AN ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN AC-

CEPTANCE OF AND RESPECT FOR SELF AND AC-

CEPTANCE OF AND RESPECT FOR OTHERS
IN TEN COUNSELING CASES1
BY ELIZABETH T. SHEERER
IOWA STATE COLLEGE

/^VBSERVATION and clinical experi- erence. This was not true of the un-
y^ence have led many psychologists successful cases. Thus Raimy's data
to the belief that the individual's con- seemed to point to change in the self
cept of himself is of the utmost impor- concept as a significant factor in psy-
tance for an understanding of the dy- chotherapy.
namics of personality development and The present study is concerned not
adjustment. Also, there is some objec- merely with an investigation of the tone
tive evidence to support this belief [1,2, or valence of the client's self reference
3,4] . In a study of fourteen nondirec- in successful counseling but also with
tive counseling cases — seven successful, the changing content of the self concept.
four unsuccessful and three doubtfully
THE PROBLEM
successful — Raimy investigated that
"aspect of the self -concept revealed by a Before formulating an hypothesis a
study of the relation between the self- preliminary study was made of three
evaluation uttered by clients in psycho- recorded counseling cases, in which on-
therapeutic interviews and the immedi- ly one question was kept in mind:
ate outcome of treatment at the end of What is the client saying that contrib-
the last interview" [3, p. 450] . In com- utes to a picture of his total personality
paring the incidence of positive, nega- at each step along the way, from his
tive and ambivalent self references in own point of view? The client state-
the successful and the unsuccessful cases ments which provided the clearest ans-
he found distinct differences between wers to this question in each case
the two groups. In successful cases the seemed for the most part to fall under
positive self references increased in fre- five headings: (1) statements relating
quency toward the end of therapy while to the problem of choice of standards
the negative and ambivalent self refer- for behavior; (2) statements showing
ences decreased. In these cases the final whether the client sees himself or others
interview showed an almost complete as responsible for his behavior, for the
lack of negative and ambivalent self ref- origin and solution of his problems; (3)
statements relating to a philosophy of
article is based primarily upon a the- life; (4) self-evaluative comments; (5)
sis being submitted by the writer in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the Ph.D. evaluative comments about other per-
degree, The University of Chicago. The thesis sons.
study considers seven of these cases only. Mr.
Gerard Haigh revised the present paper to in- The client statements which fall un-
clude the results of the three additional cases der these headings seemed to describe
in the research block. These three were an-
alyzed by Mr. Robert Pearse. two things: the degree to which the
169
170 ELIZABETH T. SHEERER

client accepts and respects self and the rather than conventions or standards of other
degree to which he accepts and respects individuals. (Note: This does not imply self-
sufficiency. Nor does it imply that the interna-
other persons. Also, there was an ap- lized values and principles are necessarily dif-
parent relationship between the kinds ferent from the conventions or standards of
of attitudes expressed toward self and others.)
the attitudes expressed toward others. 2. He may modify his behavior in order to
This point can be illustrated with a avoid trampling on the feelings or rights of
others but he does not modify his behavior out
statement made by one client in her of irrational fear of the judgment of others.
fifth counseling interview: 3. When he has acted on his own standards:
It's strange, I always expect so much of my- a. if others pass judgment against him,
self, and so little of other people, I don't know although he may regret their reaction, he will
why that is. Actually, they're synonymous. If not regret having acted on his own standards,
you throw yourself away on everything, you're nor will he abandon his standards merely be-
just as liable to exploit someone else. And the cause someone else has passed judgment
basic self-respect that you must have, that fol- against him.
lows logically . . . . you can't disregard your b. he does not exhibit a need to make
own personality and accept anyone else . . . . excuses for his behavior.
I'm just beginning to realize that. I never c. he does not condemn himself if he fails
. . . . had any regard for myself at all. Put to meet standards for behavior which others
myself out to terrific extremes, and still do, hold if these standards are not his own, even
and absolutely . . . . regard myself as practi- though others may condemn him.
cally worthless. And I just need to realize 4. He does not worry or condemn himself if
that deep underneath that's what I must have he causes others to react unfavorably toward
done to everyone. him or pass judgment against him.
5. He feels equal as a person to others—
From the preliminary study this hy- neither inferior nor superior. (Note: This is
pothesis evolved: There is a positive not to be confused with equality in specific abil-
correlation between the extent to which ities or achievements.)
an individual expresses acceptance of 6. He has faith in his capacity to cope with
the problems that confront him even though
and respect for self and the extent to setbacks occur.
which he expresses acceptance of and 7. He does not question his worth as a person
respect for others. even if it seems to him that others do.
8. He does not doubt that he is able to con-
THE FIRST STEP: DEFINITIONS tribute to the welfare and satisfactions of
others; i.e., he does not feel that he is unable
The concepts to be studied were de- to contribute anything to anyone else at all.
fined operationally with the aid of four 9. When others criticize his behavior he evalu-
judges on the basis of a study of eval- ates the criticism objectively and does not be-
come upset by it.
uative attitudes toward self and others 10. He does not expect others to reject him
in successful counseling cases other than regardless of how he behaves. (Note: This
those involved in this study. Clinical does not mean that he has the idea that others
analysis indicated that the following will accept him at all times. It means merely
definitions appeared to represent the that he is not expecting others to reject him
end point, or extreme, of the examples indiscriminately whether he gives them any
reason to reject him or not.)
of acceptance of self and the acceptance 11. When he fails in something he has at-
of others. tempted to do he does not think less well of
himself as a person or become panicky or des-
DEFINITION OF SEW-ACCEPTANCE AND RESPECT pairing.
1. The individual who expresses acceptance 12. He is not shy and self-conscious. (Note:
of and respect for self has internalized certain Self-conscious as used here does not mean an
values and principles which serve as a general awareness of his own values, motivations, the
guide for behavior. He relies upon this guide, effect of his behavior on others, etc. Rather
 ACCEPTANCE OF SELF AND ACCEPTANCE OF OTHERS 171

than this enlightened self-consciousness, this 6. He takes an active interest in others and
item refers to self-consciousness which results makes a positive effort to create mutually
in shyness and inhibition in social relationship.) satisfying relationships with them.
13. He does not reject praise, recognition, a 7. He neither dominates others nor assumes
compliment, out of fear that he does not merit responsibility for them.
it. 8. He does not condemn others or feel defen-
14. He does not regard himself as totally sive when they react unfavorably toward him
different from others, i.e., he does not regard or other persons.
himself as "queer" and generally abnormal in
9. When he notices in another person things
his reactions.
which are displeasing to him, or when he is
15. He resists domination.
aware of errors made by another person, he
16. He does not deny the facts of his experi-
does not condemn that person or condone his
ence nor try to overlook them.
behavior. Whatever is pleasing or displeasing
17. He assumes responsibility for making his
to him in another person or that person's be-
own decisions and accepts the consequences of
havior, he accepts him as he is.
his behavior.
18. a. He does not attempt to deny or distort 10. He learns to accept the opinions of
the existence of any feelings, limitations, abili- others without depending on them too much.
ties, or good qualities that he sees in himself,
but rather accepts all. THE SECOND STEP: THE SCALE
b. If he recognizes in himself a feeling, a Using1 the above definitions four
pattern of behavior that he does not like he
judges rated on a 5-point scale 51 state-
sets about to change it instead of denying, dis-
guising or condoning it, ments revealing some self evaluation
and 50 statements revealing evaluative
19. He feels that his own ideas and plans are
worthwhile. attitudes toward others, extracted from
20. He does not feel guilty every time he recorded client statements.
spends money or time for recreation; i.e., he
does not feel that he has no right to, or is not Step one of the scale represents an ex-
deserving of pleasure or recreation. pression of a lack of acceptance and re-
spect. Step five represents an expres-
DEFINITION OF ACCEPTANCE OF AND RESPECT sion of acceptance and respect with no
FOB OTHER PERSONS
expression of a lack of them. The items
1. The individual who expresses acceptance on which a majority of judges agreed
and respect towards other persons does not re-
ject, hate, dislike or pass judgment against provided illustrations of the five scale
others when their behavior or values seem to points for each of the two scales. The
him to be in contradiction to his own stand- following are examples of these illus-
ards or values. He grants others the right to trations :
their own beliefs, values, standards.
2. In attempting to advance his own welfare: Illustrations of the Steps of the "Self" Scale
a. He is careful not to infringe on the Step 1. "I haven't got what it takes to be a
rights of others; normally accepted person."
b. He expresses regret when he is aware Step 2. "All the time with any group, I just
that his behavior has created difficulties for have the expectancy that they're going to jump
others. on my weak points . . . . and I don't assert my-
3. He does not deny the worth of others or self. I have nothing to say because of a fear
their equality (as persons) with him. (Note: of condemnation, of ridicule . . . . and what
This equality does not imply equality in re- I'm looking for is release from this inability
gard to specific abilities or achievements.) He or fright of just being a human being."
feels neither above nor below the people he Step 3. "I think I'm seeing rather clearly now
meets. that most of the pain I suffer is because I am
4. In making decisions he considers not no one. I am no one, and I am not following a
only the potential effects on himself but also pattern that is really me, but just a lot of pat-
on others involved. terns that people — alternative me's, do you
5. He shows a desire not merely to avoid see, and that's not a very good way to be."
hurting others but also to serve them. Step 4. "When you're in a family where your
172 ELIZABETH T. SHEERER

brother has gone to college and everyone has a Using the definition of the concept of
good mind, I wonder if it is right to see that acceptance of and respect for self and
I am as I am and I can't achieve such things. the illustrated "Self" Scale, the investi-
I've always tried to be what the others thought
I should be but I am wondering whether I gator and two other judges rated the six
shouldn't just see that I am what I am." interviews working independently. The
Step 5. "Well, I've just noticed such a dif- judges marked all units irrelevant to the
ference. I find that when I feel things — even scale as neutral, using the letter, "N".
when I feel hate — I don't care. I don't mind. Only items revealing the client's current
I feel more free now. I don't feel guilty
about things." attitudes toward self were assigned
scale values of 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5. At least
Illustrations of the Steps of the "Others" Scale two out of three judges agreed 93.8 per
Step 1. "I get so miserable, and I can't stand cent of the time. Where the judges did
to hear her talk — Why? And she's so foolish disagree there was a very narrow
. . . . and I keep saying to myself, 'I'm embar-
rassed that she's so foolish.' I keep yelling at spread among the ratings. On only four
her and pointing out to her where she's incon- items did any one judge's rating deviate
sistent and the mistakes." by as much as two points on the scale
Step 2. "My mother is now a widow without from both other ratings. In rating the
any friends. I'll have to try and see if I can't 178 units of the six interviews on the
get her into a better social situation. We have
been preaching at her for a long time that she "Self" Scale the investigator agreed
must get herself into a better social situation, with at least one other judge 83.7 per
but I don't think she can." cent of the time.
Step 3. "I may have no patience with Using the definitions of acceptance of
grownups, or little enough; I certainly have and respect for others and the illustra-
patience with children, with children and ani-
mals." ted "Others" Scale, the investigator and
Step 4. "I believe that she is a rather selfish two different judges followed a similar
woman, and I can see her in a light possibly procedure in rating the six interviews
that would excuse her, maybe understand her on the "Others" Scale. At least two out
better." of three judges agreed 91.4 per cent of
Step 5. "I can accept Evelyn and love her
more. I suppose my reaction with Evelyn was the time. Where the judges did dis-
really a violent case of rejection which I didn't agree in their ratings, there were nine
realize but now I do, and I accept her." items on which one rating deviated by
as much as two scale points from both
THE THIRD STEP: RELIABILITY other ratings. In rating the 185 items
The reliability of the two scales and on the "Others" Scale the investigator
of each judge's ratings were determined agreed with at least one other judge
in the following manner. A sample of 84.3 per cent of the time.
six interviews was selected in such a A sixth judge, whose judgments on
way as to be essentially random in char- four of the experimental interviews
acter and yet include early, middle and agreed with at least one of the three
late interviews. They contained 178 original judges' "Self" Scale ratings
items for rating on the "Self" Scale and 77.8 per cent of the time, was used for
185 items for rating on the "Others" some of the rating of the ten electrically
Scale. The investigator divided the cli- recorded counseling cases which consti-
ent statements in the interviews into tute the population of this study.
units for rating, being careful not to dis- It was concluded that the reliability
tort meaning when separating the units, of the two scales and of the persons who
and using one complete client response were to use them further was adequate
as the unit wherever possible. for the purpose of this study.
 ACCEPTANCE OF SELF AND ACCEPTANCE OP OTHERS 173

THE FOURTH STEP: equalized in length according to the

APPLICATION AND RESULTS method used by Snyder [4], and the de-
cile figures used for comparative study,
The two scales were now utilized in
rating all of the relevant items in the showing that:
(1) In eight out of ten cases the
ten cases included in this study. The ra- "Self" ratings at a majority of the de-
tings were made by the writer, by Mr. cile points vary not more than one scale
Raskin, who applied the "Self" Scale to point from the "Others" ratings at the
two of the cases, and by Mr. Pearse,
who applied both scales to three cases. same points.
(2) In a majority of instances in
Of the total 1,366 units of response which the two sets or ratings vary more
rated, 77.1 per cent were judged rele- than one scale point from each other the
vant to the "Self" Scale and 16.8 per deviation can be accounted for by the
cent were found relevant to the "Others" fact that at that point the "Others"
Scale. When all the units of each of the Scale is represented by only one or two
fifty-nine interviews had been rated on items.
both scales, the mean rating for each (3) There is no instance in which the
interview on each scale was computed. ratings on the two scales deviate from
This gave for each interview, the ob- each other by as much as three scale
jectively determined degree of accep- points.
tance of and respect for self, and accep- (4) In such a comparison the cases
tance of and respect for others. (See rated by two different observers (the
Table I.) In order to test the basic hy- cases of Sim and Vib) show no greater
pothesis of the study, these mean ra- variations between "Self" and "Others"
tings were correlated. The product-mo- ratings than do those cases rated on both
ment correlation coefficient was found to scales by the investigator.
be .51, which is significant at the 1 per (5) There is a marked increase in
cent level of confidence. Thus, there was self acceptance and respect throughout
found a substantial and statistically sig- eight of the ten cases and a marked in-
nificant positive relationship between crease in acceptance of and respect for
the expressed attitudes of acceptance of others in six cases.
self and the expressed attitudes of ac- The mean rating on each scale for each
ceptance of others. of the ten parts of all ten cases together
In order to make more direct com- was found. From these means a plot
parisons the cases were graphically was constructed to show the relation-
TABLE I
MEAN VALUE OF SELF AND OTHERS RATINGS FOB ALL CASES BY INTERVIEWS
Interview No.
1 2 3 4 6 61 7 8 9
Case Self Other S 0 S O S O S O S O S O S 0 3 O
Par. 2.0 2.6 2.3 2.0 3.8 4.0 4.4 8.8 2.7 2.1 4.6 4.1 4.7 3.8
Int „ 2.1 2.9 2.2 4.7* 1.7 3.6* 2.0 5.0 3.6 3.9 3.3 4.1 4.9 4.5
Vlb 1.0 1.5 1.6 1.7 2.5 4.3 2.2 N 2.6 1.6 2.1 2.7 3.3 3.6* 8.7 8.0* 4.7 4.3
Sim 2.6 3.1 2.6 1.5 2.8 3.7 2.8 2.0* 3.1 8.6* 3.0 3.8 2.9 5.0*
Ban— 1.7 2.1 3.1 3.5 2.9 1.9 2.2 1.6 3.8 2.4 2.5 2.6 3.4 2.0 3.8 3.8 4.1 3.4
Quo. 2.0* 2.0* 3.0* 2.0* 3.5* N 4.0* 3.0* 4.0* 3.3 4.4 4.3 4.6 6.0*
Wab. _ 2.9 6.0* —. 8.1 4.0
—
\Vln 2.6 N 2.7 N 3.5 3.3 3.4 2.8 3.5 3.3
00m. 2.5 1.9 2.3 2.7 8.1 2.0
Sketch 2.4 2.0 3.2 2.2 8.1 2.3
'These means were computed on less than three units.
174 ELIZABETH T. SHEERER

ship between the "Self" ratings and the TABLE II

"Others" ratings and the direction of MEAN VALUES OF SELF AND OTHERS RATINGS
changes in these ratings throughout the FOR FIRST HALF AND LAST HALF
OF EACH CASE
group of cases as a whole. (See Figure
1). Here the deviation between the two First Half Last Half
ratings is not more than one point in Case Self Others Self Others
any decile. Far 2.9 2.3 4.1 3.6
Int 2.0 3.3 3.2 4.4
Vib 1.7 2.3 3.5 3.6
Sim 2.6 2.9 2.9 3.8
Ban 2.6 3.1 3.5 3.7
Que 8.0 2.0 4.3 3.8
Wab 3.0 5.0 3.2 4.3
Win 2.9 N 8.5 2.6
Dem 2.4 1.9 2.8 2.1
Sketch 3.0 2.2 2.9 2.5
All ten
cases 2.5 2.8 3.5 3.8
2 3 4 5 6 e to First Last
DECILE Interview Interview
PIG. 1. The relationship between the mean S O S O
ratings on the "self" scale and on the "others" All ten
scale in the ten cases combined. cases 2.2 2.6 3.9 3.8
The mean ratings on each scale for
the first half of each case and for the only through change in attitudes toward
last half of each case were computed. self. If we apply this to some of the
In all but one case the mean "Self" rat- problems of social psychology, it might
ing increases from the first to the sec- mean that increased acceptance of mi-
ond half of the case, and the same is true nority groups, foreigners, and the like,
for the "Others" Scale. In seven out of could best be achieved by some type of
nine cases2 the difference between the group therapy which would tend to alter
mean "Self" and "Others" ratings is the individual's acceptance of and re-
smaller in the second half of the case spect for himself. It might mean that
than in the first. (See Table II.) in situations of industrial tension, or
professional friction, the most effective
IMPLICATIONS OP THE FINDINGS
means of approach would be through
The findings of this study appear to dealing with the attitudes of the person
have implications that are at once com- toward himself, rather than devoting
monplace and startling. The central con- our energies to the expressions of, and
clusion is that one's attitudes toward descriptions of, the external "causes"
others are related, to a decidedly signifi- of the tension.
cant degree, to the attitudes one holds In any event the two central facts
towards one's self. In one sense, this is which emerge from this study promise
common knowledge. If we are to take it to have considerable significance for
seriously however, it might mean that social psychology as well as for our un-
change in attitudes of acceptance to- derstanding of personality. That the
ward others can come about basically individual's evaluation of himself and
2
No attitudes towards others are recorded his worth as a person, can be signifi-
for the first half of the case of Win. cantly altered by the therapeutic process
 ACCEPTANCE OF SELF AND ACCEPTANCE OF OTHERS 175

initiated by client-centered therapy is tial correlation between attitudes of ac-

one of these facts; the other is that the ceptance of and respect for self and at-
individual's evaluation of others — the titudes of acceptance of and respect for
degree of acceptance and respect he others.
feels for them — is significantly related (5) Acceptance of self and acceptance
to his attitude toward himself. of others is, on the average, higher in the
second half of the counseling interviews
SUMMARY than in the first.
The results of the analysis of the data (6) There is a closer correlation be-
of each case separately and of the data tween the "Self" and "Others" ratings
of all cases together can be summarized in the second half of the cases than oc-
as follows: curs in the first half.
(1) It was found that acceptance of (7) The findings of this study appear
and respect for self and acceptance of to have important implications for social
and respect for others can be operation- psychology as well as clinical psychol-
ally defined and objectively rated with ogy and personality theory.
a satisfactory degree of reliability. Accepted October 26, 1948.
(2) In roughly three-fourths of the
units of client response in the ten cases REFERENCES
the clients are occupied with self eval- 1. MUENCH, G. A. An evaluation of nondt-
uation while less than one-fifth of the rective psychotherapy. Appl. PsychoL
units deal with evaluation of others. Monogr. No. 18, 1947.
(3) In general there is a marked and 2. RAIMY, V. C. Self-reference in counseling
interviews. J. consult. PsychoL, 1948, 12,
fairly regular increase in the measured 153-163.
acceptance of and respect for self from 3. RAIMY, V. C. The self-concept as a factor
the beginning to the end of the cases. in counseling and personality organization.
There is also a marked but more uneven Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio
rise in the acceptance of others from the State Univ., 1948.
4. SNYDER, W. U. An investigation of the
beginning to end. nature of nondirective psychotherapy. J.
(4) There is a definite and substan- gen. PsychoL, 1945, 33, 193-223.