East and the role it plays
in everyday life.
Americans tend to look down on people
who haggle" (Hall, 1959, p. 129).
To the Arab, bargain-
ing is not only a means of passing a day but actually a
technique of interpersonal relations.
Modernization as a Process
Daniel Lerner (1958) conducted an extensive
questionnaire survey on modernization seeking to explain
why and how individuals and their institutions modernize
together.
Lerner stated that, "Social change operates
through persons and places.
Either individuals and
their environments modernize together or modernization
leads elsewhere than intended" (p. 78).
The study did
exemplify this conception in the behavior of modernizing
individuals and institutions in the Middle East.
With his co-researchers Lerner started his project
over a quarter century ago in six Middle Eastern
countries, namely:
Jordan and Iran.
Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt, Syria,
21
The purpose was to analyze modernization as a
process with some distinctive quality of its own, which
would explain why and how individuals and their
institutions modernize together.
The team needed a unifying factor of response made
by people.
So, this unifying factor, or key variable,
they identified as "style of life."
The evidence of
their interviews in country after country showed that
if one could classify a person as modern or transitional
or traditional, then one could regularly predict many
other things about him (Lerner, 1958).
Lerner, in his survey, adopted a method which is
summarized in the lines below.
Individuals were classified according to "sociological" (rather than attitudinal) factors--such as urbanism, literacy, socio-economic status, media participations and empathy.
A total of 1,357 interviews conducted in 6 Middle
Eastern countries were distributed as follows:
Turkey,
257; Lebanon, 262; Egypt, 259; Syria, 200; Jordan 263;
and Iran, 116.
The interviews were grouped into three types:
the
modern type, the traditional type and the transitional
type.
The result revealed significant findings in various
areas of modernization.
It was discovered that
22
Literacy operated as the single most powerful
discriminator between the types.
Education played
a critical function in the determination.
Literacy
was necessary, but not a sufficient condition of
modern style of life. Among literate respondents
there was still considerable variation in degree
of modernity.
Some illiterates were far less
traditional than others (Lerner, 1958, p. 445).
The transitionals, despite their illiteracy, are
much closer to a modern style of life than the equally
illiterate traditionals.
Judging from these results, I
presume that unpredicted factors affected and influenced
the outcome.
Lerner and his colleagues indicated that it was a
very powerful finding of their study that Middle
Easterners who are modernizing consider themselves
happier than do those who remain within traditional
lifestyles.
The researchers did not see "any feeling
of grief, or regret of loss in the modernization of
Middle Eastern people" (p. 73).
There are certain general characteristics of
attitudinal modernity that commonly appear in most of
the studies devoted to reviewing changes of attitudes
in individuals and groups within a given community at a
given time.
Cross-cultural research results indicated that
individuals and groups go through changes to satisfy
not only psychological needs, but also to occupy a
proper social status in the community.
Such is the
case in the Arab Middle East where familyi religion
23
r ,
and ethnic affiliations constitute the traditional
determinants of social structure.
In cultures such as
these, loyalties to the traditional institutions (family,
religions, ethnicity) are required of the individuals
to preserve their social status in the society.
However,
an absence of loyalty, due to oncoming changes in the
Middle East created conflicts between individuals and
these strong institutions.
The Arab Middle East is in the process of change,
but not on a level to match the new lifestyle in the
United States of America.
The Arab Middle East is
essentially an authoritarian culture.
The father is
the dominant figure in the family and the members must
be supportive and loyal to the family unit.
In the
family, the eldest son is highly privileged, and in
time assumes more responsibilities.
In the order of
importance the male child comes first and the female
child second.
In the absence of the father it is the
eldest boy who represents the family.
Therefore, the
family plays a very important role in shaping the
individual's life in social and psychological areas.
Within this culture system, religion is an important
force as a basic structure of society.
The two dominant
religious communities that live in seven Middle Eastern
countries (Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Armenia)
are Arab Moslems and Arab Christians.
Each group is
strongly attached to its beliefs and distinct religious
24
practices that made it impossible for centuries even up
till now, attainment of the peaceful coexistence.
Except for Armenia the language used is Arabic in both
religious groups.
They live in the same
geog~aphic
locations, and yet not only do not care about each
other, but barriers and restrictions are created
preventing a smooth relationship in the daily life.
Intermarriage, going into business together, and the
hiring of professionals or workers from other sects are
not usually practiced by either group (Melikian & Diab,
1974).
Studies of social distance in the area have
shown that preference for one's own religious group is
still strong but slowly on the decline (Prothro &
Melikian, 1952).
The adaptation process requires of individuals
changes in their attitudes and behaviors in the new
society.
Hence, young men and women from the Middle
East studying in this most advanced and civilized
society will go through the adaptation process that
requires an individual to drop his/her old style of
life and follow new ways in the New World.
The adaptation process requires change in behavior
and attitude of the individuals in a new situation.
is an involved process.
It
There are many variables that
play a distinctive role in the process of change.
However, with the intention of limiting the number of
ever active variables and defining the demographic
25
locations, I would say that in the Arab family of the
Middle East, religion and ethnic affiliations constitute
the most important two basic pillars of culture.
It is my understanding that the magnitude and
intensity of, and the time allotted to, the process of
change depend on three factors:
first, how strongly
the individual is attached to his/her traditional
cultural values; secondly, how strong is the ambition
and desired goals are in the individual; and thirdly,
the awareness of and faith in the positive outcome of
the attitudinal changes (Melikian & Diab, 1959}.
An
individual's psychological needs and social status are
at stake when we deal with the issue of modernity.
Group Affiliation
Melikian and Diab (1959} conducted a survey on
"group affiliations" in Beirut, Lebanon using university
students as their subjects.
They thought that their
study would serve the purpose of group identification
and affiliation in a culture which is changing as
rapidly as that of the Middle East.
According to the
researchers, in this community affiliations to groups
that are not part of the traditional culture emerge
and, at times, are in conflict with the traditional
loyalties required of the individual (Melikian & Diab,
1959}.
The authors continued their description of the
Middle Eastern culture adding another characteristic
26
which is the presence of many ethnic groups in the
area.
The vast majority of the population are Arabs
(Moslem and Christian), but minorities, such as Kurds,
Armenians, Assyrians, Yazidis and Circassians, play an
important part in society and raise many problems in
the area.
As members of ethnic minorities, they are
not fully assimilated in the general culture probably
because of their other affiliations.
They spoke their
native language, and adhered to their own beliefs and
customs.
Melikian and Diab (1959) sought first to determine
the hierarchy of group affiliations of university
students in the Arab Middle East.
Second, they sought
to answer the question as to whether this hierarchy was
affected by sex, religion or political orientation.
Third, they sought to determine whether a major social
threat, e.g., a revolution, would have an effect on the
hierarchy.
It was a questionnaire survey conducted in
May 1957 and in May 1958.
The subjects were students
at the American University of Beirut, Lebanon taking
undergraduate courses in psychology.
Middle Eastern students.
All subjects were
over 75% of the subjects in
both samples came from Lebanon, Jordan and Syria, while
the remainder came from Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain.
The subjects were of both sexes, Christians and Moslems
and were politically oriented students.
27
The basis of each question was the attainment of a
goal involving affiliations with or loyalty to one of
the following five major reference groups:
religion, national (ethnic origin)
political party.
r
family,
citizenship and
Questions were presented in the form
of paired alternatives as illustrated below:
1.
If to show your loyalty to your nation:
(a)
you were forced to give up your religion
permanently, both in private and in public, or,
{b) you were forced to give up your family and
never see them again.
(a)
2.
Which would you choose?
(b)
If in order to join a certain political party:
(a) you were forced to give up your religion
permanently, both in private and in public,
or, (b) you were forced to become a permanent
exile from the country to which you belonged.
Which would you choose?
(a)
(b)
The results of the survey indicated that the core
group in the culture--the family--still seemed to have
maintained its position.
Irrespective of the sex,
religion or political orientation the family ranked
first in the hierarchy of groups that commanded the
loyalties of the subjects.
This is attributed to the
fact that the cultural pattern of the Arab Middle East
is basically authoritarian in its characteristics and
28
to win the approval of one's family and to maintain its
confidence was still of primary importance.
When a
conflict between other values occurs, as in the case of
Christian-Moslem marriages, the main concern was not
religious but the reaction of the family to such a
marriage, the authors stated.
No one can deny the fact
that families on both sides strongly opposed the idea
of intermarriage.
But it must be kept in mind, too,
that religion plays a big role in the development of
family reaction.
The Christian church and the Moslem
mosque in the Arab Middle East will not encourage intermarriage, and if it occurs despite religious restrictions, the couple will encounter a hardship in approval
to go through a religious wedding ceremony.
Civil
marriage is not in practice--especially with Christians.
It happens that intermarriage can lead to violence and
killing in certain Middle Eastern regions.
Probably that is the reason why the youth from the
Middle East view intermarriage in the American society
as wrong and against their religious beliefs.
Religion
is taught and practiced at home, at the school, and on
Sundays (by Christians) or Fridays (by Moslems) during
the religious services in the church and at the mosque.
Hhen youth, indoctrinated with such deep rooted family
and religious education, come to America, they face
adjustment problems.
It takes quite a while before
29
they modify their attitudes and adopt local patterns of
behavior.
It is understandable that Moslems scored high on
religious affiliation.
Islam is the predominant religion
in the area except for Lebanon where Christians and
Moslems are equally divided.
It is worth keeping in
mind that of all Middle Eastern Arab countries, Lebanon
is the only one where the state religion is Christian,
the head of the government is a Christian by origin.
Despite the fact that Christians belong to minority
groups in the Arab Middle East, they are very strongly
affiliated with religion.
Ranking religion third and
ethnic origin second by Christian subjects probably
involves other variables.
It is very likely that
Armenian students at the American University of Beirut
who took part in the survey as Christian subjects
influenced the result of the survey.
Armenians are
very much ethnically oriented and the national values,
goals and aspirations overrule religion.
Despite the
fact that the Armenians were the first nation in the
world adapting Christianity as a state religion in 302
A.D., they still feel strongly attached to their ethnic
feelings, national aspirations and goals.
During the academic year 1970-71, Melikian and
Diab conducted a survey to determine the hierarchy of
group affiliations.
The questionnaire administered in
1957-58 to undergraduate students at the American
30
University of Beirut, Lebanon, was readministered to a
matched sample of 114 subjects from Lebanon, Syria,
Jordan, Bahrain and Kuwait.
Helikian and Diab compared the results of 1957 and
1971 and found out that the stability in group affiliations was maintained in four major areas but a significant change occurred in the fifth group affiliation.
Family still ranked first, followed by national
(ethnic) affiliations and third by citizenship.
Polit-
ical party affiliation became significantly more important (X2
=
8.10, significant at the .01 level when
evaluated at df
=
1) and religion became significantly
less important (x2 = 8.74, significant at the .01 level
when evaluated at df
sample as a whole.
=
1) from 1957 to 1971 for the
The basic change, therefore, occurred
in the hierarchy of group affiliations of the subjects
from 1957 to 1971 involved a significant decrease in
the importance of religious affiliations accompanied by
a significant increase in the importance of political
party affiliation.
Summary
In Chapter 2, literature pertinent to the thesis
topic was reviewed.
The chapter included background
material provided by Smith and Inkeles (1966) who made
a comparative socio-psychological study on overall
modernization.
The survey was conducted in six develop-
31
ing countries such as Argentina, Chile, India, Israel,
Nigeria and Pakistan.
It was an interview survey.
Edward T. Hall (1966) described and reviewed the
cultural patterns and mannerisms of people in the Arab
world was included, too, in this chapter.
This material
served as an adequate background material because in
his research Hall compared Americans and Arabs in
various cultural areas.
He showed how these two were
different from each other in their cultural patterns
and practices.
Daniel lerner's questionnaire survey was also
included in this chapter because he conducted his survey
in the Middle East to analyze modernization as a process
and to determine why and how individuals and their
institutions modernize together.
He conducted interviews
in those countries of the Middle East that this research
work encompasses.
The works of some other authoritative figures,
that are relevant to the topic of the present survey in
the field, were also reviewed in this chapter.
The surveys conducted by Melikian and Diab (1959,
1974) were included in this chapter as well.
They
conducted a survey on university students at the American
University of Beirut to determine the hierarchy of
group affiliation of university students in the Arab
N.iddle East.
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Themes Explored
This study examined the following specific themes
based on a set of 16 concepts.
The research literature
identified specific areas, topics and issues that seemed
relevant to assess these themes and lead the study to
its three objectives.
They were:
(1) the signs of
attitudinal modernity among the three ethnic groups,
(2) the degree of impact of background values-and
traditions on the process of adaptation, and (3) the
correlation between attitudinal modernity and school
achievement.
Usually subjects in a testing situation feel
uncomfortable about revealing personal information and
often the tester is faced with this problem when
administering tests of personality, questionnaires and
attitude scales.
Subjects are often reluctant to
portray themselves in a typical, honest manner.
Since
in my study many items of the questionnaire ask subjects
to give personal information, I made it very clear
before distributing the questionnaire that under no
circumstances would data collected on any individual be
32
33
publicized, and findings in relation to individuals
would be kept absolutely confidential.
To reassure the
subjects of the confidentiality of the test scores and
to protect their sense of privacy and
ano~ymity,
subjects
were asked not to write their names on the questionnaire.
Finally, the subjects were told that the test scores
would be reported in group form and used in the research
project only.
To measure attitudinal modernity themes a series
of questionnaire-test items were devised.
The
questionnaire was composed of 36 items, largely of
fixed-alternative-close type (multiple choice), but
including a number of open-ended questions.
Most of
these items were borrowed from Smith and Inkeles' (1966)
Studies on Modernization, and the rest were created by
the researcher.
The questionnaire was administered in
a classroom or office situation to three different
Middle Eastern ethnic groups.
Each group was composed
of 25 subjects randomly selected from the population of
each ethnic group in the student body of the School of
Engineering and Computer Science at CSUN.
A pretest was conducted on a group of students to
test if the items in the questionnaire were adequately
understood.
A sample of 50 students represented each
ethnic group in the School of Engineering and Computer
Science at CSUN.
I randomly selected 5 Moslem Arabs, 5
Christian Arabs and 5 Armenians to conduct a pretest.
34
The purpose of the pretest was to check out the
semantics of the questionnaire.
To control the
possibility of sensitization, the pretest subjects were
not included in the
act~al
experimental groups.
The
original 36-item questionnaire was used during the
pretest.
The literature examining pretest as a factor in
cross-culture studies warn the future researchers about
the effect of pretests on the results of post-test
performance by groups receiving the pretest.
The
disadvantage in administering a pretest lies in the
fact that it provides an opportunity to practice or
think about the content of the pretest, thus affecting
student's achievement or attitudes.
Furthermore, it is
indicated that the pretest might have a special effect
on the experimental group of students because it
sensitizes them to study incorporated material before
the experimental interaction (Borg & Gall, 1983).
However, the pretest administered in the present study
was of no concern because these subjects were not
allowed to participate in the actual testing activity.
The result of the pretest was encouraging.
There was
no indication that the questions were misunderstood or
the terminology was beyond the level of their knowledge.
When interviewed individually, out of 15 respondents
only 2 posed questions.
One asked about the meaning of
a word used in the questionnaire, and the second question
35
was related to geographical knowledge.
In actual
testing, the same question on geography was answered
poorly.
Subjects
Seventy-five Middle Eastern engineering and computer
science students (25 Christian Arabs, 25 Moslem Arabs
and 25 Armenians) at the California State University,
Northridge were selected to take part in the present
questionnaire survey.
Members in each of the three groups were identified
by religious and ethnic background.
The 3 experimental
groups ranged in age from 17-34 years and had come from
the following Middle Eastern countries:
Lebanon, Syria,
Iraq, Jordan, Egypt and Armenia.
Among the respondents there were six female students
in the Christian Arab sample, three female in the Moslem
Arab group and eight Armenian female students.
From the same school population, 25 American
students who were born and raised in the U.S.A. served
as a control group.
All control subjects were matched
to the three experimental groups on the basis of age,
academic career (engineering and computer science),
year of attendance at CSULJ and size of sample.
The
control group was composed of 11 female and 14 male
students.
36
CHART I
MAJOR THEMES EXPLORED IN DEFINING
ATTITUDINAL MODERNITY*
Descriptive Title
of Theme
Descriptive Title
of Theme
Educational Aspirations
Openness to New ExperiencePeople
Occupational Aspirations
Planning Valuation
Efficacy of Science and
Medicine
Religious-Secular Orientation
Family Size-Attitudes
Social Calss Attitudes
Growth of Opinion
Valuation
Women's Rights
Extended Kinship
Obligations
Co-Ed Work and School
Kinship Obligations to
Parental Authority
Information Eliciting
Questions
Mass Media Valuation
Behavioral Measures
*Adopted from smith and Inkeles (1966) research
work.
37
The number of participants was 100, and all of the
subjects completed the 36-item questionnaire which was
prepared and administered during the academic year of
1985-1986.
Religious Persuasions of the Samples
On the basis of my own experience of 30 years in
the Middle East, I hypothesized that an individual's
last name in one community and the first name in the
other two communities were precise indications of their
basic religious belief systems.
For example, Armenians
use "ian" at the end of their last name, Moslem Arabs
use Koranic names and Christian Arabs borrow biblical
names as their first name.
This is usually how these
communities name their children.
"References to Islam,
to Mohammed, to Allah (God) are common in first names
of Moslem males" (Peter, 1964, p. 50).
However, in order to check the accuracy of this
hypothesis informal interviews were undertaken in which
I asked:
"Let's see if I can guess your religion by
only knowing your name.
You can tell me 'right,'
'wrong,' or decline to answer to at all."
I discovered that the hypothesis was validated in
97% of the 20 cases interviewed.
Therefore, I assigned
individuals in the sample to different religious groups
on the basis of their names utilizing the master lists
of student names.
Three random samples totalling 25
38
each were isolated.
All of the 75 subjects in three
samples came from the Middle Eastern countries, namely:
Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Jordan and Armenia.
The
age range of the sample was from 17 to 34 years with a
mean of 23.68 years.
The range of time the Middle
Eastern subjects have been in the United States was
from 2 to 18 years with a mean of 6.46 years.
From the
same population for comparison a fourth sample consisted
of 25 American students--born, raised and studying in
America--were selected.
administered.
The same questionnaire was
The attitudinal modernity results and
school achievement score of American subjects were
compared with the results of Middle Eastern subjects.
In all the groups the number of males was larger
than the females.
The Armenian subjects included 8
females and 17 males; Christian Arab subjects included
6 females and 19 males; Moslem Arab subjects included 3
females and 22 males.
The American group was composed
of 11 female students and 14 male students.
Testing Instruments
The Questionnaire.
Each experimental and control
subject was asked to complete the 36-item Attitudinal
Modernity questionnaire.
Since no relevant instruments existed, a questionnaire was devised to measure attitudinal modernity
themes.
Test items were largely of the fixed-alterna-
39
tive-closed type as well as a number of opened questions.
A total of 36 test items (see Appendix A) were devised
of which some were borrowed from prior studies of
modernization, such as studies on modernity conducted
by Smith and Inkeles (1966) and some were created by
the author.
The last five items on the questionnaire were
questions on personal identification.
In the 31 alternative choices presented in the
questionnaire a respondent could have scored a maximum
of 67 on all the questions.
At the beginning of the questionnaire an example
was provided to assist the subjects in answering the
questions.
The subjects were instructed not to write their
names on the questionnaire.
A supplement to the questionnaire was distributed
to the subjects during the semester of Fall 1986
requesting the GPAs on the previous two semesters (see
Appendix B).
The GPA scores were intended to be used
in comparing school achievement among the groups, as
well as testing the relationship between the Attitudinal
Modernity results and academic performance.
In order to be able to evaluate the answers of the
respondents a special coding system was adopted in the
survey.
A numerical value (see Chart 2) was given to
each item in the questionnaire to assist the computation
40
CHART 2
CODE DESIGNATION AND EVALUATION OF TEST QUESTIONS*
1. a. 2
b. 1
c. 0
2. a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
1
2
3
4
5
3. a. 1
b. 2
c. 3
d. 4
e. 5
4. a. 1
b. 0
5. a.
b.
c.
d.
0
0
1
1
6 • a.
b.
c.
d.
1
1
0
0
7 • a.
b.
c.
d.
3
2
1
0
9 • a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
2
1
0
0
0
10. a. 1
b. 0
11. a. 1
b. 0
12. a. 0
b. 1
c. 2
13. a.
b.
c.
d.
4
3
2
1
14. a. 2
b. 1
c. 0
15. a. 2
b. 1
c. 0
16. a. 0
b. 1
c. 2
17. a. 1
b. 0
18. a. 2
b. 0
c. 1
19. a. 0
b. 1
20. a. 2
b. 1
c. 0
21. a.
b.
c.
d.
0
2
1
0
2 2. a.
b.
c.
d.
2
1
0
0
23. a. 0
b. 1
c. 2
24. a. 0
b. 1
c. 2
25. a. 2
b. 0
c. 1
26. a. 1
b. 0
c. 0
27. 1 pt. each
3. problem
28. a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
0
6
1
0
0
1
29. a. 1
b. 1
c. 1
d. 0
e. 2
30. a. 1 pt.
each correct
31. a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
-1
-1
0
0
+1
+2
+3
+4
*Last five items on self-identification are
excluded.
41
of the results.
The strength of the numerical values
assigned to items were based on the intensity, importance
or the complexity of the inherent and potential meaning
of each item {see Chart 2).
The Mean of the total scores of each group will be
the indicative measure of group's attitudinal standing.
Correlation Coefficient
Correlation coefficient was used as an instrument
to assess the relationship between the Attitudinal
Modernity test score and the school achievement as well
as the difference between groups and the control group
in attitudinal modernity test score.
Murray R. Spiegel (1961) described the function of
this instrument, along with a scatter linear diagram.
Correlation coefficient indicates the degree of
relationship between variables, which seeks to
determine how well a linear or other equation
describes or explains the relationship between
variables.
For example, the variables height and
weight of individuals have some correlation (p.
241) .
X = Score
X = Mean
Formula for Correlation Coefficient:
( A~US) *
(GPA)
cc =
(X -
. . I (GPA)
"(X -
(X - X)
X)
X)
(AMTS)
2
(X- X)
2
*ArUS = Attitudinal r1odernity Test Score.
42
Scatter DIagram ( I I near)
y
y
.......
.
.
........
.
.
..
...
•..
y
. ...... -
•..... •
....
.;
..!
..
. _...
-.
..
I
. ... '- ·. ·... .
.... .·....'":..: ......... . .., ...
~:
•
'----X
••
•
I
•
'-----X
(a) Positive Linear
(b) Negative LInear
Correlation
Correlation
(c) No
Correl~tlon
43
Standard Deviation
In order to determine the spread of the subjects,
standard deviation was used in this study.
Murray R. Spiegel (1961) defined this measure:
The degree to which numerical data tend to spread
about an average value is called the variation or
dispersion of the data. Various measures of dispersion or variation are available, the most common
being the range, mean deviation, semi-interquartile
range, 10-90 percentile range, and the standard
deviation (p. 69).
X
=
Score
X
=
Mean
N
=
Number of subjects
Formula for Standard Deviation:
T-Statistics*
A t-test was used to analyze results and test the
hypothesis.
The standard formula for determining t-tests:
t
=
Significant difference was identified as .05.
*If t > 2.06 then can reject R=O hypothesis with
95% confidence.
44
Null Hypothesis
In comparing the test results of the three ethnic
groups it is hypothesized that no significant difference
exists between the three groups or between each group
and the native American control group.
It is hypothe-
sized, also, that attitudinal modernity test scores and
school performance (GPA) are unrelated.
Summary
Chapter 3 examined the methodology of the study.
The three objectives of the thesis were discussed and
the method by which the questionnaire was prepared to
explore the themes were explained.
Also, an account
was presented on how the subjects were selected from
three different ethnic backgrounds and the number of
respondents in each sample.
The t-test formula was selected to analyze results
and test the null hypothesis.
Testing instruments such
as Correlation Coefficient and Standard Deviation were
as well presented in this chapter.
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
Analysis of Results
This chapter presents the analysis of results of
the questionnaire study on attitudinal modernity
administered to Middle Eastern students enrolled at
California State University; Northridge.
In addition to the major themes--attitudinal
development, value development, culture and values-among the three different ethnic groups explored, a
number of sub-factors, such as education, family
orientation, status of sexes, lifestyle preference and
ethnic strength were investigated in this survey.
The degree of relationship between attitudinal
modernity test results and school performance (GPA)
attained by the three Middle Eastern ethnic groups is
the main purpose of this study, as well as the comparison
of results with American students used as a control
group.
The survey sought to determine the mean
differences of three ethnic groups and the American
control group on Attitudinal Modernity test.
The study includes 17 tables.
45
46
Table 1 summarizes the data reflecting the
attitudinal modernity test scores attained by three
groups, the years each subject lived in the United
States of America, the age and GPA of each respondent.
The mean scores of Christian Arab and Moslem Arab
students on the attitudinal modernity test were lower
than the Armenians.
Female students in Christian Arab
sample got low scores which influenced the overall mean
of this group.
In the traditional Middle Eastern Arab
family, the daughter has always been accorded a less
significant status as compared to the son, particularly
in respect to attitudinal and behavioral development.
Studies have shown that many apparent paradoxes in
the relationship between child rearing practices and
the child's subsequent behavior may reflect the
discrepancies between the social model's behavior which
the child observes and the standards imposed on him
(King-Fun Le, 1974).
In the present survey the female subjects of the
Christian Arab sample scored low on the attitudinal
modernity test, which affected the overall result of
the group.
The school performance mean score of the
same female subjects indicated a lower result as well.
A possible interpretation regarding the daughter's
level of attitudinal modernity is that girls may react
to the comparative lack of parental attention, compared
with the more favored brother, by responding to the
47
Table l
ATTITUDINAL MODERNITY TEST SCORES AND GPA'S
OF THREE ETHNIC GROUPS
ArmenJ.ans
ChrJ.stJ.an Arabs
Sex &
SCORE Years Age
in USA
GPA
53
46
46
46
53
48
42
44
44
49
52
47
49
53
47
51
55
53
56
43
53
44
47
47
52
3.10
3.44
2.79
2.43
2.30
3.00
2.80
2.93
2. 77
3.00
3.94
2.93
3.53
2.95
2.67
2.00
2.62
2.50
3.41
2.50
3.73
3.14
3.00
3.01
3.36
MEA.;
48.8
SD
3.95
12M
3F
SF
8M
7F
3.SM
3M
lOF
3M
SM
SM
9M
6F
9F
8M
7M
SF
7F
7M
7M
10M
3M
8M
10M
7M
21
18
19
21
22
21
24
24
23
23
24
18
21
23
24
28
21
21
23
34
28
26
20
21
22
SCORE
41
47
41
35
45
so
41
46
59
48
38
47
43
43
45
48
52
43
46
49
54
39
59
38
47
Sex &
Years Age
in USA
6M
SM
10M
SM
SF
4F
4M
6M
3M
6M
6M
6.SF
6F
6M
SM
6M
2M
2M
6M
2.SM
3F
4M
17M
3F
10M
26
25
30
18
24
19
23
24
21
23
26
17
21
21
25
26
20
21
25
20
20
22
27
23
22
Moslem Arabs
GPA
.67
2.56
3.89
1.96
2.70
2.00
3.78
2.98
2.54
3.63
2.40
3.00
2.50
3.00
2.59
3.20
3.00
2.60
2.82
3.00
3.02
2.51
3.29
3.00
2.70
SCORE
43
48
so
52
42
52
44
49
57
59
43
39
40
39
38
44
46
47
43
49
so
45
37
39
48
Sex &
Years Age GPA
in USA
SM
SF
8M
18M
10M
6M
9M
8M
7F
8M
8M
4M
6M
7M
7M
7M
8M
8M
4.5M
6F
7M
SM
4M
4M
6M
27
24
24
21
32
23
29
32
25
27
21
21
27
27
27
26
26
26
28
23
30
26
22
22
22
2.00
2.88
3.50
3.00
3.00
3.27
3.29
3.46
3.44
3.00
2.75
2.08
3.60
1.38
3.67
3.50
3.14
3.17
3.00
3.73
3.46
3.00
1.89
1.45
3.44
6.94 22.8
2.95 45.76
5.56 22.76 2.77 45.72
6.98
25.48 2.92
2.45
0.44
3.07
2.79
3.23 0.67
3.39
5.91
3.01 0.65
5.65
48
questions under the influence of a low self-esteem
developed in them due to the lack of satisfaction and
recognition in the family.
This parent-son and parent-daughter relationship
pattern is stressed in the Middle Eastern countries,
and parents openly favor the boys more than the girls.
The differential attitude of parents toward the two
sexes in the family in these traditional countries was
revealed by Melikian and Diab (1959) when they conducted
their study on "Group Affiliations of University Students
in the Arab Middle East."
According to these authors
the family ascribes clearly defined roles and status to
its various members, especially to the eldest male
child who comes next in importance to the parents.
They described the responsibility and privileges that
the sons acquire in the family.
In the absence of the
father, for example, it is the eldest boy who becomes
the family representative.
Family constitutes a very
important social unit in the life of an individual,
playing a distinctive role in shaping the character and
personality of the children.
The results of the same modernity test administered
to American students is presented in Table 2.
The
table includes mean scores and standard deviations of
modernity test, chronological age and GPA of American
subjects.
49
Table 2
Modernity Test Scores and GPAs of American Students
Score
60
57
56
56
56
56
55
54
53
52
51
51
51
50
50
49
49
49
48
48
47
46
46
45
43
Sex and Age
M 30
M 33
F 21
F 23
F 31
M 18
r·1 26
F 27
F 28
F 22
M 24
F 23
M 28
M 23
M 23
F 22
M 27
M 23
M 22
M 31
F 19
M 32
M 21
F 20
F 25
GPA
3.47
4.00
2.80
3.00
3.66
3.07
3.70
2.97
2.58
2.86
3.00
3.10
3.07
2.78
2. 8 2
2.75
2. 9 5
2.40
2.62
2.33
2.31
1.93
2.20
2.29
2.80
Mean
51.12
24.88
2.86
4.22
4.13
0.48
so
50
Table 3 compares the attitudinal modernity means
and standard deviations of the three Middle Eastern
ethnic groups with kmerican students.
The comparison of the modernity means of the three
ethnic groups indicated that the Armenians scored (Mean
= 48.8) higher than the Christian Arabs (Mean = 45.76)
and Moslem Arabs (Mean= 45.72), whereas the two last
groups were almost the same.
The American students
scored the highest in the attitudinal modernity test
(Mean = 51.12).
The Standard deviation results showed that the
spread of the Armenian students (SD 3.95) was closer to
the average value (Mean) than the other groups.
American
students came second· attaining a 4.22 Standard deviation.
On attitudinal modernity test among the three
ethnic groups, Armenian
cored higher (Mean = 48.8)
than Christian Arabs (Mean = 45.76) and Moslem Arabs
(Mean= 45.72).
In themselves, though, these last two
groups were almost the same.
American students scored
highest on the same test (Mean= 51.12).
Table 4 demonstrates the chronological age difference between the three ethnic groups.
The average age
of Armenian students and Christian Arab students are
similar and the age mean of Moslem students is higher.
As to the American students, they are on the whole
older than both Armenians and Christians, and younger
than Moslems.
However, the Standard deviation scores
51
Table 3
Attitudinal Modernity Mean Scores of Three Middle
Eastern Ethnic Groups Compared with American Control
Group.
Armenians
Christian
Arabs
Moslem
Arabs
Americans
No.
25
25
25
25
Mean
48.8
45.76
45.72
51.12
SD
3.95
5.91
5.65
4.22
52
Table 4
Age Difference Among Three Groups
Armenians
Christian
Arabs
Moslem
Arabs
Americans
No.
25
25
25
25
Mean
22.80
22.76
25.48
24.88
SD
3.39
3.01
3.23
4.13
53
of the three ethnic samples reveal a very small spread,
and American students scatter on a larger range.
The analysis of the results on age indicated that
age had no impact on Attitudinal Modernity score and/or
school performance.
The age Mean of Moslem Arab subjects was the
highest of all, and yet their mean score on attitudinal
modernity and school performance did not show any
advantage over the other three groups.
The age Means of the Armenian and Christian Arab
students were almost the same, but the school performance
and modernity Mean scores demonstrated significant
differences.
From the computation of the years lived in the
U.S.A. by three ethnic groups in Table 5, it is revealed
that Armenians and Moslems had the same Mean score and
Christian Arab students scored lower.
The Standard deviations show that Christian Arab
students scored higher than Armenians and Moslems,
whereas the last two groups are very close in results.
The purpose was to find out if the length of stay
in the U.S.A. influence the modernity test score and/or
school achievement score, and compare this with Americans
who were born and raised in America.
The number of years lived in the United States
showed no consistent effect on the modernity test score
in the test administered to the three different samples.
54
Table 5
Length of Stay in U.S.A.
Armenians
(in Years)
Christian
Arabs
Moslem
Arabs
No.
25
25
25
He an
6.94
5.56
6.98
SD
2.45
3.07
2.79
55
The Armenian and Moslem students on the average
lived the same amount of years in this country, but the
results of the test revealed no consistency in the
computed mean scores of attitudinal modernity.
However,
the American students scored the highest of all the
other three groups on Modernity test.
Table 6 compares the GPAs of Spring 1986 of the
three groups.
The Armenians and the Moslem Arabs scored
similar GPA means, but Christian Arabs got a lower
score.
The GPA mean score of the American students was
higher than the Christian students' GPA mean, and lower
than the Armenians and the Moslem Arabs.
The comparison
of the Standard deviation of the three groups revealed
that Moslem and Christian Arab students were more
scattered than Armenians.
The American students and
the Armenians were very close in Standard deviation
results.
Analysis of Subfactors
The three Middle Eastern ethnic groups and the
American control group were analyzed on a number of
subfactors.*
*The response options were classified with a
numerical ranking.
Lower ranking referred to choices
of little education and higher ranking to completion of
advanced degrees.
56
Table 6
The Means and Standard Deviations of GPAs
(Grade Point Average of Spring '86 Courses)
Armenians
Christian
Arabs
Moslem
Arabs
Americans
No.
25
25
25
25
Mean
2.95
2.79
2.92
2.86
SD
0.44
0.65
0.67
0.48
57
A.
Education.
Two questions in the questionnaire
referred to issues pertaining to education.
were:
2 and 3.
These
They examined-the ·attitude of the
respondent on the issue of gender and educational level.
2.
If schooling is freely available (if there
were no kind of obstacles) , how much schooling
do you think male children in your community
(home town) should have?
a. 8 years of schooling or less.
) b. 12 years of schooling or less.
) c. Some college.
d. Advanced college degree (M.A., M.S.).
e. Complete (Ph.D.).
3.
How much schooling do you think female children
in your community (home town) should have?
a. 8 years of schooling or less.
t b. 12 years of schooling or less.
c. Some college.
d. Advanced college degree (M.A., M.S.).
e. Complete (Ph.D.).
Table 7 presents the Means scored by the four
samples to measure the attitude of the respondents
regarding the level of education for boys and girls.
The responses indicated that Armenian subjects
favored more boys' education than girls.
For Christian
Arabs equal opportunity for both genders is preferred.
Moslem Arabs definitely favored a higher education for
58
Table 7
Mean Scores of Educational Levels for Boys and Girls
Armenians
Christian
Arabs
Moslem
Arabs
Americans
2.
Mean
3.68
3.64
3.76
3.56
3.56
3.64
3.40
3.56
3•
Mean
59
boys than for girls.
For American students both sexes
should receive the same level of education.
B.
Family.
Several questions in the questionnaire
were related to family.
The responses of the subjects
of the three ethnic groups and American sample reflected
their family orientation .
. 1.
Have you ever spent much time thinking about
or becoming highly concerned and involved
regarding some public issues (such as Education,
Family, Crime, Household Income) that you
really wanted to do something about it?
a. Frequently.
b. Few times.
c. Never.
17.
Should a man feel closer to:
a. His wife.
b. Other family members (e.g., mother,
father, brother, sister).
18.
Should a man choose a job preferred by:
a. Himself.
b. Parents.
c. Others.
Comparison of the family orientation in Table 8
indicated that the family seems to have maintained its
traditional position.
Irrespective of sex, religion,
political affiliation and economic status, family ranked
on the same level for the three ethnic groups in this
60
Table 8
Mean Scores and Standard Deviations of Family
Orientation
Armenians
Christian
Arabs
Moslem
Arabs
Americans
1.
He an
1. 40
1. 44
l. 52
1.28
0.88
0.76
0.96
1.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
l. 96
17.
Mean
18.
Mean
61
study.
It is still the main source of security in a
society of conflicting loyalties and unstable values, a
society in which the individual as such has not fully
established himself.
To win the approval of one's
family and to maintain its confidence it of primary
importance.
Three questions included in the designed questionnaire sought to determine how far the three ethnic
groups stood from each other in their attitude toward
their family.
The prediction to find difference in attitude
toward family in the three ethnic groups was disproved.
However, the American subjects scored low in family
orientation questions.
This difference might be
attributed to the fact that in the
u.s.A.
after a
certain age, youngsters leave their parents and live by
themselves, seeking self-independence and relying on
their own faculties to feel secure and self-sufficient.
c.
Gender Discrimination in Education.
Question
25 referred to the degree of gender preference in
education.
25.
Suppose you were to open a secondary school
(high school) of your choice, what would be
your preference?
A mixed (boys and girls
together), boys or girls school?
Ninety percent of the three ethnic group respondents preferred mixed education.
62
Ninety-six percent of Armenian subjects, 84% of
Christian Arabs and 92% of Moslem Arabs voiced in favor
of mixed education.
Christian Arabs indicated boys school to be their
second choice scoring the highest percentage among the
three groups.
Ninety-six percent of American subjects declared
mixed education to be their preference.
D.
Agriculture.
Question no. 4 was included in
the questionnaire to investigate the attitude toward
agricultural improvements.
Table 10 reflected percent
of willingness of the subjects to improve agriculture.
4.
Two 12-year-old boys took time out from their
work in the grain (wheat, barley) fields.
They were trying to figure out a way to grow
the same amount of grain with fewer hours of
work.
Which of the following is most like
you?
a.
The parent of one boy said, "That is a
good thing to think about.
Tell me your
thoughts about how we should change our
ways of growing."
b.
The parent of the other boy said, "The
easy way to grow grain is the way we have
always done it.
Talk about change will
waste time but not help."
63
Table 9
Percent Expressing Choice for a Particular Gender
Related Secondary School
Armenians
%
Christian
Arabs
Moslem
Arabs
Americans
%
%
%
Mixed
0.96
0.84
0.92
0.96
Boys
0.04
0.12
0.08
. 00
.oo
0.04
20.04
0.04
Girls
64
Table 10
Willingness to Introduce Agricultural Improvements
Armenians
%
Christian
Arabs
Moslem
Arabs
Americans
%
%
%
Willing
0.96
0.92
0.96
0.96
Not Willing
0.04
0.08
0.04
0.04
65
Ninety-five percent of the three ethnic group
respondents demonstrated willingness to introduce
agricultural improvements.
Armenians and Moslem Arabs showed the same interest,
96%, toward introducing improvements in agriculture.
Christian Arabs scored 92% in favor and 8% indicated no
desire to introduce change.
Americans scored 96% in
favor of change.
E.
Ethnic Attitude.
Question 22 in the question-
naire explored the attitude of the ethnic groups towards
equal pay for men and women for equal work, and the
results were compared within themselves as well as with
American control group responses.
The results were
summarized in Table 11.
22.
If women do the same work as men, pay should
be:
a.
more
b.
same
c.
less
d.
much less
Ninety-three percent of the three ethnic group
respondents indicated that women should get equal pay
as men for the same work.
Armenians scored higher, 100%, regarding attitude
toward women's rights for equal pay.
Christian Arabs
scored lowest, 84%, of the three ethnic groups.
American subjects favored 100% women's rights for
equal pay.
66
Table 11
Attitude Toward Working Women's Right for Equal Pay
Armenians
%
Christian
Arabs
Moslem
Arabs
Americans
%
%
%
Same
Pay
100
0.88
0.92
100
Less
0
0.10
0.08
0
r1uch
Less
0
0.02
0
0
More
0
0
0
0
67
F.
Advancement of Science.
To assess the attitude
towarrl advancement of science, item no. 7 was included
in the questionnaire.
Scores in Table 12 reflect the
attitude of the four groups toward advancement of
science.
7.
Scholars and scientists in universities are
studying such questions as what determines
whether a baby is a boy or a girl or how a
seed turns into a plant:
a. all very good
b. all somewhat good
c. all somewhat harmful
d. all very harmful
Thirty-six percent of the three ethnic groups
declared advancement of science to be very good, 61%
considered it to be somewhat good and 3% regarded
advancement of science to be somewhat harmful.
Forty percent of the Armenian subjects believed
advancement of science to be all very good and 60%
claimed it to be somewhat good.
Moslem Arab respondents scored 32% on all very
good question and 68% on somewhat good.
Thirty-six percent of the Christian Arabs valued
advancement of science to be all very good, 56% regarded
it to be somewhat good and 8% said advancement of
science was somewhat harmful.
Fifty-two percent of American subjects regarded
advancement of science to be all very good and 48%
indicated it was somewhat good.
Table 12
Attitude Toward Advancement of Science
Ethnicity
All
Somewhat
Good
All
Very
Good
Total
All
Somewhat
Harmful
All
Very
Harmful
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
Total
75
100
27
.36
46
.61
2
.27
0
0
Armenians
25
100
10
.40
15
.60
0
0
0
0
Christian
Arabs
25
100
9
.36
14
.56
2
. 08
0
0
Moslem
Arabs
25
100
8
.32
17
.68
0
0
0
0
Americans
25
100
13
.52
12
.48
0
0
0
0
0'1
00
69
G.
Financial Status.
Table 13 presents family
economic status of the subjects.
The responses to the
question below are summarized in the said table.
31.
In
u.s.
dollars, what is your parents'
approximate annual income?
Results indicated that over 60% of parents of each
ethnic group member earned over $20,000 per year.
However, Christian Arab students definitely ranked
the highest compared to two ethnic groups in family
income status.
over 80% of Christian Arab parents
earned fairly high incomes annually.
Fifty-six percent
earned between $20,000 to $40,000 and 32% over $40,000
per year.
All American subjects come from families
with a yearly income of over $20,000.
Sixty-eight
percent of American parents earned over $40,000 annually.
H.
Opinion of Others.
Based on the response given
by the subjects to question 16 in the test, table 14
analyzed the reaction of the respondents to the opinions
of other people.
16.
What are your reactions to the opinions of
people different from you?
a. Bother you
b. Indifferent (you don't care)
c. Appreciate/respect difference of opinions
Seventy-seven percent of the three ethnic group
members demonstrated openness to the opinion of people
different from their opinion.
Table 13
Family Financial Status (Annual Income in U.S.A. Dollars)
Ethnicity
10005999
Total
600011999
1200019999
2000040000
Over
40000
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
Armenians
25
100
0
0
7
.28
2
.08
10
•40
6
.24
Christian
Arabs
25
100
0
0
0
0
3
.12
14
.56
8
.32
Moslem
Arabs
25
100
2
.08
4
.16
3
.12
13
.52
3
.12
Americans
25
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
.32
17
.68
%
-...]
0
71
Table 14
Openness
Ethnicity
Bother
Total
Indifferent
Appreciate/
Respect
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
Total
75"
100
6
.08
11
.15
58
.77
Armenians
25
100
2
.08
3
.12
20
•8 0
Christian
Arabs
25
100
3
.12
4
.16
18
•7 2
Moslem
Arabs
25
100
1
.04
4
.16
20
. 80
Americans
25
100
1
.04
4
.16
20
.80
72
Eighty percent of Armenian and Moslem Arab students
appreciated and respected difference of opinions.
Christian Arabs were appreciative of the opinions
of others differen from their opinion by72%.
Their
attitude in regard to differences in opinions was
comparatively more conservative.
Computing the responses
of the three ethnic groups, it was found that 12% were
bothered and 16% were indifferent to the opinions of
people different from their opinion.
Eighty percent of American subjects were open to
the opinions of others different from theirs and 16%
expressed indifference.
I.
Lifestyles.
Question 19 was included in the
questionnaire to assess the attitude of the subjects in
percental value about their priority between the two
lifestyles.
The results supported the prediction that Moslem
Arabs would favor rural life, and the other two groups
leaned more toward the urban lifestyle.
Moslem Arabs
are actually more rural-oriented due to the family
patterns.
19.
Would you prefer:
a.
Rural life.
b.
Urban life.
Sixty-four percent of the three ethnic groups
expressed favorable attitudes towards urban life and
36% preferred rural life.
73
Table 15
Attitude Toward Rural or Urban Life
Ethnicity
Total
Rural Life
Urban Life
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
Total
75
100
27
.36
48
.64
Armenians
25
100
8
•32
17
.68
Christian
Arabs
25
100
6
.24
19
•7 6
Moslem
Arabs
25
100
13
• 52
12
.48
Americans
25
100
11
.44
14
.56
74
Christian Arab subjects were highest (76%) of all
in favor of urban life.
Twenty-four percent of this
group voiced for rural life.
Sixty-eight percent of Armenian subjects preferred
urban life.
Fifty-two percent of Moslem Arab respondents
favored rural life and 48% for urban life.
Fifty-six percent of American subjects wanted
urban life and 44% rural.
The test related data was designed to investigate
the relationship between attitudinal modernity and
school achievement (GPA).
In Table 16, the correlation coefficient of groups
were computed and a comparison constructed using tstatistics to compare the relationship between attitudinal modernity test scores and GPAs.
The results clearly demonstrated that the attitudinal modernity and school achievement are correlated,
for three of the groups but on a different degree
within each group.
The degree of relationship between
the two variables was higher among Armenian students
than the other two groups.
scored the lowest.
Christian Arab students
Compared to American students, the
three Middle Eastern groups scored lower.
got the highest result.
Americans
75
Table 16
Impact of Attitudinal Modernity on School Achievement
R. Values
t-Test
Americans
0.76
5.61
Armenians
0.68
4.28
Christian Arabs
0.21
1.03
Moslem Arabs
0.51
2.85
76
To check the hypothesis that the variables are
actually uncorrelated, *t-tests were used.
These tests
performed on the data showed the results to be
statistically significant for all but the Christian
Arabs.
This conclusion is based on the fact that the
three groups showing high correlation coefficients all
had t-test results above 2.06 which indicates a 95%
confidence level.
The results for the Christian Arabs,
however, showed a much lower correlation value and a ttest result indicating much weaker statistical
significance.
This test was intended to determine if the
Attitudinal Modernity test scores are significantly
different for the different groups.
In Table 17 the results of Attitudinal Modernity
test are compared to determin if the scores are
significantly different for the three ethnic groups.
For this t-test a result greater than 2.00 indicates
tht there is 95% confidence that the groups are actually
different (Dunn & Clark, 1974).
It seems the difference between Christian Arabs
and Moslem Arabs is very small (t
=
0.02).
This can be
attributed to the fact that both communities speak the
same language (Arabic) and inter-cultural communication
is carried on using analysis in the business, in
*If t>2.06 then can reject R=O hypothesis with 95%
confidence.
77
Table 17
Comparison of Attitudinal
Moq~rnity
Test Scores
Group vs. Group (t-test results)
Americans
Armenians
Christian Arabs
Americans
Armenians
2.00
Christian Arabs
3.70
2.20
Moslem Arabs
3.80
2.20
0.02
78
Q
schools and in governmental dealings.
Language being
the most powerful tool of communication plays a major
role in both sects developing common attitudes in
social, educational and psychologically related areas.
As a result, the Christian Arabs and Moslem Arabs view
the aspects of life from a common angle, which reduces
their differences in outlook to a lowest degree.
It appears that the difference in religion and
political aspirations have no effects on the development
of attitudes and pattern of behaviors.
However, in
comparing Armenian subjects to Moslem Arabs the results
indicated a higher difference.
T-test computation for Armenians versus Christian
·Arabs revealed a t-value
=
2.20, same in both cases.
For the rest of the group comparison, results
obtained were:
American subjects vs. Armenians
t-value
=
2.00
American subjects vs. Christian Arabs
t-value
=
3.70
American subjects vs. Moslem Arabs
t-value
=
3.80
As these results reveal, American group compared
with the other three ethnic groups the differences are
significant because t-test results are greater than
2.00.
•
79
Scatter Diagrams
In order to explore and determine the relationship
between Attitudinal Modernity test scores and some of
the subfactors, Linear Scatter Diagrams were used as
well.
Additionally, to check the correlation between
Attitudinal Modernity results and school performance a
linear scatter diagram was prepared for each of the
three experimental groups as well as the American
control group.
These diagrams intended to demonstrate if there
was any correlation between the two variables, and the
direction and strength of the correlation--positive,
negative or no correlation.
Summary
This chapter presented 17 tables summarizing the
results of the questionnaire administered to test
attitudinal modernity of Middle Eastern students enrolled at the California State University, Northridge.
Mean scores and standard deviations of groups
tested on different themes were indicated along with
appropriate statistical interpretations.
T-statistics
were used to determine the difference between groups on
Attitudinal Modernity test scores and to see the impact
of modernity test results on the school performance.
80
SCATTER DIAGRAM 1
Armenians
60
81
SCATTER DIAGB.M-1 2
Armenians
60
•
•
55
®• •
Modernity
Test
Scores
•
•
•
•
50
•
-• •
45
•
•
••
•
•
•• •
•
•
40
0
18
20
22
24
26
28
Age
No Correlation
30
32
34
82
SCATTER
DIAGRru~
Armenians
60
3
83
SCATTER
DIAGRfu~
4
Christian Arabs
60
•
•
55
•
Modernity
Test
Scores
•
•
50
•
®
••
• @•
<!>
45
®
40
•
• •
•
•
•
35
0
3
9
6
12
Years. in u.s.A.
No
Corre~ation
15
18
84
Q •
SCATTER DIAGRAM 5
Christian Arabs
60
•
•
55
•
Modernity
Test
Scores
•
50
•
•
•
•
45
•
••
••
•
@
40
•
0
17
20
•
•
•
•
24
22
26
Age
No Correlation
•
28
30
85
SCATTER DIAGRAH 6
Christian Arabs
60
•
•
55
•
•
Modernity
Test
50
Scores
•
•
•• •
••
45
••
• •
••
•
••
•
40
•
•
•
35
0
1
2
3
G.P.A.
Positive Correlation (>veak)
4
86
DIAG~~
SCATTER
7
Moslems
60
•
•
55
Modernity
Test
Scores
•
•
••
50
• •
••
•
•
•
•® •
45
•
40
(!)
•
•
•
•
•
35
0
4
7
10
13
Years. in U.S.. A.
No Correlation
16
19
87
SCATTER DIAGRAM 8
Moslems
60
•
•
55
•
Modernity
Test
Scores
•
50
•
•
•
• •
45
•
•
•
•
®•
•
•
•
•
40
••
•
•
•
35
0
20
22
24
26
Age
No Ca.rrela-tion
28
30
32
88
SCATTER DIAGRAM 9
Moslems
60
•
•
55
••
Modernity
Test
Scores
••
50
• •
•
• •
•
•
•
•
•
• •
•
45
•
40
••
•
e
•
35
0
1
2
3
G.P.A.
Positive Correlation
4
89
SCATTER DIAGRM1 10
Americans
•
60
•
55
•
•
•
•
•
•
aodernity
Test
Scores
••
••
(!)
50
•
•
45
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
40
0
18
20
22
24
26
28
Age
No Correlation
30
32
34
90
SCATI'ER DIAGRAM 11
A"'lericans
•
60
• (!)
55
•
•
•
•
•
Hodernity
Test
50
Scores
••
• ••
• •
•
• ••
45
•
40
0
1
2
3
G.P.A.
Positive Correlation
4
91
@ •
In other tables the results of three ethnic groups
were compared with the results of the control group.
The three ethnic groups were also compared on a number
of different factors.
The results indicated that there
was a significant difference between groups and modernity
test scores that were related to school performance.
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Summary of the Problem
Besides exploring values given to some subfactors;
the present study was primarily concerned with Attitudinal Modernity differences among the three groups of
Middle Eastern university students enrolled at the
California State University, Northridge.
Secondly, it
sought to determine how comparable these three groups
were within American university students at CSUN.
Thirdly, to test related data was designed to investigate the relationship between Attitudinal Modernity
test scores and school performance (GPA) within the
three groups and the American sample.
A relevant
question was that of comparability of the American and
the three ethnic groups student samples.
Each sample
group was composed of 25 subjects randomly selected
from the Engineering and Computer Science student
population.
A 36-item questionnaire was designed based on a
set of 16 concepts chosen from the pool of 70 (Smith &
Inkeles), so as to sample educational, social, religious,
economic, family, science and ethnic areas within which
92
93
Attitudinal Modernity comparison has an intrinsic
interest.
A t-test was used to check the hypothesis
that the two variables were unrelated and Attitudinal
Modernity test results showed no difference among the
experimental groups and control group.
In the present study the subjects from the three
ethnic group samples did not seem to show the same
readiness and positive attitude towards the process of
modernization as Lerner's (1958) subjects demonstrated
in his research.
The subjects in my study scored low
in attitudinal modernity.
The findings in my research
were closer to Hall's description than to Lerner's
conclusions.
The study conducted by Lerner and his co-
workers took place in the homelands of the subjects,
whereas my research is completed in a foreign land with
groups from the Middle Eastern traditional countries.
My subjects seemed to be more reluctant to change and
resisted what was going on around them in the new
society.
My sample was, of course, very small compared
to Lerner's sample.
The subjects in my study are similarly brought up
in the same cultural atmosphere and are of the three
groups.
The first two are Moslem Arabs and Christian
Arabs that speak the same language but belong to two
different religions.
The third group which is composed
of Armenians, speak Armenian, but have different ethnic
backgrounds.
Moslem Arabs and Christian Arabs have a
94
common language (Arabic), Armenians and Christian Arabs
follow the same religion, differing in the practice of
rituals.
Melikian and Diab (1959) and my study share the
common factor that all subjects of the experimental
groups were born in the Middle East and raised in their
native land.
The difference lies in the fact that one
study is conducted in a Middle Eastern city on students
raised in that culture, whereas this research work took
place in a new and foreign country.
Findings
In the present questionnaire survey the results
provided evidence that real mean differences in
Attitudinal Modernity existed between Armenian students
and both Christian Arab and Moslem students.
There was
no difference, however, between Christian Arabs and
Moslems.
As to the comparability with American students,
there was slight difference in mean between Armenian
and American students, but a tangible difference between
American and the other two groups (Christian Arabs and
Moslem Arabs).
In short, Americans scored highest of
all the other groups.
The results on school performance (GPA) showed
that the mean scores of American, Armenian and Moslem
subjects were insignificantly different from each other,
but Christian Arab students maintained the lowest GPA
95
mean score.
A possible reason for this low GPA might
be the high family income of Christian Arabs.
The
results revealed that 32% of families in this group
ranked over $40,000 yearly income status.
The Moslem
Arab and Armenian students are mostly scholarship
recipients and they should attain high academic standing
to maintain their financial aids.
The Christian Arabs,
as well as American students (68% over $40,000 yearly
income) did not have to worry about scholarship matters,
consequently did not put much effort in school work.
It was hypothesized that the Attitudinal Modernity
scores and school achievement (GPA) were unrelated.
The present survey results could not, for three of the
groups, support this null hypothesis at the 5% confidence
level.
In contrast, the Christian Arab students showed
1.03 when the t-test was used to check the hypothesis
that the two variables were unrelated.
This indicates
a much lower likelihood that there was a GPA to MTS
correlation for this group.
This is, of course, further
reflected in the low correlation coefficient for MTS
versus GPA found for this group.
To sum up, there was an overall positive relationship between the two variables--Attitudinal Modernity
and GPA--in two experimental groups, Armenian students
and Moslem Arab students, and the American control
group.
For Christian Arab subjects Attitudinal Modernity
test scores and school achievement were unrelated.
96
Recommendations
One limitation of this study was the representativeness of the samples which consisted of university
students, enrolled in two departments only within the
same university, and, consequently, not representative
of the population at large.
Another limitation was
that it did not involve direct and consistent proportion
of both sexes.
A larger and equal number of female
students in each group would have lent a more adequate
sampling.
Summary
This chapter presented discussions on the results
and findings of the questionnaire survey on attitudinal
modernity administered to three Middle Eastern university
students from the student population of Engineering and
Computer Science departments at the California State
University, Northridge.
The comparison of the results
on the two variables revealed the following:
1.
Correlation coefficient of Modernity Test
Score vs. GPA of 25 Armenian students was 0.68.
2.
Correlation coefficient of Modernity Test
Scores vs. GPA of 25 Christian Arab students was 0.21.
3.
Correlation coefficient of MTS vs. GPA of 25
Moslem Arab students was 0.51.
97
4.
Correlation coefficient of MTS vs. GPA of 25
i>I.,c;Llcan students (born and raised in America) was
0.76.
Conclusions that were drawn from the study were
cited in this chapter.
Before the closure of this
paper recommendations were made to future behavioral
science researchers who would be interested in exploring
modernization and adaptation process of Middle Eastern
students in a modern industrialized society such as the
United States of America.
This chapter also included a discussion on the
extent of relationship between attitudinal modernity
and school achievement.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Borg, Walter R. & Gass, Meredity D.
(1983).
research.
New York: Longman Inc.
Educational
Dunn, Olive Jean, & Clark, Virginia A.
(1974). Applied
statistics: Analysis of variance and regression.
New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Farah, Tawfik E.
(1978). Group affiliations of
university students in the Arab Middle East.
Journal of Social Psychology, 106, 161-165.
The
Fernea, Elizabeth Warnock.
(1985). Women and the
family in the Middle East. Austin: University of
Texas Press.
Hall, Edward T.
(1959). The silent language •. New
York:
Doubleday & Company, Inc.
Hall, Edward T.
(1966). The hidden dimension.
York:
Doubleday & Company, Inc.
New
Joseph, John.
(1983). Muslim-Christian relations and
inter-Christian rivalries in the Middle East.
Albany:
State University of New York Press.
King-Fun Li, Anita.
(1974).
Parental attidues, test
anxiety, and achievement motivations~ A Hong Kong
study. Journal of Social Psychology, _2l, 3-13.
Lerner, Daniel.
(1958). The passing of traditional
society, modernizing the Middle East. Glencoe
Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press.
Mansfield, Peter.
(1985). The Arabs.
Britain: Cox and Wyman Ltd.
London, Great
Melikian, Levon H., & Diab, Lutfy N.
(1959).
Group
affiliations of university students in the Arab
Middle East. The Journal of Social Psychology,
~, 145-159.
I
98
99
Melikian, Levon H., & Diab, Lutfy N.
(1974).
Stability
and change in group affiliations of university
students in the Arab Middle East. The Journal of
Social Psychology, ~' 13-21.
t-1ood, Alexander M.
(1973). The future of higher
education. New York:
HcGraw-Hill Book Company.
Fatal, Raphael.
(1983). The Arab mind.
Charles Scribner's Sons.
New
York~
Peter, George C.
( 1954, Fall). A comparative study of
attitudes of Christians and of Moslems Lebanese
villagers. Journal for the Scientific Study of
Religion, IV(l).
Prothro, Terry E., & Melikian, Levon H.
(1952). Social
distance and social change in the Near East.
Society and Social Research, 34, 3-11.
Rokeach, Milton.
(1960). The open and closed mind.
New York: Basic Books, Inc.
Rokeach, Milton.
(1968). Beliefs, attitudes and
values.
San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Inc.
Rokeach, Hilton.
(1973). The nature of human values.
New York: The Free Press MacMillan Publication
Co.
Rondot, Pierre.
(1959, June-July). The minorities in
the Arab Orient today. Middle Eastern Affairs, 6·'}_, 214-228.
Saab, Hassan.
(1964, Winter).
Communication between
Christianity and Islam. The Middle East Journal,
]J!_(l)' 41-62.
Smith, David H., & Inkeles, Alex.
(1966). The OM: A
comparative socio-psychological measure of individual modernity.
Sociometry: A Journal of Research
in Social Psychology,~' 353-377.
Spiegel, Murray R.
(1961).
statistics.
New York:
Theory and problems of
Schaum Publishing Co.
Taubman, Paul, & Walrs, Terrence.
(1974).
Higher
education and earnings.
New York:
McGraw-Hill
Company.
100
Thornburg, Max w.
Middle East.
Inc.
(1964). People and policy in the
New York: w. w. Norton & Company,
Yankelovich, Daniel.
(1972). The changing values on
campus. New York: Washington Square Press.
APPENDICES
101
102
APPENDIX A
QUESTIONNAIRE
Dear Student:
I would appreciate it if you would be so kind as
to complete this questionnaire and return it to me as
soon as possible. Your responses will be held in the
strictest confidence. Do not write your name.
Please put a check mark (
) in front of the item
that best answers the question.
For example:
(
(
(
(
)
)
)
)
a.
b.
c.
d.
The capital city of France is:
London
Paris
Washington
Brussels
Thank you for your cooperation.
*
1.
*
*
*
*
Have you ever spent much time thinking about or
become highly concerned and involved regarding
some public issues (such as Education, Family,
Crime, Household Income) that you really wanted to
do something about it?
) a. Frequently
) b. Few times
) c. Never
2.
If schooling is freely available (if there were no
kind of obstacles), how much schooling do you
think male children in your community (home town)
should have?
(
(
(
(
(
)
)
)
)
)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
8 years of schooling or less
12 years of schooling or less
Some college
Advanced college degree 01.A., M.S.)
Complete (Ph.D. )
103
3.
How much schooling do you think female children in
your community (home town) should have?
(
(
(
(
(
4.
)
)
)
)
)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
8 years of schooling or less
12 years of schooling or less
Some college
Advanced college degree (M.A., H. S.)
Complete (Ph.D.)
Two 12-year-old boys took time out from their work
in the grain (wheat, barley) fields.
They were
trying to figure out a way to grow the same amount
of grain with fewer hours of work. Which of the
following is most like you?
( ) a. The parent of one boy said:
"That is a
good thing to think about. Tell me your
thoughts about how we should change our
ways of growing."
) b. The parent of the other boy said:
"The way
to grow grain is the way we have always
done it. Talk about change will waste time
but not help."
5.
Hhat should most qualify a man to hold a high
office?
a. Coming from the "right" distinguished or
wealthy family background
b. Devotion to the old and revered time-honored
ways
( ) c. Being the most popular among the people
( ) d. High education and special knowledge
6.
Which is the most important for the future of your
native country?
(
(
(
(
7.
The hard work of the people
b. Good planning on the part of the government
c. God's help
d. Good luck
) a.
)
)
)
Scholars and scientists in universities are studying
such questions as what determines whether a baby
is a boy or girl or how a seed turns into a plant.
Do you think these investigations are:
(
(
(
(
)
)
)
)
a.
b.
c.
d.
All
All
All
All
very good (beneficial)
somewhat good (beneficial)
somewhat harmful
very harmful
104
8.
Check the statement which most reflects your point
of view.
) a. It is necessary for a man and his wife to
limit the number of children born so they
can take better care of those they have
already.
( ) b. It is wrong for a husband and a wife
purposely to limit by artificial means the
number of children born.
9.
~'Vhich
one of these following kinds of news interests
you most?
(
(
(
(
(
10.
)
)
)
)
)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
World events (happenings in other countries)
The nation
Your home town (or village)
Sports
Religious (or tribal, cultural) events
(ceremonies) or festivals
If you were to meet a person who lives in another
country a long way off (thousands of kilometersmiles away), could you understand his way of
thinking?
( ) a. Yes
) b. No
(
11.
Do you think man can be truly good without having
any religion at all?
) a. Yes
No
) b.
12.
How many organizations (associations, clubs,
parties) do you belong to?
)
)
)
)
13.
a.
b.
c.
d.
None
Two
Three, four
Five or more
How often do you (usually) get news and information
from newspapers?
a.
b.
c.
d.
Every day
Few times a week
Occasionally (rarely)
Never
105
Q •
14.
How would you meet a stranger?
(
(
(
(
15.
)
)
)
)
a.
b.
c.
d.
Trust
Caution
Distrust
Fear
Do you prefer a job with:
) a. Many responsibilities
) b. Few responsibilities
) c. No responsibilities
16.
What are your reactions to the opinions of people
different from you?
( ) a. Bother you
( ) b. Indifferent (you don't care)
( ) c. Appreciate/respect difference of opinions
17.
Should a man feel closer to:
) a. His wife
) b. Other family members (e.g., mother, father,
brother, sister)
18.
Should a man choose a job preferred
by~
( ) a • Hi ms e 1 f
( ) b. Parents
( ) c. Others
19.
Hould you prefer:
) a. Rural life
) b. Urban life
20.
Do you prefer to plan affairs in advance?
) a. Mostly
) b. Sometimes
) c. Never
21.
Most important in caring for a sick person:
(
(
(
a. Prayer
b. Medical care
c. Both
106
22.
If women do the same work as men, pay should be:
(
(
(
(
23.
) . a.
) b.
) c.
) d.
More
Same
Less
Much less
If a family has both boy and girl children, which
sex would you predict the parents would pref~r the
next child to be?
) a. Boy
) b. Girl
) c. Either
24.
Is there cause for worry about illicit sex relations if men and women work together?
) a. A lot
) b. A little
) c. Never
25.
Suppose you were to open a secondary school (high
school) of your choice, what would be your
preference?
( ) a. Mixed school (boys and girls together)
( ) b. Boys school
( ) c. Girls school
26.
Even though a man and a woman may be doing the
same work, men often have other more serious
responsibilities in life, therefore, the man should
get:
) a. The same pay as the ~voman
) b. More pay than the woman
) c. Less pay than the woman
27.
Would you tell me what are the biggest problems
you see facing your native country?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
107
28.
What would be your preference for a school in
general?
(
(
(
(
29.
If your parents were to have more children, would
you like to have:
(
(
(
(
(
30.
)
)
)
)
a. To have more male teachers than female
teachers
b. To have more female teachers than male
teachers
c. To have 50% male and 50% female teachers
d. Only male teachers
e. Only female teachers
f. No preference
)
)
)
)
)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
In what country are the following cities?
zurich
I
More sisters
More brothers
Only sisters
Only brothers
Makes no difference
--------------------country
Seoul
country
31.
In u.s. dollars what is your parents' approximate
yearly (annual) income?
( ) a. 1,000-3,999
( ) b. 4,000-5,999
( ) c. 6,000-7,999
( ) d. 8,000-9,999
)
)
)
)
e.
f.
g.
h.
10,000-11,999
12,000-19,999
20,000-40,000
Over 40,000
32.
In what country do your parents earn most of their
yearly income?
33.
What is your native country?
Name of country
34.
How long have you been in the U.S.A.?
Number of years
108
35.
How old are you?
36.
Your gender?
a. Male
b. Female
(circle one)
109
APPENDIX B
A SUPPLEMENT
TO THE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE YOU HAVE
FILLED OUT EARLIER
PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION.
This information is CONFIDENTIAL and will remain so absolutely.
Last Name
First Name
What was your last CSUN GPA?
End of Fall '85
End of Spring '86
GPA PERMISSION
I hereby permit Y.A. to make a note of my GPA as of
Fall '85 and Spring '86 from my student records.
I
recognize his use of his information is for research
study and is confidential.
Signature
Hajor
THANK YOU