Interpersonal Need Orientation of School Teachers,
College Lecturers, Doctors and Defense Officers:
A Study using FIRO ELEMENT-B instrument


By
Prof T. Thomas
HOD &  Professor  , MBA Dept.
Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan
Vivekananda College of Science, Humanities & Commerce
Sainikpuri Kendra, Secunderabad-500094

Prof (Dr.) T. Dayakara Rao
Professor & Director – Incharge,
GIDC ROFEL Institute of Management Studies
14/5, GIDC, Vapi–396195
 


Introduction: -

Interpersonal interactions is an indispensable part of human beings throughout their life. We interact with others at home, in the office, in the playground, in the club, in all modes of transport, while communicating, at the shop, in the cinema theatre, at the hospital etc., - the list is endless. Further, it is rightly said that man is a superior type of social animal; we are all elements of various societies; we do not exist in isolation.

Man, being inquisitive and innovative has always been eager to invent, test and validate theories which explain his behaviour in the Interpersonal arena. Thus many behavioral scientists have propounded various Two-dimensional and Three-dimensional theories of Interpersonal Behaviour.

1.1. Two - Dimensional Theories: -

A pioneer in this aspect has been Freedman who in 1950 proposed that interpersonal behaviour can be identified as belonging to any quadrant formed by two intersecting lines of Love-Hate (horizontal) and Dominent – Submit (vertical). Several models were proposed by subsequent authors, but the essence of the models where more or less the same. Thus some of the dimensions proposed are Warmth – Hostility, Restrictive – Permissive, Regulating – Facilitating,  Attachment – Detachment and Directiveness – Receiptness etc. Even though these theories threw some light on certain aspects of interpersonal behaviour, they were not fully adequate for understanding or explaining the complex aspects of behaviour. Further much difficulty was faced in data collection and analysis as they were not amenable to statistical techniques.

1.2 Three – Dimensional Theories: -

William Schutz (1958, 1960) has been the proponent in case of three-dimensional theories of interpersonal behaviour. He proposed that human behaviour takes place in three dimensions namely Inclusion, Control, and Affection. Each of these were bidirectionally classified into 'Expressed' and 'Wanted' behaviour. Thus he developed the FIRO – B instrument for measuring the interpersonal behaviour which comprises 54 questions, 9 each of which measures the parameters Expressed Inclusion, Expressed Control, Expressed Affection, Wanted Inclusion, Wanted Control and Wanted Affection. 

Examples of statements which measure the above parameters are given below: -

a. Expressed Inclusion  =  I include people.
b. Wanted Inclusion  =  I want people to include me.
c. Expressed Control =  I control people.
d. Wanted Control = I want people to control me.
e. Expressed Affection =  I have close relationships.
f. Wanted Affection  =  I want close relationships

As experience was gained the world over in the use of FIRO-B as an instrument of behavioural research, Schutz (1982) himself discovered some of its limitations. The first revelation was that affection is much different from inclusion and control as a measure of behaviour since it manifests more at the 'feeling' level rather than at the 'behaviour' level. Hence he substituted it with 'openness' as the behavioural equivalent. He also found that 'Expressed' and 'Wanted' are not really the opposites in the some behavioural dimension. 'Expressed' is the opposite of 'Received' and 'Wanted' is the opposite of 'Actual' or 'Perceived'. With the incorporation of these changes he developed what is called "FIRO ELEMENT – B Instrument", containing 108 questions measuring the following 12 dimensions: - 

a. Perceived Expressed Inclusion (PEI)  = I include people.
b. Wanted Expressed Inclusion (WEI) = I want to include people.
c. Perceived Received Inclusion (PRI) = People include me.
d. Wanted Received Inclusion (WRI)  =  I want people to include me.
e. Perceived Expressed Control (PEC)  =  I control people.
f. Wanted Expressed Control (WEC)  = I want to control people.
g. Perceived Received Control (PRC)  = People control me.
h. Wanted Received Control (WRC) =  I want people to control me.
i. Received Expressed Openness (PEO)  = I am open with people.
j. Wanted Expressed Openness (WEO) =  I want to be open with people.
k. Perceived Received Openness (PRO)  =  People are open with me.
l. Wanted Received Openness (WRO)  = I want people to be open with me.

2. The Investigation: -

It is well known that the main determinants of our behaviour is heredity and environment. Out of these two the influence of environment in moulding our behaviour is shown to be of higher significance. Again, our professional environment wields a much larger influence on our behaviour. With this in view, four professions were chosen for this study namely School Teachers (Profession=1), College Teachers (Profession=2), Doctors (Profession=3) and Defense Officers (Profession=4). These professions were chosen for the study based on the assumed similarity between 1 & 2 and differences amongst (1&2), 3 and 4 with reference to interpersonal dimensions.

2.1 Objective of the Study: -

The objective of this investigation was to gain insight into the interpersonal relations characteristics of four different professions. More specifically it is intended

a. To find out the interpersonal relationships dimensions of PEI, WEI, PRI, WRI, PEC, WEC, PRC, WRC, PEO, WEO, PRO and WRO for the four chosen professions,
b. To carry out multiple comparison of Interpersonal Factors between various professions, and
c. To compare the complementary "Perceived" and "Wanted" factors - i.e. PEI & WEI, PRI & WRI, PEC & WEC, PRC & WRC, PEO & WEO and PRO & WRO for each profession.

2.2 Research Methodology and Data Collection: -

The FIRO Element – B questionnaire was explained to volunteers belonging to the same profession. Subsequently the instrument was provided to them with the request for filling up the column "The way it is". It was particularly emphasised that there is no right or wrong answers and that the answers are purely a matter of personal choice. After this, they were asked to fill up "The way it should be" without looking at their initial scores. A few participants were not comfortable to mark their scores thinking that they were parting with their private and purely personal information. Such participants were allowed to fill in the questionnaires completely anonymously without any data which might even remotely identify them. Some others, wanted to create an artificial congruence for the scores of "The way it is" and "The way it should be". Such respondents were assured that congruence is an exception and not a rule.

A few participants did not fill in the questionnaires. Their viewpoint was respected and they were allowed to opt out of the study. Some others preferred to fill the questionnaires at home. However, the recovery of filled in papers from this group was very low at around 50%. In the end, we collected completely filled in material from 41 School Teachers, 45 College Teachers, 42 Doctors and 46 Defense Personnel, starting with 65, 75, 82 and 55 respectively. 

3.0 Analysis and Results: -

The data was analysed using SPSS package and the results are given below: -

3.1 Descriptives: -

Table (1) gives Mean and Standard Deviation for Interpersonal Relationship variables for all the four different professions. The 95% confidence level for Mean as indicated by Lower Bound and Upper Bound are also given in the table.

The following are the findings: -

(a) PEI (I include people): -

The Mean value for this variable for the three professions namely School teachers, College teachers, Doctors and Defense Officers ranged between 4.24 and 4.43. The Mean for defense personnel was higher at 5.22.

(b) WEI (I want to include people): -

In this case the Mean value for civilians ranged between 4.49 and 4.64 with that for defense personnel higher at 5.37.

(c) PRI (People include me): -

The value was between 2.29 and 3.11 for the first three professions. It was marginally higher at 3.83 for defense.

(d) WRI (I want people to include me): -

The range of the Means for the first three professions was between 3.19 and 3.34. The other group had a Mean at 4.22.

(e) PEC (I control people): -

It was between 3.22 and 3.93 for the first three professions followed by a higher value of 4.61 for the fourth group.

(f) WEC (I want to control people): -

The first three professions exhibited values between 3.78 and 4.07 with 4.98 for the last.

(g) PRC (People control me): -

It was between 5.93 and 6.91 in the first three cases followed interestingly by a lower value of 4.74 for the last profession.

(h) WRC (I want people to control me): -
All four groups had similar Means between 5.12 to 5.82.

(i) PEO (I am open with people): -

The Means did not vary much between the samples and they were between 3.48 for the doctors and 4.37 for defense personnel with the other professions lying in between.

(j) WEO (I want to be open with people): -

The range for the Mean was between 3.50 for the doctors and 4.35 for the defense staff with others in between.

(k) PRO (People are open with me): -

The Means ranged between 3.38 to 4.26.

(l) WRO (I want people to be open with me): -

College teachers exhibited the lowest Mean of 3.62 and Defense personnel the highest value of 4.76.

If we classify the FIRO scores of 0, 1, 2, 3 as "Low"; 4, 5, 6 as "Middle"; and 7, 8, 9 as "High", most of the Means fall in the middle range with very few spill overs on either side.

3.2 ANOVA: -

Table (2) gives the ANOVA for all the twelve interpersonal factors. It may be seen that there is significant difference between groups for PEI, PRI, PEC, PRC and WRC. It may further be noted that in case of PRC and WRC there is significant difference between groups at 99% confidence level.

3.3 Multiple Comparisons: -

Table (3) gives Multiple Comparisons of Interpersonal Factors between various professions using Tukey HSD Method. The following are the findings with reference to the interpersonal factors:

a. PEI:- There is significant difference between School Teachers and Defense Personnel and also between College Teachers and Defense Personnel.
b. WEI: - There is no significant difference between any pairs of professions.
c. PRI:- There is significant difference between School Teachers and Defense Personnel in this case.
d. WRI: - There is no significant difference between any two professions.
e. PEC: - There is a significant difference between School Teachers and Defense Personnel in this case.
f. WEC: - No differences observed.
g. PRC: - Defense Personnel exhibited significant difference with every other profession.
h. WRC: - Here Defense Officers were different from School Teachers and College Teachers.
i. PEO: - No significant difference.
j. WEO: - No differences observed.
k. PRO: - No differences found.
l. WRO: - No significant differences in any case.  

3.4 Paired Sample t-tests for Expressed and Wanted parameters by Professions 1 to 4: -

The next analysis was checking the 'balance' between 'Expressed' and 'Wanted factors. This was done by Paired Sample t-tests as given in table numbers (4) through (7), for School Teachers, College Teachers, Doctors and Defense Officers respectively. In case of School Teachers, there is significant difference between PEC and WEC at 95% confidence level. However in case of PRI & WRI and PRC & WRC the difference is significant at 99% confidence level.

In case of College Teachers the only pair exhibiting significant difference is PRC & WRC. It is interesting to note that the significance level is 99.9%.

The pairs of significance in case of Doctors are PRO & WRO at 95% and PRC & WRC at 99%.

In case of Defense Officers PRO & WRO is significantly different at 95% and PRC & WRC at 99%.

4.     Interpretations and Conclusions:

4.1 Mean value of Interpersonal Factors and their Relevance: -


a. PEI: As we have already discussed this reflects the aspect of behaviour 'I include people'. The Mean ranged between 4.24 and 5.22 which indicates 'Medium' propensity for inclusion for all the four professions. We find further that there is a significant difference between the value of 4.24 for School Teachers and 5.22 for Defense. Significant difference is also observed between College Teachers with 4.27 and Defense Personnel with 5.22. This may be due to the fact that there is more emphasis on teamwork in case of Defense as against independent responsibility in case of Teachers or Doctors.

b. WEI (I want to include people): - The Mean scores here are again 'Medium' ranging between 4.49 to 4.64 for the first three professions followed by 5.37 for Defense Personnel. However the Mean differences are not significant.

c. PRI (People include me): - The Means ranged between 2.29 to 3.83. The Mean difference of 2.29 for School Teachers and 3.83 for Defense were significantly different. This means that Defense Personnel feel that they are being included to a much higher degree than School Teachers who feel that they are left out.

d. WRI (I want people to include me): - The desire for inclusion was low between 3.19 and 3.34 for the civilians as against 4.22 for Defense Officers. There is no significant difference in this factor between any of the professions.

e. PEC (I control people): - This was between 3.22 for School Teachers and 4.61 for Defense Officers. There was significant difference between School Teachers and Defense Officers at 95% confidence level. It was presumed that Defense Officers will be exercising a much higher degree of control than the other professions. This assumption has been proved wrong except as indicated above. The control exercised by the various professions are between "low" and "medium" indicating a propensity for non-autocratic approach.

f. WEC (I want to control people): - The Means are between 3.78 and 4.98 i.e. in the medium range. There was no significant difference between any two professions.

g. PRC (People control me): - The value for this factor was on the higher side with 6.41, 6.60, 5.93 and 4.74 for School Teachers, College Teachers, Doctors and Defense respectively. There is significant difference between Defense Officers and every other profession. The significantly lower value incase of Defense is rather surprising since it is well known that they receive much larger amount of control from their superiors. However since they are trained and conditioned to accept command and control as an essential part of their work, the perception of received control is on the lower side.

h. WRC (I want people to control me): - The range of the Means was between 4.00 for Defense and 5.68 for School Teachers. There was significant difference incase of Defense with School Teachers as well as College Teachers, with their wanting to receive only a lower degree of control. This probably reflects their training to be independent.

i. PEO (I am open with people): - This was 3.48 for Doctors and 4.37 for Defense with other professions in between. There was no significant difference between any two. In other words, members of the various professions express openness to the same degree i.e., Medium.

j. WEO (I want to be open with people): - There was no significant difference between professions with the range for the Means between 3.50 for the Doctors and 4.35 for the Defense staff with others in between.

k. PRO (People are open with me): - All four professions felt that others are open with them to the same extent with Means ranging between 3.36 for College Teachers and 4.26 for Defense.

l. WRO (I want people to be open with me): - Here also there was no significant difference between professions with College Teachers exhibiting the lowest mean of 3.62 and Defense Personnel the highest value of 4.76.

4.2 Balance between 'Expressed' and 'Wanted' factors: -

These were estimated by paired sample t-tests for Expressed and Wanted parameters by professions 1 to 4 as given under 3.4. Incase of School Teachers the PEC of 3.22 is significantly different from the WEC of 3.78 at 95%. This implies that there is an apparent 'helplessness' in expressing as much control as they would like to. Further the PRC of 6.41 is significantly higher than WRC of 5.68 at 99%. In other words they receive much more control than they are prepared to accept. There is also significant difference at 99% between the PRI of 2.29 and WRI of 3.34. In other words School Teachers feel that they receive much less inclusion than they desire.

The above dichotomy in three pairs of expressed and wanted interpersonal factors is not a healthy sign especially because these professionals lay the foundation stones for the education and character building of future citizens. The reasons could be many -  heavy syllabus, rigid pedagogy, large number of students, lack of opportunities for interaction with management etc. These have to be further investigated so that these assumptions may be verified.

In case of College Teachers the PRC of 6.60 is significantly higher than the WRC of 5.33 at 99% confidence level. In other words they find that their autonomy on work is challenged. 

In case of Doctors the PRC of 5.93 is significantly higher than WRC of 5.12 at 99% again implying a lack of autonomy. Further their PRO of 3.38 is significantly lower than WRO of 3.90 implying a lack of interpersonal trust. This could be because of the fact that even though the Doctor expects his patients to be open in communication, the latter fail to live up to their expectations due to obvious reasons like privacy, shyness, etc. 

In case of Defence Officers the PRC of 4.74 is significantly higher than WRC of 4.00 at 99%. Further the PRO of 4.26 is lower than the WRO of 4.76 at 99% significance level. The reasons are not difficult to understand and are probably a characteristic of the profession itself.

5.0 Summary: -

This study revealed many interesting aspects of interpersonal factors for the four professions. It was found that there is significant difference between groups for PEI, PRI, PEC, PRC and WRC. In the case of the last two factors the differences were significant even at 99% confidence level. No significant difference was observed in case of WEI, WRI, WEC, PEO, WEO, PRO and WRO.

The study of the balance between 'Expressed' and 'Wanted' factors gave the following findings: -

a. School Teachers: - There is an apparent 'helplessness' in exercising as much control as they would like to. They also receive much more control than they are prepared to accept. Further they feel that they receive much less inclusion than they desire.

b. College Teachers: - College Teachers also feel that they receive much more control than they are ready to accept.

c. Doctors: - They too receive much higher control than they are ready to accept. They also think that the openness they receive is much less than the openness they want to receive.

d. Defence Officers: - Findings same as that of Doctors.

Thus we have seen certain areas of potential interpersonal conflict with positions of authority as far as these professions are concerned. Since the first three professions are creative endeavours, it is in the interest of effectiveness that authorities grant them as much autonomy as feasible. However, in certain cases there necessarily has to be restrictions on individual autonomy in the organisational interest. It is the responsibility of management to convince the organisational participants that the restrictions imposed are fair and in the overall interest of all concerned.

 
6.0 Acknowledgement: -
Our sincere thanks goes to Dr. R. Nargundkar, Associate Professor, Indian Institute of Management, Lucknow for his valuable assistance with the Statistical Analysis and also for hospitality at Lucknow.

(Table 1) Mean and Standard Deviation for Interpersonal Relationship Variables for all the four different professions

Variabl es

Profession (1) School Teachers N=(41)

Profession (2) School Teachers N=(45)

Profession (3) School Teachers N = (42)

Profession (4) School Teachers N = (40)

 

Mean

S.D

95 % Confidence Level for Mean

Mean

S.D

95% Confidence Level for Mean

Mean

S.D

95% Confidence Level for Mean

Mean

S.D

95% Confidence Level for Mean

     

Lower Bound

Upper Bound

 

Lower Bound

Upper
Bound

 

Lower Bound

Upper
Bound

 

Lower Bound

Upper Bound

PEI

4.24

1.496

3.77

4.72

4.27

1.789

3.73

4.80

4.43

1.796

3.87

4.99

5.22

1.428

4.79

5.64

WEI

4.49

1.719

3.95

5.03

4.58

1.803

4.04

5.12

4.64

1.885

4.06

5.23

5.37

1.768

4.84

5.89

PRI

2.29

1.952

1.68

2.91

3.11

2.347

2.41

3.82

2.93

2.053

2.29

3.57

3.83

2.322

3.14

4.52

WRI

3.34

2.239

2.64

4.05

3.20

2.302

2.51

3.89

3.19

2.244

2.49

3.89

4.22

2.607

3.44

4.99

PEC

3.22

2.414

2.46

3.98

3.93

2.472

3.19

4.68

3.48

2.501

2.70

4.26

4.61

2.490

3.87

5.35

WEC

3.78

2.564

2.97

4.59

4.04

2.412

3.32

4.77

4.07

2.267

3.36

4.78

4.98

2.472

4.24

5.71

PRC

6.41

1.581

5.92

6.91

6.60

2.082

5.97

7.23

5.93

2.088

5.28

6.58

4.74

2.516

3.99

5.49

WRC

5.68

1.809

5.11

6.25

5.33

2.296

4.64

6.02

5.12

2.244

4.42

5.82

4.00

2.667

3.21

4.79

PEO

4.17

1.564

3.68

4.66

3.71

1.866

3.15

4.27

3.48

1.550

2.99

3.96

4.37

2.195

3.72

5.02

WEO

4.07

1.555

3.58

4.56

3.87

1.995

3.27

4.47

3.50

1.436

3.05

3.95

4.35

2.424

3.63

5.07

PRO

3.44

1.803

2.87

4.01

3.36

2.176

2.70

4.01

3.38

2.498

2.60

4.16

4.26

2.444

3.53

4.99

WRO

3.66

1.931

3.05

4.27

3.62

2.188

2.96

4.88

3.90

2.335

3.18

4.63

4.76

2.460

4.03

5.49


Table (2) ANOVA for Interpersonal Factors

   

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

PEI

Between Groups

28.562

3

9.521

3.561

0.016

 

Within Groups

454.473

170

2.673

   
 

Total

483.035

173

     

WEI

Between Groups

22.119

3

7.373

2.289

0.080

 

Within Groups

547.582

170

3.221

   
 

Total

569.701

173

     

PRI

Between Groups

51.978

3

17.326

3.635

0.014

 

Within Groups

810.327

170

4.767

   
 

Total

862.305

173

     

WRI

Between Groups

32.778

3

10.926

1.966

0.121

 

Within Groups

944.722

170

5.557

   
 

Total

977.500

173

     

PEC

Between Groups

48.910

3

16.303

2.672

0.049

 

Within Groups

1037.257

170

6.102

   
 

Total

1086.167

173

     

WEC

Between Groups

36.640

3

12.213

2.067

0.107

 

Within Groups

1004.699

170

5.910

   
 

Total

1041.339

173

     

PRC

Between Groups

94.933

3

31.644

7.131

0.000

 

Within Groups

754.406

170

4.438

   
 

Total

849.339

173

     

WRC

Between Groups

70.694

3

23.565

4.505

0.005

 

Within Groups

889.283

170

5.231

   
 

Total

959.977

173

     

PEO

Between Groups

22.062

3

7.354

2.208

0.089

 

Within Groups

566.243

170

3.331

   
 

Total

588.305

173

     

WEO

Between Groups

16.717

3

5.572

1.526

0.210

 

Within Groups

620.915

170

3.652

   
 

Total

637.632

173

     

PRO

Between Groups

25.783

3

8.594

1.693

0.170

 

Within Groups

863.183

170

5.078

   
 

Total

888.966

173

     

WRO

Between Groups

38.214

3

12.738

2.530

0.059

 

Within Groups

855.786

170

5.034

   
 

Total

894.000

173

     

Table (3) Multiple Comparisons of Interpersonal Factors between various professsions**
(TUKEY HSD METHOD)

** [ Profession 1 = School Teachers; Profession 2 = College Teachers; Professions 3 = Doctors;
Profession 4 = Defense Personnel]

Dependent Variable (1)

Pairs of  Professions (I&J) (2)

Mean  Difference (I-J) (3)

 Std. Error (4)

Sig. (5)

PEI

1 & 2

-0.02

0.353

1.000

 

1 & 3

-0.18

0.359

0.956

 

1 & 4

(-0.97)*

0.351

0.031

 

2 & 3

-0.16

0.351

0.967

 

2 & 4

(-0.95)*

0.343

0.031

 

3 & 4

-0.79

0.349

0.112

WEI

1 & 2

-0.09

0.387

0.996

 

1 & 3

-0.16

0.394

0.979

 

1 & 4

-0.88

0.385

0.105

 

2 & 3

-0.07

0.385

0.998

 

2 & 4

-0.79

0.376

0.156

 

3 & 4

-0.73

0.383

0.233

PRI

1 & 2

-0.82

0.471

0.308

 

1 & 3

-0.64

0.479

0.547

 

1 & 4

(-1.53)*

0.469

0.007

 

2 & 3

0.18

0.468

0.980

 

2 & 4

-0.71

0.458

0.403

 

3 & 4

-0.91

0.466

0.221

WRI

1 & 2

0.14

0.509

0.992

 

1 & 3

0.15

0.518

0.991

 

1 & 4

-0.88

0.506

0.311

 

2 & 3

0.01

0.506

1.000

 

2 & 4

-1.02

0.494

0.171

 

3 & 4

-1.03

0.503

0.177

PEC

1 & 2

-0.71

0.533

0.540

 

1 & 3

-0.26

0.542

0.965

 

1 & 4

(-1.39)*

0.531

0.047

 

2 & 3

0.46

0.530

0.824

 

2 & 4

-0.68

0.518

0.562

 

3 & 4

-1.13

0.527

0.142

WEC

1 & 2

-0.26

0.525

0.958

 

1 & 3

-0.29

0.534

0.948

 

1 & 4

-1.2

0.522

0.103

 

2 & 3

-0.03

0.522

1.000

 

2 & 4

-0.93

0.510

0.262

 

3 & 4

-0.91

0.519

0.302

* The Mean difference is significant at the .05 level

Dependent Variable (1)

Pairs of  Professions (I&J) (2)

Mean  Difference (I-J) (3)

 Std. Error (4)

Sig. (5)

PRC

1 & 2

-0.19

0.455

0.977

 

1 & 3

0.49

0.462

0.720

 

1 & 4

1.68*

0.452

0.002

 

2 & 3

0.67

0.452

0.448

 

2 & 4

1.86*

0.442

0.000

 

3 & 4

1.19*

0.450

0.044

WRC

1 & 2

0.35

0.494

0.894

 

1 & 3

0.56

0.502

0.676

 

1 & 4

1.68*

0.491

0.004

 

2 & 3

0.21

0.491

0.972

 

2 & 4

1.33*

0.480

0.030

 

3 & 4

1.12

0.488

0.104

PEO

1 & 2

0.46

0.394

0.649

 

1 & 3

0.69

0.401

0.310

 

1 & 4

-0.2

0.392

0.957

 

2 & 3

0.23

0.392

0.932

 

2 & 4

-0.66

0.383

0.316

 

3 & 4

-0.89

0.390

0.104

WEO

1 & 2

0.21

0.413

0.959

 

1 & 3

0.57

0.420

0.522

 

1 & 4

-0.27

0.410

0.909

 

2 & 3

0.37

0.410

0.808

 

2 & 4

-0.48

0.401

0.627

 

3 & 4

-0.85

0.408

0.164

PRO

1 & 2

0.08

0.486

0.998

 

1 & 3

0.06

0.495

0.999

 

1 & 4

-0.82

0.484

0.328

 

2 & 3

-0.03

0.483

1.000

 

2 & 4

-0.91

0.472

0.225

 

3 & 4

-0.88

0.481

0.263

WRO

1 & 2

0.04

0.484

1.000

 

1 & 3

-0.25

0.493

0.959

 

1 & 4

-1.1

0.482

0.105

 

2 & 3

-0.28

0.481

0.936

 

2 & 4

-1.14

0.470

0.077

 

3 & 4

-0.86

0.479

0.283

* The Mean difference is significant at the .05 level

     

 Table (4) Paired Sample t-tests for Expressed and Wanted parameters by Professions 1 to 4

   

Paired Samples Stastistics *

   

Mean

N

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

     

Pair

PEI

4.24

41

1.496

0.234

       

1

WEI

4.49

41

1.719

0.269

       

Pair

PRI

2.29

41

1.952

0.305

       

2

WRI

3.34

41

2.232

0.349

       

Pair

PEC

3.22

41

2.414

0.377

       

3

WEC

3.78

41

2.564

0.400

       

Pair

PRC

6.41

41

1.581

0.247

       

4

WRC

5.68

41

1.809

0.282

       

Pair

PEO

4.17

41

1.564

0.244

       

5

WEO

4.07

41

1.555

0.243

       

Pair

PRO

3.44

41

1.803

0.282

       

6

WRO

3.66

41

1.931

0.302

       

* Profession =1

Paired Samples Test *

   

Paired Differences

     
   

Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

f

df

Sig. (2-tailed)

   

Lower

Upper

                   

Pair 1

PEI-WEI

-0.24

1.670

0.261

-0.77

0.28

-0.935

40

0.355

Pair 2

PRI-WRI

-1.05

2.167

0.338

-1.73

-0.36

-3.098

40

0.004

Pair 3

PEC-WEC

-0.56

1.566

0.245

-1.06

-0.07

-2.294

40

0.027

Pair 4

PRC-WRC

0.73

1.450

0.226

0.27

1.19

3.232

40

0.002

Pair 5

PEO-WEO

0.10

1.221

0.191

-0.29

0.48

0.512

40

0.612

Pair 6

PRO-WRO

-0.22

1.636

0.255

-0.74

0.30

-0.859

40

0.395

* Profession = 1



Table (5) Paired Samples Stastistics *

   

Mean

N

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

     

Pair

PEI

4.27

45

1.789

0.267

       

1

WEI

4.58

45

1.803

0.269

       

Pair

PRI

3.11

45

2.347

0.250

       

2

WRI

3.20

45

2.302

0.343

       

Pair

PEC

3.93

45

2.472

0.368

       

3

WEC

4.04

45

2.412

0.360

       

Pair

PRC

6.60

45

2.082

0.310

       

4

WRC

5.33

45

2.296

0.342

       

Pair

PEO

3.71

45

1.866

0.278

       

5

WEO

3.87

45

1.995

0.297

       

Pair

PRO

3.36

45

2.176

0.324

       

6

WRO

3.62

45

2.188

0.326

       

* Profession =2

Paired Samples Test *

   

Paired Differences

     
   

Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

f

df

Sig. (2-tailed)

   

Lower

Upper

Pair 1

PEI-WEI

-0.31

2.151

0.321

-0.96

0.34

-0.970

40

0.337

Pair 2

PRI-WRI

-0.09

2.583

0.385

-0.87

0.69

-0.231

40

0.819

Pair 3

PEC-WEC

-0.11

2.587

0.386

-0.89

0.67

-0.288

40

0.775

Pair 4

PRC-WRC

1.27

2.038

0.304

0.65

1.88

4.169

40

0.000

Pair 5

PEO-WEO

-0.16

1.331

0.198

-0.56

0.24

-0.784

40

0.437

Pair 6

PRO-WRO

-0.27

1.970

0.294

-0.86

0.33

-0.908

40

0.369

* Profession = 2


(Table 6) Paired Samples Stastistics *

   

Mean

N

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

     

Pair

PEI

4.43

42

1.796

0.277

     

1

WEI

4.64

42

1.885

0.291

     

Pair

PRI

2.93

42

2.053

0.317

     

2

WRI

3.19

42

2.244

0.346

     

Pair

PEC

3.48

42

2.501

0.386

     

3

WEC

4.07

42

2.267

0.350

     

Pair

PRC

5.93

42

2.088

0.322

     

4

WRC

5.12

42

2.244

0.346

     

Pair

PEO

3.48

42

1.550

0.239

     

5

WEO

3.50

42

1.436

0.222

     

Pair

PRO

3.38

42

2.498

0.385

     

6

WRO

3.90

42

2.335

0.360

     

* Profession =3

Paired Samples Test *

   

Paired Differences

     
   

Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

f

df

Sig. (2-tailed)

   

Lower

Upper

Pair 1

PEI-WEI

-0.21

1.406

0.217

-0.65

0.22

-0.988

41

0.329

Pair 2

PRI-WRI

-0.26

1.754

0.271

-0.81

0.28

-0.968

41

0.339

Pair 3

PEC-WEC

-0.60

2.490

0.384

-1.37

0.18

-1.549

41

0.129

Pair 4

PRC-WRC

0.81

1.565

0.242

0.32

1.30

3.351

41

0.002

Pair 5

PEO-WEO

-0.02

1.388

0.214

-0.46

0.41

-0.111

41

0.912

Pair 6

PRO-WRO

-0.52

1.627

0.251

-1.03

-0.02

-2.087

41

0.043

* Profession = 3


(Table 7) Paired Samples Statistics *

   

Mean

N

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

Pair

PEI

5.22

46

1.428

0.211

1

WEI

5.37

46

1.768

0.261

Pair

PRI

3.83

46

2.322

0.342

2

WRI

4.22

46

2.607

0.384

Pair

PEC

4.61

46

2.490

0.367

3

WEC

4.98

46

2.472

0.364

Pair

PRC

4.74

46

2.516

0.371

4

WRC

4.00

46

2.667

0.393

Pair

PEO

4.37

46

2.195

0.324

5

WEO

4.35

46

2.424

0.357

Pair

PRO

4.26

46

2.444

0.360

6

WRO

4.76

46

2.460

0.363

* Profession =4


Paired Samples Test *

   

Paired Differences

f

df

Sig. (2-tailed)

   

Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

         

Lower

Upper

Pair 1

PEI-WEI

-0.15

1.333

0.197

-0.55

0.24

-0.774

45

0.443

Pair 2

PRI-WRI

-0.39

1.844

0.272

-0.94

0.16

-1.440

45

0.157

Pair 3

PEC-WEC

-0.37

1.569

0.231

-0.84

0.10

-1.598

45

0.117

Pair 4

PRC-WRC

0.74

1.255

0.185

0.37

1.11

3.995

45

0.000

Pair 5

PEO-WEO

0.02

1.273

0.188

-0.36

0.40

0.116

45

0.908

Pair 6

PRO-WRO

-0.50

1.588

0.234

-0.97

-0.03

-2.135

45

0.038

* Profession = 4


Prof T. Thomas
HOD &  Professor , MBA Dept.
Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan
Vivekananda College of Science, Humanities & Commerce
Sainikpuri Kendra, Secunderabad-500094

Prof (Dr.) T. Dayakara Rao
Professor & Director – Incharge,
GIDC ROFEL Institute of Management Studies
14/5, GIDC, Vapi–396195
 

Source: E-mail May 23, 2003

Important Note :
Site Best Viewed in Internet
Explorer in 1024x768 pixels
Browser text size: Medium