IlAction Research and Minority Problems
KURT LEWIN

Mr. Baldau presents in a very clear way the challenge of the person who
is trying to improve group relations. Although he is able to paint a relatively
friendly picture about the situation in Cleveland, he is eager to stress that heis not at all certain whether his report mirrors more than the surface. Mr.
Baldau can enumerate important progresses made by various minority groups
in the last decade, but he is not certain whether they will last or create counterpressure strong enough to reverse the trend. He is quite in doubt about theeffectiveness of the techniques used for the betterment of intergroup relations,
without being able to offer suggestions for techniques which have been proved
to be effective. He asks, therefore, for action-research, for research which will
help the practitioner. In the last year and a half I have had occasion to havecontact with a great variety of organizations, institutions, and individuals whocame for help in the field of group relations. They included representativesof communities, school systems, single schools, minority organizations of avariety of backgrounds and objectives; they included labor and management
representatives, departments of the national and state governments, and so on.
Two basic facts emerged from these contacts: there exists a great amountof good-will, of readiness to face the problem squarely and really to do something
about it. If this amount of serious good-will could be transformed into organized, efficient action, there would be no danger for intergroup relations in
the United States. But exactly here lies the difficulty. These eager people feelto be in the fog. They [eel in the fog on three counts: 1. What is the present situation? 2. What are the dangers? 3. And most important of all, whatshall we do?
We are presently conducting an interview survey among workers in intergroup relations in the State of Connecticut. We wanted to know their line ofthinking, their line of action, and the major barriers which they encounter. Not
a few of those whose very job is the improvement of inter-group relations statethat perhaps the greatest obstacle to their work is their own lack of clarity ofwhat ought to be done. How is economic and social discrimination to be
attacked if we think not in terms of generalities but in terms of the inhabitantsof that particular main street and those side and end streets which make up that
small or large town in which the individual group worker is supposed to do hisjob?
34

One of the consequences of this unclearness is the lack ~f standards bywhich to measure progress. When the intergroup worker, coming home fr~m
the good-will meeting which he helped to instigate, thin~' of t~e dlgn~toC1es
he was able to line up, the stirring appeals he heard, the ImpressIve setting of
the stage, and the good quality of the food, he cannot h,:lp ~ut feel elated by
the general atmosphere and the words of praise from h,s fflends all around.
Still, a few days later, when the next case of discrimi~ation becomes known heoften wonders whether all this was more than a whIte-wash and whether heis right in accepting the acknowledgment of his friends as a measuring stickfor the progress of his work.
This lack of objective standards of achievement has two severe effects:
1. It deprives the workers in intergroup relations of their legitimate .desire
for satisfaction on a realistic basis. Under these circumstances, satIsfactIon ordissatisfaction with his own achievement becomes mainly a question of temperament.
2. In a field that lacks objective standards of achievement, no learning
can take place. If we cannot judge whether an action has led forward or back·ward if we have no criteria for evaluating the relation between effort andachi~ement, there is nothing to prevent us from making the.wrong conclusi?ns
and to encourage the wrong work habits. Realistic fact-finding and evaluatIOn
is a prerequisite for any learning. Social research should ~ one of the top
priorities for the practical job of improving intergroup relatIOns.

Character and Function of Research for the Practiceof Intergroup Relations
The research needed for social practice can best be characteri2~d as researchfor social management or social engineering. It is a type of actIon-research,. acomparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of SOCIal
action, and research leading to social action. Research that produces nothing
but books will not suffice.
This by no means implies that the research needed is in. any ~cspect lessscientific or "lower" than what would be required for pure scIence tn the fieldof social events. I am inclined to hold the opposite to be true. Institutions
interested in engineering, such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technolo~,
have turned more and mor'" to what is called basic research. In regard to SOCIal
engineering, too, progress will depend largely on the rate with w~ich basic
research in social sciences can develop deeper insight into the laws whIch govern

"!J")':''''

social life. This "basic social research" will have to include mathematical andconceptual problems of theoretical analysis. It will have to include the whole
range of descriptive fact·finding in regard to small and large social bodies.
Above all, it will have to include laboratory and field experiments in socialchange.

Integrating Social Sciences
An attempt to improve intergroup relations has to face a wide variety oftasks. It deals wi th problems of attitude and stereotypes in regard to othergroups and to one's own group, with problems of development of attitudes andconduct during childhood and adolescence, with problems of housing, and thechange of the legal structure of the community; it deals with problems ofstatus and caste, with problems of economic discrimination, with political leadership, and with leadership in many aspects of community life. It deals with thesmall social body of a family, a club or a friendship group, with the larger
social body of a school or a school system, with neighborhoods and with social
bodies of the size of a community, of the state, a nation and with international
problems.
We are beginning to see that it is hopeless to attack anyone of these aspects
of intergroup relations without considering the others. This holds equally forthe practical and the scientific sides of the question. Psychology, sociology, andcultural anthropology each have begun to realize that without the help of theother neither will be able to proceed very far. During the last five years firsttimidly, now very clearly, a desire for an integrated approach has become articulated. What this integration would mean specifically is still open. It may
mean an amalgamation of the social sciences into one social science. It may
mean, on the other hand, merely the cooperation of various sciences for thepractical objective of improving social management. However, the next decade
will doubtless witness serious attempts of an integrated approach to social research. I am of the opinion that economics will have to be included in thissymphony if we are to understand and to handle intergroup relations more
effectively.

Two Types of Research Objectives
It is important to understand clearly that social research concerns itself

with two rather different types of questions, namely the study of general lawsof group life and the diagnosis of a specific situation.
Problems of general laws deal with the relation between possible conditions
and possible results. They are expressed in "if so" propositions. The knowledge
36

of laws can serve as guidance for the achievement of certain objectives under certain conditions. To act correctly, it does not suffice, however, if the engineer orthe surgeon knows the general laws of physics or physiology. He has to know
too the specific character of the situation at hand. This character is determinedby a scientific fact·finding called diagnosis. For any field of action both typesof scientific research are needed.
Until recently, fact-finding on intergroup relations has been largely dominated by surveys. We have become somewhat critical of these surveys of intergroup relations. Although they are potentially important, they have, as a rule,used rather superficial methods of poll taking and not the deeper. searching of
the interview type used by Likert which gives us some insight into the motivations
behind the sentiments expressed_
The second cause of dissatisfaction is the growing realization that mere
diagnosis--and surveys are a type of diagnosis---.<ioes not suffice. In intergrouprelations as in other fields of social management the diagnosis has to be com·plemented by experimental comparative studies of the effectiveness of various
techniques of change.

The Function and Position of Research Within
Soc:lal Planning and Action
At least of equal importance to the content of the research on intergrouprelations is its proper placement within social life. When, where, and by whomshould social research be done?
Since we are here interested in social management let uS examine somewhat
more closely the process of planning.
Planning starts usually with something like ~ ge~era~ idea. For one
reason or another it seems desirable to reach a certam obJectIve. Exactly how
to circumscribe this objective, and how to reach it is f requentIy not too clear.
The first step then is to examine the idea carefully i~ th~ lig~t of t~e means
available. Frequently more fact·finding about the sItuatIon IS reqUlre~. If
this first period of planning is successful, two items emerge: n~e1y, an overall plan" of how to reach the objective and secondly, a deCISIon 10 .regard to ~efirst step of action. Usually this planning has also somewhat modIfied the onginal idea.
The next period is devoted to executing the first step of the overall plan.
In highly developed fields of social management, s~ch as modern fa<.to?,management or the execution of a war, this second step IS followed by certam
37

fact-findings. For example, in the bombing of Germany a certain factory may
have heen chosen as the first target after careful consideration of various priorities and of the best means and ways of dealing with this target. The attack ispressed home and immediately a reconnaissance plane follows with the one
objective of determining as accurately and objectively as possible the new situation.
This reconnaissance or fact-finding has four functions. First it should
evaluate the action. It shows whether what has been achieved is above or below
expectation. Secondly, it gives the plaoners a chance to learn, that is, to gather
new general insight, for instance, regarding the strength and weakness of certain
weapons or techniques of action. Thirdly, this fact-finding should serve as abasis for correctly planning the next step. Finally, it serves as a basis for modifying the "overall plan."very significant developments. About two years ago the American Jewish Congress established the Commission on Community Interrelations. This is anaction-research organization designed primarily to function as a service organization to Jewish and non-Jewish bodies in the field of group interrelations. It
is mainly interested in the group approach as compared to the individual approach on the one hand and the mass approach by way of radio and newspaperon the other. These latter two important lines are the focus of attention of theresearch unit of the American Jewish Committee.

We need reconnaisance to show us whether we move in the right direction
and with what speed we move. Socially, it does not suffice that university
organizations produce new scientific insight. It will be necessary to installfact-finding procedures, social eyes and ears, right into social action bodies.

Various programs try to make use of our educational system for bettermentof intergroup relations, such as that of the American Council on Education. The
College Study in Intergroup Relations at teachers colleges, the Citizenship Education Study in Detroit, and, in a more overall way, the Bureau for Intercult·ural Education. They all show an increased sensitivity for a more realistic, thatis more scienti lie, procedure of evaluation and self-evaluation. The same holds
in various degrees for undertakings specifically devoted to Negro-White relations, such as the American Council on Race Relations in Chicago, the Urban
League, and others. It is significant that the State Commission Against Discrimination in the State of New York has a subcommittee foe cooperation withresearch projects and that the Inter-Racial Commission of the State of Connecticut is actively engaged in research. The recent creation of major research institutions at universities has also helped to broaden the vistas of many of theexisting action organizations and in making them more confident of the possibilities of using scientific techniques for their purposes.
I cannot possibly attempt even in the form of a survey to discuss the many
projects and findings which arc emerging from these research undertakings.
They include surveys of the methods which have been used until now, such asthat just published by Goodwin Watson; studies of the development of attitudes
in children; studies of the relation between intergroup attitudes and such factors
as political belief, position in one's own group; experiments about how best toreact in case of a verbal attack along prejudice lines; change experiments withcriminal gangs and with communities; the development of many new diagnostic
tests; and last but not least, the development of more precise theories of social
Change. Not too much of the results of these projects have yet found theirway into print. However, I am confident that the next few years will witness
rapidly increased output of significant and practical studies.

The idea of research or fact·finding branches of agencies devoted to improving intergroup relations is not new. However, Some of them did little morethan collect newspaper clippings. The last few years has seen a number of

Example of a Chaneae Experiment on Minority Problems
One example may illustrate the potentialities of ~ooperation ~eenpractitioners and social scientists. In the beginning of thiS year the Olauman

The next step again is composed of a circle of planning, executing, andreconnaissance or fact-finding for the purpose of evaluating the results of thesecond step, for preparing the rational basis for planning the third step, andfor perhaps modifying again the overall plan.
Rational social management, therefore, proceeds in a spiral of steps eachof which is composed of a circle of planning, action, and fact-finding about theresult of the action.
With this in mind, let us examine for a moment the way intergroup relations
are handled. I cannot help feeling that the person returning from a successful
completion of a good-will meeting is like the captain of a boat who somehow
has felt that his ship steers too much to the right and therefore has turned thesteering wheel sharply to the left. Certain signals assure him that the rudder
has followed the move of the steering wheel. Happily he goes to dinner. In
the meantime, of course, the boat moves in circles. In the field of intergrouprelations all too frequently action is based on observations made "within the boat"
and too seldom based on objective criteria in regard to the relations of the
movement of the boat to the objective to be reached.

38

,.-

of the Advisory Committee on Race Relations for the State of Connecticut,
who is at the same time a leading member of the Interracial Commission of theState of Connecticut, approached us with a request to conduct a workshop for
fifty community workers in the field of intergroup relations from all over thestate of Connecticut.
A project emerged in which three agencies cooperated, the Advisory Com·mittee on Intergroup Relations of the State of Connecticut, The Commission
on Community Interrelations of the American Jewish Congress, and the Research Center for Group Dynamics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The State Advisory Committee is composed of members of the Interracial Commission of the State of Connecticut, a member of the State Department of Education of the State of Connecticut, and the person in charge of the Connecticut
Valley Region of the Conference of Christians and Jews. The state of Connecticut seems to be unique in having an interracial commission as a part ofits regular government. It was apparent that any improvement of techniques
which could be linked with this strategic central body would have a much betterchance of a wide-spread and lasting effect. After a thorough discussion ofvarious possibilities the following change·experiment was designed cooperatively.
Recent research findings have indicated that the ideologies and stereotypes
which govern intergroup relations should not be viewed as individual character
traits but that they are anchored in cultural standards, that their stability andtheir change depend largely on happenings in groups as groups_ Experience
with leadership training had convinced us that the workshop setting is among
the most powerful tools for bringing about improvement of skill in handlingintergroup relatIons.
Even a good and successful workshop, however, seems seldom to have thechance to lead to long-range improvements in the field of intergroup relations.
The individual who comes home from the workshop full of enthusiasm andnew insights will again have to face the community, one against perhaps 100,000.
Obviously, the chances are high that his success will not be up to his new levelof aspiration, and that soon disappointments will set him back again. We arefacing here a question which is of prime importance for any social change, namely
the problem of its permanence.
To test certain hypotheses in regard to the effect of individual as againstgroup settings, the fulluwing variations were introduced into the experimental
workshop. Part of the delegates came as usual, one individual from a town.
For a number of communities, however, it was decided the attempt would bemade to secure a number of delegates and if possible to develup in the workshop
40

teams who would keep up their team relationship after the workshop. Thisshould give a greater chance for permanency of the enthusiasm and groupproductivity and should also multiply the power of the participants to bringabout the desired change_ A third group of delegates to the workshop wo~ld
receive a certain amount of expert help even after they returned to the commumty.
The faculty for the workshop included Dr. Lippitt as Pr?ject.Director, D~.
Bradford from the NEA and Dr. Benne from Columbia Umverslty. There IS
no time here to go into detail of the training procedure. ' However I should
mention a few points related to research.
The first step in carrying out such a design calls for b~oad fact-fin~i~g
about the different types of intergroup problems which the varIous commumtles
have to face. Communities and teams of group workers in the communities
would have to be selected so that the results of the three variations would bepossible to compare. In other words, this project had to face the same prohlems
which we mention as typical for planning process in general.
The experiences of the members of the State Advisory B?ard of the ~n­terracial Commission of the State of Connecticut were able qUIckly to prOVIde
sufficient data to determine the towns which should be studied more accurately.
To evaluate the effect of the workshop a diagnosis before th~ worksh?p ~ould
have to be carried out to determine, among other things, the hne of thmkmg of
the community workers, their main line of action and the ~ain barriers they haveto face. A similiar re-diagnosis would have to be earned out some months
after the workshop.
To understand why the workshop produced whatever change or lack ofchange would be found, it is obviously necessary to record scientifically t~e. happenmgs
durmg·
essentIal
t h e work sho p. Here • I feel • research faces Its
most difficult task. To record the content of the lecture or the program w~uld
by no means suffice. Description of the form of leadership has to take mto
account the amount of initiative shown by individuals and subgroups, the. ,!fito su"groups,
1.:
the frictions within and between these· ..
d IVlslonof the tramees.
subgroups the Cflses and their outcome, and , a bove all • the total management
pattern as'it changes from day to day. These large-scale aspects, more thananything else, seem to determine what a workshop will accomplish. Th~ task
which social scientists have to face in objectively recording these data IS not
too different from that of the historian. We will have to learn to handle these. .
d 'tn ' T · ·ng Community Leadership Toward
lSee summary of tralnln& prace ure H,~'Irud R nald Lippitt Mult EJu<aI;onMore Effective Gruup Living," by Palmer ow:u an0.
Bulietin, August, 1946.

41

relatively large units of periods and social bodies without lowering the standardsof val~dlty and reliability to which we are accustomed in the psychologicalrecordmg of the more microscopic units of action and periods of minutes orseconds of activity.
The methods of recording the essential events of the workshop included
an evaluation session at the end of every day. Observers who had attended thevarious subgroup sessions reported (into a recording machine) the leadership
pattern they had observed, the progress or lack of progress in the development of
the groups from a conglomeration of individuals to an integrated "we" and soon. The group leaders gave their view of the same sessions and a number oftrainees added their comments.
I have been deeply impressed with the tremendous pedagogical effect whichthese evaluation meetings, designed for the purpose of scientific recording, had onthe ~ralOlOg process .. Th: atmosphere of objectivity, the readiness by the faculty
to dISCUSS openly theIr mistakes, far from endangering their position, seemed tolea.d t~ an enh~ncement of appreciation and to bring about that mood of relaxed
objectiVity whICh IS nowhere more difficult to achieve than in the field of intergroup relations which is loaded with emotionality and attitude rigidity even amon~ the so-called liberals and those whose job it is to promote intergrouprelations.

. This and similar experiences have convinced me that we should consider
actIOn, res~arch and train~ng as a triangle that should be kept together for the sakeof ~ny of Its corners. It IS seldom possible to improve the action pattern without
trammg personnel. .In fact today the lack of competent training personnel is
one of ~~ greatest hmderances to progress in setting up more experimentation.
The trammg of large numbers of social scientists who can handle scientificproble?",s. but are als.o equipped for the delicate task of building productive,h~rd-hlttmg teams With practitioners is a prerequisite for the progress in social
sCience as well as m SOCial management for intergroup relations.
As I watched, during the workshop, the delegates from different towns allover Con~ecti~t transform from ~ ~ultitude o.f unrelated individuals, frequently
op~osed In th"lr outlook and theIr mterests, mto cooperative teams not on thebaSIS of sweetness but on the basis of readiness to face difficulties realisticall
to apply honest fact-fmding, and to work together to overcome them' when YI
saw the patte.co of role-playing emerge, saw the major responsibilities moveslowly a~cordmg to plan from the faculty to the trainees; when I saw, in the
final seSSIOn, th~ St~te Advisory Committee receive the backing of the delegates
for a plan of lmkmg the teachers colleges throughout tlIt: s·tat e WIt. h certaIn.

aspects of group relations within the communities; when I heard the delegates
and teams of delegates from various towns present their plans for city workshops and a number of other projects to go into realization immediately, I
could not help but feel that the close integration of action, training, and researchholds tremendous possibilities for the field of intergroup relations. I would
like to pass on this feeling to you.
Intergroup relations are doubtless one of the most crucial aspects on thenational and international scene. We know today better than ever before thatthey are potentially dynamite. The strategy of social research must take into
account the dangers involved.
We might distinguish outside adversities and barriers to social science andthe inner dangers of research procedures. Among the first we find a group ofpeople who seem to subscribe to the idea that we do not need more social science.
Among these admirers of common sense we find practitioners of all types,
politicians and college presidents. Unfortunately there are a good number ofphysical scientists among those who are against a vigorous promotion of thesocial sciences. They seem to feel that the social sciences have not produc:dsomething of real value for the practice of social management and therdore wtll
never do so. I guess there is no other way to convince these people than byproducing better social science.
A second threat to social science comes from "groups in power"'. These
people can. be found in management on any level, among labor leaders, among
politicians, some branches of the government, and among members of Congress.
Somehow or other they all seem to be possessed by the fear that they could not
do what they want to do if they, and others, would really know th.e. facts. I
think social scientists should be careful to distinguish between the legitimate andnot legitimate elements behind this fear. For instance, it would be most ~n­healthy if the findings of the Gallup Poll automatically would determlOe
policy for what should and should not become law in the Unite~ State.s. We
will have to recognize the difference between fact find~ng and FOhcy settt~g andto study carefully the procedures by which fact findlO.g shoul~ be fed 10 thesocial machinery of legislation to produce a democratIc effect.
Doubtless, bowever, a good deal of unwillingness ~o face reali~ yes behind the enmity to social research of some of the people 10 power positions.
A third type of v"ry real anxiety on the part of practioners can be illustrated
by the following example. Members of community councils to whom I have had'See "Public Opinion Polls and Democro'ic Leadership," by Dorwin Cartwright,/ollmal of So(iallsslJes, Vol. 2, No.2, May, 1946, p. 23-32.

43

the occasion to report results of research on group interrelations reacted withthe feeling that the social scientists at the university or in the research arm ofsome national organization would sooner or later be in the position to tell the
local community workers all over the states exactly what to do and what not todo.

develop in the children, adolescents, and adults of minorities deep-seated antagonism to their own group. An over-degree of submissiveness, guilt emotionality, and other causes and forms of ineffective behavior follows. Neither anindividual or a group that is at odds with itself can live normally or live happily
with other groups.

They obviously envisaged a social science "technocracy". This fear seems
to be a very common misunderstanding based on the term "law". The community w~~~ers ,~ailed .to real~ze that lawfulness in social as in physical sciencemea?s an If sO relatlOn, a hnkage between hypothetical conditions and hypothetIcal effects. These laws do not tell what conditions exist locally, at a given
place at a given time. In other ~ords, the laws don't do the job of diagnosis
whlch.has to be done loca~ly. N~I.ther do laws prescribe the strategy for change.
In SOCial ma~agement, as In mediCine, the practioner will usually have the choice~etwee~ variOUs metho~s of treatment and he will require as much skill andingenUIty as the phYSICian in regard to both diagnosis and treatment.

It should be clear to the social scientist that it is hopeless to cope withthis problem by providing sufficient self-esteem for members of minority groups
as individua\s. The discrimination which these individuals experience is notdirected against them as individuals but as group members and only by raising
their self -esteem as group members to the normal level can a remedy be produced.

. It seems to be crucial for the progress of social science that the practitioner
Will ~ndcrstand that through social sciences and only through them he can hope~o gain the power nec:ssary to do a good job. Unfortunately there is nothing
III SOCial laws an.d SOCial research which will force the practitioner toward thegood. SCience gives more freedom and power to both the doctor and the murdered, to. ~emocra7 and fascism. The social scientist should recognize his
responslblhty also In respect to this.

Research on MaJorities and Minorities. It has not .be'.'n the intention of this paper to discuss detailed findings of
SOCial research
howevertw_.In.Intergroup relations_ I feel,, , that I shou Id ment'10no POlOts which Illustrate, I think, basic aspects.
. Intergroup relations is a two-way affair. This means that to improve relatIOns between groups both of the interacting groups have to be studied.
. In recent !ea.rs we have started to realize that so-called minority problems
are.1O fact maJoI1~ problems, t~at the Negro problem is the problem of thewhite,. I that thef JeWIsh problem IS the problem of the non-J ew, an d so on, I t
IS a sotrue
0course that intergroup relations cannot be solved WI·thout al terlOg
.
.
0
f h
certam aspects of conduct and sentiment of the minority gro
mo tb
1 . thup.
ne 0 t e.
f s severe
fid 0 stacd cs 10 c way of improvement seems to be the notonouslacko con ence .an .self-esteemof most minority groups . M'100rity. groups tend..
to acceptt h e Imphclt
h.
d.Judgment of those who have statuseven were
the Judg. d'ment IS IIecte agamst themselves. There are manY f orces w h'Ich tend to

44

Many whites in the South seem to realize that one prerequisite for progress is the enhancement of self-esteem of the southern Negro. On the other
hand, the idea of a positive program of increasing group loyalties seems to beparadoxical to many liberals. We seem to have become accustomed to linking
the question of group loyalty and group self-esteem with jingoism.
The solution, I think, can be found only through a development which
would bring the general level of group esteem and group loyalty which inthemselves are perfectly natural and necessary phenomena to the same level for
all groups of society. That means every effort should be made to lower the inflated self esteem of the 100 percenters. They should learn the prayer fromthe musical-play, Oklahoma. "Dear God, make me see that I am not better thanmy fellow men." However it is essential to learn the second half of this prayerthat goes something like "but that I am every darn bit as good as he." Fromthe experiences thus far I would judge that raising the self-esteem of the minority groups is onc of the most strategic means for the improvement of intergroup relations,
The last point I would like to mention concerns the relation between thelocal, the national, and the international scenes. No one working in the fieldof intergroup relations can be blind to the fact that we live today in one world .
Whether it will become politically one world or two worlds, there is no doubtthat so far as interdependence of events is concerned we are living in one world.
Whether we think of the Calholics, or the Jew., the Greeks, or the Negroes
every group within the United States is deeply affected by happenings in otherplaces on the globe. Intergroup relations in this country will be formed to alarge degree by the events on the international scene and particularly by thefate of the colonial peoples. It will be crucial whether or not the policy ofthis country will follow what Raymond Kennedy has called international Jim
Crow policy of the colonial empires. Are we ready to give up the policy

45

followed in the Philippines and to regress when dealing with the United States'
dependencies to that policy of exploitation which has made colonial imperialism
the_ most hated i_nstitution the world over_ Or will we follow the philosophy
whIch J~hn CollIer has developed in regard to the American Indians and which
the_ I~stItute of Eth~ic Affairs is proposing for the American dependencies.
~IS IS a pattern whICh leads gradually to independence, equality, and cooperatIon: Wha~ever the effect of a policy of permanent exploitation would be onth.e l.nternatlO,:al scene, it could not help but have a deep effect on the situation
WlthlO the Umted States. !im-Crowism on the international scene will hampert~emendously progress of lOtergroup relations within the United States and islikely to endanger every aspect of democracy.
The development of intergroup relations is doubtless full of danger andthe development o.f social science in this field faces many obstacles. The picture: however, whICh I have been able to paint, the progress of research andpartIcularly that the organization of social research has made during the lastFe,,: years, makes me feel that we have learned much. A large scale effort of
SOCIal research on lOtergroup relations doubtless would be able to have a lasting
effect on the history of this country_
It is equally clear, however, that this job demands from the social scientists
an utmost amount of courage. It needs courage as Plato defines it. It needs
the best of what the best among us can give, and the help of everybody.

!I
1

I
~

46

The Use of Clinical Methods in Social Psychology
DONALD

W. MACKINNON

The problems of immediate concern in the areas of racial tensions andinternational affairs presented to uS by the preceding papers are indeed a challenge to contemporary methods of research in social psychology. It would bepleasant to think that we have at hand the techniques to answer the questions
raised by these men. The truth is that we do not. But we should not let this
discourage us. We have the beginnings and the faith that these, through ourcollaborative efforts, can be developed into a sophisticated and adequate methodology.

Our Task: The Inves+iCJa+lon of Group Tensions
The problems with which we are faced in these challenging papers exist as
problems in our society and threaten the peace and happiness of our social living because of the tendency of men to form groups from which other men are
acluded. There is nothing wrong with groups per Ie. Indeed, our war experience has shown us how much the health and morale of an individual depend
upon the character of the group of which he is a member. Group-formation
becomes a problem of distre"ing social concern, however, when tensions are
established between groups, when the distinction between in-group and outgroup is sharply drawn and the aggressions of one directed against the other.
Our task is, then, in large measure, the investigation of these group tensions. Though for economy of expression we refer to them as group tensions,
we must remember constantly that in the last analysis they are the tensions
that exist between individuals of opposed group memberships. Here, as in allsocial psychological problems, the ultimate unit is the individual, not the group,
however true it is that the one can never be studied in isolation from the other.
If we ask, What psychologically are the carriers of these tensions? the answer
is, I believe, The needs, sentiments, attitudes, ideologies, prejudices, etc, which
set a person of a given group-membership against those who belong to anotheror other groups. These carriers may, of course, be studied separately, but suchinvestigations can give at best partial answers to our questions, for in them theindividual as a whole is lost from sight and the personality correlates of thesingle factor under study :lfe ignored_ Research of this kind has in the pastand must by its very nature always result in false conclusions and faulty overgeneralizations, for it ignores in practice a principle wh~ch in theory we all
accept-the theory of the multiple determination of behaVIor.
47