ROBERT TRAVIS

THE MOS ALIENATION ALTERNATIVE TO SROLE'S

SCALE: ANOMIA

AN SCALE

(Accepted 14 January, 1992) ABSTRACT. A growing number of sociologists believe that Srote's Anomia Scale, whether modified or not, is too inclusive to measure anomie in any meaningful way when using survey research techniques among subcultures. Evidence from the National Opinion Research Center's annual General Social Survey, which is a cross-sectional sample of adults in the United States, tends to give credence to this criticism -- that is, although Srole's Anomia Scale displays a modes~ degree of internal reliability, it nevertheless lacks external validity in surveys on national subpoputations. This study illustrates the relative superiority of the Margins of Society (MOS) Alienation Scale, which comprises operations from theories on anomie and social isolation. A subculture of homeless Alaska Natives were personally interviewed to document the attributes of this new alienation scale and the results from this exploratory study suggest that further analysis should prove useful for studying alienation within other ethnic groups.

Over the last several decades social researchers have attempted to measure alienation in ethnic or small outgroups (Middleton, 1963; Ransford, 1968; Caplan and Paige, 1968; Flacks, 1967; Bolton, 1972; H o l m g r e n et al., 1983; Trimble 1987) and in large-scale survey populations (Srole, 1956; Bell, 1957; Yankelovich, 1972; Seeman, 1972; P o p e and Ferguson, 1982; and Davis and Smith, 1988). Since 1973, for instance, the National Opinion Research Center ( N O R C ) has included in its General Social Survey (GSS) either a modified version or the original Srole A n o m i a Scale in its cumulative national surveys. Given the tendency of N O R C to utilized the "modified" A n o m i a Scale in recent years and the general practice among social researchers to devise their own alienation scales to suit their particular studies, we currently lack reliable and valid alienation scales which tap into a variety of the dominant attitudes, values, and beliefs of the alienated in m o d e r n societies. This study seeks to address that methodological gap in survey research and to offer one possible remedy - - the Margins of Society (MOS) Alienation Scale.

Social Indicators Research 28: 71--91, ~993. 1993 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

72
THEORIES

ROBERT TRAVIS AND RESEARCH ON ANOMIE AND

SOCIAL ISOLATION

Durkheim (1951) conceives of anomie in two theoretical respects: first, as a characteristic of societies undergoing economic and moral upheavals; and second, as a social psychological attribute of human personality. Most sociologists would agree that Durkheim sought to supply us with a systemic theory of anomie, but far tess would concur that he also sought to supply us with a theory of individual anomie. For instance, in his classic study of suicide Durkheim often would allow himself to be carried away by what he intuited to be the social psychological mind-set of anomic suicides, as if he fully intended to provide us with a complementary and incipient social psychology to accompany his largely systemic view of the social order. It is with this unfinished aspect of Durkheim's work that we are most interested in. To be sure, Durkheim argues that anomie tends to result from rapid economic change; or it may exist in a more chronic state in some sectors of the occupational structure. In both cases, however, social norms exercise only a low degree of social control over behavior. Giddens (1971) illuminates, moreover, that these social norms govern the motivations and actions of social actors in two ways: "they influence the actual setting of goals, defining what is appropriate and legitimate; but as Durkheim emphasized above all, they limit and restrict aspirations" (Giddens, 1971, p. 99). When there is little chance for the social actor to use widely-shared norms, or when norms are torn asunder, conflict with one another, or produce disjunctions between aspirations and their attainment, a state of anomie exists on the social psychological level of analysis. Thus, Durkheim's conception of anomie is essentially a social psychology of aspirations, which, if left unfulfilled, induce social disaffiliation, or alienation in the modern sense. Still, Olsen (1965) insists that anomie can only be a property of the social system and, it appears, many other sociologists believe likewise. He claims, quite rightly we think, that Durkheim used the term "anomie" in two distinct ways: first, to reflect breakdowns in normative integration; and, second, to reflect breakdowns in functional integration. The former refers to inadequate moral norms, while the later refers to inadequate procedural rules. Nonetheless, Olsen's attempt at clarifica-

T H E MOS A L I E N A T I O N S C A L E

73

tion masks a reductio ad absurdum - - that is, how can anomie only pertain to the social system when social actors are the very embodiments of society? Given that society exists sui generis, does that mean that despite socialization modern individuals do not carry around in their minds some aspects of the social system? Otherwise, social actors would not exist; when we all know they do exist, and even multiply. Merton (1964, 1968a, b), on the other hand, clarifies anomie theory by distinguishing between individual anomia and collective anomie -the former is rightly a property of the individual, while the latter pertains strictly to the social system. He also argues that anoraJ_a is essentially a two-fold problem, involving disjunctions between aspirations and expectations and malfunctions in the opportunity-structure. While problems of unlimited aspirations appear to be more evident among the highly successful, problems in the opportunity-structure appear to be more evident among outsiders (both rebels and retreatists). It is unclear, however, where ritualists fit into Merton's schema of anomia; since it seems that he conjures up the image (from Durkheim) of "excessive integration" when he speaks of the "legion of routineers," or compulsives, who are lodged in quite a few social organizations. By suggesting that sociologists pay attention simultaneously to the collectivity, the social actor, and the patterns of social interaction when accounting for anomia and anon-fie, Merton seems to be setting us on a straight course. But, the way he would have us achieve that goal reflects an ambivalence about our terms and methods that belies a fundamental problem in anomie theory which few sociologists have addressed. That is, Merton would have us study anomia, then aggregate our individual scores until the social system "emerges." Yet, if the social system exists sui generis, then such a procedure entails a contradiction in terms. Our ambivalence over the two fold use of "anomie" arises when we alIow ourselves to become confused by Durkheim's evolving thinking and the "double-spin" that he himself applied to anomie. In any case, how can we legitimately undertake to study the social system if all we ever do is aggregate up? His highly-regarded work on differential opportunitystructures notwithstanding, even Cloward (1959) does not provide a scientifically valid method to help us negotiate our way through Merton's theoretical wilderness.

74

ROBERT

TRAVIS

Messner (1988) asserts that if Merton were to hold fast to his (ambivalent) notions about anomie pertaining only to the social system, then there would be no room for his theory of sociological motivations to counter Freud's drive-structure model; since only social actors have motives, not social systems. Messner ascribes this logical dilemma in Merton's theory of anomie to the latter's overemphasis on organizational, rather than motivational properties. Thus, anomie theory in general, not only Merton's, appears to suffer from a mixing of different levels of explanation in its terminology and schemata. Finally, Willis (1982) reminds us that "Durkheim did not state that the only basis of solidarity in modern societies is a set of consensual moral norms" (Willis, 1982, p. 106). Instead anomie appears to result from a variety of complex social factors. Similar to Giddens, Willis also views Durkheim's discussion of anomie in terms of collective solidarity and individual aspirations, though Willis attempts to synthesize the schema further. The latter points out that anomie is not necessarily the result of a defective normative structure, but may emerge when social actors pursue their own needs and desires without regard for their fellow citizens. Moreover, Willis seems to believe that anomie and social isolation are positively related; since "more than an absence or conflict of norms, anomie consists of weak or ineffective structure constraints (e.g., interdependence, close, frequent social contact, etc.) on individualistic goals" (Willis, 1982, p. 111). Some work on anomie and social isolation has been conducted, to be sure; but little research has been done on the attitudinal level of analysis. Travis (1990), for instance, indicates that as status characteristics both anomie and social isolation are equally good predictors of high suicide rates. He also argues that Durkheim's conception of egoism may be subsumed under the rubric of social isolation and poses the question: Can anomie also be subsumed under social isolation? Halbwachs (1978), one of Durkheim's students, focuses only on social isolation, arguing that it ensues from three primary sources: (1) the sentiment of being alone in the world; (2) the anguish, pain, and terror of such aloneness which seems to be without remedy for the social actor; and (3) the marginality that confronts the social actor as he/she loses touch with his/her former self and social network through status declassification. Halbwachs maintains, moreover, that Durkheim

THE MOS ALIENATION

SCALE

75

misinterpreted the association between systemic upheavals and individual action: that is, the former believes that changes in the consciousness of one's self foUows on the footsteps of breaks in social relationships, but precede social disaffiliation of one sort or another. In short, Hatbwachs asserts that egoistic solitude is not a sufficient cause of alienation, only a necessary one. He insists that changes in consciousness are the sufficient causes of sociaI action on the social psychological level. Changes in consciousness are induced by social isolation which stems from a lack of relatedness within a social network.
Detached from one group by a sudden disturbance, you are incapable, or at least you believe yourself incapable, of ever finding any support in another to take the place of what you have lost. When one becomes lost to society thus, one most often loses his principal reason for living (Halbwachs, 1978, p. 270).

Giddens' earlier work on suicide seems to suggest that social isolation and anomie may emerge from inadequate attempts by the individual to attain mastery over one's self and the environment. He, however, clearly associates social isolation with guilt and anomie with shame, implying that they are not positively related on the individual level of analysis. On the other hand, Bell (1957) conceives of social isolation in status terms -- that is, affiliation within voluntary associations, or formal settings. He endeavors to demonstrate that anomia is inversely and significantly related to economic status (level of education and type of occupation) and that anomia and social isolation are positively related. His findings, however, cannot be generalized across the class structure; yet, Bell does not view this as delimiting Srole's conception of anomia, only indicating that urban dwellers do not have monolithic attitudes. Revenson and Aldwin (1983) studied social isolation over the lifespan and note that social isolation, unlike Bell's research on anomia, does not seem to increase as the social actor ages. Their measures of social isolation are both behavioral (lack of intimate relationships and absence of a confidant) and attitudinal (dissatisfaction with the number of close friends one has). As opposed to Bell's research thought, Revenson and Aldwin concentrate on informal relationships; still, few social researchers seem interested in analyzing both types of relation-

76

ROBERT TRAVIS

ship -- formal and informal, so that we can have a better view of how these different types affect the world views of the alienated. Finally, Rubin et al. (1984) show that social isolation tends to diminish the child's ability to problem solve in social settings. They interpret this finding to mean that affect rather than cognition may keep children in low-dominance positions vis-a-vis their peers and that feelings of anxiety and lack of efficacy may reinforce social deficits which arise out of social isolation in early childhood. Nevertheless, it may also be the case that social isolation may actually be reinforced in later childhood and in adolescence by the interaction between affect and social cognition. Although such research appears to be fruitful, few sociologists seem interested in studying alienation during childhood. SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS An exploratory study was conducted through personal interviews, using a semi-structured questionnaire, on 76 homeless Alaska Natives in Anchorage during March 1990. Two social workers at a soup kitchen in the poorer section of town were asked to select interested homeless people for this study on the basis of four factors: (1) respondents must be Alaska Natives; (2) respondents must be sober on the day of the interview, or they would have to wait until they sobered up; (3) respondents must be between the ages of 18 and 54 years old; and (4) respondents must not be suffering from gross psychosis or severe mental illness. Respondents were paid five dollars for participating in the study and all were interviewed in a confidential setting at a homeless shelter across from the soup kitchen during afternoons only. The author personally interviewed about 75% of the homeless himselL while the remainder were interviewed by a clinical social worker. Using average number of meals served for lunch and surveys conducted at the soup kitchen on the ethnicity of the homeless, it is estimated that this purposive sample captured about 60% of homeless Alaska Natives who frequent the soup kitchen. Two cases were excluded from the analysis -- one because he was extremely hard of hearing and the other because he appeared grossly psychotic, meaning that the subsequent analysis is based on 74 personal interviews. Missing data averages about 7% on the scale items.

THE MOS ALIENATION SCALE

77

The demographic data reveals a homeless population in Anchorage which in some respects is similar to the homeless populations in Portland and Seattle during the 1980s (Blake and Abbott, 1989; King County Dept. of Housing and Economic Development, 1990). For instance, 83% of the respondents in this study are male, while the median age is about 37 years. About three-fifths of the homeless are interviewed reported incomes less than S3,000 in 1989, and this level of poverty is similar to poverty among the homeless in other major cities in the Pacific Northwest. Yet, demographics can be misleading -- that is, the homeless Alaska Natives in this study appear much more likely to be chronic alcoholics or binge drinkers than the homeless in either Portland or Seattle (Travis, 1991). The majority of such drinkers reported growing up in families where the father, the mother, or both parents drank about as much or more than homeless Alaska Natives now do. It is estimated that 86% of those we interviewed can be classified as problem drinkers. Alcoholism, as well as lack of job skills and the prevalence of ethnic discrimination (about 40% agreed with the statement "I often feet discriminated against"), all appear to contribute to a cycle of poverty among homeless Alaska Natives (Travis, 1991). For instance, it is estimated that 59% of those we interviewed are "chronically homeless," or homeless for more than one year, with the average being 6.4 years among this subgroup. Within the group as a whole, almost 70% have been placed in jail or juvenile detention, mostly for misdemeanor or drinking offenses. Homeless Alaska Natives also appear to have had "multiple careers" in several other institutions: about half come from "adopted" families, with most of these being foster homes, and 50% report that they were educated outside their village or the state of Alaska during their high school years. A third have attended boarding schools. What precise negative effects these institutional living conditions have had upon homeless Alaska Natives remains unclear at this point. Yet, many of those we interviewed report that their first experiences with ethnic discrimination were felt in high school and then later in the workplace (cf. Du Bois, 1973 for an in-depth discussion of how ethnic discrimination acts to annihilate the human soul). Thus, because of their uniqueness in American society, homeless

78

ROBERT TRAVIS

Alaska Natives were selected as the study population. It is doubtful that many sociologists would argue with the prevalent tragedy of their human condition -- a long history of poverty, discrimination, alcoholism, and high suicide rates (Travis, 1990, 1991). One would therefore expect that anomie and social isolation are part-and-parcel of the everyday fives of these "outcasts." As such, if there are outcast subcultures in American society, then homeless Alaska Natives are quite likely to be among such marginal populations. Ultimately, however, the suitability of employing this study population hinges upon whether or not the MOS Alienation Scale can successfully discriminate among those in this homogeneous population; and if it can, then the MOS Alienation Scale may be more likely to discriminate with even greater precision among other outcast subcultures and mainstream society in large-scale national and cross-cultural samples.

AN EVALUATION

OF SROLE'S ANOMIA SCALE

Srole operationalizes anomia as a "generalized, pervasive sense of 'self-to-others belongingness' at one extreme compared with 'self-toothers distance' and 'self-to-others alienation' at the other pole of the continuum" (Srole, 1956, p. 711). He asserts it is necessary to measure psychological attitudes, because the cultural abstraction of "normative structure" is not readily accessible to the instruments of the social researcher. There are five items in Srole's Anomia Scale as they are worded in the GSS:

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

Nowadays, a person has to live pretty much for today and let tomorrow take care of itself. In spite of what some people say, the lot (situation/condition) of the average man is getting worse, not better. It's hardly fair to bring a child into the world with the way things look for the future. Most public officials (people in public office) are not really interested in the problems of the average man. These days a person doesn't really know whom he can count
on.

THE MOS ALIENATION SCALE

79

These items are essentially the same as those used by Srole in his now classic study, except that the fourth item was slightly altered by NORC. In the original study it read: "There's little use writing to public officials because often they aren't interested in the problems of the average man." Srole did not attempt to validate his scale, claiming only that ~'the items seemed to have face validity as a measure of a n o m i a . . . " (Srole, 1956, p. 713). Borrowing from MacIver (1950), Srole argues that anomia is the "breakdown of the individual's sense of attachment to society" and, from Lasswetl (1952), Srole posits that anomia entails "psychic isolation," where the modern individual feels "alone, cutoff, unwanted, unloved, unvalued" (Srole, 1956, p. 712). It seems evident that Srole intended for his anomia scale to overlap social isolation, as if he assumed that anomia and social isolation are highly and positively related constructs. The General Social Surveys for the years 1972, 1974, 1976 were analyzed to formally evaluate the internal reliability and external validity of Srole's Anomia Scale. These specific years were the last times that NORC incorporated the original Srole Anomia Scale into the GSS. Response rates tended to consistently hover around 75% in these national samples of clusters of households in the United States. Sample sizes ranged from 1398 ha 1973, to 1358 in 1974, to 1357 in 1976. In general, males tended to comprise about 46% of these samples; Whites, 88%; and those currently married, 72%. The median age was about 45 years old. We conducted several reliability and validity tests on Srole's Anomia Scale: (1) reliability analyses; (2) factor analyses; and (3) predictive validity tests. All in all, Cronbach's alpha registered 0.669 in 1973, dropped to 0.601 in 1974, and climbed slightly to 0.624 in 1976. This indicates that the scale only has a modicum of internal validity, despite the fact that our factor analyses demonstrate that Srole's Anomia Scale consistently clusters around one dominant factor -- perhaps a general dissatisfaction with society. The factor loadings are quite strong, in any case, ranging from 0.452 to 0.725 on this one factor. This thus seems to suggest that Srole's Anomia Scale measures one domain of "self-toothers alienation," but that it does so only modestly well. As regards the predictive validity tests, we hypothsized that: (1) the

80

ROBERT TRAV[S

currently separated should express significantly more anomia than ~:he non-separated; (2) the currently unemployed should express significantly more anomia than the employed; and (3) Black Americans should express significantly more anomia than White Americans. These predictions are reasonable and legitimate criteria which any alienation scale that attempts to measure anomia should be held accountable to distinguish between. Moreover, in the case of the currently separated and the currently unemployed, Durkheim's notions about anomic upheavals and displacements hold sway. And in the case of Black Americans, we would expect that any minority group which has been subjected to a history of ethrfic discrimination and impoverished living conditions would be more likely to fee1 alienated towards mainstream society than those closer to the center. Nevertheless, the Srole Anomia Scale failed completely on these quite minimal predictive validity tests. On practically every criteria in almost every year, we found highly significant differences on these three tests; but none of the differences were in the predicted direction. This points to a serious problem with Srole's Anomia Scale and one that we hinted at earlier. If the Srole Anomia Scale cannot tap into the attitudes, values, and beliefs of recognizable subcultures who are more likely to be going through anomic upheavals, then it seems that Srole's critics are correct when they contend his scale is too globally-focused and inclusive to measure alienation in any meaningful way. In short, S:role's Anomia Scale cannot be considered as a legitimate survey instrument to test either the Durkheimian model or even alienation theory in the modern sense. To be sure, even before we began our fieldwork, we were aware of the methodological deficiencies of the Srole Anomia Scale. Knowing this is what inspired us to construct our own anomie and social isolation scales. We, of course, pretested these scales at various states on 50 graduate and undergraduate students at Stanford University, which afforded us the opportunity to simplify our operationalizations, rearrange our scale design, and to adjust for response sets. Only after extensive pretesting and subsequent revisions did we enter the field and personally interview homeless Alaska Natives in Anchorage.

THE

MOS ALIENATION

SCALE

81

RESULTS

As Table I indicates, all of our own alienation constructs successfully distinguish between the upper quartile (Q4) and the lower quartile (Q1) for each scale-item. Every t-statistic in the item-analysis is highly and

TABLE I Item-analysis a n d reIiability tests for the a n o m i e and social isolation pretest scales a m o n g h o m e l e s s A l a s k a natives in anchorage: 1990 (listwise d e l e t i o n / N = 66) Item-analysis Q4--Q1 T-statistic

C r o n b a c h ' s alpha if item deleted

Anornie alienation scale

W i s h I were s o m e b o d y important K n o w what I'm going to do Not sure I will get what I want Like to hear others' opinions H a r d to tell right a n d wrong Set goals I m a k e sure I can m e e t D o n ' t like to live by society's rules H a r d to be a success at s o m e t h i n g N e v e r find the right person to care e n o u g h about m e 10. K n o w the correct way to act in public 11. Wish I coutd do exactly as I wanted 12. No o n e is keeping m e f r o m getting ahead C r o n b a c h ' s alpha for pretest scale: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 2.34 2.00 1.94 2.27 2.05 1.78 2,45 t 3.86 ~ 12.692 12.52 ~ 13.72 ~ 13.69 ~ 11.73 ~ 15.28" 0.421 0.423 0.389 0.546 0.332 0.450 0.380

1.94 1.22 2.11 2.33 a = 0.464

12.37 a 9.57 ~ 14.60 ~ 15,36 ~

0.430 0.434 0.456 0.477

Social isoNtion scale

Feel all alone these days Hardly ever feel hurt in relations Feel discriminated against People can be trusted World is a painful place to live in H a v e friends I can count on M y whole world is falling apart Peopletisten to me Feet tike a stranger in social groups K n o w how others feel about me People m a k e m e feel bad a b o u t myself 12. Hardly even lose touch with people C r o n b a c h ' s alpha for pretest scale: p < 0.001. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. !0. 11. 2.55 2.61 2.83 2.17 2.50 1,78 2,49 2.16 2.34 2.11 1.61 t.67 a = 0.546 15.62" 15.98 '1 17.69 ~ 12,98 a 15.88" 13.55 ~ 15.87 ~ i4.31" 13.76" 12.948 1 t .60 ~' 10.39 ~ 0.488 0.616 0.478 0.582 0.441 0.523 0.476 0.506 0.548 0.572 0.494 0.596

82

ROBERT TRAVIS

statistically significant. However, our initial attempt to document high reliability among the. scale-items failed. The anomie scale, for instance, exhibits a mediocre Cronbach's alpha of 0.464, while the social isolation fares somewhat better with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.546. In the field we employed Schuman's (1966) random probe so that we could later evaluate whether or not our constructs coincided with the attitudes, values and beliefs in the minds of our respondents. Like Inkeles and Smith (1974), we wanted to know how well our scale-items were understood by our respondents, if their reasons for agreeing or disagreeing with our constructs actually reflected the concepts we intended to measure, and if our relatively objective scoring methods would substantiate an adequate degree of comprehension on the respondent's part. Table II illustrates the results of our random probe analysis. Three graduate students at Stanford University coded 316 random probes a piece, after a training session that lasted about one half-hour. Their independent scorings reflect a high degree of intercoder reliability -- that is, fully 85% of the time the coders agreed with each other to the extent that their scorings were within one full-point or less on a scale of I to 5 and gradients of half-points. This means that they had nine scoring choices per item and that most of the time the coders independently struck upon highly similar ratings for the random probes. The anomie constructs, moreover, reflect an interval score of 3.7 or higher, which we deem indicates that the respondents achieved a grade for comprehension of B or higher for these scale-items. Two of the social isolation constructs (items 2 and 12), however, merited a graded score of C or less, while two others (items 3 and 6) received an A-. The former items were repeated quite often during the interviewing process, suggesting, we believe, social desirability effects in one case and possible confusion over a double-negative in the other. All initial responses were ordinal in nature, following a five-point Likert scale with a "divided," or "have mixed feelings," mid-point. In sum, the random probe analysis reveals a high degree of comprehension and conceptual agreement, and it gives us confidence that we are, in fact, actually measuring alienation and not some construct which is arbitrarily thought to possess "face validity." Table III demonstrates the results of our Principal Components Analysis (PCA). Sixteen items from both the anomie and social isola-

THE MOS ALIENATION

SCALE

83

TABLE II Analysis of random probes for the anomie and social isolation pretest scales among homeless Alaska natives in anchorage: 1990 (number of probes = 316) Random probe analysis Intercoder Grade for R's Percent total interval scoret comprehension 2 repetitions 3 A n o m i e alienation scale 1. Wish I were somebody important 2. Know what I'm going to do 3. Not sure I will get what I want 4. Like to hear others' opinions 5. Hard to tell right and wrong 6, Set goals I make sure I can meet 7. Don't like to live by society's rules 8. Hard to be a success at something 9. Never find the right person to care enough about me 10, Know the correct way to act in Public ll.. Wish I could do exactly as I wanted 12. No one is keeping me from getting ahead Social isolation Scale 1. Feel all alone these days 2. Hardly ever feel hurt in relations 3. Feel discriminated against 4. People can be trusted 5. World is a painful place to live in 6. Have friends I can count on 7. My whole world is falling apart 8. People listen to me 9. Feel like a stranger in social groups 10. Know how others feel about me 11. People make me feel bad about myself 12. Hardly ever lose touch with people

4.1 4.1 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.0 3.9 3.7 3.9 4,3 4.3 3.9 4,3 3,1 4.6 4.3 4,3 4.6 4,4 4.2 4,4 4,4 3.9 2,6

B B B B B+ B B B B B B B B C AB B AB+ B B+ B+ B C-

0.013 0.022 0.013 0.036 0.036 0.022 0.058 0.058 0.018 0.085 0.036 0.027 0.025 0.108 0.036 0.036 0.022 0,044 0.009 0.004 0.013 0.036 0.009 0.121

t. Based on scoring 316 random probes by three coders, with 5 = high and 1 = low congruence. 2. "A" represents a perfect fit between responses, operations, and concepts, wl~Ne "D" or tess represents an extremely poor fit. 3. Total number of repetitions per item divided by total number of allowable repetitions (N = 222).

tion scales were random probe

chosen

for the PCA,

based

on the aforementioned PCA

analysis and further reliability tests in which we sought with low item-to-scale correlations. The

to eliminate constructs

84

R O B E R T ]~RAVIS

reveals that four distinct factors exist in o u r a l i e n a t i o n scales - marginality, a l o n e n e s s , aspirations, a n d n o r m l e s s n e s s . T h e s e a c c o u n t for a b o u t 5 3 % of the c u m u l a t i v e variance. F A C T O R 1 is the d o m i n a n t c o m p o n e n t , with seven c o n s t r u c t s exhibiting high factor loadings that r a n g e b e t w e e n 0.496 to 0.689. T h e s e s e v e n scale-items (items 1, 2, 5, 9, 12, 13, a n d 15) were thus selected into the M a r g i n s of Society ( M O S ) A l i e n a t i o n Scale and subjected to further reliability tests. TABLE III Principal components analysis of selected items in the anomie and social isolation scales, anchorage: 1990 (listwise deletion/N = 60) Principal components analysis Factor 1 (Marginality) t. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. t 0. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Feel all alone these days Feel discriminated against People can be trusted Have friends 1 can count on My whole world is falling apart People listen to me Feel like a stranger in social groups People make me feel bad about myself Wish I were somebody important Know what I'm going to do Not sure I will get what I want Hard to tell right and wrong Don't like to live by society's rules Hard to be a success at something Never find the right person to care enough about me Wish I could do exactly as I wanted Eigenvalue Cumulative percent of variance 0.662 0.661 0.229 0.039 0.689 0.081 0.208 0.388 0.654 -0.040 0.265 0.603 0.496 0.027 0.529 0.156 4.05 25.3% Factor 2 (Aloneness) 0.349 -0.036 -0.583
0.094

Factor 3 (Aspirations) 0.088 0.078 0.277 0.266 0.248 0.131 0.196 0.182 -0.168 0.458 0.707 0.274 0.309 0.662 -0.278 0.131 1.58 46.0%

Factor 4 (Normlesshess) --0.070 --0.060 --0.382 -0.721 0.022 -0.238 0.042 0.096 0.390 0.495 -0.022 0.t02 0.032 -0.068 -0.146 0.737 1.18 53.4%

0.009 0.608 0.653 0.532 0.116 --0.05 t 0.183 0.337 0.222 0.043 0.546 0.050 1.74 36.2%

THE MOS A L I E N A T I O N S C A L E

85

A s Table I V demonstrates, the M O S Alienation Scale is highly reliable, possessing a C r o n b a c h ' s alpha of 0.776. Tl~is is quite an achievement to establish such high reliability a m o n g as h o m o g e n e o u s a population as homeless A l a s k a Natives. Individual item-to-scale correlations are also high, ranging between 0.422 and 0.565. T h e r a n d o m p r o b e data for these scale items reveals an interval score of 4.2 and a solid B for r e s p o n d e n t ' s c o m p r e h e n s i o n and conceptual agreement. As an a d d e d advantage, the repetitions-rate is quite low, c o m p a r e d to the other items in the initial scales, and averages less than 3%. In sum, the M O S Alienation Scale achieved better marks for internal reliability and external validity than did the Srole A n o m i a Scale. TABLE IV Surm-nary statistics for the margins of society 0VIOS) 'alienation scale, anchorage: 1990 (listwise deletion/N = 69) Summary statistics Standard error 0.131 0.152 0,104 0,128 0.112 0.127 Cronbach's Item-to-scale alpha if item correlation deleted 0.565 0.422 0.515 0.459 0.560 0.453 0.500 0.722 0.759 0.736 0.745 0.726 0.746 0.739

Mean !
MOS alienation scale

i. Feel all alone these days 2. Feet discriminated against 3. My whole world is falling apart 4. Wish I were somebody important 5. Hard to tall right and wrong 6. Don't like to live by society's rules 7. Never find the right person to care enough about me Cronbach's alpha for total scale: 1. Based on a five-point Likert scale.

2.77 2.71 2.41 2.88 2.52 2.71

2.42 0.106 a = 0.776

T h e M O S Alienation Scale is c o m p r i s e d of seven items which are w o r d e d as follows: (1) I feel all alone these days. (2) 1 often feel discriminated against.

86 (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

ROBERT TRAVIS

My whole world feels like it's falling apart. I wish I were somebody important. It's hard for me to tell just what is right and wrong these days. I don't like to live by society's rules. I'll never find the right person to care enough about me.

Social researchers may find that because all of these scale items are negatively-framed, responses sets may appear in their data. One way to forestall that is to build in positively-framed scale items into the MOS Alienation Scale and then to arrange the differently framed items in alternate fashion. Such revisions would impose only a modest burden on respondents without tiring them out and is quite apt to increase its already high reliability. We suggest that the long-version of the MOS Alienation Scale be constructed as follows: (1) I feel all alone these days. (2) I'm sure I'll find the right person to care enough about me. (3) I often feel discriminated against. (4) I like to live by society's rules. (5) My whole world feels like it's falling apart. (6) It's fairly easy for me to tell just what is right and wrong these days. (7) I wish I were somebody important. (8) I never feel all alone these days. (9) I don't like to live by society's rules. (10) My whole world feels like it's running smoothly. (11) It's hard for me to tell just what is right and wrong these days. (12) I rarely feel discriminated against. (13) I'll never find the right person to care enough about me. (14) I don't wish I were somebody else. Social researchers who feel compelled to use the long-version would need to conduct their own reliability and P C A tests to insure that the long-version can withstand the same empirical scrutiny which the shortversion of the MOS Alienation Scale presently exhibits.

DISCUSSION

Science, as most social researchers would acknowledge, walks on two

THE MOS ALIENATION SCALE

87

feet -- theory and observation. We had originally thought that anomie and social isolation were distinct concepts, as the theories from Halbwachs and Durkheim would lead us to believe. Moreover, our initial theoretical conceptions seemed to be guided by sound empirical work, which over the years has tended to show that alienation is not a generalized construct but a multidimensional one (Seeman, 1972; Bolton, 1972; and Travis, 1986). But much of this research, however, has dealt with the tack of interretatedness between powerlessness and meaninglessness; and we are at present dealing with anomie and social isolation, which may not always invoke questions about legitimacy and which few sociologists have studied. One of the reasons why this may have developed is that we currently lack reliable anomie and social isolation scales that we can utilize on large-scale survey samples to test out whether or not they are negatively related, as are powerlessness and meaninglessness. At first, we were doubtful that anomie and social isolation were positively related; but, we thought it might prove beneficial to put aside our a priori assumptions about the distinctiveness of these two concepts. We thus subjected both concepts to a Principal Components Analysis and found, much to our surprise, that our original assumptions were incorrect. Anomie and social isolation do not appear to operate like powerlessness and meaninglessness. Instead, we found the former to be highly and positively correlated. This led us to reformulate our assumptions and ultimately guided our construction of the MOS Alienation Scale. Although this was m'a unexpected finding for us, we believe it is nonetheless fortuitous and beneficial for all concerned~ The MOS Alienation Scale is not only quite reliable, but also possesses a high degree of criterion validity. That is, few would argue with the notion that the homeless we interviewed are located on the periphery of modern American society, and this fact lends credence to our claim that alienation scales should measure more than just the internal constructs in the minds of social researchers. The MOS Alienation Scale appears to avoid this critical methodological proNem. Finally, as Halbwachs' work indicates, social isolation and marginality appear to be positively related. Marginality, nevertheless, does not seem to coincide with anomia in Srole's work. But what does

88

ROBERT TRAVIS

marginality mean? And how is it related to anomia and social isolation? Following Simmel's (1950) seminal essay on the stranger, marginality has evolved into a central concept in sociology (Park, 1928; Stonequist, 1937; Goldberg, 1941; Green, 1947; Golovensky, 1952; Antonovsky, 1956; and McLemore, 1970). Although considerable debate has ensued over the precise way to define marginality, many theorists seem to believe that it embodies some degree of conflict, exclusion, stereotyping, or mobility, wherein the marginal individual is seen paradoxically as both near to and remote from others. It is, in essence, a social situation in which barriers exist between two subcultures and where one of them is dominant in terms of power and rewards (Antonovsky, 1956). Park (1928), moreover, argues that marginality entails the concepts of anomie and social isolation. He describes the typical "characteristic of every immigrant during the period of transition, when old habits are being discarded and new ones are not yet formed. It is inevitably a period of inner turmoil and intense self-consciousness" (Park, 1928, p. 893). In such a perplexing situation, the marginal individual tends to feel "spiritual conflict and instability" -- a self divided against itself. Marginality thus evokes restlessness and malaise; but in the case of the marginal man the period of crisis is relatively permanent. Like Durkheim before him, Park conceives of marginality in anomic terms: As a result of the breakdown of customary modes of action and of thought, the individual experiences a 'release' from the restraints and constraints to which he has been subject, and gives evidence of this 'release' in aggressive self-assertion. The overexpression of individualityis one of the marked features of all epochs of change (Park, 1928, p. 887). Yet, social isolation may accompany anomic feelings in marginal situations, since the marginal individual is often on the outside looking in. Consequently, even though Srole does not make use of marginality in his anomia scale, there does appear to be enough theoretical work on the subject to suggest that it is appropriate and reasonable to link-up these diverse concepts in the MOS Alienation Scale under the more fundamental concept of marginalily. We subsequently hope that the MOS Alienation Scale :may thus allow social researchers the chance to devise their survey instruments in such a way that, besides saving the

THE MOS A L I E N A T I O N SCALE

89

respondent both time and response burden, accurately measure the social problems of marginal groups, truly reflect their word views, and eventually demonstrate how these interact with their adverse social conditions.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am indebted to Elizabeth Cohen, Sanford Dornbusch, Alex Inkeles, and Morris Zelditch, Jr. for their helpful comments. This research was supported by a National Institute of Mental Health grant, No. 2-T32MH14243-12, while 1 was a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Department of Sociology at Stanford University. All errors in interpretation and methodology are entirely my own.

REFERENCES Antonovsky, A.: 1956, 'Toward a refinement of the "marginal man" concept', Social Forces 35, 57--62. Bell, W.: 1957, 'Anomie, social isolation, and the class structure', Sociometry 20, 105-116. Blake, G. and Abbott, M.: 1989, 'Homelessness in the Pacific Northwest', in Homelesshess in the United States, Momemi, J. &d), (Greenwood Press: NY), pp. 165--180. Bolton, C.: 1972, 'Alienation and action: a study of peace group members', American Journal of Sociology 78, 537--561. Caplan, N. and Paige, J.: 1968, 'A study of Ghetto Rioters,' Scientific America 218, 15---21. Cloward, R.: 1959, 'Illegitimate means, anomie, and deviant behavior', American Sociological Review 24, 164-- 176. Davis, J. and Smith, T.: 1988, General Social Survey, 1972--1988: Cumulative Data (MRDF). Chicago: National. Opinion Research Center. Distributed by Roper Public Opinion. Du Bois, W. E. B.: 1973, 'Of Our Spiritual Strivings', in The Souls of Black Folk (Kraus-Thomson: Millwood, NW),pp. 1--12. Durkheim, E.: 1951, Suicide (Free Press: NY). Flacks, R.: 1967, 'The liberated generation: an exploration of the roots of student protest', Journal of Social Issues 23, 52--75. Giddens, A.: 1971, 'A Typology of Suicide', in The Sociology of Suicide, Giddens, A. (ed), (Frank Cass: London), pp. 97-- 120. Goldberg, M.: 1941, 'A qualification of the marginal man theory', American Sociological Review 6, 52--58. Golovensky, D.: 1952, 'The marginal man concept: an analysis and critique', Social Forces 30, 333--339. Green, A.: 1947, 'A re-examination of the marginal man concept', Social Forces 26, 167--171.

90

R O B E R T TRAVIS

Halbwachs, M.: 1978, The Causes of Suicide (Free Press: NY). Holmgren, C., Fitzgerald, B. J. and Carman, R. S.: 1983, 'Alienation and alcohol-use by American Indian and Caucasian high-school students', Journal of Social Psychology 1.20, 139--140. Inkeles, A. and Smith, D. H.: 1974, Becoming Modern: Individual Change in Six Developing Countries (Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA). King County Dept. of Housing and Economic Development: 1990, 'County Profile Monthly Report for Shelter Programs in Seattle, 1989' (Computer Tabulations). Seattle, WA. Lasswell, H.: 1952, 'The Threat to Privacy,' in Conflict of Loyalties, MacIver, R. (ed), (KennikatPress: Port Washington, NY), pp. 121--140. Maclver, R.: 1950, The Ramparts We Guard (Macmillan: NY). McLemore, S. D.: 1970, 'Simmel's "stranger": a critique of the concept', Pacific Sociological Review 13, 86--94. Merton, R.: 1964, 'Anomie, Anomia, and Social Interaction: Contexts of Deviant Behavior', in Anomie and Deviant Behavior, Clinard, M. (ed), (Free Press of Glencoe: London), pp. 213--242. Merton, R.: 1968a, 'Social Structure and Anomie', in Social Theory" and Social Structure (Free Press: Glencoe, IL), pp. 131--160. Merton, R.: 1968b, 'Continuities in the Theory" of Social Structure and Anomie', in Social Theory and Social Structure (Free Press: Glencoe, IL), pp. t 61--194. Messner, S. F.: 1988, 'Merton's "social structure and anomie": the road not taken', Deviant Behavior 9, 33--53. Middleton, R.: 1963, 'Alienation, race, and education', American Sociological Review 26,973--977. Park, R.: 1928, 'Human migration and the marginal man', American Journal of Sociology 33,881--893. Pope, A. and Ferguson, M. D.: 1982, 'Age and anomia in middle and later life: a multivariate analysis of a national sample of white men', International Journal of Aging and Human Development 15, 51--74. Ransford, H.: 1968, 'Isolation, powerlessness, mad violence: a study of attitudes and participation in the Watts Riot,' American Journal of Sociology 33, 581--591. Revenson, T. A. and Aldwin, C. M.: 1983, 'Social isolation across the adult lifespan -- a cross-sectional sequential approach', The Gerontologist 23,200--201. Rubin, K. H., Daniels-Beirness, T., and Bream, L.: 1984, 'Social isolation and social problem solving: a longitudinal study', Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 52, 17--25. Schuman, H.: 1966, 'The random probe: a technique for evaluating the validity of closed questions', American Sociological Review 31,218--222. Seeman, M.: 1972, 'The signals of '68: alienation in pre-crisis France', American Sociological Review 37, 385--402. Simmel, G.: 1950, 'The Stranger', in The Sociology of Georg Simmel, Wolff, Kurt (trans.) (Free Press: Glencoe, IL), pp. 402--406. Srole, L.: 1956, 'Social integration and certain corollaries: an exploratory study', American Sociological Review 21,709--716. Stonequist, E.: 1937, The Marginal Man: A Study in Personality and Culture Conflict (Charles Scribner's Sons: NY). Travis, R.: 1991, Homelessness, alcoholism, and ethnic discrimination among Alaska natives', Arctic 44, 247--253. Travis, R.: t990, 'Halbwachs and Durkheim: a test of two theories of suicide', British Journal of Sociology 41,225--243. Travis, R.: 1986, 'On powerlessness and meaninglessness', British Journal of Sociology 37,61--73.

T H E MOS A L I E N A T I O N SCALE

91

Trimble, J. E.: 1987, 'Self-perception and perceived alienation among American Indians', Journal of CommunityPsychology 15, 316-- 333. Willis, C. L.: 1982, 'Durkheim's concept of anomie --- some observations', Sociological Inquiry 52, 106--113. Yankelovich, D.: 1972, The Changing Values on Campus (Washington Square Press:

Kaiser Permanente, Pasadena, CA 91188, U,S.A.