THE AUSTRALIAN IMAGE OF FRANCE AND THE FRENCH
An investigation conducted in the Sydney Metropolitan Area
Submitted for the degree of Ph.D. in the School of French University of New South Wales
By: Vera Sauran
June 1971 UNIVERSITY OF N.S .w.
30351 -3. MAY 72 i LIBRARY -ii-
ABSTRACT
This thesis is an investigation of the
Australian images of and attitudes towards France and
the French. The field survey work upon which it is
based was carried out in the S3^dney Metropolitan Area
in 1968 and comprised six hundred structured inter views, designed to quantify the insights derived from
intensive interviews with a smaller sample.
The work falls within the frame of ethnic imagery. It introduces social values into the
analysis, with the assumption that ethnic perceptions and attitudes are, partly, a function of the social
norms held by the perceiving group. It is this •emphasis on social values which differentiates the
present study from most interethnic imagery studies
in Australia and overseas.
For methodological reasons, the investiga
tion used two other nationalities and polities as
terms of comparison with the French and France. Al- -iii- though its primary interest lies in the French, the analysis thus covers also the images Australians have of the Germans and Germany and the Italians and Italy.
Because the classical techniques for the investigation of ethnic images and attitudes did not fully suit the triple objective of the study - to describe the images per se, to measure the corresponding affective orientations of the perceiving group towards the foreign groups, to reveal the cultural values em bedded in the judgment of the foreign groups - a rel atively new and untried Fishbein-type scale was used.
Experimentation with.this scale thus became an additional issue in this project.
The survey showed that the French, as a group, are generally more liked by Australians than either the Italians or the Germans. The latter, however, are the most admired of the three.
Greater admiration for the Germans was pre dicted from Australian social values elicited in the survey. Whereas 'puritan’ qualities of hard work, drive, self-control, etc. associated with the Germans are highly rated, none of the outstanding character- -iv-
istics believed to be ’typical’ of the French enjoy
strong regard or respect. The relative lack of
admiration for the French v/as reinforced by a certain
animosity Australians felt for France, the polity,
at the time of the survey.
The Fishbein scale proved a practical tool
in establishing the evaluative judgments attached to
ethnic images and in quantifying the strength of
beliefs forming these images. The comparison between
the Fishbein scale of attitude and other scales
suggests that the former is a better indicator of
feelings of admiration than of liking when there is a degree of independence between the two dimensions. -v-
G-rateful acknowledgement is made of the financial assistance extended by the Faculty of Arts of the University of New South Wales, the Social Research Council of Australia and ’The Australian’ newspaper.
The author is also greatly indebted to Dr. N. Solntseff, who was responsible for the computer programme. ~vi-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ...... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... v
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... vi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ...... 1 CHAPTER II THE INVESTIGATION - ISSUES AND SCOPE .. 8
1. Psycho-dynamic vs cognitive systems.... 8 2. The image concept ...... 11 3. The field survey approach ...... 17 4. The ecological and socio-culturai approach 19 5. The question of saliency of France and the French in Australian minds ...... 22 6. The Germans and Italians as terms of comparison ...... 26 7. The time factor and the French image .. 27 8. How unique is the Australian image of the French? ...... 30 9. Summary of research questions ..... 31
CHAPTER III. REVIEW OF RESEARCH AND WRITINGS RELATING TO ETHNIC IMAGE AND ATTITUDE INVESTIGATIONS ...... 33
1. Conceptual distinction between image and attitude ...... 35 2. Attitude or attitudes ...... 37 3. Operational definition of attitudes and beliefs ...... 39 4. Relationships between sociological variables and beliefs and attitudes ... 43 5. Relationship between contact with foreign groups and attitudes ...... 46 -vii-
6. Cultural factors in inter-group beliefs and attitudes ...... 48 7. Interaction between the images of foreign people and the images of their countries ...... 51 8. 'True’ beliefs and attitudes and interviewing techniques ...... 52 9. Classical attitudes scales and the need for a different approach ...... 56
CHAPTER IV THE SURVEY DESIGN ...... 65
1. The stages of the enquiry ...... 65 2. The sampling procedures ...... 66 3. Interviewing methods and techniques ... 70 4. Detailed findings ...... 78
CHAPTER V PERCEPTIONS BETRAYING THE PERCEIVER: AUSTRALIAN BEHAVIOUR AND VALUES ...... 80
1. The interviewing situation and respondent behaviour ...... 81 2. The Australian self-image ...... 89 3. Australian values underlying beliefs about foreign people and foreign countries ...... 109
CHAPTER VI THE FRENCH AND FRANCE THROUGH AUSTRALIAN EYES ...... 128
1. The frame of reference of the image ... 128 2. Dimensional simplicity ...... 130 3. Image content: the French ...... 134 4. France, the country ... 173 5. Relation between demographic variables and beliefs ...... 190 6. The relationship between degree of liking and degree of admiration and the image of France and the French .... 202 vixx
CHAPTER VII THE GERMANS AND THE ITALIANS IN RELATION TO THE FRENCH
1 Italian and German performance as migrants ...... 204
2 Image content: the Italians ...... 211
3 Image content: Italy ...... 227
4 Image content: the Germans ...... 232
5 Image content: Germany ...... 252
CHAPTER VIII THE STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS AND THEIR MEASUREMENT OF ATTITUDES ‘ " 264
1 Section 1: the self-rating scales ... 266
2 Section 2: The F&shbein scales ...... 290
3 Comparison between the two self-rating scales, the Fishbein scales and the in- depth interviews ...... 305
CHAPTER IX FRANCE AND THE FRENCH THROUGH THE EYES OF OTHER NATIONALITIES * “ 313
.1 ■ ■ CHAPTER X CONCLUSIONS ' 321 I. INTRODUCTION
Katz and Braly's pioneer study of racial stereo- types captured the interest of social psychologists and stimulated a plethora of replications and novel approaches in the field of ethnic imagery. For over three decades theoretical as well as applied investi gations have probed into the elusive individual and group representations, feelings and verbal descriptions attached to ethnic groups. The spectrum of interests which motivated the investigators has extended over a broad range of intellectual curiosities and practical aims.
A better understanding of the judgmental processes involved in the foreign student's perceptions of his host country (Selltiz, 1955); the reduction of inter-
1. D. Katz and W.D. Braly, 'Racial Stereotypes of 100 College Students', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1950, 30, 175-193. 2. C. Selltiz, Judgmental Process in Inter-ethnic Perception. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ann Arbor, Michigan University, 1961. -2- group prejudice and tensions (U.N.E.S.C.0., 1953 and
•X 1960);^ providing business executives with a marketing tool (a ’Reader’s Digest’ study of the Common Market countries' images of one another);^- these are three illustrations of the many aims which have prompted the psychologist, the sociologist and the economist to look into people’s minds and extract the pictures they contain of groups foreign to their own.
Lately, historians, and what the French call ’les litteraires ’ , have joined the social scientists and started a new branch of investigation. Under the name of 'imagology' French academics practice the art and science of extracting the image of a country embedded in a foreign writer's literary work or in the archives of a given period.
For me, the question 'What images do Australians have of France and the French?’ arose, quite prosaically, from a series of personal experiences. We all know how some people exploit the physicians or psychiatrists they
3. W. Buchanan and C. Cantril, How Nations See Bach Other, University of Illinois Press, 1953. E. Reigrotski and N. Anderson, ’National Stereotypes and Foreign Contacts’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 1959, 23, 515-528. 4. 221,750,000 Consommateurs, Selection du Reader's Digest, Paris, 1953. -3-
casually meet at parties to obtain free medical advice.
In a somewhat similar way, Australians have quite fre quently attempted to consult me on their sexual problems - my being French, presumably seemed to my accidental patients sufficient qualification for expertise in these matters. Intrigued by such expectations about French women, I transformed my amused curiosity into an intellect ual query.
How do Australians perceive France and the French?
How are these images distributed within the population?
Do age or education or other social variables affect the content of the images? Which affective tone accompanies certain beliefs about the French? Is there a relation ship between the perception of the French people and the perception of France, the political whole? These are the type of questions which the study tried to answer in the first place.
As usual, these initial questions gave rise to new ones. Past research into the lack of correspondence between the reality of the observed object and its re flection in the mind of the observer has proved fruitful in the diagnosis of subject-bound factors. Most invest igators have agreed that, apart from sheer ignorance about the object, intricately interwoven personality and -4- socio-cultural variables, form the main correlates of reality distortion. Both sets of dynamic factors, the relatively culture-free personality factors, such as authoritarianism, and those embedded in the cultural norms and values of the observing group, have in the past contributed to the better understanding of beliefs and feelings about foreign groups.
Because I started from the hypothesis that some characteristics believed ’typically* French clashed with a number of Australian cultural norms and values, I de cided to focus my attention not on personality dynamics, but on the dynamics of culture-bound norms. The study, therefore, aimed to use some Australian norms and values as a tool of analysis. Such an approach considers the French as a reactive agent, disclosing properties of the observing group. Klineberg suggests that a foreign group may serve the purpose of Rorschach inkblots to 5 reveal something about observing subjects.
When I turned to the literature to select a valid and reliable tool for investigating beliefs and feelings
✓ / 5. 0. Klineberg, ’Recherches sur les Stereotypes: Questions a Resoudre’, Revue de Psychologie des Peuples, 196b"i 75-82. -5- about foreign groups which would be particularly suited to mass-interviewing, I felt the need to develop an instrument somewhat different from those used in the past.
None of the existing attitude scales nor popular check- word list methods seemed quite suitable for my aims. The scope of the study was therefore expanded to include the search for an instrument which could elicit information on beliefs and attitudes and at the same time reveal the dynamics of the value-judgments attached to them. The technique adopted in this study on an experimental basis, derived from Fishbein's theory of attitude, seemed cap- able of serving as an improved Katz and Braly approach.
In order to disentangle general ethnocentrism from specific anti-French reactions, it became necessary to include some ’dummy’ national groups in the enquiry.
Questions about the Italians and the Germans, running parallel to the questions about the French, were intro duced into every interviewing schedule. The project thus acquired the characteristics of a comparative study between the Australian images of the French and the
6. M. Fishoein, A Consideration of Beliefs and their Role in Attitude measurements, in M. Fishbein (Ed.), Readings in Attitude Theory and measurement, ITew York, John Wiley & Sons, 19&7, 257-266. -6-
Australian images of two other foreign groups.
The ’Australian image of France and the French’ thus developed into a sociological investigation into the perceptions and feelings attached to a foreign country and its people, in the light of attitudes towards two other foreign groups and countries, used as ’benchmarks’.
Deeper understanding of the feeling tone attached to ethnic images was sought by examining the relationship between people’s attitudes toward these foreign groups and some Australian cultural norms.
Questions of 'kind' - what kind of beliefs, what kind of feelings adequately describe the Australian image? - were handled as an exercise in diagnosis, through lengthy personal interviews with a sample of 100 people.
Questions of ’how much' or 'how many’ - how strongly are the French liked or disliked, what percentage of
Australians believe France is a reliable ally? - were handled by quantitative methods. These required inter viewing a sample of respondents relatively larger and more carefully selected than the one used for the exer cise in diagnosis. -7-
With respect to measurement the study became, in addition to its descriptive aims, an experiment with a scale hitherto employed only in a classroom setting.
Thus a secondary aim of the study became the assessment of a new attitude scale. II. THE INVESTIGATION - ISSUES AND SCOPE
1. PSYCHO-DYNAMIC VS COGNITIVE SYSTEMS
Psychology started out with a view of the mind as a kaleidoscope of ideas. Then, with behaviourism, psychology moved away for a time from mental events, such as perceptions. But with field-theories and psycho analysis, perceptions ceased to be the sheer mechanical recordings accepted by behaviourists. Social psychology, a late comer, anchored its hypotheses in mental events, explicitly or implicitly. Group dynamics, group atti tudes, interpersonal perceptions, all consider mental events, particularly the human capacity for subjective apprehension, as being legitimate objects of enquiry.
To state that subjective apprehension falls within the realm of scientific enquiry does not, however, settle all differences between the possible formulations of the nature of mental event determinants. A student of prejudice, for instance, who has reviewed the literature, knows of formulations which emphasize the unconscious, irrational processes and of formulations which stress the rationality of our attitudes. According to the model favoured, data is approached from a psycho-analytic or a cognitive point of view. Empirical data has supported either. The approach emphasized in this study rests on
the postulate of 'rationalized' attitude structures, that is on the assumption that Australians hold a certain
number of values which belong to their own cultural en
vironment and that foreign grouj)S are perceived and
evaluated according to the groups' 'standing' in terms of
these values. At the same time, perfect rationality is not assumed to exist, but is only likely to be approxi mated by any particular individual. furthermore, quite
possibly, psycho-analytica.1 factors could help to explain why some individuals embrace certain aspects of their culture at the expense of other elements.
The fact that perfect rationality in the individual is not likely to be found but only approximated is stressed in all theories of cognitive balance. Festinger
(1957), and Abelson & Rosenberg (1958), recognize that the tendency towards consistency between cognitions and affect is not absolute. Lack of a one-to-one corre-
1. 1. Festinger, Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Evanston, Row Fe terson, 1957. 2. P. Abelson and M.J. Rosenberg, ’Symbolic Psycho- Logic: a Model of Altitudinal Cognition', Behaviour- IV Science, 1953. 3, 1-8. -10- spondence between a person's individual values and his perceptions and feelings in respect to foreigners does not, however, prevent reasonable predictions about group attitudes. For instance, should one find that the French do not rate well on a number of traits which
Australian people value highly, and should the Germans be perceived as richly endowed with these traits, it would be reasonable to predict that Australians, as a group, would have a higher regard for the Germans than for the French. Individual Australians may depart from the general pattern of greater respect for the Germans, either because their personal sets of values depart from
'average' Australian values or because their feelings do not fall in line with their cognitive structures about the Germans.
It is clear that a cognitive model which postulates a rational link between cultural values and judgments attached to x>erceptions of foreign groups cannot fit perfectly the complex individual reality of ethnic attitudes. The model was used here as a guide in collect ing and examining group data. 2. THE IMAGE CONCEPT
In the 1950’s, economists came to use the term
’image’ to refer to people’s subjective apprehension of products and manufacturing companies. Walter Lippmann’e •3 term ’pictures in the mind’ gained less acceptance than the word ’image', now widely used in many fields by sociologists, economists, advertisers and the layman.
Even among sociologists, the term has come to take a variety of meanings. It has been used at times in lieu of ’stereotypes', 'beliefs' and'attitudes'. Its vigor ous survival seems justified, because none of the other concepts correspond to what is most often implied by the term ’image’.
Although there is probably no great communication difficulty overall in speaking or writing about the
Australian 'image'of the French, there is no doubt that the term has been used with different connotations by different investigators. The terms which have been occasionally employed synonymously with ’image' will serve to outline the psychological dimensions I had in
3. W. Lippmann, Public Opinion, New York, Harcourt, Brace &. Co . , 1922 . -12- mind when I referred to the 'image* af a foreign people or nation.
Foreign image studies have usually been broadly concerned with the impact of one foreign culture, foreign ethnic group or nation on another ethnic or national group. Most investigators in this field have collected data on stereotypes and have presented the resulting con stellations of verbal labels as the 'image' emerging from the research. Such studies are classically re presented by the Katz and Braly work on racial stereo types mentioned earlier. Other examples of interchange between the terms 'image' and 'stereotypes' are present in two Unesco-sponsored studies of inter-nation percept- ions, 4 in de Sola Pool and Prasad’s research in India, 5 as well as in the analytical writings of Klineberg.^
There is general agreement in the literature that stereotypes are specific categories of beliefs, easy to
4. W. Buchanan & C. Cantril, op.cit. E. Reigrotski and N. Anderson, op.cit. 5. I. de Sola Pool and K. Prasad, 'Indian Student Images of Foreign Peoole', Public Opinion Quarterly, 1958, 22, 292 - 304. 6. 0. Klineberg, Tensions Affecting International Under- standing, New York, Social Science Research Council Bulletin, 1950, 62, -13- verbalize, about which the judging group shows a degree of agreement. They are also relatively rigid over simplifications of complex social objects. A striking feature of stereotypes is the extent to which the result ing picture is impervious to information about new object-attributes (with the exception of characteristics congruent with pre-existing beliefs). If images were nothing more than stereotypes, a people’s apprehension of a foreign group would be restricted to the attribution of generalized and oversimplified characteristics, in the form of verbal labels which the person regards as an adequate definition of the object. True enough, many people have perceptions which testify to the presence of little else but glib overgeneralizations, often picked up from the cultural environment, and which remain quite im pervious to contradictory information. On the other hand, some image-bearers apparently do strive to under stand the complex reality of foreign groups. They try to leave their minds open to the possibility that they are not yet aware of many important features about the group in question. In addition, some subjects evoke the foreign group in visual flashes, or in reminiscences of varied and contradictory past experiences which may elude easy and ready verbalization. The investigator has the impression that some images have to be ’stolen’, rather than obtained, from the respondent because the words are -14-
not there to transmit the image, or because the picture
has the quality of a jig-saw puzzle for its holder, who
is struggling, perhaps for the first time, to reorganize
his perceptions into a coherent whole. Such cognitions
of foreign groups can hardly be branded ’stereotypes' in
the usual sense of the term. This is where the term
'image' has a function to perform: it is more comprehens
ive than 'stereotype', although some authors have used
either indiscriminately. In this study, the term 'image'
covers all cognitions of foreign groups, of which stereo
types are only the most skeletal variety. In this regard, 7 I have followed Marandon who also defines '1'image d'un
peuple' in the widest possible way, as 'tout ce que 1'on a dans 1'esprit ä propos de ce peuple', including memor ies, experiences and mental associations of any kind.
An image is also more than an inventory of a sub ject's beliefs taken one by one, just as perception is more than the listing of perceptual elements. The be liefs are the cognitive building blocks of the image but they are not, strictly speaking, the image. Unless the sociologist carries out the clinical task of grouping
7. S. Marandon, 'Les images des peuples', Revue de Psychologie des Peuples, 19^4, I* 8-21. -15- beliefs which go together, looks for meaningful patterns and attempts to relate these patterns to other knowledge he has about the groups holding these beliefs, the en quiry cannot be said to go beyond the compilation of beliefs. An ’image’ study is an attempt at insight into patterns of beliefs, rather than the mere description of beliefs.
A further element of confusion is introduced when the image concept is invested with the meaning often otherwise accepted for attitudes. For instance, Angela Q von Molnos defines an image by its three dimensions.
’An image’, she writes, ’has cognitive, affective and conative dimensions’. This is precisely the definition * often given to attitudes. Do we really need two con cepts, image and attitude, if their meanings overlap completely?
Conceptually, 'attitudes’ have often carried the burden of containing cognitions, affective orientations and action orientations. In practice it is the affective orientation of the individual or the group under investig-
8. Angela von Molnos, ’L’Image Suisse de 1'Allemagne’ , Revue de Psychologie des Peuples, 1963, 2~, 314-340. * A more detailed account of the two main conceptions of attitudes is given in Chapter III. -16- ation which is the dominant partner in most ’attitudes'.
Attitude scales aim at some kind of ordering of subjects on their affective pro-con orientations towards the ob ject of attitude. Beliefs or actual overt behaviour are not, per se, the focal interest of these measurement devices.
By retaining 'image' as a central concept, I have placed the emphasis on cognitions. I have not collected beliefs for the sole purpose of assessing attitudes, but to study them in their own right.
The above distinction between images and stereo types, desirable as it may be on the conceptual level, led to some difficulty in practice. At the root of the difficulty is the fact that the interviewing techniques which may serve to elicit people's images in their origin al complexity and flavour cannot at the same time serve to investigate the distribution of these images, on a quantitative basis, in a given population. The inescap able consequence of quantifying across individuals is the loss of information about nuances and complexities. A group image, derived from structured interviewing sched ules applied to large numbers of respondents, retains only the common aspects of the sample's beliefs - and this shared core of cognitions presents all the character- -17-
istics of the skeletal stereotype. The image any given individual carries in his mind may he, but is not necessar
ily, the skeleton revealed by mass interviewing techniques.
Insight into the nuances and referents of beliefs
calls for the more searching, sensitive and flexible
approach of intensive interviewing. In this situation,
the respondents reveal thoughts and feelings in their own
words, at their own pace, and bring into focus beliefs which matter to them.
The claim I have made to study ’images' and not only
’stereotypes’ has been supported by interweaving, in the analysis, the data obtained from listening to subjects talk freely and at length on France and the French, and the data obtained from computer cross-analysis of ticks placed on standardized, structured questionnaires.
3» THE FIELD SURVEY APPROACH
Access to the Australian images of a foreign group could have been obtained by several methods of investig- -18- ation. From the content analysis of written or visual documents over a period of time, a public media image could have been obtained. From interviews with ’special* people often considered as holding informed opinions, such as academics, writers, sociologists, etc., the image of an Australian ’elite’ could have been gathered.
This study adopted a third approach: it sought the images held by the ’man in the street’. It was assumed that his responses to France and the French had greater relevance to the hypothesis viewing cultural and sub cultural values as possible ’levels of explanation’ for image elements and related feelings.
The enquiry thus originally aimed to cover a re presentative cross-section of Australian-born respondents.
Because of severe limitations in finance, only the Sydney metropolitan area was surveyed. The ’Australian’ image, more modestly, became a Sydney image.
As already mentioned, the conflict between the desire to preserve the richness of information that intensive, barely structured interviews can yield and the attraction of additional information offered by the quantitative analysis of large numbers of structured interviews was resolved by retaining both methods in collecting the data. -19“
The selection of the 100 respondents for the
intensive interviews did not pretend to fulfil the de mands of statistical representativeness of the Sydney
population. The 600 persons, interviewed on a struct ured schedule were, however, selected by random propor
tional probability, and as such constitute a reasonable
sample from which inferences can be made about the Sydney
image of the French.
4.___THE ECOLOGICAL AND SOCIO-CULTURAh APPROACH
The first objective of the study v/as to describe the elements of the Australian image of France and the French, their patterning within individuals and the dis tribution of these patterns across individuals. As a group, how do Australians perceive the French and v/hat changes to the image, if any, are introduced with differ ences in age, sex, education, and contact with French people?
The second objective was to investigate the relation ships between images and the cultural filters through -20- which foreigners are perceived.
It is well-known that human minds, reflecting an external object, can be notoriously unfaithful to the true characteristics of the object. This is not to say that the image of the French (the external object) must necessarily be a caricature of the original. Conformity to the model is usually a matter of degree, ranging from the very good, with some individuals, to the grotesque with others. The various mechanisms underlying the obtained distortions, such as selective perception and selective memory, behave like interposed filters between the people observed and the people viewing. My interest in the filters took me beyond the ecological approach out lined in the first objective. It was not, of course, within the scope of this study to pay attention to all possible filters which may be linked with the way the French are perceived in Australia. Factors pertaining to the psychology of the individual such as, for instance, a person’s exacerbated prejudice towards all foreigners were not taken into account. The investigation focuses upon cultural factors, following the hypothesis that the common experiences and values of a group enter as determin ants into its perceptions and emotional reactions towards foreign groups.
This hypothesis was grounded in the recent theoretical -21-
and experimental evidence already mentioned in the first
paragraph of this chapter under the label of ’rational
ized' models. Despite a number of differences in their
presentation, these models assume a tendency towards
intra-attitudinal consistency between a person's related
attitudes as well as between a person's attitude toward
an object and his beliefs and opinions about the object.
Thus, for example, a person who has internalized the
values of his culture towards art, towards science and
technology, towards what is proper behaviour for a
'masculine' man, is likely to hold an attitude towards a foreign people or nation consistent with his culturally
determined opinions. It was therefore predicted that the culturally determined patterns of Australian attitudes
towards the characteristics perceived in foreign people and nations (their gifts, their industry, their social or sexual habits, their political make-up, their foreign policy etc.) would be reflected in Australian attitudes towards the French, the Germans and the Italians.
In order to diagnose the pertinent cultural values which might guide their likes and dislikes or their admiration and contempt for the three foreign groups, the respondents were asked to report which French, German and
Italian characteristics particularly appealed to or repelled them. This approach was used in the intensive -22-
interviews .
Then, in order to rank the characteristics thus
attributed to these foreign groups into hierarchies of
Australian values, the respondents had to rate these
characteristics on a 'good-bad' scale. This approach
was adopted for the structured interviews.
5. THE QUESTION OF SALIENCY OF PRANCE AND THE FRENCH IN AUSTRALIAN MINDS.
Throughout the investigation I was nagged by the fact that I was pursuing, in the case of France and the French, a generally ill-defined and often only faintly
emotionally toned image. The danger of spurious results
derived from over-solicitous questioning about non
existent images and feelings loomed as a constant threat.
Possible reasons why the French arouse only mediocre interest and emotional response in Australia were obvious enough. Neither historical heritage nor current polit ical or economic relations placed .France in the inner -23-
circle of Australia’s consciousness of foreign nations.
Neither has the scanty flow of migrants from France
contributed to enriching impressions about the French.
Consequently, in the majority of instances, cognitions
were not likely to be based on direct contact with French
people or products. More often than not, images would
have been formed second-hand. A friend’s trip, a French
film, sporadic political news items, reminiscences from
the history or language classroom were, besides the ready made notions at large in the environment, the most likely
suppliers of beliefs. In short, France and the French were to most Australians quite peripheral to their con cerns .
Nevertheless, I believed it would have been more cowardly than wise to give up the search for a French image in Australia. An image is not a clear-cut case of being or not-being. Its presence in a population is a matter of degree, from definite absence to fleeting impressions, to increasingly precise contours. On a dimension one might call 'strength of definiteness’,
France and the French appeared to stand low. Rarely, however, was there a complete black-out. A number of
French traits were perceived with sufficient inter individual agreement to reassure the investigator that subjects were not haphazardly picking replies to please ~S4~
him or get rid of him. In addition, lack of esteem
for the French was expressed often enough, after a
little probing, to justify an investigation into atti
tudes; remoteness has probably spared the French from
extreme forms 01 dislike, but not from milder negative reactions.
Paler images and blunter feelings have to be catered for by special interviewing techniques. They require,
for instance, more probing at the diagnostic stage, they require more 'clutches’ to reach verbal expression.
Many existing prejudice scales, such as the Bogardus
social distance scale0 or Williams’ ’distaste’ scale,910
are too coarse to handle the milder latitudes of affect.
The fact that I was dealing with a relatively ’uninvolving’ ethnic group, occupying a peripheral posi tion in Australia’s awareness of foreign nationals was in part responsible for the inadequacy of a number of existing attitude measurement techniques. It dictated
the search for a tool more sensitive than existing ones to finer shades of feelings. The next chapter reports
9. E.3. Bogardus, ’Measuring Social Distance’ Journal of Applied Sociology, 19*2 5, IX,”^99-308. 10. R.M. Williams Jr., Strangers hext Door, New York, Prentice-Kail, 19647 " -25-
in greater detail the specific lines along which this
search proceeded.
Originally, I intended to pay as much attention to
the Australian image of France, the geographical, cult ural, economic and political entity as to the Austral
ian image of the French. Pilot interviews carried out before the launching of the project quickly revealed
that most responses to the stimulus 'France' were too
sketchy to justify an exhaustive enquiry. Only probings into questions related to France's political life, French economy and way of life could generally be answered.
France’s contribution to literature, philosophy or science barely aroused respondent reaction. The physic al features of the country or character of the cities
(Paris excepted) had few mental traces in Australian minds. France, the political entity, stood out as the most reactive element. The image of France therefore became a limited one, with the political aspect domin ating the economic and social aspects.
Interest in the French, as compared with interest in France, was notably greater among women than men.
The latter often saw the French as merely political animals. But whereas male subjects were willing to use their cognitive and emotional apprehension of France, the -26-
political entity, and project it on to the French
people, many women would leave unanswered queries about French politics. The total investigation thus became
somewhat lop-sided. Overall, the Australian image of
the French people exceeds, in richness of information
obtained, the image of France.
6. THE GERMANS AND ITALIANS AS TERMS OF COMPARISON
As interviewers gained access to the respondents’ lounge rooms and attempted to establish a friendly rapport, the need to justify their questions became obvious. All interviewers quickly sensed that avowed
interest in the French aroused astonishment and suspi
cion. It seemed a futile venture. By including two
other foreign nationalities into the interviewing situa
tion, the enquiry acquired better face value. At the
same time, the addition of two terms of comparison eased the task of introspection for the majority of respond ents. Finally, as a further advantage, the presence of a German and an Italian landmark increased the precision with which the French could be located on Australia’s -27- cognitive and affective maps.
The selection of Italians and Germans for comparison with the French, among other possible choices, was deter mined by the belief that their images had enough elements in common and in contrast to allow meaningful comparisons and emphasize the relative uniqueness of each.
7. THE TIME FACTOR AND THE FRENCH IMAGE
Although the investigation stretched over two years, it does not take into account changes over time. Selected variations in some aspects of the image have occurred between 1966 and 1968, but their influence is not be lieved to have more than a marginal effect on the overall picture.
Confidence in the relatively minor influence of a three-year time factor is based on reports of stubborn stabilities in inter-ethnic representations which one finds -28-
in the literature (Gilbert, 1951)• Deutsch and Merritt conclude in a searching study on the relation-
ships between world events and images, 1 2 that :
'men cling to their earlier memories and character... they distort many of their perceptions and deny much of reality, in order to call their prejudiced souls their own.... Almost nothing in the world seems to be able to shift the (international) images of 40 percent of the population in most countries, even within one or two decades. Combinations of events that shift the images and attitudes of the remaining 60 percent of the population are extremely rare... (Such shifts) involve a combination of spectacular and cumulative events..."
However fascinating they may have been to the student of political science, neither the French student and workers' strike early in 1968 nor the tribulations of the franc in late 1968 could be considered 'spectacular* events by the average Australian citizen. Interviews which were carried out shortly after the occurrence of such events showed that the meaning of the news was integrated by most subjects towards congruence with existing beliefs. For instance, the May 1968 unrest
11. G.M. Gilbert, 'Stereotype Persistence and Change Among College Students', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1951, 46, 245-254. 12. K.W. Deutsch and R.L. Merritt, Effects of Events on National and International Images, in H.G. Kelman (Ed.) International Behaviour, New -York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965, 182-183. -29- in France was interpreted as an illustration of French fickleness by respondents who stated that ’instability is a major characteristic of the French make-up evident throughout the whole history of France.’ The French nuclear explosions in the Pacific and what they imply about French achievements in the atomic field did not prevent many subjects from continuing to view the bulk of French people as peasant communities.
Thus, without excluding the possibility of minor image changes, I felt confident that radical transforma tions over the period 1966-1968 were the exception, rather than the rule.*
As a result, the analysis of interviev/s obtained at various stages of the project into a global group image of France and the French appeared legitimate. This claim is reinforced by the fact that only the intensive inter views were scattered over a period of 18 months (1966 to mid 1967.) The quantitative data derived from the structured schedules was obtained within four fairly uneventful consecutive months, in late 1968.
* De Gaulle’s resignation from the Presidency occurred in mid-1969, after the completion of the survey. His departure is likely to have introduced changes into the image of France as his personality and style exercised a strong influence on the foreign perceptions of France and the French. -30-
8. HOV/ UNIQUE IS THE AUSTRALIAN IMAGE OF THE FRENCH?
A systematic comparison between the Australian image of the French and the images of the French held by other nations would lend support to or weaken the hypothesis that a typically Australian looking-glass accounts for some ’twisting' of perceptions. Should one find that only Australians refuse to credit the
French with ’intelligence’, or that only Australians frown upon a certain trait which the rest of the world thinks is charming, one's confidence in the influence of cultural bias would be strengthened.
Unfortunately, published studies of how other national groups view the French have few of the features required for such cross-national comparisons. Based on restricted groups of subjects, mainly students, or 1 3 on meagre samples of 10 to 20 interviews, or on brief checklists of eight to ten beliefs,1^ all these investig ations fail, furthermore, to assess the meaning to the respondent of the labels he endorses about the French and
13* 'Ce que les Anglais pensent des Francais', Realites, July 1963. 14. A. Karsten, 'Vorstellung von Jungen Deutschen über Andere Volker', Psychologie des Peuoles, 1967, 1, 100-110. -31-
of the overall feeling tone which accompanies the
image. Clearly, such studies provide insufficient
material for enlightening comparisons. Imperfect as
they are, they enable some assumptions to be made as
to the originality of Australian reactions to the
French and have been used for that purpose.
9 • SUMMARY
The following nine points summarize the scope of the research in terms of research questions:
1. What is the affective orientation of Australians towards the French in relation to a number of other ethnic groups, especially the Germans and the Italians?
2. What are the images of the French, the Germans and the Italians in the minds of Australians?
3. What is the relationship between socio-demographic variables describing Australians (such as sex, education, age and degree of contact) and attitudes towards and images of national groups and their countries?
4. What is the relationship between cultural values held by Australians and attitudes towards the foreign groups?
5. What is the relationship between liking and admira tion for the foreign groups and perceptions about them? -32-
6. What is the image Australians have of themselves as revealed by their images of foreign groups?
7. Are the perceptions of the French held by Australians any different from those held by the nationals of other countries?
8. What is the interaction, if any, between feelings and perceptions Australians hold about the people of France, Germany and Italy and the images of these countries as polities?
9. What are the merits of the Fishbein scale of attitude? III. REVIEW OF RESEARCH AND WRITINGS RELATING TO ETHNIC IMAGE AND ATTITUDE INVESTIGATIONS
1 . CONCEPTUAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN IMAGE AND ATTITUDE
It was noted previously (chap. II, section 4) that mental representations of foreign groups may range all the way from the mythical to the scientifically accurate.
The answer as to why people’s cognitions frequently misrepresent ethnic group characteristics has been sought in their prejudiced feelings toward foreign groups. A large body of evidence on national and ethnic attitudes confirms the influence of the affective on the cognitive.
Katz and Braly (1933),^ Child and Doob (1943),^ and
•7 Vinacke (1956) suggest the dependence of image content on affect. In fact, one possible way of conceptually representing images is to look upon them as the ’cognitive component’of people's affective disposition toward the group.
1. D. Katz and W.D. Braly, op.cit. 2. I.L. Child and L. Doob, ’Factors Determining National Stereotvoes', Journal of Social Psychology, 1943, 17, 203-219" 3. V/.E. Vinacke, ’Explorations in the Dynamic Processes of Stereotvping'S Journal of Social Psychology, 1956 * 43, 105-132. -34-
Many theorists and practicians treat cognitions
(or beliefs) as such a component of attitude. For these writers, ’attitude' is a multi-dimensional construct.
It includes several facets of psychological functionings
cognitions, emotions and behaviour. Katz and Stotland
(1959),^ Krech and Crutchfield (1949),^ and Proshansky and Seidenberg (1965) have adopted this view. Even if
we exclude from the discussion ’overt non-verbal' behav
iour (the 'action' or conative component), irrelevant to
this study, we are left with a two-dimensional construct
There is also convincing evidence, however, demon strating the opposite direction of influence. Carlson's n study of the effect of persuasion on affect (1956), supports the view of the primacy of cognitions in gener
ating affect.
4. D. Katz and Stotland, A Preliminary Statement to a Theory of Attitude Structure and Change, in S. Koch (Ed. 1 1sycho1ogy: A Study of a Science, New York, McGraw-Hill, 1959, Vol. 3. 5. D. Krech and R.S. Crutchfield, Theory and Problems of Social Psychology, New York, McGraw-Hill, 1948. 6. H. Proshansky and B. Seidenberg, Basic Studies in Social Psychology, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, l96"5'. 7. E.R. Carlson, 'Attitude Change through Modification of Attitude Structure', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1956, 52, 256-261. -35-
The conclusion is, of course, that both components
are interdependent. Rosenberg’s neat experiments on
hypnotic attitude reversal (I960). strongly support
the mutual interdependence theory and militate in favour
of an integrated affective-cognitive concept.
There is little doubt that it is often only the
analytical approach of the researcher, the particular
manner in which he asks his questions and subsequently ponders over the data, which allows the distinction
between affective and cognitive dimensions.
Yet, in spite of the fairly wide acceptance of and experimental support for a multi-dimensional attitude
concept, this study maintained an operational distinction between affective and cognitive elements.
Such a distinction, it was felt, was particularly well adapted to the exploration of the Australian image of the French from different vantage points. Thus, alternatively, the affective or the cognitive dimension were treated as either the 'dependent’ or the ’mediating’ variable and the questions: ’How do variations in feelings toward the French relate to cognitions about them?’, as
8. M.J. Rosenberg, ’A Structural Theory of Attitude Dynamics’, Public Opinion Quarterly, I960, vol.XXIV., 319-340. -36- well as the reverse: ’Can variations in cognitions serve as indicators of pro-con feelings?’, could be asked. There was a second reason for maintaining an operational distinction: it allowed the investigation to focus on cognitions for their intrinsic interest.
Even beliefs devoid of attitude content - not all cogni tions have emotional meaning - remained relevant targets for research.
In referring to beliefs and attitude as tv/o separate concepts, I was following the positions advocated by 9 Osgood, Suci and Tannenbaum as well as Fishbein and
Raven, 1 0 who also found it more convenient to restrict the term ’attitude’ to emotional content only and ’beliefs’ to cognitions. Fishbein’s rationale for divesting atti tudes of cognitive meaning provided a third reason for adopting his position: closer harmony between theory and the measurement techniques used in assessing affective orientations. As Fishbein points out, 11 the purpose
9. C.E. Osgood, G.J. Suci and P.H. Tannenbaum, The Measurement of Meaning, Urbana, University of Illinois £ress~7~1957. 10. M. Fishbein, and B.H. Raven, ’The AB Scales: an Operational Definition of Belief and Attitude,1 Human Relations, 1962, 15, 34-44. 11. M. Fishbein, A Consideration of Beliefs and Their Role in Attitude Measurement, in M. Fishbein (Ed.), Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1967. -37- of the more widely used 'attitude' scales (Thurstone,
Likert, Bogardus, etc.) is assessment of emotional dis position, not cognitive content. Selected cognitions are only used as indicators of affect. Thus the link between concepts and techniques is closer and clearer in defining attitudes and beliefs separately. This advant age applies to the Fishbein-type scale which was adopted in this study.
2. ATTITUDE OR ATTITUDES ?
12 13 Kramer, followed by Chein, sorted out and classi fied the content of opinion polls and questionnaires used in ethnic attitude and image studies in the United States.
They evolved comprehensive classifications of the main aspects of ethnic attitudes and related cognitions. In theory, no description of affect and cognitions is complete
12. B.M. Kramer, 'Dimensions of Prejudice', Journal of Psychology, 1949, 27, 389-451. 13* I. Chein, Analysing and Measuring Prejudice, in M. Johoda, M. Deutsch and S.V/. Cook (Eds. f, Research Methods in Social Science, New York, The Dryden Press, 1951. -38-
without the investigation of all these aspects. In
practice, of course, no single study could fill in data
on all known facets of ethnic attitudes. Demands in time from subjects and investigator, available resources,
hitherto inadequate techniques, all contribute, as Chein
has pointed out, to limit the scope of a particular piece
of research.
Within the realm of the possible, one of Chein’s suggestions was retained for exploration. It deals with
the separation of ’attitude' into ’overall pro-con affect'
and other 'specific affects'. Into the latter category
Chein fitted such feelings as fear, disgust, envy, con
tempt, etc. for the foreign group.
Systematic probing into the presence of these feel
ings during the intensive interviews showed that traces of envy, fear and disgust in attitudes towards the French or the Germans or the Italians were too thin and sporadic
to justify carrying questions about these affects within
the frame of a large-scale quantitative survey.
However, one 'specific affect' category, namely admiration/contempt appeared particularly pertinent, and consequently it was retained for closer investigation within the structured questionnaire. -39-
Thus, in Chein's terminology, the exploration into
Australian feelings towards the three nationalities was split into ’overall pro-con affect’ (overall like- dislike) and one 'specific affect' (admiration-contempt).
3. OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF ATTITUDES AND BELIEFS
By restricting the meaning of ’attitude' to affect ive, evaluative reaction and focussing on two such aspects (like-dislike and admiration-contempt), the following operational definition was reached:
a subject's attitude toward a foreign group is his position or score on two scales - a like/ dislike and an admiration/contempt scale.
If the centre position on the scale has score 0 and is taken to signify a neutral attitude, all other posi tions on either of the two scales have both direction and intensity.
There may or may not be a close correspondence s between a subject’s liking and his admiration for a foreign ethnic group. The closer the correspondence, -40- the more meaningful the reference to the subject’s ’attitude' (in singular form) toward the group. When no such correspondence obtains, it is necessary to conceive of liking and admiration as two distinct affect ive orientations and refer to the subject's 'attitudes' (in the plural).
In this study, the intensive interviews encouraged
the prediction of a gap between liking and
admiration, particularly apparent for the French and the Germans.
In relation to belief, Fishbein and Raven propose
A A a definition analogous to the definition of attitude. Just as an individual may evaluate the French as being 'good' or ’bad' or ’despicable’, he may believe or disbelieve that they are friendly, warm-hearted, reliable, etc. He judges the probability that there is a link between the French and friendliness, warm-heartedness, reliability, etc.; in general terms, he assesses the probability of a link between the French and seme other value (i.e. reliability) or object ('they learn English when they migrate'). To use Fishbein’s own words:
’A belief per se is the position that an individual
14. M. Fishbein and B.H. Raven, op.cit. -41-
ascribes to the belief statement (’the French are reliable’) on the probability dimension, i.e., the probability or improbability that the particular rela tionship expressed in the statement does exist’. 1 5
In accordance with this view, intensity is attributed to beliefs, just as it was attributed to attitudes.
Operationally, a belief was thus defined in this
study, as the position of a belief statement on a ’strength of association scale’, ranging from ’it does not fit at all my image and impression
of the foreign group’ to ’it fits extremely well
my image and impression of the foreign group. ’
The above operational definition partly answers
Eysenck’s well-known objection to the classical word- list method, introduced by Katz and Braly. 16 G-iven a list of ethnic characteristics and attributes, the subjects are usually asked to select the terms which
15- M. Fishbein, A Consideration of Beliefs and their Role in Attitude measurement, in Ivi. Fi'shbein (Ed.) Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1967, p. 259. 16. H.J. Eysenck and S. Grown, ’National Stereotypes: an Experimental and Methodological Study’, Inter national Journal of Opinion and Attitude Research, 1948, 2, 26-39. -42- they believe ’describe’ or ’are true’ of a particular nation or ethnic group. Belief judgments are thus restricted to ’yes' - ’no’ or ’all’ - ’none’ categories, without latitude for qualification, involving restric tions along lines of thought which subjects may verbal ize as: 'Yes, but to a lesser degree than other groups
I know’ or: ’I know they are supposed to be this or that, but I am uncertain whether they really are'.
Eysenck pointed out that the fact that a subject en dorses a label may mean he believes the word actually describes the group, or alternatively, it may not sign ify that such conviction is present, but only show awareness on the part of the subject that the character istic is generally imputed to the group.
The use, in this study, of a ’strength of associa tion’ dimension discriminated between various degrees of conviction attached to what would otherwise have been a blunt 'yes'. As such it shades the ’yes’ from hesita tion to conviction. It would, however, be deceptive to look upon the 'strength of association' score as having a clear diagnostic meaning in relation to the question of individual faith in the validity of the label. The various degrees of acceptance or shades of 'yes' probably reflect one of three things: -43- a) idiosyncracies of individual response (some people tend systematically to overstate, others to understate their beliefs), b) genuine degree of conviction (from weak to strong) that the judged group has the given characteristic,
(c) the amount of the given characteristic (i.e. somewhat or a little unreliable, extremely cruel, immoral in a way etc.) ascribed to the group.
Granted the range of meanings a probability score may assume, it v/as nevertheless considered an improve ment in belief measurement to invest the image with a strength of association dimension. There was good ground for asserting that the stronger the association with the belief statement, the firmer this aspect of the image in the mind of the observing group.
4» RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN SOCIOLOGICAL VARIABLES AND BELIEFS AND ATTITUDES.
Interaction between sociological and demographic factors (age, education, sex, etc.) and attitudes and beliefs could not easily be assessed from previous -44- empirical evidence. Complex and inconsistent patterns were the rule. With regard to age and sex, for instance, Reigrotski and Anderson found no signif icant differences in their survey of European percep- 1 7 tions, whereas Williams' data on prejudice toward
A P minority groups in the U.s!, shows men to he somewhat less prejudiced than women.
Consequently, for age and sex factors, predictions for the quantitative survey were based on the diagnostic observations at the depth interview level. Contrary to Reigrotsky's findings,:
a difference between males and females and an age difference with regard to attitudes toward the French was predicted. Men and older people were expected to be less favourably inclined to the Erench than women and younger respondents.
As for the influence of education on ethnic atti tudes and beliefs, an analysis by Stember, reported by
17. E. Reigrotski and N. Anderson, 'National Stereotypes and Foreign Contact, Public Opinion Quarterly, 1959, 23, 515-528. 18. R.M. Wi11iams Jr., Strangers Next Door. New York, Prentice-Hall, 1964. -45-
Williams. 1 ° showed that although the better educated are less likely to endorse crude stereotyped beliefs,
they tend to reject more frequently than the non-
educated, close personal relations with members of minority ethnic groups. As prejudice or unfavourable ethnic attitudes can manifest themselves in a variety of forms, correlation between one measure of attitude and another, or between attitudes and cognitions, re sult in complex patterns. On the whole, however, it appears fairly consistently throughout the literature that the better educated are less willing to indulge in verbal labelling and are more ready to offer
’balanced judgments’ about foreign groups, that is to attenuate a negative view with a positive one and vice versa. Furthermore, as Reigrotski and Anderson ob- served, 20' the more educated tend also to be more crit ical about their own nation and consequently to hold different cultural values than an ordinary cross-section of the community.
Relying on these findings and on observations from intensive interviews, :
19. R.M. Williams Jr., op.cit. p.55. 20. E. Reigrotski and N. Anderson, op.cit. -46-
a positive relationship between education
and liking as well as admiration for the
French was predicted.
5. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CONTACT WITH FOREIGN GROUPS AND ATTITUDES
Taft found a positive correlation between familiar
ity with a national group and preference for the group 21 among a sample of Australian students. But observa
tion tells us that the relationship between familiarity and liking may well depend on the circumstances under which ’familiarity* is acquired and that no correlation
or negative ones might also occur.
In this study, the knowledge gained during the
intensive interviews indicated that subjects* greater
contact with, say, Italians was related to more favour
able attitudes towards this group. (One can, of course, not determine whether contact strengthened favourable
21. R. Taft, ’Ethnic Stereotypes, Attitudes and Familiarity, Journal of Social Psychology, 1959, 49, 177-186. -47-
attitudes or whether favourable perceptions and feelings
promoted contact). But Taft’s positive relationship
between favourable attitudes and familiarity did not
appear to hold for cross-national comparisons. When
our respondents to the diagnostic interviews were asked
to rank the French, Italians and Germans from 1. to 3.
for degree of liking and again in order of familiarity,
two different orderings v/ere usually obtained.
Consequently, it was predicted that the quantified
data of the larger and representative sample would sup port the finding of : no correspondence between familiarity and prefer
ence across nations encountered in the qualitative interviews, but a
correlation between familiarity and preference
towards a single, given nationality was expected.
Taft's neat correlation between the two variables may be partly explained by the fact that no Southern European nationalities (Greek or Italian, for instance) were included among the ethnic groups investigated in his Australian student sample. Had the students been required to rate these besides the French and the Butch, and had they assigned high ’familiarity’ and low ’liking’ -48- ranks to the Southern Europeans (a not unreasonable assumption), the positive correlation between the two dimensions would have been weakened.
A further factor strengthening the relationship obtained by Taft was possibly the manner in which
'familiarity* was defined in his instructions to the subjects. 'General knowledge' (not only direct exper ience of members of a foreign group) was an accepted source of familiarity. Had Taft's subjects not been students but a cross-section of Sydney's adult popula tion, the French would probably have been rated as a relatively unfamiliar group. The effect of Taft's inclusion of 'general knowledge’ in the definition of 'familiarity' will remain open to speculation as the relevant classification used in this study rests on the subject's 'degree of contact' with the foreign group rather than 'general knowledge'.
6. CULTURAL FACTORS IN INTER-GROUP BELIEFS AND ATTITUDES
Attitudes and beliefs are integrated today in -49- social theory through the concepts of ’reference groups' and 'social norms’. Most sociologists agree with the view that our cultural definitions and values contribute to shaping our perceptions and evaluations about foreign ethnic groups. Krech and Crutchfield summed up the position in the following way: 22
'What we perceive as well as how we interpret what we perceive... is a function of the 'higher order' cognitive organization of beliefs, of social ideals, of morals, of cultural frames of reference. A person's response to a foreign group thus reflects, to come degree, the norms of his culture.'
23 Pettigrew even postulates that cultural norm factors actually dominate the data and that other socio logical factors (i.e. education) or personality factors function as 'secondary' variables, affecting the degree of acceptance or rejection of these norms. Pettigrew's study of intergroup attitudes in South Africa shows the effect of cultural norms and pressures, over and above personality factors. Williams' analysis of stereotype playbacks construes negative labels as reversed images 24 of dominant American socio-cultural values:
22. D. Krech and R.S. Crutchfield, op.cit. p. 92. 23. T.P. Pettigrew, 'Personality and Socio-cultural Pactors in Intergroup Attitudes: a Cross-National Comparison', Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1958, 2, 29-42. 24. R.M. Williams Jr., op.cit. p.40. -50-
1Ignorance contrasts with the virtues of competence, education, self-improvement. 'Sexually loose' is the antithesis of Puritan reserve. 'Loud and noisy' is the converse of the ideal of public decorum, the strict control of impulse, the taboos against giving in to emotion.'
On the basis of these theoretical positions and
of empirical findings, it was postulated here that the
Australian cultural lens would serve to heighten aware
ness of foreign characteristics, particularly the
positive traits which correspond to the Australian cult
ural ideal and the negative traits embodying social
taboos. As a result, the foreign nationality would be
judged against the yardstick of Australian hierarchies
of values. It was therefore hypothesized that Australian
evaluations of traits and characteristics attributed to the three foreign groups bear a relation to the affective reactions toward these groups, particularly to the specific admiration-
contempt dimension.
The expectation of cultural and sub-cultural
influences on affect did not pretend to totally 'explain' variations in attitudes. It was well understood that multiple causation was at work, with other factors besides cultural norms interacting and influencing the -51-
relationship. The socio-cultural factor was used,
analytically, as one among a number of possible 'levels
of explanations' of foreign images and attitudes.
7. INTERACTION BETWEEN THE IMAGES cOF FOREIGN PEOPLE AND THE IMAGES OF THEIR COUNTRIES
Graham, in a study of British attitudes toward
America, quoted in Buchanan and Cantril's international 25 survey of how nations perceive each other, has investi gated the carry-over effect of the images of foreign people on to evaluations of their governments. When unfavourable characteristics were attributed to Americans as people,
'these opinions affected the observer's appraisal of America as a nation, as certainly as aspects of international and national policies affected the observer's appraisal of the Americans as people.'
The interaction between people and policies domin-
25* M.D. Graham, 'British Attitudes Towards America', Ph.D. Dissertation, University of London, 1951. Chap. 1, p. 13, in ¥. Buchanan and H. Cantril, How Nations See Each Other, Urbana, University of Illinois, 1953. -52-
ated many responses to the three nationalities in
this study, particularly the French, v/hose image was
strongly coloured by political elements arising from
features of France’s political life.
Although both imagery and feelings about the
French were thus often connected with images of and feelings about France, deliberate distinctions between
French people and French politics wens also encountered, particularly among educated people.
The hypothesis was therefore of an overall
positive relationship betv/een feelings towards the French people and attitudes towards France,
the political entity; the relationship was expected to be weaker among the educated than the lesser educated respondents.
8. ’TRUE* BELIEFS AND ATTITUDES AND INTERVIEWING TECHNIQUES
As both the intensive, loosely structured inter views and the standardized structured mass-interviews of this study relied on self-reports, warnings by -53- 26 Cook and Selltiz about such techniques“ had to be taken into consideration. According to these authors, the pitfalls of self-reports embedded in. both structured and unstructured interviews originate in the fact that respondents may be influenced by other characteristics of the interviewing situation, such as the individual's striving to appear well-adjusted, unprejudiced and rational.
With regard to structured interviews, Cook and
Selltiz emphasized the already mentioned response set or expressive style (chap. Ill sect. 4) - the consistent tendency some individuals have to agree or disagree with items presented to them or to give extreme or moderate answers in a systematic manner. In addition, structured interviews may neglect the issues which seem important to the informant and raise: questions about many aspects of little relevance to him.
At first sight, these criticisms seem serious and many researchers have turned to projective techniques 27 (Campbell, 1950) in an attempt to by-pass these risks.
26. W.S. Cook and C. Selltiz, 'A Multiple Indicator Approach to Attitude Measurement', Psychological Bulletin, 1964,'62, 36-55. 27. D.T. Campbe11, 'The Indirect Assessment of Social Attitudes', Psychological Bulletin, 1950, 47, 15-38.. -54-
I was inclined, however, to accept Williams’ position
and view responses to direct questions and self-ratings 2 8 as a ’social reality’. These responses reflect
’public' as opposed to ’private’ attitudes. Sometimes
the two overlap. Sometimes the privately held atti
tudes diverge from the publicly expressed ones. No doubt some people in this survey covered up their pre
judices; no doubt others endorsed listed beliefs as a matter of acquiescence. But, writes Williams, :
'if a respondent is so easily swayed in an interview situation, v/hich is permissive, he probably will be similarly susceptible to the more powerful, social pressures often encount ered in ordinary daily life.'29
On the other hand, Cook and Selltiz, in their warnings, perhaps overlooked the fact that people who hold strong views, one way or the other, are usually quite willing to express them in response to sensit ively handled questions. In other words, the alleged discrepancy between public and private attitudes is usually not as forbidding as the literature suggests.
But the possibility of such a gap must be taken into account, and the concept of 'public' attitudes kept in mind in interpreting the results. But no apology is needed: 'public' attitudes are no less important and
28. R.M. Williams Jr. op.cit. 29* R.M. Williams Jr. op.cit. p.15* -55- no less real than private ones, and fully justify an investigation.
As far as response set is concerned, it seemed reasonable to assume that the tendencies to overstate one’s beliefs or feelings are no more prevalent in a given sample than the opposite tendencies. Thus, looking at group results, one is likely to obtain data where both factors cancel out. Unfortunately, this overall balancing-out effect could only be assumed, never demonstrated.
Finally, the presence of ’benchmark’ nationalities may be regarded as a safeguard against erroneous inter pretation of results. Comparisons between three sets of data attenuate the uncertainties arising from direct questioning and self-reports: if subjects are inclined to hide their prejudices, there is no reason to believe that this distortion will not operate in respect to all three nationalities. Admittedly, the more ’privately’ disliked group is likely to benefit most from a shift towards milder public expression of prejudice. The total effect was presumably an overall closing-up of the gap between the three nationalities. But the differences which remained nevertheless may legitimately be construed as indicators of different orientations and -56- perceptions. Some doubts might surround an ’absolute* score. How big is the shift from private to public attitude when 30 per cent of respondents claim they
'do not mind Italians’? No definite answer is possible
However, if one finds that 50 per cent of the same sample declared they ’do not mind the French’ it is reasonable to assume a significant difference in orienta tion toward both nationalities, particularly if another
30 per cent admit they dislike Italians against only
10 per cent for the French. Inter-ethnic comparisons compensate for the uncertainties inherent in investig ation of attitude and perception of a single foreign group.
9. CLASSICAL ATTITUDE SCALES AND THE NEED FOR A DIFFERENT APPROACH
Since the best method for an enquiry is the one most appropriate to its particular aims and problems, the well-known methods of attitude and image measure ment had to be scrutinized to discover whether they were adequate. -57-
A rapid examination of their shortcomings in respect to the objectives of this study justified the search for a different approach.
Thurstone and Likert type scales were ruled out because of the restrictions they place on item inclusion 30 in the scale. If one is primarily concerned with the cognitive structures of people’s conceptions of nation- objects, one must select tools of investigation which serve this cognitive emphasis readily. Both Thurstone and Likert-type scales focus on the evaluation of nation- objects. Although they utilize cognition items to carry out the evaluative function, their rationale ex cludes two types of cognitions: beliefs which are widely held by the perceiving subjects but fail to discriminate between the favourable and unfavourable poles of attitude, and beliefs which have different evaluative meaning to different subjects. A Likert scale has no use for the first type, a Thurstone scale rejects the second.
In addition, neither scale is well suited to handle inter-nation comparisons between cognitions: one nation’s
30. L.L. Thurstone, ’Attitudes Can be Measured’, American Journal of Sociology, 1928, 35, 529-554. R. Likert, ’A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes', Archives of Psychology, 1932, 140, 44-53. -58-
characteristic perceived as unique, such as ’French
instability’, for instance, obviously cannot serve as
an item in a Likert or Thurstone scale destined to
measure attitudes towards both the French and the
Germans.
■31 Osgood’s semantic differential and the Bogardus 32 social distance scale are well suited to handle
comparisons between inter-ethnic attitudes, but these scales, too, function on very limited areas of cogni
tions .
One of the most commonly used approaches in this
field has been the already mentioned word-list method.
As a tool destined to measure cognitions it has the double merit of flexibility (there is no restriction on the type of item suitable for inclusion) and speed and ease of administration in the field. On the latter score, it is better than all other techniques. As an
instrument designed to elicit stereotypes, the word-list
is commendable. However, it does not lend itself readily
31. C.E. Osgood, G.J. Suci and P.H. Tannenbaum, op.cit. 32. E.S. Bogardus, ’Measuring Social Distance’, Journal of Applied Sociology, 1925, IX, 299-308. 33. L>. Katz and W.D. Braly, ’Racial Stereotypes of ICO College Students', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1930, 30, 175-193. -59-
to attitude assessment. It cannot answer the pertinent
criticism that the evaluative meaning attached to a
stereotype is not the same for all individuals who hold
this stereotype. Likert and Thurstone scales circum
vent the handicap by obtaining information on the meaning
of the evaluative content of the beliefs used for meas
urement. A Likert approach evolves this meaning
empirically, a Thurstone approach obtains it through a
sample of judges representative of the population on
which the scale is to be used.
A step in the correct direction is taken when sub
jects who endorse labels from a word check list are
asked at the same time to indicate whether they regard the term as describing a favourable or unfavourable trait. The majority rating defines the evaluative meaning for the sample.^
Even with this additional precaution, the tool is far from ideal: sub-cultural differences in evaluation attached to a descriptive term are hidden and ignored and each term on the list carries equal weight (either favourable or unfavourable), however intensely favourable
34. T.S. Langner, * A Test of Intergroup Prejudice which takes into account Individual and Group Differences in Values'. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psvcho- logy, 1953, 48, A. -60- or unfavourable its meaning to the perceiving group.
Furthermore, it suffers from another weakness already mentioned: it allows no gradation for the degree of conviction with which a label is attached to the nation object.
What were the prerequisites for a technique appropriate to this study's aims? It should encompass a wide spectrum of beliefs to answer the descriptive aims. It should enable inter-ethnic comparisons be tween these beliefs. It should serve as an indicator of the attitudes related to these beliefs. It should reveal something about the underlying cultural dynamics attached to the evaluative judgments and it should also it goes without saying, be amenable to easy administra tion on the door-step with a sample of respondents of all levels of intelligence.
Fishbein's attitude scale, based on strength of beliefs about an object and the evaluative aspects of these beliefs, seemed best tailored to handle all these aspects. Although theoretically well grounded the scale has yet to demonstrate its empirical validity.
35» M. Fishbein, A Behaviour Theory Approach to the Relations between Beliefs about an Object and the Attitude Toward the Object, in M. Fishbein (Ed.) Readings in Attitude measurement, John Wiley & Sons , New York, 19b"7 . -61-
A priori, it has interesting advantages which militate in favour of its use for a study which is concerned with cognitions and yet aims to retain the vantage point that a knowledge of attitudes and cultural determ inants offer to the understanding of ethnic images.
Its rationale operationally defines attitude as the algebraic sum of the products of a subject’s strength of beliefs about an object and the evaluation of these beliefs, or symbolically, according to Fishbein, for a 36 sample of N subjects:
the group attitude towards an object o (such as a national group) is given by:
Where: B^_| stands for the strength of the j th belief of the i th individual about an object o, that is, the degree of probability that o is associated with some other concept ; for instance, x. may stand for ’unlike
Australians’. B^ . stands for the strength of associa tion in the i th subject’s cognitive system between the
French and ’unlike Australians’.
36. M. Fishbein, op.cit. p.394. -62- and
stands for the evaluation of x^, or the i th subject's attitude toward the concept 'unlike Austral ians'. ia stands for the number of beliefs about o
N stands for the number of subjects.
A glance at the formula shows that such an opera tional definition of attitude is a logical outcome of the postulate of 'rationalised' attitude structures
(chap. II, section 1), which views attitudes as the evaluative counterpart of beliefs.
Such a formula justifies the inclusion in the meas urement instrument of all beliefs which the researcher predicts will be attached to any of the ethnic groups in which he is interested. If his prediction is incorrect, the belief will not be endorsed. It receives score 0 and whatever its evaluative score, it will not influence the attitudinal score. Similarly, if the belief is part of a subject's cognitive structure, but has no eval uative meaning to him - if the belief is purely report- orial - the overall attitudinal score remains unaffected.
Nevertheless, this belief, which has a numerical value -63- other than zero, is recorded and included in the over all imagery or cognitive score.
In short, the instrument ingeniously uses beliefs to assess attitude, but at the same time allows the description of cognitions, whether pregnant with or de void of affective content.
Because a Fishbein scale uses the evaluative judg ments each subject attaches to listed beliefs, an under standing of the population's value judgments becomes readily available. Graded in intensity, these evalua tions give more accurate information about group values than the cruder single 'good', 'bad', 'neutral' categ ories used previously in conjunction with the word-list method (Langner, 1953). 1 At the same time, greater precision in attitude measurement is also obtained as each subject's individual value judgments affect his attitude score, in contrast with a Thurstone or word-list approach where judges or the majority of the sample determine the evaluation attached to a belief.
Evidence of the empirical validity of the scale is
37. T.S. Langner, 'A Test of Intergroup Prejudice which takes into Account Individual and Group Differences in Values', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychol- ogy, 1953, 48, 4. -64- hitherto restricted to an exploratory study by the author
*2 O of the scale, (Anderson and Fishbein, 1965). Caution was thus required for its adoption here. Two safe guards were introduced: a pilot study preceded the launching of the large-scale study and a separate assess ment of each subject’s attitudes, based on self rating, was sought in the final survey.
The pilot check lent support to Fishbein's confid ence in the scale. Based on 50 subjects, the scale dis criminated between two groups of respondents - those who claimed they admired the French and those who looked upon the French with contempt. The positive result of the pilot encouraged the experimental use of the Fishbein scale on the sample of 600 people who form, with the 100 people interviewed in depth, the source of data on the Australian image of France and the French.
The Fishbein scale was thus adopted as: (a) a practical and sensitive way to assess quantitat ively the beliefs about the French and two other nationalities diagnosed in the intensive interviews. (b) a sensitive measure of the evaluations attached to these beliefs and the relation of these evaluations to overall attitude, treated as a means of under standing the relevance of cultural filters in national images; (c) an experimental test of the validity of the scale.
38. L.R. Anderson and M.. Fishbein, 'Prediction of Attitude from the Number, Strength, & Evaluative Aspects of Beliefs about the Attitude Object: A Comparison of Summation and Congruity Theories', Journal of Person ality and Social Psychology, -1965? 3, 437-443* IV. THE SURVEY DESIGN
The interview being the groundwork upon which the
findings of this enquiry are based, it is important to
outline how interviewing reliability and validity were pursued at each phase of the research.
A brief chronological presentation of the stages
of the enquiry will be given first. A description of the sampling procedures follows. Finally, interview ing methods and techniques are reviewed.
• • • •
1. THE STAGES OF THE ENQUIRY
One-hundred intensive in-depth interviews were carried out in 1966 and early 1967. Based on the knowledge gained from these interviews, a structured questionnaire was subsequently designed. Its final format was adopted after several pilot-tests. The fieldwork for the survey took place in late 1968. -66-
600 respondents were interviewed in the Sydney Metro politan Area.
Professional interviewers were responsible for
conducting the structured interviews and part of the
intensive interviews.
The tabulation of results was done in 1970, by
computer, at the University of New South Wales.
2. SAMPLING PROCEDURES
A. The Sample; intensive interviews.
Respondents for the 100 in-depth interviews were selected from a master sample provided by a leading 2 Sydney market and audience research company who used a multi-stage probability sample.
The under 17 and over 64 year old and the foreign-
1. Neave & Campbell Pty. Ltd., Crows Nest, Sydney. 2. Audience Studies Inc., Sydney. -67- born subjects were excluded from the master sample, and the remaining sample population divided into age and sex strata to reflect the 1966 Census figures. Within these strata selection was random.
Age-wise our obtained sample of 17 to 64 year olds matched the full sample and the Census, and contained, as desired, only Australian-born subjects. It also showed a small upper-class bias in occupation and education
(which reflects the urban population characteristics of
Sydney) in relation to the New South Wales Census figures which include country areas. Instead of an approximate
47:53 ratio of white collar versus blue collar workers our sample showed the reverse split, and a correspondingly higher ratio of people with more than primary schooling.^
The advantage of such a bias was the relative above- average verbal competence of the respondents. On the negative side, however, one can assume that the occupa tion and education bias somewhat affected the distribution of opinions and attitudes towards the three nationalities. In the structured survey, for instance, attitudes favour able to the Germans and unfavourable to Prance increased with education. But as the in-depth interviews were used to provide qualitative and not quantitative informa tion, the upper-class bias had limited consequences.
5. See Appendix 1 a. -68-
B. The sample; structured interviews.
For the selection of respondents to the structured interviews, a proportional probability selection proced
ure based on the Sydney electoral rolls was used.
Detailed aims and rationale of the sample are shown in
appendix 1 b. Briefly, the procedure was as follows:
individual electors’ names served as the basis of the
selection, but the addresses of electors randomly taken
from the rolls were regarded as dwellings, where non
electors as well as electors could be interviewed.
Persons born in Australia (approximately 88 per cent of the population of Sydney) and aged between 17 and 64 qualified for inclusion.
Because of problems of cost, the sample had to be limited to 600 subjects, and Census sex and age quotas were employed for the selection of the specific respond ent within each dwelling.
Again, educational attainments of the 600 respondents
indicate that the sample contains a relatively lower proportion of subjects with ’primary education only’, by comparison with the 1966 Census figures. The self-rating on class identification on a fixed-choice list also shows a tendency tov/ards upper/'upper-middle when compared with a 1965 -69-
Gallup Poll.4 The difference between the two surveys
probably arises partly from the fact that the Gallup
Poll used only male members of the work force as re
spondents, whereas our figures include females. In
part, the difference may reflect a real bias, and this
fact must be kept in mind when the results of the survey
are discussed. The size of the inflation of the upper/
upper-middle self-rating figures is estimated at 5-7 per
cent.
Nineteen per cent of people who qualified for inter
viewing failed to complete the interview. Of these,
13 per cent were refusals to co-operate, and 6 per cent cases of emergency interruptions, mental inability to cope with the questionnaire and other sundry reasons. Two questionnaires were marred by interviewing errors and could not be analyzed. The total sample for which
results are shown thus stands at 598.
The losses due to refusals are believed unlikely to
seriously affect the overall results, particularly in view of the fact that out of the 13 per cent who declined
4. L. Broom, F.L. Jones, J. Zubrzycki, 'Social Stratifi cation in Australia,1 in J.A. Jackson TSd.), Social Stratification, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1968. -70-
to co-operate only 8 per cent knew the purpose of the
questionnaire. The remaining 5 per cent refused on
grounds not connected with the nature of the survey.
3. INTERVIEWING METHODS AND TECHNIQUES
A. The in-depth interviews
No interview can ever be assumed totally immune from the distortions arising from interaction between the investigator and the informant, particularly when the investigation deals with ethnic imagery and atti tudes and the investigator is foreign born herself.
Various experiments have shown that ethnic prejudice can be aroused or repressed by using interviewers with different ethnic characteristics. A team of Austral ian-born interviewers was hired to check the suspected bias introduced by the investigator’s foreign origin.
On the whole, the differences between the two sets of results were not alarming. The same patterns of
5. H.H. Hyman et al., Interviewing in Social Research, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1954. -71-
images and attitudes emerged from both sources, regard
less of the nationality of the interviewers, but there
were signs of a generalized bias affecting the data for
all three nationalities. Australian-born interviewers
elicited a spicier range of disparaging terms and less
inhibited expressions of anti-foreign beliefs.
Without measuring the amount of bias introduced by a foreign investigator, the comparison with the Austral
ian-born team established that the bias in the data
collected by the writer herself (from 60 out of the 100
respondents) contributed to understate negative opinions
and feelings. One can thus assume that the reported disparaging images are a shade too light and the favour
able ones a shade too flattering.
Deciding on the method of questioning to obtain diagnostic data was a matter of weighing the merits of
non-directive approaches against the use of a checklist of questions. Prior to launching the in-depth survey,
both techniques were tried. It was found that the
effect of channelling the course of a speaker’s thoughts along specific topics led, at times, to collecting be liefs which mattered little to the informants. But this particular weakness, inherent in focussed inter views, was outweighed, in our opinion, by the advantages -72-
of obtaining comparable protocols. *
At least, when an interviewer asks questions about
all the areas which matter to his enquiry, he has a
chance of using his skill in all doubtful areas. When
the onus of choosing the topic for comment is left
entirely to the informant, there is no way of knowing
whether a silence about some aspect of the foreign group
means lack of interest or, on the contrary, embarrass
ment or guilt. With unguided interviews, the essential questions may be by-passed. Appendix 1 c contains a
copy of the schedule of questions used as flexible guide lines in the in-depth interviews.
The testing of techniques for recording the inter views clearly established the merits of tape-recording over note-taking. The argument often put forward against tape-recording, namely that people stand sentinel on their answers when taped, was not found a paramount factor. Once a rapport was established, most people seemed oblivious of the instrument. In exceptional circumstances, the interviewer switched off the recorder and ’chatted’ about sensitive topics in feigned paren thesis from the interview situation.
Tapes proved not only error-free aide-memoires, but -73-
also instruments of discovery in their own right.
Relationships between responses which passed unnoticed
at the time of the interview became apparent during the
play-back of the tapes. In addition, they preserved
the flavour of verbal idiosyncrasies. In our report,
all quotations are given verbatim with their semantic
and syntactic eccentricities.
B. The structured interviews
The transformation of the open-ended probes of the
previous stage into multiple-choice, closed-ended questions for door-step interviewing produced a crop of
problems in procedures, question wording and question
sequence.
Basically two kinds of technique were used: a self-rating device and the Fishbein-type scale.
The self-rating device dealt with liking and admir ation for seven European groups, amoung v/hich were the
three nationalities of interest to us.^ Each subject was handed printed cards bearing five statements of degrees of liking and five statements of degrees of
6. Questions 1 and 3, Structured Survey Questionnaire, Appendix Id. -74- admiration for foreign groups (i.e. - ’I admire them a lot’; *1 don’t admire them at all’, etc.)* The respondent was requested to choose the statement that best described his feelings towards the foreign group.
This supposes that he can discriminate sufficiently between the items and weigh his feelings accurately enough to designate the statement closest to his atti tude .
We admit readily that self-rating is a coarse sorting device, no better and no worse than asking the pollster-type question: ’Are you in favour or against non-white immigration? .Strongly? Mildly?' But despite their roughness, self-rating techniques have proven their empirical usefulness in classifying people into broad categories. The literature abounds in examples of good correlations between self-rating of attitudes and other measures of attitudes.
The self-rating procedures were entirely manual? respondents placed cards bearing the names of national ities in slots corresponding to the statement which best matched their feelings. No words were required. To those for whom expressed prejudice arouses more guilt than feelings of prejudice, the device was reassuring.
In pilot tests where worded answers replaced card-sorting, -75- no respondent ’spoke’ the strongest negative category:
'I dislike them’, whereas almost 1 person in 10 used it when non-verbal sorting was offered.
The Fishbein scale required two measurements: a measurement of strength of belief about a statement describing the foreign group, and a measurement of the evaluation (the good-bad dimension) of the belief.
35 belief items, derived from the most recurrent descript ive terms about the three nationalities collected during the in-depth interviev/s, were used in the structured questionnaire. Each subject thus considered the 35 belief statements four times each: once to evaluate the belief itself (how ’good’, how ’bad' is being emotional, being romantic, being artistic? etc.), and three times to indicate the degree of association perceived between each belief statement and, successively, the French, the Germans and the Italians.
As previously stated, the strength of belief scores, averaged over all subjects, provided the quantitative imagery data. The evaluation of belief scores was the source of quantitative inference about Australian values involved in the ethnic perceptions of the three foreign groups. The summated cross-products (strength of belief by evaluation of belief) of the 35 items provided the -76-
Fishbein attitude scores.
A decision had to be made about the maximum
numerical value which each of the two multipliers could
take. Should the strength of association and evalua
tion of belief be scored out of a maximum of 5, 7, 11,
21, or any other numerical value? Guidance on this matter was not available. In his original experiment 7 Fishbein used a 7-point Osgood scale. Rosenberg used g a 21-point scale in a similar exercise when he measured
the importance to his subjects of certain value and need items. There is no reason to attach a magical faith to the number 7 or 21. Obviously the scale dimension with the greatest validity may vary with the nature of the enquiry and the characteristics of the population. After painstaking pilot-testing it was decided to use an evaluative 9-point judgment scale, running from (-4) to
(0) and from (0) to (+4), and a 5-point strength of association scale v/ith a maximum of (+4) and a ’nil association' value of 0. In this way, the maximum for any belief association was (+4) and the maximum positive
7. M. Fishbein and B.H. Raven, 'The AB Scales: an Opera- tional Definition of Belief and Attitude,' Human Relations, 1962, 15, 35-44. 8. M.J. Rosenberg, 'Cognitive Structure and Attitudinal Affect’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1956, 53, 367-372. -77- or negative value of an item was (+4) or (-4). Con
sequently, the highest attitude score measured on a particular belief item was (+16), the maximum negative
(-16).
Luring the pilot test the interviewers who experi
mented with 5, 7, 9 and 21-point scales reported that many people felt disconcerted with the larger scales
and hesitated endlessly about the ’hair-splitting’ dis
criminations they demand. The majority were in favour
of a 5-point scale, which was finally adopted. Although
in fact the (-4) to (+4) evaluation scale contains a range of 9 points for the respondent, the discrimina tion judgment appeared to cover only 5 points. This came about because his contribution was split into stages: a first stage involved sorting of the 35 statements into ’good', ’bad’ and ’neither good or bad’ traits and habits; second stage requested the actual rating of 'how good' and ’how bad’ of the categorized items. Based on an intensity judgment of 0 to 4, the range covered in fact (-4) to (+4) without involving an overwhelming 9 points to handle at once.
Finally, evaluative ratings had to precede strength of belief association ratings. When the inverse order was adopted many subjects were hindered by a mental set. -78-
They carried over into their evaluative judgment the
’false-true’ blinkers adopted in the strength of belief association exercise. Instead of thinking: ’how much do I value being good-looking in others, or warmhearted, or how much do I object to migrants who do not learn English?’, they would say to themselves: ’yes, the foreigners I know are warm-hearted, true, so I rate warm-hearted (+4)’, or ’no, most of the migrants I see around are not particularly good looking, so I rate good- looking (+1)', thus completely missing the point of the evaluative judgments, Q. 5 and Q. 7 in the questionnaire had to precede all other questions dealing with ethnic imagery.
4. DETAILED FINDINGS
The detailed tables of findings are bound in a separate volume under the heading Appendix 2. 5. STATISTICAL TESTS
The Statistical significance of the differences
between the 35 ’strength of association' ratings obtained
in relation to the French, the Germans and the Italians
was tested by a series of two-tailed t tests. The
105 paired comparisons (French-German, French-Italian,
German-Italian) revealed only 8 instances of differences not significant at the .05 level.
Since the results discussed in chapters VI and
VII are statistically significant, no further mention of these tests is made in the body of the report.
The t values are shown in Table 41, the last table of Appendix 2.
X* and Contingency coefficients have been calculated for Tables 9A, 9B, 9C of Appendix 2. Their values are reported in chapter VIII. V. PERCEPTIONS BETRAYING THE PERCEIVER: AUSTRALIAN BEHAVIOUR AND VALUES
Interesting features about Australians emerged from the intensive interviews and the structured questionnaires. These are examined in the present chapter.
In section 1, our observations deal with the behaviour of Australian subjects in the interviewing situation as the interviewer’s probings searched their ethnic imagery and prejudices.
Section 2 describes the Australian self-image that ’gave itself away* when respondents compared and contrasted the three outside groups with ’us Austral ians ’ .
Section 3 examines the underlying Australian values attached to beliefs about the three foreign groups. -81-
1. THE INTERVIEWING SITUATION AND-RESPONDENT BEHAVIOUR
A. No vision, blurred visions and ’psycho-logics1
Besides the unco-operative individuals who de clined to be subjected to the intensive interviews before they even knew what it was all about, approximately one person in ten raised objections about the very purpose of the interview. V/ith admonitions to the interviewers, they condemned the 'offensive1 assump tion that national groups possess typical character istics. The following comments, cited verbatim, illustrate their reactions:
Basically, all people are the same all over the world. Nationality does not make them differ ent.//- * People are different from each other as individuals, not just because they happen to be born somewhere.//- I never think of foreign people one way or the other, I just look upon people as they are, one by one, not as a group.//- I know that many people will say that the Germans are militaristic or that the French make love to every woman they meet and that these people expect me to think so too, but I would say that these expectations about foreigners come from misleading T.V. shows. I can't see what differ ence nationality makes to a person's behaviour//.
* The sign //- marks the end of a quotation from one subject and the beginning of a quotation from a different subject. -82-
In addition to these objections, about one respondent in five was reluctant to talk about some or all three of the foreign groups, not because gen eralizing about foreigners was regarded as iniquit ous per se, but because he felt that he lacked the extensive direct experience with the foreign group v/hich would allow him to speak with authority:
I have no right to speak about the French: I have only fleeting impressions about them.//“ I have not had enough to do with them to be very helpful: all I know is from hearsay. There is looseness everywhere in my mind. I never came close enough to enough French people to generalize and I don't believe in generalizing from such limited experience//.
Similar attitudes were encountered by the inter viewers who called at over 600 addresses to administer the structured interviews. Fight per cent of people approached refused to be interviewed on the grounds that the questionnaire was objectionable. In addition
15 per cent declined to answer some questions about the French, 6 per cent made these reservations about the Germans and 2 per cent about Italians. The varia tions in the latter three figures reflect the smaller incidence of contact Australians have with French people.
Only a handful of the 100 respondents who were -83-
encouraged to talk freely and analyse their images in
the intensive interviewing situation showed their
awareness of a difference between beliefs about foreign
groups one knows exist at large in one's environment
without necessarily endorsing them, and images one
feels to be 'true' perceptions.
I have never met any French people and most of the things which come to mind I know them from movies. There are also things everyone says about the French. I can give you the image everyone has. My own is probably not that much different - I had no chance to improve on it - but I must also tell you that I only half believe in it//.
The distinction between trusted and distrusted
perceptions does not tell the whole story. Respond ents who expressed misgivings on the accuracy of their second hand images were nevertheless invited to track
down their 'unjustified' impressions and feelings.
In the process, it became clear to the interviewers,
and to some exceptionally lucid subjects, that even
distrusted beliefs can and do inspire feelings of sympathy or antipathy towards foreign groups. The
skimpy knowledge, the suspicious imagery seems to
influence its owner insidiously, at odds with his values. -84-
Some resporxdents diagnosed another type of
discrepancy. They noticed contradictions between the
picture, foremost in their minds, which they labelled
'my image' and other non-integrated components, which
they referred to as 'what I know about the foreign
groups'. This knowledge, they complained, had not
found a niche within their image of the foreign group.
They realized they were holding two distinct types of
beliefs which did not fuse into one gestalt.
I have an image of France which is all frivolity, fashions and night clubs. I never associate the French with industry or science. Yet I have read a lot about French engineering. I know France leads Europe in aeronautics for instance. Consequently I should have revised my picture of France which only contains gay and frivolous elements. I should correct the old export symbols of France with what I found out about a technically advanced nation. But somehow it does not happen. I find it very confusing//.
Although the introspections we owe to the more lucid subjects throw interesting lights on the complex ity of foreign images, one must remember that the major ity of people tolerate without discomfort likely mis representations and some inconsistencies. Often a subjective logic even shields many from noticing any twist or incoherence in their representations of the foreign group. -85-
Here are two instances of typical psycho-logics:
Yes, the French are effeminate... they have a reputation, anyway, for keeping mistresses and taking a great interest in that sort of thing... to us, it makes for an image of an effeminate kind of man//.
The Germans are highly intelligent, cool and precise people. They know exactly what they want and set out to do it in a rational manner, they think and then act with method and logic...
But the same respondent, when probed later in the interview about the behaviour of the German people under Hitler, superimposed a second portrait over the cool, self-controlled image presented initially:
....What the Germans did to the Jews can be explained in terms of a ruthless leader in complete command. You could not say that the German people wanted these atrocities. It all happened through their love of the fatherland: it is so strong that a man like Hitler could lead the Germans around like sheep by letting them believe that everything he v/anted for Germany was for the common good of the fatherland. It was as if the German had lost their free-will and their ability to think. They acted on their emotions channelled by Hitler into the wrong direction. The crimes against the Jews are not something you could blame the German people for....
B. Australian reluctance to disparage foreign groups
Many respondents attempted to apologize for be littling or censuring foreigners.. To the majority who -86-
agreed that the Italians 'look dirty' the statement
appeared to summarize the result of consistent observa
tions. They often took pains to explain that they
did not intend to degrade Italians by mentioning their
unclean appearance. A small minority derived satis
faction, however, from its verbal assaults on one or
all of the three out-groups. Those who did, usually
volunteered many unsolicited details about some 'shame ful' foreign habits:
Where an Australian would use a car, an Italian will go around on a push bike and save his money., they are very stingy. You go to the workshops at the railways and you can see them there sitting with a slice of salami for lunch. I see an Italian going home every night with a bag of chook heads to feed the wife and kids on them. They live in a fowl house with one tap between four sheds, four families in one shed. What I object to is that they prefer to live under those conditions to save money. I think it’s revolting if you want to know.//- Italians don’t appeal to me one bit: they are scruffy, dark and on the smelly side. To tell you the truth, when I think of Italians I think of slobs, just slobs, greasy slobs. You couldn't possibly compare our men with a mincy little Italian. They are cowards, they are like sheep... the way they follow the Pope for instance, isn't that like sheep? They think they are terribly artistic because they have a barber who can sing. In no way are they like us... well, they have two legs and two arms, I suppose, but that's about all//.
This type of self-gratifying disparagement occurred in less than 10 per cent of cases within the intensive interviews. In the overwhelming majority of -87-
instances, the negative imagery of Australians fits
into the variety: 'I am a little reluctant to talk
about it'. Whether this polite wrapping around the
disapproving descriptions was always genuine is
difficult to assess. All one can say without reserva
tions is that most Australians bear in mind that raw
prejudice is not ’nice* and that it should not be
displayed too liberally - at least not in front of
strangers.
The structured questionnaire approach whereby
respondents are treated as anonymous sample units was
more successful than the personalized situation created
by the intensive interviewing procedures, in eliciting
clear-cut expressions of prejudice. This was partic ularly noticeable within the milder ranges of hostility. Milder unfavourable attitudes were often ambiguously
expressed in the intensive interviews, and it was at times impossible to conclude whether the respondent had
any overall favourable or unfavourable attitude:
I don't know how to put it... some Italians could show a little more personal hygiene. Some could be less narrow-minded,some may be all right. In my opinion, they are not like us at all, they have completely different habits, eating habits for one, are totally different. I must say I disapprove a bit of their living habits but perhaps they don't know any better....
When these respondents were asked to say more specific
ally how they feel about Italians, some tended to say: -88-
’Oh, I quite like them, you know’ arid shy away from
■* abrupt expressions of dislike. In the structured
interviews, on the other hand, 21 per cent of respond
ents selected the phrase »I DON'T LIKE THEM MUCH’ as the one which corresponds best to their feelings. In this situation their commitment was manual: they shuffled cards bearing the printed words to signify their attitudes. Protected from the obligation to speak their prejudice, they expressed it more willingly. Anyone who investigates prejudice in Australia is likely to drive the less coarse, less arrogant variety under ground, at least temporarily, unless he comes equipped with the least threatening techniques.
In general, expressions of contempt (i.e. ’they are not a good race’.... ’Australia should stick to a good standard of people’) came forth more freely than direct expressions of dislike.
Strongly hostile attitudes, however, occurred about as frequently in the intensive interviews as in the structured interviews. Seven per cent selected the phrase 'I DISLIKE THEM’, and approximately the same ratio of people were unambiguously contemptuous in their own freely chosen words, as in this type of remark:
Australia would be much better off without this spineless lot//.
* Negative feelings often ’escaped' only later in the interview, as a parte comments when subjects were caught off guard. -89-
2. THE AUSTRALIAN SELF-IMAGE
A. ’Our Anglo-Saxon heritage1.
Explicitly or implicitly, each of the three foreign
groups was affixed to some 'higher order', of which it
was conceived as one particular 'species’. The Italians
were catalogued 'Latins'. The French, more complex,
fitted two orders: Continental and Latin. The Germans too received a double-coding: they were both Continent
al like the French and Anglo-Saxon like 'us Australians’.
The analysis of comments which respondents volunt
eered to define these labels suggest that a few 'genus' attributes stereotype these 'higher orders'. A limited set of bi-polar traits opposed Latins and Anglo-Saxons,
sometimes also called the 'more Northern races'. The most popular dimension contrasted the /dark/Latins with the /blond/ and /fair/ Anglo-Saxons. Next in order of
frequency of mention, came the dichotomy/emotive, hot- blooded/ versus /controlled, reserved, cool, matter-of-
fact/. Continentals were matched against Australians, with the help of social rather than character traits:
polish, manners, culture, respect for tradition, pride
in one's national identity were believed to be typically -90-
Continental * .
Although the features v/hich define Latins, Anglo-
Saxons and Continentals are few, their emotional implica
tions v/ere often strong, particularly when the contrast
Anglo-Saxon versus Latin had racial overtones. When
’Anglo-Saxon' meant 'our stock' and when 'Latin' (i.e.
olive skins and emotionality) meant 'not us', latent racial antagonism was aroused. Most Australians thought that 'our common Anglo-Saxon heritage' makes Germans and
Australians more like each other and that skin colour, body build and displays of emotions set the Italians and the French apart:
It would be harder to pick a German than it would be an Italian or a Frenchman if you met one. Italians, for one, are much darker. You'd pick an Italian by his looks, by their colour, their stocky build. The Germans with their light eyes and light skins are more like us: let’s face it, we stem from the same stock.//- Italians got their very dark population, they are quite a coloured race, we are closer to the Germans: in appearance we are the same type.//- The Germans have the same Anglo-Saxon background as us. Just from their physical features, they'd be more like us.//- Basically, the Germanic races are closer to us because they are not an excitable people, they are more down-to-earth, like us.//- I feel I have less affinity with Latins than with German people. Latins are not as stable as the Northern races. Latins seem to live on the crest of a wave; their irrational thinking makes dealing with them virtually impossible for us//. -91-
Respondents to the structured questionnaire were requested to rate on a five point scale, the degree to which, in their opinion, each of the three nationalities appeared to them 'like us, Australians’. Their answers confirmed the impression gained through the intensive interviews: although Germans may display many other wise unlike-Australian traits, the overall perceived impression is of a people more ’like us’ than the French or the Italians.
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
4r ’They are much like us*
French 3-
2- 1.84 G Germans
1- 0.72 Italians
0- F G I
Even when some traits were recognized as common to both Australians and French or Australians and Italians, such as: 'the French, like us, are easy-going’, these similarities were usually treated as accidental exceptions. -92-
For the Germans, common traits served more often to reinforce the likeness theme^ whereas noted differences were more willingly overlooked. There is little doubt that racial perceptions strongly account for the
Australian tendency to regard similarities between the
French or Italians and themselves as more ’exceptional’ occurrences and to view similarities between the Germans and themselves as better evidence of likeness between the two people.
B. A ’Lucky Country’ self-image.
Sorting the three nationalities into Latins and
Anglo-Saxons and establishing a ’racial’ distance be tween Latins and Australians exposed one facet of
Australian self-perceptions. Other aspects of the self- image were traced from our respondents' answers in the intensive interviews to such questions as: ’What can
Australians learn, if anything, from the French/the
Germans/the Italians?’ or ’Is there anything in part icular you like/you do not like about these people?’.
Spontaneous comparisons between ’them’ and ’us Austral ians’, scattered through the descriptions of the foreign groups, also enriched the self-portrait. The material about Australians, gathered from Australian perceptions of three foreign groups, combined into a self-image -93- reminiscent of Donald Horne's picture of Australian society in the sixties. It lacked the original's richness of observations and style, but many themes of the amateur portrait echoed the professional one.
Australia is a young nation:
Many Australians view their own nation as an adolescent, still in the making, with a great future lying ahead. To many, Italy and France are 'have- been' old countries, wobbling under the weight of their past. By contrast, Australia as a nation is bursting with youthful vitality. Here are a number of typical remarks:
We are a young nation, we have a short history and no traditions of our own. Italy and France are old, bogged down by their outmoded ways and habits.//- We are still a pioneering nation, still developing, still going ahead. For Italy and France, glory is a thing of the past. We have no worries about our future//.
Take Britain, add America:
Australia's British ancestry is frequently acknow ledged, particularly to emphasize, as mentioned previous ly, Australians' ethnic affinity with the Germans, whom
1. D. Horne, The Lucky Country, Penguin Books, 1964. some respondents consider ’our cousins', and Austral ians’ lack of affinity with Latins. Added to the British raw material, we find both an American ingred ient and a development along ’our own lines’. No one cherishes the contention that Australia is just another
Britain or another America. ’We may have borrowed from both, but we make an original whole’:
We have a lot left over from the English stock, two hundred years back.//- We are the joint product of Britain and the United States, but we have developed our own way of life.//- We started to grow along British lines, then we had American influences - now I think we start creating things here.//- If you go back a few generations, we nearly all come from the Pommies, but our environment is more like America's was fifty years ago. We borrowed a lot from them. The combination of the British and American models makes us different from either//.
We are prosperous:
There is widespread awareness that Australia's standards of living are among the highest in the world.
We are v/ell endowed, it is said, with material luxuries our food, cur homes, our places of work match the best elsewhere. The French and even more so, the Italians, appear deprived in Australian eyes, in comparison with high local standards. Satisfaction, pride and some times contempt colour many factual-like statements.
Here are a few remarks, taken at random: -95-
We have a high standard of living, we are far superior in that respect to most other countries in the world.//“ We have the second or third per capita income in the world, we are very fortunate.//- We are really doing very well, we are a land of plenty.//- We have a high stand ard of living and we would like to keep it that way - it is important for us to ensure that people who have not got the same background do not spoil it for us.//- You find in Italy and France people who live in a manner no Australian would ever accept. No sanitation, no light, filthy holes they call homes.//- Italians accept very low standards of living: you would not see Australians all herded together in little hives, screaming and yelling.//- The average Frenchman lives in pretty poor conditions compared to ours: the French are not overendowed with wealth.//- Most of our graziers are well off, but look at the French peasants' houses.... smelly dingy places, a cow and three or four chooks: that's them//.
How handsome we are!
In the minds of most respondents, the picture of the tall, bronzed, healthy, well-built Australian en dures. Some people imply, although no one actually says so openly, that Australian men are better-looking than the males from the dark or frail Latin 'races'.
Latin people tend to be small and squat, we are reasonably tall and broad-shouldered.//- We have a very good physique through outdoor living and sport.//- Our appearance is very good:1 we have that kind of ruggedness, characteristic of our landscape. The French by comparison are rather frail and smooth.//- We must be number one or equal one in the world as far as the physical part goes, most of us resemble the picture of the tail bronzed Australian - we are sort of -96- clean-looking, healthy-looking blokes. The Italians and the French are not generally big fellows, are they? The French are small and wiry types, the Italians short and heavy//.
A minority of male respondents remember the
Australian woman. Those who do, pay tribute to her beauty:
Our women are among the most beautiful in the world.//- The average Australian woman looks better than the average woman anywhere in the world//.
From the volume of comments focusing on the
Australian male one deduces that both male and female respondents are more inclined to build their national image around the male prototype,leaving the female in the background as a pretty accessory to the central male figure.
A tgood guy1 self-portrait
Australians whole-heartedly endorse the image of warmth and friendliness they know visitors to this country take back home.
We are often told that we are generous, far more generous than our European counterparts.//- Australians are open and friendly people.//- -97-
We go out of our way to help others.//- Foreigners always tell us that we are hospitable, friendly people willing to accept anyone at face value.//- The Australian is a person who is warm-hearted//.
To most respondents, this friendliness goes hand in hand with deep-seated sincerity and honesty:
You know where you stand with an Australian: they tell you when they don’t like a thing; when they are friendly they mean it, it is not just politeness or manners. They call a spade a spade because they are sincere.//- We. are honest, we say what we mean and we dislike under hand deals.//- We have that sort of open ex pression which comes from deep-rooted honesty.//- We don’t like and don’t put on false airs and graces//.
Easy, pleasure-loving people:
On a word count, the adjective ’easy' outnumbers any other single term Australians use to describe them selves. ’Easy’ flavours Australian temperament, manners, attitudes, and behaviour:
We are easy to approach and to get along with.//- We like to take things easy,//- The Australian is an easy-going sort of a chap who gets on with anybody.//- Generally, we are easy people on the score of our living: nothing upsets us very much.//- We live from day to day: we are easy going.//- we are an easy, good humoured, good tempered race.//- We are relaxed sort of people, v/e do like easy-going things.//- The Australian has got a pretty easy sort of a nature; he will easily speak to others//. -98-
The Australian easy-going nature is perceived as the
antithesis of the drive and determination displayed by
the German or Italian migrants:
Those who migrate to our country show a lot of get up and go in comparison with Australians: we are basically pleasure-seeking. Australians are off to the pub at 5-00 p.m., Italians keep working.//- We are less determined than the Germans - we are just easy-going, not hardworking.//- The migrants toil and sweat; we like everything that has nothing to do with work.//- We like to live well, we like our leisure, we like our fun, we are happy-go-lucky without too many worries about anything. In other words we are not a terribly ambitious race, like the Germans - it may be a good thing for usl//
On the whole, the pursuit of pleasure and leisure is more often stated with indulgent tolerance than a word of censure. Occasionally, however, ’easy-going’ comes to mean ’disturbingly lazy' and judgment is passed:
We are perhaps too free and easy, insofar as we take too much for granted: we are not quite pre pared to work .for the pleasures we expect.//- On the whole we are lazy people who want all the good things in life and none of the hard work.//- We are too complacent and in time we will have to pay for it//.
'Fair go, mate'.
’ 'Fair go' is what happened to the ideals of liberty, Equality and Fraternity in Australia', -99- claims Donald Horne. He adds:
’The whole thing is ingrained in the texture of Australian life.' 2
Many of our respondents also perceive their nation that way: egalitarian and free.
Equality does not necessarily mean 'without classes’.
Few Australians go as far as reviving the old myth. The perceptions include some social stratifications, such as the boss and the ordinary bloke, the educated, the snobs, the wealthy and the working man. But in opposition to the gaps supposed to cleave the Italian and French social fabrics, Australian society appears quasi-egalitarian.
In Italy, you get your very rich people and your very poor, whereas in Australia no one is ex tremely rich or extremely poor.//- The French have a large peasant class that lives in shock ing conditions; the people in the cities, on the other hand - some of them live in opulence. We don’t get that kind of difference here.//- The average Frenchman lives in pretty poor cond itions compared to us, he is not overendowed with wealth; but then, you also get in France a class of jet-set people ostentatiously wealthy.//- My image of Italy is of beautiful elegant shops for a small class of scintillating people who spend their money on clothes and kill time at parties
2. D. Horne, op.cit., p.32. -100-
and at the other extreme a large number of peasants at bare subsistence level who live in ignorance and dirt... in Australia, our classes are much less divided. It is appalling to have people living in castles and others like animals: you do get that in Italy once you go South of Rome//.
The adjective ’free’ applied to Australian people, their society and way of life, challenges the term 'easy’ for pride of place in our respondents’ proto cols. The freedom theme has perhaps the deepest emo tional resonance amongst all those treated by our re spondents. Some descriptions timidly approach lyricism.
The Australian is a free man in lots of ways because our way of life is more free, less hemmed in by the crippling do's and don'ts of older environments.//- Freedom and democracy are important to us. I sincerely believe many of us are prepared to die for it.//- Aust.ralians feel that this is a free country where everyone has a chance and he loves it for it.//- Everyone in Australia has a fair go regardless of his origins: that is a pretty precious thing to have.//- Australians have a way of life that is much freer than anywhere else in the world//.
Pressed to explain in which way Australian people are free, subjects develop the ideas of democracy and independence. The champion, of democracy believes that
Australian political institutions are immune from dis ruptive pressures and that the political game is fair- play in Australia. The French, by contrast, are -101- sub jugated by a ’dictator’ (de Gaulle) and Italians permanently dominated by the Pope. Both have strong communist parties, poised in the background, pulling strings. In Australia, democratic freedom flourishes, unhindered.
The champion of independence looks at foreign interference suffered by other nations and sees none in
Australia. Eastern Europe under Russian domination frequently is chosen to illustrate ’our national in dependence'. Other favourite contrasting examples are
Eastern and even V/estern Germany, perceived under the tutelage of foreign guardians, as if still politically under age. Australia, doormat of American economic interests, is a very small minority theme. Australia, a free agent is the popular view.
The concern with freedom and democracy sensitizes many respondents to symptoms of subjugation in other countries:
The French under de Gaulle seem to have lost a lot of their freedom: everything in their country seems set and done before they have time to judge it. De Gaulle rules like a dictator. I bet Australians would not toler ate a man like that. V/e want the freedom to make our own decisions and I am glad to say that this is the way it works in our country -102-
because democracy is important to us,//- There is no one in charge in Australia who can pull all the strings and we don’t have to follow our leaders like sheep the way the French do at the moment.//”- In Italy political freedom is re pressed either by the Pope or the communists. Italians are a downtrodden race. In Australia, people being more educated think more for them selves, hence the lesser influence of the Church and the Left and the better functioning of demo cratic institutions in our country//.
Finally, to many, 'freedom’ is merely another way of saying ’intolerance towards any form of authority’.
We are much harder to push around than any other race of people.//- An Australian loathes being pushed around. We hate people telling us what to do.//- Too much authority is certainly one thing Australians can’t stand.//- We have little time for anyone who thinks he can boss us around: we want to decide for ourselves what we should do - not be told.//- We are much harder to push around than any other race of people//.
Attitudes toward the German’s acceptance of author ity suggest a possible ambivalence in Australians’ re actions to authority. According to the stereotyped self-image, an Australian is a man who values his free dom from authority and who rejects submissiveness. Yet at the same time Australians admire (and long for?)
German disciplined dependence on authority, particularly at work and within the family, if not in political matters. These observations support Taft and Walker, who have also noted a basic ambivalence underlying the -103-
Australian attitude towards authority. The following quotations illustrate Australian respect for German acceptance of authority:
The Germans have a striking gift for efficiency and discipline: they are orderly people who are willing to obey rules and this is the secret of their strength".//- It is because the Germans accept authority and discipline that the Germans can beat all other nations in anything they want to do.//- German superiority has some thing to do with German respect for seniority, leadership and people with know-how. This kind of respect is a good thing because it helps when people at every level accept the fact that people above them know better than they do.//- We could learn a lot from German acceptance of their superiors - in Australia we treat our boss as an equal or even less than an equal, we resent him, we feel ill at ease with him because we don't like him to tell us what to do and how we should do it.//- With the Germans,the father is the real head of the family: what he says goes,, children learn early in life to accept authority - it makes them better citizens later because it trains them to obey the rules of law//.
His sport and his beer
Whereas an Australian's love for his home and his family is singled out for mention by a minority of re spondents only, the Australian passion for sport, gam bling and drinking impresses everyone without fail. In fact, many portraits of the typical Australian contain
3. R. Taft and K.F. Walker, 'Australia', in A.M. Rose (Ed.), The Institutions of Advanced Societies, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 1958. -104- no other mention beyond 'sportsminded' and ’boozing', as if these two traits exhausted the self-perceptions.
Although no one says as harshly as Donald Horne that
Australians are a nation without a mind, Australian lack of concern for issues and ideas, lack of taste for cultural pursuits, and general intellectual apathy are noted, particularly by the more educated respond ents :
The sporty type Australian would not be too worried about the world beyond him: he is content to talk about sport and the races. He would not be concerned with events that happen outside his garden fence.//- The average Australian does not think anything is import ant, he does not take any issue seriously, he would not want or even be able to discuss ideas.//- Australians hold no'serious opinions, they don’t care to think about anything except their narrow interests, they are not devoted to culture, they have still to learn the finer art of using food, wine and love as well as appreciate painting and music. Foreigners would be quite justified in thinking that v/e are uncultured because we are unrefined and materialistic//.
Materialism and indifference to culture are not inevit ably condemned. Deploring comments come mainly from the better-educated, but one finds also, particularly among the working class Australian (the one who will proudly label himself ’working-class’) a sympathetic endorsement of Australia's 'simple' values. Here are examples of how some people view the situation: -105-
We are inclined to be matter-of-fact type of people, with an unspoiled love of outdoor living, picnics and barbecues. We like our beer and our sunshine and there is nothing wrong with that. It means that we are a no frills sort of community of simple wholesome people and I would prefer v/e stayed that way.//- All that fuss about our lack of interest in opera and dancing makes me sick: we love our homes and a good glass of beer and honest food and v/hat was good enough for our parents and should be good enough for us.//- It is important for us to have our own homes, a lot of leisure and a good time, the open air sort of thing. We are not particularly interested in culture but I can’t see anything wrong with that.//- We like our beer, our sport - we go in for the unsophisticated things in life, plain or natural things. We don’t go in for the fanciful, the flourish, the affected in any form or shape. We are not intellectual or cultural snobs. I’d say v/e are unpretentious people, just ordinary nice people//.
The masculine Australian male
Masculinity emerges as a distinctively Australian attribute, spurred on by the provocative presence of a ’French male' stimulus which invited comparisons between ’them' and ’us'. Often perceiving in the typical French man’s behaviour and appearance characteristics which are alien to the Australian brand of masculinity, a sizeable minority of Australian observers experienced discomfort.
The majority underlined the contrast between the French and the Australian male. V/hen the ’typical Australian male’ is hailed as a model he-man, the terms of reference by which the French are appraised are clearly betrayed. -106-
To the frail stature of the Frenchman they oppose the athletic build of the healthy Australian specimen.
French emotionality is the reverse of an Australian's practical resourcefulness. French involvement with things female is pitted against Australian virile pur suits, which include sport and certainly exclude parlour games. One lapidary formula, coined by one respondent, captures the prevailing image of the French male: 'what ever they are, we are not!'
The term 'effeminate' used with all shades of con viction and sometimes antipathy is used in connection with a range of referents: physical traits, dress, interest in women, visual emotionality, can all be assoc iated with effeminacy.
The following quotations demonstrate the imagery associations and contrasts with Australians. First of all, the Australian male (so say our respondents) cuts a manly image:
The average Australian thinks of someone effeminate when he thinks of the French and the way they look and move their hands... Australians don't move that way.//- It is the way they walk and wave their arms... there is something homosexual, not manly, about them. Very few Australians, unless they are inclined that way, would gesticulate like that and swing their hips.//- The French are funny: I mean the way they decorate themselves when -107-
they dress. It makes an Australian’s eyes pop out... They believe in dressing spectacular! (sic) To us, the French do not seem manly be cause of the way they dress, beret and all that//.
Furthermore, the Australian male - the one who exists in the mind of Australians - is tough, rough and self-controlled. He does not care for social refine ments, he is particularly reluctant about social graces in dealing with women. Here he is: non-emotional, unpolished:
An Australian rarely gets carried awfay. He does not forget in his excitement what is going on around him: the French do function entirely on emotions. Australians are far more level-headed.// Australian men would be highly embarrassed by show ing a soft and attentive side to women. They prove their masculinity by being tough, almost rough.//- Australian men do not shower their atten tions on v/omen, as the French do. We are unsophist icated for a start, while the French are terribly re fined//.
That a Frenchman is unlike an Australian in his social role is noted by the majority of respondents.
Not everyone, however, jumps to conclusions about these differences. Some content themselves v/ith stating the contrast. Others quickly judge and react either with sympathy for the French or v/ith impatient disapproval.
To what extent do Australians endorse the socially homosexual facets of Australian masculinity immersed in -108-
the pub, football and toughness? A tentative measure ment was tried within the frame of the intensive inter views. After the subjects had been encouraged to ex press their views about differences between Australians and the French at their own pace, in their own words, prodded somewhat perfidiously by oblique questions, they were presented with a list of standardized statements.
The items covered in the statements relate to cultural expressions of masculinity we assumed to belong to the controversial areas in which Australian ’toughness* and
’roughness’ clash with French ’refinement’ and predilec tion for female company.
The results, based on the small sample of 100 sub jects and reported with no pretence of statistical sign ificance, consistently indicate preference for the Aust- ralian brand of masculinity and rejection of the French variety. Dis Agree agree D.K. Total I’d rather see a man go in for a glass of wine and women than for his beer and football. 18 78 4 ' 100 A real man would rather spend his time with women than with his mates. 32 68 100 Kissing between men, the way some Continentals do it is a bit revolting. 69 28 3 100 Continental men have a way of getting excited I find rather appealing. 16 84 100 Very suave manners are not manly. 62 28 10 100 -109-
Agree Disagree D.K. Total I’d rather see a man be soft and sissy than hard and arrogant 32 60 8 100 A real man would not want to be called ’extremely refined'. 60 40 100 I prefer a man who goes in for art and poetry than sport and adventure 7 90 3 100 A man who goes in for art and poetry is a bit of a sissy 59 40 1 100
3. AUSTRALIAN VALUES UNDERLYING BELIEFS ABOUT FOREIGN PEOPLE AND FOREIGN COUNTRIES
A. Values attached to beliefs about foreign people
* A list of 33 belief statements about the three foreign groups, submitted to the sample of 600 respond ents to the structured questionnaire, with the purpose of investigating the propensity to endorse these beliefs, was also used to obtain an indication of the values
Australian people attach to such beliefs. Is there a consensus among Australians when they discriminate between
’good’ and ’bad’ personality traits or features of social
* The statements were selected from the most frequently spontaneous mentions recorded in the in-depth interviews. -110- behaviour? Is being 'scientifically* minded' more valued than being 'artistic*? Does one's sex or educa tion influence one's outlook? Is there evidence for the contention that one's perceptions of a foreign group in a favourable or unfavourable light is influenced by the values one brings to the situation?
The technique used in the structured situation, com bined with the knowledge gained from the intensive inter views, provided tentative answers to these questions.
A brief reminder of the investigation procedure may be warranted: at the beginning of each interview, before any mention was made of specific ethnic groups, the re spondent to the structured questionnaire was asked to rate 35 belief statements on a /good - bad/ evaluation scale. The statements were presented to him as 'observa tions about groups of people'. The respondent first sorted the statements into three piles, labelled 'good', 'baa' and 'neither good nor bad' (traits or habits).
Subsequently he turned his attention to rating each 'good' and 'bad' item on an intensity scale. How good or how bad does he judge each trait or habit described in the statement? For this purpose, the respondent used a 'ruler' graded into four intervals, each division marked 0 .to 4, where the value 4 was given the meaning 'very good' or
'very bad'. These respondent ratings v/ere then translated -111- by the interviev/er into algebraic values ranging from very bad (- 4) to very good (+ 4) through the value 0 * for ’neither good nor bad’ items.
From the numerical values assigned to statements judged good or bad, individual and sample hierarchies of approved and disapproved personality traits and hab its were obtained. A subject’s ratings reflect his individual values. Aggregated subject ratings yield sample group values by sex or age or other demographic characteristic. The individual ratings were subsequent ly used to ’weigh’ each respondent’s perceptions of the foreign groups and derive a Fishbein attitude score.
The sample group values, that is the algebraic average of the 600 judgments, concern us here.
Whichever way one breaks down the sample, by age, by sex, by education, by self-rating on socio-economic class, one finds a large degree of consensus in the rat ings attached to the 35 items of the list. The follow ing table ranks the majority of the items used, in the order of their obtained ratings, from the most valued to * the most condemned.
* Complete detailed tables, for all quantitative data, are shown in Appendix 2. -112-
BRIEF EVALUATIONS
Total Sample Ratings
A. Positive or ’good* traits: Values Hardv/orking +3.50 Trustworthy +3.44 Reliable +3.36 One can learn a lot from them +3.22 Warmhearted +3.21 Educated +3.17 Determined +3.14 Intelligent +3.13 Creative +3.01 Good soldier, can fight +2.78 Scientifically minded +2.66 Artistic +2.60 Like us +2.10 Romantic +1.99 Good looking +1.94
Negative or ’bad’ traits: Excitable, emotional -0.78 Stick to own groups -2.00 Affected manners -2.19 Conceited -2.59 Effeminate -2.81 Display bad manners -2.94 Arrogant -2.95 Do not learn English -2.96 Threat to Australia's standards -3.07 Loose morals -3.10 Lower the standard of the neighbourhood -3.12 Look dirty and untidy -3.17 Cruel -3.44
Hardworking, with a score of 3.50, was thus ranked ahead l of warmhearted (+3.21), reliable (3.36) and trustworthy
(+3.44). Although Australians perceive themselves as -113-
leisure-and-pleasure-seeking, they approve of hard work
in others.
Further dov/n the scale, education (+3.17) and intelli
gence (+3.13) follow warm-hearted. The rating for educa
tion challenges the myth that Australians do not value
education. They may not be prepared to make great sacri fices for it, but they admire it in others. There is evidence from the rating that they think of it as some thing ’more valuable' than, for instance, drive and deter mination (+3.14) or even the 'guts’ to fight one's enemies
(+2.78).
Pitted against each other, being scientifically minded (+2.66) is judged more valuable than being artistic
(+2.60), just as a country that leads in science and tech nology is more admirable for it than one which is a source of art and culture to the world, a result later shown in statement evaluations about countries.
To be 'like us Australians', is not a neutral state ment. It carries positive connotations (+2.10). Could one conclude from the favourable aura attached to the feature 'like us', that being 'different from us' would be an overall negative statement? For both the intensive interviews and the quantitative approach reported here, -114-
supporting evidence exists that some differences are
acceptable, that some traits foreign ’to us', are even
admirable, but also that many others are resented. Thus the statement, 'People who fit in well with the Austral
ian way of life' is a high positive (+3.00), whereas
'Theydon't try to learn English' describes a form of un-
or anti- Australian behaviour which is strongly censured
(-2.96). In fact, a group wh\chdoes not try to learn
English arouses as much antagonism as one whck behaves
arrogantly (-2.95), as if failure to learn English was
equated with arrogance - the arrogance of refusing to
adopt the host-country's language and 'blend in' with the
Australian way of life.
Effeminate tendencies in men are, of course, negat ively rated (-2.81): the intensive interviews prepared us for this judgment. Excitable and emotional, two traits which in some cultural environments connote the human capacity to feel and respond - a valued gift, a
faculty to experience one's environment sensitively, -
are negatively evaluated in Australia, albeit mildly
(-0.78).
Finally, at the apex of all offensive traits, the
sample ranked 'cruelty' (-3.44) and a 'dirty and untidy appearance' (-3.17). The stigma attached to lack of -115-
personal hygiene even exceeds the disapproval Austral- 1 ians express for 'loose morals' (-3.^0) and 'conceit' Sq (-2.A5).
In a limited number of instances, sub-sample differ
ences emerged from the analysis of ratings by demographic
characteristics.
Women, as well as the lesser educated and the older
respondents, displayed a consistent tendency to polarize
their ratings, when compared with male respondents, the more educated and the younger groups. Although both sets of groups ranked the statements fairly similarly from 'very good' to 'very bad' (i.e. their hierarchies of values appeared similar), the former three sub-groups were consistently more extreme, more inclined to use the higher values of the numerical / good -- bad / scale. In contrast, men, the more educated and younger age-groups
cast their'value judgments relatively more often around
the moderate numerical values.
-X- The evaluative rating totals obtained by each sub group expose the response style differences by sex, age and level of education:
* These totals are not used as such within the Fishbein scale. They have been calculated here to expose sub-group differences in rating scale usage. -116-
EVALUATION OF BELIEF RATING TOTALS
Positive belief Negative belief Base ratings ratings numbers
Male +54.93 -39.65 (305) Female +57.62 -41.23 (293)
17-30 +53.21 -38.73 (188) 30-44 +55.44 -40.12 (197) 45-64 +58.64 -42.22 (213)
Primary only +60.45 -43.76 (82) Some Secondary +58.34 -40.93 (293) Secondary completed +51.68 -39.12 (128) Some Tertiary +52.39 -37.81 (95)
One can therefore conclude that when one of the more
’moderate' sub-groups occasionally rates an item with more emphasis and conviction, either in the positive or the negative direction, the difference is worth noting.
The following items belong to these exceptions: both effeminacy and emotionality are more severely rated by men than by women:
Statements Evaluative ratings Men Women
They are emotional and excitable -0.92 -0.63 Their men seem effeminate -2.82 -2.80
Not too surprisingly, the item 'their women are partic ularly attractive' was more generously rated by men than -117-
by women and therefore also belongs to the list of
exceptions. Otherwise, all remaining 32 items were
given higher evaluative ratings by women.
The relatively better educated group in our sample
rated with exceptional emphasis four items on the list.
Whereas all other statements received lower ratings than
those given by people with primary education only, these
four items scored relatively more extreme positive or
negative values.
Statements Evaluative Ratings
People with People v/ith tertiary primary education education only
They are reliable people 3.51 3.43 They are a desirable type of migrant 3.20 3.18 We can learn a lot from them 3.31 3.11 They are cruel people -3.58 -3.54
The effect of age on rating tendencies was consistent.
All exceptions disappeared .when the younger group (17-29) was contrasted with the older group (45-64). As the older group was also the relatively lesser educated one, the effects of age and education cannot be separated with- * out further cross-tabulations.
* These additional cross-tabulations were not included in the computer programme, as the -number of ’standard’ cross-tabulations was already large. -11 8-
B. Values attached to beliefs about foreign countries.
In a similar fashion to the evaluation of beliefs
about foreign people, a smaller list of 12 belief state
ments about foreign countries was submitted to sorting and judgment.
Again, high consensus in rating was the rule. The
table below shows the hierarchy of values attached to
these beliefs, obtained from the total sample.
BELIEF EVALUATIONS
Total Sample Ratings
A. Positive or ’good* features: Values Is friendly towards other countries +3.57 Has a great deal to offer the world of today +3.55 Everything it produces is of high quality +3.44 Has a high standard of living +3.41 Is a good and reliable ally of the +3.30 Western World Is one of the world leaders in science and technology +3.31 Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world +3.23
B. Negative or 8 bad1 features: Is dominated by the Catholic Church -1.62 Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -2.90 Is ruled by a dictator -2.96 Seems lacking in backbone -3.11 Is basically unstable -3.23 -119-
Although friendliness ranked highest (+3.57), the ability to produce high quality goods and the enjoyment of high standards of living v/ere relatively more valued than staunch support for the Western Alliance. The gap in the ratings between the evaluation of a country’s
’high standards of living’ (+3.4-1) and of its ’contribu tion to art and culture' (+3.23) supports the self-view of a people more inclined to appreciate material goods than works of art.
The negative ratings attached to ’domination by the
Catholic Church’, ’arrogance in foreign policy' and
’ruled by a dictator’ were expected. The hierarchy obtained among the five ’negatives’ was more surprising: the most deprecated of the listed features, namely ’lack in backbone’ (-3.11) and 'basic instability' (-3.23) suggest that Australians regard disorder, anarchy and 'softness' in foreign countries with even greater dis taste than international arrogance or loss of internal freedom.
Again, women, the lesser-educated and the over 45 years old sub-samples rated each statement more extremely.
The only higher evaluation given by the more ’moderate’ raters was found among men, who assigned a more positive value than women raters to the statement 'is one of the -120-
world leaders in science and technology’.
The comparison of ratings between ’leadership in
science and technology’ and 'is a source of art and
culture to the rest of the world' shows interesting sub
sample differences in emphasis. Female raters (regard
less of education) and those with tertiary education
have greater consideration for a country’s contribution
to art and culture than to science and technology. Men
and those with primary education only hold reverse values.
Statements Men Women
Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world +3.14 +3.33 Is one of the world's leaders in science and technology +3.33 +3.29
People with People with primary tertiary education education
Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world +3.24 +3.21 Is one of the world’s leaders in science and technology +3.55 +3.03 . -121-
C. The relationship between cultural values and attitudes to ethnic groups
Australians feel they belong to the Anglo-Saxon
'stock*. To them Anglo-Saxon means blond, fair, matter-
of-fact, self-controlled, non-Latin. Australians place high value on hard work and drive. They approve of the reliable and the trustworthy, the clean, the organ ized, the moral, the educated, the toughly masculine.
Productive, rich societies enjoy high status in Austral ian eyes.
Consequently, Australians tend to feel uneasy or prejudiced towards the dirty, the uncontrolled, the emotional, the expressive and, to some extent, the dark, particularly the dark South Latin male (not female).
Of course, the basic contrast between the constellation good i.e. clean/organized/rich/masculine and the constella tion bad i.e. dirty/unstable/poor/soft does not en compass the complexity of judgments and feelings about the German Anglo-Saxons and the French/ltalian Latins. Other traits, not specifically Anglo-Saxon, discredit the
Germans. Some, not specifically Latin, embellish the French and redeem the Italians. The basic constellations are thus modified; the good-bad dichotomy is complicated -122-
by additional bad/good traits. No Single cultural
value can satisfactorily account for the Australian
attitude towards any of the three nationalities. To
say that the Germans are liked in Australia because they
are considered hardworking people (hardworking being a high positive cultural value) or that the French are not
particularly appreciated because Australians do not
generally fancy emotional ’races’ (emotional being a negative value) simplifies the situation to the point of absurd distortion.
It may occasionally happen that an individual holds only one salient belief about the foreign group and that his appraisal of the foreign group is thus a function of the evaluative aspect of this single belief. But the majority of people spontaneously mention between four and six descriptive traits in the in-depth interviews and usually add another few attributes after probing. There is little doubt that for the total sample of respondents a more valid estimate of the cultural evaluative factors related to ethnic attitudes is obtained by taking into account the salient features of the three foreign groups:
This may be achieved by listing the 35 positive and negative statements and by allocating each in turn as a -123- credit or a dis-credit to the nationality with the highest propensity for the trait in Australian eyes.
Taking the statement fThey are hardworking’ as an example, we allocate the quality to the Germans, because Austral ians perceive them as the most hardworking nationality of the three. For this purpose, we make use of the results of the survey, not yet discussed, whereby each respondent rated the three nationalities in turn on each of the 35 statements, to signify the strength of his mental associa tions between the stated traits and the national group.
The trait ’hardworking* being more strongly associated with the Germans than the Italians or the French, the
Germans are credited with the positive evaluative weight
(+3.50) assigned to ’hardworking’ by our sample. The
35 positive and negative weights allocated to the three nationalities, reflect the ’good - bad’ values under lying Australian beliefs about the three groups. The following table shows these allocations: -1 24-
Evaluative Ratings underlying Beliefs about the Foreign Groups French German Italian Belief Statements: They are particularly hardworking - +3.50 - They are people one can trust - +3.44 - They are reliable people - +3.36 - We can learn a lot from them - +3.22 - They are warm-hearted people - - +3.21 They are well educated — +3.17 They are a very desirable type of migrant - +3.13 - They are particularly intelligent - +3.14 - They are determined people - +3.13 - They are creative people TA ;n wt[/ +3.01 0 " They are good soldiers, they canAustrAl,Än •'*/ t't * 3,0 fight when necessary - +2.78 - They are scientifically minded - +2.66 - They seem to be gay people +2.63 - - They are artistic +2.60 Their women are particularly attractive +2.16 - - They are much like us - +2.10 - They make a fuss of their womenfolk +2.07 - - They are romantic +1.99 - - They are good looking — +1.94 —
Total positive evaluations: +11.45 +41.58 +3.21
They are cruel people -3.44 They look dirty and untidy — — -3.17 They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live - - -3.12 They have loose moral standards -3.10 *— They are a threat to Australia's high standard of living - - -3.07 They don't try to learn English - - -2.96 They are arrogant -2.95 They are easily led astray by ' their leaders - -2.83 - They often display their bad manners - -2.94 Their men seem effeminate -2.81 -- They are conceited people - -2.59 - They are irrational people ““ — -2.49 Their manners are affected and overdone -2.19 - - They stick to their own group - - -2.00 They are excitable and emotional - - -0.78
Total negative evaluations: -8.10 -11.89 -20.53 -125-
Retaining only the summated values, we obtain the following table:
French German Italian Total, positive evaluations: +11.45 +41.58 +3.21 Total, negative evaluations: - 8.10 -11.8ft -20.53
Algebraic sum of evaluations underlying beliefs about each of the three nationalities: + 3.35 +29.77 -17.32
Provided one keeps clearly in mind the procedure by which these estimates were derived (i.e. their depend ence on the specific list of 35 belief statements and on the comparison between the three given nationalities), the figures have meaning. They assess the tone and intensity of the Australian cultural ’lenses’ through which the three nationalities are viewed and compared with one another.
The estimates indicate that, overall, Australian cultural values favour the Germans, even if isolated
German traits encounter high disapproval. They clearly show that the ’typical’ French traits which Australians
’accept' are only mildly valued (artistic, gay, romantic, etc.) when compared to the solid German virtues (hard working, reliable, exemplary, etc.). But they also indicate that French ’vices’ are fewer in number and in general benign in relation to the clash between Australian -126-
values and perceived Italian traits and behaviour patterns.
A similar analysis of the evaluation of beliefs re
lated to the three countries, as distinct from the people,
is also favourable to Germany, whereas France and Italy
share the negative scores between them. From the figures,
France emerges as even less ’worthy’ than Italy in Austral
ian eyes.
Evaluative Ratings underlying Beliefs about the three Foreign Countries:
Belief statements: France Germany Italy
Is friendly towards other countries ■ ... +3.57 Has a great deal to offer the world of today — +3.55 — Everything it produces is of high quality - +3.44 - Has a high standard of living —■ +3.41 — Is one of the world’s leaders in science and technologyaQDOj atA0| feUWt - +3.31 - Is a source of art and culture + 3, 30 for the rest of the world -* — +3.23
Nil +17.01 +6.80 Total nositive evaluations:
Is dominated by the Catholic Church -1.62 Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -2.90 - - Is ruled by a dictator -2.96 - - Is lacking in backbone - - -3.11 Is basically unstable -3.23 — —
Total negative evaluations: -9.09 Nil -4.73
Algebraic sum of evaluations underlying beliefs about each of the three countries: -9.09 +17.01 +2.07 -127-
From the values which emotionally tone the percep tions of the French, the Germans and the Italians in the eyes of Australian observers, one would predict more favourable attitudes towards the Germans than towards the
French and the Italians. The same expectations would apply to Germany in relation to France and Italy.
The analysis of attitudes in terms of respondent self-ratings of their feelings towards the three people supports this prediction. This analysis is shown in chap. VIII. VI. THE FRENCH AND FRANCE THROUGH
AUSTRALIAN EYES
1 . THE FRAME OF REFERENCE OF THE IMAGE
Not only did one-third of respondents develop their image of the French in the absence of any contact with French nationals, but in addition, for the remain ing cases, acquaintance with French people was usually limited to one or two individuals met in Australia.
By comparison, direct experience with German people and particularly with Italian people was both more frequent and more diverse. Eighty-eight per cent of respondents stated they knew German people and almost every respond- * ent claimed contact with Italians.
In the case of the French, the influence of mass media, prevailing cultural stereotypes and sometimes class-room reminiscences were undoubtedly intermingled with the impact of direct interpersonal perceptions. The
* The incidence of direct contact with each of the three nationalities in Australia is related to the sizes of the migrant groups in Australia. The figures for New South Wales are as follows: People born in France, 2,833; born in Germany, 33,610; born in Italy, 72,875- (Census of The Commonwealth of Aust ralia, 30 June, 1966). -129- stimulus ’French people’ conjured up the image of the French in France, occasionally illustrated by the rare specimen met in Australia. The term 'Italian people’, on the other hand, immediately brought to mind the migrant groups in Australia. The frame of reference rarely switched to Italy, unless prompted by a probe- question. For the Germans both the immigrants in
Australia and the people in Western Germany served, on * a fairly even basis, as sources of impressions.
Because the image of the Italians and the Germans was obtained from perceptions of migrants, it included many dimensions along which the French were seldom spontaneously considered, such as performance as settlers, or as a workforce in Australia, or as next-door neigh bours . In the structured questionnaire, six of the thirty-five statements measure traits and behaviour items relating to migrants. On these items, our subjects’ ratings with regard to the French, involved a large degree of ’anticipation of behaviour’ based on impress ions about the French in general, rather than assessment of actual achievements. In the case of the Germans and
* The existence of Eastern Germany seldom influenced the image of ’The Germans’. It was only considered in answer to questions about the political life of Germany, and occasionally referred to as a source of ’suffering’ for the German nation. the Italians, the impact of real life-experiences dominated the ratings. Nonetheless, the difference between the assessment of the French and the assessment of the two ether nationalities is not as formidable as it appears to be: in all instances, the rater’s over all acceptance of the foreign group or contempt for it biased his ratings, whether he was appraising a real situation or speculating about the ’likely behaviour’ of the French as possible migrants.
2. DIMENSIONAL SIMPLICITY
Some subjects dismiss the French in one snarl: ’The French', they say, 'are nothing else but a .... people’. One adjective completes the elliptical formula. The image is reduced to a single dimension. Other sub jects, on the contrary, accumulate multi-faceted impres sions of the French. They produce prolific descrip tions: the French as citizens, the French as lovers, the
French as masters in the art of living. Examples from both categories illustrate the contrast between a dimen sionally complex image and the constricted variety: -131 -
An architect speaks: 'When I think of the French, I think of a highly creative and imaginative nation. They are endowed with a flair for fashions and for design in general. They are also vivacious and sensual people, with a gift for enjoying life. Wine, food, beauty, style matter a great deal to the French. One usually thinks of them as a nation of flirts - this may be, but they reconcile it with a high regard for women who, to the French, are more than objects of pleasure....1
INTERVIEWER PROBE: 'Is there anything else which comes to your mind when you think of the French?'
*- Yes..., I think... unfortunately the French nurse a passion for petty politics which gets them into strife. I shudder at the quibbling and bickering, at the lack of civic sense one finds in their social and political life. They are really very complex people. They can be extremely emotional and yet their language is powerfully clear and precise. I could give you other examples... other examples of their fascin ating complexity. The French manage to combine fierce nationalism with a total absence of racial discrimination.
In sharp contrast, the following outburst shows a typical case of reductionist!: 'The French? To me they are really nothing else but an erratic lot'. INTERVIEWER PROBE: 'Is there anything else which comes to your mind when you think of the French?'
'No, that's all! That’s all they are... an erratic lot I ’
The individual who perceives a variety of features about the foreign group tends to fragment his attitudes as his gaze moves from trait to trait: he may view with appreciation the 'joie de vivre' of the French, but also -132-
condemn their lack of civic sense and puzzle over their
contradictions. Conversely, the person who tags the
foreign people with one assertive label which ’sums
them up’ rarely feels ambivalent. Unambiguously, the
single label sets the tone.
It seems common sense to assert that the very minor
place of the French and of France in Australian people’s
consciousness explains the cases of skeletal imagery.
Though often correct, the argument does not account for
all instances of reductionism: some individuals in our
sample had even travelled to France and were claiming
that they ’knew’ the people well, and yet they regarded them in a monolithic manner. V/ith painstaking consist ency, they utilized every bit of information they had acquired about the French in support of their one-sided conception.
Usually, those who had access to knowledge about
the foreign group and yet clung to one all-encompassing descriptive trait strongly objected to the trait, which
to them, totally defined the group.
The ’nothing else, but....’ definition and the densely filled-in picture are two extreme forms of imagery. The most recurrent image design contains more
than one, but usually less than six or seven spontaneous -133-
strokes, to which, after further probing, a few more
details or new features are added. There is ample
evidence from the in-depth survey that the majority of respondents carry in their minds no more than a handful
of traits to evoke a nation, distant or near, including
their own.
With the help of a descriptive list of attributes most subjects can recognise additional aspects of their impressions of the foreign groups which they overlook
in the portrait they produce unaided. They can even
expand their original impressions, guessing a number of traits they had never thought of by including attributes congruent (in their minds) with those already associated with the group. It is this ability to 'fill out' an often meagre original portrait with the use of the check list provided by the interviewer which justifies such a device.
The next section of this chapter examines the spontaneously produced image dimensions descriptive of the French, captured during the intensive interviews, as well as the quantitative ratings obtained during the structured interviews, on the statements corresponding to the freely initiated portrait. The next section combines in the same manner the qualitative and quantit ative information about France. -134-
Chapter VII then presents the images of the
Germans and the Italians. It uses these as ’benchmarks'’ against which to project the Australian profile of the
French.
For convenience of analysis, the overall attitudes associated with the images presented here are left to be dealt with in chapter VIII.
3. IMAGE CONTENT: THE FRENCH
N4#re personality and behaviour dimensions, listed in the left-hand column, in descending order of freq uency of mention within the intensive interviews, summar ize the salient perceptions of the French in our sample of Australian males and females. Traits mentioned by less than 10 per cent of people have not been included in this portrait, made up from the impressions of 100 observers.
In the right-hand column figure the corresponding statements of belief items which the 600 respondents to the structured interviews associated with each of the --135-
three national groups, using a 0 to 4 points rating
scale.
Spontaneous Perceptions Corresponding about the French. Questionnaire Items of Belief Statements.
1. Excitable, emotional, They are excitable and irrational, tempera emotional. mental . They are irrational people.
2. Unstable, unreliable, They are reliable people. erratic, undependable, They are people one can irresponsible. trust. They are basically un stable .
3. Effeminate, not mascul Their men seem effeminate ine, affected in -their Their manners are affect manners. ed and overdone.
4. Artistic, creative, They are artistic. cultured. They are creative.
5. Pleasure-loving, fun- They seem to be gay loving, sensual and gay people. people; not very hard working .
6. Immoral, amoral. They have loose moral standards.
7. V/ell-mannered. suave, The men make a fuss of attentive to women, their womenfolk. romantic. They are romantic.
8. Attractive, sexy, Their women are vivacious women. particularly attractive. -1 36-
1. The excitable French.
As Latins, the French are ascribed the 'typical emotionality of the Southern races'. Many descriptive terms convey the image of people lacking the composure and control 'worthy of a man'. Highly-strung, tempera mental, effervescent, irrational: one term or the other is invariably part of the portrait. The concept is enriched with references to gesticulating arms, demon strative kissing and childish jumping up and down, per ceived as strange displays of feelings, if not as trans gressions of decorum and decency. Hand and arm gestures particularly, being alien to the Australian culture, are singled out for mention:
They get so involved that they forget everything around them and wave their arms and carry on and on .... they are a torrid type of race.//- They are very temperamental people: look at the way they use their arms. When the French get into a temper they even kick and stamp.//- I am inclined to think of them as a screaming, gesticulating lot, displaying temperamental nonsense//.
The hot-headed French, a far cry from the down-to-earth, casual Australian, enters into almost every answer to the question which investigated the 'main differences -137- between an Australian and a Frenchman'. The spectacle
of male emotionality at times arouses distaste among
Australian observers. Approximately one third of respondents explicitly state their irritation as they mention the trait:
I just don't like highly-strung races.//- I am inclined to think of the French as nasty, irrational sort of people.//- I don't like the Frenchman’s emotionality.//- I can't stand their excitability//.
The tolerant answers given by the other subjects focus on the difference between the Australian and the French without introducing negative value judg ments :
They are an emotional race: we can't under stand them at all.//- A Frenchman is much more excitcible than an Australian, that's v/hat makes him so different.//- A Frenchman has never been anything like an Australian: he is very emotional.//- We have nothing in common, the French are far more excitable//.
With no 'head on his shoulders’, a Frenchman is believed blinded to commonsense, reason and method. His lack of self-control, his tendency to panic are often viewed as slurs on his masculinity, and as
characteristic of inferior female behaviour:
The French, like women, panic before they notice that so much can actually be done to prevent the unpleasantness he tries to escape. He does not notice that he didn’t have to lose his head in the first place.//- They get so excited you cannot get through to them. They never give themselves time to think. The Germans or even Australians are more scientific ally based. The French, in everything they say or do are less rational, less methodical. This has a lot to do with their fiery tempers. They flare up like women and not much sense comes out of them at all//.
In the structured survey the association between the French (and the Italians) and the belief state ment ’they are excitable and emotional’ was strong, particularly by comparison with the rating given to the Germans on this item. The ratings obtained by the two Latin nationalities on the item ’they are irrational people’ were less emphatic, but again the contrast with the ’rational Germans is apparent z
* See Appendix 2 for detailed Tables of BELIEFS ABOUT'NATIONALITIES (Tables 1.0 to 18 C). -139-
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
'They are excitable and emotional'
3, 60 3.36 • 1 wm 0 *$.'■ *• • •
• •
• • 1. 30 y/A • • sb: • •
• 4 vyy//. • 4 I
'They are irrational people'
French f u
Germans
I Italians • • • -1 40-
Among those who feel no antipathy towards emotionality, one occasionally finds the opinion that a dash of French excitability would actually improve the apathetic Australian.
Australians lack in visual (sic) emotion: I’d like a bit of enthusiasm bubbling over.,//- Although I may find that the French are a bit too emotional, they would act as a counter balancing influence on us who lack this trait, if they ever migrated to Australia//.
V/omen, as a group, are more sympathetic to the emotional French. They often use the terms ’extro vert’ and ’demonstrative’ to expand on the meaning of ’emotional’. They also tend to connect emotions with ’warmth’ and ’sincerity* more frequently than male respondents. A higher proportion of women than of men actually welcome the French departure from the ’typical Australian non-committal reserve':
The French are excitable, they show' their emotions: this is marvellous because you know where you stand.//- They are pleasant extroverts.//- They are demonstrative, excitable people, with gay, sparkling eyes.//- They are quite sincere, you can actually read their feelings on their face.//- They are very spontaneous people, not bound by control, they show their feelings and make you share them. They’d laugh cr cry in the middle of Martin Place if they felt so inclined. They are so much less self-conscious than our men, less inhibited, less embarrassed by their feelings, more capable of empathy, and there fore closer to their women//. -14-1-
2. Fundamentally unstable.
Emotionality, to many Australians, carries the
seed of instability. As a nation, the emotional
French seem to have demonstrated to Australians, time
and again, how 'unsettled' they are. Recent and more remote episodes of French history are offered as
evidence. The French, as people, are thus assigned
the characteristics of the Fourth Republic or those of
the transient political regimes since the 1789 Revolu
tion :
I am inclined to take a poor view of their funda mental instability. They are hilarious 1 Didn't they have a government falling every week? They are very unstable, very volatile. They alv/ays seem to have trouble with their politics. I always think of the French in a state of chaos, with nothing being rationalized and settled. They are very emotional, hence unstable people. This has been true throughout France’s history.//- They have always been feuding and fighting within themselves; I feel they are not as stable or as dependable a type of person compared with the Germans.//- The thing about the French people that I suppose is the most outstanding is their instability. With the French, I think of people in eternal turmoil, never stable//.
The fact that the French 'needed De Gaulle to achieve political and economic stability after years of chaos' -Un
substantiated the beliefs about the basically unstable
make-up of the French. Like immature children, the
French, according to Australian observers, v/ill not be
have themselves unless a strict, authoritarian father-
figure firmly controls their disorderly lives.
As the country is always in strife, as the French always fight each other, they require a strong leader. Whereas the Germans and Australians give themselves leadership, the French need a strong man to settle them down and prevent them from developing as a nation of rabble again.//” French politics reflect something of the French temperament. They are so fundamentally unstable that God only knows what is going to happen to the French when le Gaulle goes. He seems to be the only big strong rally that the unsettled French have.//- They are inclined to be unstable to the extent of needing a strong leader to control them. Napoleon and De Gaulle prove it//.
Another aspect of French ’instability* is seen in the Vichy regime of the 1940’s and De Gaulle’s foreign policy of the 1960's, which both have ugly connotations. They expose the ’deplorable habit the French have of changing sides’. The older subjects in our sample are particularly severe in assessing the Vichy episode. The almost hostile relations in the I960’s between De Gaulle and France’s former allies vindicate beliefs about the disloyalty of the French:
The French seem able to change sides very quickly all the time. To my way of thinking, they tend to be a bit two-faced: they don’t seem to be a sincere type of people. They make anybody their friend, but there is nothing sincere in it. It -143-
does not take much for a Frenchman to drop you and change his mind: look at what happened during the war!//- They excel in double talk, in politics, in everything. You can’t trust them. The French are swayed by any side that is winning, whether they gave their word or not. Their Vichy set-up really proved that their word is not to be taken seriously. That goes for the country and the people.//- The French are inclined to be a bit sly and v/ork for whom they fancy at the moment. They do not stick to their allies. The French are not very reliable, very loyal people//.
Those who were reluctant to interpret French behaviour as being disloyal or wicked often chose the ’irrespons ibility’ theme:
One does not quite understand their attitudes to wards their responsibilities. They do not have the nationalistic spirit of the Germans who work for the common good of their country. Not the French! Their economy, their politics are like the sort of people they are: here today, gone tomorrow.//- They are unstable, they don’t care, they are irresponsible.//- A Frenchman has changed sides more than any other nation: he is not basically responsible.//- Before I go into any deal with a Frenchman, I would want to investigate the situation very thoroughly. If the* French as a nation could have produced such a fiasco as the Maginot line, it makes you think that the French, as people, are rather irresponsible//.
In the structured questionnaire, the French scored 1.85, in contrast with the rating of 2.60 assigned to the
Germans, on the item ’they are reliable people’.
On the more strongly emotionally worded statement,
’they are people one can trust’, the Germans still score marginally higher than the French. TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
’They are reliable people’
2.60
'They are people one can trust’
F L } French
ysj G tyy Germans
I *.*.*.* Italians -145-
A relatively smaller proportion of women than men refer to French lack of reliability or trust worthiness. When they do attribute these traits to the typical Frenchman, they fire less likely to be influenced by political events. The female version of the volatile Frenchman has more exclusively social and sexual connotations. It is the image of the flirt and the able seducer, fascinating and a little frightening, which can produce among Australian women the impression of a disingenuous and unreliable French male.
The French do a lot of fast talking, partic ularly to women. I am convinced that they do not mean half- of it. The French do not appear a terribly sincere sort of people.//- The French do as they feel and know little control of their sexual impulses. They don’t conform to a pattern of solid values. This lea.ds them from woman to woman. I like a man to be more solid and reliable. I visualize a Frenchman running every minute to visit his mistress. I would certainly not call him dependable or stable.//- A Frenchman has the idea that he must flirt with a woman, regardless of whether he wants it or not. To him it is the done thing and it comes naturally, but to me it seems con trived, even false and dishonest.//- From what you hear and imagine, they run to t2/pe: I see them as dashing lady-killers who probably don’t mean a word of what they say. You always think: 'Watch those Frenchmen’.//- I would not trust a Frenchman, I mean as a woman: it is quite obvious that he does not believe half of what he says//. label their males less Germans Though women 4 3- 2 i«*w 0
t - -
TOTAL BY
In To generous conception
they 'effeminate', SEX
us, tagging on
SAMPLE
OF
are reliability,
they
RESPONDENT also
towards
both
the
are of BELIEF rate
what many French -1 less
effeminate.
46 the
the 'They
ASSOCIATION
- when
respondents is severe
Germans:
male French
'appropriate' are compared
reliable with towards
lower
RATINGS
are
the people' with
the than
unflattering guided behaviour
Australian French the
by
and for
-147-
a male. In many instances, the image of a typical
Australian male functions as model of masculinity
against which the appearance and habits of Frenchmen
are appraised. ’The French male's actions’, a subject admits candidly, ’are really foreign to us’
and he adds: 'this amounts to the suspicion that they
are effeminate'.
About one-half of respondents based their portrait
of the French male on one or several ’effeminate’ cues.
Looks, gestures, modes of dress, occupations at which the French are supposed to excel, polish in manners, a liking for the company of women, displays of emotion,
are singled out as ’un-Australian' characteristics of the French. They condition many observers to suspect the French possess some effeminate streak. Even those who hesitate to jump to conclusions nonetheless recog nize that the French appear, though they may not really be, 'that way inclined’ to an Australian observer. ’I
can't really tell’, a cautious subject remarks, ’whether
they are in fact what they seem to be, but they certainly give you that impression’.
The inclination to judge foreign groups on poor evidence seems particularly pervasive in matters of sexuality. Europeans tend to regard young North Africans -148- holding hands in public as homosexuals. Likewise, many Australians rely on their intuitive apprehensions
in matters of virility: since the French move their hands or hips in a manner 'significant* to them,
effeminacy is imputed.
Perceived through the Australian cultural lenses, a variety of traits ascribed to the French signal likely effeminacy:
Movements and gestures:
I am not saying he is effeminate only because of the manner he dresses, or because he is ever so polite. You don't pick a man who is effeminate only by his clothes or his sophistic ation. It is really the way he stands, it is his hands, the smoothing of the hair or the eyebrow, the tongue over the teeth, all these tell you, for sure, where a man belongs.//- The French are very dainty... put it that way... they more or less do not walk along as we do, they seem to walk in a very sv/eet, swinging way... this tells me they are a bit feminine.//- From, what I have seen in films... they gave that appearance... you know what I mean... it is hard to put it down to something definite, but it is there, it is the way they move their hands... //- It is the way they move: look at Maurice Chevalier, there is something like that about him, something funny in his movements, something homosexual, not manly.//- G-oing from what you see in pictures, their mannerisms, gestures, waving hands and so forth, they are too expressive as far as their hands are concerned, it is all hands and hand signals: they appear more feminine than we'd like Australian men to be//. A kiss that tells
Almost 7 people in every 10 agreed with the statement presented to respondents at the end of the intensive interviews that ’kissing between men, the way some Continental people do, is a bit revolting’.
Before this item was presented for appraisal, a number of respondents raised the topic without being prompted
The way they act towards other men, kiss them on the cheeks and that sort of thing, you wouldn't find Australian men doing that. It goes to show that the French must be rather sissy.//- After a soccer match these French men kiss each other: this looks pretty effem inate and distasteful to us. We shake hands, the Froggies kiss//.
Frail build and fussy clothes
Big bodies and muscles are equated with mascul inity. As Australians visualize small and frail people when thinking about the French, the temptation is strong to ascribe to the males the symptoms of their physique.
The French are sort of weedy, they are not masculine at all.//- The men have closer to feminine looks than Australian men, that is why we tend to believe they aren’t quite masculine.//- They appear feminine to us because they are small and light in build, like women//. In addition, Australians generally believe that
the French male takes excessive pride in his clothes
and nourishes a predilection for flamboyant, fussy
and frilly garb:
They look effeminate: this has something to do with the way they dress, I mean they take such pride in themselves that they tend to become feminine. They wear showy, pretty, over-elaborate attire. I, for one, recoil in horror at the berets and the dandy foot wear.//- I always imagine the French dabbing perfume behind their ears and beauti fying themselves with flashy ornaments//.
Hairdressers, couturiers and emasculation:
Some occupations catering for female needs carry unmasculine connotations. No doubt, Australians would place the words ’hairdresser' and ’couturier’
on the 'feminine’ end of a semantic differential scale dealing with the masculinity-femininity dimension.
With their reputation as fashion and coiffure experts,
the French expose themselves to the hazards of mental
associations with these ’dubious’ professions. The
Christian Diors and the Pierre Cardins cast their
'homosexual' shadows over the French male:
The French go in for dress designing, hair dressing and ballet, these are occasions (sic) that are quite different to what we like our men to do. Frenchmen, in that respect, are -1 51-
entirely different to Australian men, they are more feminine in the sort of occupations they like to take up, I mean dressing women, setting their hair and that sort of thing, they are more feminine than v/e like, anyhow.//- I am sure that thinking of the French as being a bit effeminate has a lot to do with dress designing and perfuming.//- When I think of Frenchmen, I think of hairdressers and of dress designers, of things with a feminine leaning. You never hear cf famous French scientists or engineers. They definitely do not strike me as as manly as the Germans or the Australians//.
Refinement is rather suspect.
Australian symbols of virility include a certain roughness, a certain lack of polish as reported in the preceding analysis of the Australian self-image.
It was mentioned then that three-fifths of our sample in the intensive interviews endorsed the opinion that 'very suave manners are not manly', and the same proportion of respondents agreed that Ta real man would not want to be called 'extremely refined'.' Approx imately one-third of respondents took the matter up spontaneously, before we suggested it to them.
They take so much pride in themselves, they go to such extremes to be suave and refined that they tend to become feminine.//- They go to the extent of being perfect in every little detail of their bodies - women go like that into every little detail about her hair and her toenails and in matching her dress with the colour of her eyes and also in being precious in the way they speak and the gracious manners they put forward in -152-
company - when a man does that .it makes him look feminine.//- 'The French are not interested in rough games, but in good eating, in sophisticated living, they have this dapper appearance and these elaborate manners plus a pencil slim moustache., they are far too refined... I was going to say ’sissy’, but sissy is a bad word, ’too refined’ is a kinder way of putting it//.
The quantitative results support the qualitative find ings. The French scored higher than the other two nationalities on the item 'their manners are affected and overdone’.
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
’Their manners are affected and overdone’ 4t
French
G Germans 1.30 0.90 r/.Y.
I Y.Y. Italians ♦ » • • F G i -1 53-
The social enjoyment of women.
’Australians’, a woman respondent explains,
’equate masculinity with a glass of beer and surfing: it is connected as little as possible with the other sex, except perhaps for something to boast about'.
Her misgivings are substantiated by all those who castigate the Frenchman's predilection for female company. Underlying the disapproval of French tastes, one senses the Australian male’s fear that female company, in large doses, emasculates the social image of a man. Approximately 7 respondents in every 10 rejected the suggestion contained in the item: ’a real man would rather spend his time with women than with his own mates'. The same point is made in these verbatim comments:
Frenchmen pay a lot more attention to their womenfolk than we do, and this to our minds, this nonsense going on, I mean when a man takes such interest in women and their company, put it all together, it makes an image of a sort of man which, to our way of thinking, is far more connected with women than he should.//- The fact that the French are constantly watch ing the girlies and saying sweet nothings to them and wasting their time preoccupied with the social graces in connection with the other sex rather than with doing a man’s job, partic ularly when that job is looking after his country in times of war, here is something that makes you feel the French are not quite masculine//. V -1 54-
Emotionality conjures up sissiness.
V/ith emotionality and excitability as trademarks of the French, effeminacy and sissiness are often inferred by-products. The link between excessive emotion and lack of virility is neatly expounded in a typical comment from a male respondent:
The cool, intellectual approach to ideas and events belongs to man, and excess of emotion in facing problems and situations belongs to women. Thus the more emotional a man, the more effeminate he becomes, and the more a woman becomes a mentally self-controlled type, the more masculine she will be//.
The polarization man//controlied//rational// versus female//prey of her emotions// denotes a belief system about the sexes in which excitement and emotion correspond to the effete. A selection of comments which expose the excessively emotional-cum-effemirate impression the French produce appears below:
They get so easily excited, more so than any Australian I know. They seem effem inate because they get carried away like women.//- The French do cry I To an Australian, crying is a slur on his man hood, but the French do it as a habit. They are excitable people, whereas you think of a man as someone rather a bit collected, who can think calmly in times of emergencies.//- They are far too -1 55-
excitable, and this goes to show there is a feminine streak in the French.//- A man is someone logically based, he uses his mind or at least his common- sense, but you couldn't say that about the French. They flare up like women//.
Are respondents who infer effeminate tendencies from excessive emotionality lacking in consistency?
Italians, who are perceived as being even more emo tional and excitable than the French, are rated significantly less effeminate. Perhaps emotionality is used to rationalize an impression that the French are effeminate based on other cues which are difficult or embarrassing to verbalize. Perhaps in the amateur- psychology system of -our respondents, emotionality is a necessary but not a sufficient condition of effeminacy.
Over two-thirds of respondents gave the French ratings other than nil on the item ’their men seem effeminate’. These ratings do not measure the extent to which the French are believed to be actually effeminate, but the extent to which 'they give that impression'.
Although the majority of respondents has the feeling that appearances are against the French in this respect, most hesitate to state the impression with conviction.
Of the 405 respondents who scored a value other than zero, 320 used the rating value 2 or 1, which indicates the pervasiveness of their feelings. TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
'Their men seem effeminate'
r ira 3- F Ul French
2* 1.75 PH O Germans b 4 1 JRSjCL I 4 • • • • •! 0. 20 • * • ’ • I M ! *•*.** Italians O
Women, as a group, are less inclined than male respondents to endorse the belief that French manners are affected and overdone and that the French seem effeminate.
Male Ratings Female Ratings
Their men seem effeminate: 1.85 1.65 Their manners are affected and overdone: 1.79 1.69 Although approximately one-third of male subjects Al'.. " - _ in the intensive interviews specifically rejected any v — r - - 4 . O I . - - . - ' link between polish, refinement, appreciation of female link b?: • ■ . : company and effeminate leanings, the actual defence of c o rrsv" * ' - French gentility came from women; some go as far as T c r '■> ’ :■ .■ ■ expressing a distinct preference for the French brand exrres':■ - - - - - of masculinity. of mascul .
I don’t think at all that the French are effeminate. Being charming to women may look as if it is effeminate to some Aust ralians, while it is certainly not. There Is also the excitability of the Frenchman - again, the average Australian will associate this with effeminacy. This is ridiculous. French education and refinement standards are so much more intense. These things tend to produce a more effeminate image in the mind of our surfies, but it is only because our men think that sport and roughing makes them more like men. I, for one, don’t agree with that. I would appreciate what the French have to offer if I had the choice.//- Is it because the French are more refined and more inclined to show consideration to women that some Australians think of them as not being quite masculine enough? Our men are a bit crude, they are not used to sophis tication. It is quite silly to say the French are effeminate only because their manners are polished and their clothes more flamboyant.//- The French may give this impression (of being more effeminate) but it Is only from our point of view, it is the way In' which we interpret his polite manners and his way of expressing his feelings. A man can be sensitive and yet virile. The French will pull out a chair when a lady sits down, he will make her feel how her charms move him, and of course, from a rough Australian's point of view, this is sissy//. A palette and a smock: they are artistic.
The adjective ’artistic’ is generously plastered on the French. But although widely used in spontan
eous descriptions and strongly endorsed in the
quantitative ratings, the term had few precise refer
ents in the minds of Australians. Some mention
France’s great painters, throwing in the names of
Toulouse-Lautrec or Picasso, others speak of the French
’artistic temperament' without offering concrete details
of evidence. Sometimes the ’artistic' Frenchman is a nameless artist, bearded, smocked, his nationality
identified by his beret and the streets cf Montmartre where he roams. The term 'cultivated', which often accompanies 'artistic', has no richer background. The French are cultivated because they appreciate ’the
finer things in life', such as theatre and concerts,
they read poetry and respond to aesthetically beautiful
things. These explanations are rarely offered without
interviewer probing. The majority of respondents
content themselves with the bare labels and feel un
comfortable when asked to expand on the terms.
/ Exceptional subjects who give the theme a little more reflection compare French and Australian
attitudes towards aesthetic pursuits:
The French are more artistic than Australians; we don't stop and think about art or design. Most Australians only stick to things they know, they would not be interested in broadening their outlook to include such fields. I feel the average Frenchman would.//- The French are more concerned with the arts and aesthetic values than most Australians.//- The French are more sensitive to beauty, whereas Austral ians will mostly take a practical point of view. The French feel for the finer things in life, like music and the arts, they encourage art more than any other nation: they are more cultured than we are and enjoy more readily the pleasures that go with culture, good theatre, quality films, art shows//.
The association between the French and 'artistic'
reaches 3.18 out of a maximum possible of.4.00. The association betv/een the term 'creative' and the French
is not quite as strong. The Germans, whose creat
ivity is perceived in a wider range of fields (music,
engineering etc.), score marginally higher than the
French on this item, as shown: -160-
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
’They are artistic’ ’They are creative’
3.20 F French 3 r • $ av§§„ 9 <) 0 2J& f W/t. .r v 2 •S r I r/M S r- 7/A Germans -w ^ I G ^ ip. » ! |: y • ■'■ ■» L A I !• k :| im S';/••A- J r Mi f: > Italians ! rv H W/A o]- ' y-j. aao j,... '»/».'S mf/A c i F G
Gay, pleasure-loving;, sensual people
The export image of Paris, fed on a reputation
of naughty entertainment, or on stereotyped ’wine,
women and song’ phrases, is the kind of reference sustaining the happy, pleasure-loving imagery of the
French.
In the majority of instances, the 'joie de vi.vre’
of the French is mentioned with cordial approval.
For a minority, however, tne Frenchman's enjoyment of
pipe is frowned upon as frivolous, if noc sinful sexf- -161- indulgence.
These are examples of both reactions: the positive and the critical:
They are probably warm-hearted and gay at heart. I think they are a gay type of people who enjoy life: I like the French. They are not as dull as the Germans.//- I imagine the French laughing lightly and spontaneously quite often. The mood of Toulouse-Lautrec is typically French for me - the effervescence, the gay lightness, the gay pleasures. They are wise enough to get the best out of life.//- Their highly civilised way of enjoying life appeals to me.//- They are sort of joy-loving people who are looking for a terrific amount of entertainment and capable of enjoying life more fully than most people.//- I like the French, they seem to be fair dinkum in their approach to life: they seem to have less inhibitions than other people. They love life, they love the gay things in life, they are nightclubbing and going out to scrumptious dinners. They have a lively appreciation of pleasurable things that could do us a lot of good//.
They have got a much more sensual way of life than is desirable: they live to eat as it were, whereas Australian people eat to live.//- The Frenchman is more likely to want plenty of entertainment. They would come into the ’wine, women and song' category. There isn’t much backbone there.//- They are more inter ested in play than work, they live a daily sort of life without caring much about tomorrow. I imagine a Frenchman as a bloke who roams the streets a lot. The French are very super ficial, happy-go-lucky people, looking more at today and not a little ahead. They are a less serious and less sound type of people than the Germans.//- I don’t like them, I think they place emphasis on the wrong things as far as living is concerned, they are far too frivolous//. -1 62-
From frivolity to laziness there is only a short distance, which some respondents cover:
The French are a lazy and indolent lot, the Germans have more ambition than the French.//-* The Germans are industrious, not the French, they are lazy.//- They are not terribly hardworking, this is the impression in the back of my mind.//- The French don’t impress me as being as industrious as the Italians or the Germans - too much wine, too much fun.
For the item ’they are gay people', the French scored a high 3.27, and they obtained the lowest association rating with the statement 'they are hardworking\ as we shall see in the next chapter.
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
’They are gay people’ 4t
3. 27 £ '-g French
Germans
Italians • • • • r G 8 -163- r ¥, From naughtv to degenerate .
The theme of French immorality was brought up spontaneously by approximately one respondent in five. As it was probable that some respondents were repress ing thoughts on the topic because of its sexual con notations, a probe question was introduced at the end of every in-depth interview where the matter had not been treated on the subject’s own initiative. The probe was standardized as follows: »WS HAVE BEEN TOLD BY SOME PEOPLE WE HAVE INTERVIEWED THAT THE FRENCH GIVE
THEM THE IMPRESSION OF HAVING LOOSE MORALS. HOW DO
YOU FEEL ABOUT THAT?’ As a result, our analysis of people's view about French morality is not based on 'spontaneous' comments only, but includes the solicited reactions.
The majority - a little over one-half of subjects subscribes to the view of the slightly immoral French. The minority which rejects it sometimes holds the opinion that moral codes are culturally determined and that the French standards are merely different from
Australian standards. The French are not immoral, they argue, but their norms do not resemble ours.
01hers, who also f1nd fau11 with th e incrimina tion, -164- blame the film industry for the non-factual picture.
The comments below illustrate the opinions of those who focus their attention on cultural differences and those who blame false stereotype-creating films and television shows:
a) Probably what would shock us wouldn’t shock them. They might think our attitude is prudish where it’s just the way we live. And they don't think of certain things as being immoral, because they would have a looser moral code than we have and would think 'that's life' and go ahead and enjoy themselves while we would probably be more restrained, not because we are born virtuous, but because we have been told these things are forbidden.//- From our point of view what is immoral to us may not be immoral to them. Their standards are different. For instance, to them marriage is only there to make sex respectable. This is not the way I think of marriage, but that's only because 1 have adopted our way of looking at it, I mean I strongly believe in marriage as the unit of the family as most Australians do//. b) French immorality is fed to us... they make Paris a sex city, every French film is a sex film, you get the impression they are that way inclined because you hear and see so much about it.//- I think people get that impression because of pictures, dancing girls, American films. It is just an image built up by television and publicity. I don’t think they are more immoral than we are or any other nation//.
The conviction that we all are a little immoral, whether we live in Sydney or Paris, is proposed by some -165-
15 per cent of respondents:
When you hear all the things that go on everywhere, including Sydney, I could not imagine that the french could be any worse I
Nevertheless, on the whole, the image of the
French transgressing a supposed universal code of morality prevails. Sometimes the Frenchman is merely ’naughty’ and his misbehaving is shrugged off with an indulgent smile. But in some cases, the depraved habits of the French people arouse contempt
I would say they are degenerate people, morally degenerate because of their moral habits, v/hich, from what I have heard... I have never had' any dealings with them, but from what I have heard about the way they behave, I mean, they are just like alley cats! They appear degenerate in their morals. Nothing is sacred to them, not even their marriage. They lack moral dignity.//- I don’t like the attentions that the French pay to married women. I don’t like men fawning over women. I hate men trying to seduce other men's wives. I strongly believe in marriage as the unit of the family, and I believe that the French have little respect for other men’s wives. I hate it being done so obviously and in public. Their morals need stiffening up.//- They change partners more often than shirts.//- I do not particularly care about the way they behave: love and sex are there to have a good time and marriage is not a respected institution. The men seem to be a nation of flirts, their morals aren’t high, they are always fraternizing with other people’s wives. I don’t admire them for that//. -166-
In the structured survey, the French scored
significantly higher than the Germans and the Italians
on the statement: ’they have loose morals’.
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
’They have loose morals’
French
1.70 Germans 1 i rA-\9. 0 82 1 f.*.*.*. F . a » • • • Italians * • • • I « • • F G 1
f 7 __The dashing, suave lady-killers: the romantic French.
The women’s protocols contain generous praise
for the Frenchman's seductive skills. Punctuated with gratitude for the Frenchman’s perceived adulation
of the female and with fantasies of sexual encounters -167-
with a typical Frenchman, the women's responses denote
a strong fascination with the subject:
I think of the French as being very attentive to ladies, very flattering and all that sort of thing. A Frenchman would enjoy a woman1s company - a Frenchman would mingle with women at parties. Australian men tend to go to one end of the room and talk about football. The women are left on their own to talk about children and housekeeping. The French really enjoy one another’s company. I admire the men for that.//- Frenchmen spoil and pamper their women.//- I find a Frenchman’s charming manners towards women extremely appealing, even though these charming manners may probably be terribly superficial.//- Frenchmen do make a woman feel she is a woman with compliments and flattery. There is nothing more delight ful for a woman than this kind of apprecia tion.//- When I think of the French I always do so in relation to the way they treat their women: they will shower gifts and compliments over the women they like, they really like to lavish their attention on women. They take them out to night clubs and all that sort of thing.
Frenchmen are supposed to be terrific lovers - this may be true simply because they seem to have far more consideration for women than any other race.//- From what you hear and see in films I imagine the French as dashing lady- killers. You always hear ’watch those French men'. I would love to find out whether their reputation as men is overdone.//- I imagine those gallant manners to hide immense skill in the art of revealing a woman to herself.//- The French are supposed to be great lovers: I find them smooth and charming and certainly very sexy//.
The alleged gallant savoir-faire of the French
earns them a high score on both 'they are romantic’ and ’their men make a fuss about the.ir womenfolk1. -1 68
The similarity between male and female ratings on these statements suggests that Australian men also perceive
the French as skilful wooers, but choose to overlook
it in the in-depth interviews.
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
4 r 'Their men make a fuss about their womenfolk’ | 3.16 3 TTr1 French ; 2.51 ;v.v.v, 1 *••••• 2 1 I ••••••* G Germans ! • • • • • 1 1 • ••••© ! * • • • • 1 \ I Italians o- F G I -1 69-
8 8. The vivacious, sexy Frenchwomen
As we have seen, the open-ended questions about
the images people carry about foreivgn people are
almost invariably answered with the foreign male in
mind. It is interesting to speculate on likely
changes in people's judgments and feelings about
foreign groups if the female half of the populations
were less peripheral to the overall perception.
Our sample's reaction to Frenchwomen had to be
solicited by a specific probe question ('AND WHAT COMES
TO YOUR MIND WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT FRENCHWOMEN') as less than three per cent of respondents had 'volunteered'
this information without being prompted.
Where the French male's image arouses an extensive range of nuanced reactions in the Australian mind, from shades of disdain dying away into indifference and in difference muting into shades of approval, the French female, on the other hand, is the object of consistent praise.
The foreign female populations in general, and
Frenchwomen in particular, are probably exonerated from -170-
the responsibility of displaying 'solid' qualities.
If a woman is a little inconsistent, emotional or
changeable, is she not merely being female? One has the impression that the shortcomings of the French male
are quite becoming when applied to the female of the
species. If she is small and frail, she is appealing.
If she is capricious, a little untrustworthy, she is
exciting. If she is emotional and uncontrolled, she
is sexy.
In addition, the Frenchwoman is credited with
sophistication and elegance: these add glamour and
style to her otherwise slightly 'easy' virtues.
She is very occasionally criticized for her im morality, but is far more frequently considered as the most delightful epitomy of femininity. She belongs to the lounge and the bedroom. Italian women represent motherhood, German women may be housekeepers or companions. The Frenchwoman is the female, exquisite and exciting. Her concrete image is either the superbly gowned hostess entertaining for dinner by candlelight or the marvellously gifted partner in a man’s bed.
Australian women, in general, share the Australian -171 -
male’s enthusiasm for the Frenchwoman, hut tend to
confine their approval to glamour and elegance.
Let us first listen to Australian men evoking
their image of the Frenchwoman:
They are renowned to have physical appeal, and use it to the very best advantage. Whenever a Frenchwoman is mentioned, every thing stops to hear about her. I think that the Frenchwoman’s reputation as a woman stands exceptionally high.//- She is very chic and sophisticated. She is also shapely, lively; and sexy.//- I imagine her with big eyes, a lovely accent and a marvellous approach to men - quite realistic about a man’s secret wants. I am all in favour of importing them to Australia by the shipload.//- She is grace ful, very feminine, very desirable... I hope her reputation'is not overrated.//- She is small with dark hair, pretty and vivacious, slight, chic and provocative: I like her.//- She is a nice sexy person.//- I have never met one, unfortunately. I guess she is pretty and flighty, she dresses well, she is fun-loving. All this makes her bright, carefree and gay. I feel she must be something terrific.//- She is erratic and frivolous, but most attractive to the male//.
Less obsessed with sexual appeal, the images of
Australian women are tributes to the Frenchwoman’s
sense of fashion and sophistication:
I have always thought the Frenchwoman has a sort of appeal of her own: she is beautifully feminine and sophisticated.//- 1 tend to think of them as being very glamorous. They appear to be very confident in themselves.//- -172-
I always think of superbly groomed French models, with great charm and elegance.//“ She has great fashion sense and seems the acme of femininity//.
The quantitative results support the qualitative findings: Frenchwomen are strongly associated with the favourable statement, ’their women are particularly attractive'. r ’Their women are particularly attractive’
F ify! French
2.07 . Germans
I Italians F G -1 73-
4. IMAGE CONTENT: FRANCE, TH5 COUNTRY
The image of France as a country contains only
three facets sufficiently salient to justify an analysis
perceptions about France, the political entity; France,
the producer of goods and services; France, the tourist
magnet.
France’s contributions, past and contemporary, to
literature, philosophy or science, to name only a few
fields, remain almost unmentioned« The nation's cult
ural heritage is evoked by listing the names of churches
and buildings for tourists to visit. References to
social values or intellectual orientations, and comments
about forms of sensitivity, were too exceptional to be
included as part of the Australian image.
With male respondents, perceptions about French
politics overshadow all other references. Women
respondents are generally less involved in political
questions. They show greater interest in geographical and social features and often plead ignorance or lack of interest to escape questions dealing with France’s political life. -174-
A. France, the political entity
The three political themes most frequently treated by our respondents in the in-depth interviews, and the corresponding item of belief subsequently measured in the structured survey, figure below:
In-depth Survey Structured Survey
The country is: i.) France is unstable - basically unstable. ii) De Gaulle is a - ruled by a dictator. dictator, unfriendly - friendly towards other to his former allies. countries. - it often displays arrogance in foreign policy. iii) France and her World - the French are good War II record. soldiers, they can fight when necessary.
i .) An unsettled country
For the majority of Australians, France is equated with political instability. According to this widely held opinion, which we have already encountered, instab ility is and has always been a dominant national trait -175- with the French. So much so, that even periods of
stability (as under De Gaulle) are interpreted as
illustrations of this endemic feature.
According to this rationale, it is precisely because France is so incorrigibly unstable that she breeds dictators (the Napoleons, the De Gaulles) who
force some permanency upon the flighty nation. The
disciplinarian explanation of the De Gaulle phenomenon was widespread among those who noted that the Fifth Republic had survived ten years without governmental
crisis.
By connecting France's political instability with the deep-rooted inconsistency of the French character, respondents borrow from the people xo picture their governments and conversely. To some respondents France's political fluctuations are a by-product of the fundamentally erratic character of the French people.
To others, France's political strife serves as proof of the existence of such a character. Few respondents stop to consider the nature of France's institutions or the meaning, to the French, of the concept of individuality, or the weight of France's past. -176-
French political life is completely haywire. The French seem unable to build anything solid to stand on.//“ It has always been unsettled as far back as we go, their history is filled with feuding and fighting within themselves. The French are highly strung, it comes back to that.//- They have had so many governments, they don’t seem to have one for very long, which is indicative of the lack of stability of the people.//- French men are not stable, they are not a good type of person, they are fickle in their general life: just look at the way they run the country! They tend to be quick-tempered, hot-headed people. With the French .1 think of a country in eternal turmoil./'/- They are very flighty: . this is demonstrated by the way they manage their country.//- They have had so many governments: this is what makes me say their national temperament is unstable.
In the quantitative survey, although France obtained the highest score on the item ’they are basically unstable’, the rating is a moderate one
(1.68). The relatively low absolute score may, in part, reflect the fact that at the time this survey was carried out De Gaulle had achieved an era of stability and that the Gaullist party had recently been returned to the French Assembly with the largest majority in France’s parliamentary history. TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
’Is basically unstable’ 4t
French 3 -
Germans
I Italians
ii). Be Gaulle’s dictatorial rule.
Be Gaulle, the giant of the French political scene of the 1960’s, was as much resented as he was reluct antly admired. In three out of every four remarks passed on France's political life, Be Gaulle is mentioned.
He is hailed as the stabilizing influence 'which pulled the country together’ and as a figure which lent France -178-
1 quite a bit of dignity'. At the same time, however, his heavy grip on the French nation appears distasteful to the Australian anti-authoritarian ethic. Many subjects view with contempt the 'meek' acceptance of his 'dictatorial' rule by the French people.
I think they are like sheep. They more or less follow De Gaulle, who is a dictator. The French people are not forceful, they follow a strong man like sheep.//- Personally 1 don't think much of a nation which needs a dictatorial regime. It would be desirable to see the French work together as a reasonable, democratic people; without the need to call upon a dictator//.
In addition, De ‘Gaulle's arrogance in international relations, as well as his ungratefulness towards Britain and the United States, arouse antipathy. In examining the portrait of the French we have already encountered the angry reactions towards the alleged 'irresponsibility' or even 'slyness' of the French. In the following quotations, De Gaulle is abused for his off-hand treat ment of his former allies:
He seems to forget that the British gave him a home and an army during the war and he does not show the slightest bit of consideration for that.//- With the French I think immediately of De Gaulle, this so and so, who twice after the v/ar -179-
bit the hand that fed him, and as soon as the British are a bit down, he revels in kicking them around.//- I have always regarded Be Gaulle as a traitor to the other nations: since the war, he has turned against the British and the Americans that freed France from the Germans.//- I am not keen on De Gaulle overlording over Britain and keeping her out of the Common Market. He is an arrogant type of person, and Europe would be better off without him. Being rude to ex-allies will not achieve anything. It is particularly shocking after the help both England and the United States gave France during the war.
In the quantitative survey, France was strongly
associated with the item ’is ruled by a dictator’ and
’often displays arrogance in foreign policy’. Compared with Italy and Germany, France's rating is the lowest
on friendliness towards other countries and reliability as an ally to the Western World.
Compared to the ratings given by female subjects, male scores showed consistently stronger negative associations and weaker positive associations with
Franc e.
People with tertiary education are particularly
sensitized to perceived French arrogance and lack of loyalty to former allies when compared to respondents with primary education only. -180-
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
Often displa3's arrogance in foreign policy’
4 'Is friendly towards other ’Is a good Ally of the countries’ Western World’ 3 2.45 2. 59 2.27 2
1
0 F G I -181-
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS ABOUT FRANCE BY SEX OF RESPONDENTS.
'Is friendly' 'Is a good Ally' 'Often displays arrogance'
2.93 3 f+++++ «- + + + + + 2.62 f*• + + + + + 2.12 f+++++ fr+++++ 2 1.78 1. 73 ♦■ + + + + ■{• TT?TTT rTTTTT «■ + + + + + f + + + •?■ + *■ + + + + + ►+++++ }■ v + ■!■-J-r f <5- + -S- + J- + + + + + ►+++++ f + + + + + (■ + + + + + S- + 4- + + + 1 ♦■ + + + + + {■■!'+ + <• + hF+++++ + + + + + {-* + + * + »■ + + •}• + + ^ + 4" %"<- + (■++++ + (■ + + * + + H+++++ f + ■> + ■{• + f+++++ i- + + + + + f ■{■ + + + + !■ + + + + + »- + + + + + 0 *+++++
izÄ Female respondents
»« Male respondents
iii.) France's war record
Approximately one-third of women and one-half
of male respondents castigate the French for their laxity
during World War II. The favourable responses refer to
the glorious days of the French Resistance. These
account for two-thirds of female answers but only one-half -182-
of male answers. To the younger respondents, neither facet of French behaviour matters much. But those old enough to have personal memories are committed: they either praise the heroic French:
They were marvellous with their underground.//- They were good soldiers and fought hard for their war effort: they took a caning, but thereafter their behaviour was excellent.//- You have to give credit where credit is due: look at the French underground. Many of our allies were saved by the Resistance//.
or they lash out at France’s softness or even duplicity:
France was hopeless: it did not act as a bulwark against Germany, it collapsed completely. I do not admire France for what she did. With her Empire, she could have continued the war, I don't approve of the way she acted, she gave in far too easily.//- France played it both sides. When it suited her she was on the British side, when it no longer did, she was on the German side.//- I'd rather not talk about it, I get very hot under the collar: first the French are poor fighters, and then France lets us down, and now she turns her back on us and their leader abuses her former allies//. \ -183-
In the structured survey, the French scored honorably in relation to the Italians, on the item,
’they can fight when necessary, they are all good soldiers’, but they were rated significantly below the Germans:
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
'They are good soldiers'
Women respondents, who call to mind more frequently than men do the valour of the Resistance movement, rate the French higher as good soldiers. 184-
BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS BY SEX OF RESPONDENTS
GERMANS ’They are good soldiers: they can fight when necessary’ 4 3.65 ++++N1 3.58 ++■«++* ++4-4-4-4* FRENCH +++4--M- 3 ++++++ _2L70- t+++++ 2.43 ITALIANS f + + + 4" + <-■»■ + +++ + + {* 4- + + ''r + t+++++ 2 fr + + 4- + + 999999 <• + •t' + 4- 4 *■ + + + * + + ■{*++ + + 4 + + + + + 4,4“5"{**I" + »• + + + + + 1.31 f + + + + -f- +++-M- + t+++++ tr *:•+•{- •y 4- + + 4* ■}• + ■i- 4* 1 t--!- + + -!-+ + + + + + + 4-•!■ + •> 4- + H- + + + + 4++4*+4‘ i- v+4* 4” + + ■{•+++ t + 4-4*:- 4 h ■}• 4* + + + ++++++ f *:• 4 ■:* 4 I- + ■}• ■{■ -I” + ++**++ fr*v+*+ ;■+++++ + + 4- 0 Male Female Male Female Male’ • Female
Female
M- + + M-4- + h + + + Male y4-+ +
B. Vineyards and side-street cafes.
The physical and human geography of France was
covered in three main themes: the country-side
(peasants, wheat fields and vineyards), the Riviera -185-
(sophistication and beaches) and Paris (the city of
historic interest and the pleasure-ground for tourists)
Most Australians visualize beautiful, green,
cultivated landscapes v/hen asked to evoke the physical
features of the country. Many see France as a vast
Barossa Valley. Others see wheat fields and pastures.
But curiously, mountains, rivers and forests seldom
belong to the image. Germany is the land of waterways
and thick forests; the mountains and the hills belong
to Italy. To the vineyards and the wheat fields, the
pastures and their cattle, corresponds an image of a
predominantly agricultural country. Less than ten
per cent of subjects speak of the industries of France. A small minority of respondents explain that they 'know France possesses industries, but that they 'think' of the country as being agricultural.
Although I saw an interesting documentary about their atomic research programme, I still find myself thinking of primary products when I picture France.//- They’ have an atomic bomb, so they must have an awful lot of other things besides farms. But I can't help it, I always think of food products first.//- I suppose there are important industries since they make cars and aeroplanes, but the first thing that comes to mind is their wines and their cheeses//.
The Riviera receives many mentions for its beaches -186- and its luxurious and cosmopolitan atmosphere. It symbolizes prosperity, high-life, elegant dissipation.
Fine old buildings and gay, animated living define Paris, seen primarily as a tourist mecca:
I think of Paris when I think of France. I see wonderful old buildings, outdoor cafes, taxis shooting everywhere.//- I think of night-clubs and of restaurants where the food is good and the tourist a king.//- I appreciate their nightlife, the naughtiness of it all, Folies, striptease and joyous prostitution.//- In Paris, you still find evidence of the way people lived thousands and thousands of years ago in its monuments and buildings.//- The whole of Europe flocks to Paris for a bit of fun//.
C. Mediocre living standards and an unstable economy.
All respondents believe that French standards of living are not as high as those of Germany or Australia, although there is some awareness that conditions have improved in France since the war or since De Gaulle came to power in 1958. Poor housing conditions, poverty in the villages, primitive-looking farms are used as pieces of evidence to support the belief in second-rate standards.
The French live in pretty poor conditions compared to ours: look at their houses and all that, they tell you that the country is not endowed with wealth.//- They live in slummy conditions although these may be better than before the war, but still rather poor.//- -187“
Their standards are not very good compared with Germany, I can’t help thinking of peasants pulling carts and of decrepit farms.//” I feel that the standards of living in France generally speaking are quite low. I was very surprised actually to hear that they are able to spend so much in developing an atomic bomb//.
In the quantitative survey, France scored 2.00 on the item ’has a high standard of living’, against the significantly higher 2.97 for Germany. But this score places France well ahead of Italy’s low 1.31«
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
! !•!•!• • Italians
Of the 30 per cent of respondents who gave a spontaneous opinion on the state of the French economy -188-
less than 10 per cent thought of it as being stable.
The majority perceived in France’s economy the same
lack of ’solidity’ they discern in the French character
and France’s politics.
The French economy is false, it may look strong, but in fact people over there earn far less than the average Australian. What I mean is that it is all appearances, France's economy is basically weak.//- The economy is generally unstable. It seems that France could never meet any serious crisis without outside help./7/- The economy seems never to be getting anywhere: here today and gone tomorrow.//- France is a country that lives for today and not for tomorrow - the health of the country is shaky, the French are very shallow types of people//.
I). Traditional primary industries and luxury goods
Products associated with France remain, on the whole, those which belong to the traditional export
image of France, i.e. wines, perfumes, fashions, food. One-third of male respondents refer to industrial goods
by listing cars and aircraft. Women almost totally
omit the Citroens and the Mirages, and the omission
cannot be interpreted as a mere reflection of lesser female interest in these fields. In association with
Germany, women immediately mention steel, machinery and electronic equi pinenx . -189-
The image of a country which is industrially underdeveloped but quite talented otherwise in the production of luxury goods and foods ties in with the view of the French as artistic, light-hearted and sensual people. These elements form a simple, coherent whole which endures despite information to the contrary about France's European leadership in aeronautics or the possession of an atomic nuclear force. Advertising experience teaches that internally coherent and strongly established ’brand' images require ’brain-washing' campaigns to modify^*’*"’ It seems that the piecemeal information which reaches Australia about the post-war
French economy is incapable of erasing the traditional image of a champagne-producing nation.
E. A way of life
In a number of respects, Australian women's image of France differs from the men's. We have already noted differences in emphasis. In addition, women's descriptions of the streets of Paris and of French life in general are tinged with a tenderness which men rarely express. Women make liberal use of affectionate adjectives to evoke the outside cafes, the picturesque farms, the French way of life. This lyrical penchant is probably partly a feature of female style of speech -1 90- and not strictly object-bound. But one is also tempted to interpret it as a sign of appreciation often absent from the men’s reactions to France. Women, far more frequently than men, noticed something beyond the mere animation of Paris or the glitter of the Riviera or the ancient buildings. They recognized joy and love of life:
The French enjoy life. V/hen I think of France, 1 think of joy. People laugh a lot. They obviously love life.//- France is a gay, lively place. It is an exciting place because people carry with them a deep-rooted appreciation of life itself.//- They eat well, they are fond of beauty, they are alive; France is a place I would like to visit because we lack this vibrance thing here in Australia. Our homes are new but dull, our lives are healthy but dull, our amusements are dull. The French sparkle, and this sparkle animates their social life, their entertainments, their streets and everything//.
5. THE RELATION BETWEEN DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES AND BELIEFS
In chapter III, a number of hypotheses dealing with the relationship of such variables as sex, age, level of education etc., have been stated. These -191- hypotheses were derived from a review of the literature on ethnic attitudes and from indications obtained from the in-depth interviews.
It was predicted that the following sub-groups
would hold a more favourable image of France
and the French: a. women (in relation to rnen) b. people with tertiary education (in relation to
people with lower education attainments). c. younger people (in relation to older people) d. people who have French friends or relatives (in
relation to persons who have never met any French people).
Unfortunately, style of response on the scales also proved a strong factor related to these demographic cat egories. The disassociation of style of response from the influence of sex, education, age etc. on ethnic percep tions cannot be adequately handled by mere examination -X- of the data.
* Such an analysis requires statistical treatment which should have been programmed at the time of the computer analysis of the data. It was not done by lack of fore sight. However, even if the influence of style of re sponse on the usage of the scale had been fully pre dicted, the problem of incorporating the necessary statistical treatment into the computer programme would have proved beyond the resources available at the time of this study. This treatment is now planned as a separate project which will take the present analysis one step further. — 1 92^
A number of observations can, however, be made
on the data as it stands.
A. The relationship between sex of respondent and the image of France and the French.
We have noted that women tend to answer the
’evaluation of beliefs’ scale by making more liberal * use than men usually do of its extreme values. But * their ratings on 'belief associations’ with the three
nationalities (and three countries) show more flexib
ility. On the latter, women's general inclination to
rate with greater emphasis is not systematic enough to
obscure entirely the influence of perceptual differences between men and women. Thus even if one assumes an
underlying tendency to reach for the extreme values of the scale, a number of meaningful differences remain between both sets of ratings, which cannot be explained by differences in.style of response only. These differ ences we assume to be related to the sex of the respond ent; they become clear from cur comparisons across nationalities.
On the 35 belief statements about the French, women score higher than men for 19 out of the 20
* See chapter V. section 3 A. -193- positively toned statements (the exception: ’they are scientifically-minded’); males, on the other hand, score higher on 6 out of 15 negatively toned items, namely effeminate, dirty, cruel, affected, easily led astray, stick to own group.
For the Germans, women score consistently below men on all 2G positively toned items, but they endorse more strongly 9 out of the 15 negatively toned items (excitable, irrational, dirty, conceited, cruel, stick to own group, don’t learn English, threat to standard of living and to neighbourhood).
The differences between the belief endorsements given to the two nationalities shows the influence of perceptions and attitudes over and above the influence of style of response. The comparison between the ratings given by men and by women to the French and the
Germans lend support to the hypothesis that
Women hold a more favourable image of the French than r-.en do, and that their image
of the German3 is less favourable than
that of men.
For the Italians, the results are very similar to those obtained for the French:' again, positively -194-
toned beliefs are more strongly associated with Italians by women than by men (for 18 out of the 20
favourable items) and negatively toned beliefs receive higher male ratings (for 13 out of the 15 unfavourable items).
The pattern of ratings obtained for belief associa tions v/ith France and Germany repeats the pattern of ratings relating to the people of the two countries.
V/ornen score higher on six out of seven positive items and men score higher on four out of five negative items
(arrogant, lacking in backbone, unstable, ruled by a dictator) with regard to France. Conversely, men score higher on six out of seven favourable items and women score higher on four out of five negative items (which are the same four as those mentioned above) v/ith regard to Germany.
The consistency of the patterns of ratings for France and Germany also lends support to the hypothesis that
women hold a more favourable view of France
than men do.
From the information derived through the in-depth interviews, we may partly associate the more favourable -195- view of France by women to their lesser interest in political factors, a source of male antagonism. But in addition, it is reasonable to assume that women's more favourable view of the French as people and their greater involvement with France's way of life have a bearing on their more favourable image of the country.
B. The relationship between education of respondent and the image of France and the French.
In the case of the influence of education on these ratings the situation is more complex. People with tertiary educational attainments behave in their usage of the scale as if they were less willing to subscribe to almost any stereotyped statement than people v/ith primary education only: all negatively toned items
(with one exception for the French: 'they are arrogant') and all positively toned items receive more moderate ratings. Similarly, all items but three in the case of the Germans, and again all items but three in the case of Italians, are less emphatically endorsed by people with tertiary education.
This may be related, in part, to these people's lesser propensity to endorsing stereotypes, but our experience with their behaviour on the 'evaluation of belief' scale tells us that a generalized 'style of -196- response factor' is also likely to be involved.
As the separation of these two factors is outside the scope of the present analysis, any statement about a hypothesis concerning the relationship between educa tion and the image of the French must wait for further data treatment.
All one can say at this stage is that the data lends support to the empirical evidence from other studies,
namely that the better educated are less
likely to endorse stereotyped beliefs.1
Because of the relatively consistent tendency the more educated display in keeping to the moderate values of the scale, any departure from this trend is worth noting. Thus the exceptionally high ratings given to the French and to France on four items (high ratings in relation to those given by people with the lowest educational levels) can be taken as indicative of a
* See chapter V., Section 3 A. 1. R.M. Williams, Jr., Stranger Next T)cor, New York, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1964 and E. Reigrotski and N. Anders on, 'National Stereotypes and Foreign Contacts', Public Opinion Quarterly, 1959» 23» 518-528. -197-
difference in perception and attitude. The French,
we mentioned above, received a higher association score
on the statement ’they are arrogant’, and on three items
dealing with France’s political life, namely, France is
basically unstable, lacking in backbone and displays
■jf arrogance in its foreign policy. Such scores indicate
that people with higher educational qualification tend
to focus more strongly than others on
negative aspects of France’s internal and foreign politics.
In the case of the Germans, the better educated rated this nationality mo-re favourably on three posit
ively toned items. Two of these items happen to be also those which the better educated evaluate exception ally highly, i.e.; they are reliable people, they are a very desirable type of migrant. In addition, they also associate Germany more strongly than the lesser educated with the following items: has a great deal to offer the world of today; is a reliable ally of the
Western World; has a high standard of living. In other words, in all instances where people with higher educational attainment broke through the constraints of their style of response in relation to Germany, the items
* See Chapter VI, Section 4 A. -198-
were positively toned, thus indicating relatively
stronger favourable beliefs in the areas covered by
the items.
In the case of Italy and the Italians, we also
have stronger endorsement by subjects with tertiary
education on a few positively toned items of belief,
namely artistic, creative, a very desirable type of migrant, has a great deal to offer the World of today
and is a reliable ally of the West (the latter three being those which refer to the country, and the former
three relating to the people).
C. The relationship between age of respondent and the image of France and the French
The older members of our sample are at the same * time the relatively lesser educated subjects. To disassociate the effect of education from the effect of age, one should keep educational levels constant and look at age variations within each educational stratww*.
For reasons of economy, these cross-tabulations were not included in the analysis and must await handling at a later stage.
* 78 per cent of our respondents in the age group 45-65 had less than 3 years of high s-chool, as against 60 per cent in the age group 30-45 and 48 per cent in the youngest range,18-29. -199-
Without aiming at the isolation of the age from the education variable, cross-national comparisons reveal one interesting difference between the beliefs of younger and older members of the sample.
The 17-29 year old rate France, the polity, relatively better than the older members of the sample, on 8 out of the 12 belief items of the list. They do so only on 4 out of 12 items in relation to Italy and one out of 12 in relation to Germany.
These results suggest that the younger
subjects1 perceptions of France are
generally more favourable than those of the older subjects.
No such relationship between age and percep tions is evident for Germany and Italy.
No difference with age is apparent in relation to belief associations with the three nationalities.
For each nationality, approximately one-half of be liefs obtain higher associative ratings among the younger subjects and one-half weaker associative ratings. -200-
D. The relationship between degree of contact and the image oi‘ France and the French.
In following the literature and the indications derived from the intensive interviews, we predicted a positive correlation between familiarity with the French and a tendency to display less negative stereotyping.
The hypothesis is only partly supported.
People who claim to have French friends (and/or
relatives) hold more favourable beliefs about
the French than respondents who say they have
never met any French people.
The ratings of 2’9 statements of belief out of 35 shift in the predicted direction.
But the comparison between respondents who claim they have met French people (without mentioning friend ship) and those who have never met any French people does not agree with the prediction. For 12 of the
35 belief items, the perceptions of those who had no direct contact v/ith the French (never met any) are more favourable than the perceptions of tnose who have met some French people.
'Some* contact worsens the image of the French -201- for about one-half of the areas of behaviour and attributes covered by the belief statements.
Ratings on 12 belief items by degree of contact (have met/have never met French people)
Positively toned Negatively toned items of belief items of belief
Have Have not Plave Plave not met met met met
Warm hearted 2.33 2.65 Effeminate - 1.87 - 1.78 Romantic 3.39 3.54 Emotional - 3.40 - 3.29 Intelligent 2.39 2.45 Irrational - 1.97 - 1.88 Hardworking 2.09 2.45 Arrogant - 1.76 - 1.58 Fuss about women 3.08 3.35 Conceited - 2.30 - 2.14 Good soldiers 2.54 2.63 Affected - 1.82 - 1.66
By contrast, the departures from the predicted trend of a more favourable image among people who have met the Germans or the Italians, in relation to those who have never met any, are fewer in number.
Number of Item ratings which depart from the predicted direction among people v/ho have had contacts, when compared with those v/ho have had none
Have friends Have only met
French 6 12 Germans nil 3 Italians nil 5 -202-
In summary, some contact, by comparison with no direct contact, seems to be somewhat more detrimental to the French than some contact with the other two nationalities^ and the correlations between friendship and perceptions are higher for the Germans and the
Italians than for the French.
6. THB RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DEGREE OF LIKING AND DEGREE OF ADMIRATION AND THE IMAGE OF FRANCE AND THE FRENCH.
The positive correlation between affect and beliefs supports the enormous body of evidence on the subject. On every item the subjects who claim their liking or admiration for any of the three nationalities express more favourable beliefs through their ratings than those who state that they 'do not like them much' or 'dislike' them. Thus all those who like the French have more favourable perceptions of the people and their country than those who feel antagonistic towards them. It is of course impossible from this empirical study to con tribute to the discussion of the primacy of beliefs over feelings or feelings over beliefs. But the very -203- consistent manner in which the endorsement of positive beliefs strengthen and the endorsements of negative belief statements weaken in relation to liking or admiration for the foreign groups suggests that respond ents utilise the scale of belief associations about the foreign groups as an instrument by which they express their feelings, over and above the fact that their beliefs are generally more favourably oriented towards the liked group. VII. THE GERMANS AND THE ITALIANS IN RELATION TO THE FRENCH
1. ITALIAN AND GERMAN PERFORMANCE AS MIGRANTS
The images of the Italians, and to a lesser degree,
of the Germans, are coloured by the perceptions Austral
ians have of the migrants in their midst.
We mentioned before that the impact of these migrants on the Australian images of the two national
ities is a reflection of their numbers: Italians are the second largest foreign ethnic group in New South Wales, and the Germans the third largest. But for every 25 Italian born and about 13 German born migrants, there is only one French born migrant.*
The Italian portrait was swamped with fault-finding descriptions of ’these people’s propensity to live with in their own communities’ and to 'yak away in their own language in front of you'. Approximately three-quarters
* Census Bulletin n°ll, Summary of Population, New South Wales, Census of the Commonwealth of Australia, 30 June, 1966. of respondents deplore the Italian predilection for their own kind and failure to integrate into the
Australian community.
Some of those who disapprove, forgive. Seme make allowances and even, at times, blame Australians for this state of affairs, but at least one-half of respondents incriminate the migrants. The verbatim comments presented here have been chosen to illustrate the perceptions relating to the closely-knit, self- contained Italian communities:
They band together and live together and don’t assimilate.//- They don’t mix in well with the Australian society, they live within their own communities and their living habits are not the same as ours.//- They are clannish and don’t seem to learn to speak English, they’d rather associate in their own clubs and speak their own language and this creates prejudice//.
As migrants, the Germans are liberally commended.
They conform to the major expectation Australians formu late about settlers in this study: they ’blend’ into the Australian community. The laudable loss of ethnic identity attempted by the Germans, (who do not form tight, distinct communities; who learn English; who mix socially with Australians, and who are initially endowed with the important asset of being of a ’similar race to ours') is generously covered in almost every -206- respondent's protocol:
The Germans try to overcome the language barrier and mix socially with Australians.//“ They settle in efficiently and effectively, they assimilate better than the Italians, they take more our ideas.//- They don’t aggregate with their own kina as much.//- They tend to grow like us, they mix better than Italian people do.//- They like to fit in as well as they can.//- They make good migrants because they blend in well, I can't see any difference between them and us.//- They make good citizens because they become very much like us in no time.//- They are a race closely allied with the Anglo-Saxons. I believe the average German can come closer to our way of living than the Italian or the French//.
Contrasted with the ’racial’ similarity that links the Germans and the Australians, the ethnic dis similarity between ’us’ and Italians is also frequently mentioned. The perceived ethnic difference does net always carry a negative emotional valence, but it frequently seems to be one of the dimensions of prejudice
I look upon the Italians as more of a semi- Asiatic race.//- They are usually a darker race, and Australians, because of colour, object to their sister or daughter marrying anyone who is so basically different.//- They are a coloured race; we are, on the whole, much closer to the Germans than to the Italians.//- In appearance, we are the same type as the Germans, the Italians are dark, little people, dark and oily, short and fat... their appearance does not appeal to me one bit.//- They look sort of brown and lousy, if you know what I mean - I am not holding it against them but I don't like them.//- They are short and square swarthy people, I don't much care for the look of the darker ones... I feel uneasy with them//. -207-
The fact that Italians tolerate sub-standard
conditions, and even choose ’freely* to live under these conditions in order to save money, is both disconcerting and irritating to many Australians, particularly to
those who call themselves ’working-class’ Australians.
A lot of them are prepared to live in poor conditions, three families to a house, the sort of thing we won’t do.//- They live in crowded circumstances, that do not appeal to me at all//- If it is a shack, they'd also live in it.//- They seem to eat a lot of cheap food, like a piece of dry bread with a cabbage leaf.//- What gets me is the idea of them coming out as a family and living in one room, bringing out cousins and uncles and putting those up in another room, I mean this association of cheapness, eating poorly, sleeping together.//- What I object to is not so much that they live under those conditions but that they don’t have to and still prefer to live like that to save money for other invest ments, whereas the Australian bloke will have a nice house and buy his car on hire purchase//.
In the intensive interviews, our subjects did not spontaneously gauge the French on their performance as settlers. The assessment of the French on these terms was forced upon our respondents in the structured questionnaire in which six items of belief dealt with migrant practices and effects: - they stick to their own groups. - they don’t try to learn English. - they fit in well with the Australian way of life. - they are a threat to Australia's high standard of living. - they lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live. - they are a very desirable type of migrant. -208-
On each of these items, the Germans receive the most favourable ratings and the Italians the most un favourable ones. The ratings given to the French fall
consistently somewhere in between.
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
4 ’They lower the standard of the : ’They fit in well with neighbourhood’ Australia’s way of life’ 3
2 1.82
‘ 1.15 1
0.37 0.27 0 r" i F G I
4 I ’They are a very desirable type of migrant’ 2.99 3- F [H French STfct
2 Germans
1 Italians
0- F G -209-
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
’They don’t try to learn ’They stick to their own English’ grOUpS' S.28
2.15 1.73 1.75 1.15
'They are a threat to Australia's high standard of living’
F j French
G fyjfy Germans
0.43 0.35 I Italians L J yZ'Z ■ • • • • G i -210-
In all their ratings, women display more favourable beliefs about Italian and French migrants, but less
favourable ones about the Germans. The example given below illustrates the general orientation of female versus male ratings:
BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS BY SEX OF RESPONDENT
Statement: they are a very desirable type of migrant.
Males Females
The French 2.58 2.68 The Germans 3.17 2.80 The Italians 2.07 2.20
Respondents with higher educational levels (who tend to keep systematically to the more moderate values of the rating scales) associate all three nationalities more mildly with five of the six ’migrant’ items. The better educated subjects depart, however, from their response style to grant the Germans and the Italians an atypically high rating on the statement, 'they are a very desirable type of migrant’. But the French fail to benefit from this exceptional appraisal of the two other ethnic groups, as shown in the following results: -21 1 -
BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS BY EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Primary school Some only Tertiary Statement:
They are a very desirable type of migrant:
French 2.90 2.57 Germans 3.07 3.14 Italians 2.05 2.24
2. IMAGE CONTENT: THE ITALIANS
Outstanding attributes and features belonging to the ’spontaneous’ Italian image appear in the following list, accompanied by corresponding statements of belief used in the structured questionnaire. The order of appearance of the items on the list follows the order of frequency of mentions within the in-depth interviews.
As before, aspects which were not noted by more than
10 per cent of people do not figure in the analysis. -21 2-
Spontaneous Corresponding perceptions about questionnaire item the Italians of belief
1. They work hard and long They are particularly hours. hardworking.
2. They look a bit dirty They look dirty and and untidy. untidy. They are noisy people They often display bad manners.
3. They are emotional They are emotional and people excitable. 4. The Northern and the Southern Italians are different people.
5. They are strongly ( family-minded. ^ They are warm-hearted. 6. They help each oth-er ( readily. ^
7. They are cheerful, ( - They are gay people. friendly people. ^
8. They are not very brave, They are good soldiers. they make poor soldiers.
9. They are religious Italy is dominated by the people. Catholic church. 10. Their women are beauti Their women are partic ful when young, go to ularly attractive. fat later in life.
A. Italians work hard
Every image included a reference to the hardworking
qualities of the Italian migrant. The migrant’s work was regarded as his most outstanding contribution to
Australia, even when the thrift which accompanies his
industry was criticized.
One could object that some respondents may have been concealing from the interviewer resentment of
the tireless diligence of the Italian migrant. The objection can be refuted with supporting evidence: in
addition to expressing their ’own feelings' about
Italians, respondents were asked to speak about ’Aust
ralian people’s feelings about the three foreign groups’.
In talking about other Australians, each respondent
had a chance either to ’project' his own repressed
prejudices into his answer about other people's feelings, or to report to the interviewer his observations of
Australian prejudices.
As could be anticipated, respondents had more to report about Australian prejudices with regard to
Italians than about their own. Approximately 80 per
cent of respondents believed that Australians feel
resentful in some way towards Italians, but only about
one-third admitted to such feelings for themselves.
However, the nature of the reasons given for such negative attitudes was similar for both sets of answers, -214-
and this is of importance for our argument. The sources of irritation are seen (or experienced) in the propensity Italians have to resist assimilation, neglect hygiene and drop below ’acceptable' standards, as well as in their ’racial' differences. In less than 5 per cent of cases is the Italian's capacity for hard work given as a reason to resent him.
The Italian immigrant is far mere willing to work hard than most other nation alities.//- They are prepared to work long hours until they get somewhere.//- They work longer hours and they are very thrifty: I take my hat off.//- They are industrious/ they work seven days a week and toil for long hours, they are not afraid of hard work at all, they are even willing to do two jobs//.
In the structured interviews, Italians received a rating of 2.97 on the item: 'they are particularly hardworking'. This score is substantially above the score obtained by the french (2.09).
* The survey was carried out in a period of economic expansion and full employment *in New South Wales. TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
4 ’They are particularly hardworking*
3 2. 97
2 H h French 1 p • j t. 0 I Italians I ! i
B. They look a bit grubby.
About one-quarter of protocols contained spontan eous mentions of the Italians’ lack of personal hygiene and disregard for cleanliness in their homes. ’They look grubby, they smell, their homes are messy’ - these perceptions are given with a range of emotional tones, from the relatively mild: -216-
They could perhaps he cleaner.//- They are inclined to be a little sloppy in their clothing//.
to the most extreme:
They are filthy, dirty, smelly people.//“ They are actually filthy individuals, their hygiene is very crude, 1 can't stand their way of life and I can't stand their dirtiness.//- I loathe people v/ho are dirty and most Italian people are incredibly grubby and un tidy.//- When I think of Italians I think of a slob, a greasy slob.//- They are slimy, that's all I can say//.
In addition, their manners are censured. Their
'loud voices' are particularly resented by those who complain about their behaviour in public places:
Yelling, they always yell at each other.//- They make a lot of noise, singing cut loudly at each other across the street.//- They have a bad image among Australian people because they are such noisy people.//- Big-mouthed, loud and squabbling, you hear them from a mile//.
In comparison with the French., Italians receive the higher association scores on the items dealing with cleanliness and bad manners: TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
’The}' look dirty 'They often display ;heir and untidy’ bad manners’
2.12 1.G1 rrrrrTi I .\\V Italians
0.73 PH •••••< • •••••* F g| French i*— F I I
C. Gesticulating;, emotional people.
Like the French, Italians are said to he dominated by their emotions. Both nationalities are often paired
on this trait, in contrast with the cool, collected
Germans and the easy-going Australians. As for the
French, a variety of adjectives is accumulated: besides
’emotional’ and ’excitable’, the Italians are also
labelled ’volatile, high-strung, fiery, explosive.’
The shared attribute 'excess of emotionality’ and -218- its sequels (uncontrolled speech and body movements, tears and loud voices, loss of decorum, etc.) set the two Latin nationalities apart from ’us, casual Austral ians' and from the cold, 'scientifically-based'
Germans:
They are not like us at all, they are so excitable: in this they are so much like the French; they have a more exuberant outlook.//- Take off their hands and neither the French nor the Italians can talk at all; they are all gestures; they are hard to reason with because they are inclined to stick to their opinions, they don't listen to reason; they will serve you a lot of gesticulating instead.//- Their excit able temperament makes me say that an Italian is different, very different from us: let’s face it, we are not so excitable, we are much more down-to- earth sort of people//.
On both items ’they are excitable and emotional’ and 'they are irrational’, the Italians and the French * scored significantly higher than the Germans.
D. There are two types of Italian people.
The meaning of the recurrent descriptive statement: ’the Northern and the Southern Italians are quite different people’ was supplemented by evaluative judgments
-* .See chapter VI, p.138. -219-
expressing clear preference for the Northern Italian
’race’. One respondent neatly formulates the thought
most people have in mind when he explains:
'Put it that wray: there are two types of Italian people, one is very acceptable and the other not so acceptable to us'.
Physical traits (the Northerner looks more like
us, he is blend, blue-eyed and fair), economic stand
ards (the Southerners live well below 'what we Australians are used to and like to have’), and levels of education, are offered as supporting reasons for
Australian preferences:
The Northern are more like Australians and you would not be afraid of taking them in your own home and treat them as if they were just one of us. The Southern are not as good as the others.//- I like Italian people, but not the ones from the South. The Northern Italians look very much like us. You would not believe they are Italians: they are blond and fair!//.
E.___They are good family people.
Although many male respondents insert a remark about their 'close family ties’ in their descriptions of
Italians, these family bonds rarely attract more than a passing nod: -220-
They are good family people.//- Their family ties are very close.//- There are close feelings between parents and children//.
Women respondents, on the other hand, indulge in
elaborate accounts of the free-flowing, warm love between Italian parents and their children. One senses a touch of nostalgia in Australian women's perceptions of Italian family bonds, particularly with regard to the open affection which Italian fathers express for their children:
I think of Italians as good, happy, family people, I admire their family spirit, it reminds me a little of Jewish families, where every one .loves and respects papa and mama.//- Italian fathers are much closer to their children, much warmer to their children than Australian fathers. You often see Italian fathers caring for their tots, wiping their noses, pulling on the little jumpers and all that, they aren’t self-conscious at all about showing their tenderness for their children, I think it's beautiful//.
It is striking that French family life is not part of the Australian image. Little is known in
Australia of the nature and quality of French family ties. The ignorance on the matter could be explained by lack of contact with French people. But when interviewers probed on this matter, the answers revealed more than mere lack of information: they mirrored the -221- impression in our respondents' minds that the terms
'French' and ’family life' are antonyms. The field of French inter-personal relations is open to sexual and erotic bonds, to love and courting, to romance and adultery: it- appears incompatible with 'normal' family life.
F. They help each other generously
Italian loyalty towards the family is extended to
Italian friends and acquaintances, according to our Australian observers. Many comments deal with the
'bewildering' mutual help exchanged within the ethnic group. Although Australians think of themselves as being 'generous' people, they recognize that Italians outscore them in this area. Some respondents are inclined to judge as a little foolish the sacrifices Italians accept for the sake of distant relatives or even strangers in need.
If one of them gets down below standard and loses his property, the others club in and put him back on his feet.//- Italians pool their resources and help each other: they work on the same line as the Jews - they help each other, even outside their families.//- Their generosity towards people of their own race - I mean people they often don't know personally - is beyond me... it's crazy!//. -222-
G. They are cheerful, friendly people.
Women, more than men, are-impressed by the demon strative gaiety of Italians as well as by their warm hearted friendliness. Women note the contrast between
Australian unsentimentality and passive sobriety and the capacity Italians show for enjoyment, happiness, affection and warmth.
They are good-hearted people.//- They are gay and sort of lively, likeable people... They always look so happy.//- They are warm, friendly, soft-hearted and generous.//- They are very generous in their homes and bubbly, jolly people.//- They are fun-loving people, a bit like us in a way, but then they show it so much more: they actually look happy.//- They are terribly loyal and they will share with you their last crust of bread//. r
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
4 ’They are warm-hearted people’
3 - 2. 75 2. 55 -a *ttVI TTVI *'"l-1
•] 2- i ' . 4 .*.1 r r, I French l 3 .1
1 - •! •
•1 ■1 • • •)* 1 Italians i -223-
H. They ’chickened out’ during the war.
Shifting their attention away from the Italian migrant to the Italians in Italy at the time of World
War II - in one of the rare, spontaneous changes in our subjects’ frame of reference - one-third of respondents (mostly male) underline the inglorious behaviour of the Italian soldiers.
I think the Italians are cowards, I think of them as a not particularly robust race, based on their performance during the war.//- They would only show their backs to their enemies.//- They are pretty poor fighters, they are not too brave.//- The poor old Italians, they did not like the war, they they were even worse than the Frenchl//- We have here exactly the same situation as with the French: the Italians proved themselves poor soldiers and weak.//- They have not been a very good ally for the Germans. They lack in backbone, they really did not fight much//.
French failure to resist German invasion in 1940 and French collaboration with the enemy under the Vichy regime were reported as evidence of French softness and weakness and sometimes duplicity. Like the French,
Italians are accused of lacking ’guts’, but whereas the
French arouse scorn, the Italians mostly attract derision and lampooning. The contemptuous reaction towards Ital ians is particularly vehement among male respondents: -224-
I shall never forget what the Germans said to us in 1943 about Italians: ’you can have them’.//- We always have a little laugh when we mention the Italians and V/orld V/ar II. The dagos were at their best fighting the Abyssinians who opposed bows and arrows to Mussolini’s tanks.//- They hit me as if they were a spineless lot of beggars, they remind me of a little dog behind a wall, doing a lot of barking but running for its life when danger comes near it.//- Italians generally are regarded as a bit of a joke, like the Arabs in the Israel- Arab war: at the first sight of fight, they disappear.//- They just followed one another, turning their backs to the enemy and that was that.... disgusting!//.
Women, more compassionate on the whole, denounce Italian lack of fighting spirit without sarcasm:
I don't think they were as good fighters as the Germans would be.... They certainly sat on the fence, but they seem to get away with it in a pleasant sort of a way.//- They aren't very good at war.//- Italians make poor soldiers, they cannot fight//.
The rating Italians obtained on the statement:
'they are good soldiers, they can fight when necessary
(1.69) supported the evidence from the intensive inter views. Even the French scored higher on this item
(2.57).*
* See chapter VI, p. 183. -225-
I. They are religious people.
The importance of religion to Italians is a
frequent source of comment. Benevolent remarks focus
on the seriousness and sincerity with which Italians
observe their religion. Antagonistic observations
stress the ’superstitious’ and ’sheepish' obedience to
the Pope.
They are very religious, they really mean it, it is not show-off; a lot of us do not care about religion, but the Italians live by it//. The way they follow the Pope... they have got no will of their own, they are like sheep, and that kind of blind religion does not appeal to me//.
The belief that Italians are'dominated' by the
Pope was checked with the statement reading 'Italy is dominated by the Catholic Church'. In this form, the belief takes on political connotations in addition to
its sociological and psychological content. Italy
received a score of 3.36 on the item, well above France's
(1.88).
J. The Italian woman: subservient to the man, she blooms early, then 'goes to bits' .
The model for the Australian image of the Italian -226- woman is also the migrant. The ’voluptuous Italian film stars’ mentioned by a minority of male respondents rarely interfere with the image derived from the corner greengrocer’s wife.
Her portrait is brushed in with three strokes: devotion to the family; submission to the husband; adolescent prettiness which turns into fat in middle age. Female respondents are more sensitive to the first two, male respondents more preoccupied with the last facet.
She is more tied to her home with her family and more ruled by her husband than we are. She is a good wife and mother. She is terribly subservient to the man... but very happy to serve him.//- She is softer than German women, more family-loving than the French women: she is a real home-woman, her main interest is in bringing the family up, in cooking; she may take all afternoon to prepare tea. Italian women are real mums, with a host of kids around them.//- She is a motherly sort of a person, home-loving, probably strongly dominated by her man.//- I feel a little sorry for her: she works hard, seems dominated, she does not seem to enjoy the Australian woman’s freedom//.
They are very attractive in the younger generation, slim in their bodies and very beautiful in their features, but if she has two or three children, her body seems to lose all its conformity (sic) and goes to flesh, and then she is very unattractive.//- Dark and sexy when young, with flashy sort of eyes, they later get fat and flabby as they get a little older//. -227-
As a sexual symbol or model of sophistication, the French woman arouses admiration or excitement. By contrast, the Italian woman (over twenty-five) is pitied.
Her image is evoked with sympathy and a shade of dis taste .
We saw that Italian women are rated below French women on the item ’they are particularly attractive’.
3. IMAGE CONTENT: 'ITALY, THE COUNTRY
The image of Italy as a country is dimensionally as simple as that of France. Through geographical over-generalisation, respondents construe the whole of Italy as a hilly, rugged country, enabling most Italians to derive no more than subsistence standards of living from the soil. Through economic over-generalization
Italy as a whole is perceived as crippled, with poverty.
If it were not so, our respondents question, why would so many Italians migrate to Australia? Finally, through obvious lack of information,’ Italy’s cultural heritage is almost exclusively seen as composed of old buildings -228- and museums.
Italy, in the minds of Australians, has no dynamic present or future. France, at least with De Gaulle, made its presence felt. Italy has no weight, no power, no modern face. Peasants are digging and slaving, buildings are leaning over and crumbling, everything belongs to the past. Italy, in the words of one of our subjects, is a ’has-been’.
A minority mentions the industrial North, the dynamic cities, the Fiats produced by the biggest car manufacturer in Europe, but the majority visualizes only backwardness and under-development. In cases where wealth is mentioned, it serves to stress the gap between the abject poverty of the Italian peasants and the opul ence of the few immorally rich.
I see a country of small farms, of poor peasants, raising a few sheep and a few goats, a great deal of grapes.//- I see farms, dingy and poor: most Italians, to me, are peasants.//- The Northern part is perhaps different, some are higher class of people, a few may be incredibly affluent, but in the South they can't get adequate living, they export only people - that’s all they have.//- The few rich are incredibly rich and the majority would have a very poor type of living compared to the one we have here//.
Even more hazy than the impressions about France’s -229-
political life, the fragmentary comments about Italian
politics receive only labels which cover up almost
total ignorance of the topic. This ignorance is
frankly admitted by over one-fourth of male respondents
and one-half of females. Those who contributed an
answer to the question 'And what comes to you mind when you think of the political life of Italy?’ confined
their remarks to the strength of the Italian Communist party, to the influence of the Church and to reminis cences of the Mussolini era. The Communist party was associated with impressions of strife and unrest, the
Church with loss of personal freedom, and pre-war- fascism introduced the theme of post-war democracy.
The three facets appear in the comments below:
The political life of Italy is rather unstable: the Communist influence has something to do with that.//- Their political life is un stable: there is a great Communist influence.//- I can't understand how Italians can be Communists - and they have a powerful Communist party - the3r are such staunch Catholics!//.
I often think that in Italy, like Spain by the way, a lot is dictated by the Church. Italians have a religious, not a political structure. It is the Vatican which controls the Italian community... It is a set-up by which the country is run by the Church and where people don't think for themselves.//- It is controlled by the Church and people accept what the Church dishes out//.
They have quite a good government: I am pleased -230-
\
to see it is democratic; they have destroyed fascism and seem to have settled down under the control of their present president.//- I tend to think of it as it was under Mussolini, hut of course, it is not so now: they have a Parliament, they are stable at present, they appear to have a good government capable of handling the country quite well//.
Though mentioned by those who perceive the bogy
of the Communist party, instability in Italian political life was a weaker theme than instability in the life of the French, public and private. Those who compare the Italy of today to the Italy of the 1930’s perceive democratic conditions and stability. To them, Italian political life appears well handled at present, conditions ’more settled' and ’more stable’, without the French recourse to dictatorship.
On the item ’is ruled by a dictator’, Italy scored significantly below the French, and its score on the item ’is basically unstable’ is also weaker than that given to the French. V -231-
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS \
Statements: Italy France
Is ruled by a dictator 0.92 2.32
Is basically unstable 1.44 1.68
If one excludes the contempt aroused by Italy's war record and the disdain for Italy's poverty (a disdain from which pity is not absent), there appears to be less animosity towards Italy, as a political entity, than towards France.
More friendly and less arrogant than France, Italy nevertheless emerges as the least 'valuable', the least 'worthy' of the three countries. It scored a low 1.67 on the item 'has a great deal to offer to the world of today'; France's score places her marginally ahead of Italy (1.92). The outstanding leader is Germany. With a score of 2.82, Germany dominates both Latin countries in the prestige, it enjoys in the eyes of Australians. The beliefs which sustain this prestige are the subject of the next section. -232-
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
French
Germans
Italians
4. IMAGE CONTENT: THE GERMANS
We have already seen that the Germans are perceived as 'more like' Australians - they 'are nearer purer white than the Italians or the French', one of our respondents says boldly - 'they are closer to us in their -233-
social aspirations’, say many others, wording their
reactions more carefully. The Germans, as we have
already mentioned, enjoy high rating as a ’desirable
migrant group’.
Beyond racial and social affinities, beyond 'good
migrant’ performance, Australians attribute to the
Germans a range of high-status psychological traits.
They are seen to possess qualities highly regarded in most Western cultures and particularly highly valued in
Australia: they are more hardworking, more trustworthy, more reliable, better educated, more determined, more intelligent, more creative, and better soldiers than the other two nationalities.
The extensive list of ’solid' German virtues earns for the Germans epithets never used to describe either the French or the Italians: that of being people of
'high quality', of being a 'good race'.
They are fine people, a nice type of people, a good quality of people.//- They are a better race than the Italians.//- They are a better quality of person than the Italian or the French.//- The Germans are one of the best people in the world today.//- They are a good race, I admire the quality of the people//.
Their perfection is marred by two strongly un desirable traits: arrogant dogmatism, and cold hardness which some people perceive as cruelty. -234-
The long list of German qualities and the two
negative attributes figure in the table below, which
summarizes the spontaneous comments obtained in the
in-depth interviews. As before, the right-hand column
itemizes the statements of belief used in the structured
interviews.
Percen- Corresponding Questionnaire tions about the Germans Items of Belief.
1. Determined, industrious. - They are particularly hardworking. - They are determined people, they have a lot of drive. 2. Clever, intelligent, - They are particularly organized, competent. intelligent. 3. They are scientifically minded. They have great tech - They are scientifically nical skills. minded.
4. They are educated and - They are well educated. cultured.
5. They are stable and - They are reliable. reliable. - They are people we can trust. 6. They are arrogant, - They are arrogant. conceited, dogmatic. - They are conceited.
7. They are cold, ruthless, - They are cruel people. cruel. - They are warm-hearted.
8. They are first-class - They are good soldiers, soldiers. they can fight when necessary. -235-
9. They are strong, Their men seem effem masculine types inate .
10. They look clean and - They look dirty and well scrubbed. untidy.
11. They are humourless - They are gay people, and stodgy
12. The German woman is Their women are parti the Hausfrau type. cularly attractive.
A. The hardworking, determined German
The epithet ’hardworking' is linked as often with the Germans as it is with the Italians. But although the word is the same, its connotations are not quite identical. German industry is’a cut above’ the in defatigable plodding of the Italians. Italian work is manual and menial. German work is associated with executive and technical qualifications, where planning and thought are required.
Where the French (like the Australians) display their ’I don't care' disposition, the Germans show drive and determination to 'get things done'. They are credited with the necessary will-power to achieve 'any thing they set out to do'. Few answers stop at the -236- \ mention of German diligence. German industry, the
German will to achieve, ’no matter what’, forms a
gestalt (in the minds of cur subjects) with German
efficiency and know-how. The two are inextricably linked:
They do well what they set out to do.//- They are industrious people, well organized, very orderly. They are a determined race, it is part of their nature, it is a strong point in ail of them; this drive to obtain what they want to obtain.//- They are precise in their outlook, they are extremely methodical, and because they also work hard, they are efficient.//- The Germans are extremely capable in every field they enter because they always do their best, try their hardest, work steadily and long hours, every detail being planned and covered//.
The strength of association between the Germans and the two belief statements: ’they are particularly hardworking’ and ’they are determined people, they have a lot of drive’ supports the evidence from the in-depth interviews. The German scores on both items come close to the possible maximum of +4.00 and tower above the scores obtained by the French. -237-
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
’They are particularly At ’They are determined. hardwo rking ’ 340 they have lots 3. GO of drive. ’
3*
2 ■ France
1- wM W/a y/z/A Germany O1
B. An intelligent, competent ’race'
The perceived efficiency and organizational skills
of the Germans exhibit themselves in technical and
scientific fields. Our respondents equate them with intellectual power. Of the three nationalities, the
Germans are the only people to whom Australians spontan
eously attribute intelligence. Neither the French nor
the Italians, though credited with artistic talent and
with the art of enjoying life, are ever said to be -238-
intelligent. Intelligence does not seem associated,
in the minds of our observers, with'gifts in fields of
no obvious practical utility.
They are a very intelligent race: they are ahead of us and of the French in their technology.//- They have always been a very forward type of race, very competent whatever they undertake, they apply their intellectual functions to industrial efficiency, that is where intelligence really shows.//- They are very clever people, I always think of Germans as being much more intelligent than the others be cause of their mechanical achievements.//- The Germans show their intelligence in science and technology, and that is why I think of them as being more intelligent than the French//.
0. World leaders in science and technology
The German war and post-v/ar record is used as
evidence of German scientific and technological brill iance. The Germans are ranked among world leaders in these fields. Superlative terms are lavished on their skills, particularly in engineering and electronics.
German contributions to the advancement of science are more taken for granted than exposed in detail. The names of German scientists or the fields in which they distinguish themselves are not reported. German super iority in the pure sciences is inferred from technological achievements rather than directly apprehended.
They are well ahead of us and of the French in their technology,//- They have always been -239-
extremely competent in scientific and tech nical fields during the war and since the war.//- With the Germans you think all the time how efficient they are in technology be cause of how far they got... the 1940’s. They must have gone into science and technology pretty thoroughly to conquer the best part of Europe.//- Their skill in engineering is fantastic, they can lead any industry they choose, chemical, computer, machinery.//- I always associate the Germans with technical skills and great scientists because they are a pretty clever race in manufacturing generally//.
On the items designed to measure the comparative standing of the three nations on the association between
intelligence and science and technology, Germany leads France by a significant margin:
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
4 'They are particularly 'They are scientifically 'The country is one of the world's intelligent' minded' 3.51 leaders in science and technology 3
2
0 F G F G F G -24 0-
D. They are well-educated, cultured people
As Continental people, the Germans, like the
French, are tagged with the label 'cultured'. The link between culture and the French was frequently made through French interest in art, theatre, and aesthetic values generally. Culture comes to the
Germans mostly through music - particularly Beethoven and Mozart.
More than the French, the Germans are believed to value education and to reach the highest standards.
The French are not believed to be 'uneducated'. But their type of education is seen as more a matter of manners and social graces and, at best, linked with literature and poetry, rather than the training of the mind in rational and scientific thought. Less than
10 per cent of respondents spontaneously mention 'educated' in connection with the French, whereas nearly
40 per cent do without prompting, to describe the
Germans:
The Germans are always looking for higher education. I always think of education when I think of the Germans.//- They have always reached a higher standard than most people, they have always been keener on education: the Germans go to Universities, they make brilliant scholars - they must be -241 -
when yon think of the excellence of their scientists and engineers.//- They are always striving to improve themselves, they believe in education, they are education seekers, they put the accent on training the mind to solve problems in physics or engineering//.
The higher rating given to the Germans on the item 'they are well-educated' supports the qualitative impressions:
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
4 t 'They are well-educated'
3
2 ■ F French
1 -
Germans 0- F G
E. They are reliable people.
Strong-willed and determined, highly rational and self-controlled, the Germans are also said to be 'very -242- reliable people’. They work hard, they ’stick it out’, they are thorough, they strive for achievement, they produce only high quality goods: one can depend on them.
The episodes of fascism and World War II have left scars on Australian perceptions of the Germans, but these events are more often construed as exceptional ’aberra tions’ than as proof of a basic ’racial’ vice. Para doxically, more respondents use the French collapse in
1940 to make out a case for unreliability in the French make-up than refer to German behaviour before and during the second World War to raise doubts on the German sense of responsibility.
The relatively higher association between the Germans and 'they are reliable people’ than between the Germans and the item 'they are people we can trust', seems to indicate that the first statement is more a measure of stability, firmness and constancy in everyday behaviour than of faith in political wisdom.
On both items, the Germans rate higher than the
French. The gap between the two nationalities, as we have already seen, is particularly wide on ’reliability'; -243-
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
Statements: Germans French
They are reliable people 2.60 1.85
They are people one can trust 2.07 1.91
F. and G. They are arrogant and cruel people.
As has been noted, two major defects damage the image of otherwise admirable people: an aggressive, dogmatic arrogance and a cold, cruel streak. Almost every second respondent mentions arrogance and/or conceit as a basic German trait. In doing so, subjects refer to incidents they have witnessed in their dealings with German migrants as well as to the German master- race cult under Hitler.
German arrogance is associated both with the German character per se and with Hitler's Germany. French arrogance, on the other hand, is not regarded as a personality trait of the typical Frenchman, but as a specific characteristic of De Gaulle's cavalier handling of France's foreign affairs.
Those who blame the German people or their leaders for the atrocities committed during the War recoil at -244-
German cruelty. But even when cruelty is not mentioned,
most portraits still contain some reference to the un-
amiable, stern, severe, hard German character.
They think of themselves as a super race.//- They are bombastic and dominant, they seem to look down on other races, but apart from his arrogance, there is not much difference with an Australian.//- The typical German would be a very arrogant man, consider him self the supreme being of all human beings//.
I dislike their lack of humanity.//- They are cold-hearted: this is my war image coming through.//- They are unsympathetic and ruth less.//- Their unfriendly personality seems to be a basic national thing.//- What I dislike about the German is his ruthless treatment of individuals and the way he massacred the Jews//.
Women are more sensitive than men to the lack of warmth they perceive in the Germans. It inhibits in women, more than in men, an overall feeling of liking for the Ger mans. In many of our interviews with women, we found a re action which betrayed the centrality and weight within their image of the perceived German cold-hard syndrome.
Women begin by painting overall flattering portraits of the Germans, similar to those drawn by men. They enumerate the same qualities. They express admiration for
German industry, determination etc. When finally requested, however, to choose whether they feel more warmly towards the French or the Germans, about 6 out of 10 select the
French (in comparison with less than 4 in 10 male prefer ences for the French). The reasons women offer for -245-
favouring the French, despite the many complimentary be
liefs they hold about the Germans, reveal a categorical dis
taste for the cold, unfriendly personality of the German.
The quantitative scores confirm the qualitative
findings: more cruel and more arrogant and conceited, the
Germans are also less warm-hearted than the French.
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
4 ’The}' are arrogant* ’They are conceited’ ’They are cruel’
ri \ ' l J French
G Germans H. The Germans can fight.
With empathy and approval, approximately 20 per cent of subjects spontaneously exalt the German ability to fight with single-mindedness and iron will. Their comments contain tributes to the tough staunchness of men of unyielding nerve and stamina and ’manly' physical courage. Many recognize in the German defiance of danger and pain something akin to 'us Australians'.
During the war, they were fighters, they really were, they spend little time waver ing, procrastinating. They had to fight and went about it with obstination... in this Germans and Australians are similar. We too are a good fighting nation. I like to think we would fight as well as they did in the last World War.//- Like an Australian, he will fight hard when necessary./'/- He will not weaken and recoil from something that has to be done, however unpleasant, however dangerous. There is a similarity there//.
Approximately the same percentage of respondents
(20 per cent), made up mostly of women, spontaneously condemn the German aptitude for fighting, interpreting it as a sign of basic ruthlessness and lack of humanity:
They are cold-hearted and brutal.//- I shudder at their amazing lack of conscience which showed during the war.//- They are cruel and pitiless, they will crush anyone, any country, any human being standing in their way, given a chance to do so - it showed during the war.//- They fight well because they know no sympathy, no warmth, no pity//. -247-
As we saw, the cold, cruel image received a relatively high endorsement in the structured survey.
It is linked with the belief that Germans are implacable soldiers and knowledge about war crimes. At the same time, however, the majority of respondents (about 75 per cent) absolve the German 'people* from the collective responsibility of war crimes. They take pains to dis tinguish between the evil German leaders and the misled
German nation. This process of exoneration does not prevent the label 'cruel' being associated with the stimulus 'German', but in listening to people's thoughts and feelings about 'German behaviour during World War II' one understands that the word 'cruel' is applied less frequently to the 'average German person' than to the con cepts 'German soldier’, 'Nazi' or 'Hitler's Germany'.
More often than not, German cruelty is the cruelty of the fascists and of German officers - the cruelty belonging to a particular period of German history.
I. The masculine man.
Powerful physical build and character strength contribute their connotations to the masculine image of the Germans. A reputation for excellence in science, engineering and organization, and a reputation for force fulness, reinforce the associations between the Germans -248-
\ and masculinity. Another trait concurring to link the
Germans with masculinity is their perceived absence of
emotionality. These perceived masculinity ingredients reveal themselves in the following comments:
The Germans are well built and big, therefore they are more manly, more masculine men than the French.//- The Germans cut a better manly image: compared with the French they give you an impression of strength, I mean they appear more solid physically and in temperament too, they do not seem a weak emotive race at all, hence you think of them as more masculine.//- The Germans are willing to achieve, no matter what. It is this drive in them that makes them masculine men.//- They are a masterful race of top people, leaders in science and technology - they are the most masculine race in Europe.//- They are organized, rational, competent people, they are thinkers and men of action: that gives you the impression they are manly//.
In their masculinity, the Germans appear the anti thesis of the French. They receive the lowest score on the item which measured the association between the three nationalities and effeminacy:
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF RATINGS
Statement: Germans French Italians Their men seem effeminate 0.20 1.75 0.90 -249-
J. Clean-looking people.
In contrast with the darker Latins, the blond and fair-skinned Germans give Australians an impression of cleanliness. In addition, this clean outward appearance is, at times, a perceived sign of moral purity, as if well-scrubbed faces were a proof of high moral standards.
The vision of German cities and villages of toylike neat ness and immaculate perfection contributes to this impression of inward and outward cleanliness.
They are spotlessly clean: you seldom see a German who is scruffy.//- They are clean and well-scrubbed... I think of them as clean living people.//- They are nice, clean-cut people. The Germans are a wholesome race.//- I like their much.cleaner-cut way of looking and being than the lower European countries - they belong to a Nordic strain - thoroughly clean in their habits and morals//.
The French were neither praised for their cleanliness nor censured for their lack of hygiene, except by the occasional few who had travelled to France.
On the item 'they look dirty and untidy' the Germans receive a score close to nil.
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF RATINGS
Statement: Germans French
They look dirty and untidy 0.30 0.73 K. Humourless and stodgy.
Our male subjects recognize a certain stiffness in the German personality. Deduced from the meticulous thoroughness and militaristic inclinations they attribute to the typical German, this stiffness is identified under a variety of labels - sometimes it is their ‘Prussian style’, sometimes 'their heavy solidity’, sometimes ’their unbending disposition'. Australian males, although un sympathetic to this German trait, remain less critical of it than the women in our sample. The latter tend to brand this facet of the German character in terms of 'lack of humour', 'stodginess', 'dullness':
They are absolute]y humourless, they look as if they are hopelessly stodgy.//- I am amazed that the Germans are good at music, they seem such a dull, colourless people, you can't see where all this beautiful music comes from, it seems a contradiction in terms.//- They are solid citizens, I could not imagine the Germans being frivolous, but I prefer the French and the Italians, at least there is nothing dull about them//.
The French were occasionally judged to be ’a less interesting race' than the Germans, but those who held that unfavourable opinion focussed on the perceived differences in technical achievements and ability.
Generally, the French were credited with being colourful, in fact, even too colourful. -251-
The lack of humour associated with the German character was measured indirectly with the item ’they seem to be gay people’, on which the Germans (1.74) are rated significantly below the French (3.27).
L. The German Hausfrau
The German woman is seldom perceived to be either feminine or elegant. Physically, she comes close to being a sister to the Australian girl, blond, fair and healthy. Most respondents visualize a biggish, plumpish figure. In her temperament, she rarely promises excite ment: she is, however, a loyal companion, a devoted
Hausfrau of worthy character, hardworking and reliable like the German male. She is the least inspiring of the women of the three nationalities, if one may infer lack of interest from the paucity of comments.
She is a real Hausfrau - large type of woman with plaits.//- She is tall, well-built, very homely, quite hardworking.//- They are fairly heavy, but their hair and eyes just as the Australian woman’s.//- She is a more masculine type, strong, hardworking, devoted to her husband.//- German women are on the plump side, domesticated, real family women, neat, methodical.//- I see the German woman as a Hausfrau, a little plump, but with the complexion of our Anglo- Saxon girls//. -252-
5_.___IMAGB CONTENT : GERMANY
The vigour of the German economic recovery since
the war and the present might of this industrial giant
dominate the image of Germany. Fascism and Germany's
behaviour during World War II provide the second major
theme. The third theme derives from the beauty of the
country. No other topic receives sufficient stress to
deserve mention.
A.__ Germany, the industrial colossus.
Germany's economic miracle impresses every respondent. Beyond the fascination with the German industrial colossus,
one discovers the observer's respect for the resilience and efficiency of a nation which erected its power on the ruins of the war. ’They received a bashing, but they got up and set themselves to work. I admire them for it’, illustrates a typical reaction to Germany's recovery. It seems that any negative connotation that might have other wise attached itself to the military and political collapse was erased by the economic achievement. The crushing de feat of the second World War is mentioned only in order to emphasize the magnitude of the revival. -253-
It is fantastic the way Germany has recovered from the war.//- They have built a new Germany, it is remarkable how Germany has revived itself starting from zero in 1945.//- They got themselves well and truly on their feet, working 48 hours a day to make it a good country after the war: they are the sort of•people that can take a beating.//- Being a go- ahead nation, they quickly overcame the 1944 disaster//.
The sheer might of Germany’s industrial power attracts its share of attention. The country’s be lieved leadership or near-leadership in engineering, chemicals, electronics, etc. is hailed by many, and seen as a manifestation of intelligence, efficiency and determination.
Just as France’s political instability mirrored the weakness of the nation’s character, the vitality of the German economy reflects, in the eyes of our respond ents, the drive and talent of the Germans.
I look upon present-day Germany as a very efficient nation. I think of the Ruhr and the fantastic way in which Germany has become the leading European country since the war.//- I am always surprised to hear that their economic development is even in front of Australia’s. I understand that their economy is top class, -254-
this is because the Germans have always been a very intelligent and forward looking type of race, looking into the future and always trying to gain some thing better all the time.//- They are very inventive and very precise at what they do, thoroughness is typical of the whole race and therefore they have become one of the world's best in precision and heavy engineering//.
Connotations of quality are attached to German products. The reciprocal transfer of imagery which we noted between people and politics, or people and the economy of the country, also occurs between the typical national and the country’s products. German goods have a reputation among our respondents which reflects German qualities: they are believed durable
(reliable), well-designed, precise. 'Made in France' or 'made in Italy' did not suggest quality as force fully as 'made in Germany' does. 'Everything they do, they do well' and 'everything the Germans make is of high quality' were leitmotifs recurring in many reactions to German products.
The high score the German obtained on the item
'Everything they produce is of high quality' confirmed the quality impact of the German products. -255-
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
4 'Everything they produce is of high quality’
3.23 3 fSf?» 2.31
2- f I WÄ f n France r 1 1 - F I Germany 0 'M
The healthy German economy provides the country with standards of living believed to be the highest in * Europe.
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
Statement: Germany France
Has a high standard of living. 2.97 2.25
* The fact that France's per capita income in the late I960's vas the thi rd highest in Europe (after those of Sweden and Switzerland and ahead of Germany *s) is not known. -256-
B. Misled in the •past, they now behave well.
The majority of respondents spontaneously focus upon the atrocities committed by Germany during World
War II when asked 'what comes to your mind in relation to the war and the behaviour of each of the three countries’. Although every comment includes a reference to German war crimes, less than 5 per cent stigmatize the behaviour of the German 'people'. In analysing associations between the label 'cruel' and the Germans, it was mentioned that the overwhelming majority of
Australian respondents absolve the individual German of the responsibility for German massacres and acts of torture. The most popular mechanism for exoneration consists of distinguishing betv/een the 'people' and their leaders. The Germans, our respondents explain, were either 'gagged' by a ruthless dictator or 'hypnotized' by an insane Führer, unless they were totally ignorant of the treatment inflicted upon the Jews and other victims of Nazism.
The small minority who believe in collective responsibility accuse the German people, but they also hasten to add that the events of World War II belong to the past and that 'the past is the .past and should be forgotten'. -257-
Only two of the 100 respondents, actually expressed
uncontrolled hostility at the mention of the stimulus
’World War II and the Germans'.
It is significant to note, however, that the
respondents who assumed either a phenomenon of collective
hysteria or a state of helplessness under a totalitarian
regime in order to exculpate the German people also
attributed to the Germans, earlier in the interview,
courage and strength of character, as well as high self- control (lack of emotionality).
The image of the forceful, rational German is logically incongruent 'with the image of a mesmerized or meek people. This incongruence was not perceived by our respondents. One has the impression that the gener ally favourable image of the Germans cannot accommodate Nazism and the inhuman episodes of the war, and that specific contradictions within the image are more accept able to the Australian observer than the total contra diction between a ’good’ race being thoroughly evil.
I don't hold anything against them. Why should I? The Germans are people who in the first place did not know what v/as happening. As far as fighting us goes, they had no choice. I don't approve of the way they treated the Jews, but that v/as their leader's responsibility, not the people’s.//- They simply had to do as they were told: we can't blame them for that.//- I think it was the leaders they had; the people had no say in it. I feel what the Germans did can only be explained in terms of a maniac leader completely in command of all the controls in the country.//- It was a shocking business, but I think the Germans got themselves in a situation without real izing it. Wrong leadership goes a long way, and the Germans were forced to do a lot of what they did by wrong leadership and they were too frightened to protest.//- They followed blindly a person they admired, but the German people, being human, must have felt pretty badly about the atrocities against the Jews//.
Over one-half of respondents see Germany's present political institutions as 'similar to ours'; they describe German political life in superlatives: very quiet, very stable, very sound, very democratic. They also expect it to remain untroubled, because, they say,
'the private person is basically very sound, hence the Nazi aberration is unlikely to recur'. On the other hand, a strong minority of about 15 per cent expresses doubts about the long-term survival of democracy in
Germany. They fear a resurgence of Nazism, which they view, not as an episode of freakish lunacy, but as a manifestation of a frenzied, thirst for power whose germs they see in the dark recesses of the German character: arrogance.
The following quotations illustrate the majority’s -.2 59- trust in the present day democracy:
Germany is very quiet, very stable; its Chancellors are very active and reasonable men, who get the whole job of governing the country neatly done.//- The political life of Germany has always been a very sound one, if we forget about Hitler. It has been one to bring the people together and work as a community with a common aim. At present, the aim is mainly to readjust themselves and find themselves again after the war.//- Today, their outlook is very similar to ours, very democratic. They seem to be trying to help themselves and the world in general.//- Their political life seems quite stable now. Their standards of living have risen considerably, they seem satisfied with the Germany they have, I don’t think they’ll ever go back to a dictatorship. That was an eruption of in sanity, but they channel their ’get up and go' into the rehabilitation of the country//.
Distrust is evident in the following comments:
I am not too surprised to see this National Democratic Party which is supr/osedly allied with Nazism and is growing in favour. There is something about the Germans that makes me shudder. This National Party reflects something you find about the Germans: it is their arrogance and ruthless ness in the treatment of individuals and the idea they have about themselves being a master race, intolerant of any other nation.//- Being hard and unsympathetic, the Germans are attracted by forceful leaders who seem to entrance them with their arrogance and lust for power: they will always be potent ially dangerous because of this flav/ in the German character//.
The distrustful minority is too small to affect the overall rating: in comparison with De Gaulle's France, -260-
Germany is considered less arrogant towards foreign
nations. Nonetheless, the Germans, as people, are
regarded as being more arrogant than the French:
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
Statements: Germany France Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 2.03 2.78 Germans French
They are arrogant people 2.85 1.73
On the items, 'seems lacking in backbone' and 'is
basically unstable', Germany obtains very low associa tion scores in relation to France. The difference between the ratings obtained by the two countries con firms the dominant image elicited in the intensive inter views: despite minority reservations, Germany is the more stable and steady country. Without any reserva
tions, it is the most resolute and. enterprising:
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
Statements: Germany France Is basically unstable 0.78 1.68
Seems lacking in backbone 0-38 1.24 -261-
Outstripping France, Germany's higher ratings on friendliness and reliability as an ally reflect the majority's trust in today's Germany:
TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS
Statements: Germany France
Is friendly towards other countries 2.45 1.95 Is a good and reliable ally of the Western World 2.27 1.92
C. A neat and orderly country.
The whole German countryside, like that of France and Italy, is imagined as a tourist's paradise. But whereas the delapidation of France or Italy provide these countries' picturesque appeal, Germany's attraction lies in her neatness. Her trim forests, her clear water ways, her orderly highways, her spring-cleaned villages, all convey the image of immaculateness. Even the huge industrial complex of the Ruhr does not spoil the model- of-hygiene impression.
I think of cities well laid out, modern and orderly.//- My image is of large indus trial cities, properly planned and controlled.//- -262- \ T see glorious waterways crossing beauti ful countryside, everything spick and span.//- \I imagine the villages like little toy places, clean as if they were new//. N ^
The belief that Australians have more to learn from the Germans than either the French or the Italians best summarizes the overall positive perceptions of the
German people and nation prevailing among our subjects.
In answer to the question, 'what can v/e, Australians, learn from any of the three nationalities’, 95 per cent of respondents named a,t least one German trait or achievement Australians should emulate. Only one-half of respondents suggested some skill or characteristic with which the French or the Italians could enrich Aust ralia. The remaining answers included sharp negative replies (’there is nothing at all v/e can learn from them’) and sarcastic outbursts along the following lines
We can learn not to be so excitable and get the country in all that strife that the French seem to get themselves into, fighting each other.//- We should learn from the -263-
Italians not to carry knives about in socks and clothing. \ \ In the quantitative measurement of association v/ith the statement ’we can learn a lot from them' , the
German score confirmed the qualitative findings. VIII. THE STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS AND THEIR
MEASUREMENT OP ATTITUDES
Chapter IV on Survey Design outlined the two stages of this inquiry: in-depth interviews and structured interviews. This chapter will present, in its first two sections, results of the structured interviews not yet reviewed in the previous chapters and, in its third section, a comparison of the results from the two stages.
Chapter IV also discussed the means and processes of drawing the sample for the structured interviews. Appendix 1 d. contains the questionnaire administered to this sample. By reference to that appendix, the reader may refresh his mind about the two techniques used in these interviews: self-rating scales and Fishbein scales. Questions 1 and 3 of the questionnaire are described as self-rating scales whereby a respondent rates his own position on a scale. -265-
Questions 4 and 5 are complementary parts of a Fishbein scale of attitude towards the French, the
Germans, and the Italians, from which a score can be derived assigning each respondent to a position on a scale. Similarly, questions 6 and 7 are complement ary parts of a Fishbein scale relating to the three countries.
A further group of questions (page 7 of the questionnaire) .elicit responses to some relevant demo graphic and social variables, sex, education, age and degree of contact.
These three elements - the self-rating scales, the Fishbein scales and the stratifying variables - provide a scheme for presenting the results of the structured interviews in a systematic way.
Section 1 presents the findings from the self rating scales and section 2 those from the Fishbein scales. Section 3 compares the two and places them in a larger context with the results of the in-depth interviews. Each of the first two sections has a general introductory statement, followed by the presentation of the results and by subsections treating each stratifying variable in turn. -266-
SECTION 1 . THE SELF-RATING- SCALES:
A,____ Introduction.
There are two self-rating questions to be treated here. The questions are printed in the questionnaire (appendix 1 d.), and the method of administration was discussed in chapter IV on Survey
Design. The questions are repeated here and the method of administration briefly summarized again because of the implications they have for the inter pretations which follow.
QUESTION 1. One can have many different reactions to overseas people. I would like you to please tell me about your feelings toward some people from overseas. All you have to do is put the name of the people shown on these cards (SHOW CARDS) next to the statement which comes closest to your reaction toward them. You may place more than one name next to the same statement.
The entire scale of response alternatives:
I LIKE THEM A LOT I QUITE LIKE THEM I DON’T MIND THEM I DON’T LIKE THEM MUCH I DISLIKE THEM -267-
was presented to each respondent printed on a
largish sheet of paper. The nationalities, English,
American, Dutch, French, German, Italian, Greek were
presented on small cards which were arranged by the
respondent against the scale points on the piece of paper.
Each respondent was thus forced to consider at
once the whole range of scale options, the position of
any one nationality on the scale and the position of
each nationality relative to the placement of other
nationalities. The technique used for this question has several distinct advantages. It offers a means of assessing the liking of the French relative to the
six other nationalities. The non-verbal interlude in which the respondent does his rating avoids the need to articulate prejudice. As the first question in the survey, it also serves to disguise the specific interest of the inquiry in the French and the other two European nationalities, German and Italian.
B.____The Results.
The following table is based on the total
1. See chapter V, Section B., for elaboration. -268-
response of 600 respondents. The positive foils
('I like them a lot' and ’I quite like them’) are
combined as LIKE, and the negative foils (’I don't
like them much' and 'I dislike them') are combined
as DISLIKE. The full table is found as table 1 in appendix 2.
TOTAL SAMPLE SELF-RATING ON DEGREE
OF LIKING FOR SEVEN NATIONALITIES
Like I don't Dislike Do not Total mind know
t °k °k 1 t
English 71.8 20.7 7.3 .2 100 American 65.7 23-1 11.1 .2 100 Dutch 54.5 30.1 14.3 1.0 100
French 46.0 38.3 13.2 2.5 100 German 40.1 40.5 18.4 1.0 100
Italian 32.9 38.8 27.9 .3 100 Greek 29.1 43.5 26.4 1.0 100
The table is presented in descending order from the most liked, the English, to the least liked, the Greek. Note the range that separates these extremes. -269-
It allows little ambiguity in the.ordinal ranking of the nationalities presented in the table.
Among these seven, the French occupy the middle point of the ranking, about 4 percentage points below the middle of the range. The ranking for liking of the three nationalities in which we have a special interest is:
1. French 2. Germans 3- Italians and the percentages are well spaced.
This order is reversed at the negative end of the scale (disliking), and again the percentages are 2 well spaced.
The disinclination of respondents to state their dislikes as easily as their likes is worthy of note. Recourse to the neutral ’I don’t mind them' increases down the table. It seems that despite the non-verbal method of ranking, respondents are still
2. An equivalent way of summarizing this data might be to assume for the purposes of a calculation that the scale is an interval scale and to assign numbers (say 1 to 5) to the five possible positions from 'I like them a lot’ to ’I dislike them’. The calculation of a mean position over the entire sample would show in order of liking: (1) French, (2) Germans, (3) Italians. -270-
reluctant to state their prejudice openly. 3
Let us consider from this point of view our
three European nationalities and the ratio of those
who like them to those who dislike them.
For the French it is more than three to one. For the Germans it is more than two to one. For the Italians, it is only slightly better than one to one.
Seen from this point of view, the ranking of
these three nationalities can be confidently accepted
in the order given above.
The second self-rating question, Question 3, was presented in a manner similar to Question 1.
QUESTION 3. Now I would like you to tell me how much or how little you admire some overseas people. All you have to do is place a card next to the statement that comes closest to your reaction towards them. You may place more than one name next to the same statement.
The scale of response alternatives was:
3. Subject to the constraints of this data - it may be that Australians would readily state their dislike of other nationalities such as the Chinese or the Japanese. -271-
I ADMIRE THEM A LOT I QUITS ADMIRE THEM I AM UNDECIDED I DON’T ADMIRE THEM MUCH I DON'T ADMIRE THEM AT ALL
As before, the table below is based on the
total response of 600 respondents, and the positive
and negative responses are being combined for presenta
tion. The full table is found as table 5 in appendix 2.
TOTAL SAMPLE SELF-RATING ON DECREE OF ADMIRATION FOR SEVEN NATIONALITIES
Admire Undecided Don't Do not Total Admire Know £ £ £ £ £ English 77.1 9.9 12.8 .2 100
American 76.9 9.4 13.5 .2 100 German 60.6 26.6 19.4 .3 100 Dutch 55.9 29.8 16.2 .8 100
French 45.5 19.9 23.9 .2 100 Italian 37.8 23.6 38.0 .7 100
Greek 36.3 29.1 33.4 1.2 100
4. It was realised with some concern and too late that * the neutral terms which are respectively 'I don't mind' and 'I am undecided' of the two self-rating scales, are not exactly similar. 'I don't mind them' is mildly positive compared to 'I am undecid ed', sc the LIKE scale would probably have fewer positive expressions compared to the admiration scale, if these points are taken to be equivalent and neutral. This observation is only relevant when the scales are being directly compared. -272-
The table is presented in descending order from the most admired, the English, to the least ad mired nationals, the Greeks. The range separating the extremes is approximately equivalent to that for the LIKING scale, which again allows reasonable confid ence about the ordinal ranking of the seven national em ities, at least in the middle range of the scale.
In contrast to the LIKE scale, respondents seem less reluctant to say that they do not admire a nationality. The neutral term is less used all the way down the ADMIRE scale, though as with the LIKE scale, respondents show the same increasing reluctance to offer an opinion on the less admired nationalities.
These observations, when taken with the remark above on the verbal expression of prejudice, suggest that the ADMIRE scale has more cognitive content than the
LIKE scale, which relatively has a higher affective content.
A strong difference between the LIKE and
ADMIRE scales is the rank given the Germans. The
Germans are ranked third on the ADMIRE scale, compared
5. Less confidence can be placed on the ordinal ranking at the extremes, as the English and the Americans are less separated at the most admired end and the Italians and the Greeks less separated at the least admired end of the scale. -273- to fifth on the LIKE scale. The change in rank for the French from fourth on the LIKE scale to fifth on the ADMIRE scale is in part explained by this shift in rank for the Germans and in part by a downward move ment proper to the French. They are now 11 percent age points below the middle of the range on the ADMIRE scale, compared to 4 percentage points below the middle point on the LIKE scale.
The higher placement of the Germans compared to the French is reflected in the ratios of those who admire them relative to those who do not.
Once again, let us consider the ratios for our three European nationalities:
For the Germans it is more than three to one. For the French, it is almost two to one. For the Italians it is only slightly better than one to one.
The Germans and the French have thus changed places in terms of the ratios derived for the LIKE scale.
C.'____The Stratifying Variables and the Self-rating scales.
i). Sex of respondents and the self-rating scales.
The next tables present information summarized -274-
from full cross tabulations of LIKING and ADMIRATION
by sex,^ where on either side of the neutral term the
percentages have been combined.
SELF-RATING ON DEGREE OF LIKING BY SEX
LIKE DISLIKE Margins Males Females Males Females °/* % T“ IT English 68.6 75.1 6.8 7.8 5.5 F. American 73.9 67.6 10.8 11.2 6.7 F. Dutch 44.9 64.5 20.3 8.2 41.7 F. French 37.7 54.6 15.1 11.2 20.8 F. German 38.3 42.0 16.5 20.5 0.5 M. Italian 27.9 38.2 33.8 21.8 22.3 F. Greek 26.6 32.8 31.5 21.1 17.6 F. Total Respondents 305. 293 305 293
SELF-RATING ON DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY SEX LIKE DISLIKE Margins Males Females Males Females
English 76.7 77.5 13.1 12.6 1.3 F. American 76.7 77.1 14.4 12.6 2.2 F. Dutch 47.5 64.5 22.7 11.6 27.1 F. French 40.6 50.6 27.8 19.8 18.0 F. German 66.9 53.9 18.4 20.5 15.1 M. Italian 33.1 42.6 43.6 32.1 21.0 F. Greek 33.8 38.9 37.7 29.0 13.8 F. Total Resnondents 305 293 305 293
6. See Appendix 2, Tables 2A, 2B, 6A and 6B. -275-
The right-hand column of each table, labelled
’margins’, was calculated as a guide to interpretation
The figures it contains represent the arithmetic
differences of the ’favourable' and ’unfavourable’
responses given by males and females for each national
ity. To take the first row of the LIKE-DISLIKE table
5.5 corresponds to the difference between (68.6 - 6.8)
and (75*1 - 7.8). The E indicates that the differ- 7 ence is positive in favour of females.
In general, Australian women indicate that they both like and admire foreign nationalities more than
Australian men do. There are only two exceptions to
this tendency. Males give Americans higher LIKE ratings and Germans higher ADMIRE ratings. Some of the differences in percentage ratings are marginal, but most are substantial enough to suggest a sex difference in attitude tov/ards foreign nationalities.
The sex difference suggested by the data could be deceptive, since a systematic difference in scale usage, expressive of response style, was suspected on
7. The arithmetic calculation is not to be taken as an ’absolute' figure, since it ignores the neutral response. It is no more than a rough ’measure’ of the differences in response between the sexes at the extreme ends of the.scales. -276- another scale encountered earlier in this survey.
It will be recalled that females obtained higher positive and negative scores on the ’evaluation of belief’ scale by giving almost everyone of the 35 o items higher absolute ratings.
The LIKE and ADMIRE results suggest that
Australian women are more accepting and feel greater regard for foreign nationalities generally. But perhaps Australian women systematically overrate, using numerical 'superlatives’ in a manner reminis cent of their speech, while at the same time Aust ralian men shy away from emphasis in ratings and words? Perhaps, women are merely complying more readily with the social desirability of the inter viewing situation by hiding their prejudices and overstating their warmth towards foreigners?
This study does not provide enough evidence for an elaborate theory on sex differences -in scale usage in Australia. It raises the question. The tentative answer this study can offer rests on the evidence of the six scales used, two self-rating scales and the two complementary parts of the two
8. See chapter V, section 3. -277-
Fishbein scales (the ’evaluation of belief’ and the
’association of belief’ parts).
There is strong evidence of a sex difference in scale usage, express ive of a sex difference in response style. But in addition, there is, most probably, a genuine sex differ ence in ethnic attitudes.
The basis of the argument in favour of a real differ
ence in attitudes is derived from the ’association of belief’ scales for nationalities and for countries,
on which women do not systematically give higher associative ratings for all items to all nationalities. They discriminate in their associative ratings between the French and Italians and Germans, by scoring some- 9 times above, sometimes below males on the same item.
The direction of these belief rating differences is congruent with Australian women's greater liking for
Italians and French and lesser admiration for the
Germans indicated on the two self-rating scales.
ii) Education and the self-rating scales
The following two tables show the information extracted from the full cross tabulations of the LIKE
9. See chapter VI and VII. -278- and ADMIRE ratings by levels of education. Again, the foils on both sides of the neutral centre are combined.*1^
SELF-RATING ON DEERES OF LIKING
BY EDUCATION
LIKE DISLIKE
P P. S1 S2 T. S1 S2 T fo % % 1° % % English 75.6 71.4 67.9 74.8 8.5 7.1 6.3 8.5 American 76.8 65-9 57.1 67.4 7.4 8.9 16.4 13-7
Dutch 62.1 53.2 48.4 60.0 9.8 15.0 13.3 17.9 French 41.4 46.1 46.1 49.4 7.3 10.9 17.1 20.0
German 37.8 36.2 39.1 55.8 19.5 18.7 18.0 16.9
Italian 23.2 33.1 29.0 46.3 34.2 27.6 28.9 22.1 Greek 32.9 26.0 20.3 47.3 26.8 27.0 29.7 20.0
Total Respond- 82 293 128 94 82 293 128 94 ents.
10. See Appendix 2, Tables 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D and 6A, 6B, 6C, 6D. The educational categories, primary only, less than 3 years of secondary schooling, 3 years and more of secondary schooling, some tertiary (completed or not) are abbreviated here with the letters P, S. Sn T. I * 2 •* -279-
SELF-RATING ON DEGREE OF ADMIRATION
BY EDUCATION
ADMIRE DO NOT ADMIRE
P si S2 T P si S2 T $ ~ir % T“ % English 80.5 79.9 73.4 70.5 9.7 11.6 13.2 18.9
American 84.1 80.8 67.2 71.6 9.7 9.6 19.5 21.0 Dutch 63.4 55.3 47.6 62.1 13.5 19.4 16.4 14.8
French 51.2 47.8 43.0 36.8 15.9 23.2 22.7 34.7
German 54.9 55.9 60.2 80.0 23.2 19.8 21.9 11.6
Italian 37.8 37.9 37.5 37.9 36.6 39.6 35.9 36.9
Greek 45.1 33.4 35.2 38.9 25.6 36.9 34.4 28.4
Total Respond- 82 293 128 94 82 293 128 94 ents
To facilitate the interpretation, the differ ences between the LIKE - DISLIKE and the ADMIRE - DO
NOT ADMIRE percentages have been calculated and the ordinal ranking of these differences shown in two summary tables. The positions of subjects with the highest and lowest level of education (the T and P subjects) have been highlighted with a line. -280-
SUMMARY LIKE-DISLIKE SUMMARY ADMIRE-DO NOT ADMIRE DIFFERENCES DIFFERENCES Ordinal Rankings Ordinal Rankings
Rankings 2 3 4 Nationalities
English
American
Dutch
French German Tr-'lC S Italian
Greek
The tables suggest that the relationship between education and attitudes is complex, and that the LIKE and ADMIRE scales produce different patterns. The anal ysis of the association is complicated by a suspected style of response bias for v/hich there was evidence on the ’evaluation of belief’ and ’association of belief’
‘ 11 scales. Subjects with lesser educational standards tended to polarize their ratings in comparison with
11. See Chapter V, section 3, and Chapters VI and VII. -281-
subjects with higher educational attainments. However,
since the LIKE and ADMIRE tables show many instances of
ratings which depart from this trend, it is justified
to infer that ’real* attitudes are reflected over and
above the style of response interference. For instance,
LIKE ratings by T subjects are the highest (in comparison with all other subj3cts), in relation to 4 out of seven
nationalities. They are equal or higher on the DISLIKE
scale for 4 out of seven nationalities. If one compares
the results on the negative end of the ADMIRE scale, the
'prejudiced* ratings of the T subjects are stronger in 6
out of seven cases, in comparison with those of the P
subjects.
The LIKE ratings suggest that P subjects are least accepting of the Italians and the Germans. They are also more critical (less admiring) of the Germans than any other subgroup.
Both LIKE and ADMIRE ratings show that P subjects
are the most favourable group towards the English, the
Americans and the Dutch.
Attitudes towards the French are more complex:
the P’s display greater ’neutrality’ towards the French
by giving them the lowest LIKE and DISLIKE ratings, -282- whereas T subjects express the greatest polarity in feelings towards the French.
The French are both most LIKED and most DISLIKED by the tertiary-educated. On the ADMIRE scale, the T’s display equally stronger feelings. Their DO NOT ADMIRE ratings for the French are twice as high as those of P subjects. Only the Americans are the object of a similar ’discrimination' by T subjects.
Finally, one is struck by the favourable attitudes displayed by the T's towards the Germans, Italians and
Greeks on the LIKE scale. For the Germans, these ratings are backed by markedly favourable ratings of
ADMIRATION.
(iii) Age and the self-rating scales
The next set of tables summarizes the full cross- 1 2 tabulations of the two self-rating scales by age.
The three age groups considered were respectively 17-24,
30-44, and 45-64.
12. See Amoendix 2, Tables 20, 2D, 2E and 60, 6D, 6E. -283-
SELF-RATING ON DEGREE OF LIKING BY AGE
LIKE DISLIKE
17-29 30-44 45-64 17-29 30-44 45-64 °/o J> C/°. Jo c/o English 65.9 73.1 75.6 10.1 6.6 5.6 American 58.5 59.9 77.4 15.5 11.2 7.9 Dutch 50.0 54.3 58.6 9.6 17.3 16.0 French 47.9 47.2 43.2 12.2 11.6 15.5 German 39.3 43.1 38.0 17.6 17.8 19.8 Italian 26.0 39.6 33.8 29.2 26.9 27.7 Greek 18.6 35.0 32.8 28.2 24.2 26.7 Total Respond- 188 197 213 188 197 213 ents
SELF RATING ON DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY AGE
ADMIRE DO NOT ADMIRE 17-29 30-44 45-64 17-29 30-44 45-64 jr “T"" —f° ¥ W English 70.7 80.2 79.8 16.5 10.1 12.2 American 69 • 6 76.2 84.0 18.7 13.7 8.9 Dutch 45.7 58.9 61.5 16.5 17.8 17.4 French 46.8 43.2 46.5 21.3 27.0 23.5 German 57.5 65.0 59.2 19.7 18.3 20.2 Italian 30.8 43.7 38.5 42.6 32.4 39.0 Greek 25.6 40.6 41.8 40.9 27.9 31.9 Total Respond- 188 197 213 188 197 213 ents -284-
The data from the positive and negative ends of each scale shown on the above tables were combined by sub tracting the unfavourable from the favourable ratings
The differences were ranked by order of magnitude. The patterns of the relationship between the LIKE and
ADMIRE ratings and age are shown in the next table.
The letters Y stand for the youngest group, M for the middle one and 0 for the oldest.
SUMMARY LIKE-DISLIKE SUMMARY ADMIRE-DO NOT ADMIRE DIFFERENCES DIFFERENCES
Rankings
1 2 3 Nationalities
English American Dutch French German
Italian
Greek
Overall, the Y’s tend to give all seven national ities, with the exception of the French, ratings more unfavourable than those of the other two groups. For -285-
10 out of the 14 comparisons on the two scales, the Y
are placed last; in 2 instances, second last.
The argument which could be raised in relation
to a scale usage bias which leads younger people to
take refuge in the more moderate centre positions of
the scale is not a forbidding one, although there was
evidence of such behaviour on the 'evaluation of belief'
scale and on these self-rating scales.
At the same time, the Y's use the two negative foils more frequently than any other age groups in 8
out of 14 instances. There is therefore reason to
believe that the moderating effect of style of response, if at play, could also have been broken at the positive end of the scales, had there been need for it.
It is reasonable to assume, but it can be no more than an assumption, that the ratings obtained reflect more unfavourable LIKE-DISLIKE attitudes among the Y's
towards the English and the Americans, the Italians and
the G-reek and to a lesser degree, the Dutch and the
Germans.
On the ADMIRE scale, the Y’s are most critical of all nationalities, excluding the French. -286-
The French emerge as the most liked and admired nationality by the youngest age group.
(iv) Degree of knowledge and the self-rating scales
The information from cross tabulations of LIKING and ADMIRATION by degree of knowledge is presented in the next tables. The percentages on either side of the neutral term, shown in the Appendix, have been combined. 1 3 Three levels of knowledge were established through respondent self-rating on a degree of contact 1 4 scale. The foils offered were:
Have friends or relatives from.... Have met people from.... Have never met anyone from....
For simplicity, we abbreviate these categories later by the letters F (friends), M (met), NM (never met).
13. See Appendix 2, Tables 4 and 8.
14. See Questionnaire, Appendix 1 d. -287-
SELF-RATING ON DEGREE OF LIKING
BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE
LIKE DISLIKE French German Italian French German Italian % c/o ~¥~ Have friends or relatives 66.6 60.4 45.4 10.5 9.1 19.4 Have met people 44.8 35.6 28.0 15.3 21 .1 32.3 Have never met anyone 34.8 15.9 7.7 10.5 26.0 15.4
SELF-RATING ON DEGREE OF ADMIRATION
BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE
LIKE DISLIKE French German Italian French German Italian % T“ ~T~ T“ Have friends or relatives 60.0 72.5 50.8 20.9 13.4 30.3 Have met people 42.7 60.5 32.5 28.3 20.8 41 .3 Have never CO met anyone 41 .6 • 15.4 16.8 26.1 46.2
As before, the differences between the percentages of LIKE and DISLIKE ratings and between ADMIRE and DO NOT
ADMIRE ratings have been calculated and shown in two -288- summary tables. The minus signs for the Italians and the Germans correspond to a higher incidence of negative vs positive ratings.
SUMMARY TABLE
LIKE-DISLIKE ADMIRE-DO NOT ADMIRE French German Italian French German Italian a/° T~" Have friends or relatives 56.1 51 .3 26.0 39.1 59.1 20.5 Have met people 29.5 14.5 -4.3 14.4 39.7 -8.8 Have never met anyone 24.3 -10.1 -7.7 24.8 5.7 -30.8
The results indicate that, generally, attitudes towards the three foreign nationalities are positively associated with degree of contact.
But it is important not to generalize hastily about the positive associations between the two variables, attitudes and degree of contact.
First of all, the generally positive association within nationalities does not hold necessarily across nationalities. The overall ordering of the three nationalities by degree of LIKING and ADMIRATION placed 1 8 the Italians in last position twice, ' although they are
15- See Section 1 A of this Chapter. -289-
the ethnic group with which Australians have the great
est degree of contact.
DEGREE 0? CONTACT WITH THE
FOREIGN NATIONALITIES
French Germans Italians NN N
Have friends or relatives 105 164 185 Have met people 332 365 400 Have never met anyone 161 69 13
Total Respondents 598 598 598
In other words, increasing contact with Italians is associated with lesser levels of prejudice towards them, but Australians still prefer the French and the
Germans with whom they have,overall, less contact.
. Secondly, greater degree of knowledge of the French is associated with a variation in ADMIRE ratings contrary to the expected trend. At the M level, the
French are significantly less ADMIRED than at the NM level. Meeting the French increases the negative -290-
DO NOT ADMIRE ratings and improves only marginally
the LIKE ratings (in comparison with substantial differ
ence between the M and NM levels found for the Germans)
Whereas the Germans suffer more negative attitudes where no direct contact has been established, the French are more favourably regarded when no casual contact exists.
SECTION 2. THE FISHBEIN SCALES
A. Introduction.
It will be recalled that Fishbein scales define attitudes as the evaluative aspects of belief associa tions. Chapter V, section 3 presented the results obtained on the Evaluative part* of the Fishbein scales, and Chapters VI and VII dealt with the major findings derived from the ’association of belief’ part of the scales. The latter were used as quantitative supporting evidence for the image data obtained from the in-depth interviews. -291-
This section combines the two complementary
parts of the scales and presents conjointly the results
from the Fishbein scales for nationalities and the
Fishbein scales for polities.
A quick reminder will be given here of the
arithmetical procedures involved. The explanation
offered for the Fishbein scale for nationalities
applies to the Fishbein scale for polities. The only
difference between them relates to the number of be
lief items included in each scale: the first was based
on 35 belief statements, the second on 12. The values obtained for the two scales are thus not directly comparable. Only comparisons based on ordinal rank ings and ratios are meaningful.
For the sake of simplicity, we use the symbol B. for a subject’s association of belief score,on a J belief statement ’j’ and the symbol a^ for his evalua tion score of that statement. Each subject gave
(3 x 35) B. ratings as he associated each nationality J in turn with the 35 statements. He made also 35 a. J judgements. Each subject’s B. scores were multiplied J by the corresponding a. score. All subjects’ cross- «3 products B. a. were added and averaged, yielding 35 average sample scores for each nationality. Some of -292- these became positive, others negative, according to the average a. values. The minimum value each cross D product could obtain was (-16), the maximum (+16), since the maximum and minimum values of the B. term J were respectively (+4) and (0) and those of the a. J term (+4) and (-4).
The summated 35 average cross products for each nationality make up the Fishbein attitude scores.
These are shown in Appendix 2, Table 29 and following under the heading SUMMATED SCORES.
In the next section, the letters Fn stand for
Fishbein scores for nationalities and F for Fishbein scores for polities.
B. The Results:
16 The next table shows the two sets of F scores.
FISHBEIN ATTITUDE SCORES FOR NATIONALITIES AND POLITIES
Nationalities Polities
Fn scores Fd scores
French + 86 France + 24 German + 103 Germany + 53 Italian + 55 Italy + 25
16. See Appendix 2, Tables 29 and 36. -293-
The F scores rank the nationalities in the n order:
Germans (1) French (2) Italians (3) and the polities in the order:
Germany (1)17 Italy, France (2) '
Some of the 12 items composing the F^ scale tap cognitions similar (but not identical) to those express ed in statements of the F scale. Other items relate n to areas specific to the polities. Examples of both types are cited here: a) Similar items.
Nationalities Polities
They are arrogant people Displays arrogance in foreign policy
They are reliable people Is a reliable ally of the West
They are artistic people Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world'
They are scientically Is a world leader in minded science and technology.
17. The small difference between the F scores for P France and Italy is not considered significant. -294- b) Items unique to the F scale
Nationalities Polities
Has a high standard of living.
Everything it produces is of high quality
Is dominated by the Catholic Church
Similarity or lack of correspondence between items on both scales was not planned. It happened unintentionally. It will be remembered that the traits and features mentioned most frequently by the respond ents in the intensive interviews became the 'belief items' of the F scales. Since a number of character istics v/ere recurrently associated with both the foreign people and the foreign countries, these came to figure (in slightly different form) in the two scales.
Obviously, the derived similarities between the
Fn and F^ scales testify to the mutual carry-over of impressions in the minds of observers between the countries and their people. In part, it explains the similarity between the rankings on both scales.
Nonetheless, respondents discriminate on some -295-
of the ’similar’ items between ’the country' and the
'the people'. Two examples will illustrate this
point. In the next table are shown the B. a. products D u of two such 'similar' items, the first dealing with
'reliability', the second with 'arrogance' in people and countries. The higher absolute values are under lined .
French/ Germans/ Italians/ France Germany Italy Prom the Fn scale:
They are reliable people + 6.28 + 8.87 + 6.08
From the F scale: P Is a reliable ally of the Western world + 6.61 + 7.46 + 6.55
From the Fn scale:
They are arrogant people - 5.08 - 8.45 - 5.14
From the F^ scale:
Often displays arrogance in foreign policy - 8.19 - 6.06 - 3.63
Ignoring differences between the terms inferior -296- to 1.00, the figures suggest that German people are
judged more reliable than Germany, the political whole; again, the people of Germany (and Italy) appear to
Australians more arrogant as individuals than as a nation. By contrast, the evaluation of France, on arrogance, is more severe than that of the French people.
If one turns from the item details to the total scale scores, the single most outstanding difference between the attitudes towards the nationalities and the polities appears in relation to France.
By taking the German Fn and F^ scores as base values, ratios for the French and Italians and their countries were derived. These are shown in the next table:
French France Italians Italy
Ratios of F n and Fp scores based on those of Germans 0.88 0.46 0.53 0.49 and Germany
18. It is of course important to keep in mind the political circumstances prevailing at the time of the survey. In the eyes of Australians, Germany had not reasserted itself politically since World War II. France, on the contrary, under the leadership of De Gaulle, was perceived as ’meddling’ and ’stirring' in world affairs. -297-
These ratios suggest either that attitudes towards France are significantly more unfavourable than attitudes towards the French, or that attitudes towards Germany are significantly better than those towards the Germans, or a combination of both. There is some evidence that unfavourable attitudes towards
France largely account for this country's relatively low Fp score, since the F^ ratio for Italy remains roughly similar to its Fn ratio.
Another indicator of the 'deterioration' of attitudes towards France in relation to attitudes to wards the French is derived from the ratios of the Fn to Fp scores. The Germans/Germany and Italians/ltaly ratios are nearly 2 to 1. The French/France ratio is as high as 3.6 to 1.
Overall, the two sets of Fishbein scores suggest that there is a substantial over lap between the affective orientations towards the foreign people and. foreign countries, without excluding a degree of independence between them.
C. The stratifying variables and the Fishbein scales. i) ( Sex of respondent and the Fishbein scales
The table which follows shows the F_n and F p scores analysed by sex of respondent. 1 Q-
19. See Appendix 2, Tables 30A, 30B and 37A, 37B. -298-
FISHBEIN ATTITUDE SCORES
FOR NATIONALITIES AND POLITIES
Nationalities Polities
scores F scores Margins Males Females Males Females Fn Fp French +81 +92 France +22 +27 11F 5F
German +107 +98 Germany + 56 +49 9M 8M
Italian +45 +65 Italy +23 +28 19F 5F
TOTAL (305 (293) (305) (293) RESPOND- ENTS
In the right hand column, the arithmetic differ ences between the male and female scores are shown. As before, the F and M symbols indicate that the difference is in favour of either females or males.
These differences suggest that the attitudes of Australian women are less favourable than those of Australian men towards the Germans, but more favourable towards the French and the Italians.
ii) Education of respondent and the Fishbein scale
The next two tables contain the breakdown of the
F^ and F^ scores by education.^20 As previously, four
20. See Appendix 2, Tables 32A, 32B, 32C, 32D ana 38A, 383, 380, 38D. -299- levels of education were considered. 21 These are indicated here with the letters P, S^ , S2 and T.
FISHBEIN ATTITUDE SCORES FOR NATIONALITIES
BY EDUCATION
Education
P S2 T Nationalities S1
French +109 +94 +68 +74 German +114 +107 +87 +100
Italian +60 + 59 +40 +59
FISHBEIN ATTITUDE SCORES FOR POLITIES
BY EDUCATION
Education P S1 S2 T Polities
France +34 +26 +20 +15
Germany +55 +53 +48 + 54 Italy +26 +27 +20 +25
As a guide to interpretation, the scores , ranked by order of magnitude, appear in the two following
21. See p. 278. -300-
summary tables. The lines in the tables follow the
placings of the P's and the T's.
SUMMARY NATIONALITIES SUMMARY POLITIES Ordinal Rankings Ordinal* Rankings
Ranking Ranking 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Nationalities Polities
French P T France P. s, T A S2 S2. German P T Germany pi T A / S2 S2 Italy T Italian P TS 1 S2 s1 ^P S2
Some of the differences on which these rankings are based are quite small and may not be significant.
The rankings must only be regarded as 'indicative' of the position, and not as a definite rank.
In addition, the bias which education seems to introduce into scale usage must be kept in mind.
In the hypothesis of no attitude variation with education, one would expect (through the introduction of the scale usage bias) the ranking P S^ T. The influence of attitude over and above the influence of scale usage bias can be inferred from an ordering which departs from the expected in the opposite direction. -301 -
We find evidence of such a departure where the
T's occupy second or third ranking instead of fourth.
This situation occurred in relation to the Germans and
Germany, the Italians and Italy as well as the French.
Thus, generally, tertiary education seems associated with better than expected Fishbein scores.
We should note, however, that the T’s fail to transcend their ’restraint' bias in relation to France. The generally more favourable attitude of the tertiary- educated towards Germany and Italy does not extend to France.
iii) Age and the Fishbein scale
The results from the cross tabulations °f Fn and Fp scores by the three age levels appear below.22
As before, the descending order of magnitude of these scores is shown in two supplementary tables, The position of the Y’s (the youngest age group) and the
0’s (the oldest) are underscored.
22. See Appendix 2, Tables 31A, 31B, 31C and 37C, 37D, 37E. -302-
FISHBEIN ATTITUDE SCORES FOR
NATIONALITIES AND POLITIES BY AGE
17-29 30-44 45-64 17-29 30-44 45-64 French +82 +85 +92 France +27 +22 +24
German +99 +97 +112 Germany +47 + 52 + 58
Italian +49 + 58 + 58 Italy +24 +25 +26
SUMMARY NATIONALITIES SUMMARY POLITIES
Ordinal Rankings Ordinal Rankings
Ranking Ranking
Nationalities Polities
French 0 M France M German 0 M Germany °r M Y Italian 0 MY Italy M •y
Again, some of the differences are very small, and the warning of caution about definite ranking applies.
Probably only the difference between the extremes is meaningful. At the same time, one must keep in mind
(because of the previously mentioned scale usage bias in relation to age) that in the hypothesis of no ’real' -303- attitude difference due to the age variable, the expected ranking of F scores would be 0 M Y. This order obtains in 4 of the 6 cases. The only radical departure for the Y's from the 0 M Y ranking occurs for France on the F scale. P The score for the Y’s on the F scale suggests that the younger subjects hold^ relatively more favourable attitudes tov/ards France than the older subjects.
iv) Degree of knowledge and the Fishbein scale.
The scores obtained on both F scales on the fourth stratifying variable, degree of knowledge, are given in the tables below. Two summary tables accompany the full results. As before, the letters F, M, NM stand for the three levels of knowledge, 'have friends or relatives’, 'have met’, 'have never met*.
FISHBEIN ATTITUDE SCORES
FOR NAT.. .I0 ...... NAIITIES- ...... ■- — AND- ■ ------POLITII ES.1 .. BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE
Nationalities Polities French German Italian France Germany Italy
Have friends or relatives +96 +115 +70 +26 + 57 +26 Have met people +84 +100 +49 +23 + 52 +25 Have never met anyone +85 +88 +27 +25 +43 +16
23. See Apoendix 2, Tables 33A, 33B, 33C and 39A, 39B, 390. -304-
SUMMARY TABLUS
Nationalities Polities
Ranking Ranking 1 2 3 1 2 3 Nationalities Polities
French F NM/M France F NM M \ German F M NM Germany F M NM Italian F N NM Italy F M NM
The ranking F M NM is indicative of a positive association betv/een degree of contact and attitude.
This ranking obtains for the Germans and the Italians on the F_ and F_ scales.
By contrast, the M level is not associated with more favourable attitudes towards France and the French in comparison with the NM level. From these scores one can infer that acquaint ance with the French is not accompanied by improved attitudes in line v/ith the effect of contact for the other two nationalities.
Either the French, as a group Australians have not met, are ’overrated', or the positive effect acquaintance exercises on attitudes is destroyed by equally strong negative effects. -305-
3. THE COMPARISON BETWEEN THE TWO SELF-RATING SCALES, THE FISHBEIN SCALES AND THE IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS
A. SELF-RATING- and FISHBEIN
The FISHBEIN scores rank the three nation alities in the order obtained on the ADMIRE scale. They do not reflect the rankings of the LIKE scale for the GERMANS and the FRENCH.
Obviously, each of the three scales has an emotive and a cognitive content. To the extent that they reflect cognitive and emotive dimensions, they possess an amount of overlap. But it is suggested that the LIKE scale elicits a content which is more strongly emotional and that the ADMIRE and FISHBEIN scales tap a content which is relatively more cognitive.
The amount of overlap and the amount of unique ness proper to the LIKE and ADMIRE scales have been calculated. Overall, both scales show a high degree of correlation for each of the three European national ities: contingency tables of the two scales yield i 24 three .A. values significant at the 0.001 level.
24. The tables are shown in Appendix 2 as tables 9A, 9B and 9C. The values are: French: 337.10 Germans: 328.08 Italians: 448.08 -3C6-
The Contingency Coefficient values, however, show that
the scales are by no means identical. 2 ^ Each main
tains a content unique to itself.
This conclusion is consistent with the ordering
of the X values and Contingency Coefficient in
ascending order from the Germans (1) to the French (2)
to the Italians (3).
To state the tendencies (and they are only
tendencies), respondents found it possible to admire
the Germans, while not necessarily liking them; they
found it possible to like the French, while not necess
arily admiring them; but they like-admire or dislike-
don ’t admire the Italians. Thus for the Italians, the LIKE and ADMIRE scales have the highest degree of over lap, a fact which probably reflects the largely emotive response Italians produce among respondents. This is an interesting comment on prejudice as an integrating force: it brings affective unity to a range of feelings.
The next set of tables give the cross analysis
25. The maximum contingency coefficient possible for 9A, 93 and 9C tables is 0.89* For the three nation alities the coefficients are: French: 0.61 Germans: 0,59 Italians: 0.67 -307- of the ?n and F^ scores by the three foils of the
LIKE and ADMIRE scales.^
CROSS ANALYSIS 0? FISHBEIN SCORES
BY LIKE AND ADMIRE RATINGS a) Nationalities
Like Don * t Dis Admire Undec Don' t Mind like ided Admire
French +108 +80 +34 French +111 +80 4-48
German +130 +96 + 59 German +120 +90 +61
Italian +106 + 59 0 Italian +100 + 55 + 11
b) Polities
Like Don't Dis Admire Undec Don' t Mind like ided Admire
France +31 +22 +8 France +34 +22 +9 Germany +60 +52 +39 Germany +59 +47 +37
Italy +39 +23 +11 Italy +37 +25 +13
Reading each table across,’ the F_n and- F p scores clearly discriminate between the three steps of the
LIKE and ADMIRE scales.
These results provide evidence that FISHBEIN scores successfully order groups of subjects within a sample according to their 'attitudes' towards a given nationality.
26. See Apoendix 2, Tables 34A, 34B, 34C, 35A, 35B, 35C and 40A, 40B, 40C, 4CD, 40E, 40F. Again, the influence of the ADMIRE dimension
is evident on the FISHBEIN scores. . Unless the strong
weight of the ADMIRE dimension is taken into account, the descending order of the Fn scores, which reads
Germans (1), French (2) and Italians (3) at each of
the three steps of the LIKE scale, could not be explain ed .
The same descending order at each of the three
steps of the ADMIRE scale is in harmony with the find ings derived from all other parts of the survey.
It is reasonable to conclude that where LIKE and ADMIRE feelings are highly correlated, the FISHBEIN scale can be expected to reflect both. Where the correlation is weaker (i.e. where respondents ’compartmentalize’ their feelings), the FISHBEIN scale will mirror ADMIRE more neatly than LIKE.
Some of the associations between the four stratifying variables and attitudes found on the LIKE and ADMIRE scales were also reproduced on the FISHBEIN scales. For others, the associations were not found.
The following summary sets out the parallel and diverg ent findings for these variables in relation to the
French and France. -309-
LIK5/ADMIRE Scales FISHBEIN Scales
Sex variable:
Women more favourable to Same for F and F . the French. p
Education variable:
Polarization of feelings on T's unfavourable on the LIKE scale among the T’s. F scale only. Strong negative feelings on P the ADMIRE scale.
Age variable:
The French most liked and Y's more favourable on admired by the Y’s. F scale only. P
Degree of knowledge variable: Casual acquaintance does not Same for Fn and F . improve attitudes towards p the French.
The FISHBEIN scores supported the majority of findings of the other two scales, but the Fn scores failed to support the associations between education, age and attitudes.
B. DEPTH INTERVIEWS and STRUCTURED SCALES
The very first question and subsequent probes of the in-depth interviews elicited the same type of -310- feelings the structured scales captured for measure ment. The interviewing schedules opened with the question: WHAT IS THE FIRST THING THAT COMES TO YOUR
MIND WHEN YOU HEAR THE WORDS:
THE FRENCH? ___ THE GERMANS?... THE ITALIANS?27
Approximately tv/o-thirds of immediate reactions to the stimulus words were made up of spontaneous be lief statements (They are... They have.... They do... etc.)
About one-third consisted of direct expressions of feel ings towards the foreign groups, such as ’I like them’ or ’I have no regard for them1 or ’I don’t mind them at all' .
The beliefs elicited by the names of the nation alities at the onset of the interviews can be likened to sketchy drafts of the images filled out and coloured in later in the interviews. The feelings expressed were, right from the beginning, symptomatic of LIKE and
ADMIRATION attitudes in the dosages subsequently con firmed. For the French, the largest number of feelings expressed denoted liking or indifference, and frequently, mild contempt.
I have not a very high regard for them//-
27. Each nationality ’was named in turn by the inter viewer in rotating order from interview to inter view. I have no time for the French//- My general ooinion of the French-is rather poor//.
Towards the Italians, reactions conveyed dislike more
often than for the French and in addition, caustic
contempt:
They are definitely a second class people//- I have no respect whatsoever for people who do not try to adapt themselves,//- I don’t think they are a good type of race//- I don’t fancy them in the least//- There is something about them I find repellent//.
The majority of first reactions to the stimulus words
’the Germans', allude to feelings of respect for this
'good race of people'.
A subsequent probe requested respondents to name ’SOMETHING THEY PARTICULARLY ADMIRE ABOUT EACH OF THE THREE NATIONALITIES'. Forty-eight per cent of respondents could not recall anything they admired about the French. A somewhat smaller proportion of respondents (38 per cent) gave a similar answer for the Italians. Only 18 per cent could not recall any thing worth mentioning about the Germans.
But the rate of response for the French rose to
65 per cent of respondents in answer to the question asking about features ’disliked’ about the foreign -312-
groups. The rate of replies for the Italians was
67 per cent (naming at least one unworthy Italian feat ure). For the Germans it was 45 per cent.
The confidence placed in the majority of results derived from this inquiry flows from the overall correspondence between the various approaches which were used. The only serious doubts concern the in fluence of education and age on attitudes towards the three nationalities.
Otherwise the dominant impression about the findings is one of reasonable trust in their validity, since data from several different sources had good internal consist ency. IX. FRANCE AND THE FRENCH THROUGH THE EYES
OF OTHER NATIONALITIES
A comparison between the French image in
Australia and the images held by other foreign
observers would assist in isolating Australian
subject-bound perceptions from beliefs shared by most on-looking nations - sometimes assumed to mirror the ’kernel of truth’ about the observed group.
As mentioned in chapter II, ’The Investiga tion: Issue and Scope’, the limitations in the available data on how the French are viewed by others does not allow this exercise to expand be yond tentative speculation. The two foreign studies which seem most reliable (’How Nations See
Each Other’ and a Reader’s Digest study of the r> Common Market countries'"), are both based on word- list endorsement methods, of less than 15 terms each.
1. W. Buchanan and H. Cantril, How Nations See Each Other, University of Illinois, Urbana, 1953. 2. 221.750.000 Consommateurs, Selection du Reader’s Digest, 1963. -314-
Some of the stereotype labels in these lists were
not part of our inquiry, as our intensive interviews
did not produce them (i.e. peace-loving, backward,
progressive, etc.) and many of our concerns were not
investigated in these projects. Three sets of in-
depth studies, more ambitious in scope, were carried
out by the French magazine, Realites,9 but the samples used are both not defined and small (20 respondents).
Their reliability is open to doubt.
As the remaining available data was derived
from school or university student samples or from
impressionistic journalism, we retain the Realites
studies as the best under the circumstances.
However restricted in our comparisons, there is enough evidence to conjecture that, in many areas, the Australian perceptions of the French are not specific to Australia, but also at the same time, that the Australian portrait is not a mere replica of others.
It lacks some ingredients of significance and contains a unique, original feature.
The British and France’s neighbours on the
3. ’Ce que I es Anglais pensent des Francais’, Realites , jui 11 et 1963,; 7Ce que les Allerands pensent des Francais*, Realites, octobre 1963; ’La Cote de la France dans le monde’, Realites, mai 1970. -315-
Continent perceive the French as impulsive, tempera mental and unpredictable as Australians do. They
rate the French low on discipline, method and reliab
ility - three qualities they grant to the Germans,
the British and the Dutch.^ They also share with
Australians the impression that the French are not
particularly diligent but rather frivolous people.
The labels which obtained the highest degree of stereo typy among France's partners in the Common Market are:
’Don Juan', 'passionnes', ’romanesques'. All three correspond to personality traits Australians also single out.
In addition, there is evidence of agreement between our Australian sample (our women in particular) and overseas observers, that the French have a superb style of 'l’art de vivre' as well as 'l’art de jouir de la vie'. Everyone grants the French top marks in social graces.
France's economy is often evoked, on the
Continent as in Australia, with overtones of backward ness, perfume and couturiers. French products, if said to be elegant and graceful, are also believed to
4. 221.750.000 Consommateurs, op. cit. -316-
be non-reliable and non-lasting. At the same time,
however, a high proportion of France’s overseas
observers also know about the French 'industrial
revolution’ of the 1950's and 1960's and recognize
that they are clinging to an-outmoded image.
To the majority of people looking at France
from beyond France’s borders or from across the
Channel, French cultural life is defined in terms of
the arts, theatre, the cinema and literature. It
is not only in Australia that France is overlooked as
a contributor to scientific knowledge. In a recent
U.N.E.S.C.O. study, the Japanese ranked France in sixth position for science and technology and first for leadership in intellectual thought.^
The political life of France never fails to arouse interest among France’s foreign observers, but less often through its most constructive initiatives
(such as economic planning)or basic continuities
(i.e. the long reign of its middle-of-the-road parties), than through spectacular events: De Gaulle’s dramatic
5. 'Images de Haroues’, Revue de Psychologie des ' Peuples, 3, 1951. 6. J. Stoetzel, Without the Chrysanthemum and the Sword: a study of Attitudes of Youth in Post- War Janan, London, Heinemann, 1955. -317-
gestures, the disconcerting fluctuations in govern ments, the passionate quest for political institutions.
Everything we have mentioned so far about the overseas image of Prance appears congruent v/ith
Australians' perceptions. Do Australians simply
share an international stereotyped view of France?
Do Australians perceive a 'real* France? The answer
to the last question is outside the scope of this study.
Of interest to us are Australian perceptions, or blanks in perception, which do not seem to belong to
the international image.
The first of these ’failures' in perception- concerns the intelligence of the French. All other nations for whom we possess the information agree on this point: ’the French are particularly intelligent1, some even say ’too intelligent for their own good’.
Both the English and the Germans select ’intelligent’ 7 as the most outstanding trait of the French. French intelligence is described by the English in Cartesian terms - logical and articulate, capable of clear and concise expression of thought, and by the Germans as a witty and ironical faculty of the Voltaire kind.
Australians are not aware of either.
7. W. Buchanan and H. Cantril, op. cit. -318-
It is our hypothesis that Australians associate
intelligence so strongly with the Germans because they
regard intelligence as one of the dimensions of a more
general factor on which excellence in science and
technology, un-emotionality, masculinity, and effi
ciency also have strong positive loadings, whereas
their 'reverse*, artistic talent, emotions, the
feminine, the spontaneous disorder, either load negat
ively or have only weak positive loadings. If this
hypothesis is correct, then we hold one level of
explanation, immersed in Australian culture, of why
the French are not perceived as ’particularly intell
igent' by our Australian sample.
Secondly, there is no evidence that any of France's neighbours suspect the French of being some what effeminate. If we accept the psvcho-analytical view of prejudice, we may hypothesize that Australians are insecure about their own masculinity and project
their neurosis onto the French for reassurance. Europeans do not generally regard interest in women as a symptom of effeminacy. Latins may even consider it as a measure of masculinity.
Without looking for the pathological, there is no doubt that the European cultures do not ridicule -319-
passions and emotions and their expressions. The
English, more self-critical in this respect than
Australians, recognize in the French capacity for o emotion an envied lack of inhibitions. What Australians regard as something negative in the French
make-up, the English perceive as a gift, the reverse of their own complex-ridden behaviour. Their negat
ive judgement is directed at themselves. More ethno
centric in this respect, Australians evaluate negat
ively a trait relatively alien to their own culture,
and in connecting emotionality with the feminine tend
to regard the French as lacking in masculinity. This
basic link is reinforced by other ’signs', foreign to the Australian culture, such as hand movements in speech or the ’accolade’ between men, refined manners, etc., all interpreted as symptoms of homosexuality.
By suspecting the French of being effeminate,
Australians perceive a trait which none of France’s 9 neighbours attaches to French males: in this respect,
Australian originality reveals either some insecurity
in the observer or a forbidding non-acceptance of brands of masculinity different from the tough and
8. *Ce que les Anglais nensent des Francais’, op.cit.
9. There is, nevertheless, a tendency for political cartoonists, in France and Europe,to portray France as a woman. This trend, however, is never carried over to the French male. -320-
rugged self-image.
Finally, Australians’ perceptions do not
include, other than very marginally, the awareness
that their image of France is often obsolete.
National inefficiency, a peasant economy, luxury ex
ports, even French women as mere sexual objects,
belong to a world that is gone. France's neighbours,
through greater interaction, are more conscious of the
fact that the out-of-times image to which they also
still often cling belongs to the reflection of the
past. The English and the Germans who recognize the ’New France’, often mention their regrets about the loss of ’la douceur de vivre’ in a country which is becoming the ’Prussia of the Latin World’. 1 0
Through lack of information or lack of assimila tion of available information, Australians look at France through their rear-mirror, which gives them an antiquated picture without making them aware of the time lag.
10. ’La Cote de la France dans le Monde’,op.cit. -321-
X. CONCLUSIONS
We shall now recall the research questions
one by one, as outlined in chapter II, section 9
and summarize results in terms of those questions.
1. What are the affective orientations of Australians towards the French, in rela tion to a number of other ethnic groups, especially the Germans and the Italians?
Six nationalities were compared with the French. On the most basic and general affective feelings, LIKE and DISLIKE (measured on a self rating scale), the French occupy a median position.
Australians prefer the English, Americans and Dutch to the French, but like the French more than the Germans, Italians or Greeks.
For every Australian who states his dislike of the French, there are three others who express liking for them.
On the specific dimension of affect, ADMIRE and DO NOT ADMIRE (also measured on a self-rating -322- scale), the ranking obtained for liking remains un changed at the extreme positive and negative ends. At the centre, permutations occur: the Germans rise to third position, where they replace the Dutch, and the French descend from fourth to fifth position.
For every Australian who fails to admire the Germans, three others claim they do. The ratios DO NOT ADMIRE to ADMIRE are only one to two for the French and one to one for the Italians.
More liked than the Germans, the French are at the same time less admired. The non-correspondence between the two dimensions of affect indicates that a certain degree of independence exists between them, although their overlap is generally strong.
To what extent have the French been spared sharp antagonistic feelings by being less ’present' in Australia than the other two nationalities?
The effect of contact with foreign groups provided a tentative answer to this question. For all three nationalities, the French, the Germans and the Italians, increasing levels of contact (i.e. meeting the foreigners or making friends with them) correlate positively with liking for them. At the same tine, however, contact also increases dislike for -323- the Italians and the French. It was found that a higher percentage of Australians who have met Italians or French people disliked them than was the case among
Australians who have never met these foreigners.
For the two Latin nationalities, acquaintance polarizes feelings, heightening both like and dislike.
This is not true for the Germans, for whom increasing contact is associated.with lesser negative attitudes.
Similarly, feelings of admiration increase with increasing levels of contact. This relationship holds very strongly for the Germans, but less strongly for the French. At the negative end of the ADMIRE scale, the situation existing on the LIKE scale repeats itself again, negative feelings for the French (DO NOT ADMIRE) increase with increasing levels of contact.
Among Australians who have French friends and acquaintances, failure to admire the French is more frequent than among those who have never had any direct contact.
The overall higher incidence of liking for the
French (46 per cent) in comparison with the Germans
(40 per cent) and the Italians (33 per cent) cannot be attributed to the fact that Australians know the
French less well personally, since liking increases -324-
with contact. But for negative feelings, the
relatively low incidence of dislike for the French
may, in part, he related to lesser opportunities for
contact, since contact with the French is associated with more (not less) prejudice. Similarly, failure
to admire the French seems actually depressed (not
inflated) by the lack of opportunities for contact between Australians and French people. If the 27 per cent of Australians who have never met any French people were to meet them, one can predict an increase in the overall incidence of disdain towards them.
2. What are the images of the French, the Germans and the Italians in the minds of Australians?
An attempt to summarize the image data obtained through the in-depth interviews appears to the re searcher a betrayal of their complexity. The over generalizations and oversimplification inherent in national stereotypes would be duplicated now, if two hundred hours of in-depth interviews were condensed into a few short paragraphs. The elusive character of the uncondensable whole seems in keeping with the nature of ethnic imagery.
Instead of presenting the ’objective’ resume of the findings contained in chapters VI and VII, the -325- researcher proposes to select highlights from the data of particular interest to her, a French migrant to Australia.
The French are seldom judged to be evil. They are viewed, however, as lacking in a number of highly valued ’Puritan' virtues. They lack diligence, determination, stability and self-control. Their perceived defects (emotionality, lack of 'sticking- power’, effeminacy, women-worshipping etc.) engender mild derision and contempt in Australia.
Regarded as being less similar to Australians than the Germans, less intelligent and less educated, the French are judged less ’worthy' as people. The Germans, believed to be world leaders in industrial production, technical know-how and organizational skills, have more to teach Australians,in the opinion of our respondents, than the French,v/ho excel only in the art of love and enjoying life - both of which may arouse guilt feelings in a culture which values highly hard work (in others), determination and
’masculine’ activities of the 'rough and ready’ kind.
In relation to Italians, the French rate higher as migrants. They are not associated (because, perhaps, -326- of their smaller numbers) with the ’offensive’ be haviour Italians are accused of adopting, namely forming closed ethnic communities which depart in language and way of life from the Australian norms.
3. What is the relationship between socio-demographic variables describing Australians (such as sex, education, age) and attitudes towards and images of the foreign national groups and their countries?
a) The sex variable
Women tend to rate all nationalities more highly than men. They are more prodigal in their LIKE and
ADMIRE choices and avoid more often the statements expressing prejudice.
Because the female tendency to shift LIKE and ADMIRATION choices towards one end of the self-rating scales is echoed in specifically female behaviour on the evaluation of beliefs scale, the question arose whether women, when expressing more favourable atti tudes on the self-rating scales, were not merely showing a propensity to use scales in a manner differ ent from Australian males.
Several features of the data militate against the -327- interpretation that a sex bias in scale behaviour is the sole factor at play in producing more favourable ethnic ratings. On the 'evaluation of belief’ scale, women polarize their ratings towards both the positive and negative scale ends. On the self-rating scales, ratings are shifted towards the positive end only.
Furthermore, the female propensity for more LIKE and
ADMIRE choices allows of exceptions: the Americans are less liked and the Germans are less admired by women than by men.
Finally, in their own v/ords, women have ex pressed greater appreciation of French traits and greater warmth towards French people. They have also shown less involvement with German economic achieve ments than men, who in turn overlooked more readily than women the perceived hard and cold German traits.
Altogether, the evidence favours the infer ence of a genuine sex difference in atti tudes towards the ethnic groups included in the scale. In particular, it supports the hypothesis, stated in chapter III, that Australian women have more favourable attitudes towards the French and less favourable attitudes towards the Germans than Australian men.
This conclusion also corresponds to the tendency for ethnic attitudes to become established towards the foreign male populations. Australian -328-
women have a ’parti pris' in favour of the French
male (that refined, romantic woman-courter) not shared
by the Australian men. Had the men kept the image of
the French woman in mind when casting their judgments,
a decisive pro-French swing could have resulted on
the ADMIRE scale.
b) The education variable
The effect of education on attitudes varies
with the nature of the attitude measured. Respondents with tertiary education tend to be more ’disapproving’
of the French (their ratings on the ADMIRE scale are
more unfavourable) than respondents with primary educa tion only. Nonetheless, their liking for the French
remains greater than that of people with lesser educational attainments, although their dislike is also stronger.
In their judgment of the French, subjects with
tertiary education are particularly influenced by their severe evaluation of France’s political record.
Their resentment of De Gaulle as an ’arrogant and despotic' leader was undoubtedly expressed in their unflattering DO NOT ADMIRE ratings and scores on the
FISH3EIN polity scale. -329-
People with tertiary education also show
greater LIKING for the Germans and the Italians.
The ADMIRE ratings for the latter are unaffected by
education, but those for the former suggest a very
strong pro-German prejudice among the better educated.
The hypothesis of more favourable attitudes towards the French among the better educated is not supported.
c) The age variable
Liking and admiration for the French appears
somewhat stronger v/ithin the youngest group in our sample. One can infer (with some caution) that the younger respondents hold more favourable attitudes towards the French than the older ones.
This conclusion supports the initial prediction of a relationship between age and attitudes, whereby the younger subjects were expected to be more warmly disposed towards and less critical of the French.
Conclusions with regard to attitudes towards countries are discussed in relation to the FISHBEIN scale. The self-rating scales examined attitudes towards the nationalities only. -330-
4. What is the relationship between cultural values held by Australians and attitudes towards foreign groups?
Hierarchies of values held by Australians were obtained from GOOD-BAD ratings attached to beliefs about foreign people. Thirty-five character
traits or behaviour habits were thus ranked in order
of degree of approval or disapproval which Australians attach to them. High among the positively evaluated
traits came:
Hardworking Trustworthy Reliable One can learn a-lot from them Warmhearted Determined
The most negatively rated traits were:
Gruel Threats to Australian standards of living by migrants Dirty and untidy appearance Loose morals Failure to learn English
’Excitable and emotional’ obtained a mildly negative rating.
The 33 positive and negative evaluative ratings were distributed among the three nationalities by ascribing the totality of each evaluative rating to -331-
the national group possessing (in the eyes of Austral
ians) the greatest propensity for the trait. Thus
each nationality received a composite score, derived
from the summation of all the evaluative ratings it was ascribed. This score, which has both intensity and
direction, roughly reflects the evaluative ’cultural
lenses’ through which Australians appraise the foreign group.
The Germans are viewed through decisively posit- 7 ive ’lenses' (+29.7?). The looking glass was only slightly positive for the French (+3.35), and strongly unfavourable to the Italians (-17.32).
These'cultural lenses' correctly predict the order of preference German (1), French (2), Italians (3) obtained on the ADMIRE scale. This finding supports the view that percep tions and attitudes are a function of cultural frames of reference.
The method adopted in attributing a numerical value and direction to these cultural lenses failed, however, to predict the positions obtained by the French and the
Germans on the LIKE scale.
It is reasonable to assume that the greater cognitive content we have already recognized several times in the ADMIRE and FISHBEIN scales accounts for the better correspondence between cultural values and ranking of nationalities along the admiration dimension of affect. -332-
5. What is the relationship between liking and admiration for the foreign groups and perceptions about them?
The correspondence between beliefs and feelings,
for which the literature reviewed in chapter II, section
1 offers a large body of evidence, was clearly exposed
in the findings of this inquiry. Respondents who
claim to like and admire any of the three groups asso
ciate it more strongly with positively evaluated traits.
Those who dislike or do not admire it associate it more
strongly with negatively evaluated traits.
But feelings do not influence perceptions in
such a manner as to alter completely the image of the
foreign group. Something of the ’intrinsic’ identity
of the shared foreign image is preserved, whether the
image belongs to the enthusiastic pro- or the violently anti-French (or German, or Italian). Feelings influence perceptive emphasis. Unfavourable dispositions seem to blow up the foreigner’s defects, and favourable prejud ices operate in the opposite way. But few image characteristics get entirely blurred. The Germans, for instance, remain intelligent and determined, whether
Australians like them or not, and the French remain artistic, romantic or emotional, regardless of feelings towards them.
Changes of feelings are associated with permuta tions in focus on qualities and defects, but the total image is not distorted beyond recognition. BELIEF ASSOCIATION RATINGS ABOUT THE FRENCH
by decree of LIKING for Ihe French
Positively eyaluated be1iefs Negatively evaluated beliefs t------>---- r 0 12 3 4 0 1 2 3 i good looking bad manners warm hearted loose moral standards much like us effeminate reliable excitable good soldiers irrational artistic dirty and untidy well educated arrogant we can learn a conceited lot from them scientifically cruel minded romantic affected manners intelligent easily led astray creative stick to their own group hardworking don!t learn English gay threat to our standards
+ + + 4. ^ respondents v;ho sated: Tlike a let/ Quite like1 the-Prench respondents who stated:>don»t like much/ dislike1 the French -334-
6. What is the image Australians have of themselves as revealed by their attitudes and images towards foreign groups?
Australians perceive ethnic affinity between themselves and the Germans. This ethnic link between the two ’Anglo-Saxon races' is reinforced by the over whelming differenc5s perceived between 'us Australians' and the two Latin nationalities.
Confronted v/ith the hardv/orking Italians and determined Germans, Australians are reminded of their own easy-going and leisure-loving inclinations. They also perceive themselves as a young, healthy, vigorous and ’tomorrow-oriented’ people by contrast v/ith the old European nations.
Australian women juxtapose the fabled social savoir-faire of the Frenchmen against the coarse, art less manners of their Australian male companions. A strong minority of Australians sees a masculine (us)/ feminine (them) polarity in the Australian-French contrast.
Awareness of an Australian intellectual and artistic barrenness emerges from the opposition between the Australian and European environments. But their -335- own society appears to Australians more egalitarian, tolerant, free and prosperous than those of the three foreign countries. They believe their own culture incapable of breeding Hitlers and De Gaulles. It startles and offends Australians that intellectuals
(including their own) and migrants often judge the
Australian social climate stifling and oppressive, intolerant to originality and non-conformity.
7. Are the perceptions of the Drench held by Australians any different from those held by nationals of other countries?
The image Australians hold of the French is not a totally unique product. It contains, however, some
'made in Australia' ingredients added to the inter nationally shared kernel of Frenchness.
Most foreign observers assess the French as highly intelligent people. Australians fail to recognize intelligence as a distinctive French trait.
To Australians, the association between intelligence and artistic creativity is less strong than the associa tion between intelligence and technical and mechanical excellence. Intelligence, Australians feel, is a distinctive German trait.
Other foreigners look at French emotional -336- expressiveness as a gift. Australians regard it as something queer.
Knowledge of a French ’economic miracle’, similar to the German one which impresses Australians so much, is not widespread. Australians continue to view France as half-agricultural, half-industrial and an exporter of wine, perfume and songs. The image endures even among those who claim to he well informed on France’s post-war economic changes.
8. What is the interaction, if any, between feelings and perceptions Australians hold about the people of France, Germany and Italy, and the images of these countries as polities?
There is a pervasive interaction between the images of the three nationalities and the images of their respective countries. Facets of political events and economic conditions are reflected in the perceptions of the foreign people. Perceptions of the people are projected onto the foreign societies as a whole. French governmental instability of the
1950's ’demonstrates’ flaws in the French character.
From the crisp appearance and methodical character of the Germans respondents derive the ’feeling’ of orderly
German cities, neat villages, spick and span countryside. -337-
Attitudes towards the three polities measured
on the FISKBEIN scale for countries) are positively
associated with attitudes towards the three nation
alities (measured on the self-rating scales).
The above relationship was particularly pronounced for France at the negative end of the LIKE and ADMIRE scales. The data from the intensive interviews suggests that the strong relationship between DISLIKE and DON'T ADMIRE for the French and unfavourable attitudes towards France reflect the 'carry over' onto the French people of the Australian antagonism towards several political aspects of France.
9. What are the merits of the FISHBEIN scale of attitudes?
The FISHBEIN scale was adopted as an experiment in attitude measurement. In addition, the 'associa
tion of belief' part of the FISHBEIN scale was retained for its usefulness in measuring quantitatively Australian perceptions of the three foreign national
ities and their countries. The 'evaluation of belief’
part of the FISHBEIN scale v/as seen as an instrument
for the assessment of 'evaluative judgments' which
Australians attach to their perceptions of foreigners.
The research had an interest per se in the two comple
mentary parts of the FISHBEIN scale, beyond their final -338- use for the calculation of attitude scores.
The FISHBEIN 'association of belief scale', with its numerical information amenable to statistical
significance tests, contributes to the confidence that can be placed in smaller sample and less standardized work. The information derived from the 'evaluation of belief' scale provides the ordinal ranking of
Australian values which the in-depth interviews could not establish. If the latter uncovered Australian reactions to emotionality or refinement in manners, for instance, the relative intensities of approving or disapproving judgments were not assessable from the intensive interviews. The clinical work provided in sights, the standardized FISHBEIN scale mapped them.
The correspondence found between the self-rating
ADMIRE scale and the FISHBEIN scale for nationalities suggests that the FISHBEIN scale is predominately a measure of admiration. Its reflection of the LIKE dimension is somewhat looser, particularly when the correlation between LIKE and ADMIRE is relatively weak.
What are the shortcomings and advantages of the FISHBEIN scale in relation to the self-rating scales? -339-
The numerical scores obtained from the FISHBEIN scale present some dangers. They give the illusion of interval scaling precision. One tends to forget that the attitude scores are dependent on the number and nature of the belief items one includes originally, as well as on the magnitude of the association and evaluation choices (in our case, 5 and 9 point scales, in other studies, 7 or 21 point scales). The FISHBEIN scores reflect no more than ordinal ranking: they allow comparisons between sub-samples and comparisons across nationalities. As absolute values, they are meaningless.
The scale has, hov/ever, significant qualities.
a) It hides the purpose of the scale better than a self-rating scale which makes no pretence about
its objective. b) It reduces respondent flight into the middle,
non-committal categories which plagues self-rating scales. c) It summarizes scores in one figure. d) It provides imagery data as well as evaluation of
belief data. It is informative on the dynamics of
,attitudes on which self-rating scales are silent. BIBLIOGRAPHY
ABELSON, P. and ROSENBERG, M.J.: ’Symbolic Psycho logic: a Model of Attitudinal Cognition', Behavioural Science, 1958, 3, pp. 1-8.
ADORNO, T.W., FRENKEL-BRUNSWICK, E. and LEVINSON, D.J.: The Authoritarian Personality, New York, Harper and Bros., 1950.
ALLPORT, G.W.: 'Prejudice: a Problem in Psychological and Social Causation', Journal of Social Issues, Supplement Series N° 4, 1950.
ALLPORT, G.W. and KRAMER, P.M.: ’Some Roots of Prejudice', Journal of Psychology, 1946, 22, pp. 9-39. ANDERSON, L.R. and EISHBEIN, M.: 'Prediction of Attitude from the Number, Strength and Evaluative Aspects of Beliefs about the Attitude Object: A Comparison of Summation and Congruity Theories', Journal of Personal.! tv and Social Psvcholow, 1955, 3, pp. 437-443.
/ > AVIGDOR, R.: ’Etudes Experimentales de la Genese des Stereotypes', Cahiers Internationaux de Sociologie, 8(14), 1953, pp. 154-1607 BALASUNDARAM, P.M.: What do American Students think of India?, New York, 1957.
BALLEN, M.C. and FARNWORTK, P.R.: 'A Graphic Method for Determining the Scale Values of Statements in Measuring Social Attitudes', Journal of Social Psychology, 1941, 13, pp. 323-327. BANNISTER, 0.: ’Personal Construct Theory, a Summary and Experimental Paradigm', Actor Psychologica, 1962, 20, np. 104-120. BARGHOOR, F.C.: The Soviet Image of the U.S.A. A Study in Distortion, New York, Hareourt Brace and Co., 1950.
BEALS, R.L.: ’The Mexican Student Views the United States’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, September, 1954, pp. 108-115. BERNARD, J.: ’The Conceptualization of Intergroup Relations’, Social Forces, 1951, 29, pp. 243-251. BETTLEHEIM, B. and JANOWITZ, M.: Dynamics of Prejudice, Harper, 1950.
BJERSTEDT, A.: 'Ego-Involved World-Mindedness, National Images and Methods of Research: a Methodological Note', Journal of Conflict Resolu- tion, I960, 4, pp. 185-192.
BOGARDUS, E.S.: 'Stereotypes versus Sociotypes', Sociology and Social Research, 1949-50, 34, pp. 286-291. BOGARDUS, S.S.: 'Measuring Social Distance', Journal of Applied Sociology, 1925, IX, pp. 299-308. BOVRIE, W.D.: Italians and Germans in Australia, Melbourne University Press, 1954. BOULDING, K.E.: 'National Images and International Systems', Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1959, 3(2), pp. 120-131. BRIE, P. de: 'Representations du Benelux', Bulletin de 1'Institut de Recherches Economioues et Sociales , Louvain, 195T"J 17 (7) , pp . £37-710. BROOK, W.B. and HOLLAND, J.B.: 'An Enquiry into the Meaning of Minority Attitude Group Expression', American Sociological Review, 1952, 17(2), pp. 196-202.
BROOM, L., JONES, F.L., and ZUBRZYCKI, J.: Social Stratification in Australia, in J.A. Jackson (Ed.) Social Stratification. Cambridge University Press, 1968. BROWN, J.F.: ’A Modification of the Rosenzweig Picture-Frustration Test to Study Hostile Inter racial Attitudes', Journal of Psychology, 194-7, 24, pp.247-272.
BROWN, J.S. and PERLMUTTER, H.V.: 'Compatriot and Foreigner. A Study of Impression Formation in Three Countries', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1957, 55f pp.253-2SoT BUCHANAN, V/.: 'How Others See Us', Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, September, 1954, pp- 1-11. BUCHANAN, W. and CANTRIL, C.: How Nations See Each Other, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, 1953. CAMPBELL, A.: 'The American Concept of Russia', Journal of Social Issues, 1948, 4, pp. 14-50.
CAMPBELL, D.T.: 'The Indirect Assessment of Social Attitudes', Psychological Bulletin, 1950, 47, pp. 15-38.
CARLSON, E.R.: 'Attitude Change Through Modification of Attitude Structure', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1956, 57, pp - 25~6-2bi.
'Ce que les Allemands pensent des Francais', Realites, Octobre, 1963, p. 104. *Ce que les Anerlais pensent des Francais', Realites, Juillet, 1963, p. 26. * CHEIN, I.: Analysing and Measuring Prejudice, in M. Jahoda, M. Deutsch and S.W. Cook "CÄds.), Research Methods in Social Science, New York, The Dryden Press, 1951- CHILD, I. and DOOB, L.W.: 'Factors Determining National Stereotypes', Journal of Social Psychology, 1943, 17, pp/ 203-2197 ' * ~~ COETHO, G.V.: Changing Imames of America, A Study of Indian Student Perceptions, G-lenco 111., The Free Press, 1958. COLEMAN, P. (Ed.): Australian Civilization, A Symposium, Melbourne, Cheshire, 19o2.
COOK, S.W. and SELLTIZ, C.: ’Some Factors which Influence the Attitudinal Outcome of Personal Contact’, International Social Science Bulletin, 1955. COOK, S.W. and SELLTIZ, C.: ’A Multiple Indicator Approach to Attitude Measurement', Psychological Bulletin, 1964, 62(1), pp. 56-55. COOMBS, C.H.: ’Psychological Scaling without a Unit of Measurement’, Psychological Review, 1950, 57, pp. 145-158.
CRESPI, L.P.: ’Some Observations on the Concept of Image’, Public Oninion Quarterly, 1961, 2S, pp. 115-120.
DALLIN, A.: ’America through Soviet Eyes’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 1947, 11, pp. 26-39- DE FLEUR, M.L. and WESTIE, F.R.: ’Attitude as a Scientific Concept’, Social Forces, 1963, 42, pp. 17-31. DEN HOLLANDER, A.N.J.: 'As Others See Us^ a Prelimin ary View into Grouo Images’, Synthese, 1948, 6, pp. 214-37. DENNERY, R.: ’How Americans See Themselves, Studies in American National Character’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, September, 1954, pp. 12-20. DERI, S., HARDING, J. and PEPITONE, A.D.: ’Techniques for the Diagnosis and Measurement of Intergroup Attitudes and Behaviour’, Psychological Bulletin, 1948, 45, pp. 248-271. DEUTSCH, K.W. and MERRITT, R.L.: Effects of Events on National and International Images , in H.C. Kelrnan (Ed.) International Behaviour, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965, PP• 182-183- DIAB, L.N.: 'Factors Affecting Studies of National Stereotypes’, Journal of Social Psychology, 1963, 59, pp. 29-40. DUDYCHA, G.J.: ’The Attitudes of College Students toward War and the Germans before and during the Second World War’, Journal of Social Psychology, 1942, 15, pp. 317-324. DUIJKER, H.G.J. and FRIDJA, N.H.: National Character and National Stereotypes, a trend report prepared for the International Union of Scientific Psychology, Amsterdam, North Holland Pub. Co., I960.
EDWARDS, A.L.: 'Studies in Stereotypes, the Directionality and Uniformity of Responses to Stereotyoes’, Journal of Social Psychology, 1940, 12, up. 357-3^.' EDWARDS, A.L. and KENNY, K.C.: ’A Comparison of the Thurstone and Likert Techniques of Attitude Scale Construction’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 1946, 30, pp. 72-83-
EDWARDS, A.L. and KILPATRICK, E.P.: ’A Technique for Construction of Attitude Scales’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 1948, 32, pp. 374-384. EYSENCK, H.J.: 'Primary Social Attitudes: the Organization and Measurement of Social Attitudes’, International Journal of Opinion and Attitude Research, 1947, 1, pp. 49-84. EYSENCK, H.J. and CROWN, S.: ’National Stereotypes: an Experimental and Methodological Study’, International Journal of Opinion and Attitude Research, 1948, 2, pp. 26-39• EHRLICH, H.J. and RINEHART, J.W.: 'A Brief Report on the Methodology of Stereotype Research’, Social Forces, 1965, 43, pp. 564-574. FESLINGER, L.: Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Evanston, Row Peterson, 1957*
FESTINGER, L. and KATZ, D.: Research Methods in the Behavioural Sciences, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1953-
FI3HBEIN, M. (Ed.): Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement, New York, John Wiley and Sons, inc r, 1967 FISHBEIN, M. : A_ Behaviour Theory Approach to the Relations between Beliefs about an Object and the Attitude toward the Object, in M. Fishbein . XEd.), Readings in Attitude Measurement, New York, John V/iley and Sons, 1967. FISHBEIN, M.: A. Consideration of Beliefs and their Role in Attitude Measurements, in M. Fishbein X"EdY) , Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement, New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1967, pp. 257-266.
FISHBEIN, M. and RAVEN, B.H.: »The AB Scales: an Operational Definition of Belief and Attitude’, Human Relations, 1962, 15, pp. 34-44. FISHMAN, J.A.: ’An Examination of the Process and Function of Social Stereotyping', Journal of Social Psychology, 1956, 43, pp. 2T-S4. FOA, U.G.: ’Scale and Intensity Analysis in Opinion Research’, International Journal of Opinion and Attitude Research, 1950, 4, pp. 192-208.
GILBERT, G.M.: ’Stereotype Persistence and Change among College Students', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1933, 28, pp.280-290.
GILBERT, G.M.: ’Stereotype Persistence and Change among College Students’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1951, 46*, pp. 245-25^.
GILLILAND, A.R. and BLUM, R.A.: 'Favourable and Unfavourable Attitudes towards certain Enemy and Allied Countries'. Journal of Psveholopv, 1945, 20, pp. 391-399. GIRARD, A. et STOETZEL, J.: Franpais et Immigres, Tome 1, Cahiers de 1’Institut National d’Etudes Demographiques, 1954, N° 19.
GOODE, W.J. and HATT, P.K.: Methods in Social Re search , New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1952.
GRAE3ER, I.: 'An Examination of Theories of Race Prejudice’, Social Research, 1953, 20 (3), pp. 267-281.
GRAHAM, M.D.: British Attitudes towards America, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of London, 1951. GRAHAM, M.D. : ’The Effectiveness of Photographs as a Projective Device in an International Attitude Survey’, Journal of Social Psychology, 1954, 40, pp. 95-120.
GREEN , B . F. : AJbti tude Measurement; Handbook of Social Psychology, Cambridge Mass., Addison- Wesley Publishing Co., 1954.
GREGORY, W.S.: ’A Study of Stereotyped Thinking: Affective Reactions to Persons as the Basis for Judging their Nationalities’, Journal of Social Psycho1ogy, 1941, 15, pp. 89-702. GRIFFITHS , K. S . : The Construction of a Scale to Mejpsu re Attitudes towards defined' Racial "and Religions Groups, Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of Washington, 1949. GUILFORD, J.P.: 'Racial Preferences of a Thousand American Strudents’, Journal of Social Psycho logy, 1951, 2, pp. 179-204. GUNLACH, R.H.: ’The Attributes of Enemy. Allied and Domestic Nationality Groups', Journal of Social Psychology, 19^4, 19, pp. 249-258. GUTTMAN, L. and SHOPMAN, F.A.: Studies in Social Psvcholorv in World War II, p'rinceton University Press,' 1950. HALLOWELL , A. I.: Cultural Pactors in the Structural- izati-on _of Perception , in J . H. Rohrer and M. Sherif (Eds.), Social, Psychology at the Cross-roads, New York, Harper, 195-1. HAMMOND, K.R.: ’Measuring'Attitudes by Error-Choice: an Indirect Method’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1948, 45, pp. 58-48.
HANCHETT, G.: 'Attitudes towards the British’, Journal of Social Psychology, 1946» 25, pp. 145-162. HARLAN, H.H.: ’Some Factors Affecting Attitudes toward Jews’, American Sociological Review, 1942, 7, pp. 8177-827:
HARTLEY, E.: ProbIems in Prejudice. New York, King's Crown Press, 1946. HILL, M.C. and ACKISS, T.D.: ’The Insight Interview Approach to Race Relations’, Journal of Social Psychology, 1945, 21, pp. 197-209. HIMMELSTRAND, 0.: ’Verbal Attitudes and Behaviour’, Public Opinion Quarterly, I960, 24, pp. 224-250. HINCKLEY, E.D.: ’The Influence of Individual Opinion on Construction of an Attitude Scale’, Journal of Social Psychology, 1932, 3, pp. 283-29*7 HORNE, D.: The Lucky Country, Penguin Books, 1964-
HORWITZ, M. and CARTRIG-HT, D. : ’A Projective Method for the Diagnosis of Group Properties’, Human Relations, 1953, 6, pp. 397-410. HOULT, T.F.: ’An Effective Classroom Demonstration of Stereotypes - a Re-examination', Journal of Social Psychology, 1953, 38 (2), pp. 293-295- HUMPHREY, G. and ARGYLE, M. (Eds.): Social Psychology through Experiment, London, Methuen, 1952. HYMAN, H.H. et al. : Interviev/ing in Social Research, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1954. ’Images de Marques’, Revue de Psychologie des Peunles, 1961, 3. ISAACS, H.R.: ’Scratches on our Minds’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 1956, 20 (1), pp. 197-211. JAHODA, M. and WARREN, N. (Eds.): Attitudes, Penguin Books, 1966.
JAMES, H.E.O. and TENEN, C.: ’Attitudes toward Other Peoples'. International Social Science Bulletin, 1951, 3 (37, pp. 553-561. KARSTEN, A.: ’Vorstellung von Jungen Deutschen über Andere Völker’, Psychologie des Peuples, 1967, 1, pp. 100-110.
KATZ, D.: ’The Functional Approach in the Study of Attitudes', Public Oninion Quarterly, I960, 24, p. 192. KATZ, D. and 3RALY, W.D.: 'Racial Stereotypes of 100 College Students’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psycho]ogy, 1930, pp. 175-193- KATZ, D. and STOTLAND: A Preliminary Statement to a Theory of A111tune Stnicture and Charge, in S. Koch (Erf. )~, Psychology: A Study of a Science, New York, McGraw-Hill, 1959, VoTT 3H
KELLY, H.H. and HOVLAND, C.T.: 'The Influence of Judges' Attitudes in Three Methods of Attitude Scaling', Journal of Social Psychology, 1Q55, 42, pp. 147-158.
KELMAN, H. C . (Ed.): International Behaviour, Kolt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.*, 19^5 • KERR, M.: 'An Experimental Investigation of National Stereotypes', Sociological Review, 1945, 35, pp. 37-43. KLINEBERG, 0.: The Human Dimension in International Relations, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1964. KLINEBERG, 0.: 'The Scientific Study of National Stereotypes', International Social Science Bulletin*, 1951, 3(3), p. 505. KLINEBERG, 0.: 'A Survey of Research: Tensions Affecting International Understanding', Social Science Research Council Bulletin, 1950, 62.
KLINEBERG, 0.: 'Recherches sur les Stereotypes: Questions a rdsoudre', Revue de Psychologie des Pennies, 1966, 1, pp. 75-82. KRAMER, B.M.: 'Dimensions of Prejudice', Journal of Psychology, 1949, 27, pp. 389-451. KRECH, D. and CRUTCHFIELD, R.S.: Theory and Problems of Social Psychology, New York, McGraw-Hill. 1948.
KROEGER, H.J.: 'The Usefulness of the Multiple-Choice Question', International Journal of Opinion and Attitude Research, 1947, 1, pp. 102-105.
'La Cote de la France dans le Monde', Realites, Mai, 1970.
LAMBERT, W.E.: 'Evaluational Reaction to Spoken Languages', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, i960, 60, pp. 44-51. LAMBERT, W.E. and KLINEBERG, 0.: ’A Pilot Study of the Origin and Development of National Stereo types’ , International Social Science Journal, 1959, 11, pp. 221-238. LANG-NER, T.S.: ’A Test of Intergroup Prejudice which Takes into Account Individual and Group Differences in Values', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1953, 48, p. 4.
LAPIERE, R.T.: 'Attitudes vs. Actions’, Social Forces, 1934, 13, pp.230-237. LAPIERE, R.T.: 'Type-nationalization of Group Antipathy', Social Forces, 1936, 15, pp.232-237. LA VIOLETTE, F. and SILVERT, K.H.: 'A Theory of Stereotypes', Social Forces, 1951, 29. pp. 257-261.
'Les Etats-Unis et la France', Sondages, 15(12), 1953-1954. LIKERT, R.: 'A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes', Archives of Psychology, 1952, 140, pp. 44-53. LINDZEY, G. (Ed.): The Handbook of Social Psychology, Reading, Mass., Addinson-Wesley Pub. Co. (2nd Ed.), 1968-69. LIPPMANN, W.: Public Opinion, London, Allen and Unwin, 1932. LITTERER, O.F.: 'Stereotypes', Journal of Social Psychology, 1933, 4, pp. 59-69. MACCREARY, J.F.: 'The Modification of International Attitudes', A New Zealand Study, Wellington, Victoria University College Publication, N£ 2, 1952’.'
MCGREGOR, C.: Profile of Australia, London, Hodder and Stoughton, 196>6.
MCNEMAR, Q.: 'Opinion-Attitude Methodology', Psychological Bulletin, 1946, 43, pp. 289-374. MACE, C.A.: 'National Stereotypes; their Nature and Function', Sociological Review, 1943, 35(1-2), pp. 29-36. MAITIS, M. : ’The Interpretation of Opinion Statements as a Function of a Recipient Attitude’, Journal of Abn or mal and Social Psychology , I960,' ~6o , pp. 340-344. MARANDON, S.: ’Les Images des Peuples’, Revue de Psychologie des Peuples, 1964, 1, pp. 8-21. MELTZER, H.: 'Children’s Thinking about Nations and Races', Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1941, 11, pp. 343-358......
MOLNOS, ANGELA VON: ’L'Image suisse de 1’Allemagne’, Revue de Psvchologie des Peunles, 1963, 2, pp. 314-340.
MORGAN, J.J.B.: 'The Attitudes of Students towards the Japanese’, Journal of Social Psvchologv, 1945, 21, pp.219-227. OPPENHEIM, A.N.: Questionnaire Design and Attitude Measurement, London, Heinemann, 1966.
OSGOOD, C.E., SUCI, G.J. and' TANNERBAUM, P.H.: The Measurement of Meaning, Urban.a, University of Illinois Press, 1957. OSGOOD, C.E. and SUCI, G.J.: ’Factor Analysis of Meaning’, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1955, 50, pp. 325-338. PETTIGREW, T.F.: ’Personality and Sociocultural Factors in Intergroup Attitudes: a Cross- National Comparison’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1958, 2, pp. 29-42. PIERSON, D.: ’Race Prejudice as Revealed in the Study of Racial Situations', International Social Science Bulletin, 1950, 2JT) , pp.*467-478. ~ PRICE, C.A.: Southern Europeans in Australia, Melbourne University+"Press, 1963- PROSHANSKY, H.M.: 'A Projective Method for the Study of Attitudes’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 19437 38, pp.
PROSHANSEY, H. and SEIDENBERG, B.: Basic Studies in Socia1 Psvchologv, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965. PROTHRO, E.T.: ’Cross-Cultural Patterns of National Stereotypes’, Journal of Social Psychology, 1954, 40, pp. 55-59. PROTHRO, E.T.: ’Lebanese Stereotypes of America as Revealed by the Sentence Completion Technique’, Journal of Social Psychology, 1954, 40, pp. 39-42. PROTHRO, E.T. and MELIKIAN, L.H.: ’Familiarity and the Kernel of Truth Hypotheses', Journal of Social Psychology, 1955, 41, pp. 3-10. RAZRAN, G-. : ’Ethnic Dislikes and Stereotypes’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1950, ?57pp. "7-27. REIGROTSKI, E. and ANDERSON, N.: ’National Stereotypes and Foreign Contacts’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 1959, 23, pp. 515-528. REIMERS, H.H.: Introduction to Opinion and Attitude Measurements, New York, Harper and Bros., 1953* RICE, S.A.: ’Stereotypes: a Source of Error in Judging Human Character’, Journal of Personality Research, 1926-27, 5, pp. 267-276. RICHTER, M.N. JR.: ’The Conceptual Mechanism of Stereotyping’, American Sociological Review, 1956, 21(5)7 PP- 568-571• RIKER, B.L.: ’A Comparative Study of Methods Used in Attitude Research’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1944, 39, pp. 2J-42. RILEY, J.W. and TOBY, J.: Sociological Studies in Scale Ana1ysis, New Brunswick N.J., Rutgers University Press, 1954. ROKEACH, M.: ’Prejudice, Concreteness of Thinking and Rectification of Thinking’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 19517 46(l), pp. 83-91. ROKEACH, M.: The Open and Closed Mind, New York, Basic Books, I960.
ROSENBERG, M.J.: ’A Structural Theory of Attitude Dynamics', Public Ooinion Quarterly, I960, 24, pp. 319-3407 * ROSENBERG-, M.J.: ’Cognitive Structure and Attitudinal Affect’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1956, 55Tpp. 567-572.
ROSENBERG, M.J. and HOVLAND, C.I. ET AL.: Attitude Organization and Change, New Haven, Yale University Press, i960.
R0SEN3LITH, J.F.: ’A Replication of Some Roots of Prejudice', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1949, 44, pp. 470-489* SAENGER, G. and SHULMAN, H.M.: 'Some Factors Determining Intercultural Behaviour and Attitudes of Ethnic Groups', Journal of Psychology, 1948, 25, pp* 565-380.
SAENGER, G. and FLOWERMAN, S.H.: 'Stereotypes and Prejudicial Attitudes', Human Relations, 1954, 7(2), pp. 217-238. SCHOENFELD, N.: 'An Experimental Study of Some Problems Relating to Stereotypes', Archives of Psychology, 1942, 270, p. 59* SCOTT, F.D.: 'The Swedish Students' Image of the United States', Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences" 1954, 295", pp. 136-145 * SEAGO, D.W.: 'Stereotypes before Pearl Harbour and After', Journal of Psychology, 1947, 23, pp. 55-63* SEEMAN, M.: 'Moral Judgment: a Study in Racial Frames of References’, American Sociological Review, 1947, 12, Pp. 404-411. SELLTIZ, C.: Judgmental Process in. Inter-ethnic Perception, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Ann Arbor, Michigan University, 1961.
SHERIF, M.: 'An Experimental Study of Stereotypes', Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1935, 29, pp* 371-375. SHERIF, C.W. and SHERIF, M.: Attitude and_Attitude Change, Philadelphia and London, W.B. Saunders C3T, 1965. SHUVAI, J.T.: 'Emerging Patterns of Ethnic Strain in Israel', Social Forces, 1962, 40(4), pp. 323-330. SIMPSON. G-.E. and YINGER, M.: Racial and Cultural Minorities, Harper and Row, 1958.
SOLA POOL, I. DE and PRASAD, K.: 'Indian Student Images of Foreign People', Public Opinion Quarterly, 19158, 2?, pp. 292-304.
SMITH, H.P.: 'Do Intercuttural Experiences Affect Attitudes' , Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1955, 51, pp. 469-477. SMITH M.B., BRUNER, J.S. and WHITE, R.W.: Opinions and Personality, New York, Science Editions, 1936T
STAG-NER, R. and OSGOOD, C.E.: 'Impact of War on a Nationalistic Frame of Reference: Changes in General Approval and Qualitative Patterning of Certain Stereotypes', Journal of Social Psychology. 1951, 24, pp. 187-215. * ...... “ ' STEPHAN, F.F. and MCCARTHY, P.J.: Sampling Opinions, John Wiley and Sons, 1958.
STOETZEL, J.: Without the Chrysanthemum and the Sworn: a Study of Attitudes of vouth in Post-War Japan", London, Heinemann, 1955. STOLLER. A.: New Faces, F.W. Cheshire, 1966. TAFT, R.: From Stranger to Citizen, University of Western Australia, Perth, 1965- TAFT, S.: ‘Ethnic Stereotypes, Attitudes and Familiarityv, Journal of Social Psychology, 195Q, 49, pp. 177-1857’ " ~~.... TAFT, R. and BOWNES, A.S.: 'The Frame of Reference of Immigrant and Australian Children in Mutual Judgments', Australian Journal of Psychology. 1953, 5, pp. 105-111. TAFT, R. and WALKER, F.F.: Australia, in A.M. Rose (Ed.), The Institutions of Advanced Societies, Minneapoils, University of Minnesota Press, 1958.
TAJFSL, H., SCHEIN. A.A. and GARDNER, R.C.: 'Content of Stereotypes and the Influence of Similarity between Members of Stereotyped Groups', Acta Psychologica, 1964, 22, pp. 191-201. THURSTONE, L.L.: ’Attitudes Car. Be Measured’, American Journal of Sociology, 1928, 33, pp. 529-554. THURSTONE, L.L.: ’An Experimental Study of Nationality Preference', Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1928, 1, pp. 405-425.
UNSEEM, R.H. and UNSEEM, J.: 'Images of the U.S. and Britain held by Foreign Educated Indians’, Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 19541 295, pp. 73-82. VICKERY, W.E. and OPLER, M.E.: 'A Redefinition of Prejudice for Purposes of Social Science Research', Human Relations, 1947, 1(4). VINACKE, W.E.: 'Explorations in the Dynamic Processes of Stereotyping’, Journal of Social Psychology, 1956, 43, pp. 105-132. VINACKE, A.: ’Stereotyping among National-Racial Groups in Hawaii: a Study of Ethnocentrism’, Journal of Social Psychology, 1949, 30, pp. 265-291. WANG, K.A.: 'Suggested Criteria for Writing Attitude Statements’, Journal of Social Psychology, 1932, 3, pp. 367-373. WARD, R.: The Australjan Legend, Melbourne, Oxford University Press, (~2nd ed . ) , 1966. WESCHLER, J.R. and BERNBERG, R.E.: ’Indirect Methods of Attitude Measurement’, International Journal of Oninion and Attitude Research, 1950, 4, pp.'209-225. WILLCOCK, H.D.: ’Public Opinion: Attitudes towards America and Russia', Political Quarterly, 1948, 19(1), pp. 61-72. WILLCOCK,H.D.: 'Public Opinion: Attitudes to the German People’, Political Quarterly, 1948, 19(2), pp. 160-166.
WILLIAMS, R.M. JR., Strangers Next Door, New York, Prentice-Hall, 1964. WRIGHT, A. and NELSON, C.J.: »American Attitudes towards Japan and China', Public Opinion Quarterly, 1939, 3, pp. 46-62~! ZELIGS, R.: 'Children’s Concepts and Stereotypes of American, English, German and Japanese', Journal of Education and Sociology, 1955, 28, pp. 350-363. ZELIGS, R.: 'Children's Intergroup Attitudes', Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1948, 72, pp. 101-109.' APPENDIX 1 a. APPENDIX 1 a.
SAMPLE COMPOSITION - INTENSIVE INTERVIEWS
1 Sample Distribution: Interviews Census„
% 1° By sex of respondents: Males 50 51 Females 50 49
By age of respondents: 17-29 30 33 30-44 35 33 45-64 35 34
By educa- ^ tional levels: Primary school only 16 Primary only 22 Less than 4 years 54 Intermediate 31 4-6 years 0 18 Matriculation 10 Some tertiary 12 Secondary (with out exam.) 29 Tertiary degree 5 Not stated 3
1. Census June 1966, New South Wales: Population Distribution by Age and Sex, Occupation, and Educa tional Attainments. 2. The Census figures are not directly comparable with the educational breakdowns adopted in the survey. The Census shows examination attainments. The sample figures show years of schooling. ’Some tertiary’ includes respondents who attended University or some other Tertiary Institution (without necessarily gaining a degree). The Census includes only these who have obtained a University or other Tertiary degree. By self-rating on social Interviews Census class scale (fixed choice) ‘ IT Upper and upper-middle 15 'Other’ middle.3 46 Working class 34 Refused. 5
By occupation of respondent Professional, technical and related workers 12 9 Administrative, executive and managerial workers 11 6 Clerical workers 18 15 Sales workers 11 __8 Total, 'white collar' workers 52 38
Transport and communications occupations 12 6 Craftsmen, production-process workers and labourers 36 36 Total, 'blue collar’ workers 48 42
Farmers, fishermen, hunters, timber getters and related workers - 8 Miners, quarrymen and related workers - 1 Other (service, sport and recreation, armed services) - 9 Occupations not adequately described — _2 Total, ’other' nil 20
*TOTAL SAMPLE 100 100
3. The categories offered included ’upper class’, 'middle class’ and ’working class'. If the choice was ’middle’ the respondent was asked to state whether ’upper' or ’lower’ middle. The category ’other’ middle combines ’lower middle’ and all other replies, such as 'just middle’ etc. * As the Census figures relate to New South Wales, they include the occupations of farmers and miners not encountered in our Sydney sample. APPENDIX 1 b. APPENDIX 1 b.
SAMPLE RATIONALE AND SAMPLE COMPOSITION - STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS
The aim of the sample design was to construct a list of addresses likely to yield 600 Australian born respondents between the ages of 17 and 64. The list was intended to be a random sample of addresses within the metropolitan area of Sydney, at which electors are enrolled. Individual electors’ names v/ere the basis of this selection, though actual interviewing was not restricted to these electors: non-electors living at the address of selected electors v/ere also regarded as potential respondents.
Special aims
For financial reasons it was considered necessary to arrange the sample in such a way that clustering of addresses occur to avoid excessive travelling, but at the same time clustering was to remain minimal.
Rationale
a) From practical experience of surveys in the Sydney metropolitan area, it is known that approximately
50 clusters is the limit that can be covered on a
restricted budget.
b) Restriction of the sample to electors’ addresses introduces a bias towards the Australian born sections of
the populations and thus avoids a source of wastage; this
procedure has the economic advantage over dwelling based
samples of requiring no precounting. One must, however,
accept the inevitable disparities that exist on electoral
rolls, despite updating and addition of supplementary rolls.
c) It was assumed that the alphabetical listing of
electors bears no systematic relationship to any variable
likely to affect the survey.
Procedures
It was decided by random selection that the elector ate of Barton would be treated first. Thus the list of
electorates for which.up to date figures were obtained from the Commonwealth Electoral Office was established as
follows:
Barton Bennelong Blaxland Bradfield Dailey East Sydney Evans G-rayndler Hughes Xingsford-Smith Lang Lowe Mackellar Mitchell North Sydney Parkes Parramatta Phillip Reid St. George Warringah Watson Wentworth West Sydney Bankstown These electorates contain 260 subdivisions. Five of these, deemed to be outside the metropolitan area were eliminated. This resulted in a list of 265 sub divisions from which the sample was constructed.
The subdivisions vary with respect to the number of enrolments. A proportional probability selection proced ure was based on the total listing. It was calculated that cluster sizes of 18 would yield approximately 1,000 addresses when applied to the actual rolls. The total net enrolment was thus first divided by 18 to give the potential number of clusters per subdivision. Clusters were then cumulated to enable a selection from a random starting point and the use of a skip interval. The latter was derived by dividing the cumulated cluster total (70,368) by 50.
• t A random start of 1,275 was drawn and subsequently the subdivisions were selected by progressive addition of the skip interval. For each subdivision, a new random start was drawn ana by progressive addition of the skip interval, selection was made through each block.
The electoral roll numbers yielded by this selection within subdivisions constitute the final sample. The actual listing of addresses was done by consulting rolls at district electoral offices.
The actual respondent at the given sample addresses
was determined by rotation between sex and age variables.
Each interviewer was instructed to alternate his inter
views between male and female respondents and the three
age groups (17-29, 30-44, 45-64).
Interviewing was carried out in the evenings and on week-ends, in order to reach more easily the elements of
the population usually not at home during the day (males, working housewives, young adults). If a respondent with the sex and age characteristics decided by the rotation, lived at the given address and was not available for inter viewing on the first call, two call-backs were attempted. In view of budget limitations, substitutions were allowed after two unsuccessful calls. These were to take place with residents in homes immediately adjacent to the sample dwelling.
The following table shows the composition of the structured sample and corresponding Census figures. The total number of respondents interviewed was 600. Two interviews had to be discarded because of interviewing errors which could not be corrected. SAMPLE COMPOSITION - STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS
Sample Distribution: Interviews Census
By sex of N 1° 1° respondents: Males 305 51 51 Females 293 49 49 By age of Males Females Total respondents: N N N 1o 17-29 95 93 188 31 33 30-44 100 97 197 33 33 45-64 110 103 213 36 34 By educa- 0 tionai levels:"' N io Primary school only 82 14 Primary only 22 Secondary school: less than 4 years 293 49 Intermediate 31 from 4 to 6 years 128 21 Matricula- Some tertiary 95 16 tion 10 Secondary (no exam.) 29 Tertiary 5 Not stated 3 By self-rating on social class scale: N % Upner, upper middle 108 18 Middle 242 41 Working 229 38 No response, refused 19 3 By degree of contact with the nationalities l French German Italians N N % N % Have friends or relatives 105 18 :164 27 185 31 Have met people 332 55 : 365 61 400 67 Have never met any people 161 27 69 12 13 2
TOTAL SAMPLE N: 598 1° 100
1. Census June, 1966, New South Wales: Population Distribution by Age and Sex, Occupation and Educational Attainments. 2 2. See footnote , Appendix 1 a. APPENDIX 1 c. APPENDIX 1 c.
IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWING GUIDELINES
We are carrying out a study on the images Australian people have of various foreign people. The reason why we are asking these questions is to enable us to compile some information on how people generally view these foreign nationals. Your answers are ABSOLUTELY CONFIDENTIAL - your name won't be used in any way - this is just a research project.
1. Here is the first question: What comes to your mind when I mention the words
German people?.... (WAIT FOR ANSWER) and French people?..and Italian peoole?.... (ROTATE ORDER FROM INTERVIEW TO INTERVIEW BUT KEEP THE SAME ORDER WITHIN EACH INTERVIEW FOR THE REMAINING QUESTIONS UNLESS RESPONDENT CHANGES ORDER HIMSELF BY DRAWING COMPARISONS. KEEP ORDER OF QUESTIONS AS GIVEN IN THE GUIDELINES UNLESS THE RESPONDENT BRINGS UP SPONTANEOUSLY SOME POINTS WHICH WERE TO BE TREATED AT A LATER STAGE. YOU MAY THEN PROBE IMMEDIATELY ON THAT POINT AND SKIP IT WHEN REACHING THAT PARTICULAR POINT LATER ON.
2. Do you think that Australians have any*feelings against the..... and the...... and the...... ? (THE QUESTION MUST BE PHRASED AS GIVEN HERE TO LET THE RESPONDENT INTERPRET WHETHER IT REFERS TO THE PARTICULAR GROUP IN AUSTRALIA OR OVERSEAS - IF HE ASKS WHICH ONE YOU MEAN, SPECIFY THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE THE CHOICE TO HIM).
3. Considering your general impression of them as people, which of these three would you consider an asset to Australia?
4. Have you ever met any....? any 9 any 9 (PROBE FOR CIRCUMSTANCES). 5. How would you describe Australians to people who have never met Australians? (PROBE) As a people, compared to foreign people, what is our appearance? What sort of people are we? What are the things we particularly like and dislike? What do you think makes us the sort of people we are?
6. What images and impressions come to your mind when you think of the/....? (PROBE EXTENSIVELY) Anything else?..... In which ways, if any, are they different from Australians? In which ways, if any, are thev like us? And what about the.... ? and the___ .?
7. Which of these three would you consider, overall, to be most like us?.... And least like us? (PROBE).
8. What do you admire, if anything, about the.....? and the.... ? and the.... ? (PROBE) Anything else?
9. And what does not appeal to you about the... ? and the..... ? and the..... ? (PROBE).
10. At what sort of things, if any, would you say the ..... are particularly good? and the.... ? and the.... ?
11. We talked about the men of these countries. Let us talk for a moment about their women.
What is your image of the.... woman? and the...... ? and the...... ? (PROBE: WHAT SORT OF WOMAN SHE IS IN THE RESPONDENT'S MIND - WHAT QUALITIES OR DEFECTS OR CHARACTERISTICS DOES THE RESPONDENT ASSOCIATE WITH THE TYPICAL.... WOMAN).
12. What kind of relationship do you feel there may typically be between.... men and women? and the... and the.... ? 13. What comes to your mind when .you think of Germany as a country? and what about France? and what about Italy?
14. What kind of economy has Germany.... ? and and...... ?
What sort of products do you associate with..... and with...... ? and with...... ?
15. What famous..... people, past or present, come to your mind when you think of....? and of... . ? and of..... ?
16. What comes to your mind when you think of the political life of..... ? and what about...... ? and what about...... ?
17. Is there anything about.....as a country that you admire? and what about..... ? and what about..... ?
18. How do you feel about Germany and what happened during the war? and what about France and the behaviour of the French during the war? and what about Italy?
19. Some people have told us that the French give them the impression of being somewhat effeminate. What is your impression about that? (IF NO ASK WHY HE THINKS SOME PEOPLE GST THAT IMPRESSION - IF YES, ASK WHAT GIVES HIM THAT IMPRESSION).
Is there any other foreign group of neople wh0 give that impression (of being effeminate).
20. Also people have told us that the French give them the impression of being somewhat amoral. What is your impression about that? 21. On the whole, what do you think we Australians could learn, if anything, from the.... ? and the.. and the..... ?
CLASSIFICATION DATA:
SEX Male CD Female CD Occupation:...... AGE 17-29 □ 30-44 □ 45-64 □ COUNTRY OF BIRTH: Self...... Parents...... EDUCATION: Primary only P Less than 3 years secondary □ Secondary completed □ Some tertiary □
DEGREE OF CONTACT: French German Italian □ Have relatives/friends j j □ 0 Have met people | ] □ □ Have never met CD □ APPENDIX 1 d. (J£) fwfr-ot* /'-/ uz~- ta
Good morning/afternoon etc. My name is ... I am from ... We -are doing a brief study of opinions about some overseas people. The questions we äsk are about the Americans, the English and other people from the Continent. Your personal opinions are of great value to us and I Shall appreciate very much your help in this matter. First of all, may I ask you whether you have ever travelled overseas? YES □ NO iX]
Which countries Would you be interested in travelling overseas? (YES//NO have you visited? Sr Which countries would you like^.to visit? Q.l . >.C A'-':.J&K. . . fV. .. A/i.
(Start with Q . 5 then Q. 7) . i 1. One can have many different reactions to overseas people. I would like you to please tell me ab out your feelings toward some people from overseas. All you have to do• is put the name of thes people shown on these cards (SHOW CARDS) next to the statement whica comes closest to your reaction toward them. You may place more!• than one name next to the same statement. (RECORD BELOW)
LIKE A QUITE DON’T DON’T DISLIKE DON ’ T < LOT LIKE MIND LIKE KNOW MUCH *'
ENGLISH £ 2 3 4 5 6 Col. 8 CD AMERICAN Cl 2 3 4 5 6 Col.9 CD DUTCH ß 2 3 4 5 6 Col.10 CD FRENCH 2 3 4 5 6 Col.11 CD GERMAN 2 3 4 5 6 Col.12 0-, l-----! ITALIAN l; 2 3 4 5 6 Col.13 UJ ' GREEK 2 3 4 5 6 Col.14 't (P CD ?. People often believe a number of things about Australians. Which of the following things do you believe to be true of Australians generally? hardworking people YES int e Hi gent (SjLp conceited NO generous c£e3p NO crue 1 YES Backward YES Brave CjEg) NO Domineering YEiL <$? Self-control NO $, Now I would like you to tell how much or how little you admire s ome overseas people. All you have to do is place a card next to the statement that c om es closest to your reaction towards them. You may place mors than one name next to the same statement. I admire I quite I am I don’t I don ’t I d on ’ t them a."' admire unde c- admire admire them know lot them ided them much at all ENGLISH 1 2 3 4 5 6 Col.15 ( i '! AMERICAN 1 2 3' 4 5 6 Col.16 1 '1 4 6 Col.17 DUTCH 1 ! ' 2 • 3 5 1 xl 2 6 Col.18 FRENCH 1 (p 4 5 ! ,? f /'-} GERMAN (>' 2 3 4 5 6 Col.19 ! / t ITALIAN 1 2 3 4 5 6 Col.20 \x !
GREEK 1 a 3 4 5 6 Col.21 CD - 2
4. Here is a list of words and phrases that have been used to describe images and impressions of some foreign people. I want you to keep in mind just these people: The Germans The Italians The French (ROTATE) ( e? ) ( 3 ) ( / ) I shall go with you through these statements. For each statement I want you to tell me how close the statement comes to YOUR OWN image or impression of these people. Some statements you may associate strongly with $ people - others vaguely - others, not at all. This sort of ruler (GIVE RULER) will help you to answer. 0 means that you do not associate the statement at all with the people. 1 means that you vaguely associate it with the people. 2 means that your ssociate it with them a little mere. 3 means that you associate it with them quite well. 4 means that the statement fits very well your image and impression of the people .
START OFF BY ASKING: How strongly do you associate ’good looking people with the ...? (RECORD ANSWER) THEN PROCEED: And how strongly do you associate ’good looking people’ With the ...? (RECORD) and the ...? (RECORD) ASK RESPONDENT TO GIVE A QUICK ANSWER AS YOU ARE ONLY INTERESTED IN HIS IMMEDIATE REACTIONS. QUESTIONNAIRE)._ c? 3 / GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH
24. 4/. 1. They are good looking people 22.4/:. . \. 23.4/... 2. They often display their bad manners 2 5./tr. . 26.. 0... 2 7. P. .
5> 3. They have loose moral standards 2 8 . ZK. 29.. .T.. 30. .44 4. They are warm-hearted people 31 . .1 . . 32.. !jr . 33 . .44
5. Their men seem effeminate 34. Q. . 35 . .0. . . 36 . .5. 6. They are much like us 3 7 .<Ä. . 3 8 . . . . 39 . C. .
7. They are reliable people 4o. .4r. 41. .//.. 42 . / . 8. They are all good soliders, / / they can fight when necessary 43.* . 44...?.. 45 . ...
n 9. They are artistic 46.4j/. . 47 . .¥t. . 48 . .TT 10 .They are excitable and emotional 49..*-?49 . .
11. They are well educated 52. .4:. 53.. .:.. 54.. r< 12. They are irrational people 55..4.. 56.. .?.. 5 7..
13. They look d.irty and untidy 58. 0. . . 59.../.. 6 0../. 14. We can learn a lot from them 61 . ./4 . 6 2.. st. . 6 3 .
15. They are scientifically minded 6 4 Jr/. . 65...?.. 66. .fr 16. They are arrogant 6 7.44. . 6 8 . • . 69.. Q.
- ^ „ 4- * 7 0./... 71..-?.. 72. //r. Cf r 18.They are particularly intelligent 2. ..3. 3. . .<2.
19.They are creative people 6. .3.; 20 .They are conceited people (think
highly of themselves) • . .
21. They are cruel people 10 11o' 12.0. . . 22. Their manners are affected and ^ overdone 13.^. 14. .0. . 15 . £?. . .
23. They are particularly hardworking 16 . 17. .Ur. 18 . .S . 24.They seem to be gay people on 21..
25,Their men make a fuss of 2 2 O 2 3 . M. . 2 4.. «C. their women folk • • ,n. 26.They are determined people,they have a lot of drive 25 . Ur.. 26 . . a. 27..^.
27.Their women are particularly attractive 28 .5... 29 . . 30 . jf ?8.They are people one can trust 31 ■¥ 32 . . 3 3./..
29.They are easily led astray by z4 their leaders 34 * 35 . . 36 . .ff. NOT TO BE INCLUDED IN ROTATION/ASK LAST 30 .They stick to their own group 37 „.it. 31.They don’t try to learn English 40 M • • '41./r- 42 .&. . .
32/.They are a very desirable type of migrant 43 V- 4 4 . . 45 . . 33.They are a threat to Australia' s high’ standard of living 46 0. 47 . . & 48. /. . .
34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 49d 50 . . 35 .They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 52 0 53 . . a. 5 4 . .(<. .
j V S Al 'b\S 1 !♦ m 7 3 80
5. Here are statements that have been used to describe foreign people. ■J. shall read them to you and ask you to sort them out into three boxes. Here, you will put all those statements which, in your opinion, are favourable to foreign people. You will put all those statements which, in your opinion, are unfavourable to foreign people. And here, in the middle, all the things you consider neither favourable nor unfavourable statements about foreign people. In brief, does the statement say something good or something bad about these people.
WAIT UNTIL SORTING COMPLETED
Thank you very much. Now, I would like you to do one more thing. For all the words and phrases you consider "good" or "favourable" state ments about foreign people, I want you to please tell me hcw • , .. V* . » '-t 1 .
favourable you feel they are. This ruler will help you to answer. Q means vaguely favourable to foreign people - only a very mildly good statement. f2\ is_a little more favourable. {3} is fairly strongly favourable, and |4j • is for the most favourable or best statement about foreign people of all statements we have here. WAIT UNTIL RATING COMPLETED. Now,of course, we shall do the same for the things you considered bad or unfavourable statements about foreign people. means a somewhat unfavourable statement about foreign people. | is a little more unfavourable. is fairiy strongly unfavourable, and 0 is for the mbst unfavourable or most worst statement about foreign people of all the statements we have here. (GOOD) [NEITHER I [bad] f \fc? - difaltoi f'fi - f~4/( Jil) |2?1 ra IS TM Hi e P good looking -1' I bad manners Q (2*1—' 2 1-ose moral 3 3 3 warm hearted <3> 4
GERMANY ITALY FRANCE (ROTATE) K) (3) (/) I want you to tell me how close each of these statements comes to ytFtTr own image or impression of these three countries . Some statements you may associate strongly with a country - others vaguely - others not at all. As before, this ruler will help you to answer. You will remember that: • -' ; t*- 0 means that you do not associate the statement at all with the country. 1 means that you vaguely associate it with the country 1 -
2 and 3 mean that you associate it more and more and
4, of course, means that the statement fits very well your image and impression of the country. *
;VS A ,v
; i3t? -U i 3 C" CO 80 :> / GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1. Has a great deal to offer the 2./... 3 . . . world of today
2. Is friendly toward other 4^ countries 4 . . s../.
IT). Is a good and reliable ally of the Western World 7 /jk.. 8../. 9.. 99.
4. Is ruled by a dictator 10 .0. . li. 0.. i2.64r.
5. Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world 13.^9.. 14 . /. . is. .4^r.
6. Is dominated by the Catholic n U- U- Church 16 . L' . . 17...... 18. .77.
7. Is basically unstable 19 . D. . 20 .c*v.. . 21. .
8. Has a high standard of living 2 2 . .4*7. 73.9:.. 24 . .
9. Seems lacking in backbone 2 5./?.. 26. 2 7..?..
10.Is one of the world leaders CO 2. o in science and technology 2 8 . . 29 ... .
11.Everything it produces Is of ? high quality 31 M.. 32..r. 33 . .
12.Often displays arrogance in o foreign policy 3 4 . W. . 35.... 36 . . . 7. Now, I would like you to sort out some statements about foreign countries. As before, you put here the statements which, in your opinion, are favourable statements about foreign countries and here the statements which are unfavourable to foreign —-“Countries. In the middle, you put the statements you consider I . neither favourable nor unfavourable. Please remember, the !: statements are about foreign countries, not foreign people,
FAVOURABLE NEITHER UNFAVOURABLE 0 0 0 a 0 a 0 0 0 f; 1.Great deal B
to offer 1 1 l. 1 l 1 1 1 37 hv .. 0 r' • 2.Friendly 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 38 BB f- 3.Good ally (a) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 39 w @ 4. Dictator 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 40 © 5.Art and BB0 culture § 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 41 6.Catholic 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 42 7.Unstable 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 43 0 8.High BB standard & 8 8 8 8 8 8 \ 8 8 44 9.No backbone 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 45 Q 10.Science BBS" leader U0; 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 46 11.High qual 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 ii 47 12.Arrogant 12 12 12 121 12 12 12 12 Q 48 V S A 3» *b z 0 b -7- CLASSIFICATION DATA No. " NAME . ■ '>£. Resp. mW, reference ADDRESS rj //C7/7977.7. rvf '?f fyM...... A,r ** ^ SUBURB ...... V • • * . . • I, Sex Male 4J1 I. m Female 2 it- % ' / a/ II. Age 18-24 1 /-V II n o’ ^ r 25-44 X y 45-64 III. Schooling: At which stage did you complete ä> your education? a) primary only 1 G3 b) up to 3rd year secondary 2 c) 4th, 5th and 6th secondary 3 d) beyondjjcvuuu secondary.ac^uiiüü , ------^v % ( technical ^ifniversityp* e?V-4'*o ^ l'-UZ-Ctu U Q ■» ( , K____/--- . ;r , -a Utfutjt*- f*W?cTeti; IV• Occupation itusltr • i V. How well would you sa^ you know each of the threenationalitiesaboutwhichwetalked? This card will help you in answering (HAND CARD) Let us first consider the Hermans I have friends or relatives from German . / I have met people from Germany 2 I have never met any people from Germanv ^ Now the French I have friends or relatives from France ^ • Li I have met people from France I have never met any people from France Now the Italians I have friends or relatives from Italy i VI- La I have met people from Italy CZs I have never met any people from Italy 3 Social class identification: To which social class would you say you belong? (IF MIDDLE, ASK - Would you sav upper middle or lower middle?) Upper VII. Upper middle Lower middle Other middle Working r>- VII.Religion Catholic Protestant (C.of E,Method. ,Baptist etc)^2/ Other or none 3 Refused , * f u Appendix 2 ------—, UNIVERSITY OF N.S.W. 30350 -3. MAY 72 I LIBRARY I TABLE 1 DEGREE OF LIKING TOTAL SAMPLE Like Do not Quite Do not Do not Nationalities fi like Dislike Totals like mind know lot much % % % % % % No. % English 39.5 32.3 20.7 5.5 1.8 0.2 598 100.00 American 30.4 35.3 23.1 7.4 3.7 0.2 598 100.00 Dutch 21.2 33.3 30.1 •9.5 4.8 1.0 598 100.00 French 13.2 32.8 33.3 10.2 3.0 2.5 598 100.00 German 10.2 29.9 40.5 12.4 6.0 1.0 59S 100.OOj Italian 10.5 22.4 38.8 20.2 7.7 0.3 593 100.00| Greek 7.5 21.6 43.5 19.2 7.2 1.0 593 100.00 i TABLE 2A DEGREE OF LIKING BY SEX: TOTAL MALES Like Do not Quite Do not ! Do not Nationalities a like Dislike Totals like mind know lot much % % % % % % No. % English 36.1 32.5 24.3 5.2 1.6 0.3 305 100.oc American 36.2 37.7 25.2 6.9 3.9 0.0 305 100.oc Dutch 15.4 29.5 34.1 14.1 6.2 0.7 305 100.oc French 9.8 27.9 45.2 12.5 2.6 2.0 305 100,oc German 10.8 27.5 44.6 11.1 5.2 0.7 305 100.oc Italian 7.9 20.0 38.4 24.3 9.5 0.0 305 100.00 Greek 7.9 17.7 42.3 23.3 8.2 0.7 305 100.oc TABLE 23 DEGREE OF LIKING BY SEX: TOTAL FEMALES Like Do not Quite ! Do not Do not Nationalities like Dislike Totals' like i mind know much English American Dutch French German 100.00 Italian Greek TABLE 2C DEGREE OF LIKING BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 17-29 Like Do not Quite Do not Do not a like Dislike Totals National!ties like mind know lot much X % X X X X No. X English 32.4 33.5 23.9 6.9 3.2 0.0 188 100.00 American 21.8 36.7 26.1 11.2 4.3 0.0 188 100.00 Dutch 13.8 36.2 39.4 5.9 3.7 1.1 188. 100.00 French 16.0 31.9 39.9 10.6 1.6 0.0 188 100.00 German 9.0 30.3 42.6 13.3 4.3 0.5 188 100.00 Italian 7.4 18.6 44.7 18.6 10.6 0.0 188 100.00 Greek 3.7 14.9 53.2 18.6 9.6 0.0 188 100.00 TABLE 2D DEGREE OF LIKING BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 30-44 Like Do not Quite Do not Do not Nationalities a like Dislike TotaIs like mind know lot much X X % X X X No. 7. English 40.1 33,0 20.3 5.1 1.5 0.0 197 100.00 American 27.4 32.5 28.4 6.6 4.6 0.5 197 100.00 Dutch 20.3 43.0 26.9 12.7 4.6 1.5 197 100.00 French 11.2 36.0 35.5 9.6 2.0 5.6 197 100.00 German 9.1 34.0 37.6 12.7 5.1 1.5 197 100.GO Italian 12.2 27.4 32.5 21.3 5.6 1*0 | 197 100.00 Greek 8.1 26,9 33.6 19.8 4.6 2.0 197 100.00 | TABLE 2E DEGREE OF LIKING BY AGE: MALES 6c FEMALES 45-64 Like Do not Qui te Do not Do not Nationalities a like Dislike Totals like mind know lot much % % 7. % % % No. % English 45.1 30.5 18.3 4.7 0.9 0.5 213 100.00 American 40.8 36.6 15,5 4.7 2.3 0.0 213 100.00 Dutch 28.6 30.0 24.9 9.9 6.1 0.5 213 100.00 French 12.7 30.5 39.4 10.3 5.2 1.9 213 100.00 German 12.2 25.8 41.3 11.3 8.5 0.9 213 100.00 Italian 11.7 21.1 39.4 20.7 7.0 0.0 213 100.00 Greek 10.3 22.5 39.4 19.2 7.5 0.9 213 100.00 4 * TABLE 3A DEGREE OF LIKING BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: PRIMARY EDUCATION ONLY Like Do not Quite Do not Do not Nationalities a like Dislike Totals Like mind know lot much % 7. % 7. %% No. % English 52.4 23.2 15.9 6.1 2.4 0.0 82 100.00 American 37.8 39.0 15.9 3.7 3.7 0.0 82 100.00 Dutch 34.1 28.0 28.0 3.7 6.1 0.0 82 100.00 French 13.4 28.0 47.6 6.1 1.2 3.7 82 100.00 German 13.4 24.4 42.7 8.5 11.0 0.0 82 100.00 Italian 6.1 17.1 42.7 23.2 11.0 0.0 82 100.00 Greek 12.2 20.7 40.2 19.5 7.3 0.0 82 100.00 TABLE 3B DEGREE OF LIKING BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: LESS THAN 4 YEARS SECONDARY EDUCATION Like Do not Quite Do not Do not Nationalities a like Dislike Totals like mind know lot much 7. 7. 7. % 7. % No. % English 41.0 30.4 21.2 5.1 2.0 0.3 293 100.00 American 33.1 32.8 24.9 5.8 3.1 0.3 293 100.00 Dutch 20.8 32.4 30.0 10.6 4.4 1.7 293 100.00 French 13.3 32.8 39.6 8.2 2.7 3.4 293 100.00 German 9.6 26.6 43.0 12.6 6.1 2.0 293 100.00 Italian 12.6 20.5 38.6 20.8 6.8 0.7 293 100.00 Greek 7.2 18.8 46.1 18.8 8.2 1.0 293 100.00 4 * V A— TABLE 3C DEGREE OF LIKING BY DEGREE CF EDUCATION: 4-6 YEARS SECONDARY EDUCATION Like Do not Quite Do not Do not Nationalities a mind Mslike Totals like mind know lot much 7. % % % 7. % No, % English 32.0 35.9 25.8 4.7 1.6 0.0 128 100.00 American 22.7 34.4 26.6 11.7 4.7 0.0 128 100.00 Dutch 8.6 39.8 37.5 8.6 4.7 0.8 128 100.00 French 10.2 35.9 35.9 14.8 2.3 0.8 128 100.00 German 6.3 32.8 43.0 13.3 4.7 0.0 128 100.00 Italian 6.3 22.7 42.2 18.0 10.9 0.0 128 100.00 Greek 3.1 17.2 48.4 21.1 8.6 1.6 123 100.00 TABLE 3D DEGREE OF LIKING BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: SOME TERTIARY EDUCATION Like Do not Quite Do not! Do nop Nationalities mind TotaIs like mind know much English American Dutch French German Italian Greek 4 » i__ \ j TABLE 4 DEGREE OF LIKING BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE Like Do not Quite Do not Do not Nationalities a like Dislike Totals like mind know lot much % % % % % % No. French Have friends or relatives 27.6 39.0 22.9 8.6 1.9 0.0 105 100.00 Have met people from France 11.1 33.7 38.6 11.1 4.2 1.2 332 100.00 Never met anyone 8.1 26.7 47.8 9.3 1.2 6.8 161. 100.00 Germans Have friends or relatives 19.5 40.9 30.5 6.1 3.0 0.0 164 100.00 Have met people from Germany 7.4 28.2 42.7 14.5 6.6 0.5 365 100.00 Never met anyone 2.9 13.0 52.2 15.9 10.1 5.8 69 100.00 Italians Have friends or relatives 16.8 28.6 35.1 15.1 4.3 0.0 185 100.00 Have met people from Italy S.O 20.0 39.5 23.0 9.3 0.3 400 100.00 Never met anyone 0.0 7.7 69.2 7.7 7.7 7.7 13 100.00 J TABLE 5 DEGREE OF ADMIRATION TOTAL SAMPLE Do not Admire Quite Unde Do not Do not Nationalities admire Totals a lot Admire cided admire know much 7. 7. % % % % No. % English 37.3 39.8 9.9 10.0 2.8 0.2 598 100.00 American 37.6 39.3 9.4 9.2 4.3 0.2 598 100.00 Dutch 19.1 36.8 26.6 11.0 6.2 0.3 598 100.00 French 12.9 32.6 29.8 19.2 4.7 0.8 598 100.00 German 21.1 39.5 19.9 13.4 6.0 0.2 598 100.00 Italian 9.5 28.3 23.6 25.1 12.9 0.7 598 100.oc Greek 8.9 27.4 29.1 21.9 11.5 1.2 598 100.00 TABLE 6A' DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY SEX: TOTAL MALES Do not Admire Quite Unde Do not Do not Nationalities admire Totals a lot admire cided admire know much % % %%% % No. % English 35.7 41.0 9.8 9.8 3.3 0.3 305 100.00 American 37.0 39.7 8.9 10.5 3.9 0.0 305 100.00 Dutch 15.4 32.1 29.8 13.8 8.9 0.0 305 100.00 French 10.8 29.8 31.5 22.6 5.2 0.0 305 100.00 German 24.6 42.3 14.8 13.8 4.6 0.0 305 100.00 Italian 7.2 25.9 23.0 26.2 17.4 0.3 305 100.00 Greek 6.9 26.9 27.5 23.6 14.1 1.0 305 100.00 TABLE 6B DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY SEX: TOTAL FEMALES Do not Admire Quite Unde Do not Do not Nationalities admire Totals a lot admix*e cided admire know much % 7. % % % 7. | No. % English 38.9 38.6 9.9 10.2 2.4 0.0 ! 293 100.00 i American 38.2 38.9 9.9 7.8 4.8 0.3 293 100.00 Dutch 22.9 41.6 23.2 8.2 3.4 0.7 293 100.00 French 15.0 35.6 28.0 15.7 4.1 1.7 293 100.00 German 17.4 36.5 25.3 13.0 7.5 0.3 I 293 100.00 Italian 11.9 30.7 24.2 23.9 8.2 1.0 293 100.00 Greek 10.9 28.0 30.7 20.1 8.9 1.4 293 100.00 ; TABLE 6C DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 17-29 Do not Unde Do not Do not Admire Quite admire Totals Nationalities a lot admire cided admire know much % % % % % % No. X 100.00 English 26.6 44.1 12.8 12.8 3.7 0.0 188 100.00 American 32.4 37.2 11.7 12.8 5.9 0.0 188 0.0 188 100.00 Dutch 10.6 35.14 37.8 11.7 4.8 188 100.00 French 13.3 33.5 31.4 18.6 2.7 0.5 188 100.00 German 16.5 41.0 22.9 14.4 5.3 0.0 188 100.00 Italian 8.5 22.3 26.6 27.7 14.9 0.0 188 100.00 Greek 5.9 19.7 33.5 28.7 12.2 0.0 TABLE 6D DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY AGE: MALES 6c FEMALES 30-44 Do not Admire Quite Unde Do not Do not Nationalities admire TotaIs admir? cided admire know a lot much % % % % % % No. t English 36.0 44.2 9.1 8.1 2.0 0.5 197 100.00 American 32.0 44.2 9.6 9.1 4.6 0.5 197 100.00 Dutch 18.3 40.6 22.8 12.2 5.6 0.5 197 100.00 French 10.2 33.0 28.4 23.4 3.6 1.5 197 100.00 German 27.9 37.1 16.2 14.2 4.1 0.5 197 100.00 Italian 11.7 32.0 22.3 22.8 9.6 1.5 197 100.00 Greek 9.1 31.5 29.4 19.8 8.1 2.0 197 100.00 TABLE 6E DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 45-64 Do not Quite Unde Do not Do not Admire admire Totals Nationalities admire know a lot admire cided much X X % X % X No. % English 47.9 31.9 8.0 9.4 2.8 0.0 213 100.00 American 47.4 36.6 7.0 6.1 2.8 0.0 213 100.00 Dutch 27.2 34.7 20.2 9.4 8.0 0.5 213 100.00 French 15.0 31.5 29.6 16.0 7.5 0.5 213 100.00 100.00 German 18.8 40.4 20.7 11.7 8.5 0.0 213 100.00 Italian 8.5 30.0 22.1 24.9 14.1 0.5 213 100.00 Greek 11.3 30.5 24.9 17.8 14.1 1.4 213 « TABLE~7A. DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: PRIMARY EDUCATION ONLY Do not Admire Quite Unde Do not Do not admire Totals Nationalities a lot admire cided admire know much % % X % X X No. X English 51.2 29.3 9.8 7.3 2.4 0.0 82 100.00 American 56.1 28.0 6.1 7.3 2.4 0.0 82 100.00 Dutch 34.1 29.3 23.2 9.8 3.7 0.0 82 100.00 French 20.7 30.5 31.7 12.2 3.7 1.2 82 100.00 German 19.5 35.4 22.0 13.4 9.8 0.0 82 100.00 Italian 9.8 28.0 24.4 20.7 15.9 1.2 82 100.00 Greek 13.4 31.7 28.0 13.4 12.2 1.2 82 100.00 TABLE 7B DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: LESS THAN 4 YEARS SECONDARY EDUCATION Do not Admire Quite Unde- Do not Do not Nationalities admire Iota Is a lot admir< i cided admire know much X X % X X X No. X English 36.9 43.0 8.2 8.9 2.7 0.3 293 100.00 American 37.5 43.3 9.2 4.8 4.8 0.3 293 100.00 Dutch 17.4 37.9 24.9 12.6 6.8 0.3 293 100.00 French 13,3 34.5 28,0 19.1 4.1 1.0 293 100.00 German 18.4 37.5 23.9 13.7 6.1 0.3 293 100.00 Italian 10.6 27.3 21.5 26.6 13.0 1.0 293 100.00 Greek 7.5 25.9 28.0 23,9 13.0 1.7 293 100.00 TABLE 7C DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: 4-6 YEARS SECONDARY EDUCATION Do not \dtnire Quite Unde Do not Do not Nationalities admire Totals a lot admire know admire cided much X X XX % X No. X English 32.0 41.4 13.3 10.9 2.3 0.0 128 100.00 American 30.5 36.7 13.3 16.4 3.1 0.0 128 100.00 Dutch 10.9 36.7 35.2 10.9 5.5 0.8 128 100.00 French 10.2 32.8 33.6 17.2 5.5 0.8 128 100.00 German 21.1 39.1 18.0 16.4 5.5 0.0 128 100.00 Italian 7.0 30.5 26.6 21.1 14.8 0.0 128 100.00 Greek 6.3 28.9 29.7 24.2 10.2 0.8 128 100.00 TABLE 7D DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: SOME TERTIARY EDUCATION Do not T Admire Quite Unde- Do not Do not Nationalities admire Toto Is a lot admir< s cided admire ; know much ______LI______X X X X X X No. % English 33.7 36.8 10.5 14.7 4.2 0.0 95 100.00 American 31.6 40.0 7.4 14.7 6.3 0.0 95 100.00 Dutch 22.1 40.0 23.2 7.4 7.4 0.0 95 100.00 French 8.4 28.4 28.4 28.4 6.3 0.0 95 100.00 German 30.5 49.5 8.4 3.4 3.2 0.0 95 100.00 Italian 9.5 28.4 25.3 29.5 7.4 0.0 95 100.00 Greek 12.6 26.3 32.6 20.0 8.4 0.0 95 100.00 TABLE 8 DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE Admire Do not Quite Unde Do not Do not Nationalities a admire Totals admire cided admire know lot much % 7. % %% % No. % French Have friends or relatives 21.0 39.0 19.0 17.1 3.8 0.0 105 100.00 Have met people from France 12.0 30.7 28.6 22.0 6.3 0.3 332 100.00 Never met anyone 9.3 32.3 39.1 14.9 1.9 2.5 161 100.00 Germans Have friends or relatives 26.3 45.7 14.0 10.4 3.0 0.0 164 100.00 Have met people from Germany 20.5 40.0 18.6 14.5 6.3 0.0 365 100.00 Never met anyone 10.1 21.7 40.6 14.5 11.6 1.4 69 100.00 Italians Have friends or relatives 14.6 36.2 18.4 23.8 6.5 0.5 185 100.00 Have met people from Italy 7.0 25.5 25.5 25.8 15.5 0.8 400 100.00 Never met anyone 15.4 0.0 38.5 23.1 23.1 0.0 13 100.00 J TABLE 9A’ DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY DEGREE OF LIKING FOR THE FRENCH Like Do not Quite Do not Do not Degree a like Dislike Total like mind know lot much No. No. No. No. No. No. No. Admire a lot 41 21 12 3 0 0 77 Quite admire 22 102 64 6 0 1 195 Undecided 7 52 93 15 2 9 178 Don't admire much 8 20 54 27 6 0 115 Don't admire at all 1 1 5 10 10 1 28 Don't know 0 0 1 0 0 4 5 J 598 TOTALS 79 196 229 61 18 15 TABLE 93 DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY DEGREE OF LIKING FOR THE GERMANS I Like Do not Quite Do not Do not Degree a 1 like Dislike Total like mind know lot much No. No. No. No. No. No. No. Admire a lot 37 49 27 8 4 1 126 Quite admire 19 101 106 9 1 0 236 Undecided 3 21 72 14 5 4 119 Don't admire much 1 7 36 26 10 0 80 Don't admiro i at all 1 1 1 17 16 0 36 Don't know 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 ______J TOTALS 61 179 242 74 36 598 ------ji 6J TABLE 9C DEGREE OF ADMIRATION BY DEGREE OF LIKING FOR THE ITALIANS Like Do not Quite Do not Do not Degree a like Dislike Total like mind know lot much No« No. No. No. No. No. No. Admire a lot 30 19 6 2 0 0 57 Quite admire 29 74 61 3 2 0 169 Undecided 3 26 95 13 3 1 141 Don't admire much 1 12 59 68 ; 10 0 150 Don’t admire at all 0 2 10 35 30 0 77 Don't know 0 1 1 0 1 1 4 TOTALS 63 134 2 32 121 46 2 598 4 TABLE 10. BELIEFS ABOUT EACH NATIONALITY ' ' TOTAL SAMPLE 1--- BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH I* They are good looking people 2.56 2.07 2.53 2. They often display their bad manners 1.78 2.12 1.43 3# They have loose moral standards 0.82 1.19 1.70 4. They are warm-hearted people 1.73 2.75 2.55 5* Their men seem effeminate 0.20 0.90 1.75 6* They are much like us 1.84 0.72 1.05 7* They are reliable people 2.60 1.78 1.85 8. They are all good soldiery they can fight when necessary 3.62 1.69 2.57 9.They are artistic 2.26 2.86 3.13 lO.They are excitable and emotional 1.30 3.60 3.36 ll.They are well educated 3.37 1.59 2.58 12.They are irrational people 1.14 2.19 1.93 13.They look dirty and untidy 0.30 1.61 0.73 14.We can learn a lot from them 3.10 1.99 2.34 15*They are scientifically minded 3.51 1.33 2.08 16.They are arrogant 2.85 1.74 1.73 17cThey are romantic 1.48 3.15 3.43 18.They are particularly intelligent 3.36 1.83 2.42 19.They are creative people 2.97 2.53 2.87 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.60 1.88 2.23 21.They are cruel people 2.22 0.98 0.77 22.Their manners are affected and overdone 0.90 1.30 1.74 23.They are particularly hardworking 3.40 2.97 2.09 24.They seem to be gay people 1.74 3.13 3.27 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 1.36 2.51 3.16 26.They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 3.60 2.29 2.14 27.Their women are particularly attractive 2.31 2.07 2.98 28.They are people one can trust 2.07 1.71 1.91 29.They are easily led astray by their leaders 2.76 2.68 2.17 30.They stick to their own group 1.75 3.26 1.73 31.They don’t try to learn English 0.87 2.15 1.15 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 2.99 2.14 2.62 33»They are a threat to Australia*shigh standsrdof living 0.35 1.12 0.43 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 2.75 1.82 2.40 35.They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 0.27 1.15 0.37 TOTAL SAMPLE j 598 TABLE 11A. BELIEFS ABOUT EACH RATIONALITY BY SEX: TOTAL RALES BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1« They are good looking people 2.63 2.03 2.43 2. They often display their bad manners 1.85 2.14 1.42 3. They have loose moral standards 0.86 1.29 1.70 4. They are warm-hearted people 1.83 2.59 2.43 5* Their men seem effeminate 0.21 1.00 1.85 6. They are much like us 2.00 0.68 1.09 7* They are reliable people 2.78 1.61 1.81 8* They are all good soldiery they can fight when necessary 3.65 1.31 2.43 9* They are artistic 2.31 2.91 3.11 10«They are excitable and emotional 1.26 3.59 3.29 ll.They are well educaced 3.40 1.53 2.47 12.They are irrational people 1.08 2.17 1.88 13.They look dirty and untidy 0.23 1.65 0.75 l4.We can learn a lot from them 3.27 1.94 2.27 15.They are scientifically minded 3.65 1.43 2.19 16.They are arrogant 2.90 1.80 1.72 17.They are romantic 1.63 3.15 3.43 lS.They are particularly intelligent 3.40 1.74 2.35 19.They are creative people 3.14 2.50 2.72 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.56 1.93 2.20 21.They are cruel people 2.19 0.96 0.85 22.Their manners are affected and overdone 0.91 1.39 1.79 23.1hey are particularly hardworking 3.41 2.78 2.05 24.They seem to be gay people 1.89 3.10 3.20 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 1.44 2.52 3.15 26.They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 3.61 2.16 2.06 27.Their women are particularly attractive 2.51 2.04 2.93 28.They are people one can trust 2.28 1.61 1.89 29.They are easily led astray by their leaders 2.82 2.91 2.30 30.They stick to their own group 1.62 3.32 1.77 31.They don’t try to learn English 0.76 2.18 1.02 32.They $re a very desirable type of migrant 3.17 2.07 2.58 33.They are a threat toAustralia's high standard of living 0.27 1.24 0.44 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 2.93 1.74 2.38 35.They lower trhe standard of the neighbourhood where they live 0.18 1.24 0.36 TOTAL RALES 305 TABLE 113. BELIEFS ABOUT NATIONALITY BY SEX: TOTAL FEMALES ------—■ ■— BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1. They are good looking people 2.49 2.14 2.58 2* They often display their bad manners 1.70 2.11 1.45 3« They have loose moral standards 0.79 1.09 1.71 4. They are warm-hearted people 1.62 2.92 2.67 5* Their men seem effeminate 0.18 0.81 1.65 6* They are much like us 1.67 0.75 1.00 7. They are reliable people 2.41 1.96 1.90 8. They are all good soldiers* they can fight when necessary 3.58 2.09 2.70 9. They are artistic 2.22 2.81 4.23 lO.They are excitable and emotional 1.34 3.61 3.44 ll.They are well educated 3.34 1.66 2.69 12.They are irrational people 1.20 2.20 1.99 13.They look dirty and untidy 0.37 1.57 0.71 14«Ve can learn a lot from them 2.91 2.04 2.42 15.They are scientifically minded 3.37 1.23 1.97 16.They are arrogant 2.80 1.68 1.74 17«They are romantic 1.32 3.15 3.42 18.They are particularly intelligent 3.32 1.92 2.50 19.They are creative people 2.79 2.57 3.02 20«They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.65 1.84 2.27 21«They are cruel people 2.25 1.01 0.68 22*Their manners are affected and overdone 0.90 1.22 1.69 23«They are particularly hardworking 3.40 3.16 2.13 24.They seem to be gay people 1.59 3c 16 3.35 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 1.29 2.49 3.13 26.They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 3.59 2.43 2.24 27.Their women are particularly attractive 2.10 2.10 3.04 28.They are people one can trust 1.85 1.82 1.94 29.They are easily led astray by their leaders 2.71 2.45 2.04 30.They stick to their own group 1.87 3.19 1.70 31.They don*t try to learn English 0.99 2.11 1.28 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 2.80 2.20 2.66 33.They are a threat to Australia *s high standard of living 0.43 1.01 0.42 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 2.55 1.90 2.43 35.They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 0.36 1.06 0.38 TOTAL FEMALES 293 TABLE 12A BELIEFS ABOUT EACH NATIONALITY BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 17-29 BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1« They are good looking people 2.51 1.88 2.46 2* They often display their bad manners 1.39 2.03 1.32- 3* They have loose moral standards 0.80 1.17 1.38 4. They are warm-hearted people 1.98 2.54 2.46 5* Their men seem effeminate 0.27 0.89 1.78 6* They are much like us - 1.79 0.74 1.16 7. They are reliable people 2.45 1.78 1.94 8* They are all good soldiery they can fight when necessary 3.47 1.82 2.61 9. They are artistic 2.05 2.62 3.09 10*They are excitable and emotional 1.47 3.44 3.14 ll.They are well educated 3.27 1.66 2.63 12.They are irrational people 1.11 2.02 1.71 13*They look dirty and untidy 0.26 1.66 0.64 14.We can learn a lot from them 2.98 1.89 2.44 15.They are scientifically minded 3.26 1.15 1.97 16.They are arrogant 2.40 1.89 1.82 17.They are romantic 1.55 2,90 3.23 18.They are particularly Intelligent 3.14 1.73 2.32 19.They are creative people 2.56 2.42 2.77 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.20 1.89 2.06 21.They are cruel people 1.59 0.93 0.71 22.Their manners are affected and overdone 0.84 1.20 1.56 23.They are particularly hardworking 3.07 2.94 3.05 24.They seem to be gay people 1.91 2.94 3.09 25.Tneir men make a fuss of their women folk 1.58 2.49 3.12 26.They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 3.28 2.51 2.09 27.Their women are particularly attractive 2.46 1.97 2.87 28.They are people one can trust 2.21 1.72 1.99 29.They are easily led astray by their leaders 2.66 2.48 2.10 30.They stick to their own group 1.59 3.14 1.62 31.They don't try to learn English 0.96 2.19 1.22 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 2.78 1.97 2.49 33.They are a threat toAustralla's high standard of living 0.38 1.09 0.47 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 2.45 1.57 2.21 35.They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 0.35 1.13 0.43 TOTAL MALES & FEMALES 17-29 j 188 TABLE 12B BELIEFS ABOUT EACH NATIONALITY BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 30-44 BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1« They are good looking people 2.55 1.99 2.42 2« They often display their bad manners 1.93 2.06 1.36 3« They have loose moral standards 0.82 1.15 1.75 4« They are warm-hearted people 1.55 2.90 2.53 5. Their men seem effeminate 0.12 0.86 1.72 6* They are much like us 1.78 0.75 1.C4 7« They are reliable people 2.60 1.80 1.76 8. They are all good soldiery they can fight when necessary 3.62 1.64 2.44 9. They are artistic 2.32 2.89 3.12 10*They are excitable and emotional 1.19 3.71 3.34 ll.They are well educated people 3.34 1.52 2.42 12.They are irrational people 1.07 2.13 1.81 13.They look dirty and untidy 0.24 1.57 0.73 l4.We can learn a lot from them 3.11 2.05 2.26 15-They are scientifically minded 3.58 1.24 1.94 16.They are arrogant 3.08 1.62 1.62 17.They are romantic 1.41 3.19 3.47 18.They are particularly intelligent 3.39 1.78 2.32 19.They are creative people 2.99 2.56 2.86 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.76 1.91 2.27 21.They are cruel people 2.39 0.95 0.76 22.Their manners are affected and overdone 0.97 1.25 1.76 23.They are particularly hardworking 3.42 2.86 2.01 24.They seem to be gay people 1.64 3.17 3.23 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 1.23 2.45 3.12 26.They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 3.72 2.23 2.18 27.Their women are particularly attractive 2.19 1.87 2.90 28.They are people one can trust 2.02 1.73 1.92 29.They are easily led astray by their leaders 2.73 2.75 2.07 30.They stick to their own group 1.65 3.24 1.70 31.They don't try to learn English 0.91 2.06 i.2Q 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 2.95 2.22 2.64 33.They are a threat toA.ustralia fs high standard of living 0.28 1.01 0.38 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 2.72 1.89 2.44 35.They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 0.19 1.07 0.33 TOTAL MALES & FEMALES 30-44 197 TABLE 12C BELIEFS ABOUT EACH NATIONALITY BY ACE: MALES & FEMALES 45-64 BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1« They are good looking people 2.62 2.31 2.69 2« They often display their bad manners 1.98 2.26 1.61 3. They have loose moral standards 0.84 1.25 1.94 4. They are wann-hearted people 1.66 2.81 2.63 5« Their men seem effeminate 0.21 0.95 1.76 6* They are much like us 1.93 0.66 0.95 7« They are reliable people 2.73 1.77 1.86 8. They are all good solder!^ they can fight when necessary 3.74 1.63 2.64 9. They are artistic 2.40 3.05 3.31 10*They are excitable and emotional 1.25 3.65 3.58 ll.They are well educated 3.50 1.60 2.68 12.They are irrational people 1.23 2.38 2.25 13.They look dirty and untidy 0.38 1.60 0.80 14.We can learn a lot from them 3.18 2.03 2.34 15.They are scientifically minded 3.67 1.57 2.31 16.They are arrogant 3.04 1.73 1.75 17.They are romantic 1.47 3.34 3. 52 18.They are particularly intelligent 3.52 1.97 2.61 19#They are creative people 3.31 2.60 2.96 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.82 1.85 2.35 21.They are cruel people 2.61 1.06 0.83 22.Their manners are affected and overdone 0.91 1.45 1.83 23.They are particularly hardworking 3.69 3.09 2.20 24.They seem to be gay people 1.69 3.25 3.47 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 1.30 2.57 3.24 26.They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 3.78 2.16 2.16 27.Their women are particularly attractive 2.28 2.33 3.16 28.They are people one can trust 1.98 1.69 1.84 29.They are easily led astray by their leaders 2.89 2.80 2.34 30.Th€.y stick to their own group 1.97 3.38 1.87 31.They don't try to learn English 0.76 2.20 1.03 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 3.21 2.20 2.69 33.They are a threat to Austra lia ' s high standard of 1 Iving 0.38 1.26 0.45 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 3.03 1.98 2.54 35.They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 0.28 1.25 0.36 TOTAL MALES & FEMALES 45-64 213 l TABLE 13A BELIEFS ABOUT EACH NATIONALITY BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: PRIMARY EDUCATION ONLY BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1. They are good looking people 2.60 2.27 2.84 2. They often display their bad manners 2.00 2.49 1.49 3. They have loose moral standards 1.00 1.21 1.70 4. They are warm-hearted people 2.16 2.59 3.01 5* Their men seem effeminate 0.39 0.95 1.84 1.29 6. They are much like us 2.13 0.68 7* They are reliable people 2.76 1.93 2.28 8. They are all good soldiery they can fight when necessary 3.76 2.05 3.02 9* They are artistic 2.73 2.93 3.37 10.They are excitable and emotional 1.51 3.59 3.5v ll.They are well educated 3.61 1.87 2. S3 12.They are irrational people 1.66 2.34 2.12 13.They look dirty and untidy 0.44 1.51 0.71 14.We can learn a lot from them 3.30 1.94 2.50 15.Tney are scientifically minded 3.66 1.91 2.44 16.They are arrogant 2.96 2.32 1.80 17.They are romantic 1.68 3. 37 3.67 18.They are particularly intelligent 3.82 2.26 2 • 33 19.They are creative people 3.27 2.62 21 w j 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.61 2 • 1‘8 2.40 21.They are cruel people 2.55 1.51 0.87 22.Their manners are affected and overdone 1.12 1.55 1.80 23.They are particularly hardworking 3.61 3.4b 2.61 24.They seem to be gay people 2.10 3. 32 3.65 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 1.71 2.83 3.60 26.They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 3.77 2.65 2.50 27.Their women are particularly attractive 2.45 2.46 3. 35 28.They are people one can trust 2.00 1.78 2.35 29.They are easily led astray by their leaders 2.83 2.68 2.20 30.They stick to their own group 2.43 3.48 2.10 31.They don’t try to learn English 0.95 2.27 1.24 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 3.07 2.05 2.90 33.They are a threat toAustralia *s high standard of living 0.48 1.37 0*50 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 3.16 2.15 2.71 35.They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 0.44 1.28 0.49 TOTAL PRIMARY EDUCATION ONLY ! 82 j TABLE 13b. BELIEFS ABOUT EACH NATIONALITY BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: LESS THAN 4 YEARS SECONDARY EDUCATION ------ BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1• They are good looking people 2.63 2.18 2.63 2« They often display their bad manners 1.89 2.26 1.49 3* They have loose moral standards 0.77 1.33 1.75 4« They are warm-hearted people \ 1.74 2.79 2.59 5* Their men seem effeminate 0.19 0.89 1.73 6* They are much like us 1.76 0.74 1.08 7. They are reliable people 2.49 1.81 1.88 8. They are all good soldiery they can fight when necessary 3.62 1.86 2.75 9« They are artistic 2.40 2.30 3.20 10.They are excitable and emotional 1.32 3.64 3.40 11.They are well educated 3.36 1.66 2.64 12.They are irrational people 1.22 2.27 1.99 13.They look dirty and untidy 0.34 1.67 0.78 14.We can learn a lot from them 3.01 1.95 2.34 15.They are scientifically minded 3.49 1.27 2.05 16.They are arrogant 2.81 1.81 1.63 17.They are romantic 1.56 3.23 3.51 18. They are particularly intelligent 3.42 1.8 8 2.50 19.They are creative people 3.05 2.48 2.94 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.51 1.99 2.17 21.They are cruel people 2.15 0.91 0.74 22.Their manners are affected and overdone 0.90 1.35 1.76 23.They are particularly hardworking 3.34 3.11 2.23 24.They seem to be gay people 1.89 3.20 3.40 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 1.40 2.55 3.25 26.They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 3.58 2.49 2.22 27.Their women are particularly attractive 2.41 2.07 3.06 28.They are people one can trust 2.15 1.82 1.97 29.They are easily led astray by their leaders 2.77 2.74 2.00 30.They stick to their own group 1.78 3.30 1.81 31.They don’t try to learn English 0.95 2.25 1.20 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 2.95 2.17 2.57 33. They are a threat to Australia *s high standard of living 0.42 1.28 0.47 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 2.68 1.78 2.45 35.They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 0.27 1.22 0.41 TOTAL LESS THAN 4 YEARS SECONDARY EDUCATION 293 « TABLE 13C. BELIEFS ABOUT EACH NATIONALITY BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: 4-6 YEARS SECONDARY EDUCATION —■ " ■------______ BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1* They are good looking people 2.37 1.64 2.30 2. They often display their bad manners 1.77 2.04 1.48 3. They have loose moral standards 0.94 1.09 1.76 4# They are warm-hearted people 1.58 2.76 2.63 5. Their men seem effeminate 0.17 1.06 1.88 6« They are much like us 1.88 0.63 0.93 7« They are reliable people 2.56 1.72 1.68 8* They are all good soldiers they can fight when necessary 3.60 1.34 2.23 9* They are artistic 1.84 2.77 3.15 10.They are excitable and emotional 1.31 3.51 3.30 11.They are well educated 3.26 1.44 2.39 12.They are irrational people 1.09 2.14 1.93 13.They look dirty and untidy 0.22 1.84 0.76 14.We can learn a lot from them 3.13 1.91 2.26 15.They are scientifically minded 3.42 1.19 2.01 lö.They are arrogant 2.84 1.76 1.81 17.They are romantic 1.34 2.95 3.38 lö.They are particularly intelligent 3.13 1.63 2.20 19.They are creative people 2.69 2.45 2.79 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.78 1.81 2.31 21.They are cruel people 2.30 1.01 0.78 22.Their manners are affected and overdone 0.95 1.15 1.74 23.They are particularly hardworking 3.38 2.74 1.87 24.They seem to be gay people 1.59 2.89 3.22 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 1.35 2.34 2.98 26.They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 3.59 2.13 2.09 27.Their women are particularly attractive 2.27 1.85 2.87 28.They are people one can trust 1.86 1.50 1.75 29.They are easily led astray by their leaders 2.89 2.66 2.55 30.They stick to their own group 1.61 3.19 1.53 31.They don’t try to learn English 0.77 1.97 C.98 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 2.91 2.03 2.57 33.They are a threat to Australia's high standard of living 0.28 0.99 0.45 34.they fit in well with the Australian way of life 2.64 1.66 2.23 35.They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 1 0.29 1.17 0.35 1 TOTAL 4-6 YEARS SECONDARY EDUCATION 128 TABLE 13D * 'BELIEFS ABOUT EACH NATIONALITY BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: SOME TERTIARY EDUCATION BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1* The are good looking people 2.57 2.14 2.23 2. They often display their bad manners 1.26 1.49 1.17 3* They have loose moral standards 0.66 0.89 1.48 4. They are warm-hearted people 1.51 2.78 1.91 5« Their men seem effeminate 0.08 0.68 1.57 6* They are much like us 1.76 0.79 0.89 7. They are reliable people 2.84 1.65 1.61 8* They are all good soldiery they can fight when necessary 3.52 1.35 2.04 9* They are artistic 2.03 3.12 2.99 10.They are excitable and emotional 1.04 3.62 3.22 ll.They are well educated 3.37 1.36 2.37 12.They are irrational people 0.53 1.86 1.61 13.They look dirty and untidy 0.15 1.21 0.55 14.Ve can learn a lot from them 3.12 2.28 2.34 15.They are scientifically minded 3.55 1.20 1.95 16.They are arrogant 2.91 1.04 1.84 17.They are romantic 1.21 3.01 3.03 18.They are particularly intelligent 3.08 1.61 2.OS 19.They are creative people 2.75 2.72 2.68 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.65 1.41 2.18 21.They are cruel people 2.03 0.72 0.76 22.Their manners are affected and overdone 0.66 1.16 1.62 23.They are particularly hardworking 3.45 2.41 1.52 24.They seem to be gay people 1.20 3.07 2.62 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 0.98 2.33 2.76 26.^hey are determined people, they have a lot of drive 3.54 1.59 1.69 27.Their women are particularly attractive 1.94 2.01 2.58 1.58 28.They are people one can trust 2.16 1.62 i! 29.They are easily led astray by their leaders 2.52 3.03 2.13 30.They stick to their own group 1.23 3.03 1.47 31.They don’t try to learn English 0.74 1.97 1.11 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 3.14 2.24 j 2 • 57 33.They are a threat toAustralia *s high standard of living 0.09 0,61 0.21 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 2.74 1.87 2.23 35. They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live! 0.11 0.81 0.19 j TOTAL SOME TERTIARY EDUCATION _» j 4 J TABLE 14. - - BELIEFS BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE GERMANS Have Have neve BELIEF Have met friends o: met STATEMENTS people relative« anyone 1. They are good looking people. 2.76 2.57 2.06 2. They often display their bad manners 1.50 1.93 1.67 3. They have loose moral standards 0.78 0.82 0.96 4. They are warm-hearted people 2.02 1.63 1.55 5. Their men seem effeminate 0.20 0.16 0.36 6. They are much like us 2.22 1.72 1.55 7. They are reliable people 2.93 2.56 2.03 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 3.61 3.65 3.48 9. They ere artistic 2.41 2.22 2.13 10.They are excitable and emotional 1.40 1.24 1.38 11.They are well educated 3.38 3.41 3.14 12.They are irrational people 1.11 1.13 1.25 13.They look dirty and untidy 0.29 0.23 0.67 14.We can learn a lot from them 3.23 3.16 2.43 15.They are scientifically minded 3.60 3.56 3.03 16.They are arrogant 2.94 2.88 2.51 17.They are romantic 1.62 1.41 1.48 18.They are particularly intelligent 3.37 3.38 3.25 19.They are creative people 3.08 2.96 2.77 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.59 2.68 2.22 21.They are cruel people 2.17 2.22 2.30 22.Their manners are affected and overdone 0.80 0.90 1.19 23.They are particularly hardworking 3.38 3.45 3.22 24.They seem to be gay people 1.81 1.73 1.68 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 1.43 1.33 1.39 26.They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 3.59 3.63 3.48 27.Their women are particularly attractive 2.44 2.28 2.13 28.They are people one can trust 2.40 2.01 1.58 2.63 2.83 2.75 29.They are easily led aster/ by their leaders i an 30.They stick to their own group 1.01 1 • ou 2.00 31.They don’t try to learn English 0.57 0.92 1.35 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 3.17 3.02 2.38 33.Theyare a threat to Australia rs high standardof living 0.23 0.31 0.81 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 2.85 2.78 2.32 35.They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 0.23 0.23 0.59 : BASE NUMBERS 164 365 j TABLE 15. * 'BELIEFS BY DECREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF TOE FRENCH Have Have never BELIEF Have met friends o: met STATEMENTS people relative; anyone 1. They are good looking people. 2.54 2.53 2.52 2. They often display their bad manners 1.25 1.48 1.47 3. They have loose moral standards 1.43 1.74 1.81 4. They are warm-hearted people 2.45 2.53 2.65 5. Their men seem effeminate 1.34 1.87 1.78 6. They are much like us 1.11 1.06 0.98 7. They are reliable people 2.15 1.79 1.78 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 2.55 2.54 2.63 9. They are artistic 3.33 3.14 3.15 10.They are excitable and emotional 3.35 3.40 3.29 11.They are well educated 2.77 2.55 2.50 12.They are irrational people 1.90 1.97 1.88 13.They look dirty and untidy 0.51 0.72 0.88 14.We can learn a lot from them 2.73 2.29 2.20 15.They are scientifically minded 2.29 2.08 1.94 16.They are arrogant 1.87 1.76 1.58 17.They are romantic 3.39 3.39 3.54 18.They are particularly intelligent 2.49 2.39 2.45 19.They are creative people 3.07 2.82 2.84 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.17 2.30 2.14 21.They are cruel people 0.72 0.79 U. 76 22.Their manners are affected and overdone 1.61 1.82 1.66 23.They are particularly hardworking 2.14 2.05 2 • 14 24.They seem to be gay people 3.20 3.28 3.30 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 3.12 3.08 3.35 26.They are determined people, they have a lotof drive 2.11 2.16 2.12 27.Their women are particularly attractive 3.00 2.99 2.95 28.They are people one can trust 2.11 1.89 1.83 29«.They are easily led a stray by their leaders 2.10 2.20 2.17 30.They stick to their own group 1.40 1 • 7 7 1 • 88 31.They don’t try to learn English 1.06 0.98 1.55 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 2.83 2.63 2.45 33.They are a threat to Australia’shigh standardof living 0.38 0. 36 0.62 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 2.37 2.55 2.14 35.They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live j 0.27 0.32 0.54 1 BASE NUMBERS 105 332 161 I 4 » L ... - A TABLE 16. BELIEFS BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE CF THE ITALIANS Have Have never BELIEF Have met 'rlends or met STATEMENTS people relatives anyone JL. They .ire rood looking p :ple. 2.15 2.06 1.23 2. They often display the! Dad manners 1.85 2.24 2.23 3* They have louse moral standards 1.06 1.24 1.69 4« They are warm-hearted people 3.01 2.64 2.69 5* Their men see;-, effeminate 0.82 0.93 1.38 6* They are much like us 0.82 0.68 0.38 T — Xhcjf (ix v xv**t>uiC p^apl(- 2.06 1.68 1.00 8. They are aa pood soldiers, they can fight when necessary 1.84 1.63 1.62 9* They are artistic 2.97 2.83 2.31 10. They are excitable and emotional 3.63 3.60 3.15 11. They are veil educated 1.65 1.57 1.46 12. They are irrational people 2.04 2.25 2.38 13. They look dirty and untidy 1.46 1.67 1.92 14. We can learn a lot from them 2.21 1.91 1.23 15. They are scientifically minded 1.35 1.33 1.00 16. They are arrogant 1.54 1.84 1.62 17*They-arc romantic 3.22 3.13 2.77 1.38 18. They are particularly intelligent 1.85 1.84 1.85 19. They are creative people ! - 2.68 2.49 1.38 20. They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 1.76 1.96 1.54 21. They are cruel people 0.8/» 1.03 1.38 22»Their manner/, are affected and overdone 1.28 1.31 2.69 23. They are particularly hardworking 3.02 2.95 3.08 2.92 24. They seem to ~e gay people 3.25 2.56 2.38 2^.Their men a fuss of their women folk 2.40 2.23 26. They are detc'mined peop a, they have a lot of drive 2.35 2.27 2.08 1.23 27. Their women are particularly attractive 2.11 1.61 1.38 j 23.They are people one can ..rust 1.97 2.68 2.69 2.54 29. They are easily led a stay by their leaders 3.09 3.35 2.77 ! 30. They stick to their own rrroup 1.94 2.23 2.38 | 31. They don*t try to learn English 2.33 2.05 2.08 i 32. They are a very desirable type of migrant 33. Theyare a threat to Australia*snigh standardof living 0.86 1.22 1.77 | 1.54 34*They fit in well vith th ..ustralian way of life 1.95 1.77 . 35.They lower tine standard of the neighbourhood where they 1 ive 0.89 1.27 1.15 j - . J BASE NUMBERS 185 400 13 1 L. J TABLE 17A. BELIEFS ABOUT GERMANS BY DEGREE OF LIKING OF THE GERMANS Like a lot Dislike 6c BELIEF Don't 6c don't like STATEMENTS mind )uite like much 1. They are good looking people. 2.98 2.38 2.09 2. They often display their bed manners 1.32 1.90 2.52 3. They have loose moral standards 0.70 0.83 1.02 4. They are warm-hearted people 2.25 1.52 1.08 5. Their men seem effeminate 0.12 0.19 0.37 6. They are much like us 6 2.39 1.66 1.10 7. They are reliable people 3.12 2.46 1.82 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 3.75 3.58 3.45 9. They are artistic 2.57 2.17 1.89 10.They are excitable and emotional 1.25 1.37 1.27 11.They are well educated 3.50 3.33 3.21 12.They are irrational people 0.92 1.17 1.55 13.They look dirty and untidy 0.19 0.29 0.54 14.We can learn a lot from them 3.37 2.99 2.79 15.They are scientifically minded 3.59 3.53 3.31 16.They are arrogant 2.56 2.91 3.38 17.They are romantic 1.62 1.48 1.17 18.They are particularly intelligent 3.50 3.34 3.11 19.They are creative people 3.15 3.00 2.58 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.32 2.68 3.05 21.They are cruel people 1.82 2.28 2.99 22.Their manners are affected and overdone 0.72 0.98 1.11 23.They are particularly hardworking 3.55 3.33 3.35 24.They seem to be gay people 2.07 1.61 1 • _>6 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 1.56 1.24 1.25 26.They are determined people, they have a .lot of drive 3.72 3*49 3. 62 27.Their women are particularly attractive 2.62 2.17 1 • 9o 28*They are peoole one can trust 2.60 2.00 1.14 29.They are easily led ascray by their leaders 2 • 51 2 • 81 3.20 i o 9 o 9 /. 30.They stick to their own group 1.44 4.44 31.They don't try to learn English 0.69 0.90 1.22 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 3.42 2.37 2.34 33.Theyare a threat to Australia *shigh standardof living 0.17 0.32 0.81 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 3.15 2.71 1.99 35.They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 0.19 0.25 0.5C i ______i BASE NUMBERS 240 242 | r* TABLE 17B BELIEFS ABOUT THE FRENCH BY DEGREE OF LIKING OF THE FRENCH Like a lot Dislike & BELIEF Don't & don't like STATEMENTS mind Quite lik ?e much !• They are good looking people. 2.79 2.41 2.05 j 2. They often display their bad manners 1.27 1.42 2.05 3. They have loose moral standards 1.50 1.72 2.41 4. They are warm-hearted people 2.76 2.48 1.99 5. Their men seem effeminate 1.47 1.88 2.41 6. They are much like us 1.21 1.03 0.61 7. They are reliable people 2.22 1.69 1.14 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 2.76 2.55 2.00 9. They are artistic 3.32 3.09 2.94 10. They are excitable and emotional 3.43 3.24 3.46 11. They are well educated 2.83 2.55 2.04 12. They are irrational people 1.77 2.00 2.33 13. They look dirty and untidy 0.52 0.77 1.34 14. We can learn a lot from them 2.68 2.19 1.66 15. They are scientifically minded 2.15 2.15 1.87 16. They are arrogant 1.56 1.70 2.47 17«They are romantic 3.47 3.41 3.28 18. They are particularly intelligent 2.57 2.44 1.97 19. They are creative people 3.03 2.50 2.51 20. They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.12 2.22 2.65 21. They are cruel people 0.59 0.85 1.22 2.39 22. Their manners are affected and overdone 1.61 1.65 23. They are particularly hardworking 2.26 2.08 1.71 3.05 j 24. They seem to be gay people 3.40 3.18 3.14 2.86 ! 25. Their men make a fuss of their women folk 3.26 2.15 1.66 j 26. They are determined people, they have a lotof drive 2.33 3.20 2.88 2.58 27. Their women are particularly attractive 2.29 1.84 1.00 : 28. They are people one can trust 1.93 2.21 2.89 29. They are easily led astray by their leaders 1.57 1.74 2.25 30. They stick to their own group 1.04 1.20 1.39 31. They don't try to learn English 2.95 2.50 1.89 32. They are a very desirable type of migrant 33. Theyarea threat to Australia *s high standardof living 0.34 0.45 0.72 34. They fit in well with the Australian way of life 2.63 2.31 1.97 35. They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 0.28 0.38 0.66 J __ , - j BASE NUMBERS 275 229 79! TABLE 17C BELIEFS ABOUT THE ITALIANS BY DEGREE OF LIKING OF THE ITALIANS Likea lot Dislike &| BELIEF Don’t don’t like STATEMENTS mind Quite 1 lk< ( much ''rh«y are good looking people. 2.61 2.02 1.51 2 **’*'««• often display their bad manners 1.45 2.15 2.88 T5’av have loose moral standards 0.86 1.05 1.75 a. *re warm-hearted people 3.29 2.70 2.20 "Ö« tflen seem effeminate 0.70 0.83 1.23 6* Th~y are much like us 1.14 0.62 0.36 7. They are reliable people 2.49 1.69 1.07 ö. They -^re all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 1.98 1.80 1.21 9. They are artistic 3.36 2.72 2.49 10.They are excitable and emotional 3.69 3.54 3.59 are v«‘? educated 1.85 1.58 1.32 12.They are irrational people 1.82 2.28 2.47 13.They look dirty and untidy 1.01 1.53 2.43 14-We can learn a lot from them 2.75 1.83 1.32 15',They are scientifically minded 1.60 1.33 1.03 26iThey are arrogant 1.16 1.74 2.44 iJ<,They are romantic 3.36 3.07 3.01 18.They are particularly intelligent 2.19 1.80 1.48 19.They are creative people 3.02 2.35 2.23 20«They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 1.44 1.84 2.46 21.They are cruel people 0. 56 0.93 1.54 22-Their manners are affected and overdone 1.04 1.18 1.7 7 23.They are particularly hardworking 3.10 2.97 2.81 24*They seem to be gay people 3.47 2.99 2.92 23.1heir men make a fuss of their women folk 2.70 2.41 2.40 Zo.ihvy are determined people, they have a lot of drive 2.42 2.37 2.04 i nn 2 • bl X • J1 27.Tuv»ir women are particularly attractive 2S»They are people one can trust 2.44 1.60 1.02 3.01 29.They cre easily led ßstir.y by their leaders 2.54 2.56 o on "i PR 'K 30. They stick to their own group z. y y J ♦ L. O j * J j J 1.75 2.17 2.57 31. They don’t try to iearn English <5 t *i 1 1 A 32«They arc a very desirable type of migrant 2.96 L a 1 J I • jLU 33.Tneyarea threat to Australia’shigh standard of living 0.45 1.02 2.06 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 2.59 1 • 7‘v 1 a 04 | 35-Thf»y lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 0.56 1.03 2.01 1 ' BASE NUMBERS 197 2 32 167 ♦ T TABLE 18A. V BELIEFS ABOUT GERMANS BY DEGREE OF ADMIRATION OF THE GERMANS Admire a jo noc Un BELIEF jlot &Qui t< admire muci decided STATEMENTS 1 admire 5* not at a 1] 1. They are good looking people. 2.80 2.23 2.16 2. They often display their bad manners 1.63 1.68 2.34 3. They have loose moral standards 0.73 0.87 1.05 4« Th2y are warm-hearted people 1.94 1.67 1.12 5« Their men seem effeminate 0.14 0.27 0.32 6« They are much like us 2.17 1.46 1.22 7. They are reliable people 3.02 2.12 1.78 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 3.68 3.55 3.49 9. They are artistic 2.44 2.05 1.94 10.They are excitable and emotional 1.28 1.24 1.44 ll.They are v/ell educated 3.51 3.07 3.24 12.They are irrational people 1.01 1.16 1.54 13.They look dirty and untidy 0.25 0.30 0.45 14.We can learn a lot from them 3.35 2.66 2.74 15.They are scientifically minded 3.65 3.25 3.34 16.They are arrogant 2.77 2.65 3.33 17.They are romantic 1.61 1.37 1.18 18.They are particularly intelligent 3.51 3.18 3.06 19.They are creative people 3.19 2.67 2.61 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 2.57 2.41 2.88 21.They are cruel people 2.08 2.07 2.80 22.Their manners are affected and overdone 0.83 0.85 1.22 23.They are particularly hardworking 3. 56 3.11 3.22 24«They seem to be gay people 1.92 1.49 1.47 1.2 1 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 1.44 1.31 26.They are determined people, they have a lotof drive 3.70 3.34 3.53 27.Their women are particularly attractive 2.42 2.19 2.09 28.They are people one can trust 2.33 1.97 1.38 29.They are easily led astray by their leaders 2.61 2.69 3.31 30.They stick to their own group 1.57 1.84 2.21 31.They don’t try to learn English 0.73 0.90 1.31 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 3.30 2.66 2.35 33.Theyarea threat to Australia * s high standardof living 0.19 0.42 0.78 34.They fit in well with the Australian way of life 3.00 2.50 2.22 0.47 35.They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live J 0.19 0.32 BASE NUMBERS 362 119 116 l] a muci L_ at 1.76 1.16 1.82 1.04 1.59 143 1.71 1.92 3.43 1.55 1.78 1.29 1.19 2.02 2.02 2.01 0.63 2.08 2.92 2.20 2.17 2.59 0.96 0.45 0.50 2.24 2.15 2.92 2.51 2.03 2.10 2.13 2.94 2.55 . not not 3o idmire 5« 1.70 1.28 1.78 1.71 1.65 3.12 1.99 178 3.40 3.35 1.71 1.04 3.28 2.48 1.92 1.72 1.66 3.30 2.46 0.90 0.66 2.53 2.22 2.01 2.44 2.36 0.41 2.77 0.71 2.85 0.35 2.32 2.19 2.63 2.11 2.46 2.21 Un decided a &Quit< 1.39 1.56 1.50 1.78 1.37 3.35 3.38 1.58 1.56 1.77 2.83 3.26 3.47 3.11 3.42 3.29 3.15 1.90 1.12 3.02 2.86 2.88 2.31 0.62 2.87 2.72 0.33 2.36 2.07 0.72 2.50 2.75 2.43 0.42 2.68 272 2.47 admire lot Admire 1 1 live FRENCH they living necessary THE FRENCH life drive OF where THE of themselves) when of lotof folk way 3OUT a standardof A leaders fight migrant NUMBERS have ADMIRATION overdone women of can highly shigh ’ their BASE OF neighbourhood manners attractive they BELIEFS and type by they Australian their the trust group English bad (think emotional them the of of DEGREE hardworking intelligent people people. standards BELIEF STATEMENTS people untidy people people, own can astray and Australia BY learn affected from their people us to fuss soldiers, with people people * led and gay one desirable to people a particularly moral their educated are lot effeminate 4 standard be looking like 18B. veil good a try to very are threat the to dirty make display irrational in t people particularly excitable determined cruel easily well loose a seem ’ scientifically minded scientifically minded good reliable romantic particularly all artistic conceited arrogant vzarm-hearted creative much TABLE learn mariners men look stick fit seem are don are are are are are are are are men women lower are are ere are are often are are are are have are are con Theyarea They They They They They They Their They They They They Thay Their They ney *ney They They They They They We They They They They They . . . are They Their . /.Their 10. 11. They 14- 12. !5?They 33. 33. 19. 13. -- 35. 30. 16. 9. 7. 31 32. 17^ 17 8. 5. 34. 6. 28. 23. 24 21 2 25. 26. 22. 20*They 29. N <' 4-> TABLE 18C. BELIEFS ABOUT THE ITALIANS BY DEGREE OF ADMIRATION OF THE ITALIANS Admire a 3o not BELIEF Un- lot & Quit admire muci STATEMENTS “ decided admire 9 not a t al 1* They are good looking people. 2.60 2.04 1.56 2. They often display their bad manners 1.66 1.90 2.73 3. They have loose moral standards 0.95 1.14 1.46 4. They are warm-hearted people 3.18 2.65 2.40 5. Their men seem effeminate 0.62 0.99 1.14 6. They are much like us 1.07 0.65 0.39 7. They are reliable people 2.46 1.75 1.12 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 2.07 1.70 1.31 9. They are artistic 3.29 2.63 2.58 10.They are excitable and emotional 3.67 3.43 3.65 ll.They are well educated 1.97 1.48 1.29 12.They are irrational people 1.99 2.05 2.43 13.They look dirty and untidy 1.12 1.50 2.18 14.We can learn a lot from them 2.64 1.93 1.39 15.They are scientifically minded 1.66 1.25 1.04 16.They are arrogant 1.42 1.49 2.21 17.They are romantic 3.35 3.04 3.01 18.They are particularly intelligent 2.30 1.74 1.43 19.They are creative people 3.00 2.26 2.22 20.They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) 1.69 1.72 2.16 21.They are cruel people 0.68 0.89 1.34 22.Thelr manners are affected and overdone 1.12 1.15 1.58 23.They are particularly hardworking 3.15 2.96 2.79 24.They seem to be gay people 3. 35 2.97 3.00 25.Their men make a fuss of their women folk 2.66 2.48 2.36 26.They are determined people, tneyhavea lotof drive 2.57 2.33 2.00 27.Their women are particularly attractive 2.53 1.92 1.71 23*They are peoole one can trust 2.42 1.57 1.12 29.They are easily led astray by their leaders 2.56 2.41 2.96 30.They stick to their own group 3* UU 3.1 J J» 31.Thov don’t try to learn English 1.88 2.09 2.43 2.89 1.37 32.They are a very desirable type of migrant 2.16 33.Theyare a threat to Australia'shigh standardof living 0.62 0.93 1.75 34.'They fit in well with the Australian way of life 2.52 1.78 i • i 7 35.They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 0.73 1.01 1.67 BASE NUMBERS 226 141 227 v j TA3LE 19A. EVALUATION OF BELIEFS TOTAL SAMPLE & BY SEX BELIEF TOTAL MALES FEMALES STATEMENTS SAMPLE 1. They are good looking people. 1.94 1.93 1.96 2. They often display their bad manners -2.94 -2.84 -3.06 3. They have loose moral standards -3.10 -3.02 -3.18 4. They are warm-hearted people 3.21 3.06 3.36 5. Their men seem effeminate -2.81 -2.82 -2.80 6. They are much like us 2.10 1.99 2.23 7. They are reliable people 3.36 3.34 3.39 8. 'They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 2.78 2.58 2.99 9. They are artistic 2.60 2.56 2.63 10. They are excitable and emotional -0.78 -0.92 -0.63 11. They are well educated 3.17 3.12 3.22 12. They are irrational people -2.49 -2.39 -2.60 13. They look dirty and untidy -3.17 -3.05 - 3.29 14. We can learn a lot from them 3.22 3.15 3.28 15. They are scientifically minded 2.66 2.61 2.70 16. They are arrogant -2.95 -2.97 -2.92 17. They are romantic 1.99 1.96 2.03 18. They are particularly intelligent 3.13 3.06 3.20 19. They are creative people 3.01 2.97 3.05 20. They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) -2.59 -2.58 -2.59 21. They are cruel people -3.44 -3.34 -3.55 22. Their manners are affected and overdone -2.19 -2.04 -2.35 3.63 23. They are particularly hardworking 3.50 3.36 2.67 24. They seem to be gay people 2.63 2.60 1.92 2.23 25. Their men make a fuss of their women folk 2.07 26. They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 3.14 3.05 3.24 27. Their women are particularly attractive 2.16 2.23 2.10 28. They are people one can trust 3.44 3.40 3.48 -2.83 -2.76 -2.90 29. They are easily led astsry by their leaders -2.07 30. They stick to their own group -2.00 -1.93 -2.97 -2.95 31. They don’t try to learn English -2.96 3.13 3.09 3.17 32. They are a very desirable type of micrant 33. Theyarea threat to Australia’shigh standardof living -3.07 -2.99 -3.14 34. They fit in well with the Australian way of life 3.00 2.95 3.06 35. They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live -3.12 -3.03 -3.22 BASE NUMBERS 598 305 293 4 TABLE 19B. EVALUATION OF 3ELIEF5 BY AGE BELIEF STATEMENTS 17-29 30.44 45-64 1. They are good looking people. 1.79 1.88 2.14 2. They often display their bad manners -2.89 -2.97 -2.96 3. They have loose moral standards -3.03 -3.01 -3.24 4. They are warm-hearted people 3.14 3.09 3.38 5. Their men seem effeminate -2.71 -2.75 -2.96 6. They are much like us 1.98 1.92 2.38 7. They are reliable people 2.29 3.31 3.47 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 2.71 2.68 2.94 9. They are artistic 2.31 2.62 2.82 10. They are excitable and emotional -0.73 -0.59 -0.99 11. They are well educated 3.04 3.08 3.36 12. They are irrational people -2.29 -2.56 -2.61 13. They look dirty and untidy -3.07 -3.09 -3.32 14. We can learn a lot from them 3.09 3.27 3.28 15*They are scientifically.minded 2.36 2.60 2.97 16. They are arrogant -2.62 -2.94 -3.24 17. They are romantic 1.85 1.91 2.20 18. They are particularly intelligent 2.83 3.12 3.41 19. They are creative people 2.76 3.09 3.16 20. 'They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) -2.63 -2.44 -2.69 21. They are cruel people -3.35 -3.47 -3.50 22. Their manners are affected and overdone -2.02 -2.18 -2.36 23. They are particularly hardworking 3.38 3.49 3.60 24. They seem to be gay people 2.62 2.61 2.66 25. Their men make a fuss of their women folk 1.76 2.15 2.23 26. They are determined people, they have a lotof drive 3.14 3.08 3.19 27. Their women are particularly attractive 1.98 2.13 2.35 28. They are people one can trust 3.34 3. 34 3.62 29. They are easily led ast:& BASE NUMBERS 188 197 213 TABLE 19C. EVALUATION OF BELIEFS BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION Less 4-6 Some Pri. 4 Yrs BELIEF STATEMENTS Yrs. Ter only Sec. Sec. tiary 1. They are good looking people 2.29 2.11 1.67 1.51 2. They often display their bad manners -3.21 -3.06 -2.77 -2.60 3* They have loose moral standards -3.29 -3.15 -2.90 -3.04 4. They are warm-hearted people 3.39 3.32 2.94 3.05 5. Their men seem effeminate -3.15 -2.96 -2.44 -2.57 6* They are much like us 2.49 2.32 1.65 1.71 7. They are reliable people 3.43 3.32 3.32 3.51 8* They are all good soldiery they fight when necessary 3.18 3.04 2.40 2.15 9. They are artistic 2.82 2.67 2.46 2,35 10* They are excitable and emotional -1.34 -0.64 -0.35 -0.61 11« They are well educated 3.50 3.05 3.20 3,19 12. They are irrational people -2.85 -2.40 -2.55 -2.41 13. They look firty and untidy -3.33 -3.23 -3.05 -2.93 14. We can learn a lot from them 3.11 3.29 3.05 3.31 15. They are scientifically minded 3.00 2.72 2.44 2.45 16. They are arrogant -3.32 -2.98 -2.74 -2,81 17. They are romantic 2.30 2.23 1.55 1.44 18. They ere particularly intelligent 3.39 3.15 3.05 2.98 19. They are creative people 3.16 3.05 2.81 3.03 20. They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) -2.87 -2.59 -2.62 -2.29 21* They are cruel people -3.54 -3.39 -3.39 1-3 • 53 22. Their manners are affected and overdone -2.22 [-2.42 -1.83 -1.89 i 23. They are particularly hardworking 3.68 3.54 3.32 3.44 | 24. They seem to be gay people 2.82 2.79 2,45 2.25 j 25. Their men make a fuss of their women folk 2.48 2.31 1.52 1.75 j 26. They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 3.01 3.30 3.00 2.94 j 27. Their women are particularly attractive 2.51 2.26 1,90 1.93 j 28. They are people one can trust 3.48 3.45 3.38 3.46 ! 29. They are easily led astray by their leaders 1-2.89 -2.81 -2.88 -2.78 30* They stick to their own group -1.91 -2.10 -2.06 -1.68 31. They don’t try to learn English -3.17 -3.00 [-2.38 -2.75 32. They are a very desirable type of migrant 3.13 3.21 2.37 3.20 33. They are a threat to Austra 1 la ’ s hi gh standard of living -3.22 -3.04 -3.07 -3.01 34. They fit in well with the Australian way of life 3.23 3.16 2.70 2.74 35. They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live -3.45 -3.16 -3.04 -2.81 BASE NUMBERS 82 293 128 95 TABLE 20. BELIEFS ABOUT EACH COUNTRY TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALIAN FRANCE I. Has a greac deal to offer the world of today 2.83 1.67 1.92 2. Is friendly toward other countries 2.45 2.59 1.95 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western World 2.27 1.94 1.92 4. Is ruled by a dictator 0.95 0.92 2.32 5. Is a source of art & culture for the rest of World 2.24 2.77 2.75 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 0.49 3.36 1.88 7. Is basically unstable 0.76 1.44 1.68 8. Has a high standard of living ' * 2.97 1.31 2.25 9. Seems lacking in backbone 0.38 1.57 1.24 10. Is one of the world leaders in science & technology 3.17 1.01 1.78 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.23 2.03 2.31 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 2.03 1.20 2.78 TOTAL SAMPLE 598 r 4 \ TABLE 21A» BELIEFS ABOUT EACH COUNTRY BY SEX: * * TOTAL MALES BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 2.97 1.53 1.84 2. Is friendly toward other countries 2.57 2.56 1.78 3. Is a good & reliable ally of the Western World 2.43 1.75 1.73 4. Is ruled by a dictator 0.74 0.80 2.34 5. Is a source of art & culture for the rest of world 2.22 2.70 2.58 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 0.40 3.29 1.86 7*. Is basically unstable 0.69 1.62 1.82 8. Has a high standard of living 3.05 1.27 2.21 9. Seems lacking in backbone 0.31 1.88 1.28 10* Is one of the World leaders in Science & technology 3.36 1.07 1.92 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.29 1.89 2.24 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 1.85 1.07 2.93 TOTAL MKLES 305 TABLE 2 IB. BELIEFS ABOUT EACH COUNTRY BY SEX: TOTAL FEMALES 1 BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE j 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 2.69 1.81 2.01 2. Is friendly toward other countries 2.31 2.62 2.12 3. Is a good &. reliable ally of the Western World 2.11 2.14 2.13 4. Is ruled by a dictator 1.17 1.04 2.30 5. Is a source of art & culture for the rest of world 2.26 2.84 2.92 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 0.59 3.42 1.90 7. Is basically unstable 0.83 1.25 1.54 8. Has a high standard of living 2.89 1.36 2.28 9. Seems lacking in backbone 0.45 1.25 1.19 10. Is one of the World leaders in science & technology 2.98 0.95 1.63 2.39 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.16 2.18 < 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 2.21 1.34 2.62 TOTAL FEMALES 293 • 1 TABLE 21C BELIEFS ABOUT EACH COUNTRY BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 17-29 BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 2.77 1.64 2.05 2. Is friendly toward other countries 2.44 2.48 2.07 3. Is a good & reliable ally of the Western world 2.28 1.85 1.97 4. Is ruled by a dictator 1.11 0.99 2.13 5* Is a source of art & culture for the rest of world 2.03 2.59 2.72 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 0.65 3.30 1.82 7« Is basically unstable 0.77 1.38 1.61 8. Has a high standard of living 2.84 1.36 2.23 9. Seems lacking in backbone 0.46 1.38 1.06 10« Is one of the World leaders in science & technology 3.06 0.96 1.87 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 2.95 1.84 2.15 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 1.66 1.15 2.45 ' TOTAL MALES 6c FEMALES 17-29 188 TABLE 2 ID. BELIEFS ABOUT EACH COUNTRY BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 30-44 B ELI EF S TA TEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 2.72 1.58 1.81 1.95 2. Is friendly toward other countries 2.45 2.73 3. Is a good 6c reliable ally of the Western world 2.24 2.07 1.95 2.24 4. Is ruled by a dictator 0.63 0.71 5. Is a source of art 6c culture for the rest of world 2.23 2.74 2.69 1.76 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 0.43 3.38 1.67 7. Is basically unstable 0.76 1.43 2.13 ! 8. Has a high standard of living 3.02 1.21 1.50 1.21 i 9. Seems lacking in backbone 0.34 10. Is one of the world leaders in science & technology 3.10 0.85 1.61 2.21 11. Everything it produces is or high quality 3.20 2.01 2.15 1.27 2.93 ! 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy i ______ TOTAL MALES & FEMALES 30-44 ■" •] TABLE 2IE BELIEFS ABOUT EACH COUNTRY BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 45-64 BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 3.00 1.77 1.92 2. Is friendly toward other countries 2.45 2.55 1.84 3* Is a good & reliable ally of the Western world 2.30 1.90 1.85 4. Is ruled by a dictator 1.11 1.04 2.56 5. Is a source of art & culture for the rest of world 2.44 2.95 2.83 6* Is dominated by the Catholic Church 0.42 3.38 2.04 7. Is basically unstable 0.74 1.50 1.75 8. Has a high standard of living 3.04 1.37 2.36 9« Seems lacking in backbone 0.34 1.81 1.43 10. Is one of the world leaders in science & technology 3.35 1.21 1.86 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.49 2.22 2.55 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 2.23 1.18 2.92 TOTAL MALES & FEMALES 45-64 213 TABLE 22A BELIEFS ABOUT EACH COUNTRY BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: * PRIMARY EDUCATION ONLY BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1* Has a great deal to offer the world of today 2.87 1.62 2.22 2* Is friendly toward other countries 2.66 2.63 2.34 3. Is a good & reliable ally of the Western world 2.30 1.84 2.34 4. Is ruled by a dictator 1.59 1.34 2.57 5. Is a source of art & culture for the rest of world 2.67 2.88 2.98 6« Is dominated by the Catholic Church 0.66 3.35 1.96 7. Is basically unstable 0.91 1.57 1.38 8. Has a high standard of living 2.99 1.65 2.57 9« Seems lacking in backbone 0.46 1.72 1.13 10* Is one of the world leaders in science & technology 3.34 1.37 2.10 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.52 2.44 2.72 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 2.22 1.54 2.66 TOTAL PRIMARY EDUCATION 82 TABLE 22B. BELIEFS ABOUT EACH COUNTRY BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: LESS THAN 4 YEARS SECONDARY EDUCATION GERMANY ITALY FRANCE BELIEF STATEMENTS • 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 2.78 1.68 1.86 2. Is friendly toward other countries 2.43 2.61 2.09 3. Is a good & reliable ally of the Western world 2.27 2.04 2.02 4. Is ruled by a dictator 0.98 0.98 2.23 5. Is a source of art & culture for the rest of world 2.32 2.75 2.75 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 0.48 3.4S 1.90 7. Is basically unstable 0.76 1.38 1.65 8. Has a high standard of living 2.86 1.32 2.29 0.41 1.48 1 • 16 9. Seems lacking in backbone . - i 10. Is one of the world leaders in science L technology 3.11 0.98 1.67 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.18 2.06 2.29 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy j 2.14 1.26 2.57 | TOTAL LESS THAN 4 YEARS SECONDARY EDUC. j 293 i TABLE 22C BELIEFS ABOUT EACH COUNTRY BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: 4-6 YEARS SECONDARY EDUCATION BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 2.86 1.58 1.95 2* Is friendly toward other countries 2.34 2.52 1.95 3. Is a good & reliable ally of the Western world 2.16 1.80 1.79 4* Is ruled by a dictator 0.89 0.84 2.34 5. Is a source of art 6c culture for the rest of world 2.03 2.66 2.64 6» Is dominated by the Catholic Church 0.57 3.26 1.98 7. Is basically unstable 0.80 1.55 1.72 8* Has a high standard of living 3.04 1.27 2.23 9* Seems lacking in backbone 0.40 1.78 1.42 10. Is one of the world leaders in science & technology 3.13 0.88 1.86 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.24 1.91 2.25 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 1.86 1.21 2.99 TOTAL 4-6 YEARS SECONDARY EDUC. 128 TABLE 22D. BELIEFS ABOUT EACH COUNTRY BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: SOME TERTIARY EDUCATION r BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 2.95 1.78 1.84 2. Is friendly toward other countries 2.47 2.57 1.17 3. Is a good 6< reliable ally of the Western world 2.40 1.93 1.45 4. Is ruled by a dictator 0.39 0.44 2.37 5. Is a source of art & culture for the rest of world 1.92 2.89 2.67 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 0.29 3.09 1.60 | 7. Is basically unstable 0.54 1.36 1.98 8. Has a high standard of living 3.20 1.06 1.85 9. Seems lacking in backbone C. 18 1.44 1.32 10. Is one of the world leaders in science & technology 3.28 0.98 1.76 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.09 1.75 2.09 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 1.74 0.73 3.25 TOTAL SOME TERTIARY EDUC. - , I TABLE 23A. BELIEFS ABOUT EACH COUNTRY BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE GERMANS Have Have Have met friends or never met BELIEF STATEMENTS people relatives anyone 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 2.92 2.88 2.36 2. Is friendly toward other country 2.54 2.45 2.22 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 2.40 2.28 1.91 Is ruled by a dictator 0.79 0.95 1.36 5. Isa source of art and culture for the rest of the world | 2.37 2.21 2. 12 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 0.52 0.47 0. 58 7. Is basically unstable 0.84 0.72 0.75 8. Has a high standard of living 3.12 2.98 2.59 9. Seems lacking in backbone 0.32 0.34 0.71 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 3.31 3.21 2.67 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.20 3.29 2.93 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 2.02 2.10 1.65 1 BASE NUMBERS i 164 365 69 1 ------ TABLE 2 3B. BELIEFS ABOUT EACH COUNTRY BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE FRENCH Have Have Have met BELIEF STATEMENTS friends or never met people relatives anyone 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 2.25 1.88 1.80 2. Is friendly toward other country 1.93 1.84 2.18 3* Is e. good and reliable ally of the Western world 1.91 1.86 2.25 4* Is ruled by a dictator 2.41 2.33 2.25 5* Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world. 3.06 2.65 2.74 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 1.91 1.85 1.92 7. Is basically unstable 1.88 1.67 1.57 8. Has a high standard of living 2.50 2.19 2.20 9. Seems lacking in backbone 1. 16 1.22 1.32 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 1 • V 1 1.32 1.61 BASE NUMBERS 105 332 TABLE 23C BELIEFS ABOUT EACH COUNTRY BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE ITALIANS Have Have Have met friends or never met BELIEF STATEMENTS people [relatives anyone I. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 1.76 1.63 1.31 2* Is friendly toward other country 2.70 2.55 1.85 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 2.02 1.90 2.00 4. Is ruled by a dictator 0.97 0.89 1.00 5. Isa source of art and culture for the rest of the world 2.76 2.78 2.38 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 3.35 3.37 3.08 7. Is basically unstable 1 • 44 1.45 1.00 8. Has a high standard of living 1.36 1.29 1.46 9. Seems lacking in backbone 1.55 1.53 1.54 10« Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 1.10 0.97 0.92 | II. Everything it produces is of high quality 2.00 2.05 1.92 | 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 1.17 1.19 1.92 ; BASE NUMBERS 185 400 13 TABLE 24A BELIEFS ABOUT FRANCE BY DEGREE OF LIKING OF THE FRENCH Like a lot Dislike 6c Don't & Quite Don't like BELIEF STATEMENTS mind like much I* Has a great deal to offer the world of today 2.27 1.74 1.29 2. Is friendly toward other country 2.18 1.81 1.30 3* Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 2.17 1.86 1.33 4. Is ruled by a dictator 2.17 2.43 2.51 5. Isa source of art and culture for the rest of the world 2.92 2.60 2.49 5* Is dominated by the Catholic Church 1.75 1.89 2.34 7. Is basically unstable 1.48 1.67 2.32 8. Has a high standard of living 2.44 2.21 1.77 9* Seems lacking in backbone 1.03 1.29 1.80 10* Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 1.82 1.83 1.72 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 2.46 2.21 2.11 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 2.55 2.90 3.23 BASE NUMBERS 275 229 79 TABLE 24B. BELIEFS ABOUT GERMANY BY DEGREE OF LIKING OF THE GERMANS Like a lot Dislike & Don't BELIEF STATEMENTS 6c Quite Don't 1 ike mind like much 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 3.05 2.79 2.49 2. Is friendly toward other country 2.78 2.40 1.85 CO 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world j 2.56 2.21 • 4# Is ruled by a dictator 0.80 0.93 1.34 5. Isa source of art and culture for the rest of the vrorld 2.47 2.25 1.77 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 0.47 0.53 0.49 7. Is basically unstable 0.63 0.74 1.06 8. Has a high standard of living 3.19 2.90 2.67 9. Seems lacking in backbone 0.19 0.43 0.65 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 3.35 3.18 2.81 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.32 3.17 3.16 12. Often display arrogance in foreign policy 1.84 1.99 2.48 .. . i ■ i BASE NUMBERS 240 242 110 ! TABLE 24C BELIEFS ABOUT ITALY BY DEGREE OF LIKING OF THE ITALIANS Likea lot Dislike c* Don’t BELIEF STATEMENTS (x Quite Don't like mind much like - 1* Has a great deal to offer the world of today 2.16 1.55 1.23 2. Is friendly toward other country 2.97 2.54 2.21 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 2.40 1.92 1.43 4. Is ruled by a dictator 0.62 0.97 1.17 5. Is a source ot art and culture for the rest of the world 3.20 2.62 2.47 6* Is dominated by the Catholic Church 3.19 3.37 3. 54 7* Is basically unstable ', 1.21 1.34 1 • 84 3. Has a high standard of living 1.59 1.22 1.13 9. Seems lacking in backbone 1.26 1.35 2.24 30* Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 1.15 0.94 0.95 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 2.36 1.97 1.73 12. Often display.-* arrogbuwc in foreign policy 0.94 1.19 1.51 _____ ------...... ------BASE NUMBERS 197 232 1M J TABLE 2 5A * BELIEFS ABOUT FRANCE BY DEGREE OF ADMIRATION OF THE FRENCH Don't Do not Admire BELIEF STATEMENTS know admire 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 2.34 1.74 1.36 2. Is friendly toward other country 2.33 1.83 1.38 3« Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 2.26 1.89 1.33 Um Is ruled by a dictator 2.24 2.35 2.44 5. Isa source of art and culture for the rest of the world 2.95 2.66 2.44 5. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 1.91 1.85 1.87 7. Is basically unstable 1.46 1.62 2.18 8. Has a high standard of living 2.56 2.12 1.83 9. Seems lacking in backbone 0.97 1.34 1.63 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 1.94 1.83 1.46 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 2.53 2.35 1.85 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 2.56 2.84 3.14 1 BASE NUMBERS 272 178 143 1 TABLE 25B. BELIEFS ABOUT GERMANY BY DEGREE OF ADMIRATION OF THE GERMANS Don't Do not BELIEF STATEMENTS Admire know admire . 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 3.10 2.45 2.37 2. Is friendly toward other country 2.68 2.26 1.91 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world I 2.49 2.03 1.84 4. Is ruled by a dictator 0.85 0.90 1.34 5. Isa source of artend culture for the rest of the world 2.41 2.04 1.94 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 0.44 0.54 0.62 j 7. Is basically unstable 0.68 0.66 i .09 8. Has a high standard of living 3.11 2.75 2.74 9. Seems lacking in backbone 0.27 0.45 0.63 2.93 2.92 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology j 3.33 11» Everything it: produces is of high quality 3.36 3.01 3.01 2 . o4 12. Often display arrogance in foreign policy 1.86 1.92 ij BASE NUMBERS Ij 362 119 1______116 •__i TABLE 25C BELIEFS ABOUT ITALY BY DEGREE OF ADMIRATION OF THE ITALIANS Don* t Do not BELIEF STATEMENTS Admire know admire 1. Has a great deal to offer the v:orld of today 2.11 1.60 1.24 2. Is friendly toward other country 2.92 2.55 2.30 3* Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 2.29 2.01 1.56 4. Is ruled by a dictator 0.76 1.00 1.03 5* Isa source of art and culture for the rest of the world 3.15 2.57 2.53 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 3.26 3.35 3.45 7* Is basically unstable 1.13 1.29 1.82 8. Has a high standard of living 1.62 1.21 1.07 9. Seems lacking in backbone 1.23 1.33 2.05 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 1.26 0.85 0.84 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 2.45 1.93 1.67 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 1.08 1.08 1.37 EASE NUMBERS 226 141 227 TABLE 26 EVALUATION OF BELIEFS ABOUT COUNTRIES TOTAL SAMPLE & BY SEX Tota 1 Ma les Females BELIEF STATEMENTS Sample I. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 3.55 3.45 3.65 2* Is friendly toward other country 3.57 3.49 3.65 3« Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 3.30 3.15 3.45 4. Is ruled by a dictator 2.96 ■2.84 3.08 5. Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world 3.23 3.14 3.33 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church 1.62 -1.49 1.76 7. Is basically unstable 3.23 -3.08 3.39 8. Has a high standard of living 3.41 3.27 3.57 9. Seems lacking in backbone -3.11 3.05 3.17 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 3.31 3.33 3.29 II. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.44 3.34 3.53 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 2.90 2.76 3.05 ■4- BASE NUMBERS 598 305 293 TABLE 27A EVALUATION OF BELIEFS ABOUT COUNTRIES BY AGE: MALE & FEMALES 17-29 / BELIEF STATEMENTS EVALUATION 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 3.44 2. Is friendly toward other countries 3.39 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 3.10 4* Is ruled by a dictator -2.79 5. Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world 3.04 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church - 0.95 7« Is basically unstable -3.18 8« Has a high standard of living 3.20 9« Seems lacking in backbone -3.07 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 3.01 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.19 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy — 2.75 BASE NUMBERS 188 TABLE 27B. EVALUATION OF BELIEFS ABOUT COUNTRIES BY AGE: MALE 6c FEMALES 30-44 BELIEF STATEMENTS EVALUATION 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 3.54 2. Is friendly toward other countries 3.59 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western World 3.23 4. Is ruled by a dictator - 2.96 5. Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world 3.29 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church - 1.84 7. Is basically unstable -3.15 8. Has a high standard of living 3.43 9. Seems lacking in backbone -3.02 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 3.32 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.39 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -2.82 BASE NUMBERS 197 TABLE 27C. EVALUATION OF BELIEFS ABOUT CONTRIES BY AGE: MALE & FEMALES 45-64 BELIEF STATEMENTS EVALUATION 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 3.65 2. Is friendly toward other countries 3.70 3* Is a good and reliable ally of the Western World 3.54 4# Is ruled by a dictator -3.09 5. Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world 3.35 6« Is dominated by the Catholic Church -2.Cl 7« Is basically unstable -3.35 8. Has a high standard of living 3.59 9* Seems lacking in backbone -3.23 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 3.56 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.69 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -3.11 BASE NUMBERS 213 ,------Iw TABLE 28A. EVALUATION OF BELIEFS ABOUT COUNTRIES BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: PRIMARY EDUCATION ONLY BELIEF STATEMENTS EVALUATION 1» Has a great deal to offer the world of today 3.59 2. Is friendly toward other countries 3.71 3* Is a good and reliable ally of the Western World 3.77 4* Is ruled by a dictator -3.34 5* Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world 3.24 6« Is dominated by the Catholic Church -2.05 7* Is basically unstable -3.39 8. Has a high standard of living 3. 56 9. Seems lacking in backbone -3.37 10* Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 3.55 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.41 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -3.17 CO BASE NUMBERS TABLE 283. EVALUATION OF 3ELIEFS ABOUT COUNTRIES BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: LESS THAN 4 YEARS OF SECONDARY EDUCATION BELIEF STATEMENTS EVALUATION 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 3.62 2. Is friendly toward other countries 3.66 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western World 3.41 4. Is ruled by a dictator -3.05 5. Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world 3.34 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -1.64 7. Is basically unstable -3.27 8. Has a high standard of living 3.53 9. Seems lacking in backbone -3.20 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 3.41 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.53 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -2.92 BASE NUMBERS ! 293 J 1 1 TABLE 28C. EVALUATION OF BELIEFS ABOUT COUNTRIES BY DEGREE * ' OF EDUCATION: 4-6 YEARS OF SECONDARY EDUCATION i r------—---- BELIEF STATEMENTS EVALUATION 1« Has a great deal to offer the world of today 3.39 2* Is friendly toward other countries 3.41 3* Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 3.23 4* Is ruled by a dictator -2.95 5. Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world 2.99 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -1.22 7« Is basically unstable -3.23 8* Has a high standard of living 3.31 9* Seems lacking in backbone -3.02 10* Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 3.13 11* Everything it produces is of high quality 3.34 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -2.99 BASE NUMBERS 128 TABLE 28D. EVALUATION OF BELIEFS ABOUT COUNTRIES BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: SOME TERTIARY EDUCATION: BELIEF STATEMENTS EVALUATION 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 3.51 2. Is friendly toward other countries 3.38 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 2.64 4. Is ruled by a dictator -2.34 5. Is a source of art and culture for the rest of the world 3.21 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -1.74 7. Is basically unstable -2.98 8. Has a high standard of living 3.08 9. Seems lacking in backbone -2.74 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 3.03 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 3.29 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy - 2.49 BASE NUMBERS 95 4 Ituw • TABLE 29. ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1. They are good looking people 5.26 4.38 5.27 2. They often display their bad manners -5.18 -6.41 -4.23 3. They have loose moral standards -2.42 -3.71 -5.33 4. They are warm-hearted people 5.73 9.08 8.29 5. Their men seem effeminate -0.52 -2.48 -4.86 6. They are much like us „ 4.19 1.84 2.48 7. They are reliable people 8.87 6.08 6.2S 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 10.18 5.16 7.63 9. They are artistic 6.33 7.58 8.40 10 They are excitable and emotional -0.87 -2.80 -2.54 11 They are well educated 10.80 5.12 8.26 12 They are irrational people -2.78 -5.43 -4.71 13 They look dirty and untidy - 0.96 -5.11 -2.29 14 We can learn a lot from them 10.13 6.69 7.86 15 They are scientifically minded 9.46 3.56 5.69 16 They are arrogant - 8.45 -5.14 -5.08 17 They are romantic 3.23 6.57 7.16 18 They are particularly intelligent 10.69 5.95 7.80 19 They are creative people 9.23 7.84 8.82 20 They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) -6.50 -4.93 -5.79 21 They are cruel people -7.61 -3.29 -2.50 - 3.87 22 Their manners are affected and overdone -2.12 -2.95 7.49 23 They are particularly hardworking 12.05 10*55 4.95 8.51 8.7 5 24 They seem to be gay people 3.21 5.51 6.31 25 Their men make a fuss of their women folk 26 They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 11.34 7.36 6.82 27 Their women are particularly attractive 5.31 4.83 6.69 28 They are people one can trust 7.14 5.93 6.62 29 They are easily led astray by their leaders -7.85 -7.69 -6.09 30 They stick to their cvm group -3.61 -6.56 -3.47 31 They dori4t try to learn English -2.55 -6.54 -3.40 32 They arc a very desirable type of migrant 9.54 6.89 8.29 33 Theyare a threat toAustralia *s high standard of living -0.99 -3.49 -1.22 34 They fit In x?ell with the Australian way of life 8.38 5.60 7.41 35 They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live -0.78 -3.59 -1.08 SUMMATED SCORES 102.82 54.96 86.36 BASE NUMBERS 593 593 598 I______TABLE 30A ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) BY SEX: TOTAL MALES BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1. They are good looking people 5.33 4.21 5.10 2. They often display their bad manners -5.09 -6.25 -3.98 3« They have loose moral standards -2.57 -4.08 -5.32 4. They ore warm-hearted people 5.87 8.16 7.60 5* Their men seem effeminate -0.62 -2.83 -5.23 6« They are much like us 4.40 1.67 2.48 7* They are reliable people 9.43 5.50 6.23 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 9.56 3.82 7.00 9* They are artistic 6.44 7.58 8.10 10. They are excitable and emotional -0.92 -3.23 -2.88 11. They are well educated 10.76 4.92 7.89 12. They are irrational people -2.67 -5.35 -4.54 13. They look dirty and untidy -0.73 -5.00 -2.29 14. We can learn a lot from them 10.37 6.41 7.43 15. They are scientifically minded 9.70 3.78 5.96 16. They are arrogant -8.67 -5.42 -5.17 17. They are romantic 3.62 6.48 7.03 7.48 18. They are particularly intelligent 10.59 5.61 8.27 19. They are creative people 9.53 7.62 -5.09 -5.77 20. They are concei ted people (think highly of themselves) -6.53 -3.18 -2.72 21. They are cruel people -7.39 - -3.09 -3.61 22. Their manners are affected and overdone 2.02 11.70 9.54 7.26 23. They ore particularly hardworking 5.28 8.28 8.46 24. They seem to be gay people 3.17 5.35 6.26 25. Their men make a fuss of their women folk 11.03 6.75 6.40 26. They ere determined people, they have a lot of drive 5.72 4.68 6.70 27. Their women are particularly attractive 7.83 5.67 6.59 28. They are people ono can trust -7.93 -8.23 -6.35 29. They are easily led ostray by their leaders -6.41 -3.43 30. They stick to their cvm group -3.24 31. They donct try to learn English -2.23 -6.64 -2.94 32. They are a very desirable type of migrant 10.01 6.73 8.16 33. Theyare a threat toAustralia*s high standard of living -0.76 -3.74 -1.21 34. They fit in well with the Australian v?ay of life 8.84 5.30 7.18 35. They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live -0.51 -3.73 -1.01 .1 SUMMATED SCORES 107.30 45.79 81.13 BASE NUMBERS 305 305 305 « V TABLE 303. ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) BY SEX: - ’ TOTAL FEMALES BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCt . 1. They are good looking people 5.18 4.57 5.44 2. They often display their bad manners -5.27 -6.58 -4.49 3. They have loose moral standards -2.28 -3.32 -5.34 4. They are -warm-hearted people 5.58 10.03 9.01 5. Their men seem effeminate -0.41 -2.12 -4.47 6. They are much like us 3.97 2.01 2.47 7. They are reliable people 8.29 6.67 6.33 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 10.82 6.55 8.28 9. They are artistic 6.23 7.59 8.71 10 They are excitable and emotional >0.82 -2.35 -2.20 11 They are well educated 10.85 5.34 8.64 12 They are irrational people -2.89 -5.53 -4.88 13 They look dirty and untidy -1.19 -5.22 -2.29 14 We can learn a lot from them 9.87 6.99 3.30 15 They are scientifically minded 9.22 3.33 5.41 16 They are arrogant -8.21 -4.85 -5.00 17 They are romantic 2.82 6.67 7.25 8.13 18 They are particularly intelligent 10.80 6.31 8.03 9.39 19 They are creative people 8.92 20 They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) -6.47 -4.77 -5.81 21 They are cruel people -7.84 -3.40 -2.26 22 Their manners are affected and overdone -2.22 -2.81 -4.15 7.74 23 They are particularly hardworking 12.42 11.61 9.04 24 They seem to be gay people 4.61 8.75 5.68 7.38 25 Their men make a fuss of their women folk 3.26 7.99 7.26 26 They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 11.66 4.89 4.98 6.67 27 Their women are particularly attractive 6.30 6.66 28 They are people ono can trust 6.41 -7.13 -5.81 29 They are easily led astray by their leaders -7.77 -3.99 -6.72 -3.47 30 They stick to their own group -2.88 -6«44 -3.88 31 They don*t try to learn English 9.04 7.06 8.43 32 They are a very desirable type of migrant -1.24 -3.23 -1.23 33 Theyare a threat to Australia !s high standard of living 7.90 5.91 7.64 34 They fit in well with the Australian way of life -1.05 -3.44 -1.16 35 They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live i SUMMATED SCORES 93.21 64.51 91.74 BASE NUMBERS 293 293 293 TABLE 31A ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 17-29 * BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH I. They are good looking people 4.86 3.75 4.82 2* They often display their bad manners -3.93 -6.02 -3.62 3. They have loose moral standards -2.23 -3.54 -4.16 4. They are warm-hearted people 6.42 8.13 7.83 5* Their men seem effeminate -0.68 -2.25 -4.77 6» They ere much like us 4.14 1.90 2.91 7« They are reliable people 8.27 5.93 6.44 8* They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 9.57 5.34 7.46 9. They are artistic 5.08 5.96 7.07 10. They are excitable and emotional -0.89 -2.55 -2.19 II. They are well educated 10.01 5.11 8.09 12. They are irrational people -2.44 -4.46 -3.66 13. They look dirty and untidy -0.86 -5.10 -1.95 14. We can learn a lot from them 9.36 6.13 7.87 15* They are scientifically minded 7.81 2.69 4.85 16. They are arrogant -6.20 -5.10 -4.72 17. They are romantic 3.20 5.60 6.29 18. They are particularly intelligent 9.11 5.05 6.74 19. They are creative people 7.46 6.93 7.82 20. They are concei ted people (think highly of themselves) -5.61 -5.05 -5.45 21. They are cruel people -5.21 -3.06 -2.16 - 3.04 22. Their manners are affected and overdone -1.66 -2.45 7.11 23. They are particularly hardworking 10.46 10.03 8.07 8.26 24. They seem to be gay people 5.61 5.65 25. Their men make a fuss of their women folk 3.03 4.60 26. They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 10.38 8.06 6.59 27. Their women are particularly attractive 5.23 4.21 5.79 2S. They are people one can trust 7.54 5.86 6.73 29. They are easily led astray by their leaders -7.04 -6.64 -5.48 -3.05 30. They stick to their own group -3.28 -5.89 -3.38 31. They don't try to learn English -2.57 -6.37 7.41 32. They are a very desirable typo of migrant 8.36 5.83 -1.29 33. Theyare a threat toAustralia *s high standard of living -1,07 -3.16 6.60 34. They fit in well with the Australian way of life 7.29 4.79 -0.84 -3.37 -1.18 35. They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live 1 SUMMATED SCORES 98.68 48.96 82.35 BASE NUMBERS 188 188 188 i i------T ABLE 31B ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 30-44 BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1. They are good looking people 5.07 4.12 4.92 2. They often display their bad manners -5.64 -6.27 -4.07 3. They have loose moral standards -2.30 -3.44 -5.26 4. They are warm-hearted people 4.90 9.32 7.99 5. Their men seem effeminate -0.32 -2.39 -4.56 6. They are much like us 3.56 1.79 2.07 7* They are reliable people 8.72 6.18 5.95 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 9.76 5.05 7.26 9. They are artistic 6.66 7.87 8.45 10 They are excitable and emotional -0.78 -2.10 -1.94 11 They are well educated 10.47 4.91 7.58 12 They are irrational people -2.78 -5.40 -4.60 13 They look dirty and untidy -0.72 -4.80 -2.15 14 We can learn a lot from them 10.22 6.99 7.66 15 They are scientifically minded 9.43 3.18 5.13 16 They are arrogant -9.07 -4.72 — 4.73 17 They are romantic 2.91 6.47 7 • 04 18 They are particularly intelligent 10.68 5.77 7.36 19 They are creative people 9.36 8.21 9.05 20 They are concei ted people (think highly of themselves) -6.54 — 4.61 — 5.48 21 They are cruel people -8.29 -3.13 -2.38 22 Their manners are affected and overdone -2.40 -2.80 -4.02 23 They are particularly hardworking 12.18 10.27 7.29 24 They seem to be gay people 4.59 8.55 8. C 3 25 Their men make a fuss of their women folk 3.05 5.70 7.08 26 They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 11.45 7.21 7.05 27 Their women are particularly attractive 5.19 4.44 6.56 2S They are people cno can trust 6.76 5.97 6.55 29 They are easily led astray by their leaders -8.13 -8.24 - 6.08 30 They stick to their own grouo -3.79 -6.92 -3.87 31 They don9t try to learn English -2.81 -6.15 -3.55 32 They are a very desirable type of migrant 9.33 7.3o 8.44 33 Theyare a threat toAustralia*s high standard of living - 0. / 2 -3.02 -0.97 34 Tney fit in well with the Australian way of life 7.85 5.44 7.15 35 They lover the standard of the neighbourhood where they live! -0. 59 -3.13 -0.95 . .. I • SUMMA TED SCORES 97.26 57.68 34.60 BASE NUMBERS 197 197 197 4 » TABLE 31C* ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 45 * 64 BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1. They are good looking people 5.78 5.19 5.97 2. They often display their bad manners -5.85 -6.88 -4.92 3. They have loose moral standards -2.71 -4.11 -6.43 4. They ore warm-hearted people 5.88 9.68 8.97 5* Their men seem effeminate -0.56 -2.77 -5.21 6* They are much like us 4.81 1.83 2.47 7* They are reliable people 9.54 6.11 6.43 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 11.11 5.10 8.11 9* They are artistic 7.14 8.75 9.53 10. They are excitable and emotional -0.94 -3.66 -3.41 11. They are well educated 11.81 5.33 9.04 12. They are Irrational people -3.08 -6.32 -5.73 13. They look dirty and untidy -1.27 -5.40 -2.73 14. We can learn a lot from them 10.71 6.91 8.02 15* They are scientifically minded 10.96 4.68 6.95 16. They are arrogant -9.85 -5.56 -5.73 17* They are romantic 3.54 7.53 8.06 18. They are particularly intelligent 12.10 6.92 9.15 19. They are creative people ■- 10-468 8.31 9.48 -6.38 20. They are concei ted people (think highly of themselves) -7.25 -5.13 -2.91 21. They are cruel people -9.10 -3.63 -3.53 -4.A8 22. Their manners are affected and overdone -2.26 13.34 11.28 8.03 23. They are particularly hardworking 4.71 8.86 9.29 24. They seem to be gay people 3.53 6.15 7.59 25. Their men make a fuss of their women folk 12.08 6.37 6.82 26. They arc determined people, they have a lot of drive 7.59 27. Their women are particularly attractive 5*50 5.73 6.09 6.55 28. They are people one can trust 7.13 -8.10 -6.62 29. They are easily led astray by their leaders -8.31 -3.74 -6.82 -3.48 30. They stick to their ot?n group -7.06 -3.28 31. They dcn*t try to learn English -2.29 7.40 8.92 32. They are a very desirable type of migrant 10.77 -1.39 33. They are a threat to Australia *s high standard of living -1.17 -4.22 9.83 6.47 8.36 34. They fit in well with the Australian way of life -0.90 -4.21 -1.11 35. They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live SUMMATED SCORES 111.67 57.79 91.52 BASE NUMBERS 213 213 213 4 x. TABLE 32A. ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: PRIMARY EDUCATION ONLY BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1 They are good looking people 6.05 5.46 6.37 2 They often display their bad manners -6.02 -7.83 -4.77 3 They have loose moral standards -3.33 -3.71 -5.61 4 They are warm-hearted people 7.70 9.00 10.45 5 Their men seem effeminate -1.28 -3.04 -5.54 6 Tney are much like us 5.93 2.23 3.60 7 They are reliable people 9.79 6.87 7.96 8 They are all good soldiers, they can fight v/hen necessary 12.05 6.72 10.28 9 They are artistic 7.98 8.50 9.63 10 Tney are excitable and emotional -1.63 -4.96 -4.26 11 They are well educated 12.61 6.60 10.20 12 They are irrational people - 4.79 -6.98 -6.27 13 Tney look dirty and untidy - 1.44 -5.09 -2.12 14 V.’e can learn a lot from them 10.33 6.12 7.98 15 Tney are scientifically minded 10.83 5.59 7.32 16 They are arrogant -9.50 -7.65 -5.79 17 They are romantic 4.15 7.88 8.61 18 They are particularly intelligent 12.98 8.01 10.02 19 They are creative people 10.49 8.16 9.43 20 Tney are concei ted people (think highly of themselves) -7.48 -6.06 -6.70 21 They are cruel people -8.95 -5.27 - 3.04 22 Their manners are affected and overdone -2.85 - 3.80 - 3.90 9.98 23 They are particularly hardworking 13.32 12.85 10.37 24 Tney seern to be gay people 6.13 9.43 8.80 25 Their men make a fuss of their women folk 4.55 6.95 7.26 26 Tney are determined people, they have a lot of drive 11.30 7.63 S. 56 27 Tneir women are particularly attractive 6.34 6.51 6.32 8.17 28 Tney are people ono can trust 7.02 -7.96 -5.96 29 Tney are easily led astray by their leaders -8.43 -6.90 -3.77 30 They stick to their own group -4.57 -2.90 -7.54 -4.20 31 Tney dcn*t try to learn English 9.96 6.77 9.35 32 Tney are a very desirable type of migrant -1.41 33 Theyare a threat toAustralia*s high standard of living -1.26 -4.11 9.01 34 They fit in well with the Australian v,ay of life 10.51 7.32 -1.46 35 They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live -1.40 -4.15 SUMMATED SCORES 114.19 59.82 108.55 BASE NUMBERS 82 82 82 J TABLE 32 B. ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: LESS THAN 4 YEARS SECONDARY EDUC. BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1* They are good looking people 5.89 5.04 5.92 2. They often display their bad manners -5.75 -7.01 -4.49 3* They have loose moral standards -2.22 -4.19 -5.54 4* They are warm-hearted people 5.91 9.52 8.67 5* Their men seem effeminate -0.48 -2.64 -5.06 6» They ere much like us 4.24 2.00 2.64 7* They are reliable people 8.31 6.11 6.32 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 10.99 6.01 8.66 9. They are artistic 6.89 7.66 8.70 10. They are excitable and emotional -0.80 -2.29 - 2.13 11. They are well educated 10.40 5.14 8.17 12. They are irrational people -2.72 -5.41 -4.53 -2.55 13. They look dirty and untidy -1.09 -5.34 I 14. We can learn a lot from them 10.19 6.74 8.06 15* They are scientifically minded 9.67 3.49 5.78 16. They are arrogant - 8.46 - 5.32 -4.99 17* They are romantic 3.73 7.51 8.18 10.95 6.09 8.08 18. They are particularly intelligent 9.59 7.75 9.08 19. They are creative people - 20. They are conceited people (third; highly of themselves) - 6.18 5.12 -5.62 21. They are cruel people -7.25 - 3.01 -2.31 j -4.30 i 22. Their manners are affected and overdone -2.21 -3.27 11.19 8.10 ! 23. They are particularly hardworking 11.97 5.55 9.12 9.52 i 24. They seem to be gay people 3.48 6.12 7.56 I 25. Their men make a fuss of their women folk 11.84 8.42 7.38 26. They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 5.77 5.00 7.11 27. Their women are particularly attractive 7.38 6.34 6.84 28. They are people ono can trust - 7.69 -7.82 -5.57 29. They are easily led astray by their leaders -3.91 -6.80 -3.9 L 30. They stick to their own group -2.76 - 6.82 -3.49 j 31. They con*t try to learn English 9.62 7.05 8.35 i 32. They are a very desirable typo of migrant -1.27 -4.13 -1.41 j 33. Theyare a threat to Austral la’s high standard of living 8.52 5.62 7.84 j 34. They fit in well with the Australian way of life -0.74 -3.85 -1.18 | 35. They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live j ______| 107.36 53.90 93.85 ! SUMMATED SCORES i i i BASE NUMBERS 293 293 293 J i TABLE 32C. ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: 4-6 YRS. SECONDARY EDUC. BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH 1. They are good looking people . 4.25 3.03 4.34 2. They often display their bad manners -5.10 -5.91 -4.10 3. They have loose moral standards -2.46 -3.09 -5.09 4. They are warm-hearted people 4.84 8.40 7.72 5. Their men seem effeminate -0.31 -2.23 -4.49 6. They are much like us 3.62 1.48 1.88 7* They are reliable people 8.71 5.57 5.43 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 8.84 3.67 5.88 9. They are artistic 4.89 6.96 7.88 10 They are excitable and emotional -0.79 -3.05 -2.82 11 They are well educated 10.52 4.67 7.66 12 They are irrational people -2.67 -5.41 -4.79 13 They look dirty and untidy - 0.66 -5.60 -2.24 14 We can learn a lot from thorn 9.72 6.32 7.30 15 They are scientifically minded 8.63 2.84 4.82 16 They are arrogant -7.91 -4.95 - 4.90 17 They are romantic 2.16 4.98 5.64 18 They are particularly intelligent 9.56 5.03 6. / 3 19 They are creative people 8.04 7 • 44 8. 32 20 They are concei ted people (think highly of themselves) -7.20 -5.00 -6.27 21 They are cruel peoole -7.85 —3» 34 -2.44 22 eir manners are affected and overdone -1.92 -2.34 -3.43 23 They are particularly hardworking 11.49 9.16 6.06 7 ^ Q o m 24 They seem to be gay people 4 • L 1 / • DO OtUj O QA /. an 25 Their men make a fuss of their women folk Z • JZ D • Ö4 «4 • OU 26 They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 10.87 6.55 6.48 27 Their women are particularly attractive 4.59 3.77 5.65 28 They are people one can trust 6.36 5.09 5.88 29 They are easily led astray by their leaders -8.36 -7.56 -7.46 30 They stick to their cvm group -3.45 -6.77 -3.13 31 They don*t try to learn English -2.01 -6.03 -2.86 32 They are a very desirable type of migrant 8.65 6.19 7.45 33 They are a threat toAustra 11« *s high standard of living -0.72 -2.80 -1.13 34 They fit in ’..’ell with the Australian way of life 7.20 4.61 6.20 35 They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live j -0.79 -3.52 -1.02 SUMMA TED SCORES 87.41 39.58 67.93 EASE NUMBERS 128 12 8 12 8 _____ 4 * TABLE 32D. ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) BY * ' DEGREE OF EDUCATION: SOKE TERTIARY EDUC. BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANS ITALIANS FRENCH I. They ere good looking people 3.97 3.26 3.54 2. They often display their bad manners -2.79 -3.97 -3.14 3« They have loose moral standards -2.22 -3.05 -4.78 4. They are warm-hearted people 4.65 8.68 6.01 5* Their men seem effeminate -0.25 -1.86 -4.15 6* They are much like us 3.29 1.48 1.82 7* They are reliable people 10.02 5.97 5.84 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 7.86 3.17 4. 52 9* They are artistic 5.15 7.40 7.12 10. They are excitable and emotional -0.53 -2.16 -1.98 11. They are well educated 10.87 4.42 7.65 12. They are irrational people -1.37 -4.23 -3.81 13* They look dirty and untidy -0.55 -3.75 -1.72 14. We can learn a lot from them 10.32 7.53 7.85 15. They are scientifically minded 8.76 3.02 5.18 16. They are arrogant -8.22 -2.66 -5.01 17. They are romantic 2.32 4.72 4 • 84 18. They are particularly intelligent 9.45 4.99 6.47 19. They are creative people 8.64 8.41 8.61 20. They are conceited people (til irk highly of themselves) -5.71 -3.29 - 4.36 21. They are cruel people -7.24 -2.37 -2.71 -3.14 22. Their manners are affected and overdone -1.46 -2.05 23. They are particularly hardworking 11.96 8*68 5*41 7 AQ s q a 24. They seern to be gay people / • Uo 3* 7 J O i c /. A A c AO 25. Their man make a fuss of their women folk 2.1 J 4 • 04 5.17 26. They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 10.46 4.93 27. Their women are particularly attractive 4.00 4.26 5.15 28. They are people ono can trust 7.53 5.7o 5.61 29. They are easily led astray by their leaders -7.17 -7.22 -5.94 - 2.24 30. They stick to their own group -2.05 -5.27 1 31. They con*t try to learn English -2.32 -5. 52 -3.16 32. They are a very desirable type of raicrant 10.12 7.45 8.29 -0.60 33. They are a threat toAustralia*s high standard of living -0.28 -1.92 34. They fit in well with the Australian wav of life 7.71 5.4 1 6.31 -0.36 -2 .41 -0.52 j 35. They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live i i j 99.80 59.33 74.21 SUMMATED SCORES I BASE NUMBERS 95 95 « !i 4 * TABLE 33A. ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE FRENCH Have Have neve Have met BELIEF STATEMENTS friends oi met people relatives anyone 1 They are good looking people 4.82 5.12 5.86 2 They often display their bad manners -3.57 -4.26 - 4.59 3 They have loose moral standards -4.23 -5.67 -5.35 4 They are warm-hearted people 7.52 8.17 9.04 5 Their men seem effeminate -3.53 -5.07 -5.28 6 They are much like us 2.34 2.47 2.58 7 They are reliable people 7.04 6.13 6.08 8 They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 6.83 7.46 8.48 9 They are artistic 9.01 8.14 8.54 10 They are excitable and emotional -1.69 -2.40 -3.40 11 They are well educated 8.32 8.27 8.20 12 They are irrational people - 4.46 -4.77 -4.75 13 They look dirty and untidy -1.58 -2.31 -2.72 14 We can learn a lot from them 9.62 7.64 7.16 15 They are scientifically minded 5.73 5.70 5.63 -5.48 -4.82 16 They are arrogant -4.24 7.04 7.89 17 They are romantic 6.44 7.76 7.99 18 They are particularly intelligent 7.64 8.63 8.89 19 They are creative people 9.29 -5.56 -5.77 -5.9S 20 They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) -2.46 21 They are cruel people -2.18 -2.62 22 Their manners are affected and overdone -3.48 -3.97 -3.93 7.60 7.33 7.76 23 They are particularly hardv/orking 8.34 8.67 9.16 24 They seem to be gay people 6.69 6.36 7.83 25 Their men make a fuss of their women folk 6.51 6.91 6.84 26 They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 5.99 6.77 6.97 27 Their women are particularly attractive 7.27 6.49 6.48 28 They are people ono can trust -5.76 -6.24 -5.98 29 They are easily led astray by their leaders -2.37 -3.74 -3.65 30 They stick to their own group -2.79 -2.98 -4.66 31 They don’t try to learn English 8.32 8.55 7. 74 32 They are a very desirable typo of migrant -0.93 -1.05 -1.76 33 They are a threat toAustralia #s high standard of living 7.42 7.84 6.50 34 They fit in well with the Australian way of life -0.86 -0.88 -1.64 35 SUMMATED SCORES 95.51 84.24 84.65 BASE NUMBERS 105 332 161 4 TABLE 33B. ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) BY' DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE GERMANS Have Have neve: Have met BELIEF STATEMENTS friends o c met people relatives anyone 1. They are good looking people 5.24 5.23 5.43 2. They often display their bad manners -4.20 -5.61 -5.23 3. They have loose moral standards -2.32 -2.42 -2.67 4. They are warm-hearted people 6.69 5.38 5.28 5. Their men seem effeminate -0.48 -0.46 -0.91 6. They are rauch like us 4.80 3.97 3.90 7. They are reliable people 10.13 8.64 7.07 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 9.40 10.21 11.86 9. They are artistic 7.06 6.06 6.04 10 They are excitable and emotional -0.80 -0.79 -1.48 11 They are well educated 10.49 10.89 11.10 12 They are irrational people -2.84 -2.58 -3.72 13 They look dirty and untidy -0.95 -0.77 -2.01 14 We con learn a lot from them 10.71 10.32 7.75 15 They are scientifically minded 10,01 9.25 9.32 16 They are arrogant -7.89 -8.86 -7.57 17 They are romantic 3.58 3.01 3.51 18 They are particularly intelligent 10.46 10.84 10.46 19 They are creative people 9.90 8.99 8.94 20 Theyare concei ted people (thinkhighly of themselves) -6.04 -6.68 -6.62 21 They are cruel people -7.46 -7.66 -7.71 22 Their manners are affected and overdone -1.70 -2.15 -2.95 23 They are particularly hardworking 11.71 12.26 11.77 24 They seem to be gay people 5.24 4.81 5.03 2.87 25 Their men make a fuss of their women folk 3.40 3.19 10. 58 26 They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 11.54 11.39 27 Their women are particularly attractive 5.89 5.05 5.35 28 They are people one can trust 8.35 6.85 5.74 29 They are easily led astray by their leaders -7.21 -8. 16 -7.7 5 -4.04 30 They stick to their own group -3.02 -3.79 - -3.30 31 They don't try to learn English 1.68 -2.80 7.52 32 They are a very desirable type of migrant 10.21 9.62 33 Theyare a threat toAustralia *s high standard of living -0.69 -0.96 -1.83 34 They fit in well with the Australian way of life 8.25 8.62 7.41 35 They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live j -0.74 -0.69 -1.36 SUMMATED SCORES 115.04 100.20 87.72 BASE NUMBERS 164 365 69 TABLE 33C. ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE ITALIANS Have Have nevt Have met BELIEF STATEMENTS friends o: met people relative > anyone 1. They are good looking people 4.23 4.49 3.38 ' 2* They often display their bad manners -5.48 -6. 84 -6.46 3* They have loose moral standards -3.27 -3.87 -5.00 4« They are warm-hearted people 9.83 8.73 8.92 5* Their men seem effeminate -2.20 -2.55 -4.38 1.00 6# They are much like us 2.00 1.79 3.08 7. They are reliable people 7.06 5.72 8* They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 5.15 5.14 5.77 9. They are artistic 7.89 7.50 5.69 10« They are excitable and emotional -1.57 -3.43 - 0.92 11* They are well educated 5.22 5.11 4.15 12* They are irrational people -4.79 -5.69 -6.77 -7.00 13. They look dirty and untidy - 4.46 -5.34 14. We can learn a lot from them 7.60 6.36 3.85 4O • 40 J7 15. They are scientifically minded 3.55 3.61 - 4.15 16. They ore arrogant -3.94 -5.72 7.08 17. They are romantic 6.64 6.53 6.08 4.46 18. They are particularly intelligent 5.78 7.68 5.85 19. They ere creative people 8.32 20. They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) -4.97 -4.95 -3.92 -4.15 21. They are cruel people -2.72 -3.52 — 4.00 22. Their manners are affected and overdone -2.78 -2.99 9.23 23. They are particularly hardworking 10.91 10.43 8.41 6.77 24. They seem to be gay people 8.35 5.46 25. Their men make a fuss of their women folk 4.66 5.91 6.62 26. They ore determined people, they have a lot of drive 7.82 7.17 4.82 2.85 27. Their women are particularly attractive 4.98 5.65 4.77 28. They are people one can trust 6.76 -7.26 -7.94 -6.15 29. They are easily led astray by their leaders -5.91 -6.88 -5.92 30. They stick to their own croup -5.84 -6.85 -6.85 31. They dcivt try to learn English 7.59 6.59 6.23 32. They are a very desirable type of migrant -3.82 - 4.46 33. Theyare a threat toAustralia *s high standard of living -2.71 5.52 4.08 34. They fit in veil with the Australian V7ay of life 5.89 -3.99 - 4.00 35. They lover the standard of the neighbourhood where they live -2.69 48.56 27.34 SUMMATED SCORES 70.14 13 BASE NUMBERS 185 400 TABLE 34A ATTITUDE TO THE FRENCH BY DEGREE OF LIKING FOR THE FRENCH Likea lot rinn » t- Do not li? Sc Quite much 6c BELIEF STATEMENTS m i nd like Dislike 1 They are good looking people 5.71 5.25 4.14 2 They often display their bod manners -3.73 -4.21 -5.84 3 They have loose moral standards -4.71 -5.41 -7.43 4 They are warm-hearted people 9.17 7.98 6.01 5 Their men seem effeminate -4.11 -5.12 - 6.67 6 They are much like us 3.18 2.34 0.78 7 They are reliable people 7.55 5.69 3.92 8 They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 8.46 7.45 5.05 9 They are artistic 9.15 7.89 7.42 10 They are excitable and emotional -1.82 -3.38 -3.28 11 They are well educated 9.20 8.12 6.35 12 They are irrational people -4.50 -4.66 -5.41 13 They look dirty and untidy -1.60 -2.47 -4.15 14 We can learn a lot from them 9.26 7.23 5.00 4.99 15 They are scientifically minded 6.12 5.66 -7.46 16 They are arrogant -4.38 -5.19 17 They are romantic 6.88 7.59 6.57 6.03 18 They are particularly intelligent 8.36 7.95 6.90 19 They are creative people 9.51 8.66 -6.14 20 They are concei ted people (think highly of themselves) -5.66 -5.77 -2.81 -3.92 21 They are cruel people -1.87 -3.94 -4.68 22 Their manners are affected and overdone -3.55 7.39 6.24 23 They are particularly hardworking 8.10 9.18 8.66 7.68 24 They seem to be gay people 7.49 6.45 5.44 25 Their men make a fuss of their women folk 7.63 6.67 5.09 26 They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 7.36 6.42 5.38 27 Their women are particularly attractive 8.03 6.23 3.53 28 They are people orio can trust -5.61 -6.07 -7.73 29 They are easily led astray by their leaders -3.24 -3.63 -3.44 30 They stick to their cvn group -3.06 -3.63 -3.92 31 They don't try to learn English 9.30 8.10 5.66 32 They are a very desirable type of migrant -1.01 -1.19 -2.13 33 Theyare a threat toAustralia *s high standard of living 8.19 7.11 5.72 34 They fit in veil with the Australian v:ay of life -0.79 -1.14 -1.73 35 They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live SUMMATED SCORES 108.19 80.22 33.97 BASE NUMBERS 275 229 79 m TABLE 34B. ATTITUDE TO THE GERMANS . , BY DEGREE OF LIKING FOR THE GERMANS Like a lot Do not 11 Don* t BELIEF STATEMENTS & Quite much & mind like Dislike 1. They are good looking people 5.74 5.33 4.20 2. They often display their bad manners -3.77 -5.60 -7.28 3. They have loose moral standards -2.22 -2.44 - 2.66 4. They are warm-hearted people 7.22 5.30 3.57 5. Their men seem effeminate -0.27 -0.57 -0.95 6. They are much like us 5.57 3.62 2.59 7. They are reliable people 10.77 8.33 6.09 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necesj 10.69 10.07 9.27 9. They are artistic 7.21 5.99 5.42 10 They are excitable and emotional - 0.46 -1.13 -1.29 11 They are well educated 11.32 10.88 9.67 12 They are irrational people -2.20 -2.87 -3.80 13 They look dirty and untidy -0.62 -1.02 -1.56 14 We can learn a lot from them 11.40 9.62 8.64 15 They are scientifically minded 9.88 9.39 8.69 16 They are arrogant -7.42 -8.70 - 10.13 2.15 17 They are romantic 3.50 3.47 10.67 9.63 18 They are particularly intelligent 11.29 7.89 19 They are creative people 9.91 9.26 -7.09 -7.44 „ 20 Thevare conceited people (think highly of themselves) -5.47 -6.24 -7.76 -10.38 21 They are cruel people -1.68 -2.31 -2.59 22 Their manners are affected and overdone 12.74 11.70 11.62 23 They are particularly hardworking 5.83 4.67 3.78 24 They seem to be gay people 3.51 3.17 2.74 25 Their men make a fuss of their women folk 11.46 26 They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 11.43 11.21 4.06 27 Their women are particularly attractive 6.22 5.01 3.99 28 They are people one can trust 9.04 6.81 . o 00 Jj -9.04 29 They are easily led astray by their leaders -8*06 -3.76 . -4.73 30 They stick to cheir own group -3.00 -2.57 -3.75 31 They dcn*t try to learn English -2.00 9.12 7.29 32 They are a very desirable type of migrant 11.02 -0.40 -0.92 -2.49 33 They are a threat toAustralia *s high standard of living 9.67 8.26 5.90 34 They fit in vail with the Australian way of life i o £ -1.43 35 -0.74 1 1 130.15 96.34 59.13 SUMMATED SCORES j 110 BASE NUMBERS 260 242 4 i.. TABLE 35A. ATTITUDE TO THE FRENCH BY DEGREE OF ADMIRATION FOR THE FRENCH Admire a Do not Un- BELIEF STATEMENTS lot & Quit admire mucr dec ided admire 4Not at all 1. They are good looking people 5.97 5.43 3.78 2. They often display their bad manners -4.21 -3.88 -4.83 3. They have loose moral standards -4.94 -5.37 -6.14 4. They are varm-hearted people 9.53 7.81 6.50 5. Their men seem effeminate -4.27 -5.25 -5.55 6. They are rauch like us 3.35 2.06 1.40 7. They are reliable people 7.87 5.70 3.93 8. They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 8.57 7.91 5.52 9. They are artistic 9.36 7.80 7.38 10 They are excitable and emotional -2.04 -3.40 -2.70 11 They are well educated 9.24 7.76 7.17 12 They are irrational people -4.20 -5.01 -5.27 13 They look dirty and untidy - 1.99 -2.01 -3.27 14 We can learn a lot from them 9.17 7.20 6.27 4.68 15 They are scientifically minded 6.47 5.47 16 They are arrogant -4.54 -5.00 -6.31 6.66 17 They are romantic 7.52 6.97 5.94 18 They are particularly intelligent 8.96 7.63 8.52 7.45 19 They are creative people 9.72 -6.68 20 They are concei ted people (think highly of themselves) -5.22 -5.97 -3.03 21 They are cruel people -2.33 -2.38 -3.79 -4.26 22 Their manners are affected and overdone -3.71 8.79 6.87 5.83 23 They are particularly hardworking 8.99 7.34 24 They seem to be gay people 9.35 7.78 6.29 5.57 25 Their man make a fuss of their women folk 7.88 6.76 4.96 26 They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 27 Their women are particularly attractive 7.40 6.66 5.37 23 They are people one can trust 8.31 6.00 4.28 29 They are easily led astray by their leaders -5.20 -6.56 -7.17 30 They stick to their own group -3.69 -3.15 -3.45 -3.78 31 They donct try to learn English -3.33 -3.07 6.31 32 They are a very desirable type of migrant 9.37 8.19 -1.37 33 They are a threat to Australia 's high standard of living -1.22 -1.13 6.28 34 They fit in well with the Australian way of life 8.24 6.99 -1.23 35 They lover the standard of the neighbourhood where they live) -0.97 -1.05 --- ' SUMMATED SCORES 110.99 79.99 47.58 BASE NUMBERS TABLE 353 ATTITUDE TO THE GERMANS BY DEGREE OF ADMIRATION FOR THE GERMANS Admire a Do not Un- lot & Quit 0 admire muc BELIEF STATEMENTS decided admire 6c Not a t a T 1. They ere good looking people 5.57 5.12 4.47 2. They often display their bad manners -4.69 -5.17 -6.70 3. They have loose moral standards -2.27 -2.73 -2.59 4. They are warm-hearted people 6.35 5.87 3.69 5* Their iren seem effeminate -0.36 -0.70 -0.84 6* They are much like us 4.92 3.46 2.69 7. They are reliable people 10.34 7.39 5.82 8* They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 10.31 10.47 9.46 9. They are artistic 6.96 5.50 5.29 10- They are excitable and emotional -0.60 -1.48 - 1.09 11- They are well educated 11.51 9.64 9.75 12. They are irrational people *2.32 -3.08 -3.94 13* They look dirty and untidy -0.81 - 1.09 -1.28 14* We can learn a lot from them 11.09 8.73 8.49 15* They are seientifically minded 10.12 5. 38 8.48 16* They are arrogant -8.23 -7.77 -9.73 17. They are romantic 3.53 3.24 2.28 18. They are particularly intelligent 11.37 10.01 9.24 19. They are creative people 10.02 8.19 7.93 20. They are conceited people (think highly of themselves) .5.95 -6.88 -7.30 21. They are cruel people -7.21 -7.03 -9.47 22. Their manners are affected and overdone -1.89 -2.00 -2.96 11.38 23. They are particularly hardworking 12.62 10.94 3.91 24. They seem tc be gay people 5.39 4.69 2.67 25* Their men make a fuss of their women folk 3.44 3.08 11.02 26. They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 11.66 10.65 27. Their women are particularly attractive 5.70 5.25 4.21 4.57 28. They are people one can trust 8.05 6.92 -9.70 29. They are easily led astray by their leaders -7.27 -7.76 -4.54 30. They stick to their own group -3.16 -4.09 -4.00 31. They dcn*t try to learn English -2.17 -2.28 7.21 32. They are a very desirable type of migrant 10.69 8.26 -0.99 -2.43 33. Theyare a threat toAustr&lia's high standard of living -0.54 6.42 34. They fit in veil with the Australian way of life 9.17 7.85 -0.58 -0.81 -1.37 | 35. They lower the standard of the neichbourhoed where they live \ j | i I 60.54 SUMMATED SCORES 120.76 89.78 i BASE NUMBERS 362 119 116 TABLE 35C ATTITUDE TC THE ITALIANS BY DEGREE OF ADMIRATION FOR THE ITALLANS Admire a Do not Un- BELIEF STATEMENTS lot & Quit * admire much 'decided admire * Not at a 11 1 They are good looking people 5.56 4.52 3.17 2 They often display their bad manners -5.05 -5.62 -8.28 3 They have loose moral standards -3.02 -3.57 -4.46 4 They are warm-hearted people 10.67 8.61 7.77 5 Their men seem effeminate -1.50 -2.89 -3.20 6 They are much like us 2.83 1.59 1.01 7 They are reliable people 8.54 5.94 3.68 8 They are all good soldiers, they can fight when necessary 5.90 5.59 4.13 9 They are artistic 9.28 6.63 6.57 10 They are excitable and emotional -1.89 -2.85 -3.69 11 They are well educated 6.27 4.92 4.13 12 They are irrational people -4.63 -5.23 -6.32 13 They look dirty and untidy -3.51 -5,11 -6.71 4.44 14 We can learn a lot fron them 9.17 6.43 15 They are scientifically minded 4.40 3.53 2.73 -6.80 16 They are arrogant -3.96 -4.30 6.06 17 They are romantic 7.16 6.45 4.55 18 They are particularly intelligent 7.51 5.77 6.89 6.57 19 They are creative people 9.72 20 Theyare concei ted people (think highly of themselves) -4.40 -4.62 -5.57 21 They are cruel people -2.20 -3.14 -4.43 22 Their manners are affected and overdone -2.61 -2.77 -3.39 23 They are particularly hardworking 11.46 10.33 9.79 24 They seem to be gay people 9.63 8.22 7.56 4.79 25 Their men make a fuss of their women folk 6.27 5.36 6.48 26 They are determined people, they have a lot of drive 8.58 6.79 3.66 27 Their women are particularly attractive 6.10 4.78 3.77 28 They are people one can trust S.65 5.43 -7.28 -6.88 -8.47 29 They are easily led astray by their leaders -5.38 -6.37 -7.87 30 They stick to their own group -5.48 -6.14 -7.82 31 They don*t try to learn English 9.74 6.89 4.09 32 They are a very desirable type of migrant 33 Theyare a threat to Australia *s high standard of living -1.97 -2.78 -5.43 34 They fit in well with the Australian way of life 7.73 5.60 3.49 35 They lower the standard of the neighbourhood where they live -2.39 -3.08 -5.09 SUMMATED SCORES 99.90 54.92 10.91 I EASE NUMBERS 226 227 TABLE 36 ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) TOWARDS COUNTRIES TOTAL SAMPLE BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 10.21 6.07 6.88 2. Is friendly toward other countries 8.79 9.32 7.05 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 7.46 6.55 6.61 4. Is ruled by a dictator -2.94 -2.70 -7.02 5. Is a source of art & culture for the rest of the world 7.52 9.21 9.03 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -0.74 - 5.44 -2.69 7. Is basically unstable -2.37 -4.55 -5.39 8. Has a high standard of living ' * 10.13 4.51 7.69 9* Seems lacking in backbone -1.19 -4.87 -3.86 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 10.58 3.44 5.96 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 11.14 7.17 8.11 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -6.06 -3.63 -8.19 SUMMA TED SCORES 52.53 25.06 24.18 BASE NUMBERS 598 598 593 « TABLE 37A. ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) TOWARDS COUNTRIES BY SEX: TOTAL MALES —------ BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1* Has a great deal to offer the world of today 10.43 5.44 6.38 2. Is friendly tovzard other countries 9.07 9.05 6.36 3# Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 7.58 5.65 5.66 4. Is ruled by a dictator -2.29 -2.34 -6.87 5* Isa sourceof art & culture for the rest of the world 7.24 8.72 8.26 6* Is dominated by the Catholic Church -0.30 -4.73 -2.23 7« Is basically unstable -1.94 -4.90 -5.61 7.24 8. Has a high standard of living 10.07 4 • 24 -3.98 9* Seems lacking in backbone -0.96 -5.83 10* Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 11.33 3.74 6.52 11.11 6.36 7.65 11* Everything it produces is of high quality « an 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy - j.UJ SUMMA TED SCORE:1 56.12 22.55 21.08 BASE NUMBERS 305 305 305 TABLE 373. ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) TOWARDS COUNTRIES BY SEX: TOTAL FEMALES GERMANY ITALY FRANCE belief statements' 1* Has a great deal to offer the world of today 9.98 6.72 7.40 2. Is friendly toward other countries 8.51 9.59 7.78 3. Is a good anc reliable ally of the Western world 7.33 7.49 7.59 4* Is ruled by a dictator -3.62 -3.08 -7.IS 5. Isa sourceof art &. culture for the rest of the world 7.81 9.71 9.83 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -1.20 -6.18 -3.17 7. Is basically unstable -2.82 -4.19 -5.15 8. Has a high standard of living 10.20 4.79 8.15 9. Seems lacking in backbone -1.42 -3.87 -3.74 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 9.80 3.12 5.37 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 11.16 7.81 3.59 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy • 6.94 -4.23 - 8• 08 SUMMA TED SCORES 48.79 27,68 27.39 BASE NUMBERS 293 293 293 _ . _ _ TABLE 37C ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) TOWARDS COUNTRIES BY AGE: MALESFEMALES 17-29 BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1« Has a great deal to offer the world of today 9.62 5.79 7.03 2* Is friendly toward other countries 8.47 8.61 7.30 3* Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 7.18 6.06 6.54 4* Is ruled by a dictator -3.51 -3.03 -6.04 5. Isa sourceof art & culture for the rest of the world 6.31 8.14 8.39 6* Is dominated by the Catholic Church -0.63 -3.08 -1.34 7* Is basically unstable -2.38 -4.33 -5.15 8* Has a high standard of living 8.97 4.36 7.12 9* Seems lacking in backbone -1.50 -4.19 -3.28 10* Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 9.36 2.96 5.70 11* Everything it produces is of high quality 9.45 6.07 7.06 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -4.60 -3.22 -6.76 SUMMA TED SCORE' 46.74 24.09 26.57 1 BASE NUMBERS 188 188 188 TABLE 37D. ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) TOWARDS COUNTRIES BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 30-44 1’———------ GERMANY ITALY FRANCE belief statements CO 1* Has a great deal to offer the world of today 9.82 5.79 • 2. Is friendly tovzard other countries 8.78 9.82 7.04 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 7.26 6.86 6.59 4* Is ruled by a dictator -2.02 -1.87 -6.87 5. Isa sourceof art c* culture for the rest of the world 7.51 9.27 9.09 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -0.79 -6.26 -3.02 7* Is basically unstable -2.37 -4.36 -5.22 8. Has a high standard of living 10.39 4.18 7.29 9. Seems lacking in backbone -1.02 -4.49 -3.69 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 10.26 2.83 5.40 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 10.85 7.04 7.58 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -6.22 -3.69 -8.52 SUMMATED SCORES 52.45 25.12 22.15 BASE NUMBERS 197 197 | 197 TABLE 37E ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) TOWARDS COUNTRIES BY AGE: MALES & FEMALES 45-64 BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 11.08 6.57 7.13 2. Is friendly toward other countries 9.09 9.47 6.85 3* Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 7.89 6.69 6.68 4* Is ruled by a dictator -3.29 -3.19 -8.03 5. Is a source of art & culture for the rest of world 8.60 10.09 9.52 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -0.80 -6.77 -3.59 7* Is basically unstable -2.36 -4.39 -5.75 8. Has a high standard of living 10.92 4.94 8.56 9* Seems lacking in backbone -1.06 -5.83 -4.54 19« Is one of the world leaders in science &. technology 11.96 4.42 6.70 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 12.89 8.26 9.52 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -7.19 -3.93 -9.15 SUMMATED SCORES 57.73 25.83 23.90 BASE NUMBERS 213 213 213 TABLE 38A ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) TOWARDS COUNTIES BY DECREE OF EDUCATION: PRIMARY EDUC. ONLY BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 10.56 5.99 8.10- 2* Is friendly toward other countries 9.91 9.98 8.80 3* Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 8.61 7.05 8.98 4. Is ruled by a dictator -5.20 -4.20 -8.45 5* Isa source of art & culture for the rest of the world 9.32 9.60 9.61 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -1.51 -6.51 -2.93 7* Is basically unstable -3.05 -4.91 -4.57 8* Has a high standard of living 10.61 5.90 9.35 9* Seems lacking in backbone -1.45 -5.78 -3.90 10* Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 11.88 4.91 7.40 11* Everything it produces is of high quality 12.04 8.74 9.59 12* Often displays arrogance in foreign policy 07.17 -5.17 -8.43 SUMMA TED SCORE; 54.55 25.60 33.55 BASE NUMBERS 82 82 82 TABLE 38B. ATTITUDE SCORES (3ELIEF BY EVALUATION) TOWARDS COUNTRIES BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: LESS THAN 4 YRS. SEC. GERMANY ITALY FRANCE belief statements' 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 10.28 6.29 6.84 2. Is friendly toward other countries 8.86 9.63 7.71 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 7.71 7.15 7.03 4* Is ruled by e dictator -3.15 -2.90 -7.03 5. Isa source of art & culture for the rest of the world 8.02 9.47 9.37 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -0.74 -5.65 -3.04 7* Is basically unstable -2.39 -4.45 -5.32 8. Has a high standard of living 10.15 4.68 8.03 9. Seems lacking in backbone -1.34 -4.70 -3.68 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 10.71 3.33 5.78 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 11.25 7.35 8.23 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -6.25 -3.69 -7.55 SUMMA TED SCORES 53.11 26.51 26.37 ■ BASE NUMBERS 293 293 293 TABLE 38C ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) TOWARDS COUNTRIES BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: 4-6 YRS. SEC. EDUC. BELIEF STATEMENTS GERMANY ITALY FRANCE 1* Has a great deal to offer the vorld of today 9.63 5.48 6.56 2* Is friendly toward other countries 8.07 8.61 6.63 3# Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 6.74 5.72 5.76 4« Is ruled by a dictator -2.38 -2.47 -6.85 5. Isa sourceof art & culture for the rest of the world 6.27 8.27 8.13 6» Is dominated by the Catholic Church -0.33 - 3.76 - 1 • 7 3 7« Is basically unstable -2.67 -5.12 -5.69 8* Has a high standard of living 10.02 4.18 7.30 9* Seems lacking in backbone -1.18 -5.45 -4.37 10* Is one of Che world leaders in science and technology < 9.90 2.99 5.94 11* Everything it produces is of high quality 10.80 6.60 7.63 12* Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -6.04 -3.72 -9.28 SUMMA TED SCORE! 48.83 20.33 20.03 BASE NUMBERS 128 128 128 TABLE 38D. ATTITUDE SCORES (BELIEF BY EVALUATION) TOWARDS COUNTRIES BY DEGREE OF EDUCATION: SOME TERTIARY EDUC. GERMANY ITALY FRANCE B ELIEF S TA TEMEN TS" 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 10.44 6.24 6.41 2. Is friendly toward other countries 8.59 8.73 4.08 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 6.66 5.39 4 • 40 4. Is ruled by a dictator -1.12 -1.13 -5.93 5. Isa sourceof art 6: culture for the rest of the world 6.13 9.32 S. 67 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -0.63 - 6.16 -2.72 7. Is basically unstable -1.31 -3.80 -5.89 8. Has a high standard of living 9.81 3.23 5.73 9. Seems lacking in backbone -0.49 -3.86 -3.73 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 9.99 3.09 5.26 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 10.44 6.02 7.12 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -4.53 - 1.98 -8.49 SUMMATED SCORES 53.93 25.09 14.96 BASE NUMBERS 95 95 95 4 TABLE 39A. ATTITUDE TOWARDS COUNTRIES BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE * ' OF THE FRENCH Have Have neve: Have met friends c met BELIEF STATEMENTS people relative; anyone 1, Has a great deal to offer the world of today 8.09 6.65 6.58 2* Is friendly toward other countries 6*98. 6.60 8.04 3* Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 5.62 6.51 7.44 4. Is ruled by a dictator -7.50 -6.80 -7.16 5. Isa sourceof art & culture for the rest of the world 10.50 8.69 8.75 6« Is dominated by the Catholic Church -3.16 -2.43 -2.92 7. Is basically unstable -5.82 -5.39 -5.11 8. Has a high standard of living 8.33 7. 50 7.66 9. Seems lacking in backbone -3.53 -3.75 -4.32 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 6.21 6.06 5.57 11* Everything it produces is of high quality 8.15 8.38 7.51 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -8.03 -8.82 - 7 • 01 1 SUMMA TED SCORE! 25.84 23.20 25.03 RASE NUMBERS 105 332 161 TABLE 39B. ATTITUDE TOWARD COUNTRIES BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE GERMANS v------Have Have neve; Have met zriends oi met: people BELIEF STATEMENTS' relative« anvone 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 10.40 10.46 8.39 2. Is friendly toward other countries 9.16 8.73 8.28 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 7.66 7.56 6.43 4« Is ruled by a dictator -2.51 -2.85 -4.46 5. Isa sourceof art & culture for the rest of the world 8.12 7.35 7.00 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -0.59 -0.78 -0.91 7. Is basically unstable -2.49 -2.34 -2.25 8. Has a high standard of living 11.01 9.98 8.83 9. Seems lacking in backbone -0.93 -1.08 -2.33 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 11.06 10.61 9.29 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 11.42 11.24 9.91 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -5.72 -6.43 -4.83 SUMMATED SCORES 56.59 52.45 43.30 BASE NUMBERS 164 365 69* TABLE 39C ATTITUDE TOWARDS COUNTRIES BY DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE ITALIANS I riave Have never Have met friends oj met BELIEF STATEMENTS people relatives people 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 6.49 5.92 4.46 2. Is friendly toward other countries 9.80 9.18 6.46 3« Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 6.43 6.60 6.54 4. Is ruled by a dictator -2.84 -2.64 -2.62 5. Is a source of art & culture for the rest of the world i 8.99 9.35 8.00 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -5.53 -5.38 -6.08 7. Is basically unstable -4.32 -4.70 -3.15 8. Has a high standard of living 4.69 4.40 5.31 9. Seems lacking in backbone -4.70 -4.94 -5.31 10* Is one of the world leaders in Science and technology 3.61 3.38 2.62 11« Everything it produces is of high quality 7.00 7.27 6.38 12* Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -3.58 -3.58 -5.77 SUMM\TED SCORES 26.04 24.86 16.84 BASE NUMBERS 185 400 13 TABLE 40A ATTITUDE TO FRANCE \ EY DEGREE OF LIKING FOR THE FRENCH Like a lot Do not lik Don't BELIEF STATEMENTS & much 6c mind Quite 1 ik Dislike 1* Has a great deal to offer the world of today 8.13 6.27 4.48 2. Is friendly toward other countries 7.80 7.02 4.66 3* Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 7.45 6.46 4.43 4* Is ruled by a dictator -6.92 -7.16 -6.80 5. Isa source of art & culture for the rest of the world 9.87 8.44 7.53 6* Is dominated by the Catholic Church -2.62 -2.60 -3.13 7« Is basically unstable -4.71 -5.52 -6.89 8« Has a high standard of living 8.40 7.63 5.72 9« Seems lacking in backbone -3.20 -4.21 -5.06 10» Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 6.11 6.26 5.28 11« Everything it produces is of high quality 8.56 7.79 7.43 12* Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -7.38 -8.71 -9.20 SUMMA TED SCORE' 31.49 21.67 8.45 BASE NUMBERS 275 229 79 TABLE 40B. ATTITUDE TO GERMANY BY DEGREE OF LIKING FOR THE GERMANS Rkea lot Do not 11.Yi Don' t & much 6c mind belief statements (}uite like Dislike 1 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 10.97 10.08 8.95 \ 2. Is friendly toward other countries 10.12 8.67 6.25 | 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 8.60 7.12 5.87 | 4e Is ruled by a dictator -2.56 -2.86 -3.96 j 5. Isa source of art & culture for the rest of the world 8.12 7.73 5.87 | 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -0.71 -0.83 -0.63 | 7. Is basically unstable -2.07 -2.40 -2.97 1 8. Has a high standard of living 10.80 10.05 3.95 i 9. Seeins lacking in backbone -0.53 - 1.47 -1.83 ! 10. Is one of the v?orld leaders in science and technology 11.30 10.72 8.82 t 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 11.64 11.01 10.43 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -5.59 -6.08 -6.90 j ! t SUMMA TED SCORES 60.09 51.74 28.80 1 BASE NUMBERS 240 242 110 TABLE 40C ATTITUDE TO ITALY BY DEGREE OF LIKING FOR'THE ITALIANS Likea lot Jo not like Don’t & much 1, Has a great deal to offer the world of today 7.96 5.58 4.45 2. Is friendly toward other countries 10.83 9.23 / • 68 • 3* Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 7.80 6.60 4.98 4* Is ruled by a dictator -1.83 -2.83 -3.50 5* Isa source of art & culture for the rest of the world 11.24 8. 56 7.73 6* Is dominated by the Catholic Church -4.08 - 6.45 - 5.65 -5.97 7* Is basically unstable -3.54 -4.38 3.74 8« Has a high standard of living 5.44 4.28 - 6 • 84 9* Seems lacking in backbone -3.93 -4.23 10* Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 3.75 3.32 3.23 11* Everything it produces is of high quality 8.34 7.02 5.99 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -2.85 -3.73 -4.37 SUMMA TED SCORE;a 39.13 22.97 11.47 BASE NUMBERS 197 232 167 TABLE 40D. ATTITUDE TO FRANCE BY DEGREE OF ADMIRATION FOR THE FRENCH Admire a Do not Un- lot&Quit e admire rnuci decided belief statements admire & Not at a I! 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 8.38 6.35 4.68 2. Is friendly toward other countries 8.38 6.78 4.87 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 7.79 6.61 4.34 4. Is ruled by a dictator -7.15 -7.19 -6.55 5. Isa source of art & culture for the rest of the world 10.17 8.46 / • 4 8 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -3.05 -2.81 - 1.95 7. Is basically unstable -4.64 -5.29 -6,90 8. Has a high standard of living 9.04 7.o5 5.85 9. Seems lacking in backbone -3.14 -4.20 -4.81 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology ! 6.71 6.07 4. 56 11« Everything it produces is of high quality 8.81 8.31 6.47 12« Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -7.49 -S. 17 -9.52 — — SUMMA TED SCORES 33.31 22.07 8.52 BASE NUMBERS 272 178 143 TABLE 40E ATTITUDE TO GERMANY BY DEGREE OF ADMIRATION FOR THE GERMANS Admire a Do not Un lot 6cQuil admire muci BELIEF STATEMENTS decided admire 6c Not at a I 1* Has a great deal to offer the v?orld of today 11.25 8.90 8.24 2. Is friendly toward other countries 9.68 8.39 6.47 3» Is a good and reliable ally of the Western v.’orld 8.09 7.42 5.51 4* Is ruled by a dictator -2.49 -2.83 -4.47 5# Isa source of art & culture for the rest of the world 8.14 6.82 6.33 6* Is dominated by the Catholic Church -0.71 -0.98 -0.60 7* Is basically unstable -2.15 -2.27 -3.15 8« Has a high standard of living 10.69 9.56 8.93 9* Seems lacking in backbone -0.83 - 1.56 - i • 92 10* Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 11.22 9.73 9.43 11* Everything it produces is of high quality 11.78 10.48 9.77 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -5.48 - 6.29 -7.53 SUMMA TED SCORE:3 59.19 47.37 37.01 BASE NUMBERS 362 119 | 116 TABLE 40F. ATTITUDE TO ITALY BY DEGREE OF ADMIRATION FOR THE ITALIANS V------Admire a Do not Un lot&Quit€ admire muc decided BELIEF STATEMENTS admire S. Not at a 1 ■ 1. Has a great deal to offer the world of today 7.69 5.88 4.43 2. Is friendly toward other countries 10.73 9.39 7.92 3. Is a good and reliable ally of the Western world 7.56 6.99 5.24 4* Is ruled by a dictator -2.19 -2.79 -3.15 5. Isa source of art & culture for the rest of the world 10.72 8.52 8.16 6. Is dominated by the Catholic Church -4.82 -5.57 -5.84 7. Is basically unstable -3.51 -3.99 - 5.87 8. Has a high standard of living 5.77 4.15 3.46 9. Seems lacking in backbone -3.94 -4.27 -6.15 10. Is one of the world leaders in science and technology 4.15 3.07 2 • 84 11. Everything it produces is of high quality 8.62 7.09 5. / 4 ro CO CO . 12. Often displays arrogance in foreign policy -3.33 1 - 3.97 SUMMA TED SCORES 37.45 24.99 12.81 BASE NUMBERS 226 141 227 TABLE 41. STATISTICAL TESTS OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE 'STRENGTH OF BELIEF ASSOCIATION’ RATINGS t Values Italian/ German/ French/ German French Italian 1. Good looking 7.09 -51 n.s. 6.71 2. Bad manners 3.96 4.12 8.35 3. Loose morals 5.01 11.52 6.25 4. Warm hearted 13-73 10.89 2.98 5. Effeminate 12.57 24.96 11.16 6. Like us 14.81 9.96 4.89 7. Reliable 10.66 9.83 .93 n.s 8.. Good soldiers 28.37 17.04 10.81 9. Artistic 7.83 13.10 4.94 1 0. Excitable 37.05 31 .73 5.01 11 . Well educated 30.54 1 4.38 1 5.51 12. Irrational 13.20 10.09 3-22 13. Dirty or urtidy 20.23 7.70 12.31 14- Learn a. lot 14.47 10.26 4.43 15- Scientifically- minded 34.80 22.75 10.36 -16.. Arrogant 13.29 13.85 .18 n.s 17.. Romantic 23.97 29.51 4.67 18,. Intelligent 25-27 16.03 0.04 19-. Creative 6.C3 1.48 n .‘s . 4.99 20.. Conceited 8.50 4.48 4.23 21 . Cruel 14.60 18.36 3-12 22 . Affected 5.24 10.68 5.32 23. Hardworking 6.74 20.43 11.89 24- Gay 18.92 21 . 50 2.49 2 5-. Fuss women 14-00 25-22 8.67 26. Determined 20.52 24.72 1.96 n.s 27. Attractive women 3.12 9.46 12.91 28. Trust them 4.50 2.01 2.67 29- Easily led .99 n.s. 7.04 6.27 30- Stick to own 20.26 .14 n.s. 21.54 31 - No English 15.73 3.60 12.30 32- Desirable migrant 11 .95 5.66 6.79 33- Threat to standard 11 .41 1.64 n.s. 10.25 34- Fit well 12.24 4.86 7 • 82 35- Lower standards 13-64 2.13 11 .83 * n.s. at the .OS level.