gilbert hartmann lapiere

2 min read 02-12-2024

Richard LaPiere's groundbreaking study in the 1930s, often referred to as the LaPiere Paradox, continues to fascinate and challenge social psychologists today. While less known, Gilbert Hartmann's work significantly contributes to our understanding of this fascinating phenomenon.

The LaPiere Paradox: A Brief Overview

In the early 1930s, Richard LaPiere conducted a field experiment that challenged prevailing assumptions about the relationship between attitudes and behavior. Traveling with a Chinese couple across the United States, he observed that they were only refused service at one establishment out of 251. However, when he later sent questionnaires to the same establishments, a significant majority reported that they would refuse service to Chinese people. This discrepancy—the difference between expressed attitudes and actual behavior—became known as the LaPiere Paradox.

The Role of Context and Situational Factors

LaPiere's study highlighted the critical influence of context and situational factors on behavior. The presence of LaPiere himself, a white American, and the pleasant demeanor of the Chinese couple likely played a significant role in the positive treatment they received. This underscores that expressed attitudes, often gathered in abstract or hypothetical scenarios, may not accurately predict real-world behavior.

Gilbert Hartmann's Contributions

While LaPiere's research laid the foundation, Gilbert Hartmann's subsequent work offered crucial insights and nuances to the paradox. Hartmann explored the complexities of attitude-behavior relationships, focusing on the various factors that contribute to the discrepancies observed by LaPiere. His work expanded on the understanding of:

1. The Specificity of Attitudes:

Hartmann emphasized the importance of the level of specificity in measuring attitudes. Broad, general attitudes (e.g., "I dislike Chinese people") may not accurately predict behavior in specific situations (e.g., serving a Chinese couple in a restaurant). His work underscored the need for more precise attitude measurement to better understand the attitude-behavior link.

2. The Role of Social Norms:

Hartmann's research incorporated the influence of social norms and situational pressures on behavior. He argued that the presence of a respected figure like LaPiere might have influenced the behavior of the establishments, overriding their prejudiced attitudes.

3. The Methodological Limitations of LaPiere's Study:

While acknowledging the significance of LaPiere's work, Hartmann also pointed out methodological limitations. He suggested that the time lapse between the actual visit and the mailed questionnaires could have influenced the responses.

Conclusion: A Lasting Legacy

Both LaPiere and Hartmann's work profoundly impacted social psychology. While the LaPiere Paradox is not easily resolved, it continues to remind us of the complexities in human behavior and the limitations of relying solely on self-reported attitudes to predict actions. The need for considering contextual factors, the specificity of attitudes, and the influence of social norms remains a crucial aspect of modern social psychological research. Understanding this paradox continues to be relevant to understanding biases, prejudice, and the complexities of human interaction.