Theory and Measurement of Attitudes and Opinions
One of the most important (and confused) subjects in the interlocking and overlapping fields of sociology and social psychology is the category of motivation. It is apparent that human movements are possible only when appropriate action-patterns exist and that these patterns must be either inherited or acquired. It is also apparent that the functioning of both human and non-human animals is largely motivated by action-patterns that seem to be products of germinal development. These patterns are present at birth or soon after, relatively stable and unmodifiable, common to the species, usually adaptive and largely unlearned. If they are relatively simple, like grasping, knee-jerking, winking, they are " reflexes "; if they are more complex like crying, suckling-swallowing, assimilating-excreting, manipulating, they are "instincts." Just how complex such responses must be to be " instincts " is undetermined and perhaps indeterminable. The safest procedure, probably, is to call them instinctive, innate, native, germinal, and let it go at that.
On the other hand, it is equally obvious that most human cultural behavior is motivated by action-patterns acquired through social conditioning. It is his greater capacity for building new action-patterns that distinguishes the human animal from the non-human animal. Following Thorndike, it is customary to describe the innate type of behavior as original and the second type as acquired. Thus, while vocalizing is an original trait of man, speaking a language is an acquired trait; hunger, putting-objects-in-mouth-and-swallowing, is natural, but seeking specific foods is a culture-trait; sex activity is native, but particular love-making and marriage-family complexes arc acquired action-patterns. The most significant human acquisitions are the action--patterns we call language, vocal symbolization, chinking, " consciousness." These habits, like all other, action-patterns, are neuromuscular mechanisms. Thinking is acting; " consciousness " is movement of specific parts of the organism.
Since the discovery of the " conditioned reflex," it has' been found that stimuli capable of activating these neuromuscular mechanisms, whether innate or acquired, are very numerous and very variable. Under appropriate conditions, almost any stimulus may be substituted for the stimulus originally adequate to activate any given action-pattern. Then a substitute for the substitute stimulus may be supplied, and so on almost indefinitely. While the functional motor-mechanisms, innate or acquired, are relatively stable, as in the Watsonian infantile fear, love, and rage responses (117), many quite diverse stimuli may be integrated with these specific responses. The result is a new total stimulus-response action-pattern which is partly original, but which in most human behavior, is largely the result of experiential conditioning in cultural situations.
Hence, the attempt to ascribe human behavior to specific instincts " has failed. Modern sociologists and social psychologists are studying acquired and conditioned behavior intensively in the hope of achieving some scientific understanding of human, as contrasted to human-animal, motivation. This point of view is expressed in the proposition that "human behavior is cultural behavior." The specific-instinct explanation of much animal behavior is demonstrably false and some observers even allege traces of cultural behavior among animals. Certainly it is true that much adjustment-behavior of animals is conditioned, learned, or acquired, whether it be cultural or not in the sense of being transmitted by some process of symbolical communication or training in group-patterned responses. In any case, it is clear that no adequate understanding of human behavior is possible on the old specific instinct hypothesis. The problem of human motivation is the problem of acquired responses. We may grant an " instinctive " substrate for all such behavior, but scientific explanation must be made on the level of the substitute-stimulus -integration. In a given human adjustment it is practically impossible to unscramble the innate action-patterns from the innate conditioned ones. A conditioned action-pattern is as much a " drive," is as dynamic a motivation, as a raw instinct. When the conditioned integration is once achieved, it responds automatically upon the presentation of the appropriate stimulus. It is as much an integral and organic part of the functional organism as if it were an original, innate stimulus-response pattern. This is particularly true of conditioned response patterns of the unstriped muscles (Watson, 50, 51), but it is also true of all so-called voluntary habits. In language habits, this process is especially rich and varied and is of especial interest to
( 359) students of human behavior, since so much of our actual social adjustment is mediated by language habits.
The purpose of this paper is to present a bibliography of some of the material that has appeared since 1925 on the general subject of acquired motivation-patterns. A few basic studies prior to 1925 are included. A rough classification has been attempted. This serves the two-fold purpose of giving some guidance to the student and of simplifying the short discussion that follows. Needless to say, the bibliography is incomplete, but the compiler believes it will serve as a fairly adequate introduction to the subject. He urges the reader to place but little confidence in the too brief analysis that follows, but rather to consult the literature.
The bibliography is limited chiefly to the writings of sociologists and social psychologists. A great deal of similar or allied material will be found under appropriate headings in the Psychological Index since 1925. The compilation is mainly concerned with the theory, observation and measurement of " attitudes and opinions " as used by sociologists and social psychologists. No one realizes more vividly than the compiler himself that these are very ill-defined terms, but he believes that they do refer in a general way to types of acquired action-patterns that are definitely concerned with human motivation. Certainly, " attitude " is not more vague and ill-defined than " trait," as Prince (38) and G. W. Allport (2) have shown. While it must be confessed that most writers use such terms as attitude, trait, opinion, wish, interest, disposition, desire, bias, preference, prejudice, will, sentiment, motive, objective, goal, idea, ideal, emotion, and even instinct and reflex, loosely, indefinitely, and often interchangeably, yet it must also be admitted that there is a core of common meaning in all such usages. These, and other similar terms, refer to acquired and conditioned action-patterns that motivate human social behavior. If this is kept clearly in mind, much of the terminological discussion will appear as " sound and fury signifying nothing " more than a mere symptom of the " disease of language." Men who have waged epic verbal battles often discover later that they were talking about the same thing. Common usage is necessary, to be sure, if a valid scientific vocabulary is to be won, and perhaps this can be achieved only by bloodless verbal combat. But intensive research into the repetitive uniformities of acquired motivation-patterns will do more toward clarifying and standardizing terminology than will the making of many violent verbal assaults and lengthy language-defenses. The literature listed below shows that the technique and theory of such
( 360) research is already well advanced. The various investigators are studying the same kind of data, whatever they call it, viz.: socially conditioned patterns of motivation. It should be pointed out that the more 'careful writers attempt to give clear and unmistakable meanings to the terms they use. Such procedure will eventually settle the terminology difficulty.
Symonds (45,46) has mentioned seven common meanings of the term attitude : (1) great organic drives, purposes, motives; (2) muscular adjustment; (3) 'generalized conduct; (4) neural set or readiness to adjust; (5) emotional' responses; (6) feelings; (7) verbal accepting or rejecting responses. The "tendency to act," positive or negative, of Thomas (48) and his followers, Park and Burgess (32), Faris (18, 19), Bogardus (8), House (24), Lundberg (70), et al., seems to be quite similar to (4), above. This is perhaps the most prevalent use of attitude among sociologists, although we should add the preparatory movement or partial adjustment idea of Bernard (5), the relatively stable overt status-getting response of Bain (3), and the trenchant criticism of all the above by Markey (28) with his conclusion that attitudes are behavior integrations associated with signs and symbols of probable behavior.
Most attempts to study attitudes have been by way of getting verbal responses through questionnaires, rating of verbal symbols in gradations of liking-disliking, and asking people for preferences, desires or interests. This material is roughly classified under section V. The assumption seems to be that people really do, or will do, what they say they have done, or will do. The psychoanalytic school has shown the falsity of this assumption. (It should be noted in passing that there is. a rich psychoanalytic, and psychiatric literature on the general subject of motivation which is not touched upon in this compilation. A special bibliographic review of psychiatric attitude theory and study should be available.) Some students have attempted to determine the degree of correlation between verbal responses and actual behavior, e.g., Zimmerman (119), May and Hartshorne (99, 100), and Terman (110). Stouffer (79a) has found a correlation of .96 in the judgments of attitudes from case studies (unpublished as yet). Several persons read the same case studies and listed the attitudes they thought were therein exhibited with the high degree of agreement indicated above. If this work stands the test of verification, it will be highly significant. Practically all investigators, when pressed, will admit the probable discrepancy between verbal and actual behavior, especially if the verbal "attitudes" are on
( 361) tabooed subjects as many of them are. An enormous amount of time and labor have been practically wasted as a result of this naive assumption that verbal statements are highly correlated with adjustment behavior. That there is often high correlation must be admitted but it must be scientifically (quantitatively) determined just what this correlation is if the resultant generalizations are to have any scientific (predictive) value. Symonds (45) and Bain (3) have argued that verbal " attitudes " are relatively unimportant, but it should be pointed out that for some problems the verbal response is what is desired. However, in most cases, the assumption is that the verbal response is indicative of actual behavior, as buying, voting, church going, choosing occupations, etc. This may be so, but it must be determined, not assumed, before the study has any great value. Practically all writers explicitly or implicitly admit a distinction between " attitudes," however used, and verbal attitudes," or opinions.
Russell (41) has approached the problem of motivation by way of desire and feeling (by which he seems to mean about the same as attitude), while Holt (23) has emphasized the structural nature of the " wish." These two approaches seem to be the rationale back of the two types of attitude studies I have classified as Overt (III) and Verbal (V). The only way we .can tell how another person " feels " is to observe his behavior and assume that he " feels " that way, or " desires " those responses, or else to ask hint how he " feels." The one approach results in objective analysis, the other in subjective. Faris (18, 19), following Thomas (47, 48), holds that "the attitude" is the result, largely, of crisis situations, while the " wish " is the precursor of action.,. Thus Bernard's attitude (5) is Faris' wish, while Holt's wish is more nearly like Semon's " engram " or Pareto's " residue." Faris insists upon the necessity for studying the " subjective aspect of culture " (17) by imaginative in-living, Einfühlung, somewhat after the model of Cooley's " sympathetic insight " or Weber's " verständliche Soziologie " and " Nacherlebbarkeit." Faris admits a probable structural basis of attitudes, but insists that the adjustment aspect of attitude is the datum of social psychology and as such is much more important than the hypothetical engram (18) With this, most would agree heartily.
The Gestaltists make frequent use of " attitude," yet the closest Köhler (27) comes to a definition is: "A change of attitude involves a definite physiological stress, exerted upon a sensory field. by processes originating in other parts of the nervous system " (p. 184).
(362) Attitudes are directed toward or away from objects (pp. 323 f). He speaks of analytical, emotional, indifferent, dynamical, and introspective attitudes. It is difficult for Köhler to understand how a "directed attitude " depends upon a definite physiological situation of the organism as is the case in hunger or sex, but he thinks it does.
Space precludes further theoretical discussion. The reader is referred to Section I, and especially to the bibliographic articles of K. Young (56), Bernard (5), House (24, 25), Roback (39), Faris (20), G. W. and F. H. Allport (58), G. W. Allport (2), Lundberg (70). The whole subject of motivation is ally presented and criticized by Sorokin (44).
Practically all -investigators agree that human motivation is largely in the realm of habit, even though these habits may be merely conditioned original action-patterns. However, the native part of the integration is important only as a substrate upon which the superstructure of habitudinal attitudes or traits may be built : Dewey (15), Bernard (5), G. W. Allport (1, 2), Prince (38), Hart (22), Watson (51), et al. The significant thing is that there is considerable stability and cultural uniformity in these adjustment responses. This leads to the attempt to measure. All measurement, and hence all exact science, depends upon relative stability and uniformity in the behavior of defined units. All units, however carefully defined, are variables. The problem of measurement is to find sufficient stability and uniformity among reciprocal variables regarded as (hypothetical) identical units so that mathematical statements (or generalizations) of this uniformity may he made. Such generalizations constitute scientific description and explanation. Phenomena are `` explained " scientifically when their uniformities are mathematically determined. Then prediction is possible. Thus, all accurate observation that does not result in generalizations of- prediction is merely preliminary to scientific explanation. Hence, a great deal of what passes for " scientific fact" and "scientific knowledge," by this criterion would be merely hypothesis.
It has proved to be a very fascinating, though difficult, mathematical problem to define the units and devise the techniques of measuring such complex variables as the types of behavior herein discussed. But it has not been insuperable. The references in Section II describe some of 'the more successful efforts. The techniques are in general the same as those long ago worked out by the biometric school and the " intelligence " testers, but some new corre-
( 363) -lation formulas have been devised and the methods of multiple and partial correlation are being found increasingly necessary.
As indicated above, the two possible approaches are to study (1) overt behavior and (2) verbal responses. It is obvious that the latter is the easier. The questionnaire disease is ample proof. There are two intermediate types of study between overt and verbal responses. One is to ask the subject to check from a list of specific acts those he has performed within a definite time. This is exemplified by the play studies of Lehman (210) and of Lehman and Witty (104, 105, 118). The other is the case study method: Shaw (158), Bogardus (126), Burgess (132, 133), Healy (139, 140), Kreuger (143, 144), Social Forces (159), et al., found in Section IV. In the first type, if the time interval is not too great, and the subjects are honest, and` the acts accurately defined, actual adjustment behavior may be determined. In the second method, the verbal responses may be evaluated by the skilled interviewer, and the statements verified later by actual factual investigation. But such materials need to be treated statistically before scientific generalizations can be made, as Shaw (158) and Bogardus (60) have shown. Bain (122) and Perry (34) and others have criticized life-history, case study and questionnaire methodology.
The attempts to measure opinions, or verbal attitudes, range all the way from the simple summation of judgments of true and false statements to very elaborate attempts to construct a rational scale of equal steps. Thurstone has developed the latter method to its highest point in a series of brilliant papers (81-84). His is really an elaboration and logical improvement on the earlier rank-order scales of F. H. Allport (168), Rice (109), and others. Hartshorne and May (64) constructed a scale of equal steps in terms of standard deviation on a normal curve. The fault of this method lies in the assumption that the opinions comprise a normal distribution as K. Young (54,56) has shown. Thurstone's method, by several ingenious devices, succeeds in establishing a statistically valid scale of equal' steps. But it is very laborious and costly. In one study (84) he had 200 persons sort Allport's questions and states' that there should be 500 or 600! It appears fairly easy to construct a reliable test of verbal opinions but. the problem of validation is more difficult. This commonly rests upon the judgment of raters in the last analysis, and they seldom agree closely, as Kornhauser (66, 67, 68) has shown. However, Thurstone's method seems to be the best so far devised.
( 364) G. W. Allport has suggested a method of validation that dispenses with raters (78).
The social distance studies of Bogardus (7, 9, 11, 60, 173-177, 245), Poole (36, 37), Shideler (79), Woolston (234), et al., arc merely variations of the rating method, though more informative than mere likes and dislikes. The extroversion-introversion tests depend upon self-rating, perhaps checked by interviews, as with Hewlett and Lester (65), or by taking the extreme statements as judged by raters (Conklin, 62).
In addition to the discussions of theory and technique of measurement by Thurstone, Rice, F. H. Allport, Hartshorne and May, mentioned above, one should consult the bibliographic reviews of measurement compiled by F. H. and G. W. Allport (58), Manson (71, 72), May and Hartshorne (73, 74), G. B. Watson (86), and the books by May and Hartshorne (99, 100), Rice (76, 109), Lundberg (70), Meltzer (75), and Terman (110), and the very valuable theoretical discussion by Kirkpatrick (65a). Good discussions of the shortcomings and dangers of statistical analysis are those of Cooley (135, 136), Lehman and Witty (69), and Burgess (132) .
May and Hartshorne (74), in the best discussion of tests, both as to classification and methodology, point out that tests seldom duplicate life situations. In an attempt to approximate this some studies have been made of actual overt adjustment behavior under controlled or uncontrolled situations. J. B. Watson (51, 117) was one of the pioneers in this field. Voelker (115) in an admirable study of dishonesty was another. May and Hartshorne in the studies mentioned have perhaps done the most notable work in this field. Blanchard and Paynter (242-244), Carmichael (93), Chapin (95), M. C. Jones (103), Lundberg (106, 107), D. S. Thomas et al. (111), Zimmerman (119), Rice (109), and others cited in Section III should be consulted. It is interesting to note that many of these studies are of the adjustment behavior of infants whose verbal responses are not highly developed.
It is also noteworthy that many of the studies in Section VI have approached, the question of changing attitudes by observing actual behavior, e.g.; Blanchard and Paynter (242-244), Hershey (248), M. C. Jones (249), Watson (256), Bogardus (245), Zeleny (261), Marston (251), Pearson (253), Tanquist (255). Verbal attitudes remain quite constant according to D. Young (259), Willey and Rice (258), and Rice (222). 'When verbal stereotypes are highly developed, they may remain intact, even after overt adjustment atti-
( 365) -tudes have changed. A nice theoretical explanation of this is offered by Pitkin (153, pp. 316-333) by pointing out the differing numerical magnitudes of cortical and muscular patterns. This is perhaps the structural basis of many " personality conflicts."
The materials in Sections III and VI are somewhat similar in that overt behavior tends to be the subject matter of both. Sections TV and V are also similar, both being based largely on verbal response. However, case study (IV) is somewhat intermediate because the verbal reports are " interpreted " more or less objectively by the investigator and also often checked by actual non-verbal behavior. A variety of case study dealing with the group or small institution, as advocated by Cooley (135, 136) and Bogardus (127), is illustrated by Angell (120), McClenahan (150), Lynd (147), Zorbaugh (166), and Rhyne (154). This method is really a combination of the methods of verbal response, Einfühlung, statistical tabulation and observation of overt behavior. It promises to increase in importance. Most of the life-history and case-study research, however, deals with individuals, usually maladjusted. This work is obviously more valuable for social art than for the science of sociology. Such generalizations as are valid are applicable only to relatively small classes of people. When inferences from such studies are made regarding the behavior of normally adjusted people, the results are likely to be quite dubious.
Most of the studies in Section V are mere tabulations of verbal responses, usually likes and dislikes, true and false, or preferences, though some of them are quite elaborately treated statistically. The fundamental work of F. H. Allport, Thurstone and Rice mentioned above is largely based on verbal responses, although Rice is concerned with more overt behavior in his studies of voting. One might argue that voting is really verbal whether one does it on a party ballot or on a rating scale. Yet it is one thing to study the election returns and quite another to ask people why they voted as they did or how they would vote for so and so and such and such. Political voting is much more nearly overt adjustment behavior than is " voting " on a classroom questionnaire.
While no comprehensive logical classification of the subject matter covered by the attitude studies listed below is attempted here, certain types may be pointed out. Space prohibits placing all the studies under appropriate headings even if that were logically possible. I have merely tried to indicate certain types of attitudes, traits, or interests that have been studied by several investigators. Definite
( 366) subdivisions under some of the headings could be made on the basis of studies already completed, as in " race and national," " vocational," " delinquency," etc., and eventually this will be necessary as the number and variety of such studies increase.
1. Racial and national attitudes: Arai (121), Lasker (145.), D. Young (259), P. V. Young (239), K. Young (57), Garrett (188), Bogardus (126, 128, 173, 177), Ravitch (218), Gibson (189), Lapiere (208), Woolston (234), Sunne (227), Reinhardt (219), Wu (235), W. I. Thomas (48), G. B. Johnson (102), Lehman and Witty (104).
2. Play and recreation attitudes: Lehman and Witty (105, 118), Verry (114), Alderson (167), Hurd (200), Lehman (210), Stoke and Cline (224).
3. Attitudes of family and children: Blanchard and Paynter (91, 242-244), L. G. Brown (131), M. C. Jones (103, 249) , Verry (113), Walker (116), Burgess (133), McChristie (148, 149), Nimkoff (151, 215), Sayles (155, 156), M. E. Watson (163), J. B. Watson and Raynor (117), Wembridge (164), Fenton (185), Gross (247), Rice (221), Wickman (232), Pearson (253), Zeleny (261).
4. Vocational interests and attitudes: W. A. Anderson (170), K. M. B. Bridges (92), Brotemarkle (180), Cowdery (183), Freyd (186), Pickett (216), Remmers (220), Lind (146), Hubbard (197), Strong (225, 226), Wilkinson (233), Zimmerman (119).
5. Political attitudes: G. W. Allport (169), F. H. Allport and Hartman (168), Lasswell (250), Lundberg (106, 107), Moore (213), Willey and Rice (258), Rice (109).
6. Religious attitudes: Bain (171), Calkins (134), Sheldon (42), J. R. Young (238), Zimmerman and C. A. Anderson (89).
7. Extroversion-introversion: Conklin (62, 182), Guthrie (191), Heidbreder (194, 195, 196), Hewlett and Lester (65), jasper (202), Marston (251).
8. Delinquency attitudes: Balch (124), Brietz (130), Fisher (137), Guilford (190), Haggerty (192), Healy (139), Healy and Bronner (140), Sayles (155, 156), Shaw (157), Sullenger (160), TeWater (162), Wembridge (164), P. V. and E. F. Young (165).
9. Honesty and right and wrong attitudes: Brogan (178), Carmichael (93), Chambers (94), Hartshorne and May (98, 99, 100), V. Jones (204), Terman (110), Voelker (115), G. B. Watson (231).
10. Composite, i.e., attitudes on various questions all confined in the same schedule, e.g., Brogan (178), Davis (184), Harper (63),
( 368) Hart (193), Jordan (205), Katz (206), Meltzer (75), Neumann (214), Sturges (254), Wyman (236), Zeleny (240), et al.
Many other interesting studies of the attitudes involved in specific personality traits such as G. W. Allport on ascendance-submission (59), J. W. Bridges on college emotional instability (61), Hawthorn, rural-urban personality (101), Morris, mendicancy (108), Hershey, periodic emotional changes (248), and studies of attitudes involved in certain typical social relations such as Binnewies on community spirit (90)., Chapin on volume of social stimuli (95), Clark on student interviews (96), Vance on cotton culture (112), E. F. Guthrie on personality crises (138), Tallman on college self-govern-ment (161), G. V. Drown on economic self-government (246), and others, should lie mentioned.
In conclusion, we may admit that the measurement of what G. B. Watson calls " the less tangible qualities " (85) has shown remarkable development in the last ten years, and at the sane time., insist tint match more remains to be clone, both in theory and practice. Many of the present scales are quite reliable but how valid they arc is a matter of doubt. Most of them have been validated by the rating method and Kornhauser's study of the fallibility of raters (66, 67, 68) merely confirms common experience. Thurstone's method of validation by rating, though costly and laborious, is the best one so far devised. Kornhauser's suggestion of trained raters might simplify the procedure somewhat and G. W. Allport's suggestion for dispensing with raters altogether (78) may prove feasible. Matthew (212) has shown that the order of the questions on a schedule produces a marked effect upon the nature of the replies, in some cases as high as 7 per cent. It is probable that the personality of investigator, the artificial social situation of the class-room, the time of day, condition of the weather, indifference or enthusiasm of subjects, imminence of exciting events such as football games, junior proms, etc., would also affect the results of verbal response attitude studies.
I think it is safe to say that the bulk of the work so far done has little value except to show how not to do it, to define difficulties, and thus indirectly to advance theory and technique. Most of the studies are chiefly fallible, I think, because they do not duplicate life situations (Cf. May and Hartshorne (74). The remedy would seem to be this: Attitude studies should be based upon actual adjustment behavior (Zimmerman et al., 88) and correlations of verbal and overt behavior. If significant correlations are found, then, for certain types of attitudes characteristic of certain classes of people, the verbal atti-
( 368) -tudes may have predictive value for actual adjustment behavior. Even if we find high uniformity in the verbal responses of a group at different times, or of different groups at the same time, we have no surety that a similar uniformity will be found between their verbal and adjustment behavior, especially when tabooed or ill-organized behavior is the subject of investigation. "Attitudes " that do not motivate adjustment (or maladjustment) have little significance for human beings.
SECTION 1: ATTITUDE THEORY
1. ALLPORT, G. W., The Study of the Undivided Personality: J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1924, 19, 132-141.
2. ALLPORT, G. W., Concepts of Trait and Personality. Psychol. Bull., 1927, 24, 284-293. (Bib.)
3. BAIN, READ, An Attitude on Attitude Research. Amer. J. of Sociol, 1928, 33, 940-957.
4. BAMFORD, E. F., A Study of Social Attitudes. Doctoral dissertation, 1928, Univ. of So. Calif., Los Angeles, Calif.
5. BERNARD, L. L., Introduction to Social Psychology. N. Y.: Holt, 1926. Pp. 246-261. (Bib., pp. 613-615.)
6. BOGARDUS, E. S., Personality and Occupational Attitudes. Sociol. and Soc. Res., 1927, 12, 73-79.
7. BOGARDUS, E. S., Social Distances Between Groups. J. Ap. Sociol., 1926, 10, 473-479.
8. BOGARDUS, E. S., Fundamentals of Social Psychology. N. Y.: Century, 1924, chapter V.
9. BOGARDUS, E. S., Occupational Distance. Sociol. and Soc. Res., 1928, 13, 73-81.
10. BOGARDUS, E. S., Social Distance in the City. Proc. Amer. Sociol. Soc., 1926, 20, 40-46.
11. BOGARDUS, E. S., Leadership and Social Distance. Sociol. and Soc. Res., 1927, 12, 173-178.
12. BOGARDUS, E. S., Leadership and Attitudes.' Social. and Soc. Res., 1929, 13, 376-381.
13. CATLIN, G. E. G., The Delimitation and Measurability of Political Phenomena. Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev., 1927, 21, 255-269.
14. CHAPIN, F. S., Cultural Change. N. Y.: Century, 1928. Pp. 425-437.
15. DEWEY, J., Human Nature and Conduct. N. Y.: Holt, 1922. Entire book.
16. FARIS, E., The Nature of Human Nature. Proc. Amer. Sociol. Soc., 1926, 20, 15-29.
17. FARIS, E., The Subjective Aspect of Culture.,, Proc. Amer. Sociol. Soc., 1925, 19, 37-46.
18. FARIS, E., Attitudes and Behavior. Amer. J. of Sociol., 1928, 34, 271-281.
19. FARIS, E., The Concept of Social Attitudes. J. of Ap. Social., 1925, 9, 404-409.
20. FARIS, E., Social Psychology in America; A Topical Summary of Current Literature. Amer. J. of Sociol., 1927, 32, 623-630. (Bib. review.)
21. FOLSOM, J. K., The Conditioned Response and Personality. Indus. Psychol., 1926, 1, 804-810.
22. HART, H., The Transformation of Motivation. Amer. J. of Sociol., 1930, 35, 588-600.
23. HOLT, E. B., The Freudian Wish. N. Y.: Holt, 1915. Esp. Chapters III and IV:
24. HOUSE, F. N., Wishes and Attitudes as Social Forces. Amer. J. of Sociol, 1926 31, 512-525.
25. HOUSE, F. N., The Range of Social Theory. N. Y.: Holt, 1929. Chapter XV, esp. pp. 192-199.
26. KERSHNER, J. H., Race Prejudice: A Form of Group Prejudice. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1927, 11, 446-452.
27. KÖHLER, W., Gestalt Psychology. N. Y.: H. Liveright, 1929. Pp. 184 ff, pp. 323 ff, and Chapters IX and X.
28. MARKEY, J. F., Trends in American Sociology. N. Y.: Harper, 1921. Pp. 126-135.
29, McKAY, H. D., The Development of Personality Traits. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of Chicago, 1930.
30. MILLER, KELLY, Is Race Prejudice Innate or Acquired? J. of Ap. Sociol., 1927, 11, 516-524.
31. NEWCOMB, R. G., An Analysis of the Concept Personality Type. M.A. Thesis, University of Chicago, 1929.
32. PARK, R. E., and BURGESS, E. W., Introduction to the Science of Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1924. Chapter VII, Social Forces, esp., pp. 438-1143.
33. PARK, R. E., The Concept of Social Distance. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1924, 8, 339-344.
34. PERRY, H. E., The Questionnaire Method. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1925, 10, 155-158.
35. POOLE, W. C., JR., and H. K., The Laws of Social Distance. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1927, 11, 365-369.
36. POOLE, W. C., JR., The Social Distance Margin Reviewed. Sociol. and Soc. Res,., 1928, 13, 49-54.
37. POOLE, W. C., JR., Social Distance and Personal Distance. J. of Ap. Sociol.,1926, 10, 114-120.
38. PRINCE., M., Why We Have Traits. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1929, 23, 422-433.
39. ROBACK, A. A., A Bibliography of Character and Personality. Cambridge: Harvard Uuiv. Press, 1927. (Most complete personality bib, to this date. )
40. ROOT, W. I., The Psychology of Radicalism. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1925, 19, 341-356.
41. RUSSELL, B., The Analysis of Mind. London: Allen and Unwin, 1921. Esp. pp. 58-76 and 77-92.
42. SHELDON, H. C., The Place of Autistic Mechanisms in the Institutional Formulations of Certain Divergent Sects. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. Of Wisconsin, 1930.
43. SMITH, W. C., The Rural Mind: A Study in Occupational Attitude. Amer. J. of Sociol., 1927, 32, 771-786.
44. SOROKIN, PITIRIM, Contemporary Sociological Theories. N. Y.: Harper, 1928. Chapter. XI, esp. pp. 644-659.
45. SYMONDS, P. M., The Nature of Conduct. N. Y.: Macmillan, 1928. Esp. pp. 216-239.
46. SYMONDS, P. M., What is an Attitude? Psychol. Bull., 1927, 24, 200-201. (Abstract.)
47. THOMAS, W. I., The Unadjusted Girl. Boston: Little, Brown, 1923. Pp. 1-69.
48. THOMAS, W. I., and ZNANIECKI, F., The Polish Peasant in America. Boston: Badger, 1918. Volume I, Methodological Note, pp. 1-86, and Introduction to Volume III, pp. 5-88.
49. THOMAS, W. I., The Problem Of Personality in the Urban Environment. Proc. Amer. Sociol. Soc., 1926, 20, 30-39.
50. WATSON, J. B., The Heart or the Intellect? Harper's Mag., 1928, 156, 345-352.
51. WATSON, J. B., Experimental Studies- On the Growth of Emotions (pp. 328-348), and Recent Experiments On How We Lose and Change Our Emotional Equipment. Ped. Sem., 1925, 32, 349-371.
52. WILLIAMS, J. M., The Principles of Social Psychology. N. Y.: Knopf, 1922. Chapter I.
53. WILLIS, W. C., The Measure of Social Attitudes. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1924, 8, 183-188.
54. YOUNG, K., The Measurement Of Personal and Social Traits. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1928, 22, 431-442. Abstract in Proc. Amer. Sociol. Soc., 1927, 21, 92-105.
55. YOUNG, K., The Field Of Social Psychology. Psychol. Bull., 1927, 24, 661691.
56. YOUNG, K., Topical Summary of Current Literature: Personality Studies. Amer. J. Sociol., 1927, 32, 952-971. (Bib. Of 189 references.)
57. YOUNG, K., The Social Psychology of Oriental-Occidental Prejudices. American Council of the Institute of Pacific Relations, 129 E. 52d St., New York, 1929, pp. 1-23.
SECTION II: MEASUREMENT: THEORY AND TECHNIQUE
58. ALLPORT, F. H. and G. W., Personality Traits: Their Classification and Measurement. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1921, 16, 6-40.
59. ALLPORT, G. W., A Test for Ascendance-Submission. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1928, 23, 118-136.
60. BOGARDUS, E. S., Measuring Social Distances. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1925, 9, 299-308.
61. BRIDGES, J. W., Emotional Instability Of College Students. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1927, 22, 227-234.
62. CONKLIN, E. S., The Determination Of Normal Extrovert-Introvert Interest Differences. Fed. Sem., 1927, 34, 28-37.
63. HARPER, M. H., Social Beliefs and Attitudes of American Educators. Columbia Univ., Teachers Coll. Cont. to Educ., 1927, NO. 294. Pp. 91.
64. HARTSHORNE, H., and MAY, M. A., First Steps Toward a Scale for Measuring Attitudes. J. of Educ. Psychol., 1926, 17, 145-162.
65. HEWLETT, T. C., and LESTER, O. P., Measuring Introversion and Extroversion. Personnel J., 1927, 6, 352-360.
65a. KIRKPATRICK, C. L., Statistical Method in Relation to Personality and Personality Maladjustment. To appear in Proceedings of the Amer. Sociol. Soc., 1930, 24t
66. KORNHAUSER, A. W., Reliability Of Average Ratings. Personnel J., 1926, 5, 309-317.
67. KORNHAUSER, A. W., A Comparison Of Raters. Personnel J., 1926, 5, 338-344.
68. KORNHAUSER, A. W., A Comparison Of Ratings On Different Traits. Personnel J., 1927, 5, 440-446.
69. LEHMAN, H. C., and WITTY, P. A., Statistics Show. J. of Educ. Psychol., 1928, 19, 175-184. (Bib.)
70. LUNDBERG, G. A., Social Research: A Study in the Methods Of Gathering Data. N. Y.: Longmans, 1929. Chapter IX, Measurement Of Attitudes. (Bib.)
71. MANSON, G. E., A Bibliography of the Analysis and Measurement Of Human Personality up to 1926. Nat. Res. Council Reprint, NO. 72, 1926.
72. MANSON, G. E., Bibliography on Psychological Tests and Other Objective Measures in Industrial Personnel. J. of Personnel Res., 1925, 4, 301328. (Classified bib., titles 539-650 esp. valuable.)
73. MAY, M. A., and HARTSHORNE, H., Personality and Character Tests. Psychol. Bull., 1926, 23, 395-411; (Bib. review) 1929, 24, 4181135; 1928, 25, 422-443; 1929, 26, 418-444.
74. MAY, M. A., and HARTSHORNE, H., Objective Methods Of Measuring Character. Ped. Sem., 1925, 32, 45-67. (Bib. revieW.)
75. MELTZER, H., Children's Social Concepts. Teachers Coll. Cont. to Educ., No. 192, 1925. Pp. 91.
76. RICE, S. A., and OTHERS, Statistics in Social Studies. To be published by University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 1930.
77. RICE, S. A., and WEAVER, W. W., The Verification of Social Measurements Involving Subjective Classifications. Social Forces, 1929, 8, 16-28.
78. RICE, S. A., Measurements Of Social Attitude and Public Opinion. U. S. Dept. of Agri., Bur. of Agri. Economics Bull., Feb., 1930, pp. 11-20. A similar paper to appear in P. A. S. S., 1930. Discussion by G. W. Allport, pp. 20-23.
79. SHIDELER, E. F., The Social Distance Margin. Sociol. and Sec. Res., 1928, 12, 243-252.
79a. STOUFFER, S. A., Experimental Comparison of Statistical and Case History Methods in Attitude Research. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. Of Chicago, 1930.
80. SYMONDS, P. M., The Present Status Of Character Measurement. J. of Educ. Psychol., 1924, 15, 484-498. (Bib.)
81. THURSTONE, L. L., and CHAVE, E.J., The Measurement of Attitude. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1929. Pp. 96.
82. THURSTONE, L. L., The Method of Paired Comparisons for Social Values. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1927, 21, 384-400.
83. THURSTONE, L. L-., Attitudes Can Be Measured. Amer. J. of Sociol., 1928, 33, 529-554.
84, THURSTONE, L. L., The Measurement of Opinion. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol, 1928, 22, 415-430.
85. WATSON, G. B., The Measurement of Less Tangible Qualities. Voc. Quid., 1926, 4, 281-289.
86. WATSON, G. B., A Supplementary Review of Measures of Personality. J. of Educ. Psychol., 1927, 18, 73-87.
87. WRIGHT, V. C., Analysis of Various Measures of Personality. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of Wisconsin, 1930.
88. ZIMMERMAN, C. C., SIMS, N. L., and HAMILTON, C. H., Social Attitudes. U. S. Department of Agri., Bur. of Agri. Econ. Bull., Feb., 1930, p. 9.
89. ZIMMERMAN, C. C., and ANDERSON, C. A., Attitudes of Rural Preachers Regarding. Church Union and Science: Sociol. and Soc. Res., 1927, 12, 144-150.
SECTION III: OVERT BEHAVIOR ATTITUDES.
90. BINNEWIES, W. G., The Measurement of Community Spirit. Sociol. and Soc. Res., 1928, 12, 264-267.
91. BLANCHARD, P., and PAYNTER, R. H., The Socio-Psychological Status of Children from Marginal Families. Family, 1927, 8, 3-10. .
92. BRIDGES, K. M. B., Occupational Interests of Three-year-old Children. Ped. Sem., 1927, 34, 415-423.
93. CARMICHAEL, A. M., To What Objective Stimuli do Six-year-old Children Respond with Intentional Misrepresentation of Facts? J. of Genetic Psychol., 1928, 35, 73-83.
94. CHAMBERS, E. V., A Study of Dishonesty Among the Students of a Parochial Secondary School. Ped. Sem., 1926, 33, 717-728.
95. CHAPIN, F. S., Measuring the Volume of Social Stimuli: A Study in Social Psychology. Social Forces, 1926, 4, 479-495.
96. CLARK, E. L., The Value of Student Interviews. J. Pers. Res., 1926, 5, 204-207.
97. FRYER, D., Predicting Abilities from Interest. J. of Ap. Psychol., 1927, 11, 212-225. (Short bib.)
98. HARTSHORNE, H., and MAY, M. A., ET AL., Testing the Knowledge of. Right and Wrong. Relig. Educ., 1926, 21, 539-554.
99. HARTSHORNE, H., and MAY, M. A., Studies in Service and Self-Control. N. Y.: Macmillan, 1929.
100. HARTSHORNE, H., and MAY, M. A., Studies in.Deceit. N. Y.: Macmillan, 1928.
101. HAWTHORN, H. B., Methods of Studying Personality Developments in Rural and Urban Groups. Proc. Amer. Sociol. Soc., 1929, 23, 274-283.
102. JOHNSON, G. B., Newspaper Advertisements and Negro Culture. Soc. Forces, 1925, 3, 706-709.
103. JONES, M. C., The Elimination of Children's Fears. J. of Exper. Psychol., 1924, 7, 382-390.
104. LEHMAN, H. C., and WITTY, P. A., Some Compensatory Mechanisms of the Negro. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1928, 23, 28-37.
105. LEHMAN, H. C., and WITTY, P. A., Play Interests as Evidences of Sex Differences in Aesthetic Appreciations. Amer. J. of Psychol., 1928, 40, 449-457.
106. LUNDBERG, G. A., The Demographic and Economic Basis of Political Radicalism and Conservatism. Amer. J. of Sociol., 1927, 32, 719-732.
107. LUNDBERG, G. A., The Newspaper and Public Opinion. Soc. Forces, 1926, 4, 709-715.
108. MORRIS, A., Some Social and Mental Aspects of Mendicancy. Soc. Forces, 1927, 5, 605-613.
109. RICE, S. A., Quantitative Methods in Politics. N. Y.: Knopf, 1928. (Chapters III and IV are esp. good on theory of measurement.)
110. TERMAN, L. M., Tests of Character and Personality Traits, Chapter XVII, pp. 485-517, and Trait Ratings, Chapter XVIII, pp. 518-555, in Volume I, Genetic Studies of Genius. Palo Alto: Stanfard Univ. Press, 1925.
111. THOMAS, D. S., ET AL., Some New Techniques for Studying Social Behavior, N. Y.: Child Delinquency Mono., No. 1, 1929.
112. VANCE, R. B., Cotton Culture and Social Life and Institutions of the South. Proc. Amer. Sociol. Soc., 1929, 23, 50-59.
113. VERRY, E. E., A Study of Personality in Pre-School Groups. Soc. Forces, 1925, 3, 645-648.
114. VERRY, E. E., A Study of Mental and Social Attitudes in the Free-Play of Pre-School Children. M.A. thesis, Univ. of Iowa.
115. VOELKER, P. F., The Function of Ideals and Attitudes in Social Education. Teachers Coll. Cont. Educ., No. 112, 1921. Pp. 126.
116. WALKER, M., A Study of Interaction in Young Children with Special Reference to Subordination and Domination. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of Minnesota, 1929.
117. WATSON, J. B., and RAYNOR, R., Studies in Infant Psychology. Scient. Mon., 1921, 13, 493-515.
118. WITTY, P. A., and LEHMAN, H. C., The Play Behavior of Fifty Gifted Children. J. of Educ. Psychol., 1927, 18, 259-265.
119. ZIMMERMAN, C. C., Types of Farmers' Attitudes. Soc. Forces, 1927, 5, 591-596.
SECTION IV: CASE STUDY METHODS AND ATTITUDES
120. ANGELL, R. C., The Campus: A Study of Contemporary Undergraduate Life in the American University. N. Y.: Appleton, 1928. Pp. 239.
121. ARAI, C., Cultural Conflicts in Homes of the Second-Generation Japanese. M.A. thesis, University of Washington, 1929.
122. BAIN, READ, The Validity of Diaries and Life-Histories. J. of Educ. Sociol., 1929, 3, 150-164.
123. BAIN, READ, The Impersonal Confession and Social Research. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1925, 9, 351-356.
124. BALCH, E., Relationship of Social Case History to the Diagnosis and Treatment of Juvenile Delinquency. M.A. thesis, Univ. of So. Calif., 1927.
125. BELLMAN, E. S., Men's Attitudes Toward Outside Activities of Married Women. M.A. thesis, Univ. of Kansas, 1929.
126. BOGARDUS, E. S., Immigration and Race Attitudes. N. Y.: Heath, 1928. Esp. Chapters II, III, VIII, IX.
127. BOGARDUS, E. S., Community Life Histories. J. of Ap. Social., 1927, 11, 370-378.
128. BOGARDUS, E. S., American Attitudes Toward Filipinos. Social. and Soc. Res., 1929, 14, 59-69.
129. BOGARDUS, E. S., Exploring for the Causes of Crime. Soc. Forces, 1925, 3, 464-466.
130. BRIETZ, M., Case Studies of Delinquent Girls in North Carolina. M.A. thesis, Univ. of N. Car., 1928.
131. BROWN, L. G., The Development of Diverse Patterns of Behavior Among Children of the Same Family. Family, 1928, 9, 35-39.
132. BURGESS, E. W., Statistics and Case Studies. 'Soc. and Soc. Res., 1927, 12, 103-120.
133. BURGESS, E. W., The Family and the Person. Proc. Amer. Social. Soc., 1928, 22, 133-143.
134. CALKINS, D. M., The Social Background and Development of Religious Attitudes of a Selected Group. M.A. thesis, Univ. of So. Calif., 1927.
135. COOLEY, C. H., The Case Study of Small Institutions as a Method of Research. Proc. Amer. Social. Soc., 1928, 22, 123-132.
136. COOLEY, C. H., The Life-Study Method as Applied to Rural Social Research. Proc. Amer. Social. Soc., 1929, 23, 248-254.
137. FISHER, L., A Study of the Life-Histories of Twenty Delinquent Girls. M.A. thesis, Univ. of So. Calif., 1927.
138. GUTHRIE, E. F., Crises in Personality. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of Washington, 1930.
139. HEALY, W., and BRONNER, A. F., Case Studies. Judge Baker Foundation, 1922-23, Boston.
140. HEALY, W., The Individual Delinquent. Boston: Little, Brown, 1920. Esp. Book I, pp. 3-182.
141. HOFFMAN, O. F., The Nature of Life-Histories. J. of Ap. Social., 1926, 11, 147-159.
142. JOCHER, K., The Case Method in Social Research. Soc. Forces, 1928, 7, 203-211. (Bib.)
143. KREUGER, E. F., The Values of Life-History Documents for Social Research. J. of Ap. Social., 1925, 9, 196-201.
144. KREUGER, E. F., The Technique of Securing Life-History Documents. J. of Ap. Social., 1925, 9, 290-298.
145. LASKER, B., Race Attitudes in Children. N. Y.: Holt, 1929, xvi + 394 pp.
146. LIND, A. W., Occupational Attitudes of Orientals in Hawaii. Sociol., and Soc. Res., 1929, 13, 245-255.
147. LYND, R. S. and H. M., Middletown, a Study in Contemporary American Culture. N. Y.: Harcourt, 1929.
148. MCCHRISTIE, M. E., That Blamed Old Fool. Survey, 1929, 63, 21 ff.
149. MCCHRISTIE, M. E., Peg's Permanent. Survey, 1930, 63, 510 ff.
150. MCCLENAHAN, B. A., The Changing Urban Neighborhood: A Sociological Study. Univ. of So. Calif. Stud., Social Science Series, 1929, No. 1, xi+140.
151. NIMKOFF, M., The Rôle of the Family in the Formation and Development of Certain Social Attitudes Among Children. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of So. Calif., 1928.
152. ODUM, H. W., and JOCHER, K., Introduction to Social Research. N. Y.: Holt, 1929. Esp. Chapter XV.
153. PITKIN, W. B., The Psychology of Happiness. N. Y.: Simon and Schuster, 1929. (See pp. 33-41 for attitudes.)
154. RHYNE, J.. J., A Case Study of Five Hundred Mill-Village Families. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of N. Car., 1927.
155. SAYLES, M. B., The Problem Child in School: Narratives from Case Records of Visiting Teachers. N. Y.: Joint Com. on Meths. of Preventing Delinquency, 1925, p. 287.
156. SAYLES, M. B., The Problem Child at Home: A Study in Parent-Child Relationships. N. Y.: Commonwealth Fund, 1928. Pp. x+342.
157. SHAW, C. R., Family Background in Male Juvenile Delinquency. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of Chicago, 1930.
158. SHAW, C. R., Case Study Method. Proc. Amer. Social. Soc., 1927, 21, 149-157.
159. Social Forces, 1928, 6, 524-569. Technique of Interviewing, esp. articles by E. W. BURGESS, L. B. SWIFT, T. D. ELLIOT, S. A. QUEEN, HELEN MYRICK, and J. C. COLCORD.
160. SULLENGER, T. E., Social Determinants of Juvenile Delinquency. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of Chicago, 1930.
161. TALLMAN, L., Attitudes of College Students Toward Self-Government. M.A. thesis, Univ. of So. Calif., 1927.
162. TEWATER, M., Analyses with Source Materials Illustrating the Attitude of Parents, Teachers and Others as Contributing Factors in the Development of the Problem Child Situations. M.A. thesis, Univ. of So. Calif:, 1927.
163. WATSON, M. E., Factors in the Emotional Lives of Parents which Affect the Behavior of Children. Doctoral dissertation, N. Y. Univ. School of Educ., 1930.
164. WEMBRIDGE, E. R., Other People's Daughters. Boston : Houghton Mifflin, 1926. Pp. ix+333.
165. YOUNG, P. V. and E. F., Getting at the Boy Himself: Through the Personal Interview. Soc. Forces, 1928, 6, 408-415.
166. ZORBAUGH, K W., The Gold Coast and the Slum. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1929.
SECTION V : VERBAL ATTITUDES (OPINIONS)
167. ALDERSON, C. J., Social Attitudes of Athletes. M.A. thesis, Univ. of Texas, 1927.
168. ALLPORT, F. H., and HARTMAN, D. A., The Measurement of Atypical Opinion in a Certain Group. Amer. Pol. Sei. Rev., 1925, 19, 735-760.
169. ALLPORT, G. W., The Composition of Political Attitudes. Amer. J. of Sociol., 1929, 35, 220-238.
170. ANDERSON, W. A., The Occupational Attitudes and Choices of a Group of College Men. Soc. Forces, 1927, 6, 278-283; 1928, 6, 467-473.
171. BAIN, READ, Religious Attitudes of College Students. Amer. J. of Sociol., 1927, 32, 762-770.
172. BINNEWIES, W. G., A Method of Studying Rural Social Distance. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1926,.10, 239-242.
173. BOGARDUS, E. S., Race Friendliness and Social Distance. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1927, 11, 272-287.
174. BOGARDUS, E. S., Static Social Distance. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1927, 11, 579583.
175. BOGARDUS, E. S., Social Distance and. Its Origins. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1925, 9, 216-226.
176. BOGARDUS, E. S., Analyzing Changes in Public Opinion. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1925, 9, 372-381.'
177. BOGARDUS, E. S., Sex Differences in Racial Attitudes. Sociol. and Soc. Res., 1928, 12, 279-285,
178. BROGAN, A. P., Moral Valuations About Men and Women. Int. J. of Ethics, 1925, 35, 105-124.
179. BROGAN, A. P., What Is a Sin in College? Nation, 1925, 120, 570-571.
180. BROTEMARKLE, R. A., The Analytical Study of the Student Personnel Problem. J. of Ap. Psychol., 1928, 13, 1-42.
181. CLARK, W. W., The Measurement of Social Attitudes. J. of Ap. Social., 1924, 8, 345-354.
182. CONKLIN, E. S., Some Mental Effects of Menstruation. Ped. Sem., 1927, 34, 557-567.
183. COWDERY, K. M., The Measurement of Professional Attitudes: Differences Between Lawyers, Physicians, and Engineers. J. Person. Res., 1926, 5, 131-141.
184. DAVIS, J., Testing the Social Attitudes of Children in the Government Schools in Russia. Amer. J. of Sociol., 1927, 32, 947-952.
185. FENTON, N., The Only Child. J. of Genetic Psychol., 1928, 35. 546-555.
186. FREYD, M., The Measurement of Interests in Vocational Selection. J. of Person. Res., 1922, 1, 319-328.
187. GARRETT, H. E., Personality as "Habit Organization." J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1926, 21, 250-255.
188. GARRETT, H. E., Jews and Others: Some Group Differences in Personality, Intelligence and College Achievement. Person. J., 1928, 7, 341-348.
189. GIBSON, W. I., Comparative Study of the Immigrant and Negro Press in Their Relation to Social Attitudes. M.A. thesis, Ohio.State Univ., 1927.
190. GUILFORD, J. P., An Attempted Study of Emotional Tendencies in Criminals. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1926, 21, 240-244.
191. GUTHRIE, E. R., Measuring Introversion and Extroversion. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1927, 22, 82-88. (Bib.)
192. HAGGERTY, M. E., The Incidence of Undesirable Behavior in Public School Children. J. of Educ. Res., 1925, 12, 102-122.
193. HART, H., A Test of Social Attitudes and Interests. Univ. of Iowa Studies Child Welfare, II, No. 4, 1923, pp. 40. (Good bib.)
194. HEIDBREDER, E. F., The Normal Inferiority Complex. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1927, 22, 243-258.
195. HEIDBREDER, E. F., Introversion and Extroversion in Men and Women. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1927, 22, 52-61.
196. HEIDBREDER, E. F., Measuring Introversion and Extroversion. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1926, 21, 120-134.
197. HUBBARD, R. M., Interest Studied Quantitatively. J. of Personal Res., 1926, 4, 365-378.
198. HUGHES, W. H., Relation of Intelligence to Trait Characteristics. J. of Educ. Psychol., 1926, 17, 482-494.
199. HULL, C. L., Variability in the Amount of Different Traits Possessed by the Individual. J. of Educ. Psychol., 1927, 18, 97-106.
200. HURD, F., Influence of the Motion Picture on Attitudes. M.A. thesis, Dartmouth College, 1929.
201. HYPES, J. L., The Social Distance Score-Card as a Teaching Device. Soc.Forces, 1928, 7, 234-237.
202. JASPER, H. H., Optimism and Pessimism in College Engineers. Amer. J.of Sociol., 1929, 34, 856-873.
203. JONES, E. S., Opinions of College Students. J. of Ap. Psychol., 1926, 10, 427-436.
204. JONES, V., Disagreement Among Teachers as to Right and Wrong. Teachers Coll. Rec., 1929, 31, 24-26.
205. JORDAN, F., A Study of Personal and Social Traits, in Relation to High School Teaching. J. of Educ. Sociol., 1929, 3, 27-43.
206. KATZ, D., Student Opinion at Syracuse. Person. J., 1929, 7, 103-110.
207. KORNHAUSER, A. W., Results from a Quantitative Questionnaire on Likes Dislikes Used with a Group of College Freshmen. J. of Ap. Psychol., 1927, 11, 85-94.
208. LAPIERE, R. T., Race Prejudice: France and England. Soc. Forces, 1928, 7, 102-111.
209. LEE, A. S., Attitudes as a Factor of Teaching in Normal Schools. J. of Educ. Sociol., 1928, 2, 232-238.
210. LEHMAN, H. C., I, Play Activities of Persons of Different Ages, 250-272; II, Growth Stages in Play Behavior, 273-287; III, A Comparison of the Play Activities of Town and Country Children, 455-476; IV, Community Differences in Play Behavior, 477-490; all in Ped. Sem., 1926, 33.
211. LUNDBERG, G. A., Sex Differences on Social Questions. Sch. and Soc., 1926, 23, 596-600.
212. MATHEWS, C. O., The Effect of the Order of Printed Response Words on an Interest Questionnaire. J. of Educ. Psychol., 1929, 20, 128-134.
213. MOORE, H. T., Innate Factors in Redicalism and Conservatism. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1925, 20, 234-244.
214. NEUMANN, G. B., A Study of Interest Attitudes of High School Students. Teachers Coll. Contri. to Educ., No. 239, 1926, pp. 126.
215. NIMKOFF, M. F., Parent-Child Intimacy : An Introductory Study. Soc. Forces, 1928, 7, 244-249.
216. PICKETT, J., Occupational Attitudes of Teachers in Relation to Their Social Status and Leadership in the Community. M.A. Thesis, Univ. of So. Calif., 1929.
217. QUIROLGICO, J. R., An Analysis of Social Attitudes. M.A. thesis, Univ. of So. Calif., 1929.
218. RAVITCH, J., Relative Rate of Change in Customs and Beliefs of Modern Jews. Proc. Amer. Sociol. Soc., 1925, 19, 171-176.
219. REINHARDT, J. M., Students and Race Feeling. Survey, 1928, 61, 239-240.
220. REMMERS, H. H., The Measurement of Interest Differences Between Students of Engineering and Agriculture. J. of Ap. Psychol., 1929, 13, 105-119.
221. RICE, S. A., Undergraduate Attitudes Toward Marriage and Children. Ment. Hyg., 1929, 13, 788-793.
222. RICE, S. A., Stereotypes : A Source of Error in Judging Human Character. J. of Person. Res., 1926, 5, 267-276.
223. SHUTTLEWORTH, F. K., A New Method of. Measuring Character Traits. Sch. and Soc., 1924, 19, 679-682.
224. STOKE, S. M., and CLINE, W. F., The Avocations of One Hundred College Freshmen. J. of Ap. Psychol., 1929, 13, 257-265.
225. STRONG, E. K., Interest Analysis of Personnel Managers. J. of Person.. Res., 1926, 5, 335-342.
226. STRONG, E. K., An Interest Test for Personnel Managers. J. of Person. Res., 1926, 5, 194-203.
227 SUNNE, D., Personality Tests: White and Negro Adolescents. J. of Ap. Psychol., 1925, 9, 256-280.
228. SYMONDS, P. M., A Social Attitudes Questionnaire. J. of Educ. Psychol.,. 1925, 16, 316-322.
229. THOMAS, D. V., An Analysis of Student Attitudes in Relation to Campus Social Organization. M.A. thesis, 1927, Univ. of Nebraska.
230. TRAVIS, R. C., The Measurement of Fundamental Character Traits by a New Diagnostic Test. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1925, 19, 400-420.
231. WATSON, G. B., The Measurement of Fairmindedness. Teachers Coll. Contr. to Educ., No. 176, 1925, pp. 97.
232. WICKMAN, E.. K., Children's Behavior and Teachers' Attitudes. Joint Com. on Meths. of Preventing Delinquency, N. Y., 1928.
233. WILKINSON, F., Social Distance Between Occupations. Sociol. and Soc.. Res., 1929, 13, 234-244.
234. WOOLSTON, H., Stepbrothers: A Study of Prejudice and Convention. Soc. Forces, 1928, 6, 368-375.
235. WU, C. L., Attitudes Toward Negroes, Jews and Orientals. Doctoral, dissertation, Ohio State University, 1927. ,
236. WYMAN, J. B., Tests of Intelligence, Social and Activity Interests. Chapter XVI, pp. 455-483, of Terman, et al., Genetic Studies of Genius, Volume I. Palo Alto: Stanford Univ. Press, 1925.
237. YOAKUM, C. S., and MANSON, G. E., Self-Ratings as a Means of Determining Trait-Relationships and Relative Desirability. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1926, 21, 52-64.
238. YOUNG, J. R., The Changing Attitudes of Adolescents Toward Religion and the Church. Relig. Educ., 1929, 24, 775-778.
239. YOUNG, P. V., Occupational Attitudes and Values of Russian Lumber Workers. Sociol. and Soc. Res., 1928, 12, 543-553.
240. ZELENY, L. D., A Measure of Social Opinions of Students. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1926, 11, 56-64.
SECTION VI: CHANGING ATTITUDES AND OPINIONS
241. BERNAYS, E. L., Manipulating Public Opinion: The Why and the How. Amer. J. of Sociol., 1928, 33, 958-971.
242. BLANCHARD, P., and PAYNTER, R. H., The Educational Achievement of Children with Personality and Behavior Difficulties. Joint Corn. on Meths. of Preventing Delinquency, N. Y., 1928.
243. BLANCHARD, P., and PAYNTER, R. H., Changing the Child's Behavior by Direct Methods. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1925, 9, 425-436.
244. BLANCHARD, P., and PAYNTER, R. H., Changing the Child's Behavior by Indirect Methods. J. of Ap. Social., 1925, 9, 338-350.
24$. BOGARDUS, E. S., Mutations of Social Distance. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1926, 11, 77-84.
246. BROWN, G. V., A Study of Changes in Social Attitudes: With particular reference to the Columbia Conserve Company. M.A. thesis, Univ, of Cincinnati, 1929.
247. GROSS, A. J., The Family as a Builder of Social Attitudes. M.A. thesis, Baylor Univ.
248. HERSHEY, R. B., Periodic Emotional Changes in Male Workers. Person. J., 1929, 7, 459-464.
249. JONES, M. C., Conditioning and Unconditioning Emotions in Infants.. Childhood Educ., 1925, 1, 317-322.
250. LASS WELL, H. D., The Theory of Political Propaganda. Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev., 1927, 31, 627-231.
251. MARSTON, L. R., The Emotions of Young Children : An Experimental Study in Introversion and Extroversion. Univ. of Iowa Stud. in Child Welfare, III, 1925. Pp. 99.
252. MYRICK, H. L., and SHEFFIELD, A. E., Reflective By-Products of a Social. Treatment Interview. Soc. Forces, 1925, 3, 657-665.
253. PEARSON, R. R., The Social Modification of Possession Habits at the PreSchool Level. Doctoral dissertation, 1929, Univ. of Chicago.
254. STURGES, H. A., The Theory of Correlation Applied in Studies of Changing Attitudes. Amer. J. of Sociol., 1927, 33, 269-275.
255. TANQUIST, M. R., An Experimental Study of the Effects of Competition and Equal and Unequal Remuneration on the Efficiency of the Work of Children Between Five and Seven Years of Age. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of Minnesota, 1930.
256. WATSON, J. B., Behaviorism: A Psychology Based on Reflexes. Arch. Neural. and Psychiat., 1926, 15, 185-202.
257. WATSON, J. B., The Myth of the Unconscious. Harper's Mag., 1927, 155, 502-508.
258. WILLEY, M. M., and RICE, S. A., William Jennings Bryan as a Social Force. Soc. Forces, 1924, 2, 338-344.
259. YOUNG, D., Some Effects of a Course in American Race Problems on the Race Prejudice of Four Hundred and Fifty Undergraduates of the University of Pennsylvania. J. of Abnor. and Soc. Psychol., 1927, 22, 235-242.
260. YOUNG, P. V. and E. J., Mutation of Personality. J. of Ap. Sociol., 1925, 9, 442-449.
261. ZELENY, L. D., Pupil-Teacher Relationships. Social. and Soc. Res., 1929, 13, 265-275.