RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN SELECTED PERSONALITY CHARACTERISTICS AND INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOR AS A DIMENSION OF LEADERSHIP STYLE IN GRADUATE NURSING STUDENTS WHO CHOOSE A CLINICAL SPECIALTY AND A ROLE PREPARATION.
Contributors: University of Kentucky.
Published: 1985
Number of pages: 129
Subjects: Education, Higher.
Description: The purpose of the present study was to examine the relationship between selected personality characteristics from Cattell's 16 PF and interpersonal behavior as a dimension of leadership style as demonstrated by Schutz' FIRO-B. The three clinical specialties were medical-surgical/adult health (MS), maternal/paternal child health (MCH), and psychiatric/community mental health (PCMH). The two role preparations were clinicians (C) and educators (E). A smaller group of post-masters' clinicians and educators in the three clinical specialties was studied in an attempt to validate the findings.

Subjects were 126 female graduate students. All were fully admitted to master of nursing programs and had as least one year of nursing practice. There were 32 post-masters clinicians or educators. Six factors of the 16 PF were used as the predictor variables. These were submissiveness versus dominance (E), expedient versus conscientious (G), trusting versus suspicious (L), practical versus imaginative (M), conservative versus experimenting (Q(,1)) and group oriented versus self-sufficient (Q(,2)). The Social Interaction Index (SUMICA) and the total difference between behaviors expressed toward others and behaviors wanted from others (TOTDIFF) of the FIRO-B measured the criterion variable.

Data analyses showed that for both study groups means for both the predictor and criterion variables were higher than the norm group. Within clinical specialty groups the most consistent difference seemed to be between the MS and PCHM majors. The MS were the most submissive, conscientious and self-sufficient. The PCMH were the most expedient, trusting, imaginative, experimenting and group oriented. The MCH were the most dominant and suspicious. The SUMICA scores for all groups indicate a preference for interaction with people; while the TOTDIFF scores indicate these subjects are initiators of actions rather than receivers.

There were negative correlations between SUMICA and Q(,1) and Q(,2). There were positive correlations between TOTDIFF and E and Q(,1).
Notes: Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 47-03, Section: A, page: 0802.

Thesis (ED.D.)--UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY, 1985.

School code: 0102.