1. “Not Practicing What You Preach”
LaPiere, R.T.
1934

2. Background Social Psychology is the study of human interaction.
This is an early study that surprised behavioral scientists by suggesting that people’s attitudes about a person or object do not always predict how they will behave toward that person or object.

3. Information on the Study
This study is about “Social attitudes”. We all usually presume that a person’s attitude about an “attitude object” will influence that person’s behavior towards it.
“Attitude object” can be either a person or a thing.
It is then common for psychologists and sociologists to measure attitudes through the use of questionnaires. They assume the measured attitude would be reflected in future behavior when the attitude object would be encountered.

4. Last bit of information...
Before explaining the study, you must keep in mind that during the 1930’s, there was a great deal of racial and ethnic prejudice and discrimination in American society (especially towards Asian descents).

5. Theoretical Propositions...
LaPiere traveled extensively with a young Chinese student and his wife.
LaPiere was very surprised when the three of them arrived in a hotel in a small town, and that the clerk was very polite and accommodating to the Chinese couple.
Two months after their visit at the hotel, LaPiere phoned the same clerk and asked if he would accommodate an important Chinese gentlemen. What do you presume was his answer?

6. Continue... The clerk’s answer was no!
The theory implied in LaPiere’s study was that, contrary to prevailing beliefs, what people say is often not what they do.

7. Method...
This study focused on actual behavior and assessment of related symbolic attitudes.
LaPiere and his friends traveled the United States by car up and down the Pacific Coast, twice.
LaPiere did not tell his friends that he was making careful observations of the treatment they received during their trip. If they had known, they might have become self-conscious and altered their behavior in some way.

8. Continue...
So that reactions would not be altered by his presence, LaPiere often allowed them to enter restaurants before him, and let the Chinese couple secure the room while LaPiere took care of the luggage.

9. Symbolic Behavior Phase
This was his second part of the study.
Allowed 6 months to pass between the actual visit and the mailing of questionnaires to the establishments they had visited.
The questionnaires were returned by 81 of the restaurants and cafés and 47 of the lodging establishments.
La Piere also obtained responses to the same questionnaire from 32 hotels and 96 restaurants from the same regions but not visited by the Chinese couple and himself.

10. Results!

11. Continue...

12. Discussion...
“It is impossible to make direct comparisons between the reactions secured through questionnaires and from actual experience” (LaPiere).
LaPiere pointed out that if a Chinese individual wanted to come to the U.S. and read this questionnaire, he would obviously decide not to come and visit in the U.S.
Contrary to this, LaPiere’s Chinese friends enjoyed their time in the U.S and remained an almost discrimination-free trip.

13. Continue...
He suggested then, that such data might be useful in determining people’s symbolic attitudes about issues that would remain symbolic.
His conclusion to this study, was that if you want to predict how someone will behave when actually faced with a certain situation, a verbal reaction to a symbolic situation is wholly inadequate. LaPiere contended that social attitudes can only be reliably measured by studying human behavior in actual social situations.

14. Criticisms...
It can be very possible that those who took the time to respond may have been the ones with the strongest prejudicial attitudes against Asians.
After 6 months, the person responding to the questionnaire could maybe not have been the same person who met the travelers.
LaPiere’s study has been criticized by: on the basis that a simple yes and no answer to a question in a letter is not a valid measurement of a person’s attitude regarding a specific group of people.
Also, that only half of the places the three travelers visited responded to the questionnaire.

15. Zsambok, Jeanie; Hammer, David; Rojahn, Johannes
FOLLOW UP STUDY
“Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is: Direct and Indirect Measures of Attitude Toward community Integration”
Zsambok, Jeanie; Hammer, David; Rojahn, Johannes

16. Background...
The authors compared direct and indirect attitude measures regarding opening a group home for people with mental retardation in the neighborhood.
They assigned participants to one of three groups: positively worded petition statement, negative statement, or no petition.
All of the participants answered survey questions about attitudes toward persons with disabilities.

17. Continue...
Very similar to what LaPiere stated, verbally expressed attitudes regarding socially sensitive topics often do not match with they way people behave.
Keep in mind that in our society during the late 90s, very few would suggest publicly that anything less than a positive attitude toward people with mental retardation is acceptable.
However, the very same people who hold such commendable attitudes may also strongly object to the opening of a group home in their neighborhood.

18. Study...
For the indirect attitude measure in this study, they observed how people responded when asked to support a civic action for or against the opening of a group home in their neighborhood.
The assumption was that the subject’s response would be representative of the behavioral aspect of an attitude toward community integration.
Two versions of the petition were done: The positive one reflected the position that the zoning laws be kept friendly to group homes for people with mental retardation. The negative petition stated that group homes should not be opened in the neighborhood.

19. Continue...
For those with the positive petition, the following statement was: “My mother and other homeowners in this neighborhood are concerned because we heard that a group of people is passing around a petition to change the zoning laws so that group homes for people with mental retardation will not be allowed in our community. This petition is to counteract theirs. If we get enough signatures, we will forward them to the zoning board so they know that there are members of this community who favor leaving the zoning laws the way they are. That would allow group homes in our community”

20. Continue…
For the negative petition, the following statement was: “My mother and other homeowners in this neighborhood want to make sure group homes for people with mental retardation do not move into this neighborhood. This is a petition for changes in the zoning laws in this neighborhood, so that residential facilities that serve people with mental retardation will not be allowed in. We have heard about group homes moving into neighborhoods like ours and want to prevent that happening here. If we get enough signatures, we can present the petitions at the next zoning meeting for a vote”

21. How study is conducted...
The survey consisted of: respondents rate 24 items on 6-point Likert scale, ranging from I disagree very much to I agree very much.
Half the items are favorable and the other are negative attitude statements.
Total score can range from 0-144, with higher scores suggesting more favorable attitudes toward people with disabilities.

22. Continue...
Participants were recruited in urban, middle-class, residential neighborhoods in Columbus, Ohio. The neighborhood was in a group of houses within visual contact of a “central house”.
One group (n=80) was presented with the positively stated petition. Second group (n=81) was presented with the negatively stated petition. The third group (n=45) was presented with either petition. This was the control group.
The interviewers were blind to this study.

23. Results…
Positive behavioral attitude was defined as the refusal to sign the negative petition or the willingness to sign the positive petition.
Negative behavioral attitude was defined as positive responses to the negative petition and negative responses to the positive petition.
90 respondents showed positive behavioral attitudes, whereas 71 had negative behavioral attitudes.
Statistically, there was no significant different in the number of responders with positive and negative behavioral attitudes.

24. Continue...
Those who were presented with the negative petition generally had lower scale of attitudes scores than did people given the positive petition.
This suggest that stated attitudes are not only determined by a person’s attitudes, but are also susceptible to peripheral variables, such as the perceived interviewer attitude.
Approximately 20% more residents had positive reactions toward community integration than negative ones.

25. Continue...
Finally, the indirect measure of attitude is likely to predict more accurately how people would react toward a planned opening of a group home in their neighborhood than would an attitude rating scale.
An indirect attitude would be used when a specific behavior is of interest and if there is concern that responders may succumb to pressures to appear politically correct.