The Irritability - Deviancy Test

The Irritability-Deviancy Test is designed to provide some measure of the kinds of deviant and, presumably, irritating behavior the public will stand. One tends to assume that there is not much agreement between young people on the beach and adults on the beach as to what is tolerable behavior. In making decisions, for example, about what kinds of activity will or will not be permitted on the Beach, the police and political powers decide that such and such a particular behavior will not be tolerated because it is annoying to the public who are the "paying customers." Research has the responsibility to find out whether or not these are valid assumptions, to examine analytically the various types of behavior presumed to be offensive and see if they are really offensive. Moreover, one has, if he is oriented toward the adult community, the tendency to believe that the adolescent is a particularly lawless breed that has no concept of any type of behavior as being wrong, that "anything goes." Again, research is called upon to test whether or not this hypothesis is a correct one.

The Irritability-Deviancy Test is a relatively simple device consisting of some thirty items that list different sorts of behavior that are ordinarily observed on the Beach. When one first sees this list of behavior items, there is a tendency to dismiss them as being somewhat irrelevant. Yet there was no one of the items that someone during the course of the summer did not find objectionable. The person who is presented with the test is asked to make a judgment as to how he would react to each of the items, regardless of whatever the laws and ordinances might be. The alternatives are: accept, ignore, warn, ask to leave, and arrest.

This instrument gains its credibility not only because it involves concrete behavioral categories, but also because it was administered to a very large group of people. Over the course of the summer, two thousand and thirty-four of these tests were administered on Hampton Beach to the following groups:

*Teenage random consist of a group which was also given a longer interview schedule.

Let us examine the following table which presents a combined average of the percentage under each category across the summer. By this way, we can gain an insight into the comparisons between the groups of adults, teenage males and teenage females. We can see where there are similarities and differences between the various groups in terms of their tolerance of what might possibly be considered irritating or deviant behavior. In order to insure that there would be a sufficient breadth in considering what might be objectionable behavior, the category "warn" was included in the Rejection Score. When the categories "warn," "ask to leave," and "arrest," over-balance the "accept" and "ignore" categories, we have varying degrees of rejection. Those varying degrees are explained at the bottom of the table.

The striking thing about the results from the Irritability-Deviancy Test is the degree of agreement between adults and teenagers. One would have expected a far greater kind of disagreement than is actually the case. If there is conflict between the generations, it does not show itself in these superficial traits which are measured by the Irritability-Deviancy Test. On the other hand, there are points at which there are differences between the adult and adolescent response. These differences will be explored. In terms of the much-discussed manner of teenage dress and so-called "beat" style of coiffure, there is not much argument coming forth from the majority of adults. It would seem apparent that the adult tourist on Hampton Beach is not appalled by the sight of teenagers on the Beach. Nor is the adult tourist particularly concerned about whether or not the teenager expresses himself through dancing or singing, or guitar-playing. It would seem that these forms of diversion would be most acceptable to the average tourist on the beach. These latter forms of behavior are, for some reason, particularly suspect in this resort community. While there are those who feel they have legitimate reasons for opposing such forms of recreation as singing and guitar-playing, apparently such recreation does not pose the threat of a tension-producing situation as far as adults are concerned. Moreover, relatively innocent forms of sexual encounter are tolerated both by the adults and adolescents on Hampton Beach. Such items as "girls in bikinis," "holding hands," boy-and girl-watching seem all quite acceptable on the Beach. In fact, even the more obvious kinds of boy-girl relationships (i.e., "kissing in public") draws low rejection response from the adult community.

Perhaps it is even more interesting to note the fact that there is also some considerable agreement between adults and adolescents in terms of what they reject. "Drinking beer on the beach" has become for the entire community something which warrants rejection. Even "carrying beer in a basket" and having a "beer can in your hand" evoke a response of rejection. Considering the vaunted place of beer in the adolescent sub-culture, this is short of amazing that we would get such clear-cut responses in such a large sample. While not quite so pronounced, these behavioral responses having to do with automobiles also evoke a response of rejection across the entire community. Finally, it would seem that "having a fire on the beach" is seen by all members as being objectionable. (This item, of course, refers to unsupervised bonfires.) And, most everyone senses the dangers in "tossing a girl in a blanket."

It is when we get to various types of physical activity such as wrestling, sleeping on the beach and hanging around in groups that we encounter some very real differences of opinion. Sleeping on the beach and wrestling on the beach seem to rank quite high on the adult samples of objectionable behavior. However, they are not quite so objectionable to the young people.

It is when we come to activities which are very obvious, tinged with varying degrees of physical involvement and potentially, at any rate, disturbing to an adult's course of action, that we have some very real differences of opinion. Most everything which is otherwise acceptable to adults involves behavior which can be done out of the way of adult interests. However, when swearing, playing ball, hanging around in groups is mentioned, the adults tend to reject these forms of activity while the adolescents are most accepting of it. These activities, then, would seem to constitute some very real points of conflict between the adult and adolescent community as long as all other adolescent attitudes hold to their present course.

Taking a global view of the summer-long experience with the Irritability-Deviancy Test, we can conclude the following:

1. There is a remarkable agreement between adults and adolescents as to what is and is not objectionable behavior. This would seem to belie the assertion made by so many of the community's decision-makers that certain forms of recreational activities would unduly irritate the adult tourists on the Beach. We can see that this concept of what is and is not tolerable behavior needs to be thoroughly re-examined. On the other hand, taking into consideration the other variables of the Irritability-Deviancy Test, we must say that it would be a superficial conclusion to assert that indiscriminate planning of recreational activities for adolescents would be tolerated.
2. To the attitude which says that today's adolescent has no concept of what is right and wrong, the Irritability-Deviancy Test offers strong rebuttal. It is obvious from the results of this test that the community's attitudes toward drinking and certain behavior around automobiles have been internalized by the youngsters which frequent the Hampton Beach area. The inference could well be drawn that if these standards have been internalized that there are probably other standards which have likewise been internalized. In other words, the differences between the adults and adolescents in standards of behavior must be seen in the light of the total range of attitude structure.
3. There would seem to be a very definite conflict between adults and adolescents in the matter of gathering in large groups along the boardwalk. We know from the Random Interview data that a very large proportion of the young people come to Hampton Beach for the expressed purpose of "hanging around." There is among the adolescents a very strong drive to be with the members of their peer group in what they hope to be the more relaxed atmosphere of a summer beach. It would seem that there would be the stimulus of a very real difference of opinion, a very real source of conflict between the adults and adolescents right at this point. While the adolescents find this type of activity highly acceptable, the adults tend to be rejecting of such behavior. On the one hand, to discourage completely this type of behavior on the part of the adolescents might well lead to some very real hostility on their part and/or a complete withdrawal of their presence to some other resort community. The adults, on the other hand, if sufficiently irritated by this very obvious kind of behavior, could well begin transferring their irritation to other aspects of teenage behavior. It would seem, therefore, that we have a potential source of trouble in the very presence of unoccupied adolescents who are, perhaps, making it difficult for the adults to carry on their activities by blocking sidewalks, etc.
4. The rather obvious and hopefully not overly simplified conclusion which seems to arise from this analysis of the data suggests that there is no great rift between adolescents and adults and that their desired forms of recreational activities are acceptable to adults. The potential of conflict seems to lie in the direction of actual physical blocking of adults by the adolescents. It would therefore seem that the most advantageous solution to the problem would be to provide the kinds of recreation which the entire tourist community would accept - singing, guitar-playing, and dancing on the beach. However, it must be remembered that the adults find "horseplay" of varying types quite objectionable. What is suggested then is a kind of programmed way in which adolescents would be permitted to engage in the above-mentioned activities in restricted areas along the main part of the beach. It is well within the data provided by this instrument to suggest that this type of activity would become acceptable to the majority of adults. It would have to be recognized by all responsible persons planning such activity, or who are in any way responsibly involved in community decision-making processes, that there would always be some opposition to any kind of activity on the beach. For example, we had young men who thought people ought to be warned about looking at pretty girls.
5. There seems to be no reason to believe that young people and adults cannot accommodate themselves to one another on Hampton Beach. To use a cliché, there seems to be on Hampton Beach among the tourists an attitude of "live and let live."

+    Teen-age males
++  Teen-age females
+++Adults

1* Rejection is taken to mean those forms of behavior which are rejected by a significant majority of the population. The Rejection Score is arrived at by subtracting the combined percentages of those in the Warn, Ask to Leave, and Arrest categories from the combined percentages of the Accept and Ignore categories.

2* High Rejection is that category in which the Rejection Score is over 50.

3* Medium Rejection is that category in which the Rejection Score is between 20 and 50.

4* Low Rejection is that category in which the Rejection Score is below 20.

5* High Acceptance is when the combined percentages of Accept and Ignore is over 65.

6* Medium Acceptance is when the combined percentages of Accept and Ignore is between 55 and 64.

7* Ambivalent is when the combined scores of Accept and Ignore are approximately equal (5%) to the categories of Warn, Ask to Leave, and Arrest.

We have been examining the total response given to the Irritability-Deviancy Test. It is important to discover whether or not there are any marked changes in response patterns over the summer period. Let us then look at each of the age groups for any marked changes across the summer.

In the adult population there is a very consistent attitude through the entire summer period. For example, 41.3 percent of the adults accepted dancing on the Beach at the beginning of the summer; toward the end of August dancing on the Beach was accepted by 43.1 percent of the adults. This is rather typical of the consistency of the adult responses.

There is one interesting shift in attitude among all groups. Playing the radio on the beach was objected to in the early part of the summer, but toward the end of the summer it came to be acceptable. The transition in attitude among the adults was particularly marked. In the early part of the summer there was a mildly negative reaction to this: 40.8 percent of the adults would "warn" and 2.9 percent would "accept." By the end of the summer, the warning response dropped to 2.2 percent and the accept response rose to 78.5 percent. We might conclude from this that in the early part of the summer the adult is expecting to find tranquility on the beach, but by the end of the summer he is adjusted to the reality that the beach is a relatively noisy place. This seems to imply that more boisterous teenage events might possibly find more acceptability toward the end of the summer and there would tend to be more complaints at the beginning of the summer - just when a program would be striving to gain acceptance. This kind of thing, trivial as it might seem at the outset, ought to be regarded as a reality factor in future program planning for adolescents in a summer resort area.

Generally, the same kind of consistency seems to hold true for the responses given by the adolescents. However, there seems to be a slight change in attitude during the middle part of the summer, particularly among the male teenagers. The following responses among teenage males were more accepted in the middle part of the summer than at either the beginning or the conclusion of the summer: swearing, kissing in public, tossing a girl in a blanket, the various phases of activity revolving around the use of beer, hanging around in groups, ball playing, all physical activities, and all activities having to do with cars.

It is difficult to say that these differences reflect a markedly different group. The data on the random interviews do not show any marked differences over the summer in social class as measured by the father's occupational prestige. However, something must account for these differences for they all tend toward the same direction. One can summarize these differences in terms of more acceptability of sex and drinking, and a greater desire for physical activity. An examination of the sample of teenage females on the beach suggests a parallel kind of response pattern. Reflecting on the teenage sample as a whole, the safest generalization which might be made would take into account the real probability of a different social class of young people on the Beach during the mid-summer period.

It is interesting to speculate about the relationship which may or may not exist between police activity at this period of the summer and the more permissive attitudes which seem to exist among the adolescent community. There should be no suggestion that there is a cause and effect relationship in either direction. The Beach Observation Scale suggests that police activity during this segment of the summer season becomes generally less intense. It would seem to be good fortune that this phase of police activity seemed to occur at this particular time. One can readily imagine the depth of resentment which would have been stirred up by relentlessly intensive kinds of police law enforcement. This particular phenomenon which can be observed in the middle part of the summer on the Irritability-Deviancy Test does not suggest in any way that there should be no activity of the police, or a particularly pronounced permissive policy throughout the entire summer. What it does suggest to this observer is that flexibility in law enforcement may be a most critical element in any overall policy of law enforcement over the entire duration of a summer season. One might also add that there should not necessarily be any undue fear that flexibility on the part of law enforcement signals the end of all morality.

The Irritability-Deviancy Test was given to most of the young people who took the random interview - arrested and non-arrested. Again, we have a marked consistency in attitude between the non-arrested randoms and the general sampling of youth on the beach. The general sample was a bit more accepting of dancing on the beach and a little more rejecting of beer on the beach. Both the randoms and the general sample seem to suggest what might commonly be called the "beach culture of young people" consisting of a style of dress and a sort of cautious hedonism. We might conclude from examining the comparisons between the random and the general sample that there is a strong probability that the random interview reflects the mood of the young people who come to Hampton Beach.

Those young people who were arrested and who took the Irritability-Deviancy test are more alike than they are different from the other two groups. The arrested group seems to tend toward a more permissive attitude; they are much more sensitive in these matters involving cars. It is almost amusing to see their responses to swearing and wrestling. They are very much different than either of the other groups. Perhaps the arrested young people feel that they are conforming to what the adult world expects of them by answering in such ways. If this is true, they have a warped view of reality.

Finally, let us see another dimension of this Irritability-Deviancy Test: the age of the young people and their frequency of visiting the beach. This dimension gives us a fairly good idea of the kinds of age groups and the habits of the young people in coming to the beach. It also presents us with a picture of whether or not these groups change across the summer.

Summarizing the data of these two tables, we find the following:

1. There is a shift in modal distribution of females according to age. Wave I finds a concentration of females at seventeen years of age; Wave II finds a sharp decline in age group; and during the last part of the summer, Wave III, the fifteen year-old group tends to persist, but an older group seems to come onto the scene and we have a bi-modal distribution.
2. The age distribution of males as reflected in the sample of those tested by the Irritability-Deviancy Test shows some shifts, but not in the same directions as the female age distribution. The summer begins with a modal group of about seventeen-and-a-half, and as the summer goes on into July this mode slightly increases to eighteen. As the summer concludes, there is a persistence in this eighteen-year-old group, but there seems also to be a concentration of sixteen-year-old males in the last days of the beach season.
3. As the summer begins, there seems to be a relatively even division between the kinds of beach visiting that is done between seasonal, regular weekend, and occasional. In the middle of the summer the female weekend regulars start to stay home. The occasional visitor seems to be somewhat younger than the regular weekend visitor.
4. There is an even more dramatic shift in patterns of beach visiting among the males. In the beginning of the summer the typical male visitor to the beach is a seventeen and a half year old male who comes to the beach, or intends to come to the beach every weekend. However, by the end of the summer, the male visitor to the beach tends to be a younger male, sixteen, who only comes to the beach occasionally. There may be many reasons for this shift in behavior. It could possibly be a sampling error. But even a sampling error could not account for a shift from 47.3 percent of the male population in Wave I to 17.5 percent of the population of males by the end of the summer. One then turns to two other possibilities: the police practices may have discouraged those who came to the beach on a regular basis; or the fact that there seemed to be a relatively trouble-free atmosphere on the beach this summer discouraged the young men who might be looking for the excitement of a conflict of some sort. In any event, there is no doubt but what something is going on. There might be those who would take satisfaction from the fact that the regular youngsters had gone elsewhere. But one derives small comfort from the fact that all that is necessary, if they have been overly harassed by the police, to return for one night all at once.
5. There seems to be no question, if this sample of beach youth population is truly reflective of the beach population as a whole, that there is but a tiny fraction of youngsters on the beach who live in town all year long. In a very real sense, what some of the year-long residents say about the young people on the beach being "outsiders" is probably correct. Hopefully, the community may be making strides to understand that while the "outsiders" are in Hampton they are our responsibility.
6. These findings seem to be more in the nature of provocative leads to further research than anything else. It would seem to be sufficient at this point to outline the facts as they present themselves. In all probability, they are but surface indicators of far deeper phenomena. One of the questions which naturally suggests itself is: Are these patterns of age distribution over the summer and these shifts on beach visiting behavior a direct result of policy on the beach, or is this a "natural" kind of social phenomena with root causes in some set of conditions outside the community? If it is the latter, how does this affect programming? It is very definite that different kinds of programming are effective with different age groups. As a control factor, it would be most advantageous if the same kinds of programming could be carried out without the external and obvious force of the police present.
7. Parenthetically, one might observe that the younger age group among the females could possibly be the cause of the changes in the response pattern noted earlier.

To summarize briefly:

1. There may not be as much conflict between expectations of behavior in adults and adolescents as had been suspected. There were significant parallel responses in adults and adolescents.
2. There were points of conflict which, if not taken into account, could produce a real climate of irritation and hostility.
3. While there was an almost remarkable consistency in attitude over the summer, interesting shifts within the teenage attitude pattern suggest a possible changing youth population across the summer. This shift might be due to patterns of leisure time use relative to social class.
4. There seems to be a shift in age groups across the summer, particularly among the teenage females. Generally, the girls get younger over the summer, and the boys seem to stay at about the same age. Curiously, at the conclusion of the summer, an older group of girls and a younger group of boys come to the beach.
5. As reflected in the marked decline in regular weekend visitors, the beach seems to have lost a certain attraction to one group of people.
6. The Irritability-Deviancy Test is a most useful instrument. Patterns in attitude similarity and conflict is a vital part of program planning and community relations.