Abstract
A vast amount of research has been conducted in the area of personality differences between 'behaviourally disturbed' and 'non-disturbed' children. In a classical analysis of delinquents, Burt (1944) found they were characterized as being less intelligent, possessing heightened levels of excitability and toughmindedness (unsentimental, insensitive and solitary). Shrider (1962) and Pennington (1954) employed the HSPQ and found delinquents to be lower in intelligence, thicker-skinned (impulsive, adventurous and active), lacking in social ego-strength and more radical and experimental. Glueck and Glueck (1950) and Hathaway and Monashesi (1953) had made comparisons between delinquents and non-delinquents; the delinquent group were discriminably less emotionally stable, less serious and inhibited, unfriendly, dominant, liable to display greater mood fluctuations and more adventurous. Cattell, Tastsuoka and Eber (1970) had found a division of personality disorders which roughly correspond to the neuroses and the problems of behaviour or conduct disorders characterized by such factors as affectothymia, dominance or ascendence and lowered super-ego strength. Cattell and Cattell (1975) had shown delinquents to be demonstrably more solitary, less intelligent, more easily aroused, guiltprone, nervous and excitable. Eysenck (1960), in submitting data to factorial analysis (taken from children referred to guidance clinics), was able to distinguish between those with conduct disorders (typically extraverted neurotic), tending to swear, steal, be rude, aggressive and egocentric, with those children manifesting personality problems (introverted neurotic), who were likely to be depressed, seclusive, nervous and sensitive.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.