xt7ksn01176b https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7ksn01176b/data/mets.xml   Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station. 1956 journals 043 English Lexington : Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Kentucky Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Progress report (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n.43 text Progress report (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n.43 1956 2014 true xt7ksn01176b section xt7ksn01176b Progress Report 43 December l956 i
Informal Social Participation ‘ 
K in Five Kentucky Counties  
~ John R. Christiansen K
    · · - Emu ·\ ··\ . '1\ l
    L "  *§gt%— 
ri;      W Q  l H/JFTIJ
V    "  ~ »         .. r---it»       · ·—». J
K Kentucky Agriculturol Experiment Stotion P
University of Kentucky
Lexington

 Progress Report   DGC€mb6I‘, 1956
INFORMAL SOCIAL PARTICIPATION IN
FIVE KENTUCKY COUNTIES .
A John R. Christiansen
. Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station
University of Kentucky
Lexington

 CONTENTS I
U Page I
· Purpose and Methodo1og;y.°...................,............... II. N
Rurality of County and Informal Social Participeti0n....... M A U
Variables Associated with Informal Social Partj.c:Lpetion.... 7 I
Conc1us:Lons....................... .... ..................... 8
Appendix Tsb].es........... .... ...».......................... IO

 INFORMAL SOCIAL PARTICIPATION IN FIVE KENTUCKY COUNTIES
, , l
. By John R. Christiansen
Purpose and Methodology
It is generally accepted that, granting biological limitations and
prerequisites, persons develop into the kind of beings they are largely
` because of Hieir experiences within their social and cultural environ»
ments. The kind of person an individual becomes, therefore, is in large
measure the inevitable expression of the kind of world in which he lives
and makes for himself.
‘ Living in a modern society is a long series of tasks to learn, where
A learning well brings satisfaction and reward, while learning poorly brings
unhappiness and social disapproval, One such task confronting all persons
is learning to participate as socially responsible individuals in society.2
This task relates to man  and varied activities; for example, getting along
with play—mates as a child, achieving a satisfactory marriage, and main-
taining congenial relations with fellow workers. Such a task is obviously
, recurrent, and is fulfilled largely through learning the principles--mainly
through social experience-—that underly successful social participation.
In many parts of rural society today, an extensive knowledge of social
participation principles and the antecedent social experience necessary to
obtain such knowledge are not required for successful participation. This
is because social contacts are not often so varied or complex as those oc-
curring elsewhere. Rural residents who lack opportunities for social ex-
perience may not necessarily be handicapped in their native environment,
but may face difficulties if they attempt to become assimilated into another
society characterized by a wider range of social interactiona
In particular, it has been observed that some people living in rural
areas lack the social poise and facility that is more characteristic of
their city cousins. This difference sometimes makes their adjustment as
employees and as members of communities less easy when they move into a
more urban environment. This problem of underdevelopment in social skills
is particularly important to Kentuckians because of the large migration
from rural areas of the state to the industrial cities farther north and
 
lSocial Science Analyst, Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA; for-
— merly Assistant Rural Sociologist, Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Sta-
`bj.OI°1r.:
2 . .
See Robert J. Havighurst, Human Development and Education (New`York:
Longmans, Green, and Co., 1953), passim, for a discussion of man's develop-
A mental tasks.
- 1 a

 - 2 -
to rapidly developing urban areas of the state itself. Lacking ade-
quate training, socially, educationally, and otherwise; rural-urban mi-
grants have often been forced to accept relatively low status positions r
and low-grade employment in urban communities.
While this problem of adjustment is a complex one, it is a reason- V
able hypothesis that people living in more isolated rural areas lack the
social experiences which would help prepare them to more easily move into
the more sophisticated patterns of urban life. That Kentucky people liv-
ing in the more rural areas have not participated as much in the more
formal organizations such as: the Farm Bureau, P. T. A., Red Cross,
churches, itc., as have those living in urban areas has already been dem-
onstrated. While recognizing this lack of formal social participation
by rural residents, it has sometimes been assumed that they engage in
informal participationz so frequently as to offset the possible loss of Q
beneficial social experiences stemming from infrequent formal participa-
tion. Yet, it has not been determined that rural people actually do en-
‘ gage in more informal participation than others. In facg, evidence bear-
ing on the proposition suggests the converse conclusion. Owing to the
1See Harold F. Kaufman, Rural Churches in Kentuckv, 19h7, Ky. Agr.
Exp. Sta. Bul. 530 (Lexington, Kentucky: 19H§), p. 6; James K. Young and
Hard W. Bauder, Membership Characteristics of Special-Interest Organiza-
tions, Ky. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. 59E {Lexington, Kentucky: 19;3$, p. og
and Ward U. Bauder, Objectives and Activities of Special-Interest Organi-
zations in Kentucky, Ky. lgr. Expt. Sta. Eul. 6§9_(iexington, Kentucky: ~
I9$65, pT_8.
zlnformal participation is une social interaction which takes place
in the family, neighborhood, recreation, business, and other primary groups.
ln contrast to formal participation, informal participation is subject to
more covert convention, i.e., regulations governing group behavior in infor- t
mal participation remain unwritten and understood, while formal participants‘
actions are frequently controlled by constitutions, laws, or other symbolic _
rules of order. ln informal participation also, a broader range of sanc-
tioned alternatives for interaction is available to participants. See C.
H. Cooley et al., introductory Sociology (New York: Charles Scribner's and
Sons, 19335, Eg-60, 203, 210-215, for a discussion of primary groups.
3Kentucky studies have shown that an association exists between
rurality of county and formal participation (n.l.,p.2); other researches
have demonstrated an association between formal and informal participa-
tion. See W. A. Anderson, Rural Social Participation and the Famiég Life
Cycle, Part ll, Cornell ngr. Exp. Sta. Memoir 318 (Ithaca, U. Y.,: 19535;
0. D. Duncan and J. W. Artis, Social Stratification in a Pennsylvania
Rural Coymunity, Pa. Ayr. Exp. Sta. Sul. €a3 (State College, Pa.,: 1951);
and D. G. Hay, “The Social Participation of Households in Selected Rural
Communities of the Northeast," Rural Sociology, KV (June, 1950), pp. 1hl-
lh?.

 e 3 -
importance of these considerations, the present study was undertaken.
The study was designed to determine whether rurality of residence
and the following nine other social variables are associated with the
incidence of informal participation;
1. Tenure situation of family
2. Income of family »
3. Socio-economic status of family
Q. Size of farm
5. Age of farm operator
y 6. Number of children in family under 18 years of age
7. Extent of husbands' formal participation
8. Extent of wives' formal participation
9. Educational attainment of husbands
An answer to this question will prove helpful in many ways. First, it
will provide a possible explanation for the needs of rural people regard-
1 ing the acquisition of social adoptness. Second, the derived information
will possibly point out to action agencies where programs might best be
used to moot the social developmental capabilities and needs of rural _
people. Further, it will provide data which might indicate reasons for
participation or lack of participation in informal activities, and thus
may serve to point the way for action designed to effect the incidence
of social participation.
The population selected for the study consisted of all farm familiesl
  living in Trigg, Powell, Hagoffin, Harrison, and Garrard counties, Ken-
tucky, during l9h9 and 1950 when Une data were collected. These counties
7 ·were selected from different social areas of the state, and in a broad
I way, typify four of the nine state economic areas of Kentucky. Viewed on
a rural-urban continuum, the five counties, although all more rural than
y urban, can be ranked from less rural 50 more rural as follows: Harrison,
Garrard, Trigg, Powell, and Magoffin. when ranked according to the 1959
Farm-Operator Family Level—of-Living Index,  he same order was observed.
In 1950, the counties ranked in the same order according to median family
income, namely: Harrison, §l,918; Garrard, $1,860; Trigg, $1,075; Powell,
$1,052; and Magoffin, $893.
1The definition for a ”farm" was that used in the l9h5 Census of
Agriculture.
2See Herbert A. Aurbach, "A Guttman Scale for Measuring Isolation,"
Bpral Sociology, XX (June, 1955, pp. lh2-IM5).
3Hargaret J. Hagood, Farm-Operator Family Level-of-Living Indexes
  Counties g pee g;;tee1"s`15e‘tee, 1930, 19] o, ‘i9E5j Qs 19§_o,, (Washing-
ton: U. s., Dept. o1’Agr., 19525, pp:—§2—P_3T— `"` "“`°
MU. S. Bureau of the Census, U. S. Census of Population: 1950, Vol.
II, Part 17, Kentucky, Chapter B. _(W€shington,—§.*C;: U. S. Govt. Print-
ing Office, 1952), pp. 116-119.

 - h -
Data were obtained from a proportional, stratified, random sample
of farm families in each of the counties by using a schedule in personal
interviews, The sample was distributed as follows: Harrison county,
l2O families; Garrard, lOO; Trigg, Eh; Powell, EO; and Magoffin, llO,
These figures represent 5 percent of the farm families in each county
' on the basis of l9h5 census informations
Rurality gf County apd Informal Social Participation
People in the lesslrural counties gen rally participated in the follow-
. ing informal activities more often than did those in the other counties:
Husbands and Wives':
l. Movie attendance
2. Business trips to town
3. Nonbusiness trips to town
Families':
l. Exchanging work with other families
2, Making social calls
Ba Shopping `
hs Observing holidays ·
S. Visiting
6. Having picnics
Ta Having business discussions
This conclusion was reached on the basis of chi-square tests for the (
existence of association, and an analysis of the direction of association _
based on a comparison of the "average" participation rates of people in ?
each county on the various informal participation items with the average
participation rate of the entire sample (Tables l and 2). ‘
Statistically significant associations (P 2..05) were found to exist
among counties and participation in each of the informal activities listed
in Tables l and 2 excepting "Families having visitors all day or longer“
(Item 12, Tania 1), and vrieniesu (Item 6, Tabie 2).. c
This comparison of county participation rates to that of the total
sample indicated that in six of the eight informal activities in which
only husbands and wives engaged (Items 1-8, Table l), participation was
higher among those living in the less rural counties, In the other two
instances, the direction of association was inconsistent with rurality
of county.
lThe items of informal participation used in this study were arbitrari-
ly selected because of their amenability to measurement and comparison with
data from other researches. They are not thought to be a random sample of
informal participation activities nor to be all of similar nature. Further-
more, it is not maintained that such participation is necessarily beneficial
to participants, Only in a general way is this hypothesized,

 ‘é‘
O; __,
Tug 3.;*;:
[I] EUG
M 0 “
Mw **2
>'“ §°&¤>`6
'1Z"" =¤‘··’*
0; °E·§?
·...’··
40 ..'Z‘.‘“”5
Eu. °g~R§
¤
QSO §%)_'¤*"O
2* 02-9 °
[.4 E·* 'U
Es *2 .
@2 E W
D 82.*
[··* O U LD
 BQ gm -
pq ¤
  .-1 25 `O
U); .-1 H _ .
ZZ E $$-1 M O m
E; '*2`(1[) U;   S • YT" >`
¤ 1: *-1
[..<] :3-Q *5 ;.. B H .m E
mg U1—· v BES 5 M <~?. +6; `
ua #0 "“ B? M 2 °’ "' ¤¤ ‘··
gun M O B g E $1.. Q; 'Q
r—(' lg
gw 3 $3 §°€. M 2 Z? Eg 5 6 .,0
2.,. O 2* ~ ~ ‘é*:. 1 ·» ~i ¤
[dm _m M1 _C_ 0 CBR B PI *·’
D: g gp. B *5 HO; ,__ O Fg ,1 .
3 M mg 2 .¤ #-4 0 '“‘ M 0
<¤ ..1 ·-* ·P. 1.. cm M 2 .¤ EP ¤> >
CLD I °°——· ·¤·?.” ~ QE .2 -¤·EP°’ 5; ,__ O Z
Zan vg, .,0; ,0% M O (D O 0
gg     > E 2. .6 * § 1, " 2 §  
0M 3 Eg E Z E —g0§.. '*   H H $3 <¤
Q *r >_·~.-· 0** (D >. gg;) 1.. O QJ
Lnm .-1 G-) 5 U q) .-1 (D "U td
Z -2 .¤r_2~ M U. ¤ —‘: 3 M B "'Z
00E 1:; *;.13 `; <» 3 5% ,9 2 3 SZ
*22 "¤ és E S $ Sm -1 ~ V2
jgw § 2 2 g m gag > ‘ E H § g
MO? <¤ E “ :>~ 1-.5:, E m ··* E 0 0
Ld 1-.:1 Q, cl ·-1 ··-· cr' G, 1.. Q,
M _Q $-1 G)
< M 1-· ¤ ·
0 0“ ¤°¤ ¤ T.>v· U ‘~ M ‘~ *5
.2 *3* SQQIM. g ..._7_g>_ ,2 E 0 ,,, Q
Ld S SM- S12? `“ —·‘¥’ 5 ? .Z` *1 1
A 3   °... EEE E? *5 gg E §
CQ Q ‘“¤*-’.B`·‘3‘ E 4-· M <¤ 3, cd H
Si    B ~“ gg :;;;,0
<>==>&"‘~..$-·¤“- E 3 `“ "‘.$’.é’
E_.·_€}·`., :2 *5 3* 200
—m;g-g-§.:°.. gi **3-
· • um - ¤ .
g €E;,,.?£·,E.’“$·§,`2·’.i‘.. g §£~°°i
JS`. '“·*¤ ·$·¤`°’~‘··'0.—¤ ¤SQ*""
Dm »» O ¤ > Q 4.J. ME
"’¤>§¤B“¤*'”‘· ·{g`"‘·° 2.. xd
:‘é.g,¤;_ 1- *'§tTw$`;,·‘2_¤”‘§0.7u· §..._0
°°Oms:.‘“° FQ ·"°""> $°¤°C1 · '·-•.-.53
:'.E$4.>®;U$é:¤.g>¤D.;_'E‘m KNO
J >0§O°¤w"‘¤·x .»"*‘° ¤.`6`°’
y\;   __(U·r·* '>·B• '.-1_‘_,."’:
· 3 -3 ··¢I>.;... . U ru
0*1 rn mu ·¤9 *‘. *,.1
Oy—Q__¤ ° $@73
.6 3 Dm-? .¤Dw>“°"... @**-5
(D0'),.4 .-40Jqj   >`
fj'>'~h¤D:__F°;@ pSE
*5 m§§—9§"""’$EéD 5*3:
M M size-2 32*
ms, cn cu
C6 ><~—~g>...~ wv-¤
q$4.>'.¢ mq
• [I4 >* "_|
0 Em V-· ¤
... [21;; g2·g<<$
.—: rdrég
—· .1:
. Q; *-’
f\i _¤g)f\`3
.-1 H _L)
°°-E3
M
·)g ,2
*1
*1

 - h - _
Data were obtained from a proportional, stratified, random sample
of farm families in each of the counties by using a schedule in personal
interviewsa The sample was distributed as follows: Harrison county,
120 families; Garrard, 100; Trigg, Eh; Powell, 50; and Magoffin, ll0,
These figures represent 5 percent of the farm families in each county
' on the basis of l9h5 census informations
Rurality of Countv and Informal Social Participation
People in the lesslrural counties gen rally participated in the follow-
. ing informal activities more often than did those in the other counties:
Husbands and`Wives':
ls Movie attendance
2. Business trips to town
3. Nonbusiness trips to town
Families':
l. Exchanging work with other families
2, Making social calls
3. Shopping _
hs Observing holidays
5. Visiting
6. Having picnics
To Having business discussions
This conclusion was reached on the basis of chi—square tests for the "
existence of association, and an analysis of the direction of association ~
based on a comparison of the "average" participation rates of people in ,1
each county on the various informal participation items with the average
participation rate of the entire sample (Tables l and 2).
Statistically significant associations (P 2..05) were found to exist
among counties and participation in each of the informal activities listed
in Tables l and 2 excepting "Families having visitors all day or l0nger“
(1-tam 12, Tania 1), and ¤·P1¤n1Cs·· (Item 6, rabie 2)., _
This comparison of county participation rates to that of the total
sample indicated that in six of the eight informal activities in which
only husbands and wives engaged (Items l-8, Table l), participation was
higher among those living in the less rural counties, In the other two
instances, the direction of association was inconsistent with rurality
of county.
1The items of informal participation used in this study were arbitrari-
ly selected because of their amenability to measurement and comparison with
data from other researches. They are not thought to be a random sample of
informal participation activities nor to be all of similar nature. Further-
more, it is not maintained that such participation is necessarily beneficial
to participants. Only in a general way is this hypothesized,

 N
¥>
gg §• A
vv {GS
(DO '.-••
~,_‘ OHL}
[-4:0 ¤°°~  
[:1*-* H ‘ SM   m U
¤> ¤
U); E E; M `  2 °’ · 3;,
.-4 3 ;.q Bch UD
MO "U O M 0¤¤°> M - 5
m =~ O` 2 "’ —·‘-·3 Q ~¤ M ¤
Z N JJ H 3 $-4 _Q FC .
OU] M gg gg O (D 2 {D M   +-·
y-•<: H cd   E`) H B H "" (D M
[.4;; “’ M Bw-· ,¤ O GH ·¤ B an 5
O 5 .¤ M "' ?°"" ¤ .¤
{[1] B5   gp OBQ) I-4 .-a H >
ppm ¤ H .¤ 3 g **‘gB az EP 2 °’
GE-· 3 EM 2 .c2 M .2 in M ’¤ gp S
PAL,] ‘.-4 E   (DH ‘»• G) H _C .-4
[-·t¤ Q ·?P,,D $1 4: ·§Dq»"‘ *°’ 3 <¤ *3 ‘
M; “ -¤·.-4 __¤ MBE O ..C.‘ (D
cd m_, _¤ M _¤ H M. UD ,.. ___
~ ¤ '* E *— ¤ 2 ·~ -¤
Z ··]¤ 23,. EP 2 B jj 0 ”> ¤»
Z4; ’·· pq) -¤ H .2 M "' Q >
5 FB ~ E E3. E U 3 F
mg s? 2 3 Egw § 5 A >
[_,],_] "C pn an -¤"·-4g M ..4 3 zu  
EFL >. E `gn E S2 g ’“` 2 3 =¤
¤>
~3z 3> 2 3 ~ 3 3 3 2 &
rn sm o ¤D.¤¤) -¤ 3 M °> *°
Z M U.; . **:3 .¤-·
A g Q >~ 'E_bD·-G O (D *
ED U, wv <» u Em ¤—• ·· 3 ,_, U
O` QE °° ’* 2 O H
UH M ,@ 3 3 E M E E ' S
233* .2 T`-€§‘“§§@§»”%“§.  
. \ Q) U
bak] S   3 ""' CD dwg ;>` 9 Q) 2 3
ZO‘i> m -¤ >_ M ¤*¤E— *-· Z ¤ .¤ M¤>¤· ¤> ·—· ¤ "¤ `
~Z< 2 § E § “x3 § E 3 Q Q  
<¤ >` =—·
Aww “’ °’ 2 ¤ .¤> ¤ O
Q MG U ··•>_ |·-4 (U U (U
wuz 2.3 gig § E5; `“ 3 3 5 E E
mgm ui ¤~“” §§E 3 O 3 ” “ “
O Q §E3' ·m EG E 3 3 5 B&°
J o +—~¤s`*‘· ·c>. E ¤ ,¤ M ¤=¤°’
U]   8 ·r{0 O >` """  
Ld w “’¤ ' ·h Z E gg M T°°’°
Q ¤ 333~3 3 mn` Q ~ z %$~
>*·‘q)•`»-<_q).¤4'_. Q) 4.: °
g EQ2 ¤.g=:» . g S EQ;
";Fg.?}·§.,(l] fg-gz'.-g° E  
Q;- `2§·.¤.§§,’;-'2‘3··5· ·_4 ¤$3.g
E C m°'»-1.¤ C: >E',-1. ¤U)_»-4  
Q) (\$'P¤.,(gBg*·; ·,..{·,_4_(2 _Q UD (`¤¤ JJMU
M ·-¤¤¤¤¤F¤ ,¤__cc$_r.n>'.*:°,E·m Ne->0J
>-4 mum n-. FD HH _B_¤ H· {3,,0;..
§,;Dg·¤FggM·g>w mac-  
3g~3B¤?5 mH5‘x‘>·¤ ¤£
E >0“$O¤C:-'(g>°;-·°q)¤U)•  
J ·....»r¤·~-B(,,u¤s,,,° tm ’··· cd rd
`;~§ 3 ‘§B‘§;·9'E3£7¤B·—E`;D· °‘3·E
3 ¤ z33—3g?w:°2z FSE
; mi3¤ 30-2¤°>¤¤ Ss';
3 ;z€;3¤¤§2€ S23
3 ;~~¤€§~¤“ 322
33 w E3?. 2*g
ns _¤
M E-•¤>.5‘
¤—·
-2; ME
ie
7(·

 O *" ’
E—· g·
.H¤
nn E¤.¤
EH *E§
•-az O¤3"‘=•-·
Ez SQEO
·+-· >~ % _
Eg {`—;g5.5;;_ * 6-
¤->:!qrd
EU ¤E2S> *  
[-L1 Qkukg 4%
(/)O ""gO;5 U.
gw __‘m #8 E,
aq; Mi ::.3 ¤
·-·
§<¤ [EELS A ¤
zg 23*5 "` E U ~
am E ° fg    
ZE, go $71; gw H
EH -,q gp mgp  
<»:; E E ¤~·—\O ·¤
D-4 H SH ¢\0·—· ‘”
Hg E3 ggzh 00 Tg
2*** B g.E.DBq)!»·• G) '
H; g ¤O;~;H 5  
>_ #403 (1,;..
D{•*·* >_ U A .-4gE (D H
°‘U E3 ’“ °"5» "BEB ·¤ `
*3 z¤ 3 §?§E~H“2 S
Ulm up U 2 gcump
L=1<¤ ·»-· B ;.¤¤> >~
·-+ ·¤ 0 "‘ 2 .¤’** 0
Hm ·¤ 5 ¤><¤~ ***3 :3 ·¤
En: 2* 3* §°B*‘.$%"5»£g ·~ °’  
<¤;.. (S rv 2·E.°¤D¤<»¤—· `;,‘ 3
¤¤ ¤ S ¤z2&§B ¤ 2  
mm ¤ cm {jh ¤g.;=_>_¤§D 3 .5 A
&¤ ¤ §@§2E» @ Q
OZ H *5,-4 ,C‘.-1¤_D..CG.}"*H O Qc
4 EE dt'!}   ug fd
Ei, <¤¤.. M Q€:`·E?Pm,.¤ Q 4*
ZE] Ag EMM SEED 2 if ·
—¤
¤¤ ¥$2§~H ~ 2
UE jg-? gm " 0
{fa ..CZ'E¢D¤D..C:H,*‘ 0   `
m"* ¤·~¤¤°’<» "’ U
[Lua \ .::-...341 *6 ,1)
-¤0¤b °’
J ,..4%-I H .H
V4 D3? ..C U »-E
r‘”uJ ¤>
§$:> 3 '° 3
·-·
ga-·E—· 3 wm B O
41 <¤ EUG, V E
USO g wcggw 3 H A
¥=· Q ’3Z¤>¤<->¤>® ¤s O -
OS ~ ¤3S2$¥~~ 2 2
Z 09 OOO >,` .°
(MH 4: 008 (U »-a
  g OO Z Cy
www SQ (G O `
m”€ GE z E
Qi U]
A; ‘;; ¤ ¤ $3
U  $:0 C:
H 5% ’~ QE $?°·‘Y`§
- Q) ug
2 S2 @2:  
cnc; “’ u;....»
E (3.*: 'O2 www P
2 z&§?m;? &“E
>-• PC _- cn 4)-,.4
°§€€E€$ Eaz  
.   DE
~(\; d*·.*;m ¤<