The American Dilemma: An Empirical Test

American Creed valuations more readily endorsed than specific ones with situational relevance, but the degree to which a given item represents a fait accompli for the respondent seems to be a factor in determining whether the majority of the sample accept or reject it. This finding supports the definition of the situation interpretation of race relations favored by Lohman and Reitzes, Blumer, Killian, Rose and others.11 Where the formal group structure defines a given action in clear-cut terms and where these definitions are acted out by most of the members, then an individual's valuations (or attitudes, as the case may be) tend to follow even though initially he might have preferred a different state of affairs. Table 2 summarizes the amount of agreement and disagreement for the ten itempairs. Each person responded to ten itempairs for a total of 1030 paired responses. Of these, 647 were consistent, the subjects agreeing or disagreeing with both sides of a given item-pair. No dilemma is indicated in these response-pairs. remaining 383 response-pairs were inconsistent, indicating a potential dilemma. Whether a dilemma exists, however, depends on the respondent's reactions to his own inconsistencies. Analysis of response patterns rather than individuals facilitates statistical treatment of the data where multiple responses are permitted, but it does raise a question as to J Joseph D. Lohman and Dietrich C. Reitzes, Note on Race Relations in Mass Society, op. cit., and Deliberately Organized Groups and Racial Behavior, American Sociological Review, 19 (1954), pp. 342-348; Herbert Blumer, and the Social Act, Social Problems, 3 (1955), pp. 59-65; Arnold M. Rose, Intergroups Relations vs. Prejudice: Pertinent Theory for the Study of Social Change, Social Problems, 4 (1956), pp. 173-176 and Inconsistencies in Attitudes Toward Negro Housing, Social Problems, 8 (1961), pp. 286-293; and Lewis M. Killian, The Effects of Southern White Workers on Race Relations in Northern Plants, American Sociological Review, 17 (1952),