behavtoural aspects - shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/.../10603/543/13/13_chapter6.pdf ·...
Post on 26-Jul-2020
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
CHAPTER V1
BEHAVTOURAL ASPECTS
The behavioural aspects in wives of alcoholics and wives of non-
alcoholics such as self-concept and assertiveness are analysed in two sections.
The results are given io the following pages.
SECTION I SELF-CONCEPT
The self-concept Scale
This scale was used to measure the self-concept of wives of alcoholics and
non-alcoholics. ms scale consists of 4 sub-scales. They are (a) Personal self-
esteem, (b) F d y self-esteem, (c) Social self-estean and (d) Self-confidence.
The test was done individually to all the two groups of samples. The scoring was
followed as given by the author. The score of the two groups of the subjects on
each of the four sub-scales were separately subjected to mean, 't' test, S.D., and
ANOVA test to find out the relationship of these four areas with various socio-
demographic data, between the groups and to test if it is significantly different
between the groups and to test the relationship of four areas of self-concept with
Wives of Alcoholics and Non-Alcoholics and its relationship with various socio-
demo~aphi~data.Tnesummariesofthemean,~t'test,mdANOVAtestforfou~
sub-scales of self-concept scale are also presented in tlus chapter.
The relationship of self-concept with various socio-economic demographic
data between the groups are given below.
Table 6.1.1
Personal self esteem Vs Age between the groups
The above table depicts that in both the groups ' 3ge is not an important
duencing factor in building up personal self-esteem. When the age group 50
Age
20-30
30-40
40-50
50and above
and above showed highest mean value of 33.17 in wives of non-alcoholics,
Wives of non- alcoholics
29.3500
29.8696
26.8837
3 1.8929
33.1667
among wives of alcoholics, 40-50 age group showed highest mean value (M=
No. of cases
100
23
43
28
6
Wives of alcoholics
19.6400
19.6667
19.0877
21.1364
19.3333
21.14). In both the groups, 30-40 age group showed lowest personal self-esteem.
But taking into account both group separately, the wives of non-alcoholics
No. of cases
100
15
57
22
6
showed better personal self esteem than the wives of alcoholics (M= 29.3 5 Vs M
Table 6.1.2
Family self esteem Vs Age between the groups
The above table states that age has no::: -. ;role - in building up of family
Age
20-30
3 0-40
40-50
50and above
self-esteem. Among wives of non-alcoholics, accordmg to the increase of age the
family self esteem increases except for 20-30 age group (M= 23.82 to M= 26.5).
Wives of alco holica
22.7200
23.7333
22.5263
22.5909
22.5000
But in wives of alcoholics age and family self-esteem are not related. There the
age group 20-30, showed hlghest (M= 23.73) family self-esteem. When the age
No. of cases
100
15
57
22
6
group 50 and above showed lowest family self-esteem in wives of alcohol the
same age group showed highest family self-esteem in wives of non-alcoholics.
Considering the study group and control group separately wives of alcoholics
Wives of non- alcoholics
24.2900
23.8261
23.7907
24.9643
26.5000
possessin y more family self-esteem.
No. of cases
1 00
23
43
28
6
Table 6.1.3
Social Self esteem Vs Age between the groups
The table pertaming to social self esteem Vs age shows that, age is not an
integral part in the determination of social self esteem, Since both the yroups
No. of cases
100
23
43
28
6
Age
20-30
30-40
40-50
50and above
does& show any particular pattern for mean value. But the higher mean value,
i.e., and 24.99 in wives of non-alcoholics states that they are having better social
self-esteem than the study group. Among wives of alcoholics and wives of non-
Wiies of non- alcoholics
24.9900
23.0000
23.9767
27.7 143
27.2 667
Wives of alcoholics
22.8700
21 -3333
23.2281
23.3636
2 1.5006
alcoholics the age group between 40-50 showed good social self esteem and the
No. of cases
100
15
57
22
6
age group between 20-30 showed lowest social self esteem.
Table 6.1.4
Self -confidence Vs Age between the groups
The above table states that the age is an indicator only in the case of wives
of an alcoholics when measuring the self confidence in them. Among the wives of
alcoholics the mean value decreases from 25.40 to 23. 67. Hence we could
interpret that according to the increase of age the self-confidence of wives of
alcoholics decreases. But t h ~ s is not true in the case of wives of non- alcoholics.
Among them, 40-50 age group showed hghest mean value of 20.43. The total
self-confidence also was very low in wives of alcoholics (M=19.81) when
compared to the control group (M=24.94).
Age
20-30
3 0-40
40-50
SOand above
Wiies of non- alcoholics
19.8100
19.3913
19.9767
20.4286
17.3333
No. of cases
1 00
23
43
28
6
W i i e s of alcoholics
24.9400
25.4000
25 B877
24.5909
23 -6667
No. of cases
100
15
57
22
6
Table 6.1.5
Personal self -esteem Vs Education between the groups
From the above table it is clear that in wives of alcoholics with the
Education
Primary
Secondary
Undergraduate
Graduate
Postgraduate
in crease of the education personal self-esteem also increases. Because the mean
value shows gradual increase fiom 18.36 to 24.5 for them. In the case of wives of
non-alcoholics except in primary level of education, and postgraduates the mean
W i i e s of alcoholics
19.6400
18.3600
19.2286
19.8800
22.0000
24.5000
value shows gradual increase. It means that education has an important role in the
Wives of non- alcoholics
29.3500
27.0455
26.8 1 82
32.357 1
33 B952
30.7000
No. of cases
1 00
25
35
25
13
2
determination of the personal self-esteem. Considering both groups separately, the
No. of cases
100
22
33
14
21
10
wives of non-alcoholics show higher personal self-esteem (M= 29.35 Vs M=
Table 6.1.6
Family self -esteem Vs Education between the groups
The table shown above states that lugher the education the family self
esteem in wives of alcoholics increases but it is not true in the case of wives of
non-alcoholics. Considering the study group and the control group separately the
wives of non-alcoholics showed better family self esteem with regard to the
education levels. (M= 24.29 Vs M=22.72)
Education
-W
Secondary
Undergraduate
' Graduate
Postgraduate
No. of cases
100
22
33
14
21
10
Wives of alcoholics
22.7200
22,0800
22.0000
23.2400
24.0000
28.5000
No. of cases
100
25
35
25
13
2
Wives of non- alcoholics
24.2900
23.909 1
22.4545
26.0000
26.0476
25.1000
Table 6.1.7
Social self esteem Vs Education between the groups
It is observed from the above table that in wtves of non-alcoholics hgher
educated one shows better social self esteem than the study group. When the
No. of cases
1 00
22
33
14
21
10
mean value in wives of non-alcoholics increases from primary to graduate level
Wives of non- alcoholics
24.9900
23.7273
22.7273
26.5714
28.3810
25.9000
Education
Primary
Secondary
Undergraduate
Graduate
Postgraduate
i.e. 23.73 to 28.38, the mean value in post graduates shows 25.9. All these scores
.. : in&cate to better social self-esteem. But in wives of alcoholic' S mean value
Wives of alcoholics
22.8700
22.0000
22.7714
23.9600
22.7692
22.5000
shows no increase. So it could be concluded that more social self-esteem was
No. of cases
100
25
35
25
13
2
reported by wives of non-alcoholics.
Table 6.1.8
Self confidence Self -esteem Vs Education between the groups
The above table states that according to the lugher education level . self
confidence also increases except in secondary level educated ones among wives
of alcoholics. The tugher mean value in wives of alcoholics shows that (M=
24.94) they are more confident than the wives of non-alcoholics (M=19.81) with
regard to education levels. But in wives of non-alcoholics accordmg to the
increase of education level the self-confidence decreases.
No. of cases
100
22
33
14
21
10
Education
Primary
Secondary
Undergraduate
Graduate
Postgraduate
No. of cases
1 00
25
35
25
13
2
Wives of Alcoholics
24.9400
24.5200
25.37 14
23.9600
22.8462
23.5000
Wives of Non- alcoholics
19.8100
22.409 1
20.3333
18.3571
18.3810
1 7.4000
Table 6.1.9
Personal self -esteem Vs Social status between the groups
The table shown above states that with the increase of the social class
level, wives of alcoholics shows higher personal self-esteem. But in wives of non-
alcoholics social status has no such role in the determination of personal self-
esteem. Among them, middle class wives have more personal self-esteem and it
is low in upper class wives. However the mean value shows that personal self-
esteem is high in wives of non-alcoholics (M= 29.35 Vs M= 19.64).
I
Social status
Low class
Middle class
Upper class
Wives of non- a1 co h ol ics
29.3500
26.6 154
3 1.5714
25.8000
No. of cases
l00
39
56
5
Wives of alcoholics
19.6400
19.5833
29.6210
20.6667
No. of cases
100
36
61
3
Table 6.1.10
Family Self -esteem Vs Social status between the groups
It is noticeable fiom the above table that in both the groups the middle
class people reported good family self-esteem. (Wives of alcoholics M=24.82,
wives of non-alcoholics M= 24.82). In all together good f d y self-esteem was
seen among wives of non-alcoholics (M=24.29 Vs M=22.72).
Table 6.1.11
Social self -esteem Vs Social status between the groups
No. of cases
100
39
56
5
Social status
Low class
Middle class
Upper class
Social status
Low class
mddle class
Upper class
Wives of alcoholics
22.7200
21.4722
23 -5246
21.3333
I
No. of cases
100
36
61
3
Wives of non- alcoholics
24.2900
23.6923
24.8214
23.0000
Wives of alcoholics
22.8700
22.7222
22.8852
24.3333
No. of cases
100
36
61
3
Wives of non- alcoholics
24.9900
23.23 08
26.3750
23.2000
No. of cases
100
39
56
5
The above table depicts that higher social self-esteem with regard to social
status is shown by wives of non-alcoholics. (M=24.99 Vs M=22.87). In wives of
alcoholics according to the increase of class level slight increase in mean value
was seen (M= 22.72 to M= 24.33). But h s trend was not tme in wives of non-
alcoholics. Among them middle class wives showed highest social self-esteem
Table 6.1.12
Self -confidence Vs Social status between the groups
The above table depicts that, with the increase of social status level, the
self-confidence also increases in either group. But comparatively higher self-
confidence was reported by wives of alcoholics. (Wives of alcohoiics M= 24.94,
and wives of non-alcoholics M= 19.81).
Social status
Low class
Middle class
Upper class
Wives of alcoholics
24.9400
25 -2222
24.8525
23.3333
No. of cases
100
36
61
3
Wives of non- alcoholics
19.8100
22.2308
1 8.6429
14.0000
No. of cases
100
39
56
5
Table 6.1.13
Personal self -esteem Vs Employment status between the groups
It is observed fkom the above table that employment status is an important
factor in the determination of the personal self-esteem. Because in both the
groups, the employed ones showed hgher mean value (m= 21.5 and M= 3 1.41)
withm the groups. Since the mean value of wives of alcoholics is 19.64 and in
wives of non-alcoholics in 29.35, it could be concluded that the wives of non-
alcoholics are having more personal self-esteem than the study group.
Table 6.1.14
Family Self -esteem Vs Employment status between the groups
Employment status
Employed
Unemployed
Wives of dcoholics
19.6400
21 .S000
19.23 17
Employment status
Employed
Unemployed
No.ofcases
100
27
73
1Yo.of cases
100
18
82
No. of cases
100
27
73
Wivesofnon- alcoholics
29.3 5 00
3 1.4074
28.5890
Wives of non- a1 coh olics
24 2900
24.8889
24.0685
Wives of alcoholics
22.7200
22.7222
22.7 195
No. of eases
100
18
82
Table 6.1.14 states that family self esteem is not related with the
employment status for both the groups. The mean value of employed and
unemployed ones of study group and control group are 22.72 and 24.29
respectively. If shoes that wives of non-alcoholics are having more family self
esteem than the wives of alcoholics.
Table 6.1.15
Social Self -esteem Vs Employ men t status between the groups
The above table shows that the employment satus have an important role
in the maintenance of social self esteem in both the groups. Because in both the
groups employed wives showed . . . hgher mean value (wives alcoholism
M=23.39 and wives of non- alcoholics M=26.96). Considering each group
separately, wives of non-alcoholics reported better social self esteem than wives
of alcoholics (M=24.99 Vs M=22.87).
No.of c88es
100
27
73
Wivesofnon- alcoholics
24.9900
26.9630
24.2600
Employment status
Employed
Unemployed
Wives of alcoholics
22.8700
23.3882
22.7561
No.ofcases
100
18
82
Table 6.1.16
Self-confidence Vs Employment status between the groups
The table shown above shows that, in both the groups, the employed ones
shows better self-confidence. Considering both group separately, the wives of
non-alcoholics show. poor self-confidence than the study group (Wives of
a1 coholics M=24.94 and wives of non -alcoholics, M= l 9.8 1 ).
Table 6.1.17
Personal self -esteem Vs Personal income between the groups
No. of cases
100
27
73
Employment status
Employed
Unemployed
Wives of alcoholics
24.9400
25.4146
22.7778
Personal income
No income
Less than Rs. 1000
Rs. 1000-2500
Rs.2500-5000
Rs. 5000 and above
No. of cases
100
18
82
Wives of alcoholics
1 9.6400
19.1059
22.3333
21.3333
24.6667
24.6667
Wives of non- alcoholics
19.8100
20.1096
1 9.0000
No. of cases
100
82
6
6
3
3
Wives of non- alcoholics
29.3500
28.6761
28.0000
34.8000
3 1 .a000
30.61 11
No. of cases
100
73
2
5
2
18
Since the above table shows no pdcular pattern it is clear that personal
income and personal self-esteem are not related. When among the wives of non-
alcoholics the highest mean value of 34.8 shown by the RS.lOOO-2500 income
level groups, the hghest personal self esteem (M= 24.67) was shown by the
Rs. 5 000 and above group in wives of alcoholics. In wives alcoholics according to
the increase of personal income level, personal self-esteem also increases except
for less than Rs.1000 category. Takmg into account for both the groups, the high
personal self-esteem was seen in wives of alcoholics.
Table 6.1.18
Family self-esteem Vs Personal income between the groups
The table pertaining to family self esteem Vs personal income are not
showing any particular pattern for mean value, for both the groups. It means
personal income is not an important factor in measuring family self-esteem. But
Personal income
No Income
Less than Rs. 1000
Rs. 1000-2500
2500-5000
Rs.5000 and above
Wives of alcoholics
22.7200
22.6588
25.3333
23.0000
21.6667
22.3 3 3 3
Wives of non- alcoholics
24.2900
24.3099
20.5000
24.0000
28.5000
24.6667
No. of cases
100
82
6
6
3
3
No. of cases
100
73
2
5
2
18
comparatively higher mean value scored by wives of non-alcoholics (M= 24.29
Vs 22.72) shows that they are having more family self esteem than the wives of
alcoholics. When the income level less than Rs. 1000 shows highest mean value in
wives of alcoholics that category scored lowest mean value in wives of non-
alcoholics. When the income level Rs. 2500- 5000 scored highest mean value in
wives of non-alcoholics that category scored lowest mean value in wives of
alcoholics (M= 21 -67).
Table 6.1.19
Social Self -esteem Vs Personal income between the groups
The table pertaining to social self esteem Vs personal income shows that
in the determination of social self esteem, personal income has no role. Because
in both the groups the mean value is not showing any particular pattern. In both
Personal income
No Income
Less than Rs. 1 000
Rs. 1000-2500
Rs.2500-5000
Rs.5000 and above
Wives of alcoholics
22.8700
22.8000
20.6667
22.8333
25.6667
24.3333
No. of cases
100
82
6
6
3
3
Wives of non- alcoholics
24.9900
24.4085
20.50000
26.6000
23 .OOOO
28.0556 L
No. of cases
100
73
2
5
2
18
the group the income level less than Rs. 1000 showed lowest social self esteem
score. However, the higher mean value i.e. M=24.99 shows that wives of non-
alcoholics are having more social self esteem than the other group (M=22.87).
Table 6.1.20
Self-confidence Vs Personal income between the groups
The above table shows steady decrease of mean value in wives of
alcoholics (M=25.31 to M=20.33). It means, among them as the personal income
increases, the self-confidence decreases. But in wives of non-alcoholics personal
income and self-confidence are not related. The self-confidence is also less in
wives of non-alcoholics with regard to personal income between the groups
(Wives of alcoholics, M=24.94 and wives of non- alcoholics, M= 1 9.8 1).
No. of cases
100
73
2
5
2
18
Personal income
No Income
Less than Rs. 1 000
Rs. 1000-2500
Rs.2500-5000
Rs.5000 and above
Wives of alcohoiics
24.9400
25.3059
23 -6667
23 -6667
23.0000
20.3333
No. of cases
100
82
6
6
3
3
Wives of non- alcoholics
19.8100
20.1690
17.0000
2 9.4000
22.5000
18.8333
Table 6.1.21
Personal Self-esteem Vs Status in house between the groups
The above table states that among wives of alcoholics the status in house
has an important role in measurjng personal self-esteem. In wives of alcoholics
accordmg to the increase in good attitude of the husbands, the wives' personal
self-esteem increases from 1 7.79 to 2 1.18. But in wives of non-alcoholics status
in house has not a good role in determining the personal self-esteem. Among
them more personal self-esteem is reported by the wives, those who are getting no
acceptance from their alcoholic husbands. However more personal self-esteem is
reported by the wives of non- alcoholics.
No. of cases
l00
70
26
4
Status in house
Good acceptance
Little acceptance
No acceptance
Wives of Alco holies
19.6400
21.1842
19.0930
17.7895
No. of cases
1 00
38
43
19
Wives of Non- aleo holics
29.3500
29.6429
28 -3 846
30.5000
Table 6.1.22
Family Self-esteem Vs Status in house between the groups
It is observed fiom the above data that in wives of non- alcoholics alone,
status in house has an important role. Because accorchng to the acceptance fiom
the husband the wive's family self-esteem is increasing among them (M=22.5 to
24.66) But in wives of alcoholics status in house has no such role. There the mean
value is not showing a stsdy pattern. Considering the total samples, more family
self esteem was shown by the wives of non-alcoholics. (M=24.29 Vs M=22.72).
Table 6.1.23
Social Self-esteem Vs Status in house between the groups
No. of cases
100
70
26
4
Status in house
Good acceptance
Little acceptance
No acceptance
Wives of Alcoholics
22.7200
22.6316
23.0698
22.1053
Status in house
Good acceptance
Little acceptance
No acceptance
No. of case8
100
38
43
19
Wives of Non- aleo h 01 ics
24.2900
24.6571
23. S769
22.5000
I
Wives of AI coh olics
22.8700
22.1316
23.6512
22.578 1
Wives of Non- alcoholics
24,9900
25.6714
22.8846
26.7500
No. of cases
1 00
38
43
19
No. o f cases
100
70
26
4
The table shown above states that in both the groups the social status in
house and social self esteem are not related.. since its shows difference in mean
values. But the higher mean value (i.e. M= 24.99 Vs M= 2287) in wives of non-
alcoholics shows the hgher social self esteem in them, with regard to status in
house. Among wives of non-alcoholics, those who are not gettmg acceptance
fiom their husband showed highest mean value of 26.75 than those who are
getting acceptance from their husband rated mean value of 25.67. But among
wives of alcoholics those who are getting little acceptance fiom the husband
scored hlghest social self-esteem (M= 23.65)
Table 6.1.24
Self confidence Vs Status in house between the groups
The table shown above states that self-cudidence is more in wives of
alcoholics (wives of alcoholics, M=24.94, and wives of non alcoholics
M= 19.8 1). In both the groups, those wives who are not getting any acceptance
from their husband reported lowest self-confidence (wives of alcoholics M =
Status in house
Good acceptance
Little acceptance
No acceptance
No. of cases
100
70
26
4
Wives of non- alcoholics
19.8100
19.4429
20.7308
20.2500
Wives of alcoholics
24.9400
24.1579
25.279 1
No. of cases
100
38
43
25.7368 19
24.94 wives of non-alcoholics M=19.81). Those who are reported of getting
consideration fully or little fiom their husbands showed comparatively better
self-confidence in either group.
Table 6.1.25
Personnel self esteem Vs interest in social activities between the groups
From the above table it is clear that interest in social activities could not
built up good personal self-esteem in wives. When, those who are not interested
insocial activitiesreportedhigherpmsond selfesteem(M=22.25) andno
response category reported lowest (M= 1 9.00) personal self esteem in wives of
alcoholics. In wives of non-alcoholics no response group reported lugher
personal self esteem M=3 1 -8 1) . However, scores on persbnal self esteem was
higher in wives of non-alcoholics (M= 29.3 5 Vs 1 9.64).
No. of cases
100
57
7
36
Interest in social activities
Yes
No
No response
Wives of alcoholics
19.6400
20.8214
22.2500
19.000
No. of case9
100
28
4
68
Wives of non- alcoholic^
29.3500
28.0526
27.2857
3 1.8056
Table 6.1.26
Family self esteem Vs Interest in social activities between the groups
The above table states that interest in social activities has no duence in
making family self esteem. When the "no response" group showed hghest
(M=26.17) and those are not interested in social activities showed lowest (M=
2 1 .57) family self esteem in wives of non-alcohol ics , in wives of alcoholics (M=
26.1 7), its just reverse was true in wives of non-alcoholics. Comparing both the
groups, the wives of non-alcoholics showed more family self esteem (M= 24.29)
than the study group (M= 22.72).
No. of cases
100
57
7
36
Wives of Non- dcoholics
24.2900
23.4386
21.5714
26.1667
Interest in social activities
Yes
No
No response
Wives of AIcoholics
22.7200
23,4643
24.5000
22.3088
No. of cases
100
28
4
68
Table 6.1.27
Social self esteem Vs Interest in social activities between the Groups
The above table shows that the higher social self esteem with respect to
interest in social activities was shown by wives of non-alcoholics (M=24.99 Vs
M=22.87) when "no response" group scored highest social self esteem (M=27.5)
in wives of non-alcoholics, those are interested in social activities showed
hghest social self est eern in wives of alcoholics (M=23.29).
Table 6.1.28
Self-confidence Vs Interest in social activities between the groups
Interest in social activities
Yes
No
No response
Wives of alcoholics
22.8700
23.2857
2 1.2500
22.794 1
No. of cases
100
57
7
36
No. of cases
100
28
4
68
Wives of non- alcoholics
24.9900
24.0702
19.5714
27.5000
No. of cases
100
57
7
36
lnterest in social activities
Yes
No
No response
Wives of alcoholics
24.9400
23.6786
2 1.7500
25.647 1
No, of cases
1 00
28
4
68
Wives of non- alcoholics
19.810'0
20,0526
16.2857
20.1111
It is observed f+om above table that interest in social activities and self-
confidence are related. Because in both the groups those who are not sure about
the social involvement (no response group) reported highest self confidence
(wives of alcoholics Mz25.65 and wives of non-alcoholics M= 25.65) and those
have no interest in social activities reported lowest self confidence (wives of
alcoholics ,M=2 1 .7 5 and wives of non-alcoholics M= 1 6.27). But, while
considering both the groups separately, the wives of alcoholics are having more
self-confidence with regard to interest in social activities.
Table 6.1.29
Personal self-esteem Vs Relation with husband between the groups
It is observed fkom the above table that the relation with the husband has a
Relation with husband
Good
Bad
major role in m h g good personal self-esteem. The wives of non-alcoholics are
having more personal self-esteem than the study group (M= 29.35 Vs M=
Wives of alcoholics
19.6400
20.1538
19.5632
1 9.64). Those wives maintaining good relation with husbands reported higher
No. of cases
1 00
13
87
Wives of non- alcoholics
29.3500
32.7876
28.3247
No. of eases
1 00
77
23
personal self-esteem in both the groups (wives of alcoholics M= 20.15 and wives
of non- alcoholics M= 32.78).
Table 6.1.30
Family self-esteem Vs Relation wit h husband between the groups
It is clear fiom the table that relation with husband has importance in
buildmg up of family self-esteem for both the groups. The higher mean value in
both the groups (wives of alcoholics M= 24.00, wives of non-alcoholics M=
25.39) for good relationship with husband indicates the hgher family self esteem
in them. Taking into account the 100 samples each ( wives of alcoholics and
wives of non-alcoholics ) the hgher family esteem was shown by the wives of
Relation with husband
Good
Bad
non- alcoholics.
Wives of Alcoholics
22.7200
24.000
22.5287
No. of cases
1 00
77
23
No. of cases
1 00
13
87
Wives of Non- alcoholics
24.2900
75.3913
23.9610
Table 6.1.31
Social self-esteem Vs Relation with husband between the groups
The above table depicts that relationship with husband is an important
factor in the detemimtion of social self-esteem. Because in both the groups the
good relationshp with husband shows hlgher mean value (wives of alcoholics,
M=23.77) and wives of non alcoholics, M=28.57). However considering both the
group separately, the wives of alcoholics are having comparatively hgh social self
esteem (M-24.99) than the wives of non alcoholics (M=22.87).
Table 6.1.32
Self-confidence Vs Relation with husband between the groups
Relation with husband
Good
Bad
Wives of alcoholics
22.8700
23.7692
22.7356
Wives of non- dco hoiics
24.9900
28.5652
23.922 1
NO. of cases
100
13
87
Wives of non- alcoholics
19.8160
18.3913
20.2338
No. of cases
1.00
13
87
Relation with husband
Good
Bad
No. of cases
100
77
23
No. of cases
1 00
77
23
Wives of alcoholics
24.9400
22.923 1
25.2414
The above table depicts that the relations with husband has very strong
influence in the building up to self confidence. Because in the study group and in
the control group those reported bad relationship with husband scored highest
mean value, which is an indicator of hgh self confidence in them. (wives of
a1 coholics =25.24, wives of non-alcoholics, M=20.23). But when compared both
the groups separately, hgher self-confidence was in wives of alcoholics (wives of
alcoholics, M=24.94 and wives of non-alcoholics, M= 1 9.8 1).
Table 6.1.33
Personal self-esteem Vs Land holdings between the groups
Land holdings
No property
Less than 1 acre
l m e -2 acres
2 acres -3 acres
3 acres -4 acres
4 acres -5 acres
5 acres -6 acres
6 acres -7 acres
Wives of alcoholics
19.6400
22.7333
20.2857
19.8889
19.1053
18.1429
18.3000
17.8889
l 9.0000
No. of cases
100
12
26
8
22
1 1
10
9
2
No. of cases
100
I5
21
9
19
14
10
9
3
Wives of non- alcoholics
29.3500
28.6667
28.1 154
26.7500
26.7273
34.7273
29.4000
3 5.7778
30.0000
The above table describes that personal self-esteem is low in wives of
alcoholics (M= 1 9.64) when compared to wives of non-alcoholics (M= 29.3 5).
When the hgher level of land holders showed better personal self-esteem in
wives of non-alcoholics, in the study group it is just the reverse. In both the
groups the lower level property holders showed better personal self esteem than
the middle level property holders.
Table 6.1.34
Family self-esteem Vs Land holdings between the groups
The above table depicts that wives of non-alcoholics have higher family
self-esteem than wives of alcoholics with respect to land holdings (M=24.29 and
No. of cases
100
12
26
8
22
1 l
10
9
2
Land holdings
No Property
Less than 1 acre .
Wives of alcoholics
22.7200
24.2000
22.0476 .
No.of cases
100
15
21
l acre -2 acre
2 acres -3 acres
3 acres -4 acres
4 acres -5 acres
5 acres -6 acres
6 acres -7 acres
Wivesofnon- alcoholics
24.2900
24.4 167
24.3077
9
l9
14
10
9
3
22.4444
20.5789
23 -6493
23.6000
25.3333
19.3333
24.2500
22.0909
26.0000
24.7000
26.6667
25.5000
22.72) Since no parbcular pattern for mean value,it is clear that family self esteem
and land holdmg are not moving in the same direction.
Table 6.1.35
Social Self-esteem Vs Land holdings between the groups
The table shown above states that according to the increase in property
level the social self-esteem is not increasing for both the groups. However the
high social self esteem was reported by wives of non-alcoholics (M=24.99) with
regard to land holdmg thm the study group (M=22.87) . In wives of non-
alcoholics, the higher level of landholders showed slightly increased social self-
esteem.
No. of cases
100
12
26
8
22
I l
I0
9
2
Land holdings
No property
Less than 1 acre
1 acre -2 acres
2 acres -3 acres
3 acres -4 acres
4 acres -5 acres
5 acres -6 acres
6 acres -7 acres
No. of cases
100
15
21
9
19
14
10
9
3
Wives of dcoholics
22.8700
24.1333
22.1900
2 1.7778
22.0000
22.357 1
24.9000
24.3333
21.3333
Wives of non- alcoholics
24.9900
23.3333
24.0769
25.2500
22.7273
26.54.55
24.1000
33.8889
26.5000
Table 6.1.36
Self-confidence Vs Land holdings between the groups
The above table pertaining to self confidence and land holding states that,
self confidence shown by wives of alcoholics are higher than the wives of non-
alcoholics, since the mean values are 24.94 Vs 19.81. in both the group, no
pattern was established for mean value. So it could be interpreted that self
confidence and land holding are not moving in the same direction. But it could be
stated fiom the table that in wives of non- alcoholics up to middle level there is
gradual increase in self-confidence.
No. of cases
100
12
26
8
22
1 1
10
9
2
Land holdings
No ProPerty
Less than 1 acre
1 acre -2 acres
2 acres -3 acres
3 acres -4 acres
4 acres -5 acres
5 acres -6 acres
6 acres -7 acres
No. of cases
100
l 5
21
9
19
14
10
9
3
Wives of alcoholics
24.9400
25.0000
24.2381
25.8889
25.0000
25.2 143
22.4000
27.6667
25.3333
Wives of non- alcoholics
19.81000
20.0000
22.46 1 5
18.5000
20.1 818
20.0909
17.5000
15.5556
14.5000
The scores of wives of alcoholics and thereof non-alcoholics on personal
self-esteem, family self-esteem, social self-esteem and self-confidence on S elf
Concept Scale (S.C.S.) are gven below. Difference in mean scores of various
sub-scales on self concept along with 't' value is given in Table 6.1.37. It is
graphically presented in Fig. No. 6.1
Table No 6.1.37
Scores on Self-concept Scale
It is observed that 't value is significant. This shows that there is
significant difference between wives of alcoholics and non-alcoholics on the
Sign i- ficance
<.05
Total
Personal self-esteem
personal self-esteem, family self-esteem, and self-coddence scores. The higher
mean value in wives of non alcoholics shows that they are high in self-esteem on
Family self-esteem
Social self-esteem
Self-confidence
personal, family and social areas but are low in self-confidence.
Wives of alcoholics
M
19.64
22.72
22.87
24.94
l
t
- 1 1.2828
SD
5.0822
Wives of non- alco holies
M
29.35
4.5684
3.7997
4.9233
SD
6.8922
24.29
24.99
19.81
4.475 1
7.8759
4.7005
-2.4428
-2.4121
7.4989
<. 05
x.05
<. 05
Figure 6.1 Scores on Self Concept Scale
0 Personal Family self Soclal self Self sef esteen esteem e s t m confidence
The following table gives the surnmaq of statistics obtained from a sample
of 100 obse~vations each fi-om the alcoholic and non-alcoholics wives.
Analysis of variance two way classifications is used here with groups
decided by the element which is alcoholic and non-alcoholic on one side and one
of the socio-economic and demographic variable as the second classification.
Hence this corresponds to a random effect model and hence the various sum of
squares were calculated through regression. It is done with a purpose of verifying
whether there is any difference in the mean sel f-concept for the different process
considered. The following table provide the result corresponding to various
categories indicate there in.
The table provides 3 different hypothesis being tested. There will be 2
mair ifects and one interaction effect depending upon the probabilities reported
.: respective. F-values are used for declaring whether the effect is sigmficant or
*t.
Table 6.1.38 Personal self esteem score Vs Age between the groups
Source of variation
Between the groups
Age
Two way interactions
R .?sidual - . -7 i l L
F
Sum of squares
4283.842
452.969
150.463
6656.358
11973.995
P
123 S66
4.355
l -447
DF
1
3
3
192
199
Significance o f F
-000
.005
.23 1
Mean square
4283.842
150.990
50.154
34.669
60.171
In the two way analysi S of variance considered to test for average personal
self-esteem score In a two dunensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dunension and the age group as another dunension, the following results
are obtained. The personal self-esteem score seems to have different averages for
the two groups as well as the different age groups. But the averages are in the
same pattern for different age level S, between the two groups.
Table 6.1.39 Family self esteem score Vs Age between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average family
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the age group as another dunension, the following results
are obtained. The family self-esteem score seems to have different averages for
Significance of F
-023
.712
.515
Source of variation
Between the groups
Age
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Sum of squares
109.173
28.417
47.486
3972.847
4171.995
DF
1
3
3
192
199
Mean square
109.173
9.472
15.829
20.692
20.965
F
5.276
-458
.765
the two groups but had the same averages for the different age groups. Also the
averages are in the same pattern for different age levels, between the two groups.
Table 6.1.40 Social self esteem score Vs Age between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average social
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the age group as another dimension, the following results
are obtained. The social self-esteem score seems to have different averages for the
two groups as well as the dfferent age groups. But the averages are in the same
pattern for different age levels, between the two groups.
Significance of F
.016
.057
,270
Source of variation
Between the groups
Age
Two way interachons
Residual
Total
Sum of squares
22 1 -493
283.823
1 46.993
7139.484
7795.020
DF
1
3
3
192
199
Mean square
221.493
94.608
48.998
37.185
39.171
F
5.957
2.544
1.3 18
Table6.1.41 Self confidence score Vs Age between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self
confidence score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dunension and the age group as another dimension, the following results
are obtained. The self-confidence score seems to have different averages for the
two groups but had the same averages for the Qfferent age groups. Also the
averages are in the same pattern for different age levels, between the two groups.
The four tables shown above show that there is a &ffkrence in various self-
concept S between the wives of alcoholics and their non-alcoholi CS inrespective of
age. The table pertaining to personal self esteem Vs age shows that there is a
hfference in their personal self-esteem between the wives dependmg upon their
age. The other three tables show that there is no difference in family self esteem,
social self esteem and in self-confidence between wives dependng upon their
age-
Source of variation
Between the groups
Age
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
F
54.357
.66 1
-324
Significance o f F
-000
.577
-808
Sum of squares
1278.934
46.686
22.886
4517.458
5902.875
DF I
1
3
3
192
199
Mean square
1278.934
15.562
7.629
23.528
29.663
With the increase in age a person is getting more opportunities to go
through various paths of life thus getting more experience in life which enables
him to face life as it is and in this process he becomes more aware of h s worth,
importance, role, image, skills and abilities about themselves whch makes them
proud of their value; self evaluation makes them correct themselves and become
more attractive persons. Thus their personal self-esteem is increasing. That is why
with the increase of age, personal self esteem increases.
But family self-esteem and social self-esteem are measured through the
relationship they are building between family and society. These two are the
mattress of one's socialization process and personality development. The
interpersonal and intra-personal relation ships are important here. Since these two
are something related to behaviour pattern, the age has no influence on it. In the
case of self-confidence also age has no role. Because self-confidence is coming
through the strong appreciation about one's abilities and skills. One's recognition
and realization about hs/her worth in society and the society's remark on it on the
basis of self-confidence. So age has no importance here.
In the four tables shown above a direct relation is established only in
personal self-esteem Vs age. As the personal self esteem score is moving in the
same pattern depending upon their age between the groups we can conclude that
personal self esteem and age are closely related between the groups. Since no
relation is established for family self-esteem, social self-esteem and self-
confidence with their age, the question of pattern of their self-concept with their
age between the groups does not arise.
Table -6.1.42 Personal self-esteem score Vs Education between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average personal
self-esteem score in a two dmensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the educational level as another dunension, the following
F
123.909
5.627
1.401
Mean square
4124.263
187.297
46.636
33.285
60.171
r
Source of variation
Between the groups
Education
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
results are obtained. The personal self-esteem score seems to have hfferent
Significance of F
,000
-000
.235
averages for the two groups as well as the different educational groups. But the
Sum of squares
41 24.263
749.187
186.544
6324.059
11973.995
averages are in the same pattern for different levels of education between the two
DH
1
4
4
190
199
groups.
Table 6.1.43
Family self-esteem score Vs Education between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average family
self-esteem score in a two dvnensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the educational level as another dunension, the following
results are obtained. The f d y self esteem score seems to have different averages
for the two groups as well as the dfierent educational groups. But the averages
Source of variation
Betweenthegroups
Education
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
are in the same pattern for different levels of education between the groups.
Sum of squares
88.307
274.3 50
75.648
3698.752
4171.995
DF
1
4
4
190
199
Significance o fF
-034
-008
.424
Mean square
88.307
68.587
18.912
19.467
20.965
F
4.536
3.523
-971
Table -6.1.44
Social self-esteem score Vs Education between the grou ps
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average social
Source of variation
Between the groups
Education
Twowayinteractions
Residual
Total
self-esteem score in a two hens ional classification with the experimental groups
as one dunension and the educational groups as another dimension, the following
Sumof squares
185.090
354.990
183.181
7032.129
7795.020
results are obtained. The social self-esteem score seems to have different averages
for the two groups as well as the different educational groups. But the averages
DF
l
4
4
190
199
are in the same pattern for hfferent levels of education between the two groups.
Table 6.1.45 Self Confidence score Vs Education between the groups
Mean square
185.090
88.747
45.795
37.01 1
39.171
F
5.001
2.398
1.237
Significance ofF
.026
.052
,296
Significance of F,b
-000
.OO 1
-948
Source of variation
Betweenthegroups
Education
Twowayinteractions
Residual
Total
Sum of squares
1116.848
426.377
15.871
4144.782
5902.875
P
51.197
4.886
,182
DF
1
4
4
190
199
Mean square
1116.848
106.594
3 -968
21.815
29.663
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self
confidence score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the educational level as another dimension, the following
results are obtained. The self-confidence score seems to have Merent averages
for the two groups as well as the educational groups. But the averages are in the
same pattern for different levels of education between the groups.
The four tables shown above depict that there is difference in personal
self-esteem, family self-esteem, social self-esteem and self-confidence between
wives depending upon their level of education. As the level of education increase,
the degree of self concept also increases because self concept sterns fiom a
person' s appraisal of their own worth, significance, alternativemess, competence
and ability to satisfy their aspirations whch to a greater extent depends on
education. In our society well-educated ones are gettmg respect, recognition and
reputation. So naturally their self worth will increase. That is the reason b h d
this relationship of education and self-concept .
Table 6.1.46 Personal self -esteem score Vs Social status between the groups
Source of variation
Between the groups
Social Status
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Sum of squares
4824.457
3 15.367
3 18.934
6625.490
11973.995
DF
3
1
2
194
199
Mean square
4824.457
157.683
159.467
34.152
60.171
P
141.264
'4.617
4.669
Significance of F
-000
,011
.010
In the two way analysis of vauance considered to test for average personal
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the social status as another dimension, the following results
are obtained. The personal self-esteem score seems to have ihfferent averages for
the two groups as well as the different social status groups. A1 so the averages are
not in the same pattern for different social status levels between the groups.
Table 6.1.47 Family self-esteem score Vs Social status between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average family
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classfication with the~expmimental groups
as one dimension and the social status as another dimension, the following results
are obtained. The f d y self-esteem score seems to have different averages for
F
6.791
3.217
-241
Source of variation
Betwam the
grouPs
Social Status
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Significance of F
-010
-042
-786
DF
l
2
2
194
199
Sum of squares
136.855
129.653
9.723
3909.374
4171.995
Mean square
136.855
64.827
4.861
20.2 51
20.965
the two groups as well as the different social status groups. But the averages are
in the same pattern for different social status levels between the groups.
Table 6.1.48
Social self-esteem score Vs Social status between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average social
Source of variation
Between the groups
Social Status
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classfication with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the social status as another dunension, the following results
are obtained. The social self-esteem score seems to have hfferent averages for the
Sum of squares
239.859
128.409
122.958
7318.934
7795.020
two groups but had the same averages for the different social status groups. Also
P
6.358
1.702
1.630
the averages are in the same pattern for chfferent social status levels between the
Significance of F"
-0 12
,185
.l99
DF
. 1
2
2
194
199
group S.
Mean sq uare
239.859
M204
6 1.479
3 7.726
39.171
Table 6.1.49
Self-confidence score Vs Social status between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self-
confidence score in a two dimensional classification with the expaimental groups
as one dirnenslon and the social status as another dimension, the following results
are obtained. The self-confidence score seems to have different averages for the
two groups as well as the different social status groups. Also the averages are not
in the same pattern for different social status levels between the two groups.
Out of the above four tables, those tables p e h g to personal self-
esteem Vs social status and self confidence Vs social status depict that there is a
Merence in personal self-esteem and self confidence among wives depending
upon their level of social status. There is also difference between wives of
Source of variation
Between the groups
Social Status
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Mean square
1303.887
165.963
76.382
21.146
29.663
Sum of squares
1 303.887
331.926
152.763
4102.341
5902.875
F
61 661
7.848
3.612
DF
1
2
2
194
199
Significance of F
.OOO
.OO 1
.029
alcoholics and their of non-alcoholics in the degree of their personal self-esteem
and self-confidence irrespective of their social status.
Alcoholic's wives are always in a massive stressful situation. They are
always pre-occupied with their drmking husband and miserable conditions at
home. They are pursuing the shame, guilt, grief, anger, hurt, fear, loneliness and
like emotional feelmgs and responses. So they are thinking about themselves, as
inferior to other$, they have no status in society, everyone looks at them with a
contempt and their children will not get a good fbture. These types of thoughts
will reduce their self-worth and self-respect. Due to their negative feelings and
responses they will also lose their confidence in doing the things. But the social
status they are getting will have a major role in determining their personal self-
esteem and self-confidence. Because through higher social status in the society,
their social reputations are r e c o w e d and valued. That is a relief for the
alcoholic's wives. So they are showing better personal self-esteem and self-
confidence than those wives having low social status levels. Their good
connections with other knowledgeable people will boost up their personal self-
image and self-confidence. It will give them better understanding about
themselves and their value in the society. But there is some other personalities
also who do not give importance to others remarks on them. Because they are
confident about their abilities. They are an exemption to the above results.
As the personal self-esteem and self-confidence scores of alcoholic's
wives and there of non-alcoholic's wives are not moving in the same pattern
depending upon their social status between the groups we could conclude that
personal self-esteem and self-confidence are not closely related between the
groups.
The table pertaining to family self-esteem Vs social status and social self-
esteem Vs social status shows a Merence between wives of alcoholic's and
there of non-alcoholics in the degree of their family self-esteem and social self-
esteem. The table far the family self-esteem Vs social self-esteem shows that there
is a hfference in f d y self-esteem between wives depending upon their level of
social status. But the table for social self-esteem Vs social status shows no
difference in social self-esteem between wives depending upon their level of
social status.
Family self-esteem is somehng related to the acceptance the family
members are giving to an individual. It also depends on the love and respect one
could gain in their home. High-class people are always stnct in keeping manners
and their reputation in the society. So they are not interested in flashing out their
home affairs, domestic problems etc to the society. So in the society's view they
are always in cordial relationships. This is the fact behmd the relationshp
between family self-esteem and social status. But when we consider the social
self-esteem, social status has no role in determining it. Thi S is because social self-
esteem is the remark of the society to each one individual. In whatever socd
status they are in, well-mannered interaction with the society will be valued.
In both (family self-esteem and social self-esteem) these tables the scores
of family self-esteem and social self-esteem of wives of alcoholics and non-
alcoholics are moving in the same pattern depending upon their social status,
between the groups. So we could conclude that family self-esteem and social self-
esteem are closely related to social status between the groups.
Table 6.1.50 Personal Self Esteem score Vs Employment status between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test .for average personal
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the employment status as another dimension, the following
results are obtained. The personal self-esteem score seems to have different
Source of variation
Between the soups
Employment
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
F
123.810
6.4 14
.071
Sum of squares
4439.038
229,949
2.554
7027.287
11973.995 .
Significance of F
.OOO
,012
.790
DF
l
l
1
196
199
Mean square
4439.038
229.949
2.554
35.854
60.171
averages for the two groups as well as the diEerent employment status groups.
But the averages are in the same pattern for different employment status between
the two groups.
Table 6.1.51
Family Self-esteem score Vs Employment status between the groups
In the two way analysls of variance considered to test for average family
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classfication with the experimental groups
as one dunension and the employment status as another dimension, the following
results are obtained. The farmly self-esteem score seems to have different
averages for the two groups but have the same averages for the different
employment status groups. Also the averages are in the same pattern for different
employment status between the two groups.
Source of variation
Between the groups
Employment
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Significance o fP
,019
.544
.601
Sum of squares
1 15.335
7.623
5.643
4035.484
4171.995
DF
1
1
l
196
199
Mean square
1 15.335
7.623
5.643
20.589
20.965
F
5.602
.3 70
,274
Table 6.1.52
Social self -esteem score Vs Employment status between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average social
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
Source of variation
Between the l3roUPs
Employment
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
as one dimension and the employment status as another dunension, the following
F
4.997
3.004
.g55
results are obtained. The social self-esteem score seems to have Merent averages
Significance of F
.027
.OS5
-330
Sum of squares
189.177
113.722
36.160
7420.417
7795.020
for the two groups but have the same averages for the different employment s t a s
groups. Also the averages are in the same pattern for different employment status
DF
1
l
1
196
199
between the two groups.
Mean square
189.177
113.722
36.160
37.859
39.171
Table 6.1.53 Self -confidence score Vs Employment status between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self
confidence score in a two dimensional classrfication with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the employment status as another dunension, the following
results are obtained. The self-confidence score seems to have different averages
for the two groups as well as the different employment status groups. But the
averages are in the same pattern for different employment status between the two
groups.
Source of variation
Between the groups
Employment
Two way interactions
Resldual
Total
The above tables show that there is a difference between wives of
alcoholics and there of non-alcoholics in the degree of their self-concept
irrespective of their employment status. The tables p e m n g to personal self
esteem Vs employment and self-confidence Vs employment show that there are
Significance of F
,000
-03 1
.353
Sum of squares
1221.33 1
107.207
19.686
4460.137
5209.875
F
53.671
4.7 1 1
-865
DF
1
l
1
196
199
Mean square
1221.331
107.207
19.686
22.756
29.663 .
also differences in personal self-esteem and self-confidence between wives
depending upon their employment status.
Self-concept is an organized knowledge structure, whtch includes
knowledge components like who1 what am I? and the evaluative components
which are the feeling about oneself like traits, physical characteristics, roles,
values, personal goals, benefits etc. When one inhvidual went out for job, they
could understand about themselves each day through different types of
interactions and roles they have to do. The work assigned to them will give an
opportumty for them to understand and reveal their self, principles and belief
towards their life. Our society, whlch gives special respect to the employed
women, will increase their self worth and image. The employed women are
getting more chances than unemployed women to evaluate themselves by
acquiring knowledge about their rights, roles and the demands on their society,
culture and job atmosphere and compare it with where they are standing by most
of the employed women are proud about their position in the society. Since they
are earning they also get an independent personality like their husbands in home
affairs whch will increase their self-respect and worth. So their personal self-
esteem and self-confidence increased.
The tables pertaining to family self esteem Vs employment and social self-
esteem Vs employment show that there is no Qfference in family self-esteem and
social self-esteem between wives depending upon their employment status.
The family members do not see one person in accordance with their
employment status at home. They regard them as a member at home, not in the
image of their employment status. The employed ones are also are so. This is
because at home, they are only wives, sister, mother sister-in-law etc. They could
show the power or status of their employment only at their job atmosphere and not
in the home. So the relationslup at home will be in the light of these facts only. So
the family self esteem and employment status are not related. In the case of social
self esteem also it is the same. The society is giving importance to the individual' S
good personality. In whatever job they are in, the society will remark their
behaviour, manners and culture. If the interaction is good and positive they will be
valued.
The various self-concept scores shown above move in the same pattern
depending upon their employment status, between the groups. Therefore we could
conclude that various self concepts except family self esteem and social self
esteem whch don't have any relation with employment status of wives, are
closely related between the groups.
Table 6.1.54 Personal self -esteem score Vs Personal income between the groups
Source of variation
Between the groups
Personal Income
Twowayinteractions
Residual
Total
Mean square
605.638
12.507
33.134
49.234
60.3 69
F
12.301
.254
6 7 3
Sum of squares
605.638
37.520
99.402
1772.41 1
2595.886
Significance of P
.001
-858
.574
DF
1
3
3
36
43
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average personal
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the personal income group as another dimension, the
following results are obtamed. The personal self-esteem score seems to have
different averages for the two groups but had the same averages for the &fierent
personal income groups. Also the averages are in the same pattern for &&rent
personal income levels between the two groups.
Table 6.1.55
Family self-esteem score Vs Personal income between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average family
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one hmension and the personal income group as another dimension, the
following results are obtamed. The family self-esteem score seems to have the
Significance of F
.491
.849
. l 57
Source of variation
Between the groups
Personal Income
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Sum of squares
9.092
15.028
103.716
675. S00
807.886
F
.48 5
.267
1.842
DF
1
3
3
36
43
Mean square
9.092
5.009
34.572
18.764
18.788
same averages for the two groups as well as the different personal income groups.
Also the averages are in the same pattern for &Eerent personal income levels
between the two groups.
Table 6.1.56
Social self esteem score Vs Personal income between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average social
self-esteem score in a two dvnensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dunension and the personal income group as another dunension, the
following results are obtained. The social self-esteem scores seem to have the
same averages for the two groups as well as for the Merent personal income
groups. Also the averages are in the same pattern for different personal income
levels between the two groups.
Source of variation
Between the W'UPS
P e r d Income
Two way hteractions
Residual
Total
Sum of squares
32.582
203.67 1
50.320
4643.978
4995.886
DF
1
3
3
36
43
Mean square
32.582
67.890
16.773
128.999
116.183
F
.253
,526
.l30
Significance of P
.618
,667
.g42
Table 6.1.57 Self confidence score Vs Personal income between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self-
confidence score in a two dimensional classdcation with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the personal income group as another dimension, the
following results are obtained. The self-confidence score seems to have mfferent
averages for the two groups but had the same averages for the different personal
income groups. Also the averages are in the same pattern for mfferent personal
income levels between the two groups.
The above tables show that there is no Merence in self-concept levels of
wives dependmg upon their personal income levels. But the tables perhirung to
personal self esteem Vs personal income and self-confidence Vs personal income
show that there is a difference between wives of alcoholics and there of non-
Source of variation
Between the POUPS
Personal Income
Two way interdons
Residual
Total
Sumof squares
92.228
27.032
39.697
712.867
932.727
DF
1
3
3
36
43
Significance of I?
-03 8
,715
.577
Mean square
92.228
9.01 1
13.232
1 9.802
21 -691
F
4.658
-455
-668
alcoholics in the degree of their personal self-esteem and self-confidence
irrespective of the personal income levels. Money is essential for smooth running
of familial needs. When a wife e m s money it increases her self-worth. The
earning wives are independent without dependmg on husbands' salary. This
increases their personal worth and self confidence.
The table pertaining to f d y self esteem Vs personal income and social
self esteem Vs personal income shows that there is no difference between wives
of alcoholics and non alcoholics in the degree of their farmly self esteem and
social self esteem irrespective of their personal income levels. At home, the
earning member is only a wife. She is not considered as a ' working woman'.
So family self esteem is not connected with personal income. Society gives
respect to those who can mingle with the people in the soclety as per the
standard norms followed by the society. Good social interaction gives the social
self esteem . So social self esteem has no relation with the personal income.
As there is no relation between self-concepts levels and personal income
levels of wives, the question of the pattern of self-concept score for different
personal income levels between the groups does not arise.
Table 6.1.58
Personal self esteem score Vs Status in house between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average personal
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the status in house as another dimension, the following
results are obtained. The personal self-esteem score seems to have different
averages for the two groups but had the same averages for the Merent statuses in
house. Also the averages are in the same pattern for hfferent statuses in house,
between the two groups.
Source of variation
Between the groups
Status in House
interactions
Residual
Total 11973.995 199 60.171
Sum of squares
3641.128
150.28 1
Mean square
3641.128
75.140
DF
1
2
F
100.1 14
2.066
Sipificance of P
.000
.l29
Table 6.1.59
Family self esteem score Vs Status in house between the gmups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average f d y
self-esteem score in a two hensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the status in house as another dimension, the following
results are obtained. The family self-esteem scores seem to have hfferent
averages for the two groups but had the same averages for the dfferent statuses in
house. Also the averages are in the same pattern for &fferent statuses in house,
between the two groups.
Significance of F
-050
-581
-536
Source of variation
Between the groups
Status in House
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Sum of squares
79.970
22.445
25 -766
4000.540
4171.995
DR
I
2
2
194
199
Mean square
79.970
1 1.222
12.883
20.621
20.965
F
3.878
.544
-625
Table 6.1.60
Social self esteem score Vs Status in house between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average social
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the status in house as another dunension, the following
results are obtained. The social self-esteem score seems to have different averages
for the two groups but had the same averages for the different statuses in house.
Also the averages are in the same pattern for different statuses in house, between
the two groups.
Source of variation
Between the
groups
Status in House
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Sum of squares
177.644
10.725
197.987
7361.588
7795.020
DP
I
2
2
194
199
Significance of F
-032
-868
-076
Mean square
177.644
5.363
98.993
37.946
39.171
F
4.681
.l41
2.609
Table 6.1.61
Self confidence score Vs Status in house between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self
confidence score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the status in house as another dunension, the following
results are obtained. The self-confidence scores seem to have different averages
for the two groups but had the same averages for the ihfferent statuses in house.
Also the averages are in the same pattern for Merent statuses in house, between
the two groups.
The above four tables say that there is a difference in the various self-
concept scores between the wives of alcoholics and there of non-alcoholics. But
Source of variation
Between the W"'PS
Status in House
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
F
42.105
1.506
,052
Significance o f F
-000
.224
-949
Sum of squares
979.806
70.087
2.418
4514.525
5902.875
DF
1
2
2
194
199
Mean square
979.806
35.043
2.209
23.27 1
29.663
these tables show that there is no difference in various self-concept scores
between wives depending upon their status at home.
In the majority of the alcoholics' families, the alcoholic husbands do not
understand the value of the wives. Since self-concept is the understandmg about
their real self and the wives of alcoholics are ready to suffer ev-g for the
betterment of them and their children's future. They are not much bothered of
their importance or acceptance at home as they know that they are doing all these
for the betterment of their family life. But they are not ready to mingle with
society because of their shame, fear, anxiety, guilt-feeling etc. They are helpless in
thls matter without active involvement in social activities. Whatever status they
are g e m , these h d s of feelings cannot be changed. It is an &er effect of their
husband's behaviour. However, the inesponsibility of the husband forces her to
manage the whole family needs without any external help. The feeling that
nobody is there to help her will enable her to work hard. That wdl increase her
self-confidence.
As there is no relation between status at home and various self-concept
scores of wives, the question of pattern of various self-concept scores for statuses
in house, between the wives does not arise.
Table 6.1.62
Personal self esteem score Vs Interest in social activities between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average personal
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dunension and the interest in social activities as another bens ion , the
following results are obtained. The personal self-esteem score seems to have
Mment averages for the two groups but had the same averages for the Merent
groups for varying interest in social activities. The averages for different groups
for varymg interest in social activities are in the same pattern, between the two
groups.
Significance ofF
-000
-528
-004
Source of variation
Between the
P O ~ P S
Interest in social work
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Sum of squares
45 14.360
45.118
391 .g05
6822.767
11973.995
DF
1
2
2
194
199
Mean square
4514.360
22.559
1 95.953
35.169
60.171
F
128.362
.64 1
5.572
Table 6.1.63
Family self esteem score Vs lnterest in social activities between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average family
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dunension and the interest in social activities as another dunension, the
following results are obtamed. The family self-esteem score seems to have
different averages for the two groups but had the same averages for the different
groups for varying interest in social activities . Also the averages are in the same
pattern for ddTerent groups for varying interest in social activities, between the
two groups.
Significance of F
-006
.357
.004
F
7.838
1.035
5.608
Source of variation
Between the
GOUPS
Interest in social work
Two way interactions
Residual
Tatal
Mean square
153.088
20.222
109.539
19.532
20.965
Sum of squares
153 -088
40.444
2 19.078
3789.228
4171.995
DF
1
2
2
194
199
Table 6.1.64
Social self esteem score Vs Interest in social activities between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average social
self-esteem score in a two hensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the interest in social activities as another dunension, the
following results are obtained. The social self-esteem score seems to have
cbfferent averages for the two groups as well the different groups for varying
interest in social activities Also the averages are not in the same pattern for
different groups for varylng interest in social activities between the two groups.
Sigaifkance of F
.003
.022
-057
Source of variat ioa
Between the liF"'PS
Interest in social work
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Mean square
327.588
141 339
106.203
36.464
39.171
F
8.984
3.893
2.9 13
Sum of squares
327.588
283.879
2 12.406
7074.016
7795.020
DF
l
2
2
194
199
Table 6.1.65
Self confidence score Vs lnterest in social activities between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self
confidence score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the interest in social activities as another dunension, the
following results are obtained. The self-confidence score seems to have different
averages for the two groups as well as the different groups for varying interest in
social activities . But the averages are in the same pattern for different groups for
varylng interest in social activities, between the two groups.
The above four tables depict that there is a difference in the various self-
concepts between the wives of alcoholics and non-alcoholics. But the tables
Source of variation
Between the P ~ P S
Interest in social work
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
pertaining to personal self-esteem Vs interest in social activities and family self
Sum of squares
1004.693
173.268
39.549
4374.213
5902.875
DF
1
2
2
194
199
F
44.559
3.842
377
Mean square
1004.693
86.634
19.775
22.547
29.663
Significance of P
. 000
.023
-4 18
esteem Vs interest in social activities show that there is no difference in personal
self-esteem and family self esteem, between wives dependmg upon their interest
in social activities. And the table pertaining to social self esteem Vs interest in
social activities and self curxEdence Vs interest in social activities show that there
is a difference in social self esteem and self confidence between wives depending
upon their interest in social activities.
Personal self-esteem is not a product of any external forces. Every
Individual knows what he is what is his worth. P e r d self-esteem is one's belief
regardmg self, how well one is living up to the standards of value prescribed by
the worldview. It is an attitude. So involvement in social activities has no direct
relationship in it. In the case of family self esteem also it is the same. One's proud
knowledge about their dealing with the f d y is the family self-esteem. It is a
person' S ability to satisfy their aspirations along with family members. So social
activities don't have any role in it.
Active involvement in social advities will give an indwidual the chance
to show their dull md abilities out of their house. Other active members of those
organizations are strong inspirations for them to work actively. The appreciation
and encouragement, the social beings are giving to the other individual will
certainly increase their self worth and value. It will gve insight to them about
their role and importance in the society and the sense that they can also contribute
something to the society will increase their social self-esteem and self-confidence.
So we can say that involvement in social activities has a major role in detaminhg
the social self-esteem and self-confidence. But disturbed emotions or hurt feelings
are exemption for h s general picture about social self-esteem. Because negative
attitude towards society make the wives of alcoholics as introverts which wdl lose
her confidence and social self esteem.
In the above four tables, social self esteem and self confidence scores only
are moving in the same pattern depending upon their interest in social activities,
between the groups. So we could conclude that social self-esteem and self-
confidence are closely related to interest in social activities, between wives of
alcoholics and non-dcoholics. No relation is established with the interest in social
activities against their personal self-esteem and family self esteem, between the
groups.
Table 6.1.66 Personal self-esteem score Vs Relation with husband between the groups
Source of variation
Between the groups
Relation with husband
Two way interactmns
Residual
Total
Sum of squares
4356.975
252.670
103 -229
6903.891
11973.995
P
123.694
7.173
2.93 1
Significance of P
-000
.008
.088
DF
l
1
1
196
199
Mean square
4356.975
252.670
103.229
35.224
60.171
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average personal
self-esteem score in a two dvnensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dunension and the relation with husband as another dimension, the
following results are obtained. The personal self-esteem score seems to have
hfferent averages for the two groups as well as the chfferent groups of vary1118
degrees of relation with the husband. But the averages are in the same pattern for
Afferent groups of varylng degrees of relation with the husband, between the two
groups.
Table 6.1.67 Family self esteem score Vs Relation with husband between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average farmly
self-esteem score in a two dmensional classfication with the experimental groups
'
Significance of F
.028
-086
-98 1
Source of variation
Between the groups
Relation with husband
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
DF
1
1
l
196
199
Sum of squares
99.864
60.699
-012
3988.040
4171.955
Mean square
99.864
60.699
-0 12
20.347
20.965
F
4.908
2.983
.OO 1
as one dimension and the relation with husband as another dunension, the
following results are obtained. The family self-esteem score seems to have
different averages for the two groups but had the same averages for the different
groups of varying degrees of relation with the husband. Also the averages are in
the same pattern for Merent groups of varying degrees of relation with the
husband between the two groups.
Table 6.1.68
Social self esteem score Vs Relation with huaband between 'the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average social
self-esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
S one dimension and the relation with husband as another dimension, the
following results are obtained. The social self-esteem score seems to have
different averages for the two groups as well as the different groups of varying
F
4.332
8.302
2.456
Source of variation
Betweenthegroups
Relation with husband
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Significance of F
.039
. O M
-119
Sum of squares
158.613
303.962
89.926
7176.412
7795.020
DF
1
1
1
196
199
Mean square
158.613
303.962
89.926
36.614
39.171
degrees of relation with the husband. But the averages are in the same pattern for
different groups of varymg degrees of relation with the husband, between the two
groups.
Table 6.1.69 Self confidence score Vs Relation with husband between the groups
Source of variation
Between the groups
Relation with husband
Two way interamons
Explained
Residual
Total
Significance of F
-000
,023
.794
,000
Mean square
1 193.309
119.343
1 S63
478.917
22.786
29.663
Sum of squares
1 1 93.309
119.343
1.563
1436.750
4466.125
5902.875
F
52.369
5.237
.069
21.018
DF
1
1
l
3
196
199
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self-
confidence score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dunension and the relation with husband as another dunension, the
following results are obtained. The self-confidence score seem to have different
averages for the two groups as well as the hfferent groups of vsaylng degrees of
relation with the husband. But the averages are in the same pattern for different
groups of varymg degrees of relation with the husband, between the two groups.
The above four tables show that there is a difference between wives of
alcoholics and there of non-alcoholics in the degree of their self-concept
irrespective of the level of their relation with the husband. The table pertaining to
family self esteem Vs relation with the husband shows that there is no Merence
in their family self esteem, between the wives depending upon their relation with
the husband. The other three tables show that there is a difference in their
personal self-esteem, social self esteem self-confidence between wives dependmg
upon their level of relation with their husband.
In marital life wives' backbone and strength is their husbands. If the
relationship is cormal she feels secured in life and that will give her the power to
ovacome all the obstacles wmes to her life. Husband's love, care and the feeling
that he will be always with her are a power for her to pursue her life smoothly.
She feels respected, considered, loved, cared etc by her husband, whtch is
expected the most. Good relationshp with the husband is a must for a satisfied
life. It will increase the wives' self worth, self-respect and self-contidence
because of the above reasons. Happy life d l ylve strength to her to interact well
and make good relationship with the society. It makes her feel good about the
society and that the evaluation about her and her family life is cordial. That makes
her proud about herself and her position in the society. So the social self-esteem is
also related to the relationshp with the husband. But considering the f a d y self
esteem, whatever may be the level of the relationship with the husband, for the
smooth running of their family life especially for the future of their children and
psychologcal balance of themselves, they have to adjust with their f d y
circumstances and must have p o d relationship and express good terms with the
family members. Parents are the models for their chldren. So they must behaves
so. If the mother behave in a proper manner in an alcoholic's house the children
will get at least one parental model. So she should subside her negative
impression and emotions about the family. Because of this awareness, the wives
are adjusting with ail h d s of their negative emotions. That is why family self-
esteem and relation with the husband are not closely related.
In the tables pertaining to personal self esteem Vs relation with husband,
social self esteem Vs relation .with husband and the self confidence Vs relation
with husband, the respective self concept scores are moving in the same pattern
dependmg upon their relation with their husband, between the groups. Therefore
we could conclude that these self-concepts and relation with the husbands are
closely related between wives of alcoholics and non-alcoholics. The self concept
of family self esteem is not closely related to the level of relation with their
husbands between the wives of alcoholics and there of non-alcoholics as no
relation is established between family self esteem and their relation with the
husband.
Table 6.1.70 Personal self esteem score Vs Land holdings between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average home
personal self-esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the
experimental groups as one dimension and the groups for hfferent vo1umes of
land holdings as another dimension, the following results are obtained. The
personal self-esteem score seems to have different averages for the two groups but
had the same averages for the different land holdings groups. But the averages of
chffe~ent levels of land holding are in the same pattern, between the two groups.
Significance of F
. 000
-176
.003
F
240.946
1.517
3.494
Source of variation
Between the groups
Land holdings
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Mean square
4700.259
50.584
116.523
33.348
63.580
Sumof squares
4700.259
303 -502
699.139
5302.322
10935.780
DF
I
6
6
159
172
Table 6.1.71
Family self esteem score Vs Land holdings between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average family
self esteem score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dunension and the groups for different volumes of land holdings as another
dimension, the following results are obtained. The family self-esteem score seems
to have different averages for the two groups as well as the different land holdings
groups. But the averages are in the same pattern for different groups of varying
land holdings, between the two groups.
Significance of F
.006
.007
.957
Source of variation
Between the i F U P S
Land holdmgs
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Mean square
159.539
61 -699
5.137
20.186
21 .&l9
F
7.904
3.057
-254
Sum of squares
159.539
370.194
30.822
3209,544
3752.821
DF
1
6
6
159
172
Table 6.1.72
Social self esteem score Vs Land holdings between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance cansidered to test for average social
self-esteem score in a two dunensional classification with the experimental groups
Source of variation
Between the groups
Land holdings
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
as one dunension and the groups for dfferent volumes of land holdmgs as another
Sum of squares
308.41 1
640.444
343.565
6234.301
7503.630
dimension, the following results are obtained. The social self-esteem score seems
Significance of F
.006
.Q1 5
.l95
DF
1
6
6
159
172
to have different averages for the two groups as well as the different land holdmgs
groups. But the averages are in the same pattern for different groups of varying
land holdmgs, between the two groups.
Mean square
308.41 1
106.741
57.261
39.209
43.626
F
7.866
2.722
1.460
Table 6.1.73
Self confidence score Vs Land holdings between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self
Source of variation
Between the groups
Land holdings
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
score in a two dunensional classification with the experimental groups
as one dimension and the groups for different volumes of land holdings as another
dunension, the following results are obtained. The self-confidence score seems to
Sum of squares
1 1 75.824
213.106
41 1.381
3359.988
5129.145
have chfferent averages for the two groups but had the same averages for the
P
55.642
. 1.681
3.245
different land holdmgs groups. But the averages are not in the same pattern for
DP
1
6
6
159
172
Significance of F
. 000
-129
.005
mfferent groups of varying land holdings, between the two groups.
Mean square
:
1 175.824
35.518
68.563
21.132
29.82 1
The four tables shown above show that there is a difference in various self-
concepts between the wives of alcoholics and there of non-alcoholics irrespective
of their land holding. The table pertaining to personal self esteem Vs land self
confidence Vs land shows that there is no difference in these self-concepts
between the wives depending upon their area of land in hand. But the tables
pertaining to family self esteem Vs land holding and social self esteem Vs land
holding shows that there is a difference in these self concepts between the wives
dependmg upon their area of land in hand.
Personal self esteem and self confidence are not related with property in
hand, because personal self esteem is one's sense of contentment and self
acceptance and self confidence is the strong faith in hls shlls and abilities. Both
are part of one's personality. Interaction with the society has an inevitable role in
moulding these two qualities. Land holdmg has no dluence on it. But
considering the family self-esteem and social self-esteem, property has close
relation with it. Our society has a tendency to consider land lords in a high
position in the society, because many people are dependmg upon them for their
daily bread by doing some work for them. In social activities and in organizations
etc they will have good positions. They may have high level contacts also. So
those people coming under that category will have high social self-esteem. The
status the high-level economic strata people get will increase their pride about
their family's position at society. The thought that their family and family
members have very good image in the society d l increase their worth about their
family. That is why property in hand and family self-esteem are closely related.
Out of the four tables shown above, a direct relation is established only in
family self esteem Vs land holding and social self esteem Vs land holding. As
these self concept scores are moving in the same pattern depending upon the
volume of land owned by them, between the p u p s we can conclude that family
self esteem and social self esteem are closely related with the volume of land in
hand, between the wives of alcoholics and there of non-alcoholics. Since no
relation is established for personal self-esteem and self-codiden ce with the
volume of land in hand with them, the question of pattern of these self-concepts
with the volume of land in hand with them, between the groups does not arise.
Significant findings from Self Concept Scale ( Rajini)
The self-concept scale has been used to bring out the understanding of
Wives of Alcoholics and Wlves of Non-Alcoholics about their real self There are
four sub-scales - personal self-esteem, family self esteem, social self-esteem and
self-confidence - whch are compared between the groups. The analysis with
respect to the data of structured interview schedule for the two groups of subjects
have already been presented in h s chapter through various tables. The following
sdent features of the self-concept scales may be hghl~ghted.
Various socio-demographc data ltke age, education, social status,
employment status, personal income level, status in house, interest in social work
activities, relation with husband and land holding and its relationship with
personal self esteem, family self esteem, social self esteem and self confidence
were compared in wives of alcoholics and non-alcoholics. The wives of alcoholics
showed hghest mean value in self confidence. ie. 24.94 Vs. 1 9.8 1 . It shows that
self confidence in wives of alcoholics is very hlgh as compared to control group.
The wives of alcoholics showed poor scores in personal self esteem (WO4
19.64; WONA 29.35). In family self esteem and social self esteem the mean
values were very close but slightly hgher in social self esteem. (Family self
esteem, 22.72 Vs. 24.29; Social self esteem, 22.87 Vs. 24.99). The result shows
that wives of non-alcoholics have better self-concept.
Self Concept Vs Age
In wives of non-alcoholics those belong to 50 and above age group shows
hghest level of personal and family self esteem and 40-50 age group shows
highest level of social self-esteem and self-confdence. But the 30-40 age group
shows lowest personal and fbmily self-esteem. Lowest social self-esteem was in
20-30 age group and lowest self-confidence reported by 50 and above age group.
In wives of alcoholics 40-50 age p u p shows highest personal self-esteem
and social self-esteem. Kghest family self-esteem was in 20-30 age group
whereas self-confidence is decreasing accordmg to the increase of age. Lowest
personal self-esteem was in 30-40 age group. Lowest family self-esteem and
social self-esteem was in 50 and above age group and 20-30 age group
respectively.
Self Concept Vs Education
h wives of non-alcoholics graduates shows hghest and secondary level
educated ones shows lowest personal, family and social self esteem. But self-
confidence is high in secondary level educated and lowest in post graduates.
Graduates and under graduates also have very poor self-confidence. However
general trend is that, upto graduate level according to the increase of education
level self-concept increases, except for self-confidence. With the increase of
education self-confidence decreases.
In wives of alcoholics according to the increase of education level
personal, family and social self-esteem increases.
In wives of non-alcoholics accordmg to the increase of social status self-
confidence decreases. Other components of self -confidence decreases other
.:omponent S of self-concept lke, personal self-esteem, f m i l y self-esteem and
social self-esteem are hghest in middle class and lowest in upper class.
In wives of alcoholics with the increase of social status personal self-
esteem also increases whereas self-confidence decreases. Family self-esteem was
hghest in middle and social self-esteem was in upper class.
Self Concept Vs Employment Status
In both the groups employed ones shows better self-concept. But with
regard to family self-esteem, employed and unemployed ones are having almost
same averages for wives of alcoholics and non- alcoholics.
Self Concept Vs Personal Income
In wives of non-alcoholics personal self-esteem was highest in Rs. 1000-
2500 group and lughest social self-esteem in Rs.5000 and above groups. But
personal self esteem and social self esteem are lowest in less than Rs. 1000 group.
Where Rs. 2500-Rs. 5000 goup are highest in family self-esteem and lowest in
self-confidence, less than Rs. 1 000 group showed lowest family self-esteem and
'~ghest self-confidence.
In wives of alcoholics where less then Rs. 1 000 group are highest in family
self-esteem and lowest in social self-esteem, Rs. 25 00-5000 group showed lowest
family self-esteem and highest social self-esteem. With the increase of personal
income level the personal self-esteem increases and self-confidence decreases.
Self Concept Vs Status in House
In wives of non-alcoholic S, personal self-esteem and social self-esteem are
hghest in those wives who are getting acceptance fiom their husband and lowest
in those wives who are getting 'little acceptance'. Self-confidence is highest in
those wives who are getting 'little acceptance' and lowest in those wives who are
getttng 'acceptance'. But family self-esteem is increasing with the increase of
status in house.
In wives of alcoholics according to the increase of status in house,
personal self-esteem also increases. The trend in family self-esteem and social
self-esteem are almost same in average. These highest family and social self-
esteem was in those wives who are getting little acceptance and lowest in those
wives who are completely neglected by their husbands. Self-confidence was
highest in those wives who are absolutely neglected by their husbands, and lowest
in those wives who are getting acceptance fiom their husbands.
Self Concept VS Interest in Social Activities
In wives of non-alcoholics, those are not sure about their social
involvement shows highest i.e. no response group.
In wives of alcoholics, those are not interested in social activities showed
highest, and those are not sure about their social involvement (no response p u p )
showed lowest personal and family self-esteem. Social self-esteem was highest in
those are interested in social activities and lowest in those are not having any
interest in social activities. In both the groups, self confidence was highest in no
response group and lowest in those are not interested in social activities.
Self Concept Vs Relation with Husband
In both the groups, those wives are in good ~elationship with their husband
showed better personal, family and social self-esteem. Whereas better self-
confidence was shown by those wives are not in good relation with their husband.
Self Concept Vs Land Homing
In both the groups self concept is not showing a particular trend in
connection with land holding.
Result of 't' test
The result of 't' test shows that there is a significant drffaence between
wives of alcoholics and non-alcoholics. It supports our findmg that wives of
alcoholics show better self-concept than the wives of non-alcoholics.
Result of ANOVA
The two-way analysis, which was done for self-concept between the
groups as compared to socio-demographic variable show the following, results.
Personal self-esteem
The ANOVA yielded significant chfferences for age, education, social
status, employment status, personal income 1-1 and relation with husband.
The ANOVA yielded no significant hfferences for status in house, interest
in social activities and land holdings.
Family self-esteem
The ANOVA yielded significant hfferences for education, social status
and land holding.
The ANOVA yelded no sipficant mfferences for age, employment
status, personal income level, status in house, interest in social activities and
relation with husband.
Social self esteem
The ANOVA yielded significant differences for education, interest in
social activities, relation with husband and land holdmgs.
The ANOVA yielded no significant differences for age, soclal status,
employment status, personal income level and status in house.
Self confidence
The ANOVA yielded significant differences for education, social status,
employment status, personal income level, interest in social activities and relation
with husband.
The ANOVA yielded no sigmficant differences for age, status in house
and land holdings.
SECTION II SELF-ASSERTIVENESS
Rathus Assertiveness Schedule
Ths scale assessed the assertive nature in wives of dcoholics and non-
alcoholics. The mean score of various socio-demographc data between the
groups are given in the following pages.
Table 6.2.1
Self Assertiveness Vs Age between the groups
The above table depicts that self-assertiveness is more in wives of
alcoholics with regard to age. When the highest assertiveness score was reported
by the age group 50 and above, next to 20-30 age group, in wives of alcoholics,
the same was reported by the age group 30-40, next to 50 and above in wives of
non-alcoholics. The lowest assertiveness score reported by both the groups was
40-50 age group next to 20-30 age group.
Age
20-30
3 0-40
40-50
50 and above
No. of cages
100
23
43
28
6
1
Wives of alco h oiicsl
74.5600
74.0667
75.0000
71.7143
75.8333
No. of cases
100
15
57
22
6
Wives of non - alcoholics
73.3600
72.3478
75.0000
73.4091
73.1667
An ANOVA test done to see the relationship of self assertiveness with
various socio-demographic data is also given in the following pages.
Table No.6.2.2
Self Assertiveness Vs Education between the groups
The above table depicts that wives of alcoholics are more assertive
(Mz74.56) than the wives of non-alcoholics (M=73.36). Among wives of
alcoholics primary group scored highest assertiveness score (M=78.00) and
secondary educated ones scored lowest assertiveness score of M=7 1.4 next to post
graduates (M=7 1 .5). But in wives of non-alcoholics when secundary educated
ones scored highest assertweness score (M=76.00) the lowest score was reported
by the post graduate (M=70.30) and primary educated ones (M=70.41).
No. of cases
100
22
33
14
21
10
Education
Primary
Secondary
Under graduate
Graduate
Post graduate
Wives of alcoholics
74.5600
78.0000
71.4000
7 5.6800
74.7692
7 1.8000
No. of cases
100
25
35
25
13
2
Wives of non - alcoholics
73.3600
70.409 1
76.0000
71.8571
74.76 19
Table 6.2.3
Self Assertiveness Vs Social status between the groups
The above table states that wives of alcoholics are more asserbveness
than the wives of non-alcoholics. (M= 74.56 Vs M=73.36). Among wives of non-
alcoholics accordmg to the increase of social status level the asserttve behavior
also increases. But in wives d alcoholics, when the upper class shows very high
assertive behaviour (M=86.3 3), the lowest assertive behaviour was shown by the
Social status
Low class
Middle class
Upper class
middle class people (M=72.57).
Table 6.2.4
Self Assertiveness Vs Employment status between the groups
Wives of alco h olica
74.5600
7 6.9444
72.5738
86.3333
No. of cases
100
36
61
Wives of non- alcoholics
73.3600
71.5641
74.3929
No. of cases
2 00
18
82
Wives of non - alcoholics
73.3600
76.7407
72.1096
Employment status
Employed
Unemployed
No. of cases
100
39
56
3 75.8000
No. of cases
1 00
27
73
Wives of alcoh oIics
74.5600
77.8889
73.8293
5
The table shown above describes that employment status is a major factor
in the determination of assertive behaviour in wives. Because in both the groups,
the employed wives showed lugh assertive behaviour (wives of alcoholics, M=
77.89, and wives of non-alcoholics, M= 76.74) than the control group. However,
the assertiveness was more in wives of alcoholics, since their mean value is
higher .
Table 6.2.5
Self Assertiveness Vs Personal income between the groups
It is observed from the above table that when the income group of Rs.
5000 and above showed hlghest assertiveness in wives of alcoholics (M= 79.67)
in wives of non- alcoholics it was shown by the income group of Rs. 2500-5000
(M= 8 5.5). But in both the group S the no income group reported lowest assertwe
Personal income
No income
Less Rs. 1000
Rs. 1000-2500
Rs.2500-5000
5000 and above
No. of cases
100
7 1
4
5
2
18
Wives of alcoholics
74.5600
74.094 1
78.0000
75,3333
77.6667
79.6667
No. of cases
100
85
3
6
3
3
Wives of non - alcoholics
73.3600
7 1.3662
80.0000
76.0000
85.5000
77.6667
behaviour (wives of alcoholics, M= 74.09 and wives of non-alcoholics, M=
7 1 .3 7). When consider both the groups separately, the wives of alcoholics are
more assertive than the wives of non- alcoholics (wives of alcoholics M= 74.56,
wives of non-alcoholics, M= 73.3 6).
Table 6.2.6
Self Assertiveness Vs Status in house between the groups
The above table describes that status in house has major influence in the
measurement of self assertiveness in wives. Because in wives of alcoholics
No. of cases
100
70
26
4
according to the increase of acceptance from the husband the assertiveness
Status in ouse
Good acceptance
Little acceptance
No acceptance
decreases.( wives of alcoholics M=75.79 to 73 -89). But it was just opposite in
No. of cases
100
38
43
19
Wives of aleo h olics
74.5600
73 -8947
74.6047
75.7895
wlves of alcoholics. There, accordmg to the increase of acceptance level the
Wives of non - alcoholics
73.3600
73.8143
73.923 1
61.7500
assertive nature also increases. However, more assertive behaviour was reported
by the wives of alcoholics.
Table 6.2.7
Self Assertiveness Vs Interest in social activities between the groups
It can be interpreted fiom the above table that, among the wives of
alcoholics, those who have no particular involvement or interest in social
activities reported highest assertive nature (M=75.81) and those who have
absolutely no interest in social activities reported lowest assertive nature (M=
70.75). But in wives of non-alcoholics the result is just the reverse to the above.
Among them, those who have no interest in social activities reported the highest
(M= 85.00) and those who have no particular involvement in social a&Vrties
reported the lowest (M= 70.64) assertwe behaviour. When we consider both the
groups separately, wives of alcoholics showed more assmve behaviour (wives
of alcoholics, M= 74.56 and wives of non-alcoholics, M= 73.36).
No. of eases
100
57
7
36
Interest in social activities
Yes
No
No response
Wives of alcoh olica
74.5600
72.0714
70.7500
75.8088
No. of cases
100
28
4
68
Wives of non - alcoholics
73.3600
73.649 l
85 .OOOO
70.6389
Table 6.2.8
Self Assertiveness Vs Relation with husband between the groups
It is observed fiom the above table that, the wives of alcoholics are more
assertwe than the wives of non-alcoholics (wives of alcoholics M= 74.56, wives who
of non-alcoholics M= 73.36). However in both the groups those,are in bad
No. of I
cases
l 00
77
23
Relation with husband
Good
Bad
relationship with their husbands showed more assertive nature.
Table 6.2.9
Self Assertiveness Vs Land holding between the groups
Wives of alcoholics
74.5600
69.7692
75 -2759
No. of cases
100
13
87
Land holding
No property
Less than l acre
1 acre -2 acres
2 acres -3 acres
3 acres -4 acres
4 m e s -5 acres
5 acres -6 acres
6 acres -7 acres
Wives of non - alcoholics
73.3 600
71.1739
74.0130
No. of cases
100
12
26
8
22
l l
10
9
2
Wives of alcoholics
74.5600
73 -4667
74.2857
76.7778
77.7368
69.8571
77.9000
67.1111
88.3333
No. of cases
100
15
21
9
19
14
10
9
3
Wives of non - aIcoholics
73.3600
70.5000
70.3077
73.5000
76.4091
76.0909
76.6000
70.7778
76.5000
The above table states that in wives of non-alcoholics except in 6 acres of
land holders, accordmg to the increase of land, self assertiveness also increases
though below 0.5 difference were seen in some categories. But in wives of
alcoholics, upto 3 areas of land holders, according to the increase of property
assertive behaviuor also increases. After that the pattern is not in an order. Among
the wives of alcoholics those acquired 7 areas of land showed very hgh mean
value (M=88.33) and those posses 6 areas of land showed lowest assertive nature.
The score of wives of alcoholics and there of non-alcoholics on Ruthus
assertiveness schedule along with ' t' value is given below.
Table 6.2.10
Score on Assertiveness Schedule
The result of t test shows that there is a significant difference between
wives of alcoholics and non-alcoholics. It is grqhcdly presented in Fig. No. 6.2.
Groups
Wlves of alcoholics
Wivesofnon-alcoholics
Mean
74.56
73.36
SD
12.1849
12.7323
t
0.6775
Significance
>. 05
Figure 6.2 Scores on Assertive Schedule
The following table gives the s m q statistics obtained from a sample of
1 00 observations each fi-om the alcoholic and non-alcoholic groups.
Analysis of variance two way classltications is used here with groups
decided by the element whch is alcoholic and non-alcoholic on one side and one
of the socio-economic and demographc variables as the second classification.
Hence t h ~ s corresponds to a random effect model and hence the various sum of
squares were calculated through regression. It is done with a purpose of verifying
whether there is any difference in the mean assertive scores for the different
process considered. The following table provide the result correspondmg to
various categories as indicated there in.
The table provides 3 hfferent hypothesis being tested. There will be 2
main effects and 1 interaction effect dependmg upon the probabilities reported the
respective. F-values are used for declaring whether the effect is sipficant or not.
Table 6.2.1 1 Self assertiveness score Vs Age between the groups
Significance ofF
-614
-701
.g65
Source of variation
Between the groups
Age
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Sum of squares
40.462
225.748
43.082
30478.850
30819.680
DF
l
3
3
192
199
Mean square
40.462
75.249
14.361
158.744
154.873
P
.255
.474
.090
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self
assertiveness score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental
groups as one dimension arid the age group as another dunension, the following
results are obtained. The self-assertiveness score seems to have same averages for
the two groups as well as the mfferent age groups. Also the averages are in the
same pattern for Qfferent age levels, between the two groups.
The table describes that there is no difference in the degree of self-
assertiveness between the wives on the basis of their age. There is also no
hfference in their assertiveness between the wives of alcoholics and there of non-
alcoholics irrespective of their age. Assertive behaviour is moulded in their
chldhood days when the parent teaches how to show socially acceptable
expressions. The fieedom they are g e m 8 to express their feelings and emotions
and the life events they are passing though also have a major role in the build up
of their asserhve behaviour. Dependmg upon the training, the assertive nature will
booster up or down along with the recognition these personahties are getting. So
the age has no relation with assertiveness.
Table 6.2.12 Self Assertiveness score Vs Education between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self
assertiveness score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental
groups as one dimension and the educational levels as mother dimension, the
following results are obtained. The self-assertiveness scores seems to have same
averages for the two groups as well as the educabonal groups. Also the averages
are in the same pattern for different levels of education between the groups.
The above table shows that there is no difference in the degree of self-
asse~lveness between the wives on the basis of the level of education. Self-
assertiveness is a peculiar nature of an io&vidual, whch mainly depends on the
circumstances and atmosphere in which an inhvidual is brought up, rather than
on education. Self-assertive people find it difficult to experience their desires and
emotions and will asset to their r ights. Extroversion is the central nerve of h s
F
.302
,264
1.806
Source of variation
Between the groups
Education
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Significance of F
.584
.90 1
.l29
Sum of squares
46.772
163.60 1
1 1 20.490
29463.590
30819.680
DP
l
4
4
190
199
Mean square
46.772
40.900
280.122
155.072
154.873
type of behaviour or personality. So education can have no role in it and as such
education and self-assertiveness is not closely related.
Table 6.2.13
Self - Assertiveness score Vs Social status between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self 4
assertiveness score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental
groups as one dimension and the social status as another dunension, the following
results are obtained. The self-assertiveness score seems to have different averages
for the two groups as well as the different social status groups. Also the averages
are in the same pattem for different social status levels between the two groups.
The above table shows that there is no difference in the degree of self-
assertiveness between the wives, on the basis of their social status. There is also
no hfference in the wives of alcoholics and non-alcoholics irrespective of their
social status, because assertiveness is commonly considered a central facet of
extroversion. They would show greater self-confidence in whatever they do.
Source of variation
Between the groups
Social Status
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Sumof squares
91.124
321 -029
7 5 5.43 1
29671.220
3081 9.680
DF
I
2
2
194
199
F
-596
1.049
2.470
Mean square
91.124
160.5 14
377.71 5
152.944
154.873
Significance of F
-44 1
.352
.087
However, since money and social status gve reputation and recogmtion in society
it has some d u e n c e on assertive behaviour.
As there is no relation between the social status and self-assertiveness of
wives of alcoholics and there of non-alcoholics, the question of the pattern of self-
assertive score for chfferent social status levels, between the two groups does not
arise.
Table 6.2.1 4
Self Assertiveness score Vs Employment status between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self
assertiveness swre in a two h e n sional classification with the experimental
groups as one dimension and the employment status as another dimension, the
following results are obtained. The self-assertiveness score seems to have same
averages for the two lyoups but have different averages for the Merent
Significance of F
-3 67
.039
-894
Source of variation
Between the groups
Employment
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Mean square
125.689
663.227
2.757
1 53.478
154.873
F
319
4.32 1
.018
Sum of squares
1 25.689
663 -227
2.757
30081.696
30819.680
DF
l
1
l
196
199
employment status group S. The averages of different employment status groups
are in the same pattern between the two groups.
The above table shows that there is no difference in sel f-assertiveness
between the wives of alcoholics and non-alcoholics. But there is a Merence in
the degree of self-assertiveness between wives depending upon their employment
status.
Assertiveness is a behaviour pattern, whch is shown by extrovert
personalities. Multiple role hctioning or stressful life etc has no role in it. But
the employment status of an individual has great Influence in it, because our
society gves special weight and status to the employed ones, which will increase
their self-concept. Increase of self-concept is one of the main factors in increasing
of self-assertiveness. That is why the self-assertiveness between the wives shows
differences dependmg upon their employment status. The self-assertiveness scores
are moving in the same pattern depending upon their employment status, between
the groups. Thesefore we can conclude that self assertiveness and employment
status are closely related, between the group S.
Table 6.2.15
Self assertiveness score Vs Personal Income between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self-
assertiveness score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental
groups as one dimension and the personal income group as another dunension,
the following results are obtained. The self-assertiveness score seems to have
same averages for the two groups as well as the different personal income groups.
Also the averages are in the same pattern for mfferent personal income levels
between the two groups.
The above table depicts that there is no &Rerence in the degree of self-
assertiveness between the wives, on the basis of the level of personal income.
There is also no difference in the degree of self-assertiveness between the wives
of alcoholics and non-alcoholics irrespective of their personal income.
Assertiveness is a kmd of behaviour, whch c m o t be changed through external
Source of variation
Between the groups
Significance of l?
-774
Sum of squares
10.998
Mean square
10.998
Personal Income 36.518 .279 -840
DF
l
F
.084
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
80.99 1
4711.167
4912.432
3
36
43
26.997
130.866
114.243
-206 .89 1
forces or materials. They give importance to their arguments and strongly believe
it to be true. Nobody can change hs or her beliefs. That is why personal income
has no role in it,
Table 6.2.16 Self assertiveness score Vs Status in house between the groups
h the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self
assertiveness score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental
Significance of F
.474
,912
.l58
Source of variation
Between the groups
Status in House
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
groups as one dunension and the status in house as another dunension, the
following results are obtained. The self-asserhveness score seems to have same
Sum of squares
79.985
28.471
579.01 1
30140.198
30819.680
averages for the two groups as well as the groups for the different statuses in
house. Also the averages are in the same pattern for hfferent statuses in house,
between the two groups.
DF
1
2
2
194
199
The above table shows that these is no Merence in the degree of self-
assertiveness between the wives on the basis of the statuses in house, There is
Mean square
79.985
14.236
289.505
'1 55.362
1 54.873
F
.5 15
.092
1.863
also no hfference in the degree of self-assmhveness between the wives of
alcoholics and there of non-alcoholics irrespective of their status in house.
Assmve people will not compromise their opinion with others, because their
suppressed emotions and ambitions in their childhood made them that type of
person. So they do not bother about their status or position others are giving to
them. They believe in there self. Their self-concept will always be very high. So
the status in house have no influence on determining the asserhve nature.
Table 6.2.17 Self assertiveness score Vs Interest in social activities between the grou ps
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self
assertiveness score in a two dmensional classification with the experimental
groups as one chmension and the interest in social activities as another
Significance ofF
-498
-239
,026
Source of variation
Between the groups
Interest in social work
Two way interachons
Residual
Total
dunension, the following results are obtained. The self-assertiveness score seems
to have different averages for the two groups as well as the different groups for
Sumof squares
69.3 98
43 3.903
1 123.367
29190.41 0
3081 9.680
varying interest in social activities. But the averages are not in the same pattern
F
.461
1.442
3.733
DF
1
2
2
194
199
Mean square
69.398
216.952
561 -683
150.466
154.873
for kfferent groups for varying interest in social activities between the two
groups.
The above table states that there is no difference in the degree of self-
assertiveness between the wives, on the basis of their interest in social advities.
There is also no difference in their self-assertiveness between the wives of
alcoholics and non-alcoholics irrespective of their interest in social activities,
because assertiveness is a part of one's personality. Involvement in social
activities, mingling with other people etc cannot influence their character except
giving intensive training for their behaviour modification methods. That is why
assertiveness in wives of alcoholics and non-alcoholics d ~ d not show any
difference and interest in socd activities also have no role in it.
Table 6.2.18
Self assertiveness score Vs Relation with husband between the groups
Significance o fF
,647
-094
-573
Source of variation
Between the groups
Relation with husband
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
F
.2 10
2.828
-3 18
Sum of squares
32.4 19
436.587
49.1 1 5
30261.978
30819.680
DF
l
1
1
196
199
Mean square
32.419
436.587
49.1 15
154.398
1 54.873
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self
assertiveness score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental
groups as one dimension and the relation with husband as another dimension, the
following results are obtained. The self-asserhveness score seems to have same
averages for the two groups but had diffkrent averages for the different groups of
varylng degrees of relation with the husband. Also the averages are in the same
pattern for dierent groups of varying degrees of relation with the husband,
between the two groups.
The table given above says that there is no difference in the degree of self-
asserhveness between the wives, on the basis of the relation with their husband.
There is also no difference in their self-assertiveness between the wives of
alcoholics and non-alcoholics irrespective of their relationship with their
husbands. Since assertweness is seen among extrovert personalities who always
believe to be right, other persons even their husbands have n o h g to do to
change their behaviour. So the relationshp with husband have no relation with
assertive nature of his wives. Even though the researcher felt during her interview
that those wives are absolutely bad relationshp with husbands are more asserhve.
Table 6.2.19
Self assertiveness score Vs Land holdings between the groups
In the two way analysis of variance considered to test for average self
assertiveness score in a two dimensional classification with the experimental
groups as one dimension and the groups for different volumes of land holdmgs as
another dimension, the following results are obtained. The self-assertweness score
seems to have same averages for the two groups as well as the different land
holdings groups. Also the averages are in the same pattern for Merent groups of
varying land holdmgs between the two groups.
The table shown above depicts that, between the wives, there is no
chfference in the degree of self-assertiveness on the bask of the volume of land
they are holdmg. There is also no dfference in their assemveness between the
wives of alcoholics and o non-alcoholics irrespective of their property in hand.
The reason is that assertiveness i s a behaviour, whch is linked with their inner
1 Source of variation
Between the groups
Land holdings
Significance of P
-636
.l02
Two way interactions
Residual
Total
Sum of squares
36.238
1736.961
Mean square
36.238
289.493
DF
I
6
F
-225
1.800
-640 687.434
25577.917
28045.803
114.572
160.867
163.057
6
159
172
.712
feelings and mind. There is no voice for external affairs. So naturally assertive
behaviour is not having any relationshp to the volume of land holdings or
property belonging to them. As there is no relation between the land holding and
self assertiveness of wives of alcoholics and non-alcoholics, the question of the
pattern of self assertiveness score for different levels of property volumes in hand
between the two groups does not arise.
Significant findings from Rathus Self Assertiveness Schedule
Various socio-demographc data like age, education, social status,
employment status, personal income level, status in house, interest in social work
activities, relation with husband, land h o l b g and its relationshtp with self
assertiveness were compared between the groups. The result shows that wives of
non-alcoholics show slightly hlgher mean which indicates that they show more
assertive behaviour than the wives of alcoholics do. Wives of alcohohcs showed
mean value of 74.56 while the control group showed 73.96.
Self Assertiveness Vs Age
In both the groups those who are 50 and above age p u p and 30-40 age
group are hghly assertive and lowest assertiveness was shown by 40-50 age
group and 20-30 age group respectively.
Self Assertiveness Vs Education
In wives of non-alcoholics secondary level and graduates are more
assertive than post graduates and primary educated ones whereas in wives of
alcoholics primary educated and under graduates are hghly assertive and
secondary level and postgraduates are less assertive in nature.
Self Assertiveness Vs Social Status
In wives of non-alcuh01ics accordmg to the increase of social status the
assertive also increases. But in wives of alcoholics upper class shows highest and
middle class shows lowest assertive behaviour.
Self Assertiveness Vs Employ men t Status
In both the groups employed ones are more assertive.
Self Assertiveness Vs Personal Income
In wives of non-alcoholics income group of Rs.2500-5000 group and less
than Rs. 1 000 group are hghly assertive. But in wives of alcoholics those who
belong to high income of Rs.5000 and above group and less than Rs. 1000 group
are hghly assertive. In both the groups least assertwe are those with no income
Self Assertiveness Vs Status in House
In wives of non-alcoholics according to the increase of acceptance level
asserhve nature also increases. But the reverse is in the case of wives of
alcoholics. There according to the increase of acceptance level assertive nature
decreases.
Self Assertiveness Vs Interest in Social Activities
When those are not interested in social activities shows highest assertive
behaviour in wives of non-alcoholics whereas the 'no response' group i.e. those
are not sure about their social involvement are having highest assertive behaviour
in wives of alcoholics. But the lowest assertiveness was found in 'no response'
group in wives of non-alcoholics and in those are not interested in social activities
group in the case of wives of alcoholics.
Self Assertiveness Vs Relation with Husband
In both the groups assertive behaviour was high in those wives who are
having bad relationshp with their husband.
Self Assertiveness Vs Land Holding
In wives of non-alcoholics except in 6 acres of landholders, accorhg to
the increase of land holding, self assertiveness also increases, though below 0.5
differences are seen in some classification. But in wives of alcoholics asserhve
nature and land holhng are not much connected. There 7 acres of land holders
show hghest assertiveness and 6 acres of land holders shows lowest
assertiveness.
The result of 't' test also shows no significant Merence between the
groups.
The result of ANOVA test shows that with respect to assertive behaviour,
only one variable i.e. assertiveness Vs relation with husband shows s i d c m t
difference between the two groups. Other variables ltke age, education, social
status, employment status, personal income level, status in house, interest in social
activities and land holding as against assertiveness show no significant difference
between the groups.
top related