1.... .....‘:. Luv .3 @Hnwmum. Prvl/ air . v. p :4 inunfifudlt 6r. . fifiif ti sserta. i . ;. .prYuIV.Va\ .rrncrri . .. .3: 5.2.... ..... 1...... 29.. t. I... A a 4 L. .‘ 33.3.94va ,,.h..1€:.$..m.c.hfr;.vas-i.£§2.,?.é..x.....i...rr....i.;3.5., 1.5:): (11...... .. ‘ Khan” LEW‘ . . . . . - .1 a mum; will 11m ll Jill ”LI ultumam a, f: Y This is to certify that the thesis entitled FAMILY-COMMUNITY RESOURCE LINKAGES AND THEIR RELATION TO SELECTED FAMILY VARIABLES presented by Barbara Kenrlck Miller has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degreein FamII! ECOIOQY W Major professor "_ DateAUQUSt I6. I973_ 0-7639 ABSTRACT FAMILY-COMMUNITY RESOURCE LINKAGES AND THEIR RELATION TO SELECTED FAMILY VARIABLES BY Barbara Kenrick Miller This study focused on the family's linkage to com- munity resources. It had a two-fold purpose: to expand the knowledge of the family system beyond its immediate boun- daries to include the environment from which it derives resources, and to provide community decision makers with these data as a factual contribution to the assessment of community resources. More specific objectives were: (1) to devise a system for measuring family—community resource linkages; (2) to determine the relationship among scope, penetration, and flow dimensions of family—community resource linkages and selected family variables: social position, size of family, stage of family life cycle, income, length of residence in the community, and hours spent in home pro- duction; and (3) to determine broadly the families' unmet resource needs in the community. Since the community is the locus of a range of resources including food, health services and social groups, their presence, or absence, can influence deve10pmental Barbara Kenrick Miller patterns of the family and its members. For the purpose of analysis, this range of resources was classified into nine subsystems, each having a functional relationship to the family: business, employment, recreation, culture, religion, education, health, civic, and welfare. There were three dimensions to the linkages families make with these subsys— tems which can be quantified by use of standard scores: scepe, penetration, and flow. Sc0pe described the number of subsystems families contact: penetration, the number of con- tact hours; and flow, the relative use of or contribution to the community. It was hypothesized that these linkages would be related to the selected family variables. Questionnaires were administered to a stratified random sample of 140 families in adjoining towns of Owosso and Corunna, Michigan, over a three—month period. The pro- cedure was to call on the family in person, leaving detailed questionnaires for all family members 14 and over and sum— mary questionnaires for children 13 and under, and arranging the return for the completed ones. For analysis, the community was divided into two areas separated by the city limits. The geographical area within the city limits was designated internal, while the area outside the limits at whatever distance was designated external. As would be expected, greater use was made of the internal subsystems; however, external contact hours were substantial indicating that internal community resources were insufficient to meet residents' needs. Families Barbara Kenrick Miller entered from three to nine subsystems with seven the mean number. Employment accounted for the highest mean contact hours both within and without the community. Business was second in hours, but was utilized by all families. Within the community, penetration was positively related to family size, while externally no relationship with family variables .was significant. A Selected elements from the penetration scores were formulated into an equation quantifying flow: the relative use of or contribution to the community. Internal flow was significantly related to the family variables with life cycle most prominent although marginally significant. The mean score for internal flow was slightly negative, within a narrow range of scores. There was no significant rela— tionship between the external flow score and family variables. Families with children tended to make greater use of and participate more in the community. They had more income either from internal or external employment, and supplemented this through home production. In the one and two person households there appeared to be differing char— acteristics. The older families with long years of resi— dence in the community depending upon fixed incomes, shOpped primarily in the local community and were entertained at home through hobbies and television. Others with high scores in volunteer health activities penetrated the internal civic and recreational subsystems as well as local employment. The third cluster of small households with Barbara Kenrick Miller higher income made use of the external community through business and culture. Analysis of the contact hours in the leisure sub— systems of culture and recreation indicated a large amount of time allocated to these pursuits by some segments of the community. In addition, more suggestions were made in rela— tion to community recreation facilities than for other cate- gories of community resource development as municipal improvements, education, or employment. Previous research relating individual and family participation to selected subsystems was supported in relaf tion to activity of families across many subsystems. The range of contact hours in different subsystems by home production, internal community, and external community for different family members can also be utilized in relation to individual behavior as well as providing an empirical base for future study. FAMILY-COMMUNITY RESOURCE LINKAGES AND THEIR RELATION TO SELECTED FAMILY VARIABLES BY Barbara Kenrick Miller A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of. DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Family Ecology 1973 DEDICATION To my husband Donald Merrill Miller who inspired and supported this commitment to further education and To my mother Elsie P. Kenrick who fostered the joy of living that made it possible. P- P- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In this section there is a temptation to go beyond the acknowledgment of the contribution of many individuals to this study, to the larger field of which it is a part. Suffice it to say, that participation in the implementation of the change of focus for the College of Human Ecology was a time of great personal growth. That this was accompanied by the counsel and financial support of different departments only demonstrates the diversity of personalities and discie plines contributing to this graduate experience. Central to these Opportunities were the guidance and support of Dr. Jean Davis Schlater. The author is grateful for her counsel from course selection to the deve10pment and refinement of the research problem. Appreciation is also extended to members of the guidance committee: Dr. Beatrice Paolucci, Dr. Margaret Bubolz, and Dr. Denton Morrison, each of whom contributed from his specialty. Earticular acknowledgment should be made of the contribution of 140 families representing 341 individuals who shared their personal lives for an understanding of family-community interaction. In addition, there were the secretaries, Evelyn Nichols, Sue Buschman, and Mary Ann White, who prepared the volume of pre-test and testing materials; the original iii research group, Mrs. Barbara Ferrar, Karen Goebel, and Lynn DeSpelder; the fellow graduate students who joined with seminar leader Dr. Jo Lynn Cunningham to critique each other in the process of deve10ping the research prOposals; and Verda Scheiffly, who conveyed some understanding of the computer Operations along with the computer analysis. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES O O O C C O C O C 0 LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. II. III. IV. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . Statement of the Problem Direction of Research . Conceptual Framework . Theoretical Definitions Operational Definitions Objectives . . . . . . Assumptions . . . . . . Hypotheses . . . . . . REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . Family . . . . . . . . . Linkages . . . . . . . . The Community . . . . . . METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . Community Selection . . Sample Selection . . . Pretest . . . . . . . . Instrument . . . . . . Field Procedure . . . . Independent and Depend nt Statistical Analysis . . Reliability and Validity e FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Family Variables . . . . Linkage Variables . . . . Flow . . . . . . . . . . Suggestions for Community Test of the Hypotheses . Conclusions . . . . . . . V ooHU usmfimoamam season musuasu mmmsflmsm Subsystems Participation by families in nine community subsystems. Figure 2. 84 Penetration The penetration scores represent contact hours of fam- ilies utilizing resources in the community. As explained in methodology, the standard scores are used in the statisti- cal analysis. However, the number of contact hours des— cribed below illustrates the diversity of time allocation by families. Total hours for the total community are included as well as total hours for the internal and exter— nal communities for a better comparison with contact hours in the subsystems. The mean of these hours is the basis of comparison among families, eXpressed in standard scores from one to ten. Contact hours internal to the community.--Employment accounts for the most contact hours within the community, followed by business and health. The high maximum score for health could be accounted for by a hospital stay of sev- eral weeks by one of the respondents. The culture hours represent using the library and joining with special inter- est groups. These are much lower in the internal community (Table 13) than home production hours in the culture cate- gory (Table 11), which indicates a maximum of 3500 hours and a mean of 858 hours. When the hours spent in school by children 14 years and over are averaged with the parents (Table 13), the max- imum hours appear to be below the mandatory school hours 85 because the family includes adults. But when examining the use of the local school systems, either public or private, within the local community as reported by children 13 and under, the hours represent only the school—age population (Table 14). Table 13. Mean family contact hours spent in eight internal community subsystems (N=l40). Hours Subsystem Mean Minimum Maximum St. Dev. Employment 664.0 0.0 3100.0 751.8. Business 267.8 4.0 2370.5 289.3 Health 132.7 0.0 2909.5 367.0 Education 75.5 0.0 793.3 167.9 Religion 65.9 0.0 600.0 117.9 Culture 60.1 0.0 500.0 81.3 Recreation 50.6 0.0 1300.5 134.6 Civic 22.0 0.0 404.0 53.0 Total Internal Subsystems 1338.7 6.0 4879.0 1005.1 Total Community 2185.2 67.0 6347.5 1205.9 86 Table 14. Contact hours of children 13 and under in public and private schools within community (N=64). Hours School Mean Minimum Maximum St. Dev. Public 765.9 0.0 3000.0 53715 Private 68.8 . 0.0 1190.0 252-7 In the education community are included other organ- izations with primarily educational objectives as scouts and 4-H. It appears from the table above that public school children in this study enter into other educational activity more than those attending a private school since the mean hours of participation by public school respondents exceeds mandatory school hours of 1190. Contact hours external to the community.-—On the whole, family members spent fewer hours outside than inside the community locating resources. The ordering of the use of subsystems outside the community is somewhat different from the ordering of subsystems inside the community (Table 15). The most utilized subsystem outside was that of employment which was likewise true within the community. The mean external hours were 499 as compared with internal, 664. The difference could be attributed to the fact more family members work inside the community than outside. That 87 is, if the husband were working in Flint or Lansing, his wife may not be working because of the higher wage scale for these workers. However, if working she would be likely to work within the city, contributing to the higher internal employment. In addition, if the husband worked internally, more members of the household might work to raise family income and consequently the mean of family hours in employ— ment. Table 15. Mean family contact hours in eight external community subsystems (N=l40). Hours SUbSYStem Exfizzflal Minimum. Maximum St. Dev. Infizggal Employment 499.5 0.0 2726.0 704.9 664.0 Business 123.0 0.0 679.3 136.3 267.8 Recreation 106.7 0.0 1215.0 223.6 50.6 Health 44.0 0.0 3000.0 271.6 132.7 Culture 33.0 0.0 432.0 63.4 60.1 Education 27.0 0.0 906.7 119.3 75.5 Religion 12.0 0.0 350.0 47.9 65.9 Civic 1.4 0.0 65.0 7.4 22.0 Total External 846.5 0.0 3991.0 839.0 1005.1 Total Community 2185.2 67.0 6347.5 1205.9 88 The next important subsystem in terms of utilization is business although the mean hours were 123 for outside as compared to 267 inside the community. Since there is no attempt in this study to determine economic impact of these hours, it is not known what they represent in monetary terms. It could be that families use the local community for routine expenditures. If they buy large items externally, their hours would represent more dollars flowing outside the com— munity. On the other hand, since the major grocery stores were outside the city limits families would have included shopping at the grocery store as hours outside. The recreation subsystem ranks number three for external hours whereas it is ranked seventh for internal. This represents the time many families say they spent at national or state parks and in places distant from home for vacation trips. The other external hours are much lower than internal but again no estimate can be made of economic impact those hours may have. Dolla£§.--This section on dollars represents con- tributions made with dollars instead of time to volunteer groups in the different subsystems. These data appear more irregular than the data on hours: the means are not con- Sistently related to maximum values, reflecting great variations in size of contributions and number of contribu— tors or the reporting of them. 89 For example, the mean dollar contribution in the religious subsystem was highest representing a high rate of contribution by relatively few families (Table 16). Table 16. Dollar contribution by families to the community by subsystems (N=l40). Dollars Subsystem Mean Minimum Maximum St. Dev. Religion $69.23 $0.00 $1,000.00 $160.52 Employment 22.26 0.00 155.00 32.87 Culture 4.37 0.00 97.00 11.92 Civic 3.91 0.00 92.00 13.04 Health ' 2.96 0.00 150.00 14.00 Education 2.48 0.00 125.00 12.26 The $155 maximum contribution with a mean of $22.26 in the employment subsystem represents for the most part union dues. On the other hand, the maximum value of $150 in health, representing contributions to the Red Cross and health drives, indicates a greater range in contributors since the mean is only $2.96. Civic includes dues for organ- izations as Kiwanis and Rotary, participated in by relatively few but whose single maximum contribution was about $90. Flow Resource flow, as explained in methodology, rep- resents the relative use of or contribution to the community. 90 Table 17 refers to the flow in hours internally, while Table 18 refers to the flow in hours externally. Internal Hours Table 17 represents the minimum, maximum, and the mean hours for the selected components from the pertinent subsystems under the major categories of positive, negative, and neutral flow. Hours are reported in this table, whereas in the next section of this chapter only the standard scores will be used in the multiple regression analysis. In the positive flow category the selected means represent the hours families or individuals contribute to the community. .Employment is included because it contributes .to community well-being, even though compensation also accrues to the individual. In addition employment is an indicator of the ability to pay taxes, another positive contribution. In religion, civic, culture, health, and education subsystems the hours represent time individuals have given, without compensation, to the functioning of those subsys- tems. The negative flow category led by education represents the use families have made of public facilities such as a public—supported school system, library, parks, or health clinic. As would be expected in neutral flow, business hours lead other subsystems in contact hours. The hours in health, Table 17. 91 Contact hours of families in selected sectors of internal community subsystems by positive, negative, and neutral flow (N=123). Hours Flow Mean Minimum Maximum St. Dev. Positive Employment 664.0 0.0 3100.0 751.8 Religion 65.9 0.0 600.0 117.9 Civic 21.2 0.0 403.0 52.8 Culture 17.3 0.0 272.0 36.3 Health 11.9 0.0 400.0 46.6 Education 10.3 0.0 365.5 38.0 Negative Education 61.9 0.0 793.3 160.0 Health 35.7 0.0 2909.5 276.3 Recreation 16.2 0.0 480.0 55.5 Culture 8.6 0.0 120.5 17.5 Civic .8 0.0 11.5 1.8 Neutral Business 267.8 4.0 2370.5 289.3 Health 85.2 0.0 1700.0 247.3 Recreation 34.3 0.0 1300.0 123.2 Culture 34.2 0.0 500.0 70.6 Education 3.4 0.0 235.3 23.9 92 Table 18. Contact hours of families in selected sectors of external community subsystems by positive, negative, and neutral flow (N=123). Hours 'Flow Mean Minimum Maximum St. Dev. Positive Employment 499.5 0.0 2726.0 704.9 Religion 12.0 0.0 350.0 47.9 Culture 8.8 0.0 99.0 18.7 Civic 1.3 0.0 65.0 7.4 Health 1.0 0.0 54.0 6.4 Education .5 0.0 32.5 3.2 W Recreation 84.7 0.0 1200.0 208.0 Education 23.3 0.0 906.7 119.2 Culture 6.0 0.0 105.0 15.5 Health 3.4 0.0 252.0 24.9 Civic .l 0.0 4.0 .5 9.21.1331 Business 123.0 0.0 679.3 136.3 Health 39.6 0.0 3000.0 270.8 Recreation 22.0 0.0 499.5 71.0 Culture 18.2 0.0 400.0 52.3 Education 3.3 0.0 75.0 12.7 93 recreation, culture, and education represent business operations in those subsystems. That is, in health the mean hours of 85 describe contact hours with a doctor for which individuals have compensated him either out—of- pocket or through an insurance program to which they have contributed. The 1,300 maximum hours in recreation may represent the utilization of a country club by one respon— dent. External Hours As a whole, the hours spent outside were fewer than inside as discussed under penetration. The most hours in positive flow were in employment with 499 mean hours. The volunteer time represented by the hours in the remaining external subsystems could be substitutions for local activity or extensions of local activity, as with regional meetings. Some respondents mentioned regional meetings in both the religious and health subsystems. Using the state parks on vacation trips some dis— tance from the city contributed to negative flow of 34.7 mean hours. The hours in the education subsystem were at state universities some distance from the city. Using special health facilities in Grand Rapids for a child on welfare also accounted for some negative hours. Higher mean hours for health under neutral represents use of these services with payment by the individuals. Two contrasting examples of use of these services are: a woman 94 with Parkinson‘s disease went to University Hospital at Ann Arbor only after an extended stay in the local hospital; another preferred the health facilities in Flint for the delivery of her child although that service could easily have been rendered locally. In the first example, the external facility was utilized only after an extended stay in the internal community; in the second, local facilities were bypassed. In recreation and culture subsystems, individuals and families are using special facilities not available locally: namely, rental campgrounds and a sophisticated cocktail lounge. Another component of flow is assessed housing val- uations. Secured through the city assessor's office, they are included to represent contributions to municipal expen- ditures through real estate taxes (Table 19). The minimum assessed valuation was $339; the maximum, $15,000. These figures are doubled to represent market value. The sample mean was $4,338.76. In selecting the sample, assessed housing valuation was employed as an indirect measure of access to resources. The higher value residential area was believed to be north of Main Street, the lower value south of Main Street. This was supported at the.(MMH.level of significance. 95 Table 19. Assessed valuation of residences of all respon- dents compared with stratified sample of the survey community. . All Respondents North South valuation (N=120) (N=60) (N=60) Minimum $ 339.00 Maximum $15,000.00 Mean $ 4,338.76 $5,107.20* $3,335.25* St. Dev. $ 2,262.12 *Significant at p <.0001. Suggestions for Community Development Sixty-two per cent of the respondents made from one to eight comments about resource development in the community (Figure 3). The other 38 per cent seem to have implied satisfaction with present community resources, for they made no suggestions. Although the respondents were asked to rank order their suggestions from one to three, many preferred to list their suggestions without ranking. Consequently, two tables concern the content of their suggestions, one giving rank order, the other combining ranked and unranked by category. Table 20 lists the suggestions made in ranking one, two, and three. Of the ten resources mentioned, activities or facilities associated with the use of leisure time account for four. The form most mentioned was facilities, as parks, roller skating rinks, whether ranked one, two, or three. 96 u) 40" ._1 f0 :5 '9. > 30" "-1 'U E. .2 zoJ O .:J 8 .4 o .10 H (D m 1 l 1 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Number of Suggestions Figure 3. Number of suggestions for community develOpment by per cent of individ- uals (N=277). Improving streets and roads, whether through better main- tenance, parking, or layout, also assumes importance to the respondents. Increasing diversity of goods and services is mentioned in different forms: addition of shopping centers, specialty stores, restaurants. The summary of the unranked suggestions in Table 21 differs in detail, but emphasizes the same resource areas: recreation, business, and municipal services. Recreation appears as most pressing in terms of community needs. Inasmuch as many of the recommendations for recreation relate to the teenager, there seems to be a recognition that a develOpmental need of the young person is to sample many different events and behaviors in prepara— tion for making a commitment to the adult role. Recreation 97 Table 20. Suggestions for community resource development by rank (N=172). RANK I RANK II RANK III . Per Per Per Suggestions No. Cent No. Cent No. Cent Facilities: Parks, Roller Skating, etc. 20 13.605 13 14.444 11 16.418 Streets, Roads: Maintenance, One- Way Streets, Snow Removal, Parking, RR Track 16 10.884 5 5.556 6 8.955 Recreation: for Teens 16 10.884 4 4.444 4 5.970 Shopping Centers: Quantity, Quality, Location 8 5.442 5 5.556 5 7.463 Restaurants 8 5.442 6 6.667 5 7.463 Specialty Stores: Diversity, Location 6 4.082 7 7.778 2 2.985 Recreation: for Young Children 5 3.401 6 6.667 2 2.985 Law Enforcement 4 2.721 5 5.556 3 4.478 Cultural Entertainment 2 1.361 4 4.444 5 7.463 Like Community As It Is 13 8.844 98 Table 21. Total suggestions for community resource develop— ment by category. Category Ranked Number Unranked Total Leisure Facilities: Parks, Roller Skating For Teens For Young Children Cultural Entertainment Improve Movies: Quality, Quantity For Adults Museum Recreation Night Spots Business Restaurants Specialty Stores: Diversity, Location Shopping Centers: Quantity, Quality, Location Services, Hours, Prices Communication: Additional Outlets, Improvement Personnel: Attitude, Practices Business, general Municipal Streets, Roads: Maintenance, One-Way Streets, Snow Removal, Parking Law Enforcement: Police— Citizen Relations Sanitation and Aesthetics: Public Garbage Pick-up, Empty Lots, Store Fronts, Sewage Disposal Transportation Service Civic Center Tax Structure Airport Housing 92 44 24 13 11 00000 000 OG) 39 27 12 000000 71 0001me 01-be F‘.b #01 i“ (.70 l-‘wob U101 52 20 HNNQCDH 163 HUG-[>- U100 91 47 14 wamooH 99 Table 21. Continued. Category Ranked Number Unranked Total Education Adult Higher Education Auxiliary Services: School Lunch, Cross—walks Pre-school, Day Care Education, General Vocational Tax Structure Special Education Teachers Music in Schools Health Doctors: Specialists, Family, House Calls Drug Education Nursing Home Equipment for Sick at Home, Reduced Ambulance Rates Health Spa Free Medical Clinics Health Costs Social Workers Services, Social Problems Jobs Better Jobs Jobs for Teens More Factories Higher Wages Jobs for Women Jobs for Adults Job Counseling Stronger Unions Social, Political Greater Participation: Involve- ment of More People, Less Con— servative People, Less Discrimination City Manager Structure Political Activity Specialized Groups, Women's Lib OO 00000000 0 000 000000 00000000 O O N 00 I-‘i-‘l—‘NNNWub mm 2 N HHHPHN wwq 2 HHHHNmeCD 1"" CD 10 28 mm i-‘l—‘I-‘NNanb N N WU'INI HrJHHAPJN l-‘l—‘i—‘i—‘Nth O [.1 G) 10 100 is one area where transition from the family to the larger system can take place. Community—centered rather than home-centered facilities foster these explorations. However, in this survey community, there are relatively few alterna— tives for such community interaction. The young peOple reacted to the problem by driving around the block of the shOpping area on Friday nights in such numbers that customers could not use the parking lots. The city's response was to pass an Aimless Driving Ordinance. Most responses about business imply a limited selec— tion of resources in the survey community. They suggest a need for greater diversity with more restaurants, specialty stores, and shOpping centers. At the present time, individ— uals speak about going to comparable establishments out of town. In suggesting such additions for the local commu- nity, they may be attempting to reduce the friction of space. In addition, a few respondents may feel that more competi- tion would improve the service the stores give, and the attitudes of the personnel. Another area receiving much attention is that of municipal services. Some of these suggestions may have been associated with the fact that the survey was conducted dur- ing winter and early spring. A snowfall had clogged the streets, and spring thaws contributed to roller—coaster conditions at some street corners where the surface material was disintegrating. During the survey there was some pub— licity about a new street layout in the central city, 101 creating some one-way streets. The respondents for the most part feel this is unnecessary. Each of the three categories of education, health, and jobs received a similar number of suggestions. These may in fact reflect more individual family concerns, because there had not been local community discussion of these to the extent of events related to recreation and municipal improvements. Within some of the categories there appear to be contradictions. For instance, some feel that the schools should supply more services, and yet the taxes are too high; there are not enough family doctors, yet more specialists are desired; improve the functional and aes~ thetic aspects of the community, but do not increase taxes. Despite the contradictions, such a listing is use— ful because it brings in perspective at the decision—making level the need for more resources or better communication about the ones already available. Test of the Hypotheses This section presents the results of the relation of selected family variables to the three dimensions of linkage and the number of suggestions for additional com- munity resources. Two statistical tests of relationship were employed: the Pearson correlation coefficient and multiple regression analysis. The product—moment correlation matrix charts the one-to-one relationship between continuous variables. The 102 portion relating family variables to linkage variables is included as Table 22. Direction of relationship is indi~ cated by the minus sign (-) for negative, while the remain— ing ones are positive. The multiple regression analysis (Table 23) presents two forms of relationships between independent and dependent variables: the multivariate and the univariate. The uni- variate is used when the singular dependent variable, such as scope or flow, is related to the whole of the family variables. Also, the contributions(fifindividual subsystems to the multivariate analysis of the penetration dimension are treated individually in relation to the whole of the family variables. The multivariate analysis of a particular relation— ship computes the effect of all the family variables (inde— pendent variables) on the components of the penetration dimension (dependent variable). This is found in Table 23 by locating the figure for multivariate F ratio. To the right of the F ratio on this line is located the alpha level of the result of the multivariate computation. To the right of this numeral are the resulting probability levels of the effect of each of the family variables on this rela— tionship. Significance is noted by an asterisk (*). Subsumed under the multivariate analysis are uni- variate F ratios and alpha levels for the contribution of individual subsystems to the penetration scores related to Table 22. 103 Matrix of Pearson correlation coefficients relating family variables to linkage variables. Var. No. 6 Link. Var. Sussvs H1805 HIEHP HlREO HlCUL HlREL H1500 HlHEA H1010 H2805 HZEHP HZREC HZCUL HZREL HZEDU HZHE4 HZCIV H3805 HSEHP H3REC H3CUL H3REL H3E00 HJHEA H3CIV 11805 IlEMP IlREC IlCUL IlREL IlEDU IlHEA IlCIV 12805 IZEHP ‘IZREC IZCUL IZREL IZEDU IZHEA IZCIV 13805 I3EHP I3REG ISCUL Social Posit. ’0111170 9.01650“ -.030071 —.lb7055 *oZZ9081 50050930 2.075351 4.058787 —.203“80 +.001096 -.0“3860 -.166869 4.206703 4.070319 -.075351 §.002308 -.15Z523 +.010“5b _.038660 —.138601 +.202008 +.067165 -.07535l +.058787 4.202197 4.107950 +.195138 +.0906§7 +.16123Q -.08“8“1 -.l“5059 *.077661 +.110121 4.0355k8 4.173300 4.065550 +.109277 2.077599 ~.155906 +.093993 +.215023 4.077755 +.187762 2.070219 Family Size .620 .220513 .06109h ‘0000179 -0073106 “0011201 .136308 -.125201 .167039 -.176343 .008136 .089699 -.399863 .054915 .202396 °.125201 .161236 .009108 .029186 .072155 ‘0230103 .068128 .200335 -.125201 0167039 .009985 ‘0125531 .221508 .063631 -.068370 .412305 .020312 ‘01“0953 '.323696 -0320007 .271676 .086870 ’0153392 '0030975 -,207075 ’0100321 ‘0202050 .277912 .075081 Income -.056015 .022358 .121134 ‘01“0‘“? .151657 .008530 -.102078 ‘0031037 -.251737 .000585 .198387 -.257l37 .107578 .071b49 -.102078 -.049795 -.l63553 .001005 .180439 ‘0217062 .109693 .067605 -.102078 -.031037 .235794 .097884 .238431 .158960 .025194 .034659 -.070001 .007382 -.011795 -.005769 .236506 .129354 '0020050 .305843 -.076386 -.014650 .121825 .052077 .248389 .116233 Stage of Length of Life Cycle Residence .176511 .078825 .088339 .133208 .159h32 -.206108 ‘0019106 .130689 .07226b .050200 .084068 .168599 .026555 -.210882 -.066196 .130489 .075721 .038950 .083626 .147567 .091883 ‘0207993 ‘0010725 .130489 .072264 -.000007 -.000724 0003791 -.001900 .050782 .170863 .104797 “0013909 -.083079 '001906“ .078328 -.000929 .028643 .256156 .105779 -.011368 -.053586 ’0026595 .0947“? *.002804 .017922 .020713 .010583 .131010 '0032099 -.077956 ’0016007 .043699 .268056 .02219“ -.034203 .302988 -000117“ '0165711 ‘0021952 .060590 .115527 .011711 -.026323 .210454 -.0§3§23 -.1b6026 c.021952 .043699 -.065623 .004372 -.046h67 0.060622 .097073 -.027097 .037603 0065000 .139212 .127672 -.083238 ’0006975 .111745 '0213901 .100955 .0913b1 .060352 .062915 -.115167 “0005071 104 Table 22. Continued. Var. Link. Social Family Stage of Length of No. Var. Posit. Size Income Life Cycle Residence 51 I3REL «.138762 -.126157 -.001852 3030552 .100769 52 I3E00 4.049338 .729326 .235218 .261041 -.199607 53 I3HEA ~.112&73 .013272 -.065301 .106111 .055544 50 I3CIV c.067611 -.171524 -.004555 -.035712 .06209§ 55 01805 1.215609 .036100 .270701 .062107 -.160771 56 OlEHP +.082710 .225262 .268764 .007631 -.123673 57 OlREC +.116209 .103888 .209387 .087115 -.082817 58 0100L +.120306 -.07hk62 .l9b78h -.066463 0.115531 59 OlflEL +.252568 .023732 .242681 -.02395h -.073856 60 OlEDU +.237282 .006152 .075592 -.027410 -.077267 61 01HEA -.037057 .120790 -.038372 .026830 -.125725 62 DiCIV 4.220459 .053281 .165854 .090196 -.099816 63 02805 +.072426 .176768 .261786 .130775 -.195612 64 OZEHP +.051530 .155234 .259605 -.023930 -.097960 65 OZREC 4.133012 -.007226 .191230 .059387 -.090489 66 0200L 4.048729 -.1k3506 .107905 -.102021 c.077170 67 02REL +.213~51 -.005045 .208768 -.059728 -.075808 68 02E00 4.198272 -.035899 .067803 -.042409 -.002181 69 02884 1.003211 .059244 -.008263 -.006506 -.069l8l 70 OZCIV +.201478 .040800 .199968 .086250 -.086938 71 03805 +.127980 .226096 .285794 .139507 -.235853 72 038"? 4.083437 .206576 .266570 -.010559 -.128772 73 03860 +.ll6555 .037283 .178622 .075011 -.095759 74 0300L +.082951 -.109868 .139600 -.085862 -.095869 75 03REL +.245856 .010682 .227016 -.008240 -.076091 76 03600 +.202682 e.017635 .051070 -.035617 -.0§6082 77 03HEA +.010568 .113418 -.040623 -.013058 -.091086 78 03CIV t.2288k8 .051603 .160755 .088960 -.099996 79 ASSVAL +.257705 .366863 .364811 .226357 .018513 80 D-EHP c.12779b .225231 .260003 -.011007 -.094227 81 D-CUL 4.064240 -.168583 .076062 -.163386 -.043276 82 D-REL 4.159005 -.09i397 .121740 .012238 .202880 83 D-EDU +.207829 .114532 .297496 -.063707 -.099027 84 D-HEA -.000431 -.074501 .148840 .170162 .120940 85 D-CIV +.268352 .120070 .368463 .036582 ..018355 86 IPOSII 4.200776 -.1l9570 .071703 .109551 .117859 87 INEGAT +.038604 .005100 .200046 .111727 -.181754 88 INEUTR 4.149915 .457662 .324838 .119786 -.182507 89 FLOHl +.142565 -.350283 -.070611 .000605 .223638 90 OPOSI7 +.164306 .055055 .312219 -.155765 -.166186 91 ONEGAT +.252533 .127863 .279672 -.013077 -.228303 92 ONEUTR 4.136057 -.208262 .192667 -.087210 -.072780 93 FLOHOI ~.073112 -.050068 .036220 -.112536 .032230 94 FLOHIN 4.199257 -.227239 .033614 .097050 .218853 Key to Linkage Variables: H = Home Production 2 = Adults and children weighted equally I = Internal Subsystem 3 = Adults and children weighted one-half O = External Subsystem Posit = Positive Flow D = Dollars Negat = Negative Flow 1 = Adults Only Neut = Neutral Flow 105 Table 23. Summary of multiple regression analysis of independent variables of family size, income, social position, life cycle, and residence with dependent linkage variables of scope. penetration, flow, and number of suggestions. Variable P Ratio Alpha Probability Levels Level Step Wise Regression of Independent Variables Multi- Uni- Family Social Life Resi- Variate Variate Size Income Position Cycle dence W 19.75 .0001* .0001* .0039* .0176 .3703 .3754 PENETRATION: Internal Subsystems Adults 9911 1.6294 .0105 .0001* .0573 .3675 .9163 .9096 Business 2.2437 .0545 . Employment 1.1960 .3155 Recreation 2.5477 .0316 Culture .6289 .6781 Religion 1.1735 .3264 Education 6.1579 .0001* Health .7316 .6012 Civic .8194 .5383 Adults with Children as 222 3.3351 .0001* .0001* .6775 .7172 .6943 .8800 Business 3.5597 .0050 Employment 3.6508 .0042 Recreation 2.8246 .0192 Culture .4775 .7925 Religion 1.2180 .3051 Education 28.5469 .0001* Health .9215 .4697 Civic 1.3166 .2618 Wagner: 653351?“ 3.3915 .0001* .ooo1* .2580 .5434 .8076 .9182 Business 2.7074 .0237 Employment 2.3548 .0447 Recreation 3.0192 .0134 Culture .4116 .8400 Religion 1.2239 .3023 Education 28.0040 .0001* Health .5587 .7315 Civic .9321 .4630 Table 23. Continued. 106 Variable F Ratio Alpha Probability Levels Level Step Wise Regression of Independent Variables Multi- Uni- Family Social Life Resi- Variate Variate Size Income Position Cycle dence PENETRATION: External Subsystems Adults Only 1.3775 .0664 .1500 .0063 .1123 .8556 .8493 Business 3.0285 .0132 Employment 2.3768 .0430 Recreation 1.2659 .2834 Culture 1.9882 .0854 Religion 2.3360 .0463 Education 1.4951 .1967 Health .8644 .5074 Civic 1.8753 .1037 Adults with Men a_s 923 1.3511 .0789 .0454 .0195 .1808 .7829 .9097 Business 2.6204 .0277 Employment 2.0118 .0820 Recreation 1.5132 .1910 Culture 1.6834 .1440 Religion 1.8051 .1172 Education 1.0527 .3904 Health .3658 .8711 Civic 1.5396 .1829 Adults with Children as m ‘ 1.5030 .0276 .0184 .0136 .1215 .7700 .8620 Business 3.3938 .0068 Employment 2.2541 .0535 Recreation 1.1644 .3309 Culture 1.6386 .1552 Religion 2.1762 .0614 Education 1.0767 .3770 Health .7145 .6138 Civic 1.9046 .0788 FLOW: Inside 4.4310 .0010* .1180 .3811 .1294 .0368 .1224 Qgfigigg .8112 .5440 .3868 .9107 .5503 .2832 .6696 NUMBER OF SUGGESTIONS 1.3927 .1744 .0080 .5252 .3039 .6951 .6817 VI 107 the whole of the family variables. In determining which sub- system may have affected the total relationship, some alpha levels below the level of significance of .01 will be dis— cussed. Home production is related to linkage variables through a multiple regression analysis in Table 24. Direction and level of contribution to significant relationships of the multiple regression analysis is noted through the use of raw regression coefficients. Pertinent coefficients and their standard error are presented in Table 25 and refer for the most part to the results of pene— tration in which adults and children are weighted equally. The results of these analyses are discussed in relation to each hypothesis. Hypothesis 1: Scope and Family Variables HO: There is no relationship between scope and social position, family size, income, stage of family life cycle, length of residence, and home pro- duction. According to the correlation coefficients (Table 22), the only relationship in this hypothesis that could be rejected was that of family size. This correlation was .62, well above the .48 significance at .01 alpha level. However, additional information was derived from the multivariate analysis on which basis the null hypothesis is rejected at .0001 (Table 23). HA: Scope is positively related to social position, family size, income, stage of family life cycle, length of residence, and home production. 108 .. L‘- 9". Table 24. Summary of multiple regression analysis of independent variables of heme production with linkage variables (N-123). Variable P Ratios Alpha Probability Levels Level Step Wise Regression of Independent Variables Home Production by Subsystems MUIti- Uni- , Busi- Employ-‘Recre- Cul- Reli- Educa- Variate Variate ness ment ation ture ,gion tion Health Civic SCOPE 1 Adults only 1.6355 .1224 .0119 .9043 .1414 .4190 .3754 .2743 .8950 .1941 Adults with Children as one 2.5145 .0149 .4945 .9134 .0447 .0170 .0743 .1456 .5768 .0766 Adults with Children as one-Half 1.8105 .0821 .4852 .9066 .0721 .1909 .1075 .0912 .8180 .0848 PENETRATION Internal Subsystems Adults only 1.0880 .3053 .1810 .0702 .9541 .1498 .5582 .8311 .2071 .5458 Business 2.5943 .0122 Employment 1.1224 .3536 Recreation 2.3413 .0229 Culture .9823 .4536 Religion .6518 .7327 Education .3377 .9497 Health .9537 .4759 Civic .5853 .7883 Adults with Children as one 1.5331 .0065 .0486 .0333 .6224 .0837 .4497 .1421 .0661 .3761 Business 4.1871 .0003 Employment 1.5363 .1524 Recreation 1.2132 .2976 Culture 1.8262 .0792 Religion .7955 .6077 Education 3.5299 .0012 Health 1.0972 .3705 Civic .7684 .6313 Adults with Children as one—half 1.1766 .1724 .3477 .1675 .9095 .0769 .5429 .4346 .0817 .4894 Business 2.7540 .0082 Employment .8464 .5640 Recreation 1.4050 .2019 Culture 1.3717 .2164 Religion .6241 .7562 Education 2.0081 .0516 Health .8527 .5587 Civic .7899 .6126 109 Table 24. Continued. Variable P Ratio Alpha Probability Levels Level Step Wise Regression of Independent Variables Hulti- Uni- Hours Production by Subsystems ' Variate Variate Busi- Fmploy- Recre- Cul- Reli- Educa- ness ment ation ture gion tion Heal Civic pzuzrnarrou ' External Subsystems Adults only .9491 .5905 .6290 .7940 .3875 .8679 .0046 .9980 .0996 .9985 Business 1.5612 .1443 Employment .3212 .9566 Recreation .7850 .6169 Culture 1.8648 .0724 Religion 1.7193 .1013 Education .5731 .7981 Health .9134 .5082 Civic .3443 .9467 Adults with . 1 refi—EE one 1.3579 .0387 .4789 .7464 .7781 .6452 .0001 .3925 .1215 .9482 Business 1.6744 .1121 Employment .7239 .6702 Recreation .4547 .8853 Culture 1.1717 .3223 Religion 2.7958 .0073 Education .7292 .6655 Health .2537 .9790 Civic 1.9374 .0610 Adults with %%§%%§%% Si 1.3491 .0420 .4532 .8123 .4989 .8162 .0001 .3965 .0525 .9801 Business 1.8845 .0691 Employment .5855 .7882 Recreation .5299 .8320 Culture 1.1213 .3544 Religion 2.2626 .0278 Education .5336 .8292 Health .4480 .8897 Civic 1.9016 .0664 Table 24. Continued. 110 Variable F Ratios Alpha Level Multi- Uni- variate variate Probability Levels Step Wise Regression of Independent Variables Home Production by Subsystems Busi- Employ- ness ment Recre- Cul- Reli- Educa- ation ture gion tion Health Civic FLOW Adults 9511 .7208 .7716 Inside .2958 .9661 Outside 1.1395 .3425 Adults with ren as gag .6721 .8200 Inside .1970 .9908 Outside 1.1546 .3330 Adults with Children as one-half .6304 .8576 Inside .2163 .9875 Outside 1.0533 .4010 .8384 .8480 .7957 .8596 .8468 .7839 .0255 .9314 .9245 .7924 .9574 .2544 .0536 .6671 .7213 .6729 .8613 .4297 .0521 .9844 .6418 .7648 .9148 .3999 111 Table 25. Selected raw regression coefficients with corresponding standard error.a Raw Regression Standard Variables Coefficients Error Scope Family Size .45 ‘ .07 Social Position .26 .11 Home Production Religion .23 .13 Culture -.17 .08 Recreation .14 .09 Internal Penetration Education Subsystem Family Size .88 .09 Employment Subsystem Family Size —.44 .11 Home Production Employment .28 .13 Health .38 .26 Incomeb .21 .15 Business Subsystem Family Size -.24 .07 Home Production Employment .25 .08 Incomeb .20 .11 Recreation Subsystem Home Production Health .47 .19 Civic Subsystem Family Size -.20 .09 Home Production Health .33 .20 External Penetration Business Subsystem Income -25 ‘13 Employment Subsystem .25 .10 Income Culture Subsystem Incomeb -21 ‘10 aCorrelations for adults and children weighted equally, except for noted cases. Adults only. 112 As discussed above, the correlation coefficient indicated the relationship between scope and family size to be positive and significant at .62 (Table 22). The multivariate regression (Table 23) shows this same variable to be significant at .0001. Income is also significant at .0039. The correlation coefficient supports this positive relationship between income and sc0pe with a correlation of .44. The correlation coefficient gives some strength to social position at .28 which is supported by the raw regression coefficient of .26 (Table 25). Home production is almost significantly related to scope when children 13 and under are weighted equally with adults (Table 24) according to the multivariate analysis at .015. The great« est support comes from the culture subsystem at .017, £014 lowed by recreation at .045. According to the raw regression coefficients, the relationship with culture is a negative one, -.l7, and with recreation a positive one at .14. The eschewing of the sedentary for the active as it relates to home production may be an indication of the energy level of those families emphasizing home production. Of marginal significance are the subsystems of religion and civic as ‘related to home production and scope at .07 and .08 (Table 24). These are in the positive direction according to the raw regression coefficients of .23 and .28 (Table 25). Home production then appears somewhat related to the number of different subsystems families enter, with recreation at home making the greatest contribution followed by religious 113 activity and political activity. Inasmuch as the signifi- cant contribution of culture to home production is in a negative direction, the strong orientation to sedentary leisure in the home may be associated with narrow contact with the community. In summary, of the family variables related posi— tively to utilizing different subsystems, family size is most significant, followed by income. Home production and social position are closely related. In addition, the correlation matrix points to a negative relationship between residence and scope of -.23. That is, the longer the length of residence, the fewer sub- systems entered. This is substantiated by the fact that the education subsystem correlates at .58 with the number of subsystems entered when the children's contact hours are weighted equally with adults. Those with the longest length of residence are past the child—rearing stage and would not be entering the education subsystem except for job training, which they did not indicate they were doing. Scope refers to the number of different subsystems families enter. Although 100 per cent of families use the business subsystem, it would be useful in relation to understanding resource needs to determine which subsystems contribute to the diversity of subsystems available in the community. According to the correlation matrix, education is significantly related to the number of subsystems entered at .57. Internal recreation is correlated at .37 114 when children are weighted equally with adults. This is followed by external employment for adults only at .24. In addition, the raw regression coefficients (Table 25) link two more subsystems with home production: civic at .27 and religion at .23. These data seem to describe the family entering the most subsystems as the larger family, relatively new to the community compared with the average length of residence of 22 years, with children 14 and over entering the educational and recreational subsystems. It is probable that these families also engage in religious activity in the home as well as making some use of the civic subsystem. Because of the variety of components of this latter subsystem, further analysis would be necessary to determine exact activity. It is likely that families with high scope scores do not spend time watching television, an activity that accounted for many hours of culture at home. Hypothesis 2: Penetration and Family Variables H : There is no relationship between penetration within 0 the community and social position, family size, income, stage of family life cycle, length of resi- dence, and home production. This hypothesis was rejected for family size based on the correlation matrix for the educational subsystem at .73, when children were weighted equally with adults. The multiple regression supported this conclusion for all family variables at .0001 in relation to penetration in the internal 115 community. This hypothesis was also rejected when chil- dren's hours were weighted as one—half at the .0001 level of significance in the multiple regression analysis. How— ever, more significance for component subsystems was noted when children were weighted equally with adults, so dis— cussion will be based on those figures, except for the marginal significance of income to two subsystems based on adults only. I H A: Penetration within the community is positively related to social position, family size, income, stage of family life cycle, length of residence, and home production. Family size is again the dominant family variable at a significance of .0001 (Table 23). Contributions come from three subsystems: education at .0001, employment at .0042, and business at .005. However, the correlation with the education subsystem is the only one of these in which a positive relationship was noted in the raw regression coefe ficients (Table 25). This was positively related at .88 reflecting the contact hours of children 13 and under as well as those 14 and over with the education subsystem. The significant relationship of family size with the employment subsystem is a negative one at _,44 (Table 25), suggesting that wage earners with larger families tend to travel to distant locations for employment probably influ— enced by the higher earnings associated with external factory employment, as one alternative. 116 The larger family size implies the presence of children and it would appear that working outside the com- munity, involving as it does commuting time of at least two hours a day, would detract from available hours for the wage earner's participation in family activities._ For some factory workers this is evident as these fathers work the night shift, leaving their homes about 4 o‘clock in the afternoon. For others on a day shift, the father leaves about 4 o'clock in the morning and is at home by the time children are out of school in the afternoon. Family size is also negatively related in a marginal degree to use of the local business within the city limits at -.24 (Table 25). Although some of this could represent travel to the shopping malls outside the county, it could also refer to the major grocery stores and the local shOp— ping plaza located just outside the city limits. This is indicative of the volume of business the central shopping area is losing to other centers. Family size was also negatively related, —.20, to penetration of the civic subsystem. This may refer to participation in civic organizations, including fraternal organizations, that appeared to offer fellowship to older couples and individuals. Counting these hours in the civic subsystem runs counter to the purpose of this classifica— tion, which referred to community—oriented activity. The family variable of home production is positively related to use of the internal community at a significance 117 of .0065, particularly the business community at .0003, followed by education at .0012 (Table 24). Since home pro— duction is significantly related to family size, .0003 (Table 12), it follows that the larger family would have need for a greater quantity of resources and would tend to produce goods and services more economically at home, but also have need for supplies from the community. Use of the educational subsystem reflects the presence of children associated with family size. The home production subsystem contributing most to the relationship of home production to penetration is that of employment at .0333. That is, those. families where a wage earner works within the home use the internal community subsystems to a greater degree. The subsystems they appear to use most in the community are business at .25 and employment at .28 correlation accord— ing to the raw regression coefficients (Table 25). Since working at home represents either a second job for the husband or supplementary income from the wife, this greater use of the internal community may be the effect of the resulting income of the second job, or the higher energy level concomitant with the extra work load. Home volunteer work relating to health apparently contributes at a significance of .0661 to the relationship between home production and use of the internal community (Table 24). Home health production refers both to nursing activity at home as well as soliciting for fund drives in the neighborhood. This is positively related to using the 118 recreation facilities, being employed in the internal com~ munity, and activity in the civic subsystem at .47, .38, and .33, respectively. Inasmuch as there was only one instance of extended home nursing care, it may be that the discriminating factor is the willingness to contribute time to a cause beyond the family, such as a fund drive. This interest in the local community is reinforced by local employment and participation in civic groups and political activity. The marginal significance of income to the internal community at .06 is through the employment subsystem and business subsystem according to the raw regression coefe ficients for adults only (Table 25) at .21 and .20, respec— tively. HO: There is no relationship between penetration out51de the community and social p051tion, family size, income, stage of family life cycle, length of residence, and home production. This hypothesis was not rejected by the coefficients of the correlation matrix and the multiple regression analy— sis. However, some interesting trends are evident. Income appears more related to use of the external community than family size (Table 25). When children are weighted equally with adults, the use of the business and employment subn systems is marginally significant at .26 and .25, respec— tively as measured by the raw regression coefficients, reinforcing the negative relationship of family size to internal employment and business. That is, larger families 119 tend to go outside the city limits for employment and shop— ping. Even though the presence of children would dilute the scores, their presence must influence the decision to work and shop outside the local community to maximize income and seek out appropriate resources. When adults alone are considered, the relationship of income to the external cultural subsystem is .21. The correlation matrix did point out that use of the business system external to the community was correlated at .52 for adults only with the use of the cultural subsystem. This supports an impression of the field worker that adults in single and two—person households appeared to seek leisure outside the local community. In summary, the larger family size is related to significantly higher contact hours with subsystems in the community. This community is not limited to the local one, for it appears that the wage earners of these families are commuting to employment outside the city limits and doing their shopping there. In the first instance, the commuting may be to Flint and Lansing, while the shopping can be focused on the major grocery stores just over the city lim- its as well as the shOpping malls in outlying cities. Use of the internal recreation subsystem, the civic subsystem, and local employment are highly related to fami— lies involved in home—based volunteer health activity. This relationship may include family size, and therefore may be a result of interest in the community through 120 activities of children and of time available because of minimal commuting time. There is also a group of onen and two—person house— holds who go outside the community for leisure activity as defined in the cultural subsystem. From the remarks by respondents, these appear to be more specialized services as night clubs and theatre to be found in more diversified communities. Hypothesis 3: Flow and Family Variables HO: There is no relationship between flow within the . community and social position, family size, income, stage of family life cycle, length of residence, and home production. The null hypothesis was rejected on the basis of the multiple regression analysis at .001. Although no one fam- ily variable was significantly related, life cycle appeared to have some influence for the first time in this analysis. The correlation matrix presented information about relation— ship of subsystems to the flow score. HA1: Flow is positively related to social position and income. There appeared to be no trend of relationship between any family variable and flow according to the raw regression coefficients which centered around zero. This may indicate that families utilizing the community resources are at the same time contributing to the community, as illustrated in Table 26. The means for positive and negative are so close, it appears there is balancing within the family system. 121 Table 26. Standard scores for components of flow (N=123). Flow = positive-negative neutral Components Standard Scores Of Equation Internal' External Mean Positive 42.97 42.00 Negative ' 42.47 41.70 Neutral 42.23 41.90 . Standard Deviation Positive 4.55 2.98 Negative 3.06 2.90 Neutral 3.52 3.53 Flow .12 .09 Range Flow —.l84 to -.163 to +.176 +.l79 122 On the other hand, some elements were not included for methodological reasons. For instance, the welfare category ranging from unemployment insurance to subsidized housing was represented in the data only with a frequency count. Also dollar contributions were not differentiated between internal and external. Their inclusion would have added another dimension to the positive and negative scores. According to the correlation matrix, the employs ment and civic subsystems were most related to the flow scores. These correlations were .53 for civic when children were weighted equally with adults and .51 for employment when children were weighted as onenhalf. These positive scores probably contributed to the overall correlation between positive flow and total scores of .77. Further analysis would be indicated regarding the civic subsystem to determine which activity, from participating in civic groups to political activity, was the predictive element. Ho: There is no relationship between flow outside the community and social position, income, family size, stage of the family life cycle, length of residence, and home production. This hypothesis was not rejected in relation to family variables. However, the use of the external commu— nity seems to be associated with the business and recreation subsystems. According to the correlation matrix, the use of the recreation subsystem is highly related to negative flow at .67 (Appendix G). This would indicate use of state parks or other public facilities outside the city limits 123 by adults only. The use of the external business subsystem is highly correlated at .54 with neutral flow when only adults are compared. This correlation is still significant when children 13 and under are weighted equally with adults at .51. Neutral flow also correlates at .44 with the cul— ture subsystem. This indicated that goods and services are the primary use of the external business community, fol— lowed by leisure pursuits of a sedentary nature by adults only. Hypothesis 4: Suggestions for Community Development and Family Variables HO: There is no relationship between numbers of sug— gestions for community resource develOpment and social position, family size, income, stage of family life cycle, length of residence, and home production. ‘ This hypothesis was not rejected. As explained in methodology the many suggestions did not lend themselves to comparison with family variables. Some significant relation— ships may emerge on the basis of individual linkage behavior, an analysis beyond the scope of present use of the data. Conclusions In this diverse community, one family variable emerges as significantly related to linkage dimensions, that is, family size. Although one— and two—person households are in the majority, a substantial number of families, 46 per cent, are now in the process of rearing children. Thus families with children appear to dominate in the 124 community because of their numbers. They are also more active, entering more subsystems and spending more hours in the internal community. Home production as a whole is also related to fam— ily size. The greatest contribution comes from families supplying goods and services for themselves in addition to securing them in the community. From the data this activity extends to almost every subsystem, except the leisureaoriented subsystem of culture. Home production in culture is empha- sized by smaller family units. About half the population is in the lower two catee gories of social position, indicating a combination of edu- cation of high school or less and of semi-skilled or unskilled employment. The median income is about $10,000, indicating either good pay in lower job categories or misinterpreta— tion of respondent's job title. The dominance of blue— collar workers would imply the presence of an extended family system, a possible alternative to community resources for the family. The fact that the mean length of residence for fam— ilies is 16 years and for individual family members is 27 years lends strength to the notion of extended kinship and friendship network. The long—time residents appear also to include those of lower income. It may be they are employed locally where wages tend to be lower, or are among the 20 per cent depend- ing on social security and other fixed incomes for sustenance. In contrast, the higher incomes are associated with larger 125 families more recent to the community or of recent family formation and of higher social position. Although 100 per cent of the families use the internal business subsystem, employment accounts for the most contact hours followed by business, health, education, and religion. This ranking was secured from the adult schedules, including individuals 14 and over. Therefore, if children 13 and under were accounted for, there could be a transposin tion of the rankings between health and education. Utilizing the external community also focuses on employment and business. Although the means are less than for the internal community they are so substantial that it is evident families need to go outside the city limits for resources. The third subsystem in order of utilization is recreation. This can, of course, be attributed to vacation trips for which there is no substitute in the local commu- nity. On the other hand, the number of suggestions for improvements in the area of recreation for the local commu— nity suggests there is a lack in this area, not satisfied by the use of the external community. Use of the external health subsystem ranks fourth, and from the comments of the respondents, was for the most part prompted by specialized needs not available locally. It appeared that internal flow was significantly related to family variables with stage of the family life cycle being most prominent but not significant. According to the raw regression coefficients, the relationship among 126 the family variables and flow was Very close to zero. This may indicate that the contribution to and use of the community are so evenly balanced within the family system that no great differences exist among families. This appears to be substantiated by results from penetration which link the use of the educational system (negative) with employ— ment (positive). ' Four clusters of similar characteristics emerged from what appeared to be a diverse relationship of the family to the community. These reflect the influence of family size on the breadth and depth of the contact hours with community subsystems. The larger families enter more subsystems than smaller families. They also spend more hours in home pro- duction activities of recreation and education. The latter could include home study or preparation for volunteer lead— ership in an educational group as Scouts. In addition, the wage earners are employed outside the city limits and do more shopping there. Inasmuch as the major grocery stores were just over the city line, as was a shOpping mall, this could represent patronizing the metropolitan area as well as traveling 30 to 40 miles to modern shopping malls. In addition, the higher the income, the more subsystems entered. This diversity was also related to length of family residence in that younger families or those more recent to the commu- nity entered more subsystems. 127 Included in this pattern is the family with high participation in volunteer effort in the health community from the home, as participating in health drives. These families are employed locally, utilize local recreational facilities and recreation, and participate in fraternal organizations. In contrast, some smaller families with lower income and longer length of residence in the community were more restricted in the number of different subsystems they entered, and focused a great amount of time on leisure activity in the home. They also shopped at internal busi— nesses. Then there appeared to be a nucleus of adults with higher income who made use of the external business and culture subsystems. Of small family size, they may be the ones who enjoy eating out, and traveling to places of interest. One interesting phenomenon evident in the data was the utilization of two subsystems emphasizing leisure: one active, the other sedentary. The means, as summarized in Table 27, show that most of this leisure is home oriented and of a sedentary character. The greatest contribution to these sedentary hours is made by small families of long residence in the community and low income. Small families with higher income tend to utilize the external culture sub- system. 128 Table 27. Summary of hours in culture and recreation subsystems (N=l40). Mean Hours Source Culture Recreation Total Home Production 858.5 142.6 1001.1 Internal Community 60.1 50.6 110.7 External Community 33.0 106.7 139.7 Total 951.6 299.9 1251.5 Families with children make use of internal recrea- tion facilities more than external recreation facilities. 1 However, according to the number of suggestions made regard— ing internal recreation, there is an apparent need for more facilities, extending over the age span from young children to adults and from natural environments as parks and horse— back riding areas to man—built roller skating rinks and swimming pools. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS This chapter is divided into three sections: summary, limitations of the study, and implications for further study. Summary This study had a two—fold purpose: to expand the knowledge of the family system beyond its immediate boun— daries to include the environment from which it derives resources, and to provide community decision makers with these data as a factual contribution to the assessment of community resources. More specific objectives were: (1) to devise a system of measurement for family's linkage with community resources; (2) to determine the relationships among sc0pe, penetration, and flow dimensions of family- community resource linkages and selected family variables: social position, size of family, stage of family life cycle, income, length of residence in the community, and hours spent in home production; and (3) to determine broadly the families' unmet resource needs in the community. The random sample of 140 families was drawn from adjoining cities in Michigan with a total population of about 24,000. Separated by 30 or 40 miles from cities of larger 129 130 size, they illustrated the relationship of smaller commu- nities to the needs of families vis—a—vis other community centers. All family members 14 and over were asked to report through a detailed questionnaire the number of contact hours with the community over a period of a year. A summary questionnaire for children 13 and under reported their con« tact hours in the subsystems when unattended by adult family members. These hours were associated with services and facilities representing a range of resources classified into nine subsystems: business, employment, recreation, culture, religion, education, health, civic, and welfare. The individual contact hours were transformed into mean family hours for quantifying the linkage dimensions of scope, penetration, and flow. Mean family hours were the basis for deriving standard scores for each linkage dimen- sion, thereby locating families in relation to each other. Scope described the number of subsystems families contact; penetration, the number of contact hours in each subsystem; flow, the relative use of or contribution to the community. Families received one standard score for scope, one for internal flow, and one for external flow. The assignment of standard scores for penetration was more complex, for there were scores for each subsystem by internal and external community. In addition, the treat- ment of the summary questionnaires was varied to determine the effect on the family means for each subsystem. Most 131 significance was apparent when the contact hours of chil— dren 13 and under were weighted equally with contact hours of individuals 14 and over. Multiple regression and Pearson correlation coef— ficients were used to relate the linkage variables of sc0pe, penetration, and flow with family variables of fam— ily size, income, social position, stage of family life cycle, years of residence, and home production. Home pro— duction scores were derived like linkage scores from the hours families reported they spent in providing within the home the goods or services they could have purchased from the community. Such activity ranged from meal preparation to remodeling a home. A combination of family size and income was sig— nificantly related to scope, indicating that the larger families with better income would enter more subsystems. The range of different subsystems entered was from three to nine, with the mean at seven. Of all family variables, family size was most significantly related to use of the internal community, while income along with family size was marginally related to use of the external community. Employment accounted for the highest mean contact hours both within and without the community. However, business, though second in hours, was utilized by all families and accounted for more significance in a positive relation to family variables than employment. 132 The third most utilized subsystem in the internal community as reported by adults only was the health sub— system, followed by education. Consideration of the con- tribution of children 13 and under to utilization of the education system could transpose this ordering. In the external community, the third and fourth positions were occupied by recreation and health, respectively. Although the prominence of recreation in the external community may be attributed to vacation trips, the number of suggestions for additional recreational facilities in the local com— munity suggests a need for increased resources in this area. Selected elements from the penetration scores were formulated into an equation quantifying flow: the relative use of or contribution to the community. Internal flow was significantly related to the family variables with family life cycle most prominent although marginally significant. The mean score for internal flow was slightly negative, within a narrow range of scores. There was no significant relationship between the external flow scores and family variables. The mean score for the external community was slightly positive within a narrow range of scores. Families with children tend to make greater use of and participate more in the community. They have more income either from internal or external employment, and supplement this through home production. In the one- and two-person households there appear to be differing 133 characteristics. The older families with long years of residence in the community,depending upon fixed incomes, shop primarily in the local community and are entertained at home through hobbies and television. Others with high scores in volunteer health activities penetrate the internal civic and recreational subsystems as well as local employ- ment. The third cluster of small households with higher income makes more use of the external community through business and culture. Limitations of the Study The goal of gaining an overall View of family con- tact with the community was accomplished. However, some possible limitations inherent in the methodology and find- ings should be noted. Asking families for hours spent in the community over a period of a year was a complex task since families do not ordinarily quantify their behavior in these terms. Requesting information concerning all subsystems for all family members extended the length of the question— naire and time involved. Harmonizing the function of activities categorized in subsystems would aid in interpretation of findings. In this study, it appeared that although some civic organiza- tions have as their purpose some goals of community contri- bution, their function within the study community was more social, contributing to individual needs. Consequently, 134 when contact hours with these organizations are summed with political activity, it is not readily apparent what inter— pretation to make. Relying on standard scores to divide the families into categories based on utilization of the_community repa resented the distribution of contact hours, but hindered the isolation of those having little contact with the community. Since standard scores are based on the standard deviation, they are most effective with a normal curve dis— tribution. Inasmuch as the distributions for the linkage variables were skewed, in most instances with a few maximum scores influencing the mean, the standard scores represent— ing little or no utilization were close to the mean with consequent masking of their characteristics. Knowing the hours of utilization of the community does not indicate the quantity or quality of a resource contribution to the family system or to the functional or dysfunctional effect of these resources on either the fam- ily or the community. Identifying areas of resource develOpment is only the first step in the decision process. If these data are to be of most value to community decision makers, families would need to establish priorities among the suggestions. One approach could be to assess the contribution of the . facility or service to develOpmental needs of individuals and families in relation to costs and the necessary changes in behavior patterns to utilize these added resources. 135 The effect of welfare was inadequately represented because data on its contribution were not comparable to either dollars or hours. Thus a possible influence on the negative component of the flow score is absent. Financial support from welfare ranged from unemployment insurance through supplementary ADC payments to total support and subsidized housing. Implications for Further Study The following implications fall into three sec— tions: those relating to improved techniques for further study of linkages between the family and community; the construction of distinctions between family and individual behavior; and research including the results of this study, but exploring other questions. The raw data in contact hours with services and facilities within subsystems provided by this study can be analyzed to provide categories of high, medium, and low contact hours representing utilization of community resources. This would facilitate a response to hours typical of indi- vidual behavior. In addition, these categories could serve as the basis for analysis. The questionnaire could be divided in half and, with random assignment of the parts, the families would not be faced with the stress of a complex questionnaire, thereby contributing to greater cooperation and more accurate responses. 136 Supplementary questionnaire items specific to the con- tribution of the welfare subsystem to the family would be valuable. In this way an assessment could be made of the contribution of these benefits, such as unemployment insur— ance, on the total family income. This study has been confronted with the problem voiced by Kunkel (1967), in translating individual behavior to group or family behavior. In Kunkel's case, there was a transition from village to family organization. It is pos— sible that individual behaviors could be similar in both situations, but the organizing system be different. In the' present study, family behaviors, encompassing diverse age levels, were quantified by averaging individual hours to arrive at family hours. Is there a construct of family behavior per se, or only individual behavior distinguished by its organizing system? Rather than family behavior, the question may revolve around the family as an intervening system and the allocation of resources to design and maintain the social and physical components of the system. However, our society is so indi— vidually oriented that the individual and his needs are understood better than the family and its systemic needs. To acquire better understanding of the latter would neces— sitate research into the family system, taking into account the definition of family vs. individual behavior and the effect of allocation of resources to the individual or fam— ily under conditions of affluence and scarcity. Krieger (1972) 137 and Chapin and Hightower (1965) overlooked this relationship and consequently related individual needs to community resources without considering the intervening family system. The proposal by Krieger (1972).explores the way the community could meet individual development needs. The coma munity intervenes when dysfunctional conditions are aggraa vated, implying in some cases a family system malfunction, in others, individual aberrations. The response would be a community institution to meet individual needs without con- sidering the adjustments possible within the family system. An example of such a possibility is teaching the mother how. to supplement nursery school educational goals. The approach is also applicable to other specific areas besides child develOpment. Research by Chapin and Hightower (1965) utilized discretionary “free" time as a basis for predicting trends in land use. That this may be inadequate is supported by their own research, in that there was a discrepancy between what subjects would currently like to do and what they actually did. Some of the discrepancy may be accounted for by systemic demands. In any case, there appears to be a need to research the energy needs of the system in addition to the elements of the system. A question for further exploration suggested by this study relates to the great interest in leisure, sup- porting the findings of Chapin and Hightower (1965) and Havighurst and Feigenbaum (1958). It was evident in the 138 present study, both in the amount of contact hours devoted to leisure and in the suggestions for additional community resources, that families were allocating considerable time to active and passive leisure activity. With the empha~ sis on recreation from the advertising media and models in society, the question about allocation of resources comes to the fore. I Thus recreation could be studied in relation to the systemic needs of the family and illustrate the discussion by Etzioni and Lehman (1967) about the relationship of goal and nongoal activity to the functioning of a system. Are leisure pursuits replacing time, energy, and resources that could be devoted to the maintenance of the physical and social elements of the family system? To what extent, for instance, does the color television and snowmobile substi- tute for safety maintenance of the shelter, an adequate supply of food, or interpersonal communication? Does lei- sure function as a nongoal activity draining excess energy from the system, or diverting attention, in the process of tension management with the result of maintaining harmonious relationships among components? Given some of the dysfunc- tional elements of the society, are these allocations of time and money to leisure at the family level functional or dysfunctional to the distribution of resources for a viable family and society? Another area of investigation is the extent to which family systems contribute to community resources. One aspect 139 of this contribution has come through taxing real property. Inasmuch as housing can reflect economic resources, the differential property values would appear to be an apprOpe riate basis for equitable distribution of community costs. However, it was noted in this survey that there were many families living in marginal housing whose income, by current mortgage practices, could have supported a higher standard. Yet attractive, or more durable housing was apparently not within their value structure. So not only do these fami— lies not contribute economically in the same proportion as those who have invested in good housing, but their contribua tion to the aesthetic dimensions of a community is minimal. This suggests that understanding the effect of different contributory patterns between the family and the community, ranging from the aforementioned property taxes to hours in volunteer activity, may have implications for adaptive mechanisms between the family and the community. This study focused on the family‘s utilization of the public community, but untapped by this study is a net— work of family and friends who undoubtedly accounted for some differences in the apparent contentment of some reSpon- dents of this study. The relationship of this network to families as complementary to or as a substitute for the public community may be related to the adequacy of public community resources, and would therefore complement this study of the public community. 140 In conclusion, the major interest has been on the family as a viable system exchanging resources with a com— munity. Further study in this area can only enhance appre— ciation of the infinite variety and complexity of this interaction and understanding of the functional and dysfunc— tional effects 5f modification of these linkages. APPENDICES 141 APPENDIX A TABLE 28. POPULATION OF PLACES, 1970 142 APPENDIX A Table 28. POpulation of Places, 1970. United States Size of Place Number Population Total . . . . . . . . . 20,768 144,747,761 Places of — 1,000,000 or more . . . . . . . . 6 18,770,773 500,000 to 1,000,000 . . . . . . 20 12,989,017 250,000 to 500,000 . . . . . . . 30 10,466,400 100,000 to 250,000 . . . . . . 100 14,292,614 50,000 to 100,000 . 240 16,740,130 25,000 to 50,000 . . . . . . . 520 17,848,705 20,000 to 25,000 242 5,404,850 10,000 to 20,000 . 1,143 16,026,535 5,000 to 10,000 . . . . . 1,839 12,930,372 2,500 to 5,000 . . . . . 2,295 8,041,728 2,000 to 2,500 . 987 ' 2,200,587 1,500 to 2,000 1,361 2,353,858 1,000 to 1,500 . . . . . . . . 2,182 2,678,402 500 to 1,000 . . . . . . . . . . 3,294 2,371,707 200 to 500 . . . . . . 3,990 1,332,486 Less than 200 . . . . . . . 2,519 299,597 Cumulative Summary: Places of - 1,000,000 or more . . . . . . . . 6 18,770,773 500,000 or more . . . . . . . . . 26 31,759,790 250,000 or more . . . . . . . . . 56 42,226,190 100,000 or more 156 56,518,804 50,000 or more 396 73,258,934 25,000 or more . . . . . . . . . 916 91,107,639 20,000 or more . . . . . . . . 1,158 96,512,489 10,000 or more . . . . . . . . . 2,301 112,539,024 5,000 or more . . . . . . . . . . 4,140 125,469,396 2,500 or more . . . 6,435 133,511,124 2,000 or more . . . . . . . . . 7,422 135,711,711 1,500 or more . . . . . . . . 8,783 138,065,569 1,000 or more . 10,965 140,743,971 500 or more . 14,259 143,115,678 200 or more . . . . 18,249 144,448,164 Source: 1971 "Number of Inhabitants," U.S. Census of POpula- tion 1970, Final Report PC (1)-A1, U.S. Summary (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1970). 143 APPENDIX B TABLE 29. MATRIX OF PEARSON CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS AMONG LINKAGE VARIABLES 144 v-1. —— maladwol kudos-o ~nonNao baconaoo a.m.-N. finanwuoo NONmOdo 0:00... otOMOuon coache- mm«0nuo sowoueoa Mthowo bsoawugo gowns“. saturuo Nhnmmaoo unssoa. :NNmau. mucosa-I undocu- hhtaNn-i :omhnu. honora. mo~«o«oo ~n538u. omroswo m~oonaoo awmoowcl Nomad-o moose“. owowda. bh~ooao hwmsrno Numnuno 0~awtaol «mo:onol «uwsmo. ownoouo (neon-o oaoaaeod uIUNH a: m-ooaon Canadaou O‘Nmnuo combo-o0 mommawo «50009. omMOon. owouwu. coonmooa Mon~ouo mumacdo c.0009. OQONnNo ooNnheo oouoon. mmmaou. oomhwoou Onwaou. omlwnu. h1n0a5.0 ko~0u~. owodooo aaQONN. «Nooma. donate-o omwoou. naomnmo n-¢oo.l ooc-~.: cannon. NnumNN. NNmooua Nn.«~n. :«hoao. wranswo -n~ca.l ~3khcwoo sonwoo. onmmou. caaohao mmuonno oaaooo.u m3m~u on masoneol oomnoa. «somnwo ammneo. doused. connheoo «woven. n~aouno Odnhvcol choked. cosmowo Ndmnbao tbwmddo ”unusual :omaoa. econmuo mamdo=ou ouwwwao nomh:~. mthma. momma“. omnwsooi omuno°o «oowou. «bemoan: ommwvuo towwmm. mwoonuo nomuoooa ossmoa. «mm:«~. amoeba. osmmowo hm:on~. cabana. issued. «m-0o.l mnsoso. oownwu. woosha. mandoN. «hrhoN. occaaaou >~uun on mBZMHUHhmMOU ZOHfifidmmmOU zommfimm m0 XHmB<2 Locumaoo moosoaot eunucool ono~aOo :nmsoool mantra-I Omn~caon ootuuao ammouaol Nchmnco nonmoaol ~:dom:o nnmooaol hano:.oo kmlnoOol N:Da«cou Qumooooo onownoou swanmaol omvaomo ~tooooon 50:039.: wnmwaoou Nunwoaon mohouoou canons. N~0muao nonmem- monouo.i :mhooa.n menace-o ~n~oo«.u msueuo. onnowaoo ostooo cauo:oo ommm1ool onnmwaou mcfioéaoc «sound-o «akmNaol -ho~o.u manned. nuance.“ «mzuu Ln N~un~aoo «wooed. :nno:uo cacucaot monoouo od~n«o. 03mmua. «a:noooo «Indoo. nwnahc. «om:m«. «amonooo oumonuo Nmowaeo hocswoo saowea. amwluu. owoaouo «onwnu. awnc~e.: nuomwno ”cacao. «omowo. «cmnoool msmaooo «sodas. Noooma. s~como. moonno. nonmagu msusswo «tsmuwo thooaon ascsna. omenmo. aommso. neomwm. schcsaol ammOhuo resume. unamsdoc ooaomc. Mmemo. o~aono. cooaoaou :awuu on teammaoo «Clhudu shoNJao Numnuuo: {anuuo amonowo nm¢:~No nonmouo nmemon. gammawo oowumo. oohowuou cu~mmoo hmwoowo «whooa. oocsuwo ohonono mamoo«o acn38o. nu~nooou -u~muo #0530". seesaw. mmmoww. unma3n. Nwomun. 3:5mao. onusho. m:«moao wo-~oo cwhuso. mmmnmuo omnnwooo «mnsoo. onNcno. 1:5«oooo modsnoco nmo030. oooomo. nomooao onmaaoo: arousa- hoonoc. abocoaoo schooaol cocoon.“ Juxau an cooomaot wnnoodo newts“. ocoawao Ncsowa. wono:«o ooouano mucous. :Nwmno. oohmhdo u~a3mdo cowhno. ouaouuo muowmuo uosno~a oeno~uo nsoomo. 030Nnu. asho:«. amooocou mnowou. mwm:o«. cunwon. no~omoo mNn~:o. NmnNMN. Nonsnw. ~maoaool noossa. oomsnoc nosmno. «oncmm. JGQOON. mnuwoN. anoanmo :smuaool mnemsdo accuse. sosnoo. mmmoomo cacood. QN:«:~. Gnom:~. door~ooo oooh:«o :ooumo. aooeoeod 430““ :n “soom“. nouns». a:9hnuo twosoaoo QwodNo. Hotbwcol ounmnoot omoomo.l Nooabool ~n0-o.t n:o~:«o mma~ouoo accede. nsmsno.o osmsnooo «dowho.n moo:oaol :oosuo.o «sauna. noaosool ncLoMQ. mmm3~coc mkn-9.0 sotoMo.I :nwooaol cowaco.l nmmooa. o:unn«.0 «:~:m«. ~m~om«. amcmoa. «:0omo. nausea. anowow. :no:na. o~om¢«.0 m:@m~«. ”mucou- :ooonuo 50:0No. oonuoa. Naemou. :ooo~«o momonaoc smmsoao o~s~odo m~uamwo cognac.“ omuuu nn mmqmfiHm¢> MU4MZHQ 02024 m XHmzmmm< unencuol nooacaoo msonnu. crocoao omuoho. mucosa. summon. Juhwodo Nce~ouo onhQNNo oomdmooo canola. hnlowuo smoke”. consoao o~uo:d. :m:o0«oo manoeu- onascu. o-mo«o :ooooo. unbeco- ~nco:o. :moanu. adamoa. oooo-o unmomo.o ousm:«o ssosuu. «aNNoN. unnonu. oonwcdo awasmuol anammo. nswaco. owsosao noocso. ~ndoso. monaoo. «scams. muomow. oonmN. mwamsaol comma“. ommn~uo mams-. «omooo. cocoau. m~soo«ou NnJmOQ. momomu. caao:~. adamnw. «:«nuwg ~n50u9.0 nonrmo. crammu.l Nomona. coconQ.I :owwno. nan33N. smooou. camono. odowmm. Noaomo. ma::-. «o~:«n. ncswum. «owmmN. osowwwo 9‘030oot wooden-I :m:s:u.0 hnnuno. Nooooo. ncmsao. macaw“. nonoow. :«mnmo. h:--. owoooo. msnnww. omnoowo «manna. nauanN. «nowado akuuoao! cooduo. snaoma.l omJQoa. o3~0nool Nnoo:o. onnnswo nonnana Oom039. omudsNo ocaeoo.d soon:~. oeoooood atuun macaw NH «n . mm mam»? utuoo 443mm: >Hono «uxno Domno amxno 4:0»0 owxno armno mamno >Ho~o cmx~o Domwo Juuwo Asowo cudwo thwo mamwo >Hudo «uruo Damuo Juxao Abode owaao dtuao mamuo ’Hunu cmznu Down“ Juana Asonu omdnu ntwnu manna auowu «wzwu :awwu Judmu Jaowu ommwu atm~H mamwn ’Huan durum Domau Amman Jacau ammun dtwan macaw 145 146 mmomoso moumouol cocoon. cauuwoo: mMMcmNoo ownsom. oohaua. oo«moe.o oo~o~m. ~uwoco. acknowo h~m3~«. «undone! owumau. ttuwn a: lmmamao awlON-u h:oo«n. nNNGOo. ascend. nnmuma. Naobcw. NJOGQHo NNmuano moonma. chmnoc Oatmwuo mwoooa. omhwoNo wanwu on «ntsdm. NNJNOa. 0@:mh«o oooooe. Goa-nu. homomm. ouo::«. haowoo. Omc300. ~3bonn. m3ccmu. hemmno. osoooo. «nomNNo )Huau on nmflswaoo anamoeou Nmmoou. «mcmue.: anomu«.| O‘Nswooo sonaowo Nmuuou. ownhwa. «anomao mmwoae.o mkwunool mowowaot Nonwmool (wlau NH «newswou Mucoua. hsmsmaoo ts-uo.c nooaoo. Nsoommcl ommssw. gflwd msamcc. «moamm. emoc:o. ooso:«. on«0:n.t n~mmoooo Dowuu on :sowoNo ~3ao~aol Onward. cmoscao ncaswo. oosomwu mcmnmc. ooomru. «acmdr. :OOQno. unecocol endoco. 0Nm053. scenaa. Judan mm no:~o«o swwnacoo ~3on0«. ononna. avowed. omQQOA. «:omam. 033-no Muooo3. noown:o (mnocao mammn~. LNNONu. ooomso. Jacau an xnxhqt onhtawmuoo waaxdm «mm::oo «Mamba. omc:no. mmmmmo. oosmow. s3nomo. Norm33. sasmam. mammrao oowaom. nmcnwa. Nb~osuo om3N:o. «ms:ooon ouduu an omnmom. omnmmw.l Mxfiuan. nomcMo. oNo:~N.I Nsuoum. hmommu. asmkmo.c ownmbm. ma3moo. o«m:««. :oo«m«. msmooooo cowama. atwuu NM ”momma. Nmsmmo. no:mow. omommuo m3~nsm. oodmno. mounmm- M«:Non. ”madam. m~umo~o 0:0:ou. Nommou. «cooks. wagon“. mamau «n ZHIOJu hOIOJu «hsmzo hdomzo hnmoao «IOJu mwbwzH hqouz~ pHmOdH >Honc «uric Dowuo Juana 43000 :0 no No «m cm mo no no mo :0 no No «a 1.4'7 cado~uc two-Odo 030m!“- scooowo Gannon. «soom». :hanoao mmwnuwo «unowd. oncoOoo dowaoaoo ~l~nkoo cmumou. sweaNQ. smomwuo oheuwuo mnmoono owammdo Nomauo. awhoauo konuu. h$u00¢a mucouao OONoOA. onuowno ~n~modo Ono-no. moaned. oummuu. «ONeu-oo chewed. Nutoawo cowamno omaoaq. kc:-ao ouum~uo «ooouwo cataco- boea-o nonnna. cocooaoa 430nm um eonnhuo noun-no: haunuo. samenno Nocomuo film’s». -~ooao Nmomnuo canton. ocuoouo: manna-o amousuo «mauso- thomuon «amuse. tooahoo oohOMaoo Necomaot «03009.: cabana. phrasn. amoeh-.I «doc... coe~05. smOOMIoI ownsooon Conwaugu :Nomoa. mom309o Ocuosoo! ~o~oaao NMmohou hauta..- aunt-coo nuance-0 moocno. suseto. Inmleuct «-o-o amused. echON. coca-non ou¢n~ a: wancwoc «ooamn. Nowuhao Omoooooo Housmmo monnoa. o:¢mmuo Juneau. snowflaoo MNMONQo odouadol racewa- cummOA. .mcawaoi ~¢mnsuo onmnoooo Cunard. ”krona. mamubaoo nnnmwao «osmuno nonooa. oowuhuo ammuoaoc noahnd. moowhu. ownomuoo ”cameo. Oohwcao cooomaon omomna. :~:ooo.: enmunuc omumou. snoocuoo cmooou. @thhN. Hmoaac. I1m~awoo mmaroooo amoswmo ONnnnao aooaoaod tann .1 onulsuo Ouowcdo NoNoon. ooflnn~o NnOoNMo Naooouo awaken. ono~muo n:.ooao osmaouo sandma- aoommoo chwooo common. nanomm. ool~ooo «O‘Nun. QJOQGo. kahuna. «ahmnu. mNOmoe. «nONNuo woONmNo anodes. define». “atom“. Nmmmce. oafiunuo «owmse. :Nwomo. oevmawo ooocso. «canowo socnrco ookuaooo 0u~n«~. moflcmw. OnNnuo.o sebum". c~ooooo «kNom~. ”ahead. omlhwn. acceooou manna so Dunc-u. nacho“. omunoe. -nuooo cusses. cannowo cwumsao no:ouoo stoome. ownmmN. .0uNh9.I QMKOdoo smoonw. coonnoo owoaauo surmsaoo noaama. canned. m=o~o°.| mended. Neo::~. caanO. astuau. aomnsool nsooso. noomuw. «Newsaoo Noomwu. snmo:~. hwosro. oomueu. «swcseoo 6:19:9- «csonuo Nou~oooo somewa. secosoo manna“. homo-«a: o~umsoo onoouw. team-co: manna». onntsw. aoaooaou >Hu~u no find-Coo- antenna! {unedu- uncann- snake-o u~¢ncdo Noocwo-I omoooool awahwaon unwnnooo ammo»..- nsmawoao ::«hco.: ommsnn. mc~m06.0 conshooo nosamo.i onsanao «anode-o Oh:s«9.3 ommnuuno nmonon. soosao.0 :msmko.u msoosool onmnuoo N0d¢aooo ¢m«0haov Oooooaoo ownomno «cocoOol «amuse-o okonnaol on:«~o. 003ouooo Oonnlo. cameo“. amoroo. condoaol omNOOQoI osooaool Nuwwnuol omwswooc hmcswaoi monmoa. nuance-u «uxmu no «ancho- ooocunou NnoNNo. ~0N~oco bhu»ta.c «oo:o«. :«waool mucouwo ~:h«neol Nohoaqoi :«mowdo onaumwo huuaoo. camoufl- «owrua. nomuoao awnonoon n~muwuol mmumoa. mnnoowc ndmooo. osmooo. anonao. coo~oac noaooo.l sonoOeoa acamoa. otauhwo a~5m««. cooked. lwomno. «canoe. :cooaoo nhocmoo «onmo«. -cooa. noamoool Owosso.l ::o~hoo momoad.l «mcuawo NounON. auamrwol mcootuon «Nnn««.: manned-I cocoaeou Dow~n cc .5033.- cocooNo connuuo «shaman ”soon:- snukma. cadomoo «on:n«. navawcc mmooooo :mnomeo nsoooo. dosumoo Nmatwuo owawmoo «onscdo huoowwo nm:om«o amenono reckon. nomocu. sosocdo «oONOQ. ascend. sweo-g monsouo arson». cannon. «omsco. «nmnou. «canoe. mnwucu. mnsaamo om~oo«. osmsQN. cocoo~o smsoMOo stnwsc. mambo“. mo:«o@. auoanao cased“. oo:~na. nocooo. o:uosoo cosmoo. ascomuol Juxun n: « no«.sdo unnatu. «snsoc. Natuhwo Nonuon. nomwnn. staunc- mo:ma- houmouo casewo- «canoe-I naodmao nnom~«. no:o«9.0 agreed. mocmhuo menuon. o~o~o«o «odoso. ntnmu~c «anoma- unnece- cwsmado onwnodo cuwamn. m:mum«. ammaoo. cmmoowo omoomuo uNQuMaot msornu. ann~auo snows». Manama. meNan onosnw. Daemowo muuonooo msdmnwo hnwmeo. amtomwo noowsw. corona. chmmdmc um-o«. «manna-0 odeo~wo «mummo. neaaceou Jao~u ~c nucbct zouhCJucuou uamtcm ounnoqo noosoaol nuance. monoun- comrau. Gannon. assume. hh~5w~o Manama. «nouns-I umonoo. omvmmmo «Nacho. crewmaol Hmosoaon «canoe. mm::nnco on10oooo m3009wco annoOoI mthmso. os~doool mohraao oaommo. oeuono.l atomsaoo NQJOuuot ”Medea. oehmsa. cowocaol :Namaao «wanna. mwmnoaol mmomaaoc nueooaol anhowaol ca~omoo cnmneuon noomcwo onsmOO. maooom. 059050. NHQOuo. ouk~ouo meowqoo Oommwaol mos:h~. Noosouo aemomw. aaoaoaou ouan a: banana «204$ drama” bdwNZH humonn ’Holo dwzlo :OUIO Juana Janna utuno 4¢>wwc >Huno duxno :awno Juana Anono Guano utuno manna >nu~o cwxwo sowwo Jua~o Jauwo omuwo ntuwo wsm~c >Houo duxuo Douao Juana Janna uwxuo atmac maodo >Hon~ (wxnn sauna Juana 430nm ”menu drunH «Dunn >Hu~n H0~H o: cuneraot -:::ool «demon. alumna-I (uan no nNhanNoI ”masma.o kmomsoot eoana«o aau- o: xuuhdl ZOthauumou uaazdm s:oom~o «domaooi Nnooruo ooomse. Juuuu n: omnond. moncdo. QMNNOH. :coosa. JDDNH N: hnwnuool «a~:o«. osm:uo.0 :wn:«ool awawn a: anoau hoxoqu «hawzo hdowzo :m no ~m «a 149 900::«0 koomonoo o~oouuo nanote- sla~coo anomauo «unmwao «amoewo «annowo munch-o nnocnuoi confisc- owonoa. na-an mnoooaol snowba- owmnwaol «swans. hmmnso. meououo annoouo somwnuo ONooOooo ounONNo nuoeNocl omGNnu. ouoummo Godohuo cahomwo scuba“. centage: anonsao INNONQ.I nowcloo cacao-cu :owuo no m-~mou mamas-o nwnamno o«huouo owowmuo mhcmno. hmncmu. oammh-o «cwaoo. buowfida ooomwiol mooooa. thMBN. cmhcm-oo whomaaoo onwnun. macaw-o Deanna. omuoau. unhDOOo OJOOON. lmkwmo. snug-«o nomnNNo mnawwoo ~ao-co nhlwud. lwnoooo downhwo Ola»... Nmomouo cannon. «ow-Ne. monocoot «Nauouo can-acou 4wxao on an~QOoo ooam:aou '35 ENE bwuurmo noocme. mocoou. camswuo cameowo cawouuo ~N::oo. «omsnuc «a:~coo ONewowo Nuosoeoc nomowwo odowco.o knoooa. cowaomo hookah. soacom. owowowo «cache. enemas. Demucaot monmmuo cousnn. uNNuono honh~oo thmoN. snmauwo OAMNQm. nmsmoaol ooussoo woosowo manomn. coacoa.« Jauao um ordwaa. aonouc.u osmmawo mmmaua. Nunouoo «awmmoo oeflwmao monocu- mslo:oon oo.:meon mons:o.l obwkwa. shaman. :obmoa. nooosao Loveso. tonsco. “shoe“. onceoo.l amlnuwo J~mocoo addhauo nomad». mumosoo oweOOoo sookuuo hnm:oooo oddsoao onflhco. sowo:«o ann~w~. «cwoouo common. ohtmou. monoaaou Nuadmwo no.6...u undue hm ~ommo«.0 cooh:oo nnwnOO. anomOoo taoanuo Nuhnraol nm3005. «umwowo 0::omo.0 oormha. mcoowo. concmOo oowmuwo mamwoe. an~nn«. noncwuo name‘s. n~:«naol ooocsaot «anmmao :msrmuo sokase. woemoo. ssmrawo :mmcra. oeoacaon cooauool oouwmu. mn~o~«. :nasma. mcwnom. mNmoouo soca:oo eohu~a.l scamsool omoqmu. moomhuo mso~odo cocoon.“ azwao on m-mmao manoo«.: Emma mnhhwm. ohm33o. nmonoa. m::~:«. nmuwawo «JNNon. omwcoao ooummc. wmsawo. :0anmw. ooowuuo M3uomaot nmmomu. mshooa. m35onNo hmhoswo moacun. m««mo:. wuwnon. «hsomwu hwuooo. seabed. Oc~nm~. moomom. mmwcnn. «3005:. cunts». onmoowo :omomb. noam:«o m~m«o«. nmwdano osonnn. alum. ofismnw. wumomwo ocooca.« maowo an moswomo NaoaOo. Nousowo dashbo- nco~M«. 5:9mmm. momma“. ommo~oo nNmooo. asuson. omhnmw. mcmwwo. owmnua. somNMN. cocosoot :KKNno. nabucwo «m:s:o. coonou. :nowno.l smosso. mnnswuo omraauaa Howard. «onsowo mucosa. somsaa. tsuasooc mnnooo. scwnbu. nom:@ooo macada. mouoowo Mn:«0oo «Nomad. LoaNKaoo noanc. :eusauo NomaOo.I :no:o«. eoaooeod ’Honu an dehct zonbtawumoo uaatdm :~an~o.o on:soQ.i emcee“. announco «sncmo.l ooNsaoon @knnkuo ~3moaa. Muc::ao aoon:«. smassoot s~300aol anomaoov «o:oca.c escacool mumsuoo: :Noooo.l omoo~:. Madmwaol ca3mso.o 31omno.t nd~«:oo Namodo.0 :uNNnco coonco.n Nomson. ncoNant mom::ooo s-00o.l Nmonwco soa:oco: Nomocool «unmoa.l mma3n:. amcuoool «sassooo 03~ouaol «unawo. concuaol scooho. doomsw. aouooo.« «uxnu mm nsoomwoo ouwoooou gownmaoo so::o«. noowso. o~m«:n.0 acomomo 00000:. nmmmmaot mmaooao noamnoou onn3ma. acoo3a.: osmdmu.l coaxed. 5::m3N. :nmsma. omwaauo Nocooo. c:o:ec. owucmc.l 3mmndao ~o~a0«. mNNmmN. Noomwo. msoseo. o-osoo mmN30c. Owosaool Nua~Ma.0 coamma. m«m~:m. ~:«~«do «encou- onumoo. snowmo. owned:- otmswo. omméouo armusao honoco.o caooacoi oooeocou sauna Nm Nosomw. cananoos :Nmmnao mswcoo. mwoono. mn:on~. nmmsoaou mn3nna. mmona:o Nowunco Nmoooooo smwmau. com0~3o Nonrwo. Nowamcot Msasoc. «chmo. msmnauol omcowo. aocsnu. mahoamo oNomod. mamown. onawmao «N:moc. semen“. Noawoo. nsscmu. msnowwo owawmw. Nsnrsn. ”nonma- owoumo. Nnonoo.0 saomoao accumu. omndmwo caNNoN. ootoow. oobnumo m:«~ao. msouho.o noummaon acaeoo.a Juana «m znxogu bozoJu abnmzo btouzo humono «IOJu chauzu haomzu bumoaH >Holo amino Domoo Awauo Jaouo dtuoo 4¢>mm¢ >Homo awrno Douno Juana JDQHO Duane atmno mamno >Ho~o durwo :ommo 4m¢~o abomo omdwo atuwo mamwo >Hoao «urao Douao Judge Jaoao omdao atmuo mamqo ’Honn «wrnn Damnn Juann so no «m am we on so no mm :0 no No «0 on on on 55 as an :5 ms Nu as on on no so 00 mo :0 no No «0 on am on um mm mm em mm «m 150 Nocucm. ENOumao uumMOe. onummow eooouu. MQJNOu. Ousomuo anoava. anmouo unscen- monumeol Nonnum- «Iowan-I nachoeou mounts-o ocuohwo oorwmm. Nonnmoun Manamaoc stood:- owNMOoo: nuucuu. ”003:9. noomnuo cognac-u >Ho~o as :omcuool swun~uoo huwnowu watch“. Games:- «staunct unannwo cod-«a. ahnduuo odoud-o whoonao mmwohaoo CenJmOo Noswoooc maul-«o: announ- «memo-o: om-ooo ooo~duo aonauao omchon. mun-co. b~c::ooo ddthN. cameo-cl cocoa-cu u0uo ~o xudhct zenbcaudflou maaxdm condteoo nommmuol nooecuo nooowd. candneoo onossooi m:omm«. snowed. casmua.u ass~oao ooaoue. «maumooo «Nomnaol «onomoon hadnmeoo onmuuuo nnnmoeoo ureaso. «arose. onNooeuo Nn~¢ooo arctsa. nooumooo clooouo omnkoaon unusua- onnoeo. csNNcoao oohooao no~¢~oc oncomaol tsnouao nooemo.l unease-u dmzuo do xonau hoaodu «hauzo bduuzo humane «3043 absqu bdouZn humoan anon: dmzca :auoo Julia 430:: atmto 41>mmc >Hono «wzno sauna Juana Jaona Guano atuno manna 3Ho~o ¢w2~o aomwo 4u¢~o Jaowo oudwo utuuo manna >Huuo «uzuo 151 nmnnhuo: onnahdo mosahaoo conune. ommotwo :onoouo: confine. h~oosoo macacno: muNmOoo: nomwwdo hoonna. oncomeo: cocoon. eaooooou t:w:o on «no-an. nNOMOuol muha:aw: N-n-o owoeooo: «odomuo smunun. unmaoao anQOu. usuonwo omuomao Nowonwo :smnna. nnauOnol auobaoo: aa..ee.u 4<>mw¢ wk Hanna‘- thono. omeJmo. momdhe. how-ado ecuonu. mecca“. summon. NoounN. twooeno nescmoo: kahuna. occauco: snowmoot soonmeo: «coohN. coo-ooou >Huno as odhmaao: onlnauoo omnhmdo Nabmnu. saumoao: utnooao: nsflmwwo baboon. oaflmwoo: macawao oleoao NmOoan: webbwao nonmroo: «:Nmsoo: osmowu. omommao: canooe.« «wxno sh :NGNNdo o:e~cno: cahaewo Nuance. oolnoo. «mason. a~m~oao mocha“. smu~m~o canona. 050100.: momkso. :omcwo. Oowooo. Osnmauo: 03ooo«o mumnwco: mowmno. nuance.“ :amno as xndbc: onhcau unmana. Nsoosa. «smnmo. Namesao o~o::~. ”Hanna. ohmondo onosooo coacho. «owrou. enchwoo: Nuance. Nnmmouo «anon..- ouchuuoo amoaaao Newman. Omnanoo caoaud. aaoeouou Juana ms GJNQQc. mhmamao: tnsosc. msmomno («:mo«~. monmso. «cauouo mromouo oohwdwo Ooococo anhnre. o~3msao on:onao acmNsd. chaosoo: mQQNOo. osnooao: :~o«09o «oomowo acooswo cocoon-u Jauno ch «100 mantHo:o mm< >Huno awrno Domno guano Jsono owxno utmno mamno :0 Na «m o@ on no so on mm :o no No «o on as on us on ms :h nu Nb an Beau Hmuusoz u usmz 30am O>Hummmz n ummmz 3oaw o>fiusmom n unmom unmnumco cannmflmz cmunnfiso 6cm mussnc u m xaamsvm pmuzmwm3 coupawno pcm muasnd n N mace muaspd u mumaaoo Emumxmnsm assumuxm Emum>mbsm HmcuoucH cofluospoum oEom H II IHODH 152 "moanmflum> oomxcfiq Ou xmx assess.“ m-~ma.- m--z. mmaouo. szoJu asaoao.n «onims.- mom«am.o toxosu assess.“ s~:mam. aramzo ceases.“ heumzo zuzosu corona «pawzo haouzo so no No no unupcc saunasuucou uaazam Nam-c..- .conmo. nuance. suu:~:.- nflflflflflflu ~onoma. canons. saanna. oak:=«. sdkdsd. zuxosu unso:o. u.»~aa.: «undue. o.uo.«.- s~nos..o Noouoa. sk~ooa. mmemss. «~«-s.- oo~s°9.- poxozu campus. cocoou. ooooau. m~noo.. ooomo~. no-n«. :«oooa. oases“. Samoa“. asmn33. ahsuzo uo~nn~. nuns»..- «¢~:.«. «o~.n~. «sosua. aswnuo. oka-«.o musing. mamas“. ~no¢o«. b¢uuzo a....e.« o~o~m..: «naoe~. «Names. oo~a«o. moose“. -o~ao.- mains". nmmouu. ankoza. bumoao goons... mosnns.- ~ono.¢.- coo:°¢. nammma. cocoa“. «aewoo. ssooid. ~o~ool. 33°41 gasses.“ osmssn. -sa-. oonmmn. akNoao. macaw». macros.- noo~«o.- «pamzu .s..ao.« oaeoau. ~nnson. «eokoe.o s~cmo«. cusses. ~m~aos.- scouzu 9.59.... :nuco~. saunas. on~m-. m:n~o«. amdnsu. human” gasses.“ swans“. aroma». so:ooa. nookuo.o ,Ho-o ossaa..« monono. o~okoa. o~:u:o.- Ho-o .uz-o sou-o 4mm-o sau-o .a on on so a. a. a. no ~o do xuuu¢z acuu¢su¢¢ou maaxam :0 no Nm am so n¢ No am am on an no no mo :0 no we do APPENDIX C ADULT QUESTIONNAIRE, FAMILY- COMMUNITY LINKAGES SURVEY 153 ~FAMILY-COMMUNITY LINKAGES STUDY l972 APPENDIX c Family'# Hember__‘ . In this day and age it Is difficult for families to get alonngithout.the community. Most of the things you use in the house are made somewhere else and brought Into the home.through the community, and you use the community for many services. education culture and religion civic activities goods and services \1/ecreat ion FAMILY I V /’ work ///// A‘ health social service In this study we are asking family members like yourself to tell us how'much they use different parts of the community. 154 15’s The different ways that individuals use the community will be added together to give a picture of how a family uses the community. Your family will differ from other families in the community because. I) You may find you don't need a service or don't belong to an organization 2) You will use facilities in the local community in different ways '3) You may go to other towns or cities for some of the things you need '4) You may make things at home. instead of getting them in the community So on the following pages you will see the column headings:, Didn't obtained obtained provided need In Owosso . in at H -Corunna another home 9‘32911 156' We expect that most families have a rhythm about what they do. This is eSpecialiy true when a large part of the day is taken up with going to work or going to school. For example: Weekdays Weekends a.m. work/school/community shOpping/church activities p.m. work/school/shopping working around house hobbies TV 'hobbles You have probably established habits about when you shOp and for how long. You may even plan around certain programs on TV. So if you can think about the things you do fairly regularly, you will find it rather easy to answer those parts of the questionnaire that concern you. Think about what you did last week: ‘ ' . ' '.; _... . .... 4' weekdays weekend; How much time did xgglspend going grocery shOpping? eating out? going to work? going to school? going to a club meeting? If there is a fairly regular pattern, multiply the weekly time by 50 to give an estimate for the year. Some usual times are: 2 hours/week 9 i00 hours/year 3 hours/day, 5 days/week, 8% months/year - S'i0 hours/year (kindergarten) ? hours/day,5 days/week, 8% months/year 3 ii90 hours/year (school) 8 hours/day, 5 days/week, 50 weeks/year = 2000 hours/year (job) 157 Of course. "last week" will not cover all the things in the community that you sometimes do: such as, going to a state park, the dentist, club meetings, adult education class. 0r there are things you have done at home as raising food, making clothes, or having a party. Therefore, you may find it helpful to think about what may have happened by seasons. For example: winter snowmobiling concert/museum remodeling Spring gardening ‘ ' wedding summer camping distribute petitions fall political activity food preservation Some of the estimates for seasonal activity or monthly activity are: 3 hours/twice a month, l0 months/year = 60 hours 2h hours/day, 5 days = l20 hours (camping) l hour/3 times I 3 hours (dentist) 'What are some things you used the community for that happened only once or twice last year? winter . summer spring . fall 158 In summary: Would you please give us the best guess you can of the time you spent in the community last year. To help you remember the different things, similar activities are grouped together under different sections. A lot of different things are mentioned to help you remember something you may have done 6 months ago. Ihg_ tjme you_put in the boxes is your best estimate of the number of hours_you spent in the community obtaining or providingvarious goods and services. These hours are to include travel time and telephone time if used. In addition, you put in the boxes the time you spent ordering goods by mail from another place. For example: If you go into the community to have your hair cut every month and this takes an hour, including travel time, it would amount to l2 hours over a year's time. In addition if you care for it at home by spending one-half hour a week shampooing your hair, you would Spend 25 hours over a year's time. . 3 Hours YOU spent last year : in obtaining or providing Didn't inside -' in ' at ; need Owosso- another home a i Corunna place ' Personal Care Services \ . 55 (beauty shop, barber, gymnasium) 52.1 é;2,2 Pets and Pet Care X Q, #l in the list below, please estimate the number of hours you spent last year (from now until last year at this time) in obtaining and providing for a particular group of products or services. You include time in the community and/or time spent at home in supplying similar products (eg. sewing clothes instead of purchasing them, changing the oil in your car instead of going to a service station, preparing meals instead of eating out). It may help to figure from a weekly basis, and then multiply by 50 for the year, then adding or subtracting for seasonal differences. 159 Family # This part is about goods and services you Egy,from business-- 1 Member or make/provide at home instead of buying . Part of Community: Hours 190’spent last year BUSINESS in obtaining or providing Didn't inside ‘ in 7 at need Owosso- another home Corunna place Automobiles, Trucks Snowmobile, motorcycle, camper, bicycle Vehicle Maintenance Supplies Vehicle Maintenance Services Financial Services (loans, stockbroker, financial counselor) Reading Materials Flowers Hobby a Sports Supplies 5 Services (arts, crafts,(photography, fishing) Home Office Supplies 8 Equipment (stationery, typewriter) Printing Services _.- Pets 8 Pet Care (grooming, vet, kennel) Funeral Home Service Rental Lodging (Motel) TranSportation Service (bus, taxi,,chauffeuring) 16°" Family # This part is about goods and ' _ . Member services you Egy,from business-- or make/provide at home instead of buying . . - Hours xgg_spent last year in obtaining or providing Part of Cammunity: . _ Didn't inside in at BUSINESS ' need Owosso- another home ’ Corunna place Musical instruments, Supplies 5 Services Sound Systems, Supplies 5 Services Food Products Meals Clothing, Accessories and Fabrics (including dressmaker, tailor) Clothing Maintenance (cleaner, laundromat,~shoe repair) Personal Care Products Personal Care Services (beauty shep, barber,gymnasium) Child Care Services I...”— Household Furniture (including_furnishings and accessories) ..... L... ._...- .- o- ---. Household Equipment and Appliances on? A W ‘ —" Repair Furniture and Appliances Home Maintenance Supplies (floor wax, paint, fertilizer,_etc.) Home Maintenance Services ' (carpet cleanigg, painting,mowing, etc.) Home Betterment SUppiies (lumber, siding,_kitchen cabinets, etc.) Home Betterment Services (electrician, carpenter, etc31A ‘_ 161 Family # Member Part of Community: ’ Hours YOU Spent last year BUSINESS in obtaining or providing Didn't inside I ,in ' at need Owosso- another" home Corunna ‘ place Drugs Other: Specify * e *y* e e a e e * One of the more important ties you have with the community is the source of income. 2. Did you have an income-producing job last year? Yes No \If noI go to Question I2.\ VJf yes, go to_guestion 3.\ 3. What was the title of the job, or jobs? Q. Did you do this work (question 3) from your home? Yes No “II“. Vlj no,_go to Question 6.\ \If yesa go to question 5.\ 5. How many hours did you work last year? 6. Did you do this work (question 3) inside the city limits of Owosso-Corunna? Yes No \if no, go to questionfi§.§ \If yes, go to question 23\ 7. How many hours did you work last year? (include commuting) 162 Family # Member Part of Community: EMPLOYMENT '8. Did you do this work (question 3) outside the city limits of Owosso-Corunna? Yes No m \lf no, go to question ll3\ \Jf yes,ggo to question 97\ 9. Where?’ ID. How many hours did you work last year? (include commuting) ll. What was your income last year from working at the job or jobs described in question 3? Check one less than $2,500 $29500 ' “0999 $5.000 ' 99999 $l0,000 - lh,999 $15,000 - 19.999 $20,000 - 2h,999 . $25.000 - 29.999 . $30,000 and over CD‘JCfi\hJ?UOBD-i O l2. Sometimes your income doesn‘t come from a job, but from past earning of yourself of others. Did you have income from any of the following? Yes No \If no, go to question l5.\ \lf yés, check {Page that apply:\ dividends inheritance ' loans social security pensions investment Insurance ‘ rental/royalties other 9 :3. Did these sources make a difference in the income group checked in question ll? Yes No ~l‘+. if noLgo to question ISA \lf yes,_check new income level below.§ . less than $2,500 $2s500 ' 1‘9999 $5.000 - 9.999 510,000 - Ih.999 $20,000 - 2h,999 $25,000 - 29.999 . $30,000 and over ODxJO‘UTJPU’N’-‘ 163 Family # Part of Community: Member EMPLOYMENT 15. At other times Income may be provided by other community sources. Did you have income from any of the following? Yes No filf no, go to question l8.\ ‘Jf_yes, check the appropriate space:\ unemployment insurance ______food stamps organizations as church, ______school lunch volunteer organizations subsidized housing ______social services __ ADC __ other, specify legal aid l6. Did these sources make a difference in the income checked in question II or IE? Yes ‘ No l7. Ylf no, 00 to question l8:\ \If yes, please check a new income level below:\ less than $2,500 $2.500 - u,999 $5,000 - 9.999 $I0,000 - lh,999 $20,000 - 29.999 $25,000 - 29.999 $30,000 and over m \l 0‘ W 3' w N a 164 ' Family # Part of Community: Member EMPLOYMENT l8. There are some org a'nizations you belong to because of your job. Your membership provides an Opportunity to contribute to the community. This may be in time and/or dollars. Please estimate as well as you can your contribution over the past year. Remember: Please check at least one box for every item. Hours YOU Spent i last year Didn't ; inside i in Contributed belong = Owosso- . another dollars (amt) to 1 Corunna community last year ' Union .. "_......J _— .. ._.. - '7" Junior Achievement i I i i i I 4 I i «4 Chamber of Commerce Professional Association Farm Bureau Other (specify) (>¢.-<.-—-—Jr—.A~Ao m4-oo~—-- J.- .155 Family # Part of Community: . Member ' RECREATION l9. All forms of recreation can be found in the community. In general, activities under recreation have to do with physical activity either as a participant or obser- ver. They are divided into three main categories: I) those that are fully supported by the peeple that use them, as Spectator sports, country clubs, tennis clubs; 2) those that are publicly owned for the benefit of everyone as city parks, national parks, public golf courses; and 3) those activities provided at home, as swimming pool, roller skating. In summary, this section has to do with physically oriented activity. We would like you to estimate hours Spent in the different places: from the home to public supported, to private supported. We are leaving out the times you might use the facilities of a neighbor or friend. Thus, if you go horseback riding at a stable, you may put it under private supported if you pay by the hour; under provided at home if it is your own horse; or not at all if you ride at a relative's place in‘~---» the country. ' Hours YOU Spent last year Didnlt inside i in at home use or Owosso- I anotter belong Corunna é pla e figivate supported: (paying admission 3 l or membership fee) such as, miniature i % golf, pro ball, country club, swim I X club, bowling league, high School Sports Public supported: such as, state park, public tennis courts, campsites, X fishing and hunting sites Home centered: such as, ping-pong, X- shooting baskets, swimming pool Total time at cottage at another , X , ~ - X place X 8 box not to be used 1166 Family # Part of Community: Member CULTURE S RELIGION 20. Recreation doesn't have to be active. When it isn't, the category is usually CULTURAL or EDUCATIONAL. In this study we are grouping together under cultural things such as museums, libraries. In addition, you will find here all those "education" classes you take for enjoyment, l.e. crafts, speed reading. (under EDUCATION on the next page will be the classes that would have to do with getting a degree or improving your job perfonmance. ) There is a category for dollars contributed, since you may support an organi- zation with money even though you don't spend hours using it. Hours 192'spent last year rDidn't inside . in at home ContribUted] use or Owosso- i. another dollars (amt) belong_ Corunna community Iast_year _1 Private supported: movies, . night clubs, concerts, 1 a X X theater, music lessons, I county fair Public supported: attending museums, art exhibits, X i X library nature center, zoo X X 'Iittle theater, musical X X groups adult education clasSes I X X for_pleasure Public supported: volunteer- ing your time to help any of the above with their ser- X vices or contribution of dollars Formal/Informal interest groups: garden club, gun club,_chess club, judog etc. Home Centered: TV, reading, ' ; parties . x x - X Religious community: church services, church centered organizations and meetipgs Services: such as weddings and funerals not covered above .167 Family # Part of Community: Member EDUCATION 2l. As mentioned on page l3, the part of the community called EDUCATION in limited here to those educational experiences which lead to a degree or improve job perfor- mance. Under the formal and informal classifications, the emphasis is on receivin instruction. Under the heading of volunteer the emphasis is on giving instruction. Hours YQU_Spent last year Didn't inside I in I at home Contributed I use or Owosso- another I . dollars (amt) g belong Corunna community , . last(year ‘ Formal: Private F] i schools, parochial 5 g x schools, universi- I ties i Seminars, short i x 3 courses I , Formal: Public i schools, night 2 X school, public uni- ' versity Seminars, short 4 I X courses : Informal: (receivlflg instruction) exten- I sion service, scouts, IIYII Volunteer: (giving instruction) exten- sion service, scouts, h-H, teacher's aid participating in parent-teacher organization (PTA) Donations to alumni organizations X = box not to be used .168 Family # ' Part of Community: ‘ . Member HEALTH 22. For this category, please remember all the different kinds of health care you received last year, from visits to the doctor or dentist for check-ups, for emer- gency care or for nursing care. Since the study is about use of community resources, it is only necessary to divide the hours spent between private help, public supported services and the volunteer activity you may have participated in. Hours YOU Spent last year Didn't inside i in at home Contributed I use or Owosso- ? another, dollars (amt) belong, Corunna ' community last year tist, nursing care, (payment by Blue Shield other insurance, or I cash) I Private: doctor, den- ‘ I I I Taking, staying, I visiting Public: doctor, den- tist, nursing care, clinics, (payment by x Iedicaid, social serb vice) Taking, staying, visiting Volunteer: Red Cross gray lady, clinics, X “drives” X = box not to be used Part of Community: ms. .169 Family # Member 23. The part of the community called CIVIC includes community oriented activity ranging from service clubs to political activity to public services as fire and police protection. Since you may contribute dollars instead of, or in addition to, time, please list these amounts where apprOpriate. Hours YOU Spent last year Didn't use or belong inside Owosso- Corunna in another community at home Contributed I dollars (amt); lastpyear. ' Community organizations, Service Clubs: Kiwanis, Rotary, Altrusa Fraternal organizations: Elks, Masons, Knights of Columbus and Auxilliary Other (Specify) Political Sphere vote attending public hearings, school issues, zoning, candidates partisan, non-partisan activity: distributing petitions, League of Women Voters political party appointed or elected office X e box not to be used .170 Family # Part of Community: Member CIVIC 23. (Continued) In the protective sphere, include the hours you may have required Special service from the police or fire departments, such as reporting a theft, or a fire in your house. If there is public pick-up of trash, or special public works as the repair of road or sewer or water affecting your house, then record the hours you Spent in connection with this service. Under judicial, there are two categories: one is for the occasion when you may be part of the judicial system in jury duty or testifying In court for someone else; the other is when you are using the judicial process for personal business. Hours YQQ.Spent last year in obtaining or providing Didn't in Owosso- in at home need Corunna another (place Protective Service Police Fire Public Works, Trash Pick-up Judicial Courts: Jury duty, etc. Courts: Personal business Family # Member 24. As you think about your community, what kinds of things do you feel are missing ‘ here that would make it better for you and your family? rank rank rank rank rank rank rank rank 25. 27. 28. 29. 30. 3i. 32. Of those things you just listed: a. Would you please place a l, 2, 3 by the first three that are most important? b. Would you place an X by the one that is least important? Sometimes having transportation makes a difference as to what you can do. What ways do you have of getting from here to places you want to go? Do you or your family own an automobile or truck? Yes No If yes, how many? Do you need to depend on someone else outside the family for a ride? Yes No Sometimes Your sex: Male Female Your age at your last birthday? IA - I7 38 - #6 l8 - 25 A7 - 65 26 - 30 _________ 66 + 3i - 37 Last grade completed? under 7 years of school' 7‘- 9 years of school _ lO - ll years of school (part high school) High school graduate ' l - 3 years college (also business schools) Four-year college graduate (AB, BS, BM) Professional (MA, MS, MD, Ph.D., and the like) lHlHl APPENDIX D SUMMARY QUESTIONNAIRE, CHILDREN 13 AND UNDER, FAMILY-COMMUNITY LINKAGES SURVEY 172 APPENDIX D spymnz QUESTIONNAIRE, CHILDREN 13 AND UNDER, FAMILY-COMMUNITY LINKAGES SURVEY Family # FOR HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD Q. #0. We know that children l3 and under also do things In the community. Thel most time-consuming of which Is going to school. Will you please fill out a _ separate form for each child l3 and under concerning what he does by himself. (You do not count the time he goes with you on activities you have already mentioned.) For example: If he goes to the store for you, put that down here; do not list the trip to the store if he Is included in a family outing. Hours This Child Spent Last Year Part of Community Didn't inside ' ' ih at home go by chsso- another h mse f . Qprunna i place Business Employment Recreation Education Culture 5 Religion Health Civic Welfare w —r—v Q. hi. How does he get where he needs to go? Q. #2. Sex: Male Female Q. #3. Age at last birthday? 3 C under A - 6 7 - l3 Q. an. Present grade In school? .173 APPENDIX E HOUSEHOLD DATA SHEET 174 FOR 33. 39. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD APPENDIX E HOUSEHOLD DATA SHEET Family # . Member Do you: Own your house Rent your house or apartment Other (Specify) Is this dwelling a: house apartment mobile home other How many rooms do you.have, not counting bathroom? How long has this family lived in this community? years. What is the longest time any one member Of the family has lived in this community? years. Does income from other family members change the category for income you checked in Question l7? Yes No If Yes, please check the total annual income available for family use. d 0 less than $2,500 $2.500 - h,999 $5,000 - 9.999 $l0,000 - l#,999 3' \fl '0 U1 0 $l5,000 - 19.999 $20,000 - 2h,999 \JO‘ 0 a $25,000 ’ 290999 $30,000 and over m llllIH-I 175 APPENDIX F APPOINTMENT FORM FOR FAMILY 176 APPENDIX F APPOINTMENT FORM FOR FAMILY MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY East Lansing, Michigan #8823 College of Human Ecology Department of Family Ecology Human Ecology Building FAMILY - COMMUNITY LINKAGES STUDY Return date Thank you for helping with the study. We need your reSponse in order to understand the different ways families use the community. This information could be useful to planners when community decisions are made. Barbara K. Miller Graduate Assistant Phone: (517) 355-767l 177 APPENDIX G APPOINTMENT FORM FOR INTERVIEWER 178 APPENDIX G . APPOINTMENT FORM FOR INTERVIEWER FAMILY-COMMUNITY LINKAGES SURVEY Fanny * Date Left Date/PIck-up Penmission to Interview Later Yes NO HOUSEHOLD HEADS: Husband Wife Other Number in Family: Number Surveyed: __ I8 and over I8 and over l3 and under ~__~ l3 and under Stage in Family Life Cycle Address: Telephone Number St reet or Road City County Assessed Valuation (Square Footage of Home 179 BIBLIOGRAPHY 180 BIBLIOGRAPHY Abramson, J.A. 1968 "Rural to Urban Adjustment," Ottawa, Canada: Minister of Forestry and Rural DevelOpment. Anderson, W.A. 1946 "Family Social Participation and Social Status Self-Ratings," AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 11: 253-258. 1955 "Fringe Families and Their Social Participation," New York College of Agriculture Experiment Station Bulletin, 909. and Donald N. Sibley 1957 "The Social Participation of Fringe Families," Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Sta— tion Rural Sociology Publication 50. Ansbacher, Heinz L. 1967 "Life Style: A Historical and Systematic Review," JOURNAL OF INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGY, 23:191—212. Arensberg, Conrad M. 1961 "The Community as Object and as Sample," AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST, 63:241-264. Axelrod, Morris 1956 "Urban Structure and Social Participation," AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 21:13-18. Bell, Norman W. and Ezra F. Vogel 1960 A MODERN INTRODUCTION TO THE FAMILY, Free Press of Glencoe, Illinois. 181 182 Bell, Wendell 1968 "The City, the Suburb and a Theory of Social Change,“ THE NEW URBANIZATION, Scott Greer, et al., eds., New York: St. Martin's Press. Berry, Brian J.L. 1968 THEORIES OF URBAN LOCATIONS, Washington, D.C.: Commission on College Geography, Berry, Brian J.L. and Jack Melzer, eds. 1967 GOALS FOR URBAN AMERICA, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Black, K. Dean and Carlfred B. Broderick 1972 “Systems Theory vs. Reality," Unpublished Manuscript. Chapin, F. Stuart, Jr. 1968 “Activity Systems and Urban Structure: A Work— ing Schema,“ AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PLANNERS and Henry C. Hightower 1965 "Household Activity Patterns and Land Use,“ AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PLANNERS JOURNAL, 31:222-231. Downie, N.M. and R.W. Heath 1965 BASIC STATISTICAL METHODS, New York: Harper & Row. Draper, N.R. and H. Smith 1966 APPLIED REGRESSION ANALYSIS, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 183 Etzioni, Amitai and Edward W. Lehman 1967 "Some Dangers in 'Valid' Social Measurements," THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITI— CAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, Vol. 11, September. Finn, Jeremy D. 1967 "Multivariance: Fortran Program for Univar— iate and Multivariate Analysis of Variance and Covariance," Buffalo, New York: Depart- ment of Educational Psychology, School of Education, State University of New York at Buffalo. Friedly, Philip H. 1969 "Welfare Indicators for Public Facility Invest- ments in Urban Renewal Areas,“ SOCIO—ECONOMIC PLANNING SCIENCES, 3:291—314. Fuguitt, Glenn V. 1965 "The Growth and Decline of Small Towns as a Probability Process,“ AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 30:403-411. Goldschmidt, Walter 1947 AS YOU SOW, New York: Harcourt Brace & Co. I Gross, Bertram M. 1967 "The Coming General Systems Models of Social Systems," HUMAN RELATIONS, 20 (November): Havighurst, Robert J. 1957 "The Social Competence of Middle—Aged People," GENETIC PSYCHOLOGY MONOGRAPHS, 56:301-375. and Kenneth Feigenbaum 1958 "Leisure and Life—Style," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, 64:396-404. 184 Hemmens, George C. 1970 "Analysis and Simulation of Urban Activity Patterns,“ SOCIOHECONOMIC PLANNING SCIENCES, 4:52—65. Hirsch, Werner Z. 1959 "Expenditure Implications of Metr0politan Growth and Consolidation." THE REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS, August,; 41:232— 241. Hollingshead, August B. 1967 "Two—Factor and Three—Factor Indexes of Social Position," SOCIOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, Charles M. Bonjean, Richard J. Hill and S. Dale McLemore, eds. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Com- pany, 318—385. ’ Hook, Nancy C. and Beatrice Paolucci 1970 "The Family as an Ecosystem," JOURNAL OF HOME ECONOMICS, 62:315—318. Howard, William A. 1969 "City-size and Its Relationship to Municipal Efficiency: Some Observations and Questions," EKISTICS , 28 : 312-315 ._ Krieger, Martin H. 1972 "Social Indicators and the Life Cycle," SOCIO—ECONOMIC PLANNING SCIENCES, 6:305-317. Kuhn, Alfred 1963 THE STUDY OF SOCIETY: A UNIFIED APPROACH, Homewood, Illinois: The Dorsey Press. Kunkel, John H. 1967 "Some Behavioral Aspects of the Ecological Approach to Social Organization," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, 73:12—29 (July). 185 Lewis, Richard J. and Leo G. Erickson "Marketing Functions and Marketing Systems: A Synthesis,“ Unpublished Manuscript, Michigan State University 1970 Metcalf, Wendell O. 1962 "Starting and Managing a SmalI Business of Your Own," Small Business Administration, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Michelson, William and Paul Reed "The Theoretical Status and Operational Usage of Life Style in Environmental Research," Speech, American Sociological Association, August 31, 1970, Washington, D.C. 1970 Monane, Joseph A SOCIOLOGY OF HUMAN SYSTEMS, New York: 1967 Appleton—Century—Crofts. Nye, F. Ivan and Felix M. Barardo (eds.) EMERGING CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS IN FAMILY 1966 ANALYSIS, New York: The Macmillan Company. Odum, Howard T. ENVIRONMENT, POWER AND SOCIETY, New York: 1971 John Wiley and Sons. Plonk, Martha "Decision Class and Linkage in One Central— Satellite Decision Complex,“ Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Michigan State University. 1964 Roterus, Victor 1946 "Effects of Population Growth and Non—Growth on the Well—Beimg(IECitiesfl'AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 11 (February):90-97. 186 Schlater, Jean Davis 1969 "Investigating Values Underlying Family Decisions,“ Michigan State University: Agriculture Experiment Station Bulletin 23, May. 1970 "National Goals and Guidelines for Research in Home Economics, A Study Sponsored by Association of Administrators of Home Econ— omics," Michigan State University. Sly, David F. 1972 "Migration and the Ecological Complex," AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 37:615n628. Steglich, W.G., Walter J. Cartwright and Ben M. Crouch 1968 "Survey of Needs and Resources Among Aged Mexican—Americans.“ Field Report on Project #29-A-l, Texas Governor‘s Council on Aging, August 25, 1968, Lubbock, Texas: Texas Tech— nological Institute. Warren, Roland L. 1968 "Theory and Practice in Community DevelOpment," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 50:1226-1238 (December). Wilcox, Leslie D., Ralph M. Brooks, George M. Beal, and Gerald E. Klonglan 1972 SOCIAL INDICATORS AND SOCIETAL MONITORING, AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY, San Francisco: Jossey- Bass, Inc. Winnick, Louis 1966 "Place Prosperity vs. People Prosperity: Welfare Considerations in the Geographic Redistribution of Economic Activity," ESSAYS IN URBAN LAND ECONOMICS, University of California: Real Estate Research Program, 273-283. 187 Zelinsky, Wilbur 1962 "Changes in the Geographic Patterns of Rural Population in the United States, 1790—1960," GEOGRAPHIC REVIEW, 52:492-524 (October). VITA 188 VITA Barbara Kenrick Miller, born in New England, seasoned by the Depression, was graduated, at nineteen, from the Col- lege of Home Economics at Cornell, at the beginning of peace after World War II. Following four years as Assistant County 4—H Club Agent in New York State, she returned to , Graduate School at Cornell for a Master's Degree in Housing and Design. This was excellent preparation for service as. 4-H Club Specialist in Home Improvement for New York State. Exploration in new areas was facilitated by the one- year Harvard-Radcliffe Program in Business Administration, an appropriate introduction to the position of Product Analyst with Frigidaire in Dayton, Ohio, representing the homemaker in the Future Planning Department. Marriage to Donald Merrill Miller, a Californian, contributed ten years of family experience with the advent of three children, when the Opportunity to return for further education was presented. Not only was the College of Human Ecology at Michigan State University a leader in the study of family decision making, the selected area of focus, but at the time of matriculation, was exploring and developing the ecological approach to the study of the family system. Not only did 189 190 this approach harmonize the writer's eclectic experience, but provided the long-sought constructs on which to build a teaching and research experience. Beginnings were made in these areas as the writer worked through, with the instructor, the develOpment and presentation of a course required of all freshmen to lay a foundation in the eco— logical approach: and discovered, through the study reported here, the craftsmanship required as research design leads into uncharted relationships. MICHIGAN smTE UNIV. LIBRQRIES 11111111111111 11111111111111 1111111 31293102131418