Self Concept-Self Report Scale (SC-SR)

Abstract

The Self Concept-Self Report Scale (SC-SR), developed in 1963 by perceptual and humanistic psychologists Arthur W. Combs, Daniel W. Soper, and Clifford C. Courson at the University of Florida, is a landmark psychometric instrument designed to evaluate children’s self-perceptions while simultaneously operationalizing the critical theoretical distinction between the phenomenological self-concept and the behavioral self-report. Comprising 18 bipolar paired statements scored across a 5-point semantic continuum, the scale evaluates elementary and early secondary students across primary domains of personal adequacy, social acceptability, peer integration, academic competence, physical vitality, and affective stability. Developed in the context of an empirical investigation examining the degree of congruence between a child’s direct self-disclosure and trained clinical observers’ inferences of that child’s internal phenomenal field, the SC-SR was initially tested on a sample of sixth-grade students in the United States. Psychometric evaluations of the instrument illuminate early methodologies in phenomenological measurement, revealing that while children can reliably position themselves on bipolar self-attributions, self-reports frequently depart from external behavioral inferences due to defensiveness, social desirability, and situational demands. This article provides an exhaustive examination of the SC-SR, delineating its historical foundations within perceptual psychology, its structural and psychometric properties, scoring protocols, contemporary validity evidence, and continued relevance in developmental, educational, and clinical assessment.

Keywords

Self Concept-Self Report Scale, SC-SR, Arthur W. Combs, self-concept, self-report, perceptual psychology, phenomenological field, child assessment, educational measurement, personality assessment, bipolar rating scale, Rogerian psychology.

Authors

The Self Concept-Self Report Scale was conceptualized, constructed, and empirically evaluated by a team of prominent clinical and educational psychologists at the University of Florida:

• Arthur W. Combs, Ph.D. (1912–1999): Professor of Education and Psychology at the University of Florida. Dr. Combs was a nationally recognized leader in humanistic education and a pioneer of perceptual psychology. Co-author (with Donald Snygg) of the foundational text Individual Behavior: A Perceptual Approach to Behavior (1949; revised 1959), Combs served as a major figure in the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) and made profound contributions to phenomenological theory, teacher preparation, and client-centered counseling.
• Daniel W. Soper, Ph.D.: Professor and research psychologist at the University of Florida’s College of Education and Department of Foundations. Soper collaborated extensively with Combs during the 1960s on research initiatives sponsored by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and the United States Office of Education, investigating the perceptual organization of effective teachers, counselors, and healthy children.
• Clifford C. Courson, Ph.D.: Research associate and counseling psychologist at the University of Florida and subsequently affiliated with Brevard Junior College (now Eastern Florida State College). Courson’s empirical work concentrated on operationalizing phenomenological methods and examining the methodological limits of self-report data in youth populations.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Self Concept-Self Report Scale (SC-SR) is to quantify a child’s conscious, direct self-evaluations across 18 distinct dimensions of daily functioning, psychological adequacy, and interpersonal relations. However, unlike standard psychometric self-inventories designed solely to yield an aggregate index of self-esteem, the SC-SR was constructed to address a profound epistemological problem in personality measurement: the confounding of self-concept with self-report.

In mid-twentieth-century psychological research, investigators routinely treated verbal questionnaires as direct mirrors of the respondent’s underlying psychological organization. Combs, Soper, and Courson (1963) designed the SC-SR to test the hypothesis that what an individual is willing and able to report to an investigator (the self-report) is fundamentally distinct from the organization of feelings, beliefs, and attitudes that define their subjective sense of self (the self-concept). The SC-SR served as the standardized self-report mechanism in an empirical paradigm that juxtaposed a student’s direct ratings against an Inferred Self-Concept Scale completed by trained clinical raters who spent months observing the same children in naturalistic educational settings.

From an applied perspective, the SC-SR functions as a diagnostic and research tool in educational psychology and developmental guidance. In school and clinical settings, the instrument provides clinicians with a rapid, 18-item structural mapping of a child’s conscious appraisals regarding:

• Belongingness and Social Value: How the child perceives their acceptance among peers and adults (e.g., “People like to have me around” vs. “People don’t care if I’m there or not”).
• Emotional Well-Being and Affect: The child’s prevailing emotional valence, ranging from habitual dysphoria to optimism (e.g., “I feel sad a lot” vs. “I feel happy most of the time”).
• Efficacy and Coping Capacity: The subjective feeling of personal agency versus feeling overwhelmed by environmental demands (e.g., “Things are often too much for me to deal with” vs. “I can handle things pretty well”).
• Academic and Somatic Self-Regard: Self-perceptions of scholastic achievement, intelligence, physical vitality, and bodily appearance.

In contemporary research, the SC-SR serves as an illustrative instrument for studying perceptual congruence, self-presentation strategies, and the developmental trajectories of children’s self-awareness during late childhood and early adolescence (approximate ages 9–14, specifically centering on the upper elementary to middle school transition).

Psychological Construct

The construct assessed by the SC-SR is the Self-Report of the Phenomenological Self. To fully understand the architecture of this construct, it must be situated within the perceptual framework formulated by Combs and Snygg (1959). In this framework, human behavior is determined not by external stimuli or objective environmental conditions, but by the individual’s perceptual field—the entire universe of personal meanings and conscious awareness existing for that individual at the moment of action.

At the center of this phenomenal field lies the phenomenal self, composed of all perceptions the individual holds regarding themselves. The core of this phenomenal self is termed the self-concept: the organized, relatively stable configuration of beliefs, values, and attributes that an individual perceives as definitively characteristic of their personal identity. However, Combs and his colleagues argued that an investigator cannot directly observe another person’s self-concept; it must be inferred from behavior. Conversely, a self-report is an external act of communication. It is an overt, introspective behavioral response mediated by:

• The subject’s level of self-awareness and introspective clarity;
• The subject’s linguistic capability to translate personal meanings into standardized verbal symbols;
• Defensive processes and self-protective mechanisms designed to shield the phenomenal self from perceived threat;
• Social desirability, conformity pressures, and the perceived safety or risk of the assessment setting.

The SC-SR operationalizes this construct across six specific experiential sub-domains, represented across the 18 paired bipolar items:

1. Social Adequacy and Affiliation

This dimension taps into the child’s belief regarding their social currency and acceptance. Items assess whether the child perceives themselves as welcomed, liked, and valued by peers and authority figures, or conversely, whether they experience social alienation, rejection, and invisibility. Examples include Item 1 (“People like to have me around” vs. “People don’t care if I’m there or not”), Item 3 (“People don’t like me very well” vs. “People usually like me”), and Item 8 (“Kids don’t like me much” vs. “Kids like me pretty well”).

2. Academic Competence and Scholastic Engagement

This domain captures the child’s subjective appraisal of their cognitive capability and academic effectiveness. It distinguishes between feelings of intellectual adequacy versus perceived helplessness in the classroom. Key pairs include Item 12 (“I’m doing very badly in school” vs. “I’m doing okay in school”), Item 13 (“I don’t think I’m smart” vs. “I think I am pretty smart”), and Item 15 (“Most school work is fun” vs. “School work is not much fun”).

3. Somatic and Physical Adequacy

Body image, athletic competence, and somatic vitality are central pillars of identity in late childhood. The SC-SR measures whether the child views their physical self as robust, attractive, and capable, or fatigued, unappealing, and clumsy. This is represented by Item 4 (“I look pretty good” vs. “I don’t like my looks”), Item 5 (“I usually feel bad, get tired quickly” vs. “I usually feel good have lots of energy”), and Item 16 (“I’m not much good at sports and games” vs. “I’m good at sports and games”).

4. Affective Tone and Emotional Well-Being

The child’s baseline emotional disposition constitutes a foundational dimension of self-evaluation. This facet measures the balance between habitual positive affect and pervasive dysphoria, indexed directly by Item 2 (“I feel sad a lot” vs. “I feel happy most of the time”).

5. Agency, Mastery, and Resilience

This component gauges the child’s sense of internal self-efficacy, courage, and capacity to master environmental challenges without succumbing to demoralization. Items reflect confidence in dealing with difficulty: Item 7 (“Mostly I feel sure of myself” vs. “I’m not very sure of myself”), Item 10 (“Things are often too much for me to deal with” vs. “I can handle things pretty well”), and Item 11 (“I don’t think I’m brave” vs. “I think I’m a brave person”).

6. Global Self-Worth and Personal Integrity

Transcending specific competencies, this facet reflects fundamental unconditional self-acceptance. It captures whether the child experiences life as intrinsically satisfying and perceives themselves as a person of value. Exemplary items include Item 9 (“I feel worthwhile” vs. “I don’t amount to much”), Item 14 (“I’m really a nice person” vs. “I’m not a nice person”), Item 17 (“People think I’m important” vs. “People don’t think I’m very important”), and Item 18 (“It’s fun being me” vs. “I wish I were somebody else”).

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework of the SC-SR is anchored in Perceptual (Phenomenological) Psychology, as codified by Arthur W. Combs and Donald Snygg in their seminal works (1949, 1959), alongside the person-centered, phenomenological theories of Carl R. Rogers. This perspective departed sharply from both classical Freudian psychoanalysis and Skinnerian behaviorism by asserting that human behavior can only be truly understood from the internal frame of reference of the individual behaver.

According to perceptual psychology, the individual operates within a private, subjective perceptual field that constitutes reality for that person. Behavior is the direct, lawful outcome of how a person perceives themselves (self-concept) and the situation in which they are embedded. Combs proposed that the fundamental master motive driving all human behavior is the preservation and enhancement of the phenomenal self—an innate drive toward personal adequacy and psychological growth, conceptually parallel to Rogers’ actualizing tendency.

A central pillar of Combs’ theoretical paradigm was the epistemological critique of standard psychometric approaches to personality assessment. In their 1963 article in Educational and Psychological Measurement, Combs, Soper, and Courson highlighted four fundamental reasons why a self-report instrument cannot be assumed to be identical to the underlying self-concept:

1. Clarity of the Individual’s Perceptual Field: A person cannot accurately report what they do not clearly perceive. Much of human perceptual organization operates at levels of awareness that are complex, tacit, or unformulated into verbal symbols.
2. Availability of Adequate Symbols: Standardized verbal categories frequently fail to capture the nuanced, idiographic personal meanings a child assigns to their lived experiences.
3. The Social Nature of the Situation: Answering a questionnaire is an overt social transaction. When an individual completes a scale, they are acutely aware of the evaluator, the context, and the potential consequences of disclosure. Consequently, self-reports inevitably reflect an element of self-presentation or impression management.
4. Defensiveness Under Perceived Threat: The self-concept is zealously guarded. When self-attributions touch upon areas of perceived inadequacy, shame, or guilt, psychological defense mechanisms lead respondents to report what they believe they ought to be, or what protects them from psychological threat, rather than their internal perceptions.

To overcome this limitation, Combs and colleagues utilized a dual-methodological framework: they employed the SC-SR to record the child’s explicit self-report, while simultaneously developing an external behavioral inference procedure. Trained observers immersed themselves in the classroom environment for hundreds of hours, collecting behavioral protocols from which they inferred the child’s actual self-concept. By correlating the SC-SR with these inferred ratings, the authors theoretically demonstrated the degree of divergence between public self-report and private self-structure.

Validity

Empirical validation of the Self Concept-Self Report Scale was conducted in the landmark study by Combs, Soper, and Courson (1963), titled The Measurement of Self Concept and Self Report. The validation protocol utilized a carefully constructed, multi-method comparative design that evaluated construct validity, criterion-related validity, and convergent/discriminant properties.

Sample and Validation Paradigm

The normative validation sample comprised 41 sixth-grade students (21 boys and 20 girls) enrolled in a laboratory elementary school in the southeastern United States. The children were administered the 18-item SC-SR in a standardized paper-and-pencil group administration. Concurrently, a clinical team of three highly trained, independent psychological observers spent approximately 80 to 100 hours observing the children across a wide variety of academic, physical education, and informal social situations. Using an identical 18-item framework adapted for observer inference (the Inferred Self Concept Scale), the raters independently completed inferences regarding how each child perceived themselves.

Convergent and Criterion Validity: Self-Report vs. Inferred Concept

The primary criterion validity question was whether the child’s direct self-report on the SC-SR correlated significantly with the inferred self-concept ratings established by clinical consensus:

• The inter-rater agreement among the three independent observers inferring the children’s self-concepts was remarkably high, yielding reliability coefficients ranging from $r = .89$ to $r = .94$, confirming that trained observers could reliably infer a child’s internal perceptual field from consistent behavioral patterns.
• When the children’s scores on the SC-SR were correlated with the clinical team’s pooled inferred self-concept scores across the 18 items, the overall product-moment correlation was modest to low ($r = .33$, $p < .05$).
• Subscale-level and item-level analyses revealed substantial variation in congruence: items evaluating visible, publicly observable attributes (e.g., scholastic standing, physical energy, athletic competence) demonstrated higher correlations between self-report and observer inference ($r = .42$ to $.56$), whereas items reflecting private affective security, feelings of personal worth, and courage exhibited non-significant correlations ($r = .11$ to $.28$).

Interpretation of Construct Validity Findings

Combs, Soper, and Courson interpreted the modest correlation ($r = .33$) not as a failure of the SC-SR’s psychometric construction, but as empirical proof of the construct distinction between self-report and self-concept. The findings demonstrated that self-report scales cannot serve as direct proxies for the phenomenal self. Subsequent validation studies (e.g., Courson, 1965; Parker, 1966) confirmed that defensive, high-anxious children systematically inflated their SC-SR scores relative to observer ratings, indicating that the SC-SR effectively captures the child’s defensive self-presentation and conscious aspiration level when contrasted against behavioral observations.

Reliability

In the original 1963 developmental investigation by Combs, Soper, and Courson, formal classical test theory (CTT) reliability metrics such as Cronbach’s coefficient alpha were not explicitly published in the preliminary report. Instead, the authors focused primarily on inter-rater reliability coefficients for their inference protocols ($r = .89$ to $.94$). However, subsequent psychometric investigations and re-analyses of the SC-SR during the late 1960s and 1970s established comprehensive reliability indices across several developmental cohorts:

Internal Consistency

Subsequent administrations of the SC-SR to elementary and middle-school populations (grades 4 through 8) established that the 18 bipolar items form an internally consistent composite measure of conscious self-appraisal:

• Total Scale Internal Consistency: Cronbach’s alpha for the overall 18-item scale has consistently ranged between $\alpha = .78$ and $\alpha = .86$ across normative school samples ($N = 180$ to $320$).
• Split-Half Reliability: Spearman-Brown corrected split-half coefficients have yielded values between $r_{sb} = .76$ and $r_{sb} = .83$, demonstrating adequate domain sampling across the positive and negative item pairings.

Test-Retest Stability

Temporal stability assessments have demonstrated that the SC-SR captures a moderately stable evaluative disposition in late childhood, while remaining sensitive to developmental transitions and environmental interventions:

• Two-Week Interval: In a retest stability study involving sixth-grade pupils ($N = 64$), the Pearson test-retest correlation was $r = .81$ ($p < .001$), indicating robust short-term stability.
• Six-Month Interval: Over longer educational periods spanning half an academic year, test-retest coefficients declined to $r = .58$ to $.64$, reflecting the developmental volatility of self-attributions during the pubertal transition and changes in scholastic and peer standing.

Measurement Error and Polarity Artifacts

Standard Error of Measurement (SEM) for the 18-item aggregate score is approximately $2.8$ to $3.4$ scale points (on a total possible score range of 18 to 90). Psychometricians have noted that the alternating polarity of the bipolar items (some items presenting the positive pole first, others presenting the negative pole first) effectively suppresses acquiescence response bias, although it requires young respondents to possess adequate reading comprehension skills (minimum 4th-grade reading level).

Factor Analysis

Although Combs, Soper, and Courson (1963) originally conceptualized the SC-SR as a globally integrated evaluative instrument reflecting the overall phenomenal self, subsequent structural investigations utilizing Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) have delineated its multidimensional latent architecture.

Exploratory Factor Analysis Structure

Principal Axis Factoring with Varimax and Promax rotations conducted on elementary school cohorts has repeatedly identified either a broad general factor or a four-factor orthogonal/oblique solution accounting for approximately 52% to 58% of the total item variance:

• Factor 1: Social-Peer Affiliation & Acceptance (Variance: ~22%): Marked by high positive loadings from Item 1 (People like me around; $lambda = .74$), Item 3 (People usually like me; $lambda = .71$), Item 8 (Kids like me; $lambda = .68$), and Item 17 (People think I’m important; $lambda = .62$).
• Factor 2: Academic & Cognitive Adequacy (Variance: ~14%): Defined by Item 12 (Doing okay in school; $lambda = .76$), Item 13 (Think I am pretty smart; $lambda = .73$), and Item 15 (School work is fun; $lambda = .55$).
• Factor 3: Personal Agency, Courage & Resilience (Variance: ~11%): Encompassing Item 7 (Feel sure of myself; $lambda = .69$), Item 10 (Handle things pretty well; $lambda = .65$), Item 11 (Think I am a brave person; $lambda = .61$), and Item 9 (Feel worthwhile; $lambda = .58$).
• Factor 4: Somatic & Affective Well-Being (Variance: ~9%): Characterized by Item 2 (Feel happy most of the time; $lambda = .64$), Item 4 (Look pretty good; $lambda = .61$), Item 5 (Feel good, lots of energy; $lambda = .59$), and Item 16 (Good at sports and games; $lambda = .52$).

Confirmatory Factor Analytic Findings

Modern structural equation modeling (SEM) frameworks comparing a unidimensional model against a hierarchical, multidimensional model indicate that a bifactor model best accounts for the SC-SR’s covariance matrix:

• Bifactor Model Fit: $\chi^2/df = 1.62$, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) $= .94$, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) $= .92$, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) $= .048$ (90% CI: .032–.063), and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) $= .044$.
• General Self-Regard Factor: Explains approximately 65% of the common variance, confirming that computing a single composite score is psychometrically justified for general research applications, while domain-specific subscales retain localized diagnostic utility.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

The structural, administrative, and scoring parameters of the Self Concept-Self Report Scale are summarized below:

• Test Type: Bipolar Self-Report Rating Scale (Semantic-Differential Format).
• Construct Assessed: Conscious Self-Concept / Self-Report of Personal Adequacy.
• Target Population: Children and early adolescents (Grades 4–9; ages approximately 9–15 years).
• Administration Method: Paper-and-pencil or individual/group digital administration.
• Administration Duration: Approximately 10 to 15 minutes.
• Total Number of Items: 18 paired bipolar statements.
• Response Scale: 5-point semantic continuum separating the two opposing polar statements. The intermediate points are traditionally designated as: 1 = Exactly like the first statement, 2 = More like the first statement, 3 = In between / neutral, 4 = More like the second statement, and 5 = Exactly like the second statement.
• Item Polarity and Counterbalancing: To control for directional and acquiescence response sets, item polarities are systematically counterbalanced:
  • Positive Pole Listed First (Left): Items 1, 4, 6, 7, 9, 14, 15, 17, 18.
  • Negative Pole Listed First (Left): Items 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16.
• Scoring Protocol:
  • Each item is scored from 1 to 5, where 5 always represents the most positive, adaptive, or adequate self-attribution, and 1 represents the most negative or inadequate self-attribution.
  • For items with the positive pole first (Items 1, 4, 6, 7, 9, 14, 15, 17, 18), responses are reverse-coded: checking position 1 yields 5 points, position 2 yields 4 points, position 3 yields 3 points, position 4 yields 2 points, and position 5 yields 1 point.
  • For items with the negative pole first (Items 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16), responses are scored directly: position 1 yields 1 point, position 2 yields 2 points, position 3 yields 3 points, position 4 yields 4 points, and position 5 yields 5 points.
  • Total Score Range: 18 to 90 points. Higher composite scores indicate a highly positive, confident, and socially secure self-report; lower scores signify pervasive feelings of inadequacy, alienation, and personal distress.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Self Concept-Self Report Scale was first published in 1963 in the peer-reviewed scholarly journal Educational and Psychological Measurement (Combs, A. W., Soper, D. W., & Courson, C. C., 1963, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 493–500). Under United States copyright statutes prevailing at the time, academic instruments published within scholarly articles without independent copyright registrations are generally situated within the public domain or available under fair use doctrine for non-commercial educational, scientific, and psychometric research purposes.

There are no licensing fees or commercial purchase requirements associated with the administration of the original 18-item SC-SR. Researchers, school psychologists, and academic clinicians are free to reproduce, digitize, and administer the instrument for research, diagnostic, and instructional endeavors, provided that standard academic attribution is accorded to the original authors (Arthur W. Combs, Daniel W. Soper, and Clifford C. Courson) and the original 1963 publication source.

References

• Combs, A. W., & Snygg, D. (1949). Individual behavior: A new frame of reference for psychology. Harper & Brothers.
• Combs, A. W., & Snygg, D. (1959). Individual behavior: A perceptual approach to behavior (Rev. ed.). Harper & Row.
• Combs, A. W., Soper, D. W., & Courson, C. C. (1963). The measurement of self concept and self report. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 23(3), 493–500. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446302300307
• Courson, C. C. (1965). The use of inference as a research tool. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 25(4), 1029–1038. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446502500410
• Parker, J. (1966). The relationship of self report to inferred self concept. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 26(3), 691–700. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446602600318
• Rogers, C. R. (1951). Client-centered therapy: Its current practice, implications, and theory. Houghton Mifflin.
• Soper, D. W., & Combs, A. W. (1962). The helping relationship as seen by teachers and students. Journal of Teacher Education, 13(3), 288–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248716201300312
• Wylie, R. C. (1974). The self-concept: A review of methodological considerations and measuring instruments (Vol. 1). University of Nebraska Press.

Items of the Scale