Toward Prediction of Attitude-Action Discrepancy

In an attempt to predict behavior discrepant from measured attitudes, an instrument is developed which utilizes Parsons and Shils' pattern-variable scheme. Some 338 subjects are tested to ascertain their racial attitudes. A sample of 40 subjects is drawn, and these are forced to activate their attitudes in the face of social opposition. The instrument as a whole is unable to predict discrepant behavior, but the diffuseness-specificity variable is found to be an excellent predictor of actual situational behavior in an experimental situation which makes that dilemma paramount. Emphasis is placed on the fact that individual pattern-variable dilemmas, when measured, may offer a way to significantly increase prediction of actual behavior. T here is little evidence to indicate that behavioral science has been able to demonstrate a high correlation between questionnaire responses and overt behavior. In utilizing standard attitude and opinion measuring techniques, much research seems to demonstrate that accurate prediction of the actual behavior of individuals is very difficult. Although substantial work has been done in attitude research to develop adequate instruments for measuring and scaling, and for years the failure of many attitudes to materialize into action has been noted, real systematic work in explaining and attempting to predict this discrepancy is relatively new. In behavioral science such a state of uncertainty is not desirable. Since prediction is a basic goal of science, it does not behoove the behavioral scientist to be content with a body of data on the assumption that it is predictive. Although it is often very difficult to test how well attitudinal measures correspond to sub-. sequent behavior, such problems should not be a perpetual excuse for accepting the assumption that actions follow attitudes. The research literature is replete with examples of attitude-action discrepancy. Since the warning of Bogardus in 1933, that an individual's rating on a social distance or attitude scale is no real indication of the behavior that will follow in a life situation, scores of studies have sought to demonstrate and elaborate on this problem.1 One of the classic studies in this area was conducted by De Fleur and Westie in 1958. The experiment was designed so that the subjects were asked if they would consent to being photographed in close social relationships with Negroes. Of those who indicated that they would not mind, over one-third refused to fulfill the prescribed action when the situation was actually presented.2 Thus, a call was issued for a renewed examination of the attitude-action problem. Subsequently, other studies have sought to clarify this discrepancy.3 These studies have used such concepts as reference groups, social involvement and experience with the attitude object as explanatory variables. The important factor, however, is that none of these studies have offered a practical instrument which could be used in conjunction with attitude scales to give the researcher a method whereby he might state the likelihood of such an attitude being transformed into overt be1 Emory S. Bogardus, "A Social Distance Scale," Sociology and Social Research, 17 (January-February 1933), pp. 265-271. 2 Melvin L. De Fleur and Frank R. Westie, "Verbal Attitudes and the Salience of Attitudes," Anerican Sociological Review, 23 (December 1958), pp. 667-673. 3 See for example, Lawrence S. Linn, "Verbal Attitudes and the Salience of Attitudes," Social Forces, 43 (March 1965), pp. 353-364; and James M. Fendrick, "Perceived Reference Group Support: Racial Attitudes and Overt Behavior," American Sociological Review, 32 (December 1967), pp. 960-970. This content downloaded from 207.46.13.127 on Sun, 02 Oct 2016 06:01:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms ATTITUDE-ACTION DISCREPANCY 399 havior. It is to this end that this research is directed. The present study seeks to take initial steps toward the construction of an instrument which will measure individual propensities toward adoption of various definitions of the situation. It then puts the instrument to an empirical test by requiring a sample of subjects to whom it was given to activate a set of their previously measured attitudes. Standard attitude scales largely confine themselves to the measurement of cognitive definitions of a given category of objects or events. Such procedures are inadequate for prediction purposes. One must also be able to measure the manner in which individuals are likely to see their relationship to other parts of the situation. In effect, the employment of behaviors toward objects in a real situation is not only a result of cognitive definintions of that object, but it is also a result of the actor's orientation to all the relevant circumstances of the situation. This is illustrated in a statement by Raab and Lipset. In examining the relationship between prejudiced attitudes and discriminatory behavior, they first maintain that: "The evidence clearly indicates, however, that prejudiced attitudes are very far from being neat little mental packages; and that, at the very least, they do not predetermine prejudiced behavior."4 Next, they point to the fact that: Not only do prejudiced attitudes differ from one individual to another, but they tend to differ from one situation to another for any given individual. For an attitude is not a thing, it is a process; it is an interaction. It is an interaction involving not only the person and the object, but all other factors that are present in any situation.5 The latter quotation succinctly summarizes the major thesis of this research. Viewing attitudes in this manner would seem to imply that some measure of all the situational variables would have to be devised in order to predict behavior. Few schemes, if any, would be able to take account of all situational factors external to and independent of the actor, and it would probably not be necessary to do so. The important thing one must know is how the actor defines external parts of behavioral situations. If a method can be found to measure given propensities toward certain situational definitions, then one might be on the path to predicting how the attributes of the situation and those of the actor merge to produce be-