For verification of this paper, please visit on http://www.socialresearchfoundation.com/remarking.php#8

According to the study of Tattersall R. B. (1981) who discusses diabetes as a whole heterogeneous group of disorder whose only common factor is hyperglycemia. The diabetic personality from childhood through adolescence and adulthood is examined, and it is conclude that diabetic can be almost any know personality type. Crowell, D. H. swift (1953) reported the exact role of emotion & personality in the onset and course of diabetes has long be controversial. Knowles H. C. (1964) Danowski; T. S. korsnick A (1964) reported that emotion Amy produced physical changes that could influence the course of diabetes. Dunbar (1943) described the diabetic personality which, she claimed could antedate the illness & predispose to it; the characteristic features were said to be weakness, irritability, hypochondriasis, frequent mood swing and a tendency to changes in behaviour ranging from over dependency to rebelliousness.

There are certain association between different types of personality and type-2Diabetes for instance, Conti et al. in their systematic review that type D personality was more prevalent in diabetes patients than controls (Conti, Carrozino, Patients, Vitacolonna & fulcheri, 2016) Additional personality type has been found to be affecting treatment and management of social support and poor glycemic control (Shao, Yin & Wan, 2017). Moreover, poor compaiance has also been found to be related to type-2 Diabetes and type B and Type D Personality (Millcevic, Jaksic, Margetic&Jakovljevic, 2015). Morever, neuroticism and depression has also been found to be related to treatment adherence among type2 diabetes (Lee et al. 2021: Nager et. al, 2021) However, Li et al, have concluded that type D personality may not be associated with medication adherence but screening for type D personality may help identity high-risk patients (Li etal., 2016) Thus. Personality type especially type b and D, not only is a risk factor for type 2 Diabetes also affects treatment adherence as well. Personality factors and adverse life events have been implicated in the development of diabetes. Kemmerer, Wolfgang & rein dell (1977) suggest that personality changes due to diabetes mellitus vary according to the severity of the illness & the patients emotional & physiological condition at the time of onset. Since personality traits cannot be separated from reaction to the illness the need for a differentiated psychotherapy adopted to individual idiosyncrasies is emphasized. Maninger (1939, 1936,1935) reported that the role of emotional factors in the etiology of diabetes has been a source of conjecture. Tebbi (1990) reported more depressive symptoms in their sample of adult with independent diabetes mellitus. Padgett, debarah K. (1990) 147 adults with non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus completed a cross cultural measure of diabetes self-efficacy, the diabetes self-efficacy scale (DSES) the self-rating depression scale, and a demographic questionnaire Disease related factors associated by chart review, included disease duration, The presence of complications & level of glycosylated hemoglobin (Hb ALC) As hypothesized behavioral & psychological factors were more strongly associated with self-efficacy beliefs than were diasease-related factors. Higher DSES scores were associated with male gender, younger age higher education, higher self-related adherence & lower depressive symptoms. Correlations between level of Hb alc & DSES Scores & between Hb Alc & adherence ratings were very weak. Koski, Maija-Liisa (1991) Reviews recent psychosomatic research on insulin dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) Areas covered include (1) the influence of psychological factors on the onet of of IDDM (2) Areas covered include (1) the influence of psychological factors on the onet of IDDM (3) the fluence of IDDM on the personality development of juvenile diabetes, and (4) psychotherapeutic intervention in IDDM. Goals for psychotherapy with IDDM patients, particularly Juveniles. include helping the patient develop a sense of ownership & responsibility for his body & helping him develop alternative channals for the release of previously repressed or denied feelings. Therapeutic intervention may provide at least short term benefits in term of metabolic control better adherence weight loss, & fewer episodes of diabetic Ketoacidosis. von drar , Dean D (1990) examined the relationship among age diabetes glucose control (GC) and depression in 116 type I and type II diabetes (aged18-71 yrs) Depression was assessed by the self-rating depression scale psychological & somatic symptoms of depression were positively correlated with diabetes GC, but age was not correlated with diabetes GC or depression. Result suggests a relationship between diabetes GC and depression. Findings of the study & supporting studies clearly suggest significant difference in the personality pattern of the diabetic patient.

The data obtained is statistically analyses with the help of appropriate statistical. Tools, like correlation, and regression analysis of variance chi-square test, t test.

In order to see tha effects of presence of the diseases (Diabetes, nonpsychoso-matic patients) on the personality factors of the patients it is compaired with the personality  factors of normal person, the relivent data is collected & the analysis of variance of the data is worked out on the basis of one way classification. The results and their interprelation for different personality factors have been presented below one by one.

Personality Factor ‘A’
Personality factor ‘A’ is not significant at 0.05 level of significance.
Personality Factor ‘B’              
Factor B has not been found valid as a measure of intelligence in Indian setup as reported by Joshi & Joshi (1965) this factor is not considered in this research work.

Personality Factor ‘C’
Table (a)
Table of Analysis of Variance

Source	D. F	S. S	M. S. S	F
Bet. Group	2	778.60645	389.30322	109.8254
With-in-group	297	1052.79004	3.54475
Total	299	1831.39648

***  Significant at 0.001 level
Table (b)
Table of Means & Significant of the differences of the means

Groups	Means	Comparison	Differences of thee mean
Diabetes	5.65	Diabetes-Nospsy.Som	-0.15(N.S.)
Nonpsychosomatic	5.80	Diabetes-Normal	-3.49*
Normal	9.14	Nonpsy.som-Normal	-3.34*

                    S. E. of difference                =           .26626        (Bet.Group)
                    C. D at 0.05 level                 =           .52403        (Bet.Group)
                    G. M.                                    =           6.8633
                    S. D.                                      =          1.8828
Personality factor ‘C’ is highly significant at 0.001 level of significant. Thus it suggests that the diabetic and nonpsychomatic patients are affected by feeling, easily upset, and emotionally less stable. It means the person who scored low on factor C tends to be low in frustration to lerence for unsatisfactory condition, and annoyed, active in dissatisfaction, having  neurotic symptom(Phobias, sleep disturbances, psychosomatic complaints tec) low factor is common to almost all forms of neurotic disorders. This also suggests that any person suffering from any disease in likely to have less emotional stability.

Personality factor ‘E’
Table (a)
Table of Analysis of Variance

Source	D. F	S. S	M. S. S	F
Bet. Group	2	65.52734	32.76367	13.9782
With-in-group	297	696.13965	2.34390
Total	299	761.66699	2.54738

***   Significant at 0.001 level
 
Table (b)
Table of Means & Significant of The Differences of The Means

Groups	Means	Comparison	Differences of thee mean
Diabetes	5.65	Diabetes-Nospsy.Som	-0.13(N.S.)
Nonpsychosomatic	5.17	Diabetes-Normal	-1.05*
Normal	6.09	Nonpsy.som-Normal	-0.92*

                     S. E. of difference              =   .21651        (Bet.Group)
                     C. D at 0.05 level               =   .42612        (Bet.Group)
                     G. M.                                 =   5.4333
                     S. D.                                  =   1.5310
Personality factor ‘E’ is highly Significant at 0.001 level of Significance. It means that the diabetic & nonpsychomatic patients are humble, mild accommodating confirming (Submissiveness) The Person who scores low on factor ‘E’ tends to be give way to others, to be docile, and confirm. He is often depended, confessing, anxious for obsessional correlation. This Passivity is part of many neurotic syndromes.
Personality Factor ‘F’
Personal fector F is not significant.

Personality Factor ‘G’
 Table (a)
Table of Analysis of Variance

Source	D. F	S. S	M. S. S	F
Bet. Group	2	118.64063	59.32031	14.9296
With-in-group	297	1180.08008	4.3443355
Total	299	1298.72070

*** Significant at 0.001 level
Table (b)
Table of Means & Significant of the Differences of The Means

Groups	Means	Comparison	Differences of thee mean
Diabetes	8.22	Diabetes-Nospsy.Som	-0.74*
Nonpsychosomatic	7.48	Diabetes-Normal	-0.80*
Normal	9.02	Nonpsy.som-Normal	-1.54*

                S. E. of difference                 =              .28190   (Bet.Group)
                C. D at 0.05 level                  =              .55480   (Bet.Group)
                G. M.                                     =              8.2400
                S. D.                                      =              1.9933
Personality factor ‘G’ is highly significant. It Means diabetic and nonpsycho-somatic are expedient evades rules feels few obligation (weaker super ego strength) The person who score low on factor ‘G’ tends to be unsteady in purpose. He is often casual & Lacking in effort for group undertaking. His Freedom from group influences lead to anti-social acts, but at times makes him more effective while his refusal to be bound by rules causes him to have less somatic upset from stress.

Personality Factor ‘H’
Table (a)
Table of Analysis of Variance

Source	D. F	S. S	M. S. S	F
Bet. Group	2	144.20508	72.10254	17.7645
With-in-group	297	1205.46094	4.05879
Total	299	1349.66602	4.51393

***         Significant at 0.001 level
Table (B)
Table of Means & Significant of The Differences of The Means

Groups	Means	Comparison	Differences of the mean
Diabetes	7.02	Diabetes-Nospsy.Som	+0.15(N.S)
Nonpsychosomatic	6.87	Diabetes-Normal	-1.39*
Normal	8.41	Nonpsy.som-Normal	-1.54*

                S. E. of difference  =              .28491   (Bet.Group)
                C. D at 0.05 level   =              .56074   (Bet.Group)
                G. M.                      =              7.4333
                S. D.                      =              2.0146
It suggests that diabetic & nonpsychosomatic patients are shy-restrained, diff-edent timid (Thractia) The person who scores low on this trait tends to be shy with-drawing, caution, retring A ‘’Will flower’’ he usually has inferiotry he tends to be show and in expressing himself dislikes occupations with personal contact, prefers one or two close friends to large groups.
Personality Factor ‘I'
Personal fector I is not significant.

Personality Factor ‘L'
Table of Analysis of Variance

Source	D. F	S. S	M. S. S	F
Bet. Group	2	75.02051	37.51025	16.1584
With-in-group	297	689.45996	2.32141
Total	299	764.48047	2.55679

 
 
 
 

***     Significant at 0.001 level
Table (B)
Table of Means & Significant of The Differences of The Means

Groups	Means	Comparison	Differences of thee mean
Diabetes	5.83	Diabetes-Nospsy.Som	+0.44*
Nonpsychosomatic	5.39	Diabetes-Normal	+1.21*
Normal	4.62	Nonpsy.som-Normal	+0.77*

                S. E. of difference  =              .21547   (Bet.Group)
                C. D at 0.05 level   =              .42407   (Bet.Group)
                G. M.                      =              5.2800
                S. D.                       =              1.5236
Thus it suggests that the diabetic patients are suspicious self-opinionated, hard to fool (pretension) The person who scores higher an factor ‘L’ tends to be minsunder-standing & doubtful. He is often involved in his own ego, self opionated and mental life. He is usually deliberate in his actions unconcerned about other people, a poor tem member.
Personality Factor ‘M’
Table (a)
Table of Analysis of Variance

Source	D. F	S. S	M. S. S	F
Bet. Group	2	168.71973	84.35986	23.3928
With-in-group	297	1071.04980	3.60623
Total	299	1239.76953	4.14639

***    Significant at 0.001 level
Table (b)
Table of Analysis of Variance

   S. E. of difference  =              .26856   (Bet.Group)
                C. D at 0.05 level   =              .52855   (Bet.Group)
                G. M.                      =              5.7900
                S. D.                       =              1.8900
Personality factor M is highly significant at 0.001 level of Significance. It means that the diabetic patients are imaginative wrapped up in emmer urgencies, careless of practical matter (Autia) The person who scores high on factor M Tends to be unconventional unconcerned over everyday matters. Self motivated imaginatively creative, concerned essential & obvious Particulars. His inter dedicate interest lead to unrealistic situation accompanied by expressive outburst. His individuality tends to cause him to be rejected group activities.
Personality Factor ‘N’
Table (a)
Table of Analysis of Variance

***    Significant at 0.001 level

Table (b)

Table of Means & Significant of the difference of the means

Groups	Means	Comparison	Different of three means
Diabetes	5.72	Diabetes-Nospsy.Som	+0.30*
Nonpsychosomatic	5.42	Daibetes-Normal	+1.58*
Normal	4.14	Nonspy.som-Normal	+1.28*

S. E. of Difference      =     .27298  (Bet. Group)

C. D. at 0.05 level       =     .53724    (Bet. Group)

G. M.                             =     5.0933

S. D.                              =     1.9302

Personality factor N is highly significant at 0.001 level of Significance. It means that the diabetic patients are shrewed- calculating warlelly, penetrating (shrewdness) The person scores high on factor N Tends to be polished & experienced. He is often hardheaded & analytical. He has intellectual, unsentimental approach to situations, an approach akin tocynicism.
Personality Factor ‘O’
Table (a)
Table of Analysis of Variance

Source	D. F	S. S	M. S. S	F
Bet. Group	2	92.16699	46.08350	14.7865
With-in-group	297	925.62988	3.11660
Total	299	1017.79688	3.40400

***         Significant at 0.001 level   

Table (B)

Table of Means & Significant of The Differences of The Means

Groups	Means	Comparison	Differences of thee mean
Diabetes	7.07	Diabetes-Nospsy.Som	+0.55*
Nonpsychosomatic	6.52	Diabetes-Normal	+1.35*
Normal	5.72	Nonpsy.som-Normal	0.80

                S. E. of difference      =              .24966   (Bet.Group)
                C. D at 0.05 level        =              .49136   (Bet.Group)
                G. M.                =              6.4367
                S. D.                  =              1.76654
Diabetic & Nonpsychosomatic have scored higher than normal group & nonpsychoso-matic has scored lower than diabetic group. Thus it suggests that the diabetic patients are apprehensive- worrying, Depressive, Trebled (Guilt Pronencess) The person who scores high on factor ‘O’ tends to be depressed, Mody, worrier, full of foreboding & brooding. He has a child life tendency to anxiety in difficulties. He does not feel accepted in group or free to participate to anxiety in difficulties. He does not feel accepted in group or free to participate high factor ‘O’ score is very common in clinical group of all types.
Personality factor ‘Q¹’
                Personality Factor I is not Significant.

Personality factor ‘Q²’
Table (a)
Table of Analysis of Variance

Source	D. F	S. S	M. S. S	F
Bet. Group	2	29.54688	14.77344	4.3152
With-in-group	297	1016.79980	3.42357
Total	299	1046.34668	3.49949

 ***   Significant at 0.001 level   

Table (b)

Table of Means & Significant of the differences of the means

Groups	Means	Comparison	Differences of thee mean
Diabetes	4.80	Diabetes-Nospsy.Som	-0.76*
Nonpsychosomatic	5.56	Diabetes-Normal	-0.58 (N.S)
Normal	5.28	Nonpsy.som-Normal	+ 0.25 (N.S)

                                S. E. of difference   =              .26167   (Bet.Group)
                                C. D at 0.05 level     =              .51499   (Bet.Group)
                                G. M.                        =              5.2133
                                S. D.                          =              1.8503
It means diabetic patients are group dependent-A ‘Joiner’ & sound follower low on factor ‘Q prefers to work and make decisions with other people, likes & dependents on social approval and admiration. He tends to go along with the group and may be lacking in individual resolution. He is not necessarily gregarious by choice rather he needs group support.

Personality factor ‘Q³’
Personality Factor I is not Significant.
Table (a)
Table of Analysis of Variance

Source	D. F	S. S	M. S. S	F
Bet. Group	2	87.91992	43.95996	11.6046
With-in-group	297	1125.08008	3.78815
Total	299	1213.00000	4.05686

*** Significant at 0.001 level

Table (b)

Table of Means & Significant of the differences of the means

Groups	Means	Comparison	Differences of thee mean
Diabetes	7.00	Diabetes-Nospsy.Som	+1.16*
Nonpsychosomatic	6.84	Diabetes-Normal	-0.06*
Normal	8.06	Nonpsy.som-Normal	-1.22*

                S. E. of difference  =              .27525   (Bet.Group)
                C. D at 0.05 level    =              .54172   (Bet.Group)
                G. M.                      =              7.3000
                S. D.                       =              1.9463
                Thus it suggests that the diabetic and no psychosomatic have scored than normal group and non psychotic has lower than diabetic group. This reveals that this trait does not play important role in the cases of diabetes.

16- Personality factor ‘Q⁴’
Table (a)
Table of Analysis of Variance

Source	D. F	S. S	M. S. S	F
Bet. Group	2	269.44629	134.72314	38.6302
With-in-group	297	1035.79004	3.48751
Total	299	1305.23644	4.36534

***    Significant at 0.001 level

Table (b)

Table of Means & Significant of the differences of the means

Groups	Means	Comparison	Differences of thee mean
Diabetes	7.26	Diabetes-Nospsy. Som	+1.23*
Nonpsychosomatic	6.03	Diabetes-Normal	+2.32*
Normal	4.94	Nonpsy.som-Normal	+2.09*

                S. E. of difference    =      .26410   (Bet.Group)
                C. D at 0.05 level      =     .51978   (Bet.Group)
                G. M.                         =      6.0767
                S. D.                          =      1.8675
Diabetic & no psychosomatic have scored higher than normal group and nonpsy-chosomatic has scored lower than diabetic group thus, It suggests that the diabetic patients are tense, frustrated, driven, over wrought (high ergic tension) the person who scores high on factor Q⁴ tends to be tends, excitable, results, fretful, inpatients. He is often fatigued, but unable to remain inactive. In group he takes a poor view of the degree of unity, orderliness & leadership &. His frustration representation. Excess of stimulate, but undischanged drive has in the case of diabetic.
Above description of personality pattern reveals that diabetic patients have got different personality profile specialty with reference to factors L, N, O and Q⁴ on which diabetic patients have scored significantly higher than nonpsychotic and normal groups.

1. Buchar, Raichard E; Romankiewing eduards & Defreitas Targina, pauling (1981) Brosilia, Bragil) [Psychological & PsychodymanicCharacteristics of the diabetic patients (post) acta psiquiatricay, Psychological de America latina (May) Vol. 27(2) 117-123. 2. Cohen (1960): Diabetes acidosis: An evaluation on the cause course and Therapy of 73 cases. Ann. int. medical 52: 55-86. 3. Crowell, D. H.; swift (1953) : Personality & Physical disease to A test of the Dunbar hypothesis applied 4. to diabetes mellitus & rheumatic fever.genet : Psychol. monoge 48:117-53. 5. Conti, C., Carrozzino, D., Patieno, C., Vitacolonna, E., & Fulcheri, M. (2016). The clinical link between type D Personality and diabetes. Frontiers in psychiatry, 7, 113. 6. Dunbar, (1943) psychosomatic diagnosis (Hoebar) New York pp 498- 541. 7. Jalali, N., Taghavikojidi, H., Badrfam, R., & Zandifar, A. (2021). The relationship between personality disorder, depression and eating disorder with treatment adherence in patients with type 2 diabetes; a cross-sectional study in diabetic patients in Iron. Journal of Diabetes & Metabolic Disorders, 20(1), 153-159. 8. Kammerer, Wolf gang & Reindell, Medizinsche (1977) psychomatic aspect of Diabetes mellitus. (Germ) Zeit Schrft for psycho- somatic medigin And psychoanalysis (Oct.-Dec.) vol. 25 (4) 351-362. 9. Kaski, Maija & Liisa (1991) what’s new in the psychosomatic of insulinDependent diabetes mellitus psychiatria fannica Vol. 22; 71& 78. 10. Knowles, H. C.: Danowski, T. S. : Korsnick , A ; (1964) : A conference on adjustment problem in Jvuenile diabetes. Diabetes 13: 649 – 650 11. Lopez, Ibar Alina, Juan J , (1985) aspects psychololicasy psyquiatric as- de le “Diabetes mellitus” [psychological & psychiatric aspects of diabetes mellitus] (Span) 12th congress of the international diabetes foundation (1985) (medrial) (Spain) Actas luso espano las deneurologin Y psiquitria Y Ciencias Afinsee (Sept-Oct) (1985) Vol. 13 (5) 321-328 12. Lee, S. F. & Li, C. P. (2021) Personality as a predictor of HbA1c level in Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Medicine, 100(27). 13. Li, X., Zhang, S., Xu, H., Tang, X., Zhou, H., yuan., J.,------& Zhang, W. (2016). Type D personality predicts poor medication adherence in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a six-month follow-up study. PloS one, 11(2), e0146892. 14. Menninger, WC (1935, 36, 39) the interrelationship of metal disorders & diabetes mellitus. Journal of mental science 81, 322-57 15. Millicevic, R., Jaksic, N., Aukstmargetic, B., & Jakovljevic, M. (2015). Personality trains and treatment compkiance in patients with type2 diabetes mellitus. Psychiatria Danubina, 27(suppl2), 42-45. 16. Padertt, Deborah, K (1991) Correlation of self-efficacy belifes among patients with non isulin dependent diabetes mellitus in Zagab Yugoslavia. Patients education_counselling (Oct) Vo. 18 (2) 139-147. 17. Robin Gary, M. (1981) : Co Nathinglan, University; Hospital university part (England) psychiatric aspects of diabetes: A Physicians view : British Journal of psychiatry (Dec.) Vol. 139, 485-493 18. Shao, Y., yin, H., & Wan, C. (2017). Type d personality as a predictor of self-efficacy and social support in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Neuropsychiatric Disease and treatment, 13, 855. 19. Tebbi (1990) Vocational adjustment and general well being of adult well insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. Diabetes care Vol. 13 : 98-103. 20. Von Dres, Dean. D (1990) : Correlates of depression in diabetic adults. Behaviour, Health and Aging (Sum-fal) vol. 1 (2), 79-84 21. Willis, T (1984) Preactics of physic, Tradise 11, Pharmaceutice rationatis. Ist ptg; Londn, Dring, Hayer, Hayer, & Leigh