J. Llehav. Thrr. & E.kp. Prychror. Vol. IO, PP. 21.24. 0 zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA Pergamon I’m\ Ltd., 1979 Prlmrd in Char Britain 0005.7908/79/0301-0021 $02.00/O FACTOR ANALYSIS OF THE RATHUS ASSERTIVENESS SCHEDULE WITH A COLLEGE POPULATION JEFFREY S. NEVID Hofstra University and SPENCER A. RATHUS Northeastern University Summary--Separate principal-components analyses were conducted on the Rathus Assertiveness Schedule (RAS) scores of male and female college students in a large nationwide sample. The results showed the factorial complexity of the scale, with eight and nine factors emerging for males and females respectively, and thus supported the situationally-specific nature of assertiveness. Previous factor analyses of other self-report assertiveness instruments (Bates and Zimmer- man, 1971; Gambrill and Richey, 1975; Gay, Hollandsworth and Galassi, 1975) have supported a situationally-specific understanding of the construct of assertiveness. The present study extended these factorial investigations with the Rathus Assertiveness Schedule (RAS) (Rathus, 1973; Rathus and Nevid, 1977), in the hope of shedding further light on the com- plexities of “assertiveness”. METHOD The respondents were 1401 college and university students from all regions of the Wiled States. Eighty college and university professors were selected at random from the 1975 Directory of the Association for the Advancement of Behavior Therapy, and 35 of these administered the RAS to their classes or to the classes of colleagues within an allotted two-month time span. Com- pleted questionnaires were returned from 764 females (Mean age = 22; S.D. = 5.5) and 637 males (Mean age = 22; S.D. = 4.0). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Separate factor analyses were conducted for male and female respondents. Principal- components analyses (l’s in the diagonals, varimax rotation of all factors having eigen- values >l) were performed. Tables 1 and 2 display the derived factors and the percentage of the variance accounted for by each. Items loading at 0.35 or above were included for descriptive purposes. Factor analyses revealed eight factors for females and nine for males, with the major factors (Assertive Business Dealings, Complain- ing to Rectify Injustice, Insensitive Self- Expressiveness, Spontaneity, and Verbal Fluency) largely convergent between the sexes. However, several sex-specific factors also emerged, including General Argumentativeness and Arguing over Prices among women, and Combativeness, Control Over Arousal during Confrontations, and Self-Aggrandizement among men. It appears that male responses are more discreetly clustered around issues of verbal and possible physical confrontations, possibly reflecting sex-role stereotyping. Factor 7 for women, Avoiding Public Confrontation, suggests that many women who are self- aggrandizing among peers have adopted the socially-induced “better seen than heard” attitude concerning public confrontations with noted figures. Requests tor reprints should be addressed to: Jeffrey S. Nevid, Psychology Department, Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY 11550. 21