A STUDY OF READING INTERESTS Thu-is For the Degree a§ M. A. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Hal Richard Taylor I960 ' ""“‘""°“'°““°'°‘"’-'Of¢2vrnoo..v A STUDY OF READING INTERESTS BY Hal Richard Taylor AN ABSTRACT Submitted to the College of Communication Arts of Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of General Communication Arts 1960 (’5) 3 / . , ~¥ Approved /&ztt[/j Jig/($51.» “was Hal Richard Taylor The purpose of this study was to determine the differ- ences and similarities in reading interests among farm and urban people. In addition, the study compared 1959 reading interests of farm men, urban men, and urban women with those from a study conducted in 1931 by Douglas Naples and Ralph W. Tyler. A theoretical formulation was based upon work of other investigators in the areas of interests and reading interests and in rural and urban living. The previous studies indicated that interests are largely influenced by sex, environment, vocation, and education; that farm living has been rapidly changing toward a more urban-like atmosphere. These hypotheses were developed from the theoretical foundation: Reading interests of... l. ...farm and urban men of 1959 and of 1931 will be more closely related than the reading interests of farm and urban men of 1931. 2. ...urban men of 1959 and of 1931 will be more closely related than the reading interests of farm men of 1959 and 1931. 3. ...1931 urban men and farm men will be more closely related than reading interests of l931'urban men and women; those of 1959 farm and urban women will be more closely related than those of 1959 farm (or urban) men and women; and those of Hal Richard Taylor 1959 farm and urban men will be more closely related than those of 1959 farm (or urban) men and women. 4. ...college educated farm men (or women) and college educated urban men (or women) will be more closely related than the reading interest relationship of non-college educated farm (or urban) men (or women) and college educated farm (or urban) men (or women). The Iaples-Tyler Reading Interest Check List of 115 topics was mailed to four groups. Response and groups were as shown below with average age and education: lst 2d 3d Non- Av. Wave wave Wave Total Col. Col. Age Farm males 26 28 6 60 26 34 41 Farm females 20 19 28 57 20 37 48 Urban males 19 11 18 48 34 14 41 urban females 50 10 60 23 37 52 Topic scores were organized by deciles to correspond with 1931 data. Correlation coefficients were computed to determine relationships of the various groups. The 1959 study tended to verify the 1931 findings that sex is a predominant factor in determining reading interests. The hypotheses to that effect were supported and were signif- icant to the 5 percent level and 1 percent level with regard to women groups versus urban men and women groups as well as farm men and women groups; to the 5 percent level only with regard to men groups versus urban men and women groups. The 1959 study also indicated that farm men and urban men are more alike today than in 1931 and that the difference as hypothesized was significant to the 5 percent level. Hal Richard Taylor None of the other hypotheses were supported. There seemed to be an interaction between variables of environment and education which prevented making conclusive statements with regard to the more important of the two variables. Topical changes since 1931 which were observed most significant in 1959 included: 1. An increase of interest in "successful business men and women,“ and in'bollege and higher education," by urban men. 2. An increase of interest in "U. S. foreign affairs" by farm men. I 3. A greater similarity among men in what they least like to read about than in what they most like to read about. 4. An increase in interest among urban women of the topic on "elementary and secondary education." 5. A general stability of topic choice as compared with the contradictory choices made in 1931. It was also observed that there was a greater similarity of interest in all topics among women than among men in 1959. (No data were available for a 1931 farm women group.) A STUDY OF READING INTERESTS BY Hal Richard Taylor A THESIS Submitted to the College of Communication Arts Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of General Communication Arts 1960 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This study was begun and completed under the sponsorship of the National Project in Agricultural Communications at Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. Sincere appreciation is extended to that organization and to its executive director, Mr. Stanley Andrews, for his encouragement toward the undertaking of the study. Special thanks also are extended to the members of my reviewing committee-~Dr. Paul J. Deutschmann, Dr. Malcolm S. MacLean, Jr., and Dr. John M. Parsey--who offered patient and stimulating advice throughout the planning of the study and the preparation of the report. Special appreciation also is offered to Dr. George Klare of Ohio University and Mr. F. C. Byrnes, associate director of NPAC, who first stimulated the investigation of reading interests by questioning and outlining of possible reading interests at a series of training programs in written commun- ication. To the mail room staff of the Information Service at Michigan State University and to Mr. Earl C. Richardson, agricultural editor of the Information Service, are due special thanks for assistance in obtaining subjects for the study. And, because without her full cooperation the whole venture would have failed, to Mrs. Maribeth Gaskin, secretary for the National Project, must go the expression of most sincere ii appreciation for her assistance both in typing the final manuscript and in tabulating returns. Finally, thanks must go to the efforts of my wife, Margaret, for her unfailing encouragement and the varying patience of a young lady, Helen, to whom Christmas, 1959, was very short indeed. - iii - TABLE OF CONTENTS AC KNOW MENTS o o o o o o o o o o o o o L 18 T OF TABLES o o e o o o o o o o o o 0 Chapter I , INTRODUCTION 0 o o o o o o o 0 Why be Concerned What We Need to Know About Reading Interests Reading Interests in a Communication Context An Example of Message Selection Comparing Interests in American Society The Organization of the Report Chapter II, REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . Changes in Farming--193O to Present The "New" Society Interests, Reading Interests, and Related Concepts Chapter III, THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT AND PROJECT TASKS. Chapter IV, METHOD OF PROCEDURE . . . . . Definitions of Groups Sampling Plan Method of Survey The Check List Statistical Procedure Chapter V, PRESENTATION AND ANALYSES OF DATA Topical Differences and Similarities Summary of Data Using Division Comparisons Chapter VI, DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS . Summary APPENDIX A, MATERIAL SENT TO GROUPS . . . APPENDIX B, SUMMARY OF DECILE RATINGS . . B IBLImRAPHY O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 iv Page 11 12 41 46 54 7O 86 96 103 Table 1. 2. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. LIST OF TABLES Response by Waves and Education . . . . . . . . . . Correlations Between Reading-Interest Scores of Gr Cups 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Hypotheses and Significance Level of Differences. . Additional Correlations to Compare Education and Environment 0 O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Significance Levels of Differences, Education and EnVironmentoeoooeoeooeeeoeoooee Topics Which Both Urban Men and Farm Men Placed in the FirSt peeile in 1959 Q Q . Q Q . Q Q Q Q Q Q Q . Variations in Most Interesting Topics, Men Only . . Topics Which Both Urban Men and Farm Men Placed in the Tenth Decile in 1959. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Variations in Least Interesting Topics, Men Only... Topics Which Both urban Men and Farm Men Placed in the FirSt Dec11e in 1931. Q 0 O O O Q 0 O O O O O 0 Variations in Most Interesting Topics, Men Only . . Topics Which Both Urban Men and Farm Men Placed in the Tenth Decile in 1931. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Variations in Least Interesting Topics. . . . . . . Topics Which Both Urban Women and Farm Women Placed in the First Decile in 1959 . . . . . . . . . . . . Variations in.Most Interesting Topics, Women Only . Topics Which Both Urban Women and Farm Women Placed in the Tenth Decile in 1959 , , , , , , , , , , , , Variations in Least Interesting Topics, Women Only. Page 50 55 56 58 59 6O 61 61 62 63 63 64 64 64 65 65 66 18. 19. 20. 21. Summary of Topic Deciles by Divisions, General Groups only. 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 68 Correlation Coefficients by Divisions, General GroupSODIYooooeooooooooococo...69 Level of Significance of Difference Among Correlation Coefficients by Divisions of General Groups. . . . . 69 Reorganization of Groups by Correlation Coefficients, with Regard to Sex, Environment, and Education . . . 72 vi Chapter I INTRODUCTION The problem of this study is one of simple question. Is there any difference today in general reading interests between farm and urban people? Or, to be more positive: how similar are reading interests today among farm and urban people? What are those differences and similarities? Has there been any change in the past 30 years? Why 23 Concerned? The establishment of some differences and similarities should be valuable to the communication specialist in that knowing them would provide him with accurate knowledge of handicaps or communication barriers his program might face as he dealt with each group. More important, such knowledge would give him some insight into attitudes underlying opinions on public and other issues, possibly even on the agency pro- viding the information. Even more importantly, knowledge of reading interests may lead to the development of further studies to determine why there are certain interests among people and why they make choices among various interests. If such answers were available, the information worker, or any mass communicator, should be able to establish a firm base upon which to conduct his program. Practically, he would better know when he was providing material desired _ 1 _ - 2 - by readers. He could thereby increase the chances that his messages would be read. There is another reason for some concern about read- ing interests. It has much broader implications than the immediate problems of the individual mass communicator. It is based on the assumption that most people read some- thing. The amount of published reading material is tremen- dous and apparently so never-ending that certainly people should not want for something to read. Probably the character of that material-—the approach or subject-matter content itself--has much to do with popular attitudes to- ward current social problems. A general opinion in the United States holds that the degree to which we are informed about current events and values of importance to our society helps to determine the extent of our protection against those who might have de— signs against us. Since reading may either enlighten or confuse, the character of reading may be of considerable importance to our society. To know the present character of reading would seem initial to attempts to change or continue it. What We Need £2_Know About Reading Interests The term "interest" here is defined to imply a con- cept relating to the factors within an indivdual which attract or repel him to or from subjects or activities within his environment. "Reading interests" are intended to relate to those topics or subjects to which a person is - 3 - attracted or repelled when he reads or thinks of reading. In this study, the construct of reading interest shall be defined operationally, so to speak, in terms of an instru- ment known as the Waples-Tyler Reading Interest Check List.1 Character of reading may or may not be a reflection of reading interests; at least the two terms as used here are not meant to be synonomous. But surely there is some relation between them. We already have indications that reading interests are not necessarily a direct measure of actual reading, although sex differences in interest often carry over into actual reading. We also have reliable evidence that people are most likely to read topics which they say are of highest interest. However, nothing of any recency examines the possibil- ity that extensive changes in agriculture, or the increased mobility of American society, might also have affected reading interests. Nor do we have any concrete evidence concerning the extent or change in reading interests, if any, no matter what the cause. Reading Interests ig_§_Communication Context Materials which people read deal with an infinite num- ber of topics or subjects. American people in particular have a vast network of communication industries at their disposal. Many of those industries are dependent for Ifioflaplesflaouglas, anarnalph WTTyler794)fW_hit People Want to Read About. Chicago: American Public Library AssoETation and‘the University of Chicago Press, 1931. _ 4 _ support upon the very population they serve. Let us examine the situation in more detail. Communication in its simplest nature requires at least three elements--a source, a message, and a destination or receiver. The source usually is thought of as an individual --speaking, writing, gesturing, drawings-or as an organi- zation. An organization serving as a source might be a newspaper, publishing company, television or radio station, or any kind of agency preparing and releasing messages on some specific subject or activity. The message may be thought of as a signal or code capable of being interpreted meaningfully as information about or of something or some- one. Inked words on paper, a wave of the hand, a semaphore device for trains or between ships, impulses in an electri- cal current all are messages. The destination or receiver also may be an individual or the member of a group or organization. Here we shall think of the receiver as the reader. He decodes and interprets the message or messages he receives on printed matter. One other element is involved in the communication process--that of channel. Some theorists define channel in terms of the sense modalities-—sight, sound, touch, smell, and taste, i.e., spoken messages use sound waves as the primary channel, giving the receiver words to hear and decode. Printed messages rely on light waves as the pri- mary channel, offering inked words for the receiver to see and to decode. The receiver, in either case, then may en- code his interpretation. - 5 - Sometimes the receiver creates a new message and may direct it back to the original source, in a return process called feedback. Feedback tells the original source how his message is being interpreted. Mass communicators often find it difficult to obtain feedback, because they have many receivers, each of whom is decoding, interpreting, and encoding. As the concept of communication is studied, it becomes evident that such a simplified explanation cannot always be considered the total process, by any means. To the reader, the world possibly exists of a confusion of subjects or activities. Contained among the subjects or activities also are various sources of information which are constantly sending messages somewhere. The reader has learned that in order to exist in his own environment with a minimum of frustration, he must be selective toward the messages he receives. He has learned to be selective toward his per- ceptions of subjects or activities about which he may even transmit his own messages to himself. Thus, he has also learned to relate sources with certain subjects and activi- ties. In terms of an individual receiver, messages do not always appear in printed form, as has already been sugges- ted. That which is transmitted is not the event, but an abstraction of an event converted in some way to trans- missible form--a code. The mere fact that different trans- missible forms exist in various codes-~sound codes, visible _ 6 - symbols other than printed words and those which impinge upon the other senses sometimes in combination with those channeled through sound and sight waves--all serves to add to the total confusion. Always, a reader--or receiver-- ,must select out of this confusion that which he wishes to receive. One who selects abstractions from the confusion of the world makes his decisions on the basis of how well they will fulfill need satisfactions and provide problem solutions. Sometimes there are groups, agencies, and enterprises who make those selections for receivers, i.e., a newspaper or wire service with correspondents located throughout the world. These selection operations--whether made by individuals for themselves or by groups for other groups or individuals --are each developed in a complexity of varying degrees with regard to selection but common in the source—message- channel-receiver flow. People tend to select and rely more on those messages which they interpret and perceive as most valuable to their individual well-being. Perhaps as people verify those perceptions, or through experience create new ones, they strongly reinforce or build their interests around certain subjects and concepts. Perhaps people also create similar perceptions and interest in the agencies or sources which select and transmit those messages. Likewise, perhaps the agencies themselves then begin to depend upon the receivers they serve. Rightly or wrongly, - 7 _ they create their own perceptions using feedback from their receivers. Rightly or wrongly, the agency or original source perceives needs and values of the receivers and the flow begins once again. An Example of Message Selection A brief look at information available to farm people may serve as an example of how intensively many subjects are treated by information sources. Doing so also may begin to show how agriculture has changed in recent years, a fact pertinent to the study. Perhaps because America in past years contained primarily an agrarian society, a significant governmental emphasis was placed on attempts at technological progress in agriculture. Included was the cooperative arrangement between the federal government and the land-grant educational system to support major experimental efforts in agricultural research and to report that research through extension services. Farm people have been receiving the results of that research in many ways --through publications, the press, radio and television, meet- ings, demonstrations, and so on and on. In large measure, agricultural research agencies and services have provided information primarily on innovations that would advance farm productivity. But as the nation's farmers improved their knowledge through the years, some rather spectacular changes came about. Efficient farms became truly industrial organizations in themselves in their approach to investment, technology, and production. A problem of over-production brought surplus commodities, and numerous _ 3 - unworkable plans arose--some of which still attempt to sta- bilize agriculture. In recent years agencies such as the extension services of each state, in order to broaden the scope and outlook of farm people--and perhaps in efforts to temper emphasis on production--began to issue information considerably different than that of, say, 10 or 15 years ago. Thus, a vast amount of information now exists in printed form about public policy, marketing, urban-rural relations and family relations. This is not to say that all farmers have shown interest in new ideas about farming nor about the recent emphasis on broadening farm-family living. On the contrary, many farmers seem willing to farm and live in accord with traditional methods. Others accept new practices only when their friends and associates have shown that they think the practices are worthwhile. In other words, they may not read at all the thousands of bulletins and news articles available to them. Comparing Interests in_American Society Such characteristics do not seem confined to farm people alone. In fact, because of mobility patterns since World War II--movements of farm people to urban areas, urban to suburban, suburban to farm, urban to farm, farm to suburban, etc.--and because of the consequent changes in values, shopping habits, and growing knowledge of the environment surrounding a mobile society, it even becomes difficult to pinpoint any distinct and different character- istics. On almost any issue there are people who are vastly - 9 _ uninformed, despite sincerely organized efforts to provide interesting and accurate information. Most people seem to be alike in the ways they obtain or do not obtain information. They perceive messages and sources in terms of needs and problem solutions related to their roles in groups to which they belong. But people react differently to messages and the information contained in accord with prior experiences, attitudes, and interests. Few Americans are so isolated today as to be untouched by some source of information. Sources, in this sense, re- fer to other people in similar groups or social systems and to all the mass media used by government agencies, public organizations, and private enterprises. It does not seem accurate to say that farm people are as limited in access to media today as is generally supposed.. Instead the differences in accessibility lie within media rather than within receivers. For instance, general newscasts, con- sumer-education programs, farm shows, or any topic presented on radio and television can occur only at definite times. Seldom are there rebroadcasts. Access is limited to actual time of programming. The same scheduling limitation would hold for meetings, tours, field days, demonstrations, and office calls. Thus, to compare interests of urban people with those of rural people, it would be preferable to examine similar sources or methods. Also, it would be preferable to compare people in similar roles. For instance, a farmer nowadays, _ 10 - especially if he is successful, has a broad store of knowl- edge and skills necessary to manage a complex business. He would not compare with a clerk in a store, with a machine- tool operator in a factory. He might more logically compare with a store manager, a factory president, or a superinten- dent of a school system. These individuals would have sim- ilar economic or managerial responsibilities. True, there probably would be vocational differences, no matter how similar the responsibilities. A cattle grower might prefer to read of feeding practices in the Farm Journal, whereas a pharmacist probably would prefer an article boosting prescription sales in Modern Pharmacy. But in choosing printed media, as in this example, with which to make comparisons, each individual would use the same channel, sight, from which to secure his information. Also, printed media may be read and re-read at the readers' convenience, suggesting similar advantages and disadvantages of media accessibility. Hence, the decision in this study is to examine reading interests, rather than to study inter- ests relating to those media with less accessibility. The Organization of the Report There are six major chapters that follow. They describe in more detail the materials developed and used for the study, the procedures used, the data gathered, and the con- clusions reached. Chapter II summarizes previous research related to reading interests. It also attempts to demonstrate some _ 11 - information that is related to changes in farmers' interest patterns. Chapter III describes the preliminary steps of the study--the theoretical development and formulation of theoretical hypotheses. Chapter IV outlines the method of procedure, the use of the Waples-Tyler Reading Check List as the measurement instrument, and the sampling plan. Chapter V presents an analysis of data collected and the resulting correlations obtained. Chapter VI summarizes the findings of the study and gives the general conclusions and implications with regard to previous interest studies and with regard to changing agricultural programs. The appendix presents detailed data not contained in the body of this report and describes the materials used in carrying out the study. The bibliography lists research and resource materials used in the preparation of this re- port and as background for the study. Chapter II REVIEW 93 LITERATURE A number of studies (34, 84, 91, 94, 95) indicate that an individual's interests are high when topics suggested to him relate to his vocation. Strong (84) says this is espe- cially so when vocational interest is defined not as a single choice but as the sum total of many interests that bear in any way upon an occupational career. But what happens if the vocation undergoes changes within itself? Strong says that interests are not static. They change from time to time. Let us examine, then, the nature of changes that have taken place in agriculture in order better to determine if there might be changes in farmer-interest patterns. Then let us examine some of the literature in the fields of interests, reading interests, and related concepts which may be pertinent to the problem at hand. Changes in Farming--193O to Present Most U. S. city dwellers know in a general way that the hayseed stereotype of the farmer is a bit out of date. For few Americans could have stood silently by during the past 30 years and have failed to notice the spectacular ways agriculture has changed and production has improved. - 12 - _ 13 _ Burck (13) says that the average U. S. farm worker is 110 percent more productive than he was 25 years ago. As a result, despite the fact that there are 37 percent fewer farm workers, putting in fgwgr_hours, U. S. farm production is 54 percent more than 25 years ago. Census figures of 1950 indicate that only 13.5 percent of the nation's popu- lation lived on farms, as against 25 percent in 1930. Those ,farm people produce 54 percent more products than farm people did 25 years ago (13). Total farm output rose from $22.6 billion in 1930 to $34.7 billion in 1953, creating a rise in average net income for each farmer from $361 to $2,268 in 1951 or 259 percent. Average factory employee income rose 166 percent in the same period. Of course, averages do not tell a complete story-—about 40 percent of the farms grossed more than $2,500 a year in 1950. many, many unproductive areas and farmers bring down average figures, but the average is still high. From 1930 to 1953, average farm capital investment in land and equipment increased 65 percent. The two million farms that grossed $2,500 a year or more had an average investment per worker of more than $16,000. Many corn-belt family farms had an investment per worker exceeding $50,000 (13). The new farmers of whom Burck writes--highly mechanized, capitalized, and specialized--are only one part of the total farm population. Stabilizing production and the agricultural economy for both those people and the less productive farmers has created no small problem for American society. Similarly - 14 _ the differences between farm and urban income increases have led to criticisms of agricultural subsidizing and thoughts of unfair government treatment to other groups of society (13). Agriculturists are quite aware of agricultural changes and the criticisms of the rest of American society. McCormick (59) lists seven problems most frequently talked about as a result of concern: farm income, farm prices, efficiency, freedom, the family farm, increasing or at least maintain- ing the farm population and the number of farms, and increas- ing farm products. Perhaps the striking rise in productivity has intensified those problems, for surely they have long been with us. Burck (13) says that productivity began to rise in the early 1940's at 4 percent a year or nearly double the rate between 1920 and 1940. Even during World War II, when there were 10 percent fewer men on farms, American civilians ate 12 percent better than 1935—1939. After the war, improved breeds, fertilizer, seeds, and feed coupled with machines and better management prac— tices brought astounding outputs per acre. Kreitlow (48) writes, "...just as surely as production increased and surpluses arose, farming as_a way of life became lost and became a business." So also may have begun a change in social attitudes about farming. Spaulding (8) discusses trends in agriculture and sees them as closely related to the economic institution of the gesellschaft integration, indicative of the disintegration of the traditional rural community. _ 15 _ Kreitlow (48) lists a number of trends and organizes eight as related most closely to home and family: "1. Less parental control....“ Here he says movement is to-a shared or democratic control rather than strong patriarchal or matriarchal control. "2. Increased activities outside the home...." Today there also is a tendency for each member of the family to go his own way in search of satisfying activities rather than to rely on the old notion that activities should center under one roof with all members of the family. "3. Increasing numbers of impersonal relationships ...." Environmental conditions which are the same as those factors which made for a decrease in personal relations in city family life create such relationships. For example, the family is no longer a self-sufficient productive unit; its buying leads to impersonal and business-like relation- ships between any member of the family and a store clerk. "4. Increased availability of_leisure time...." There are less chores because of mechanization. It doesn't take youngsters as long to go to and from school as it once did. Farmers and members of their families may use extra time for more production, to go to town more often, or for recreation. "5. Acceptance of urban standards...." This has been brought on by increasing contacts between rural and urban people, by mass media. Often instead of examining the value of urban standards, rural people accept them and assume that they are desirable. - 16 - "6. Modern farm homes...." Electricity has brought better food preservation methods, plumbing, lighting, radios and television sets, central heating, and everything generally found in an urban home. Farm homes, newly built, have been smaller in size and more similar to urban homes in construction and design. "7. Decreased numbers of persons in the farm home...." In addition to the decreasing size of the individual farm family-~despite increases in birth rates-~now there is a separation of the greater family into separate units, i.e., son and his wife no longer live with the parents. Now there is more work available in the villages and cities. Village and city work has helped reduce the number of extra family members who once went back to the farm when there was no other place to go. And the fact that there is less need for large numbers of farm laborers undoubtedly has influenced decisions to go elsewhere. "8. Decrease in_the practice of folk arts and skills ....". This trend or change has been brought on especially by the decrease in size of families and by the ability now to enjoy other recreation. Kreitlow also suggests five trends that are related to the social organization of the total society. Included are: "1. Change in the composition of the population...." The average age has been increasing and today farm groups- are just as mobile as urban groups. As a result, rural living now has a degree of instability it previously had not known. - 17 - “2. Rising standards gf_1iving...." Urban families may set the pace, but farm families probably have improved their living standards more since 1940 than any other group in our society. At least their rising incomes could have provided means for improving their standards of living. "3. Decline of neighboring [sic] in the local setting ....". Visiting among farm neighbors declined especially during the period of rapid change in transportation and communication. At the same time people changed their reasons for contacting others--once location and common work needs determined and perhaps limited contacts; now interests may be more important. Interests also may be broader since mobility is greater. (If we aren't inter— ested in the family at the neighboring farm, we'll just hop in the car and drive on down the road until we find someone who does interest us.) "4. Increased emphasis on organizations...." Farm people probably have as many, if not more, clubs to join as any group. Also, in comparison with the rural past, farm people now participate more. They take an active part in governmental units, i.e., school district, town, county, and even state organizations. They also work frequently in church and adult education groups and are often members of special commodity groups. "5. Greater interdependence between rural and urban people....9 Kreitlow says interdependence is brought on mainly by specialization. By producing more for the market instead of for the cellar, farm pe0ple require certain - 13 _ commodities which only urban people can provide. And by providing rural people with goods, merchants come to rely on them for their own support. Such are the trends in agriculture which lead to con- siderable concern among farmers and farm groups, agricultural agencies and governmental policy makers. Largely the concern carries political implications. As Spaulding (80) points out, "...for their money, farm people characteristically rely on the sale of perishable products on a market over which they have no control since they are neither high nor stably established within the power structure of the indus- trial-commercial institution." Spaulding continues: Economic and governmental institutions "... are functionally interrelated and it is in terms of them that agriculture is most thoroughly in- volved with the industrial-commercial gesselschaft integration. However, the stability of the govern- ment institution is greater than that of the economic institution for the agricultural population. Hence, in working for greater economic stability, on which their levels of living and position in the power structure of the system's economic institution de- pend, the farm population has utilized the govern- mental institution to obtain commercial support of agriculture, for the position farmers have achieved in their involvement in the industrial- commercial gesellschaft integration is a tenuous one, dependent upon cash income and credit, and the control of these is seated above them in the overlapping power structure roles of the gesell- schaft governmental and economic institutions." (p. 221) As the traditional rural community breaks down, what- ever the politics of the farm problem--if all farm problems can be spoken of as one problem--the local farm leader also undoubtedly will undergo a change in position status, pres- tige, social role, and social values. That is, he will - 19 _ change--almost evaporate--unless he can make the transition from the former gemeinschaft structure to gesellschaft structure. Unfortunately, not all farmers have the capital, the education, the skills, and the abilities to make the transition. Simply put, we have larger farms, fewer farms, and fewer farmers today because of the heterogeneity of the farm population. Some individuals have been able to keep pace with technical and political changes. Some have not. Morally, it appears necessary to help those people who have not kept pace. But as Lionberger (53) suggests, the tragic side of attempts to help them is that, by and large, low income farmers have indicated that they have not felt a need for the services offered by government agencies. He concludes that agencies responsible for chan- neling information to low income farmers might well consider making better use of channels that appear to be in operation. Unless they do something at least, Burck's prediction may become a reality: "...the transformation of every genuine farmer into a highly capitalized, highly productive, highly specialized, prosperous professional entrepreneur." Unfor- tunately, Burck's prediction supposes even further changes in farming than we have had to date. Additional changes are not to be labeled bad, but such a movement cannot help but create changes elsewhere in the social system which would require consideration and adjustment. "Pertinent in this respect," Spaulding says, "is the labor movement,’ which reflects, as does the 'farmers' movement,‘ the on- _ 20 - going adjustment to the gesellschaft integration of the industrial-commercial way of life." The "New" Society Today, then, we see a farm population rapidly becom— ing a part of a mass audience, which some writers (1, 4, 22, 23, 28, 51, 66) indicate already includes no such entity as the farmer. Nelson (66) and Anderson (4, 5) see the attitudinal and value-system differences attributed to rural and urban people also diminishing. Loomis and Beegle (55) predict that the general values of rural and urban people will merge and "...contact with people with disturbing and unpopular ideas“ will result in little or no difference between farm and urban residents in regard to tolerance. They point to present attitudes toward strikes, organized labor, wages, and the socialization of industry--wherein farm people side with management generally--but also recall how the farmers have aligned with laboring interests in national and state elections.- Green (36) maintains that despite suggestions to the contrary, the older society had less cohesiveness. Family and village groups may have been more intimate, but prob— lems were defined by individuals or primary groups, and their solution was sought by individuals or primary groups. Now, in modern society, distant points and peoples are brought within formal contact through bureaucratic organ- ization and communication devices. Once, despite the lack of formal integration, the smaller groups were united by moral concensus, and the ideas, values, and economic - 21 _ activities of one locality differed very little from those of others. Now, interests, loyalties, identification, and attitudes probably tend to splinter according to age group, occupation, region, and social class. The influence of communication media upon people today, whether rural or urban, receives considerable mention by sociologists (l, 7, 22, 23, 41, 51, 55, 61, 62, 79). Loomis and Beegle (55) say about 25-30 percent of the adult popu- lation reads one or more books a month; 45-50 percent sees a motion picture once every two weeks or oftener; 60-70 percent reads one or more magazines more or less regularly; about 85-90 percent reads one or more newspapers regularly; about 90-95 percent listens to the radio 15 minutes a day (this was in 1950, before widespread ownership of television sets). McEvoy (61) reports that in Indiana surveys, news— papers had at least one reader in 92 percent of the families contacted; radio reached at least one person in 71 percent of the families; television reached 78 percent. His returns were mainly from middle class urban families. They gener- ally received two or three different newspapers, three magazines (for families that received any magazines), and had at least one person who read, listened to or watched one or more of the media that came into the home. As for purely rural--or partly rural--sources, Loomis and Beegle (55) report weekly newspapers published in 8,812 towns and villages in 1952. Copp, et a1, (23) found that a categorization of information sources among farm people _ 22 _ was a difficult task, since most sources involved "...both a medium and a sender of communication." Some researchers, as COpp (22, 23), Beal, 33 El (7), and Lionberger (53) appear to worry about farmers' eval- uation of the effect of different media on their operations. Other studies, such as those by Longstaff and Laybourn (56), Lorge (57), Miller (63), and Schramm and Ludwig (79) Show similar worries about urban receivers-~or any receiver, rural or urban, for that matter. They seem to slight the suggestions of Hyman and Sheatsley (41) that people are all similar; that they merely react differently to infor— mation according to their prior experiences, attitudes, and interests; and that people fall into two extreme groups: the hard core of chronic "know-nothings" and the "interested" people who acquire the moSt information. Fliegel (28) may have touched on this concept in his study about aspirations of low-income farmers and their performance and potential for change. He found that there was a significant relationship between aspiration and family income from nonfarm sourCes. Aspiration was related to orientation toward farming as an occupation, with those high in aspiration tending to reject farming. But he con- cluded that if those who are farm oriented are not high in aspiration, they are not likely to enlarge or develop their farms so as to increase income. Fliegel's findings appear significantly related to those of Hyman and Sheatsley when we first study Strong's (85) notion: _ 23 _ "If a man has the ability and the want to acquire an interest, he has the want and there is nothing remarkable in the fact that interest emerges, since interest is supposed to develop when one is successfully satisfying his needs." (pp. 10-11) Perhaps then knowledge of interests would lead to pre- dictions of farm orientation. If agencies concerned with helping people adjust to agriculture's changes could develop people's interests into high aspirations, the agencies might create more satisfactory objectives and goals which could be implemented toward more effective social adjustment. Interests, Reading Interests, and Related Concepts "Interests" already have been defined to imply the factors within an individual which attract or repel him to or from subjects or activities within his environment. Berdie (10) explains several criteria employed to define interests: attention, process of choice, persistence, success, differential remembering, set or predisposition, emotions or feelings. He also describes the dimensions of interests as "extensity," or spatial quality as an attribute of sensation; "intensity," or degree of strength; and "duration," or the tendency to last in time. Strong (85) calls an interest simply a response of liking; an aversion is a response of disliking. In tests conducted by Strong (85) the relationship of interests to attitudes seemed close indeed, at least insofar as his measurements are concerned. For a simple interest test of "like, indifferent, and dislike" simply becomes an attitude test when changed to "agree-disagree." _ 24 - Educators have studied interests for many years, primarily as a basis on which to develop curricula that will train students for their vocation (19, 29). Evidence from the use of most interest tests bears out the conclusion that interests are primarily of environmental origin; that they appear to have a chance relationship to abilities; that they measure pleasurable associations in social life; that the number, kind, and complexity of one's interests are determined by his training; and that the slight differ- ences found particularly by Strong (84), between men of 25 1 make it clear that interests are not and 55 years of age particularly affected by years of activity in a given occupation. Research in reading interests discloses similarities. Here, "reading interests" have been defined as the same factors involved in "interests" except that they are related to reading or thinking of reading. In other words, reading interests constitute those topics a person likes or dis- likes to read about. For 30 years, William S. Gray (33) has included reviews of studies about reading interests in his summaries of read- ing investigations for the Elementary School Journal and for the Journal of Educational Research. The task has not been a small one. McCullough (60) totaled Gray's summaries in ‘iTfiorndike (88) dispfites the age theory however. He studied shifts of interests with age by asking respondents, ages 23 to 40, to estimate strength of tendencies of them- selves at age 12 and at the time. Although he concluded that interests do change with age, it may be possible to question the ability of respondents to recall their interests to age 12. _ 25 _ her own review of reading research for three years, i.e., from July 1, 1953 through June 30, 1956, Gray reported 291 reading investigations._ McCullough also noted other reviews of research, i.e., a count of 760 pieces of research from 1945 through 1952 that did not include 135 items on reading instruction or 129 items on the psychology of reading. Obviously studies on reading do not always include studies of interest. For example, among Gray's review of research for July 1, 1956, to June 30, 1957, are really only two major studies of reader interest. One had to do with a study of preferences of magazines and radio commen- tators among college students. The other, by MacLain and .11 Pinna (58), showed how‘distance from news events affected interest. Broadly speaking, the other studies related to what might be called general interests, i.e., what students like to paint or draw, predicting occupations from wearing apparel, and analyzing grades of students by subjects liked or disliked. In 1931 Waples and Tyler (94) undertook to study "what people want to read about" by classifying under 117 head- ings the topics appearing in contemporary magazines over a 10-year period. They excluded four types of material: pure fiction, humorous writing, historical subjects, and subjects addressed primarily to vocational groups. They exposed their list to specific groups of indivi- duals, asking each person to indicate his relative interest in each topic. They obtained returns from about 5000 people _ 25 - who represented 13 major groups. Most of the people inter- viewed had not attended college. Major findings were first, that all groups of adults express genuine interest in reading about matters of real importance; second, people like to read about themselves; and third, two topics, international attitudes and problems and personal hygiene, were subjects of universal high inter- est. Self-improvement and laws and legislation were of near-universal, high interest. Here are the most interesting topics, as revealed by the study: To non-college men: Laws and legislation (common sense of legal procedure) Citizenship (individual responsibilities toward improvement of government and social conditions) International attitudes (what other nations think of this country and of each other) Personal hygiene (simple medical discussions, as in press columns) Interesting places in the U. S. (entertaining travel sketches) Adult education (opportunities to learn more about useful and interesting subjects) To non-college women: Prevention and treatment of specific ills (first aid) Personal hygiene (as above) Self improvement (ways of overcoming social, voca- tional, and personal deficiencies) The use and abuse of reading (elementary guides to useful reading) Successful marriage (conditions of and how they may be secured) Adult education (as above) The study showed some interesting contrasts when Waples and Tyler tested a group of Vermont farmers and villagers. _ 27 - Most Preferred Successful business men and women Citizenship The next war Preparedness Peace movements Prices and costs of living Personal hygiene Plant life Rural problems Interesting places in the U. S. Religion and the world today The use and abuse of reading Most Avoided Actors and actresses Royalty and social leaders U. S. foreign affairs Foreign government and politics Mining and metal industries Trades and manufacturing Comments on marriage and divorce Eugenics and birth control Attitudes--men versus women Writers and writing Arts and art crafts It is interesting to note the preferences for "citi- zenship," the "next war," "preparedness," and "peace move- ments" as opposed to the avoided topics of "U. S. foreign affairs," and "foreign governments and politics.“ Those avoided topics seem to be the very ingredients of war and peace o Similarly, there was a preference for "prices and costs of living," yet people avoided two topics key to the issue: manufacturing." "mining and metal industries," and "trades and The Waples and Tyler study failed to reveal any rela- tionship between reading interest and actual reading. It really was not intended to do that anyway, although the questionnaire did contain space for listings of recently- read books. Also the contradictions noted above may be partially explained by the Parry and Crossley study (71) showing that invalidity often follows social pressures, in this case the depression. Also, the Waples-Tyler work did not give much information about the Vermont farm people studied, admittedly unnecessary at the time. _ 23 _ Few studies even today relate directly to interests among agriculture; even fewer relate to reading interests of farm people. The major effort, as already noted, seems to be directed toward measuring the influence of reading upon farmers. Studies show an evaluative concern for past agency programs, but often give little thought to the possi- bility that attitudes, interests, and so forth may well have had more influence than the reading effects being evaluated. In fact, sometimes there is little or no evidence that people even read the agricultural matter, much less became influenced by it. But a few studies do have a bearing upon reading inter- ests--especially useful for comparisons of rural-urban values, availability, and considerations made by sources to provide interesting information. For instance: Anderson (4, 5) in his investigations of values in rural living, disclosed opinions of rural life among rural and urban people that are similar. ‘A study by the American Association of Land- Grant Colleges and Universities and the Fund for Adult Education (2) pointed to the few differences in availability of all mass media between rural and urban segments of our population. Availability varies, of course, by area, but the urban-oriented person frequently overlooks the rural magazines and periodicals, since most other media are urban centered. (A fuller description of printed media available to farm people is described by Loomis and Beegle (55) and has been discussed earlier.) _ 29 _ The land-grant report outlined an attempt to obtain from college information people a view of mass media efforts to disseminate information to rural people. Responses were rarely unqualified but typically contained evaluative judg- ments, i.e. considerable pessimism regarding the effective- ness of printed media in adoption of new practices; opinions reflecting more confidence in personal contacts. A number of the publicists thought that if mass media were to be effective in promoting social objectives, their use was contingent upon three conditions: first, monopolizing the media and neutralizing counter social objectives; second, using the mass media to analyze basic attitudes; and third, supplementing mass media with face-to-face contacts. Such answers correspond closely with reports of Katz and Lazarsfeld (46). Although placing some confidence in written materials, college information specialists emphasized a "balanced program," defined to specify attempts to use all media available to them rather than rely on only one or two. Two even more practical studies about effects, based on availability are those of Carpenter (20) and Irvine (42). Carpenter uncovered attitudinal factors brought on by for- mat, shape and size, and length of publications. Irvine emphasized importance of educational level of farmers, urging that materials be prepared to meet the abilities of people in the South, thereby allowing readers to develop wider interests and skills. - 3o - Johnson and Haver (45) found that barely 1 percent of extension publications and 2 percent of experiment station materials dealt with new technology. They wondered how to increase output per man in farming in order to keep up with advancing industrial wage rates and decided that the solution lay in new technology and in economic adjustment to new technology. But they found indications that economic adjust- ment within technologies and skills now known to individual farmers probably would not do the job. Farmers apparently have this feeling too; Johnson and Haver investigated in seven states and found that only 18 percent of the infor- mation which 1075 farmers would use in operating farms for profit dealt with new technology. The problem then seemed to be in definitions of "new technology," for Johnson and Haver concluded that there should be new emphasis on new technology--at least on labor-saving technology, especially in handling livestock, feeds, livestock products and wastes, and fruits and vegetables. Lionberger's findings (53 and 54) on diffusion of farm information closely parallel Gray and Rogers conclusions (35)--to be discussed later--that social role is a basic determiner of reading patterns. A number of individuals and groups apply the social role theory. Gunlogson (37) says: "There are many indications that the farmer is not only aware of the multiplying developments in agriculture but that he is searching more dili- gently for information about new things and prac- tices and how to apply them on his farm. The information sources that can best serve in this capacity will become increasingly valuable to the farmer. _ 31 _ "There seems to be a growing interrelation- ship between information sources, and between information and contact. A farmer may read about something in a paper or in manufacturers' litera- ture, then go to the county agent or a neighboring farmer for further and more localized information." (13. 9) And, as Printers' Ink (27) urged advertisers so recently: "Prestige is an important motivating factor in a farmer's decision to buy machinery. Thus, a manufacturer of milking machines assumed that its market lay among farmers with herds of 15 cows and up. However, the Farm Research Insti- tute of Champaign, Illinois, quickly established the fact that many farmers with only 8 to 12 cows wanted to have milking machines as a status sym- bol.... the farmer is responsive to advertising that gives him information, even semi-technical and detailed information, about the complicated products on which he has come to rely." (p. 102) Copp (23) suggested that if information is accessible, failure to adopt might be related either to indifference to the media or failure to exploit the medkifor farm infor- mation. He considered that this failure is demonstrated by farmers' evaluation of the effect of different media on their operations, saying: "only two-fifths felt college bulletins had made a difference." _Although Copp (22, 23) primarily discussed adoption of farm practices, he offers an insight, as we have already discussed, into a possible means for creating information of interest to farm readers. Some further comments are appropriate here. Copp says that adoption seems to be better influenced not by promotion of recommended practices but through obtaining changes in an operator's personality orientation. If it becomes impossible to change personality orientations, then "...the agricultural educator will be _ 32 _ forced to conduct his teaching in terms of the operator's A frame of reference.V If that approach were applied to written material, then there might be some correlation between the mature reader described by Gray and Rogers and information thought to be interesting and useful to agri- cultural people. It could be that rural readers are more mature than we have thought. Before jumping to any definite conclusions, however, caution is advisable. Hyman (40) demonstrated effectively the fact that people do not always answer questions in ways that give a true picture of their behavior. Such caution also is applicable to studies of reading interest. For instance, outside the field of agriculture, Carnovsky (16) studied the relationship of reading interest to actual reading. Specifically, purpose and scope of his study was to determine (a) what subjects students (at the University of Chicago) were interested in reading; (b) effect of sex in differentiating reading interests; (0) year-to-year changes; (d) what class differences were evident; (e) how students compared in different divisions of the university; (f) effect of intelligence on reading interests; (g) effect of scholarship; and (h) effect of reading habits. Carnovsky's assumption was that such factors as adver- tising, readability, and accessibility had a general influ- ence on reading. His analysis showed low correlations between interest and actual reading. His evidence, with respect to reading, was more suggestive than conclusive. _ 33 _ Therefore he felt that interest alone does not furnish an adequate guide to what people read. Other factors did intervene, however: knowledge of material to be read, accessibility, readability, and author- ity of the authors. Sex differences in interest also appeared stable and perhaps may be considered significant. These factors are all verified by other studies, especially, Waples (90, 92), Nafziger (64), and Johnson (44). Carnovsky's study considered non-fictional material in book form. His sample was limited to students at the University of Chicago. One might consider that the reading reported was limited to too few titles, but perhaps this is only a general limitation. At least the study did serve as a focus for further investigation. Gray and Rogers (35), attacking the relationship be- tween interests and actual reading practices in terms of maturity, suggested the problem of purpose which readers have: "Closely associated with reading interests are the purposes that prompt individuals to read .... current motives for reading vary all the way from sheer escape to the painstaking search for the answer to a challenging social problem or for a guiding philosophy of life." (p. 14) Gray and Rogers selected five categories to represent the major aspects of reading: (a) interest in reading; (b) purposes for reading; (c) recognition and construction of meaning; (d) reaction to and use of ideas apprehended; and (e) kinds of material read. _ 34 - They established 13 major categories as "purposes of Areading," defining purpose broadly in terms of behavior as the “motivation which causes a person to do a particular piece of reading." They arrived at the purpose, listed below, by studying literature, consulting experts, and tabulating responses from about 400 people: 1. As a ritual, or from force of habit. 2. From a sense of duty. 3. Merely to kill time. 4. To know and understand current happenings. 5. For immediate personal satisfaction or value. 6. To meet practical demands of daily living. 7. To further vocational interests. 8. To carry on and promote professional or vocational interests. 9. To meet personal-social demands. 10. To meet socio-civic needs and demands (good citizenship). 11. For self development or improvement, including extension of cultural background. 12. To satisfy strictly intellectual demands. 13. To satisfy spiritual needs. These parallel, partially, the social influences sug- gested by Waples, Berelson, and Bradshaw (93), which might more properly be considered effects of such reading. Gray and Rogers pointed out that studies about purpose of reading have taken the approach either of finding specific motives for reading or of relating stated purposes with other assumptions concerning human behavior. They say: ”...studies...indicate that not more than 10 percent of adults voluntarily seek serious, challenging reading material; that half or more of the adult population read little more than the daily newspaper, a few periodicals of medi- ocre value, and an occasional mystery book; that another 30-40 percent limit their reading largely to immediate-reward reading, including low-grade fiction, in preference to serious reading that promises only delayed rewards." (p. 45) - 35 _ They made five conclusions from their study of other ' studies about reading: (a) that social role or class appears as a basic determiner of an individual‘s reading pattern; (b) that the concept of social role represents a constellation of intellectual, emotional, and social char- acteristics; (c) that education seems the most likely indi- cator of the participation patterns; (d) that education is not seen as bearing a direct, simple, causal relationship to the reading pattern but rather as a clue to social role which is more nearly the determiner of the pattern; (e) that education appears to be the springboard or stimulus for the development of a firm foundation of interests and skills. They thought education might lead to wider inter- ests and higher skills, which in turn would stimulate ever growing interests. In this way, according to Gray and Rogers, education is a determiner of social role as well as an outcome of it. In an attempt to identify and measure characteristics of reaching maturity, Gray and Rogers then made three separate studies: first, an exploratory study of 21 persons widely distributed in respect to education, socio-economic status, and vocation; second, a cross-sectional sampling of 38 adults out of the 160,000 population of a midwestern city; and third, 21 adults selected and interviewed because they were reputedly "well-read" and therefore assumed to be mature readers. The studies brought forth several conclusions, including these: -36.... 1. Each adult reader is distinctive; he represents a combination of reading interests, attitudes, and skills rarely duplicated in full by others. 2. Diverse patterns of reading behavior are the product of varying external factors and personal characteristics that influence development of each person. 3. "...enthusiasm for reading bears a consistent relationship to other maturity levels on the part of the selected cases.... the highly mature reader possess the motives or inner drives and the reading skills that enable them to make use of reading in harmony with their enthusiasm for the role it may play in their lives." (p. 232) 4. "...amount of education appears to be less effective in inculcating the kinds of interests and motives that lead to wide personal reading than in developing ability to understand and interpret what is read.... formal education does not always insure essential reading skills." (p. 233) This might be stated in another way: amount of formal education seems more closely related to level of reading competence than to extent of personal reading. Other evi- dence supports this notion (75, 76, 78, 83, 90, 91, 92, 95). Education apparently contributes a great deal to developing an ability to understand and interpret what is read. Yet it also undoubtedly develops interest and motives that lead to wide reading. The studies above also offer evidence similar to that of Gray and Rogers, continued below: '5. Quality of the education given is highly important. As quality varies, education may limit or facili- tate growth toward a high level of maturity in reading. Most outstandingly mature readers had had some period in school or college when they acquired strong motives that led to stimulating adventures in reading. 6. Individuals who see themselves as socially responsible members of the larger community-- degree to which one feels himself personally _ 37 _ involved in problems and events outside the orbit of his daily routine, and the degree to which he enters into the solution of those problems through communication with others-— are more mature readers. Or, individuals are more mature readers if they see themselves as socially responsible members of the larger community of which they are a part. Undoubtedly they are also simply more mature. 7. Superior readers are blessed, generally, with high native intelligence. Klapper (47) takes a somewhat broader outlook relating his remarks to effect of the communication, yet more pointed and specific than agricultural evaluations of effects. He attributes receipt of a communication to pre-existing atti— tude patterns, saying that they influence and sometimes determine whether a reader sees or hears a communication at all, whether he pays it passing or careful attention, and how he reacts to it. To Klapper, the deeply ingrained or ego-involved attitudes may even affect the meaning which the reader attributes to the communication itself. He also maintains that the significant point is that effect actually derives neither from the content nor from the source, but rather from the image of the source which prevails among the audience. A recent content analysis study of Ellison and Gosser (26) refutes the old notion that people may be more likely to read if material is short. They believethat "mass readers will sit still for long, thoughtful articles on topics that appeal to them." _ 38 _ Ellison and Gosser seem to practice that type of study mentioned by Gray and Rogers--relating reading to other aspects of human behavior. They say: "There is evidence that the individual reader is growing even more concerned about his own orien- tation and adjustment; the increase in articles about personal management, physical and spiritual, is pronounced. -The same period has witnessed a sharp drop in biographical articles except... biographies of criminals. Is the reader becoming too concerned about himself to want to read much about others?" (p. 34) "Even in the age of satellites, editors are find- ing science hard to sell. The Atlantic shifted from its '47 emphasis on science to a '57 con- cern with overseas events, and no other magazine chalked up a gain for science. It will surprise no one to learn that Coronet shifted its preference for cultural miscellany to personal affairs." (p. 34) It is difficult to summarize such studies briefly and make any separate, conclusive statements from them all. We have the studies by the National Opinion Research Center (95) which reported human behavior, interesting personalities, and homemaking as the most interesting subjects about which 2114 adults in 17 cities prefer to read. We have the Strang (83) studies and the Schramm (78) lists of why people read, how interests vary (slightly) by age, by economic status, and so forth. We have the many library studies (15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 49, 75, 90, 92, 94) some of which have already been discussed. There are studies relating to reading interests in newspapers and magazines (26, 58, 64, 65); studies to determine why people want to read books (52); what their major fields of concern are (11); how interests are related to sex and marital status (44); and how "educated" people _ 39 _ seek information through reading (38). There are also attempts to relate radio listening and reading (6, 33), and to determine effects of television upon interests (8, 9). Undoubtedly there has been some significant progress in some areas of reading interest in past years. However, much duplication of effort is evident, and, perhaps in some cases, the patterns of investigation and evaluation instru- ments have not been suitable to the solution of the problems. Such an observation may be too critical. But it is difficult to study mass communication (47) and people if only because of the complexities which permit people to move other people (50). One can summarize, however, by making these conclusive statements about reading interests: 1. Next to themselves, people like to read about some- one like themselves. 2. Of factors that determine reading interest--sex, education, environment, age, and time spent each week in reading--sex is by far the most important. 3. Next to sex, the most important factor is education. Topics of most importance to society, for instance, are least interesting to readers with little school- ing. 4. Age, environment, and time are less important factors. In fact, reading interests become stabilized with age; they may change, but degree of change becomes less as one grows older. 5. Topics related to a group's vocation or occupation often are highest in the group's list of total interests, but the group does not necessarily read only about its vocational problems. -40.. Attitudes that govern reading may be affected by social necessity, and expectations as to reward compared to efforts required (including avail- ability, readability, and content). Chapter III THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT AND PROJECT TASKS Much of the preceding information leads one to restate the questions mentioned at the beginning of this paper. Is there any difference today in general reading interests between farm and urban people? Are there any similarities? If so, what are the differences and similarities? Before proceding further, let us define "general reading interests." They refer to topics related to the whole of society's problems. For instance, general reading interests would include topics such as health, government, foreign relations, problems of science, changes and problems of education, and so on and on. Waples and Tyler (94) made a further categorization of 115 topics representative of the rather broad topical groupings above. As a contrast to "general reading interest," "vocational reading interests" would relate directly to topics concerned only with a specific occupation. To use the Waples and Tyler instrument again, we must remember that Waples and Tyler found that special interest groups tended to show more interest in new ideas relating to their vocation than in topics of general interest. There is no particular reason why people today would not act similarly, since people tend to see problems according to the notions of their own group. -41- _ 42 - But we also know that it is sometimes a different group that is taken as the basis of reference. For instance, among the Waples-Tyler classifications is one topic relating to the vocation of agriculture: "What are the recent devel- opments in farming?" Farmers in 1931 placed that topic high among all those in which they expressed interest. Today, as in 1931, we also might expect individuals belonging to other groups but who have a close relationship to farming, i.e., bankers who loan money to farmers, to place the topic high in interest. But here we must measure group relationships rather than individual relationships in order to determine some form of the relationship and some accuracy with which we might make predictions. And, according to our basic questions, our groups are simply rural and urban people. Let us analyze briefly the two groups and attempt to make some basic pre- dictions. If agriculture has changed--in standard of living, mobility, values, reliance upon urban resources, and so on-- to the extent supposed by agricultural writers, we might assume that farmers have broader reading interests today than in 1931. If urban people are more aware of agriculture's problems, we might suspect a higher interest, generally speak- ing, in rural problems now than in 1931. But there are no topics in the Waples-Tyler test to measure rural interest by urban people. We might assume that topics of government problems, marketing, business conditions, and so on could possibly contain some reference to agricultural conditions. _ 43 _ But the only item in the check list related to agriculture, without any assumptions, is that specific one, "...recent developments in farming." Probably urban people today--as in 193l--would express little or no interest in it. All we can do then is to concern ourselves with general reading interests. Considering degree of change between rural standards of living and those of city people, we might expect relatively little change in general reading interests of urban people since 1931. At least change might not be as great by comparison with rural people. Therefore, the rela- tionship of reading interests of urban people of 1931 and 1959 would be closer than the relationship of reading interests of 1931 farm people and 1959 farm people. Were we to compare reading interests among farm people of today with urban people of today, again in view of the changes in agriculture, we might expect considerable simi- larity between urban and farm groups. In other words, we would expect a closer relationship in reading interests between farm people of today than between 1931 groups iden- tifiable with farm and urban people. The assumptions expressed here disregard two factors: differences among groups as to sex and as to education. How- ever, despite the changes in agriculture since 1931, and despite the fact that those changes might affect placement of specific topics in ranking, we should still expect men and women to compare in their reading interest differences much as they did in 1931. Waples and Tyler apparently did not test farm women in 1931, so comparisons of farm and urban people mentioned above must apply only to male subjects. _ 44 - Waples and Tyler also did not specify education of the farmers tested in 1931, so we cannot compare reading interests of farmers today with farmers of 1931 according to education--at least, not by using the Waples-Tyler data. Other studies tell us that education tends to broaden read- ing interests and also that vocations or occupations are important in determining reading interests. But if rural groups are better educated today, if they have more material available to read, we might expect them to have similar read— ing interests to urban groups, especially so if both groups are educated. Comparisons implied above do not permit any conclusion about why and how people differentiate among topics available to them. Also, such comparisons do not indicate whether people actually will read topics in which they express an interest. But we can speculate about reference groups and the relationships between the groups selected. Considering that the social pressures brought on by the depression may have influenced ratings of topics in the Waples—Tyler 1931 test, we might determine whether there is some degree of social stabilization prevalent now that was not prevalent in 1931. For instance, the contradictory choices of 1931 may have largely disappeared by now. At the same time, we might find some new relationships between topics now which might be indicative of present social pressures, i.e.,inter- national tensions. -45.. In summary, and in view of the rationale expressed above, the relationships presumed in this chapter become project tasks to determine whether: will farm will farm will 1. Reading interests of farm and urban men of 1959 be more closely related than the reading interests of and urban men of 1931. 2. Reading interests of urban men of 1959 and of 1931 be more closely related than the reading interests of men of 1959 and of 1931. 3. Reading interests of 1931 urban men and farm men be more closely related than reading interests of 1931 urban men and women; those of 1959 farm and urban women will be more closely related than those of 1959 farm (or urban) men and women; and those of 1959 farm and urban men will be more closely related than those of 1959 farm (or urban) men and women. 4. Reading interests of college educated farm men (or women) and college educated urban men (or women) will be more closely related than the reading interest relation- ship of non-college educated farm (or urban) men (or women) and college educated farm (or urban) men (or women). Chapter IV METHOD 9E. PROCEDURE In a sense, the study reported here is a replication of the Waples-Tyler study of 1931 (94), with a few limitations as to groups tested. Basically, however, the method of pro- cedure closely follows that used by Waples and Tyler. According to instructions for using the Waples-Tyler instrument, the first problem in determining reading interest relationships is to define the group or groups whose reading interests are to be determined. For purposes of this study, two rather broad groups are to be studied--rural or farm people and urban or city people. Definitions gf_Groups The U. S. Census distinguishes between rural and urban localities or communities on the basis of population. But in locating an individual to be studied, it would be diffi— cult to determine size of his community without an accurate check of addresses with populations. To simplify the oper- ation, all persons in this study whose address carred a rural route number were presumed to belong to a rural or farm group. All individuals whose address included a street number in a city (Lansing or East Lansing) or Michigan were presumed to be of the city or urban group. _ 46 _ - 47 _ Admittedly such definitions disregard the possibility that a person may live on a farm yet work in a city or vice versa. A personal data sheet, which accompanied the Waples- Tyler check list, contained space for subjects to specify their occupation and major place of residence. Therefore, it became possible to check on the accuracy of the original determination regarding group by address. In 1931 tests, Waples and Tyler divided urban groups by vocations. In this study, however, vocations were not considered within rural groups or within urban groups. The two groups--rural and urban--undoubtedly represented widely different vocations, but the major distinction was intended to relate to environment. Perhaps such a concept for distinguishing between groups differs from Waples-Tyler intentions of keeping groups homo- genous, particularly by lumping urban vocations into one. However, Waples and Tyler encouraged use of any group who was somewhat like—minded. It would seem that to obtain like- mindedness among individuals in the urban group, especially, one could use subjects with a similar social background or environment. If individuals were selected by social back- ground, then sampling would obtain an urban group representing different vocational backgrounds, but more representative of an urban group as a whole. Sampling Plan Waples and Tyler found that a relatively small number of returns--60—-were necessary from a homogenous group in order to determine the reading interest of the group as a _ 48 _ whole. Thus, for this study, it was necessary to obtain four separate groups of 60 each representing farm men, farm women, urban men, and urban women. The present study also required individuals comparable in education. Instead of obtaining 60 college educated people and 60 non-college educated people for each group and each sex, it was decided to collect 60 people from each group and sex without regard to education. By dividing each 60 by education, it would be possible to obtain small numbers from each group and sex with and without a college education. Arbitrarily, all individuals with more than a high school education were con- sidered "college" educated-~excepting subjects who might list business college or shortcourse training. Subjects for each group were available in Ingham County, Michigan. The Cooperative Extension Service of Michigan granted permission to select, at random, 100 names from 8000 farm men on the local county agent's mailing list. He checked each name after selection to determine if the farmer was married, and if so, the title Mrs. was added. If not, the next name on the list was checked for marital status until a married farmer was found. This list then became the farm women group. Permission also was granted to select, at random, 100 names from a list of 15,000 farm men on a Michigan State University mailing list used for mailing a quarterly farm economic publication. The names were checked to see if they duplicated any in the farm women group--they did not-- _ 49 _ and to assure that farmers were from Ingham County only. This list then became the farm men group. Urban women in Ingham County were chosen at random from a consumer education list of 9000 names also available in the Michigan State University mailing room. From the total, 100 names were selected. Urban men were selected from Lansing and East Lansing Lions' Club membership lists. Their occupations seemed comparable to farming, insofar as economic status was con- cerned, for most members owned their own business. Ages varied, permitting a broad range from which to select sub- jects. From the total of 235 members, 100 were selected at random for testing. It was possible for the farm men group to contain farmers generally older than people in other groups. The list used was old, corrections and additions had been made yearly, but there was no assurance that new names added in time had been farmers young in age, relatively speaking. And as the list itself grew older, the original farmers contained in the list also grew older. There was no evidence to show when the list was formulated. Method of Survey Questionnaires or check lists were sent to each name selected, coded to indicate first mailing. The mailing included a set of instructions—-identical to those used in l93l--and a new letter to explain the reasons for the test. (Copies of each item are included in Appendix A.) - 50 _ In addition, mailings included a self-addressed, stamped envelope in which subjects were to return the check lists. Response by waves of mailing and education is shown in Table 1 below: Table 1 Response by Waves and Education Ist 23 33 NE’ Some Av. Wave Wave Wave Total College College Age Urban women 50 10 60 37 23 52 Urban men 19 ll 18 48 14 34 41 Farm women 20 19 18 57 37 20 48 Farm men 26 28 6 60 34 26 41 The Check List Originally, Waples and Tyler developed a check list of topics containing 117 items. However, the data contained in their book, What People Want £2_Read About, lists only 115 topics. Therefore, two items were dropped from the questionnaire mailed to 1959 subjects.1 Waples and Tyler data show topics by division. It was not known whether questionnaires originally contained the division titles. Since it was thought that presence of division titles might influence scoring, they were not included in the 1959 tests. In all other ways the instrument used was identical to that used in 1931. Statistical Procedure Methods for inspecting and tabulating returns were identical to Waples and Tyler procedures. Inspection of returns involved checking to see if subject followed 1Topic titles were: "What makes a good sportsman," and "What are the issues in American party politics." - 51 _ instructions; tabulating returns was a bit more involved and time consuming. The Waples-Tyler method consisted of recording returns on a large sheet of cross—ruled paper, topic by topic for each check list returned. Items marked with an "X" by subjects received an arbitrary score--recommended by Waples and Tyler--of 2 points; items left blank received 1 point; items marked with a zero received 0 point. After each score had been recorded, scores for each group were computed merely by adding topic scores for each respondent. According to Waples and Tyler, a topic score shows the relative interest of the group in that topic. Waples and Tyler considered the topic with the highest score as EBEE interesting; that with the lowest score as least inter— esting. After the scores were obtained for all the topics, each was placed in a decile rank according to Waples and Tyler directions. That consisted of arranging the 115 scores for the 115 topics in order from the highest to lowest. Normally, there would be 11.5 topics in each decile, but tie scores were listed together. Tied scores hindered allocation of deciles, particularly in the small educational groups. But, by Waples-Tyler direction, all of the tied topics were placed in the decile in which the majority of the tied scores belonged. Hence there was a difference in the number of topics in deciles, just as in the 1931 Waples-Tyler data. - 52 _ As a result of the tabulation and computation, each topic would contain a decile rank for comparison with the 1931 decile ranks. The statistical device known as the method of correlation (makes it possible to compare the deciles representing read- ing-interest scores obtained from any two groups and to obtain a single value, the correlation coefficient. It shows how nearly the two groups have the same relative interest in the same topics. Exact agreement on topics by any two groups would yield a correlation of 1.00. On the other hand, if the two groups were interested in different tepics, the correlation between their reading-interest scores would be less than 1.00. As decile ranks were organized, as described above, a scatter diagramwas made from which correlation coefficients could be computed, using the formula r - Ngdxdx - {d3 dy ./N£d2x - (sax)2 /de2, - (id,)2 in which dx is defined as an individual's score deviation, in step intervals, from an arbitrary origin on the x scale, and dy is defined similarly for the Y scale.1 In all cases, N was 115, or the number of topics scored, rather than the number of individuals in a given group. Tests of significance used the formula rz-z-l 1 1 2,/R:3+ N33“ in which N referred to number of individuals in a given group. 1See McNemar, Quinn, Psychological Statistics, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1949, PP. 115-121. _ 53 _ A table of values of z for various values of correlation coefficients was consulted for different correlation coef- ficients. The difference between z's was obtained. Then the standard error of the difference in 2's (see formula) was multiplied by 1.96 and by 2.576. If the z difference was larger than either figure, the difference in correlation coefficients was considered significant at the 5 percent and 1 percent level respectively.1 To repeat, the N of 115 used in computations for corre- lation coefficients referred to the 115 topics in the check list. In tests of significance, N was the number of indi- viduals in groups whose correlation coefficients, based on their separate scoring of the 115 topics, had already been determined. Such a procedure probably served to provide a precautionary measure with regard to the significance of correlation coefficients. 1Procedure for determining level of significance between two correlation coefficients is described in Lindquist, E. F., Statistical Analysis in Educational Research, New York: Houghton Mifflin Compifiy,1940, pp. 21332187' Chapter V PRESENTATION AND ANALYSES OF DATA One test for reliability was conducted. The task involved obtaining a new sample of 60 farm males from the same population described in the previous chapter. After scoring each check list and organizing scores into deciles, the results were combined in a scatter diagram of 115 interest topics with those of the original sample of farm males. The correlation coefficient for the two groups was .90. Table 2 shows the correlation coefficients obtained to determine the relationships between the reading interests of groups referred to in the hypotheses or project tasks expressed in Chapter III. The hypotheses were: 1. Reading interests of farm and urban men of 1959 and of 1931 will be more closely related than the reading interests of farm and urban men of 1931. 2. Reading interests of urban men of 1959 and of 1931 will be more closely related than the reading interests of farm men of 1959 and of 1931. 3. Reading interests of 1931 men and farm men will be more closely related than reading interests of 1931 urban men and women; those of 1959 farm and urban women will be more closely related than those of 1959 farm (or urban) men and women; and those of 1959 farm and urban men will be more - 54 _ _ 55 - closely related than those of 1959 farm (or urban) men and women. 4. Reading interests of college educated farm men (or women) and college educated urban men (or women) will be more closely related than the reading interest relationship of non— college educated farm (or urban) men (or women) and college educated farm (or urban) men (or women). Let us examine Table 2 at this point: Table 2 Correlations Between Reading-Interest Scores of Groups Correlation Identification General:§roup Comparisons Coefficient Symbol Farm men, 1959 .70 FM59 Urban men, 1959 UM59 Farm men, 1931 .54 FM31 Urban men, 1931 UM31 Urban men, 1931 .50 UM31 Urban men, 1959 UM59 Farm men, 1931 .59 FM31 Farm men, 1959 FM59 Urban men, 1931 .40 UM31 Urban women, 1931 UW31 Farm women, 1959 .83 FW Urban women, 1959 UW59 Urban men, 1959 .51 UM59 Urban women, 1959 UW59 Farm men, 1959 .64 FM59 Farm women, 1959 FW Educational Comparisons, 1959 only College educated farm men .68 FMc College educated urban men UMc College educated farm men .97 FMc Non-college educated farm men FMnc -56- Table 2 (continued) College educated farm women .75 FMc College educated urban women UWC College educated farm women .79 FWc Non-college educated farm women FWnc College educated urban men .59 UMc Non-college educated urban men UMnc College educated urban women .85 UWc Non-college educated urban women UWnc Table 3 shows the hypotheses symbolically, using the identification symbols of Table 2, and the correlation coef- ficient for each group. Table 3 also shows the level of significance, if any, of the difference between the correlation coefficients and whether the difference was as hypothesized. Table 3 Difference ‘Level of Hypotheses and Correlation as Significance Coefficient (r) Hypothesized 5% 1% General Group Comparisons FM590M59 FM3101431 r - .70 r - .54 yes yes no UM31UM59 FM31FM§8 r = .50 r s . no no no FM310M31 "311N331 r - .54 r = .40 yes no no FW59UW59 UM590W59 r = .83 r 3 .51 yes yes yes FW59UW59 FW59FW59 r = .83 r e .64 yes yes yes FM 9UM FM59FW59 r5: .98 r . .64 yes no no FM590M59 UM590W59 r = .70 r = .51 yes yes no _ 57 - Table 3 (continued) Educational Comparisons, 1959 FMcU FMCFMnc , r = . 8 r = .97 no yes yes rvcuwc rwcrwnc r = .75 r = .79 no no no FMcUMc UMCUMn r = .68 r : .5 yes no no chuwc UWcUWnc r . .75 r = .85 no no no In Chapter 111, it was hypothesized that the reading interests of farm men today and those of urban men today would be more closely related than the reading interests of farm men in 1931 and those of urban men in 1931. Table 3 shows that the hypothesis to that effect was sustained, and the table also shows that the difference between relationships was significant at the 5 percent level. It was expected, however, that urban men of 1931 and of 1959 would have more closely related reading interests than would farm men of 1931 and farm men of 1959. Table 2 and Table 3 show that the correlation coefficient of the two groups of urban men was .50 whereas that of farm men—-l931 and 1959-- was .59. Thus, as shown graphically in Table 3, the hypothesis was not proven correct. The difference actually was in the opposite direction but was not significant. Although the hypothesis suggesting a larger relationship in reading interests among farm men and urban men of 1931 than among urban men and urban women of 1931 was supported by the direction of the obtained difference, it was not sig- nificant. Neither was there a significant difference in -58- correlation coefficients of farm men and urban men of 1959 as compared with farm men and farm women of 1959, although the direction was as hypothesized. The hypotheses set forth in Chapter III with regard to college educated and non-college educated groups were contra- dicted by direction in three of the four cases (see Table 3). What is more important, the one that was significant was contradictory too. It stated that college educated farm men and college educated urban men would have more closely related reading interests than would college educated farm men and non-college educated farm men. As noted, the difference was significant in the opposite direction as that hypothesized. Because of the changes in direction among the other hypotheses relating to education, additional correlations were made to cover other possible combinations of comparisons. Table 4 shows the results of the additional computations, arranged for comparisons with similar or different environ- mental conditions and educational levels. Table 4 __f Group 5‘ EnvIronmenE Eaucation Farm males .97 same different Urban females .85 same different Farm females .79 same different All females .78 different same (no college) All females .75 different same (college) All females .73 different different) FW All females .68 different dierren (W110 All males .68 different same c(coIlege) All males .68 different different Urban males .59 same dierrent All males .53 different same (no college) All males .52 different different (1m. rune) - 59 - Table 5 presents the significance levels, if any, of the differences among the various combinations presented above. Differences between male and female comparisons were not made. Table 5 Significance Level of Combination Differences W W of Difference in r's Groups and r's 5% ML Men FMncFM¢(.97) FMcUMc(.68) yes yes " FM¢UMnc(.68) yes yes " UMncUMc(.59) yes yes " FMncUMnc(.53) yes yes “ FMncUMc(.52) yes yes FMbUMc(.68) FMbUMnc(.68) no no " UMncUMc(.59) no no " F UM“ (.53) no no “ FMEEUMc(.52) no no FMbUMnc(.68) UMncUMc(.59) no no : :MncUMn%(ég§) no no MncUMc . no no UMncUlc(.59) Puncwn (.53) no no " FMncUMc(.52) no no FlucUth(.53) FMncUMc(.52) no no Women UW UWc(.85) FW FW (.79) no no no " rvfiguv°c(.7s) no no " FWcUWcI.75) no no " FWn UWc(.73) no no ” FWc c(.68) yes no FW FW (.79) FWnc ?c(.78) no no " FWcUWc .75) no no " FWncUWc(.73) no no " FWcUWnc(.68) no no FWDCUWnc(.78) FWcUWc(.75) no no “ FWnCUWc(.73) no no " FKQUWnc(.68) no no FWCUWc(.75) Fin UWc(.73) no no " FWéUWnc(.68) no no FWncUWc(.73) FWcUWnc(.68) no no Topical Differences and Similarities The correlation coefficients presented in the foregoing tables help us answer the question about how similar reading - so _ interests are today among farm and urban people. But the correlations do not give us any indication as to what those similarities or differences are. In order to find the specific similarities and differences, we must examine results topic by topic. A summary of decile ratings for each topic in the entire check list is shown in Appendix B. Accompanying the 1959 results in that summary are the 1931 results used for making comparisons. Table 6 shows the topics which were placed in the first decile or "most interesting" category in 1959 by both urban men and farm men. The table also indicates the decile place- ments in 1931 for the same topic by each group. Table 6 Topics Which Both Urban Men and Farm Men Placed in the First Decile in 1959, 1931‘Decile UM FM 13. Criticisms of government policies 2 5 14. Problems of the federal government 2 5 19. International attitudes 1 3 Table 7 shows variations between the two groups, farm males and urban males. The table shows the 1959 decile of one group for a given topic where the other group placed the topic in the first decile-~or scored it "most interesting." Also shown is the decile by each group in 1931 for the same topics. - 51 - Table 7 Variations in Most Interesting Topics, Men Only ec e in c e n UM FM UM FM 4. Successful business men and women 1 2 9 1 15. Problems Of state and city government 1 4 4 4 16. Laws and legislation 3 1 2 2 21. The next war 1 2 1 l 25. Natural resources--develop- ment and conservation 5 l 2 4 26. Prices and costs of living 2 l 1 1 48. New developments in farming 7 1 9 2 56. The nature of human nature and intelligence 1 4 6 3 74. Rural problems 8 l 9 l 77. Interesting places in the U. S. 3 l l 1 91. College and higher educa- tion 1 3 8 6 (Same topic, by college educated subject) 1 1 93. Adult education 3 l 2 2 (Same topic by college educated subject) 3 l 95. Religion and the world today 3 l 7 l 96. Criticism of the church 3 l 3 2 108. Travel and outdoor life 2 l l 3 Table 8 shows other similarities among urban men and farm men, this time through a presentation of topics placed in the tenth decile--or scored "least interesting"--by both groups. Table 8 Topics Which Both Urban Men and Farm Men Placed in the Tenth Decile in 1959 IUEIPDecile UM FM 7. Artists and musicians lO 9 9. Actors and actresses . 10 10 11. Royalty and social leaders 10 10 55. Personal beauty 10 8 -62- Table 8 (continued) 99. Writers and writing 10 10 102. Arts and art crafts 10 10 105. Motion pictures 6 5 106. The theater 10 9 Table 9 shows the variations between the two groups of men. The table shows the 1959 decile for one group for a given topic where the other group placed the topic in the tenth decile or "least interesting" category. Also shown is the decile placement by each group;-urban men and farm men-— in 1931 for the same topics. Table 9 variations in Least Interesting Topics, Men Only ec e n eci e in UM FM UM FM 8. Authors 9 10 10 9 50. Mining and metal indus- tries 10 9 10 10 63. Birds and insects 10 8 8 5 70. Modern styles, manners and customs 10 9 8 9 84. Prohibition violations and enforcement 10 7 4 3 103. Civic beauty and archi- tecture 9 10 9 9 110. Getting along with relatives 10 6 8 7 115. Household management and _food preparation 10 6 7 3 Although there was some duplication in scoring of topics in 1959 as compared to 1931, Tables 10 and 11 present a cross check to show that some topics placed in the first decile in 1931 moved into different deciles than those presented in the preceding tables. Deciles for 1959 are shown for com- parisons. - 63 - Table 10 Topics Which Both Urban Men and Farm Men Placed in the First Decile in 1931 I959 DECIIG UM FM 21. The next war 1 2 22. Preparedness 3 2 27. Prices and costs of living 2 1 54. Personal hygiene 3 2 77. Interesting places in the U. S. 3 l Table 11 Variations in Most Interesting Topics, Men Only e n Decile in 1959 De II I 1931 c UM FM UM FM 4. Successful business men and women 1 2 9 1 1?. Citizenship 4 4 2 l 18. U. S. foreign affairs 4 2 l 10 19. International attitudes l l l 3 23. Peace movements 3 2 2 l 31. Labor and the labor market 2 2 l 3 42. Electrical inventions 8 3 l 2 53. Prevention and treatment of specific ills 7 5 l 5 61. Plant life 9 4 6 l 74. Rural problems 8 l 9 l 81. The detection and preven- tion of crime 5 6 1 6 95. Religion and the world today 3 1 7 l 98. The use and abuse of read- ing 8 6 3 1 108. Travel and outdoor life 2 l 1 3 Tables 12 and 13 provide another cross check, but allow comparisons between least interesting topics--or those of the tenth decile--in 1931 and 1959. - 64 _ Table 12 Topics Which Both Urban Men and Farm Men Placed in the Tenth Decile in 1931 M 1959 UeciIe UM FM 9. Actors and actresses 10 10 ll. Royalty and social leaders 10 10 50. Mining and metal industries 10 9 51. Trades and manufacturing 8 9 99. Writers and writing 10 10 102. Arts and art crafts 10 10 Table 13 Variations in Least Interesting Topics eci e in ec e in UM FM UM FM 7. Artists and musicians 10 10 10 9 8. Authors 9 10 10 9 18. U. S. foreign affairs 4 2 l 10 20. Foreign politics 6 8 7 10 34. Marketing-~sales methods 5 6 10 7 55. Personal beauty 10 10 10 8 86. Comments on marriage and divorce 6 4 7 10 87. Eugenics and birth control 6 5 3 10 88. Attitudes--men vs. women 9 9 9 10 106. The theater 10 10 10 9 Comparisons could not be made between farm and urban women groups for 1959 and 1931, since Waples and Tyler did not test farm women in 1931. Table 14, however, shows the topics placed in the first decile--"most interesting" by both groups and lists the decile given each topic by urban women in 1931. Table 14 Topics Which Both Urban Women and Farm Women Placed in the First Decile in 1959 ? 1 1931 Dec iIe UW 52. Public health and medical progress 53. Prevention and treatment of specific ills 54. Personal hygiene huard _ 65 _ Table 14 (continued) 56. The nature of human intelligence 58. Getting along with other people 77. “Interesting places in the U. S. 93. Adult education 95. Religion and the world today 115. Household management and food preparation HHHth Table 15 shows the variations in the "most interesting" topics and also the 1931 decile for urban women. Table 15 variations in Most Interesting Topics, Women Only Decile in 19m UW FW UW 27. Prices and costs of living 1 3 2 57. Personal qualities analyzed 1 2 2 59. Self improvement 2 1 2 90. Elementary and secondary education 1 2 5 (same topic, college educa- ted groups) 1 1 96. Criticism of the church 2 1 l 111. Parents' relationships with children 2 1 1 -(same topic, college educa- ted groups) 1 1 Table 16 shows topics "least interesting" to urban and farm women and the 1931 decile for urban women. Table 16 Topics Which Both Urban Women and Farm Women Placed in the Tenth Decile in 1959 ec e UW ll. Royalty and social leaders 10 50. Mining and metal industries 10 51. Trades and manufacturing 9 Table 17 shows the variations between "least interesting" topics. - 66 - Table 1? Variations in Least Interesting Topics, Women Only Decile in l§5§-Decile thIEET' UW FW UW 5. Statesmen and politicians 7 10 8 9. Actors and actresses 8 10 10 20. Foreign politics 10 8 10 28. Organization and administra- tion of big business 10 9 10 36. Business ventures 7 10 9 46. Developments in the auto- mobile industry 9 10 10 64. Marine life 10 8 10 71. Organizations--political, social, and fraternal 8 10 8 99. Writers and writing 10 9 9 103. Civic beauty and archi- tecture 10 9 9 106. The theater 8 10 9 107. Sports 10 9 10 (same topic, college educa- ted groups) 7 10 None of the topics in the first decile of both men groups was in the first decile of both women groups, or vice versa. Each group did have one topic in common among the tenth deciles or "least interesting" topics--Topic ll, "Royalty and social leaders.” A study of the Summary of Decile Ratings in the Appendix shows that the "most interesting" and "least interesting" topics did not vary widely, group to group, generally speak- ing. But one difference was that urban women put Topic 13, "Criticisms of government policies," in the fifth decile, whereas men ranked it in the first decile and farm women ranked it in the third decile. Another difference was Topic 115, "Household management and food preparation," women groups placed it in the first decile; men put it in the lower deciles. - 67 - Two other variations were those of Topic 52, "Public health and medical progress," and Topic 53, "Prevention and treatment of specific ills.“' Topic 52 was in the first decile of both women groups and in the third and fourth deciles of urban men and farm men respectively. But it ranked in the sixth decile for non—college urban men. Non-college farm men boosted it to the third decile whereas the general farm group put it in the fourth decile. Topic 53 was in the first Idecile of women groups, the seventh and fifth deciles of urban men and farm men respectively. Again, non-college urban men dropped it a decile to the eighfliand non-college farm men moved it up to the fourth. The differences form a pattern of sorts. But when we examine Topic 54, "Personal hygiene," we find that it was in the first decile of all women groups and generally higher for all men groups than were the two previous topics. The non-college groups, however, tended to place it in a higher decile--first and second (urban non-college and farm non- college respectively)--than did the college groups for both farm and urban men. Summary gf_Data Using_Division Comparisons As has been mentioned previously, the topical divisions which Waples and Tyler used were omitted from the check list in 1959. There were twenty divisions, and there were four general groups tested in 1959. Table 18 summarizes deciles of topics by division for each of the groups tested. (Method of obtaining deciles followed the same method used in obtaining deciles for individual - 68 - topics, except that scores used to determine deciles repre- sented averages of the scores of all topics within each division.) Table 18 Summary of Topic Deciles by Divisions, General Groups Only I959 UecIIe Division UM FM UW FW 1. Interesting Personalities (Topics 1-12) 6 10 7 9 II. The United States Government (TOpics l3-l7) l 1 4 3 III. Foreign Relations and Foreign Politics (Topics 18—20) 2 3 7 5 IV. War and Peace (Topics 21-23) 1 1 3 4 V. Business Conditions (Topics 24-27) 3 2 6 7 VI. Business Administration (Topics 28-38) 4 7 9 10 VII. Values and Problems of Science (Topics 39-45) 8 6 8 8 VIII. Industrial Science (Topics 46-51) 9 7 10 10 IX. Health and Hygiene (Topics 52-55) 7 7 1 l X. Psychology (Topics 56-60) 2 4 1 1 X1. Plant and Animal Life (Topics 61-64) 10 9 10 8 XII. Social Changes and Social Problems (Topics 65-74) . 7 8 6 5 XIII. Peoples and Places (Topics 75-79) 5 7 4 4 XIV. Crimes (Topics 80-84) 8 9 8 7 XV. Sex (Topics 85-88) _ 6 6 5 6 XVI. Education (Topics 89-94) 3 4 2 2 XVII. Religion and Beliefs (Topics 95-97) 4 2 2 2 XVIII. Literature and the Arts (Topics 98-106) I 10 10 9 9 XIX. Recreation (Topics 107-109) 3 3 5 6 XX. The Home (Topics 110-115) 8 5 3 3 Table 19 shows the correlation coefficients obtained by comparing each general group with another, according to the divisions and deciles of interest. (In making computations, N in each case was 20, whereas in obtaining correlation coef- ficients according to topics, N was 115.) _ 59 _ Table 19 Groups,1§59 only Cbrrelation CbéTflclent UW/FW .95 UM/FM .82 FM/UW .56 UM/UW . 55 ru/rw . 54 UW/FW . 48 When we compare the various combinations of group differ- ences, as represented by correlation coefficients, we can determine the level of significance of those differences. Table 20 presents such information. Level Of Significance of Difference in r's Groups and r's Table 20 5% 1% UW/FW (.95) UM/FM (.82) yes yes " ' FM/UW (.56) yes yes " UM/UW (.55) yes yes " FM/FW (.54) yes yes " UM/FW (.48) yes yes UM/FM (.82) FM/UW (.56) yes yes " UM/UW (.55) yes yes ” FM/FW (.54) yes yes " UM/FW (.48) yes yes FM/UW (.56) UM/UW (.55) no no " FM/FW (.54) no no " UM/FW (.48) no no UM/UW (.55) FM/FW (.54) no no " UM/FW (.48) no no FM/FW (.54) UM/FW (.48) no no Chapter VI DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS The 1931 study of Waples and Tyler, which the present study replicated in some degree, found that sex was a pre- dominant factor in determining reading interests. The 1959 study tended to verify the 1931 findings, despite the fact that 1959 samples possibly might be considered somewhat inadequate, at least insofar as absolute comparisons of groups were concerned, i.e., 1931 post office workers do not compare in many ways with 1959 Lions Club members. But, as in 1931, the 1959 study indicated that similar sexes had higher correlations than different sexes, in both farm and urban cases. Farm men and urban men in 1959 had a correlation coefficient of .70; farm women and urban women had a correlation coefficient of .83; but farm men and women had a correlation coefficient of .64 and urban men and womei had a correlation coefficient of .51 (see Table 2). Two other factors seemed predominant, just as in 1931, and they were vocation and education. But the problem in 1959 dealt with environmental conditions, rather than voca- tional conditions, for the primary question had to do with a comparison between farm people and urban people. With regard to the environmental variable, the results showed that farm men and urban men of 1959 had more closely -70- _ 71 _ related reading interests than did similar groups in 1931. And the difference between the relationships was significant (see Table 3). There were no 1931 data to enable a comparison between farm women and urban women of 1931 with 1959 results. The 1959 study showed that the two groups of women had a reading interest correlation of .83, however, and further tests, according to divisions of topics in the check list, showed a correlation coefficient of .95 (see Table 19). The educational variable created more complexity. It was thought that educational improvements among farm people would help account for more closely related reading interests with urban groups. Only one hypothesis was supported in that respect (see Table 3) and it supposed that college educated farm men and college educated urban men would have more closely related reading interests than would college educated urban men. Even though the direction of the hypothesis was supported, the difference was not significant. One is tempted to specu- late that the lack of distinction between urban vocations accounts for the lower correlation of the urban men. Women seemed to be more closely related when environmental conditions were the same. Although the difference was not significant, the direction was opposite to that hypothesized (see Table 3). One might speculate that, despite the lack of significance in the opposite direction as hypothesized, urban women have more material available to read than do farm women, rather than that they are more alike by environmental unity. Also, the fact that farm and urban women in nearly - 72 - all cases, have a larger correlation coefficient than do groups of farm and urban men may indicate a similarity of tasks not so evident among men and tasks which cover a broader area rather than the stricter vocational tasks of men. Pos- sibly the similarity of women groups is related to amount of reading they do, particularly in regard to the similarity of topics liked or disliked as opposed to the small number of topics agreed upon by men groups. In certain respects, education did not seem to be as important a factor as environment (see Tables 4 and 5). Reading interests tended to be more closely related when the environment was the same and education was different, par- ticularly among farm males, urban females, and farm females. Farm males, those with both college and no college education, were significantly more closely related than any other male group. Education did not seem to make any significant dif- ference between female groups, and environment seemed to be significant only in one respect. In that one respect it was significant only to the 5 percent level and represented the extremes of the various female combinations. A reorganization of Table 4 shown in Table 21 below helps to point out the organization of groups with regard to sex, environment, and education: Table 21 Farm males .97 same different All males .68 different same (colleg) All males .68 different different (UMDCFMC ‘ _ 73 - Table 21 (continued) Urban males .59 same different All males .53 different same (no college) All males .52 different different (UMcFMnc) Women Urban females .85 same different Farm females .79 same different All females .78 different same (no college) All females .75 different same (college) All females .73 different different All females .68 different different (UWncFWc) Education did seem to create a higher relationship between urban and farm males if the farm males were college educated. If urban males were college educated, however, and farm men were not, relationship was smaller. In no such case, though, was there a significant difference. The significant differences obtained do support the notion that environment may be the more important factor when compared to education, but the ordering of other groups by educational differences--as shown in Table 21—-do not support the notion. There seems to be an interaction between environment, education, and sex that cannot be sorted out in order to make complete conclusions. Topical differences and similarities give an idea of what the actual differences and similarities are between farm and urban people. For instance, among topics placed in the first decile by both farm men and urban men, two of the topics --No. 13, "Criticisms of government policies," and No. 14, "Problems of the federal government,"--rose from the fifth decile of interest among farm men in 1931 (see Table 6). _ 74 - Similarly, Topic 4, "Successful business men and women," was in the ninth decile among urban men in 1931, yet in 1959 they put it in the first decile. Farm men dropped the same topic from the first decile in 1931 to the second in 1959. Urban men also showed an increase in reading interest about Topic 91, "College and higher education," moving the topic from the eighth decile in 1931 to the first in 1959. Farm men put the same topic in the sixth decile in 1931; in the third decile in 1959. The most extreme change among farm men seemed to be in Topic 25, "Natural resources--development and conservation," where it was moved from the fourth decile in 1931 to the first decile in 1959. Urban men's interest in the topic dropped from the second to the fifth decile. Except for the degree of change expressed by farmers in "CriticiSms of government policies," and "Problems of the federal government," urban men seemed to have made more change than farm men at least in regard to topics in which they and farm men were most interested. But when we examine topics in which both farm men and urban men were least interested, we find that farm men moved more topics from the midrange of interest to the lower end of the decile scale than did urban men. For instance, farm men moved four topics to the tenth decile (No. 7, "Artists and musicians,“ No. 55, “Personal beauty,“ No. 105, "Motion pictures," and No. 106, "The theater"). Urban men put all but one of the same topics in the tenth decile in 1931. The exception was Topic 105, “Motion pictures," which urban men had placed in the fourth decile in 1931. Such a change could _ 75 _ be expected in view of the rise in television coverage during recent years, particularly in urban areas. Although farm men scored some topics higher than those which urban men placed in the tenth decile, farm men tended to place the same topics lower in 1959 than in 1931. The exceptions, noted in Table 9, are Topic 110, "Getting along with relatives," and Topic 115, "Household management and food preparation." The slight rise--from the seventh decile to the sixth--of Topic 110 among farm men may indicate some worry about loss of relatives from farm work units; the difference between farm men and urban men ranking--the sixth decile for farm men and the tenth for urban men--may indicate a difference in meaning of the concept. Farmers, for example, may think of butchering, curing meat, gathering fruit for home use and for market, etc., whereas urban men may think of the topic purely as it relates to homemaking. In general, then, the data seem to indicate that urban men and farm men are more similar in the items they lga§t_ like to read about rather than in the topics they most like to read about. It also appears that the topics in which both farm men and urban men were most interested in 1931 are of less interest now. For instance, Tables 10 and 11 show that many items which ranked in the first decile in 1931 for each group now ranks in a lower decile. Degree of change appears greater among urban men than among farm men. A specific example is the drop among urban men in read- ing interest of Topic 42, "Electrical inventions." It was ‘ in the first decile in 1931; in 1959 it was placed in the _ 75 - eighth decile. Similarly, urban men dropped Topic 53, "Pre- vention and treatment of specific ills," from the first decile in 1931 to the seventh in 1959. Most significant rise among topics of farm men was TOpic 18, "U. S. foreign affairs." In 1931 farm men placed it in the tenth decile. In 1959 they placed it in the second decile. Items placed in the tenth decile in 1931 for either group--farm men and urban men-~tended to approach the decile given by the opposite group in 1959. In other words, there seemed to be less extreme difference in ranking during 1959 than in 1931. An example is Topic 18, "U. 8. foreign affairs," which as previously noted was placed in the tenth decile in 1931 by farm men and in the second decile in 1959 by farm men. In 1931 urban men placed it in the first decile; in 1959 they put it in the fourth decile. Although it was not possible to make comparisons between 1931 female groups and 1959 female groups, one significant change by urban women was noteworthy. In 1931 urban women placed Topic 90, "Elementary and secondary education," in the fifth decile; in 1959 they placed it in the first decile. Perhaps the change carries implications with regard to higher birthrates in recent years as compared to the years prior to and during 1931. The change also may bear a relationship to greater emphasis on education and a higher percentage of attendance in grade schools, high schools, and college for the present generation of urban women as compared to the generation tested in 1931. _ 77 - Decile placement of topics between 1959 women groups was seldom different to any large degree. Most widely separated by decile placement was Topic 48, "Developments in farming," which farm women placed in the second decile and urban women in the ninth. Women also placed Topic 74, "Rural problems," the same way--in the second decile by farm women; in the ninth decile by urban women. In 1931 groups tended to choose topics as "most inter- esting" which were somewhat contradictory to topics they chose as "least interesting.” Men appeared to drop that tendency in 1959, but women continued the contradiction in one respect. They placed Topic 5, "Statesmen and politicians," and Topic 20, ”Foreign politics," in the lower deciles (see Table 17) even though they placed related topics of government, foreign affairs, international attitudes, etc., generally in much higher deciles.. Perhaps women have a different connotation for the terms used in Topics 5 and 20 than do men. Generally, however, people seemed to prefer items more in keeping with the times and those of most value to American society today. People seemed to back up their selections of most interesting topics with other topics that would tend to provide background information--or information of parallel value. One might call such a trend an indication of stability or of maturity in reading interests. At the same time, the evidence is not conclusive, i.e., there seems to be little maturity in the preference for "personal hygiene" over "public health and medical progress"and "prevention and treatment of specific ills." - 73 - Thus, in 1959 there still were strong indications that environmental conditions--or vocations--strongly influence reading interests, i.e., the unvarying placement in the highest deciles of Topic 48, “Developments in farming," among farm men. But the Waples-Tyler instrument is a check list of general reading interests, not vocational reading interests. Despite the importance of vocations and environments, the use of the Waples-Tyler instrument indicates a tendency for people to be alike in a number of their reading interests, particularly among urban women and farm women and among farm men and urban men when compared with 1931 results. The data in Tables 19 and 20 help substantiate such statements and also bear out the conclusion that there still is considerable difference in reading interests when two groups differ by sex, i.e., those topical divisions which men placed in the higher deciles were placed somewhat lower by women groups; similarly those divisions placed in the higher deciles by women were placed lower by men groups. The mid-range deciles do not show such wide variations. The lowest deciles for one sex tend to be low for the other sex, with some variation but few of any significance. ' We can make several speculations as conclusive remarks concerning the placement of topics or divisions. First, the wide variation between urban men and farm men in Division 1, ”Interesting Personalities," might be explained by the fact that farm men have less availability to media and people. Farm men simply have less contact with written material and with people who might talk about such things as are listed topic-by-topic within the division. _ 79 - As mentioned in Chapter I, the character of the material farm men read--the approach or subject—matter content itself --may have much to do with popular attitudes toward current social problems relating to interesting personalities. Women, too, tended to rank Division I low, although urban men and urban women placed the division in a higher decile than did farm men and farm women. But the topics represented in the division probably have a closer relationship to urban activities --industry, business, politics, education, etc.-—which might account for the differences between groups. Even though all groups ranked the topic, "Royalty and social leaders," in the last decile, one would expect such disinterest to stem from the American culture or value system. Once again, we could speculate that urban men obviously would be more interested in Division VI, “Business admini- stration,“ since those tested were business men themselves. But we might not expect farmers to rank the division as low as the seventh decile--three deciles below the urban men placement of the division. If farming has become a business- like operation, we could expect farmers to rank the division at least as high as did the urban men. When we examine the ranking of topics within Division VI, we find that farm men did compare favorably on all items with urban men and that farm men placed two topics-~which might have a connotation closely related to farming--fairly high. The two topics were "Labor and the labor market" and ”Business management." Therefore, we might conclude that farmers did rank the topics according to expectations, but _ so - that they looked upon the rest of the division's topics as more representative of urban business rather than of farm business. Topic 28, ”Organization and administration of big business," was placed in decile eight among farmers, which would lead to the thought that farmers do not think of their own occupation as ”big business." Off-hand, one might suspect that farm men placed Division XX, "The Home,“ higher than urban men because of different connotations for the term itself. But when we examine other topics within the division, we find, as noted previously, that farm men ranked Topic 110, "Getting along with relatives," in the sixth decile whereas urban men placed it in the tenth; Topic 112, "Successful marriage," ranked in the second decile of farm men interests and in the fifth of urban men interests. The differences might be explained as before that farm men are concerned about loss of members of the farm family work unit and are searching for answers as to why people are moving from the farms. Also the farm family may be a closer social group than urban families. Obviously writers cannot always relate the material they direct at one or all four groups to the topics or divisions which are high in interest. If such were the case, writing for men would lean toward topics related to the fed- eral government, war and peace, business conditions, foreign relations and foreign politics, psychology, and possibly recreation. For women, authors would discuss health and hygiene, psychology, education, religion and beliefs, the home, the federal government, war and peace, and people and places. - 31 - Instead, it might be better--at least more practical-- to take advantage of the similarities, both among the most interesting topics and the least interesting topics. A writer also might prepare material intended mainly for one group or sex by slanting it to another group or sex by making reference to topics in which most mutual interest is shown. It is not meant to imply here that one can or should wander between audiences in his writing but merely to suggest that the difficulties in keeping information directed to a specific group or sex might be lessened if the topics of mutual interest are known and included in the message. By writing about mutually interesting topics, an author could provide a frame of reference relatable to the readers' past experiences. All people tend to be most interested in the things or events with which they have already had some experience. People tend to select and rely more on those messages which they interpret and perceive as most valuable to their individual well-being. Therefore, knowledge of reading interests should enable sources--or authors--to pre- pare messages which will fulfill need satisfactions and pro- vide problem solutions for readers. For instance, we know now that farm men are most inter- ested in new developments in farming. We also know that they are interested in government policies, problems of the federal government (after all, they may see themselves as contributing to one of the problems), and laws and legislation (no doubt, in particular the laws that may affect them and their products). We also know that farm men are interested in peace movements, _ 32 - for after all they have an important role to play in feeding the rest of the world. We know that farm wives are interested in health, human nature, getting along with other people, and self-improvement. Since there was some similarity among farm men and women, we might assume that the farm family group is a rather closely knit group and that interests of individual members of the family might receive a sympathetic interest by another member of the family. We might conclude, too, that there are interrelationships between topics. How will peace programs affect possible new developments in farming? Will there be any curtailment of certain services offered by farm agencies if defense spending goes up? What will a certain direction in U. S. relations with Russia do to the sale of specific crops? In other words, "how do events and decisions, laws and legislations, affect mg_and my own?" Use of knowledge about other most interesting topics might be valuable even when writers prepare information about one specific topic known to be of high interest. For instance, one might use anecdotes in written material which directly relate to those other topics. If we wanted to create a neg- ative attitude toward an old practice--say we want to urge people to stop milking by hand--we might direct a simile toward the topics in which people are least interested, i.e., "milking by hand is as old fashioned as a Madonna in a modern art show." Or, we might take a more positive approach, taking advantage of women's high interest in health, and point out that milking by machine is sanitary and conducive to better health. - 33 _ Such suggestions, while possibly naive, at least might offer ideas to agencies devoted to agriculture and education. School or college information services might wish to take advantage of the rise in reading interest about education; agricultural production or research services might wish to examine their efforts with regard to old production infor- mation, especially that concerned with plant and animal life. And even though farm men placed Topic 48, "Developments in farming," in the first decile, they rated the division to which that topic belongs in the seventh decile. One could interpret such placement as an indication that farm men do not think of their vocation as like any other vocation; pos- sibly then sources should avoid drawing comparisons with other vocations when they prepare material about farming, all of which encourages need to establish firmly in mind the topics which are of interest to farmers. In broad conclusion, we might say that men--both farm and urban--today seem to be concerned with the problems and conditions besetting America; women seem to be concerned with health and psychology--other people. Both groups seem least interested in literature and the arts and in plant and animal life. Thus, one might consider that the subjects which people say they are interested in reading and those in which they are not interested in reading indicate that our country is 223 going to hell-in-a-handbasket as so often we are tempted to believe. The agencies and education insti- tutions, the mass media, and the individuals who prepare and select material for people to read might well regain their - 34 _ faith in human beings and provide information which compares more favorably or directly with the reading interests people say they have. Of course the present study relates to groups of people who all reside in one county--the 1931 farm group, for instance, came from Vermont and were almost isolated from the other groups tested. And, of course, the present study and its conclusions are not meant to imply that reader interests are the only factors of importance to communicators. The real block to communication does not lie solely in interests, attitudes, or other psychological barriers of audiences or receivers. Instead the block may more properly lie in the failure of communicators to take them into account. Or, if they are taken into account, there is the assumption that they are unimportant as factors involved in how people learn and react as members of society. Summary In summary then, the conclusions of this study are:. 1. That sex remains the strongest variable creating differences and similarities in reading interests as in 1931. 2. That farm men and urban men are more alike today than in 1931 and that the difference as hypothesized is sig- nificant to the 5 percent level. 3. That there seems to be an interaction between var- iables of environment and education which prevents making conclusive statements with regard to the more important of the two variables. -85- 4. Topical changes since 1931 which were observed most significant in 1959 included: a. 6. An increase of interest in “successful business men and women," "college and higher education" by urban men. An increase of interest in "U. S. foreign affairs," by farm men. A greater similarity among men in what they least like to read about than in what they most like to read about. An increase in interest among urban women of the topic on “elementary and secondary education." A general stability of topic choices as compared with contradictory 1931 choices. 5. It was also observed that there was a greater similarity of interest in all topics among women than among men. APPENDIX A MATERIAL SENT TO TEST GROUPS Letter. Check List Instructions Reading Interest Check List - 87 - NATIONAL PROJECT IN AGRICULTURAL CONMUNICATIONS American Association of Lend-Grant Colleges and State N p A C Universities - American Association of Agricultural College Editors STANLEY ANDREWS Wells Hall ' Michigan State University Executive Director East Lansing, Michigan Would you please help this project develop some data for a training program in written communication? Last year this project presented a training program to members of the Agricultural Extension Services all over the country. Our goal was simply to help county agents and home demonstration agents write better, so that they, in turn, might better serve people like yourself. The enclosed questionnaire is a reproduction of a Univer- sity of Chicago test regarding reading interests of adults. Your answers will help us report up-to-date information neces- sary for the continued use of our training program. Therefore, may we ask you to please fill out the ques- tionnaire as soon as possible according to the instructions on the next page. A self-addressed, stamped envelope is enclosed for your convenience in returning your answers. Sincerely yours,d#fl", M/Ké/fl" H, Hal R. Taylor ' Training Specialist - 33 - WHAT DO YOU LIKE BEST TO READ ABOUT? On the following pages you will find a list of questions discussed in magazines and books. The questions have to do with real things; they do not represent poetry or novels or stories, which you may like to read better. Also, the questions do not cover the books or articles that tell you how to do some particular thing, like flying an airplane, or making a dress, or hooking up a radio. In order to show which questions you are most interested in read- ing about, please follow the directions below as carefully as you can. Look over the entire list of questions rapidly, to get a general idea of what they are about. Then go back and consider each question in order. If the first question is one you think would be XEEZ.$2£2ET estigg to read about, place a cross (X) in the space to the left. If it seems to be of merely average interest or if you cannot easily de- cide whether it is interesting or not, do not mark it at all. If it is not interesting, mark it zero (0). Then do the same with the other questions. In general, the number of questions you do not mark at all (those of some but not much interest) should be about the same as those you mark X or O. .A good way to decide whether a question is interesting or not is to ask.yourse1f whether you would like to read about it right 2121, if you had at hand a book or magazine article about it. If you would, then mark it with an X, as interesting. If you are not sure, or if you would probably delay reading it for some time, leave it blank. But if you think you probably would not read about the question no matter how much time you had, then mark it 0, as not interesting. - 89 _ READING CHECK LIST For what qualities are typical people important? How people of legend and history really lived. How well-known leaders of industry won their fame. How successful business men and women made their succesS. How great politicians and statesmen became great. How scientists make their great discoveries. 1 Why certain artists and musicians are popular. What some well-known authors are really like. How successful actors and actresses win their publics. Why educators and religious leaders have started world-_ movements. How kings and queens and social leaders win renown. Why certain soldiers and sailors became heroes. What government policies are questionable? What problems of the federal government are most acute? What are the troublesome problems of state and city governments? How to improve our laws and our obedience to law. What problems beset the American citizen? Does the United States know how to manage its foreign affairs? How other nations feel toward the United States. How foreign governments meet their political problems. -1- - 90 - How the next war may come upon us. How nations are preparing for war. What peace movements are accomplishing. How are business conditions in other countries? How to develop and conserve our natural resources. What makes industries prosperous? What determines prices and costs of living? How big business is organized and directed. How our foreign trade is developing. How the money market behaves and how it affects investments. How capital and labor can get together. _ What are the present methods and values of insurance? Are publicity and advertising worth the cost? How marketing and sales methods have developed. Is business becoming more or less crooked? How various recent fortunes were made. How to win personal success in business. How to improve business management. How science helps society. How recent chemical inventions work and why they are valuable. How recent mechanical inventions work and why they are valuable. How recent electrical inventions work and why they are valuable. How modern science has made war terrible, How scientific facts and theories explain the world we live in. - 91 - How primitive man became civilized. How is the automobile industry developing? What is happening in aviation? What are the recent developments in farming? What are the recent big achievements in engineering? What recent changes have occurred in the mining and metal industries? What are the recent gains in trades and manufacturing? How medical progress affects public health. How specific ills are prevented and cured. How to keep healthy. How to enhance personal beauty. Why people behave as they do. What makes a personality? How to get along with other people. What methods of self-improvement are best? What is successful living and how is it done? How plants live and why they are valuable. How animals behave and how they are trained. What has been learned about birds and insects? What do we know about fish and marine life? What factors make for and against social progress? Where is modern civilization headed? What are the significant facts about American life today? By what qualities are Americans best known? How the status of women is changing. “3's 75. (6. I 77. 78. 79. 83. -92- How modern styles, manners, and conventions developed and where they are leading us. What our political, social, and fraternal organizations are doing. How problems of social welfare are being met. What are the problems of modern city life? What are the problems of rural life? How exploring expeditions are organized and why. What places abroad are interesting? Where to find interesting places in the United States. Who are the world's most interesting peoples? How customs vary in different countries and periods. How criminals commit their crimes. How crimes are being detected and prevented. How to improve our courts and court procedure. How our criminals are treated and with what success. What are the evils of prohibition and how can they be reduced? What about our public morals? How modern problems of marriage and divorce are being dealt with. What are the facts concerning eugenics and birth control? Do men treat women fairly in business and in the professions? What do we know about the training of young children? What important changes are taking place in elementary and secondary education? What is happening to the college and higher education? How vocational training reduces the number of misfits. -4- 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 103. 109. 110. 111 . 112. 113. 114. 115. _ 93 - Should adults go on learning, and how? What is the meaning of culture? What is the place of religion in the world today? Why and how is the church being criticized? How superstitions and beliefs may be explained. What are the good and bad effects of reading? How modern writers write. What are the policies and effects of the modern newspaper? How language and conversation are changing. How arts and art crafts are practiced and enjoyed. How American buildings and cities might be made more artistic. How great music is produced and what great music does. How movies are made and what they may become. What is happening to the theater? What are the recent developments in sports? How to enjoy travel and outdoor life, and why. How people spend their leisure and why they like their particular hobbies. How to get along with relatives. How parents should and should not treat their children. What makes a successful marriage? How to make the home garden a success. How to care for the family car. How to improve methods of household management and food preparation. 4n Ilaill 1 - 94 - DATA BLANK Please supply the following information: 1. 5.5 Your name and address: (if you desire) Your age: Male or female: How many years of schooling have you actually completed? grades, years high school, years college, years post-graduate work. In what department or subject have you done most of your col- lege work, if you attended college? What is your father‘s occupation? Describe the nature of your own occupation as clearly as you can in the following space: V— Where have you lived most of your life? large city; ‘suburb of a large city; small city; small town; I. onna farm? About how much time do you spend each 222E_in reading things you do not have to read on account of your daily work or business or possible school assignments? less than 1 hour; from 1 to 2 hours; from 2 to 4 hours; from 4 to 8 hours; from 8 to 12 hours; more than 12 hours? - 95 _ 13. Where do you get your books or magazines: From: From: book clubs school or college libraries public libraries circulating or rental club libraries libraries friends special reference libraries publishers' association book stores H t--’ 0 List below the titles of all the books you read last week. Write the name of the libraries they came from, if you read any library books: BOOKS LIBRARIES l2. What magazines do you read most regularly each month? 13. What newspapers do You read daily? Please write the date: , 1959 Thank you for filling out these pages. Please return the whole pamphlet to the address below in the enclosed self-addressed envelope. National Project in Agricultural Communications Room 13, Wells Hall, Unit 3 Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF DECILE RATINGS - 97 oooeoeoooooeeeooomhfidflfld awwehom .mmpmum seams: OOOOOOOOOOOOOQHnmgoNfipHU ....cofiumamwwma cam mama oeeeeeooeeeoeepnwsGH0>ow memo was madam no msmanonm eeeeeeeeeeoeoepgmsnhm>ow anyone“ on» no msoanonm oeeoeoeeeeooeeeeWGHOHHCQ unmsnno>ow mo msmwowaflno m on CfiflDN ‘9 V‘ ‘fifllfi m c: cocam H F4 rqouN F; cucav H r4 r#03¢ co v; (cord #3 C“ ‘¢C0¢> a: co Inoam a) .4 undo) p1 r4 'mcvw' ,4 .4 vrqv' U) to '¢CQF1 b- to wrdca N on ~moaN Oi OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOmonog Hm>mn cam humpwaflz OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOmkmuNGH Hmaoom cam spammom m OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOmHmvde msofiwfiamn mom mnovmosnm OH ....mommonpom cam mnemod OH eeeeeoeeeoeeoeeeomhonvg< OH ...mnmwowmss com mpmwvn< OOOOOOOOOOOOOOumHpaoflom m mamaoavmaom Una cosmoumpm m OOOOOOOOOOOOOOquEOB and cos mmonflmsn Hammmooosm h ....hnumsunfi mo mnflmuamo m m t~ t~ ‘¢ <9 m <3 rd 0 G) H 0* Dr Id C) (D [-4 O b- F; O G) F! C) (D P4 C) ‘¢ ,q OH OH OH OH ‘3 Pi F1 F1 0’ ,4 <3 I4 ‘3 Id F1 F1 OH OH OH ,1 eeeeoeeeeooeeeeeehhofimflfi cam snowed no canoes ...mmdpfldmaomhma Hmowmhfi V 630* VNwCOP-WCD N ‘V OQG> ‘$UDVHDCQD- ‘¢ a: t‘ In NCO ¢t~QH$t~O§ ‘fi t~ ‘¢U1 (OGSmCDfilo U3 Cfi 5' ‘3“) (DEBVHm!OCD ‘¢ O! CO 0! (D Vfdb I4C001656HD {D (D VHO OldV¢CDODC> C“ OI .ha .mH .mH .vH .ma 0 o o o oo o udCQ fljfl‘ Intot~a3¢w3 on mowmoa 0 a O G O G HmmH mmma mmnwpmm oawomo no mnmsssm 98 O O O OH O O b b b N b ¢ 5 O O ......msoHpno>nH HmoHsmno .OO O N v O O O O O b O O O O O O .oonoHom Ho mosHm> HmHooO .OO O OH O H N N > OH O O O O O O ......p=msmwmams mmqumsm .OO 5 Q N N V V 0 m N F V m N m V ococooeooeoeeeeoemmmflflmgn nH mmooosm Hmnomumm .5O 5 b b O O O OH O OH O O b O O O ........mouflpno> mmmnHmsm .OO O s O v n b v v v O O O N N O ..............mO=mam mmoo IHmun cam moano mmosHmsm .OO O O O O O O O O O O O O b OH OH .muonpos mmHmmIIOnHuoxumfi .vO s m m H m m m w s w w w s s m saHoHHnsn cam mnnmfipnm>e< .mm O O O O b b b b b b b b O b O ................wonmnsmnH .NO w v v H N N b O O N O N O O H poxams noan on“ cam gonna .HO m w m m m w a 0-H m m w m m CH N. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOmpgm—F— Ipm0>nHllumths homes 029 .OO O O O O O O O b O O O O O O O ............msmnp nOHmnom .ON OH OH OH v O O OH OH. O b O O O OH O ..mmonHmsn OHQ mo noHpmnp :mHsHscm Onm noHpmmHanho .ON N H H N H N N m m H H H H N H coooeooooeeeeoeooeewnfl>HH no mpmoo cum mmOHum .bN O O O H O O O O O O O O O O O ...............thanmons IlmnoHpHOnoo HmHhumsan .ON O O w O O O O O v H O H w v N ....noHum>uomcoo Odd pnms IQon>mUInmmonsomou Handpmz .ON O n O N O O OH 5 O O O O O s O Odessa mnoHpHOnoo mmmnHmsm .ON N N N b H O O O O O H N H N N ..........munmso>os momma .ON O O O N N O v b O O N N H u H .w...........mmocsmnmmonm .NN O O v H v H N O N O N N H O H .............nm3 axon one .HN OH OH OH O O O O O O O b O OH OH 5 .........m0HpHHom nOHonom .ON N N N H H H N N N H H H O O H ..mecsqupm HmnoHHmnuode .OH on on on on E 338. HOOH m m w OH w m w v m m m m m N; N- 00.OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOdeEHQ< ONQ O O n O O O O O b N b v H O O ...............ouHH panm .HO O H N O O O N H N O N O m H N ......oHHH Hammmooosm 0:8 .OO H m m m e e H H H m e m e m m .........pamso>oumsHumHmm .mm H H H H m N H H H m m m N N N 00000000000000.eeeemHQOQQ nmepo :aHa mnoHa manpoo .mn H H H H N N N H N fl F Q m N m coeeeeeoeeeeeoeoecmNthfld . moHpHHmsd Hmsomumm .bO N H H v H H N H H O N v O O O .........monoOHHHmanH One enemas ness: no cases: one .OO O O O OH OH OH O O O OH OH OH O O OH ..........>p:mon Hanomnmm .OO H H H H v m H H H N m m H H H .........oamHmsn Haaomnmm .wm H H H O O b H H H O O O O H H .........mHHH OHHHoQO no «sesamouu one noHpco>onm .OO H H H o H m H H H m m v m H m coeoeeeeeeeeeeeeemmohmohm HmOHUms Onm anmon oHHnsm .NO OH O OH b O O OH OH OH O O O OH O OH .OcHn5uommsnms cam moumnh .HO OH OH OH O OH OH OH O OH O O O OH OH OH ....................mman ImsunH Hmpos cam OanH: .OO OH OH OH O O O OH O O ¢ O O O O b ..............OanemnHOnm .Ov OH O O v u b N N N H H H N O O ..Oannmm :H mpnosOoHe>mO .OO O OH O O O O O O .O b b b O O O .nOHpmH>m nH manmSOOHo>mn .bw m s m m m m oH OH oH m w w m oH e ..........supmsenH oHHnos locum on» nH mucosmon>oQ .OO O O O OH 5 O O O b O O O v b O ......Oonnms usonm mpomh .OO 5 m o m m b m m w F O W F m m oeeeeeoeoeoeeeoeeooOQOHom chem no moHnoonp can mpomm .vv O b b O b O O OH O O O O O O v ......onmmnm3 sum monoHom .Ov b b b O b O b O b H O O N O H ....mnoHano>nH HmOHnaoon .N¢ b O O O O b O O O H v N N OH O ....mnoHanm>nH HmoHnmnoos .Hv on on on on: mm a: 2: moHQoa o s 0 Sb 05h, Sh HOOH 100 O O O O O O O b O O O O O b H ............mano mo :oHp Ino>onm was noHuomva 038 .HO O O O O O O 5 OH O O OH O O O O ...................mmsHuo .OO O O O O O b O H O O O b O h . h ..............mOan posse Osm mmmm Honvo Ho msopmso .OO O N O O O O O O O O O O O N .O ......mmHOomO OanmmHman .Oh H H H N O O H H H N H H H O H ............mmvmpm nepHnD . ms» nH mmomHm OsHumonounH .55 O O O O O O O N O O O b O O O Omounm moomHa Oanmmuman .Ob OH b O O O O n O O O O O O O O muo>oomHO and noHamnodem .Ob O O O N O O H N N N N H H O O ...........msmHnonO Hmasm .Ob m m O O O m m w m m w O O O O .....spHo may no msoHnonm .ms N O N O O O O O O O 5 O n O b ..msmHnonQ enmmHmBMHmHoom .Nu O O O n O O OH OH OH O O O O O O ....Hmnnopmnm Odd HmHoom .HmOHuHHomllmnoHammHanno .Hb O O O O O OH O O O O OH O O O O ..............msowmso tam .msoocms .mmHOPm sumac: .Ob v N m N‘ w m m N N m m N. m m m .OO...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOnm—boa mo msumpm OsHOnmno mas .OO m m m w v m m m fi m m 0 F m m 00.0.00....OOOOOOQNOHH05< one no moHpmHnmuomumno .OO m n v 0 MN ¢ m N‘ v m m N. m m m .OO.OOOOOOOOOOOOOOdOHH08< nnmuos no munmssoo .hO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ......noHummHHH>Ho shove: .OO O O b O N O O O O O O O O O O ..........mmmnwoum HmHoom cam hpmHoom psonm mmHnomnB .OO OH O OH OH > O O b O s OH O O OH O ..............meH manms .OO OH 5 O OH O OH O O O O O O O O O ........muoomnH Odd mOnHm .OO on on on on E . mOHOoB HOOH OOOH 101 O OH O O O O O O O O . O O b b O mmoua 0:» cam ampuommn mna .OOH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH O O OH O OH OH O OH ......Onmwmm¢.mmm.mmwwwnz .OO O O O s s O O O O s O O H O O ........ On“ lumen mo mmsnd Odd mm: oak .OO OH O O O b O O O O O b O O O b mmmHHmn Odd mnoHpOpmnmmdm .OO O N N H O O N H H H N H N H O ..nousno may no smHOHpOno .OO m H H N N M" H N H H m H H H N. eeoeeeococooeeeeeeoehduou OHuoa on» can aoOOHHOO .OO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ...mnspHso Oo Oaflcaos was .OO H H H O O O H H H H H H N H N ..........:oHpOosOm uHsOO .OO m H N N b m N V m m m m h m m eeeoeeeoeeeeoeo.OMQHQHNHQ .Onm monOOHsO HmdoHuaoo> .NO v H N m H H m N N m H m Q V w cooeoeooeeoeoeooeoeeeQOHu. , Imosvo nman: and mOmHHoo .HO N H H O H N O H N O N O O O O ................noHpmosum hnmvsooom Odd mumunmsmHm .OO O O O O O O O O O O O O O H O ...........OaHnHOna:OHHno .OO O O O b O O O b O O O O OH O O .nmsoB .m> unanimousuOHHO .OO O O O b O O O O O O O O OH O O Honadoo nuuwn and mownmwsm .OO V V w V m m ¢ m w v v v OH m N- 00.......OO...OOO.0°OH°>HU Odd mOOHuums no mpnmssoo .OO O O O N O O O O O O H O O O O ............mHmHos oHHnsm .OO O O O O OH OH O OH O O O b O H O ..............pnmsoouounm Onm mnoHpOHoH> noHanHnonm .OO O O O O O O O O O b O b O O n ........mHOsHano Ho «:08 lamenp 0:» Odd mHmanHho .OO O b b O O O O O O N O O O O O ..........00Hamsn Ho noHu ImhpmHanOd map was mausoo .NO 0: on on on Em 3D ED MOHQOH. HOOH 102 H H H O O OH H. N H O O O O H O .........noOpOuOOonO noon and pamsowmams OHonmmaom .OHH O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ...........uao OHOEOO One .OHH O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O ..........amthw mean one .OHH O N O O O O O N N N N N O O O ......0OOHMHOS Hammmoooam .NHH N H N O H N H H H N O N O H O ............amHOHHno and? mOHnmnovaHwn .mpamnmm .HHH w m m m OH OH 0 m v m N. o N; v w .O0.0000000000000000mQ>flp uaaou Op“: anHO OOOOOOO .OHH m N N N- o b m w m ¢ N m Q w v .OO...OOOOOOOOOOOOQHgmHOH mo mm: may end moHnno: .OOH O N N H N N N N N H H H O O H ..omflH noovpso was Hm>aub .OOH OH O OH N O O O OH O O O O O OH O ...................mauoam .OOH O O O OH O OH O OH OH OH OH OH O O OH ..............noamosu was .OOH O O O O O OH O OH O OH OH OH O O O ..........mou5¢ofia aoHpos .OOH w m b w h w w m m CH m m w m m 000.000.00.000.000000ngs OVOH OH O OH O O O O O O OH OH OH O O O .....................0959 lumpHnonO can Ousamn oH>Ho .OOH O O O OH OH OH O O O OH O OH OH OH OH ..........mpmauo cad OHHO .NOH @ ¢ 0 F m w m m m a m w m h w 00000000.OOOOQOflPflmHo>QOO no aha may and owmswnag .HOH on 0: on on E menace HOOH OOOH BIBLIOGRAPHY Allen, Fredrick Lewis. The Big Change. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1952. American Association of Land Grant Colleges and Univer- sities and The Fund for Adult Education. Rural Social Systems and Adult Education. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State College Press, 1953. Anderson, Irving H., and Grant Fairbanks. "Common and Differential Factors in Reading Vocabulary and Hearing Vocabulary.” Journal of Educational Research, Vol. XXX, January 1937, pp.—3172324. Anderson, W. A. "A Study of the Values in Rural Living." Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station Memoir 277, Ithaca, New York, November 1947. Anderson, W. A. "A Study of the Values in Rural Living." Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station Memoir 286, Ithaca, New York, August 1949. Baxter, Richard H. "The Measurement of Listener Interest in Representative Types of Radio News Stories." Master's thesis, State University of Iowa, June 1946, p. 27. Beal, George M., Everett M. Rogers, and Joe I. Bohlen. "Validity of the Concept of Stages in the Adoption Process." Accept New Ideas, Special Report 15, Agricultural—Eatension Service, Iowa State College, Ames, 1955. Belson, l. A. ”Research Techniques USed in a Study of the Effects of Television Upon the Interests and the Initiative of Adult Viewers." Paper presented at Annual General Meeting of the.British Psycholog- ical Society, April 6, 1956, 6 pages. Belson, W. A. "The Effects of Television Upon the Interests and the Initiative of Adult Viewers.” Mimeographed summary presented at Annual Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, August 31, 1956, 11 pages. - 103 - Ii‘l ’IIIIII .1‘ 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. - 104 - Berdie, R. F. "Interests." In Philip L. Harriman (ed.), Encyclopedia of Psychology, Citadel Press, New York, 1916, pp. 3052314. Bobbitt, Franklin. "Major Fields of Human Concern." Curriculum Investigations, Supplementary Educational Monographs N6. 31, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, 1926. Brown, Roger. Words and Things. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1958, p. 330. Burck, Gilbert. "The Magnificent Decline of U. S. Farm- ing." Fortune, June 1955. Bush, Chilton R., and Darwin L. Theilhet. "The Press, Reader Habits, and Reader Interest." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. CCXIX, January 1942, PP. 7-10. Butler, Helen L. "An Inquiry into the Statement of Motives by Readers." Library Quarterly, Vol. X, January 1940. . Carnovsky, Leon. "A Study of the Relationship Between Reading Interest and Actual Reading." Library Quarterly, Vol. IV, No. 1, January 1934. Carnovsky, Leon. “Community Studies in Reading II. Hinsdale, a Suburb of Chicago." Library Quarterly Vol. V, No. 1, January 1930, PP. 1:30. , Carnovsky, Leon. "The Dormitory Library: An Experiment in Stimulating Reading.“ Library Quarterly, Vol. 111, No. 1, January 1933, pp. 37-65. Carter, Harold D. Vocational Interests and Job Orientation. Applied Psychology Monographs—No. 2, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1944. Carpenter, William L. "Length, Detail, and Farmer Acceptance of Agricultural Publications." Bulletin 22, Department of Agricultural Journalism, College of Agriculture, University of Wisconsin, 1955. Charters, I. W. "College Preparation for Reference Work." School and Society, Vol. XXVII, February 1928. Copp, James H. "Personal and Social Factors Associated with the Adoption of Recommended Farm Practices Among Cattlemen." Kansas State College Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 83, Manhattan, Kansas, September 1956. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. - 105 - Copp, James H., maurice L. Sill, and Emory J. Brown. "The Function of Information Sources in the Farm Practice Adoption Process." Rural Sociology, Vol. 23, No. 2, June 1958, pp. l46-I57. Cravens, M. E. "Who's Pricing Who Out of the Market?" Timely Economic Information, No. 379, September 1959, GEio State UniversitySAgricultural Extension Service, Columbus, Ohio. Dale, Edgar, and Ralph W. Tyler. "A Study of the Factors Influencing the Difficulty of Reading Materials for Adults of Limited Reading Ability." Library Quarterly, Vol. IV, No. 3, July 1934, pp. 384O412. Ellison, Jerome, and Franklin T. Gosser. "Non-Fiction Magazine Articles: A Content Analysis Study." Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 1, Winter, 1959. ”Farm Families: Key to Marketing Gains." Printers' Ink, January 30, 1959. . Fliegel, Frederick C. "Aspirations of Low-Income Farmers and Their Performance and Potential for Change." Rural Sociology, Vol. 24, No. 3, September 1959, pp. 2052214. Fryer, Douglas. The Measurement 2£_Interests. New York: Henry Holt and’Company, 1931. Gates, Arthur 1. Interest and Ability 12_Reading. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1930. Gleason, H. A. An Introduction £2_Descriptive Linguistics. New York: HEnryHolt and Company, 1959. Grace, Alonzo G. "The Reading Interests of Adults." Journal gf_Educationa1 Research, Vol. XIX, April 1929. Gray, William S. "Summary of Readin Investigations, July 1, 1929 to June 30, 1930 [through] ...1959." Elementary School Journal and Journal of Educational Research,”Vols.‘XXXTT_XXXII, XLVITT‘En o s. tEFEEEE—XLXII, 1931-1959. Gray, William 8., and Ruth Munroe. The Reading Interests and Habits gqudults. New York: The Macmillan Com- pany, 19300 Gray, William S., and Bernice Rogers. maturity in_Reading: Its Nature and Appraisal. Chicago, IIIInois: Univer- sity of Chicago Press, 1956. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. .41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. - 106 - Green, Arnold W. Sociology. New York: MCGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., I955.” (Chapter 10, "Population," pp. 158-177; Chapter 15, "The Division of Labor," PP. 272-292.) . Gunlogson, G. B. What the Farmer Sees, Reads, and Hears. Chicago, Illin01s: Western Advertising Agency, July 1956. Houkom, Alf. "The Reading Interests of Educated People." Master's thesis, Graduate School, University of Illinois, 1933. Hovland, Carl 1., and Walter Weiss. "The Influence of Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness." Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 15, No. 4, Winter I9'F1 , pp. 635:65U. Hyman, Herbert. "Do They Tell the Truth?" Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. VIII, No. 4, Winter 1944, pp. 5573559. Hyman, Herbert H., and Paul B. Sheatsley. "Some Reasons Why Information Campaigns Fail." Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. XI, 1947, pp. 413- Irvine, Paul. ”Predicting Potential Readers of Publications." The Journal of the Alabama Academy of Science, Vol. I9, Décemfier'1947. Ittelson, W. H., and F. P. Kilpatrick. "Experiments in Perception.” Scientific American, Vol. 185, No. 2, 1951’ PP. 50-5.50 Johnson, B. Lamar. "Adult Reading Interests as Related to Sex and Marital Status." School Review, Vol. 40, No. 1, January 1932, pp. 33-43. Johnson, Glenn L., and Cecil B. Haver. Agricultural Information Patterns and Decision Hiking. Unpublished bulletin,‘AgriculturaI—ExBEFiEEEt'StitiEn, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1958. Xatz, Elihu, and Paul F. Lazarsfeld. Personal Influence. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, I955, pp. 396. Klapper, Joseph T. "Studying Effects of Mass Communication." Teachers College Record, Vol. 57, No. 2, November 1955. Xreitlow, Burton W. Rural Education: Community Back- grounds. New YoFE?_—Harper and Brothers, 1954} Krieg, Laurel. "Community Studies in Reading IV. A Middle- Western Manufacturing Company." Library Quarterly, Vol. IX, No. 1, January 1939, pp. 72-35. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. - 107 - Lazarsfeld, Paul F., Bernard Berelson, and Hazel Gaudet. "The Nature of Personal Influence." Chapter XVI, The PeOple's Choice, Columbia University Press, m IOrE, 1948’ pp. 150-158. Lerner, Max. America a§_a Civilization. New York: Simon and Scfiuster, I957: Link, Henry C., and Harry Arthur Hopf. People and Books: A Study of Reading and Book-Buying HEBitE} New York: Book Manufactfirers' Institute, 1946. Lionberger, Herbert F. "Information Seeking Habits and Characteristics of Farm Operators." University of Missouri, Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin 581, Columbia, Missouri, April 1955. ' Lionberger, Herbert F., and C. Milton Coughenour. "Social Structure and Diffusion of Farm Information." Univer- sity of Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin 631, Columbia, Missouri, April 1957. Loomis, Charles P., and J. Allan Beegle. Rural Sociology, The Strategy of Change. Englewood Cliiis, New Jerse : P?Entice-HEIIT_Inc., I957. (Particularly Chapter 13, "Library and Mass Media Systems," pp. 403-432.) Longstaff, H. P., and G. P. Laybourn. "What Do Reader- ship Studies Really Prove?" Journal of Applied Psgchology, Vol. 33, No. 6, DecemBer I949, pp. 585- Lorge, Irving. "Psychological Bases for Adult Learning." Teachers College Record, Vol. 41, No. 1, October 1939, PP. 1’12. MacLean, Malcolm 8., Jr., and Luca Pinna. "Distance and News Interest: Scarperia, Italy.". Journalism Quarterly, Vol. XXIV, Winter 1958. PP. 36-48. McCormick, Francis B. "The Farm Problem--What Is It?" Timely Economic Information, No. 379, September I959, Ohio State Ufiiversity Agricultural Extension Service. McCullough, Constance M. "Reading." Review of Educational Research, Vol. XXVIII, No. 2, ApriI‘I958. McEvoy, Poynter. ”Media-Habit Survey of Indiana Homes." Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 1, Winter 1959,. PP . 63 -6T. ll|n :4!| 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. - 108 — Merton, Robert K. "Patterns of Influence: A Study of Interpersonal Influence and Communication Behavior in a Local Community." Communications Research, 1948-1949, (ed. P. F. Lazarsfeldfand F} N. Stanton) New York: Harper and Brothers, 1949, pp. 180-219. Miller, Robert A. "The Relation of Reading Characteristics to Social Indexes.“ The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 41, No. 6, May 1935, pp. 738-756. '_— Moshier, L. Marion. "A Comparison of the Reading Interests of a Selected Group of Adults in New York City and a Similar Group in a Town in New York State." Master's thesis, School of Library Service, Columbia University, New York, June 1931. Nafziger, Ralph 0. "A Reader-Interest Survey of Madison, Wisconsin.” Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 7, No. 2, Nelson, Lowry. "Rural Life in a Mass-Industrial Society." Rural Sociology, Vol. 22, No. 1, March 1957, PP. 20—30. Newcomb, Theodore M. "Determinants of Opinion." Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 1, No. 4, October 1937, pp. 71-78. Newcomb, Theodore M. "The Influences of Attitude Climate Upon Some Determinants of Information." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol. 41, o. , _— JulyOSeptember I946, pp. 29I-302. Nilsen, Thomas R. "24 Ways to Better Communication." Personnel Journal, Vol. 37, No. 5, October 1955, pp. 171-172. Nixon, H. X. "Two Studies of Attention to Advertising.“ Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. IX, No. 2, April I925, pp. 176-18]. Parry, Hugh J., and Helen M. Crossley. "Validity of Responses to Survey Questions." Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. XIV, No. 1, Spring I950, pp. 61-80. Parsons, Rhey Boyd. "A Study of Adult Reading." Master's thesis, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, 1923. Perloff, Evelyn. "Prediction of Female Readership of Magazine Articles." Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 33, No. 2, April I949, pp. I75=I99. Perloff, Evelyn. ”Prediction of Male Readership of Magazine Articles.“ -Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. XXXII, No. 6, DecemBer 1948, pp. 6 3-674. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. - 109 - Ridgeway, Helen A. "Community Studies in Reading III. Reading Habits of Adult Non—users of the Public Library.“ Library Quarterly, Vol. VI, No. 1, January 1935] PP. 1-33. Roberts, C. R., and R. A. Davis. “Reading Interests of Teachers.“ Educational Administration and Super- vision, Vol. I5, No. 2, FeBruary I929, pp. I923I16. Schramm, Wilbur. "Measuring Another Dimension of News- paper Readership." Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 4, December 1947, pp. 293-306. Schramm, Wilbur. "Why Adults Read." Adult Reading, Fifty-fifth Yearbook of the National society of the J Study of Education, Part 11., (ed. Nelson B. Henry), 5 University of Chicago Press, Chicago,»1956. 2 '«'Su Schramm, Wilbur, and Merrit Ludwig. "The Weekly News- paper and Its Readers." Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 3, Summer 1951, pp. 391—314. Spaulding, Irving A. "Change in Rural Life and the Reintegration of a Social System." Rural Sociology, Vol. 24, No. 3, September 1959, pp. 215322 . Star, Shirley A., and Helen HacGill Hughes. "Report on an Educational Campaign: The Cincinnati Plan for the United Nations." American Journal of Sociology, Vol. LV, No. 4, January I950, pp. 339-499. Stone, John Paul. "Factors Influencing Reading Choices." Master‘s thesis, Graduate School, University of Illinois, 1930. Strang, Ruth. Explorations in_Reading Patterns. The University of CEIcago Press, Chicago, IIIInois, 1942. Strong, Edward H., Jr. Change of Interests With Age. Stanford: Stanford UniverEIty Press, 193IT' Strong, Edward K., Jr. Vocational Interests of Men and Women. Stanford: Stanford University Pigss, 1943. Swanson, Charles E. "Readability and Readership: A Con- trolled Experiment." Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 4, December 1948, pp. 339-343. Thorndike, Edward L. Adult Interests. New York: The Macmillan Company, I935. Thorndike, Edward L. "Note on the Shifts of Interest with Age.” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 33, No. 1 February I949, 55 pages. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. - 110 - Thorndike, Edward L. The Psychology of Wants, Interests and Attitudes. Neijork: “D.—IppIeton4Century‘COm- pany, Inc., 1935. Waples, Douglas. "Community Studies in Reading 1. Reading in the Lower East Side." Library Quarterly, Vol. III, No. 1, January 1933. PP. 1-20) Waples, Douglas. People and Print. Chicago, Illinois: University of CEicagB—Press, 1938.: Waples, Douglas. "The Relation of Subject Interest to Actual Reading." Reader in Public Opinion and Communication, editEH—Ey'BErnard‘BereIson and”Morris Janoiitz, Tfie Free Press, Glencoe, Illinois, 1953, Pp. 347-351. Waples, Douglas, Bernard Berelson, and Franklin R. Bradshaw. What Reading Does to People. Chicago, Illinois: The UniversIty of Cfiicago Press, 1940. Waples, Douglas, and Ralph W. Tyler. What People Want to Read About. American Library Associatifin and the University of Chicago Press, 1931. "What, Where, Why, Do People Read?“ Denver, Colorado: National Opinion Research Center, 1946. L“ - A - ‘a 'ij-‘fiy A ...g o \ r ‘4. {IVS ‘12:}:- U,“ ”(V‘fia 1...,” flut‘s‘i‘ y I L. ~~n«~:*”"77 m A ', -mfifi./’ Wi‘vfl A r, '11,,ch 6: L:- ¢-——--"\ ”'TITI'ITIflfllLfiflfljflfilfifilflifllfiiflflfliflflfiflm'ES