A CIRCUMFLEX MODEL FOR MATERNAL BEHAVIOR
EARL S. SCHAEFER
National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, Maryland
T
HE goal of this research is to develop
an ordered, parsimonious nomological
network for the domain of maternal be-
havior. A theoretical basis for this organiza-
tion of maternal behavior is provided by
Cronbach and Meehl's (1955) analysis of
construct validity and by Guttman's (1954)
circumplex model for the analysis of the inter-
relationships of a set of concepts. Both articles
suggest that if a systematic set of relationships
among concepts can be demonstrated, the
scientific usefulness of a conceptual scheme is
increased. The purpose of this paper is to
demonstrate the generality of a social interac-
tion conceptualization of maternal behavior by
ordering the intcrcorrelation matrices of three
sets of data on maternal behavior. When
ordered both with factor analysis and with
Guttman's circumplex model, similar two-
dimensional organizations of maternal behavior
concepts were found for the three sets of data.
Additional confirmation of the two-dimen-
sional organization was found in Baldwin,
Kalhorn, and Breese's (1945) data on the Fels
Parent Behavior Rating Scales, although
Roff's (1949) factor analysis and Lorr and
Jenkins' (1953) second-order factor analysis
demonstrate that additional dimensions can
also be found in the Fels scales.
DATA AND METHOD
Descriptions of the data ordered in this paper can
be found in published studies by Schaefer, Bell, and
Bayley (in press), Sanford, Adkins, Miller, and Gobi)
(1943), and Baldwin, Kalhorn, and Brcese (1945).
These studies have in common the use of concepts that
describe molar social and emotional interactions. This
level of conceptualization is supported by Symond's
(1939) emphasis upon the quality of the parent-child
relationship and by Orlansky's (1949) conclusion that
the total pattern of a child's experience rather than
specific infant care practices is the important factor in
personality development. The relatively molar and
abstract concepts used have been given behavioral
definitions or have unambiguous interpretations.
The primary statistical model used in the organiza-
tion of these studies was Guttman's radex theory
(1954). Radex theory, which Guttman (1954) calls "a
new approach to factor analysis," includes two com-
ponents, the simplex, which is not pertinent to this
paper, and the circumplex. Guttman (1954) suggests
226
dividing factor analysis into the earlier approach of
common-iactors and his notion of order-lactors, although
he points out many connections between the two kinds
of factor theories. The circumplex order is described as
follows: "It is an order which has no beginning and no
end, namely, a circular order. A set of variables obeying
such a law will be called a circumplex to designate a
'circular order of complexity'." In this article, as in
Guttman's presentation of the model, the law of circu-
lar order or law of neighboring is applied to "the
simplest case of the radex which can be completely
portrayed by a simple, two-dimensional diagram." The
data that radex theory was designed to order are sets of
product-moment correlation coefficients. Guttman de-
veloped the circumplex model to organize mental test
data but has found "some data from the Minnesota
Multiphasic Inventory to form an approximate circum-
plex."
Guttman (1954) points out the need to define a
universe of content before attempting to order data.
The universe of content of this paper is the social and
emotional behavior of a mother toward an individual
child. Therefore, variables that only indirectly relate to
maternal behavior with the individual child were ex-
cluded from the sets of variables to be ordered. Ex-
amples of variables that were excluded are behaviors
toward persons other than the child, such as Coopera-
tiveness with Examiners, Sociability, and Dependency,
and situational stresses such as Financial Stress.
Although Guttman did not attempt to limit the
methods by which a circumplex order can be dis-
covered, he explicitly included inspection of the matrix.
Guttman's (1954) statement of this point, although
made in relation to the simplex, applies equally to the
circumplex if "order" is substituted for "hierarchy."
"I submit that a hierarchy, if it really exists, may often
reveal itself to inspection alone. Not always, to be sure;
we shall see reasons why a hierarchy can sometimes be
obscured to direct inspection. But surely the converse
holds, if inspection reveals a hierarchy, then the
hierarchy exists. . . ."
Another method, not reported by Guttman (1954),
which was developed in this study to search for a cir-
cumplex order was to choose two variables from the
universe of content that had high correlations with
other variables in the matrix and zero or low correla-
tions with one another. By plotting the correlations of
all variables with the two relatively orthogonal variables
one could determine, by inspection, if a circular order
of the variables was revealed. Use of this method re-
sulted in the ordering of both positively and negatively
correlated variables. Guttman had stated that radex
theory could allow for negative correlations although
he did not discuss them further in his original paper.
All circumplex orders reported in this paper were estab-
lished by plotting correlations of variables with two
orthogonal variables and then, by inspection, rearrang-
ing the correlation matrix into circumplex order.
 TABLE 1
CIRCUMFLEX ORDERED CORRELATION MATRIX, UNROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS, AND RESIDUALS FOR ZERO TO THREE-YEAR MATERNAL RATINGS JUDGED
TO BELONG TO UNIVERSE
(N = 56)
Unrotated
Factor
Miternal Behaviors Loadings CircuBplex Ordered Matrix and Residuals
I II 1 2 3 1* 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Ik 15 16 17 18
1. Autonomy -1*7 67 00 -06 07 -oi* -01 -06 05 12 -01 11 03 -17 01 00 02 oi* -03 >
2. Ignoring -37 -08 36 -03 08 -05 -08 -09 06 01 -01 -1C -01 02 oi* -01 -02 -02 -01* n
3. Punltiveness -76 -1*9 •03 67 00 00 00 oi* 00 -02 -06 -06 01 01 -05 oi* 02 05 05 5
n
1*. Perceives Child as Burden -7k -1*9 09 76 3o -12 -03 -10 07 07 00 07 02 -07 01 -09 00 01+ -06 d
5. Strictness -66 -50 •07 56 75 62 oi* 07 -07 -05 01 09 00 05 -03 -02 -02 -06 02
6. Use of Fear to Control -67 -57 •08 55 79 75 76 13 -06 00 05 01 -07 -03 oi* 00 oi* 02 Oh £2
7. Punishment -61 -53 •13 1*8 76 61 73 81* 01 -12 07 -02 -06 03 -06 12 06 Ok 10 a
X
8. Irritability -57 -67 •13 61 76 82 61* 70 72 09 03 -06 01 -03 02 oi* oi* 01 01
9- Anxiety 21 -69 •1*1* -11 16
08
25 15 25 12 1*3 00 -oi* 09 -09 06 05 03 00 -03 §
O
10. Intrusiveness 29 -73 •61* -20 15 18 23 28 35 56 12 -05 -02 05 -03 02 02 02 o
11. Concern about Health 31* -53 •1*1 -36 -06 08 13 08 05 11 1*0 61 12 -13 -03 -13 -02 oi* -03 H
tr*
12. Achievement Demand 53 -50 •56 -1*3 -li* -12 -10 -15 -12 05 51* 1*6 56 -10 -09 03 -06 05 03
13. Excessive Contact 63 -51 •81 -1*9 -22 -29 -11 -16 -08 -10 39 53 35 1*8 01 02 00 -02 02 O
Ik. Fostering Dependency 72 -1*3 •62 -56 -39 -31 -35 -20 -27 -10 51 57 1*1* 51 68 -02 oi* -02 -01 W
15- Emotional Involvement 76 -23 •51 -65 -1*3 -51* -1*1 -38 -22 -2l* 37 31 25 55 62 63 01* 02 03 g
16. Expression of Affection 3° 15 •30 -So -73 -73 -68 -65 -56 -57 12 17 20 33 US 62 69 03 02 f.
17-
18.
Etiualitarianism
Positive Evaluation
82
76
43
1*1*
•06 -76
10 -71*
-78
-75
-78 -81 -78 -69 -75 -13 -05 09
-81* -70 -72 -59 -71 -17 -08 -05
26
21
23
28
39 51* 82
32
01
H
S
35 51 77
Correlations of Other Variables with Circumplex Order t-1
H
H
Rejection of Homemaking 21 67 57 71* 33 1*6 37 61 22 -03 -15 -12 -29 -28 -28 -1*6 -52 -50
Negative Emotional States •12 1*9 1*3 1*9 1*1 1*3 30 1*8 12 10 -06 -12 10 oi* -23 -1*5 -55 -5k >
Msod Swings •27 56 57 59 50 67 57 71* 50 1*2 20 23 05 09 -35 -50 -53
-01 Q
Financial Stress -02 31 23 31 32 20 30 36 08 09 00 -19 05 -20 -25 -21* -35 -26
Poor Physical Health -ll* 23 33 1*2 22 21* 31 36 oi* 20 -01 -11 -07 -13 -17 -21 -23 -23
DoDinance -i*l* -16 08 17 05 19 11 50 72 57 1*8 72 27 1*7 38 ll* -02 01
Self-Abasenent -18 -ll* -05 ll* 00 Ok 02 25 1*0 1*5 1*2 17 22 29 05 15 Ok -oi*
Dependency -08 18 -01 29 -02 03 02 35 27 23 30 21 00 17 01 06 -06 -12
Over-Conscientiousness -53 -1*8 -16 -12 -02 -13 -06 -02 1*0 1*7 6U 62 55 1*2 39 35 23 12
Sociability •17 -32 -29 -22 -21 -27 -19 -09 17 26 33 1*5 17 25 39 !*6 38 36
Cooperativeness 22 -63 -62 -61* -1*7 -55 -51* -69 -20 -23 09 05 11 13 31* 56 65 60
Estimated Intelligence 22 -55 -28 -1*1 -19 -36 -23 -38 -13 -26 oi* 23 -01 -18 31 2l* 37 37
Narcissism 00 07 -01 02 02 -02 01 ll* 27 20 .16. 35 -Ik 03 07 00 01 05 to
228 EARL S. SCHAEFER

of the three judges were retained. In order to

Autonomy
explore for a circumplex order, the correlations
60-}- of each variable with Equalitarianism and
• Ignoring
40 .| Intrusiveness were plotted. The variables ap-
Perceives Child as Puiitlveness <
peared to fall into a circular order. The corre-
Burden -60 -40 -20 20 40 60 80 100 lation matrix was rearranged by inspection
• Positive Evaluation
Equfllrtorianism-*
o( Chlld into the ordered matrix reported in Table 1.
Since inspection revealed, within error limits,

\
• Expression of Affection
Concern About Health, a well-ordered matrix, it was concluded that
Anxiety—*-.
• Emotional Involvement
11
the variables included in this universe form a
Intrusive ness *"*- -™isiue
U\ ^Excess*
•Fostering Dependency
Contact
quasi-circumplex as defined by Guttman
Achievement Demand (1954). To verify this ordering with a well-
FIG. 1. A CIRCUMFLEX OT MATERNAL known method, the matrix was factor-analyzed
BEHAVIOR RATINGS with Thurstone's (1947) complete centroid
Rotated factor loadings based on data from observations method. The factor loadings and the second
of maternal behavior between the child's age factor residuals are reported in Table 1. The
of zero to three years
second factor residuals are small and do not
To verify the orderings so obtained with a more justify extraction of a third factor. Before
familiar method, the correlation matrices were factor plotting the factor loadings in Fig. 1, the fac-
analyzed using Thurstone's (1947) complete ccntroid tors were orthogonally rotated clockwise 35° 3'.
method. In the judgment of the author, the residuals
after extraction of two factors do not justify extraction Plots of the factor loadings give a circular
of a third factor since the error variance, due to the order that is identical to that derived by inspec-
small size of the samples, is relatively large. The com- tion from the correlation matrix.
munalities of practically all variables are relatively The findings could be interpreted in terms
high, and the circular order obtained by plotting the
loadings of the variables on the two factors is practically
of two bipolar dimensions which could be
identical to the circular order of variables obtained by labeled Autonomy vs. Control and Love vs.
inspection of the correlation matrix. Although plotting Hostility. The first dimension would be repre-
the unrotatecl factor loadings revealed the circumplex sented by Autonomy at one pole and Anxiety
order, orthogonal rotations of two sets of data were of the Mother, Intrusiveness, Concern about
made to give the plotted figures a common orientation.
These rotations made it possible to interpret the results Health, Achievement Demand, Excessive Con-
in terms of both cowwzow-factors and order-factors. tact, Fostering Dependency, and Emotional
Involvement at the other pole. One pole of this
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION dimension resembles the concept of maternal
The first circumplex organization of mater- overprotcction (Levy, 1943). The positive pole
nal behavior was developed from ratings by of the second dimension would be Positive
Schaefer et al. (in press) of data gathered at Evaluation of the Child, Equalitarianism, and
the University of California Institute of Child Expression of Affection, and the negative pole
Welfare (Jones & Bayley, 1941). Fifty-six would be Ignoring, Punitiveness, Perceives the
mothers were rated on 32 behavior variables Child as a Burden, Strictness, Use of Fear to
from sets of notes that had been made by an Control, Punishment, and Irritability. The
observer during 10 to 20 testing sessions, with dimension of acceptance vs. rejection is similar
each mother and child between the child's age to this dimension (Symonds, 1939) although
of one month to three years. Reliabilities of Love vs. Hostility is suggested to represent it
the combined scores of three judges ranged here. However, consideration only of the
from .67 to .89, with a median of .82. Pearson comwow-f actors would not reveal the sequential
product-moment correlations were computed ordering within dimensions that is shown by
among the 32 variables. Three judges were Fig. 1.
asked to select the rating scales that were The correlations with the circumplex or-
directly related to the social and emotional dered variables of the variables that were
behavior of the mother with an individual excluded as not clearly relating to the universe
child. High agreement between judges was of content are also reported in Table 1. Many
found. The 18 scales selected by at least two of these variables are not highly related to the
 TABLE 2
CIRCUMFLEX ORDERED CORRELATION MATRIX, UNROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS, AND RESIDUALS FOR NINE- TO FOURTEEN-YEAR
INTERVIEW RATINGS
(N = 34)
Unrotated
Scale Factor
Ho. Maternal Behaviors Loadings Circtmrplex Ordered Correlation Matrix and Residuals
Y~~
I II 1 15 7 12 18 21 28 8 9 20 13 24 17 5 23 10 27 19 n
1 Ignoring •80 44 04 01 05 01 -01 -02 02 06 -03 00 06 03 -02 02 04 00 04 S
o
15 Punitiveness •90 11 81 10 03 -02 -06 01 -03 06 06 04 00 n 01 03 04 -02 03 cj
7 Irritability •87 07 74 89 10 04 -04 00 -15 05 -05 19 03 17-09 04 06 02 09
12 Perceives Child as Burden •42 -03 38 41 46 07 04 03 01 00 -17 04 12 -02 04 -04 05 05 23 sw
13 Use of Fear to Control •85 -05 67 74 78 43 11 09 -11 -02 -n -02 04 -01 02 -05 -02 03 09 X
21 Strictness •62 -17 42 48 49 30 65 13 -08 00 -24 -17 20 00 05 -14 -ll 02 07
28 Wish to Control Child •82 -46 44 70 68 38 81 72 -08 -03 -05 -08 02 -03 00 -04 -03 -01 01 g
8 Social Isolation of Child •67 -38 39 53 4o 30 48 40 64 -06 14 -15 00 -13 o4 -08 01 -04 -16 o
9 Intrusiveness •66 -56 59 58 30 57 51 77 59 01 04 05 -05 03 05 05 01 -02 H
20 Excessive Contact •4l -64 02 36 27 02 27 12 58 65 64 11 -20 07 01 10 03 -02 -18 t-<
13 Fostering Dependency •16 -60 -13 11 29 13 15 03 33 19 48 55 -08 28 -20 15 01 03 10 NJ
24 Achievement Demand 06 -09 11 29 13 27 O
19 -64 -37 -24 -17 19 15 13 -03 -07 -02 02 05
17 Emotional Involvement 19 -75 -45 -14 -04 -08 -13 -08 15 02 22 47 70 65 -05 09 03 -02 -02
5 Positive Evaluation of Child 65 -55 -78 -63 -69 -21 -50 -26 -28 -19 -09 09 03 44 48 -01 00 -05 -02 §
23 Expression of Affection 80 -46 -82 -74 -69 -37 -71 -56 -49 -45 -22 06 30 37 58 76 02 00 04 >
10 Equalitarianism 88 -29 -79 -78 -72 -31 -76 -60 -62 -47 -37 -15 04 33 42 73 85 02 02 H
27 Positive Mather-Child Relationship 92 -22 -84 -87 -80 -33 -74 -51 -66 -58 -48 -26 01 33 31 67 84 89 13 §
19 Autonomy 45 62 -05 -30 -26 02 -32 -31 -64 -70 -67 -76 -34 27 -40 -07 12 24 40 >
f
Correlations of Other Variables with Circumplex Order w
S
77 73 78 28 59 24 4o 25 31 07 06 -32 -19
<j>
6 Rejection of Hbmemaking Role -67 -66 -57 -72 -11
lit Anxiety of Mother 44 70 67 33 43 37 65 43 64 42 34 -09 21 -26 -39 -52 -65 -51
26 Emotional Withdrawal of Mather 38 63 56 18 55 43 64 49 51 52 20 -11 20 -18 -43 -48 -58 -52 o
3 Dependency of Mother 19 36 42 43 14 13 22 16 30 11 42 n 27 -13 -11 -19 -31 -08
it Sociability of Mother -50 -66 -51 -18 -52 -25 -66 -58 -46 -58 -02 25 10 34 50 59 67 49
2 Cooperativeness -76 -88 -So -43 -71 -47 -75 -57 -67 -46 -14 19 08 48 65 70 83 46
11 Marital Happiness -55 -73 -73 -17 -52 -29 -50 -38 -38 -44 -23 13 -12 47 54 53 62 30
22 Estimated Intelligence of Mother -33 -31 -09 -29 -08 -47 -40 -29 -47 -12 43 20 31 33 46 56 44
16 Positive Emotional State of Mother -31 -36 -38 -30 -36 -14 -37 -22 -35 -13 -01 31 20 22 36 36 45 22
25 Communicativeness of Mother -40 -58 -37 -36 -42 -34 -58 -56 -50 -44 05 17 08 09 39 39 53 51
230 EARL S. SCHAEFER
circumplex set, while the correlations of others
with the circumplex set are relatively high. It
seems probable that if variables that do not
belong to a universe are included in a matrix
they may obscure the circumplex order that
exists.
The circumplex organization of maternal be-
havior was confirmed from a second set of data
reported by Schaefcr et al. (in press). The data
were ratings made from written notes on either
one or two home interviews with 34 mothers
between the child's age of 9 to 14 years. The
subjects were again from the Berkeley Growth
Study (Jones & Bayley, 1941). The concepts
were revised from the first set of ratings to be
appropriate for the age level of the children
and for the type of data available. Median
reliability after combining the ratings of three
judges was .85. The 18 variables selected by at
least two of the three judges as belonging to
the universe arc reported in circumplex order
in Table 2. The order was established by
plotting the correlations of all variables with
two orthogonal variables and then rearrang-
ing the correlation matrix by inspection with
the plotted order as a preliminary guide. The
fact that the ordering of this matrix is not as
clear as the first may be due to the fact that
the interview data may not be as valid as
observation data. Again two factors were ex-
tracted from this matrix, and the second factor
residuals were computed. Since the small size
of the sample suggests that much of the re-
maining variance may be error variance, a
third factor was not extracted. The communali-
ties of most variables are high. The factors
were rotated counterclockwise orthogonally
35° 58' to an orientation similar to that of the
first set of data and are plotted in Fig. 2.
The orthogonal rotation did not result in
simple structure nor is it obvious that simple
structure in terms of common-factors exists for
this matrix. There is, however, a relatively
clear ordering of variables within a two-
dimensional space. The rotated reference axes
could again be interpreted as Autonomy vs.
Control as defined by Autonomy and the op-
posed variables of Strictness, Social Isolation
of the Child, Wish to Control the Child, In-
trusiveness, Excessive Contact, and Fostering
Dependency. The horizontal axis might be
labeled Love vs. Hostility as represented by
100-
60 i
Autonomy
60-
40
• Positive Mother- Child
20-
Equa!«tarioni3m» Relationship
Expression of Affection
-100 -SO -60 -40 -20 20 40 60 80 * 100
Ignoring *
Positive Evaluation of Child
"20 '
Perceives Child as Burde^
Puniliveness^ 1rri,ob||i,y -10 • • Achievement Demand
• Emotional Involvement
U» of Ftor to Control • S,r[^fl9s _6Q
Social Isolation*
* Fostering Dependency
Wlih to Control .
• Excessive Contact
.-80 •
Intrusivenesff
FIG. 2. A CIRCUMPLEX OF MATERNAL
BEHAVIOR RATINGS
Rotated factor loadings based on data from interviews
with mothers between the child's age
of nine to fourteen years
Positive Mother-Child Relationship, Equali-
tarianism, Expression of Affection, Positive
Evaluation of the Child, and Emotional In-
volvement as opposed to Ignoring, Punitive-
ness, Irritability, and Use of Fear to Control.
However, a summary of these data in terms of
cowMMow-factors seems to the author a less
adequate presentation than an organization of
the variables in circumplex order, as reported
in Fig. 2.
The organization of the interview data on
maternal behavior is similar to the organiza-
tion of the behavior observations. Despite some
changes in the intercorrelation of variables, the
ordering is quite similar with a sequence of
high autonomy, an equalitarian positive rela-
tionship, high positive involvement, possessive-
ness, hostile control, hostile irritability, and
hostile ignoring. Although some sectors of the
circular space are less well represented than
others, by projecting polar opposites of the
included variables the entire two dimensional
space would be adequately represented.
The ratings by Sanford et al. (1943) of
parental press variables were also organized
with the circumplex model. The intcrcorrcla-
tions of the variables that were judged to be
directly related to the universe are ordered in
Table 3. The unrotated factor loadings and
second-factor residuals using Thurstone's
(1947) centroid method are also reported in
Fig. 3 and Table 3. Although the sampling of
the universe is less extensive, the ordering ob-
tained can be interpreted as similar to that of
the other studies. The area of low Dominance
 A CIRCUMFLEX MODEL FOR MATERNAL BEHAVIOR 231

can be interpreted as autonomy, Deference and
Affiliation as a loving positive relationship,
Nurturance as a more involved but positive
relationship, Dominance and Retention as con-
trol, Aggression as hostility, and Rejection
and Capricious Discipline as hostile rejection.
Presses not included in this universe tend to
have lower correlations except for Lack
(Family Support) that is highly related to Ag-
gression and Rejection. Some variables of
parental behavior are not highly related to the
universe as defined. In denning the universe of
content as the social and emotional behavior
of the mother with the individual child, many
variables that are also thought to be relevant
to the development of the child have been
omitted from these analyses. Although these
other dimensions should also be studied in-
tensively, they should not be permitted to
obscure the circumplex order that exists within
the specified universe.
Published research on the Fels Parent Be-
havior Rating Scales allows a comparison of
different ways of organizing the same set of
data. Baldwin et al. (1945) reported the
intercorrelations of the scales and also re-
ported an organization of 19 of the variables
into three major clusters: Democracy in the
home, Acceptance of the child, and Indulgence.
They also reported "a number of other syn-
dromes which seem of minor importance."
Roff's (1949) factor analysis of the Fels data
resulted in seven factors, thus confirming that
the total set of data is factorially complex.
Lorr and Jenkins (1953) performed a second-
order factor analysis using Roff's matrix of
correlations of the primary factors and re-
ported three second-order factors that were
labeled dependency-encouraging, democracy
of child training, and organization and effec-
tiveness of control in the home. Roff's (1949)
first two unrotated factors included most of
the common factor variance of the scales in-
cluded in Baldwin et al.'s (1945) three major
clusters and also gave a sequential ordering of
variables that appeared similar to the circum-
plex orders of maternal behavior found in
previous studies. An attempt was therefore
made to organize the set of variables included
in Baldwin et al.'s (1945) three major clusters
in circumplex order. The quasi-circumplex that
emerged is reported in Table 4. The unrotated
first-order factor loadings reported by Roff
(1949) and the clusters to which the scales
were assigned by Baldwin et al. (1945) are
reported in circumplex order in Table 5. We
see a sequence from the cluster of Indulgence
to Acceptance to Democracy. There is no
sharp demarcation between these clusters.
Most of the variance of the scales is included
in the first two factors, and the loadings of the
scales on subsequent factors are low. Effective-

TABLE 3
CIRCUMFLEX ORDERED CORRELATION MATRIX, UNROTATED FACTOR LOADINGS, AND RESIDUALS OF PARENTAL
PRESS VARIABLES FROM SANFORD ET AL. (1943)

Unrotated Factor Circumplex Ordered Correlation Matrix and Residuals

Loadings
Maternal Behavior
I II 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Deference 79 10 01 02 OS 05 03 13 -12
2. Affiliation 96 -IS 75 -04 -13 -03 07 -05 02
3. Nurturance 75 -SO 56 76 07 -03 -12 02 00
4. Retention -26 -65 -22 -28 19 02 -02 10 -IS
5. Dominance -46 -63 -37 -37 -05 55 06 08 -07
6. Aggression -96 -IS -75 -83 -76 33 59 -08 16
7. Rejection -78 38 -45 -86 -75 OS 20 61 -11
8. Capricious Discipline -66 54 -59 -69 -77 -33 -11 71 61
Correlations of Other Variables with Circumplex Order

Understanding 00 30 30 05 -12 -41 -26 -33

Exposition 12 14 46 48 56 -22 -12 -24
Excitance 06 37 10 -30 -24 -22 -05 37
Sentience 00 23 11 -10 10 -30 -30 -22
Lack (Family Support) -45 -59 -75 00 22 71 59 82
232
100-
80- •
Copriciousa 60--
Discipline
» Rejection
Deference
-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 20 so * 100
I 1—I—I—1_ —t— -H 1 1
« Aggression
-40-.
i Nurluronce
Domlnooce *
Retention7
-100
FIG. 3. A CIRCUMFLEX OK PARENTAL PRESS RATINGS
Unrotatcd factor loadings based on data from Sanford,
Adkins, Miller, and Cobb (1943)
ness of Policy and Low Disciplinary Friction
have appreciable loadings on the third factor
which may describe the success of parental
policy with the child.
The three methods of organizing the inter-
correlations of this set of data—the circumplex
ordering, the cluster method of Baldwin et al.
(1945), and Kofi's (1949) unrelated first-
order factor analysis—give related organiza-
tions. These organizations are also related to
Roff's (1949) rotated factor loadings and to
Lorr and Jenkins' (1953) second-order factor
loadings that will not be discussed here. These
different ways of organizing the data illustrate
the well-known fact that there are many differ-
ent ways to organize the same set of data. The
advantage of the circumplex order over the
previous organizations is that it directs atten-
tion to the sequential order of variables and
docs not divide the matrix into discrete clusters
or factors.
A generalization of this circumplex model
can be used to order other concepts that have
been used to describe maternal behavior. A
number of these concepts are hypothetically
ordered in Fig. 4. Freedom is placed on the
Autonomy vs. Control dimension with its polar
opposite, possessiveness. Democratic behavior
and cooperative behavior arc placed in the
quadrant which indicates both loving accept-
ance and autonomy. Acceptance and its polar
opposite, rejection, are placed on the Love vs.
Hostility dimension. Excessive love, overindul-
EARL S. SCHAEFER
AUTONOMY
> FREEDOM
•
INDIFFERENT
•
NEGLECTING
-100 -BO -60 -to -20 20 40 40 80
i Affiliation
-20
-40 OVER INDULGENT •
-63
OVER PROTECTIVE
FIG. 4. A HYPOTHETICAL CIRCUMFLEX OF MATERNAL
BEHAVIOR CONCEPTS
gence, protective indulgence, and overprotec-
tiveness are placed in a quadrant that indicates
both love for the child and an inability to treat
the child as a differentiated individual who
has his own activities and interests apart from
the parent. The variables of authoritarian,
dictatorial treatment and demanding, antag-
onistic behavior are placed in the quadrant
that indicates both a hostile relationship to the
child and control; while neglect, indifference,
and detachment are placed in the quadrant
that indicates varying combinations of hostil-
ity and autonomy for the child. This organiza-
tion seems to satisfy both a law of neighboring
and a law of polar opposites.
This paper has demonstrated a two-dimen-
sional organization of maternal behavior con-
cepts which describe molar social and emo-
tional interactions between mother and child.
A contrasting approach to the study of parental
behavior is that of Sears, Whiting, Nowlis, and
Sears (1953), Sears, Maccoby, and Levin
(1957), and Whiting and Child (1953), among
others, who analyze more molecular variables
that relate to the socialization of specific sys-
tems of behavior such as oral, anal, sexual, etc.
The results of these studies tend to show less
organization among variables. Whiting and
Child (1953) report practically no relationship
between severity of socialization for different
systems of behavior in their cross-cultural
study. Sears et al. (1953, 1957) also report low
 A CIRCUMFLEX MODEL FOR MATERNAL BEHAVIOR 233

TABLE 4
CIRCUMFLEX ORDERED CORRELATION MATRIX or TI
ET i
Scale
Kumber 2.11 Jf.l 1.91 U.2 7.1 2.12 7.2
2.11
l*.l 63
l.SO. 61 67
U.2 55 7U 71
7-1 50 53 6k 61*
2.12 1*7 Jj.y 63 62
1*7
7.2 1*8 5^t- 69 67 55 51
8.'* 1*2 UY 60 52 1*6 1*6 88
8.3 ia 53 60 50 1*3 53 79 86
5-2 35 ll^ 51 53 1& 1*9 61* 66 70
20 oli 23 28 33 31* 52 50 58 76
3.15
3.11* 18 22 27 32 39 39 52 76 92
6.1 20 18 29 31* 1*1 37 51 1*1* 67 79 87
3.22 15 18 23 31 37 38 51 53 71 88 88 78

8.1 11 18 20 30 16 27 51 61 60 69 71 75 70
3.16 08 08 26 36 31 29 1*3 35 36 62 70 7^ 60 61* 60

3.11 -05 ol* 08 03 00 10 33 U9 58 65 61* 56 63 56 1*2

Variables Reportj

3.17 2U 30 1*5 1*6 30 33 69 70 60 61 1*9 1*1* 37 1*3 W* 5^

1
3.18 21 23 39 1*5 33 23 66 66 50 5* 52 1*9 1*1 1*9 36 57 37

correlations between variables in their studies.
Sears et al. (1957) reported a factor analysis of
parent behaviors derived from interview data
which gave seven factors of parent behaviors,
yet the communality of the variables was low.
It is interesting to note that these investigators
(Sears et al, 1957) report that the quality of
maternal warmth is the most pervasive quality
of maternal behavior and that it has the most
pervasive effects upon the child. Despite the
different conceptual schemes, their quality of
maternal warmth appears similar to the dimen-
sion of Love vs. Hostility of this study. Child
(1954) states, "It is probable that the com-
bined study of general parental characteristics
and specific features of socialization as joint
antecedent variables will be one of the impor-
tant directions taken by future research." The
tentative integration of molar concepts of
parental behavior into an ordered conceptual
scheme, presented here, should facilitate such
research.
The conceptual model that has been pre-
sented may also assist in the interpretation of
existing maternal behavior research by sug-
gesting the essential equivalence of diverse
conceptual schemes or may help in the selec-
tion of variables to be included in future re-
search on maternal behavior. It may challenge
investigators to explore new dimensions of
234 EARL S. SCHAEFER

TABLE S
's (1949) UNROIATED FACTOR LOADINGS POR THE FELS PARENT BEHAVIOR RATING SCALES WITH CLUSTER
MEMBERSHIP OF BALDWIN ET AL. (1945)
Scale Unrotated Factor Loadings
Number Scale Name I II III IV V VI VII Cluster Membership
2.11 Duration of Contact 68 -20 -06 -07 -06 -15 25 Indulgence
k.l General Babying 77 -20 -16 -10 -10 02 06 Indulgence
1.91 Child-Centeredne ss 8k -16 -01 15 10 00 02 Indulgence, Acceptance
k.2 General Protect!veness 80 -06 05 16 -18 03 27 Indulgence
7-1 Solicitouaness 72 -01 -17 12 -05 -38 -09 Indulgence
2.12 Intensity of Contact 69 Ok -2k 22 10 -09 -39 Indulgence
7.2 Acceptance 86 17 23 -05 -03 13 01 Indulgence, Acceptance
8.k Rapport 80 18 33 -19 07 19 -02 Acceptance
8.3 Affectionatenesa 79 25 Ok -2k 15 25 -12 Acceptance
5.2 Approval 69 53 03 00 15 -06 15 Acceptance, Democracy
3.15 Democracy k6 81 00 -12 05 -11 -10 Democracy
3.14 Justification of Policy k7 83 -07 02 -01 -10 -1k Democracy
6.1 Readiness of Explanation k5 78 -Ik 11 -11 -02 03 Democracy
3.22 Non-Coerciveness k5 79 -05 -Ok 09 -17 01 Democracy
8.1 Understanding kl 68 -05 -03 -18 35 25 Democracy
3.16 Clarity of Policy 36 68 2k 35 -16 -Ik 09 Democracy
3.H IJon-Restrictiveness 21 67 08 -29 31 19 -16 Democracy
Variable Reporting Success of Policy

3.17 Effectiveness of Policy 59 27 53 Ik 20 15 -10 Acceptance

3.18 Low Disciplinary Friction 53 33 63 -02 -03 -10 -10 Acceptance

maternal behavior rather than to reinvestigate
known dimensions with new names.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
By organizing several empirical studies of
maternal behavior using Guttman's (1954) cir-
cumplex model, it was demonstrated that
many of the existing concepts of maternal
behavior can be ordered within a two-dimen-
sional space. Concepts that do not describe
molar social and emotional interactions of
mother and child often do not show a clear
circumplex ordering. The following interpreta-
tions of the findings were made:
1. Two major dimensions of maternal be-
havior can be isolated in all studies; these can
be labeled Love vs. Hostility and Autonomy vs.
Control,
2. A circumplex organization of this universe
shows a clearer nomological network than an
organization in terms of discrete dimensions.
3. A theoretical generalization of the circum-
plex of maternal behavior is presented. It pro-
vides an ordered, parsimonious nomological
network or model for much of the variance of
a mother's social and emotional behavior
toward an individual child.
 A CIRCUMFLEX MODEL FOR MATERNAL BEHAVIOR
REFERENCES
BALDWIN, A. L., KALHORN, JOAN, & BREESE, FAY
HUFFMAN. Patterns of parent behavior. Psychol.
Monogr., 1945, 58, No. 3 (Whole No. 268).
CHILD, I. L. Socialization. In G. Lindzey (Ed.), Hand-
book of social psychology. Vol. II. Cambridge, Mass.:
Addison-Wesley, 1954.
CRONBACH, L. J., & MEEHL, P. E. Construct validity in
psychological tests. Psychol. Butt., 1955, 52, 281-
302.
GUTTMAN, L. A new approach to factor analysis: The
Radex. In P. F. Lazarfeld (Ed.), Mathematical
thinking in the social sciences. Glencoe, 111.: Free
Press, 1954.
JONES, H. E., & BAYLEY, NANCY. The Berkeley growth
study. Child Develpm., 1941, 12, 167-173.
LEVY, D. M. Maternal overprotection. New York:
Columbia Univer. Press, 1943.
LORR, M., & JENKINS, R. L. Three factors in parent be-
havior. /. consult. Psychol., 1953, 17, 306-308.
ORLANSKY, H. Infant care and personality. Psychol.
Bull., 1949, 46, 1-48.
ROFF, M. A factorial study of the Pels Parent Behavior
Scales. Child Develpm., 1949, 20, 29-45.
235
SANI'ORD,R.N., ADKTNS, MARGARET M., MILLER, R. B.,
& COBB, ELIZABETH. Physique, personality, and
scholarship. Monogr. Soc. Res. Child Develpm.,
1943, 8, No. 1.
SCIIAEKER, E. S., BELL, R. Q., & BAYLEY, NANCY.
Development of a maternal behavior research
instrument. /. genet. Psychol., in press.
SEARS, R. R., MACCOBY, E., & LEVIN, H. Patterns of
child rearing. Evanston, 111.: Row, Peterson,
1957.
SEARS, R. R., WHITING, J. W. M., NOWLIS, V., &
SEARS, PAULINE S. Some child rearing antecedents
of aggression and dependency in young children,
Genet, psychol. Monogr., 1953, 47, 134-234.
SYMONDS, P. M. The psychology of parent-child relation-
ships. New York: Appleton-Century, 1939.
THURSTONE, L. L. Multiple-factor analysis. Chicago:
Univer. Chicago Press, 1947.
WHITING, J. W. M., & CHILD, I. L. Child training and
personality: A cross-cultural study. New Haven:
Yale Univer. Press, 1953.
Received July 14,1958.