1. Mills Longitudinal Study - Age 21 Assessment

The Mills Longitudinal Study began in 1958 as a study of creativity, leadership, and plans for the future in women from the Mills College senior classes of 1958 and 1960. In each of these years, Mills College faculty members were asked to nominate seniors who had “exceptional creative potential for work in the arts, sciences, or humanities.” (For a more detailed description of this nomination process, see Helson, 1967.) Those seniors who were nominated as “creative” were compared with the rest of the senior class using questionnaires and personality inventories. The “creatives” were then invited to UC Berkeley's IPAR (the Institute of Personality Assessment and Research, which later became IPSR, or the Institute for Personality and Social Research) for further testing and observation, along with a comparison group of seniors with similar SAT scores and majors. The assessments were conducted this way in 1958 and again in 1960. Age 21 Total Sample (Senior Class Samples from 1958 and 1960) In each of the two assessment years, about two-thirds of the Mills senior class participated in testing on the Mills College campus. There were 63 participants from the class of 1958 and 77 from the class of 1960. Based on college records, these samples were representative of their respective senior classes. All participants were asked to complete personality inventories (CPI, MMPI) and questionnaires about college life, childhood interests, family background, and marriage/vocational plans. Age 21 Assessed Sample In each assessment year, the creative nominees and matched comparison group members were invited to IPAR for further assessment beyond the senior class testing. There were 25 total participants from the class of 1958 and 26 total participants from the class of 1960. Of these 51 total participants, 31 were creative nominees, although only the project director knew which women had been nominated as creative. All 51 members of this subsample were interviewed and asked to complete a variety of behavioral tests and inventories. They also played charades, discussed topics in small groups, and ate meals with the IPAR staff. After the assessment, ten staff members described each participant with Q-sorts, Adjective Check Lists, and rating scales.