Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 113
RACIAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOR
113
OCR for page 114
Lev Mills
Le Rsi? (1972)
Screenprint on paper
The Studio Museum in Harlem, New York City
OCR for page 115
Far more research involving either sys-
tematic experimentation or large-scale sample surveys has been conducted
on the attitudes of whites than on those of blacks. Some of the very earliest
surveys on racial attitudes excluded blacks altogether. As one survey analyst
wrote (Smith, 1987:441~:
The attitudes white Americans hold toward their black counterparts prob-
ably comprise the longest running topic in public opinion research. Yet,
despite this prominence of race-relations topics in scientific sample surveys,
until recently black Americans-long the minority group most identified
with "racial matters" in the United States-were virtually invisible to seri-
ous students of American values.
In part this imbalance was due to small numbers of blacks in national
survey samples. But in part it may also have reflected assumptions shared by
many researchers, stated most clearly as Myrdal's "American dilemma": a
contradiction between American democratic values and the actual discrimi-
natory treatment of blacks. This view therefore posed American race relations
as a problem fundamentally located in the minds of white Americans (Myr-
dal, 1944: 1xxi), with black attitudes, perceptions, and beliefs as secondary
reactions. This attention to white attitudes virtually ignored the important
role of black self-determination, and it also drew attention away from the
practical costs and advantages, to blacks and whites, of segregation and
discrimination. But, the focus on attitudes of whites did have a substantive
basis. In view of the economic and political power of the white majority, a
115
OCR for page 116
A COMMON DESTINY: BLACKS AND AMERICAN SOCIETY
change in some of their attitudes would be necessary if blacks were to succeed
in their struggle for civil rights and equality.
In this chapter we present the data on white and black attitudes and then
the explanations that have been offered for those attitudes. We trace change
in the racial attitudes of white Americans, and we examine actual practices
of discriminatory or equal treatment in black-white relations. The literature
on the attitudes of whites is extensive, but is focused on a few particular
types of issues: openness to integration, support for racially equalitarian
treatment, and other matters involving evaluations of blacks, integration, or
racial equality.
The focus on these issues in the survey data, at least implicitly, carries over
much of the assumption that the American dilemma is a matter of whites'
acceptance of blacks. We redress this emphasis wherever possible by compar-
ing the attitudes of blacks to those of whites. Black attitudes often differ
from those of whites. For example, blacks are far more likely than whites to
believe that discrimination and prejudice are ongoing social problems that lie
at the heart of black-white inequality and to place a stronger emphasis than
do whites on equalitarian values. On many important issues, however, the
attitudes of blacks and whites are very similar.
This chapter presents evidence supporting several important findings:
growth in white acceptance of the goals of integration and equal treatment;
white reluctance to accept the implementation of policies intended to change
race relations; reluctance on the part of whites to enter social settings (e.g.,
schools) in which blacks are a majority; continuing discriminatory behavior
by whites, especially in areas involving close personal contact; conflicting
beliefs of whites with regard to the values of equality and individualism; and
high levels of support among blacks for goals of integration and equal treat
ment.
In addressing both black and white perspectives, three points stand out:
(1) blacks and whites share a substantial consensus, in the abstract, on the
broad goal of achieving an integrated and equalitarian society; (2) their
images of what constitute integrated, equalitarian, and racially harmonious
conditions are often different or contradictory; and (3) black and white
perceptions of the genesis and reproduction of group inequality are sharply
divergent. The outcome of these patterns is a dynamic tension in which
blacks are a self-aware and politically conscious group that resists a view of
integration as complete assimilation, while many whites believe in and ad-
vocate equalitarian ideals but often express ambivalence and sometimes man-
ifest open resistance and discriminatory behavior toward blacks.
THE EMPIRICAL RECORD: 1940-1986
CHANGE IN RACIAL ATTITUDES: AN OVERVIEW
Beginning in the late 1930s, the methodology and institutional base for
conducting scientific sample surveys improved (see Rossi et al., 1983~. This
116
OCR for page 117
RACIAL ATTITU DES AN D BEHAVIORS
made it possible to develop an "attitudinal record" over time based on the
recorded replies of sample survey respondents to questions concerning black-
white relations (Schuman et al., 1985~. In some cases, these questions have
been asked in identical or near-identical form from the 1940s to the 1980s.
Several clear patterns emerge from these trend studies. Schuman and col-
leagues (1985) drew several conclusions regarding change in the attitudes of
whites. We supplement their list with other conclusions regarding the atti-
tudes of blacks.
· Black Americans have supported racially equalitarian principles as far
back as there are data.
· There has been a steady increase in support among white Americans for
principles of racial equality, but substantially less support for policies in-
tended to implement principles of racial equality.
· Blacks also exhibit a gap between support for principles and support for
policies intended to implement those principles, and blacks show recent
decreases in support for policy implementation strategies.
· Whites are more accepting of equal treatment with regard to the public
domains of life than private domains of life, and they are especially accepting
of relations involving transitory forms of contact.
· Openness to equal treatment also varies by the number or proportion of
blacks likely to be involved. Where blacks remain a clear minority, the data
indicate growing white acceptance of racial equality. Where blacks approach
a majority, change is less frequent and overall levels of pro equal-treatment
response are low.
· Whites living in the North have been and remain more pro equal treat-
ment than those living in the South. Patterns of change are usually the same
. , .
in eacn region.
· Measures of black alienation from white society suggest an increase in
black alienation from the late 1960s into the 1980s.
· The process of change during the 1960s and early 1970s appeared to
involve both generational changes (cohort replacement effects) and individ-
ual change. For the late 1970s and into the 1980s, what change has occurred
is almost entirely a product of cohort replacement.
What factors are responsible for changes in Americans' attitudes toward
black-white relations? We identify three basic social forces: alterations in
social context (historical change), individual modification of attitudes, and
cohort replacement. Change over time in attitudes, whether positive or
negative in direction, can be brought about through a process of demo-
graphic or cohort replacement, or it can be brought about by modifications
in individual attitudes. In the former case, older generations who have one
set of attitudes are replaced by younger people who hold a different set of
attitudes. In the case of individual change, a person who expressed a partic-
ular attitude at one time changes to a different position at a later time.
For example, previous studies of white attitudes (Hymen and Sheatsley,
1964; Schuman et al., 1985; Taylor et al., 1978) found that change during
117
OCR for page 118
A COMMON DESTINY: BLACKS AND AMERICAN SOCIETY
the 1960s and early 1970s involved both cohort replacement and individual
change. But Schuman and colleagues (1985) reported that positive change
recorded in the late 1970s was mainly a product of cohort replacement.
They also found that the difference between the very youngest cohorts and
other recent cohorts had narrowed. Thus, recently, even cohort replacement
was weakening as a mechanism for producing change in whites' attitudes
toward blacks.
WHITE ATTITUDES
The Scientific American Reports
Until fairly recently the most widely known and best studies of change in
racial attitudes were based almost exclusively on data collected in early sur-
veys by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) and reported in a
series of articles published in Scientific American. The first of these articles
(Hymen and Sheatsley, 1956) focused on issues of desegregation, reporting
particularly on change between 1942 and 1956 in attitudes toward desegre-
gation of schools, housing, and public transportation. On each of these
issues there was evidence of increasing support for desegregation. Hyman
and Sheatsley also reported that there were often large differences between
North and South: there was majority sentiment for desegregation by north-
erners and for continued segregation by southerners. Also, younger people
were more likely than older people to favor desegregation, and highly edu-
cated people were more open to desegregation than were people with low
levels of education. The age differences and the apparent effects of education
provided grounds for expecting that further change would occur as younger,
better educated individuals "replaced" older, less educated individuals.
Hyman and Sheatsley suggested that attitudes were importantly linked to
actual social conditions. Thus, where segregation existed without significant
challenge, the attitudes reflected such conditions. They did not find that
many Americans sensed a moral dilemma on race issues. They tried to
examine Myrdal's (1944) concern with the contradiction between American
values and the treatment of blacks by asking a question on whether or not
blacks were being treated fairly. As they explained (Hymen and Sheatsley,
1956:39~:
Certainly a study of the comments people make in answering the questions
reveals little soul-searching, hesitation or feeling of guilt. Many declare:
"They're being treated too doggone good." Respondents remark: "Just
look around you. They are being given every opportunity for progress that
they never had before. "
These results notwithstanding, there were two key reasons at that time to
think that further change was probable. First, belief in the innate intellectual
inferiority of blacks, a fundamental ideological factor in the case for segrega-
tion, had greatly declined between 1942 and 1956, falling from roughly 60
118
OCR for page 119
RACIAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS
percent to just over 20 percent. Second, the survey findings suggested that
positive change in attitudes followed the implementation of concrete social
change.
The large sample sizes of the surveys allowed the analysts to divide south-
ern communities into areas that had desegregated their schools, those that
were moving in the direction of doing so, and those that were adamantly
resisting change. They found the more change that had already taken place,
the more positive were the attitudes toward school desegregation. Thus, 31
percent of respondents in areas with desegregated schools supported deseg-
regation, compared with 17 percent in areas just beginning to take steps
toward desegregation and only 4 percent in areas resisting desegregation.
Some areas were probably more receptive to desegregation than others to
begin with, but none even approached majority support. Hyman and Sheats-
ley did not argue that overwhelming opposition to change could be readily
converted, but rather that where openness to racial change existed among at
least a substantial minority of whites, it was likely that leaders could act to
. ,~ . . . .
ntluence majority opmlon.
The second article in the series (Hymen and Sheatsley, 1964) stressed many
of the same points. In particular, it noted that the growing pace and intensity
of the civil rights struggle had not slowed improvement in attitudes toward
desegregating the schools, public transportation, and housing. The pace of
change in attitudes from 1956 to 1963 was, in fact, faster than the pace of
change had been between 1942 and 1956. For example, support among
southern whites for school desegregation rose from 2 percent to 14 percent
between 1942 and 1956, an increase of 12 points in 14 years; between 1956
and 1963, support for desegregation went from 14 percent to 30 percent,
an increase of 16 points in just 7 years. Hyman and Sheatsley reported that
change was not simply a function of younger, better educated people replac-
ing older, poorly educated people: many people who had supported segre-
gation at an earlier time had, at least in terms of their verbal replies to survey
questions, changed to support for desegregation.
Hyman and Sheatsley again stressed that opinion bore an important con-
nection to prevailing social conditions. Their 1963 data confirmed important
differences among southern communities. Support for school desegregation
ranged from a high of 54 percent in areas that had implemented desegrega-
tion, to 38 percent in areas that had made only token steps in that direction,
to 28 percent in those areas where the schools remained segregated. In this
case Hyman and Sheatsley were more certain than earlier that action by
public officials had probably encouraged attitude change rather than the
other way around.
In a subtle manner, the content and tenor of the Scientific American reports
on racial attitudes changed as key social issues and events in the nation
changed. While the first two articles stressed the strength of a positive trend
in racial attitudes, the third article in the series (Greeley and Sheatsley, 1971)
was also more directly and extensively concerned with the issue of "white
backlash." Key questions used in the earlier analyses continued to show
119
OCR for page 120
A COMMON DESTINY: BLACKS AND AMERICAN SOCIETY
positive change, especially in the South. The overall level of support for
desegregated public transportation was so high, 88 percent in 1970, that the
question could not be used to elicit evidence of much further change. On
the basis of these data, Greeley and Sheatsley saw little support for the idea
that a white backlash against racial progress had arisen. Only among poorly
educated "white ethnics" did they find any indication of a backlash, and
even those effects were not large (Bobo, 1987a).
The fourth and most recent article in the series (Taylor et al., 1978) found
little support for the white backlash hypothesis. Indeed, this article reported
just the opposite, a remarkable "liberal leap" forward between 1970 and
1972 followed by steady positive change between 1972 and 1976. The sharp
upturn in support for racial desegregation in the early 1970s was matched by
similar upturns in positive attitudes on social and civil liberties. Thus, Taylor
and colleagues argued that more favorable racial attitudes were part of a
general and robust trend in public opinion. Although the replacement of
older cohorts by younger cohorts and the increasing average level of educa-
tion were important factors in the trend, much of the observed change
involved individual changes in attitudes, not just cohort replacement.
In sum, from the early 1940s to the late 1970s there were important shifts
in white attitudes, from widespread belief that blacks were born less intelli-
gent than whites to the belief that the races were of equal intelligence and
from majority support for segregation of public places, schools, and housing
to majority support for equal treatment. Even assuming that social pressures
for "correct" answers affected responses and that attitudes were only tenu-
ously connected to behavior, the change had been impressive.
One analyst characterized this research as having shown such sweeping
progress that questions on some issues, for example, desegregation of public
transportation and of schools, had become obsolete; that the survey data
provided no support for the white backlash hypothesis; that changes in racial
attitudes were closely linked to the liberalization of public opinion on other
issues; and that both cohort replacement and individual change in attitudes
contributed to the trends documented in the Scenic American reports
(Seeman, 1981:394~.
However, the consistency, unambiguity, and comprehensiveness of the
changes documented in these studies were not completely replicated by
other studies. Condran's (1979) analysis of the NORC data for five questions
asked in 1963, 1972, and 1977 suggested that change from 1972 to 1977
had not been as consistently positive as had the change from 1963 to 1972.
He also found that on questions concerning residential integration and on
those that asked if blacks should "push" themselves where they were not
wanted, younger age cohorts were less positive than older cohorts. He
concluded that much of the positive change in racial attitudes may have
involved only verbal adherence to newly institutionalized racial norms and
that certainly "the liberals of 1977 [had] less reason to be sanguine concern-
ing white American racial attitudes than their counterparts of 1972" (Con-
dran, 1979:475~.
120
OCR for page 121
RACIAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS
In addition, the widespread controversies over school busing, opposition
to some affirmative action plans, and the continuing pervasiveness of residen-
tial segregation also raised questions about the meaning of the changes
reported in the Scientific American reports. In an article published separately
from the Sc~enujic American reports, Greeley and Sheatsley (1974) directly
addressed the extent and implications of whites' opposition to school bus-
ing. Fewer than one-fifth of whites in 1972 favored "the busing of black
and white school children from one school district to another. " Yet, Greeley
and Sheatsley noted, blacks were far from uniform in their attitudes toward
school busing, and whites' support for the principle of school desegregation
continued to grow. They concluded that opposition to busing could not be
reduced to simple racism. They did note that the crucial race issues had
shifted from matters of broad principles to the far more problematic issues
"of the practical policies which most effectively will achieve racial justice"
(Greeley and Sheatsley, 1974:249~.
Social Distance
Social distance preferences further complicate the picture of change. These
questions pose hypothetical social settings that vary in racial composition.
Respondents are asked to indicate whether they would take part in such
settings, withdraw from such settings, or in other ways respond positively or
negatively. Three of these questions pertain to willingness to allow one's
children to attend schools with different numbers of black students, ranging
from a few, to about half, to more than half. The National Opinion Research
Center and Gallup have used nearly identical versions of these questions.
The Gallup data provide the longer series, the questions having first been
asked in a survey in 1958. At that point 75 percent of whites said they
would not object to sending their children to a school in which a few of the
students were black; 50 percent said they would have no objection to a
school in which half of the students were black. Responses to all three
questions show positive change over time. But, the increase in openness to
desegregated schooling is much lower when the question specifies that most
of the children in the school would be black. In addition, the educational
and regional differentials are more pronounced for the "few" and "half
black" questions than for the "most" question (see Table 3-1 and pages
125-127; see also Smith, 1981~.
The patterns of results are largely similar when the questions pertain to
residential areas and housing. Two questions address contact under circum-
stances in which blacks would be the clear minority ("next door" and "same
blocky; one implies a more substantial black presence in the neighborhood
("great numbers". As is true for schools, the number of blacks mentioned
in the question has an important effect on white openness to interracial
contact.
Thus, when asked in 1958, "If black people came to live next door, would
you move," 56 percent of whites said they would not move. But when
121
OCR for page 122
~ ~v-) h~ c -A
E(~=
By
~ -
JJ
¢
Ad
-
¢ ~
if
As
~ 4= -~d
. ~ Ed 'a
¢
o · o
ED O.
c ~
..Ed
Jo ~
5
. ~ ~ ~
.0
4~
Cat
0'
O . O
C) ~
~ 0'
~ ~ ~ ~ oo Us
C
- Don o ~ DO
+ + + +
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ of
on ~ Go oo oo
Cat ~ ~ ~ Cat
_ _ _ _ _ _
Dee Go
U: ~ ~ ~
Cat ~ ~ ON
~ _ _ _ _ _
oC)Z ._
ACE- C C C
oo ~ ~
~ u~ d~
+ + +
+ +
~ ~ o ~ ~
oo ~ ~oo ~
oN
- - - - -
- -
d ~ \0
N
- - - - - l
o
-
1
o
N
+ + 1
oo 0 ~d~ ~ ~
~ oo oo ~ oo oo
oN ~ ~ ~oN
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
d ~ ~ ~ ~ O
~ oN
- - - - - - -
o
. -
4J
:>
D C C C~ Z C C ori
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s
~ (V ·- ~ ~ ~ ·- =._
~ ~ ~ ¢ U) ¢
_ oo oo _ U: ~ O ~ \0
oo oo oo oO ~ d~
oo ~ oo ~ ~
_ d~ - ~ ~ +1 -
+ + + + ++
O ~ ~ ~ ~ ood~ ~
~ oo oo oo oo ~ oo
0N 0N ~ ~ ~ ~ C~
_ _ _ _ _ __ _
~ oo ~ ~ oo ~ d4
No u)
~ ~ ~ c~ ~ ~ o~ ~
~ - - - - - -- -
~ ' ~-~, ~C C; Z ~ .°
u ._ ~ 5 ~ -, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~C i
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C 3
.c
122
~o oo
_
o ~o ~ _
-+ ~ 1 1
oo o
~ oo oo
_ _ _
_ _ ~4
~ oo oo
_ _ _
d~ ~ O
~ Cr~ C~
_ _ _
o
._
4 -
~ ~ C~
.- C o ,0 ~ O mC ~ O C
~_C~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ o °
~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ C~ ¢
. o
Ct
OCR for page 123
O. of ~
No To us ~o Id ~
~ on ~ ~ o ~
^^ ~ ~
~ Go Go
- 1 - ~,°, ~
~o
~ ~ Go No (v ·
oN ~ ~ ~o ~
- - - - ad of · -
1- ~ ~ · o ^e
.-
~ ~ ~o
bC ~5 E ° .
E ~ ~ ~o ~ E
C: C: °
-_ At_
8 ~ 8 ^= to
o ~ ~ .
~At, ~ ~ o
u: u: ~o \o ~ ~ ~ u: oo ~, ~' '` cx ax ~E `-
oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °
~ ~,~ Z _~.
0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~o 0 ~ ~ ~_ ~ 0 ~o oo ~ ~ ~ ,=
~ + ~ + 1 ~ ~ ~ ~+ _ ~ + _ ~ ~ x._ ~ o
O ~ O ~ O ~ 00 00 ~ ~ C~ 00 0 ~-~ ~L~ ~ ~ .
oo oo oo oo oo oo ~ ~ ~ oo oo ~ ~ oo oo ~ 0 ~_
0\ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ cr~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~u, ~ ~ ~ .
__________ ____ ~0
~ c~ ~ 0 ~
oo ~ oo ~ oo ~ oo oo ~ ~ u~ ~ ~ ~I,^ ~. O ~ ~ 0
u: ~ ~ ~ u~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ d~ \0 \0 c~ · ~ ·,.,
0N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ON ~ ~ ~ (: cI' ~- ,~
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~C
c ~ ~ ' oE ~ 2 ~ ~ B 5 L
o ~ c =._ '^ c
_ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o
. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o
· ~ ~ ~ ~ .
123
OCR for page 150
A COMMON DESTI NY: BLACKS AN D AMERICAN SOCI ETY
tudes. Accordingly, one line of interpretation is to examine how concrete
policy implementation of general principles may entail contradictory or com-
peting values.
Several of the important questions used in national surveys concerning
implementation of principles of equality explicitly invoke action by the
federal government. Hence, if respondents endorse the principle but reject
the hypothetical governmental intervention, the responses might not indi-
cate a "superficial" or merely symbolic orientation, but, rather, a principled
objection to the use of federal power. More generally, it has been proposed
that there is a genuine consensus among present-day American whites that
racial discrimination should not be practiced or approved. For many Ameri-
cans, however, this consensus does not extend to policies for implementa-
tion that involve compulsion. This situation is thought to express a contra-
diction between values of equality and values of individual freedom (Lipset
end Schneider, 1978; Rokeach, 1983~. This interpretation gains plausibility
from the historical prominence of a clash between "equality" and "free-
dom" in American political attitudes and behavior.
Since at least the time of Alexis de Tocqueville (1835), commentaries on
American life have stressed the prominence, and sometimes the complexity,
of beliefs and values of individualism and concepts of liberty (Bellah et al.,
1985; Williams, 1970:Ch. XI). The early traditions were those of religious
and political individualism, with emphasis on individual moral value and
responsibility, coupled with claims to freedom from imposed authority.
These traditions were also subtly connected with a kind of utilitarianism that
sometimes turned into a preoccupation with self-interest narrowly conceived
(Davis, 1975:353-73~. Hence, individualism can lead to easy justification of
self-interest, to opposition to "welfare state" policies, and to rejection of
affirmative action policies.
A plausible hypothesis is that American individualistic values favor univer-
salistic competition-"May the best person win"-while regarding disadvan-
taged status as one's own fault. Attitudes of whites toward the condition of
blacks and toward race-related public policies seem to be substantially related
to how racial differences are explained. In general, Americans are sympathetic
to inequality only to the extent that they perceive that inequality to be
"undeserved." Whites tend to deny that race is currently a social problem
and, therefore, believe that blacks themselves are responsible for the remaining
socioeconomic differences between the races (Bobo, 1987a; Williams, 1988~.
Blacks, to a much greater extent, believe that race is still very much a social
problem in America and therefore believe that systematic barriers limit their
chances in life. These beliefs help explain why blacks and whites differ so
sharply in levels of support for equal opportunity policies such as affirmative
action and why, in particular, white opposition to such policies is so high.
In The Anatomy of Dial Attitudes Apostle and colleagues (1983) demon-
strate that there is utility in grounding surveys of attitudes in a format that
allows respondents to explain their reasons for holding given beliefs and
attitudes. From a sample of 500 white persons in the San Francisco Bay area,
150
OCR for page 151
RACIAL ATTITUDES AN D BEHAVIORS
their study elicited explanations of the racial attitudes expressed, which were
then related to the respondents' beliefs and prescriptions. The hypothesis
that competing values affect attitudes toward racial social policy was found
to help explain a considerable amount of the difference between endorse-
ment of principle and implementation of orinciole in such areas as emolov
ment and housing. In particular, those respondents who were classified as
"individualists" by the researchers were the most likely to oppose institu-
tional intervention against racial discrimination (Apostle et al., 1983:88-95,
110~.
On the basis of surveys carried out in 1972, Sniderman and Hagen (1985)
found that white Americans gave four main explanations for black-white
inequality: individualistic (personal responsibility), fundamentalist (God's
will), past discrimination (historical treatment), and deliberate economic
exploitation (radical). The predominant view, held by about 60 percent of a
nationwide sample, is individualistic. If asked spontaneously to explain the
causes of social and economic inequality between blacks and whites, most
whites emphasize a lack of effort by blacks (Kluegel and Smith, 1986; Schu-
man, 1971~; if asked to choose the single most important reason among a
set of possible causes, the individualistic factor is the one most likely to be
chosen (Apostle et al., 1983; Sniderman and Hagen, 1985~. These individ-
ualistic explanations of black-white inequality support the view that govern-
ment has no role to play in improving the status of blacks. The individualistic
emphasis also contributes to an underestimation of the extent of black-white
inequality and to exaggeration of the effects of equal opportunity or affir-
mative action-type programs. For example, 53 percent of whites in a 1980
national survey perceived blacks to benefit from "some" or "a lot" of
reverse discrimination (Kluegel and Smith, 1986~.
The views of black Americans differ sharply. The 1980 national survey
found that 53 percent of blacks but only 26 percent of whites believed that
blacks face significant discrimination (Kluegel and Smith, 1986~. A 1981
national survey found that 65 percent of blacks rejected the claim that a lack
of motivation or effort was responsible for black-white inequality, compared
with 40 percent of whites (Bobo, 1987a).
Blacks also appear to differ from whites in what they mean by discrimina-
tion. Even whites who think discrimination contributes to black-white in-
equality tend to view it as a problem created and maintained by prejudiced
individuals. Blacks view discrimination as a result of both prejudiced individ-
uals and broader social processes (Bobo, 1987a; Kluegel and Smith, 1986~.
It is tempting to consider the competing values hypothesis as a resolution
of the problem of the principle-implementation gap. However, it is not the
entire story. First, and most important, it ignores the third basic finding
from studies of white attitudes and beliefs concerning equal treatment in
race relations: whites want considerable social distance from blacks. And,
especially with regard to housing, the evidence shows that many whites will
go to considerable efforts to maintain that distance. Thus, there is not only
a gap between principle and implementation to be explained, but also a gap
151
OCR for page 152
A COMMON DESTINY: BLACKS AND AMERICAN SOCIETY
between support for principles and willingness to practice equalitarian prin-
ciples on a personal level.
THE MEAN I NG OF RACIAL EQUALITY
The explanation for the principle-implementation gap may depend on the
question of what those who say they endorse the principles of racial equality
and integration mean by those terms. One answer is that they have in mind
some conception of American pluralism-the peaceful and equal participa-
tion of different groups in the democratic polity. But, as discussed above,
pluralism in America carries with it claims for the primacy of liberty as well
as equality. Some people surely would agree with the economist Milton
Friedman that the principle of equal treatment should be endorsed and
practiced but that individuals should have the personal right to practice
differential treatment, because to compel them otherwise would be an in-
fringement of their liberty (Friedman, 1962: 1 1 1) .
For example, two racial intermarriage questions asked of respondents in
the 1982 and 1983 General Social Surveys illustrate this point, as well as the
importance of specific question wording. Although 66 percent of whites (in
1982) said they opposed laws against intermarriage, only 40 percent (in
1983) said they personally "approved" of racial intermarriage. Analogously,
about two-thirds of whites (in 1977) said that they would not favor laws
against interracial marriage, but three-fourths of the respondents said they
would be either "very uneasy" or "somewhat uneasy" if a close relative
were planning to marry a "Negro" If. Milton Yinger, 1986:12~. The differ-
ence can be explained by noting that it is possible to personally object to a
behavior or outcome without simultaneously feeling that others should be
prevented from engaging in such behavior. Thus, it is possible that some
whites may endorse the general principle that blacks have the right to live
where they choose-and so reject the notion that groups of whites have the
right to collectively prevent black desegregation of a neighborhood-and yet
support each individual's right to live in a segregated neighborhood.
More concretely, objections to government coercion do influence people's
reactions to the issue of open housing laws (Schuman and Bobo, 1988) and
possibly school busing (Taylor, 1986~. We might suppose, then, that there
exists a three-directional ambivalence in the attitudes of many whites toward
racial equality: support for it in principle, and support for it in practice, but
only if certain preference boundaries are not overstepped-too many blacks
or interracial contact is too close. The competing values hypothesis explains
why whites can be in favor of equal treatment in principle but reject policies
to implement it. But in using that hypothesis the issues have been too
compartmentalized, for it ignores the expressed preferences of whites con-
cerning black-white social distance.
"Implementation" has multiple, concrete implications. While a policy
may introduce competing values and allow an objection on grounds of
principle-"forced busing violates individual liberty"-the same policy may
152
OCR for page 153
RACIAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS
also create a solution that results in an overstepping of many whites' prefer-
ence boundaries, such as too great a proportion of blacks in the schools. It
is difficult with the data available to sort out the independent effects of each.
Whites are likely to stress the clash of principles, but blacks will be inclined
to agree with the Reverend Jesse Jackson that "it's not the bus, it's us. "
GROUP STATUS
Changes in the status of one group often lead to intensified competition
with another group (Brewer and Kramer, 1985:223-226~. And some inter-
group behavior in black-white contacts, especially public confrontations, is
due to real or perceived advances in blacks' status and fears among whites of
losing an established and superior group position.
The crucial role of defining and maintaining boundaries between groups
has been documented in detail by experimental and observational studies
(Brewer and Kramer, 1985; Stephan and Rosenfield, 1982~. These social
boundaries are accentuated by perceived oppositions, and by threats, includ-
ing expressions of hostility or negative evaluations by members of out-
groups. For instance, black activism to advance group position may have
played an important role in raising group consciousness among many whites.
{ackman and Muha (1984) have focused the issue in terms of intergroup
attitudes and ideologies as a mechanism of defending group status position.
They hypothesize that claims based on group interests, as in preferential
goals or quotas, are opposed by dominant groups (racial, gender, or class)
on grounds of a principle of individual achievement. Jackman and Muha
interpret the findings (from a national survey of 1,914 respondents) as re-
vealing that well-educated whites show higher acceptance of racial integration
and black rights as a sophisticated way of avoiding offense and confrontation
by emphasizing individual rights, while evading commitment to group
equality. "By upholding individualism as a guiding principle in the empirical
and normative interpretation of social life, the rights of,qro?~ps are thus
rendered illegitimate and unreasonable" and the status quo can be protected
(lackman and Muha, 1984:760~. This argument rests on a single (1975)
survey in which there is little information on the contextual meaning of
responses and no direct link between those responses and group-level or
institutional factors. Still, the Jackman-Muha interpretation of the data can-
not be summarily dismissed.
Some recent attempts to show a relationship between measures of individ-
ualistic values and measures of attitudes on issues such as affirmative action
have produced unexpected results. Attitudes toward affirmative action poli-
cies tended to be more highly correlated with attitudes toward equalitarian
values than with individualistic values (Bobo, 1989; Kinder and Sanders,
1987; Sears, 1988~. This finding has been interpreted to mean that for many
people low levels of support for affirmative action flow more from low levels
of commitment to equality and a lack of awareness of social structural causes
of inequality (coupled with prejudice) than from a high commitment to
153
OCR for page 154
A COMMON DESTINY: BLACKS AND AMERICAN SOCIETY
individualistic values. This research will doubtless be subjected to close re-
view in the near future, and it will need replication in more studies before
its full implications are understood.
Of relevance to these issues is a body of research in social psychology that
provides explanations of how people explain a social phenomenon such as
black-white inequality. Attribution theory (Fiske and Taylor, 1984; Heider,
1958) focuses primarily on how people develop explanatory accounts of
interpersonal behavior. The two major types of causes are external, such as
an environmental constraint or pressure to behave in a particular way, and
internal, indicative of the underlying dispositions of the individual. Of course,
many behaviors involve combinations of the two kinds of causes. The way
in which a phenomenon is explained largely determines the meaning it has
for a person. An outcome lacking a systematic, controllable cause differs
from an outcome for which a clear social process or individual action can be
pinpointed as the cause. Furthermore, outcomes rooted in a social force
have different implications for ameliorative efforts than those rooted in a
. .
persona . intention.
The views of both whites and blacks may reflect what has been termed the
"fundamental attribution error" (Tones and Nisbett, 1972~. Experimentally
controlled studies of the attribution process routinely find that observers
systematically overestimate the extent to which an actor's behavior is attrib-
utable to internal causes and systematically underestimate the importance of
external causes. This tendency to overattribute to internal causes and to
underestimate the importance of external environmental causes appears to
be especially likely when judging a disliked out-group (Pettigrew, 1979~.
This general psychological bias toward dispositional attributions when
joined with possible self-interest motivations to protect a historically privi-
leged group status may reflect a reasoned opposition of some whites to black
advancement. In addition, the traditional American belief that the country
is a land of abundant opportunity for those who want to work hard is
another important contributor to low levels of support for equal opportunity
policies (Kluegel and Smith, 1986~. The fundamental attribution error may
be more characteristic of societies with individualistic achievement orienta-
tions than those without such cultural beliefs. The crucial theoretical point
is that long-standing and general beliefs about how society does and should
allocate important social rewards affect both how racial inequality is per-
ceived and how it is explained. As a result, attitudes toward policies to affect
black inequality are also affected by these beliefs about why that inequality
occurs. Beliefs that existing differences are based on individual merit may
lead to opposition to policies such as affirmative action. Data do not allow
us to determine whether the beliefs and perceptions of blacks or those of
whites are more veridical. There is no doubt a measure of self-interest in the
perceptions of both groups. The motivational factors behind the behaviors
of whites and blacks are not a simple matter of values versus self-interest;
both elements are at work.
154
OCR for page 155
RACIAL ATTITUDES AN D BEHAVIORS
CONCLUSIONS
These findings lead us to four general conclusions. The foremost conclu-
sion is that race still matters greatly in the United States. Much of the
evidence reviewed in this report indicates widespread attitudes of societal
racism. This is not to gainsay convincing evidence of improving racial atti-
tudes: a transformation of basic racial norms in the United States is the
clearest finding from the survey trend data (Schuman et al., 1985; Smith
and Sheatsley, 1984~. The once widespread acceptance of segregation and
discrimination as the guiding principles of black-white relations has given
way to acceptance of the principles of desegregation and equal treatment.
There are reasons to believe that this change extends beyond mere lip service
or token and transitory forms of social contact. The second major conclusion
regarding racial attitudes is thus a record of genuine progress.
Yet, a reluctance to live in racially mixed neighborhoods and interpersonal
awkwardness and racially differential treatment across many situations all
point to the persistence of race as an important factor in American society.
Although each of the phenomena mentioned also has causes that are
frequently unrelated to race, such as social status differences and political
values, a direct concern with race is substantially implicated in each outcome.
Our third major conclusion, then, is that in the midst of progress there
remain significant forms of resistance to a variety of proposals for racial
change.
It would be erroneous, however, to reduce the American racial pattern of
progress and resistance to purely racial causes. A number of traditional
values, which are not in and of themselves race related, play an important
role. The values of liberty, equality, justice, and fairness are an inevitable
component of any attempt to comprehend racial attitudes and relations in
the United States. Values such as individualism affect not only how people
perceive and explain black-white inequality, but also the likelihood of sup-
porting policies aimed at affecting group statuses. Our fourth major conclu-
sion is thus that a number of value-based concerns affect the observed
patterns of racial progress and resistance.
The connections between attitudes and actual behavior are exceedingly
complicated. White attitudes concerning black-white relations have moved
appreciably toward endorsement of principles of equal treatment. Yet there
remain important signs of continuing resistance to full equality of black
Americans: principles of equality are endorsed less when social contact is
close, of long duration, or frequent and when it involves significant numbers
of blacks; whites are much less prone to endorse policies to implement equal
participation of blacks in society.
These findings suggest that a considerable amount of remaining black-
white inequality is due to continuing discriminatory treatment of blacks.
However, direct evidence of systematic discriminatory behavior by whites is
difficult to obtain. The best evidence is in the area of residential housing.
Discrimination against blacks seeking housing has been conclusively demon
155
OCR for page 156
A COMMON DESTINY: BLACKS AND AMERICAN SOCIETY
strafed. How much the important example of the housing market indicates
discrimination in other areas, such as the labor market, is tempered by the
fact that residential segregation is very high on whites' "rank order of dis-
crimination." Nonetheless, the overall preponderance of evidence indicates
that the existence of significant discrimination against blacks is still a feature
of American society.
REFERENCES
Apostle, Richard A., Charles Y. Glock, Thomas Piazza, and Marijean Suelzle
1983 The Anatomy of Racial Attitudes. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Arrow, Kenneth J.
1963 Social Choice and Individual Valises. 2d ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Bellah, Robert, Richard Madsen, William M. Sullivan, Anne Swidler, and Steven M.
Tipton
1985 Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Bobo, Lawrence
1987a Racial Attitudes and the Status of Black Americans: A Social Psychological View
of Change Since the 1940s. Paper prepared for the Committee on the Status of
Black Americans, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
1987b Race in the Minds of Black and White Americans. Paper prepared for the
Committee on the Status of Black Americans, National Research Council, Wash-
ington, D.C.
1989 Memorandum to the Committee on the Status of Black Americans, National
Research Council, Washington, D.C.
Brewer, M. B., and R. M. Kramer
1985 The psychology of intergroup attitudes. Annual Renew of Psychology 36:219-243.
Campbell, Angus
1971 White Attitudes Towards Black People. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Institute for Social
Research.
Campbell, Angus, and Howard Schuman
1968 Racial attitudes in fifteen American cities. Pp. 1-67 in Supplemental Studies for the
National Advisory Committee on Civil Disorders. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govern-
ment Printing Office.
Cavanagh, Thomas
1985 Inside Black America: The Message of the Black Vote in the 1984 Elections. Washing-
ton, D.C.: Joint Center for Political Studies.
Condran, John G.
1979 Changes in white attitudes towards blacks: 1963-1977. Public Opinion Quarterly
43 (Winter) :463-476.
Davis, David Brion
1975 The Problem of Slavery in the Ape of Revolution. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University
Press.
Davis, James A., and Tom W. Smith
1987 General Social Surveys, 1972-1987. Machine readable data file. National Opin-
ion Research Center, Chicago, Ill.
Denisoff, R. Serge, anti Ralph Wahrman
1979 An Introduction to Sociology. 2d ed. New York: Macmillan.
156
OCR for page 157
RACIAL ATTITU DES AN D BEHAVIORS
de Tocqueville, Alexis
1835 Democracy in Amer?ca. Reprinted 1966. New York: Harper & Row.
DuBois, William E. B.
1899 The Philadelphia Ne,gro: A Social Study. Reissued (1973), Millwood, N.Y.: Kraus-
Thomson Organization Limited.
Farley, Reynolds
1984 Blacks and Whites. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Farley, Reynolds, Suzanne Bianchi, and Diane Colosanto
1980 Barriers to the racial integration of neighborhoods, the Detroit case. Annals of the
American Academy of Politicaland Social Science 444(January):97-113.
Farley, Reynolds, Shirley Hatchett, and Howard Schuman
1979 A note on changes in black racial attitudes in Detriot: 1968-1976. Social Indicators
Research 6:439 413.
Farley, ~ 1 l *t
Hatchett
1978 Chocolate city, vanilla suburbs: will the trend toward racially separate communi-
ties continue? Social Science Research 7(December): 3 19-344.
Featherman, David L., and Robert M. Hauser
1978 Opportunity and Change, New York: Academic Press.
Fiske Susan T. and Shellev E. Tavlor
Reynolds, Howard Schuman, Suzanne Bianchi' Diane Colosanto, and Shirley
. ~ , ~ ~ _ , _ · En,
1984 Social Cognition. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Friedman, Milton
1962 Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Greeley, Andrew M., and Paul B. Sheatsley
1971 Attitudes towards racial integration. Scientific American 225:13-19.
1974 Attitudes towards racial integration. In Lee Rainwater, ea., Inequality and Justice.
Chicago: Aldine.
Harris, Louis
1987 The Harris Surrey. Orlando, Fla.: The Tribune Media Services, Inc.
Hawley, Amos Henry, and Vincent P. Rock
1973 Segregation in Racial Areas. Division of Behavioral Sciences, National Research
Council. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences.
Haworth, J. G., J. D. Gwartney, and C. Haworth
1975 Earnings productivity and changes in employment discrimination during the
1960's. American Economic Re~v 6542~[March]:158-168.
Heider, Fritz
1958 The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Hyman, Herbert H., and Paul Sheatsley
1956 Attitudes towards desegregation. Scientific American 195(December):35-39.
1964 Attitudes towards desegregation . Scientific American 21 1 (1) fJuly]: 16-23 .
Jackman, Mary R.
1978 General and applied tolerance: does education increase commitment to racial
integration? American Journal of Political Science 22: 302-324.
Jackman, Mary R., and Michael J. Muha
1984 Education and intergroup attitudes: moral enlightenment, superficial democratic
commitment or ideological refinement? American Sociological Re~v 49:751-769.
Jones, Edward E., and Richard E. Nisbett
1972 The actor and the observer: divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. In
Edward E. Jones, D. Kamouse, Harold H. Kelley, Richard E. Nisbett, S. Valins,
and Bernard Weiner. Attribution: Percez~g the Gooses of Behavior, Morristown,
N.J.: General Learning Press.
157
OCR for page 158
A COMMON DESTINY: BLACKS AND AMERICAN SOCIETY
Jones, Edward W., Jr.
1986 Black managers: the dream deferred. Harvard Business Renew (May/June): 8~93.
1988 Memorandum to the Committee on the Status of Black Americans, National
R£:se!arch Council, Washington, D.C.
Kinder, Donald R., and Lynn M. Sanders
1987 Pluralistic Foundations of American Opinion on Race. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.
Kluegel, J. R., and E. R. Smith
1986 Beliefs About Equality: American's Views of What Is and What Ought to Be. Haw-
thorne, N.Y.: Aldine de Gruyter.
Lipset, Seymour Martin, and William Schneider
1978 The Bakke case: how would it be decided at the bar of public opinion? Public
Opinion 1~1~(March/April):38-44
McCloskey, Herbert
1964 Consensus and ideology in American politics. American Political Science Renew
58:361-382.
Molotch, Harvey Luskin
1972 Manacled Inte,gration. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Myrdal, Gunnar
1944 An American Dilemma: The Ne,gro Problem and Modern Democracy. 2 vols. New
York: Harper and Brothers.
O'Neill, June, James Cunningham, Andy Sparks, and Hal Sider
1986 The Economic Ogress of Black Men in America. Clearinghouse Publication 91.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Pearce, Diana
1979 Gatekeepers and homeseekers: institutionalized patterns in racial steering. Social
problems 26:325-342.
Pettigrew, Thomas F.
1973 Attitudes on race and housing: a social psychological view. In A. H. Hawley and
V. P. Rock, eds. Se~re,gation in Residential Areas. Washington, D.C.: National
Academy of Sciences.
1979 The ultimate attribution error: extending Allport's cognitive analysis of prejudice.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 5 :461-476.
Pettigrew, Thomas F., and D. Alston
1988 Tom Bradley's Campaign for Governor: The Dilemma of Race and Political Strategies.
Washington, D.C.: Joint Center for Political Studies.
Rieder, Jonathan
1985 Canarsie: The Jews and Italians of Brooklyn Against Liberalism. Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press.
Rokeach, Milton
1973 The Nature of Human Values. New York: Free Press.
Rossi, Peter H., James D. Wright, and Andy B. Anderson
1983 Handbook of Surrey Research. Orlando, Fla.: Academic Press.
Schelling, Thomas C.
1972 A process of residential segregation: neighborhood tipping. Pg. 157-184 in An-
thony H. Pascal, ea., Racial Discrimination in Economic Life. Lexington, Mass.:
D. C. Heath and Co.
Schuman, Howard
1971 Free will and determinism in beliefs about race. In Norman Yetman and C. Hoyt
Steele, eds., Majority and Minority: The Dynamics of Racial and Ethnic Relations.
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
158
OCR for page 159
RACIAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS
Schuman, Howard, and Lawrence Bobo
1988 Survey-based experiments on white racial attitudes toward residential integration.
American jrournal of Sociology 94~2)[September] :273-299.
Schuman, Howard, and Shirley Hatchett
1974 Black Racial Attitudes: Trends and Complexities. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Institute for
Social Research.
Schuman, Howard, and Graham Kalton
1985 Survey methods. In Gordon Lindzey and Elliot Aronson, ads., Handbook of Social
Psychology. 3d ed. New York: Random House.
Schuman, Howard, Eleanor Singer, Rebecca Donovan, and Claire Selltiz
1983 Discriminatory behavior in New York restaurants: 1950 and 1981. Social Indicators
Research 13:69-83.
Schuman, Howard, Charlotte Steeh, and Lawrence Bobo
1985 Racial Attitudes in America: Trends and Interpretations. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press.
Sears, David O.
1988 Symbolic racism. Pp. 53-84 in P. A. Katz and D. A. Taylor, eds., Eliminating
Racism: Profiles in Controversy. New York: Plenum.
Sears, David O., Carl P. Hensler, and Leslie K. Specr
1979 Whites opposition to "busing": self-interest or symbolic politics! American Polit-
ical Science ~v 73: 36~-384.
Sears, David O., and John B. McConahay
1973 The Politics of Violence. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Seeman, Melvin
1981 Intergroup relations. Pp. 378-410 in Morris Rosenberg and Ralph H. Turner,
eds., Social Psychology: Sociological Perspectives. New York: Basic Books.
Sen, Amartya
1971 Collective Choice and Social Welfare. New York: Holden Day.
Smith, A. Wade
1981 Racial tolerance as a function of group position. American Sociological J~v 46:558-
573.
1987 Problems and progress in the measurement of black public opinion. American
Beh6moral Scientist 30:441-455.
Smith, James P., and Finis R. Welch
1986 Closing the Gap, Forty Years of Economic Ogress for Blacks, Santa Monica, Calif.:
Rand Corporation.
Smith, Tom W., and Paul B. Sheatsley
1984 American attitudes toward race relations. Public Opinion 640ctober/Novem-
ber):14-15, 50-53.
Sniderman, Paul M., and Michael G. Hagen
1985 Race andInequality:ASt?~dyinAmerican Valises. Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House.
Stephan, Walter G., and David Rosenfield
1982 Racial and ethnic stereotypes. Pp. 92-136 in Arthur G. Miller, cd., The Eye of the
Beholder: Contemporary Issues in Stereotyping. New York: Praeger.
Stouffer, Samuel
1955 Communism, Conformity, and Civil Liberties. New York: Doubleday.
Taub, Richard P., D. Garth Taylor, and Jan D. Dunham
1984 Paths of Ne,ighborhood Change: Race and Crime in Urban America. Chicago: Univer-
sitv of Chicago Press.
Taylor, D. Garth
1986 Public Opinion and Collective Action. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
159
OCR for page 160
A COMMON DESTINY: BLACKS AND AMERICAN SOCIETY
Taylor, D. Garth, Paul B. Sheatsley, and Andrew M. Greeley
1978 Attitudes toward racial integration. Scientific American 238~6)Rune] :42-50.
Turner, Charles F., and Elizabeth Martin, eds.
1984 S?~'veyin,g S?~byect~ve Phenomena. 2 vols. Panel on Survey Measurement of Subjective
Phenomena, Committee on National Statistics, National Research Council. New
York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Turner, Costellano B., and William Julius Wilson
1976 Dimensions of racial ideology: a study of urban black attitudes. Journal of Social
Issues (Spring):139-152.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
1979 Meas?~ri~g Racial Discrimination. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing
Office.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
1984 A History of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 1965-1984, Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Weiss, Leonard, and Jeffrey G. Williamson
1972 Black education, earnings, and interregional migration: some new evidence. Amer-
ican Economic Renew 62~3~:372-383.
Williams, Robin M., Jr.
1970 American Society: A Sociological Interpretation. 3d ed. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
1988 Racial attitudes and behavior. Pp. 331-352 in Hubert O'Gorman, ea., ~rveyin,g
Social Life: Papers in Honor of Herbert Hyman. Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan
University Press.
Yinger, John
1986 Measuring racial discrimination with fair housing audits. American Economic Re~v
76~5~:881-893.
Yinger, J. Milton
1986 Black Americans and Predominantly White Churches. Paper prepared for the
Committee on the Status of Black Americans, National Research Council, Wash-
ington, D.C.
160
Representative terms from entire chapter:
equal treatment
