If I get
assurance
of four years in college, I might get married this spring.
Adorno-T-Authoritarian-Personality-Harper-Bros-1950
29 1.
20 1.
99 2.
11 1.
70 2.
48
1. 80
1. 74 2. 20 2. 54 2. 79 1. 55
Conventional ism
12. (Modern church) 5 19. (One should avoid) 2 38. (Emphasis in the colleges) 5 55. (Leisure) 7 58. (What a man does)
60. (Important values)
Cluster mean 5. 00
Authoritarian Submission
20. (Progressive education) 23. (Undying love)
32. (Essential for learning) 39. (Supernatural force)
43. (Sciences like chemistry) 50. (Obedience and res~ect) 74. (Tireless leaders)
77. (No sane, normal person)
Cluster mean
Authoritarian Aggression
3. 66
6. (Women restricted)
23. (Undying love)
31. (Homosexuals) 6 47. (Honor) 5 75. (Sex crimes)
Cluster mean
Anti? intraception
28. (Novels or stories)
38. (Emphasis in colleges) 53. (Things too intimate) 55. (Leisure)
58. (What a man does)
66. (Books and movies)
Cluster mean
Superstition
2. (Astrology)
10. (Pearl Harbor Day)
39. (Supernatural force)
43. (Sciences like chemistry) 65. (World catastrophe)
6 5. 00
3. 40
1
2
5 6 1 2
Cluster mean
1. 80
2. 20
3. 78
1. 70
6 6 1 5 5
3 1 6 7 7 6 1 1 1 2 6 2 2 1 6 5
4. 00 3. 13
2 1 6 7 6 2 1
5 5 3 7 6 6
5. 33
5
1 1 1 1
2. 83 4. 09
6 1 1 2 1
2. 60 2. 22 3. 97 4. 35 2. 58
? Power
9. 35. 47.
and "T oughness"
(Red-blooded life) (Law in own hands) (Honor)
1
1
5
7 2
3. 20
3
1
6
3
5
6
I 1 1 1 5
~M e a n a (N = 295)
3. 99 2. 50 3. 00 3. 27 5. 00
3. 55
3,04
3. 99
3.
9. 14. 17. 24. 30. 35, 42. 56. 59. 67.
(Force to restore) (Return to fundamentals) (Rats. . ? germs) (Familiarity)
(Things unstable) (Reports of atrocities) (Law in own hands)
(For one reason)
(Crime wave)
(Always war)
(Eye to profit)
5
2
5 4. 44 1. 60 1 3. 33
5 5. 01 0. 79 5 4. 20
MEASUREMENT OF ANTIDEMOCRA TIC . TABLE 13 (VII) (CONT'D)
TRENDS
271
~Group --a
2. 04 1. 42 2. 09 1. 65 1. 66
1. 77
70. (Plots)
74. (Tireless leaders)
Cluster mean
Destructiveness and Cynicism
2 1 2 2 1
1. 60
Cluster mean 4,09
3,09
3. 74
Projectivity
46. (Sex orgies)
56. (Crime wave)
65. (World catastrophe)
70. (Plots)
73. (Infection and disease)
Cluster meaq
Sex
31. (Homosexuality) 42. (For one reason) 46. (Sex orgies)
75. (Sex crimes)
Cluster mean
Over-all meanb
5 2 554. 60 112. 58 7 2 3. 27 5
aThe group means and D. P. 's are based on all four groups taking Form 78 (see Table 3 (VII), notea)
bover-all means are based on the sum of the 38 individual items, with no overlap.
7 1 4. 26 7 3 3. 71
2. 59 2. 21
1. 56
2. 11 1. 16 1. 55 1. 65 2. 02
1. 70
2. 16 1. 05 2. 11 2. 8 I
2. 03
1. 80
4. 60
6
1
2. 20
6
4. 79 3. 78
1
5 2 3. 64
1 6 1
4. 50 2. 50
4. 31 2. 95
2. 06 3. 26 3. 05
3. 71
2. 50
0. 43 1. 42 1. 05
2. 06
5 4. 60 1. 16
3. 64
3. 22
1. 98 2. 04
1. 86
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
earlier observation that they do not represent the most extreme cases found in the study. Mack's mean score, 4? 3r, is just inside the high quartile for the group of Public Speaking Men in which he was tested; it is only slightly above the average score of the Working-Class Men (4. 19) and well below that of the San Quentin Group (4. 73). Larry's mean score, 2. 95, is barely low enough to be included in the low quartile for the Public Speaking Men. It is, however, well below any of the group means obtained in the study.
Turning to the 9 variables within the scale, it may be noted that on 7 of them Mack's mean score is above the group mean. He deviates from the group most markedly in the case of Authoritarian Aggression. This is con- sistent with what was set down as one of the outstanding features of his interview, that is, his tendency to blame and to condemn on moral grounds a wide variety of individuals, groups, and agencies-F. D. R. , the New Deal, the O. W. I. , the Civil Service, in addition to various ethnic minorities. That homosexuals, sex criminals, those who insult "our honor," and anyone who does not have undying love for his parents should be regarded in the same way is not surprising. It is to be noted, however, that he does not agree that "women should be restricted in certain ways. " This inconsistency may be interpreted in the light of the following quotation from the clinical section of his interview: 9
"I hope to get married to the girl I'm going with now. She is an awfully nice com- panion. Most girls are interested only in a good time and want fellows with lots of money to spend. I didn't have the money for giving them a swell time. The girl I'm in love with now lived nine miles from me. She attended a rival high school. I dated her once in high school. When I got back from the army, I worked in a lumber mill. This girl had graduated from - - and started teaching. Her uncle is the vice-president of the bank. I talked to him about buying an automobile that she was interested in. I looked it over for her, since I knew something about cars, and told her it was in good condition. I got started going with her that way. I found out that she wasn't interested in money, but was interested in me in spite of my discharg~ from the army, my poor health, and prospects. She's just very good -not beautiful, but a tremendously nice personality. She is French with some Irish in her. She has a nice figure and is very wholesome. When we get married depends on circumstances. It's quite a responsibility. She wants to get married now; she is teaching in - - ? I'm under the GI Bill.
If I get assurance of four years in college, I might get married this spring. We're well suited; I know she's interested in me, because I have so little to offer. We're both at the proper age. I intend to work part time. I don't like her teaching; I like to support my wife. I've always had that idea. But maybe under the circumstances, that won't be fully possible. She is a good cook and that is an asset, what with my stomach condition. When I tell her that you approve of our marriage, she will be pleased, but, of course, I'm always a man to make my own decisions. "
It seems that Mack does believe that "a woman's place is in the home," but
9 Throughout the book, the interviewer's report of the interview is given in small type. Quotation marks within this material indicate a verbatim record of the subject's state- ments.
? MEASUREMENT OF ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
273
was prevented by the logic of his situation at the time from saying so in his questionnaire.
Sex, Anti-intraception, Conventionalism, and Projectivity, in the order named, are the other variables on which Mack is well above the group mean. Sex was not mentioned in the interview protocol given in Chapter II. The following quotation from the clinical part of Mack's interview may, how- ever, throw some light on his responses to the Sex items in the scale:
(Where did you get your sex instruction? ) "I never had any from my parents, though I did get some suggestions from my aunt; no real instruction. What I know I have picked up from reading. I've listened to men talk, but accepted little of it; I weighed it in the light of what I have read. "
(What was your first sex experience? ) "It was in 194o-'4r, the aftermath of a New Year's party in Washington. There was liquor. I was always a backward boy. "
According to well-supported theory, it is precisely the kind of sexual inhi- bition and "backwardness" described here, and further expressed in the extreme conventionalism of the passage about plans for marriage, that lies behind the moralistic and punitive attitude toward the supposed sexuality of other people which is the main theme of the Sex items in the scale. The inconsistency seen in Mack's disagreement with the statement that "men are interested in women for only one reason" might be explained in the same way as was his response to Item 6 (Women restricted): agreement would contradict too sharply the facts of his present situation. It is to be noted, how- ever, that the item (For one reason) has a very low group mean and a low D. P .
Mack's interview could serve well as a model of Anti-intraception. His emphasis upon practicality, efficiency, and diligence as ends in themselves, his tendency to ignore social and psychological determinants of human characteristics and human events, his failure to take into account possible inner sources of his opinions, the discrepancies between his expressed values and what appear to be his real motives, were outstanding features of his interview. The several Anti-intraception items of the F scale seem to have afforded him an excellent opportunity to express these same tendencies. An interesting discrepancy occurs in the case of Item 53 (Things too intimate), where his score of 3 is well below the group mean. This response is not very consistent with the pattern of values that he sets forth in his interview, but it seems quite consistent with what he does in the interview: as the above passage in which he discusses his approaching marriage well illustrates, he is able within the space of an hour to come to a rather free discussion of certain intimate matters with a stranger. True, his generally deferential behavior in the interview is probably an aspect of his Authoritarian Submission, but, more than this, there is a strong indication that however much Mack may assert his independence he is really a rather lonesome and troubled young man who would like to talk with someone who understood him.
? 274
THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
One familiar with Mack's interview might have expected him to go higher on Conventionalism. One of his major reasons for rejecting so many groups is that they violate conventional values, and his positive evaluations of in- groups are in the same terms-honesty, charity, thrift, diligence, etc. His ideas about work and about love and marriage seem to be utterly conven- tional. True, his mean score for Conventionalism is as high as it is for any other variable save Anti-intraception, and one reason why he does not stand out more sharply from the group is that the group mean itself is high-higher than for any of the other variables. Furthermore, the Conventionalism items, as a group, were not very discriminating, the mean D. P. , r. 26, being the lowest of those obtained for the several variables. Item r9 (One should avoid), on which Mack's score is below the group mean, does not discrim- inate between the high and low quartiles; that he should not agree with it seems consistent with his expressed value for independence. It is interesting that despite his rejection of religion in the interview, he refuses to criticize the modern church when invited to do so by Item r2. His conventionalism will not allow him to attack so well-established an institution.
From Mack's interview (Chapter II) we inferred that one reason he accuses various groups and agencies of wishing to establish a closely cohesive and selfishly exploitive ingroup was that he wished to do the same thing himself; unable to justify such antisocial wishes, he sees them as existing not in himself but in the world around him. This is projectivity in a rather extreme form, and if Mack had not gone above the group mean on this vari- able, in his scale responses, we should have had to conclude that something was radically wrong with the scale. His score of 7 on Item 70 (Plot) seems perfectly in keeping with what he had to say about politics in his interview. His responses to Items 46 (Sex orgies) and 73 (Infection and disease) are consistent with the picture of sexual inhibition given above. That he is well below the group mean on Item 65 (World catastrophe) seems attributable to the value for hard-headed scientificness which he expressed both in his interview and in his response to items under the heading of Superstition. It is notable that his scientific "realism" does not insure that he keeps his feet on the ground when it comes to interpreting social events. (Indeed, it seems to have the opposite effect, and one might inquire if this is not generally true. )
Mack stands only slightly above the group mean on Destructiveness and Cynicism. This is a reminder of the fact that his interview leaves the impres- sion of a relatively "mild case"; he makes no rabid statements, nor does he show any taste for violence. Attention to the individual items of the Destruc- tiveness and Cynicism group shows that it is those pertaining to open or all- out aggression on which he scores at or below the mean, while he goes well above the mean on items that have to do primarily with cynicism. It is interesting to recall, in this connection, his outstandingly high score on
? MEASUREMENT OF ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS 2 75
Authoritarian Aggression. One might say that Mack cannot express aggres- sion directly unless it is done in the name of some moral authority or unless it is against some group that has been rejected on moral grounds.
It might be suggested that another way in which Mack handles aggression is by means of cynicism. There was certainly no want of cynicism in his interview-the bureaus grab power, the civil servants think only of them- selves, Roosevelt selfishly seeks a fourth term, etc. -and he obtains top scores on the items most expressive of this trend: 30 (Reports of atrocities), 59
(Always war), 67 (Eye to profit). This is, of course, hypothesizing that Mack has unconscious aggressive tendencies which are projected onto human nature and the world. Something like a high-water mark in cynicism is reached by Mack when he agrees, rather emphatically, with both Item 30 (Reports of atrocities are exaggerated) and Item 48 (Germans and Japs should be wiped out) of theE scale: in agreeing with the former he is saying that the Germans were not as bad as they were pictured; in agreeing with the latter he is saying that nevertheless we ought to wipe out as many of them as possible.
On the strength of Mack's interview, we should expect him to obtain one of his highest mean scores on Authoritarian Submission. Glorification of such ingroup authorities as General Marshall, the vVar Department, the big capitalists, and God as "strictly a man," was one of the interview's outstand- ing features. Yet his scale score on this variable (4. 0) is at the group mean. Consideration of the items which pertain to this variable can effect some reconciliation of scale and interview, but it also reveals certain weaknesses in the Form 78 scale. The items on which Mack scores well above the mean -23 (Undying love), 32 (Essential for learning), 50 (Obedience and re- spect), and 77 (No sane, normal person)-are those which express Authori- tarian Submission in its purest form: three of them have to do with family loyalty and the third with . authoritarian education. When it comes to the items which have to do with religion, however-39 (Supernatural force) and 43 (Sciences like chemistry)-and in which ideas and feelings first ex- perienced, presumably, in relationships with parents are now represented on a cosmic plane, his value for the objective-scientific comes to the fore and his scores are as low as they could be. One might say that Mack's submissive tendencies are insufficiently sublimated to permit their expression in abstract
religious terms; the forces which are important for him are more tangible; they have concrete existence either in men or in physical objects. In this light, it is surprising that he does not agree with Item 74 (Tireless leaders). This item, be it noted, has a very high group mean and a relatively low Discriminatory Power. It seems likely that for some of the truly submissive subjects, like Mack, the item is too open, comes too close home, so that in responding they go contrary to their strongest feeling, while the great ma- jority of the subjects, for whom the item was not emotionally involving,
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
responded in accordance with the element of objective truth in the statement. Rephrasing of this item in later forms seems to have improved it by minimiz- ing the rational aspect and by putting the emphasis more squarely on leader- ship. Another poor item, it seems, is 20 (Progressive education). Liberals and potential fascists alike, very probably, are attracted by the word "pro- gressive. " That Mack is no real supporter of progressive education is attested to by his enthusiastic endorsement of Item 32 (Essential for learning) which is about as clear a statement of educational reactionism as could be found.
Mack is below the group mean on the rather unsatisfactory Power and "Toughness" cluster. All the items of this cluster have been discussed above. The? correspondence between interview and scale lies in the fact that in neither place does he show any strong inclination to be a tough and aggres- sive fellow. It is in his admiration for power and in his willingness to submit to it, rather than in any wish to be an aggressive leader, that his potentiality for fascism lies.
Enough has been said about Mack's extraceptive outlook, as seen both in his interview and in the scale responses discussed above, so that his very low score on Superstition is no more than is to be expected. The surprising thing, perhaps, is that he should agree with Item 2 (Astrology), when the great majority of the subjects do not. His agreement here suggests that his relative lack of superstition is not based upon a genuine identification with science as a way of life, but rather upon his general need to appear hard-headed and realistic and unlikely to be "taken in. "
In general, there is rather close correspondence between Mack's interview and his scale responses. Discrepancies appear chiefly when the scale, which concentrates upon things thought to be generally significant, fails to catch something which is relatively specific and unique, and, more commonly, when the particular scale item is deficient and fails to discriminate between high and low scorers. There is reason to believe that the latter difficulty has been largely overcome in the revisions of the scale.
Turning to a consideration of Larry's case, it may be noted first, that he scores below the group mean on all the F scale variables save one, Authori- tarian Aggression. He deviates most widely from the mean, in the low direc- tion, on Power and "Toughness," Projectivity, and Anti-intraception; then come Superstition and Authoritarian Submission; and he comes close to the mean on Destructiveness and Cynicism, Sex, and Conventionalism.
Less can be said about the relative lack of these tendencies in Larry than about their operation in Mack. Larry agrees with none of the statements in the Power and "Toughness" cluster, and this accords with the interview's picture of him as a rather soft and agreeable young man. He agrees with only one of the Projectivity statements, Item 56 (Crime wave), and even here his score is barely above the group mean on a statistically poor item. His lack of this tendency was commented upon in the discussion of his interview,
? MEASUREMENT OF ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS 277
where his willingness to admit his-not too lofty-motives and his inclina- tion to find the origins of his own views were noteworthy. A low score on Anti-intraception is certainly to be expected from a man who gives consid- erable attention to his own feelings, makes a positive value of pleasure, says he likes to "philosophize," and discusses psychological determinants of prej- udice-as Larry did in his interview. Inconsistencies appear in the case of Items 55 (Leisure) and 53 (Things too intimate), where he goes somewhat above the mean; the former may be taken as an expression of his conven- tionality, while the latter would appear to be connected with his special problem-"that disease" (tuberculosis) that he had.
There was nothing in Larry's interview to suggest that he was super- stitious and, hence, it is to be expected that he should obtain a low score on the Superstition variable. Why he should agree with the astrology item is a question. Perhaps it should not be surprising to find an element of mysticism in this weak and rather passive character. Authoritarian Submission was rather prominent in Larry's interview. He made it clear that he has a great deal of respect for his family and that he has had little occasion to rebel against them either in deed or in thought. That he is still below the mean makes it clear that in order to be high on this variable something more than ordinary respect for proper authority is required: the submission must be exaggerated or overdone, and it must be generalized to include other objects besides family members. Two of the three items on which Larry goes above the mean-23 (Undying love) and 77 (No sane, normal person)-refer spe- cifically to ingroup feelings in regard to the family; the third, 32 (Essen- tial for learning), gives him an opportunity to express his conventionality.
Larry is below the group mean on Destructiveness and Cynicism, but the naive optimism and friendliness toward the world which he showed in his interview is enough to raise the question of why he is not still lower. One thing to note is that the items on which he goes up have, in general, high group means and low D. P. 's. It seems that these items approach close enough to being cliches so that most people agree with them, and Larry is enough of a conformist to go along.
In connection with Larry's score on Sex, which is . 55 below the group mean, the following quotation from the clinical section of his interview is enlightening.
(Sex? ) "No great problem. I thought about girls all the time, as boys will, and I looked at them. I started out with them at about I 5. I liked them a lot and associated with them at school and in the neighborhood. You know, you have the usual sexual desires, but you don't let them bother you. "
(Sex morals? ) "I feel a girl should remain a virgin until 2 I or 2 2 anyway. If she expects to marry soon after that, she should wait until after marriage, but if she is a career girl or doesn't want to get married, then an affair with an unmarried man is OK if they keep it quiet and secluded so the moral standards of others are not
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
lowered. She should pick out one fellow to have a sex relation with, not carry on with several. "
(You? ) "Not until after I came out of the hospital, when I \Vas 2 3 or 24. Since then I've had several affairs, lasting a few weeks or a month. I won't marry until I have more security. She almost has to be a virgin, though not necessarily. I lost respect for the women I slept with. I know that's selfish, but I guess that's the way most fellows are. "
Although this is conventional enough-"the way most fellows are," as Larry says-it does not bespeak the kind of inhibition which we conceive to lie behind high scores on the Sex items. Actually, Larry's score on this variable would have been very low were it not for his score of 6 on Item 3I (Homo- sexuality). It is possible that he is not free of worry in this area-but this is a matter that had best be left until it is time to discuss the clinical material itself.
Enough has been said about Larry's conventionalism to make it appear reasonable that he should be close to the mean on this variable. A problem is presented by the fact that he is actually above the mean on Authoritarian Aggression. True, his score is still far below that of Mack, but Larry's inter- view gave the impression of a young man who would hardly want to punish anybody, and it is a criticism of the scale that it fails to confirm this impres- sion. The two items on which his score goes up are 3I (Homosexuals), which was discussed above, and 23 (Undying love). This latter item, though it has an element of punishment in it, also expresses Authoritarian Submis- sion, and Larry's response is probably to be explained on the basis of his family loyalty. The group means and D. P. 's of the Authoritarian Aggres- sion items are, relatively, quite satisfactory. It seems that in regard to the present variable, the F scale was not a fine enough instrument to give the true picture in Larry's case.
The differences between Larry and Mack seem to be reflected fairly well in their F-scale responses. Mack scores higher than Larry on all the variables save one, Superstition. Mack is more than 2 points higher on Anti-intracep- tion, Projectivity, and Sex, more than I point higher on Power and "Tough- ness," Authoritarian Aggression, and Conventionalism, and r. oo and . 87 higher, respectively, on Destructiveness and Cynicism, and Authoritarian Submission. It is particularly interesting that the variables which are most differentiating, that is, Anti-intraception, Projectivity, and Sex, are those which seem to be at the greatest distance from the overt content of fascist ideology. They are variables that seem to have their sources deep within the personality and to be relatively impervious to superficial changes in the external situation. It will remain for later chapters to show that as we go deeper into the person the differentiation between high and low scorers becomes more clear-cut and dependable.
? MEASUREMENT OF ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
279
G. CONCLUSION
The attempt to construct a scale that would measure prejudice without appearing to have this aim and without mentioning the name of any minority group seems to have been fairly successful. The correlation of . 75 between the E and the F scale means that scores on the former may be predicted with fair accuracy from scores on the latter. That we have achieved the second purpose underlying the F scale-to construct an instrument that would yield an estimate of fascist receptivity at the personality level-has still to be demonstrated.
Numerous variables in areas not ordinarily covered by studies of political, economic, and social ideology have been attacked directly; and they have been found to form a syndrome and to correlate significantly with antidemo- cratic trends in areas covered by the A-S, E, and PEC scales. This means, at the least, that the conception of a potentially fascistic pattern can be con- siderably extended, and that the hypothesis of central personality disposi- tions which give rise to this pattern is lent considerable support. It remains to be shown conclusively, however, that the variables with which the F scale has been concerned are, in reality, variables of personality. If it is true that they are, then they will be exposed directly as we consider findings from procedures designed especially for the investigation of personality and in which the individual is allowed to express himself spontaneously. If our major hypothesis is correct, then the clinical investigations soon to be re- ported should not only substantiate the findings of the present chapter, but give a deeper understanding of the potentially fascistic pattern and of its development within the individual.
? CHAPTER VIII
ETHNOCENTRISM IN RELA TION TO INTELLIGENCE AND EDUCA TION Daniel ]. Levinson
There are several reasons why one might expect intelligence and educa- tion to be related to ethnocentrism. One reason is primarily methodological: since all of theE-scale items (and most of the items in the E-F-PEC series) are negative, i. e. , agreement represents a pro-ethnocentric stand, perhaps some of the less intelligent individuals make high scores not out of real con- viction but simply out of suggestibility and lack of discernment. In answer to this point, it may be noted that we were primarily interested in measur- ing both active receptivity as well as a more passive suggestibility to anti- democratic ideology. Nevertheless, we should expect suggestibility to be but one-and far from the most important one-of the many factors showing some association with high scores on the E scale.
Various hypotheses and interpretations presented in other chapters have implied, directly or indirectly, that intelligence and ethnocentrism are nega- tively correlated, i. e. , that the high scorers on E are somewhat less intelli- gent on the average than the low scorers. Thus, the analysis of the ideological as well as of the clinical material has suggested that ethnocentrism is related to stereotypy, rigidity, and concreteness in thinking (also see Rokeach (98) ), to narrowness of the ego bounds, and to difficulty in grasping psychosocial explanations of social phenomena. Since these variables are at best only partial components of intelligence, and since they are only imperfectly
(though significantly) related to ethnocentrism, we might expect a rela- tively low but consistent negative correlation between intelligence and ethnocentrism.
The correlation may be brought closer to zero by the operation of another factor: it has often been observed that an individual may function in a highly complex, abstract, and flexible manner in one area of life (e. g. in his occupa- tion as a physical scientist, mechanic, or businessman), and in a completely contrasting-less intelligent-manner in his social outlook or in his family life. It is as if the basic intellectual capacity can express itself only in accord-
z8o
? ETHNOCENTRISM IN RELA TION TO INTELLIGENCE 281
ance with certain emotiomil-motivational principles; it is free, indeed stim- ulated, to act along certain lines, impeded and distorted to varying degrees along other lines. Whatever the reasons, it is a matter of fact that many individuals are inconsistent in their actual intellectual performance, and may show certain "nonintelligent" (stereotyped, rigid) qualities in their social thinking despite having a relatively high intelligence as it is ordinarily meas- ured. Conversely, individuals of moderate or low "basic" intelligence may be able to function realistically and flexibly in their social thinking. To the extent that intelligence tests measure something more basic-unfortunately it is not entirely clear what specific psychological functions they do measure -their correlation with ethnocentrism may be lower than initially expected. If the correlation were very high, above . 4-. 5, say, we should be inclined to suspect that the scales are inadequate; it does not seem likely, on theo- retical grounds, that intelligence per se plays so large a role in ideology.
The relation between ethnocentrism and education is also likely to be sig- nificant but low. One of the main stated aims of our educational system is the teaching of democratic values as expressed in our Constitution and in other great documents. To the extent that we are succeeding in aims such as these, ethnocentrism and years of education ought to be negatively cor- related, that is, the more the education the less the ethnocentrism.
The above hypotheses are consistent with the results of previous studies of prejudice and generalliberalism-conservatism. 1
On the average, "liberals" (with respect to ideology regarding group rela- tions, politics, religion, etc. ) have been shown to be slightly more intelligent, to receive better grades in college, to read more and to have greater intel- lectual curiosity. While the differences are significant, there is of course much overlap between the two extreme groups.
It was not feasible within the scope of the present research to administer intelligence tests to the groups taking the questionnaire. Fortunately, such tests had already been administered to some or all of the members of four groups: Maritime School Men, Employment Service Men, Psychiatric Clinic Men and Women, and San Quentin Men. No information was obtained in our questionnaire regarding years of education; this question was omitted partly because of the probable unreliability of the answers and partly because of the fear that it might make the less educated subjects defensive about the entire questionnaire. In some cases, e. g. , the college students and the pro- fessionals, the amount of schooling was relatively constant for the entire. group.
1. 80
1. 74 2. 20 2. 54 2. 79 1. 55
Conventional ism
12. (Modern church) 5 19. (One should avoid) 2 38. (Emphasis in the colleges) 5 55. (Leisure) 7 58. (What a man does)
60. (Important values)
Cluster mean 5. 00
Authoritarian Submission
20. (Progressive education) 23. (Undying love)
32. (Essential for learning) 39. (Supernatural force)
43. (Sciences like chemistry) 50. (Obedience and res~ect) 74. (Tireless leaders)
77. (No sane, normal person)
Cluster mean
Authoritarian Aggression
3. 66
6. (Women restricted)
23. (Undying love)
31. (Homosexuals) 6 47. (Honor) 5 75. (Sex crimes)
Cluster mean
Anti? intraception
28. (Novels or stories)
38. (Emphasis in colleges) 53. (Things too intimate) 55. (Leisure)
58. (What a man does)
66. (Books and movies)
Cluster mean
Superstition
2. (Astrology)
10. (Pearl Harbor Day)
39. (Supernatural force)
43. (Sciences like chemistry) 65. (World catastrophe)
6 5. 00
3. 40
1
2
5 6 1 2
Cluster mean
1. 80
2. 20
3. 78
1. 70
6 6 1 5 5
3 1 6 7 7 6 1 1 1 2 6 2 2 1 6 5
4. 00 3. 13
2 1 6 7 6 2 1
5 5 3 7 6 6
5. 33
5
1 1 1 1
2. 83 4. 09
6 1 1 2 1
2. 60 2. 22 3. 97 4. 35 2. 58
? Power
9. 35. 47.
and "T oughness"
(Red-blooded life) (Law in own hands) (Honor)
1
1
5
7 2
3. 20
3
1
6
3
5
6
I 1 1 1 5
~M e a n a (N = 295)
3. 99 2. 50 3. 00 3. 27 5. 00
3. 55
3,04
3. 99
3.
9. 14. 17. 24. 30. 35, 42. 56. 59. 67.
(Force to restore) (Return to fundamentals) (Rats. . ? germs) (Familiarity)
(Things unstable) (Reports of atrocities) (Law in own hands)
(For one reason)
(Crime wave)
(Always war)
(Eye to profit)
5
2
5 4. 44 1. 60 1 3. 33
5 5. 01 0. 79 5 4. 20
MEASUREMENT OF ANTIDEMOCRA TIC . TABLE 13 (VII) (CONT'D)
TRENDS
271
~Group --a
2. 04 1. 42 2. 09 1. 65 1. 66
1. 77
70. (Plots)
74. (Tireless leaders)
Cluster mean
Destructiveness and Cynicism
2 1 2 2 1
1. 60
Cluster mean 4,09
3,09
3. 74
Projectivity
46. (Sex orgies)
56. (Crime wave)
65. (World catastrophe)
70. (Plots)
73. (Infection and disease)
Cluster meaq
Sex
31. (Homosexuality) 42. (For one reason) 46. (Sex orgies)
75. (Sex crimes)
Cluster mean
Over-all meanb
5 2 554. 60 112. 58 7 2 3. 27 5
aThe group means and D. P. 's are based on all four groups taking Form 78 (see Table 3 (VII), notea)
bover-all means are based on the sum of the 38 individual items, with no overlap.
7 1 4. 26 7 3 3. 71
2. 59 2. 21
1. 56
2. 11 1. 16 1. 55 1. 65 2. 02
1. 70
2. 16 1. 05 2. 11 2. 8 I
2. 03
1. 80
4. 60
6
1
2. 20
6
4. 79 3. 78
1
5 2 3. 64
1 6 1
4. 50 2. 50
4. 31 2. 95
2. 06 3. 26 3. 05
3. 71
2. 50
0. 43 1. 42 1. 05
2. 06
5 4. 60 1. 16
3. 64
3. 22
1. 98 2. 04
1. 86
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
earlier observation that they do not represent the most extreme cases found in the study. Mack's mean score, 4? 3r, is just inside the high quartile for the group of Public Speaking Men in which he was tested; it is only slightly above the average score of the Working-Class Men (4. 19) and well below that of the San Quentin Group (4. 73). Larry's mean score, 2. 95, is barely low enough to be included in the low quartile for the Public Speaking Men. It is, however, well below any of the group means obtained in the study.
Turning to the 9 variables within the scale, it may be noted that on 7 of them Mack's mean score is above the group mean. He deviates from the group most markedly in the case of Authoritarian Aggression. This is con- sistent with what was set down as one of the outstanding features of his interview, that is, his tendency to blame and to condemn on moral grounds a wide variety of individuals, groups, and agencies-F. D. R. , the New Deal, the O. W. I. , the Civil Service, in addition to various ethnic minorities. That homosexuals, sex criminals, those who insult "our honor," and anyone who does not have undying love for his parents should be regarded in the same way is not surprising. It is to be noted, however, that he does not agree that "women should be restricted in certain ways. " This inconsistency may be interpreted in the light of the following quotation from the clinical section of his interview: 9
"I hope to get married to the girl I'm going with now. She is an awfully nice com- panion. Most girls are interested only in a good time and want fellows with lots of money to spend. I didn't have the money for giving them a swell time. The girl I'm in love with now lived nine miles from me. She attended a rival high school. I dated her once in high school. When I got back from the army, I worked in a lumber mill. This girl had graduated from - - and started teaching. Her uncle is the vice-president of the bank. I talked to him about buying an automobile that she was interested in. I looked it over for her, since I knew something about cars, and told her it was in good condition. I got started going with her that way. I found out that she wasn't interested in money, but was interested in me in spite of my discharg~ from the army, my poor health, and prospects. She's just very good -not beautiful, but a tremendously nice personality. She is French with some Irish in her. She has a nice figure and is very wholesome. When we get married depends on circumstances. It's quite a responsibility. She wants to get married now; she is teaching in - - ? I'm under the GI Bill.
If I get assurance of four years in college, I might get married this spring. We're well suited; I know she's interested in me, because I have so little to offer. We're both at the proper age. I intend to work part time. I don't like her teaching; I like to support my wife. I've always had that idea. But maybe under the circumstances, that won't be fully possible. She is a good cook and that is an asset, what with my stomach condition. When I tell her that you approve of our marriage, she will be pleased, but, of course, I'm always a man to make my own decisions. "
It seems that Mack does believe that "a woman's place is in the home," but
9 Throughout the book, the interviewer's report of the interview is given in small type. Quotation marks within this material indicate a verbatim record of the subject's state- ments.
? MEASUREMENT OF ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
273
was prevented by the logic of his situation at the time from saying so in his questionnaire.
Sex, Anti-intraception, Conventionalism, and Projectivity, in the order named, are the other variables on which Mack is well above the group mean. Sex was not mentioned in the interview protocol given in Chapter II. The following quotation from the clinical part of Mack's interview may, how- ever, throw some light on his responses to the Sex items in the scale:
(Where did you get your sex instruction? ) "I never had any from my parents, though I did get some suggestions from my aunt; no real instruction. What I know I have picked up from reading. I've listened to men talk, but accepted little of it; I weighed it in the light of what I have read. "
(What was your first sex experience? ) "It was in 194o-'4r, the aftermath of a New Year's party in Washington. There was liquor. I was always a backward boy. "
According to well-supported theory, it is precisely the kind of sexual inhi- bition and "backwardness" described here, and further expressed in the extreme conventionalism of the passage about plans for marriage, that lies behind the moralistic and punitive attitude toward the supposed sexuality of other people which is the main theme of the Sex items in the scale. The inconsistency seen in Mack's disagreement with the statement that "men are interested in women for only one reason" might be explained in the same way as was his response to Item 6 (Women restricted): agreement would contradict too sharply the facts of his present situation. It is to be noted, how- ever, that the item (For one reason) has a very low group mean and a low D. P .
Mack's interview could serve well as a model of Anti-intraception. His emphasis upon practicality, efficiency, and diligence as ends in themselves, his tendency to ignore social and psychological determinants of human characteristics and human events, his failure to take into account possible inner sources of his opinions, the discrepancies between his expressed values and what appear to be his real motives, were outstanding features of his interview. The several Anti-intraception items of the F scale seem to have afforded him an excellent opportunity to express these same tendencies. An interesting discrepancy occurs in the case of Item 53 (Things too intimate), where his score of 3 is well below the group mean. This response is not very consistent with the pattern of values that he sets forth in his interview, but it seems quite consistent with what he does in the interview: as the above passage in which he discusses his approaching marriage well illustrates, he is able within the space of an hour to come to a rather free discussion of certain intimate matters with a stranger. True, his generally deferential behavior in the interview is probably an aspect of his Authoritarian Submission, but, more than this, there is a strong indication that however much Mack may assert his independence he is really a rather lonesome and troubled young man who would like to talk with someone who understood him.
? 274
THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
One familiar with Mack's interview might have expected him to go higher on Conventionalism. One of his major reasons for rejecting so many groups is that they violate conventional values, and his positive evaluations of in- groups are in the same terms-honesty, charity, thrift, diligence, etc. His ideas about work and about love and marriage seem to be utterly conven- tional. True, his mean score for Conventionalism is as high as it is for any other variable save Anti-intraception, and one reason why he does not stand out more sharply from the group is that the group mean itself is high-higher than for any of the other variables. Furthermore, the Conventionalism items, as a group, were not very discriminating, the mean D. P. , r. 26, being the lowest of those obtained for the several variables. Item r9 (One should avoid), on which Mack's score is below the group mean, does not discrim- inate between the high and low quartiles; that he should not agree with it seems consistent with his expressed value for independence. It is interesting that despite his rejection of religion in the interview, he refuses to criticize the modern church when invited to do so by Item r2. His conventionalism will not allow him to attack so well-established an institution.
From Mack's interview (Chapter II) we inferred that one reason he accuses various groups and agencies of wishing to establish a closely cohesive and selfishly exploitive ingroup was that he wished to do the same thing himself; unable to justify such antisocial wishes, he sees them as existing not in himself but in the world around him. This is projectivity in a rather extreme form, and if Mack had not gone above the group mean on this vari- able, in his scale responses, we should have had to conclude that something was radically wrong with the scale. His score of 7 on Item 70 (Plot) seems perfectly in keeping with what he had to say about politics in his interview. His responses to Items 46 (Sex orgies) and 73 (Infection and disease) are consistent with the picture of sexual inhibition given above. That he is well below the group mean on Item 65 (World catastrophe) seems attributable to the value for hard-headed scientificness which he expressed both in his interview and in his response to items under the heading of Superstition. It is notable that his scientific "realism" does not insure that he keeps his feet on the ground when it comes to interpreting social events. (Indeed, it seems to have the opposite effect, and one might inquire if this is not generally true. )
Mack stands only slightly above the group mean on Destructiveness and Cynicism. This is a reminder of the fact that his interview leaves the impres- sion of a relatively "mild case"; he makes no rabid statements, nor does he show any taste for violence. Attention to the individual items of the Destruc- tiveness and Cynicism group shows that it is those pertaining to open or all- out aggression on which he scores at or below the mean, while he goes well above the mean on items that have to do primarily with cynicism. It is interesting to recall, in this connection, his outstandingly high score on
? MEASUREMENT OF ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS 2 75
Authoritarian Aggression. One might say that Mack cannot express aggres- sion directly unless it is done in the name of some moral authority or unless it is against some group that has been rejected on moral grounds.
It might be suggested that another way in which Mack handles aggression is by means of cynicism. There was certainly no want of cynicism in his interview-the bureaus grab power, the civil servants think only of them- selves, Roosevelt selfishly seeks a fourth term, etc. -and he obtains top scores on the items most expressive of this trend: 30 (Reports of atrocities), 59
(Always war), 67 (Eye to profit). This is, of course, hypothesizing that Mack has unconscious aggressive tendencies which are projected onto human nature and the world. Something like a high-water mark in cynicism is reached by Mack when he agrees, rather emphatically, with both Item 30 (Reports of atrocities are exaggerated) and Item 48 (Germans and Japs should be wiped out) of theE scale: in agreeing with the former he is saying that the Germans were not as bad as they were pictured; in agreeing with the latter he is saying that nevertheless we ought to wipe out as many of them as possible.
On the strength of Mack's interview, we should expect him to obtain one of his highest mean scores on Authoritarian Submission. Glorification of such ingroup authorities as General Marshall, the vVar Department, the big capitalists, and God as "strictly a man," was one of the interview's outstand- ing features. Yet his scale score on this variable (4. 0) is at the group mean. Consideration of the items which pertain to this variable can effect some reconciliation of scale and interview, but it also reveals certain weaknesses in the Form 78 scale. The items on which Mack scores well above the mean -23 (Undying love), 32 (Essential for learning), 50 (Obedience and re- spect), and 77 (No sane, normal person)-are those which express Authori- tarian Submission in its purest form: three of them have to do with family loyalty and the third with . authoritarian education. When it comes to the items which have to do with religion, however-39 (Supernatural force) and 43 (Sciences like chemistry)-and in which ideas and feelings first ex- perienced, presumably, in relationships with parents are now represented on a cosmic plane, his value for the objective-scientific comes to the fore and his scores are as low as they could be. One might say that Mack's submissive tendencies are insufficiently sublimated to permit their expression in abstract
religious terms; the forces which are important for him are more tangible; they have concrete existence either in men or in physical objects. In this light, it is surprising that he does not agree with Item 74 (Tireless leaders). This item, be it noted, has a very high group mean and a relatively low Discriminatory Power. It seems likely that for some of the truly submissive subjects, like Mack, the item is too open, comes too close home, so that in responding they go contrary to their strongest feeling, while the great ma- jority of the subjects, for whom the item was not emotionally involving,
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
responded in accordance with the element of objective truth in the statement. Rephrasing of this item in later forms seems to have improved it by minimiz- ing the rational aspect and by putting the emphasis more squarely on leader- ship. Another poor item, it seems, is 20 (Progressive education). Liberals and potential fascists alike, very probably, are attracted by the word "pro- gressive. " That Mack is no real supporter of progressive education is attested to by his enthusiastic endorsement of Item 32 (Essential for learning) which is about as clear a statement of educational reactionism as could be found.
Mack is below the group mean on the rather unsatisfactory Power and "Toughness" cluster. All the items of this cluster have been discussed above. The? correspondence between interview and scale lies in the fact that in neither place does he show any strong inclination to be a tough and aggres- sive fellow. It is in his admiration for power and in his willingness to submit to it, rather than in any wish to be an aggressive leader, that his potentiality for fascism lies.
Enough has been said about Mack's extraceptive outlook, as seen both in his interview and in the scale responses discussed above, so that his very low score on Superstition is no more than is to be expected. The surprising thing, perhaps, is that he should agree with Item 2 (Astrology), when the great majority of the subjects do not. His agreement here suggests that his relative lack of superstition is not based upon a genuine identification with science as a way of life, but rather upon his general need to appear hard-headed and realistic and unlikely to be "taken in. "
In general, there is rather close correspondence between Mack's interview and his scale responses. Discrepancies appear chiefly when the scale, which concentrates upon things thought to be generally significant, fails to catch something which is relatively specific and unique, and, more commonly, when the particular scale item is deficient and fails to discriminate between high and low scorers. There is reason to believe that the latter difficulty has been largely overcome in the revisions of the scale.
Turning to a consideration of Larry's case, it may be noted first, that he scores below the group mean on all the F scale variables save one, Authori- tarian Aggression. He deviates most widely from the mean, in the low direc- tion, on Power and "Toughness," Projectivity, and Anti-intraception; then come Superstition and Authoritarian Submission; and he comes close to the mean on Destructiveness and Cynicism, Sex, and Conventionalism.
Less can be said about the relative lack of these tendencies in Larry than about their operation in Mack. Larry agrees with none of the statements in the Power and "Toughness" cluster, and this accords with the interview's picture of him as a rather soft and agreeable young man. He agrees with only one of the Projectivity statements, Item 56 (Crime wave), and even here his score is barely above the group mean on a statistically poor item. His lack of this tendency was commented upon in the discussion of his interview,
? MEASUREMENT OF ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS 277
where his willingness to admit his-not too lofty-motives and his inclina- tion to find the origins of his own views were noteworthy. A low score on Anti-intraception is certainly to be expected from a man who gives consid- erable attention to his own feelings, makes a positive value of pleasure, says he likes to "philosophize," and discusses psychological determinants of prej- udice-as Larry did in his interview. Inconsistencies appear in the case of Items 55 (Leisure) and 53 (Things too intimate), where he goes somewhat above the mean; the former may be taken as an expression of his conven- tionality, while the latter would appear to be connected with his special problem-"that disease" (tuberculosis) that he had.
There was nothing in Larry's interview to suggest that he was super- stitious and, hence, it is to be expected that he should obtain a low score on the Superstition variable. Why he should agree with the astrology item is a question. Perhaps it should not be surprising to find an element of mysticism in this weak and rather passive character. Authoritarian Submission was rather prominent in Larry's interview. He made it clear that he has a great deal of respect for his family and that he has had little occasion to rebel against them either in deed or in thought. That he is still below the mean makes it clear that in order to be high on this variable something more than ordinary respect for proper authority is required: the submission must be exaggerated or overdone, and it must be generalized to include other objects besides family members. Two of the three items on which Larry goes above the mean-23 (Undying love) and 77 (No sane, normal person)-refer spe- cifically to ingroup feelings in regard to the family; the third, 32 (Essen- tial for learning), gives him an opportunity to express his conventionality.
Larry is below the group mean on Destructiveness and Cynicism, but the naive optimism and friendliness toward the world which he showed in his interview is enough to raise the question of why he is not still lower. One thing to note is that the items on which he goes up have, in general, high group means and low D. P. 's. It seems that these items approach close enough to being cliches so that most people agree with them, and Larry is enough of a conformist to go along.
In connection with Larry's score on Sex, which is . 55 below the group mean, the following quotation from the clinical section of his interview is enlightening.
(Sex? ) "No great problem. I thought about girls all the time, as boys will, and I looked at them. I started out with them at about I 5. I liked them a lot and associated with them at school and in the neighborhood. You know, you have the usual sexual desires, but you don't let them bother you. "
(Sex morals? ) "I feel a girl should remain a virgin until 2 I or 2 2 anyway. If she expects to marry soon after that, she should wait until after marriage, but if she is a career girl or doesn't want to get married, then an affair with an unmarried man is OK if they keep it quiet and secluded so the moral standards of others are not
? THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
lowered. She should pick out one fellow to have a sex relation with, not carry on with several. "
(You? ) "Not until after I came out of the hospital, when I \Vas 2 3 or 24. Since then I've had several affairs, lasting a few weeks or a month. I won't marry until I have more security. She almost has to be a virgin, though not necessarily. I lost respect for the women I slept with. I know that's selfish, but I guess that's the way most fellows are. "
Although this is conventional enough-"the way most fellows are," as Larry says-it does not bespeak the kind of inhibition which we conceive to lie behind high scores on the Sex items. Actually, Larry's score on this variable would have been very low were it not for his score of 6 on Item 3I (Homo- sexuality). It is possible that he is not free of worry in this area-but this is a matter that had best be left until it is time to discuss the clinical material itself.
Enough has been said about Larry's conventionalism to make it appear reasonable that he should be close to the mean on this variable. A problem is presented by the fact that he is actually above the mean on Authoritarian Aggression. True, his score is still far below that of Mack, but Larry's inter- view gave the impression of a young man who would hardly want to punish anybody, and it is a criticism of the scale that it fails to confirm this impres- sion. The two items on which his score goes up are 3I (Homosexuals), which was discussed above, and 23 (Undying love). This latter item, though it has an element of punishment in it, also expresses Authoritarian Submis- sion, and Larry's response is probably to be explained on the basis of his family loyalty. The group means and D. P. 's of the Authoritarian Aggres- sion items are, relatively, quite satisfactory. It seems that in regard to the present variable, the F scale was not a fine enough instrument to give the true picture in Larry's case.
The differences between Larry and Mack seem to be reflected fairly well in their F-scale responses. Mack scores higher than Larry on all the variables save one, Superstition. Mack is more than 2 points higher on Anti-intracep- tion, Projectivity, and Sex, more than I point higher on Power and "Tough- ness," Authoritarian Aggression, and Conventionalism, and r. oo and . 87 higher, respectively, on Destructiveness and Cynicism, and Authoritarian Submission. It is particularly interesting that the variables which are most differentiating, that is, Anti-intraception, Projectivity, and Sex, are those which seem to be at the greatest distance from the overt content of fascist ideology. They are variables that seem to have their sources deep within the personality and to be relatively impervious to superficial changes in the external situation. It will remain for later chapters to show that as we go deeper into the person the differentiation between high and low scorers becomes more clear-cut and dependable.
? MEASUREMENT OF ANTIDEMOCRA TIC TRENDS
279
G. CONCLUSION
The attempt to construct a scale that would measure prejudice without appearing to have this aim and without mentioning the name of any minority group seems to have been fairly successful. The correlation of . 75 between the E and the F scale means that scores on the former may be predicted with fair accuracy from scores on the latter. That we have achieved the second purpose underlying the F scale-to construct an instrument that would yield an estimate of fascist receptivity at the personality level-has still to be demonstrated.
Numerous variables in areas not ordinarily covered by studies of political, economic, and social ideology have been attacked directly; and they have been found to form a syndrome and to correlate significantly with antidemo- cratic trends in areas covered by the A-S, E, and PEC scales. This means, at the least, that the conception of a potentially fascistic pattern can be con- siderably extended, and that the hypothesis of central personality disposi- tions which give rise to this pattern is lent considerable support. It remains to be shown conclusively, however, that the variables with which the F scale has been concerned are, in reality, variables of personality. If it is true that they are, then they will be exposed directly as we consider findings from procedures designed especially for the investigation of personality and in which the individual is allowed to express himself spontaneously. If our major hypothesis is correct, then the clinical investigations soon to be re- ported should not only substantiate the findings of the present chapter, but give a deeper understanding of the potentially fascistic pattern and of its development within the individual.
? CHAPTER VIII
ETHNOCENTRISM IN RELA TION TO INTELLIGENCE AND EDUCA TION Daniel ]. Levinson
There are several reasons why one might expect intelligence and educa- tion to be related to ethnocentrism. One reason is primarily methodological: since all of theE-scale items (and most of the items in the E-F-PEC series) are negative, i. e. , agreement represents a pro-ethnocentric stand, perhaps some of the less intelligent individuals make high scores not out of real con- viction but simply out of suggestibility and lack of discernment. In answer to this point, it may be noted that we were primarily interested in measur- ing both active receptivity as well as a more passive suggestibility to anti- democratic ideology. Nevertheless, we should expect suggestibility to be but one-and far from the most important one-of the many factors showing some association with high scores on the E scale.
Various hypotheses and interpretations presented in other chapters have implied, directly or indirectly, that intelligence and ethnocentrism are nega- tively correlated, i. e. , that the high scorers on E are somewhat less intelli- gent on the average than the low scorers. Thus, the analysis of the ideological as well as of the clinical material has suggested that ethnocentrism is related to stereotypy, rigidity, and concreteness in thinking (also see Rokeach (98) ), to narrowness of the ego bounds, and to difficulty in grasping psychosocial explanations of social phenomena. Since these variables are at best only partial components of intelligence, and since they are only imperfectly
(though significantly) related to ethnocentrism, we might expect a rela- tively low but consistent negative correlation between intelligence and ethnocentrism.
The correlation may be brought closer to zero by the operation of another factor: it has often been observed that an individual may function in a highly complex, abstract, and flexible manner in one area of life (e. g. in his occupa- tion as a physical scientist, mechanic, or businessman), and in a completely contrasting-less intelligent-manner in his social outlook or in his family life. It is as if the basic intellectual capacity can express itself only in accord-
z8o
? ETHNOCENTRISM IN RELA TION TO INTELLIGENCE 281
ance with certain emotiomil-motivational principles; it is free, indeed stim- ulated, to act along certain lines, impeded and distorted to varying degrees along other lines. Whatever the reasons, it is a matter of fact that many individuals are inconsistent in their actual intellectual performance, and may show certain "nonintelligent" (stereotyped, rigid) qualities in their social thinking despite having a relatively high intelligence as it is ordinarily meas- ured. Conversely, individuals of moderate or low "basic" intelligence may be able to function realistically and flexibly in their social thinking. To the extent that intelligence tests measure something more basic-unfortunately it is not entirely clear what specific psychological functions they do measure -their correlation with ethnocentrism may be lower than initially expected. If the correlation were very high, above . 4-. 5, say, we should be inclined to suspect that the scales are inadequate; it does not seem likely, on theo- retical grounds, that intelligence per se plays so large a role in ideology.
The relation between ethnocentrism and education is also likely to be sig- nificant but low. One of the main stated aims of our educational system is the teaching of democratic values as expressed in our Constitution and in other great documents. To the extent that we are succeeding in aims such as these, ethnocentrism and years of education ought to be negatively cor- related, that is, the more the education the less the ethnocentrism.
The above hypotheses are consistent with the results of previous studies of prejudice and generalliberalism-conservatism. 1
On the average, "liberals" (with respect to ideology regarding group rela- tions, politics, religion, etc. ) have been shown to be slightly more intelligent, to receive better grades in college, to read more and to have greater intel- lectual curiosity. While the differences are significant, there is of course much overlap between the two extreme groups.
It was not feasible within the scope of the present research to administer intelligence tests to the groups taking the questionnaire. Fortunately, such tests had already been administered to some or all of the members of four groups: Maritime School Men, Employment Service Men, Psychiatric Clinic Men and Women, and San Quentin Men. No information was obtained in our questionnaire regarding years of education; this question was omitted partly because of the probable unreliability of the answers and partly because of the fear that it might make the less educated subjects defensive about the entire questionnaire. In some cases, e. g. , the college students and the pro- fessionals, the amount of schooling was relatively constant for the entire. group.
