NONVERBAL EXPRESSIONS. 0F PRBUDICE

Thesis for the Degree of M. A.
MICHIGAN STATE. UNIVERSITY.
BARON PERLMAN
1969::

ABSTRACT

NONVERBAL EXPRESSIONS OF PREJUDICE

BY

Baron Perlman

This study was undertaken to determine if indica-
tive measures of nonverbal behavior could be gathered in a
situation where expressions of prejudice were likely.

In our experiment purporting to study student opin-
ion on social issues, Negro or Caucasian accomplices pre-
sented either a prepared "radical" or "conservative" view-
point to the causes and solutions of big city racial prob-
lems in the United States to Caucasian male gs who were all
from introductory psychology classes. The 80 gs were ran-
domly assigned to one of four experimental conditions:
Negro radical, Negro conservative, Caucasian radical, and
Caucasian conservative. Two raters were present for each
session and the mean of their scores was used as the data
for analysis. The scripts of the accomplices sounded spon-
taneous and were rehearsed by all the accomplices so that
their vocal reflections and body movements were similar.

While the subject was listening to the accomplice talk, his

Baron Perlman

nonverbal behavior was rated through a one way mirror. Ten

nonverbal behaviors were rated for frequency of occurrence.

They were:

1.

2.
3.
4.

10.

Recrossing the legs or shifting or tapping feet,
any leg movement.

Shifting in chair, changing trunk position.
Apparent eye to eye contact. Face to face contact.
Looking up or down.

Shaking or nodding the head "Yes."

Shaking or nodding the head "no."

Body congruence. The top half of the accomplice
and S are in similar positions. The arms are
crossed for both people or one arm is leaning on
the arm of the chair, etc. The bottom half of the
bodies are in similar positions. The right legs
are crossed for both peoPle or we have a mirror
image: the right leg crossed for one, the left
for the other. Anything like this.

Any mouth, eye, or eyebrow movements. Nervously
wetting the lips, raising the eyebrows, etc.

Nervous picking or playing with clothing or part of
the body. Picking the nails, etc. Playing with
eye-glasses, pen, or pencil. Scratching.

Tenseness in arms and hands. Clenching fists.
Holding hands together. Rigidity in arms. Grasp-
ing arms of chair. Kneading hands together.

Analyses of variance for the nonverbal behaviors

were computed. Three behaviors showed significant differ-

ences in frequency of occurrence due to the race of the

accomplice. There was more body congruence and shaking

the head "Yes" to a Negro accomplice and more tenseness in

arms and hands to a Caucasian accomplice. Two behaviors

Baron Perlman

differed significantly depending on the speech heard. Both
leg movement or tapping the feet, and apparent eye to eye
contact were more frequent during the presentation of the
conservative speech. Contrary to expectations, there were
no significant Race X Speech interactions on the behaviors
studied.

The hypothesis that nonverbal behavior would yield
indicative measures was supported. A broad speculative
framework was discussed. It was argued that the three non-
verbal behaviors which differed significant due to Race
all seemed to represent anxiety on the part of the subject.
Likewise, the two behaviors which differed significantly
due to Speech seemed to have the communicative meaning of
boredom.

It was noted that the data obtained in this study
was based only on a short 7 or 8 minute interpersonal en-
counter. However, the results led the author to conclude
that if a longer time period were used, the data would re-
veal greater and clearer differences.

Some research which could be attempted was dis-
cussed. An interesting study would be that of the behav-

iors of Negroes towards other Negroes in such a situation.

NONVERBAL EXPRESSIONS OF PREJUDICE

BY

Baron Perlman

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Psychology

1969

(' nrvz’
(Ga t /4

/<)fl2€9499'

DEDI CATION

This study is dedicated
to my parents who, des-
pite it being a long haul
were with me all the way.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First I would like to thank Dr. Messé. Had his
office hours not been what they were I never would have
made it up all those Monday mornings. His help in style,
organization, and data analysis was greatly appreciated
and I feel that I learned much from him.

Next my gratitude to Dr. Thorton. Chasing him
around kept me in good physical condition and waiting to
see him improved my patience. His comments concerning the
proposal and thesis aided me greatly in obtaining the tools
necessary to greatly increase my skills in psychology.
Also, his insights and ideas concerning the research were
illuminating and thought provoking.

To Dr. Stollak, my committee chairman, I express
sincere appreciation. His humor and proper perspective of
the entire situation kept me at the task. While I tired of
writing and rewriting the research, he never seemed to feel

the fatigue. I wish I had more of his energy and spirit.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . .

LIST OF

LIST OF

Chapter

TABLES . . . .

APPENDICES . .

1. INTRODUCTION

History . .

Nonverbal Behavior
Behavioral Unit

TABLE OF

Statement of Problem

2. METHOD . . .

Subjects .
Accomplices
Setting . .
Raters . .
Design . .
Procedure .

3. RESULTS . . .

4. DISCUSSION .

CONTENTS

Significant Differences

Due to Race

Significant Differences
Due to Speech .

5. SUMMARY . . .

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . .

APPENDICES

iv

of Behavior

of

Behavior

Page

iii

vi

Now!“ l-‘

13
13
13
l4
l4
l6
19

23

24
27
32
35

38

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
1. Experimental Design . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2. List of Nonverbal Behaviors . . . . . . . . 18

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page
A. scripts O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O 38
B. Instructions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

C. Table 3. Reliability of Raters Using
Product Moment Correlations . . . . . . 52

D. Table 4. Mean Frequency of Occurrence,
Standard Deviations, and Mean Totals
for 10 Nonverbal Behaviors . . . . . . 53

B. Table 5. Analyses of Variance . . . . . 56

vi

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

HiStory

Both clinical lore and scientific history report
on the usefulness of the study of the nonverbal behavior..
It is known, for example, that skillful clinicians are
guided by bOdily behavior of their patient. (Mahl, 1968)
Likewise, looking at the scientific historical antecedents
to the study of nonverbal behavior, we can go back to Dar-
win. He concluded that nonverbal behavior was character-
istic of distinct emotional states and that expressive
movements have a signaling or communicative function.
(Darwin, 1955)

Freud too, was interested in nonverbal behavior.

He that has eyes to see and ears to hear may convince
himself that no mortal can keep a secret. If his lips'
are silent, he chatters with his finger-tips; betrayal
oozes out of him at every pore. (Freud, 1905, 77-78)
Freud prOposed that conflicted, repressed-unconscious im-

pulses, wishful thoughts, emotions, and memories were often

manifested in action instead of verbalization.

William Reich (1958) when writing about character
analysis advanced the thesis that an individual's stable
defenses were manifested in the "how" of his skeletal be-
havior and of his speech.

Birdwhistell (1952) insisted that nonverbal behav-
ior has organizational principles of the same structure as
the principles found in oral languages. Nonverbal behav-
ior may be an essential aspect of the verbal communication.
Birdwhistell talked of basic movement elements, "kines,"
analogous to phonemes. The kinesic channel may be a rela-
tiVely independent channel of communication and whole kin-
esic conversations may be held outside awareness. "On a
historical basis, then, there was some reason to believe,
or at least to assume as a working hypothesis, that non-
verbal behavior was significantly related to many varia-
bles . . . " (Mahl, 1968)

If an interest in nonverbal behaviOr has a histor-
ical basis, why has the scientific study of nonverbal be-
havior been relatively neglected? One argument is that
psychology has been primarily concerned with theoretical
issues in the past, and not as interested in behavioral
description. There are also methodologiCal problems (es-
pecially storing and filming records of nonverbal behav-
ior) which existed prior to the reCent development of

video tape. The cost of camera filming was and is still

prohibitively expensive. Furthermore, as Mahl (1968)

noted, judges when looking at films and rating an individ-
ual's nonverbal behavior often obtained contradictory re-
sults. Devising analytic methods of nonverbal behavior

has presented another problem. Many psychologists are'
even skeptical that gestural and body movements have psy-
chological significance. Mahl (1968) presents an extensive
discussion of these problems. Currently, the field of non-
verbal behavior is relatively unexplored. "There is no
secure footing, nor anything firm to take hold of. . . .

he (an experimenter) must do his own exploratory research
in order to evaluate the arguments of our.imaginary tough

minded psychologist." (Mahl, 1968)
Nonverbal Behavior

Yet, an absence of experimentation in an area and
a historical basis for studying nonverbal behavior does
not answer the question of "Why study nonverbal behavior?"
Paul Ekman (1968) considered nonverbal behavior a promising
data source. According to Ekman, nonverbal behavior is a
relationship language, sensitive to, and the primary means
of, signaling changes in the ongoing interpersonal rela-
tionship. Nonverbal behavior is a primary means of expres-
sing emotion. Nonverbal behavior may present information
about the subject which the subject is unaware he is com-
municating. Finally, nonverbal behavior has a "meta-com-

municative" function. It may limit or qualify how the

verbal discourse and interpersonal situation should be

interpreted. Experimentation has shown that nonverbal be-

havior provides information about interpersonal relation—

ships, emotion, basic attitudes towards self and others.
In more natural situations, only the professional--the
gifted actor, the smart psychopath, the experienced
diplomat, the persuasive courtroom lawyer, the winning
car salesman—-is a convincing nonverbal liar. (Ekman,
1968)

While the study of nonverbal behavior is a rela-
tively virgin area of exploration, some experimentation has
been done. Much of the information stems from a concern
with nonverbal behavior in a psychotherapeutic or inter-
viewing situation. Dittman (1962) utilized films from dif-
ferent psychotherapy hours of a single patient and showed
that the area of the body involved in movement was related
to the independently.rated mood. Dittman (1965) in an
article concerning facial and bodily expression reaffirmed
his thesis that bodily cues yield information concerning
affect. Ekman (1965a, 1965b) has shown that naive judges
can reliably judge affect from viewing nonverbal behavior
of normal individuals during stress interviews. Also, some
claim can be made to at least gross accuracy in the judgment
of emotion without any contextual knowledge. Ekman and
Friesen (1967a) showed that not only gross affective states
but also specific emotions can often be determined from

nonverbal behavior. Intensity of the emotion could also be

gathered. Specific emotions can often be perceived frOm

facial expressions and from body acts, while head orienta-
tion and body positions will most frequently only allow
perception of gross affective states. Information about
intensity of emotion is available from head and body move-
ments.

Exline (Exline, Gray & Schuette, 1965; and Exline
& Winters, 1965) found that the amount of interocular con-
tact between normal subjects and interviewers was related
to the interviewer's inquiries about embarrassing themes.
The activity of another person's eyes has important affec-
tive connotations. Exline et al. (1965) cited Francis
Bacon and Shakespeare as literary men interested in this
idea. Bacon wrote about eyes as communicating love and
envy, concern and unconcern. One learns from the other's
eyes something of the other's desires, willingness, or
ability to relate emotionally to another.

Work has also been done investigating nonverbal
behavior as it reflects psychodynamic themes or ego defens-
es. (Mahl, Danet, & Norton, 1959) The authors.found that
many inferences drawn from nonverbal behavior alone were
found to be accurate when verified against the patient's
verbal behavior and past history. Deutsch (1946) inter--
preted his own research and research of others in a Freud-
ian framework. He was interested in relating nonverbal
behavior to childhood, repressions, sexuality, and espec-

ially unconscious material. Krim (1953) believed that

expressive behavior reveals characterological and emotional
attitudes and that therapists would profit from observing
such behavior in addition to the verbalization of the
clients.

Nonverbal behavior was studied as a component.of
simultaneous verbal discourse. Ekman (1965a) studied how
nonverbal behavior can accent a specific part of the verbal
message; head shakes, shift in eye gaze, hand taps, etc.
These can draw attention to a specific word of phrase.

Mahl et a1. (1959) described nonverbal behavior and its
relationship to verbal content. Nonverbal behavior may ex-
press the same meaning as what is being said or it may ex-
press an opposing view. It may also be related to more
global aspects of the interaction, rather than to the spe—
cifics of the verbal exchange.

Ekman (1968) described research where he found none
verbal behavior a source of information about changes in
psychological functioning. It also yielded information.
about individual differences among patients.

Linn (1965) in an experiment concerning verbal at-
titudes and overt behavior involving racial discrimination
found discrepancies between verbal attitudes about preju-
dice and subsequent overt behavior involving these atti-
tudes. One implication of Linn's study is important for
this current research being proposed. Statements or

predictions of behavior involving possible prejudice

expressions based on attitude measurements often have lit-

tle reliability unless first validated empirically. Paper

and pencil tests of prejudice may or may not predict social
behavior of people.

Mahl (1968) studied gestures and body movements in
initial interviews. He obtained positive results when
analyzing nonverbal behavior during the initial interview.
Individuals differ markedly in nonverbal behavior. Some
of these differences seem to be sex related. Many of these
differences seem to be a function of personality variables.
Mahl also did work on the visual situation of the inter-
view: its effect on gestures and body movements. When the
subjects moved from the normal face to face situation to a
back to back situation, there was a significant decrease in
the frequency of communicative gestures. Autistic actions
increased significantly.

Many of the nonverbal behaviors to be used in this
study have been explored in previous experimentation and
have yielded some predictive information. Scheflen (1964)
found that posture was not unique to each individual but
occurred in characteristic standard configurations whose
common recognizability was the basis of their value in
communication. He talked about postural congruence. In a
general way, congruence in posture indicated similarity in

views or roles in the group. Congruence, like other

postural behavior has meaning, and may represent copying or
identification.

Hess (1965) believed that eyes are clues to emo-
tions. He used a nonverbal behavior we will not use, i.e.,
dilation and constriction of the pupils as a measure of
interest, emotion and attitudes. Argyle (1965) has done
research concerned with eye contact in a dyad. Eye contact
was-one way of gathering feedback on another person's re;
actions. It was a function of the distance apart the two
people are and of affilitive motivation. There was less
eye contact if there was tension in a relationship. Gibson
& Pick (1963) were interested in the direction of a person's
gaze which usually indicated what object the person was in-
terested in or what the person was responding to. Exline
(1965) also felt that the eyes communicated the degree and
affective quality of one's involvement with another.

In summary, nonverbal behavior may have direct
meaning. It may emphasize, contradict, or aid in inter-
preting verbal behavior, or have little relations to verbal
behavior. Nonverbal behavior may also signify information
about activity level and the acCumulation and discharge of
tension or anxiety. It was claimed by many reSearchers
that psychotherapy could profitably enlarge its scope and
pay more attention to gestures and body movements. On a
more general level: nonverbal behavior exists and there-.

fore can be studied. We would want to determine what

nonverbal behavior exists in certain situations and what it
means. Whether, when, and how nonverbal behavior serves
as an independent source of information about certain rele-
vant variables is important but it is a subsidiary issue.
And it can only be judged after a great deal of research.

(Mahl, 1968)

Behavioral Unit

 

Nonverbal behavior has been discussed very gener-
ally and the question must now be asked of what are the
behavioral units in the analysis of nonverbal behavior.
One of the methodological problems in studying nonverbal
behavior has been to define just what to study. Mahl
(1968) utilized several measures. He looked at general
postural changes in an individual. Communicative gestures
such as shaking one's head yes or no were considered.
Finally, Mahl labeled a third type of nonverbal behavior,
autistic gestures (such as playing with one's clothing or
body, etc.). But these were still gross measures of non-
verbal behavior and they must be reduced to a more Speci-
fied units of analysis.

Ekman (1968) concerned himself with the time factor
and felt that it can radically influence the results ob-
tained. As an example, using arbitrary units defined by
behavior occurring during standardized time segments will

not, in all probability, lead to valid results. Ekman

10

based this statement on previous research. The unit he
uses now, the nonverbal act/position, is based upon readily
observable visually distinct patterns of nonverbal activity
which determine both the unit boundaries and a taxonomy.
The beginning and end of this unit is defined in terms of
natural start and stop points in behavior. An act begins
when a movement is first detectable, and ends when a move-
ment is no longer apparent, or when another visually dis-
tinctive type of movement commences. "Our unit of analysis
is thus geared to what can be observed and is distinctive
to the unaided eye . . . " (Ekman, 1968) This behavior
unit which Ekman described is the one to be used in the
proposed study. A nonverbal act is defined as a movement
within any single body area.

Ekman described two ways of looking at nonverbal
behavior. The first was called the indicative approach.
Direct measures of the nonverbal behaviOr were taken.
Meaning of nonverbal behavior was defined in terms of how
the nonverbal behavior varied systematically with other
prescribed variables. The second approach mentioned was'
the communicative one. This measures observers' judgments;
determining the meaning nonverbal behavior conveys to
others.

In this study the indicative approach will be used.
Frequency of nonverbal behavior units will be recorded.

The use of frequency and duration as a measuring method is

11

supported by many psychologists, including Ekman and Skin-
ner. Skinner (1953) claimed that the frequency of a re-
sponse is emphasized by most of the concepts which have
foreshadowed an explicit recognition of probability as a
datum. These frequencies are of the observable facts and
may be studied as such, rather than as evidence for the
embodiment of probability in neural or psychic states.
Duration is also important as the basic facts can be dis-
covered only by examining behavior during appreciable in—
tervals of time.‘ Duration will not be used in this study.
The communicative meaning of non-verbal behavior will be
deduced from the frequency of occurrence of nonverbal be-
haviors.

The indicative approach does not completely exclude
the communicative approach, however. An attempt to estab-
lish a relationship between nonverbal behavior and other
classes of events which have been manipulated (our inde-
pendent variables) will be made.. Once this relatiOnship
is established, the nonverbal act has psychologiCal meaning
in that it can be considered to indicate the other related
variable. It seems that once indicative information is
gathered, communicative information of the behavior (if it
exists) can be found.

Ekman mentioned five indicative measures: (1) non-
verbal behavior may be indicative of characteristics of the

person emitting them. (2) Relate nonverbal behavior in

12

relation to the situation in which the behavior occurs.

(3) Rate behavior in relation to what the other interact-
ant does, or to his characteristics. The 4th and 5th re-
late nonverbal behavior to previous and subsequent non-
verbal and verbalized behavior. The first three indicative
measures are part of the underlying rationale in our experi-

mental design.

Statement of Problem

 

In this experiment the usefulness of nonverbal be-
havior as a dependent variable is being tested. Nonverbal
behavior will hopefully communicate to the §_differences
between the various experimental conditions. The purpose
of this experiment is to study nonverbal behavior as an
expression of prejudice. By manipulating two independent
variables (race of aCcomplice and viewpoint of racial dis-
orders) prejudice will be determined from differences among
the dependent variables (nonverbal behavior). Prejudice
as defined here can be viewed as sensitization to the situ-
ation by a subject. Differences in behavior when hearing
the same VieWpoint are hypothesized to result from a §fs
awareness of whether the accomplice is Negro or Caucasian.
This awareness (sensitization) is manifested in the gfs non-
verbal behavior. Another hypothesis is that it will be
possible to give indicative measures of nonverbal behavior

communicative meaning.

CHAPTER 2

METHOD

Subjects

The gs were 80 Caucasian males obtained from the
introductory psychology classes at Michigan State Universi-

ty in the spring of 1969.1

Accomplices

 

Four male accomplices,2

two Negro and two Cauca—
sian were hired from the theater department at Michigan

StatewUniversity.

Setting

A small room with a one way mirror, two chairs, and

a low table provided the experimental setting. The chairs

 

1Ss were only male Caucasians since the E was not-
interested, at this time, in the interaction effects be-
tween a female S and a male accomplice. Research has shown
that males and females exhibit different types of non-Verb-
al behaviors in different frequencies.

2The two Negro actors were Alan Smith and Donald

Trammel. The two Caucasian actors were Ray Price and Glen
Sussman. I would like to thank all of them for the time

13

14

were soft backed and had arms since much of the literature
on nonverbal behavior involves a §_sitting in such a chair.
The chairs were placed facing each other on a slight angle

towards the one way mirror approximately five feet apart.
Raters

A pilot study was run to train five raters3 all of
whom were undergraduates at Michigan State University re-
ceiving credits for research methods in Psychology. Two
of them were present for every experimental session in
order to obtain independent measures of nOnverbal behavior.
Raters viewed the session through the one way mirror and

used labelled counters to gather the frequency of behaviors.

Design

All accomplices learned both a radical and conserv-
ative script. A copy of the scripts can be found in Ap-
pendix A. One script presented a radical viewpoint about
the casues and solutions of racial disorders, the other
script was.a conservative vieWpoint about the same tOpic.

The scripts were written so that each.could be said by a

 

and effort they spent and for their helpful comments and
suggestions.

3The five raters were Cliff Beresh, Betty Hills,
Rosemary Klein, David Lauridsen, and Ruth Sugar. I would
like to thank them for the many hours they worked and for
their helpful comments.

15

Negro or Caucasian accomplice. The actors worked together
in learning the scripts and added pauses, "you knows," "I
think," tone of voice, postural and gestural cues, etc.
As reported by the raters, in agreement with the Efs ex-.
pectations, all scripts sounded spontaneous and almost
identical, no matter who was saying them.

gs were randomly assigned to one of the two races
of accomplice, giving either the radical or conservative
vieWpoint. Therefore, there were four experimental condi—
tions with twenty gs to each condition.' The experimental

design is diagrammed in Table 1.

TABLE 1

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

 

 

 

 

VieWpoint Race of Accomplice

Negro Caucasian
Radical 20 20
Conservative 20 20

 

The S was not told or led to believe in any way
that the §_was interested in his nonverbal behavior. No
mention was made of the one way mirror. The drapes cover-
ing the mirror were only partly drawn so as to not accentu-

ate the mirror's presence. Instructions (see Appendix B)

16

were read by one of two Caucasian Es in a uniform manner
so as to avoid any test effect.

The use of the selection of a number and letter to
determine the topic of discussion avoided giving the g any
insight into the true nature of the experiment.’ It was
feared that if the §_was told directly that his opinions
to the causes and solutions of racial problems were being
studied, and if the S was in a dyad with a Negro accomplice,
that the §_may have correctly surmised that the Negro §_is
not a subject at all. A small box containing 80 pieces of
paper each listing a number and letter was used for the

supposed random selection of topic and speaking order.

Procedure

 

The gs were told that the §_was interested in study-
ing undergraduate opinions concerning social issues in the
United States. All accomplices were informally but neatly
dressed for the experimental sessions.

The accomplice and S were seated. The S did not
know.that the accomplice was working for the E. Care was
taken to treat the accomplice at all times just as if he
was any other subject. For example, when reading instruc-
tions, the §_looked at both the §_and accomplice with equal
frequency. The S and accomplice were told that they were

to discuss one of several social issues the g had chosen.

One of them was asked to pick a piece of paper from the

17

small box. The Q then looked at a list of numbers and let-
ters and told the g and accomplice that according to the
letter picked, they were to discuss the causes and solu-
tions of racial problems in the United States; specifically
causes and solutions of racial disorders in the big city,
and that according to the number picked, the accomplice was
to speak first.

The "S" (actually the accomplice) was asked to talk
for up to ten minutes (actually he talked for the length of
his script); then the real S talked for up to ten_minutes
giving his opinions; finally they discussed their views for
an additional ten minutes. It was made clear that the
first time each spoke, that the other was not to interrupt.
To further insure that the accomplice's talk did not appear
prepared, the S and accomplice were given about three
minutes to think about that they wanted to say before the
accomplice began. If the experimental session lasted over
35 minutes, the.§_re-entered the room and informed the pair
that their time was up. The E was not present in the room
during the actual session.

It was during the accomplice's speech, while the g
was listening, that the §fs nonverbal behavior was rated.
The ten nonverbal behaviors of the §_which were scored for

are found in Table 2.

18

TABLE 2

LIST OF NONVERBAL BEHAVIORS

Nonverbal Behaviors

 

l. Recrossing the legs or shifting or tapping feet, any
leg movement.

2. Shifting in chair, changing trunk position.

3. Apparent eye to eye contact. Face to face contact.
4. Looking up or down.

5. Shaking or nodding the head "Yes."

6. Shaking or nodding the head "No."

7. Body congruence. The top half of the accomplice and
S are in similar positions. The arms are crossed for
Both people or one arm is leaning on the arm of the
chair, etc. The bottom half of the bodies are in
similar positions. The right legs are crossed for
both people or we have a mirror image: the right leg
crossed for one, the left for the other. Anything
like this.

8. Any mouth, eye, or eyebrow movements. Nervously wet-
ting the lips, raising the eyebrows, etc.

9. Nervous picking or playing with clothing or part of
the body. Picking the nails, etc. Playing with eye-
glasses, pen, or pencil. Scratching.

10. Tenseness in arms and hands. Clenching fists. Hold-
ing hands together. Rigidity in arms. Grasping arms
of chair. Kneading hands together.

 

CHAPTER 3

RESULTS

Five combinations of pairs of raters were used, and
reliabilities for each pair on each of the ten behaviors
was calculated using product moment correlations. A table
of these reliabilities (Table 3) is presented as Appendix
C. Raters A and B had the highest reliability. It ap-
peared as if rater C accounted for the low reliabilities
in the pairs C and D, and C and B.

Table 4, presented as Appendix D, presents the mean
frequency of occurrence and standard deviations for each of
the ten nonverbal behaviors for each of the four'experiment-
al conditions. In addition, mean totals are also given.
Nine analyses of variances were computed, one for each of
the ten behaviors (except for "head shaking no" which did
not occur with enough frequency). The full summaries of
these analyses wre presented as Appendix E (Table 5).

For behavior 1, recrossing the legs . . . , (see
Table 5), the F value for Speech was.significant (p < .01)
while Race and a Race x Speech interaction was not signifi-

cant. The frequency with which the S recrossed his legs or

19

20

shifted or tapped his feet differed significantly depending
upon whether the §_heard a radical or conservative speech.
As Table 4 shows, the mean frequency of behavior 1 to a
conservative speech was 8.51 as compared to 5.26 for a
radical Speech. This behavior gave no significant indica-
tive measures for race of accomplice.

The analysis of variance for behavior 3, apparent
eye to eye contact--face to face contact, yielded a signif-
icant Speech effect (p < .05) but Race and the interaction
Race X Speech were not significant. The mean frequency of
behavior 3 to a conservative Speech was 6.25 while to a
radical speech it was only 4.39 (Table 4). Thus, the g
looked more at the accomplice and orientated his head more
toward the accomplice when the latter was giving a conserv—
ative speech. The race of the actor does not significant-
ly influence behavior 3.

Behavior 5, nodding head "yes," was one of three
behaviors where significant differences appeared in the.in-
dicative measure depending on the race of the accomplice.
Race was significant (p < .01) while Speech and the Race x
Speech interaction were not significant. Mean frequency of
behavior 5 to a Negro was 3.98 and to a Caucasian it was
1.72 (Table 4). The S nodded his head "yes" with signifi-
cantly different frequency depending on the race of the ac-
complice. As seen in Table 4, the mean frequency of body

congruence per 10 minute session was very low as compared to

21

other behaviors. The main effect of Speech and the inter-
action Race X Speech were not significant but Race was sig-
nificant (p < .01) (Table 5). Even though the absolute
frequencies were low, there were more body congruences be-
tween a g and a Negro actor (0.61) than to a Caucasian
actor (0.27). (See Table 4.) Since body congruence is
usually measured with frequency and duration, any communi-
cative meaning hypothesized for behavior 7 will be very
speculative.

Behavior 10, tenseness in arms and hands . . . ,
yielded a significant main effect Race (p < .05) while
Speech and the Race X Speech interaction were not signifi-
cant. Tenseness in arms and hands, etc., was displayed
significantly more by the S when he was listening to a
Caucasian actor. The mean frequency of occurrence when
with a Negro was 1.43 as compared to 2.99 when with a
Caucasian (Table 4).

In summary, three behaviors showed significant dif-
ferences in frequency of occurrence due to the race of the
actor. There was more body congruence and shaking the
head "yes" to a Negro actor while there was more tenseness
in arms and hands, etc. to a Caucasian accomplice. Two
behaviors differed significantly depending on the speech
heard. Both leg movement or tapping the feet and apparent

eye to eye contact showed more frequency to the conservative

22

VieWpoint. There were no significant Race X Speech inter-

actions for any of the behaviors studied.

CHAPTER 4

DISCUSSION

It appears that our most general hypothesis is sup-
ported. Nonverbal behavior does vary in the different ex-
perimental conditions. Out of the ten behaviors chosen,
nine occurred with enough frequency to allow good indica-
tive measures to be taken. The only exception was behavior
six, shaking the head "no." The problem is now one of
translating this indicative information about nonverbal
behavior into communicative data.

Basically; the S exhibits more body congruence and
shook his head "yes" more to a Negro accomplice, yet ex-
hibited more tenseness in his arms and hands when with a
Caucasian. Leg movement or tapping the feet and apparent
eye to eye contact occurred with a higher frequency to the
conservative speech.

The system of communicative meaning to be attempted
assumes that the nonverbal behaviors represent'a continuum
ranging from boredom to anxiety. The three behaviors which
differ significantly due to Race all seem to represent anx-

iety. Likewise, the two behaviors which differ significantly

23

24

due to Speech can be seen to have the communicative meaning
of boredom. A very broad speculative framework will be
discussed with some attempt to try to conceptualize the un-
derlying variables leading to the observed behavior.

Significant Differences of Behavior
Due to Race

 

 

Anxiety

As Table 4 shows, there is more body congruence on
the part of a S when he is with a Negro accomplice. Body
congruence is usually measured by frequency and duration.
As will be recalled in this case only frequency measures
were taken. Therefore, more body congruence per 10 minute
session may not mean that the S is identifying with the
accomplice. Two people in body congruence for a full ten
minutes has different meaning than two people in body con-
gruence seven or eight times for one or two seconds each in
ten minutes.

Scheflen (1964) discussed congruence as indicating
similarity in views or as copying. More body congruence
per ten minutes to the Negro seems to suggest that the g
is moving around more than during the Caucasian speeches.
He is in body congruence, then shifts about before forming
another body congruence.

The explanation which seems to give meaning to this

behavior is that the g’is sensitive to the fact that the

25

accomplice is Negro or Caucasian. With a Negro, the S
while listening shows that he is "with" the Negro, he
agrees with the Negro. The §_may feel guilt over past in-
terpersonal situations with Negroes, or over the Cauca-
sians' treatment of Negroes. The S copies the Negro's
posture: communicating that they agree to reduce anxiety.

It is hypothesized that the g is nonverbally com-
municating his anxiety. Therefore, the frequency of body
congruences is higher to the Negro than the Caucasian.

This hypothesis is partially supported by behaviors 2 and

9 (shifting in chair or changing trunk position and nervous
picking, scratching, etc.) which, although not significant-
ly different for Negroes and Caucasians, do show more fre-
quency to a Negro. More movement, more congruence possibly
indicates more anxiety.

The S also shakes his head "yes" significantly more
to a Negro than to a Caucasian accomplice. The §_is com-
municating agreement with the Negro. But there is no sig-
nificant difference between yes nods to a radical Negro or
conservative Negro. Again it is hypothesized that the g
feels guilty or threatened and his nonverbal behavior com-
municates this, while also alleviating his anxiety.

Tenseness in the arms and hands, etc. is also hy-
pothesized to communicate anxiety. This hypothesis is sup-
ported by everyday observation and past research. There is

significantly more of this behavior to a Caucasian than to

26

a Negro. The §_when with a Negro, does not seem to be too
influenced by what is said. The significant differences
due to SpeeCh are found in behaviors which seem to indicate
boredom. If any directional communicative meaning can be
established, it appears that differences due to speech lie
nearer the boredom end of the continuum. But with a Cau-
casian, the §_may be anxious because of that-is said, i.e.,
he expects the Negro to be radical and it does not surprise
him. Or if the Negro is conservative the §_feels some
safety. But to have another Caucasian say things very
radical may be anxiety producing. It is threatening to
have a Caucasian call oneself a racist and advocate sweep-
ing change.

With the conservative Caucasian speech, the § may
feel anxious for opposite reasons. The glis hearing an-
other Caucasian say things which are irrational and ladden
with prejudice. To test this hypothesis it would be neces-
sary to have a group of gs hear a middle of the road speech
by both Negroes and Caucasians and record frequency of

tenseness in arms and hands, etc.

Boredom

As described above, the Caucasian subject may be
expecting a Negro to say certain things and might find the
radical vieWpoint boring. More body congruence could,

therefore, represent fidgeting in the chair. The movement

27

could communicate boredom. To the Negro conservative
speech more body congruence could easily keep its communi-
cative meaning of boredom. The S's expectations of a bat-
tle of ideologies has not materialized as the Negro is not
calling for speratism or radical change. The S may,
therefore, find the situation boring. Besides further re-
search centering on nonverbal behavior, another experiment-
al means of obtaining relevant information would be the
self-report. The S could be asked how he felt, was he
bored or anxious, and did he have any ideas as to why.
Such data might prove to illuminate our speculations.

Significant Differences of Behavior
Due to Speech

 

 

Anxiety

There is significantly more of behavior 1 (leg
movement or tapping feet) to the conservative speech. If
it is assumed that the 80 gs are well read liberals who
"know where it's at," then the above hypothesis is possible.
The gs could find the radical speech in agreement with
their views but to have someone talk conservatively could
be anxiety or even anger arousing.

The analysis of variance for behavior 3 (apparent
eye to eye contact) showed significant differences between
frequency of behavior during the conservative and radical

speeches. There is more of behavior 3 to the conServative

28

speech. Argyle (1965) supports the notions that less ap-
parent eye to eye contact indicates tension in a relation.
If we use the same assumption as above, i.e., a liberal S
finds the conservative speech anxiety producing, then
Argyle's research would be placed in doubt. But the as-
sumption is really not too defendable. Therefore, to label
either of the above two behaviors as communicating anxiety

is not firmly grounded in the data.

Boredom

To expect the majority of the Ss to be radical is
asking a great deal. Many of the Ss came from small towns
in the midwest or from Detroit (where recent problems may
influence one's outlook). At the best, the Ss would prob-a
ably show a majority of moderates with the radicals balanc-
ing out the conservatives. Therefore, the more tenable
speculation is that leg tapping or foot movement and more
eye to eye contact indicate boredom or disinterest. The
Ss probably found the radical speech much more interesting
and possibly much more arousing than the conservative one.
Even if one had heard both viewPoints before, the radical
speech is more likely to hold one's interest. The Ss knew
'they were in an experiment which was to last 30 minutes
sand most came to obtain credits required for introductory
Ensychology. It is argued here that a S.is more likely to

become bored with the proceedings if he is listening to

29

what is said. The mere presence of a Negro may make him
somewhat anxious but nonverbal communication about the
Speeches is probably reflecting a more immediate internal
state of boredom.

More eye to eye contact during the conservative
speech if interpreted as indicating less tension would seem
to mean that the SDis more bored during the conservative
speech. For the above reasons this is very possible.

It must be noted that the broad speculative attempt
at obtaining communicative meaning is based on the very
short 7 or 8 minute interpersonal encounter. It is the st
feeling that a clearer’division of communicative meaning
would be obtained if nonverbal behavior was rated over a
longer time period. The 7 or 8 minutes seems too short to
yield anything more than a glimpse at possible differences.

From the S's-contact with the Ss as well as from
reports by raters and actors, the factor boredom surely
seems a possibility. As for anxiety, the Negro actors did
not report that their SS were "up tight" with anymore fre-
quency than the Caucasian actors. Of course, this does
not mean that the SS with a Negro actor were not more anx-
ious, but to validate communicative interpretations of
anxiety from nonverbal behavior requires that perhaps an-
other dependent measure should have been used. It would
have been quite easy for example, to ask each S after the

experimental session, how he felt. It is the S's opinion

30

that many SS could have felt anxious during the sessions,
but this is based on a general feeling of what was taking
place and not on actual data per se.

Our speculation leads us to conclude that nonverbal
behavior is certainly a useful indicative measure and prob—
ably can be given communicative meaning. But future re—
searCh would be required before nonverbal behavior could be
used to predict from a specific situation the future behav-
ior and present attitudes of an individual.

Much future research is possible. Negro and Cauca-.
sian accomplices could enter stores and deal with sales
clerks and the nonverbal behavior (as well as verbal) of
sales clerks recorded. Interaction of Negroes and Cauca-
sians in social situations could be observed, and behavior
recorded. Self-reports could be used in studies similar
to this one. Studies could be extended to include female
SS and finally female or male accomplices. Attitudes of
Negroes towards such points of view could be investigated
by using all Negro SS in a study.

The word prejudice as used here is defined as a
sensitization to the race of a person with whom one finds
himself. This sensitization is communicated in many ways,
one of which is nonverbal behavior. While merely looking
at nonverbal behavior is tunneling one's vision, to be able
'to find communicative meaning in nonverbal behavior would

:fit one small piece in a large whole of the conflicts

31

between Negroes and Caucasians in the United States. In
the future, perhaps such knowledge will help the social

soientist make everyone just a little more color blind.

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY

This study was undertaken to determine if indica-
tive measures of nonverbal behavior could be gathered in a
situation where expressions of prejudice were likely.

In our experiment purporting to study student opin—
ion on social issues, Negro or Caucasian accomplices pre-
sented either a prepared "radical" or "conservative" view-
point to the causes and solutions of big city racial prob-
lems in the United States to Caucasian male SS who were all
from introductory psychology classes. The 80 SS were ran-
domly assigned to one of four experimental conditions:
Negro radical, Negro conservative, Caucasian radical, and
Caucasian conservative. Two raters were present for each
session and the mean of their scores was used as the data
for analysis. The scripts of the accomplices sounded
spontaneous and were rehearsed by all the accomplices so
that their vocal reflections and body movements were simi-
lar. While the subject was listening to the accomplice

talk, his nonverbal behavior was rated through a one way

32

33

mirror. Ten nonverbal behaviors were rated for frequency
of occurrence. They were:

1. Recrossing the legs or shifting or tapping feet,.
any leg movement.

2. Shifting in chair, changing trunk position.

3. Apparent eye to eye contact. Face to face contact.

4. Looking up or down.

5. Shaking or nodding the head "Yes."

6. Shaking or nodding the head "No."

7. Body congruence. The top half of the accomplice
and S are in similar positions. The arms are
crossed for both people or one arm is leaning on
the arm of the chair, etc. The bottom half of the
bodies are in similar positions. The right legs
are crossed for both people or we have a mirror
image: the right leg crossed for one, the left for
the other. Anything like this.

8. Any mouth, eye, or eyebrow movements. Nervously
wetting the lips, raising the eyebrows, etc.

9. Nervous picking or playing with clothing or part
of the body. Picking the nails, etc. Playing with
eyeglasses, pen, or pencil. Scratching.

10. Tenseness in arms and hands. Clenching fists.
Molding hands together. Rigidity in arms. Grasp-
ing arms of chair. Kneading hands together.
Analyses of variance for the nonverbal behaviors

‘were computed. Three behaviors showed significant differ-
ences in frequency of occurrence due to the race of the

accomplice. There was more body congruence and shaking the
head "Yes" to a Negro accomplice and more tenseness in arms

and hands to a Caucasian accomplice. Two behaviors dif-

fered significantly depending on the speech heard. Both

34

leg movement or tapping the feet, and apparent eye to eye

contact were more frequent during the presentation of the

conservative Speech. Contrary to expectations, there were
no significant Race X Speech interactions on the behaviors
studied.

The hypothesis that nonverbal behavior would yield
indicative measures was supported. A broad speculative
framework was discussed. It was argued that the three
nonverbal behaviors which differed significantly due to
Race all seemed to represent anxiety on the part of the
subject. Likewise, the two behaviors which differed sig-
nificantly due to Speech seemed to have the communicative
meaning of boredom.

It was noted that the data obtained in this study
was based only on a short 7 or 8 minute interpersonal en-
counter. However, the results led the author to conclude
that if a longer time period were used, the data would re-
veal greater and clearer differences.

Some research which could be attempted was discus-
sed. An interesting study would be that of the behaviors

of Negroes towards other Negroes in such a situation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Argyle, M., & Dean, J. Eye-contact, distance and affilia-
tion. Sociometry, 1965, SS, 289-304.

Bender, I.E., & Hastorf, A.M. The perception of persons:
forecasting another person's responses in 3 person-
ality scales. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psy-
chology, 1950, ES, 556-561.

Bettelheim & Janowitz. Prejudice. Scientific American,

Birdwhistell, R. Introduction to KinesicS. Louisville,
Ky., University of Louisville, 1952.

Byrne, D., & McGraw, C. Interpersonal attraction towards
Negroes. Human Relations, 1964, $1, (3), 201-213.

Darwin, C. The Expression of the EmotionSin Men and
Animals. New York. Philosophical Library,gl955.

Deutsch, F. Analysis of postural behavior. Psychoanaly-
tic Quarterly, 1946, 16, 195-213.

 

Dittman, A.T. The relationship between body movements and
moods in interviews. Journal of Consulting Psy-
chology, 1962, SS, 480.

Ekman, Paul. A methodological disucssion of nonverbal be-
havior. Journal of Psychology,.1957, 22, 141-149.

Ekman, Paul. Body position, facial expression, and verbal
behavior during interviews. Journal of Abnormal &
Social Psychology, 1964, SS, (3)? 295-301.

IEkman, Paul. Communication through nonverbal behavior: A
source of information about an interpersonal rela-
tion. In Tomkins, S.S., & Izard, C.E., (Eds.),
Affect, Cognition and Personality. New York:
Springer, 1965a, 390-442:

35

36

Ekman, Paul. Differential communication of affect by head
and body cues. Journal of Personalityyand Social
Psychology, 1965b, 2, (5), 726-735.

 

 

Ekman, P., & Friesen, W.V. System for the classification
and analysis of nonverbal behavior. Unpublished
technical report, 1965, San Francisco, Langley
Porter Neuropsychiatric Institute.

Ekman, P., & Friesen, W.V. Head and body cues in the judg-
ment of emotion: A reformulation. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 1967a, 31, 711-724.

 

Ekman, Paul, & Friesen, W.V. Nonverbal behavior in psycho-
therapy research. In, Research in Ps chothera ,
Volume III, Shlien, J. (Ed.), I568, I79-215.

Exline, R.V., Gray, D., & Schuette, D. Visual behavior in
a dyad as affected by interview content and sex of

respondent. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 1965, l, 201-209.

 

Exline, R.V., & Winters, L. Affective relations and mutual
glances in dyads. In, Tomkins, S.S., & Izard, C.
E. (Eds.), Affect, Cognition, and Personality, New
York: Springer, 1965, 319-350.

Freud, S. Fragment of an analysis of a case of hysteria.
(Orig. pub. 1905) In, The Standard Edition of the
Com lete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud?
V01. 7, London: Hogarth, 1953, 3-122.

 

 

 

Gibson, J.J., & Pick, A.D. Perception of another persons
looking behavior. American Journal of Psychology,’
ZS, September, 1963, 386-394.

Hess, E.M. Attitude and pupil size. Scientific American,

Krim, A. A study in nonverbal communiations: Expressive
movements during interviews. Smith Coll. Stud.
SOC. Wk., 1953, a, 41-80

Lambert, W.W., & Lambert, W.E. Social Psychology. New
Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1964.

Leventhal, M., & Sharp, E. Facila expressions as indica-.
tors of distress. In, Tomkins, S.S., & Izard,
C.E. (Eds.), Affect,.CogEition, and Personality,
New York: Sprnger, 1965, 296-318.

37

Linn, W.S. Verbal attitudes and overt behavior: A study
of racial discriminations. Social Forces, 1965,
-4_3.' (3), 353-3640

 

Luborsky, L., Blinder, B. & Macworth, N. Eye fixation and
recall of pictures as a function of GSR responsiv-
ity. Percept. Motor Skills, 1963, SS, 469-483.

 

Mahl, Danet & Norton. Reflection of major personality
characteristics in gestures and body movements.
American P§ychologist. 1959, ii, 357.

 

Mahl, G.F. Gestures and body movements. In, Research in
Psychotherapy, Volume III, Shlien, J. (Ed.), 295-
345.

 

 

Reich, W. Character Analysis. London: Vision Press,
1958.

 

Riemer, M.D. Abnormalities of the gaze--a classification.
' Psychiatric Quarterly, 29, December, 1955, 659-672.

 

Scheflen, A.E. The significance of posture in communica-
tion systems. Psychiatry, 1964, 31, 316-331.

 

Schlosberg, M. Three dimensions of emotionl Psychological
Review, 1954, SS, 81-88.

 

Skinner, B.F. Some contributions of an experimental analy-
sis of behavior to psychology as a whole. American

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

Scripts

APPENDIX A

SCRIPTS

Conservative Speech

 

O.K. I think that one of the main causes of racial
disorders in the cities is a communist conspiracy. Com-
munists organized the riots so we would look bad to other
countries. That's why Stokely Carmichael is always in Cuba
and North Viet Nam. There wouldn't be any riots if the
policemen would just enforce the laws they have. The-prob-
lem is all those damn intellectuals who have raised such a
big fuss that the officers are afraid to enforce the law,
because when they do, they get in trouble themselves.

Now, what kind of country is this where cops get in trouble
for enforcing the laws? Breaking the law by anyone must
not be tolerated, because when laws are allowed to be bro-
ken, the victims are the peaceful, law abiding citizens,
and the Negro in the past, I think, has not been a respon-
sible citizen. I think he's rioted and looted and burned
and deserves much of the punishment he's gotten. Now I

know the white man in the past hasn't been any angel,

either, but times have changed and the Negro shouldn't use

38

39

past grievances as an excuse to break the laws. Now maybe
one of the reasons why integration--at least pushy integra-
tion has not worked is because there is such a cultural
difference between the races. Negroes have their own
world, and I think most Negroes would want to stay to them—
selves. They have their own world and aren't interested in
white values and ideals. All they really want is to have

a few middle-class comforts--a good car, a T.V., you know.
And there are plenty of jobs available for Negroes who want
to work.

The middle class Negro works--he doesn't riot. He
stays home and is a good citizen. I think the people who
riot are the ones who haven't worked their way up. They
just want to get the same material things that the hard-
working members of the middle class have gotten for them—
selves. The large and growing Negro middle class is prodf
that all the Negro has to do is work as hard as his white
counterpart and he will get what he wants. The trouble is
coming from those who don't give a damn about going through
the usual channels to achieve economic and personal success.
The ghetto Negro is an easy—going hedonist who wants to
join the hard-working class, but unless he changes his
values, he's never going to get in; and rioting is going to
hurt his goals. Pause. In fact, I'm not sure he wants to

get in.

40

Another trouble is, everybody told the Negro that
if he'd just make a little trouble, the government would
give him everything he wants. Now, that's like giving
candy to a little boy for being bad rather than rewarding
him for being good. And the government, I think, has en-
couraged riots, because every time the Negroes burn the
town down, the government gives them a nice new one. Now
the Negro thinks the solution is to destroy what he has so
that the government will give him better. Why can't the
lower class Negro work like everybody else to integrate
himself. Many minority groups have felt persecuted by the
main stream American culture. AS soon as they worked a
little bit and got ahead, it's funny how they stopped feel-
ing victimized. And I think the Negro who really wants to
will do the same thing. The middle class Negro—-he doesn't
feel victimized and go out in the street and riot and loot,
because he's worked hard, and he has accomplished something
--and he's integrated. And the solution to racial disorders
is to enforce the laws, stop the rioting and stOp giving
rewards to law breakers. Stop molly-coddling people who
don't appreciate this great country of ours. And find the
Commies who are stirring up all this trouble, and punish
them. Within the law, of course. And we, we have to sup-
port the police, because if the police are made powerless,
who's going to defend us from this lawlessness. We've got

communists everywhere. In fact, a lot of Negroes wouldn't

41

be rioting and looting if it wasn't for Communists. Most
of them are pretty satisfied right where they are--on wel-
fare or out in the streets and they weren't complaining
until the communists came along.

The Negro must learn the white man's way of
achieving his aims. There just aren't any Shortcuts. And
trying to take shortcuts results in the lawlessness which
we are witnessing today. All the Negro has to do is follow
the lead of his more industrious black brothers. It can
be done. It's the American way. And even the black lead-
ership is doing it. Look at the way they publish books.
They're getting royalties from these books. So, you know
they're being industrious and earning their way. And the
people who promise the pot of gold to the Negro will have
to be silenced for they are adding fuel to the flames.

And I think we must be patient. Integration takes time.
The Negro must learn to postpone immediate gratification
for future goals. It will take time for the Negro to fit
in, and we have to wait and keep this country in one piece

while we wait.

42

Negro Radical

 

First of all, Whitey, you are a racist. Now, not
all whites are Whiteys are racists. You've killed blacks.
When you can't kill blacks directly, you do it legally,
economically, and socially. Racists put blacks in the
slums, charge higher prices for shitty goods, charge
fucked-up rent, rape our women, pay us less at work, hire
blacks last and fire us first. Racism, racism against the
black ranges through unions, colleges, management, welfare,
government, and everywhere.

Now politically, blacks have about as many rights
as before the Civil War. Black communities are run by
white carpetbaggers, right now--today. Legislation is
loopholed so all the laws sound just great on paper, but
you know they don't mean shit--you just have to work a lit-
tle harder to fuck the black man. And the police--hell we
all know the police are pigs. Capital punishment is real
handy for eliminating blacks, and your generals in the
Armed Forces always try to use up the blood of the black
man so he doesn't lose any of his previous white boys. Of
course, the situation doesn't improve. You know, we really
can't vote--we can't even register down South and every-
where else everybody screws up the districts or throws our

vote out.

43

And then there's the social structure. The middle
class and its careful choice of friends, like, you know,
frats, country clubs, and all that shit. Of course, now,
every party has to have its black couple--the super—nigger
type--sort of like a badge saying, "I like Negroes." You
know, "I once had a friend who was Negro." You're getting
real subtle, real subtle, but you're still a racist. You
know it, we know it, so let's drop the act, man. You dig!

You've seen to it that we have no past. We got
lots of "White Knights" but what about some black heroes.
You know, there have been lots of them. You know--or
didn't you know? Like DuBois, Cleaver, Stokely Carmichael,
Leroi Jones. You've heard of them? We do have a history.
Black children are tired of learning about white Dick and
Janes doing their thing in nice little white houses when
all they see is a world which is cruel, hostile and filled
with empty promises.

Now, what to do about this situation? As I see it,
get rid of you Whiteys. Just get him clear the hell out of
here. If it isn't done soon and peacefully, then someone
is going to get ripped off, and it ain't going to be the
black man. It's going to be good-bye Whitey--George Wal-
lace, Daley, cops, college presidents, the establishment,
and even some blacks. You know, some Negroes look black
on the outside but they're really whiteys on the inside.

Blacks must be given power--power to run our own businesses,

44

Schools, apartments, towns, and governments. And some laws
with guts have to be assessed--not this messing around with
laws aimed at tokenism but at real, relevant problems.

Laws are needed to protect the black man from Whitey and
to protect Whitey from himself. And then there's all this
Sai5_about law and ordere-like old J. Edgar saying justice
is only incidental to law and order and Nixon wanting to
jail people before they commit a crime--we know who is
going to get sCrewed by that kind of a deal. Economically,
all the government has to do is to spend a little less
money on wars and stop screwing the black man and give us
some credits for a lot of blood, sweat, and grief. You
owe us more than you could ever pay for in a million years.
You people owe it and we're going to collect from those
who wrenched us from our homeland, enslaved us, lynched

us, beat and tortured us, humiliated us, stripped away our
heritage, our pride, our dignity, our humanness. You're
trying to keep us slaves, even today--trying to c00p us up
into little stinking ghettos sitting with the rats under-
neath the freeway. The unions have to be opened up, equal
hiring laws have to be enforced, the welfare system has to
be reorganized. There's got to be black controlled busi-
nesses and government for black communities and schools.
We blacks must have real power over our own real problems,

not this piddling shit we've been getting. And finally,

4S

you've got to learn, one way or the other, that the black
man is going to change this country, and if Whitey resists,

he's going to have one hell of a fight on his hands.

46

Caucasian Radical

 

First of all, Whitey's a racist. Now, not all
whites are Whiteys, but all Whiteys are racists. Whites
kill blacks. Whey they can't kill blacks directly, they
do it legally, economically, and socially. Racists put
blacks in the slums, charge higher prices for crummy goods,
charge ridiculous rent, rape black women, pay less at work,
hire blacks last and fire them first. Racism, racism
against the working black ranges through unions, colleges,
management, welfare, government, and everywhere.

Now politically, blacks have about as many rights
as before the Civil War, Black communities are run by
white carpetbaggers, right now--today. Legislation is
loopholed so all the laws sound just great on paper, but
whitey knows they don't mean shit--he just has to work a
little harder to fuck the black man. And the police--
hell, we all know the police are pigs. Capital punishment
is real handy for eliminating blacks, and the Whitey
generals in the Armed Forces always try to use up the blood
of the black man so he doesn't lose any of the precious
white boys. Of course, the situation doesn't improve. You
know, blacks really can't vote--they can't even register
down South and everywhere else everybody screws up the dis-

tricts or throws the black vote out.

47

And then there's the social structure. The middle
class and its careful choice of friends, like, you know,
frats, country clubs, and all that crap. Of course, now,
every party has to have its black couple--the super-nigger
type-~sort of like a badge saying, "I like Negroes." You
know, "I once had a friend who was Negro." Whitey's get-
ting real subtle, real subtle-—but he's still a racist.

He knows it, we know it, so let's drop the act, man.

Whitey has seen to it that the blacks have no
past. There are lots of "White Knights" but what about
some black heroes. You know, there have been lots of
them. You know--or didn't you know? Like Jimmy Brown,
Stokely Carmichael, Leroi Jones. You've heard of them?
Blacks have a history. Black children are tired of learn-
ing about white Dick and Janes doing their thing in nice
little white houses when all they see is a world which is
cruel, hostile and filled with empty promises.

Now, what to do about this situation? As I see it,
get rid of Whitey. Just get him clear the hell out of
here. If it isn't done soon and peacefully, then someone
is going to get wiped off the face of the earth, and it
ain't going to be the black man. It's going to be good-bye
Whitey--George Wallace, Daley, cops, college presidents,
the establishment, and even some blacks. You know, some
Negroes look black on the outside but they're really

whiteys on the inside. Blacks must be given power--power

48

to run their own businesses, schools, apartments, towns,
and governments. And some laws with guts have to be passed
--not this messing around with laws aimed at tokenism but
at real relevant problems. Laws are needed to protect the
black man from Whitey and to protect whitey from himself.
And then there's all this shit about law and order--1ike
old J. Edgar saying justice is only incidental to law and
order and Nixon wanting to jail people before they commit

a crime--we know who is going to get screwed by that kind
of a deal. Economically, all the government has to do is
to spend a little less money on wars and stop screwing the
black man and give him the due share of money he has paid
in--and give some credit for a lot of blood, sweat, and
grief. The white man owes more than he could ever pay for
in a million years. Whitey owes it and they're going to
collect from those who wrenched them from their homeland,
enslaved them, lynched them, beat and tortured them, hur
miliated them, stripped away their heritage, their pride,
their dignity, their humanness, and he's trying to keep
them slaves, even today--trying to coop them up into little
stinking ghettos sitting with the rats underneath the free-
way. The unions have to be opened up, equal hiring laws
have to be enforced, and the welfare system has to be re-
organized. There's got to be some black controlled busi-
ness and government for black communities and schools.

Blacks must have real power over their own real problems,

49

not this piddling shit they've been getting.' And finally,
whitey's got to learn, one way or the other, that the
black man is going to change this country, and if Whitey
resists, he's going to have one hell of a fight on his

hands.

APPENDIX B

Instructions

APPENDIX B

INSTRUCTIONS

The purpose of this study is to obtain undergraduate
opinions concerning certain social issues in the United
States. To determine which social issue you will discuss,
will one of you pick a piece of paper from this box. Ac-
cOrding to the letter picked, you two will discuss the
causes and solutions to racial disorders in the United
States, specifically in the big city. You will speak first
(point to the accomplice). You will speak for up to ten
minutes concerning your viewpoints as to the causes of
racial disorders and solutions to the problem. After you
speak, the other subject will speak for up to ten minutes.
While one of you is speaking we would appreciate no inter-
ruptions from the other person. Immediately after the se-
cond person is done speaking, you will have ten minutes to
discuss your Opinions between yourselves.

Feel free to offer your opinion no matter what it
is. The purpose of this study is to gain YOUR opinions to
certain social issues. You can use any language, compari-

sons, or examples you like if it helps you in expressing

50

51

your View. This session is being tape recorded. All that
is said here is confidential and will be known only to the
experimenters.

To give you a chance to organize your thoughts,
you will have about 3 minutes to think about what you will
say. When you are done, please leave the room. One of
the experimenters will meet you in the hallway.

If you have any questions, please ask them now.

APPENDIX C

Reliability of Raters Using Product
Moment Correlations

52

.HmanS on on camp mmfluHHHQMHHmH map .mmocmHmHMHU DSMUHMHSmHm mmumofiwcfl

moccanm> mo mammamcm map.mnm£3 mnow>mnmn mmocu Hon Donn Umuoc on vasonm DHH

 

 

 

mam. mmm. mmm. Nam. oo.H mmm. vow. mmn. oo.H 0mm. 0 m
can. mmh. men. mom. oo.H omm. mmm. emu. omm. mmm. m G
mmm. hmh. mum. oo.o mmm. mom. mom. mom. va. «be. m U mumumm
th. Nam. mmv. mum. oo.H mom. mmh. mam. mun. man. Q 0
0mm. ova. «mm. «mm. mmm. mmm. mmm. bah. mom. Hmm. m a 4
|bH m m h w m H. m m H
H0H>msmm

HmZOHfiflflmmmOU BZMSOE BUDQOMQ UZHmD mmmedm m0 NBHAHdeAmm

m mqmflfi

U xHQmem¢

APPENDIX D

Mean Frequency of Occurrence, Standard
Deviations, and Mean Totals for 10
Nonverbal Behaviors

APPENDIX D

TABLE 4

MEAN FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE, STANDARD DEVIATIONS,
AND MEAN TOTALS FOR 10 NONVERBAL BEHAVIORS

W

 

 

Behavior Speech Race; Mean Totals
Negro Caucasian of Speech
1 Radical 5.97=i 4.55 5.26
4.15=S.D.
leg
movement Conservative 7.83 9.18 8.51
6.06 6.91
Mean Totals
of Race 6.90 7.37
2 Radical 1.85=X 1.60 1.73
1 52=S.D. 1.98
shifting Conservative 3.08 1.78 2.43
2 72 1.82
Mean Totals
of Race 2.47 1.69
3 Radical 4.68=X 4.10 4.39
1.56=SODO 4.18
eye to eye Conservative 7.15 5.35 6.25
4.27 3.53

Mean Totals
of Race 5.93 4.73

53

54

TABLE 4--continued

 

 

 

Behavior Speech Race Mean Totals
Negro Caucasian of Speech
4 Radical 5.60=X 5.03 5.32
2 49=S.D. 4.85
looking up
or down Conservative 7.68 5.43 6.56
4 56 3 47
Mean Totals
of Race 6.64 5.23
5 Radical 3.18=X 1.40 2.79
4.24=S.D. 2.26
nodding Conservative 4.78 2.03 3.41
head 4.51 3.71
yes
Mean Totals
of Race 3.98 1.72
6 Radical 0.15=X 0.08 0.12
0.56=S.D. 0.08
nodding Conservative 0.15 0.20 0.18
head 0.67 0.69
no
Mean Totals
of Race 0.15 0.14
7 Radical 0.68=X 0.25 0.47
0.66=S.D. 0.47
Congruence Conservative 0.53 0.28 0.41
0.54 0.41

Mean Totals
of Race 0.61 0.27

TABLE

55

4--continued

 

 

 

Behavior Speech Race Mean Totals
Negro Caucasian of Speech
8 Radical 8.03—X 11.1 9.57
6 16-S.D. 7.01
mouth,
eye, Conservative 7.68 9.30 8.49
eyebrow 5.84 6.42
movements,
etc. Mean Totals
of Race 7.86 10.2
9 Radical 10.5=i 8.98 9.74
4.74=SODO 5066
Nervous
Picking Conservative 12.9 11.4 12.2
etc. 6.90 6.91
Mean Totals
of Race 11.7 10.2
10 Radical 1.13=i 3.25 2.19
1.73=SODO 5.05
Tenseness Conservative 1.73 2.73
1.98 2.72
Mean Totals
of Race 1.43 2.99

 

APPENDIX E

Analyses of Variance

APPENDIX E

TABLE 5
ANALYSES OF VARIANCE

Behavior 1

w

 

 

Source df MS F
Race (A) 1 0.03 0.001“
Speech (B) 1 209.63 7.69 **
A X B l 38.49 1.41
Error (w) 76 27.78

**p < .01.

Behavior 2

M

 

Source df MS F
Race (A) l 12.02 2.92
Speech (B) l 9.80 2.38
A X B 1 5.50 1.34
Error (w) 76 4.12

 

56

57

TABLE 5--continued

 

Behavior 3

 

 

Source df MS F
Race (A) 1 28.20 2.23
Speech (B) l 69.38 5.48*
A X B l 7.50 0.59
Error (w) 76 12.67

*p < .05.

Behavior 4

 

Source df MS F
Race (A) 1 39.90 2.55
Speech (B) l 30.63 1.96
A X B l 14.03 0.90

Error (w) 76 15.65

 

58

TABLE 5--continued

 

Behavior 5

W

 

 

Source df MS F
Race (A) 1 102.38 7.16**
Speech (B) l 24.76 1.73
A X B l 4.75 0.33
Error (w) 76 14.30

**p < .01.

Behavior 7

 

Source df MS F
Race (A) 1 2.28 8.14**
Speech (B) 1 0.08 0.29
A X B l 0.15 0.54
Error (w) 76 0.28

 

**p < .01.

TABLE 5--continued

Behavior 8

 

W

 

Source df MS F
Race (A) 1 110.45 2.72
Speech (B) l 23.14 0.57
A X B 1 10.49 0.26
Error (w) 76 40.61

 

Behavior 9

 

Source df MS F
Race (A) l 44.26 1.15
Speech (B) 1 116.41 3.03
A X B 1 0.02 0.00
Error (w) 76 38.45

 

60

TABLE 5--continued

 

Behavior 10

W

 

Source df MS F
Race (A) l 48.83 4.90*
Speech (B) 1 0.03 0.00
A x B 1 6.33 0.64
Error (w) 76 9.96

 

*p < .05.

”UN 4 10:19

HICHIGRN STQTE UNIV. LIBRQRIES

lllllllll I‘lllllllhlllllllllll llllllllllHlllllllll‘Hl

31293101795759