459 



-17- 



The first five fscCort In Table 3 are those referred to by KcKeooeU, 

 «• Inner Need {acton. Considering solely the scores on these five 

 factors, the ^tal nuaber of "low" assignaents (i.e. — or -) per cluster 

 can be calculated; siallarly the total number of "medium" assigruncnts 

 (i.e. 0) and "high" assignaents (♦■♦■ or ♦). These totals are shown in 

 Table 4 below. 



'■ TABLE A 



DISTRIBUTIONS OF LOW, MEDIUM AMD HIGH INNIR NEED FACTOR SCORES 



-c 



Inspection of Table 4 reveals a natural grouping of clusters according 



to the Inner Need dimension: 

 Low Inner tfe/t^ 



xT; 



.^^ 



Medium Inner Ncei. 2 



3 9 



4 5 8 



High Inner Reed il^ 12 10 

 There could be a case for classifying Cluster 4 as a High Need 

 cluster. However on balance its inclusion with the Medium Need clusters 

 is preferred, and it is interesting to see from Table 3 that scores on - 

 the Smoking Alone factor perfectly predict the allocation of Low, Medium 

 and High Need groupings as shown above. 



09 



c 

 I 



c 



N 

 I 



o 



o» 

 o 



w 



HcKennell (5) preferred a 7-Cluster solution for his jytmple, and 

 gave cluster profiles based on the first eight factors. Comparison between 

 the two studies shows that some of the WHEAT clusters are broadly 



