Verbal Attitudes and Overt Behavior: A Study of Racial Discrimination

The present study in attempting to measure the relationship between racial attitudes and overt behavior asked Ss to pose for a photograph with a Negro of the opposite sex. Discrepancies between verbal attitudes and subsequent overt behavior involving those attitudes was found in 59 percent of the cases. The relationship between attitude (prejudice) and behavior (discrimination) is seen to be a function of the level of social involvement with the attitude object as well as the amount of prior experience with it. One implication of the study is that statements or predictions of racial behavior based on attitude mea-surements have little reliability unless first validated empirically. T he present study is concerned with the relationship between verbal attitudes as expressed through response items on an attitude questionnaire and subsequent overt behavior.' It is incorrect to assume that the response to a verbal question (printed or oral) necessarily reveals an attitude which would become operative in the situation depicted in the question. This study will examine the utility of attitude measurements as a means for predicting future behavior. Since considerable funds are expended on attitude research each year and since such research constitutes a large bulk of the social science enterprise, it is essential to make clear what relevance such data have and what kind of restrictions must be placed on their application. This is not to say that there are no verbal attitudes which correlate highly with behavior. But, if the goal of a research project is to predict behavior on the basis of verbal attitudes, evidence must be cited showing the probability of accurate prediction and the degree of validity in generalizing from an attitude to behavior.2 The present study will examine the relationship between expressed racial attitudes and overt behavior, looking at the level of precision and accuracy that can be obtained in predicting behavior from attitude scores based on written verbal responses. It will also be of interest to examine how people will account for discrepancies between their expressed attitudes and their behavior if and when discrepancies exist. But, before turning to a discussion of the empirical findings of * The author is indebted to David Mechanic for his valuable advice and criticism in the designing and carrying out of this study and to Michael Hakeem, Gerald Marwell, and William H. Sewell for their criticisms of the text. The work reported here was supported by a NIMH training program in social psychology (Grant #2N-7413). 1 One of the most diversely defined concepts in social psychology is attitude. Not only are there vast differences concerning what properly constitutes an attitude, but there has been developing a large literature debating how attitudes should be measured. Both of these topics have been thoroughly discussed in a recent article by Melvin DeFleur and Frank Westie, "Attitude as a Scientific Concept," Social Forces, 42 (October 1963), pp. 17-31, so that a long theoretical analysis of the problems of defining and measuring attitudes will not be dealt with in this paper. This is not to say that they will be ignored; they will be discussed, but relevant only to issues that are raised in this research. 2 Robert K. Merton has pointed out that it should not be assumed that overt behavior is intrinsically any "more real" than verbal behavior nor should it be considered as more "truthful." Overt actions do not necessarily reflect verbal attitudes and may deliberately conceal or disguise them. In fact, there are times when it may be valuable to know a person's verbal opinion even if it is not directly related to his behavior. . .. See Merton, "Fact and Factitiousness in Ethnic Opinionaires," Amiierican Sociological Reziew, 5, (1940). This content downloaded from 207.46.13.57 on Mon, 08 Aug 2016 05:05:14 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms