m -W^iim

,r-t->.~r\i '^l


®Ijp (Sift of

Counseling Center




Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2010 with funding from

Lyrasis IVIenlbers and Sloan Foundation


Tfte^uufttment ^ S^ciat (^^m^S^eU^tee


74e IfteodunemeHi o^ Saccai ^cmfietence

/4 '^^t^iMuai ^ (4e

Bdf^ /4. VoU



Educational Test Bureau

EciocAiioihiiAL Publishers, Inc.



Printed in U.S.A.

To the mcmorij of


Wir lernen so v'iel als wir leben, und wissen so viel als wir wirken.



There is a destiny that makes us brothers.

None goes his way alone. All that we send into the lives of others

Comes back into our oicn. Edwin Markliam

^ -^ It is hardly possible to make due acknowledgment for the

varied assistance received in a work of this kind. One feek that he is only the agent through whom many influences con- verge to a new end. Especially is this true when the outcome epitomizes a lifetime of varied observation, study, and instruc- tion.

The initial inspiration for the present work may be said to date from undergraduate association with the late Prof, Guy M. Whipple, at Cornell, and the continuing interest in human development which he generously communicated to me. This beginning was augmented by intimate association with Henry H. Goddard in the days when the work of Binet, and research with the feeble-minded, were yielding a new orienta- tion and a more profitable approach in the field of human development. I am also deeply indebted to many other associates and teachers whose specific influence it is now difficult to trace but which colors this entire volume.

Likewise the whole atmosphere within which this research has been conducted, and the cooperative sharing of ideas and effort, have afforded conditions and aid highly favorable to th^ present result. For this setting, and for generous support and freedom in working conditions, grateful credit is accorded the late Edward R. Johnstone, former Director of The Training School at Vineland, whose enthusiasm for research and the use of scientific method contributed so heavily to the welfare and the happiness of both normal and handicapped children. His successor, Walter Jacob, and the Board of Trustees of The Training School, continued that support in the later stages of this work.

Previous efforts are to be found in my early work on job analysis and training in correctional institutions in collabora- tion with Burdette G. Lewis and the late Wm. J. Ellis, at a time when Stanley D. Porteus was independently engaged in similar work on industrial and social rating scales; in work with Lloyd N. Yepsen which eventuated in his social adjust- ment score card; in association with Myra W. Kuenzel in the construction of a scale of industrial virtues ; and in cooperation

viii Acknowledgments

with Dr. Henry A. Cotton in the preparation of a scale for measuring mental deterioration and recovery.

These maiieiivers anticipated the work on the present Scale. This was concretely begim with the assistance of S. Geraldine Longwell, now my wife, while studying the improvement of cerebral palsy patients receiving muscle training in collabora- tion with Dr. Winthrop M, Phelps. The initial form of the Scale and the first condensed manual were products of joint work which was extended from the birth-palsied to the feeble- minded, then to the normal, to variously handicapped groups, and to multiple social uses.

This initial formulation of the Scale was materially assisted by seminar and staff discussions with the author's junior colleagues at the Vineland Laboratory. Among these, especially helpful aid was obtained from J. Thomas Mclntire, A. Douglas Glanville, and George Kreezer. At this period I also drew heavily on the more recent work in the literature of child development which has had such a vigorous expression during the past thirty years.

I am especially indebted to Katherine Preston Bradway for critical suggestions on method, for all data constituting the initial standardization, for records on the first re-examinations of normal subjects, for initial statistical treatment of data, for exploratory studies with deaf and with blind subjects and in the field of inheritance, and especially for work on the Thomson method and other statistical devices for item evaluation, scale calibration and validation. Mrs. Bradway also critically re- viewed the final manuscript.

Further collection, tabulation and revised treatment of data were accomplished by Kathryn Fitch Deacon. She par- ticipated also in the successive series of examinations of the normal growth study, in several application studies, in analyz- ing miscellaneous data, in collating the work of collaborating students at other centers, and in critical reading of the present volume.

Thanks are due the members of the Vineland research staff who collaborated in various exploratory applications of the Scale, to other authors and to libraries for access to unpublished studies, to those institutional superintendents and school au- thorities who cordially offered access to special populations for trial investigations, to Marianne H. Wasson for translating the study by Helmut von Bracken, to Noemi Morales for as-

Acknowledgments ix

sistance in translating the Scale into Spanish, to my son Eugene E. Doll for counsel, several exploratory studies, and helpful review of the manuscript, and to the many research workers and correspondents whose critical interest induced specific improvements in formulation.

We are specifically indebted to the people of Vineland for their cooperative assistance in receiving our examiners and cordially assisting us in gathering of data. The Mothers Re- search Club of Vineland, at whose annual meetings at the Vine- land Laboratory the early phases of this work were profitably discussed, gave invaluable early encouragement. Our initial normative data were obtained from the children of these par- ents in the initial stages of the investigation. Assistance was received also from a similar group associated with the paro- chial schools, through whom favorable home visiting contacts were established. Further aid was received from the local pub- lic school authorities and teachers.

The initial and revised preparation of manuscript has been the work of Florence C. Matlack, whose continuing sympathetic understanding, encouragement, and protection from distractions have contributed indispensably to bringing this work to print. I am also indebted to her for continuing assistance in reviewing and recalculating much of the data, preparing the final graphs and the index, and faithfully seeing the work through over fifteen arduous years.

To Lillian Note Dilg I owe cordial thanks for her unflag- ging editorial support and unlimited good will during the nearly four years of publication stages. And to the Educational Test Bureau for sparing no effort in the production. Also to Merle W. Tate for a critical reading of the statistical treatment of the basic data.

Appreciation is expressed to Raymond S. Patterson and the John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company for permission to use the item illustrations from their publication "Your Child Grows up". These interpretative sketches were prepared by Hazel Hoecker, New York City.

Thanks are due the "children" and staff of The Training School at Vineland, New Jersey, for their cheerful collabora- tion. Only those at the immediate scene can know the cordial and effective manner and extent of their support. To all those who "belong" and have given so generously I express regi-et and pride that the list is too long for personal mention.

X Acknowledgments

And over all is the aura of inspiration and esteem of Agnes Martz Doll and our gi'owing sons Eugene and Bruce. Her confidence in me, and the home laboratory supplied by them, afforded a major source of motives and materials.

What can be said for indebtedness to the professional literature? Truly yesterday today was tomorrow; there is nothing new under the sun; we pillage the common heritage; all men are brothers. To burden this text with the library sources on which much of it is based, from which inspiration and utility have been freely drawn, or toward which warrant for authoritative support is directed, seems as futile as it would inevitably be tiresome. Since the original copy was either conceived or actually formulated prior to 1938 it is particularly difficult to document works which have appeared since about that date, although some supporting references are included, and specific contributions on the uses of the Social Scale are cited. The interested reader will find adequate recent treatment and ample references to topical backgi'ound in the scholarly "Manual of Child Psychology" edited by Leonard Carmichael.

God keep me froyn ever completing anything. This lohole hook is but a draft Nay, but the draft of a draft. Oh, Time, Strength, Cash, and Patience! Herman Melville

Ederar A. Doll



Acknowledgments ----- _ vii

Tables and Figures ------ xvii

Part I Philosophy of the Method

Chapter 1. Introduction

Epitome _______ 1

Origin of the Scale ______ 4

Progress Schedule ______ 6

Further Evolution ______ 7

References _______ g

Chapter 2, Postulates

Major Premises ______ 10

Biological Orientation - - - - - 11

Growth Potentials ______ 12

Environmental Modifiability _____ 14

Behavior Modalities ______ 14

Behavioral Components _____ 15

Focus of Behavior - - - - - 15

Maturation Principle ______ 16

Categorical Aspects _-__-- 17

Environmental Circumstances - - - - 19

References _______ 20

Chapter 3. The Problem of Measurement

Common Observations ----- 23

Stages of Maturation - - - - - - 25

Techniques of Social Appraisal - - - - 27

Difficulties Encountered _____ 33

Example of Analytic Method ----- 35

References _______ 37

Part II Construction of Social Maturity Scale Chapter 4. Design of the Scale

General Plan __----_ 39

Requirements __ - 42

Range of Application - _ 44

Interview Method ______ 45

Calibration Principle ------ 46

Point Scale Principle ------ 48

Year Scale Principle ------ 48

Final Scale _______ 50

Chapter 5. Item Criteria

General Considerations ------ 55

Item Formulation ______ 59

Practicability of Items _____ 63

Item Scoring in re Placement _ _ _ _ 64

Habitual Performance - - 65



Chapter 6. Item Specification

Orientation _--____ 67

Item Graphs -------71

Self-Help General Category ----- 75

Summary -------93

Self-Help Eating Category ----- 96

Summary ------- 110

Self-Help Dressing Category ----- 112

Summary ------- 129

Locomotion Category ------ 131

Summary ------- 145

Occupation Category ------ 149

Summary ------- 180

Communication Category ----- 185

Summary ------- 206

Self-Direction Category ----- 210

Summary ------- 228

Socialization Category ----- 231

Summary ------- 255

General Summary _-_- - 259

Part III Administration of the Scale Chapter 7. Procedures and Scoring

General Features _-__-- 266

Rapport with Informants ----- 267

Interview Technique - - - - 270

Categorical Sequences _ - _ _ - 272

Habitual Performance ----- 277

Scoring Principles ------ 278

Scoring Summary ___--- 283

Total Scores ------- 287

SA Scores - - - - - - - 288

Special Procedures ------ 291

Self-Informing ------ 292

Double Scoring ------ 292

Retrospective Examining - - - - 293

Multiple Informants ----- 296

History and Literature ----- 297

Description and Counseling - - - - 297

Informal Use ------ 298

Chapter 8. Illustrative Examinations

Case I Normal Preschool Child - - - - 299

Case II Superior Adult ----- 305

Case III Constitutionally Inferior Adult - - - 309

Case IV Deteriorated Adult - - _ _ 323

Case IV At Prime - - - __ 330

Case V Blind Adult - _ _ _ _ 335



Part IV Standardization and Validation Chapter 9. Normative Standardization

Preliminary Experimentation ----- 347

Normative Scene ______ 349

Selection of S's - - - - - - 352

Collection of Data --____ 357

Treatment of Data ------ 353

Normative Results --_-__ 354

Item Sex Diflferences ----- 365

Total Item Scaling - - - _ _ 363

Total Scores -_-___ 368

Year Scale ______ 373

SA and SQ Scores - - - _ _ 374

LA - SA Distributions - - _ - _ 379

LA - SQ Distributions ----- 330

Absolute Scaling ------ 38O

Reliability -_-___ 330

Validity ------- 38I

Types of Scores ------ 382

Scattering ______ 334

SQ and Social Status ----- 386

Statistical Cautions - - - _ _ 388

References ------- 388

Chapter 10. Item Validation Feeble-Minded Subjects

Institutional Scene ------ 390

Description of S's - - - - - - 395

Sex Diflferences ------ 490

Item Validation ---_-_ 491

Differential Items -_-_-_ 495

Influence of LA ------ 497

Types of Scores --___- 493

Scattering --__--_ 412

Chapter 11. Scale Validation V. T. S. Subjects

Analysis of Total Scores - - - _ _ 414

Influence of LA and MA - - _ - _ 416

Quotient Scores ---_-_ 423

SA - MA Differences ------ 427

Summary of Relationships ----- 428

Reliability of Measurement - - - - _ 429

Self-Informing --__-_ 432

Validity _______ 433

Sources of Error _---__ 434

VTS Residual S's - - - - _ - 435

Insufficient Data - - - - - _ 436

Visually Handicapped S's - - - - - 436

Auditory Handicaps _____ 437

Aphasic S's ----- - 437

Crippled S's ------ 437

Convulsive Seizures ----- 437



VTS Residual S's (contU)

Deteriorating S's - ~ - - - - 438

Mentally Disturbed S's - - - - - 438

Diagnosis Deferred _ _ _ _ - 438

Constitutionally Inferior ----- 438

Borderline Dull-Normal ----- 439

Influence of Secondary Variables _ - - - 440

Length of Residence _ - _ - _ 440

Paternal Occupation ----- 442

Etiology ------- 444

Mongoloid Type ------ 446

References -__-- - 447

Part V Applications

Chapter 12. Varieties of Uses

Normative Maturation _____ 449

Social Studies -------450

Education - - - - - - - 452

The Handicapped ______ 453

Executive Uses ______ 454

Field and Laboratory Studies _ - - _ _ 456

Casework -_--_-_ 457

Literature - - - - - - - 458

Chapter 13. Exploratory Studies

Growth Rates -_--__ 460

Normative S's - - - - - - 460

Mentally Deficient S's - - - - - 462

Physically Handicapped S's _ _ _ _ 465

Inheritance ___---_ 466

Family Strains ------ 466

Twins __-_--- 467

Developmental Periods - - _ _ - 471

Preschool S's - - - - - - 471

Individual Infants _____ 473

Early and Late Childhood _ _ _ _ 476

Early and Late Adolescence _ _ _ _ 482

Senescence ______ 484

Retrospective Growth Records _ - _ _ 486

Social Variables ______ 487

Socio - Economic Status _ - - - - 487

Marginal Social Status _ - _ - - 488

Dependent Children _____ 490

Culture Groups ____-- 495

Nationality Derivation _ _ _ _ 495

Negro S's - - - - - _ 497

Pueblo Indians _ ^ _ - _ 502



Social Variables (cont'd.)

Conduct Disorders _ _ _ _ « 505

Behavior and Intelligence - - - _ 505

Behavior and Organic Involvement - - - 507

Child Guidance Problems - - - _ 510

Maladjusted Youths - - - - - 511

Juvenile Delinquents _____ 512

Adult Offenders - - - - - - 517

Physically Handicapped S's _____ 520

Auditory Handicaps _____ 520

Visual Handicaps _____ 527

Orthopedic Handicaps - - - - - - 535

Mentally Handicapped S's - - - _ _ 541

Feeble-Minded _--___ 541

General Evidence _____ 541

Degree of Deficiency _ _ _ _ 543

Double Scoring _____ 544

Training (Idiocy) _____ 547

Physical Therapy (Cerebral Palsy) _ _ _ 550

Social Placement - - - - - 551

Special Class S's - - - - - 557

Social Adequacy _____ 558

Later Maturity _____ 559

Mentally Disturbed _____ 560

Convulsive Seizures _____ 562

Educational Applications _____ 563

Principles and Practice _____ 563

Grade School ChUdren - - - - - 564

High School Students _____ 566

Special Education _____ 567

Literary Employment ______ 571

Fiction, Cultures, Biography _ _ _ _ 572

Adaptations - _ _ _ _ - - 574

Abbreviation and Expansion _ _ _ _ 574

Group Form ______ 578

Summary _______ 579

References _______ 579

Chapter 14. Clinical Integration.

Principles _______ 5g5

Case 1 Superior Twins _____ 588

Case 2 Young Idiot ______ 589

Case 3 Adult Idiot ____-- 5M

Case 4 Adult Imbecile _____ 5W

Case 5 Marginal Deficiency _____ 595

Case 6 Borderline Dull-Normal _ _ _ _ 598

Case 7 Potential Moron _____ 6^2

Case 8 Potential Normality _____ 606

Case 9 Spastic Imbecile _____ 610

Case 16 High Moron ____-- 612

Case 11 Spastic Inadeqiitate _____ €16


Chapter 14 {cont'd.)

Case 12 Borderline Normal - - - - - 618

Case 13 Doubtful Diagnosis ----- 621

Case 14 Borderline Moron ----- 623

Case 15 Aphasic Moron _ _ _ - _ 625

Case 16 Organic Impairment ----- 627

Case 17 Blind Moron ------ 629

Case 18 Deteriorated Moron ----- 632

Case 19 Psychotic Episode ----- 635

Summary ___---- 637

References - - - - _ - - 637

Epilogue -------- 639

Name Index _--_--- 643

Subject Index __----- 647



Fig. I. Median LA by point scores - - - - 371

Table A. For converting total scores to social - age values 290

B. Fragmentary example, differential comparisons 499

C. MA and SA boundaries, clinical degrees of MD 543

D. Illustrative abbreviated scale - - - 576

E. Profile, VSMS 577

1. Description of normative subjects - - 355

2. Item standardization, normal S's - - 366

3. Total scores by LA, normal S's - - - 369

4. Distribution of total scores, normal S's - - 372

5. Standardization of SA and SQ scores, normal S's 376 5A. Distribution of SA by LA, normal S's - - 378 5B. Distribution of SQ by LA, normal S's - - 379

6. "Scattering" on point scores, normal S's - 385

7. Distribution of SQ by POC, normal S's - - 386 7A. Distribution of SQ by own occupational class - 387

8. Description of FM S's, item - analysis sample 397 8A. Distribution of SA by LA, item - analysis sample 398 8B. Distribution of MA by LA, item - analysis sample 399 8C. Distribution of SA by MA, item - analysis sample 400

9. Mean item total norms, item - analysis sample 402 9A. Items showing significant CR's, N vs FM S's - 406

10. Types of item scores, N vs FM S's - - 409

11. "Scattering" on point scores, FM S's - - 413

12. Distribution of LA and MA, VTS S's - - 417

13. Distribution of LA and SA, VTS S's - - 419

14. Distribution of MA and SA, VTS S's - - 421

15. Distribution of MA and SA, LA's combined - 422

16. Distribution of LA and IQ, VTS S's - - 428

17. Distribution of LA and SQ, VTS S's - - 425

18. Distribution of IQ and SQ, VTS S's - - 426

19. Summary data, etiological - cultural origins - 445

20. Sample data on continuing maturation - - 486

I. (Doll) Analysis of SA increments, FM S's - 464

I. (Ceres) Mean scores, VSMS, gi'oups I - II - 478




Chapter 1. Introduction

Chapter 2. Postulates

Chapter 3. The Problem of Measurement


Two little seeds awoke one day.

As seeds will do in the month of May,

But lo, and behold, they had clean forgot

If they were carrots or beets or what!

At length they decided that they must needs

Call a council of^ sixteen seeds,

Some said onions or beets; but no.

Others said it couldn't be so;

Some said turnips or celery seeds;

Some said lettuce; and some said weeds;

Then a sunflower spoke; "It may be slow

But the way to find out is just to grow!" County Y's

Epitome. This volume presents the Vineland Social Maturity Scale for the measurement of social competence. It elaborates previous preliminary publications and includes the background of the method, detailed manual, basic data, preliminary standardization and validation, illustrative group and clinical application.

This scale is not just one more "testing" instrument in the field of human measurement. On the contrary, as a standard- ized method for the quantitative estimation of personal social maturation it presents a unique device for the overall evalu- ation of human behavior. Social competence is a universal human attribute. The measurement of its maturational degrees within known limits of error affords a new means for investi- gating its constituent variables and its significant relations to many human problems.

Attention has often been directed to the study of the or- ganism as a whole, with corresponding deprecation of the dissectional analysis of human growth and behavior. Investi- gations concerned with single aspects of behavior such as physical growth, physiological functioning, intellectual en- dowment, behavioral adjustment, learning, and the like, almost inevitably fall short of holistic integration. Many thoughtful students appreciate the importance of treating maturation and adjustment in bio-psycho-social terms. But how shall we en- compass the complete individual in his dynamic complexity? Decomposition is essential for an understanding of a compound,

2 Introduction

and reassemblage of elements is equally necessary to the in- tegrity of the aggregate. The H2O is not the water; the frac- tional distillates of human behavior may not reveal the unique self ; the group is more than the catalogue of its members.

We explore here two fundamental considerations; (a) the ontogenetic evaluation of the individual as an independent so- cial unit with emphasis on his subjective self-sustaining social adequacies, and (h) the individual as a cooperating and contri- buting member of the social group. The former scrutinizes certam developmental "operations" of the individual in their predominantly personal relevance as an important precon- dition of social self-sufficiency. The latter probes the extension of such personal activities into spheres of congregate welfare or their impingement upon other persons.

This relation of one person to another integrates individ- ual with social psychology. Personal and subjective experiences acquire social significance when shared with other persons. The ultimate import of self-psychology derives from its social rele- vance. We are concerned here, then, with human behavior as ultim.ately capitalized in some relevant expression of social competence. This competence, we submit, ir.ay be conceived in terms of personal independence and social responsibility. Thus the social adequacy of the individual as a whole, with due regard for age and culture, is conceived as the social end- result of the physical, physiological, intellectual, habitual, emotional, volitional, educational, occupational aspects of per- sonal growth, adjustment, and attainment which ensue from his constitutional predispositions and environmental impacts.

This social competence is not something static. It entails both phylogenetic and ontogenetic evolution and it varies with physical and cultural conditions according to time, place, and circumstance. Social competence may therefore be expressed in terms of age, status, opportunity, talent, health, degree of free- dom., and so on.

In short, social competence may be defined as a functional composite of human traits which subserves social usefulness as reflected in self-sufficiency and in service to others. This con- cept postulates at all points a relation between constitutional aptitude and environmental activity and assumes that deviation or variation from the normal in these respects, whether arising from physical, mental, or social causes, is ultimately mirrored in some measurable increase, decrease, or other modification of social competence.

Epitome 3

Consider for a moment some of the advantages of such a scale in its larger aspects. Our experimental evidence shows that it provides a fairly reliable and valid measure of genetic maturation and senescent decline in social competence. It ex- presses individual differences in such competence within defi- nite limits of statistical deviation or co-variation. It reflects the influence of known variables. It therefore may be used as an indirect measure of its components; for example, such a constituent variable as mental age can be estimated from the measure of social age.

Of critical importance is the fact that this scale does not require the presence of the subject for examination; on the contrary, the standard method provides an examination of the subject in absentia, and therefore, if desirable, without his col- laboration; e.g., if deceased or otherwise inaccessible to direct examination. This makes possible the plotting of retrospective growth curves and thereby reduces the limits of error in the prediction of further growth (by supplying more points for a given curve). By the sam.e reasoning the Scale affords an im- mediate method of longitudinal as well as cross-sectional study.

Moreover, it yields not only a measure of total competence within the limits of definition, but also a somewhat detailed description or analysis of that competence. It provides a basic criterion for the study of environmental influences and com- parative culture groups. It affords an objective quantitative method for family history study. Used as a developmental schedule for anamnesis it reflects precocity, retardation, alter- ations, or decline in growth. It serves to reveal the social consequences of such handicaps as deafness, blindness, insanity, delinquency, and other mental, physical, and social abnormali- ties. Translated in terms of the customs and attainments of "primitive" or ethnic groups it affords a useful scientific device in the field of cultural anthropology.

The present volume samples some of these possibilities. A few applications of the Scale have been investigated with some thoroughness ; other explorations have been made as pro- totypic studies to demonstrate the practicability of the method. In spite of the serious preliminary work already accomplished, the present form of the Scale should be viewed as only the first step in the development of a method that merits extensive experimental evaluation. In view of the wide range of useful- ness which such an instrument affords it is evident that par- ticular areas of the Scale should be elaborated, more extensive normative standardization undertaken, and wider differential validation essayed in various fields of application.

4 Introduction

The standardized interview procedure on which this scale is based is itself a relatively new departure in the field of hu- man measurement. While the Scale is constructed on the same principles as the Binet-Simon scale for intelligence, the manner of its employment is radically different. In spite of precon- ceived objections to the method of interview as applied to precise measurement, the evidence herein indicates the practicability of the definitive interview technique.

Origin of the Scale. In the course of various investigations on these propositions we ultimately designed the present pro- cedure. About 1925, The Vineland Laboratory was engaged in studies of job analysis of training procedures (Buhl, 1928; Doll, 1924, 1929a; Kuenzel, 1928)* as an expansion of the tech- niques of industrial occupational analysis previously employed in the correctional institutions of New Jersey (Doll, 1920, 1921, 1926; Doll and Kuenzel, 1930). Occupational, classroom, and cottage training situations were reduced from their overall extent to relatively specific unit operations. This work led to the designing of experimental score-cards for the measurement of learning in occupational situations (Kuenzel, 1929), ad- justment in social group relations (Yepsen, 1928), and im- provement or recovery (Doll, 1929b) among hospital patients (see Chapter 3).

These efforts soon proved helpful in another direction. In 1928, systematic muscle training was begun at The Training School for a group of mentally deficient and mentally normal patients with motor handicaps produced by intracranial birth lesions (Doll, 1933a). In undertaking to measure the improve- ment of these patients under treatment we endeavored first to observe the nature of the anticipated progress and then to gauge its amounts (Melcher, 1930). Amelioration was ex- pected in body mechanics through increased facility of move- ment at the various joints, enhancement of muscle tone, and smoother timing of antagonists. This was essentially a neuro- muscular problem which was primarily the mutual responsi- bility of the physical therapist and the examining orthopedist. Various attempts to measure such benefits proved clinically unsatisfactory. We finally concentrated on a different problem, namely, the gains in total performance of the individual from the point of view of social usefulness, or the practical capital- ization of rectified body mechanics as expressed through in- creased personal adequacy (Longwell, 1935).

* References in parentheses apply to authors and related years of publica- tion in the list of references at the ends of the same chapters in which they occur.

Origin of the Scale 5

The problem was complicated by the wide variation in the characteristics of the patients (Doll, 1933b). They represented both sexes, life ages from two to fifty years, mental ages from two to thirteen years, and mental conditions from low-grade imbecility to mental superiority. The motor handicaps ranged from almost complete helplessness to relatively minor inco- ordination.

Obviously, such a study required anticipation of improve- ment through growth and development as well as from treat- ment, and the possibility that these might be interdependent. This led, naturally, to a consideration of maturation versus amelioration. The problem seemed simple enough until we attempted to use our knowledge of genetic psychology in so practical a manner.

A staff seminar was organized to canvass the field. The literature of child study was found rich in general orientation but barren of details that could be employed for the systematic appraisal of individual social development. In this respect the situation was much the same as that which confronted Binet and Simon when they first proposed their scale for measuring intelligence (Binet and Simon, 1016). To employ an engineer- ing simile, preliminary survey lines had been run but there were no accurate devices for chaining, and no satisfactory instruments for determining levels.

In the field of psychometry a wealth of material was avail- able. But our problem was not one of adapting mental tests as indirect measures of social aptitude. Our task was to measure attainment in social competence considered as habitual per- formance rather than as latent ability or capacity. Mental traits could not be ignored as components, but their direct measurement was to be avoided except as contributing factors and for controlling interpretation.

The wide range of our subjects in developmental status and motor handicaps required that we encompass the entire period of normal maturation and that we consider all factors contri- buting to social maturation, such as intelligence, motor facility, training, experience, motivation, conduct, environmental cir- cumstances. Our goal was to appraise the social effects of these participating variables while avoiding their isolated measure- ment, to evaluate their integrated capitalization rather than their ispecific roles.

At this point we adopted the method of Binet and Simon by postulating a developmental central factor (corresponding to their "judgment," or Spearman's g) operating in combination

6 Introduction

with various specific or group factors. This central factor we loosely conceived as progressive self-direction culminating in the direction and protection of others.

Unlike Binet and Simon, we sought to measure accustomed performance in mastered attainment rather than innate capac- ity for solving novel problems. Like them, however, we were obliged to follow the principle of sampling representative per- formances from which general performance might be inferred.

The conclusions from these considerations were not imme- diately self-evident. On the contrary, our initial attack served only to emphasize the difficulties without more than faintly suggesting their resolution. We were obliged for a time to con- tent ourselves with the less ambitious task of appraising the immediate consequences of muscle training in specific direc- tions.

Progress schedule. Capitalizing our earlier experiences we then formulated a tentative systematic performance schedule arranged as a descriptive progress chart. The categories of this schedule included items on the motor aspects of locomotion, dressing, bathing, eating, speech, writing, and eliminative con- trol. For each of these categories a number of detailed per- formances were arranged in presumptive order of progressive difficulty. With the exception of the items on speech and writ- ing, most of the categories were fairly complete from the easi- est to the most difficult tasks for the developmental period corresponding to infancy and early childhood. This made it possible to score each patient in terms of the entire schedule and thus determine his overall progressive status regardless of the variables of sex, age, mental age, diagnostic classification, and motor handicap.

This uniform chart enabled us to rescore each patient at successive time-intervals and note such changes as might have taken place. For this purpose the child was observed, the physi- cal therapist interviewed, and the patients' cottage attendants carefully questioned as to the extent to which each item was usefully performed, and as to the habitual or emergent nature of such performances. On some items the child was actually "tested," but the progressive or habitual extent to which the performance was revealed in daily behavior was deemed more significant.

This study was carried out over a period of three years with birth-palsied subjects receiving muscle training (Longwell, .19S5). As the work progressed it became evident that we were employing a device with significant possibilities for

Further Evolution 7

estimating the social improvement or genetic social maturation of the feeble-minded in general. Accordingly we set ourselves the task of extending this schedule so as to encompass a wider variety and range of activities. This task was undertaken early in 1934 and the first draft of the final scale was completed in July of that year.

Further evolution. Tentative examinations were made of a number of trial subjects with this rough draft. These were normal and feeble-minded, juvenile and adult, low-grade and high-grade, male and female. The Scale was still only a series of items arranged in presumptive order of difficulty. These first results led to rearrangements, rejections and addi- tions and also provided preliminary year-scale groupings. The modified draft was submitted to the executive staff (depart- ment heads) and to the full research staff of The Training School for critical evaluation. Helpful suggestions and general approval encouraged further work.

By this time the need for precise definition of items was apparent as well as for a systematic method of administration and scoring. After numerous formulations, which incidentally led to further modification of items, a fairly stable preliminary manual of procedure was worked out.

From the data obtained on a relatively small number of subjects, experimental Form A was evolved. This was presented for discussion at the annual meeting (1935) of the American Orthopsychiatric Association and published in its Journal (Doll, 1935a). Favorable reception led to releasing the Scale to a few colleagues for collaborative experimentation.

To facilitate such collaboration a preliminary brief manual was published (Doll, 1935c). Further data on normative standardization and feeble-minded validation were soon pre- sented at the annual meeting (1935) of the American Asso- ciation on Mental Deficiency and published in the Proceedings of that Association (Doll, 1935b).

As experience with the method gave assurance of its mer- its, a systematic program of standardization and validation was carried out (Doll, 1936a). The many studies ensuing from that program both at Vineland and elsewhere over the subse- quent years delayed the preparation of the elaborated manual and formal report of substantiating data now presented here- with.

These investigations, fortified by extensive correspondence with collaborating workers, generally confirmed the practicabil-

8 Introduction

ity of the method and yielded further refinements. Form B and a revised condensed manual were published (Doll, 1936b). and the method was released for general experimental use. We further tested the efficacy of the method and sought addi- tional clarification of various diflficulties. This was accomplished (1) by applying Form B with various tjrpes of handicapped subjects such as deaf, blind, delinquent, and insane; (2) by investigating such influences as inheritance and culture in family strains, with twins and siblings, with Negroes and Pueblo Indians; (3) by demonstrating its clinical usefulness in social, educational and psychological casework; (4) by ex- ploring its administrative ramifications and its feasibility for appraising fictional characters and biographies. In particular we began longitudinal growth studies of both normal and feeble-minded subjects. The results of these and other ex- perimental evaluation of the method and its versatile potential- ities are summarized in subsequent chapters, especially Parts IV and V.


BiKET, Alfred, and Th. Simon. 1916. The development of intalligenee m children. (Trans, by Elizabeth S. Kite). Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.

Buhl, George H. 1928. The education of low-grade feeble-minded througb job analysis. Training School Bulletin, 26, 1-10.

Doll, Edgar A. 1920. The correlation of mental types with occupational assignment. Proceedings of the American Prison Atsociation, 1920, pp^ 306-313.

Doll, Edgar A. 1921. Report of the Psychologist. In New Jersey Stats Prison Biennial Report for Fiscal Years 1920 and 1921, pp. 92-122. Trenton: N. J. State Prison.

Doll, Edgar A. 1924. Capabilities of low-grade feeble-minded. Training

School Bulletin, 21, 65-77. Doll, Edgar A. 1926. Psychology in the organization of prison industries,.

Bulletin of the Taylor Society, 11, 219-223.

Doll, Edgar A. 1929a. Job analysis as a basis for teaching. Bulletin of th* Taylor Society, 14, 134-141.

Doll, Edgar A. 1929b. A score-card for measuring the improvement of mental patients. Unpublished research form. The Vineland Laboratory.

Doll, Edgar A. 1933a. Birth lesion as a category of mental deficieacy. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 3, 1-13.

References 9

Don, Edgah a. 1933b. Psychological significance of cerebral birth lesions.

American Journal of Psychology, 46, 444-462. Doix, Edgar A. 1935a. A genetic scale of social maturity. American Joumai

of Orthopsychiatry, 6, 180-188. Doll, Edgab A. 1935b. The measurement of social competence. Proceedings

of the American Association on Mental Deficiency, 40, 103-123. Doll, Edgab A. 1935c. The Vineland Social Maturity Scale. Training Bchool

Bulletin, 32, 1-7, 25-32, 48-55, 68-74. Doll, Edgab A. 1936a. Preliminary standardization of the Vineland Social

Maturity Scale. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 6, 283-293. Doll, Edgae A. 1936b. The Vinelnnd Social Maturity Scal£i revised con- densed manual of directions. Vineland: The Training School. Doll, Edgab A., and Myka W. Kuenzel. 1930. Job analysis for placement

and training. Unpublished monograph. The Vineland Laboratory. KtTENZEL, Mtha W. 1928. Job analysis for training assignment in dining room,

housework, pantry and poultry occupations. Unpublished research report,

The Vineland Laboratory. KuENZEL, Mtha W. 1929. A score-card of industrial virtues. Unpublished

research form, The Vineland Laboratory. LoNGWELL, S. Geraldine. 1936. Influence of muscle training on birth-injured

mentally deficient children. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 46, 349-370. Melcher, Ruth T. 1930. Research in progress on birth injury. Training

School Bulletin, 27, 41-49. Yepsen, Llotd N. 1928, Objective estimation of social behavior. TrainUig

School BuUetin, 26, 33-41.


Maturity is not dated on any

calendar, nor is it achieved at a given day

like a twenty-first birthday and the right to

vote. The maturity of adulthood is the outcome

of lifelong growth. A child begins to grow up

the minute he is born. He may be "grown up"

at any level, provided he is making use of the

potentialities and adjusting to the needs inherent

in that stage of his development. In this sense

"growing up" is a process which is continuously

going on in infancy, in childhood, in adolescence

and on throughout life. Child Study

Major premises. This book explores the following assump- tions :

1. Social competence maj'- be defined as the functional ability of the human organism for exercising personal inde- pendence and social responsibility.

2. This competence may be measured progressively in terms of maturation by sampling its genetic stages by means of representative performances at successive life ages.

3. Such maturation may be taken as a practicable measure of the changing organism as a whole, as an epitome of the useful capitalization of all minutiae of detailed structures, functions and experiences of the integrated personality.

4. Individual status in social competence may be expressed in terms of numerical and descriptive deviation from established maturational norms and evaluated in terms of related variables.

5. The Scale proposed herein affords a unique procedure for the measurement of individual social competence in its group and clinical ramifications.

6. Such measurement provides a valid means for the scientific pursuit of many relevant social studies.

The treatment of these propositions will involve some repetition. Re-statement of standpoint will clarify diverse emphases. The argument may first be expounded in terms of some of the postulates which underlie the construction of the Scale.

Biological Orientation 11

Biological orientation. Capacity for survival is a universal attribute of all things. That this capacity may be greater or less, and variously displayed, from matter to man. Smith to Jones, or cave to penthouse adds to its fascination by the very diversity of its expression (Allee, 1938; Bradley, 1938; Jen- nings, 1930). From gas to cell, cell to organism, organism to society, without survival there would be void.

Added to the capacity for survival are the attributes of