J? : n. - £3 5: .- a; av -. .2 L. ‘7, I 1:... £3: — ‘ 2,”.«vfz. Ir. 2,... ....,.,...Lr..,.... .....,.$..¢.... . . . 1... ; ungafiv é: 1;! o. .9 .33 1 S A8 .3 9...... . .. ... . . . . 1.9:: 3. . . «.4: x a. . . r I _ . . ; . I . n x . A . ; ’ - I" .134 , , . Sch“; J..U\... «Tr! p0! VENDMWwwvt 7.51:? :1 15.7...“nw... .1 74.: . 515.... W...“ Ennis... ..w.w......3..,.. . . 3. 91.2... {as}: 1.2....» s 1 3.... . . .4 , ., . 7 . u .7 . .. .: i x f mtrmrrfiuxfluu .3. .. a}. 5.)... . re $95.24;?! 962.22 J. a? vuilgfierflitéxmfiky . a “5 University I This is to certify that the thesis entitled Individual and Community Variables as They Relate to Delineating Community Boundaries presented by Russell Earl Lewis has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Doctor of .EhilQSQphsLdegree in Wevelopment 0-7639 ABSTRACT INDIVIDUAL AND COMMUNITY VARIABLES AS THEY RELATE TO DELINEATING COMMUNITY BOUNDARIES By Russell Earl Lewis This research was generated due to the lack of empirical research in the literature dealing with the concept of community. The main research objective was to construct a model for community development workers to utilize which would enable them to identify the parameters of a community in relationship to certain socioeconomic characteristics of the residents and in relationship to the problem or issue with which the community is confronted. This model should enable the professional to do his job both more effectively and more efficiently. The primary procedure utilized to meet the objective was the testing of a set of interrelated hypotheses dealing with the concept of community. In this study, 260 interviews were administered to a selected sample of residents in the Eastown area of Grand Rapids, Michigan. The information collected during the 260 interviews was recorded on the interview guide, coded, and transferred to IBM cards for further analysis. Relationships between an individual's territorial concept of :ommunity and selected individual and community variables were ,fi“ Russell Earl Lewis 4} determined by using various statistical techniques, especially multiple regression. Significant independent variables found to be related to an individual's territorial concept of community were: education, occupation, income, foreign travel experience, the problems with which the community is confronted, and knowledge of community problems. Variables not found to be significantly related to an individual's territorial concept of community were: residence, home ownership, strength of ethnic ties, strength of religious ties, childhood communit , participation in formal community organizations, and community identity. It was concluded that an individual's conception of community was based upon his social status, life histogy, and knowledge of community_ problems. Furthermore, an individual's conception of community varied in relationship to the type of problem or issue with which the community is confronted. Finally, it was concluded that as the information base of an individual expanded, that individual's territorial concept of community also expanded. In summary, it was found that an individual's concept of community is situational, temporal, and informational. An individual who is a member of a modern complex culture has more than one conception of community. Such an individual's concept will expand with the addition of information and in the face of problems which are highly complex and are not directly related to his family unity. These working constructs of individuals must be recognized by those persons and agencies con- cerned with community organization and community development if the concept of community is to be of service in their efforts. INDIVIDUAL AND COMMUNITY VARIABLES AS THEY RELATE TO DELINEATING COMMUNITY BOUNDARIES By Russell Earl Lewis A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Resource Development 1974 Copyright by Russell Earl Lewis 1974 This dissertation is dedicated to my wife, Catherine, for her constant encouragement and understanding, and to my son, Justin, for the boundless joy and hope which he has brought me in the past nine months. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to my wife, Catherine, for being a constant encouragement in my studies and for performing the difficult task of typing the rough drafts of this dissertation. She also provided much insight regarding form and content of the dissertation. My parents have also played a major role in my doctoral studies. I would like to thank them for their constant support and the financial assistance which enabled me to complete this work. During the past three years a friend and neighbor, Fred Kleiboer, has made life much easier by being a companion in need and lending his support during times of stress. I would also like to express my deepest appreciation to Dr. Jerome P. Heckenmueller, who gave me much excellent advice concerning the statistical and analytical components of the dissertation. Jerry was also a major source of encouragement during the writing of the dissertation. I am also grateful to another friend and colleague, C. Milton Schmidt, who provided much assistance in preparing the final draft of this dissertation. His critical reading of the dissertation led to many significant changes in form and content. I am sincerely appreciative for the advice and time given to me by my major advisor, Dr. William J. Kimball. I would also like to thank Drs. Robert George, Martin Heatherington, Milton Steinmueller, and Manfred Thullen for their assistance throughout the project. The data for this dissertation were collected by Aquinas College students in Dr. Paul Fuller's course on interview techniques and students in my course on urban sociology. To these students I am deeply indebted and thankful for their tireless efforts. A special note of appreciation goes to two students who organized much of the data collection, assisted in training interviewers, and coded the surveys. Without the assistance provided by Valerie Keller and Susan Marcoux, this task would have been greatly increased. I would also like to thank my brother, Gordon, for his help in coding the surveys and transferring the information to IBM cards. He was also helpful in designing the questionnaire for ease of data recording and coding. Also, I am deeply indebted for the help in the preparation of this dissertation which was provided by my most efficient and discerning typists, Pat French and Donna Huisjen. A final note of appreciation goes to the many people in Eastown who opened their doors to the interviewers and gave freely of their time and information. Without their c00peration, this dissertation would not have been possible. It is hoped that the research in the following pages will help make Eastown and all other communities a better place to live. Although many individuals contributed to this project, any mistakes of a technical or conceptual nature are my full responsibility. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ....... , .................. ix L LIST OF TABLES ..... . . . . ................ x CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . ........... 1 Problem Statement ..................... 1 Basic Design of this Study ........... . . . 3 CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ................. 6 Previous Attempts at Conceptualizing the Concept of Community ................. 6 Definitions of Community ............... 7 Attempts to Delineate Communities ........ I. . . 10 CHAPTER III: RESEARCH DESIGN . ................ 17, Definition of Study Variables ............... 17 The Independent Variables ............... 18 The Dependent Variable ................ 19 Propositions and Hypotheses ................ 19 Null Hypotheses .................... 29 Questions and Indices Used to Measure the Study Variables ...................... 30 Measuring the Independent Variables (X1...X13) . . . . 31 Measuring the Dependent Variable (Y) .......... 36 Pretest of the Interview Instrument ............. 37 Data Analysis and Hypotheses Testing . . . .‘ ........ 38 Multiple Regression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Computer Programs Used . . . ............. 40 CHAPTER IV: STUDY AREA AND DATA COLLECTION ........... 41 Study Area . . . ...................... 41 Selection of Study Area ................ 41 Detailed Description of Study Area .......... 45 Data Collection Techniques ................ 48 Sampling ....................... 48 Interviewers ..................... 49 Data Collection . . . . . . . . ............ 50 CHAPTER V: RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS AND RESPONSES ...... '51 Survey Completion Percentages . .............. 51 Respondent Characteristics ................. 52 Summary of Respondent Characteristics ......... 64 Representativeness of Sample ............. 64 Respondents' Territorial Concept of Community ....... 68 Territorial Concept of Community Index (TCCI) ..... 71 Index of Community Problems (ICP) ........... 72 Community Identity Index (CII) ............ 72 vi Index of Community Knowledge (ICK) ........... 76 Community Activity Index (CAI) ............ . 77 Summary of Sample's Concept of Community ....... 78 CHAPTER VI: RESULTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4. . ...... 80 Statistical Analysis of Findings .............. 80 Simple Correlations Test of Hypotheses ........ 80 Multiple Correlations Test of Postulates ....... 86 Pr0position One . ................ 88 Proposition Two . . . . ............. 89 Pr0position Three . ..... . . ........ 89 CHAPTER VII: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS . . . ........ . . . . . . 90 Summary and Conclusions . . . . . ............. 90 Summary of Findings . . . . . . . . . ......... 91 Comparison of Research Findings ......... A . . . 94 Community Model . . . . . ............... 97 Implications for Community Development Workers ....... 101 Implications for Eastown ............... 102 Policy Recommendations for Eastown ...... . . . . 102 General Implications . . . . ............. 103 General Policy Recommendations ............ 103 Limitations of Study . . . . ................ 104 Singularity and Non-linearity ............. 104 Unrepresentativeness of Sample ............ 104 vii Researcher Bias .................. . . 105 Interviewer Bias . . ................. 105 Interview Instrument . . . . ............. 106 Recommendations for Further Research . . . ......... 106 APPENDIX: INTERVIEW INSTRUMENT AND CODING PROCEDURES . ..... 111 Eastown Community Survey ............ . . . . . . 111 Data Coding and Transformations . . . ........... 120 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . ............ 122 viii FIGURE 1. FIGURE 2. FIGURE 3. FIGURE 4. FIGURE 5. LIST OF FIGURES Sets of Variables in Proposition One ......... Location of "Eastown“ in Grand Rapids, Michigan Detailed Map of ”Eastown". . . . . ..... Responses to Territorial Concept of Community Index. . Community Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... ix 22 42 43 74 TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE Dmem-Dw 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. LIST OF TABLES Survey Completion Percentages ............. 52 Total Family Income of Respondents .......... 54 Educational Characteristics of Respondents ...... 54 Length of Residence of Respondents .......... 55 Childhood Community of Respondents .......... 56 Occupational Characteristics of Respondents ..... 57 Index of Ethnicity Means ............... 58 Membership in Ethnic Groups of Respondents ...... 58 Ethnic Group Affiliation of Respondents ....... 59 Strength of Ethnic Ties of Respondents ........ 59 Index of Religious Identity Means ........ . . . 60 Religious Affiliation of Respondents ......... 60 Strength of Religious Ties of Respondents ...... 61 Index of Foreign Travel Experience Means ....... 62 Foreign Travel Experience of Respondents ....... 62 Frequency of Foreign Travel of Respondents ...... 63 Length of Foreign Travel of Respondents ....... 63 Summary of Respondent Characteristics ......... 65 Demographic Characteristics of Sample ......... 67 Size of Respondents' Concept of Community ..... 71 TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. Territorial Concept of Community Index Means ..... 75 Community Identity Index Means ............ 76 Index of Community Knowledge Means .......... 77 Community Activity Index Means . . . ... . . . . . . . 78 Simple Correlations of Study Variables ........ 82 Tests of Null Hypotheses ............... 84 Multiple Correlations of Study Variables ....... 87 Coding Changes .................... 120 Transformations ................... 121 xi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Problem Statement At some point in time even the most ideal of communities faces a number of complex problems which it must attempt to solve. In the past, it was common for most of these problems to be solved by citizens of a community confronted with the problems. However, as communities have grown larger and more complex, it has become necessary for communities to call upon the expertise of persons in agencies designed to be of assistance to communities. In the United States, as in many technologically advanced societies, there are a number of pe0ple with roles designed to help communities cope with problems. Examples with which this researcher is most familiar include the urban planner, the social worker, the community development specialist, and the applied anthropologist. Many of these professionals face a major handicap in their attempts to solve community problems or resolve community issues: the parameters of the comunity ‘ the professionals are dealing with is unknown in most situations due to the lack of a theoretical base which has been reinforced by quantitative studies. This study preposes to alleviate the professionals' task of defining the community parameters by constructing a model for professionals to utilize which will enable them to identify the parameters of a community based upon certain socioeconomic characteristics of the community and the problem or issue with which the community is confronted. The study was designed in such a way that it would be of most value to community development workers. However, any person or agency concerned with community based problems or issues should be able to benefit from the results of this research. In discussing the importance of defining community parameters, Simpson, a sociologist, aptly pointed out: Despite its inevitable difficulties, however, the problem is important for both social theory and social action, and therefore should not be abandoned. How can we analyze something we cannot even identify? And how can we succeed in action programs which fail to take account of pe0ple's behavioral and psycho- logical definitions of reality?1 Without a basis for establishing community parameters, two equally disadvantageous results are possible. The community develop- ment worker may be unfamiliar with his target of development and establish the community parameters on partial or faulty data which could lead to an ineffective community develOpment project. The other possibility is that the community development worker would come into a community with the parameters already defined for him by an agency or by the power elite in the community, and, without supporting data the community develOpment worker would find it difficult to implement a I successful community development project because the proposed project either exceeded or fell short of the parameters already established. IRichard L. Simpson, "Sociology of the Community: Current Status and Prospects," Rural Sociology, Vol. 30, No. 2 (June, 1965), p. 141. The professional should be able to do his job both more effectively and more efficiently by defining the community according to a socio- economic profile provided by the residents and taking into consideration the particular problem or issue being faced by the community. Basic Design of this Study The central concern of this study was the relationship between selected socioeconomic characteristics and community problems and an individual's territorial concept of community. Three general propositions were identified which had been shown by other researchers to play an important role as independent variables related to a person's concept of community. Thirteen hypotheses were derived from these prepositions for testing. The first proposition was: An individual's territorial concept of community is affected by both his social status and life history. The variables considered in the hypotheses derived from the first proposition were: education, occupation, income, home ownership, ethnic ties, length of residence, religion, foreign travel experience, and childhood community. The second proposition was: An individual's territorial concept of community varies in relationship to the type of problem or issue with which the community is confronted. The variable considered in the hypothesis derived from the second pr0position was: the type of problem or issue with which the community is confronted. The third proposition was: An individual's territorial concept of community is affected by his community identity, participation, and knowledge of community problems. The variables considered in the hypotheses derived from the third proposition were: community identity, participation in formal community organizations, and knowledge of community problems. Whereas previous attempts at delineating community boundaries were seldom based upon a quantitative data base, this researcher utilized survey research to gather data which was used in the construc- tion of a community model based upon quantitative rather than qualitative data. The data for this study were obtained from 260 residents of the Eastown area of Grand Rapids, Michigan, who were interviewed in their homes. The interview instrument which was used contained both new and tested scales and indices. The method of constructing and administering the interview instrument is described in Chapters III and IV. The responses to all of the questions on the interview instrument were recorded on the instrument by the interviewer. The information collected during the 260 interviews was then coded and transferred to IBM cards for computer analysis. The means were computed for the various items in the interview to gain a more complete image of the sample community and respondents. A review of this information is presented in Chapter V as background data for understanding the conclusions of this dissertation. The relationships between selected socioeconomic characteristics and community problems and an individual's territorial concept of community were determined by using various statistical techniques. These associations are presented in Chapter VI. In addition to a summary of research findings and conclusions, the implications of the results of this research for community development workers is included in the final chapter of this study. CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW Previous Attempts at Conceptualizing the Concppt of Community A review of the pertinent literature made it abundantly clear that there was a need for additional research related to the concept of community. Hillery made the following points clear in a recent article dealing with current problems of community theory: 1) There is a basic tendency not to examine assumptions; 2) due to this a confusion has developed between conmunity as sentiment and community as phenomenon; 3) community has been assumed to be something "out there," a working reality, and seldom, if ever, has the point been raised that it may be more appr0priately considered an artificial construct; 4) ideal types have suffered a recent neglect; and, 5) the chief substantive issue in community theory is the lack of attention to developing a general taxonomy of communities that is empirically grounded. By pointing out the fact that more research was needed in this area it was not implied that little has been done in attempting to delineate community boundaries. Conversely, a number of researchers have attempted formulations of theory related to community delineation. A number of authors' definitions of the concept of community and a discussion of previous attempts at community delineation follow. 1George A. Hillery, Jr., "Selected Issues in Community Theory," Rural Sociology, Vol. 37, No. 4 (Dec., 1972), pp. 534-552. 6 Definitions of Community The following definitions were by no means exhaustive of the literature; however, the more important definitions from the fields most directly concerned with community problems were included. First, a dictionary definition: "Community: A group of people living together in some identifiable territory and sharing a set of interests embracing their lifeways." 2 According to Park, an early human ecologist in the University of Chicago's Sociology department: The essential characteristics of a community, so conceived, are those of: 1) a population, territorially organized, 2) more or less completely rooted in the soil it occupies, 3) its individual units living in a relationship of mutual inter- dependence that is symbiotic rather than societal, in the sgnse in which that term applies to human beings. At a later date, Park refined his definition as follows: The community may be regarded 1) as merely an aggregate of people living in a geographical area, in which case a census study may be the method of investigation; 2) as a pattern of control mechanisms exerted on the lives of individuals, calling, for example, for a legal study; or 3) as a functional entity, requiring studies based upon the analysis of the interactions of individuals. 4 2Charles Abrams, The Language of Cities (New York: Avon Books, 1971), p. 59. 3Robert Ezra Park, "Human Ecology," in Roland L. Warren, Perspectives on the American Community (Chicago: Rand McNally & Co., 1973), p. 34. 4Robert Ezra Park, Human Communities (Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1952), p. 118. Pilcher, an anthropologist, made the following comments: The concept of community has had two major components as it has been used in anthropology, First there is the social component, the implication of a social structure and a social group, and second there is a territorial component5 the contiguous residence of community members. Parsons, a social theorist, had the following to say in relation to the concept of community: Though the territorial reference is central, it should also be pointed out that there is another term to the relation. The full formula, that is, comprises persons acting in territorial locations, and since reference is to social relations, persons acting in relation to other persons in respect to the territorial relations of both parties. The population, then, is as much a focus of the study of community as is the territorial location. Loomis and Beegle, rural sociologists, simply stated: "the community may be defined as a social system encompassing a territorial unit within which members carry on most of their day-to-day activities necessary in meeting common needs." 7 According to the community development specialist Roland Warren, "various criteria thought to characterize communities include a specific population, living within a specific geographical area, amongst whom there are present shared institutions and values and significant social interaction." 3 5William W. Pilcher, "The Dispersed Urban Community: The Case of the Portland Longshoremen," Growth and Change, Vol. 3, No. 3 (1972), p.3. 6Talcott Parsons, Structure and Process in Modern Societies Glencoe, Ill.: The freePPress, 1960), p.251. 7Charles P. Loomis and J. Allan Beegle, Rural Sociology (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1957), p. 22. 8Roland L. Warren, The Community in America, 2nd ed. (Chicago: Rand McNally & Co., 1972), p. 2. In reviewing the various definitions, Kaufman pointed out that: Some consensus exists concerning at least three elements in the definition of community. One, community is a social unit of which space is an integral part; community is a place, a relatively small one. Two, community indicates a configuration as to a way of life, both as to how people do things and what they want -- their institutions and collective goals. A third notion is that of collective action. Persons in a community should not only be able to, but frequently do act together in the common concerns of life. 9 Bernard10 called for a revolution of community paradigms because past paradigms have been too general and simplistic. Future paradigms must separate the concepts of locale, sentiment, and interaction to be useful to the communities being studied. According to Bernard: The usual definition of community (this includes the three characteristics of locale, common ties, and social interaction) is simple, but deceptive. It encompasses two quite different, though related, concepts, one referring to "the community" and one to "community." "The community" as it is currently conceived usually refers to settlements of the kind encompassed in the definition implied above in which locale is a basic component. "Community," as distinguished from "the community," emphasizes the common-ties and social-interaction components of the definition. 1 According to Hillery, "lack of attention to separating these two aspects [community as a human group and community-as-sentimenfi] in the study of community has probably been the greatest single obstacle to theoretical development." 12 9Harold F. Kaufman, "Toward an Interactional Conception of Community," in Roland L. Warren, Perspectives on the American Community (Chicago: Rand McNally 8 Co., 1973), p. 63. 10Jessie Bernard, The Sociology of Community (Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman & C0,, 1973), p. 1892 111bid.. pp. 3-4. 12George A. Hillery, Jr., "Selected Issues in Community Theory," Rural Sociology, Vol. 37, No. 4 (Dec., 1972), p. 536. 10 In light of the foregoing discussion, this researcher followed Hillery's13 distinctions and concentrated on community as a human group rather than community-as-sentiment (or common-ties). This was done to avoid the problems that other researchers had encountered by mixing these two components of the concept of community. The component which this researcher concentrated on was that which had been variously labeled as the territorial, spatial, geographical, or locale component of the concept of community. Human interaction occurs within space; therefore, it was assumed that by delineating the territorial component of the concept of community information would also be gained concerning an individual's sphere of social interaction. According to Hillery, "of all the important areas in community, space is the least well-understood, in spite of the research that has gone on in connection with it." 14 Attempts to Delineate Communities One of the earliest attempts at delineating community boundaries was the classification scheme of the folk-urban typological tradition as represented in the later works of Toennies and Redfield.15 These 131bid. 14George A. Hillery, Jr., personal communication in a letter dated February 5, 1974. 15See for example, Ferdinand Toennies, Community and Society_ (Gemeinschaft und Gesellschatt),trans., and introduced byTCharles P. Loomis (East Lansing, Mich: Michigan State University Press, 1957); and, Robert Redfield, The Little Community (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955). 11 attempts to operationalize the concept of community utilizing constructed types, or ideal types, had their founding in theoretical formulations of early sociologists such as Compte, Durkheim, Spencer, Toennies, and Weber. The difficulty with ideal, or constructed types was that they were based upon theory only and were little more than artificial constructs. This was an excellent beginning as it was based on sound theoretical principles; however, it had become nearly impossible to operationalize except when dealing with one of the ideal types: an isolated folk comnunity or a large urban comnunity. This classifi- cation scheme had been utilized with some success by anthrOpologists doing ethnographic studies in preindustrial cultures; however, the folk-urban conceptualization of community is presently being questioned even in this field.16 Hillery also pointed out that the typological tradition "17of community "represents an unfortunate mixture of the two concepts as a human group and community-as-sentiment. With the above points in mind, it was concluded that this use of the concept was not precise enough to be of service to the researcher dealing with community development problems. However, the concept was applicable when dealing with small, relatively homogeneous cultures where sentiment, locale, and interaction were coincidental. 16See for example, Morton Klass, "Community Structure in West Bengal," American Anthrppologist, Vol. 74, No. 3 (June, 1972), pp. 601-11; and Pilcher, "Dispersed Urban Community," pp. 3-10. 17Hillery, "Selected Issues," p. 536. 12 Early attempts at community delineation in the United States included the trade-area community delineation method devised by Galpin and utilized by Galpin and Sanderson.18 This method was rather easy to administer, allowing the researcher to delineate community boundaries based upon the trade-area for a rural trade center. The trade-area 1 method had a major impact on community theory; however, once again this had become harder to operationalize due to an ever increasing scale of urbanization and increased transportation networks. The techniques used by Galpin and Sanderson to delimit rural communities have come under attack because of the difficulties of using these techniques and because these methods implicitly excluded the importance of interaction. In reviewing Galpin's technique, Drabick and Buck concluded that: "Sociologically and ecologically it is incomplete because of the almost total lack of consideration accorded community interaction processes between people and "19 There may still be some value in this technique for institutions. determining trade areas for rural communities; however, it could no longer be assumed that this one measure was a valid measurement of an individual's spatial referent. 18C.J. Galpin, "The Social Anatomy of an Agricultural Community," (Wisconsin Agr. Expt. Sta. Res. Bull. 34; Madison, 1915); and, Dwight Sanderson, "Locating the Rural Community," Cornell Extension Bulletin 413 (Ithaca: New York State College of Agriculture at Cornell University, 1939). 19Lawrence W. Drabick and Roy C. Buck, "Measuring Locality Group Consensus," Rural Sociology, Vol. 24, No. 2 (June, 1959), p. 108. 13 Shortly after Galpin's pioneering efforts at delineating community boundaries, Park and the other University of Chicago human ecologists devised a different conceptual framework for dealing with the community. k20 Par was the main pr0ponent of the concept of “natural areas" within a complex metropolitan area. As Burgess stated, the assumption in studying and delineating natural areas was that: ... the natural areas could be significantly studied ... in their spatial pattern: the topography of the local community; the physical arrangements not only of the landscape but of the structures which man had constructed, that sheltered the 21 inhabitants and provided places of work and of play. However, according to Meenagan: There are several reasons which seem to render this approach to delineating communities as unworkable today. First ... much of what Park and his associates had to say about the city and its sub-communities, were really only applicable to a particular city, at a particular time in history. Secondly ... there seems to be a minimal incorporation of the role of social condition of society and its people. This is compounded when one notes the tremendous social changes which have occurred in the post-Park period. The use of "natural areas" as a method of studying communities faced many problems. The major problems with this method centered around the heavy emphasis on the biological order with little emphasis 20Robert Ezra Park, Human Communities (Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1952). 21Ernest W. Burgess and Donald S. Bogue, "Research in Urban Society: A Long View,“ Urban Sociology (Chicago: Phoenix Books, 1964), p.7, cited by Thomas Wi—Meenagan, "Community Delineation: Alternative Methods and Problems," Sociolpgy and Social Research, Vol. 56, No. 3 (April, 1972), p. 347. 22Thomas M. Meenagan, "Community Delineation: Alternative Methods and Problems," Sociolpgy and Social Research, Vol. 56, No. 3 (April, 1972), p. 347. 14 on the social order. The method had more potential for furthering the understanding of the ecological setting within which community organi- zation develops than as a means of providing information useful to the community development worker. Also, the "natural areas" delineated using this method could not be assumed to be communities because they happened to be similar in topographical features. This did not exclude the possibility that there were communities contained within "natural areas," but this was far different from assuming a causal relationship between "natural areas" and communities. More recent methods of delineating corrmunity boundaries have relied on information available in the census tract data. Examples 123 include social area analysis utilized by Shevsky and Bel and an expansion of this method utilizing factorial analysis.24 The researcher utilizing social area analysis relied on the measures of three indices to gain an indication of the rank, life style, and ethnicity of a section of an urban community: ' 1. An index of social rank (or economic status) made up of one education and one occupation variable. 2. An index of urbanization (or family status) made up of the variables fertility, the proportion of women in the labor force, and the proportion of single-family dwellings in the housing stock. 23See Wendell Bell, "Social Areas: Typology of Urban Neighbor- hoods," in Marvin B. Sussman, Ed., Community_Structure and Analysis (New York: Crowell and Co., 1959), pp. 61-92; andTEshref’SheVSky and Wendell Bell, Social Area Analysis (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1955). 24See Maurice Van Arsdol, Santo F. Camilleri, and Calvin F. Schmid, "The Generality of Urban Social Area Indices," American Sociological Review, Vol. 23 (1958), pp. 277-284. 15 3. An index of segregation (or ethnic status) made up of the combined proportions of minority ethnic groups (Negroes, other races, foreigE-born persons from continents other than Europe). 5 Factor analysis had replaced traditional social area analysis due to its greater empirical strength. Factor analysis had added additional variables to the three original indices in an attempt to explain more variation and provide justification for the way in which the original indices were constructed. In other words, factor analysis was a stronger methodological application of social area analysis. In reference to Bell's social area analysis, Meenagan pointed out the following limitations: First since social area analysis depends upon the dicennial census information for its population and housing data, the method is really only as strong as the census data. Secondly, the method seems to contain a substantial amount of arbitEgriness with respect to both measures and indices. The final method considered was that which was devised by Drabick and Buck in measuring group consensus in reference to spatial referents in rural Pennsylvania. A group of individuals representing various segments of the community population were asked to outline graphically what they considered to be the limits of their community. "Differences in boundaries were discussed and opportunities for changing them allowed. The resulting outline represented the greatest agreement 25Philip H. Rees, "Problems of Classifying Subareas Within Cities," in Brian J.L. Berry, Ed., City Classification Handbook: Methods and Applications (New York: Joyn Wiley 8 Sons, Inc., 1972), p. 276. 26Meenagan, "Comnunity Delineation," pp. 349-50. 16 possible within the particular group participating."27 The method allowed community members to define community boundaries through a process of group interaction, and the results could be graphically portrayed. However, the technique had not been tested in an urban area; therefore, it could be found to contain many of the same draw- backs as trade-area analysis. 27Drabick and Buck, "Measuring Locality Group Consensus," p. 112. CHAPTER III RESEARCH DESIGN In the design of this study a number of variables to be explored were first identified. After the variables were identified and defined, three propositions and thirteen hypotheses were formulated for testing. Finally, the interview instrument was constructed and the appropriate methods of data analysis were selected. Definition of the Study_Variables After a thorough review of the literature dealing with the concept of community, it was possible to identify a number of variables which this author hypothesized as being related to the concept of community. An independent variable (X) is that variable which is considered to be a predictor of the dependent variable (Y). If there is a strong relationship between the two variables, a researcher may then reasonably predict the configuration that the dependent variable will take based upon his knowledge of the independent variable(s). In reality, many independent variables are usually related to one dependent variable; therefore, this researcher considered the relationships between many independent variables and a single dependent variable. In this study the dependent variable was an individual's territorial concept of community. Thirteen independent variables were chosen for analysis. 17 18 The Independent Variables Most of the independent variables chosen for analysis in this study had been utilized by other researchers in a similar way; however, some of the variables were used in a different manner or were an original contribution to the study of community. Information Base: The amount of information an individual had at his disposal. Social Status: An individual's relative position in a hierarchy of social prestige, power, and income. Life History: The history of an individual's development in his sociocultural environment. Education: The amount of formal education of an individual measured by the number of years in school, college, and the university. Occupation: The principal activity in which an individual was engaged to provide income for himself and his family. 122222} The total family income per year. Residence: The length of time an individual had lived in the Eastown area prior to the time of interview. Home Ownership: Whether an individual owned, or was buying, his own home. Ethnicity: The degree to which an individual identified with a particular ethnic group. Religious Identity: The degree to which an individual identified with a formal religious institution and/or dogma. Foreign Travel: The actual amount of contact with cultures other than an individual's native culture. Childhood Community: The community in which an individual lived 19 during the first ten years of his life. Community Problems: A generic class of problems which were assumed to affect most communities in industrialized nations, including Eastown. Community Activity: An individual's participation in formal community organizations during the year preceeding the interview. Community Knowledge: The amount of knowledge an individual had concerning community problems. Community Identity; The degree to which an individual identified with the community in which he was living. The Dependent Variable Territorial concept of community: The spatial area which an individual identified as his community. It was assumed that the amount of space an individual identified with was directly related to his sphere of interaction. It was also assumed that an individual's perceived community was a function of community problems.‘ Propositions and hypotheses Three general propositions were identified which had been shown by other researchers to play an important role as independent variables related to a person's concept of community. Thirteen hypotheses were derived from these pr0positions for testing. As Phillips explained, "Propositions are statements about the nature of reality and thus can be judged in terms of truth and falsity, provided they refer to observable phenomena. Hypotheses are propositions formulated for empirical testing."1 The hypothesis was that which was logically derived from 1Bernard Phillips, Social Research: Strategy and Tactics, 2nd ed. (New York: The’MaCMillan CO., 1971). 20 a proposition, while the null hypothesis was that which was tested. The null was simply the hypothesis stated in the null form. If the null hypothesis was rejected based upon findings in a data base, the researcher was able to accept the hypothesis, thereby lending support to the initial proposition from which it was derived. This researcher followed Phillips' definition.2 Each pr0position was based on a theory base or an empirical finding. Hypotheses were then formulated from the propositions providing that the variables included in any particular hypothesis were a subset of the set of variables included in the proposition from which the hypothesis was derived.3 Proposition One: An individual's territorial concept of community is affected by both his social status and life history. The first nine hypotheses were derived from proposition one. The direction of the relationship between independent and dependent variables was based upon this researcher's general knowledge of the literature in the social sciences and the findings of other researchers dealing with the concept of community. 21m. 3This position is also supported by Lawrence S. Meyers and Neal E. Grossen, Behavioral Research: Theory, Procedure, and Design (San Francisco: N.H. Freeman and Co., 1974); and Pertti J. Pelto, Anthropological Research: The Structure of Inquiry (New York: Harper and Row, 197072 21 In discussing the results of their research Drabick and Buck noted that: " ... it is quite possible that the ethnic, economic, and social composition of the area, as independent factors or in combinations, may "4 have contributed to the findings. In other words, they realized the importance of social status but did not design their study to measure the effects of these variables. In his study of a small Mississippi city, Fanelli did take into consideration the relationships between social status and community perceptions. "The relationship between extensiveness of communication contacts and position was in part investigated in the present study by u 5 comparing the social status of high and low communicators. In discussing the findings of his research Fanelli stated: No statistically significant percentage differences (at .05 level) were found between high and low communi- cators in various age, sex, education, and social status categories. Thus we must conclude that these data do not support the notion that extensiveness of communication about community problems is relaged to differences in positional factors of this kind. ‘ In reviewing the technique of social area analysis, Rees pointed out the following: One of the key questions that the social area frame- work is helpful in answering is whether the individual's or household's characteristics alone are sufficient for the prediction of behavior, or whether it is essential to consider the social environment as well. Reviewing the 4Drabick and Buck, "Measuring Locality Group Consensus," p. 117. 5Alexander A. Fanelli, "Extensiveness of Communication Contacts and Perceptions of the Community," American Sociological Review, 21 (August, 1956), p. 442. 61bid. 22 work on this problem, Bell came to the conclusion that there was "convincing evidence that the social character of local areas within a city as defined by economic, family and ethnic characteristics is an important predictor of individual attitudes and behaviors, sub—cultural patterns, and social organizations." Although there had only been a limited number of community studies which utilized similar variables as this study, it could be seen from the studies reviewed that both social status and life history variables were considered as potential predictor variables in relation to an individual's perception of his community. (Also, refer to Figure 1). Social Status Variables Life History Variables Education Occupation Income Home Ownership Ethnic Ties Length of Residence Religion Foreign Travel Experience Childhood Community Figure 1. Sets of Variables in Proposition One Education, occupation, and income were used as direct indicators of social status. Home ownership and strength of ethnic ties were used as indirect indicators of social status. Research which had been carried out heretofore utilized these variables in a similar manner. 7Rees, "Classifying Subareas," p. 278. 23 It was assumed that higher social status leads to greater opportunities and more information; therefore, it was thought that an individual's territorial concept of community would increase with social status. Conversely, it was thought that an individual who had lived in the area for a long period of time would have a smaller territorial concept than an individual who had lived in the area for a short period. This hypothesis was based on the assumption that such a person would have had a more constrained information base than a person who had lived in other communities recently. Religion was a variable that had been ignored to a large extent in most community studies. This researcher used strength of religious ties as an independent variable. It was thought that the greater the religious ties, the more constrained the information base of an indi- vidual, and therefore, the smaller his territorial concept of community. The independent variable of foreign travel experience had not been previously used in any research to the knowledge of this researcher. It was thought that foreign travel would have the opposite effect of strong religious ties. In other words, foreign travel would have expanded an individual's information base by making him more aware of other communities and cultures, thereby increasing his territorial concept of community. The independent variable of an individual's childhood community was included because it was thought that the early years of sociali- zation would have had a major effect on an individual's concept of COnInunity. It was thought that an individual socialized in an urban 5€?i?ting would have had a larger territorial concept of community than 24 an individual socialized in a rural area, based upon the importance of childhood socialization. Hypothesis One: An individual's territorial concept of community is directly related to his level of educational attainment. Hypothesis Two: An individual's territorial concept of community is directly related to his occupation. Hypothesis Three: An individual's territorial concept of community is directly related to his family income. Hypothesis Four: An individual's territorial concept of community is inversely related to his length of residence in the community. Hypothesis Five: An individual's territorial concept of community is directly related to home ownership. Hypothesis Six: An individual's territorial concept of community is inversely related to his strength of ethnic ties. Hypothesis Seven: An individual's territorial concept of community is inversely related to his strength of religious ties. Hypothesis Eight; An individual's territorial concept of community is directly related to his foreign travel experience. Hypothesis Nine: An individual's territorial concept of community is directly related to the size of community in which he spent the first ten years of his life. Proposition Two: An individual's territorial concept of community varies in relationship to the type of problem or issue with which the community is confronted. 25 Hypothesis ten was derived from the second proposition. Although this author knew of no previous empirical studies testing this relationship, the following theoretical works all cited the importance of community problems, issues, and action. For example, Kaufman stated that: The community field consists of an organization of actions carried on by persons working through various associations or groups. This organization of action occupies the center of the community arena and is dis- tinguished from other fields of action in a locality by a complex of characteristics or dimensions. Providing a setting for community action and an integral part of the arena are patgerns of demographic, ecological, and physical factors. In their article on the concept of community, Sutton and Kolaja suggested that "community phenomena consist of all those social inter- actions which arise from and/or embody the efforts of many or most persons and groups to shape the major decisions and conditions constituting 'solutions' to the problems which flow from the common use of an area."9 In the chapter on community action and leadership in Poplin's text on communities he began with the following statement: ... during recent years there has been a growing interest in viewing the community from a more dynamic, "on-the-scene" perspective. Could we not gain much by using human action itself as a unit of analysis? Would not our understanding of community life be greatly enhanced by focusing upon local residents as they attempt to solve the problems which inevitably arise when man lives in proximity to his fellow man? Should we not examine patterns of leadership and decision making at the local level? Several students of the community have offered affirmative answers to these questions. 8Kaufman, "Toward an Interactional Conception of Community," p.13. QSutton and Kolaja, "The Concept of Community," p. 198. 10Poplin, Communities, p. 180. 26 Poplin then reviewed the works of Kaufman and Sutton and Kolaja. He cited these works as the strongest theoretical base for considering the importance of community problems. This researcher included the second proposition to test empirically the assertions of these authors. Hypothesis Ten: An individual's territorial concept of community is directly related to the complexity of the problem or issue with which the community is confronted. Proposition Three: An individual's territorial concept of community is affected by his community identity, participation, and knowledge of community problems. Three hypotheses were derived from the third proposition. All three of the independent variables had been previously used in a study by Fanelli.11 Community identity had also been used as a dependent variable in a study by Durand and Eckart.12 Drabick and Buck13 had utilized both community knowledge and participation as independent variables. In Fanelli's study he suggested that an individual's orientation toward the community was related to the extensiveness of his communi- cation contacts about community problems. "If the community does not happen to be particularly important or salient for some individuals, 11Fanelli, "Perceptions of the Community," pp. 439-45. 12Roger Durand and Dennis R. Eckart, "Social Rank, Residential Effects and Community Satisfaction," Social Forces, Vol. 50, No. 2 (Sept., 1973). pp. 74-85. 13Drabick and Buck, "Measuring Locality Group Consensus," p. 111. 27 they may not be so likely to talk to others about community problems as those who are strongly identified with the community.“14 In other words there was a direct relationship between an individual's community identity and his knowledge of community problems. Fanelli also tested the relationship between knowledge of community problems and participation in community affairs. He concluded that "high communicators are much more likely than low communicators to report active participation in community matters."15 Once again, this finding indicated a direct relationship between knowledge of community problems (high communication) and participation in community affairs. Another relationship tested by Fanelli, which was even more directly related to this research, was the relationship between the extent of an individual's communication and his perceptions of the community. According to Fanelli: .. to the extent that the individual is cut off from significant interaction with others he is likely to develop "private" (as opposed to "shared") frames of reference which effectively limit his grasp of social reality. Extending this idea to the community situation under consideration here, we suggest that high communicators (with a relatively wide range of contacts about community problems) are likely to perceive the congnity in a different way than do low communicators. Fanelli found that a difference in community perception did exist between high and low communicators. More specifically, he discovered 14Fanelli, "Perceptions of the Community," p. 442. 151bid., p. 443. 151b1a. 28 that high communicators were more aware of community factions and less likely to give their community a high community spirit rating than were the low communicators.17 In their 1973 study, Durand and Eckart studied the relationships between community satisfaction (identity) and a number of predictor variables. They identified and tested three hypotheses: The first hypothesis predicts that community satis- faction will tend to increase with length of residence for those individuals who inhabit stable neighborhoods composed of persons of comparable social status as opposed to those individuals who inhabit changing or dissimilar residential area. Hypothesis two predicts an interactive relationship between city and individual social rank and community evaluations. Hypothesis three ... predicted that community satis- faction would increase as a multiplicative function of relative economic stake in the community and frequency of neighborhood contacts among thgse who inhabit socially compatible residential enclaves.1 After the analysis of the data, they concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support hypotheses one and two. However, they concluded that "limited support is found for a prediction that community feelings would be a multiplicative function of relative economic stake and frequency of neighborhood contacts."19 Drabick and Buck utilized a group interaction method to delineate community boundaries in rural Pennsylvania. Although they did not test any specific hypotheses, they contended that: 17Ibid., pp. 444-45 18Durand and Eckart, "Community Satisfaction," pp. 80-83. 19Ibid., p. 74. 29 The individual's conception of the community is based on his knowledge and perception of and participation in the formal, semi-formal, and informal aspects of the com- munity together with theointegration of these units into a distinct social system. As can be seen from the foregoing review of the literature, there was considerable support for using the variables of community identity, participation, and knowledge of community problems as independent variables related to an individual's territorial concept of community. Hypothesis Eleven: An individual's territorial concept of community is directly related to his participation in community acti- vities and organizations. Hypothesis Twelve: An individual's territorial concept of community is directly related to his knowledge of community problems/ issues. Hypothesis Thirteen: An individual's territorial concept of community is inversely related to his strength of community identity. Null Hypotheses The following were the null hypotheses (H0) chosen for statistical analysis: 1) There is no relationship between a person's level of educational attainment and his territorial concept of community. 2) There is no relationship between a person's occupation and his territorial concept of community. 3) There is no relationship between a person's family income and his territorial concept of community. 4) There is no relationship between a person's length of residence in the community and his territorial concept of community. 20Drabick and Buck, "Measuring Locality Group Consensus," p. 111 30 5) There is no relationship between a person's home ownership and his territorial concept of community. 6) There is no relationship between a person's ethnic identity and his territorial concept of community. 7) There is no relationship between a person's religious identity and his territorial concept of community. 8) There is no relationship between a person's foreign travel experience and his territorial concept of community. 9) There is no relationship between a person's early childhood community _and his territorial concept of community. 10) There is no relationship between the type of community problem and a person's territorial concept of community. 11) There is no relationship between a person's participation in community activities and organizations and his territorial concept of community. 12) There is no relationship between a person's knowledge of community problems and his territorial concept of community. 13) There is no relationship between a person's strength of community identity and his territorial concept of community. Questions and Indices Used to Measure the Study Variables The interview instrument which was used to gather the data was constructed in such a manner that all levels of measurement could be 21 treated as interval data. Questions and indices to measure the ZIFor an extensive argument and mathematical proof of the validity of treating ordinal data as interval data in multiple regression, see Jacob Cohen, "Multiple Regression as a General Data-Analytic System," Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 70, No. 6 (1968), pp. 426-43. 31 variables were either adopted or modified from existing questions and indices whenever feasible to strengthen the validity of the research instrument. Most of the measures utilized in this research instrument had been previously used and were shown to be both reliable and valid. The two major exceptions to this were the questions and index used to measure an individual's territorial concept of community and the questions and index used to measure community problems. However, both of these measures had face validity. In other words, the indices appeared to be measuring that which they were designed to measure and caused no problems in the administration of the interview instrument. The interview instrument, in its totality, rested on face validity. Measuring the Independent Variables (X1 ... X13) The independent variables are discussed in the same order as they were used in the hypotheses. This order was used throughout the dissertation, whenever feasible, in discussing this group of variables to enable easy comparison of one section with another. Education Question 41 was designed to measure the amount of formal education an individual had completed. A college graduate was defined as an individual with a terminal degree from a four year institution of higher learning. A graduate degree included a masters or any higher degree. This variable was the independent variable in hypothesis one. Occupation Question 48 was designed to measure the principal wage earner's occupation. The classification system followed the present United 32 States Census Classification of Occupational Groups22 with the exception that retired persons and students could not be assigned a rating on this scale. Occupation was the independent variable in hypothesis two. mm: Question 40 was designed to measure total family igggme, Intervals of 4,000 dollars were used. The total range was from less than 4,000 dollars to more than 20,000 dollars. Income was the independent variable in hypothesis three. Residence Question 42 was designed to measure the length of residence of an individual. Intervals of three years were used with a total range from less than three years to more than eighteen years. Residence was the independent variable in hypothesis four. Home Ownership Question 55 was designed to measure whether or not an individual owned his own home. Home ownership was the independent variable in hypothesis five. Index of Ethnicity (IE) Questions 50-52 were designed to elicit an individual's degree of ethnicity. In speaking of religio-ethnic identity, Dashefsky contended, 22See Delbert C. Miller, Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement, 2nd edition (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1970), pp. 170-72. 33 . measurements of identity are carried out in terms of self- reported statements or placement in social category such as age, sex, and race."23 This research utilized the method of self-reporting. The index had a possible range from 0-5, which was arrived at by summing the transformed scores of questions 50-52. A score of 0 indicated no ethnic identity, while a score of 5 indicated maximum identity with an ethnic group. IE was the independent variable in hypothesis six. Index of Religious Identity (IRI) Questions 53 and 54 measured an individual's religious identity. The index had a possible range from 0-4, which was arrived at by summing the transformed scores of questions 53 and 54. A score of 0 indicated no religious identity, while a score of 4 indicated maximum religious identity. IRI was the independent variable in hypothesis seven. Index of Foreign Travel Experience (IFT§)_ The index of forgjgn travel experience measured the actual amount of contact with cultures other than the respondent's native culture. The possible range of scores was from 0-16, arrived at by summing the transformed scores of questions 59-61, the greater the score the more extensive the contact with other cultures. IFTE was the independent variable in hypothesis eight. 23Arnold Dashefsky, ”And the Search Goes On: The Meaning of Religio-Ethnic Identity and Identification,” Sociological Analysis, Vol. 33, No. 4 (Winter, 1972), p. 240. 34 Childhood Community Question 45 was designed to measure an individual's childhood community. Childhood community was the independent variable in hypothesis nine. Index of Communitnyroblems (ICP) The index of community problems was arrived at by summing the scores of questions 6-15. It was designed to give an indication of the respondent's attitudes toward a number of problems facing many communi- ties. The possible range of scores was from 0-70. The greater the score, the greater the spatial area which the respondent considered important when attempting to solve community problems. ICP was the independent variable in hypothesis ten. Community_Activity Index (CAI) The community activity index measured a person's participation in community organizations. This index was modified, to gather the pertinent information for this study, from a similar index developed by Miller.24 The CAI measured an individual's actual behavior in formal community organizations. The range of possible CAI scores, arrived at by summing questions 29-33, was 0-5, with 0 indicating no community involvement and 5 indicating maximum involvement. CAI was the independent variable in hypothesis eleven. 24Miller, Handbook of Research Desigp, pp. 286-87. For more information on this scale refer to questions 29-33 on the interview instrument which is included in the appendix. 35 Index of Community Knowlegge (ICK) The index of community knowledge measured the amount of knowledge a respondent had concerning community problems. This index was also modified from a similar index developed by Miller.25 The range of possible scores, arrived at by summing questions 22-28, was 0-7. A score of 0 on the ICK indicated that a person had no knowledge about community problems. Conversely, a score of 7 indicated maximum know- ledge of community problems/issues. ICK was the independent variable in hypothesis twelve. Comnunity Identity Index (CII) This researcher slightly modified both the questions and the scaling techniques used by Fanelli26 in constructing a revision of 27 Fanelli's "community,identification index." The possible range of scores, arrived at by summing questions 17-21, for the C11 was 5-25. A score of 5 indicated very strong identification with the conmunity, while a score of 25 indicated the opposite. CII was the independent variable in hypothesis thirteen. Ibid. 26Fanelli, "Extensiveness of Communication Contacts," pp. 439-45. Refer to questions 17-25 for more detailed information. 271bid., p. 442. 36 Measuring the Dependent Variable (Y) Territorial Concept of Community Index (TCCI) The possible range for this index, arrived at by summing questions 1-16, was from 16-112. A score near the low end of the index indicated that a person's territorial concept of community_was relatively constrained spatially. Whereas, a high TCCI score indicated the opposite. The possible response categories for questions 1-16 were all the same: 1) 1-10 blocks (immediate neighborhood) 2) more than 10 blocks, but not the entire city (extended neighborhood) 3) the county 4) western Michigan (approximately a 45 mile radius) 5) the state 6) the nation 7) the world I§§I_was not used to test hypothesis ten because the independent variable -- community problems -- was a subset of TCCI. However, an allowable statistical technique was to use question sixteen -- community -- to test the relationship between an individual's terri- torial concept of community and the problems with which the community was confronted. This prevented using questions six through fifteen as both independent and dependent variables. Question sixteen -- community -- and IC§I_were both used to measure the area which an individual identified as his community. 37 Pretest of the Interview Instrument The data analyzed in this study were gathered using a single interview instrument which was designed for the explicit purpose of gaining the necessary information to test the hypotheses of this study. A copy of the interview instrument and a description of the coding and transformation procedures utilized in this research are included in the Appendix. In an attempt to alleviate problems which might occur in data gathering and analysis, much time was devoted to the design of the instrument, and a pretest was administered as a final check of the interview instrument. The pretest was administered to 40 individuals living in Grand Rapids outside the Eastown area in November, 1973. Few significant changes were made between the tentative and the final form. This was because the tentative form was easy to administer and the respondents expressed little or no difficulty in understanding the questions. The major changes included: 1) dividing the question on fire and crime protection into two separate questions; 2) adding response categories to the question dealing with where the principal wage earner worked; 3) adding a question on the type of dwelling unit; and, 4) adding questions to, and rearranging the section on travel experience. The other changes were of a mechanical nature, making the format easier to read, administer, and code. The questions were so ordered to avoid bias and to make the interview instrument easy to administer. Respondent characteristics were placed last to avoid 'turning off' a respondent when asked a question which he considered to be too personal. 38 Data Analysis and Hypotheses Testing_ Two basic types of data analysis were performed to test the null hypotheses (H0): 1) the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (r) was determined for the relationship between each pair of variables and an intercorrelation matrix was printed containing this information; and 2) multivariate (multiple regression) analysis was performed on sets of variables to determine the relationships between two or more independent variables predicting one dependent variable. A further discussion of the methods and their importance follows: Relationship measures are based on two underlying principles -- the principle of covariation and the principle of joint occurrence. Covariation refers to relations between variables quantitatively measured and applies to the case where a unit change in one variable is paralleled with some degree of regularity by a comparable change in another variable. If two variables are directly related, then increases (or decreases) in one variable are paralleled by increases (or decreases) in the other. An inverse relation based on the principle of covariation occurs when an increase in one variggle is paralleled by a decrease in the other variable. Multiple Regression The specific multivariate technique which was chosen for analysis of the data was multiple regression. Multiple regression allows the researcher to consider the relationship between many predictor (X) variables and one criterion (Y) variable. In other words, in an hypothetical set of variables, X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, X5: multiple regression can identify which combination of these variables best predicts the values of a particular dependent variable, Y. Multiple regression permited examination of the simultaneous effects of a large 28Sanford Labovitz and Robert Hagedorn, Introduction to Social Research (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1971):'p. 76. 39 cluster of variables?1 The sets of independent variables tested were organized according to the following strategy: 1) Set A represented the independent variables which were most expected to be related to Y (territorial concept of community). Variables which were included in Set A were: education, occupation, income, length of residence, and home ownership, These relationships were considered the main hypotheses of this study, related to H0 1-5; 2) Set 8 consisted of variables which were considered as exploratory issues of the research. This set consisted of the following variables: index of community_problems (ICE), index of community identity (C11), index of community knowledge (ICK), and the community activity index (CAI), These four variables were con- sidered in H0 10-13; and 3) Set C consists of variables which were considered as unqualifiedly exploratory. This was because the interview instrument elicited minimal information regarding these variables and/or the measures were of a highly tenuous nature because they had not been previously tested. It was hoped that by testing the relationships between these X variables and Y the hypotheses and indices of measurement might be further refined for future studies. Variables included in Set C were: index of ethnicityp(IE), index of religious identity_(IRI), index of foreign travel experience (IFTE), and childhood community, related to H0 6-9. Multiple regression (MR) was performed in the following manner: MR analysis for Set A, then Sets A and B, then Sets A + B + C. Each additional set was tested for the increment of the multiple regression coefficient (R). 31Pertti J. Pelto, Anthropological Research (New York: Harper and Row, 1970), pp. 186-98. 40 Computer Prpgrams Used After the coded responses from each questionnaire were keypunched onto IBM cards, they were fed into the CDC 6500 computer at Michigan State University's Computer Center to be standardized for further analysis. A computer program -- File Build -- of the Computer Institute for Social Science Research (CISSR) was used to standardize the data so that it would be in an appropriate format for use in other CISSR programs. Another CISSR program -- IC MATRIX (Intercorrelation Matrix) -- was used to calculate the mean, standard deviation, and the Pearson- moment correlation coefficients for all pair of variables. The IC MATRIX was then used as a data set for multiple regression analysis using another CISSR program -- LS (Least Squares). The statistics calculated by LS included the partial correlation coefficients, the multiple correlation coefficients, (R and R2), and the significance level. CHAPTER IV STUDY AREA AND DATA COLLECTION Study Area In selecting the survey area for this research a major consider- ation was to locate an area which made the collection of data in a short period of time with a limited amount of resources a realistic possibility. Another important consideration was to locate a study area which had population characteristics similar to the population of the United States in general. This allowed more meaningful generalizations regarding the data than if the study area was quite dissimilar to the larger population. This researcher was fortunate to be indirectly involved in a community development project in an area which contained the requisite population characteristics and was in a location that provided for ease of data collection. Selection of Study Area At the time of this study a significant community development project was being carried out in the eastern portion of the city of Grand Rapids, Michigan, known as Eastown (see Figures 2 and 3 for maps). The project was a cooperative venture between the Eastown Community Association and Aquinas College. A major objective of the 41 42 FRED-".1 [ C0. ' : ,—:—Muo “no: I I I. .. - - J EASTOWN Figure 2. Location of "Eastown" in Grand Rapids, Michigan 43 g raingm 2a agfimzuaw a: =e.23?NNL Dull .......................u.u......u SE. ..a 82.3“ 9.: .38 um.. ... _ .... cflMMMMMMUg k\\ilg xzooaucopu hephen': Sch .. 2a .3233”. 2: 82.3.. 3 $257. mam D D .m. mafia .D up 9333:. Kn” acduh K on 504 Wilcox Park “I u>¢ duxbw 3::m a 32.8. A El um E] ,E] TOM S ETROI gl: «22222 4% [:1 :3 ....‘g. , Detailed Map of "Eastown" Figure 3. Aquinas College Geography Department Boundaries of "Eastown" Source: Boundaries of East Grand Rapids 44 project was to initiate student and faculty involvement in the area to break down the "town-gown" barrier which existed. However, other objectives included discovering the needs of the community members and delineating the Eastown community boundaries. The Eastown area was comprised of 1600 households as initially delineated by community development workers from Aquinas College during the early Spring of 1973. At a later date (Fall, 1973) it was thought that the southern boundary should be relocated due to citizen interest in the community development efforts (food co-op, tenants union, etc.) that were taking place in the Eastown area. At this time the southern boundary was tentatively extended from Sherman to Franklin (see Figure 3). This added 418 households to the population of Eastown for a total of 2018 households. As the above discussion implies, precise delineation of the boundaries for Eastown was not yet accomplished at the time of this study. However, it appeared that Eastown would include the additional 418 households added by changing the southern boundary line. Therefore, the larger area was used as a population for this study. It was thought that this study would be of some assistance in determining the boundaries of the developing community of Eastown. Although gathering information which might prove to be valuable in local community development efforts was a pleasant spin-off of this study, the Eastown area was also chosen because Aquinas College's involvement in the community assured ease of data collection. A number of students from Aquinas College were able to become involved with a research project in the Eastown area, thereby contributing to the college's goals of becoming more involved with the local community. 45 Also, Aquinas College was located in the study area, which gave the students and this researcher relatively easy access to the community. All of these factors made the collection of data during a short period of time with limited resources a possibility. In addition to ease of data gathering, the Eastown area was chosen due to its demographic makeup. The area, as initially delineated, had a 20 per cent college student population, 11.4 per cent black population, 16 per cent retired population, with the remainder of the population being primarily white family units. "Eastown is an age and racial microcosm of the City of Grand Rapids while differing considerably from the more exclusive suburban community of East Grand Rapids.“1 The population characteristics of Eastown were not highly dissimilar to those of Grand Rapids in particular, and the nation in general. Because the research was carried out to build a model of community in general, the population characteristics of Eastown made it more meaningful to generalize from the findings than if the data had been collected in a relatively homogeneous area such as East Grand Rapids. Detailed Description of Study Area Grand Rapids was located along the Grand River in western Michigan (see Figure 2). As a city of approximately 200,000 people, it was the commercial, cultural, educational, financial, industrial, and trans- portation center for the western region of the state. Eastown was located primarily within the city limits of Grand Rapids, Michigan (see Figures 2 and 3). As previously indicated, Eastown was very similar 1Thomas W. Edison, "Eastown: A Humane Human Geography" (unpublished paper, Michigan State University, 1973), p. 9 46 to Grand Rapids in age and racial characteristics. The following description of Eastown was based upon three years of informal participant-observation by this researcher and on a formal study of the area by Edison.2 Eastown was an area that would be classified by most researchers as a transitional neighborhood. In the past ten years there had been an influx of blacks from the south-west sector of Eastown with a concomitant out-migration of white families. According to Edison, "...the current transitional state of Eastown could stabilize and become the basis for a truly integrated community."3 There had been official attempts to stabilize the area as an integrated community. As an initial member of the Neighborhood Task Force created by the President of Aquinas College during 1972, this researcher could recall discussions revolving around the benefits to be gained by stabilizing the area into an integrated state. This task force was eventually replaced by the Eastown Community Association and Aquinas' Off-Campus College. In a pamphlet distributed by the Eastown Community Association, a description of Eastown stressed the transitional nature of the area: In recent years, EASTOWN, like the rest of the world, has been changing. To some people, the changes are unsettling, even threatening. To many others, however, they are exciting. We are becoming an intellectual center, to which large numbers of students, professors, and artists are being attracted. We are 2mm. 3m d., p. 5. 47 becoming one of the few parts of the city where black and white families are succeeding in living side by side in harmony and mutual respect. This new diversity is creating some tensions, but it is making Eastown a vital and exciting place to live.4 At the time of this writing it appeared that the efforts of Aquinas College and the Eastown Community Association were succeeding in creating a stable neighborhood. The most transitional sector of the area was no longer the social, but the business sector. The commercial area had a constant influx of new specialty shops during the early 1970's, with many of these shops lasting only a few months. Many of these shops failed as commercial ventures while others moved on to one of the many malls constructed during the late 1960's and early 1970's. According to Edison, "...presently as much as 15% of the retail floor space may be vacant in Eastown."5 Edison concluded that, “Although there are notable problems, and rather conspicuous vacancies, the commercial area seems to be going through a healthy period of readjustment.“6 Eastown did not have the political precedence that many communities and neighborhoods have. The central focus of Eastown has traditionally been "the commercial area located along Lake Drive and Wealthy Street in the central part of the area. It is with this area that most neighborhood residents identify, and that most non- residents acknowledge as Eastown."7 Even though there had been little 4Peggy Hertel in an unpublished pamphlet distributed by the Eastown Community Association in 1973. 5Edison, "Eastown," p. 16. 51mm, p. 17 71bid.. pp. 5-5 48 political self-awareness in the Eastown area, Edison concluded: Although the independent political history of Eastown is minimal, the territorial integrity of the area through time is impressive, and may in fact be an adequate substitute. At any rate, the area defined within the boundaries has experienced a uniform historical bacEground, and goes beyond simple social relationships. The demographic characteristics were previously discussed; however, the significant aspects of population location within Eastown could be summarized as follows: 1) Eastown was an age and racial microcosm of Grand Rapids. 2) Eastown and Grand Rapids were both fairly representative of the United States in reference to age and racial characteristics. 3) The most atypical demographic characteristic of Eastown was its high percentage (20 per cent) of college students. 4) The southwest sector of Eastown contained most of the black population and had the highest p0pulation density. 5) Blocks that had a high student population percentage also tended to have a high percentage of blacks and older people. Data Collection Techniques Sampling There were approximately 2018 households in the Eastown area. According to Baumel, et. al.,9 to estimate a percentage figure within plus or minus 5 per cent of the actual mean, it was necessary to draw a sample of at least 333 households for a population of this size. 81bid.. pp. 7-8. 9C. Phillip Baumel, Daryl J. Hobbs, and Ronald C. Powers, IDE. Community Survpy_(Iowa State University, Nov. 1964), pp. 17-19. 49 This figure was based upon statistical theory dealing with the computation of confidence intervals. This sample size assured a large enough number of completed interviews for meaningful multiple regression analysis. The 338 households were chosen by a systematic sampling method of interviewing every fifth household in the area. The following steps were followed in selecting the sample: 1) Block maps were compared with air photos to locate all lots without houses on them. These lots were excluded from the household selection. 2) Numbers were drawn to decide which house to begin with. Sampling began with the fifth house from the North-East corner of block one and proceeded in a clockwise direction on each block until every fifth house had been identified on two sets of block maps. One set of maps was used by the interviewers and the other set was filed for safe keeping. Interviewers Two groups of students administered the survey in personal interviews during the first two weeks of December, 1973, and the last two weeks of January, 1974. These were the time periods which students could devote to this project. The range of interviewing time was from twenty to thirty minutes per interview. The group of interviewers was composed of the researcher and two approximately equal groups of students. None of the interviewers received any financial remuneration for their time. 50 The group of students who administered the interviews during December were primarily adult undergraduates (40-60 years of age) who had just finished an intensive course in interview techniques, taught by Dr. Paul Fuller, offered through Aquinas College's Continuing Education Division. The second group of students, who administered the interviews during January, were advanced social science students from Aquinas College who were members of an Urban Sociology course conducted by this researcher. Data Collection Upon completion of the pretest, the final form of the interview instrument was constructed and administered to a sample of 338 house- holds in the Eastown area of Grand Rapids, Michigan. A total of 260 surveys were completed. After the data were collected, the coding was done and the results were keypunched on IBM cards in readiness for further computer analysis. CHAPTER V RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS AND RESPONSES The following description of the respondents and their responses to the interview instrument provides background information for understanding the relationships between variables discussed in the later chapters of this dissertation. Survey Completion Percentages From the sample of 338 households selected, a total of 260 surveys were completed. This represented 77 per cent of the sample.‘ 0f the surveys not completed, 36 (10.6 per cent) were refusals, 4 (1.2 per cent) were vacant homes, and 38 (11.2 per cent) were households called upon four or more times without anyone responding. See Table 1 for more details. Those persons who refused to cooperate with the interviewers did not appear to represent any certain demographic pattern. In other words, interviewers were refused by blacks, whites, young, old, males, females, etc. Both male and female interviewers experienced approximately a ten per cent refusal rate. Reasons given by respondents for not wanting to be interviewed usually centered around the ideas of non-involvement or not wanting their personal characteristics and views known to the public. Although a number of respondents initially 51 52 expressed their doubts on the wisdom of allowing an interviewer into their home, in all cases the interview was ended on a positive note. The homes in which no response could be solicited did not appear to represent any distinct location pattern. Such homes were scattered throughout the sample area. Table 1. Survey Completion Percentages Response December Group (13) January Group (16) Totals Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Completed 112 82.4 148 73.3 260 77.0 Refused 11 8.1 25 12.4 36 10.6 Vacant 4 2.9 O .O 4 1.2 No Response 9 6.6 29 14.3 38 11.2 Grand Total 136 100% 202 100% 338 100% Respondent Characteristics The questions discussed follow the same order as they appeared in the interview instrument (see appendix). Those questions which were independent variables in the hypotheses were discussed in greater detail than those questions which were merely intended as background information on the sample. Tables were provided for each of the gpestions dealipg with an independent variable. When two or more questions were used as an index they were discussed together. Percentages were given for nominal data. Both the mathematical mean (average) and the mode (greatest number of responses) were provided for all interval data. 53 Spy; 0f the 260 respondents, 92 (35.4%) were males and 168 (64.6%) were females. Marital status: 170 (65.4%) of the respondents were married, 42 (16.2%) were single, 23 (8.8%) were divorced or separated, and 25 (9.6%) were widOwed. ’ Number of persons living in an individual's home: The mean number of adults per dwelling unit was 2.19 with a mode of 2 (153 or 58.8% of the respondents). The mean number of children between 14-18 years of age was .45 with a mode of O (186 or 71.5% of the respondents). The mean number of children under 14 was 1.01 with a mode of 0 (142 or 54.6% of the respondents). Age; The mean age of the respondents was the "36-40 age range." The mode was the category of age 56 and over (57 or 21.9% of the respondents). Total family income: The mean income of the respondents was in the range of "8,000 to 12,000 dollars" per year. The mode was also in this range (70 or 26.9% of the respondents). An important note regarding this question was the fact that 13.1 per cent of the respondents refused to answer it. A number of these persons commented that information regarding income was too personal to give to an unknown interviewer. Question 40 was the only question which caused such difficulties. Table 2 shows the complete distribution of the sample's family income. 54 Table 2. Total Family Income of Respondents Family Income Category Number of Respondents Percentage under 4,000 dollars 24 ' 9.2 4,000 - 8,000 dollars 54 20.8 8,000 - 12,000 dollars 70 26.9 12,000 - 16,000 dollars 32 12.3 16,000 - 20,000 dollars 26 10.0 over 20,000 dollars 20 7.7 no response 34 13.1 Total 260 100% Education: The mean educational level of the respondents was "some college." The mode was also this category (80 or 30.7% of the respondents). Further description of the sample's educational characteristics is provided in Table 3. Table 3. Educational Characterisitcs of Respondents Level of Education Number of Respondents Percentage less than 5 years 0 0.0 5 - 8 years 3 1.2 9 - 12 years 24 9.2 high school graduate 74 28.5 some college 80 30.7 college graduate 47 18.1 55 Table 3 (cont'd.) graduate study 20 7.7 graduate degree 10 3.8 no response 2 0.8 _._-_ Total 260 100% Length of residence: The mean length of residence of the respondents was approximately ten years. The mode was the "more than 18 years" category (83 or 31.9% of the respondents). Table 4 gives the complete distribution of this variable. Table 4. Length of Residence of Respondents Length of Residence Number of Respondents Percentage less than one year 21 8.1 1 - 3 years 48 ’ 18.5 4 - 6 years 39 15.0 7 - 9 years 22 8.4 10 - 12 years 16 6.2 13 - 15 years 17 6.5 16 - 18 years 14 5.4 more than 18 years 83 31.9 Total 260 100% 56 Size of community: The mean size of the sample's previous community was the "50,000 to 100,000 population range.“ The mode was the "100,000 to 250,000" category (100 or 38.5% of the respondents). Location of an individual's previous community: The mean location of the respondents' previous community was "within a 45 mile radius.” The mode was "within a 15 mile radius" (101 or 38.8% of the respondents). Childhood community: The mean size of the respondents' childhood community was the "10,000 to 50,000 population range." The mode was in the "100,000 to 250,000 range" (90 or 34.6% of the respondents). By examining the results of questions 43, 44, and 45 it was concluded that at least 90 of the respondents had lived in the Grand Rapids area most of their lives. Complete distribution of responses to this question are given in Table 5. Table 5. Childhood Community of Respondents Childhood Community Number of Respondents Percentage rural area 46 17.7 village of 3,000 or less 14 5.4 village of 3,000 to 10,000 16 6.? city of 10,000 to 50,000 36 13.7 city of 50,000 to 100,000 16 6.2 city of 100,000 to 250,000 90 34.6 city of 250,000 to 500,000 9 3.5 city of 500,000 or more 22 8.5 no response 11 4.2 Total 260 100% 57 Wage earners per household: The mean number of wage earners per household was 1.41 with a mode of 1.0 (121 or 46.5% of the respondents). Principal wage earner worked: 0f the 219 employed principal wage earners (202 (92.2%) worked in the greater Grand Rapids area. Seventeen (7.8%) of the employed principal wage earners drove more than fifteen miles to work. Occupation: The mean occupational category of the respondents was the "craftsman and foreman” category. The mode was the "professional and technical" category (66 or 25.4% of the respondents). Table 6 details the occupational characteristics of the sample. Table 6. Occupational Characteristics of Respondents Occupational Category Number of Respondents Percentage student 11 4.2 unskilled 24 ' 9.2 operative 20 7.7 craftsman & foreman 35 13.5 clerical & sales 39 15.0 managerial 34 13.1 professional & technical 66 25.4 retired 31 11.9 Total 260 100% Relationship to theyprincipgl wpge earngp; 108 (41.5%) of the respondents were also the principal wage earners of the household. 104 (40%) of the respondents were the spouses of the principal wage 58 earners. The remaining 48 (18.5%) of the respondents were grouped into the category of being unrelated or a relative other than spouse. Degree of ethnicity: Questions 50-52 were used to create an index of ethnicity with a possible range of 0-5. The actual range of the sample was from 0-5 with a mean of 1.23 and a mode of 0 (183 or 70.4% of the respondents), which indicated that the sample had little identity with an ethnic group. Table 7 details the means for each question. Tables 8, 9, and 10 show the distribution of responses to questions 50, 51, and 52, respectively. Table 7. Index of Ethnicity Means Question Key Words Range Mean Number 50 member of ethnic group 0-1 .284 51 which ethnic group 0-1 .292 52 strength of ties 0-3 I .657 Total 0-5 1.233 Table 8. Membership in Ethnic Groups of Respondents Response Number of Respondents Percentage no 183 70.4 yes 75 28.8 no response 2 .8 Total 260 100% 59 Table 9. Ethnic Group Affiliation of Respondents Ethnic Group Number of Respondents Percentage none 183 ' 70.5 foreign (non-citizen) 3 1.2 American Indian 5 1.9 black 30 11.5 white 11 - 4.? Dutch 11 4.2 Polish 6 2.3 Spanish surname 0 .0 other 11 4.2 Total 260 100% Table 10. Strength of Ethnic Ties of Respondents Response Number of Respondents Percentage weak 11 4.2. average 28 10.8 strong 35 13.5 no response 186 71.5 Total 260 100% Religious identity: Questions 53-54 were used to create an index of religious identity with a possible range of 0-4. The actual range of the sample was from 0-4 with a mean of 2.90 and a mode of 4 (104 or 40% 60 of the respondents), which indicated that the sample had a rather strong religious identity. Table 11 lists the means for each question. Tables 12 and 13 detail the distribution of responses to questions 53 and 54, respectively. Table 11. Index of Religious Identity Means Question Key Words Range Mean Number 53 religious affiliation 0-1 .86 54 strength of ties 0-3 2.04 Total 0-4 2.90 Table 12. Religious Affiliation of Respondents Religious Affiliation1 Number of Respondents Percentage no formal affiliation 31 , 11.9 Baptist 29 11.2 Catholic 79 30.4 Chrisitan Reformed/ Reformed 31 11.9 Congregational 22 8.5 Jewish 0 -0 Methodist 13 5'0 Presbyterian 8 3-1 other 43 16.5 no response 4 1-5 Total 250 100% 1Listed in alphabetical order. 61 Table 13. Strength of Religious Ties of Respondents Response Number of Respondents Percentage weak 33 ‘ 12.7 average 93 35.4 strong 104 40.0 I no response 30 11.9 Total 260 100% Home ownership: Of the 260 respondents, 73 (28.1%) indicated they did not own their home and 187 (71.9%) indicated they did own their home. (A table was not included for this variable due to the minimal number of response categories.) Dwelling unit: 208 (80%) of the dwelling units in the sample were single family homes and 52 (20%) were classified as multiple dwelling units. 1 Times an individual had moved: The mean number of moves for the sample was 2.07 with a mode of 1 (107 or 41.2% of the respondents). Number of states traveled in py an individual: The mean number of states traveled in by the respondents was in the "ll-15" category. The mode was the "21 or more" category (83 or 31.9% of the respondents). Forgjgn travel experience of an individual: Questions 59-61 were used to create an index of foreign travel experience with a possible range of 0-16. The actual range was 0-16 with a mean of 4.19 and a mode of 0 (88 or 33.8% of the respondents), which indicated that a number of respondents had traveled outside of the United States for a 62 short period of time. The means for each question are detailed in Table 14. The responses to questions 59, 60, and 61 are given in Tables 15, 16, and 17, respectively. Table 14. Index of Foreign Travel Experience Means Question Key Words Range Mean Number 59 traveled outside U.S. 0-1 .66 60 number of times 0-8 2.24 61 length of stay 0-7 1.29 Total 0-16 4.19 Table 15. Foreign Travel Experience of Respondents Response Number of Respondents Percentage no 88 33.8 yes 172 66.2 Total 260 100% Table 16. 63 Frequency of Foreign Travel of Respondents Number of Times Number of Respondents Percentage 0 88 33.8 1 42 16.2 2 43 16.5 3 22 8.5 4 18 6.9 5 7 2.7 6 17 6. 7 2 .8 8 or more 21 8.1 Total 260 100% Table 17. Length of Foreign Travel of Respondents Percentage Length of Stay Number of Respondents less than a month 119 45.7 1-3 months 21 8.1 4-6 months 5 1.9 7-9 months 3 1.2 10-12 months 3 1.2 more than a year 18 6.9 extended period 3 1.2 not applicable 88 33.8 Total 260 100% 64 Summary of Respondent Characteristics The average Eastown resident, based upon the mean response to the interview instrument, was: a married female with 2.19 adults and 1.46 children living in her household. She was between the ages of 36 and 40 and had lived in the area for ten years. The single-family dwelling in which she lived was either owned or being purchased. She had moved a total of 2.07 times in her life. The principal wage earner in her family worked in the city of Grand Rapids as a craftsman or a sales person. She had attended college, but did not complete a four year degree program. The total family income of her household was between 8,000 and 12,000 dollars per year. She had very little ethnic identity; however, she had strong religious identity. Finally, she had visited from 11 to 15 states and had a moderate amount of foreign travel experience. For more detailed information refer to Table 18. Representativeness of Sample After reviewing the data it was concluded that the sample was representative of the Eastown population with the exception of one major variable: more females (168, 64.6%) than males (92, 35.4%) were interviewed in the survey. In a study which was carried out in the Eastown area by Fessenden,2 the respondent characteristics closely approximate those of this study. Upon examing his data he concluded that, "The characteristics of the respondents agree generally with those of the larger sample of the 2Gordon Fessenden, "Municipal Decentralization and Neighborhood" (unpublished research report, May 7, 1974), p. 9. 65 Table 18. Summary of Respondent Characteristics Characteristic Mean Response Modal Response Category Percentage Sex --- Female 64.6 Marital Status --- Married ' 65.6 Adults in Household 2.19 2 58.8 14-18 Year Olds in Household .45 O 71.5 Less than 14-Year Olds in Household 1.01 0 54.6 Age 36-40 56 and Over 21.9 Income $8,000-12,000 $8,000-12,000 26.2 Education Some College Some College 30.8 Length of Residence 10 Years More than 18 Years 31.9 Prior Community Size 50,000-100,000 100,000-250,000 38.5 Prior Community Location Within 45 Miles Within 15 Miles 38.8 Childhood Community 10,000-50,000 100,000-250,000 34.6 Wage Earners 1.41 1 46.5 Location of Employment Grand Rapids Grand Rapids 62.1 Occupation Craftsman Professional 25.4 Relationship to Wage Earner --- Self 41.5 Ethnicity Low None 70.4 Religious Identity Strong Strong 40.0 Home Ownership --- Yes 71.9 Dwelling Type --- Single-family 80.0 Times Moved 2.07 1 41.2 States Visited 11-15 21 or More 31.9 Foreign Travel Moderate Yes 66.2 Eastown Community__Survey."3 A comparison of the two samples indicated that the major difference was the distribution of males and females. Fessenden interviewed 16 (44.5%) males and 20 (55.5%) females.‘ Although his study had a small sample (N=36), it lent support to the sample characteristics of this study due to four important points: 1) he used the same questions to measure respondent characteristics as were used in this study; 2) he defined his population using the same boundaries as 315 d.. pp. 11-12. 66 this study used; 3) his sample was randomly selected; and, 4) his , study was carried out within the same general time period as this study. The sample for this study was a representative cross-section of Eastown. Eastown had a 11.4 per cent black population, and 11.5 per cent of the respondents were black. Eastown had a 16 per cent retired p0pulation, and 11.9 per cent of the respondents were retired. Eastown had a 20 per cent college student population. Accurate data on the number of students in the sample was lacking due to the fact that a number of students also worked and indicated their employment status rather than their student status during the interview. After discussing this point with a number of interviewers, it was concluded that each interviewer interviewed approximately two students. This indicated that 22.3 per cent of the respondents were students. It was earlier suggested that Eastown was a microcosm of Grand Rapids. By examining the data it was concluded that the sample was fairly representative of the Grand Rapids metr0politan area. This supported the contention of Eastown being a microcosm of Grand Rapids. Grand Rapids had a 53 per cent female and a 47 per cent male population and the sample had a 64.6 per cent female and a 35.4 per cent male population. This uneven distribution of the sexes was one of two major limitations of the sample. A second major difference in demographic characteristics between the sample and Grand Rapids was the student population. Grand Rapids, had an 8.4 per cent student population while the sample had a 22.3 per cent student population. 67 Grand Rapids had an 11.3 per cent black population, and 11.5 per cent retired population and 11.9 per cent of the sample was retired. Also, Grand Rapids had 21.6 per cent of the population over 54, and the sample had 21.9 per cent of the p0pulation over 56. Marital characteristics were nearly identical for Grand Rapids and the sample. Grand Rapids had a 63.6 per cent married population, while the sample had a 65.4 per cent married population. Although comparable quantitative data was not available, it was concluded that social status characteristics of the two areas were also quite similar. The modal educational level for Grand Rapids was "high school graduate" while for the sample it was "some college." The modal occupational category for Grand Rapids was "some college." The modal occupational category for Grand Rapids was "sales and clerical" while for the sample it was "professional." The modal income level for Grand Rapids was "10,000 to 14,999 dollars" while for the sample it was "8,000 to 12,000 dollars." Table 19 gives a detailed comparison of the demographic characteristics of Grand Rapids and the sample. Table 19. Demographic Characteristics of Sample Characteristic Grand Rapidsgi Sample female 53.0% 64.6% black 11.3% 11.5% retired 15.0% 11.9%5 over 54 21.6% 21.9% student 8.4% 22.3% married 63.6% 65.4% 4Statistics for Grand Rapids prepared from 1970 U.S. Census of Population. 5This figure based upon the number of respondents over 56. 68 Respondent's Territorial Concept of Community The main objective of this study was to discover how large an area an individual considered to be his community. An individual's territorial concept of community was measured by his responses to the first sixteen questions on the interview instrument. The first three questions measured the actual distance traveled for an activity, while the following thirteen questions measured the area which concerned an individual when dealing with an activity or confronted by a problem. Family Recreation: The mean response was "more than 10 blocks," with the mode also being this response (88 or 33.8% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent did not travel outside of her extended neighborhood for daytime family recreation. Grocepnyhpppipg; The mean response was "1-10 blocks," with a mode of "more than 10 blocks" (122 or 46.9% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent purchased her groceries in her immediate neighborhood. Other Shopping: The mean response was "more than 10 blocks," with the mode being the same (116 or 44.6% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent did not travel outside of her extended neighborhood to purchase goods other than food. Elementapy_School: The mean response was "1-10 blocks,” with the mode being the same (222 or 85.4% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent thought her children should be able to attend elementary school within the immediate neighborhood. High School: The mean response was "1-10 blocks," with a mode of "more than 10 blocks" (124 or 47.7% of the respondents). This indicated 69 that the average respondent thought her children should be able to attend high school within the immediate neighborhood. Fire Protection: The mean response was "more than 10 blocks," with a mode of "the entire city" (96 or 36.9% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent was primarily concerned with fire protection for her extended neighborhood. Crime Protection: The mean response was "the county," with a nearly bimodal distribution of "the entire city" (84 or 32.3% of the respondents) and "the nation" (71 or 27.3% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent was concerned with an area as large as the county when dealing with crime protection. Economic Problems: The mean response was "Western Michigan," with a mode of "the nation" (106 or 40.8% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent was concerned with an area as large as Western Michigan when confronted by economic problems. Educational Problems: The mean response was "the county," with a bimodal distribution of "the entire city" (71 or 27.3% of the respondents) and "the nation" (70 or 26.9% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent was concerned with an area as large as the county when confronted by educational problems. Housipg and Urban Renewal Problems: The mean response was "the county," with a mode of "the entire city“ (110 or 42.3% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent was concerned with an area as large as the county when confronted by housing and urban renewal problems. Noise Pollution Problems: The mean response was "the county,“ with an approximately bimodal distribution of "the entire city" 70 (98 or 37.7% of the respondents) and "the nation" (76 or 29.2% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent was concerned with an area as large as the county when confronted by noise pollution problems. Air Pollution Problems: The mean response was "Western Michigan," with a mode of "the nation" (130 or 50% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent was concerned with an area as large as Western Michigan when confronted by air pollution problems. Water Pollution Problems: The mean response was "the state," with a mode of "the nation" (142 or 54.6% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent was concerned with an area as large as the state when confronted by water pollution problems. Health Related Problems: The mean response was “Western Michigan," with a mode of "the nation" (111 or 42.7% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent was concerned with an area as large as Western Michigan when confronted by health related problems. Land-Use and Development Problems: The mean response was "Western Michigan,“ with a bimodal distribution of "the nation" (83 or 31.9% of the respondents) and "the state" (78 or 30% of the respondents). This indicated that the average respondent was concerned with an area as large as Western Michigan when confronted by land-use and development problems. Community: The mean response was "the entire city," with the mode being the same (100 or 38.5% of the respondents). This indicated that theeaverage respondent considered the city as "her community." Because this question was utilized as the dependent variable in testing hypothesis ten, and because of the general importance of this single 71 question to this entire study, the distribution of responses to question 16 is detailed in Table 20. Table 20. Size of Respondents' Concept of Community Area Number of Respondents Percentages 1-10 blocks 38 14.6 more than 10 blocks 43 16.5 the entire city 100 38.5 the county 27 10.4 Western Michigan 12 4.6 the state 15 5.8 the nation 11 4.2 the world 8 3.1 no response 6 2.4 Total 260 ' 100% Territorial Concept of Communitnyndex (TCCI) Questions 1-16 were used to construct an index which measured an individual's territorial concept of community, The possible range of this index was from 0-112. The actual range of the sample was from 6-79, with a mean of 46.01. To convert this mean to a figure which could be compared to the mean for each of the sixteen individual questions, it was necessary to divide the mean by the number of questions in the scale, which yielded a transformed mean of 2.87. This indicated that the average territorial concept of community for the sample was greater than "the entire city," yet did not encompass "the county.“ 72 Upon examining the means for question 16 and the TCCI, it was concluded that the average respondent identified the city as his community. Table 21 and Figure 4 give a more detailed picture of the results of the first sixteen questions. The most interesting point to note regarding questions one through sixteen was the tendency for the mean and the mode to increase as the complexity of the problem increased. Also, those questions which were perceived by the respondents as directly affecting their families had a smaller mean and mode than those questions which indirectly affected their families. Index of Community Problems (ICP) Questions 6-15 were used to measure an individual's attitudes regarding a number of comnunity problems. The possible range of this index was 0-70. The actual range of the sample was 4-65 with a mean of 38.98. To convert this mean to a figure compatible with individual means of the eleven questions, it was necessary to divide the mean by the number of questions in the index, which yielded a transformed mean of 3.54. This indicated that the county was perceived as the most functional community problem-solving body by the average respondent. The means and the modes are detailed in Table 21 and Figure 4. Community Identity Index (CII)_ Questions 17-21 were used to construct an index which measured the degree of an individual's community identity, These questions were designed as part of an index. The results of the index and a summary of each question are presented in Table 22. 73 :mmwguwz :Lmummz 0H me eH mH NH HH OH m m e e m N a Lensez eeeemeeo . . . . . . . 4| . _ . . . _ . i. . _ . . . _ . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I _ _ . . _ . . . . . . . . meOPD OH H _ . . _ _ . . . . . . . . . . _ . . _ _ . . . . . . _ . . . . _ _ _ . . . . . . _ _ . . . . . _ . . . . _ . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . _ _ . . . . . . axeo_e OH . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . _ . . _ . . . . . . . . _ . _ . . seep pee . . _ . . _ _ _ . . . . . . . . . _ . _ _ . . . . . _ . _ . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . _ . . . _ seegoe pee . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . _ _ . . . . _ . _ . _ . . _ . . _ . . . mumpm mg“ corpus on» mwmcoamwm thunwwog swalqoud asn-puei swalqoud NllPBH uotqnllod 4819M “0140110d 41V uo11nllod as1oN [emauaa uequn swalqoud [euotqeonpg swalqoud o1wou033 uotqoaqoud awtug uotnoaloud autg 100435 HPLH loouos Kuenuawala 6u1ddoqs Jauio 6u1ddous KJBDOJQ u01qeaaoaa Kltweg Key Words 74 Responses to Territorial Concept of Community Index Figure 4. 6Broxen line is mean and solid line is mode. 75 Table 21. Territorial Concept of Community Index Means Question Key Words for Verbal Description Mean7 Number Questions Considered of Mean Response 1 Family recreation more than 10 blocks 1.65 2 Grocery shopping 1-10 blocks .67 3 Other shopping more than 10 blocks 1.61 4 Elementary school 1-10 blocks .13 5 High school 1-10 blocks .73 6 Fire protection more than 10 blocks 1.84 7 Crime protection the county 3.02 8 Economic problems Western Michigan 4.28 9 Educational problems the county 3.84 10 Urban renewal the county 3.23 11 Noise pollution the county 3.60 12 Air pollution Western Michigan 4.75 13 Water pollution the state 5.13 14 Health problems Western Michigan 4.68 15 Land-use problems Western Michigan 4.61 16 Community the city 2.24 Total mean for index 46.018 7The possible range for each question was from 0-7. The total actual range for the index was from 6-79. 8The transformed mean was 2.87 computed by dividing the total mean (46.01) by the number of questions (16) in the index. 76 The possible range of the index was 5-25 (5 indicating maximum identity). The actual range of the sample was from 9-24 with a mean of 13.46. To convert this mean to a figure compatible with individual means of the five questions, it was necessary to divide the mean by the number of questions in the index, which yielded a transformed mean of 2.69. This indicated that community identity for the sample was rather moderate. There was neither strong positive identity with the community, nor was there strong negative community identity. Table 22. Community Identity Index Means Question9 Key Words Range Mean Number 17 Willingness to move 1—5 3.18 18 Part of community 1-5 2.31 19 Meaningfulness of community 1-5 2.17 20 Control over community 1-5 2.98 ___ 21 Opportunities for offgprjpg 1-5 2.82 Index total 5-25 13.46 Index of Community Knowledge (ICK) Questions 22-28 were used to construct an index which measured the amount of knowledge an individual had concerning community problems and issues. The index is discussed in the text with a summary of each question included in Table 23. The possible range for this index was 0-7. The actual range of 9For more details on these questions refer to the interview instrument which is included in the appendix. 77 the sample was from 0-7 with a mean of 3.51. This indicated that the knowledge of community problems and issues for the sample was moderate. Respondents were more likely to gain information through informal rather than formal means (compare questions 22-24 with questions 25-27). Table 23. Index of Community Knowledge Means Question10 Key Words Responses11 Meanlz Number Yes - % No - % 22 Inform yourself 215 (82.7) 45 (17.3) .83 23 Discuss problems 204 (78.5) 56 (21.5) .77 24 Gather information 180 (69.2) 80 (30.8) .68 25 Speak to leaders 77 (29.6) 183 (70.4) .29 26 Visit organizations 86 (33.1) 174 (66.9) .33 27 Write letters 60 (23.1) 200 (76.9) .23 28 Persuade others 100 (38.5) 160 (61.5) .38 Total ' 3.51 Community Activity Index (CAI) Questions 29-33 were used to construct an index which measured an individual's pgrticipation in formal community organizations. The index is; discussed in the text with a summary of each question included in Table 24. 10For more detailed information refer to the interview instrument which is included in the appendix. 11In all cases responses totaled 260. ‘12The range for each question was 0 (00) t0 1 (yes). 78 The possible range for this index was 0—5. The actual range of the sample was from 0-5 with a mean of 1.65. This indicated a low level of participation in community organizations. The majority of the respondents contributed money to an organization, and 40 per cent belonged to a community organization; however, very few respondents took part in any community leadership role. Table 24. Community Activity Index Means Question13 Key Words Responses14 Mean15 Number Yes - No - % 29 Contribute money 182 (70.0) 78 (30.0) .70 30 Belong to organization 105 (40.4) 155 (59.6) .40 31 Serve on committee 73 (28.1) 187 (71.9) .28 32 Assume leadership 31 (11.9) 229 (88.1) .12 33 Board member 40 (15t4) 220 (84.6 .15 Total 1 1.65 Summary of ngple's Concept of Community After reviewing the results of the questions and indices designed to measure an individual's concept of community, a number of important trends were discovered. The average respondent identified the city as his community. However, the concept of community of an individual apparently fluctuated depending on the type of problem confronting the community. , ,l3or gore detailed information refer to interview instrument which is igg ude in the appendix. In all cases responses totaled 260. The range for each question was 0 (no) to 1 (yes). 79 A moderate amount of community identity existed for the average respondent. The average respondent also had a moderate amount of knowledge concerning community problems and issues. However, she participated very little in formal community organizations. CHAPTER VI RESULTS Statistical Analysis of Findings A review of the responses to the interview instrument used in the Eastown Community Survey provided a detailed view of the characteristics of the sample and their concept of community. In this and the following chapter an individual's territorial concept of community was related to the other variables in this study. Simple Correlations Test of Hypotheses The null hypotheses were tested by means of determining the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients (r) for paired variables in each of the null hypotheses. For rejection of the null, the results were considered to be significant at a .05 level or greater. According to Young and Veldman, ...Statisticians generally have agreed that if an event will occur by chance less than five times out of one hundred (Pr g .05), then when such an event occurs the null hypothesis is rejected (ile., the hypothesis of chance occurrence is rejected). 1Robert K. Young and Donald J. Veldman, Introductory Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd Edition (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1972), p. 205. 80 81 For r to be significant at the .05 level, it had to be equal to or greater than .138. For r to be significant at the .01 level, it had to be equal to or greater than .181.2 Even though a null hypothesis was rejected, based on a significant r, it should be noted that the relationship between the dependent (Y) and the independent (X) variables could still be a very weak one. The amount of variance (r2) was computed for each relationship. In general, the higher the correlation and the variance, the stronger the relation- ship between the variables of any given hypothesis. For example, an r 2 of .197. This indicated that of .444 (hypothesis 10) results in an r approximately 20 per cent of that information necessary to make a perfect prediction of the dependent variable was known. In other words, with an r2 of .197 one would still be 80 per cent uncertain of the relevant factors comprising the relationship between the dependent and independent variables. . The first null hypothesis (H31): There is no relationship between a person's level of educational attainment and his territorial concept of community, was rejected because a correlation of .257 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was significant at the .01 level. H02; There is no relationship between a person's occupation and his territorial concept of community, was rejected because a correlation of .153 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was significant at the .05 level. 21bid., p. 542. 82 Table 25. Simple Correlations of Study Variables Variable Name3 and No.4 Community 16 1.00 Income 40 .146 1.00 Education 41 .;_7_7_5 .13; 1.00 Residence 42 .004 -.069 -.036 1.00 Childhood Community 45 .071 .I§9_ .080 .097 1.00 Occupation 48 .127 .418_ .491_ -.067 .1§Q_ 1.00 Home Ownership 55 .053 .ggg_ .141_ .g§g_ .122 .098 TCCI 63 .54;_ .I§Z_ .g§z_ -.037 .066 ”ya; CII (Identity) 64 .021 —.001 .013 .14§_ -.010 -.l§fi_ ICK (Knowledge) 65 .130 .198_ .24§_ .009 .165_ .218, CAI (Activity) 66 .076 .§99_ .239_ .055 .15;_ .g§z_ IE (Ethnicity) 68 .028 .047 .133 -.191_ -.042 .056 1R1 (Religion) 69 -.126 -.121 -.011 .105 -.034 -.026 IFTE (Travel) 70 .130 .2§4_ .218 .060 .093 .089 ICP (Problems) 71 .444_ .149_ .ggg_ .055 .057 .14]. Variable No. 16 4O 41 42 45 48 3For an elaboration of variable names refer to Chapter 111, Research Design. 4Numbers 16-55 are equal to the question numbers on the interview instrument. Numbers 63-71 were the numbers assigned to the indices in the computer printout. 5Significant correlations are underlined. All correlations are positive unless indicated to the contrary. For r to be significant at the .05 level it must be equal to or greater than .138. For r to be significant at the .01 level it must be equal to or greater than .181. 83 1.00 -.035 1.00 .025 -.043 1.00 ._1_53 .ts_5 .109 1.00 Mpg .133 ._1_8_o_ .pgip 1.00 .029 .045 .057 .__2_o_9_ ._1_7_3__ 1.00 .137 -.092 .017 ._1_4p .055 .15; 1.00 ._1_5p 16.3. .080 .fi ._1__4_8_ -.045 -.088 1.00 -.033 ._9_71 .055 .126 .130 .043 -.081 .129 1.00 55 63 64 65 66 68 69 7O 71 84 .umcvpngca mew meowumpoegou acoupwrcmwmm 89.8.3”. uoz mo.A «8. 95. A5553 H8 8978 2 88%: mm. «mm. mmm. “883.35: 3...: 33-8 NH 8832. pez 8.x :0. a. 3:385 :3 88-8 2 8833. d. .qu ...mmm. 38225 as 32:53-3 2 8.3.8.8”. eez 8N 3e. 8e. ....8 8222... 83-8 a 88.33. mm. Ma. .mfl. :22: 5.: 83-8 N 88%.... eoz 8x N8. N8: 283.35 x: 88-2.. N 883?. pa: 8A N8. 25. 33:53 2 83-8 e .3383. .3: 8.x :5. e8... toes 25: 53-8 .8. 808.82 eoz 8.5. :5. N8; 8828”. 33-8 e “338.82 mm. .alNd. Melt 2.85 83-8 N .0388: .3. leo. WIN. 8:338 88-8 N 83.83. .Nlo. 8mm. eMmlN. 85828 83-3 H coemruoo 22 N2 2 x > mpmmnpoqxx momoeeoa»: __=z co agape .eN oeeeh 85 533; There is no relationship between a person's family income and his territorial concept of community, was rejected because a correlation of .167 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was significant at the .05 level. H04; There is no relationship between a person's length of resi- dence in the community and his territorial concept of community, yg§_ not rejected because a correlation of -.037 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was not significant at the .05 level. pup; There is no relationship between a person's home ownership and his territorial concept of community, was not rejected because a correlation of -.O36 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was not significant at the .05 level. 5095 There is no relationship between a person's ethnic identity and his territorial concept of community, was not rejected because a correlation of .045 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was not significant at the .05 level. H01; There is no relationship between a person's religious identity and his territorial concept of community, was not rejected because a correlation of -.O92 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was not significant at the .05 level. H08: There is no relationship between a person's foreign travel experience and his territorial concept of community, was rejected because a correlation of .163 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was significant at the .05 level. Hag; There is no relationship between a person's early childhood community and his territorial concept of community, was not rejected 86 because a correlation of .066 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was not significant at the .05 level. H010: There is no relationship between the type of community problem and the person's territorial concept of community, was rejected because a correlation of .444 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was significant at the .01 level. Hull; There is no relationship between a person's participation in community activities and organizations and his territorial concept of community, was not rejected because a correlation of .133 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was not significant at the .05 level. H012: There is no relationship between a person's knowledge of community problems and his territorial concept of community, was rejected because a correlation of .155 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was significant at the .01 level. 7 Hal}; There is no relationship between a person's strength of community identity and his territorial concept of community, was not pejegteg_because a correlation of .043 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was not significant at the .05 level. Multiple Correlations Test of Postulates Multiple regression was performed on three sets of independent variables (X)7 to gain information pertinent to the propositions put forth earlier in this paper. The results are given in Table 27. 7For a review of these sets see Table 27. 87 .umcepgmucz mew meowumpmgeou mPQNHFas peacemwcmemm g. 32. eNNm. u + Nm + < New 8 0H. wmmo. mean. mm + < pom mo mooo. mmmm. muse. u + Hm + < umm oH mooo. mmHN. mama. Hm + < umm 0H omo. ammo. Nona. Ammumpzocx w zpw>rpom .Xpwpcmuwv mm now me mmczh Ammum_3o=x w xuv>wuum mooo. mmom. mme. .xuwucmuw .mewFQoeq xuwcaesouv No new xpwczssoUioH exp .11: fipm>m2u :mwmgoe a xuwczesoo mmo. ammo. mmmfl. voocup+cu .cowmepmg .auruvczumv u pom me one .111 Amucmu_mm2 co gumcm_ a aegmgm=30 «so; goo. mmso. oflwm. .meoucv .cowumaauuo .co’pauzumv < pom Huuhimm one med 2 m x > cowuwmoaoga manmP2m> Ausum mo mcowpmpmcgou wpawu_=z .NN mpnmp 88 The greatest amount of variance was accounted for by education, occupation, income, home ownership, and length of residence (Set A) and community problems, identity, activity, and knowledge (Set 81). Set A accounted for nearly 8 per cent of the variance, while Set Bl accounted for nearly 21 per cent of the variance. Ethnicity, religion, childhood community, and foreign travel (Set C) were not independent from the other variables, as was demonstrated by the fact that only an additional 1 per cent of the variance was accounted for by the addition of Set C in the calculation. Proposition One It was earlier proposed that an individual's territorial concept of :ommunity is affected by both his social status and his life history. This proposition was accepted because a multiple correlation of .2810 existed in the results calculated from the data for the relationship between TCCI and education, occupation, income, home ownership, and length of residence (Set A). This was significant at the .001 level. More supporting data was found in the multiple correlation of .1989 between TCCI and ethnicity, religion, childhood community, and foreign travel (Set C.) This was significant at the .035 level. By examining the simple and partial correlations it was concluded that education and foreign travel were the most significant predictor variables of all social status and life history variables considered. Other significant predictor variables included occupetion and income. It was found that home ownership, length of residence, ethnicity, religion, and childhood community were not significant predictor variables in regard to an individual's territorial concept of 89 community. Proppsition Two The second proposition stated that an individual's territorial concept of community varies in relationship to the type of problem or issue with which the community is confronted. This proposition pg§_ accepted because a multiple correlation of .4553 existed in the results calculated from the data for the relationship between I§§I_and community problems, identity, activity, and knowledge (Set 81). This was significant at less than the .005 level. Additional supporting data was found in the simple correlation of .444 between an individual's concept of community and communityiproblems. The single variable of community problems explained nearly 20 per cent of all variance. Proposition Three The third proposition stated that an individual's.territorial concept of community is affected by his community identity, participation, and knowledge of community problems. This proposition was not accepted because a correlation of .1662 existed in the results calculated from the data. This was not significant at the .05 level. However, a simple correlation of .155 did exist between I§§I_and knowledge, which was significant at the .05 level. In other words, there was a direct correlation between an individual's knowledge of community problems and his territorial concept of community. Community identity and pgrticipation were not found to be significant predictor variables in reference to an individual's territorial concept of community. CHAPTER VII SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND LIMITATIONS In this study, 260 interviews were administered to a selected sample of residents in the Eastown area of Grand Rapids, Michigan. The information collected during the 260 interviews was recorded on the interview instrument, coded, and transferred to IBM cards for computer analysis. Relationships between an individual's territorial concept of community and selected individual and community variables were determined by using various statistical techniques. The analysis of the data provided insights regarding the viability of the concept of community as it has been used in the field of community development. Summary and Conclusions The main objective of this research was to construct a model of community in relationship to certain socioeconomic characteristics and community problems. To meet this objective, major attempts at delineating community were reviewed and a set of interrelated hypotheses dealing with the concept of community were tested. 90 91 Summary of Findings Conclusion One: It was concluded that an individual's conception of community was based upon his social status, life history, and knowledge of community problems. Furthermore, an individual's conception of community varied in relationship to the type of problem or issue with which the community was confronted. By examining the data,1 one could see that the significant independent variables related to an individual's territorial concept of community were: education, occgpation, income, foreign travel experience, the problems with which the community is confronted, and knowledge of communitytproblems. It was concluded that each of the significant variables was an indicator of the amount of information which an individual had available to him (information base). Education, occgpation, and income were all direct indicators of social status. Persons of higher social status usually have access to a larger information base than persons of a relatively lower status. Foreign travel experience also tended to expand an individual's information base. Knowledge of community problems was another indicator of how much information an individual has available. It should be noted that these variables were not totally independent of each other. By examining the multiple correlations2 it was concluded that foreign travel experience and knowledge of community problems were to a large degree dependent on the level of 1See Tables 25 and 26. 2See Table 27. 92 income, occppation, and education of an individual. An examination of the simple correlations indicated that education was the strongest single indicator of an individual's information base. The final indicator, the problems with which the community is confronted, was a bit more subtle. An individual who had a fairly large information base often found it easier to relate problems of an apparent local nature to a larger area than those persons with a relatively small information base. In other words, persons with a relatively large information base were apparently more capable of understanding the interrelatedness of complex problems. Conclusion Two: The above explanation led to a second conclusion. It was concluded that the larger the information base of an individual, the larger was that individual's territorial concept of community. Further support for the second conclusion could be seen by examining certain trends in the data which were not at significant levels. The strongest of these trends was the correlation of .133 between an individual's territorial concept of community and his perticipation in formal community organizations. Once again, the greater the participation of an individual in community affairs, the greater the opportunity for expanding his information base. Another trend identified was the negative correlation of -.092 between an individual's territorial concept of community and his strepgth of religious ties. This correlation also supported the conclusion because strong religious ties were related to a more select, if not a smaller, information base. Other variables which were not found to be related to an individual's territorial concept of community at a significant level 93 included: length of residence, home ownership, strength of ethnic ties, childhood community, and community identity. Correlations for these variables were not strong enough to warrant any further speculation; however, these variables do warrant further testing by other researchers in this field. A summary of the significant variables as they relate to an individual's territorial concept of community included: the weaker the religious identity, the greater the participation in community activities; the greater the knowledge of community problems, the higher the social status, and the more foreign travel eyperience of an individual, the larger was an individual's territorial concept of community. An individual with opposite characteristics had a smaller, less flexible territorial concept of community. The preceeding discussion emphasized independent variables related to the individual; however, it should be recalled that the problems with which the community_is confronted was in reality a community variable. Keeping in mind that the problems facing the community explained nearly 21 per cent of all variance,3 it appeared than an important relationship was identified which heretofore had been largely ignored in the literature. By examining the data of this research, the relationship between community boundaries and problems could be observed. The problems are not the same for every community; however, the underlying principle that the greater the magpjtude and complexity 3See Tables 25, 26, and 27. 94 of problems the larger will be the spatial referent of a community, 4 should remain true. Comparison of Research Findings As noted earlier, many researchers had attempted to sharpen the definition of community and delineate its boundaries. A number of researchers had also questioned the validity of the concept, suggesting that the concept was either impossible to operationalize or it was simply outmoded.5 Comparison of Findings Very few studies of an empirical nature had been carried out to test the relationships between an individual's territorial concept of community and selected independent variables. However, in a related 6 he demonstrated the importance of study which was done by Fanelli communication in reference to an individual's percepti0ns of community. He pointed out that high communicators in a community had a different perception of the community than did low communicators. The results of this research supported such a conclusion because individuals who Eflrticipated in community affairs and had a knowledge of community problems had a larger territorial concept of community than those persons who did not. 4For a graphic and mathematical representation of this principle see Figure 4 and Table 21. 5For an excellent summary of the arguments favoring an abandonment of the concept, see Bernard, Sociology of Community, pp. 170-90. 6Fanelli, "Extensiveness of Communication Contacts and Perceptions of the Community," pp. 439-45. 95 In the same study, Fanelli concluded that extensiveness of communication about community problems was not related to differences in 7 social status or education. The results of this study pointed to a 8 different conclusion. A significant correlation was found between the extensiveness of knowledge of community problems and education, income, and occupation. Fanelli also reported that, "high communicators are much more likely than low communicators to report active participation in community matters."9 The results of this study supported such a 10 conclusion. A correlation of .556 was found between knowledge of community problems and participation in community organizations. 11 In their study Durand and Eckart concluded that community evaluations were not related to an individual's social status. This study supported this conclusion because there was insufficient evidence to support a relationship between community identity_and education or income. However, a significant correlation was found for the relation- ship between community identity and occupation. The results suggested that as an individual's occgpational status increased his community identity decreased. 7191g: 8At the .01 level. See Table 25. 9Fanelli, "Perceptions of the Community," p. 443. 1OSignificant at the .01 level. See Table 25. 11Durand and Eckart, "Community Satisfaction," p. 74. 96 In the same study, Fanelli concluded that community feelings were related positively to the frequency of neighborhood contacts.125upporting data was not found in this study. It was found that the more active an individual was in the community, the weaker was his community identity, k13 In their study in rural Pennsylvania, Drabick and Buc concluded that an individual's concept of community was positively related to his knowledge of and participation in the formal, semi-formal, and informal aspects of the community. The results of this study lent considerable support to this conclusion. A significant relationship was found between both knowledge_of community problems and participation in formal organizations and an individual's territorial concept of community. The comparisons of the above studies with this research lend significant support to the findings of this study. Precise comparison of the other efforts was impossible due to the differences in samples, statistical procedures, and variables. However, all of these studies lent support to the conclusion that the most significant predictor variable related to an individual's territorial concept of community was his information base. Since no studies were found which related an individual's territorial concept of community directly to the problems with which the communityyis confronted, there was no additional empirical support for the conclusion that an individual's territorial concept of community increased with the complexity of the problem or issue with which the community was confronted. 12Ibid. l3Drabick and Buck, "Measuring Locality Group Consensus." 97 Viability of the Concept of Community As was shown in the preceeding pages and in chapter one, a number of individual researchers had concentrated much theoretical and some empirical efforts on defining the concept of community and in developing techniques to delineate community boundaries. According to Simpson, "...it seems that for most Americans, except small-town dwellers and some suburbanites, 'community' has no hard and fast empirical referent."14 This conclusion was supported by the data of this research. The key is that there was no "hard and fast empirical referent;" however, there was an empirical referent which is flexible depending upon a number of characteristics which can be measured. For this reason it was concluded that the concept of community can contribute to the understanding of human behavior. In other words, the concept still contains valid components. These components must be explicitly stated and the concept must undergo further empirical investigation; however, the concept is not dysfunctional. Community Model According to this research, the information base of an individual and the problems with which the community is confronted were the most important predictors of an individual's territorial concept of community. It was concluded that an individual's territorial concept of community expanded as his educational level, occupational status, income level, foreign travel, and knowlegge of community problems increased. It was 14 Simpson, "Sociology of the Community," p. 141. 98 also concluded that increases in the complexity of the problem with which the community was confronted expanded an individual's territorial concept of community. A final conclusion was that an individual's territorial concept of community decreased when problems were directly related to his famiiyiunit and when there was an increase in religious strength. Figure 5 details the relationships between the above variables. Direction of Predicted Result on Independent Variable Dependent Variable Increase in education Expansion of territorial concept Increase in occupation Expansion of territorial concept Increase in income Expansion of territorial concept Increase in foreign travel Expansion of territorial concept Increase in knowledge Expansion of territorial concept Increase in religious strength Contraction of territorial concept Increase in relationship of problems to the family unit Contraction of territorial concept Increase in complexity of community problems Expansion of territorial concept Increase in complexity of the social system Expansion of territorial concept Figure 5. Community Model The interactional concept of community suggested by Kaufman came the closest to explaining the concept of community of all the methods considered in this study. According to Kaufman: 99 ...the community may be seen as a network of interrelated associations, formal and informal, whose major function is problem solving for local society. In a changing society the community may be seen as a problem-solving process which pgovides needed adjustment for the local life. The data of this research supported such a postulate. The ideas of Kaufman were incorporated in the model of community which follows, especially the point that a major function of the community is problem solving. Kaufman's model was generated primarily from a very logical theoretical base with little empirical support; however, it is contended that this research lent validity to the idea of a community being viewed as a problem-solving association or group. Following the components necessary for any model of community 16 suggested by Arensberg, a community may be defined as a group of individuals interactipg with a spatial referent through time, who are functioning_for individual and social survival or advantage, creating a recognizable structure which is in the constant process of change. Examples of communities17 include families, villages (neighborhoods), cities, and cultures (nations). All of these meet the criteria set forth in the above definition of community. 15Kaufman, "Toward an Interactional Conception of Community," p. 69. See also Poplin, Communities; and, Sutton and Kolaja, "Elements of Community Action." 16Conrad M. Arensburg, "American Communities," American Anthro- pologist, Vol. 57, No. 6 (Dec., 1955), pp. 1143-62. 17Taken from a similar scheme suggested by Hillery, "Selected Issues," p. 536. 100 Which one a person identifies with as his community is to a large part situational. If one is a member of a small, highly integrated culture, it is possible that the entire culture would be considered "his community." Conversely, a culture which is less integrated and more complex in its social system will have a number of interrelated communities which could be identified by most members of that culture. An individual would then usually identify with one of these interrelated communities as "his community." However, it is more than merely situational. In a complex culture, such as the United States, it is also to a large part temporal. When an individual is faced with survival or social needs directly related to his family, his territorial concept of community may be redefined to include only those areas relevant to his immediate needs; i.e., his home, block, neighborhood, etc. Yet, when a problem is identified as a problem of higher complexity, the spatial referent then expands to include a greater resource base to deal with the more complex situation. An individual's conception of connlunity is both situational and temporal. The final dimension to be added is that it is also iptpr- mational. Assuming that both formal education and foreign travel allow an individual to add information to his information base, it can 18Two examples of this are the Old Order Amish and the Hutterian Brethren; see Russell E. Lewis, "A Comparison of Old Order Amish and Hutterian Brethren Family Systems and Community Integration" (unpublished M.A. Thesis, Michigan State University, 1972). 19See Table 21 and Figure 4 for a mathematical and graphical demonstration of this expansion from a minimal community spatially to a much larger spatial concept. 101 be contended that as one's information base is increased, so is one's territorial concept of community. In summary, an individual's concept of community is situational, temporal, and informational. An individual who is a member of a modern complex culture has more than one conception of community. Such an individual's concept will expand with the addition of information and in the face of problems which are highly complex and are not directly related to his family unit. These working constructs of individuals must be recognized by those persons and agencies concerned with community organization and community development if the concept of community is to be of any service in their efforts. Implications for Community Development Workers The concept of community is central in most community development efforts, yet many community developers have had to delineate community parameters on an arbitrary basis in the past. According to Hillery, "the point is that we should be certain of the way in which the object under study is viewed among the people before we assume the nature of its reality."20 As urbanization increases and community problems continue to grow, the need for involvement of community developers and other applied researchers will likely continue to grow. The methods presently used in community delineation have a tendency to be oriented toward less complex social systems. 20Hillery, "Selected Issues," p. 537. 102 The techniques of community delineation which were suitable in a predominantly rural country must be developed into techniques suitable for the complex social systems of an industrialized urban nation. Implications for Eastown In applying the model to Eastown, it appeared that the boundaries assigned to the area by community development workers were not inclusive enough for all community functions. When dealing with problems directly related to the nuclear family unit, such as education and recreation, the boundaries of Eastown were appropriate. The average respondent, however, viewed the city as "his community“ and responded to the city, or a larger area, as the most functional area for dealing with the problems not directly related to the nuclear family, such as air pollution and land-use problems. In summary, this indicated that the average respondent considered Eastown as his community only part of the time. It appeared that he considered the Eastown area capable of solving the wants and needs which were directly related to his family. However, the average respondent tended to identify with a much larger area when concerned with more complex problems. Poligy Recommendations for Eastown 1) The boundaries of Eastown should be delineated in reference to a particular problem or issue. 2) Community development workers in Eastown should concentrate their efforts on programs which are of immediate concern to the individual and his family. 103 3) The Eastown Community Association should serve as a liaison between the residents of Eastown and the organizations concerned with the more complex problems which indirectly affect Eastown. General Implications The major implication of this research is that community development workers and other applied researchers must now recognize that an individual in a complex social system, such as the United States, has more than one conception of community. To a large extent, his concept of community will depend upon the type of problem with which the community is confronted. The community model should help community development workers eliminate wasted efforts in dealing with inappropriate areas for a particular problem. Community development workers must realize that community is not always synonymous with pity, A community is at times a family, a neighborhood, a city, a county, a region, a nation, or even the world. Which one of these an individual identifies with depends upon his situational, temporal, and informational characteristics. By utilizing the means presented in Table 21, community development workers might be able to delineate the boundaries of their target community in reference to a specific problem. General Policy Recommendations 1) Community development workers should define community parameters based upon the problems with which the community is confronted. This should increase the efficiency and effectiveness of their efforts. 104 2) The community model developed in this study should be used as an indicator of community parameters until a more sophisticated model has been developed. Table 21 should be of most direct use to the community development worker. 3) Community development workers must be trained and be willing to work in a number of different "communities." The changing boundaries of the community emphasize the need for a very broad training in the social sciences, which integrates knowledge from a number of disciplines. Limitations of Stuoy Even though due caution was exercised in the selection of the sample, construction of the interview instrument, and the analysis of the data, a number of limiting factors were still noted. Singolarity and Non-linearity The first limitation of this study was its singularity and non- linearity. Due to financial and time constraints, the study of a single community at one point in time, using a single research method was the only feasible Option. A study based upon two or more communities combining research methods (i.e., formal participant- observation and survey research) would serve as an indicator of the validity of the findings of this study. Unrepresentativeness of Sample The second limitation was the unrepresentativeness of the sample. The demographic characteristics of the sample population were similar to those of Grand Rapids in reference to all but two characteristics. 105 There were a disproportionately high number of females. Also, there were more students in the sample population than in Grand Rapids. This limited the ability to generalize from the findings to a certain extent; however, it was not known by this researcher, the precise bias introduced by the disproportionately high number of females and students. Researcher Bias The third limitation was one which is inherent in much survey research. Respondents were forced to answer in categories which possibly reflected more the mental constructs of the researcher than those of the respondents. For example, the researcher concentrated on the territorial component of the concept of community and designed questions which were assumed to measure an individual's territorial concept of community. However, some respondents could have responded to the questions as though they dealt with the human interaction or sentiment components of the concept rather than the territorial component. Interviewer Bias The fourth limitation was possible interviewer bias caused by a large number of relatively inexperienced interviewers. All inter- viewers had thorough training in interview techniques; however, the majority of them had little previous field exposure. With a large number of relatively inexperienced interviewers there was doubtless a certain amount of variability in the procedures utilized by the inter- viewers. Any variability in presentation could have biased an individual's responses to the interview instrument. 106 Interview Instrument The final limitation of this study was the fact that the interview instrument had not been used previous to this study. To compensate for this limitation a pretest was administered, and the interview instrument was constructed using existing scales and indices whenever feasible. Major problems were not encountered during the administration or analysis of the interview instrument. However, a replication of the interview instrument used in a similar study would be necessary before any further conclusions regarding the validity and reliability of the interview instrument could be made. Recommendations for Further Research This study constituted an attempt to operationalize a very important concept in the social sciences in general, and community development in particular. A number of important questions remained unanswered. The findings from this study, and similar studies, suggested the need for more research, and they suggested certain approaches for the conduct of the research. 1) The interview instrument which was utilized in this study functioned in a very effective and satisfactory manner. Therefore, the interview instrument may be of some use for those persons interested in similar problems and information. However, during the administration and analysis of the interview instrument, minor changes were suggested that should improve the instrument. a) More questions dealing with the amount of information an individual has regarding community problems would facilitate the formulation of additional 107 hypotheses dealing with the concept of an information base. b) This researcher concentrated on problems of an environmental nature due to his interest in this area, and because there was a general concern for environmental problems at the time of this study. More questions dealing with different community problems would facilitate the formulation of measures helpful to the community develOpment specialist in delineating community boundaries. A greater variety of questions dealing with problems which directly affect the family, such as education, crime, and recreation, ‘would provide valuable information and would facilitate the formulation of additional hypotheses regarding how an individual's territorial concept of community becomes more constrained spatially when faced with problems directly related to his nuclear family. c) The questions dealing with community problems which were used in the interview instrument for this study were of a generic nature. In an applied situation, it would be helpful to add questions dealing with the specific problems faced by the target community. A number of community-specific problems can usually be identified by talking with comnunity leaders and/or examining a few issues of recent newspapers which have a regular circulation in the target community. 108 2) It is recommended that the interview instrument be used in a replication of this research project. After replication, the results could be compared and any discrepancies could then be identified for further research. Ideally, the replication should occur in communities of various sizes, both rural and urban, in different locations throughout the world. This would provide the necessary data to test the applicability of the theoretical model presented in this study to different social and cultural settings. It was concluded by the author that communities and cultures experiencing rapid sociocultural change would be an ideal “natural laboratory" for testing the proposition that an individual's territorial concept of community is affected by his information base and the complexity of community problems. 3) Because this research was primarily designed to gain information regarding the territorial or spatial components of community, it is recommended that other research projects concentrate on the other components (i.e., interaction and sentiment) of the Community. By testing a set of interrelated hypotheses regarding human interaction, it should be possible to confirm or deny the assumption that the Sphere of human interaction in the community is equal to an individual's territorial concept of community. 4) The only variables which were found to be significantly related to an individual's territorial concept of community were indicators of an individual's information base. This indicates that future research should concentrate on variables assumed to be indicators of an individual's information base. 109 5) Four variables were identified which deserve further research. The first two variables were strongly related to an individual's territorial concept of community at a non-significant level: community activity and religious identity_(negative correlation). These two variables need further research before any further conclusions can be made regarding their relationship to an individual's territorial concept of community. The second two variables were surprisingly unrelated to an individual's territorial concept of community: ethnicity and childhood community. The variable of ethnicity was related at a low level, positively. This was significant, however, because it is the opposite direction as one would expect after reviewing the literature on ethnic groups. It had usually been assumed that religious identity and ethnicity are directly related concepts inasmuch as they both are indicators of a relatively constrained information base. However, the evidence from this study contradicts the assumption that ethnicity indicates a relatively constrained information base. The variable of childhood comnunity was also related positively at a low level. This deserves further research because the question of early socialization is so important in the social sciences. The results suggested that early socialization is displaced with new information regarding an individual's territorial concept of community. 6) A final recommendation is that anomalous relationships (those which were identified as different from relationships suggested by previous researchers) be further explored and tested to determine the correct relationships. Three such relationships were identified: a) a positive relationship between social status 110 and knowledge of community_problems; b) a negative relationship between occupational status and community identity; and c) a negative relationship between community activity and community identity. APPENDIX INTERVIEW INSTRUMENT AND CODING PROCEDURES EASTOWN COMMUNITY SURVEY December, 1973 Prepared by: Russell E. Lewis Section I: Respondent's Territorial Concept of Community Hello! Would you be willing to take a few minutes of your time to tell me about your community? Your answers are very important because they will help people working with communities do a better job in solving community problems. Please feel free to answer all questions openly as your name or address will not be recorded or connected with the data in any way. The next sixteen questions will all have the same response categories. To avoid having to read them over and over again, please refer to this card (give respondent the 5 x 7 card) for the possible responses. Thank you. 1. How far do you travel for day-time family recreation? 1) 1-10 blocks 2 more than 10 blocks, but not the entire city 3 the county 4 Western Michigan (approximately a 45 mile radius) 5) the state 6 the nation 7 other 8) DK/NO (Do not know/no opinion) 9) NR/NA (No response/not applicable) (same responses for the next fifteen items) 2. How far do you travel to do your grocery shopping? 3. How far do you travel to do your other shopping? (clothes, gifts, etc. 111 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 112 How far should our children have to travel to How far should our children have to travel to How large an area should we concern ourselves with fire protection? How large an area should we concern ourselves with crime protection? How large an area should we concern ourselves with economic problems? How large an area should we concern ourselves with educational problems? How large an area should we concern ourselves with housing and urban renewal problems? How large an area should we concern ourselves with noise pollution problems? How large an area should we concern ourselves with air pollution problems? How large an area should we concern ourselves with water pollution problems? How large an area should we concern ourselves with health related problems? How large an area should we concern ourselves with land-use and development problems? How large an area do you consider to be "your elementary school? high school? with when dealing with when dealing with when dealing with when dealing with when dealing with when dealing with when dealing with when dealing with when dealing with when dealing community?" 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 113 Please respond to the rest of the questions by choosing one of the responses which I will read to you. Please wait until I have read all of the responses before answering. Thank you. Would you be willing to move to a different community? U! h (A) NH vvvvv definitely not '8) DK/NO rather not 9) NR/NA neutral probably definitely so 00 you feel that you are a part of this community? never 8) DK/NO seldom 9) NR/NA sometimes most of the time all of the time A community has little meaning for me, other than a place to work and live. 1) strongly disagree 8) DK/NO 2) disagree 9) NR/NA 3) neutral 4) agree 5) strongly agree Do you feel that you have a say about what goes on in this community? 1) never 8) DK/NO 2) seldom 9) NR/NA 3) sometimes 4) most of the time 5) all of the time Do you think your children would have greater opportunities if they settled in a different community? definitely not 8) DK/NO doubtful 9) NR/NA neutral probably definitely so 114 Did you, in the past year 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. Inform yourself about community issues and problems? 0) no 8) DK/NO 1) yes___ . 9) NR/NA__ Discuss community problems frequently with more than one person? Gather information or advice about connmnity problems from others? Speak to key leaders about community problems? Visit community organizations or board meetings to inform yourself? Write letters, circulate literature, or hold meetings in your home? Persuade others to take a particular position? Contribute money to a community chest campaign? Belong to one or more organizations that takes stands on community issues and problems? Serve on any comnittee working to improve comnunity life? Assume leadership of any community action program? Serve on any board responsible for community programs? 115 Section II: Respondent Characteristics 34. 35. 1) male 2) female What is your marital status? 1) single 9) NR/NA 2) married 3) divorced or separated 4) widowed How many people are living in your home at the present time? 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. Adults 9) NR/NA Children 14-18 years 9) NR/NA Children under 14 years 9) NR/NA What is your age? 0) less than 21 5) 41-45 I) 21-25 6) 46-50 2) 26-30 7) 51-55 3) 31-35 8) 56 & over 4) 36-40 9) NR/NA In which of the following income ranges would your total family income be classified? 1) under $4,000 5) $16,000-20,000 2; $4,000-8,000 6) $20,000 and over 3 $8,000-12,000 9 NR/NA 4) $12.000-16.000 What is your level of education? 1) less than 5 years 6) college graduate 2) 5-8 years 7) advanced graduate 3) 9-12 years study 4) high school graduate 8) graduate degree 5) some college 9) NR/NA 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 116 How long have you lived in this community? 0) less than 1 year 5) 13-15 years 1) 1-3 years 6) 16-18 years 2) 4-6 years 7) more than 18 years 3) 7-9 years 9) NR/NA 4) 10-12 years What size community did you live in before moving to this community? 1) rural area_ 2) village of 3, 000 or less— 3) village of 3, 000-10, 000 4) city of 10, 000- 50, 000_ 5) city of 50, 000- 100, 000: 6) city of 100, 000- 250, 000 7) city of 250, 000- 500, 000 8) city of 500,000 or more 9) NR/NA Where was this community located? 1) within a 15 mile radius 2) within a 30 mile radius 3) within a 45 mile radius 4) in Michigan— 5) in adjacent or nearby states 6) other states 7) Canada 8) other 9) NR/NA Where did you spend the first 10 years of your life? 1) rural area“ 2) village of 3, 000 or less_ 3) village of 3, 000- 10, 000 4) city of 10, 000- so, 000 5) city of 50, 000- 100, 000_ 6) city of 100, 000- 250, 000: 7) city of 250, 000- 500, 000” 8) city of 500, 000 or more 9) NR/NA How many wage earners live in this household? 9) NR/NA 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 117 Where does the principal wage earner work? 1) Eastown area 2) East Grand Rapids 3) Grand Rapids 4) adjacent city (Grandville, Wyoming, Kentwood, etc.) 5) nearby village or town (Ada, Rockford, Cascade, etc.) 6) more than 15 miles, but less than 30 7) more than 30 miles 9) NR/NA What is the principal wage earner's occupation? 1) professional & technical 2) managers, officials, and proprietors 3) clerical & sales 4) craftsman & foreman 5) operatives 6) unskilled, service, and domestics 7) student 8) other 9 NR/NA What is your relationship to the principal wage earner? 1) self 5) sibling 2) spouse 6) unrelated 3) parent 7) other 4) child 8) NR/NA Do you consider yourself to be a member of any ethnic group? 0) no 8) DK/NO 1) yes___ 9) NR/NA___— If yes (to 50), which of the following groups? 1) foreign (non-citizen) 6) Polish 2) Indian 7) Spanish surname 3) black 8) other 4) white 9) NR/NA 5) Dutch (In reference to number 51) would you say your ties are: 1) weak 8) DK/NO 2) average 9) NR/NA 3) strong 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 118 What is your religious affiliation? 0) no formal affiliation 5) Jewish 1) Baptist 6) Methodist 2) Catholic 7) Presbyterian 3) Christian Reformed/ 8) other Reformed ’9) NR/NA 4) Congregational (In reference to number 53) would you consider your affiliation to be: 1) weak 8) DK/NO 2) average 9) NR/NA 3) strong 00 you own your own home? 0) no 1) yes 9) NR/NA Is home single or multiple dwelling unit? 1) single 2) multiple 9) NR/NA How many times have you moved? 9) NR/NA How many other states have you traveled in? 0) none 4) 16-20 1) 5 or less 5; 21 or more 2) 6-10__— 9 NR/NA__—— 3) 11-15 Have you traveled outside of this country? 0) no 1) yes 9) NR/NA If yes, how many times? 61. 62. 63. 64. 119 If yes to question 60, how long (record longest period of stay)? 1) less than a month 2) 1-3 months 3) 4-6 months 4) 7-9 months 5) 10-12 months 6) more than a year 7) other 9) NR/NA (Record block number). (Record interviewer number). Are there any additional comments which you would like to make for this survey? (If respondent wants to comment, record comments below.) 120 Data Coding and Computer Transformations All questions were coded using the numerical coding system as represented in the interview instrument. Three of the response categories were recoded after the completion of the interviews, due to the fact that they were open-ended. Data analysis was performed on the first sixty-one questions. A number of internal computer transformations of the data were necessary to have the data conform to the particular program format (1C MATRIX and LS) used in analysis. Coding changes and transformations are detailed in Tables 28 and 29, respectively. Table 28. Coding Changes Question Number(s) Changes Made 1-16 7 was coded 'the world' 17-56 none 57 0=0 13-15=5 1-3=1 16-18=6 4-6=2 19-21=7 7-9=3 22 or more = 8 10-12=4 58-59 none 60 8 = 8 or more 61-63 none 64 none 121 Table 29. Transformations Question Number(s) Transformation 1 - 33 If = 8 or 9, assign mean 18 & 20 Subtract value from 6 34 - 35 If = 9, assign mean 35 If = 3 or 4, assign 1 46 - 47 If = 9, assign 0 48 If = 7 or 9, assign O 48 Subtract value from 7 49 If = 3-9, assign 3 50 If = 8 or 9, assign O 51 If = 1-8, assign 1 51 If = 9, assign O 52 If = 9, assign 0 53 If = 9, assign O 53 If = 1-8, assign 1 54 If = 9, assign O 55 - 61 If = 9, assign mean SEL ECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Abrams, Charles. The Language of Cities. New York: Avon Books, 1971. Baumel, Phillip C.; Hobbs, Daryl J.; and Powers, Ronald C. The Community Survey. Ames: Iowa State University. Bell, Wendell. "Social Areas: Typology of Urban Neighborhoods." Community Structure and Analysis. Edited by Marvin B. Sussman. New York: Crowell and Co., 1959. Bernard, Jessie. The Sociology of Community. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman and Co., 1973. Burgess, Ernest W., and Donald J. Bogue, eds. Urban Sociology. Chicago: Phoenix Books, 1964. Coser, Lewis A., and Bernard Rosenberg. Sociological Theory: A Book of Readings. 3rd edition. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1969. Harris, Marvin, ed. The Rise of Anthropological Theory. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 1968. Labovitz, Sanford, and Robert Hagedorn. Introduction to Social Research. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1971. Loomis, Charles P., and J. Allan Beegle. Rural Sociology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1957. Manners, Robert A., and David Kaplan, eds. Theory in Anthropology. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co., 1968. Meyers, Lawrence S., and Neal E. Grossen. Behavioral Research: Theory, Procedure, and Design. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Co., 1974. Miller, Delbert C. Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement. New York: David McKay Co., inc., 1970. Park, Robert Ezra. Human Communities. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1952. 122 123 Park, Robert Ezra. "Human Ecology.” Perspectives on the American Community. Edited by Roland L. Warren. Chicago: Rand McNally & Co., 1973. Parsons, Talcott. Structure and Process in Modern Societies. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1960. Pelto, Pertti J. Anthropological Research:- The Structure of Inquiry. New York: Harper & Row, 1970. Phillips, Bernard S. Social Research: Strategy and Tactics. 2nd ed. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1971. Poplin, Dennis E. Communities. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1972. Redfield, Robert. The Little Community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955. Rees, Philip H. "Problems of Classifying Subareas within Cities." In Brian J.L. Berry, ed. City Classification Handbook: Methods and Applications. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1972. Shevsky, Eshref, and Wendell Bell. Social Area Analysis. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1955. Toennies, Ferdinand. Community and Society (Gemeinschaft und Gessell- schaft). Translated by Charles P. Loomis. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1957. Warren, Roland L. The Community in America. 2nd ed. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1972. , Warren, Roland L., ed. Perspectives on the American Community. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1973. Wiseman, Jacqueline P., and Marcia S. Aron. Field Projects for Sociology Students. San Francisco: Schenkman Publishing Co., 1970. Young, Robert K., and Donald J. Veldman. Introductory Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1972. Journals Arensberg, Conrad M. "American Communities." American Anthropologist, Vol. 57, No. 6 (December, 1955), pp. 1143-62. Clark, David B. "The Concept of Community: A Re-Examination." Sociological Review, New Series, Vol. 21 (August, 1973), pp. 397-416. 124 Cohen, Jacob. "Multiple Regression as a General Data-Analytic System." Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 70, No. 6 (1968), pp. 426-43. Dashefsky, Arnold. l'And the Search Goes On: The Meaning of Religio- Ethnic Identity and Identification." Sociological Analysis, Vol. 33, No. 4 (Winter, 1972), pp. 239-45. Drabick, Lawrence W., and Roy C. Buck. "Measuring Locality Group Consensus." Rural Sociology. Vol. 24, No. 2 (June, 1959), pp.107-17. Durand, Roger, and Dennis R. Eckart. "Social Rank, Residential Effects and Community Satisfaction." Social Forces, Vol. 50, No. 2 (September, 1973), pp. 74-85. Fanelli, Alexander A. "Extensiveness of Communication Contacts and Perceptions of the Community." American Sociological Review, Vol. 21, No. 5 (August, 1956), pp. 439-45. Greer, Scott. "The Social Structure and Political Processes of Suburbia." American Sociological Review, Vol. 25 (August, 1960). Havighurst, Robert J., and Anton J. Jansen. “Community Research: A Trend Report and Bibliography." Current Sociology, Vol. 15, No. 2 (1967). pp. 1-120. Hillery, George A., Jr. "Definitions of Community: Areas of Agree- ment." Rural Sociology, Vol. 20, No. 2 (June, 1955), pp. 111-23. Hillery, George A., Jr. "Selected Issues in Community Theory." Rural Sociology, Vol. 37, No. 4 (December, 1972), pp. 534-52. Kaufman, Harold F. "Toward An Interactional Conception of Community." Social Forces, Vol. 38, No. 1 (October, 1959), pp. 9-17. Klass, Morton. "Community Structure in West Bengal." American Anthropologist, Vol. 74, No. 3 (June, 1972), pp. 601-11. Meenagan, Thomas M. "Community Delineation: Alternative Methods and Problems." Sociology and Social Research, Vol. 56, No. 3 (April, 1972), pp. 345-55. Pilcher, William J. "The Dispersed Urban Community: The Case of the Portland Longshoremen." Growth and Change, Vol. 3, No. 3 (July, 1972), pp. 3-10. Reiss, Albert J., Jr. "The Sociological Study of Communities." Rural Sociology. Vol. 24, No. 2 (June, 1959), pp. 118-130. Simpson, Richard L. ”Sociology of the Community: Current Status and Prospects." Rural Sociology. Vol. 30, No. 2 (June, 1965), pp. 127-149. 125 Sutton, Willis A., Jr., and Jiri Kolaja. "The Concept of Community." Rural Sociology. Vol. 25, No. 2 (June, 1960), pp. 197-203. Sutton, Willis A., Jr., and Jiri Kolaja. "Elements of Community Action." Social Forces, Vol. 38 (May, 1960;, pp. 325-31. Van Arsdol, Maurice; Santo F. Camilleri; and Calvin F. Schmid. ”The Generality of Urban Social Area Indices." American Sociological Review, Vol. 23 (1958), pp. 277-284. Other Edison, Thomas W. "Eastown: A Humane Human Geography." Unpublished paper, Michigan State University, 1973. Fessenden, Gordon. "Municipal Decentralization and Neighborhood.” Unpublished research report, Aquinas College, 1974. Galpin, C.J. "The Social Anatomy of an Agricultural Community." Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin 34. Madison, 1915. Hertel, Peggy. Unpublished pamphlet, Eastown Community Association, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1973. Lewis, Russell E. "A Comparison of Old Order Amish and Hutterian Brethren Family Systems and Community Integration." Unpublished M.A. thesis, Michigan State University, 1972. Sanderson, Dwight. "Locating the Rural Community." Cornell Extension Bulletin 413. Ithaca: New York State College of Agriculture at Cornell University, 1939. United States Department of Commerce. U.S. Census of Population: 1970. Detailed Characteristics: Michigan, 1972. llllllllllllllllllr