Final - Chapter 4

$"
(##$" "$$$

(##$" "$$$#&"(
"$$ "$$"#"'#"##
$"$$""#"'"
62
CHAPTER – 4
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
4.1 Introduction
The purpose of the present chapter is to analyse and interpret the data
collected with the help of tools. The raw score have got no value without
interpretation and generalization. The investigator cannot achieve his/her
objectives without interpreting the basic facts of material collected through the
tools used for the study.
Analysis of data means studying the tabulated material in order to

determine inherent factors or meanings. It involves breaking down existing
complex factors into simple parts together in new arrangement for the purpose
of interpretation. According to Karlinger, F.N., “Interpretation takes the result
of analysis, inferences pertinent to the research studies and draws conclusions
about these relations.”
Interpretation is thus by no means a mechanical process. It is used for

critical examination of the results of analysis in the light of all the limitation of
data gathering devices.
The data of the study have been analysed and interpreted in the
following ways.
Part 1 - Category wise (Normal, Physically disabled students)
• Self-concept
• Adjustment
Part 2 - Gender wise (Normal, Physically disabled boys and girls)
• Self-concept
• Adjustment
62
Part 3 - Locale wise (Normal, Physically disabled urban and rural
students)
• Self-concept
• Adjustment
4.2 Part I – Category wise (Normal and Physically disabled students)
1. Self-concept of normal and Physically disabled students.

2. Adjustment of normal and physically disabled students.
4.3 Part II Gender wise – (self- concept)
1. Gender wise self-concept of normal students
2. Gender wise self-concept of physically disabled students
4.4 Part II Gender wise – (Adjustment)
3. Gender wise adjustment of normal students.
4. Gender wise adjustment of physically disabled students.
4.5 Part III Locale wise (self -concept )
1 Locale wise self- concept of normal and physically disabled urban boys.
2. Locale wise self- concept of normal and physically disabled urban girls.
3. Locale wise self- concept of normal and physically disabled rural boys.
4. Locale wise self-concept of normal and physically disabled rural girls .
4.6 Locale Wise (Adjustment)
1 Locale wise Adjustment of normal and physically disabled urban boys .
2. Locale wise Adjustment of normal and physically disabled urban girls.

3. Locale wise Adjustment of normal and physically disabled rural boys.
4. Locale wise Adjustment of normal and physically disabled rural girls.
63
4.7 Procedure of analysis of data :
After data collection tabulation work was done .Tables were prepared
according to the selected variables and then tables were arranged category
wise, gender wise and locale wise. Then statistics (t-test) was adopted for
analyzing data and interpretation is presented on the basis of formulated
hypotheses .The main hypotheses are presented here:
Main Hypotheses :
Part I category wise
Hypothesis I – There is no significant difference between self- concept

of normal and physically disabled students of secondary classes.
Hypothesis II - There is no significant difference between adjustment of

normal and physically disabled students of secondary classes.
Part II Gender wise
Hypothesis III - There is no significant difference between self-

concept of normal students of secondary classes on the basis of gender.
Hypothesis IV - There is no significant difference between self- concept

of physically disabled students of secondary on the basis of gender.
Hypothesis V - There is no significant difference between adjustment of

normal students of secondary classes on the basis of gender.
Hypothesis VI- There is no significant difference between adjustment

of physically disabled students of secondary classes on the basis of gender.
Part III Locale wise
Hypothesis VII – There is no significant difference between self-

concept of normal and physically disabled boys on the basis of locale.
Hypothesis VIII – There is no significant difference between self-

concept of normal and physically disabled girls on the basis of locale
64
Hypothesis IX – There is no significant difference between self-
concept of normal and physically disabled boys on the basis of locale.
Hypothesis X – There is no significant difference between self- concept

of normal and physically disabled girls on the basis of locale.
Hypothesis XI – There is no significant difference between adjustment

of normal and physically disabled boys on the basis of locale.
Hypothesis XII – There is no significant difference between adjustment

of normal and physically disabled girls on the basis of locale.
Hypothesis XIII – There is no significant difference between

adjustment of normal and physically disabled boys on the basis of locale.
Hypothesis XIV – There is no significant difference between

adjustment of normal and physically disabled girls on the basis of locale.
Dimensions of self- concept –
1. Physical
2. Social
3. Temperamental
4. Educational
5. Moral
6. Intellectual
Dimensions of Adjustment –
1. Emotional
2. Social
3. Educational
Subsidiary hypotheses are formulated with each variables dimension of

self- concept and adjustment regarding category wise, gender wise and locale
wise. Analysis and interpretation are presented on the basis of subsidiary
hypotheses.
65
Part -1 – Category wise
Section – Self-concept
Dimension – Physical
Subsidiary Hypothesis
IV−I(I) There is no significant difference between normal and

physically disabled students in the dimension of Physical self-concept.
Table IV (1)
Statistical measures regarding ‘physical’ self- concept.
S. 't' Level of
Category N Mean S.D.
No. value significance
1. Normal 200 31.94 4.24 Significant

2.59 at 0.05 level
2. Disabled 200 30.75 4.93
Table value of 't' – 0.01 = 2.60

0.05 =1.97
Analysis and Interpretation:
The above table indicates the result on the Physical dimension of self-
concept between the normal and disabled students. The mean scores of both
categories are 31.94 of normal and 30.75 of disabled respectively. The
calculated ‘t’ value is 2.59 which is more than the table value at 0.05 level. It
implies that there exists a difference in physical dimension of self-concept
between the normal and disabled students. The self-concept of physical
dimension exists more in normal students than disabled students.
Hence, null hypothesis is rejected.
66
Part - 1 − Category wise
Section − Self-concept
Dimension – Social
Subsidiary Hypothesis:
IV-I (II) There is no significant difference between normal and physically

disabled students in the Social dimension of self-concept.
Table No. 1V (2)
Statistical measures regarding ‘Social’ self-concept.
S. 't' Level of
1. Normal 200 29.19 3.86 Non

1.71
2. Disabled 200 29.47 4.12 significant
Table value of 't' - 0.01 = 2.60
0.05 = 1.97
Analysis and Interpretation-
The above table indicates the result on the Social dimension of self-
concept between the normal and disabled students. The mean scores of both
categories are respectively 29.19 and 29.47.The calculated ‘t’ value 1.71 which
is less than the table value on both the levels of significance. It implies that
both the samples are homogenous in social dimension of self-concept.
So, the null hypothesis is accepted.
67
Part-1 − Category wise
Dimension − Temperamental
Subsidiary Hypothesis-
IV-I (III) There is no significant difference between normal and physically

disabled students in the Temperamental dimension of self-
concept.
Table No. IV (3)
Statistical measures regarding ‘Temperamental’ self-concept.
S. 't' Level of
1. Normal 200 29.45 4.36 Non

1.40
2. Disabled 200 29.27 4.55 Significant
Table value of 't'- 0.01 = 2.60
0.05 = 1.97
The above table indicates the results on the Temperamental dimension

of self-concept between the normal and disabled students. It is readily
perceived from the above table that there is no significant difference in the
mean scores obtained by normal and disabled students on the temperamental
dimension. The mean scores of both the categories are 29.45 and 29.47. The
calculated ‘t’ value 1.40 is less than from the table value. It can be also said
that both the two categories have almost equal level of self-concept of
temperamental dimension.
Hence, null hypothesis is accepted.
68
Dimension − Educational
Subsidiary Hypothesis-
IV-I (IV) There is no significant difference between the dimension of

Educational self-concept of normal and physically disabled
students.
Table No. IV (4)
Statistical measures regarding ‘Educational’ self-concept.
't' Level of
S. No. Category N Mean S.D.
value significance

2.94 at 0.01 level
2. Disabled 200 31.29 5.27
Table value of 't' 0.01 = 2.60
0.05 = 1.97
The above table reveals the result on the Educational dimension of

normal and disabled categories. In the table the mean scores, SD and t value is
presented. The calculated t value is 2.94. The calculated t value is more than
the table value at 0.01 level. It clarifies that there exists difference between
both the categories on the educational dimension of self-concept. Educational
dimension of self-concept is more in normal (32.78) students than the
physically disabled students (31.29).
So, the null hypothesis is rejected.
69
Dimension − Moral
IV-1(V) There is no significant difference between Moral dimension of

normal and physically disabled students.
Table No. IV (5)
Statistical measures regarding ‘Moral’ self-concept.
't' Level of
value significance
1. Normal 200 31.90 3.03 Non

1.88 significant
2. Disabled 200 31.25 3.82
Table value of 't' 0.01 = 2.60,
0.05 = 1.97
The above table shows the result on the moral dimension of self-
concept. The mean scores of the normal students are 31.90 and 31.25 of
disabled student. The calculated value is 1.88 which is less than the table value.
It implies that both the samples are homogenous. It can be said that there is no
significant difference between both the categories on moral dimension of self-
concept.
70
Section - Self-concept
Dimension - Intellectual
IV I (Vl) There is no significant difference between Intellectual dimension

of self-concept of normal and physically disabled students.
Table No. IV (6)
Statistical measures regarding ‘Intellectual’ self-concept.
't' Level of
value significance
1. Normal 200 27.38 4.20 Non

1.74 significant
2. Disabled 200 26.58 4.95
0.05 = 1.97
It is readily perceived from the above table that there is no significant

difference in the mean scores obtained by the normal students 27.38 and
physically disabled students 26.58 on the intellectual dimension of self-
concept. The‘t’ value 1.74 is less than table value. It can also be said that both
the samples are homogenous on the intellectual dimension of self-concept.
71
Integrated table of all six dimensions of ‘self-concept’ of normal and
physically disabled students
Table No IV (7)
" !
$
"! $
Normal 200 31.94 4.24 Significant
Physical 2.59 Rejected
Disabled 200 30.75 4.93 at 0.05 level
Normal 200 29.19 3.86 Non
Social 1.71 Accepted
Disabled 200 29.47 4.12 significant
Normal 200 29.45 4.36 Non
Temperamental 1.40 Accepted
Educational 2.94 Rejected
Normal 200 31.90 3.03 Non
Moral 1.88 Accepted
Normal 200 27.38 4.20 Non
Intellectual 1.74 Accepted
Table value 't' 0.01 = 2.60
0.05 = 1.97
Discussion
The above table indicates that two hypotheses are rejected and four are
accepted. The table shows that there are significant differences in two
dimensions of self-concept. These dimensions are Physical and Educational of
self-concept. Social, Moral, Temperamental and Intellectual all dimensions of
self-concept are homogenous in both the categories. The difference exists in
two dimensions i.e. physical and educational at 0.05 level, while in
Educational dimension difference is significant at 0.01 level. This may be due
to the reason that students suffer from inferiority complex and sickness. In
social, moral, temperamental and intellectual dimension of self-concept both
the categories are same.
72
Graph – I
Bar graph of mean scores of normal and physically disabled students on self-concept
Dimensions of self-concept
73
Section − Adjustment
Dimension − Emotional
IV-II(1) There is no significant difference between adjustment of normal
and physically disabled students on the Emotional dimension.
Table No. IV (8)
Statistical measures regarding ‘Emotional’ adjustment
't' Level of
value significance
8.15 at 0.01 level
2. Disabled 200 4.92 4.29
0.05 = 1.97
The above table reveals the result on the Emotional dimension of
adjustment of normal and physically disabled students. In the above table the
mean scores, S.D. and 't' value are presented. The mean scores of normal
students are 2.28 and 4.92 of disabled students. The calculated t value is 8.15.
It is more than the table on both the level of significance which clarifies that
there exists significant difference between both the categories, normal and
physically disabled students on ‘Emotional’ dimension of adjustment. The
physically disabled students are more adjustable than normal students.
74
Part-1 − Category Wise
Dimension − Social
IV-II (2) There is no significant difference between adjustment of normal

and physically disabled students on the Social dimension.
Table No. IV (9)
Statistical measures regarding ‘Social’ adjustment.
't' Level of
value significance
1. Normal 200 5.30 2.05 Non

0.17 significant
2. Disabled 200 6.40 2.50
0.05 = 1.97
An observation of above table makes it clear that the difference between

the two categories on the social dimension of adjustment is on equal level. The
mean scores of normal students are 5.30 and of disabled students are 6.40. The
calculated ‘t’ value is 0.17 which is less than the table value. So, it can be
concluded that both the categories somehow are homogenous on the social
dimension of adjustment.
75
Part-1 − Category Wise
IV-II (3) There is no significant difference between adjustment of normal
and physically disabled students on the dimension of
‘Educational’ adjustment.
Table No. IV (10)

Statistical measures regarding ‘Educational’ adjustment.
't' Level of
value significance

2.96 at 0.01 level
2. Disabled 200 4.83 3.43

0.05 = 1.97

The above table indicates the result on the ‘Educational’ dimension of
adjustment between the normal and physically disabled students. The mean
scores of the both categories are respectively 3.97 of normal student and 4.83
of disabled students. The calculated value of ‘t’ is 2.96 which is more than the
table value at 0.01 level. It implies that there exists difference in ‘Educational’
dimension of adjustment between the normal and physically disabled students.
Educational adjustment exists more in physically disabled students in
comparison of normal students.
76
Integrated table of all three dimensions of ‘adjustment’ of normal and
physically disabled students
Table IV (11)
t- Level of Status of
Dimensions Category N Mean S.D.
value significance Hypothesis

Emotional 8.15 Rejected
Disabled 200 4.92 4.29 at 0.01
Normal 200 5.30 2.05 Non

Social 0.17 Accepted

Educational 2.96 Rejected
Disabled 200 4.83 3.43 at 0.01
0.05 = 1.97
Discussion
The above table indicates that two hypotheses are rejected and one is
accepted. Hypothesis related to social dimension is accepted and emotional and
educational dimensions are rejected. Social dimension of adjustment is almost
equal in both the categories. The reason might be that the disabled children
are equally accepted by parents and their peer group. Emotional and
Educational adjustment are found more in disabled children than normal
children for this reason may be that disabled children are getting extra care,
affection and study facilities than the normal children.
77
Graph–2
Bar graph of mean scores of normal and physically disabled students on adjustment
Dimensions of Adjustment
78
Part–2 – Gender wise (Normal Boys and Girls)
IV-III (1) There is no significant difference between normal boys and girls on
the Physical dimension of self-concept.
Table – IV (12)
Statistical measures regarding ‘Physical’ self-concept.
't' Level of
Category Group N Mean S.D.
value significance
Boys 100 29.74 4.54 Non

Normal 1.08 significant
Girls 100 29.06 4.28
0.05 = 1.98
The above table shows the result on the physical dimension of self-
concept of normal boys and girls. The mean score of the both the groups of
boys and girls are respectively 29.74 and 29.06 and SD is 4.54 of boys and
4.28 of girls. The calculated ‘t’ value is 1.08 which is less than the table value
on both the level of significance. In brief, it can be said that there is no
significant difference between normal boys and girls on the physical dimension
of self-concept.
79
Part-2 −Gender Wise (Normal Boys and Girls)
IV-III (II) There is no significant difference between normal boys and girls
on Social dimension of Self-concept.
Table – IV (13)
Statistical measures regarding ‘Social’ self-concept.
't' Level of
value significance
Boys 100 29.38 3.96 Non

Normal 0.78 significant
Girls 100 28.95 3.78
0.05 = 1.98
The above table reveals the result on the social dimension of self-
concept of normal boys and girls. In this table mean, SD and‘t’ value is
presented. The mean scores of normal boys is 29.38 and normal girls is 28.95.
The calculated ‘t’ value is 0.78 which is less than the table value on both the
levels. It implies that both the samples are somehow homogenous on the social
dimension of self-concept. In brief it can be said that there is no significant
difference between normal boys and girls on the social dimension of self-
concept.
So the null hypothesis is accepted.
80
Part-2 – Gender Wise (Normal Boys and Girls)
Section – Self−Concept
Dimension – Temperamental
IV-III ( 3) There is no significant difference between normal boys and girls on

Temperamental dimension of self-concept
Table – IV (14)
't' Level of
value significance
Boys 100 32.30 3.88

Non
Normal 1.38
significant
Girls 100 31.45 4.74
0.05 = 1.98

difference between the mean scores obtained by normal boys and girls. The mean
score of boys is 32.30 and girls is 31.45 and SD of boys is 3.88 and of girls is 4.74 on
Temperamental dimension of self-concept. The calculated ‘t’ value is 1.38 which is

less than the table value on both the level of significance at 0.05 and 0.01.
Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.
81
Dimension – Educational
IV-III (4) There is no significant difference between normal boys and girls on
Educational dimension of self-concept.
Table – IV (15)
't' Level of
value significance
Boys 100 33.58 4.86 Significant

Normal 2.52
Girls 100 31.85 4.81 at 0.05 level
0.05 = 1.98
The above table indicates the results on the Educational dimension of

self-concept between the normal boys and girls. The mean scores of the both
groups are respectively 33.58 and 31.85 of boys and girls. The calculated ‘t’
value is more than the table value at 0.05 level. It implies that there exists
difference in educational dimension of self-concept between boys and girls.
The educational dimension exists more in normal boys than girls.
Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected.
82
Dimension – Moral
IV- III (5) There is no significant difference between normal boys and girls
on Moral dimension of self-concept.
Table – IV (16)
Level of
Category Group N Mean S.D. 't' value
significance
Boys 100 32.15 3.12 Non

Normal 1.14
Girls 100 31.66 2.91 significant
0.05 = 1.98

the two categories on the moral dimension of self-concept is statistically equal.
It is proved by the calculated ‘t’ value which is less than the table value at
0.05 and 0.01 levels. So it is concluded that both boys and girls are somehow
homogenous on the moral dimension of self-concept so there is no effect of
gender difference on moral dimension of self-concept.
83
Dimension – Intellectual
IV-III (6) There is no significant difference between Intellectual dimension

of self-concept of normal boys and girls.
Table – IV (17)
't' Level of
value significance

Normal 4.38
Girls 100 26.07 4.28 at 0.01 level
0.05 = 1.98
The above table shows the result regarding intellectual dimension of

self-concept. The mean scores of boys are 28.59 and 26.07 of girls and SD is
3.83 for boys and 4.28 for girls. The calculated ‘t’ value is 4.38 which is more
than the table value at both the levels. It clarifies that there exists significant
difference between both the categories on the intellectual dimension of self-
concept. Intellectual dimension of self-concept exists more in boys. So it can be
concluded that intellectual dimension of self-concept is affected by gender
difference.
So the null hypothesis is rejected.
84
Integrated table of all the six dimensions of self-concept of normal boys
and girls.
Table – IV (18)
Dimensions of t- Level of Status of

self-concept value significance hypothesis
Boys 100 29.74 4.54 Non

Physical Normal 1.08 Accepted
Boys 100 29.38 3.96 Non
Social Normal 0.78 Accepted
Boys 100 32.30 3.88 Non
Temperamental Normal 1.38 Accepted
Boys 100 33.58 4.86
Educational Normal 2.52 Significant Rejected
Girls 100 31.85 4.81
Boys 100 32.15 3.12 Non
Moral Normal 1.14 Accepted
Boys 100 28.59 3.83
Intellectual Normal 4.38 Significant Rejected
Girls 100 26.07 4.28
Discussion
accepted. The table shows that there are significant differences in the two
dimensions of self-concept. These two dimensions are educational and
intellectual. The educational and intellectual dimensions of self-concept of
normal boys are higher than that of normal girls. Its reason may be perhaps
different socio economic status, IQ level and educational facilities can affects
the educational and intellectual dimension of self- concept of boys and girls.
The other four dimensions of self-concept i.e. Physical, social, temperamental
and moral dimensions of self-concept of both the categories are almost the
same.
85
Graph – 3
Bar graph of mean scores of self-concept of normal boys and girls
Dimensions of self- concept
86
Part-2 – Gender Wise (Disabled Boys and Girls)
IV-(IV) (1) There is no significant difference between disabled boys and girls
on physical dimension of self-concept.
Table – IV (19)
Statistical measures regarding ‘Physical’ self-concept.
't' Level of
value significance
Physically Boys 100 28.50 4.42 Significant

2.62 at 0.05 level
disabled Girls 100 28.15 4.45
0.05 = 1.98
The above table reveals the result on the physical dimension of self-
concept of disabled boys and girls. In this table the mean scores and ‘t’ value
is presented. The mean score of boys is 28.50 and of girls is 28.15. The
calculated ‘t’ value is 2.62. The ‘t’ value is more than the table value at 0.05
significance level. It clarifies that there exists significant difference between
both the groups on the physical dimension of self-concept of physically
disabled boys and girls. Physical self-concept of boys is better than girls.
87
IV-(IV)( 2) There is no significant difference between disabled boys and girls on

Social dimension of self-concept.
Table – IV (20)
Statistical measures regarding ‘social’ self-concept.
't' Level of
value significance
Physically Boys 100 29.68 4.05 Non

0.63
disabled significant
Girls 100 29.31 4.20
Table value of 't; 0.01 = 2.63

0.05 = 1.98

An observation of the above table makes it clear that the difference between
the two groups on the social dimension of self-concept have equal level. It is proved
also by the‘t’ value. The mean scores of both groups of physically disabled category
is 29.68 and 29.31 and SD is 4.05 and 4.20 respectively ‘t’ value 0.63 value which
is less than the table value. So it is concluded that both the groups are homogenous on
the social dimension. Girls and boys have almost same self-concept on social
dimension.
88
IV-(IV) ( 3) There is no significant difference between disabled boys and girls
on Temperamental dimension of self-concept.
Table – IV (21)
Level of
significance
0.82
disabled Girls 100 31.10 4.61 significant
Table value of 't' 001 = 2.63

0.05 = 1.98
difference between the mean scores obtained by the disabled boys and girls on
the temperamental dimension. The mean scores of disabled boys 30.53 and of
girls is 31.10and SD is 5.10 and 4.61. The calculated ‘t’ value is 0.82 which
is less than the table value at 0.01 significance level. It can be said that both the
groups of same category have almost equal level of temperamental dimension
of self-concept.
89
IV-(IV) ( 4 ) There is no significant difference between disabled boys and girls

on Educational dimension of self-concept.
Table – IV (22)
Level of
significance
2.42 at 0.05 level
0.05 = 1.98
The above table indicates the result on the educational dimension of

self-concept between the disabled boys and girls. The mean scores of the both
categories are respectively 30.46 and 32.23 and SD is 5.12 and 5.20. The
implies that there exists difference in educational self-concept between the
physically disabled boys and girls. The educational self-concept exists more in
girls than the disabled boys.
90
Dimension – Moral
IV-(IV) (5) There is no significant difference between disabled boys and girls
on Moral dimension of self-concept.
Table – IV (23)
't' Level of
value significance
Physically Boys 100 31.44 3.60
Non
disabled 0.73 Significant
Girls 100 31.04 4.04
Table value of ‘t’ 0.01 = 2.63

0.05 = 1.98
Analysis and Interpretation: The above table shows the result on the
moral dimension of self-concept of physically disabled boys and girls. The
mean scores of the both groups are respectively 31.44 and 31.04 and SD is 3.60
and 4.04 of disabled boys and girls. The calculated ‘t’ value is .73 which is
less than the table value on both level of significance (0.05 and 0.01). It implies
that both the groups are somehow homogenous on the moral dimension. In
brief it can be said that there is no significant difference between both the
groups of physically disabled boys and girls on the moral dimension of self-
concept.
91
Dimension – Intellectual
IV-(IV) (6) There is no significant difference between physically disabled

boys and girls on Intellectual dimension of self-concept.
Table – IV (24)
't' Level of
value significance

1.81 significant
0.05 = 1.98

difference between the mean scores obtained by physically disabled boys and
girls students on the intellectual dimension of self-concept. The mean scores of
disabled boys and girls are 25.99 and 27.25 and SD is 4.57 and 5.20. The
calculated ‘t’ value is 1.81 which is less than the table value at both the levels
(0.05 and 0.01) of significance. It can be said that both the groups have almost
an equal level of self-concept on intellectual dimension.
92
Integrated table of all six dimensions of self-concept of physically disabled
boys and girls
Table No. IV (25)
Dimension of 't' Level of Status of
self-concept value significance hypothesis
Physical 2.61 0.05 Rejected
Social 0.63 significant Accepted
Temperamental 0.82 significant Accepted
Educational 2.42 0.05 Rejected
Moral 0.73 Accepted
disabled Girls 100 31.04 4.04 Significant

Intellectual 1.81 Accepted
disabled significant
Girls 100 27.25 5.20
0.05 = 1.98
Discussion:
The integrated table shows that there is a significant difference between
physically disabled boys and girls in two dimensions of self- concept. These
two dimensions are physical and educational. The possible reason of existing
difference may be that girls feels physically weak due to lack of nutrient diet.
In educational aspect girls are better than disabled boys. It may be due to their
laborious nature in their study. In physical dimension disabled boys are
stronger than disabled girls. The cause may be type of disability differ in them.
It is found no significant difference in Social, Temperamental, Moral and
Intellectual dimension of self-concept between both groups.
93
Graph − 4
Bar graph of mean scores of self-concept of physically disabled boys and girls
94
Part-2 − Gender wise (Normal Boys and Girls)
IV-V (1) There is no significant difference between normal boys and girls on
Emotional dimension of adjustment.
Table – IV (26)
Statistical measures regarding ‘Emotional’ adjustment.
't' Level of
value significance
Boys 100 2.41 1.79 Non

Normal 1.25
0.05 = 1.98
The above table shows the result on the emotional dimensions of

adjustment of normal boys and girls. The mean scores of the both groups of
normal category is 2.41 and 2.13 respectively and SD is 1.79 and 1.33. The
calculated ‘t’ value is 1.25 which is less than the table value. It implies that
both the samples are somehow homogenous on the emotional dimension of
adjustment. In brief it can be said that there is no significant difference between
the both groups on the emotional dimension of adjustment.
95
Section – Adjustment
IV- V ( 2) There is no significant difference between normal boys and girls

on Social dimension of adjustment.
Table – IV( 27)
Statistical measure regarding ‘Social’ adjustment.
't' Level of
value significance

Normal 4.46 at 0.01 level
Girls 100 5.92 1.76
0.05 = 1.98
The above table reveals the result on the social dimension of

adjustment of normal boys and girls. In the table mean SD and ‘t’ value is
presented. The mean scores of both groups are 4.68 of boys and 5.92 of girls
and SD is 2.14 and 1.76 respectively. The calculated ‘t’ value is 4.46. The‘t’
value is more than table value on 0.01 level. It clarifies that there exists
significant difference between both the groups of normal category on the social
dimension of adjustment. Social dimension of adjustment is better in normal
girls in comparison to normal boys.
96
IV− V (3) There is no significant difference in Educational adjustment

between normal boys and girls.
Table – IV (28)
Statistical measure regarding ‘Educational’ adjustment.
't' Level of
value significance
Boys 100 4.36 1.73 Significant at

Normal 2.27 0.05 level
Girls 100 3.57 3.95
0.05 = 1.98
The above table shows the result on educational dimension of

adjustment of normal boys and girls. In the table the mean S.D. and ‘t’ value
is presented. The mean is 4.36 of boys and 3.57 is of girls. SD is 1.73 and 3.95
is of boys and girls respectively. The calculated ‘t’ value is 2.27. The ‘t’ value
is more than the table value at 0.05 level. It clarifies that there exists significant
difference between both the groups of normal category on the educational
dimension of adjustment. Educational adjustment is found more in normal
boys.
97
Integrated table of all the three dimensions of adjustment
of normal boys and girls.
Table – IV (29)
Dimension
't' Level of Status of
of Category Groups N Mean S.D.
value significance hypothesis
adjustment
Boys 100 2.41 1.79 Non

Emotional Normal 1.25 Accepted

Social Normal 4.46 Rejected
Girls 100 5.92 1.76 0.01level

Educational Normal 2.27 Rejected
Girls 100 3.57 3.95 0.05 level
0.05 = 1.98
Discussion
On the basis of results presented in the above table it is clear that there
exists difference between the two dimensions of adjustment of the normal boys
and girls. These dimensions are social and educational. The social dimension of
adjustment of girls is better than boys and educational dimensions of
adjustment of boys is better than the girls belong to the same category .Its
reason may be that social environment of home, school and locale perhaps
differ of both the groups. The educational dimension of boys may be better
than girls. Its reason may be that social norms and of family are different for
boys and girls. Family interactions and relationship between family members
play a pivotal role in the social adjustment. The type of schools and medium of
instruction may also influence the adjustment level of adolescents boys and
girls.
98
Graph − 5
Bar graph of mean scores of adjustment of normal boys and girls
Dimensions of adjustment
99
Part-2 − Gender Wise (Disabled Boys and Girls)
IV-VI (1) There is no significant difference physically disabled boys and girls
on the Emotional dimension of adjustment.
Table – IV (30)
Statistical measure regarding ‘Emotional’ adjustment.
't' Level of
value significance

1.12 significant
0.05 = 1.98
Analysis and Interpretation
The above table shows the result on the emotional dimension of

adjustment of normal boys and girls. The mean scores of the both groups are
5.28 and 4.60 and SD is 4.42 and 4.15 respectively. The calculated ‘t’ value is
1.12 which is less than the table value. So, it is concluded that both the groups
are homogenous on the dimension of emotional adjustment.
100
IV- VI (2) There is no significant difference between physically disabled

boys and girls on the dimension of Social adjustment.
Table –IV (31)
't' Level of
value significance

2.39 at 0.05 level
0.05 = 1.98
Analysis and Interpretation: The above table indicates the result on

the social dimension of adjustment between the disabled boys and girls. The
mean scores of the both groups are respectively 6.82 and 5.98 and SD is 2.51
and 2.44. The calculated value of ‘t’ is 2.39 which is significant at 0.05 level.
It clarifies that there exists significant difference between both the groups on
the emotional dimension of adjustment. Boys are more socially adjusted than
girls.
So the null hypothesis is rejected.
101
IV- VI ( 3) There is no significant difference between physically disabled

boys and girls on the Educational dimension of adjustment.
Table –IV (32)
't' Level of
value significance

1.90 significant
disabled
Girls 100 4.38 3.14
0.05 = 1.98
The above table shows the result on the educational dimension of

adjustment of boys and girls of physically disabled category. The mean scores
of both groups are 5.30 and 4.38 and SD is 3.66 and 3.14 of disabled boys and
girls respectively. The calculated ‘t’ value is 1.90 which is less than the table
value. It implies that both the samples are homogenous on the educational
dimension of adjustment. In brief, it can be said that there is no significant
difference between both the groups on the educational dimension.
102
Integrated table of all three dimensions of adjustment of physically
disabled boys and girls
Table –IV (33)
Dimensions
't' Level of Status of
of Category Group N Mean S.D.
value significance hypothesis
adjustment

Emotional disabled 1.12 significant Accepted
Girls 100 4.60 4.15

Social disabled 2.39 at 0.05 level Rejected
Girls 100 5.98 2.44

Educational disabled 1.90 significant Accepted
Girls 100 4.38 3.14
0.05 = 1.98
Discussion
It is clear from the above table that two dimensions of adjustment i.e.
emotional and educational boys and girls do not differ. There is difference in
only one dimension of adjustment i.e. social dimension. Social dimension of
adjustment of boys is better than girls of the same category. Reason behind
the findings may be that disabled girls feel socially isolated. An Emotional and
Educational dimension of adjustment is almost same. The reason behind the
findings may that perhaps disabled girls and boys are getting same care, equal
opportunities and facilities for study. Psychological needs of both girls and
boys are met and their home environment is congenial.
103
Graph −6
Bar graph of mean scores of adjustment of physically disabled boys and girls.
Dimensions of adjustment
104
Part-3 − Locale wise (Urban Boys)
Dimension − Physical
IV- VII ( 1) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

urban boys on the Physical dimension of self-concept.
Table –IV (34)
Statistical measure regarding ‘Physical’ self-concept..
't' Level of
S. No. Category Group N Mean S.D.
value significance
1. Normal Urban 50 30.80 4.74 Non

Boys 0.14 significant
2. Disabled 50 30.68 3.61
0.05 = 2.01
The above table reveals the result on the physical dimension of self-
concept of normal and disabled boys. In the table the mean SD and ‘t’ value is
presented. Mean score of normal and disabled boys is 30.80 and 30.68 and SD
is 4.74 and 3.61. The calculated t’ value 1.42 proves non-significant
difference on physical dimension of self-concept between normal and disabled
boys because ‘t’ value is less than the table value on both the level of
significance. So, it is concluded that both the categories are homogenous on the
physical dimension of self-concept.
105
Part-3 – Locale Wise (Urban Boys)

urban boys on the Social dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV (35)
Statistical measure regarding ‘Social’ self-concept.
't' Level of
value significance
1. Normal Urban 50 28.50 4.42 Significant

2.62
2. Disabled Boys 50 30.15 4.45 at 0.05
0.05 = 2.01
The above table shows the result on the social dimension of self-concept
of urban normal and disabled boys. The mean of the both categories is 28.50
and 30.15 and SD is 4.42 and 4.45 respectively. The calculated ‘t’ value is
2.62 which is more than the table value at 0.05 level. It implies that there is a
difference in social dimension of self-concept between the normal and disabled
urban boys. This aspect of self-concept is more in normal boys than disabled
boys.
106
Part-3 – Locale Wise (Urban Boys)

urban boys on the Temperamental dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV (36)
Statistical measure regarding ‘Temperamental’ self-concept.
't' Level of
value significance

0.69
2. Disabled Boys 50 33.06 3.76 significant
0.05 = 2.01
The above table indicates the results on the Temperamental dimension

of self-concept of normal and disabled boys. In the table the mean, SD and ‘t’
value is presented. Mean scores of normal and disabled urban boys are 33.56
respectively and 33.06 and SD is 3.40 and 3.76. The calculated ‘t’ value is 0
.69 which is less than the table value. So it is concluded that both the categories
of urban area are homogenous on the temperamental dimension of self-concept.
107
Part-3 − Locale Wise (Urban Boys)
IV- VII (4) There is no significant difference between the normal and
disabled urban boys on the Educational dimension of self-
concept.
Table IV (37)
Statistical measure regarding ‘Educational’ self-concept.
't' Level of
value significance

0.76
0.05 = 2.01

difference between the mean scores obtained by normal and disabled boys on
the Educational dimension of self-concept. The mean score of normal boys is
34.28 and of disabled boys is 33.52 and SD of normal and disabled boys is 5.54
and 3.60 respectively. The calculated ‘t’ value is 0.76 which is less than the
table value at both levels of significance. It can be said that both the
categories have almost equal level of educational self-concept.
108
Dimension − Moral
IV-VII (5) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

urban boys on the Moral dimension of self-concept.
Table - IV ( 38 )
Statistical measure regarding ‘Moral’ self-concept.
S.No. Category Group N Mean S.D. 't' Level of

Value Significance
1 Normal Urban 50 33.58 4.86
2.52 Significant
2 Disabled Boys 50 31.85 4.81 at 0.05 level
0.05 = 2.01
The above table indicates the result on the Moral dimension of self-
concept between the normal and disabled boys. The mean score of both
categories are respectively 33.58 and 31.85 and SD is 4.86 and 4.81 of normal
and disabled urban boys. The calculated ‘t’ value is 2.52 which is more than the
table value at 0.05 level. It implies that there exists difference in moral
dimension of self-concept between the normal and disabled urban boys. The
moral self-concept exists more in normal students than the disabled urban
students.
109
Dimension − Intellectual
IV-VII (5) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

urban boys on the Intellectual dimension of self-concept.
Table - IV ( 38 )
Statistical measure regarding ‘Intellectual’ self-concept.

Value Significance
1 Normal Urban 50 29.78 4.06
1.61 Non
2 Disabled Boys 50 28.58 3.35 Significant
0.05 = 2.01
The table shows mean SD and ‘t’ value of normal and disabled urban
boys. The mean scores of normal and disabled boys are 29.78 and 28.58 and
SD is 4.06 and 3.35 respectively the calculated ‘t’ value is 1.61. It reveals
non-significant difference between normal and disabled urban boys because
concluded ‘t’ value is less than the table value. In brief it can be said that both
the categories are homogenous on the intellectual dimension of self-concept.
110
Integrated table of all six dimensions of self-concept of normal and
physically disabled urban boys .
Table- IV (40)
Dimensions of 't' Level of Status of
Category Group N Mean SD
self-concept value Significance Hypothesis
Physical Normal Urban 50 30.80 4.74 Non
Boys 0.14 Accepted
Disabled 50 30.68 3.61 Significant
Social Normal Urban 50 28.50 4.42 Significant
Boys 2.62 at 0.05 level Rejected
Disabled 50 30.15 4.45
Temperamental Normal Urban 50 33.56 3.40 Non
Boys 0.69 Accepted
Disabled 50 33.06 3.76 Significant
Educational Normal Urban 50 34.28 5.54 Non
Boys 0.76 significant Accepted
Disabled 50 33.52 3.60
Moral Normal Urban 50 33.58 4.86 Significant
Boys 2.52 at 0.05 level Rejected
Disabled 50 31.85 4.81
Intellectual Normal Urban 50 29.78 4.06 Non
Boys 1.61 significant Accepted
Disabled 50 28.58 3.35
Discussion
dimensions of self-concept. These two dimensions are Social and Moral of self-
concept .The other four dimensions i.e. physical, temperamental, educational
and intellectual are homogenous in both the categories. The urban disabled
boys have higher social self-concept than normal urban boys. This may be due
to the reason that the disabled boys are getting better kinds of facilities and
acceptance of society in comparison to normal boys. In moral aspect the
normal urban boys have better self-concept than the disabled boys. The reason
may be normal urban boys believe in religions and involve in various customs
of society as compared to the disabled urban boys.
111
Graph − 7
Bar graph of mean scores of self-concept of normal and physically disabled urban Boys
Normal Disabled
40.00
35.00 33.56 33.06 34.28 33.52 33.58
30.80 30.68 31.85
30.15 29.78
30.00 28.50 28.58
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
Physical Social Temperamental Educational Moral Intellectual
112
Part-3 − Locale Wise (Urban Girls)
Dimension − Physical
IV-VIII (1) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

urban boys on the Physical dimension of self-concept.
Table - IV (41)
Statistical measure regarding ‘Physical’ self-concept.

Value Significance
1 Normal Urban 50 32.06 3.89
1.52 Non
0.05 = 2.01
The above table shows the result on the Physical dimension of self-
concept of normal and disabled urban girls. The mean scores of the both
categories are 32.06 of normal girls and 30.86 of disabled girls and SD is 3.89
and 3.96 respectively. The calculated ‘t’ value is 1.52 which is less than the
table value at both the level of significance. It implies that both the samples are
homogenous on the physical dimension of self-concept. In brief it can be said
that there is no significant difference between the normal and physically
disabled urban girls on the physical dimension of self-concept.
113
IV-VIII (2) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

urban boys on the Social dimension of self-concept.
Table - IV (42)

Value Significance
1 Normal Urban 50 30.10 3.43
2.24 Significant
2 Disabled Boys 50 31.68 3.61 at 0.05 level
0.05 = 2.01
The above table indicates the results on the social dimension of self-
concept between normal and disabled urban girls. The mean scores of both the
categories is respectively is 30.10 and 31.68 SD is 3.43 and 3.61. The
calculated ‘t’ value 2.34 is more than table value at 0.05 level. It implies that
there exists difference in social dimension of self-concept between urban
normal and physically disabled girls. It can be said that social dimension of
self-concept is found more in disabled urban girls than normal urban girls.
114
Dimension − Temperamental
IV-VIII (3) There is no significant difference between normal and physically

disabled urban girls on the Temperamental dimension of self-
concept.
Table - IV (43)

Value Significance
1 Normal Urban 50 33.40 4.68 Non
0.38
0.05 = 2.01

difference between the mean scores obtained by normal and disabled urban
girls on the temperamental dimension of self-concept. The mean scores of both
the categories are respectively 33.40 and 33.08 and SD is 4.68 and 3.48. The
calculated ‘t’ value is 0.38 which is less than table value at both the level of
significance. So, it can be said that both the categories have almost an equal
level of temperamental dimension of self- concept.
115
IV-VIII (4) There is no significant difference between normal and physically

disabled urban girls on the Educational dimension of self-
concept.
Table - IV (44)

Value Significance
1 Normal Urban 50 34.04 5.26 Non
0.20
2 Disabled Girls 50 33.02 4.54 Significant
0.05 = 2.01
The observation of above table makes it clear that there is no difference

between the two categories of urban girls on the educational dimension of self-
concept. It means that both the categories have an equal level of self-concept.
The mean scores of the normal and disabled categories are 34.04 of normal
girls and 33.02 of disabled girls and SD is 5.26 and 4.54 respectively. The
calculated t value is 0.20 which is less than the table value. So, it can be
concluded that both the categories are somehow homogenous on the social
dimension of self-concept.
116
Part-3 - Locale Wise (Urban Girls)
Dimension - Moral
IV-VIII ( 5) There is no significant difference between normal and physically

disabled urban girls on the Moral dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV (45)
't' Level of
value significance

Girls 0.67 significant
2. Disabled 50 32.34 2.56
Table value of’t’ 0.01 = 2.68
0.05 = 2.01

difference between the mean score obtained by urban normal girls is 31.94 and
of disabled girls is 32.34 and SD is 3.31 and 2.56. The calculated‘t’ value is
0.67 which is less than the table value on both the level of significance. It can
be said that both the categories of urban normal and disabled girls have almost
equal level of self-concept on moral dimension.
117
IV-VIII (6 ) There is no significant difference between normal and physically

disabled urban girls on the Intellectual dimension of self-concept.
Table-IV (46)
't' Level of
value significance
1. Normal Urban 50 28.59 3.83 Significant at

Girls 4.38 0.01 level
2. Disabled 50 26.07 4.28
0.05 = 2.01
The above table indicates the result on the intellectual dimension of self-
concept between the normal and disabled urban girls. The mean scores of the
both girls of categories are 28.59 and 26.07 and SD is 3.83 and 4.28. The
calculated ‘t’ value is 4.38 which is more than the table value at both the level
of significance . It implies that there exists difference in intellectual dimension
of self-concept between the normal and disabled urban girls. The intellectual
self-concept is found more in normal urban girls than the disabled urban girls.
118
physically disabled urban girls.
Table- IV (47)
Physical Normal
Urban 50 32.06 3.89 Non
Girls 0.14 1.52
Disabled 50 30.86 3.96 significant.
Social Normal
Urban 50 30.10 3.43 Significant
2.62 2.24
Disabled Girls 50 31.68 3.61 at 0.05 level
Temperamental Normal
Urban 50 33.40 4.68 Non
0.69 0.38
Disabled Girls 50 33.08 3.48 significant.
Educational Normal
Urban 50 34.04 5.26 Non
0.76 0.20
Disabled Girls 50 33.02 4.54 significant
Moral Normal
Urban 50 31.94 3.31 Non
2.52 0.67
Disabled Girls 50 32.34 2.56 significant
Intellectual Normal
Urban 50 28.59 3.83 Significant
1.61 4.38
Disabled Girls 50 26.07 4.28 at 0.01 level
Discussion
The table shows that there are significant differences in social and
intellectual dimension of self-concept between normal and disabled urban girls.
Urban disabled girls have higher social dimension of self-concept as compared
to the normal urban girls. The reason may be that disabled girls perhaps are
aware to maintain social relations and have capacity of problem solving and
judgement ability. The normal urban girls have better intellectual self-concept
than the disabled urban girls the reason may be that normal urban girls are
satisfied with educational achievements and their personality as compared to
disabled girls.
119
Graph−8
Bar graph of mean scores of self-concept of normal and physically disabled urban girls
120
Part-3 - Locale Wise (Rural Boys)
Dimension - Physical
IV-IX( I) There is no significant difference between normal and physically

disabled rural boys on the Physical dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV ( 48 )
't' Level of
value significance
Significant
1. Normal Rural 50 28.68 4.11
2.87 at
2. Disabled Boys 50 26.32 4.09 0.01 level
0.05 = 2.01
The above table reveals the result on the physical dimension of normal
and disabled rural boys. In the table mean SD and ‘t’ value is presented. The
mean scores of normal and disabled boys are 28.68 and 26.32 and SD is 4.11
and 4.09. The calculated t value is 2.87 which is more than the table value. It
clarifies that there exists significant difference between both the categories of
boys of rural area on physical dimension of self-concept. The physical
dimension of self-concept is higher in normal boys than the disabled boys.
121
Dimension - Social
IV- IX (2 ) There is no significant difference between normal and physically

disabled rural boys on the Social dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV (49)

't' Level of
S.No. Category Group N Mean S.D.
value significance
1. Normal Rural 50 28.32 4.00 Non

Boys 0.76 significant
2. Disabled 50 27.72 3.82
0.05 = 2.01

the two categories of rural normal and disabled boys on the social dimension of
self-concept have an equal level of self-concept. It is proved by the calculated
‘t’ value which is less than the table value. So, it can be concluded that boys of
both the categories are somehow homogenous on the social dimension.
122
Part-3 –- Locale Wise (Rural Boys)
IV-IX (3 ) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled
rural boys on the Temperamental dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV (50)
't' Level of
value significance
1. Normal Rural 50 31.04 3.96 Significant at

Boys 3.35
2. Disabled 50 28.00 5.03 0.01 level
0.05 = 2.01

The above table reveals the result on the temperamental dimension of
self-concept of normal and disabled rural boys. In the table the mean scores SD
and‘t’ value are presented. The mean scores of normal and disabled boys are
31.04 and 28.00 and SD of normal and disabled boys are 3.96 and 5.03. The
calculated‘t’ value is 3.35 which is more than the table value. It clarifies that
there is a significant difference between both the categories of rural boys on
temperamental dimension of self-concept. The temperamental self-concept is
better in normal boys than disabled rural boys.
123
Part-3 – Locale Wise (Rural Boys)
IV- IX (4 ) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

rural boys on the Educational dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV (51)

't' Level of
S No. Category Group N Mean S.D.
value significance
1. Normal Rural 50 32.88 4.00 Significant
Boys 6.35 at 0.01 level
2. Disabled 50 27.40 4.58
0.05 = 2.01
The above table indicates the result on the educational dimension of

self-concept between the normal and disabled rural boys. The mean scores of
the both categories respectively are 32.88 and 27.40 and SD is 4.00 and 4.58
respectively. The calculated ‘t’ value is 6.35 which is more than the table value.
It implies that there exists difference in educational self-concept between the
normal and disabled rural boys. The educational self-concept exists more in
normal boys than the disabled boys.
124
Dimension - Moral
IV- IX ( 5 ) There is no significant difference between normal and physically

disabled rural boys on the Moral dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV (52)

't' Level of
value significance
Boys 2.41
2. Disabled 50 30.24 3.79 0.05 level
0.05 = 2.01
The above table reveals the result on the moral dimension of self-
concept between the normal and disabled boys. In the table the mean SD and
‘t’ value is presented. The mean scores of normal boys are 31.96 and 30.24 of
rural disabled boys and SD are 3.31 and 3.79 respectively. The calculated ‘t’
value is 2.41. The calculated ‘t’ value is more than the table value. It clarifies
that there exist significant difference between both the categories on the moral
dimension of self-concept. The moral aspect of self-concept is much better in
normal boys than disabled rural boys.
So ,the null hypothesis is rejected.
125
IV-IX (6) There is no significant difference between normal and physically

disabled rural boys on the Intellectual dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV (53)

't' Level of
value significance

Boys 5.38
2. Disabled 50 23.40 4.17 at 0.01 level
0.05 = 2.01
The above table indicates the result on the intellectual dimension of self-
concept of the normal and disabled boys. The mean scores of the both
implies that there exists difference in intellectual dimension of self-concept
between the normal and disabled rural boys. The intellectual self-concept exists
more in normal boys than disabled boys.
126
physically disabled rural boys.
Table- IV (54)
Physical Normal Rural 50 28.68 4.11 Significant
2.87 Rejected
Boys at 0.01 level
Disabled 50 26.32 4.09
Social Normal Rural 50 28.32 4.00 Non
0.76 Accepted
Disabled Boys significant
50 27.72 3.82
Temperamental Normal Rural 50 31.04 3.96 Significant
3.35 Rejected
Disabled Boys at 0.01 level
50 28.00 5.03
Educational Normal Rural 50 32.88 4.00 Significant
6.35 Rejected
50 27.40 4.58
Moral Normal Rural 50 Significant
31.96 3.31
2.41 at 0.05 level Rejected
Disabled Boys
50 30.24 3.79
Intellectual Normal Rural 50 27.40 3.20 Significant
5.38 Rejected
50 23.40 4.17
Discussion
The above table indicates that one hypothesis is accepted and five are
rejected. The table shows that there are significant differences in five
dimensions of self-concept of normal and disabled boys of rural area. These
dimensions are physical, temperamental, educational, moral and intellectual.
The normal boys have better self-concept than disabled boys. It may be that
disabled students suffered from inferiority complex, sickness, shyness and
emotional imbalance. The social dimension of self- concept of normal and
disabled boys is almost equal. The reason may be that disabled boys are
equally accepted by parents and peer group.
127
Graph−9
Bar graph of mean scores of normal and physically disabled rural boys
128
Part-3 – Locale Wise (Rural Girls)
IV-X ( 1) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

rural girls on the Physical dimension of self-concept.
Table-IV (55)

't' Level of
value significance

Girls 2.41
2. Disabled 50 30.24 3.79 0.05 level
0.05 = 2.01
The above table shows the result on the physical dimension of self-
concept of rural girls. The mean scores of the both categories are 31.96 and
30.24 and SD is 3.31 and 3.79. The calculated ‘t’ value 2.41 is more than the
table value at 0.05 level. It implies that there exists significant difference in
physical dimension of self-concept of rural girls. This type of self-concept is
found more in normal rural girls in comparison to disabled girls.
129
Part-3 - Locale Wise (Rural Girls)
Dimension - Social
IV-X (2 ) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

rural girls on the Social dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV (56)
't' Level of
value significance

2. Disabled 50 26.94 3.96
0.05 = 2.01
The above table indicates the result of the normal and disabled rural
girls on social dimension of self-concept. The mean scores of the both
categories are 27.80 and 26.94 respectively and SD is 3.79 and 3.96. The
calculated ‘t’ value is 0.86 which is less than the table value at 0.05 level. It
can be said that both the samples are homogenous on the social dimension of
self-concept. In brief, it can be said that there is no significant difference
between both the normal and disabled rural girls on the social dimension of
self-concept.
130
Dimension - Temperamental
IV-X (3 ) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

rural girls on Temperamental dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV (57)
't' Level of
value significance

2. Disabled 50 29.12 4.04
0.05 = 2.01

difference between the mean scores obtained by the normal and disabled rural
girls on the temperamental dimension of self-concept. The mean scores of
both categories are respectively 29.50 and 29.12 and SD is 4.78 and 4.04. The
calculated ‘t’ value is 0.38 which is less than the table value at 0.05 level. So
it can be said that both the categories have almost an equal level of
temperamental dimension of self-concept.
131
Dimension - Educational
IV-X (4) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

rural girls on the Educational dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV (58)
Statistical measure regarding ’Educational’ self-concept.
't' Level of
value significance

Girls 3.22 at 0.01 level
2. Disabled 50 29.99 4.31
0.05 = 2.01
The observation of above table makes it clear that the difference

between the two categories on the educational dimension of self-concept has
not the equal level of educational self-concept. The mean scores of the normal
and disabled categories are 31.67 and 29.99 and SD is 2.91and 4.31.. The
calculated ‘t’ value is 3.22 which is more than the table value of 0.01 level. It
implies that there exists significant difference in educational dimension of self-
concept between the normal and disabled girls. Educational self-concept was
found more in normal girls than disabled girls.
Hence, null hypothesis is rejected.
132
Part- 3 - Locale Wise (Rural Girls)
Dimension - Moral
IV-X (5) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

rural girls on the Moral dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV (59)
Statistical measure regarding 'Moral’ self-concept.
't' Level of
value significance

2. Disabled 50 29.74 4.08
0.05 = 2.01

difference between the mean scores obtained by normal and disabled girls are
31.38 and 29.74. SD is 4.11 and 4.08. The calculated ‘t’ value is 1.64 which is
less than the table value at both the level of significance. It can be said that
both the categories have almost equal level of self-concept on moral dimension.
133
IV-(X.VI) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

rural girls on the Intellectual dimension of self-concept.
Table- IV (60)
Statistical measure regarding 'Intellectual’ self-concept.
't' Level of
value significance

2. Disabled 50 24.20 3.48
0.05 = 2.01
The above table shows the result on the intellectual dimension of self-
concept of rural girls. The mean scores of both the categories are respectively
25.28 and 24.20 and SD is 3.95 and 3.48. The calculated ‘t’ value is 1.08 which
is less than the table value it proves the samples are homogenous on the
intellectual dimension of self-concept. In brief, it can be said that there is no
significant difference between both the normal and disabled rural girls.
134
physically disabled rural girl
Table - IV (61)
Physical Normal Rural 50 31.96 3.31 Significant
Girls 2.41 Rejected
Social Normal Rural 50 27.80 3.79 Non
Girls 0.86 Accepted
Temperamental Normal Rural 50 29.50 4.78 Non
Girls 0.38 Accepted
Educational Normal Rural 50 31.67 2.91 Significant
Girls 3.22 Rejected
Disabled 50 29.99 4.31 at 0.01level
Moral Normal Rural 50 31.38 4.11 Non
Girls 1.64 Accepted
Intellectual Normal Rural 50 25.28 3.95 Non
Girls 1.08 Accepted
Discussion
dimensions of self-concept. These dimensions are Physical and Educational.
Physical dimension of self-concept of normal girls is better than the disabled
girls. It might be possible that normal girls are very carefree and satisfied with
their physique and adjust themselves easily in the available environment and
disabled girls feel guilt with their disability because of their body image. Due
to being less adjusted as compared to normal girls the disabled girls are also
lacking educational self-concept. Normal girls are educationally better than
disabled girls. The other four dimensions of self-concept temperamental, moral
and intellectual are almost of equal level among the normal girls and disabled
girls.
135
Graph− 10
Bar graph of mean scores of self-concept of normal and physically disabled rural girls
136
Part-3 - Locale Wise (Urban Boys)
Section - Adjustment
Dimension - Emotional
IV-Xl (1) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

urban boys on the Emotional dimension of adjustment.
Table- IV (62)
Statistical measure regarding ’Emotional’ adjustment.
't' Level of
value significance

3.07
2. Disabled Boys 50 2.26 1.62 at 0.01 level
0.05 = 2.01
In the above table mean scores SD and ‘t’ value are exhibited on the
Emotional dimension of adjustment between the normal and disabled urban
boys. The mean scores of both categories are respectively 4.04 of normal boys
and 2.26 of disabled boys and SD is 3.76 and 1.62. The calculated ‘t’ value is
3.07 which is more than the table value at 0.01 level. It implies that there exists
difference in emotional adjustment between the normal and disabled urban
boys. The emotional adjustment exists more in normal boys than the disabled
boys.
137
Part-3 - Locale Wise (Urban Boys)
Dimension - Social
IV- Xl (2) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

urban boys on the Social dimension of adjustment.
Table- IV (63)
't' Level of
value significance

1.86
0.05 = 2.01

difference between the mean scores obtained by normal and disabled urban
boys on the dimension of social adjustment. The mean scores of normal boys
are 5.66 and disabled boys are 4.88 and SD is irrespective of 1.81 and 2.33 for
normal and disabled boys. The calculated ‘t’ value is 1.86 which is less than the
table value. So it can be said that both the categories have almost equal level of
social adjustment.
138
Part-3 - Locale Wise (Urban Boys )
IV-XI (3) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

urban boys on the Educational dimension of adjustment.
Table- IV (64)
't' Level of
S No. Category Group N Mean S.D.
value significance

0.13
0.05 = 2.01

the two categories on the educational dimension of adjustment is equal level. It
is proved by the ‘t’ value. The mean scores of both categories are 4.40 and
4.48 and SD 2.60 and 3.17. The calculated ‘t’ value is 0.13 which is less than
the table value. So it can be concluded that both the categories are homogenous
on the educational dimension. It can be stated that normal and disabled urban
boys have almost the same dimension of educational adjustment.
139
Integrated table of all three dimensions of adjustment of normal and
physically disabled urban boys
Table - IV (65)
Emotional Normal 50 4.04 3.76
Urban Significant
Boys 3.07 Rejected
Social Normal 50 5.66 1.81 Non

Urban
Boys 1.86 Accepted
Educational Normal 50 4.40 2.60 Non

Urban
Boys 0.13 Accepted
Discussion
The above table indicates that two hypotheses are accepted and one is
rejected. There is difference in emotional dimension of adjustment between
normal urban and disabled urban boys. Educational adjustment is more in
normal boys than disabled boys. Disabled students are found more tender
minded, shy introvert and submissive as compared to the normal students.
From above comparison it is clear that social and educational dimension of
normal and disabled boy students are almost equal. However disabled urban
boys have the same level of educational adjustment as compared to the normal
urban boys. The reason may be that boys of both categories have no problems
or difficulties regarding in the field of social and educational adjustment.
140
Graph − 11
Bar graph of mean scores of adjustment of normal and physically disabled urban boys
141
IV-X1l.(1) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

urban girls on the 'Emotional' dimension of adjustment.
Table-IV (66)
't' Level of
value significance

3.89
2. Disabled Girls 50 2.24 1.40 at 0.01 level
0.05 = 2.01
The above table indicates the result on the emotional dimension of

adjustment between the normal and disabled girls. The mean scores of both the
calculated ‘t’ value 3.89 reveals significant difference at 0.01 levels. It implies
that there exists difference in emotional adjustment between the normal and
disabled girls. Emotional adjustment found more in normal girls.
142
Dimension - Social
IV-Xll.(2) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

urban girls on the Social dimension of adjustment.
Table- IV (67)
't' Level of
value significance
Significant
1. Normal Urban 50 6.10 1.65
at
2.57
2. Disabled Girls 50 5.10 2.19 0.05 level
0.05 = 2.01
The above table reveals the result on the social dimension of adjustment
between the normal and disabled girls. The mean scores of both the categories
are respectively 6.10 and 5.10 and SD is 1.65 and 2.19. Calculated ‘t’ value
2.57 reveals significant difference at 0.05 level. It implies that there exists
difference in social dimension of adjustment between the normal and disabled
girls. Social adjustment is found more in normal urban girls.
Hence the null hypothesis is rejected.
143
IV-Xll.(3) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

urban girls on the Educational dimension of adjustment.
Table- IV (68)
't' Level of
value significance

2. Disabled 50 3.46 2.41
0.05 = 2.01

difference between the mean scores obtained by normal and disabled girls on
the educational dimension of adjustment. The mean scores of the both
calculated t value is 0.94 which is less than the table value at both levels of the
significance. It can be said that both the categories of urban normal and
disabled girls have almost equal level of educational adjustment.
144
Integrated table of all the three dimensions of adjustment of normal and
physically disabled urban girls
Table- IV (69)
Emotional Normal Urban 50 4.64 4.12 Significant
Girls 3.89 Rejected
Social Normal Urban 50 6.10 1.65 Significant
Girls 2.57 Rejected
Educational Normal Urban 50 3.88 1.99 Non
Girls 0.94 Accepted
Discussion
It is clear from the above table that one dimension of the adjustment is
almost the same in urban girls which is educational dimension. Its reason may
be that perhaps both categories of girls are getting the same educational
environment, resources and opportunities to get education. There are
significant differences in emotional and social dimension of adjustment. It is
found that normal girls are emotionally better than disabled girls. They adjust
themselves easily in the available environment and knew how to accommodate
themselves according to situation available.
145
Graph − 12
Bar graph of mean scores of adjustment of normal and physically disabled urban girls.
146
IV-Xlll-(1) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

rural boys on the Emotional dimension of adjustment.
Table- IV (70)

't' Level of
value significance

5.48
0.05 = 2.01
The above table indicates the result on the Emotional dimension of

adjustment between the normal and disabled boys. The mean scores of the
both categories are respectively 6.52 and 2.56 and SD is 4.71 and 1.95. The
calculated ‘t’ value is 5.48 which is more than the table value. It implies that
there exists difference in emotional adjustment between the normal and
disabled boys. Emotional stability found more in normal rural boys.
Hence the, null hypothesis is rejected.
147
Dimension - Social
IV-Xlll-2) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

rural boys on the Social dimension of adjustment.
Table- IV (71)

't' Level of
value significance

7.64
0.05 = 2.01
The above table reveals the result on the Social dimension of adjustment
between the normal and disabled boys. On the social dimension of adjustment
the mean scores of the both categories are respectively 7.98 and 4.48 and SD is
2.59 and 1.93. The calculated ‘t’ value is 7.64 which is more than the table
value. It can be said that there exists difference in social adjustment between
the normal and disabled boys. Social adjustment found more in normal boys
than disabled boys.
148
IV-Xlll- (3) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

rural boys on the Educational dimension of adjustment.
Table- IV (72)

't' Level of
value significance

Boys 2.76 at 0.01 level
2. Disabled 50 4.32 2.33
0.05 = 2.01
The above table clarifies that there exists significant difference between
educational adjustment of normal and disabled boys. The mean scores of the
normal and disabled categories are 6.12 and 4.32 and SD is 3.96 and 2.33. The
calculated ‘t’ value 2.76 is more than the table value at 0.01 significance
level. It implies that there exists difference in educational adjustment between
the normal and disabled boys. Normal boys are more educationally adjusted
than disabled boys.
149
physically disabled rural boys
Table- IV (73)
Rural
Boys 5.48 Significant Rejected
Disabled 50 2.56 1.95
Social Normal 50 7.98 2.59

Rural
Disabled 50 4.48 1.93
Educational Normal 50 6.12 3.96

Rural
Disabled 50 4.32 2.33
Discussion
The above table indicates that all the three hypotheses are rejected.
Normal boys have good and better adjustment level as compared to the
disabled boys. It may be home and academic environment available is different
for normal and disabled students. It may be possible that disabled students are
lacking family acceptance and are not getting equal opportunities and
educational facilities as compared to the normal students. Reason behind the
findings may be that family interaction and relationship between family
members of normal and disabled students may affect the emotional and social
adjustment.
150
Graph − 13
Bar graph of mean scores of adjustment of normal and physically disabled rural boys
151
IV-XIV(.1) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

rural girls on the Emotional dimension of adjustment.
Table – IV (74)
't' Level of
value significance

Girls 2.54 at 0.05 level
2. Disabled 50 2.02 1.25
0.05 = 2.01
The above table indicates the result on the emotional dimension of

adjustment between the normal and disabled rural girls. The mean scores of the
both the categories are respectively 4.56 and 2.02. SD of normal and disabled
girls is 4.23 and 1.25‘t’ value is 2.54 which is more than the table value. It
implies that there exists difference in emotional adjustment between the normal
and disabled rural girls. Emotional adjustment found more in normal rural girls
than disabled girls.
152
Dimension - Social
IV-XIV -(2 ) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

rural girls on Social dimension of adjustment.
Table- IV (75)
't' Level of
value significance

2. Disabled 50 5.74 1.87
0.05 = 2.01

difference between the mean scores obtained by normal and disabled rural
girls on the social adjustment. The mean scores of the both the categories are
respectively 6.86 and 5.74 and SD is 2.37 and 1.87. ‘t’ value is 1.12 which is
less than the table value. It can be said that both the categories have almost
equal level on social dimension of adjustment.
153
Part-3 - Urban Wise (Rural Girls)
IV-XlV-(3) There is no significant difference between normal and disabled

rural girls on Educational dimension of adjustment.
Table- IV (76)

't' Level of
value significance

2.04 at 0.05 level
Girls
2. Disabled 50 3.26 1.36
0.05 = 2.01
The above table reveals the result on the educational dimension of

adjustment between the normal and disabled rural girls. The mean scores of the
both categories are respectively 5.30 and 3.26 and SD is 3.53 and 1.36. ‘t’
value 2.04 reveals significant difference at 0.05 level. It is more than the table
value. It implies that there exists difference in educational adjustment between
the normal and disabled rural girls. Educational dimension of adjustment
found more in normal rural girls.
154
physically disabled rural girls.
Table- IV (77)
Rural Significant
Girls 2.54 Rejected
Social Normal 50 6.86 2.37

Rural Non
Girls 1.12 Accepted
Educational Normal 50 5.30 3.53

Rural Significant
Girls 2.04 Rejected
Discussion
It is clear from the above table that one dimension of the adjustment i.e.
social dimension is almost same. There is difference in two dimensions of
adjustment i.e. emotional and educational. The reason behind the findings may
be that disabled girls have no inferiority complex due to their body image and
they mix up smoothly with others. Social dimension of self-concept is equal in
both the normal and disabled rural girls. The above table shows that the girls
belong to normal category are superior in emotional adjustment the reason may
be that the home adjustment of normal girls is better as compared to physically
disabled girls and educational environment is also better for normal girls as
compared to disabled girls.
155
Graph − 14
Bar graph of mean scores of adjustment of normal and physically disabled rural girls
156

Final - Chapter 4

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final - Chapter 4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

 $"

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

Analysis of data means studying the tabulated material in order to

Interpretation is thus by no means a mechanical process. It is used for

Part 1 - Category wise (Normal, Physically disabled students)

Part 2 - Gender wise (Normal, Physically disabled boys and girls)

4.2 Part I – Category wise (Normal and Physically disabled students)

1. Self-concept of normal and Physically disabled students.

1. Gender wise self-concept of normal students

2. Gender wise self-concept of physically disabled students

4.4 Part II Gender wise – (Adjustment)

3. Gender wise adjustment of normal students.

4. Gender wise adjustment of physically disabled students.

4.5 Part III Locale wise (self -concept )

4. Locale wise self-concept of normal and physically disabled rural girls .

4.6 Locale Wise (Adjustment)

1 Locale wise Adjustment of normal and physically disabled urban boys .

2. Locale wise Adjustment of normal and physically disabled urban girls.

Part I category wise

Hypothesis I – There is no significant difference between self- concept

Hypothesis II - There is no significant difference between adjustment of

Part II Gender wise

Hypothesis III - There is no significant difference between self-

Hypothesis IV - There is no significant difference between self- concept

Hypothesis V - There is no significant difference between adjustment of

Hypothesis VI- There is no significant difference between adjustment

Part III Locale wise

Hypothesis VII – There is no significant difference between self-

Hypothesis VIII – There is no significant difference between self-

Hypothesis X – There is no significant difference between self- concept

Hypothesis XI – There is no significant difference between adjustment

Hypothesis XII – There is no significant difference between adjustment

Hypothesis XIII – There is no significant difference between

Hypothesis XIV – There is no significant difference between

Dimensions of self- concept –

Subsidiary hypotheses are formulated with each variables dimension of

IV−I(I) There is no significant difference between normal and

Statistical measures regarding ‘physical’ self- concept.

1. Normal 200 31.94 4.24 Significant

Table value of 't' – 0.01 = 2.60

IV-I (II) There is no significant difference between normal and physically

Table No. 1V (2)

Statistical measures regarding ‘Social’ self-concept.

1. Normal 200 29.19 3.86 Non

Table value of 't' - 0.01 = 2.60

Analysis and Interpretation-

So, the null hypothesis is accepted.

IV-I (III) There is no significant difference between normal and physically

Table No. IV (3)

Statistical measures regarding ‘Temperamental’ self-concept.

1. Normal 200 29.45 4.36 Non

Table value of 't'- 0.01 = 2.60

Analysis and Interpretation:

The above table indicates the results on the Temperamental dimension

Hence, null hypothesis is accepted.

IV-I (IV) There is no significant difference between the dimension of

Table No. IV (4)

Statistical measures regarding ‘Educational’ self-concept.

1. Normal 200 32.78 4.83 Significant

Table value of 't' 0.01 = 2.60

Analysis and Interpretation:

The above table reveals the result on the Educational dimension of

So, the null hypothesis is rejected.

$"