. .3 . or .3 fl Wh— .hw.0‘ .‘..n .* w“... a t a“ a. . ».. o. :3. 138..” t. 1. 1*: an; my a. z. ‘00. . o «I. “Kr/U ‘4‘ v.0 . 5.. fivu‘ J 0:.“ v. 1. _. w. a. I, .5 “U. fins .5 ,. 3 C a»). r. .... 3 1. . ‘ . .. . J .. . I.o a..." a: 3 «a - ,. .. m. J We a. 32 A 9. . 1... (.5 . I . o 4‘ oh...” ‘VIQ flow 00% It... on O... 0.. M.- .P.“ am“ a 3.... o. h . A. k a .i 0.. .0 'I ll ‘ . Iva [0‘ "in... 33 t2. . org... my. um.‘ 3 a. .u... a .0“; 5 cw (rue. mm... mm m C :3. 9(a- I". t .., ‘0 '0 3 . k ~"'.i 3 3V; “3 5O i a... G A r“ “in. ,3 ..... AM. _::__,:,:__ 2;: i,.,,,:,:: : s 7 . ‘~ v I 3 129 10221 5930 i. ‘- ’ ".710"; A131“... _."-’.-:'zut‘ Thisistoeertifgthatthe thesis entitled Attitude as a Determinant of Distortions in Recall: A Replication. presented by Clifford E. BreMiller has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for ILA. degree inmnology Major professor Bantam i m. o‘. ‘n- o t T . ATl‘I'lEJLS is A ori'n;a.;l;..nsr or DIJl‘CRi‘IJETJ mom. .2. i-‘ilili‘LICn'l‘ICl‘I By Clifford 1;}.Brehliller A THEJIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of " ujr' ‘7 ’7‘1 ““:.i'1."‘ 5.1..) fled bl‘ mils.) Departnent of Psychology 1953 IHESLS The author sincerely thanks Dr. hilton Rokeach for his advice and the patient assistance rendered in this research and in the preparation of the manuscript. l‘f" I: (bi/"£180 513 1 ‘ ERUU 4.4.... o o "T‘V’i‘g '. =1“. , -.-_~.1~.'_'rn HALL All .5444. "- J. o haterials Subjects Procedure REJU T3 . . uiaotsslox . -V-vu 1‘ - u . - O UéfbfiY . O BIBLICGRAEH‘ . AEPLQDIi . . TABLE on co _ rflw-I ‘. ~9- A-J-J-J-fi‘ ‘I‘ 1'1“" .Lx) PAGE ll 11 13 ()1 C9 {\9 l—J ()3 H O3 C) C.“ QI‘: Iv VI PAC-r13 LO. Names of the 32 persons shown in Set I of the p.310 1305 o o o o o o o o a o o o o o o o o o o 12 ‘L Analysis of variance of the mean unfriendliness i t scores ‘or he Ligh, hiddle, and Low groups and Kegro vs. white photos . . . . . . . . . 17 Means and t ratios of the friendliness ratings given by High, aiddle, and Low groups to regro and. WSLite 13301308 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o 17 Frequency of recall of Various anes by High, Middle, and Low groups to Legro and White photos and Chi square values testing significance of rences between recall to Hegro and white 3 di“fe pllOtO o o o o o o o o o o o o o a o o o o 0 19 Chi square analysis of over-all differences 'n frequency of recall of nanes . . . . . . . . 20 Differences in recall of names between prejudice groups for Segro and white photos . . . . . 22 1" ""F\T"- J...- 4; deJUVLJ.\/l-u 1w 1"”; T‘I" f I'N‘w + "fi'rn‘ and-l...“ J‘fifi n ‘ \r "‘ ‘r -1 .4 .11; QC) 0 J\ l.) t- 4V " LL'K/ ‘4‘ L- b .2; 401(1'; 'U C... " ' ‘ 'L" ' "' -, «"l “ ‘ *‘ 1 ’~ -r‘. v-7 ‘ I "- ”1’ .. 'v ‘ I“- V ‘ . " F '3“ pOfbgnt llfldlfl.a Ll ythdJlU;J dfln L‘Cloldpf. . . "- 4-2-. . , -,., - 1 _,.n- ' , ,-_ . . , ~ , ,j < -_~, one 01 A: earliest 11..o*1cal antecedents Oi Lie "‘ I” -‘~ "‘ "A. ' I . o-l -. ~. -, -N r‘ ‘ «4 .~v- . - . ~ *‘ ‘ - . q , fl " .. ' I ‘ '1‘. COACgaft Ui ’ dEElt chdfi l3 gawflhlJlO;M‘ 13 lfi.:uh3 Cnrlm’.n)-u 01 3- "’1 P' - ‘ t " ‘ - ' - "e - " V ‘1“ -‘ “1 ‘. ' ‘ ". 1 r“ 'T“ 'L I" . ’ I " I - . ‘,’ L. ‘ -‘ ‘fi v.1.e .IL.ruJUL- _‘-J 1.3L 404;. ..;t-..'I,~,’ , “Mu-.L tiCL-J. 41' U' 0418 L3-)':;I‘l..-c}lu~ pl -' 1 -., . ...-. .-‘ ' , -_ 'I ~ 2.- _l.,-., .1. AX...¢..::J. U .1 O . u'pe on U as l , ; ll ‘1— . ‘ _, .:-.: —.-.. a- _. _, -, ,, ,1 .3..- .., ' ,. ,,,., .‘ . ,... '. - 1. .. lie OJflCeyt «is lirne apron l; e-,las1:ea 1n eJClJlO_V "I “1' - 7m: et‘fi"; .... “' 13“" " 10“" Va“ ‘ J“-‘-‘."‘ ""7 Tr “33".: .1 J 4.11K4-.'..4;J all-1&4. 4..4.L.\;.-ii' 013.1 , .. ”LU 4.11 ail-1.! .L'.‘:.l. k. '.'_.l :4. b C '- Eire: . ..4_-_.- - 7,1. 1 - :- 1, ._ ,. , -‘.._, ,.: ._ 1 ,_ ,- -: . _- 1,, 4.3;. U‘Uihvfll U4. CU CiUu; 4.1.1.;- , lid-NJJKJJ: L-‘...---‘::..;.€J V4: C _,-_'.-‘,'_'..'\3.':, ‘ - . 4- - s .. . . ' -_ czrv \ ‘4 ' ,A_ 4—1.. ' 4 "an 00 ere reed is an attitud-L (lo, p. a1). while his statenent apgelred to he a ¢ood deal overdrann to man? sociolcgi wt (3), a nuibnr “f invest'gators were stixulatad to exani :e the usefulness of the cancept as an ennlanation for a Wide variety of social behavior. tnce the concept UGO; e e: M olished, r. 4. hi port, Shurntone, DO‘ard‘n, likert, Droba, and others ”evelOped procedures for geasur- 'n;; ttitufe At the sane ixe, d. T. and r. f. nllport, Janiel natz, Bain, raris, and l:-s:-\r did a great deal toward forning a sustematic theoretical interpretation of II r .‘I the concept (13, “. ll}. Lheir conclusions in gen ral agree ‘I 'o be learned or conditioned results H D O O I: (.0 H p. (D H H- :1 V (.4. (—4- H. c—i. C 0 CI . M 0.10 U o O F‘b :3 (D C i:- _ 4 if: [—4 s: (D (:3 g; L. $.21 C)’ (D F4 3.4. ([1 Ft Ci I..J (J v. T. w' f' ‘ T " " ~-. -'- ~ IA lavJ A. do “iiiort thbQ: J J. ’fie cor cegt of attitude is p b- 1v the goat ' 9 :3 c flotlHCtl¢c anu in isceisi l conc pt 1:1 cute or ary ameiican social 3s cnolO3y. Lo ot1e1 ter‘ eludil nore frequently ill Ageliicntal and theoretice-l literature (2, p. VQQ). according to gore recent Uri tings, the concept has grow in interest and has continued to naintein its i;tortanc= up to tne gresent daV. etrauss, however, "the COUICG t oesgite its ke3 igportance, is narkei by 1.1oer1bl“ confusion” (16, p. 329). fie reuarks that a great deal of the lisunderstrndin come from a t*1uoncy to use the concept as a ”common sense ex; anation" rather than as a “general causel ex:lanetion . 4fter Iv’lc in3 tie reerese :2t tive centerporary use es of the tern ettituie, onerif and Cantril have con- .L. < 3 eluded tnat the characteristic oi attitudes which is intenuea most freoue ly is ” a functional stauaof reauizieas” of tne CT?&H184 (lo, 9. 17). .e srlall aunere to th s general neaning in our discussien. ine Leasurenent of attitudes has been of such wide (0 preafi interest that by the present tine, measurenent of been undertaken. Murphy (10) writes that a large part of this nterest seens to Le based on the nope of findin; general attitudes thic “ can be related to general Zehavior traits. This inelies that once such connections have been estaslishei, the tas: of pro ictin; behavior becogg gerely the task 01 geasurin; the attitude. in tse past few years a unber of feneral attituae- trait connections of th's sort ;.ve been isolatea, and sone of these hive been submitted to con-iierable inv esti- gation. outstanaing exa plea of general attituces, union aggea" -r to h re i;mto itance in the organizing and directing of tenavior, can be seen in herif and Cantril's w rk on ego attitudes (lo), aLd the work of Adorno, levinson, frenaol-Brunswik, and others on tile attitude of ethno - centris: (l). Laerif and Cantril have denonstrateo that with the possession of certain stron: attituaes, there are persist- ent tendencies toward omission of details from the percep- tual field contrastin: a with the attitude, and tendencies for the perceptual field to actively con: :ron'se with the attitude (15). LL.1jor conclusions 1'nic1 they nave drawn from their find n3s are that social attitudes Clay a part in det Hr ;inmgchat is Ecrce iv ed, and that the ancunt of -‘ this influence is ue epe endezlt u1on two things: the axount of ambiguity present in the situation, and the degree to vhich accurate perception is a threat to seli-esteen (15, p. £7). The work of adorns, Lrenkel-Lrunstik, and Levinson on the attitude of ethnocentrism (1} has developed as flirt C ’3 3 L2" H U )1, y. 5 C ’ x t 1' ( S; :1; cf- (‘2 ('1 ‘f K C. I F] C C t . t P (T L4 CJ H- (:- , -L r- a. ./ v C? c+ H cf 5 S ('L‘ (i. w H (a C p. H O ([2 pl k. H, L. C. '15 ...- ..'- -.‘L'. .'_: .. t‘OH'Jtzlki ..wlflO—L‘l'ulT-eo $314.3 ..J. ‘ . L. ’— Q I "m. I- I _ ‘ ' .'-' J- - -\ to c mousiiio 141 uuul roll;flllltj Lu; viliLity 13 a ..—-s-' -— . —* \ ~ - “r‘ .“ Que, 1onn1 1e LCMLP uevelo c 1' L”Vln,43 \l, 3. 01-111 . .., °. ' . .~ .-. “V's.-.“ _ ' . ,'_L. ., 4-, _ 1 - ..-.. . V. -1; -l‘.’l-o.":l silo SC'di‘lli ‘73 "I I 1:..'L;L:. l1"; uaT‘.’.le 0T1 +3118 if)» 1.1.1.041 v-x ivy a ‘ b. ‘ ‘ N J‘ W q . 1“ ~ - - “ 'V - ~- 'L'“ 1‘ ~ “ 7 5041;; IICA‘: L- 9145 lub VI r 1:1 UI\/¢.—; l 1.8 C..:‘sl_4..: LI Ll ‘ ...L‘.) \I LOLA. a , 0.1 ~.A. \ - \ fl . \ ‘ ‘l . L" ‘f ‘ 1 ' IL, 1 L ‘\ ‘f -: 4L ya- LL." 11 N)... U—AKJ \ ~ s at -1411 J \ n-- 3") :1 J-L 41‘“ v Ll“) L LIV; O. "T" )h- ’3 _. ‘ ~ Lt ' 173.1; L: ‘" "‘ 1r "1.; 4““ 1 ‘1 1" ”"11; 3..) \llK/KJ .4 L! l ULLKAV 64 V LI LLI» 6. ...—\JJ. V O ‘JL’I LJ Lt: dyslvlL—a OJ. ‘1 Lv ..v A" : 5 . -r-. ,“- ‘ -, - ' ' " ' ‘ 1 . ‘Y‘l ‘0 }S l . " " t"! ‘ ‘i 'L‘ ‘ ’1‘] u 'v r V J 1W J. .LLIKAlAL .. , x) U-J.:.L ‘ D-A(.I.L \AJ. 4.1L; b.31-_s 1 “V .L 1.. LI , Ith/i. .LQ ill U-L- .« -.-.‘-L.. 4.._ ' . - - 1 ‘ -1 fir Y -..« . 4-fln 4- - , oil atianiin, “ere louni to be closelj reliteu b3 the ax -.» ' l ' 3 ' - ~_.' ' rleguaicei attituce kl). , xrom tnese naJor investigations, two provocative 1 ° "" ‘-~- rur- ' 1»; tug-I ---'-~.-1" ".r L V 3.; ‘ Ln ('1‘ :31 "1 ' ‘\ 1' :1 -' 7’"- 0 Ines Oi e‘.~_-v_l- lull 4.x. HDJ'VLJ nxawfv van \LL’JdLO-‘JfiJL-d. L 19 l I ‘ O ”I" A""" .~.-~ 2-“ 4* ': "3 ‘r '17" 1° '0 .‘1 V " -'- 4'11 :1 ' ' 'f11'1'.’ 'r‘ v.1 r- 0‘1 'T' r: 1.le .h C’J'I-l- VU‘ILL UV.‘ ~L": U--‘JJ- .A-u— xoL-Lw d‘“. J...— J.- U - JJ. AX. pngIQ g-LO-'n has A Q. . -- 1.. o +‘ 4" . ‘ a ‘p. O I f“ —, - . cell oi Cufl-b';Clce “its UJG iinain 1 o; CllHlCal systole hu 2" 1 ‘ ~ ‘ *v a 1 ,- + ‘ D o 3 o ‘ ‘ I) .49 Lieseit stui, 1e :onccrnen nits tie Linainds c1 an - - ~ , . , r- ' - 4. 4. .. ,, 1 4.1 erfsri-cnt Ly nolelcn kl-) nuisL Ses-s u. out acios Jot” taste lines by winfin‘ ev1aence . ici a,ne1rs to 33”” a -. L. — n 2- .. . -.. . ' .. .- .- 1 4-". , .- ~- ~ . .-~. ., — 4- _1 Condom 11ccor Cybfi tin; 1n soti reeiession gnu ”are; cuai ,7. I r” _-_ x c . . ‘ 4— w ‘ ' -'. ,- A J. “‘1‘ l “ ‘_ -._‘ - _‘ : ‘ L 4 _\ A _I) ulsuurtlufl. Lug Deidre ovlfllnq t0 an edi_Lnav*un u- . ‘- ~ .\ '. l -. —- w l A . .*~ 4- -. ~. » ~—.~ ' " n“ ' + 1—. —,—. ' by“ , ,1 Lusleacg11.--ecnocxs_ngi IuLLthL, .m3 ”111 Lijfilt Liierig :re- - ' .-. -.. . .9 -.1 ,. - ,L. ,. _ ,1 1.1., ,-,.,_- ,.-..,:,.. .g- . . ~.\ - V154 sane o1 tie 13:1 clo cl] relate; en,e11”entLl st nies C“. deleted to the influence of attitudes on regiession is a stuiy of the effect of failure upon recall of tasks by hosenzwe'g and mason (lb). They sresen‘ed each of forty children with s'np e ji sax puzzles. lac: child was given a tine period for the nus zles wnich allowed him to finish only half of the tot l nuzsber. at tde end of each uncongleted puzzle, it vas suggested that the subject had faile' the task. After the series, the child Was asked to recall the nanes of the puzzles. Although the Zei;arnik effect Lvould favor recall of the uncompleted puzzles, these were renembered less requen y than the oncle ted ones. Another study with similar findings was en enterinent by Levine and “urchy on tie learning and for written material corresponding and conflicting with attitudes (9). They chose groups of five individuals of Opposing strong politics attitudes, and presented th- L sassajes, one conform n3 with their groups with written group political attitude, and the other antagonistic to it. The naterials were presented for five consecutive Lieeks and neasures oi ‘ both le'rning and forgetting were obtained. ‘, .- L ”- . ' ‘, --.n. ,4--1 ' .m. ",-\- ‘5'». '-- -‘ ‘«~. ‘, ‘L‘ . 'I W L._‘ +-‘ __‘_" -1drca Lita nateii l defuldl_; 11th thlthQEQ, they s. U) (D (1 found are receive decrease; in learnin: and inc;easc-s in forgetting for the material csnflictin: tith attitud s. This difference reached si nifica nc_, in one ;rouu, onlv 4. U‘ for forgeztin; and this in the later gart of the e:{:eri- nent, but was significant both for learning and f rgettin; throughout the trials of t e ot 1er croup. a stu y 1‘y Eruner and oOOdna n (1) dononstrnted the influence of value azir need ugon perception. five groups cnildren Lere cnosen from "Rich” and ‘:oor” economic O H) "rouse, and were asked to stir ate the sizes of coins fron one cent to a half dollar with an adjustable soot of light. rheir results shofied that the estimations of the floor sroup consistently exceeded those of tne Iich groug, both in the remembered condition was the 5re1tsst. An excerinent shouiL; nerce: fornsnce with expectition was conircted hr Brunor and Postman (5). oubje C's were tecnittoscouically shown incongruous trick cards rith color reversals sucn as a — ‘3 W . ‘ '5‘ -‘~ 5 I ‘~ ‘7“ r ‘-¢ 4‘ "“ " L" 1‘. I .- ' "‘ fl“ 6 red sir o1 sLad s. 1n a l r1e nunoer of c1ses, the per— -\— " .' w . -- \ 'w ‘- 1 L' r t . (1 r 17' f' ' I" "7‘1“ . ' 1 ‘ 'L. 1‘. P 1‘ . '1’ a Cast was a c111ron se. 1or Cudwgls, the red 511 O1 7" u K: (W ‘ 1 ~ '| ‘ I? '3 . ‘ " 'fl ('1 ‘-\ ‘l 'r. 'q l .3 r: ' - ". ‘F‘ (f! ‘1" .’ 'Q C, "V W1 “4 ' -V i 'v“ \A ‘ \A-L .4. - uh “I 5- ‘ \J N! \J ‘ ~/'Lr\ —r .l ..A— 813 es cec« 6 title , ;u 1 c ~11 s_1uc o- a 1urp e r ‘ .C' _“." L -~_ / u ..x OJ. 118v~rt~a (d, J." .1i) 0 L.) ‘ " ) 1 ‘\ C -‘ ‘ 1. 1 'fr‘. . ‘~1 I " d, ‘f1*'f~r\ ‘31:) C 1‘ ‘\01L‘\1Cil bauea 451.50 6 L‘b‘ 1....vn On .1611 aLdfo LI-J.V \l pen are the results of rartia l renressions that form a .L .- . " "r “'1 g I“! 3‘ f: . a I """ ‘L 1‘ ‘L' “I ‘ connronis“ betueon an ebo-tn eatenin 1n1ulse and the . ,— \ r ... , ,1 4- . ‘ L \ _ ' r- .1 -~-'~ , vr r‘ r~ +- :3 tendency to perform an alternate seeially dJurOVeg ct (a). ~-. .-- .3. ‘ ,1 4. ' .. 1. 1.. 1-. 1 ‘. a quantitative g1en01enon H 1.“, (7‘ { L U) H I O "3 F’- (d according to Freud, ‘ ' 'V I' ~ A .1 ~ ‘ r1 ."‘ ("C ' ‘v . ‘N ‘ "f‘ .N 45Icn 5c55 not unly u‘on t c re.5555e5 153Ll5e t5el 5ut also urin all ‘5scci tio5 with it ’11 invvree prepcrtion incivi C1wL-..~ri;_) U ('7 ). sed' (1:: to recall material :uels log in prejueice. 1.. 4 ,5, +5 ,5 3; -. -Llo .‘....C uILQeLM up €3L3 .431 lo ‘51& 541;;i31-5rcayi icemi.55 161E3;3 c-n 3;otc_; 5L;5 I55I555;tin; ecudl 5 er; cf dale 525 f5;& e unites 5n; .egroee. Lie fullo in 5-555 w‘re equally istributed b7 race an; 5e: to t-e iaces 8&0531 axit5, grey, 5ree' ne, 5:0 n, 515 ch, lynch, geet, Cole, 55iti,l Jone5, LJW, 511 $503. fine as Jud ed each 3L0 05 53h for fr enc line55 or un:ri5:5- Le5e. rhen follo ed a t35r fer Incigental reclll. Ine gigs-frejucicei gr053 recalleq the n5gee 5 5y, CIe5ne, and 53333 signifiC5zitly xcre often t1.n tLe lc"-l1 judiced frcup to both 5egrc 55d ”hit laces. fie lo. -3rejucicei gr3u3 recalled the nage aener and save ”$0 r“““eh5a5” Sign fiCfiuth gore ofte; thgn the high-3rejuiiced :rcup to both legro and "gite fa es. Ine frerue n07 of recall of the various males to the Le;ro 5‘; “5i ue f5ce5 was not 5ignificantlv cifferent fch eech oth5r iIiica , th5t 3re'udic iéifict gegroes 553 be a 1;anife:t:ticn of a gore perve5ive 5'53nthr03y (1:, 3. 55;). In 5150553 3; -C.LL “re5t”r recall of -. - . .1-- . I u '- «r: L - +3 “eze re5uiL5, “oneeca 3UInt55 out 5i5t ' ‘0" -\ ~rs a (5‘ 4 "’ .' " ‘ " -' V‘ ”N q‘ "‘ ‘ ‘- t.e n5.55 5r5~ creene 55d 3503 or J 9 9 to su3port bot: t: greudii5 hygothe5is tL-t slip actions are 3arti l regression 0" c~53’0515e fOJIltigne, 5;; th= fincin e thet the 35rct3tual field tends to 5 lietcrte5 in the d°:’ctica o” confer 5nce with a strum 5ttitule. 5e 5150 r5portee tfi5t the Si aifi- \ ‘w ‘4 . ' ,_ — -. q— r I . . r ' . ' J- ,4 - ~ - -.- “q 'x‘ ‘1 one ....1.1'-~ , lb 4.3.me 1' 3;; f: 96*}. t g. qun...$‘1C‘f .L U- “n “ -‘.. w 1‘.~ '4 w . ‘: .~ ‘ ‘ - . 1"? .;‘~ "a "' ' ' "I " ’ '2“ 4" “ 1” ‘ ".T‘ M' ‘7 v? o") --'-‘1:‘~ J. CC LA ..L $L»n..-v p; 1.1 J 'AL‘LAAlleL \l UH "U; 'r J. NJ '3 V0 Liz.|.{l Lida-Lt- .L J-‘L.Lv‘:/ ;;LV"~ a: ' ' l 'n ' “‘- r v: ' t ' I .v:. ' '37 ' (1:) " '0 "' ‘1 - " "w “'7" ’~ ‘ -. .—; '1 " --, 7 ‘ u; 84 1.31.1 -AL 1 U ‘1] " 1 Al —_'I V 311%]. V V U J- ULLV -.-l- -5 -_.J. bL‘J , '~A-n-L\A ”.1 ‘- U “D. V I V l ‘ ' * "'WQ “‘1‘ ' 71 .g‘-'~ . :1 UL-U O I -.U-L ‘Lkig'l‘-t , 1" H (I t__1. g: C~ H. (2 CD 0 ( - _),. 4.3,. 4.. ,.,.- _. . ' :1 ;L_-..gu Lulu: u Cu -Ltr4u v .. 3. um". - ' ' ,. .. . .‘. :.' . _ -‘ - h , i & .. m .1.‘. . ., _ >.\ .1. .. ,' _ 1n Vlb I 04.. 9-1; firm-1t ';.‘ tu-1..w-1cg o; ‘vflo lo .. ,1mu, w ~lire “‘Q ’- H: ' J‘ ‘ -‘ ‘7 7“ 2';- " ~rw. 1; f 'f“ ‘"~ 11.7.6 ‘ 1' ‘n to : 1L3 J. V5.1" Ua-lb-JV , 1 LI - ;~.Ab ‘./ \d “:1 5-1.5.4. ’. '. J b 4.132! Lit- 8&‘Avflc‘v ALU V \A -\ ‘-’~ -. 3..." .-, .’—, -~ .‘. - . .a- ‘ I. 4.“ h’fl -| v ”a .- - ‘ ‘ x , - h pi 2-24ngl-43 nbnln \u), ; r 943 o: -ruug to 3 “are ‘. .L- "' l.‘~.l" t‘ T’q. J. \"T " ‘ "' '1‘ .’ . UU \J UA‘U \JJ- b-*-J-L;Ju-L I . .w ‘ -‘_ o ’~-a_~. 1L.I‘.C Lalv‘J. VJ. L _ 4-, .41?! E. 0 LG. ’I' (‘ ' ." 1 .A '1. .L.‘, 4 ., , _ use .5 4t 0; .r. ' , .:. . ‘ 1 . $1-1ul21 _,b CVTI’ ”01".{111 I 3‘ 4’ w r "J -.'r- ." 08 0:3 Q .5 IO 1‘ L3} . ‘,’\ (- vpvuo wane 9- ~ -- '1 -,- . *a: '1: "'1 “0“»... 0-; Lu , Laid - - N -« 1‘ ‘3' - N ..." " - . a v . ‘ ..- 'V. *- '. 4" 'v' "" nwmeu Lu, byulffl u; JULEILIt’ to 301$ .6310 ufiJ ““1“ til. , .L _ ..- -~~ 4. n '-. ' 4—5.. _ . ' -..- .. ' . 1ac~s go a fi“c;ter e t;;u u.un .uugeou- lo. 1n gfichu 1' z— ,x -.‘ L ‘ 1 I ‘- w. .v‘ 4‘ .3" ~~ . .a — «. ya \ ‘- ." . F‘ ." I" nous.04 9004 t“;. Lluulhl Q: iuiic;uive 0‘. a ”Feats? . ‘ ' "\V . ,~ ‘ ‘ “O -.‘r r ' i - . ‘- ~'-‘ I 4- 1% r-- c-AlVKiIIt-JOLA ‘r 1&1 I‘UA‘LL .L ..galvr :.l\ 11:). 4-1 11:-8 'l'a-l LIA: t.Ll5—J , .. - ,--,.‘A .z- ‘ ', +' , .e fl:gOb1€JlZ€ usat: I " 11, -. _ c‘ “‘ 1 . -L “\ 3 :2— v‘. '= 1r or“ v .Q a. 1 4" . “ . r. "1‘4 'F' . ..uCI'C UILOL... El. U9 “.4. .Lan_u-'v I'v.-xxul./.L----lr Id‘uu "3 .x' 3 , '0 -- - "’ \' (590.2)": .71 at '1‘”? f, uC_T€6 o. eju&13 e euure H... 1“ r. 11;. or ".T' -\‘r .L.‘.\U-LJL..4.. ! ‘ ' ’C \“ ‘ o \— " ‘ ,r. -. .~ ‘ ' .-. ~»\ «a .- VI . ,- ‘- v I a. Q- IUJ;T“14“ ULL‘C —. ' a . . 4- u 4— ' ...-.~ AutluLuv QJd n1. CQJuuhplwl .~ ;,' ; “ "J" ' 4' ' ‘1‘ 'I‘,';‘ .1 ....ALLA..Lt:u4 UJUlO‘A \JJ. ortgnt ihglic ;tlo“s L3” 2301* J- ‘a ': ‘ " !' ."N rw f. r». r « 4.‘ z 43 (-w 'I -,'; , u;.-.4.~L, lb “ls-L) ‘v~'\:t~.4. u/tvL (J.L.op...4.:1: \ - LN" “ .- ' \s w "v llcfiu1*d LLS .t.c,. I ’- ' . -vv . 7“ ‘ ..- 1; cuu31130t13;1 “ltn “o a: J-’: ‘ O . ,“ ' A‘,.<—. . “-. t . b.1603.) Quyc‘d. OAL J..ULLU~.AC_L k} I ..- l . 'v‘JLl‘Ve 5- —1 s il*”l““ Jku. .. . :3 Mat 11 G) ‘.. ,.‘,-,‘J.‘-. ‘ ~Asl 0&4; b-..: 0 all .. l v\ (‘1! . u .z p 6 to Cleo; ‘x-v'v U 4.. ”.0 .~ _, ...t ,,_ .. .‘4.‘u.. w \" a '. .._.,.L' e U VJ. le'...) U -1 Ci'v LI “:1, 138:1 3 \U-L ‘1'?- Dbl—l-J li’l‘Vysxi V ,. .- - w 3.‘ . ‘ J-‘ - A ' ‘ “J. , .».. . ° -. C-‘Iler- “by. 'a 1 .1 ,I‘c‘llCCln_jg 0...... .83 1.x 8.0 halvuac. Lab QVCULM hug d; JJ‘ v“ 1 . _| u at J- , . -I- _ ,, . . . , ° .~- p 4.. Ounces; 01 .e fr5u64t VVL-,, 1. an ‘u “I“ , .- ~ - 4" - - 4- .' ~--. .~\ ~ . . ’1. . -. - DJ ha..$;‘t _ J) “6"U ‘30::eL—A IO»: ;- (3 3’1 4 MS :. l--\A -‘-- 4 ‘o . 4" ~-n “t t a"! C' t1‘ 1‘ ‘r 1" 1 / " I" “1 “" 7" "a C‘ I” .LJl \-\ LLLL‘ .‘KJJ. 5.: Mad (1 L;L'~AU.C JVJ 14$J.\AC.L . 5.: 180"“ .~ “.3 .LIILQ C E- - ’ 021313J2;'. 8 E1111 10 D . r‘ x- q . -.- ‘\ - -\ -. 4] ‘ -‘.- . my- -, ~ -r- ‘ I ’fl irieAcliAeee c1 octa reAro ana ”Ilite yflOEOS. 3 Moreover, no c1fzcrenc ('3 . G 1 '1 x 'H:- 1 "a *r 'n 11 r - 4.4.]- 44V +141 -. .LO- :1_ 3-1uk- .1 L4 line 3 sAculd occur within prejucice grou33 (’3 bet een tAe Le;ro and wAite pnotos. . no differences are exwecte d in frequency of re- F! (3‘ call of vurious ertionelly-loxded names or neu ut:;l nA;,s bet een Negro and ”TAite ghctoc for reuse differing in cegree of grejudice. 11. Since tAe distortions in recall of nine; acre fcuni to be functicns of experigent, the general Agpathesis that such distor- t be _Jrc:crt isnel to cejree of prejudice tions mi“‘ L) 4. . - ‘,- ——~, taeA AyJo- A seeAed artAy of if v,c.1i'*1cn. It was tAesized in line 'iti em; lier finii njc tA: : i' b F S (D (1.1. C ‘31 H O (7) 11a. In geneiel, the :rc tcr the derree c the greAter the anticipated freqiency o of th followin: nAnes, indicative of recall by ‘1' H- eiiilarity or zxzpryg se: lgnnri, .lacg, crown, I ‘-'A -‘-‘r .‘ . .3 'I" v 9'1 etude , Liflkl Urafo IIb. Convereely, the less tAe prejudice the greAter (D the enticipm ed ire TAU ncy of iecall of th following nAAes, indicative of recall by con- trAAt or of tolerAnce of enbiguity: Unite, Lest, AnitA and ther ieutral nznes. ll Asterials The materials consisted of two sets of thirty-two photo;IApls, a tilted rack for the photogrApLs, and record blanks. The tIO sets of photographs were identical except that Set 1 had names printed beneath the photos while set ll had no names. the pictures were cardboard-hacked, enents of front-face views of individuals showing head and neck, obtained frOA police files. The thirty-two photos were conposed of eight female and eight hale negro V s, and eight fenale and eight male (I! whites. Ages were judged to range from twenty to fifty years of age. After randomly assigning connon first names to reduce the one value of the surnames, one of the ei;ht surnames -- Aest, Jhite, Gray, Greene, Brown, Black, Lynch, and smith -- was assigned to one of the eight individuals in each of the above four race and sex groupings. A coxplete list of the names is found in Table 1. The rack was a tilted platform of plywood designed to give maximum visibility to the pictures.. The record form was an 8% A ll mimeographed sheet with a five-point TABLE I \T - -,‘1 '1 0—1 ‘ ‘.-P‘ 9 W'N .-. . .',.,,~‘ ... .,—\ .—— T... . "‘1 I lWfi .__-,-. . .,'., l' "’1" .‘ .. 1 ‘ I . . :-. -' «U ' ‘ , ~ ' I ’ it -. ’ 4.ILs\-s.1~) - ‘44.) H rusty ...-J U--\IIJAo .5-u V4.11 UL‘ L-“ .LLU ..VJ _ H -'—.'*—.—‘- “—- -.——- -—.—-‘ ‘AHQ---—.--- -‘ - -- -- *‘C. I'ID—--.-.— - ...”- , —‘ - ...—.I a‘dfi—O “—- 7.... ”...—...... _._...---- A-.-.-..._. -.....“-. .- --. ..._. ---..- .-..-. .- u..._»..-...-.._.-_ ”mm—...... .. --.-...... hale Heiress John Greene Fred Gray Charles Lynch Ralph Blacn Peter Brown Robert White Frank Best William Shith kale Uhites Fred Greene Jillian Gray Robert Lynch JaAes Black Frank Brown Charles White John Best. Walter SAi h Female fiegroes Betty Greene Mary Gray Dorothy Lynch Edith Black dhirley Br an Ann Nhite Helen Best Joan Smith ..- Female Whites Ann Greene \ "'T' r. i n, 1.. t- A c) H m «a Lary Lynch ‘ Baroara Black Helen Brown Jean White Joan Best Dorothy Snith . ‘- -- ._ ._.. scale of friendliness at the tOp, and thirty-two spaces for recording responses to the photographs, an exaiple of which appears in Appendix A. . subjects After adhinistration of Levinson's ten-iteh Athno- centrism Scale (1, p. lCB-le} to approxihately 250 collefie s0phomore and junior students, three groups of thirty subjects each, half male and half female, were selected. rhese we shall call respectively ”highs,” ”hiddles,” and ”Lows." The highs .ere the thirty students obtaining the h';hest scale ratings for ethnocentrisn, the Riddles were those scoring most centrally between the Aighs and Loss, and the Lens were those having lowest scale ratings. To guard against connection with the later experi- ment the h Scales were given in classrooms by instructors. Also only data from subjects who reported no fore-hnowled e of the test on guestion 1 (see p. is) or association of the scale with the experihont mere used. rrocedure The subjects were tested individually. At the beginning of the experiment 3 provided him- self With four blank mimeographed record forms like those shown in Appendix A, and Bets 1 and ll of the photographs. V 14 to look at each one carefully, and write down t1 e nanes of C" L Q ’d (D H 0’) O :3 m (D 7 here in these spaces. after you have for friendliness along done that, rate the picture (2) five-point scale you see at the tOp of the page. her ex- a-ple, if you think the person is very friendly, write dov.n nunber l he; e; if you think the person is sonewhat friendly, write number e; if you think he is neither friend- 8 ’Ja ly nor unfriendly, write down nu ber 3; if you think he ... somewhat unfriendly, nuhber a; and if you think he is ver; unfriendly, put down lumber 5. no you have any QUOStiOHS. before we be; gin“” set I of the photogrnphs was then pre- sented in a ores rIln . d rand 0:1 order. for all four pre- sentations of icture s, L began by plac'nj the cards face down in front of himself, and then settinj the: r C t5 (D 3 k, one on the ra K so thlt they were clear y visible to the subject. Eh Speed of p"esentation was die ta te dby s. it was never more than ten seconds per card, and showed J. little variation from subject to subject. W”? ter cogp letion of the presentation, 5 immediately renove d the response sheet and supplied a fresh one. Kart II. Set ll of the pictures was couposed of the same 52 photOjr phs prearranged in a random order I "Q ' 4." V‘ - r .-'. ‘ ‘3‘” ‘K 4‘ . A41 («J "M ~ “N. r. - I , , Ll;:erd--t .Liv-- VA ..- U VJ. JUL} 1. .LLJ.~1U.1.1.«.D Ul‘-~j:1l;¢' fr. U I. i n .r‘ . . .. ~ .‘u _ i ' -' . J— . . ‘. ... _, -' '. -.A:1—L LIA—‘LJLQ bl-uu t.-le A1ut-..cs ~11- U dun-L 5-1;! ill . Q to I ,. (C r F1. ( b C, (.1 P, ’3' +7.4 ~ -— -1 -. +7... - ,. ,. , .. nix- .. .-.. -. .. VJ- Jl 43 J.‘ _'..~C~-Jbr UlLC: iii-L re.) VJ. 8.7.0-1. Of :v..'. "A ._ 17L‘42'34- “ £1..O i211 0 time a .' ; exceeded fifteet seconus i r...spot-.sii:1z,_; so ”.1: pictures, n rerinaed him: ”he enbcr, your first uses is t-e .ost scc rate. nfter tiese instructisns, very fen LuC,BC:Q too. gore till fiIte~n seconds to respond to JJBCCS uere encuurgjea to leave - -. ,: 4 .r . ... .- -. '1 . ..- . 31.13-.) lt J.-. __ Opal“. .).;C t3 - . ~ —, P», I . .- ""' .~ .- ' ' . '.v_.- i r 3,:- _‘\ ‘. " 3“ -‘- -‘ l .’J ‘ I —‘\ ".‘ " “, ‘ O.-lL-_lg)fgt3 1; .bal 13. the L.1t.fil-‘.<3 .-.,a7du IC;._.U.-QVQ an. End 1. A}, — . ,. ---..-' - . . .-: ...: . ,,-, -4-:_; DivAlLAL 1675,15.) Vs- :xAl-bl I‘LLJU -‘ e\i (1.3“ rbrllj Cd‘i . ‘t-a I'A‘lk) U$1-J I. O 'J .'_. ’ . ' J- , . , ,' m- , . _. ..., '..,..,i .29. , -, ._‘ .:_4. 4. ”5,3,5”, DMD) r53“; v.1. Due l:IL.xJ.IVld.., Lure LLLDJLCJ ”(3.5.3 u$-lv.~ ~ -,‘ .--t ri.»3\w~~+ t :” 1:.“ ' awrt . ‘:' ..' \D‘L .'.L'\).—~.‘. LA‘JJKAU ALE {44...béfil -V .«J. 36:50-8 - — I‘ ..« J-‘ 4 -" -‘ -.~e.--\ 4 - , ,-'. ~«. .~ .-‘ v. P 9:4 0 ‘3 .Lat (.10 Jot-1 U.L.‘L.Li.‘..~\. L.le 64's.;{bI‘ Ln LQ-AL I‘¢'~:U vs: Jut - W n " p‘ ‘ . ‘Q ~I ," ‘ "‘ n ‘ v . fl 1" v’: 4" "~ '. ‘5 I . "\ ‘ +1‘ QQIOLe lSGJlHJ u J&b thtluhdu nOt UQ ”uhtlwfi one J- U - v - -x '; 'i-‘v '.~ '~ w ' -- .3. - w' ~. ‘- 3N. , . ‘ (V ff * ,_3 r; (1 sz“.§el $05 {It to \AJL‘; UJ. sill.) CACALJLJ4-§4. Us). l6 '4‘ ‘ “f’~( “'1 ‘ reii inorv consideretupne. 1ne dir-e; emcee 1ct c'en BAG groups 14 IBCJll or tne nin,s do not epgeer to be due , ~11.” 'i-w to ony ulll6::“CUb 1n “Jllltf < ' _, .H I. 1 .1 p: .L.‘. n1 1s recoileu lu.u or use negro and 17.; to learn the ne es. ghe -, ,. .11 _‘- ‘ oer cent or use white feces correctly. inc -iddles recllled rcsge tiv el'r lo.b and l5.0 :er cent, ind t1e rows 1;.0 end 1:.o per cent correctly. since tnere Litn tne feces with CHI-.3108 1'53 9 ('7 NJ cig1t differe ecual freque I --. ..J ~L- «u‘ ,3 x y“..-‘ 4\ 1- . ~\ .- '+ '51-'7- J..Lw‘oC bel apol ux.l...-:i LIL 3 3 +' .21 '. fi CW A1 U iA-.-e t.) LA £318" I'iIl -. ncy, correct recall once 1;.o per cent of the tile. To indicate tie ‘ 4‘ "I ‘ i ‘\ ’n‘r‘. -» ‘ .' I“ 4 -~ - ‘ ' 'I- ~ ~--~.» . ‘N '~ ~- -\ ' .- 4-. orlblmlly b0 wile: MCSJ. ml“ .111 L-C 1:10 bOb, ”,1ng nbceghlugu .. - _ 4..- H .,+ - -_‘,.. rm” . r .-‘1 ,‘l f. _4 .:..‘. f. ,K‘,‘ 2‘, r ‘, ... ’. _-.‘. ,:3 ...‘. ' 4. , ' befiarruc tv glad e1 our U‘Jbr nygoumeee; 103A4e,r3 “flu .Jlb: «H;- ~ ”r «um-.1: +1” rm «1“ - "1 L1 *1 ‘“‘ ”If I‘“" .‘J AU HOE-3. VJALU-LAl ..L l I A.“ L L’U-r ALL vb-JU —A \Jn- JL -— .L. x r-a—.. 4L4 9H 0; ‘1 1““1 {1"d 3. v n no. v A mode u was it» amAN u ~26 H39“ :11 cadence om: 8: ow: om: ow: cm: #509 ... mmnan E .2. mm om mm mm mm. mm mm a. 2383 m2 mm.m m: 3 mm mm... man 3 R on tom mm mm; on an 8 ma mp. mm .3 S 323 mu 3.: mm S in 2 38 mm 3 mm .33 3v 2; Q. mm 3 ma S.m 3 mm NS 9396 ma :0. mm S R an 3a .1. mm k. 86.5 Nov 86 S m: an no. .33 mofi 8 mm m: #88 m2 $.n N2. «2. . R mo.v $6 mm .8 .1. £83. a ~30} son 56% germ 9 «Eu .6.” 0332 ”mam .332. 890mm EH3» 890mm 832 88% BE: 82 05% Mom 38% a2; 5.39% mag no enema E mnogan Hb sandy 1U 03 A ' .l- _ . - ' _ '." - ' , I" - ,7 -l. ..'_ ‘ J. J . , . H A . \ l. ‘x t 'h ‘ A. 1 ‘Va . ' '3 ‘ 1-1 “x \1 . ~ ,- .‘ v_- . . .j N w ; ~ r\ ..\_ ‘ . (. .- . . ,. . . _ , ,_ 'I' l U-L J- V U ’_-:JC U0 ‘JAL‘V l.- I 'J b --» J- V,“ A'. .n- .31.— ‘-—~ U «HA . .K/ . J‘/ a. - V '— \J , , . ' .1. __ ‘ 4. _ .‘ A ' - ' V .. . .. t , .L ‘ "1' ' 9.; ‘7' . " ' '. ‘ " "N - "‘ ~‘. A If) ' ' ' ' 7" ‘1‘. ‘ ’-‘ ' " . " -' .L ‘ 'T "" " ‘ "" .3 ......u. .-- u.’ 2-1V] UUL—a o ..--v -.l .,-..‘.-., .. J'--\.-.C’-J\-L LA LA.) 4... v.11 :JI\;'~J.-..L \, v -r w .e- i‘n - ‘ r l .1 b ... I: - ,. ‘ .... .__ ‘ ‘ a J- ‘ -‘ - ; - .‘1 .‘ ‘ ,‘ '1 -1 .- ‘ -\ .- , UJ— ...CLI-\.J. .A.L_L _KJJ. 4-1VKJ 1's] ‘ .1 l’"_]_ J '4 .LU “A; - ‘_th " ..V Us.) oh ('1 H. ’ 2 .-— *J. r. H O a ,_ (_.. C‘ C Ir .- I cr (I H fl H CI (L. ; £ cf H rt «2 CL |_J L; r— (i) ii y b C ll , ...}, . .:_. ,. . - ,. _. ‘1, - ' .L .. -, .... . " ,4. -. .‘.‘ ' .4...” H... , veep. LAC] pru;lC“ uJU mare red. uuu “cue..; newes _. ,» .- ,—. . ‘ ,, n J- .- ~;~ ‘ ..- M .; 1 l ,3 . ,1 ' - . . pi 4;rlca;tly less dream. .cr his w-uu p a1; L-w 2-0a a .14.. "-‘ ‘ .‘ ... 1 . 4- , . ' . . .. -:‘-,..., _f‘ -' .r-Ja, .--. - . ' .. ..._ ‘r '1 1 t .. v--e J.Ll oxluule V8.4.h‘33 u'Vat 14.; Lur' \llrrci":;-.Ceie 1-- _eC-...-__'.. Q 1; ~71” .2“ .-' -: + r\‘L"- 7-. ‘. ' 1 m.-. -'- --.. .. .u ; C...’ 4—4 ,1 *. q-y- ..-. . W _. .- 1 _.b;;;r+u ‘Jrrsl ..-.LU’G bruit.) «do, hid. ...LU' .L'o‘aC..L ... u-.‘A.b.L.).Ld\J VJJ.“' .LK/V\-I.J. ' 1. \ r‘ .-- 1" . ‘- '~. 'L ,r' t J- -. -'- ; . '_‘ ~ I- J“ ‘--\ .1‘ 1‘ 1" . 4- +.' - I ‘.‘.'l .- .L’.‘UE}I\3~JU1-.;;J UK) fl Lab Lula 3-.) 113.2 v-6 CASL\10.1 VHS 1; £ru¢.;.- ' 4 ‘4' ‘ . f1 '- " r'~ ’ ‘ . - - I ‘7 1" J." " rc.;t ev1ucnce cvncernlng 3., After e;;:-;_.-inin:_j all ;;1__':1:L: r -‘ '.- ... .' ~ ': '-‘ . " >,,‘ h: ‘.'\ V' ' _.-‘ .‘. A 1. V :- ‘ '. . ‘. -~ .' ”y *— .-‘ ¢;yULfluL;S ¢& 221 ¢u, we CVAClUAU tnrt are ev1d53ce tear; .2 U . , -L— f‘ ,- - .- ,— .N ._ ' . . >--, -. . I< ~ ‘,‘ a' .v —_ I. v- ,- -‘ z ‘ ,v ’ r. ‘l .o- w‘; .-- - 3‘ ...—f l .' ’— IeJ;Cu Auflcgca L _1824”;;J:j dejoCfieJlb Uduufl; uQG 5:: '~'-“. 4‘ .“7"‘ 1'.'-' ," ~. "... .1. ,’ ,- r- Cbuu 19461 UL C firiJCddd. ' ‘- -u 4-, 4- .» \- rV . a 1"" ° —.5 "' - .-" 3 r vs ,-- 4', '~ .8 burn I10}. bf.) a CQilgileU ubluil OJ. ClrrBI’bgCGc ....1 It- {in H. }' 1) F4; (P H (- H O (C (J l V | a ' J HI H (D C (J p a O *5 H (D (,3 L; F.) H C) k—J (D O P. f. FJ. O r r 'r 1 (0 f k I H a. .,“ -. - r: 7 \ .— - ,3 .‘ ~.-~ .--~ -‘ -, -- .—- 4- - -‘- 'a — .- n4 .- -“ _ -‘ I 4- ’- ~~_‘ ,- -l- -- ....L__,-'., ...J. “4.6; , cum LO“ :-_:..'x.'hi_l.; bu mm: -42: _I‘O gnu -11 u -‘ £110 00;: (‘V (~ _- ‘—A -,-. ‘2 c.— ~ l 1 - .5” "| 5- I- .1-— 4- If —-I (.‘ _‘ 9' - ‘2. -- l q :— La. 1" .‘ '5 If" 'fit1‘l. ‘n L: 1 r ,1; 11- ‘. <5 JCJ‘JQ-LCA »' J O 4-0.1. U.Le LA»;— ULA QC ;A :4 .L0 CI , baa-e Vii-h k-‘v- M.- v '4 k..- \.r -O.) A"‘_‘ v" t ; _‘I .;’.n - P.“ A ._‘ ' .-.- ' _g'l ' .4 J- ‘-. ,. :— . ,. ., I “' . ,..._._ ‘1‘ - .. ,_ . ego. erriereacee 21 fllrqufl a. tad u gar cemt LGJCl set w:“ ‘ —- .. .: .. .‘ 2 _.-V . x .. - , .... .-.‘r- .'..] - .-.- 4. 'Jrzdh...lce Ql'dllgb ..JI Law.-- M63120 «:;.1'..L .:-.l VL. : .LJb J _j '-‘.-. -"r~ x.“ ...,a',‘ La (J..i v-~ 1V._.LCILJ I». C As i’or hypothesis lla predict tin 5 greater recall of the nanes Lynch, Black, BrOWn, Greene, and Gray, Table VI shows that only the names Lynch and Black reached a satisfactory level of si 5nific ince for tile 2e5ro photos. Of these nahes, Lynch reached the 5 per cent level and was recalled hos frequently by the middle group. Black apyroached the 5 per cent level, and Was reca lledx ost fre equ ently by the LOWS. Both of these results run counter to our predictions in hypothe sis lla. The only nahes concerni: 5'H3gothesis Ila to be recalled With significant differences for the White photos Were the names Black, and Greene, which eached the 2 per cent and l per cent levels respectively. Black, as for the fiegro photos, was recalled most frequently by the Lows. Greene Was recalled hm st frequently by the Middles. Both of these results give evidence a5ai-.s t Hypothesis Ila. None of the results shoWn in Table VI reach d si5nifi- canoe for Hypothesis lIb, namely that the nanes White, Bes , and Neutral nanes tend to be recalled most freouently by those low in prejudice. The nahe Best, which shOWed the 5 reatest difierenccs betWeen prejudice groups to both Hegro and White photos, was given most frequently to the Negro photos by the LOWS, and most frequently to the White photos by the highs. The trend was toward sugport of the hypothesis for Kegro photos, and toward rejection for the White photos. 1 ‘ I v, , .__ ,. .3 .- A 5 _ J--l 3 ‘Qal 3.- M-L --.-j __ «I VLLV >-v l '—; 1 ~ I‘ '5 'vu ‘ - ‘ r ' 4 " fi ‘ 'A l'qC:;_1-.L a..- l- 2L); ul...i'- .1- .L 'f" ‘ 3 . -J v ‘ .l t “f8 'V ‘ ' ' ‘ . -" ‘:_ A ’"I ‘ Lb A -lVLK.\-L'- J. kw '..‘. I4 1 4'... \J - -Lw. ..- - 1 ' ..,_ ‘_5 ~ .4. ,_' 1. -I- ...'.‘ . _.. ”‘45 - ril11n5 Jet sen Lnose 1 r- ~ -" .L ' ~. .~ - . ' .-. . --' 1 4L. -. ' I‘L-l—M. Ulw‘;‘.§;;;l :1 \ .LA-a .L vikil-lq. «a H _ _ _ , ,, .,_ .‘ ,1 .. , .3 3 .."t,. l UCUL‘LLIA Cu UK) L1,--.L. 5.; Al ~-;LJ .1- Ul‘ -.J o 5er cent 1"‘\""‘ 'r ‘4 3.:1 4" L’ \' “JUL; Lgnch for _ 54.2}. _ 5-15-51 . , 5 H, .. f ..'ULLl‘-L QC “\1; _"-’ Ll‘m .DpI-‘V ’\‘:‘\ - -= r) b“ out llu'.;c.6;11UJ.u -r-- “14;.(‘3’5‘ 'Cz»-,.L'U , 2b-]..- r.L ‘J'uixd "a C‘ ~a J-‘Lulé , 1 . . —- » -‘ r‘ a. li“; b—fi - .3 -- _‘... gagic C q “1",”: I’D ‘ 1 _... \J ..L. ..L. . ,_ o ‘N 1 . ~45 I“ -1 u; .41}. ‘4. r‘ "‘ 17‘ ._r- kI-L.LU 1. P. 1—.1’.‘ -.C ‘ v 1’ 0 . .L . - V- (5' {J f‘t ‘n '.‘. lA‘LJ U_A-_LI\JLJ :". “I 'I " 1 .1. | ~ ‘lea. l b0m*-L _ - . .'. .L. . ..l . . 0.1. 2-1.1. w; 4-": ‘ .3 1‘ -’-- n l ' J , 4...-“ .L- [I . . . . .. n 'I. ’3 .- W Kr"... V U s J b 4. .. -, . - U_4, .L ‘.. 11.1 L U -Y‘ .4. K 7. ~A’H ... . 1 . 11 -V -' I v _‘ fi ‘_ J. ‘v' . ..L. 0‘1 L4 - .-. o 3’1‘?‘ ‘ .1; AAA.— -.v + 2:: U 4 E3 raj .1 ..i '35) K. .L {‘0 U} {.4 11 I.)f\ ‘ ..— -L..' \. v.1 J ' . V .‘ -‘\ I" .u.‘ U u. U .I »x‘ ... 'v ‘f‘ v - L‘ to 0') DISCUOOIQI The 5eneral hypothesis that differences in attitude ‘ tend to produce differences in structurization of the per- ceptual field (1, 4, 6, 9, 12, 13, 14) Was uplield in the present study. Di fi ences in attitude betWeen group were found to produce si5nificant differences in recall of nanes to Ke5ro and White photos. Our results concernin5 nisanthrOpy shOW that both Hypothesis Ia, nredic=t in5 that friendliness judgments would be functions of misanthrony, and Hypothesis lb, re- ‘ *0 dieting that recall of nanes would be functions of nisan- thrOpy, Were rejected beyond the l per cent level by both the analysis of variance of friendliness judgnents an the Chi square analysis of frequencies of recall of the nanes. t risen thrOpy S5iven by indi- dgtamd. vidual analyses of group differences \TableQJV) between (I) in {I} Additional evidence a a J photos for the three prejudice rrouJO. Friendliness judg- 3 4 nts were found to be significant betWeen the photos of the High and Middle groups , and the differences between photos in recall of nanes were found to be significant for the fli5hs only. Althou h these ana lyses show no significant dii'f er ences betWeen 1e 5ro and W1 ite photos for the LOW group, the Keutral names show significant differences between photos for this group beyond the l per cent level. Thus we find that Hypothesis Ia has been rejected for the hi5h and hiddle groups, and hypothesis lb has been rejected for every group. The rejection of hypthesis lb seems to be contradic- tory to Roheach's findin5s in an earlier study. Une of our finding noted in Table 1V su55ested at least a partial ex- planation of why this has occurred. in Table 1V it was seen that the di5hs were the only 5roup which showed a si5nifi- cant total Chi square for recall of all the names between the Negro and White faces. This difference for the High group was significant considerably beyond the l per cent level. The fact that differences in recall to the hegro and white photos given by both the Low and hiddle groups were not significant suggests that there is a range of pre- judice extendin5 well into the high end of‘the prejudice continuum, which does not respond to differences between Negro and white photos with any consistency. It appears possible that at least some of Rokeach's high-prejudiced subjects might have fallen within this range, and thus failed to produce any significant 5roup differ noes in recall between the photos. It is interesting that of the four nanes shown in Table IV for which differences between the Kegro and White photos were found for the High group, the nanes Brown and Greene were recalled more frequently to Negro photos, while the name Best and Len al na1e were recalled :ore frequently by the High group to white ph tos. This sujjests that for the High group names given to Ee3ro photos are 5iven in line with a zwr judiced attitude, and oonverselv that ha a';es relatively less suggestive of prejudice are more likely to be given to white photos. Althou3h this findinr adds further wei i3ht a 3ainst the nisanthropy hy> thesis, it cf 13 to substantiate the broad ;:renis e underlyin3 Hyp OtD es {.5 {.14 8 I Ila ad lib, nanely, that attitudes tend to produce distor- {13‘ tions in recall such that what is recalled is consistent with the attitude. Turning to our hypotheses regarding recall of nanes as functions of de3ree of prejudice, we fi 11d that-for Hypothesis Ila, predicting greater recall of the na es Lynch, Black, Greene, and Gray by the High group, that there is no si5n1fi- cant evidence (Table VI) in favor of the hypothesis, and that significant evidence against it occurs for the no es Lynch, Blacx, and Greene. The two of these nanes which Hoheach found were recalled significantly more often by the Hi3hs, Lynch and Greene, were recalled more the present study by the Middle L-Ioh 1.. group. t should be p inted out that these fir1din3s do not necessarily conflict with those of Boreaoh, who enployed only a high and low 3oup in c011 trast to the present study wherein High, hiddle, and Low 3roups were used. Our 7 _\ ~Y~" a o eneral n;notnes1s Q 9 ..L' findin3. s, furthermore, contradict our II, which predicted that differences in recall are propor- tional to the degree of attitude manifested. While the nane Black was recalled to both negro and white photos 7 most often by the ni3hs, next most often by the Liddles, and least often by the Lows, the other names, Lynch and Greene, did not follow this pattern. The absence of any si3niiicant findin.s bearing upon Hypothesis Ilb, namely that t11e nanes fihite and Best and leutral na hes will be recalled nore frequently by those lower in prejudice, is difficult to explain adequately. Perllaps the most cautious eXpla nation is that the relative- ly Keutral nanes retained in the present experiment, namely Shith, names other than those presented with the photos, and "no res spor se", were less salient for the characteristic of "neutrality" thai the Leutral esponses showing signifi- ant differences in Rokeach's experim nt. Our findin3s, in general, regardi.3 differential recall of names produced for Ne3ro and white photos by groups hi3h, middle, and low in prejudice, show that signi- ficant recall differences occur, but that they occur con- siderably differently between the three 3roups than they did between the hi 3h- and low-prejudi ced 3roups in Roheach's earlier study. While other factors can be seen to partially -. account for specific points of difference between this and 30 Rokeacn‘s study, Levinson's suggestion that the middle group tends t ward more erratic and conflicting ehavior than either the high or low group (1, p. 968) may, in a general way, account for the surgrising amount of differ- ence in the findings. The yresent study is a retlicat ion of an earlier 8 udT y Rokeacn in wnicn L0 d- d‘ in! ("t g: {.3 (_ z“. 3 .J (I) H- :43 4 (D (1" c :- Pd. I0 ('t (D {Lu I 0 L) Q: eterninant of distortion in recall. Tires "rouys of suojects scorin“ relztivelv gi~u . . _ _ . ) “ _lhb , 1 \ ,- -.. A --- ~'--' - ~ -" ‘ middle, a-d 101 in 5: Judice Jere e loyed. Tiese sub- . A 4. q \ 1‘ ..L, ~ 1" 5 . j J a .5 , .-, ’ \ .. JVCbS d”r3 330d} gxotoéra_ls oi unirtl-LJO faces. of u ‘. .-. ‘ _ a _ .1 A! ... ’2‘ ",- .. ‘ : a .‘--?" .L- ‘ ,-.. - '. -. o -‘ tnese, eivnt Jere negro Males, eiwnt ncho Lemalcs, eiJht white nales, and ei,h‘ W1ite fe-ales The Moll .113 nages \:'ere dis riouted to these gnoto- ;rap:s equally by race and Six: Lynch, Black, Brown, Greene, Gray, inite, Best, and Sniti. Tue subjects judged each of the gnoto reens on a five-yoint s ale ior de ree _I ,-.. ,3 H“, r ..L‘- d, . -. u, .- 4. . .. ., .., . V of Lrlbuullue . Luefl tne sane :40u0wrggis were slow; -. '. 1 , .. ' n .z..: , ' ..-! ..4. 4—2, ...,-. .- . r, 1-, - +‘. again, out tlis time niunout tne “ales a ,ed, and cue subjects were tested for incidental reca' ll of the names. one iygotnes 3 tested was to the ei:ec t that distor- O tions in recall are a fun tion or neral nieamtgropy D ([1 factor rather tha: nostility to 35301110 ni1orit" 5‘0ups. It was found, however, that tie sub ects in :eneral res- ,ond ed with Sifllific; tly nostility towa d Lejro pnotos than tOWar' waits photos. Furthergore, it was found that tne white yhotos were in general judged signlli- ““4. - .fiq 5. - . ‘. 1 - ‘.,.,,. '3, r: ,. , --‘-. 4- -. e. .14- cantlj less iriendl; tnan tne negro globes. inese results (:1 h) are contra r3 to Roheach's findin3s that hi 3h- p1 ejudiced subjects respond with greater hostility than low- prejudiced subjects to white as well as Negro photos. Thus, {okeach's misanthropy hygothesis is rejected at a significant level of confidence. A second :ypotiesis was to the ei‘fect that with increases in prejudice there should be increases in the 7" frequency of recall of the names Lynch, Black, arown, Greene, and Gray. Conversely, wi uh decreases in preju- dice there should be increases in the recall of th names White and Best and heutral names. n general, these expectations were not confirmed. However, it was found that in general, attitude was an important factor in deternin' n3 recall. The nanes Lynch and Greene were recalled with significantly greater frequency by the hiddle 3roup than by the :i3h and Low groups, and the na 1e Black was found to be recalled with significantly greater frequency by the Low group than by the Hi3h and Liddle groups. It was also found that the hi: 3h group recalled four of the names with significant differences between hegro and white photos whereas the hiddle and Lev groups showed significant Re 3ro- white differences for only one name. 10. ll. 12. 33 "-1141 1‘1: :"17 ”1.1.4... v 1-11.1131- ‘ ,: r I 1 . ”I“ f 9 ~ . ' ~ % ofi . ‘fr ‘ W ‘1‘ -: - -. .‘., ... anorno, l. 4., drenLel-lrunsn1n, L., L-viisca, .. u., g s ‘ j - ,* x»- T."- ‘2 - {”4 'L l" ‘9‘ ‘A \V v‘ “ ‘. l‘ ' CAM1Joaniora, 1\.1 . 1le 11M1.) ita H;A LéufluxlalltV. T. If -.T u" ' ' O 1 1'7‘ 5 3. e , -OI‘ixi ~LCLTP€L1 an‘l 13:0:3. , lQD O. Allport, G. J. Attitudes. in L hanabook L5 social Jruic olo“*. C. “urcheson, ed. ”orcestcr: Clcrk Lniver sity iress, lsgo, ch. l7. :lu"e H. 53 gppraisal Lf M1101;s and gnaniecli's Ine Iolisa Loasant in nLrope and Lnerica. 4ex York: ooc. ocience nesearc i1 Council, lLo9, €ull. 44. Lruner, J. and Coodnan, C. Value ano need as organizing factors in perception. a- of “bno :. and Loc. Psychol., 1947, 42, 3”-44. sruner, J. and Lostnan, L. On the percention of incon- o M * '0‘." r - ‘. “V" 7 fl ‘YV. r‘ f‘ :2 (\I C r F" Drui V' A yardulid. u. 1 1830., lglo', lo, LOO-8&0. Jrenkel-Lrunswik, n. intolerance of ambiguity as an enotional and perceptual personality variable. Q, Lf :Lrs., 1949, 15, 104—145. 1Ieud, o. Collected peoers, Vol. IV. London: Hegarth ireSS, luau, p. 00. Freud, o. The psyc:0p:thology of everyday life. In rhe basic writings of oigLuno :reud. (Trans. and e&. by a. A. Brill) new iork: Hodern Library, 1938. levine, 3., and Murphy, U. ihe learn in; and forgetting of controversial material. g, of Abnorn. and zoo. Fogcnol.,194o, 33, oO7-El7. murpny, G., and Jur nv, L. B. Exceriuental soc pejcnolosx. Lev fork, narper and bros., 1? Olive, R. Unpublished 4.A. thesis. nichigan State College. nokeach, n. Attitude as a determinant of distortions in recall. Q. Lf nonorn. and sec. Is;chol., 1952, 47, 422- CK). lb. nosenzweig, 9., and ”1son, of 1e: cry in relatior. Erit. ;, of rsvc1ol. cherif, m. and Cantril, L. involve ents. Lew otrauss, A. 1e concept of 33. g, of :3 Zork: Jo: 'c1ol., lgéd, 1:, studv ession. JL‘dV G. “n i”;ntal to the theory of rep lvUé, pli, .\.4‘I-L)U. e‘rmr' CflOlOTV of7e ‘0 ..I‘ ’1 ‘r'\;‘_"" «Ale SJUV 1 l n .iley, in social psvchol- lt“ U-J." attitude 7 "UU; O 35 ..4—‘-._- n?! “r . gu'i’L1.DLx :3. '1 “ f 1". ---:.~-'- 1:." " "" :‘ 1" ~71 '-‘ 'r= .. .11 1'. ‘ :‘ thCL—{J BLA1A\-L J.‘ K)“: 1 A1 .L‘Jlal.)l—nia.fi‘-JJJ AXZiLI-MG-_3 015414) .1LHC-LL1.‘ VL‘ ‘nghc‘JAJ 1 2 3 4 5 .3? E? :i i%- i— ‘Very Friendly Friendly Neither Unfriendly ‘Very Unfriendly Friendly nor Uhfriondly # V —-— I I gA4 -..— i F HICHIGRN STQTE UNIV. LIBRRRIES 31293102215930