The objectives of the study were: (1) To determine the impact of socio-economic status upon variables, like, certain personality traits and values of college going male and female adolescents. (2) To determine the impact of sex upon variables, such as, certain personality traits and values of college going male and female adolescents. (3) To determine the interaction among different socio-economic status and sex of college going adolescents during operational impact upon certain personality traits and values. (4) To make deeper probe into the nature of certain traits of personality and values within the operation frame work of certain traits of personality. 

The hypotheses of the study were: (1) There is no significant difference between total college going male and female adolescents with regard to certain personality traits and values separately. (2) There is no significant difference between pair combinations of SES College going students separately with regard to certain personality traits and values separately. (3) There is no significant difference between college going males and female adolescents of various level of SES separately with regard to certain traits of personality. (4) There is no significant difference between college going male and female adolescents of various levels of SES separately with regard to values. (5) There is no significant difference between college going male adolescents of various SES levels separately with regard to certain personality traits and values separately. (6) There is no significant difference between college going female adolescents of various SES levels separately with regard to certain personality traits and values separately. 

The findings of the study were: (1) The total college going male and female adolescents had no significant mean difference in all the twelve traits of personality and in all the six values separately. (2) The college going male and female adolescents of high and middle SES, high and low SES had significant mean difference in all the twelve traits of personality; high and middle SES groups were significantly different only on theoretical value; high and low SES groups significantly differed on social value; middle and low SES groups had significant mean differences in ten traits of personality, in remaining two traits A and B traits, the mean difference was not significant; and in case of values, these groups differed on social and political values. (3) The college going male and female adolescents of high SES and low SES separately differed significantly in all the 12 personality traits and six values separately, while male and female of middle SES differed significantly on E trait of personality and economic value. (4) The college going male adolescents of high and middle SES, and high and low SES differed significantly in all the twelve personality traits, high and middle SES groups differed significantly in all the six values; high and low SES males differed significantly only on one value-social value; middle and low SES boys differed significantly in social and political values and D, E, I, J, K, and L personality traits. (5) The college going females of high and middle SES and high and low SES differed significantly in all the twelve traits of personality; middle and low SES females differed significantly in nine traits of personality (excluding A, B, H traits). (6) High and middle SES female adolescence differed significantly in social value only; high and low SES female adolescence differed significantly in social value only while middle and low SES did not differ significantly in all the six values.