THE COMPARABILITY OF THE TUSCARORA AND OJIBWA RORSCHACH PROTOCOLS

94 BUREAU

OF

AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

[Bdll. 150 circumstances,

and

tlieimperfectdiscrimination possiblein this kind of quantitative treatment.

The

only deviant

group

(high

F

percent, indicating a rigid, con- stricted, Ojibwa-like personality)

which

seems to correlate to

some

degree with sociological distinctions, includes eight men.

The

2 herb doctors inthesampleof 70 fall into thisgroup, as doesalsothe hospitalized case of paranoid schizophrenia; an aged hermit

who

is

regarded as an

anomaly by

the

community

; one

man who came

spon- taneously to the house to take a Rorschach while he

was

drunk; a

young man

with reputed mechanical genius

who

has joinedthe

army;

and

2

men —

¹

^an

automobile mechanic,the other a boiler-tender

— who

are

more

shy

and

retiring,

and

also

more

mechanically inclined, than

most

other Tuscarora.

While

all (except the hospital case) are well

enough

adjusted to life in Tuscarora society, they (like perhaps the

modal Ojibwa)

avoid too-close

and

continuous relationships with people,

and

relatethemselves rather to

nonhuman

objects (plants

and

machinery). Their social roles are, however, highly individualized, ratherthanfunctions of adefinable

common

status.

The

^reason for the absence of

any

very noticeable correlation between the

modal and

deviant types,

and

social status, probably lies in the fact that Tuscarora is not a class-stratified society,

and

has

no

racial or regional subsocieties.

With

a relatively homogeneous, equalitarian culture,

and

a

low

degree of predictability of thestatus of

any

individual at birth, the variations in personality (other than sex-differences) are probably functions of "accidental" differences inthe formative experiences of individuals.

That

there is a central tendencyat all,

and

the point at

which

it falls, is

no

doubt a function of theculture.

Wallace]

MODAL PERSONALITY

OF

TU&CARORA

ENTDLUSTS

95

Figure^6.

— ^Map

^{of the}Lake Winnipeg region (after Hallowell, 1936).

disregardedasdirectlydeterminantofpersonality.

They may

indeed play a role in the

complex

matrix of determinants

which

produces personality; but they operateonly through themediationof culture.

Thus

it is

assumed

that the concept of culture (as used here) is catholic

enough

to embrace the indirect influences or limitations im- posed

upon

culturalbehavior

by

extracultural variables.

More

relevant to the inquiry is the possibility that apparent dif- ferences (or similarities)

may

be due, not to differences inherent inthepeople taking thetest,butto vagaries of sampling, administra- tion,

and

scoring,

which

influence or bias the data so as to give the impression of differences (or similarities)

which

do not really exist,

and which would

not be discovered if completely valid

and

reliable testingprocedureswere used. Thisboils

down

^tothe question:

"Are

the Korschach protocols collected

by

Dr. Hallowell

and

the writer properly comparable sets ofdata?"

The

sampling of the

Ojibwa

population could not be as carefully controlled as

was

that of the Tuscarora. Because of the nature of theculture,the

Ojibwa

populationeastof

Lake Winnipeg

is scattered geographically over a large area. Individuals

from

six separate

96 BUREAU

OF

AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

[Bull. IBO bands, arranged along a steep gradient of acculturation, are repre- sentedinthe sample^; thetotalpopulation of those six

bands

isprob- ably about

two

thousand. Eighty-one percent of the sample comes

from two bands

alongtheBerensKiver,

whose combined

populationis

about 612 (504 aged 7

and

up).

An

ethnographer's census of the kind completed

by

thewriter atTuscarora

was

manifestly impossible for the

Ojibwa

in theircondition ofgeographical dispersion.

Hence

it is difficult to estimate the approximation of the

Ojibwa

sample

statistics to the population parameters. Hallowell's tables indicate, however,that a fairly well distributed

random

sample

was

probably obtained (see table 7, below). Since the

Ojibwa

sample is numeri- cally larger than the Tuscarora one, the writer initially

hoped

to be able to abstract

from

the

Ojibwa

records a series of 70

which

exactly

matched

the Tuscarora in age-sex categories; but this proved to be impossible becausethe

Ojibwa

sample simply

had

too

few

representa- tives in certain categories. Furthermore, such

matching might

have glossed over differences in population parameters

which

were cul- turally determined. ^It

was

finally decided to use the whole

Ojibwa

adultsampleof 102 records.

Table^7.

—

The samplingof the Ojibwapopulation hyage, sex,andlocality A:

THE

SAMPLE

Agegroup

Wallace]

MODAL PERSONALITY

OF

TUSCARORA

INDIANS

97

system of administration,

and

hence viewed the administrative situ- ationinsubstantiallythe

same

light.

The

notabledifferencesincluded

:

(1)

The

necessary use of

an

interpreter

by

Dr. Hallowell for 83 (81 percent) of thecases (noneoftheTuscarorarecordsweresecuredwith the aid ofan interpreter,allbeingrecorded inEnglish) ; (2) offering the

Ojibwa

^subject,

who

frequentlyusedhisfinger topoint outhiscon- ceptsonthecards,an

orangewood

stick to facilitatelocating responses (nosuch pointerstick

was

^giventotheTuscarorasubject) _; (3) telling the

Ojibwa

subject before the test that the card could be held in

any

position (nosuchinstruction

was

giventotheTuscarorasubject); (4) offering the

Ojibwa

subject a trial blot before the standard series

was

presented (notrialblot

was shown

totheTuscarora) ; (5) admin- isteringthe inquiryto

many

of the

Ojibwa

subjects immediatelyafter recording their responses to the card, instead of

making

the inquiry only after the responses toall 10 cards

had

been recorded (the Tus- carora inquiries were all

made

after the responses were recorded for all cards)

; (6) recording

Ojibwa

reactiontimes by the minute

hand

of a wrist

watch

(Tuscarorareactiontimeswere recordedinhalf of the cases

by

stop watch,

and

in half

by

thesecond

hand

of a wristwatch)

;

(7)

more

liberalencouragementof verbally inhibited

Ojibwa

subjects than of verbally inhibitedTuscarora; (8) discontinuing thetestwith very anxious

Ojibwa

subjects,

who

thus do not appear in the

sample

(no Tuscarora Rorschachs were discontinued, oncebegun) _; (9)

more

consistentprivacyinthe

Ojibwa

situation,ifthe interpreterisnotre-

garded as

an

"audience"

(many

Tuscarora Rorschachs were

admin-

isteredbefore

an

"audience")

.

The

significance of thesedifferences in experimental procedure,in- sofar asthey

may

haveaffected essential data, such asproportions of determinants, is difficulttoevaluate. Conductingthe testthrough

an

interpreter

may

have

had

the effect of filtering out

some

^{ofthe allu-}

sions

and

nuances in the original responses,

and

of

making

a subtle inquiry

more

difficult. This

might

lead to scoring

some

responses

F

which

actually involved otherdeterminantslosttotheexaminerinthe course of translationback

and

forth.

On

the otherhand. Dr. Hallo- wellhasconsultedwithDr.Klopfer onthis point,

and

bothagree that forcing inadequately bilingualsubjects touseEnglish

would

have been

more

distortingthan

any

interpreter; furthermore, that there are

no

apparent consistent differences between records obtained with

and

without an interpreter.

The

offeringof a pointer sticktothe subject

might

suggest to

him

that the examinor

wanted him

to pick out de- tails;

and

^thisinturn

might

have led toahigher percentage ofZ?, d^

and Dd

^responses than

would

have been given

had

the pointer stick notbeenpresented.

On

the otherhand, however,the

orangewood

stick

was

onlyoffered after

Ojibwa

subjects wereseen consistently to point

98 BUREAU

OF

AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

[BoLL. 150

outconceptswitlitheir fingers,so thatthe pointersimplyfacilitated a

form

ofbehavioralready in use.

Giving

the

Ojibwa

subject permis- sion, without his asking, to turn the cards,

might

facilitatehis search fordetails,

and might

enable

him

togivealarger

number

ofresponses thanifhe

had

felt (as

some

subjectsalwaysdo) thathe

must

keepthe card rigidly inthe position in

which

it is

handed

^{to him.}

The

trial blot,ofcourse,

may have

reduced the reactiontime to

Card

1 in

some

cases,

and purged

that card of its threatening aspect as the first,

strange, stimulus. This

might

reduce the incidence of rejections, anxiety-responses, tension-responses, on that card,or otherwise affect the subject's reaction to it. (These effects, however,

would

be

more

likely to be apparent

upon

sequence analysis than in the quantitative scoring.) Trialblotsare

an

accepted alternativeinRorschachproce- dure,however, used forinstance

by

Hertz,

and Rorschach

^experts

do

not seriouslyquestion the essentialcomparability of records obtained withorwithoutthetrial blot. (Bell, 1948, p.76)^.

The

minglingof

performance

proper

and

inquiry of course

makes

impossibleany

com-

parison of

Ojibwa and

Tuscarora response times.

The

less pi-ecise

recording of

Ojibwa

reaction times probably

would

not

make much

difference,

where

averages or

modes

are concerned, since the

Ojibwa

reaction times areslow. It

makes no

difference in thisstudy

anyway,

since the series of

Ojibwa

reaction times were not available to the writer during his study of the

Ojibwa

data.

The

items ₍₇₎

and

₍₈₎ above

would seem

tocancel eachotherout,

more

orless. Finally,the relative privacy of the

Ojibwa

situation

might have

led to compara- tively fewercolorresponsesthan

would have

been giveninthe "audi- ence"situationfrequentlyobservedatTuscarora.

In

sum, then, differences in administration

may

theoretically

have

been conducivetoahigher

Ojibwa F

^{percent, ahigher}

^Ojibwa D

^per-

cent,

d

percent,

and Dd

percent,ahigheri?,

and

lower

FC^ CF^ and

C, than

would

have been observed if bothseries

had

been administered accordingto the Tuscarora procedure.

To

the writer it seems,

how-

ever, to be very dubious whether thevery large differences in

modal

profiles could be due simply to such

minor

procedural differences.

Dissimilaritieshave beenstressed

up

to thispoint;butit

must

be

em-

phasizedthat theessentialoutlinesofprocedure werethe

same

ⁱⁿboth cases,

and

thatthe

meaning

ofdifferences inprocedureishighlyprob- lematical

anyway. To

balance Kimble's observation

on

the unrelia- bilityofthe

Rorschach under

varied administrative conditions

(Kim-

ble, 1945), for instance, there is Fosberg's report on the high relia- bility of quantitative

Rorschach

scores under varied administrative instructions (Fosberg, 1938).

The

writer's feeling is that variabil- ityinadministrationcannot beheld responsible for the extensivedif- ferences

which

will be describedinthefollowingsection.

Wallace]

MODAL PERSONALITY

OF

TUSCARORA

INDIANS

99 Another

conceivable source of confusion is differences in scoring between Dr. Hallowell

and

the writer. It

would

seem very unlikely, however, that such differences could be large enough, or consistent enough, toproduce

any

significantskewing ofthe separate

group

re- sults.

Both

investigators weretrained

by

the

same man

(Klopfer)

;

they

had

discussed scoringproblems both before

and

afterthe writer

"Went into the field;

and

Dr.

and

Mrs. Hallowell

went

over several of theTuscarora Rorschachs in detailforthe purposeofchecking

on

the closenessofhisscoringtotheirs. Differenceswere noted inthehand- ling of color responses,

and

the writer accordingly revised the scor- ing of all Tuscarora color responses.

While

undoubtedly complete agreement

would

neverbe reached, neither party feels that the error

from

thissourceislikely tobesignificant.

Table^8.

—

TheRorschachattributesoftheOjibwamodalclass

100 BUREAU

OF

AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

[Bull. 150

THE MODAL PERSONALITY STRUCTURE OF THE OJIBWA INDIANS