{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02954341987466428, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008057296329453895, 'mean_word_length': 5.388571428571429, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A cross-cultural investigation of Eysenck's hypothesis regarding the relationship between personality and anttitudes.

Two separate studies were carried out to investigate Eysenck's hypothesis concerning a negative correlation between extraversion and tender-mindedness. The first study involved 106 British students, who were given Eysenck's Inventory of Social Attitudes, the Maudsley Personality Inventory (short form), and Part I of Richardson's British version of the Study of Values. The second study was carried out with a group of Iranian students (n = 69), who were given the Eysenck Personality Inventory, Melvin's Inventory of Social Attitudes and the Allport-Vernon-Lindzey Study of Values. 
 
 
 
Both studies failed to reveal any significant correlation between extraversion and tender-mindedness. There was, however, a significant positive relationship between tender-mindedness and religionism as measured by the Study of Values. The results are discussed in the light of similar findings reported by Siegman (1963) and some possible reasons for the failure of Eysenck's main hypothesis are suggested.