UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The effects on residential opportunity structures on participation patterns in voluntary organizations Scheu, William John 1975

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1975_A1 S34_9.pdf [ 4.99MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0100061.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0100061-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0100061-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0100061-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0100061-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0100061-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0100061-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0100061-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0100061.ris

Full Text

THE E F F E C T S OF i t E S I D E K T T A L O P P O R T U N I T Y S T R U C T U R E S P A R T I C I P A T I O N PATTERNS I N VOLUNTARY O R G A N I Z A T I O N  hy William  John  B.S.,  Scheu  M.S.  A THESIS SUEMITTEC IN PARTIAL THE R E Q U I R E M E N T S  FOS  FULFILLMENT  THE DEGREE  OF  DOCTCB CF P H I L O S O P H Y  in  the department of  ANTHROPOLOGY AND  SOCIOLOGY  We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s a s c o n f o r m i n g t o £ne r e q u i r e d standard.  The  University  of British  April  1975  Columbia  OF  In  presenting  an  advanced degree at  the L i b r a r y  this  in p a r t i a l  fulfilment  the U n i v e r s i t y of  s h a l l make i t  I f u r t h e r agree for  thesis  freely  t h a t permission  of  the  requirements  B r i t i s h Columbia,  available  for  reference  for e x t e n s i v e copying o f  I agree  for  that  and study. this  thesis  s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head o f my Department or  by  his  representatives.  of  this  written  thesis for financial  is understood that gain s h a l l  permission.  Department of  Anthropology/Sociology  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Vancouver 8, Canada  Date  It  A p r i l 9. 1975  Columbia  not  copying o r p u b l i c a t i o n  be allowed without my  ABSTRACT  The major f o c u s o f alternative for  models  of  explaining  organizations. varying local  voluntary  residential  whether  the  personal  the  question  operate same  of  to  in  posed  encourage  degree  for  to  is  whether  densities  of  organizational  a l l residents;  upon an the  two  voluntary  opportunity  depending  or attachments  explore  articulation  opportunity  organizational  participation  resources,  to  participation  primary  areas  density  is  individual-environment  organizational  to  differential  investigation  individual The  participation  this  or  elicits  individual's  local  residential  a rea. The d e v e l o p m e n t by  the  theory  hypotheses randomly  were  a  Bell's  Vancouver.  Social  Area  In general,  of,  from  stratified  densities but  methods o f  tested  selected  Metropolitan from  and  and a n a l y s i s  of  a  in  with  the  problem i s  "contextual data  eight  from  different  The a r e a s  were  typology—similar  informed  analysis." 822  The  respondents  "social  areas"  purposively i n nature  to  in  chosen Wendall  Typology.  the  analysis  residential combination produce  suggests that  the  a r e a s do n o t a c t with  characteristics  to  participation  urban r e s i d e n t s .  of  of  different  differences  in  Increased  opportunity independently individual  organizational organizational  ii  Dpportunities environment  present only  organizational a i o r e  wealthy.  in  the  conditionally  memberships  for  immediate affect  an  t h e better  residential increase  educated  in  o r the  iii  T A B L E OF CONTENTS Page  List  of  Tables  List  of  Figures  v . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  vi  CHAPTER 1  Introduction T h e o r e t i c a l Framework. The L o c a l R e s i d e n t i a l A r e a Population Type, Life Style, and the Organizational Structure Of Residential Areas The L o c a l R e s i d e n t i a l A r e a As An E n v i r o n m e n t a l Opportunity Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Local Residential Opportunity S t r u c t u r e s and Contextual Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11  P r o b l e m F o r m u l a t i o n and H y p o t h e s i s Development . . . . . Opportunity Density-A Contextual Effect . . . . . . . Individual Characteristics  18 19 20  The 2  1  Methodology  Effects  of  a Contextual  Conditional . . . . . . .  6 8  14 16  22  .....25  Research Design S a m p l i n g Frame . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S t a g e One: S e l e c t i o n Of Primary Sampling Units S t a g e Two: S e l e c t i o n Of H o u s e h o l d s . . . . . . . . , Stage T h r e e : S e l e c t i o n Of R e s p o n d e n t s . . . . . . D i s p o s i t i o n Of Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I m p l i c a t i o n s Of S a m p l i n g D e s i g n Means Of Data C o l l e c t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The I n t e r v i e w Creating An O p p o r t u n i t y S u r f a c e Of V o l u n t a r y Organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25 27 27 30 30 31 33 34 34 37  iv  TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Chapter  Page O p e r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n s Of T h e C o n c e p t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Opportunity Density ...........................41 P a r t i c i p a t i o n In V o l u n t a r y O r g a n i z a t i o n s . . . . . . 44 Stage In F a m i l y L i f e C y c l e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 S o c i a l Rank O f R e s i d e n t i a l Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 F a m i l y L i f e C y c l e Of R e s i d e n t i a l A r e a . . . . . . . . . 48 Age O f R e s i d e n t i a l A r e a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Statistical  Methods  Covariance Analysis 3  Of D a t a  Analysis  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  S t r a t e g y Employed  ..............51  The A n a l y s i s Ecological  54 Test  Limitations  O f The M a c r o - P r o c e s s e s Of The E c o l o g i c a l  Model S p e c i f i c a t i o n  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  55  C o v a r i a t i o n Test  58  of the M i c r o - P r o c e s s e s  . . . . . . . . .  Model E v a l u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Covariance A n a l y s i s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sex and O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y S t a g e i n F a m i l y L i f e C y c l e and Opportunity Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E d u c a t i o n and O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y . . . . . . . . . Income and O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary Of C o v a r i a n c e A n a l y s i s . . . . . . . . . . . . Regression Analysis 4  62 63 63 65 68 70 71 73  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  79  Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  79  Practical Conclusion Bibliography  59  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Summary and C o n c l u s i o n Study  48  Implications—an  Example  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  85 92 94  V  LIST  OF TABLES  TABLE  Page  1 Disposition  Of S a m p l i n g  Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32  2 Summary Of 3 - s t a g e Step-wise Regression A n a l y s i s Of Opportunity D e n s i t y R e g r e s s e d On Means O f S o c i a l R a n k , F a m i l y L i f e C y c l e , and R e s i d e n c e S t a b i l i t y . . . . . . . . . . . . 57  3 C o v a r i a n c e A n a l y s i s Of S e x , W i t h T h e Number O f V o l u n t a r y Organization Memberships Regressed On O p p o r t u n i t y Density 63 4 C o v a r i a n c e A n a l y s i s Of S t a g e Of F a m i l y L i f e Cycle, With The Number Of V o l u n t a r y Organization Memberships R e g r e s s e d On O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 5 C o v a r i a n c e A n a l y s i s Of E d u c a t i o n , W i t h The Number O f Voluntary Organization Memberships Regressed Cn The C o v a r i a t e , Opportunity Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 6  Covariance Voluntary Covariate,  7  Summary Of S t e p - W i s e Regression Analysis Of Total Organizational M e m b e r s h i p s R e g r e s s e d On EOD, I C D , F L C , F L C , LR AND OD 77 2  Analysis Of Income, With The Number Cf Organization Memberships Regressed On The Opportunity Density ........................71  vi  LIST  OF FIGURES  FIGURE  Page  1  Sampling T y p o l o g y Used To C o n t r o l T h e M a e r o - d e m o g r a p h i c C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s O f The R e s i d e n t i a l Areas Chosen In Stage One. 28  2  Spatial Location O f The E i g h t P r i m a r y S a m p l i n g W i t h i n The G r e a t e r Vancouver M e t r o p o l i t a n R e g i o n .  3  Spatial The  Distribtuion  Of  Voluntary organizations  Within  M e t r o p o l i t a n V a n c o u v e r R e g i o n I n 1971  4  E n u m e r a t i o n Of V o l u n t a r y O r g a n i z a t i o n  5  Graphical  6  Units . . . . 29  Presentation  Of  39  Classification  Ideal-Typical  . . . 40  Covariance  Relations Depicting Various Outcomes of Contextual Analysis 61 Regression Lines of Organizational Memberships By O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y F o r M a l e s And F e m a l e s .............64  7  Regression Lines Of O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Memberships By Opportunity D e n s i t y F o r The F i v e Stage I n F a m i l y C y c l e Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67  8  Regression Lines Of O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Memberships Ey O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y F o r T h e F o u r E d u c a t i o n a l Groups . . . 69  9  Regression Opportunity  Lines Density  Of O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Memberships F o r T h e Four Income G r o u p s  Ey 72  vii  i.  ACKNOWLEDGEMENT  I  would  like  t o take  who were  this  those  people  stages  o f t h eV a n c o u v e r  Urban  thesis  i s only  Special  Gray,  Scott  Meis  co-principals  I  would  Meissner they  and Kathy  also  l i k e  f o r the  appreciate  involved  t o  i nc a r r y i n g  Studies  must  a l l  outthe i n i t i a l  Project,  thanks  thank  o f which go  t o  this George  Storie  f o r their contribution  thank  George  as  i n t h e study.  offered  Braxton  a part.  opportunity  i n  encouragement t h e  the time  Alfred  t o  writing  and very  and Robert  and  and constructive of  helpful  Kelly.  Gray  this  thesis.  suggestion  Martin  criticism I  provided  also by  1  CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION  The to  what  area,  purpose degree  the  this  problem  memberships is  p a r t of  the r e l a t i o n s h i p analysis  methods  of  of  have,  investigation  of  little  new  s t u d i e s have activities  in  voluntary  the  tended occur  of the  has to and  of  a  most  and  residential  scientific  affects The  interest  in  environment.  i n f o r m e d by t h e  theory  and  1  part,  been  correlates replicate  the  social  in  the  previous  to  the  point  of  findings,  Moreover, these  contexts  provided inadequate  voluntary  limited to  been c o n t r i b u t e d .  neglect  how  organizations.  participation  Except to  2  explore  i n d i v i d u a l s and t h e i r  individual  returns. theory  social  analysis."  for  to  opportunity structure  problem i s  studies  organizations  diminishing  an  between  is  context  as  a general  "contextual  Survey  dissertation  socio-ecological  conceptualized  resident  The  of  in  which  explanations  for  * Blau,1957; Coleman,1958; Lazarsfeld,1959; Blau,1960; Davis, S p a e t h and Huson,1961; G r e e r and O r l e a n s , 1962; Tannenbaum and Bachman, 1964 ; v a l k o n e n , 1 969; Scheuch,1969; 3reen,1971; Hauser,1971. K o m a r o v s k y , 1946; S c a f f , 1952, F o s k e t t , 1 955; A x e l r o d , 1956 ; Scott,1957; W r i g h t and Hyman,1958; Babchuk and B o o t h , 1 9 6 9 ; Hyman and Wright,1971; R e i d and Frideres,1971; and B o o t h , 1972.  2  2  that  reason  (Nohar,  1968).  on t h e  individualistic  survey  research:  Coleman  bias  (1961 :607)  that  has  has  commented  characterized  much  The typical survey a n a l y s i s i n f e r r e d causes and p r o c e s s e s internal to the individual, simply because the variables being c r o s s tabulated were attributes of the same individual. Galtang  ( 1967: 150)  adds:  this individualism i s f u r t h e r e m p h a s i z e d by building a probability model into the s a m p l i n g p r o c e d u r e , so t h a t t h e i n d i v i d u a l i s t o r n out o f h i s s o c i a l c o n t e x t . . . The of  sampling a great  strategy  number o f  of  very  d r a w i n g a few dispersed  respondents  sampling  points  at  each  makes  it  impossible . . . t o a c c o u n t s y s t e m a t i c a l l y f o r the effects of the s o c i a l c o n t e x t i n w h i c h a p e r s o n f i n d s himself. The e f f e c t of local community structure or locally based formal organizations cannot be deduced from d a t a that ignores these variables (Segal and M e y e r , 1969: 2 1 9 ) . At  the  (Michelson,  same  1970)  time,  has  a  prevented  "fixation most  s t u d i e s from s e p a r a t i n g  the  from  on b e h a v i o r ,  do  individual effects not  furnish  i n f o r m a t i o n about  a g g r e g a t e ( B l a u , 1960; A good example synthesis Area  of  the  Analysis, i t  ecology  carried  effects  Greer,1960; is  Factorial  Chicago School is out  one  of  the  today.  of of  on  the  aggregates"  human  socio-spatial  ecology context  because e c o l o g i c a l  individuals  except  data  in  the  H o b i n s o n , 1 950) . Ecology. of most  Emerging  from  a  Human E c o l o g y and  Social  p o p u l a r forms o f  urban  Collections  of  census  data  3  aggregated  to  the  factor-analyzed of  to  urban s o c i a l  the  along  what  metropolitan  of  census  empirically isolate  the  city  or  t u r n s out  family,  and  the  Forgetting  (census  to  be t h e  ethnic  tracts  basic  is  space  viewed  dimensions  statuses.  of  This  a  relatively  populations shifts  to  the  or  social  mapping t h e s e  degree  to  respectively concentric  fit  the  zones  investigation  the  this  of  Fortunately, from Social  social areas  affecting  the  area  urban  1  the  patterned  city  another  is  form  analysis  creates  analysis  social  then  testing  dimensions  spatial  what  models  of  (Hoyt, 1933, 1939), But here  the  consequences  or  s t r u c t u r e has  for  very r a r e l y r a i s e d ,  of  investigation  has p o s e d  posited  residents  of  of  sub-area  social  sectors  The q u e s t i o n  a  socio-  s p a t i a l l y and  three  as  just  such  "independent  attitudes  Anderson and Egland, 1961; M u r d i e , 1 9 6 9 ; H u n t e r and L a t i f , 1973; 1  of  ( H a r r i s and O i l m a n , 1945) .  have been area  these  classical  spatially  inhabitants  The focus  ( B u r g e s , 1925) ,  stops.  homogeneous  neighborhoods  which  and m u l t i p l e n u c l e i  effects  areas.  as  ranking  dimensional a t t r i b u t e space  of  for  t r a c t s ) , each ranked  neighborhoods i n a three constellation  are  dimensions  physical  metropolis  "neighborhoods"  usually  economic,  of  structure.  moment,  distribution  level  a  emerging question. variables"  and b e h a v i o r .  Berry and Rees, P a t t e r s o n , 1974.  1969;  4  In t h e of  process  social  area  differences Bell  analysis  Bell  discovered  what  effects.  In  by d e m o n s t r a t i n g  and F o r c e they  a  neighborhoods  founfl  empirically validating  in p a r t i c i p a t i o n patterns  (1953),  holding  of  considered  series  on t h e  of  basis  individual  in  the  to  be  participation  of  behavior  individual  time, how  in  the  context  procedures  of  socio-spatial  the  was  procaedure  was one  of  statistics  and t h e  sample  urban  residents.  delineate areas,  while  information patterns  the on  within these  areas  affecting  from t h e  effects  At the  explanation  kin  contexts  as  offered  areas  and  same as  to  produced  theoretical  underway.  The  in  use  of  aggregate  studying  social  survey  the  context  was  of  used  characteristics  different  contexts.  within  a  methodological  census s t a t i s t i c s  the  individual  neighbors,  behavior  survey  sample  authors  neighborhood  individual  Aggregate  and  residents.  combining the  and c h a r a c t e r i z e  these  social  methodological  investigating context  the  residential  behavior of  Nevertheless,  and f a m i l i s m ,  (Bell,1969:132) .  of  area  distinguishing  with f r i e n d s ,  was l i t t l e  (1959)  independent  significant  residential  were  and Kube  a manner i n d e p e n d e n t  there  social  differences  or  there  neighborhoods,  constant,  T h e y saw  characteristics  however, the  in  be  rank  characteristics  neighborhoods  individual  and, G r e e r  social  and v o l u n t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n s . of  between  to  constructs  that  investigations  of  what t h e y c o n s i d e r e d  differences  (1956)  the  The  census  behavior  of  were used  to  residential to  and  gather behavior  theoretical  5  task the  was  one  social  local  of  t r y i n g to  context  residential Since  methodological Quantitative One o f  the  an a d e q u a t e  theory  produced b e h a v o r i a l v a r i a t i o n s area to  these e a r l y  Df t h e s e p o i n t s  develop  not  front  is  from  how one  another.  studies  has  of  of  stood  the  fifties,  still.  evidenced  Interest  by  the  Ecological Analysis at Evian,  major o b j e c t i v e s  of  this  work on b o t h in  the  Symposium  France  symposium  in  on  1966.,  was:  ...to review the possibilities of joint s t r a t e g i e s of s e v e r a l l e v e l s of aggregation, particularly the p o s s i b i l i t i e s of c o m b i n i n g sample s u r v e y s o f v a r i a t i o n s a t t h e l e v e l of the i n d i v i d u a l with the e c o l o g i c a l a n a l y s e s of the p r o x i m a l c o n t e x t s o f such variations (Dogan and R o k k a n , 1 9 6 9 : 1 2 ) . In  i  number  joint  strategy  from  the  that  explores  effected  of  received  p o i n t of the  more  1969;  or  Linz,  the  social  behavior 1960; theory  whether  their  in  of own  some  Scheuch, the  context  1962b;  was  perspective  not of  viewed  analysis  behavior  is  more by  the  which t h e y both  task  of  are  (Valkonen,  areas  and h i s  accounting affected  or  tested  analysis,"  from  a passing  for  how  individual  collaborators  and O r l e a n s , 1 9 6 2 ) .  elaborated  "contextual  in  combination of  residential  Greer  a form o f  this  1 969) .  was p u r s u e d by G r e e r  Greer,  when  characteristics,  theoretical of  symposium,  people's  a group or environment by  the  elaboration  question  more  Interest  considerable  of  analysis"—  of  1969;  coming o u t  "contextual  by  characteristics members,  papers  (Greer,  Although  this  within  the  footnote  in  6  Greer  and O r l e a n s  points  (1962:637)  to  its  possibility:  The differentiation of sub-populations, a g g r e g a t e d and c a t e g o r i z e d a c c o r d i n g t o suba r e a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , e n a b l e s the d e s c r i p t i o n of e m p i r i c a l r e g u l a r i t i e s w h i c h may be v i e w e d as s t r u c t u r a l o r c o m p o s i t i o n a l e f f e c t s . . . They go on to  note  that:  Whereas behavioral variations from one to a n o t h e r d i f f e r e n t i a t e d s u b - p o p u l a t i o n may be a function of the location of each in c o n c e p t u a l l y d i s t a n t and distinctive social a r e a s (or s o c i a l c o n t e x t s ) , an e x p l a n a t i o n o f how and why these variations occur will depend upon an adequate theory of social organization.  Before contextual social  formulating paradigm, then,  organization"  metropolis  the  of  problem  the  the  theory  local  s h o u l d be o u t l i n e d .  populations,  differentiated the  metropolitan  residential urban  into  areas,  ecology  is  (Duncan  "spatially  residential  socially  areas  and  homogenous  forming  a well and  within  the  based  within  a  FRAMEWORK  relatively  landscape  of  hand  1  THEORETICAL Urban  at  a  documented  Duncan,  spatially  clusters  mosaic  of  across local  phenomenon  within  Murdie,  1969;  1955;  Greer's development of spatially based organization a c t u a l l y i n c l u d e s f o u r l e v e l s : the household, neighborhood, local r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a , and t h e m u n i c i p a l i t y . He saw t h e s e in ascending order as to size or spatial scale, and descending order as t o the p r o b a b i l i t y of f a c e to f a c e o r primary r e l a t i o n s . In t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n however, we are only concerned with elaborating t h e r e l a t i o n between t h e i n d i v i d u a l and the l o c a l r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a . 1  7  Patterson, operating  1974) . to  areas  have  that  some  1973,  Rossi,  general gross  Moreover,  create  received are  theory  the  well  of  neighborhoods,  and  One  aggregates world"  obtain urban  a  patterned  in  conveniently  connection: which  context,  of  sense the the  if were  analysis.  that  of  the these  residents,  he  was t h a t  began "between  data,  social  and  it  there  was t h e  most  of  was  social  the  work o f  possible  o r d e r and u n d e r s t a n d i n g and  acquire  of  a  to  focus He  on the  adopted  urban  approached  residential its  formulation social  this  residential community  and  to the  better  r e l a t i o n between i n d i v i d u a l s and theory  the  psychology  connection  metropolis  of  scheme a p p r o p r i a t e t o  by  He b e l i e v e d  investigations the  of  when  by c e n s u s  men l i v e d and d i d  (Greer, 1972:6).  of  and  the  Greer.  postulated  greater  between  a  socio-spatial  behavior  i n 1952,  psyche  of  within  this  structures  texture  of  the  Michelson,  types  found  urban  investigation level  population  consequences  result  outline  relations  concerns  understanding urban  the  an  expressed  seemed a m i s s i n g  the  on  masses d e s c r i b e d  individual  But  Greer's  investigating the  for  with  (Gans, 1967;  organization  what  work o f  of  1968).  sub-area  social  awaited the  attention,  understood  accounting  has  processes  considerable  corresponding  organization  social  residential  Simmons,  variations  the  and m a i n t a i n t h e s e d i f f e r e n t  quite  1955;  many o f  their  empirical  organizational  strategy  in  communities. with  a  own c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  as  his He  conceptual a field  for  8  social  action  immediate defined  by c o n c e n t r a t i n g  organizational  group as  it  structure,  exists  The L o c a l But  what  is  the  in  basis of  For c e r t a i n l y  metropolitan  sub-populations  for  it less  argues  that  Webber  ( 1963)  "without only  important  argues  a limited  that  the  are  supposed  to  bundle  of  hold.  than  its  the  It  condition becomes  cohabitation  of  is  spatially  the  urban  as t h e  further  a basis  for  what  case basis  But  reasoned  that  that  that  the  aspect  of  basis  of  freed place  genus  interests  proportion  metropolitan "accessibility" place  is  community; from will  communities  of  place-related  a decreasing  interests  is  represents  common  these  while  exist  larger  from t h e  represent  social  does  is  (1964)  community,"  the  the  area  community"  of  territorial  reasoned  of  of  Quite  Stein  community  further  of  social  self-evident  fact."  society.  "place  the  1960) .  based  residential  an " e c l i p s e  "propinquity"  accessibility  important  is  spatially  (Greer,  no n e c e s s a r y ,  propinquity alone.  total  necessary  has  The  and s p e c i a l  to  inhabitants  It  been  deriving  attach  cather  has  the  geographical contiguity  that  in  propinquity."  interests of  claimed  there  communities that  is  of  Area  this  the  the  metropolis  f o r m i n g a community i n " s o c i a l  contrary, becoming  the  explanation  which i s  Residential  organization?  basis  upon the  the  and  as  propinquity, become  less  (Webber, 1963) .  individual affiliation  with  9  multiple local  groups  transcending  community  interaction suburbs  it  many  once  of  1966).  Nevertheless,  most  as a  (Gans, 1968; employed  in  misleading dormitory  whole,  Wayne, their to  speak  the  people  but l i v e  1972) .  of  do not in only  inhabit a small  most  the  meaningful in  bedroom  the  city  or  part  of  it  workers  are  not  area  it  is  a r e a s as  only  residential  many l o c a l  from  and  f o r example,  While  immediate  removes  activities  had, r e s u l t i n g ,  (Coleman,  metropolis  locality,  residential  communities: They a r e t h e s e a t of most men's t r e a s u r e — t h e s i t e f o r the home t o which he is committed and the s e t t i n g f o r t h e e v e r d a y l i f e of h i s wife and c h i l d r e n . Their work, education, play and social circle all c e n t e r on the suburban community. find the breadwinner himself, w i t h d i m i n i s h i n g work weeks i n most o c c u p a t i o n s , s p e n d s more o f h i s waking hours in t h e s u b u r b t h a n i n t h e c e n t r a l c i t y where he works ( G r e e r , 1 9 6 2 a ) .  And even t h o u g h cultural is  far  It  is  activities  away  i n time  an e x p e d i t i o n  normally  location still  is  of  the  city  available  and s p a c e a t to  with  attend  local  all social  Janowitz  liability."  Warren  activities  collection  the  suburbanite,  the  end  of  the  of  "...it  working  a c u l t u r a l event r a t h e r  day.  than a  ( G r e e r , 1 962a) .  residential  area i s  activities  (1955)  calls  (1963)  refers  (in  its  to  encompases some v e r y c r u c i a l  what  social  central  expected a c t i v i t y "  Granted,  to  the  schools,  of  its  no  residents,  activities, the to  longer but  giving  "community of some  community  of  it  rise  limited  these  centers,  the  basic  district  10  shopping  centers,  libraries that  and  compose  instances various only  parks,  the  the  the  like)  s e r v i c e s of  virtue  of  residential  population  Of the  prerequisites  each  at  This on  common vital  style  a local  of  interdependenceis  such  conducted members living  into  or  local for  things  as  There  beneficiaries  in a particular local  are  area  mutual  more t o  the  locality  the  common  events—or  the  creating  and  in  improvement individual  enjoy  above.  education  voluntary  is  same  involved  common i n t e r e s t s . local  can  of is  areas  similar  community from a  the  activity  people  there  mentioned  similar  through and  of  to  bonds  But  on  neighborhood  where  transformed  a  a basis  rise  where  interests.  activities  The o r g a n i z a t i o n  examples  of  forms  give  create  residential  s i m i l a r i t y of  and  dependence  events  development  facilities,  geographically  can  life  1966).  maintaining  and  individuals  of  (Coleman,  functional  to  homogenous r e s i d e n t i a l  understanding  dependence  I n many  in relatively  and  than j u s t  functions"  centers,  in  resources  public  areas.  community  residence  company,  of  relevant  residential  schools,  similar social  other's  grounds,  interdependence."  course,  activities  "locality  local  their  areas.  "functional  play  programs a r e a v a i l a b l e  delimited  their  as  nuclei of  governmental  by  supervised  and  recreation  association interests  Most o f  can  this activity  organizations largely  are  limited  (Wilkenson,  be is  whose to  1970).  those As  11  3 rear  ( 1960)  still  exists  basis  from  abilities  of  voluntary  points within  out,  the  the  metropolitan  the  common c o n c e r n s ,  its  residents  organizations  residential  to  is  known t h a t  organization  vary  the  from  The q u e s t i o n  is  in  organization  across  Population Type,  Life  Structure basic  differentiated spatially  collective  g r o u p " does  deriving  attract,  their  its  commitments  and  and s u p p o r t  respective  local  local  the  Style,  areas,  area  this  to  variation  surface.  and  Areas socially the  and  following  spatially  nature  o r g a n i z a t i o n found i n  r e s t s on t h e  community  And the O r g a n i z a t i o n a l  between the  social  for  metropolitan  Of R e s i d e n t i a l  sub-populations,  of  residential  what a c c o u n t s  relation  grounded  residential  n a t u r e and d e g r e e  one  another.  The  area,  organize,  within  spatial  areas.  But i t  social  "inclusive  of  the  respective  tenet:  The social organization of a local residential area may be derived from a congerie of s i g n i f i c a n t s o c i a l a t t r i b u t e s of specific sub-area population aggregates, for contiguity indicates the likelihood of c o n t a c t , homogeneity i n d i c a t e s the l i k e l i h o o d of similar interests, and p o p u l a t i o n type i n d i c a t e s the s p e c i f i c c o n t e x t that may be inferred from those interests (Greer, 1960:516). Greer  points  have  become  independent  out  that  "the  lifeways  differentiated continua:  one  along  of  urban  two  quite  ranging frcm a  populations separate  familistic  to  and an  12  extremely  u r b a n mode o f  to  social  high  economic  life;  rank,  and the  with  ramifications.  all  Along the  other  its  r a n g i n g from  social  first  low  c u l t u r a l and  continuum,  At the high urbanism pole we find neighborhoods of apartment houses where single persons, c h i l d l e s s couples, and one child f a m i l i e s predominate. A t the o p p o s i t e end we f i n d t h e s i n g l e f a m i l y d w e l l i n g units inhabited by f a m i l i e s w i t h s e v e r a l c h i l d r e n , where the woman's r o l e i s t h a t of wife and mother instead o f p a r t i c i p a n t i n the l a b o u r force (Greer,1962b,109).  At t h e importance the  family-centered is  local  placed  physical  and homemaking.  local from  many o f  the  services young  the  (Gans,  population  from  the  most  of  immediate  local  with  and  for the  Moreover,  of  creating  turnover few makes  even  the  from  stage.  less  local the  the  Freed more  concerned community  u n m a r r i e d and  transient.  similar  rearing  entailing  are  of  the  continuum  cycle  they  guality  that  child  more d e t a c h e d  life  area,  more  residential  community,  their  are  turnover,  have  of  and  providing  responsibilities  local  couples  constant whom  to  1968 : 1 0 2 ) .  combined  high  This  due  the  end  extreme  neighborhood,  for  couples are  family  to  unit,  facilities  urban  availability  childless  mobility,  area  continuum,  community  childless  residential  the  dwelling  and s o c i a l  At t h e  and  relationships about  on t h e  residential  appropriate  unmarried  end of  Their  neighbors, further  high  leads  to  detachment  area.  of  people  reasons it  very  in a residential  for  being  involved  difficult  to  area, in  the  maintain  13  viable level  voluntary organizations  in  an a r e a .  At t h e  aggregate  then— The more f a m i l i s t i c a s u b - a r e a p o p u l a t i o n i s , the greater the number of voluntary organizations situated in the immediate r e s i d e n t i a l environment.  Conversely, The mora urban t h e s u b - a r e a p o p u l a t i o n , the fewer t h e number o f voluntary organizations s i t u a t e d i n the l o c a l r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a . Crosscutting familistic  the  life  styles  stemming  from  sub-area  population  difference  social  in  as  equipment" at  the  is  degree  as  available  aggregate  spatial  to  to  which  for  it  the  u r b a n and  differentiation  local  make the  is  collective  to  of  The s o c i o - e c o n o m i c  expected  developed, well  differentiation  the  rank. is  the  opportunity i s personal  spatial  rank o f  an  important  structure  of  indicative  resources, residential  a  local  of  the  or " c u l t u r a l area.  Thus,  level.  As the social rank of a residential p o p u l a t i o n i n c r e a s e s , the number of active voluntary o r g a n i z a t i o n s s i t u a t e d i n the l o c a l r e s i d e n t i a l area should increase. The  coincidence  characteristics variable found number  should  nature  of  throughout  the  of  voluntary  of  these  go a l o n g  the  organizations are  with  low  levels  social For  education  for  the  organization example,  found i n a  predominately of  population  way i n a c c o u n t i n g  metropolitan area.  whose r e s i d e n t s moderate  sub-area  spatially-based  area,  to  two  the  residential  childless and i n c o m e ,  couples should  14  be c o n s i d e r a b l y organizations are  smaller  situated  predominately  education  social is  it  behavior  cf  the  people  Residential  at  of  residents university  disposal.  spatial  distribution  residential  in turn,  living  number  a r e a whose  their  the  ,  the  c h i l d r e n , have  metropolitan  these structures  of  The L o c a l  several  incomes  of  with  a residential  account  organization that  in  raising  and s i z e a b l e  Given t h i s  when compared  affect  areas,  the  in these varied  of how  patterned  neighborhoods?  A r e a As An E n v i r o n m e n t a l O p p o r t u n i t y Structure  It  is  affects  suggested that its  structure."  residents Orleans  residents Variations  topography  the  of  by in  different  ( 1962: 636)  residential  acting the  metropolitan  with  local  as  an  social  residential  organization "opportunity  organizational  areas  opportunities.  As  present  their  Greer  and  state:  ...the aggregated s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of spatially distinct sub-area populations denote the p r e v a i l i n g conditions for s o c i a l interaction (the structure of available social opportunities). For  example,  the  away f r o m home, have t o  visit  distribution resulting  more women i n a r e s i d e n t i a l  the  with of  social  fewer  the  neighbours. particular  organization  area  that  c h a n c e s women who s t a y Thus the  particular  population  types  sets "limits"  on the  at  work home  spatial and  the  kind  of  15  interaction  possible.  environments activities  set  Michelson  broad l i m i t s  taking place  on t h e  within  also  argues  that  r a n g e and i n t e n s i t y  their  of  influence.  Beyond this limit, an e n v i r o n m e n t may make some phenomena.,.either easier or more difficult to maintain, so that, a l l else e q u a l , t h e s e phenomena w i l l t e n d t o be found successfully maintaining t h e m s e l v e s more i n some types of setting than in others ( M i c h e l s o n , 1970 : 2 5 ) . Viewing the as  a  set  1962)  of  o r g a n i z a t i o n of  limiting conditions  avoids  the  environmentalists. Michelson*s conditions things  are  react  to  But  a  equal.  particular  all is  state  environment  1958; of  Beshers, classical  more  to  both Greer  focusing  on  the  else  being  possible  environment  characteristics  (1962:363)  (Schnore,  is  just  It  residential  determinism  there  an e n v i r o n m e n t not  individual Orleans  strict  p r o p o s a l than of  the  limiting  equal,  that  varies  (Gans,1968:112)  for  the  way  other people  with .  or  their  Greer  and  that:  the social characteristics of individual residents are i n d i c a t i v e of their potential for interaction (their access to the s t r u c t u r e of s o c i a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s ) . Given  a collection  family skills,  life  may  differentially"  environmental  individuals in different  cycle,  they  "differential  of  or p o s s e s s i n g well  be  (Michelson, access"  (Greer  opportunity  different  expected 1970) and  structure.  s t a g e s of sets  to  social  "articulate  with,  Orleans,  of  the  1962)  or  have to  an  16  Conceptualizing opportunity more  structure  than  only be  Deciding  part  of  decided  which  residential  discussion  celations--as  well  forms—is  within  the  Local  that  as  at  Residential  them i s  take  another.  It  of  is must  describes  the  and  in producing Quite a  the  effects  systematic  individual-environment  analytical the  model  characteristics  forms  the  in a  best  participation.  hand i f  "contextual  include  form  structure  alternative  these  for  combining  organization of  individual variables  individual  opportunity  voluntary  the  to  the  involves of  functional  of  effect nature  variables  task;  orani zational  environmental  or the  which  the  an  residential  characterizing  variable,  interrelation  in  as  merely  environmental matter.  the  procedures  problem i s  to  further  test  developed  paradigm."  O p p o r t u n i t y S t r u c t u r e s and  Contextual  Analysis  Basic "contextual that  the  a  contextual  conditional"  individual  "individual from  to  paradigm i s (Harper,  behavior  differences" combination  residential  opportunity  probability  of  differently  depending  may  the  1961);  result  the  two.  structure  belonging upon  to  the not  or " e n v i r o n m e n t a l of  notion  just  instance, influence  voluntary organizations, an  individual's  the  possibility  differences,"  For may  of  sex.  from but the the but Gans  17  (1 967:61 ) as  points  "sorting"  groups  diversity. their in  But  work,  opportunity as  many community through  while  women have  Levittown  of  out  the  for  "total  reaction  to  people  able  to  fine  sort  suggests that in  the  the  offered  may be  since  of  in  the  the  thought such  men o r women d i f f e r  composition  their  activities—and  This  susceptibility"  used  themselves  women's g r o u p s  sorting.  are  express  on community  array of  extremely  variation  are  rely  "differential  relationship  which  men to  organizations  in  a  their  residential  environment.  Alternatively, the  probability  differentially This  can  difference"  of  at  be  a person's  thought such  of  the  individual level  of  the  environment  Both o f however. the  these  It  conditional  levels  of  as  of  a  effect  joint  is  "opportunity  relationship  f r o m the  or  from  the  point  of  In any  the  identical  logic  behind  contextual  conditional  individuals  with r e s i d e n t i a l  Michelson,  Greer,  and  the  view o f the  and O r l e a n s s h o u l d  size  nature  1961:218). equivalent,  are  of  looking  view  the  of  at the  environment.  effect  "differential  environments  the  upon the  you  point  individual, case,  individual  logically  depends on whether  but  density".  suggests that  and Huson,  are  decrease  participation,  contingent  Spaeth,  effects  or  "conditional  a relationship  (Davis,  simply  may i n c r e a s e  organizational  different  since  age  of  the  relation"  posited  be i m m e d i a t e l y  by  of  Gans,  obvious.  18  The effect  "contextual  of  the  differences behavior  contextual are  independently  differences  This of  the  Put  in  difference  of  in  Here  any  cf  their way,  affect  between t h e  conditional is  basic  of  h y p o t h e s e s to  the  process  of  alternative  explanatory  linkage  they  necessary (a)  as  propositions  participation the  "addition  to  two  the  the  effect  different  propositions environmental participation  to  the  of the  effect  DEVELOPMENT developing  problem  of  structures  in  individual  the  characteristics in voluntary  on  organizations.  on  is  or  individual  (b)  effects have  hand, i t  environmental  propositions on  organizations; joint  two  propositions:  characteristics  voluntary  specifying  at  types of  in voluntary organizations; of  the  individual-environment  different  opportunity  effects  participation  of  the  follow.  modes  three  to"  differences.  and  adequately  relate  to c o n s i d e r  residential  of  personal  environmental  effect  PROBLEM FORMULATION AND HYPOTHESIS the  the  people's  individual-environment a r t i c u l a t i o n underlying  development  In  in  own  behavior i n  contextual  to  environmental  produce d i f f e r e n c e s  another to  contrast  "combination with" i n d i v i d u a l  contextual  models  to of  are thought  than  stands  conditional.  thought  characteristics.  rather  effect"  individual and  individual  (c) and  individual  19  Opportunity The  more v o l u n t a r y a s s o c i a t i o n s  residential  area,  individual  residents  increased exposed  chance to  particular are  to  be  one o r  join.  area,  will  find  more o f  their  them  or not.  residents  and  urban c e n t e r s , freedom  of  to  it  choice  is of  is  important  to  a  not  out  of  or  by  the  numbers  of  likely  that  represented  is  that  membership  obtainable  by  mobility  of  for  people  to  area.  The e n t i r e  wider  information in  (Webber,  the  urban large  exercise  a city  effect,  propositions to  simply t o the  l i k l e l i h o o d of  are  1963).  contextual  densities refer  all  l o c a l organizations  cf  that  the  be  Chances  flow  note  participation  opportunities,  1971),  more  high  cf  organizational  or  and n a t u r e  larger  course,  nature  opportunity  mean an  across,  sought  also  whether  possible  organizational  of  Green,  optimally  becomes an o p p o r t u n i t y s t r u c t u r e  To u n d e r s t a n d t h e  for  run  be  is  of  increased  over  opportunities  1968).  argument,  make i t  in a  them t h r o u g h n e i g h b o r s  Supposedly the  the  located  particular interests  (Lee,  them r e g a r d l e s s  are  existence  With  choose from,  voluntary organizations  available  1969;  themselves. to  the  the  or  there  will  about (Cox,  Effect  Wore o r g a n i z a t i o n s  i n t r o d u c e d to  The a l t e r n a t i v e  want  are  residents  l i v i n g i n the  residents  who  to  organizations  organizations  in  greater  that  organizations  in  the  information  better  friends  Dsnsity-A Contextual  it  relating individual existence  p a r t i c u l a r types  of  20  people  making  use  propositions  the  Heretofore, different different measures  sub-area for  have  1969;  sub-areas  Green,  1971).  distribution  not  degree  opportunities still  be  density"  1969)  concepts  organizations the  can is  located  strategy followed  social  strata  The  1957)  a  be the  the  been  only  with  empirical  of  social  Orleans,  1962;  course,  indicate  the  types,  but  1972)  or  areas.  the  actual  These  "global" or  must  concept  of  inference  The e m p i r i c a l r e f e r e n t  residential  of  "organizational  chain  number  on  the  organization  present  of  of  voluntary  area.  This  is  investigation.  Characteristics  organizational have  that  vary  population  actual  w i t h i n each in  and  of  shorter  made.  people  assumed  indices  particular  (Chapin,  Individual  The h i g h e r  These,  But by e m p l o y i n g  density"  to  opportunity structures  certain  in  all  structures  (Greer  social  situated  (Coleman,  (Scheuch, these  of  inferred.  "opportunity  of  the  contextual,  influence  types. of  is  merely  been a g g r e g a t e c e n s u s  residential the  have  effect  in  are.  opportunity  the  and f a m i l i s m o f  Robson,  who t h e y  population  testing  effect  should  investigators  residential  behavior, rank  of  covered  characteristics  If, the  opportunities  way r e g a r d l e s s  are  individual  participation.  increasing  same  them—these  relating  organizational then,  of  participation rates  documented  i n study  of  higher  after  study.  21  The more  wealthy,  occupational  of  participation correlates age  of  1969),  education  income  (Hodge  well  related  not  focus  forms  of  is  individual  the  effect  may  participation.  in  same d e g r e e  have  density  supporting for  opportunity  all  elicits  participation, or  and  and l o c a l  of  depending  or  upon  "attachments"  to  are  relations Instead  residential  alternative between  opportunity  area  is  whether  generally  participation  whether amounts  the  organizational  being posed  organizational  different  and  directly  interrelation  residential  residents;  1971)  these  the  individual  a  1972),  Babchuck,  being  question.  testing  the  cn  Booth,  Wright, 1971),  however,  into  that  on  individual  1958;  as  is  participation.  The p r i m a r y q u e s t i o n  the opportunity  1969;  literature  investigation,  on s p e c i f y i n g  It  Hyman and W r i g h t ,  called  with  literature  The  Hyman and  1968;  characteristics  structures  resources  1971;  in  being  the  the  (Wright and Flyman,  (Curtis,  present  primary  in  to  deal  resources.  organizations.  and T r e i m a n ,  really  operates  cycle  joiners.  generally  and  abounds  voluntary organization  In t h e are  that  higher  characteristics  (Babchuck and B o o t h ,  established  to  skills,  voluntary sex  organizational  organizations  proposition in  and t h o s e w i t h  individual  motivation,  or family l i f e  all  the  in voluntary  an i n d i v i d u a l ' s  educated,  are  relating  participation  type  better  status  Propositions  this  the  the of  to  the  density  of  organizational  an  individual's  personal  the  local residential  area.  22  However, the  w i t h i n both  effect  individual interest  of  the  the  in,  as  well  as  remain that only in  the if  if  case, are  there  to  increased  and  to  is  and  people's  determining  for exploiting  an  their  available  if  an  skills,  consequence  motivations and  no m o t i v a t i o n . likely  t o be c o m p a r a t i v e l y  greater  organizational  (a)  associations  motivated  membership.  lacks  voluntary  in  many  the  adequate  participate  whatsoever  It  are  individual an  opportunities follow  and m a i n t a i n  or  remain  would  are p r e s e n t :  i n many  o p p o r t u n i t y to  Conditional  individual  individuals  join  participate  individual's  as  nc o p p o r t u n i t i e s ,  is  (b)  example,  motivation needed  and  position  For  effect  conditional,  a Contextual  when b o t h c o n d i t i o n s  social  no  there  unused  area,  contextual  are viewed  capacity  of  extreme  participation  the  the  structure.  The E f f e c t s  inactive  of  contextual  characteristics  opportunity  In  models  by  their  1  educational  disposable  income  organizations,  may w e l l  eliciting  participation.  have  an  little  or  or s u p p o r t i n g  an  On  the  other  To say t h a t A and B a r e b o t h n e c e s s a r y f o r C i m p l i e s t h a t C w i l l not o c c u r i f e i t h e r A or B i s a b s e n t . However, one need not state a p r o p o s i t i o n i n absolute terms, i m p l y i n g n e c e s s a r y c o n d i t i o n s o r s t r i c t d e p e n d e n c y ; one c a n a l l o w f o r t h e o p e r a t i o n of o t h e r v a r i a b l e s and measurement error by formulating the r e l a t i o n s i n s t a t i s t i c a l and p r o b a b i l i s t i c terms ( B l a l o c k , 1955:375). 1  23  hand,  individuals  necessary when  social  faced  with in  skills,  by  participate  to  possessing  an  adeguate  impoverished  with  a more o p p o r t u n e  the  cr  a considerably  individuals  This  an e d u c a t i o n a l  last  type  contextual  extent  of  proposition  different  to  nature,  the  nonadditive. before  the  relation  of  The n o t i o n  that  is  models  Songuist,  the  affected employing  density  the  consistent of  an  are e i t h e r  attributes  of  specify  the  to  act  in  thereby  additive  in  conditional  are  must  be  In  be  present  transtated terms  into  (Blalock  1970).  contextual  effects  is  interaction  effect are  that  can  effect  participation.  two f a c t o r s  hypotheses stated  effect  situated  correlates  contextual  The f o l l o w i n g of  seen  on o r g a n i z a t i o n a l  contextual  behavior  is  individual  relations  multiplicative 1 965;  effects  the  may  compared  but  Such p r o p o s i t i o n s  combination  contrast  when  deals with the  opportunity density  joint  structure  characteristics  way o r g a n i z a t i o n a l  producing  resources  environment.  conditional.  with  financial  opportunity  lesser  similar  predisposition,  interactive  alternative  conditional  the  individual  considered 1. 2. 3. 4.  with  as  and t h e  previous  attribute  and  are:  life  cycle  of  contextual  discussion.  or a d d i t i v e .  Sex Stage i n f a m i l y Education Income  forms  The  organizational The  individual  24  If  the  effects  are  interactive,  it  is  expected  that:  As o r g a n i z a t i o n a l d e n s i t y i n c r e a s e s , t h e r a t e of increase in organizational memberships w i l l be g r e a t e r f o r : 1. 2. 3. 4. If  the  effects  Women ; Parents r a i s i n g c h i l d r e n ; The more e d u c a t e d ; The w e a l t h i e r .  are a d d i t i v e ,  it  is  expected  that:  As o r g a n i z a t i o n a l d e n s i t y i n c r e a s e s , t h e r a t e of increase in organizational memberships w i l l be t h e same f o r e v e r y g r o u p of p e o p l e : 1. 2. 3. 4. Moreover,  if  the  No m a t t e r what t h e i r s e x ; Whether o r not t h e y a r e r a i s i n g children; Whether they have a college e d u c a t i o n or did not graduate from h i g h s c h o o l ; Whether they are q u i t e wealthy or not v e r y w e l l t o d o . effects  are a d d i t i v e ,  then:  These different individual attributes will i n c r e a s e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l m e m b e r s h i p s , o v e r and above t h e i n c r e a s e s stemming from t h e e f f e c t s of o p p o r t u n i t y d e n s i t y .  After the  d e s c r i b i n g the  variables,  t h e next  chapter,  and  research design,  e x p l a i n i n g the  these  hypotheses  operationalizing  strategy  will  be  of  tested  analysis in  in  Chapter  25  CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGY  RESEARCH DESIGN In  order to  environment  test  linkage  necessary  that  the  possible:  (1)  to  demonstrated  people  similarly effect  of  in a  different  same  context. The  research of  different  had  to  At  contain  characteristics.  contexts;  it  and it  must  time  be  (2)  with  that  the  demonstrated  clear  of the  to  that  selecting  each o f  to  behave  differently  density  be  social  to e s t a b l i s h  made i t  the  individuals  tests  same c o n t e x t ;  (3)  is  must  different  p r o v i d e a way o f  same  following  characteristics  these t e s t s  the  it  must be d e m o n s t r a t e d  social  varying in  1,  effects  individuals react  had to  areas  organizations.  of  it  individual-  Chapter  with  conditional'  types of  design  residential  areas  effects  of  make t h e  s i m i l a r l y i n the  similar  conditions  in  contextual  people  'contextual  that  design  establish  individual  models  forward  research  behave  sharing  different  put  that  characteristics establish  the  the  the  a number voluntary  residential  different  social  26  The  research  aggregate  indices  design  was b a s e d  on the  d e r i v e d from c e n s u s  describe  conditions  relatively  homogeneous s u b - p c p u l a t i o n s  the  metropolitan  hypotheses based  voluntary  area.  advanced  sub-area  where  data  Further  population  surface.  types  densities T h e s e two  may  be  are  to and  would  delimited  across  As t h e familism of a r e s i d e n t i a l sub-area population increases, the number of local voluntary organizations increases.  2)  As the s o c i a l r a n k o f a r e s i d e n t i a l s u b - a r e a population increases, the number of local voluntary organizations increases. intent  then,  residential  environments  compositions  representing  typology  similar  to  ecology  typologies  the  with the  systematically different  different  (Bell,1969;  relationships  chosen  have  organizational  to  familiar social  hypothesized will  was  associated  opportunity  cells space  the  with  densities.  select  demographic of or  R o b s o n , 1969) .  hold,  a  sampling factorial  And i f  residential  them  the  are:  1)  The  from  spatially  spatially  hypotheses  within  taken  way  co-vary  to  defined,  located  the  that  used  spatially  d i r e c t i o n was  i n Chapter I as  organization  metroplitan  different  assumption  varying  the  areas  voluntary  27  Sampling  The s a m p l e stratified, procedure  frame  areas  selection  Further  Stage  of  of  A nine-celled systematically  control  the  spatial  other  status  displaying  family-life-cycle. boundaries each ar ea  area  two  distribution  socio-economic  of  eight  would  typology.  Sampling within  the  within  three  the  in  units;  (See  P S U ' s ; and  was  Primary represent  third,  below.  constructed  with  of  were  an one  by  overlayed  cell  1).  iscpleth displaying  population  Sampling Areas chosen a particular  the  Figure  and S c h e u ; 1 9 7 2 ) ,  distribution  to  stages-in-  (See  metropolitan  maps  a  households.  areas:  status  conjunction  spatial These  second,  macrodimensions  Meis  of  Units  residential  the  This  selection  maps were p r o d u c e d , of  design.  eligible  typology two  of  purposively  stages follows  and s o c i o - e c o n o m i c  ecology  technique,  purposive  Of Primary, S a m b l i n g  composition  a factor  mapping  these  sampling  family-life-cycle Using  Primary  households  One: S e l e c t i o n  demographic  the  respondents  discussion  multi-stage,  random s a m p l i n g  first, as  of  a  cluster,  involved,  candom s e l e c t i o n a  employed  unequal  residential  Frame  by  and  the  stage  in  and such  i n the  the that  social  28  STAGE IN FAMILY L I F E CYCLE Young M i d d l e Age  High SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS (Blishen Scale)  (9)  Medium  f  Mature  8  |  7  <4  |  6  j.  j.  4  Low  1.  FIGURE  S a m p l i n g T y p o l o g y Used To demographic Characteristics A r e a s Chosen In S t a g e O n e .  Only  eight,  however,  for  residential couples choosing  rather there  area  high  the  The identifies these  number each  of  the  empirical  the  The MacroResidential  were  chosen,  instance  of  young  status.  above  manner  status  of  a  married  Purposively  two d i m e n s i o n s  and s o c i o - e c o n o m i c  essentially of  stage  in  and  concluded  Figure  1 uniquely  sampling. in  of  areas  concentration  along  each  the  of  eight  same numbers i d e n t i f y  locations area. ,  stage of  nine  socio-economic  sample  family-life-cycle first  a  no  these e i g h t a r e a s i n the  stratified  the  was  with  with  than  Control O f The  areas  the  cells  in  selected areas, the  within  eight the  and i n  respective  Figure 2 spatial  M e t r o p o l i t a n Vancouver  29  F I G . 2: P R I M A R Y  S A M P L I N G  U N I T S  30  St age  Two:, S e l e c t i o n o f H o u s e h o l d s In t h e  selected the  sources,  City every  eight  process these  s t a g e a sample  from each  1970  the  second  of  the  Primary  .lists  for  was r a n d o m l y drawn u s i n g a t a b l e selecting  an  sequence  inital  number  supplementary  sampling  c o u l d be  t h e e q u a l p r o b a b i l i t y of  St age T h r e e ^ S e l e c t i o n In a d d i t i o n t o criteria  of  people's (2)  the  wives' a  least  above  study  nature  one  of  thesis  a household,  the  husband  the  is  from e a c h a r e a  numbers.  After  so  that  without  destroying  household.  criteria,  the  one  (1)  between  In t h i s  the  research nature  if  it  had  and and  of  at  current  eligibility the  of  process,  consisted  which  selected  eligible  husbands'  selection  Upon e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e  two  facilitate  non-work a c t i v i t i e s ,  member of  then  further  larger  only part:  "eligible"  interviewers only  From  identified  of  and t h e i r  was c o n s i d e r e d  employment.  as  lists.  random  sampling  schedules.  married couple,  full-time  This  last  each  interdependence  activity  of  the  resumed  objectives  work e x p e r i e n c e  household  random  as  Of Respondents  the  which t h i s  daily  each  enumerated.  each l i s t ,  selecting  of  sample e l i g i b i l i t y were employed t o  two a d d i t i o n a l p r o j e c t of  was  appropriately  Using  M e t r o p o l i t a n area  households  of  sample from  was  areas.  enumeration  sample of  was r a n d o m l y  boundaries  Units  separate  an i n i t i a l  sample  the  w i t h i n the  Sampling  produced eight  households  stratified  Directories household  cf  wife  representatives  of and  to  be  31  interviewed. an  Moreover,  interview  considered  b o t h had t o  before  the  household  Prior  to  received  a  advising  the  initial  letter  c o u l d be  calls kept of  for  a record of  those  the  the interviewers  that  refused,  complete  the  eligibility to  for  the  was  be  household  the  s t u d y and  w o u l d be c o n t a c t e d when b o t h  the  not e s t a b l i s h e d ,  cf  each c a l l  to  set  husband and  but n o t  of  rate  the  one o f  the  two  interview.  lengthy  of  time  relatively  a  sheet this  breakdown presented  of in  f o r r e f u s a l r e c o r d e d by  or  least 3']% o f  59  requiring  was  households willing  then,  both  interviews,  high r e f u s a l  households,  those  would a p p e a r ,  budget  face  of 26.3% d e s e r v e s comment.  respondents  stage 3,  number of  interviewer  on the  and  i n at  It  Each  completed i s  reasons  sample d r a w n ,  the  The d i s p o s i t i o n o f  completion rate  indicated that  total  three.  interview.  refusal  criteria  submit to  reason  could  selected  purposes of  an i n t e r v i e w  attempted  The t o t a l  the  they  outcome  Further investigation  of  each  was l i m i t e d t o  i n c l u d i n g the  1.  8.3%  that  respondent's  interviews  Table  contact,  contact  to a r e s i d e n c e  sample,  interview  complete  present. ,  initial  each  and  Of Sample  e x p l a i n i n g the  residents  up an a p p o i n t m e n t  If  to  "completed".  Disposition  wife  consent  is  that  to the  respondents a  r a t e i n the  principal study.  32  TABLE Disposition  1  Of Sampling  Response  COMPLETED  57.8  REFUSED Not I n t e r e s t e d Too Busy Hostile  18.3 4. 2 3 ..8  INACCESSIBLE D i d n ' t Speak E n g l i s h Not At Home-3 C a l l b a c k s Extended V a c a t i o n  26.3%  1.0 2.2 2^8 6.0%  INELIGIBLE Retired Unemployed Deceased Divorced-separated Illness-disability  3.6 1.2 1 .0 1.4 2^7  TOTAL N  100 % (711)*  9.9%  *  T h i s N r e f e r s t o number o f not r e s p o n d e n t s .  Other c o n d i t i o n s must  have  present  study  Canadian with and  an  effect,  were i n  the  Census.  The  field  work o f  the  letters  show" felt  had  p r e v a i l i n g i n the  to  the  their  rights  to  field  at  the  interviewing two o t h e r  editor  conversations  however.  of  pointed  Vancouver  same t i m e  period  p r i v a c y were b e i n g  fact  as  also  newspapers, the  community  Interviewers  major s t u d i e s  local to  households,  that  imposed  for the  the 1971  coincided  i n the  area,  and  "talk  many  people  upon.  33  The c o m p l e t e d  interview  and f o r t y  minutes.  A total  interview  p e r i o d from J u l y ,  Implications Juan creating for  Linz  (1969)  a sample  analyzing  ecological on t h e  the  contexts  other  larger  hand,  These  dilemma.  fails  defined  by  to  have  is  rather,  over  than  ecological  survey  general.  by s i m u l t a n e o u s l y of  the  context-oriented  larger sample  hand,  represent  on t h e  of of  basis the  Of c o u r s e  survey,  but  areas  this  are  following points  the  sampling of  of  areas  ecological this the  study, smaller  be e x t e n d e d  this  areas  different  to  the  dilemma may  be  a representative in  the  socio-economic  case i n  legitimately  is,  of  ecological  populations  community  and  l a r g e r community  B u t when the  executing  defined  sampling the  in  adequate  p r o d u c e the  selecting  the  difficulty  behavior,  and under s a m p l i n g  and c a n n c t  l a r g e r community i n  one  combinations  to  the  ecological  objectives  is  the  1972.  representative  these  as  hour  during  specifically  population within  restricted  areas  of  statistically  random c r i t e r i a ,  are  to  inhabitants  necessary.  one  Design  on the  a set  purposively selected  inferences  resolved  is,  adequately  usually  been  that  different  characteristics,  to F e b r u a r y ,  pointed  which  of  were c o m p l e t e d  has  randomly the  an a v e r a g e  Of S a m p l i n g  conflicting  to  generally  822  1971  on t h e i r  in  Since  proportional  of  impact of  still  community  located.  areas  design  lasted  conjunction generally  sample  with  the  requires  34  an  extremely Given  the  ecological Primary of  large  and a s i m i l a r l y l a r g e  research  areas  budget,  could  be  only  the  investigations Vancouver  gener a l i z a b i l i t y purposive  divorced  not  totally  Metropolitan  of  results  sampling  essentially  are  the  sampled.  S a m p l i n g U n i t s were p u r p o s i v e l y  entire  the  sample  is  criteria  budget. eight  Thus,  chosen  because  chosen,  the  findings  generalizable  to  population.  employed  children,  or separated,  unemployed,  as or  in  stage  well  as  retired  the The  further restricted  excluded  the  by  the  which  3  unmarried, adults  from  sample.  MEANS OF DATA COLLECTION Two  different  kinds of  h y p o t h e s e s put toward i n individual  attributes  structured  interview.  geographic  location  Vancover  this of  thesis.  respondents  of  These  described  in  data  test  type,  be g a t h e r e d collection  using  number,  from  the  specific  were g a t h e r e d  voluntary organizations  different  within  a  and the  numerous  procedures  are  turn.  The structured  information  to  Data on t h e  Data r e g a r d i n g t h e  M e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a had t o  sources.  A  d a t a were c o l l e c t e d  on t h e  Interview  interview  was  used  in  gathering  voluntary organizational participation  as  35  well  as  the  socio-economic  sampled  interviewing member  respondents.  Interviews  teams composed  of  the  simultaneously, own  and d e m o g r a p h i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  the  cf  team  one  were  member of  interviewed  member o f  the  study,  all  sampled  conducted each  of by  sex.  Each  separately,  but  couple  of  their  sex. Throughout  familiarized several was  the  with t h e  orientation  given  of  the  study objectives  manual.  and e x p e c t e d  interpretations  well  as  the  probes  to  probed f o r A completed  that  of  i n each  to  be  were  instrument which  of  used  each q u e s t i o n , and t h e  in  each  T h i s manual o u t l i n e d  functions  be  and t h e  and t r a i n i n g s e s s i o n s d u r i n g  an i n t e r v i e w e r s  kinds  interviewers  the as  information  instance.  interview  consisted  of  a series  of  topics  included: A.  A description of the household which r e s u l t e d t h e i r i n c l u s i o n o r r e j e c t i o n from t h e sample ;  B.  A description characteristics;  C.  Two a c t i v i t y log workday o r weekday da y;  D.  A description of the i n d i v i d u a l ' s i n v o l v e m e n t voluntary organizations;  E.  A d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s involvement in the most recent local, provincial and f e d e r a l elections;  F.  A description  G.  S p e c i f i c a t i o n of the i n d i v i d u a l s ' social and s o c i a l a c t i v i t y i n t h e l a s t week;  of  of  individual  and  in  household  reconstructions of the last and t h e l a s t d a y o f f o r weekend  the  i n d i v i d u a l ' s work  in  experience; network  36  H.  Specification history;  I.  A d e s c r i p t i o n of  The  section  of  information  on  employed the  following  respondent A.  of  the  the  the  individual's  individual's  interview  participation series  in  residence.  used  in  voluntary  of  questions  Probe:  C.  Are you a member o f or groups such as: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5)  answered y e s was  and  participation  any o t h e r  asked other  to  to  any  detailed  helps  accurate p r o f i l e  belong to here?"  of  a  organizations  of  second  groups to  out,  the  or  the  offices  j o i n the this  its  meeting  about  their  held,  length  organization. use  of  aided  would o t h e r w i s e  question  organizations  last  the  be  "Do y o u happen in  the  of As  recall  p r o v i d e a more c o m p l e t e  memberships t h a n asking  questions  information  a respondent  example, any  point  these  organization,  including attendance,  and B o o t h ( 1969)  undoubtedly  of  name t h e  m e m b e r s h i p , and how t h e y came t o  for  facilitate  s p o r t s , r e c r e a t i o n o r hobby c l u b s f r a t e r n a l , c i v i c or c h a r i t a b l e o r g a n i z a t i o n s s o c i a l or c u l t u r a l s o c i e t i e s PTA or o t h e r c h i l d r e n a c t i v i t y o r g a n i z a t i o n s o r g a n i z a t i o n s o f r a t e p a y e r s , or t e n a n t s  they  respondent  case:  to  A r e you a member of any other organizations that are p r i m a r i l y f o r p e o p l e i n y o u r l i n e of work?  Do you a t t e n d o r are you a member c h u r c h or o t h e r r e l i g i o u s groups?  Babchuk  organizations  a member of any professional trade a s s o c i a t i o n s , or unions?  B.  location  gathering  recall:  Are you societies,  If  residential  and the to  community  i n an i n t e r v i e w c o n t a i n i n g  136  37  questions  Creating  ( W r i g h t - a n d Hyman,  An O p p o r t u n i t y S u r f a c e Of V o l u n t a r y O r g a n i z a t i o n s  The i n f o r m a t i o n needed surface"  consisting  geographic  location  metropolitan  area  of was  on o p e r a t i o n a l i z i n g investigation  in  the  of  Several  exist, limited  needs  enumerated  they the  were l i k e w i s e  only  began  public that  was  the  and  the  the  in  the  and  local  constructing  not  directories meet  types  l i m i t e d . . So  identifying  in  voluntary organizations  were c o m p i l e d t o number  and  elaborated  private,  organizational  but because  type  below.  Vancouver M e t r o p o l i t a n areas  easy.  they  list  number,  further  sources q u i c k l y i n d i c a t e d  comprehensive  "opportunity  in operationalizing  concepts  of  an  organizations  instrumental  "opportunity density"  governmental  actual  voluntary  section  of  constructing  the  of  An  in  of  concept  sort  1958).  of  limited  going and  any  active to  be  lists  did  specific  and  organizations in  fact,  voluntary organizations  that in  existence. To c o m p i l e sources a)  b) c) d) e)  were  a  more  comprehensive  list  the  following  used:  The directory of s e r v i c e s c o m p i l e d by the United Community S e r v i c e s of Greater Vancouver; The Vancouver and other M e t r o p o l i t a n C i t y Directories; The Lyn Morrow C l u b D i r e c t o r y ; Metropolitan telephone d i r e c t o r i e s ; Libaries in the different municipalities;  38  f)  Local newspapers in the municipalities; Community c e n t e r s i n the municipalities; Planning boards in the municipalities; The 822 s u r v e y i n t e r v i e w s .  g) h) i)  When  consulting  organizational place into  name  one  of  the  that  Metropolitan  to  files.  organizations  was  organization  name,  type  file  of  the  data  metropolitan  3)  on  base  two  or  be  of  what  the  topography  within  then,  of  a  of to  this  became  Vancouver  organizations. computer  dimensional as  to  printed  and u p d a t e d :  by  to  file  were  voluntary  Greer r e f e r s  the This  according  Greater  mapped  the  geographic  source  Lists  a  and  and t r a n s f e r e d  multiple  noted,  meeting  mile. }  computer  three  pictorially displays organizational  ¥  organizations,  surface can  and  the  classified  4,  location  constructing  surface a  X  cards  by  then  tenth  data  and a n o m a l i e s  for  was  Figure  and l o c a t i o n .  opportunity  as  in  the  sources  most f r e q u e n t  nearest  unique voluntary  opportunity  Figure  the  sorted  a l l duplications  its  spatial  From h e r e  and  3,415  of  dimension  its  punched  disk  these  organization  two  fixed  was  different  enumerated  a  area  information computer  types  assigned  coordinates  Each  different  of  and a d d r e s s  were r e c o r d e d .  address  This  each  different  surface  "a s n a p s h o t  modern c i t y "  (See that of  (Greer,  1958) .  This same grid s y s t e m was a l s o respondents' home l o c a t i o n s . 1  used t o  fix  all  sampled  39  F I G . 3:  V O L U N T A R Y  O R G A N I Z A T I O N A L  T O P O G R A P H Y  40  CODE  FIGURE  ORGANIZATIONAL TYPE  1.  F r a t e r n a l and  2.  Civic  3.  H e a l t h and C h a r i t y  4.  Church  5.  Cultural  and  6.  Business  and  7.  Sports  8.  Child'Oriented  9.  Political  10.  Unions  11.  Ethnic  12.  Social  4. Enumeration Classification  and  Veterans  Service  and  and  Of  Religious Educational Professional  Recreation  Voluntary  Organization  41  QEIRAIIONALIGATIONS ^  Opportunity  A major p r o b l e m a r i s e s , voluntary  organization  throughout  a metropolitan  spatially  bounded?  identifying  interaction  without  first  precluding ( S e i b e r and point  of  procedure at  investigation  density  residential  is  the  areas  areas  to  community  a geographical  an  of  be  appropriate  the  of  From  V a l k o n e n (1969: 61)  the  how a r e  specifying  Summers,1974)?  view,  for  aggregated  arbitrarily  empirical  measuring different  area,  What  Density  in  in  j ^ E CONCEPTS  the  for level  a r e a and  boundary problem  ecological  notes that  research  the:  ...difference between a r e a l u n i t s and o t h e r types of collectives used in contextual a n a l y s i s seems t o be t h a t a r e a l u n i t s a r e as a rule, " m o d i f i a b l e u n i t s " : a s e t of a r e a s is not the only possible one, but the a g g r e g a t e s can be c o n s t r u c t e d i n o t h e r ways. In typical contextual a n a l y s i s , the u n i t s can be d e f i n e d more c l e a r l y . Of c o u r s e ,  p a r t of  boundaries  of  the  problem of  ecological  availability  being  boundaries  respective  dealing  of  with  area units  are those to  (Valkonen,1969).  studies  restricted  global  within  collecting  effects,  Along t h i s  line  organizational structure  in  metropolis  of  "...frequently  and  stems the  Greer local  data  administrative  "best" or  global  arbitrary from  agencies.  the  which the  social a  modifiable  However,  when  most  relevant  phenomenon  applies  points  out  that  residential  resemble  St.  the  areas  Augustine's  42  definition  of  everywhere  God,  and  Wilkinson  an  whose  concurs,  organizations  infinite  of  circle  periphery  claiming  is  this  whose  nowhere as  no s t r i c t  possible  the  boundary demarcation  evidence  question  of  establishing  of  is  (Greer,1960)  t h e s e a r e a s be a p p r o a c h e d a s  Although  center  that  social  the  fields.  a social  field  is  boundaries  ...may generally be answered through i m p o s i t i o n of a r t i f i c a l boundaries by the observer a t a p o i n t beyond which t h e m u t u a l action contingencies (interactions) of the e l e m e n t s a r e r e g a r d e d as r e l a t i v e l y weak and insignificant in contribution to the dominant observed c h a r a c t e r of the field. The connections which structure an interactional nexus obviously vary in "strength" and in r e l e v a n c e to the t o t a l ; and the absence of natural absolute boundaries in no way precludes i d e n t i t y . T h i s means t h a t , i n o p e r a t i o n , study of a f i e l d must p r o c e e d from t h e c o r e o u t w a r d , a s it were, r a t h e r t h a n from t h e b o r d e r s w h i c h do not e x i s t i n w a r d ( W i l k i n s o n , 1 9 7 0 ; p 3 1 3 ) .  set  In  the  of  individuals  areas  and  voluntary each is  problem a t  of  the  the  voluntary  to  be by  geographical meetings  the  is  the  eight of  consist  sampled  g r o u p of  The " i n t e r a c t i o n " "spatial  fields  by t h e  to  positioned  the  link"(Hemmens, home  Thus the  be  residents  organizations  in  elements  from  surrounding  considered  voluntary  of  activity  places.  the  individuals  traveling  meeting  of  residential  spatially  which t h e  areas traversed of  the  individuals  social  areas  "elements"  set  the  organizational  residential  the  to  areas belong.  of  of  associated  traversed  dimension  i n each  organizations  conceived  1966)  hand t h e  spatial  each  of  that in in  to  the  common  attending which  they  43  hold  memberships. To d e t e r m i n e  point  beyond  weak,  the  the  spatial  which the  voluntary  social  the  entire  fields  sample  organizations.  standard  deviations activity  program  boundaries  as  The  or  3.2  linkages)  the  radius  Wilkinson's  notion  established  from  travels  miles  entered  parameter  of  that  the  the  core  outward  a  the  parameter)  computed  the  circle  a r o u n d the  geographic  centroid  of  area,  and  calculated  Data  input  opportunity  falling to  within  the  surface  program of  total  each  of  was  on  participate  in  a  plus  two  95% o f  the  computer  Building  field  on  must  be  program a l g o r i t h m circumference each  of  a  residential  number of  the the  voluntary  calculated  into  of  radius  the  as  a circle.  perimeter  general  be r e g a r d e d  (encompasing  the  organizations  to  the  distance  (using  then  to  were  mean  were  at  are  mean and s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s  distances  spatial  the  voluntary  eight  perimeters.  entire  metropolitan  organizations  described  above.  In  summary, t h e  o p e r a t i o n a l i z ed indicate miles  the  structure  centre  the has  operationalized the  a  opportunity  each  time  been as  a  voluntary with  organizations  of  first  of  variable  number o f  from t h e This i s  in  density  eight within  values a radius  was that  of  3.2  area.  that  the  residential  characterized "primary g l o b a l  structure  organizations  i n each  cf  the  and  opportunity independently  variable." eight  That  is,  residential  44  areas  has  attributes of  been of  the  areas  organizations  analytically aggregated of  characterized  derived  to  identify  the  effect" (Hauser,  This  side-step  with  are  in  When  it  possible  for  problem  the  of of  present  having  a  to  "contextual  defined  variable  not  of  the  as  measuring is  organizational  l i m i t e d to  organizations. a  measure  of  calculating eight  the  number  To have  also  participation the  residential  "temporal environments  possible.  totalling  i n d i v i d u a l memberships,  such  as  organizations  have  been  been i n c l u d e d . . only  Organizations  ways c f  entail  organizations  have  being  characteristics  In v o l u n t a r y  attendance  o p p o r t u n i t y " i n each was  than  individual  residually  voluntary  logically  and t h i s  number  statistically  This investigation  actual  would  the  of  major  or  actual  area) ; r a t h e r  interpretation  a number o f  memberships at  the  using  1974) .  participation.  looked  the  sort  makes  the  an unmeasured  Participation  of  of  substantive  1971;  There  some  measure  measured  (i.e.  i n each  as  residents.  analysis  a whole  situated  summary  area  as  and  professional, excluded  The f o c u s  looking  at  local  Churches  are p r i m a r i l y  cf  residential  located  in  business  while  this  all  church  study i s  opportunity  local  job and  related union  memberships limited  to  structures.  residential  areas  45  and  are  thus  related  included.  organizations  location  and  residence  locations,  from  given  meeting  to  sites  they  have  the  entire  the were  been  the these  sites  related  of  many j o b -  to  bifurcation  organizations  extent located  ignored for  density  residential  areas  Stage number  variable  the of  work  work and  have been  excluded  engaging  they  were  were  opportunity  surface  for  each  depending  As the in  is  employed  In  this  indicate  oldest  child  become  groups.  After  the  and  the  the  eight  the  passed  and f i n a l l y  l e a v e s home,  there  the parents  to  i n the  be a c t i v e  are  in  criterion nature  of  1957 ; F e l d m a n ,  cycle  school  involved  has  the  age o f  life  increasingly child  the  (Duvall,  case,  enters  on  institutionalized activities  parents  of  the  been o p e r a t i o n a l i z e d  being r e l a t e d  being  to  before  Cycle  ways  different  taken  from  calculated.  of  1962).  community,  s i m i l a r l y excluded  In F a m i l y L i f e  which i t  organizational  residential  has  Rodgers,  family.  within the  cycle  with  is  job-related  in family l i f e  explanations  child  that  measures  Stage  1961;  closely spatial  metropolitan  opportunity  the  are  meeting  consideration.  Also,  a  The  the  stage of  age  and  outside  in  youth  through  decreasing  eldest  the  the  begins  the  home,  serving teen  demands  r e s i d e n t i a l community.  years for  46  The types is  stage  of  in  analysis  family  life  i n Chapter  3.  variable i s  In b o t h c a s e s ,  a c o n d i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e formed from  oldest  child  wife.  living  In t h e  at  regression  home,  a discrete  continuous  the  c a s e where  an i n d i v i d u a l  children, upper  and a wife  bond i s  family  with  age o f  forty.  t h e age  of  As  the  curvilinear  polynomial  This  the  the  covariance  variable  is  the  treated  low  end by  a member o f a f a m i l y w i t h age o f  who i s  home,  forty;  of  the  the  a member o f  and a w i f e  over  variable  no  a the  take  child.  of  1969;  family  Curtis,  values  second-order  regression  When s t a g e o f the  of  voluntary organizations  (Babchuk,  cycle."  age  by an i n d i v i d u a l  was formed by s q u a r i n g t h e life  combined w i t h the  or under the  relationship in  it the  A l l intervening values oldest  however, of  no c h i l d r e n l i v i n g at  the  participation  is  two  age  v a r i a b l e bounded at  equal to  created  the  used i n  present  analysis,  as  in  cycle  equations  family  life  analysis,  the  of  life is  expected  1971) , a n o t h e r the  of  cycle  Chapter is  then  be  variable "family  used  in  the  3.  used a s  following  with to  variable  variable is 1  cycle  cutting  a  "factor" points  are  us e d : -  Wife 40 y e a r s o r l e s s , o l d e s t c h i l d 0 t o 3 y e a r s o l d W i f e 40 y e a r s or l e s s , o l d e s t c h i l d 4 to 12 y e a r s o l d Wife 40 y e a r s o r l e s s , o l d e s t c h i l d 13 t o 15 y e a r s o l d W i f e 40 y e a r s or l e s s , e l d e s t c h i l d 16 + y e a r s o l d Wife o l d e r t h a n f o r t y y e a r s , no c h i l d l i v i n g at home  For further d i s c u s s i o n s of u s i n g g u a d r a t i c e q u a t i o n s h a n d l i n g c u r v i l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s , s e e B l a l o c k (1 9 7 2 : 4 0 8 ) . 1  in  47  Social  The  social  analytically Dogan  of  variable  (i.e.  economic within  and R o k k a n , are  the  variable  s c o r e s of  each o f  the  their  1969).  separately the  is  Thus  variable,  combined  with  organizational regression of  opportunity  with  of  in  that  aggregating of  (1968) and  the socio-  interviewed  rank  people  next  of  residing  surface.  two  t o be  variable",  the of in  discussed  residential  in  an  ecological  Chapter 3  as  a  the  specific  respective  metropolitan  values  by a summary measure  density,  c a r r i e d out  and  or  each  social  of  the  "global  assumption  for  an  area.  opportunity  structure  characteristics the  the  analysis Greer's  along  by  is  Rosenberg,  states  sampled  characterized  residential  and  Blishen  the  individual characteristics  This  across  The e i g h t  areas  means d e r i v e d  areas,  areas.  area  respective  test  residential  those i n d i v i d u a l s  the  Area  (Lazarsfeld  statistical  residential  residential  are  of  summing and d i v i d i n g ) ,  different  the  rank  derived  1955; the  Rank Of R e s i d e n t i a l  partial  aggregate  residential  aggregate  population  residential  areas  covary  48  Family L i f e  The same  to  life  form  an  residents  procedures  cycle  variable state  the  average  i n each o f  the  Age Here  again  followed. residents  the average each o f  length the  outlined.  family  eight  of  was  where life  the  aggregated  each  value  cycle stage  of  the  areas.  Area  statistical  time  i n the  follows  The i n d i v i d u a l  above),  variable,  same  this  had l i v e d  just  variable  Of R e s i d e n t i a l  the  Only  this  (discussed  eight  characterizes  in  Of R e s i d e n t i a l A r e a  o p e r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n of  statistical  family  Cycle  the  actual length  a r e a were  time the  procedures of  aggregated  time  to  p o p u l a t i o n had been  was the  create  residents  areas.  S T A T I S T I C A L METHODS OF DAT A ANALYSIS Covariance procedure testing  adopted carried  employed b e c a u s e important argument: control possible observed  analysis in out of  problems these  the  is  the in  its  not  the  data  primary  analysis  Chapter  3.  superiority  and  This in  statistical hypothesis  technique  handling  is  several  encountered i n a n a l y z i n g any c o n t e x t u a l  problems are  p r o p e r t i e s of  result  is  that genuine  (1)  a f a i l u r e to  statistically  i n d i v i d u a l s s t r i c t l y enough  part  or a l l o f t h e  (Tannenbaum  and  contextual  with a effect  Bachman ;1964 : 5 8 5 -  49  588);  (2)  control  a failure  other  possibility  to  adequately  individual factors that  the  observed  spurious  ( H a u s e r , 1970 ;658-662 ; and of  individual  the  model  individual  and e n v i r o n m e n t a l  resulting  in  bias  in  the  involved about  a  as w e l l  the  as  of  (3)  relating  the  on  the  of  the  fact thus  test  the  effects  of  behavior  p r o d u c e s downward  possibility of  to  the  in  indiviual  effects  meaning  is and  a failure  model t h a t  r a i s i n g the  substantive  raising  differences  factors  mis-specified  estimates  statistically  structural effect  but  form  and  simultaneously  nothing  functional  residual  specify  the  variables  of b e i n g  analysis  mislead  (Sonquist,  1970; 29-46) . The a n a l y t i c a l or  "compositional"  Huson,1961)  group  individual  behavior  ability  individual  that  in  necessary  have  been  or  for  eliminate  variables  (such  the  statistical analysis,  covariance  analysis  the  as  sex)  Where  all  in  involving  than those  that  technique  of  it  data is  partial  techniques  fails  individual  the  requirements,  are  wanting  differences  contamination  or  on  Bachman (1964)  the  individual  multiple  and  the  have  variables  other  and  assessing structures  Tannenbaum  any  "structural"  shown s t a t i s t i c a l l y  comparisons.  correlation  for  group  rigorously control  controlling  inter-group  determining  specifically  composition  dichotmous  dichotomosly adequately  to  of  ( B l a u , 1957,1 9 6 0 : D a v i s , S p a e t h  properties.  demonstrate naturally  effects  developed  influence  their  techniques  meet  regression of  of to  effects  suggested  capable  are  the that or  producing  50  greater  statistical  structural control  controls  variables  reduces  the  chances  differences  inflating  the  case  other  because,  states  of  the  individual differences  regardless  predictor among  assessing effects,  only  or  partially  ( S c h u e s s l e r , 1969:  effect as  from the  the  This  a spurious "contextual  simultaneous  factors. of  for  statistical  should  number  of  Before  on  the  be  contextual  argue t h a t  categories  the  have  without  number of  cases:  it  possible  to  at  the  time  techniques  take  cf  advantages having  this  to  variable  residual  theory  of  and  multiple  one  relations adequately  Compared  regression  being able to  make use  group  then,  controls.  more e f f i c i e n t  more i n d e p e n d a n t  an  dependent  correct  in  on  or  residual  effect,  his  the  with  assessing  by proper s t a t i s t i c a l  analysis  Specifying  to  correlated  characteristics is  tabulation,  statistically  be  groups  a legitimate  among i n d i v i d u a l  same  the  may  the  prepared  large  and  greater  c o n t e x t u a l v a r i a b l e , group c o m p o s i t i o n  should  covariance  wrongly  with  identifies  individual  as  cross  This  contextual  contextual  requires  differences  accounted  individual  differences  Hauser  ( H a u s e r , 1 9 7 3 ;663 ) .  be  either  effects  a genuine  generally of  the  V a l k o n e n , 1969) .  one and a v o i d what  control  cf  legitimate  contextual  To s e p a r a t e  fallacy"  as  individual  H a u s e r , 1970:  both  i n v o l v e d i n an a n a l y s i s .  individal  controlled  in  of  use  an of  to or  control  extremely data  variables into  makes  account  ( V a l k o n e n , 1969 ;64 : B l a l o c k , 1972; 4 7 4 ) . and  statistically  testing  the  functional  51  form  of  any  because  contextual  the  become one effects  presence  o f the  of  various  or  studying  the  environments  interaction, covariance  analysis  than  regression  with  its  capacity  is possible  the  p r e s e n c e and  well  as  significance  graphically  estimates  within  covariance  analysis  functional  form  of  display each  for  with e i t h e r  ( B l a l o c k , 1 9 7 2 ;474).  Its  category of  contextual  covariance  analysis  detailed  the  strategy  next  for  becomes  most  producing  more  ability  correlation  to  test  for  interaction  correlations a control  arguments  behavior  of t e s t i n g  partial  p a r t i c u l a r l y appropriate  has  differential on  cf s t a t i s t i c a l  separate  important  i n t e r a c t i o n terms  necessity  given  in  statistical  social  Faced  particularly  the  appropriate information  of  is  central ideas in  (Sonquist,1970). statistical  argument  and  slope  variable for  makes  testing  ( B l a l o c k , 1972) .  employed  in  as  Chapter  the The  3  is  section.  COVARIANCE ANALYSIS STRATEGY EMPLOYED  The  basic  objective  is  to  statistically  of  individual-environment  hold:  the  testing  Essentially covariate  the this  covariance  the  The of  determines slopes  variables  r e l a t i o n or  first  step  interaction whether  forms  i n Chapter  the  computed f o r e a c h differ  analysis  alternative  hypothesised  relation.  test  individual attribute  which o f  linkage  presence  regression  initial  individual-contexutal  conditional for  the  determine  additive  contextual  of  the  entails effects. set  level  significantly  1  of from  of the a  52  common s l o p s is  to  ( W a l k e r and L e v , 1 9 5 3 ; 3 9 0 - 3 9 2 ) .  reject  the  hypothesis  of  one common s l o p e )  because o f  analyses  be c a r r i e d out  control  should variable  testing  to  The that  from  correct  conditional  of  in  their  a common s l o p e  takes  different  not  to  one  of  this  the  entails  slopes  relations  a  direction.  It  differ  has  been  established,  be i d e n t i c a l another  not  or c o i n c i d e n t .  differing  and  common  level  equally,  participation. slopes  the  from z e r o  does  each  opportunity  of  differing  that  a  however, the  control  They may  significantly  be  in  that  (Walker and  slope  mean  is  analysis  must be e s t a b l i s h e d  zero  within  contextual  regressions  from  lines  evidence  individuals  significantly a  is  organizational  may be assumed,  Establishing  need  category  is  equal  L e v , 1953; 393) .  regression  the  of  differs  line  (or  separate  interaction  organizational  t h e common s l o p e  regression  each  In p a r t ,  or s u p p o r t a l l  hypothesis  significantly  slopes  effects,  regressions  the  additive:  accepted, a  the  statistical  elicit  but d i f f e r e n t i a l l y the  of  form  and not  does not  If  within  decision  zero.  presence of  the  density  which  the  regression  interaction  (B l a l o c k , 1972; 474) .  see  significantly  equal  If  single for  the  variable parallel  their  "a M  inter cepts. The same  presence  slope,  of  but  c o r r e c t f o r m of  the  p a r a l l e l regression  different relation  intercepts is  lines is  additive:  all  evidence the  with that  the the  organizational  53  opportunity density equally  and i n  The with used  in  a d d i t i o n to  variables  the  elicits  method  or  individual  operationalized of  investigating  covariance the  supports  in  all  effects. this  analysis  h y p o t h e s e s i n the  individuals  1  chapter, just next  combined  outlined  are  chapter.  A s i n g l e r e g r e s s i o n l i n e may be assumed, t h e n , o n l y a f t e r e s t a b l i s h i n g a common s l o p e as w e l l as a common intercept (Walker & L e v , 1953; 393-394) . 1  54  CHAPTER 3 THE ANALYSIS  In  this  variables  chapter  developed  h y p o t h e s e s advanced major  focus  alternative they  of  voluntary question  to  in  of  method  Chapter  More  posed  is  opportunity  participation  to  the  or  elicits  depending attachments  These  of  to  an the  test  the  briefly,  the  explore  two  to  alternative  contextual  effect,  specifically,  or  forms  statistical  all  primary  organizational individuals;  or  supports  differentially resources  or  area.  contextual effect  analysis  forms  in  residential  opportunity  personal  as  voluntary  o f a r t i c u l a t i o n have  the  Moreover, using  local  participation  within the and  in  degree for  residential  the  varying  eliciting  organizational  local  identified  respective  to  participation  whether  individual's  specifically  conditional.  same  organizational  upon  is  densities  supporting  density  Reviewing  individual  in  the  used  individual-environment articulation  operate  whether  operationalized  are  investigation  explaining  being  and  2  C h a p t e r 1.  organizations.  organizational areas  in  this  models  relate  the  have  of  of  been  p a r a d i g m as a  a  contextual  covariance, been  more  specified  their as  55  rendering  either  involving  statistical  the  a relation  contextual  acts  independently  organizational of  the  in  density  acts  individual  and  for  the  The  conditional  differentially  participation  that  in  that  density  individual interaction opportunity  combination  accounting  of  individual  degree o f  indicates  in voluntary  relation  relation  to  statistical  or in  a  opportunity  addition  accounting  characteristics  individual  in  or  The a d d i t i v e  indicates  participation.  contextual  additivity,  interaction.  effect  characteristics  of  for the  with  degree  of  organizations.  ECOLOGICAL TEST OF THE MACRO-PROCESSES  Before however, the  proceeding  it  is  residential  imperative  covary  across  It  be r e c a l l e d  this  be  the  critical  determined: tested  it  are  the that  contextual  the  voluntary opportunity  aggregate population  will  with  characteristics metropolitan from t h e  relation is  the  merely  basic  surface  discussion has  assumed.  proposition  structure of  never  analysis,  and  specific  residential be put in  to  The b a s i c  areas  the  test.  1  that  Chapter been  that  empirically  propositions  following:  1)  As t h e f a m i l i s m o f a residential sub-area population increases, the number o f l o c a l v o l u n t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n s l o c a t e d i n the area increases.  2)  As t h e s o c i a l r a n k o f a r e s i d e n t i a l s u b - a r e a population increases, the number o f l o c a l v o l u n t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n s l o c a t e d i n the area increases.  to  56  One in  this  organizations  tend to  1966).  regression  are  Many  perpetuate  accomplished often  will  the  between  new c a u s e s Chapter  consideration  i n p a r t a " r e s i d u u m of organizations,  themselves. single  local  1,  for  members h e l p  rapid  in  which they  action"  existence, that  were  The bonds o f  rates  as  sentiment  pointed  of  have a n e f f e c t  certain on  the  have  created  m a i n t a i n such groups  However,  turnover  certainly  once  past  Even o r g a n i z a t i o n s  goal  identified.  must  while  out  in  sub-area viability  organizations.  Table analysis  the  are  populations  2  of  results  presents  the  three  clearly  organizational  bear  densities  3-stage  hypotheses out  the  of  and s o c i o - e c o n o m i c  accounting  for the  postulated basic  density  of  an i n d e p e n d e n t  status  regression above.  The  propositions  that  expected  with,  and f a m i l y s t a t u s .  family-life-cycle-stage  contributes  step-wise  do c o v a r y i n t h e  social  residence  rank  a  residential  average  into  analysis:  manage a c o n t i n u e d e x i s t e n c e .  formed  also  be t a k e n  As t h e a v e r a g e length of residence in a local area increases, t h e number o f l o c a l voluntary organizations in the area increases.  (Coleman,  of  relation  "ecological"  3)  Local  further  Although  the r e s i d e n t s  effect.  length  a r e more i m p o r t a n t  o p p o r t u n i t y i n an of  way  area,  in the  i n an a r e a  57  TABLE  2  Summary Of 3 - s t a g e S t e p - w i s e R e g r e s s i o n A n a l y s i s Of O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y R e g r e s s e d On {leans O f S o c i a l R a n k , F a m i l y L i f e C y c l e , and R e s i d e n c e Stability  Density  E f f e c t On Of O r g a n i z a t i o n s  Independent V a r i a b l e s : Mean C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of R e s i d e n t i a l Areas  (Step)  Socio-economic Status Stability Family L i f e C y c l e  1 2 3  R Square Squared Changed  0.57 0.81 0.91  Beta*  — 0.24 0.10  .70 .74 -.42  *The s t a n d a r d i z e d p a r t i a l r e g r e s s i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s a r e from the l a s t s t a g e i n t h e s t e p - w i s e r e g r e s s i o n . The family way  negative  life the  cycle  of  the  family  organizations decreases.  is  actually area  associated  should  variable  relationship residential  sign  be e x p e c t e d ,  the  life  situated  of  as  the  the local  This  residential due.to  "empty  number  of  the  particular  more f a m i l i e s  "mature" o r  cycle in  that  mean  course,  operationalized.  indicates  approach  with the  taken  nest"  in  a  stage  voluntary  residential  area  58  L i m i t a t i o n s O f The E c o l o g i c a l C o v a r i a t i o n T e s t This test  of  particular test these  observations definitive  relations  of  eight.  attempt  1  at  locational  profile  voluntary  organizations.  into  of  consideration.  m e r e l y h a s been positive contextual  outcome  cannot  2  given Nor  the  can  limited  it  explaining  the  be all  strongest number  of  considered  a  aspects  of  the  a metropolitan opportunity surface Other  dimensions  Nevertheless,  assumed is  be c o n s i d e r e d  in  it  previous  sufficient  to  let  c o u l d be  taken  partially tests instances, us p r o c e e d  of  what  and  the  with  the  analysis.  A more a p p r o p r i a t e t e s t would e n t a i l a g g r e g a t e s o c i a l r a n k and f a m i l i s m measures d e r i v e d from the 1971 c e n s u s for all census tracts that could then be r e l a t e d t o t h e s p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of voluntary o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The scope of the argument put forward here gives major emphasis t o " l o c a l " o r i e n t e d v o l u n t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n s (Greer and O r l e a n s , 1962) and does not proport to explain the location of more specialized organizations that must c e n t r a l i z e l o c a t i o n to m a x i m i z e a c c e s s i b i l i t y f o r a select membership. 1  2  59  MODEL SPECIFICATION In  order to  test  the  individual-environment specified. covariance  This  OF THE MICRO-PROCESSES  alternative  linkage,  may be  dene  they  in  hypothesized must  terms  be  of  forms  of  statistically the  following  aquation: Ygi=ag+BgXgi+egi  where: "igi"  is a measure of memberships f o r i n d i v i d u a l  "ag"  is the intercept ordinate ;  "Bg"  is the s t a n d a r d i z i e d each g r o u p g  "xgi"  is a measure o f t h e d e n s i t y of v o l u n t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n s of the r e s i d e n t i a l area in which the i'th individual in group g re s i d e s  "egi"  is  an e r r o r  of  organizational I i n group g  group  regression  g  on  the  slope  for  term  a nd iig«  will represent in turn the social groupings of sex, stage in family l i f e c y c l e , e d u c a t i o n , and i n c o m e .  Before  entering  instructive  to  directly  combine  this  the covariance  analysis  to  prototypes  g r a p h some  using  two  hypothetical  into basic  strategy of  the  covariance  discussed  the  groups  analysis  might  equation  i n Chapter  alternative of  it  people  2,  be with and  hypotheses,  with  different  60  individual  attributes:  G1 and G2 (see  Figure 5 a depicts effect  stems  density  from  an  fact  equation  because both  same  there  opportunity  density  the  the  effect  separation  density there lines  has  no  are the case  opportunity increase 5c.  The  difference  two  the  lines.  may be  common  there  of  observed  regression (b =b^)  and  i  any  due  to  interaction effects  of  characteristics.  is  depicted  in  lines.  lines  effects  is  5b.  identified  by  Organizational  are  as t h e  Figure  h o r i z o n t a l , and  slopes  of the  two  same. where act  individual in  number  differential  because both  both  the  is  while  individuals is  again the  effect  fashion  memberships  effect  intercepts, of  individual  i n an a d d i t i v e  organizational  on b o t h g r o u p s the  nor a r e  main  opportunity  same s l o p e s  two r e g r e s s i o n  interaction  the  T h e r e a r e no e f f e c t s  1  effect  This  individual differences  the  density  in  the  As  total  one  and i n d i v i d u a l  no e f f e c t  are  The  of  have  from  of  only  density.  only  ( a = a^).  The e x a c t o p p o s i t e Here  is  characteristics, resulting  where  increases.  lines  intercepts  individual effects  that  5).  individual's  memberships  from t h e  the  outcome  opportunity  increases,  organizational  the  Figure  is  to  p r o d u c e an  shown  in Figure  indicated  same e f f e c t  shown by the  and  of  by  the  density  same s l o p e s  of  61  A. S i n g l e E f f e c t o f Opportunity Density Only a =a ; 1  2  b =b >0  0 r g a n i z a t i o a  a^j < a  2  1  G  +  +  1= 2 G  Opportunity  +  +-  1  FIGURE  +  +  a =a ; 1  2  +.  Density  D. I n t e r a c t i v e E f f e c t s o f O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y and Individual Characteristic  2  G  2  +  Opportunity  b >0  H  e m b e r s h i P s  0  <5l  Density  a i < a 2 ; b-| =  2  G  1  C. A d d i t i v e E f f e c t s o f O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y and Individual Characteristic  0 r g a n i z a t i o n a  ; bj =b =  2  O r g a n i z a t i o n a  a 1 •  B. E f f e c t o f I n d i v i d u a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c Only  0 r 9 a n i z a t i o n a  2  b-|<b2  H  e m b e r s h i  G2  P s  1  + + Opportunity  + +-Density  Opportunity  Eensity  5. Graphical Presentation of Ideal-Typical C o v a r i a n c e R e l a t i o n s D e p i c t i n g V a r i o u s Outcomes Of Contextual Analysis  62  The  last  contextual tends  increase  have  F i g u r e 5d d e p i c t s t h e  in the  Group same  Greater  effect  organizational  organizational  i n Group 2 ,  individuals longer  in  conditional.  to  individuals  case  but  fails  to  1.  Thus the  of  density  participation  make a two  the  for  difference  regression  for  lines  no  sets  of  form o f  the  slope.  MODEL EVALUATION.  Analysis hypotheses  will  in  proceed  order  to  individual-environment forms  specified,  analysis. relative model results  the  Here t h e effects  are  of  through each determine  alternative the  established.  w i l l be f o u n d  the  relations. investigation  in  the  With  four  the  will shift  appropriate to  regression  reviewed,  components  summary first  the  initial  models a r e  remaining A  of  of  the  interpretation  section of  Chapter  and  the  final of 4.  the  63  Covariance  Sex  and O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y  Table voluntary  3 presents  density  differences  among t h e  interaction of  the  the  organization  opportunity  use  Analysis  is  not  in  memberships for  and  slopes  significant,  TABLE  on  males. due  to  number of  residential The t e s t  of  statistical  i n d i c a t i n g no d i f f e r e n t i a l  environment  l o c a l voluntary  for the  regressed  females  regression  residential  participating  covariance tests  for  men  or  women  when  organizations.  3  C o v a r i a n c e A n a l y s i s O f S e x , W i t h The Number Of V o l u n t a r y O r g a n i z a t i o n M e m b e r s h i p s R e g r e s s e d On O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y  Sex (Factor)  Fema l e & Male  Test For Differences Among Slopes B's (Interaction)  Test For Differences Among Intercept, A's  F(1,818)=0.5 N.S.  F(1,819)=0.2 N. S.  • Significant The t h e two  test  therefore  be  .32*  p<.00?  for  regression  Common S l o p e B (Covariate)  differences slopes also  c o n s i d e r d the  among t h e  fails  same,  "a -intercepts n  significance  indicating that  of  and  may  there  are  64  0 R M G B A N N B 1 E  4.0  +  3.0  + | | |  I  I  0.0  + 0.0  + 100  + 200  OPPORTUNITY FIGURE  + 300  + 400  DENSITY  6. R e g r e s s i o n L i n e s Of O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Memberships By O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y For M a l e s And F e m a l e s  65  nc  effects  tests  indicate,  slope and  due  for  sex  women,  sex  either.  then,  that  there  (see  equally,  increases,  Stage  to  residential  test  the  different  the  interaction  differential  use  different  s t a g e s of  belonging  to  The the  five  indicating family  life  for  presence  cycle  not  density  increase.  Density  tests  on the  family  on  life  number o f  opportunity  life  cycle.  slopes  significant  residential  regression  opportunity  regression  due  The to  indicating  no  e n v i r o n m e n t by p e o p l e  in  cycle  when  it  comes  to  '^"-intercepts  of  organizations.  differences  regression the  is  family  voluntary  test  among  two  b o t h men  regressed  stages i n the  statistical  the  covariance  memberships  difference  of  memberships  these  for  C ^ c l e and O £ £ o r t u n i t y _  organization for  for  the  of  common  as  4 presents  density  a  6 ) , which shows t h a t  i n Family Life  voluntary  is  Figure  organizational  Table  The r e s u l t s  1  slopes of  among t h e is  significant,  additive  and o p p o r t u n i t y  effects  however,  between s t a g e  in  density.  The b i v a r i a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p between sex and the number o f o r g a n i z a t i o n a l memberships h e l d by an i n d i v i d u a l disappears in this d a t a s e t when a l l b u s i n e s s , p r o f e s s i o n a l and u n i o n o r g a n i z a t i o n s are excluded. When t h e s e are included back into the dependent variable men, again, have more organizational memberships than women as generally established in the literature. However, it is very i n t e r e s t i n g to note t h a t when Curtis (1971) excluded all union memberships from his n a t i o n a l Canadian sample, sex differences in organizational memberships also completly disappeared. 1  66  TABLE  4  C o v a r i a n c e A n a l y s i s Of Stage Of F a m i l y L i f e C y c l e , With The Number Of V o l u n t a r y O r g a n i z a t i o n Memberships R e g r e s s e d On Opportunity Density  Family L i f e Cyc l e (Factor)  Wife<40 6 Child: 0-3 4-12 13-15 . ™.+ No C h i l d 6 wife>40  Test For Differences Among S l o p e s B's (Interaction)  Test For Differences Among Intercept, A  F ( 4 , 8 1 2 ) = 0.2 -s.  F (4 , 8 16) 11. 13 P<.001  N  •Significant  The  regression the  of  stage slope,  intercepts  these  may there  are  be  opportunity  not  individual's of  the  discloses  density  considered  coincident.  t h e expected  life  cycle  and  early  and l a t e s t a g e s  to  have  that  stage  This  the  same  lends  life  cycle  a c t i n an a d d i t i v e f a s h i o n  (see F i g u r e  Closer  7) f o r e a c h  curvilinear relation  of the family those  life  cycle  individuals  to effect observation  family  between  o r g a n i z a t i o n a l memberships.  than  though  result  i n family  o r g a n i z a t i o n a l memberships.  ^"-intercepts  memberships  two t e s t s i n d i c a t e t h a t  i s no common r e g r e s s i o n e q u a t i o n f o r  evidence t o the hypothesis and  .22*  p<.001  results  each f a m i l y  Common S l o p e B (Covariate)  stage family  People  i n the  have  fewer  involved  in  67  4.0  FIGURE  7.  +  R e g r e s s i o n L i n e s Of Organizational Memberships By Opportunity Density For The Five S t a g e In F a m i l y C y c l e Groups  68  the are at  middle in,  the  stages;  the  b u t no m a t t e r  number o f  same r a t e ,  as  which  organizational  the  stage  individuals  memberships  residential  increases  opportunity  density  i n c r e a s e s.  Education  and O p p o r t u n i t y  Table voluntary  5 p r e s e n t s the organization  density  for  different  test  the  difference  for  interaction  density  very  is  differential  use  voluntary  educational  covariance  memberships  statistical  to  Density  the  among  on  and  environment  depending  opportunity levels.  slopes  indicating  residential  organizations,  education  number of  on an  The  due  considerable in  belonging  individual's  5  A n a l y s i s O f E d u c a t i o n , With The Number Cf O r g a n i z a t i o n Memberships B e g r e s s e d On The Covariate, Opportunity Density  Test For Differences A mong Slopes B's (Interaction)  F (3, 800)=8.26 p<.001  Within Group Slopes B's  .00 .09 .30 .36  to  opportunity  level.  Covariance Voluntary  0-11 Y r s 12 Y r s 13-15 Y r s 16 Y r s +  regressed  regression  between  TABLE  Educa t i o n (Factor )  on t h e  individual educational  significant, of  tests  Test For Signi ficance for Within Group S l o p e s  F (1 ,283)= 0.01 S.S. F ( 1, 237) = 1. 88 N . S . F (1 ,156) = 15.86 P<.001 F (1, 121) = 18.35 P<.001  69  4.0  +  0.0  + 0.0  100  200  300  400  OPPORTUNITY DENSITY FIGURE  8. Regression By O p p o r t u n i t y Groups  L i n e s Of O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Density For The Four  Memberships Educational  70  For i n d i v i d u a l s 5,  last  two  between  columns  0-11  and  opportunity  participation. have  with  just  Much  completed  appears  to as  the  a  slight  to  in  the effect  The  of  pronounced  15  years  It  appears, present  environment  have  organizational  memberships  high  Income  no  a considerable  education.  increases  with  The  toward  increase,  the  16  or  effect  even  more  is  for  of  have  of  organizational residential one's  relatively  individuals  organization  l a d d e r of  a  more  years  increasing  when e d u c a t i o n difference  those  memberships. is  the  on  not  opportunities  immediate  effect  is  environment  that  the  there  other hand, for the  who  increased it  organizational  with  e a c h s t e p up t h e  low, with  density  education.  and O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y  Table 6 presents the voluntary covariate, with  tendency  then,  relation  Although  participation  in  no  Table  true f o r i n d i v i d u a l s  residential  on i n c r e a s i n g  is  (see  organizational  education,  individuals  opportunities  but makes  of  organizational  for  education.  there  eduction.  On  immediate  pronounced rate  8)  opportunity densities  people present  education  and  same i s  significant.  13  of  density  statistically with  Figure  a high school  be  participation  years  organization residential  different  difference  among  covariance  tests  memberships  on the  regressed  opportunity density  levels  of  regression  income. slopes  number  for  The due  on  the  individuals  test to  of  for  the  statistical  71  interaction density  is  opportunity  between also  individual  significant,  structure  participation  income  indicating  elicits  depending  that  differential  on  an  Moreover,  it  r e a c h e s the  threshold  level  of  $13,000 o r  rate  of  increase  a  significant  participation  as  not  the  opportunity residential  organizational  individual's  resources.  is  is  and  economic  u n t i l an i n d i v i d u a l ' s  opportunity densities  TABLE  more, in  that  income there  organizational  increase.  6  C o v a r i a n c e A n a l y s i s Of Income, With The Number Of V o l u n t a r y O r g a n i z a t i o n M e m b e r s h i p s R e g r e s s e d On The C o v a r i a t e , Opportunity Density  Test For Differences Among Slopes B's ( I n t e r a c t ion)  Income (Factor)  $0-4,999 $5-8,999 $9-12,999 $13,000 +  summary,  the  analysis  the  individual  characteristics  organizational  form  Test For Significance for Within Group S l o p e s  F (1 ,46) = 0 . 1 5 N. S. F ( 1 , 238) = 1.94 N . S . F (1 ,258)= 1 .71 N. S. F ( 1 , 234) =17.88 P<.001  Analysis  determining  of  .06 .09 .09 . 27  F ( 3 , 776) =3.07 P<.03  Summary. Of C o v a r i a n c e In  Within Group Slopes B's  of  density.  of  covariance  articulation and t h e It  between  residential  has a  aided  in  set  of  environment  has b e e n e s t a b l i s h e d  that  an  72  I  0 R M G E AM N B  3.0 + | | I  0.0  + 0.0  • 100  + 200  OPPORTUNITY FIGURE  9.  + 300  + 400  DENSITY  R e g r e s s i o n L i n e s Of Organizational Memberships By O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y For The F o u r Income G r o u p s  73  i n d i v i d u a l ' s income with life  opportunity cycle  density  do  With  not  effects,  components  of  these  and t h e  within  multiple  pointed  accomplished of  model i f  findings  of  the  deciding  the  nature  of  there  is  no  raise  the  to  of  above  a multidimensional  model.  analysis.  Analysis Chapter  2,  estimate the in  a  very  can a i d  variables  to  little  relative  is  effects  multidimensional  been i n c o r r e c t l y  section  the  relations  questions  by  1  the  variables has  previous  a l l for  specified.  us c o n s i d e r a b l y be e n t e r e d  i n to  The in the  equations.  Strictly except that 1  it  with  opportunity  particular  regression  in  component  regression  following  out  i n attempting  a number o f  family  fashion  and  variance explained  Regression As was  at  now a p p r o p r i a t e t o  to  sex  in  and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n .  when c o n s i d e r e d  we t u r n  that  articulate  forms is  differentially  i n an a d d i t i v e  And l a s t l y ,  between sex  it  articulate  An i n d i v i d u a l ' s s t a g e  articulate  really  the  established,  For t h i s  to  density.  relationship  relative  density.  appears  opportunity  and e d u c a t i o n  speaking, the e f f e c t  this is o f sex i s  an additive zero.  relationship,  74  It  is  known  that  opportunity  density,  contextual  conditional  and t h e of  same h o l d s  and  for  income.  ( B l a l o c k , 1 972 ; with  One o f  in  is  the  education  variables  for  memberships  the  product  Next,  it  cycle  is  known t h a t  and  related may be  * Opportunity Density  i n an a d d i t i v e  creates  the  model:  = IOD  in  density  family appear  further  life to  be  candidates  included: Stage  in Family L i f e  Resitential However, including  it  covariance  FLC as  be t a k e n  into  needs  that  it  further for  it  consideration be r e c a l l e d  before the  relation  to  This curvilinear relation  can  a  will  = OD  from  has  participation. account  C y c l e = FLC  Opportunity Density  a variable,  analysis  organizational  curviliner  by i n t r o d u c i n g F L C i n t o  The symbol »*• w i l l be used o p e r a t i o n of m u l t i p l i c a t i o n .  1  two  = EOD  opportunity  two  is  procedure  regression  stage  fashion—so  the  this  an i n d i v i d u a l ' s  residential  ways  relationship  and o p p o r t u n i t y d e n s i t y i n the  a  model  of  1  Employing  Education * Opportunity Density Income  most common  conditional  inclusion  is  interaction,  in a regression  the  Sonquist,1970).  income,  following  that  education,  statistical  interaction  involved  between  organizational  a new v a r i a b l e  variables  relation  involving  handling s t a t i s t i c a l  to create  the  to denote  the  the  regression  mathematical  75  equation  along  (Blalock,  with i t s  1972:408) . *  second  This FLC  One time area.  individual  "Length of  Wright  hyman,  because  of  its  articulate  with  For  the the  new a r e a , area  for  friendship the  section  of  residence  people  some t i m e  on  the  that  literature  in  orginally  more u s e  network  a variable  relation  way  example,  than  is  a particular  considered  length  has  received  (Babchuk,  Gans, the  1967),  1969 ; and  present  with the  of  residential  is  model  environmental  entertained  with  a  new  local  them a s  and  presumably  (Litwak,1961).  covariance  been  presented  settling  this  well into  residents  developed  Though not  analysis,  might  might v e r y  a way o f  who had a l r e a d y  an  opportunity  to an a r e a ,  opportunities,  of  that  i n a p a r t i c u l a r area  people  numerous o r g a n i z a t i o n a l  make c o n s i d e r a b l y  in  Curtis,1971;  in a conditional  structure.  2  density.  was  length  is  the  possible  notion  individual's  in  be  variable opportunity  The  lived  1958;  enough t o  FLC  complement  by i n t r o d u c i n g  be c o n s i d e r e d  residence"  attention  important  to  has  considerable and  accomplished  * FLC =  further variable  an  is  o r d e r or q u a d r a t i c  a  in  local  discussed  in  conditional  When b o t h F L C and FLC are i n t r o d u c e d i n t o t h e same regression equation, ordinary regression procedures of parameter estimation become unstable b e c a u s e o f the h i g h m u l t i c o l i n e a r i t y between t h e two v a r i a b l e s . Such a problem is overcome by using a computer a l g o r i t h m t h a t handles orthogonal polynomial regression. Such a program was used in this analysis. See T r i p T r i a n g u l a r R e g r e s s i o n P a c k a g e , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1  2  76  relation  was  tested  relationship  between  density  voluntary  to  be  and  additive.  model  and length  found of  unsupportable:  residence,  organizational  Thus t h e  opportunity  memberships  last candidate  for  the  the  was  found  regression  is: Length  Reviewing  of  Residence  quickly,  multidimensional  = LR  the  model a r e  as  components  for  the  fellows:  E d u c a t i o n * O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y = EOD Income * O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y = IOD S t a g e I n F a m i l y L i f e C y c l e = FLC Family C y c l e * Family C y c l e = F L C R e s i d e n t i a l O p p o r t u n i t y D e n s i t y = OD L e n g t h O f R e s i d e n c e = LR 2  Total  Creating the  # Of O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Memberships = I  following  regression  eguation:  ( 1 . 1 )  Y = a + B E 0 D + B £ l 0 D + B j F L C + B i ( F L C + Bj0D + BfcLR+e 2  t  T a b l e 7 summarizes regression to  note  for is  the  muliplicative the  lesser  the  unable  to  own t o  the  in  equation.  the  1.1,  strong  effects  life  results  equation  components  family  the  cycle.  length also  leaving  organizational  us  variance It  that  the  opportunity  of  be  by  densities  the  of  that  thing  the  two  order  by  and s t a g e density  contribution  dropped  conclusion  of in  residence  opportunity  explained  multiple  The f i r s t  importance  significant  may t h e r e f o r e  with  step-wise  EOD and I O D , f o l l o w e d  make any f u r t h e r overall  a  specified.  relative  of Note  just  of  of  in was its  other.variables from  equation  the  voluntary  residential  areas  do  77  not a c t  independently  characteristics hold  in  on t h e  one  hand, given  individuals  opportunity  density  of  l e v e l s of  residential  the  the  in  are  addition chances  multiple  this  family  life  cycle,  or i f  conditioned On t h e  they  they  individual  that  by other the  are i n the  are  more  residents  It  appears  attributes  study,  opportunity densities,  i n an a r e a ,  to  organizations.  individuals.  reside  voluntary  in  voluntary  characterize  income  and  increasing  memberships i n  that  of,  used  to  the  effects  of  the  education  or  hand,  longer  regardless individuals  middle years  likely  to  of  the  belong  to  organizations.  TABLE  7  Summary Of S t e p - W i s e R e g r e s s i o n A n a l y s i s Of T o t a l O r g a n i z a t i o n a l M e m b e r s h i p s R e g r e s s e d On EOD, I O D , F L C , F L C , 2  LB  AND  OD  Dependent V a r i a b l e : T o t a l # Of VO Memberships B  INDEPENDENT VARIABLES  (Step)  EOD EOD+IOD EOD+IOD+LR EOD+IOD+LR+ ( F L C + F L C ) EOD + IOD+LR + ( F L C + F L C ) +OD 2  2  *OD c o u l d  make no r e a l  c o n t r i b u t i o n to  B Square S q u a r e d Changed  1 2 3 4 5  R  13.7 22. 1 24.8 26. 6 26.6  2  at  this  8.4 2.7 1.8 0.003 *  stage.  78  Before is  concluding  instructive 1.1  equation simply  to  this  compare  interpretation,  the  overall  with an a l t e r n a t i v e l y  includes  all  opportunity density the  with  however,  performance  specified  equation  individual characteristics  in  a straight  it  as  forward a d d i t i v e  of that  well  model  as of  form: Y = a + B ^ E + B a l + B j F L C + B i f F L C Z + B^LR + B^OD+e  However, effect  found  given in  the  expected  that  well  equation  as  equations multiple  to  the  strong  covariance 1.2  eguation 1.1.  the  correlations  may  tests,  will  fit  be e v a l u a t e d  (R's)  or  (R )  for  1.1  are  respectively  and 1 . 2  overall 26.6%. lends  variance This  each  explained  comparatively  further  support  tc  not  relative  determination  2  statistical  analysis  The  data  (1.2)  the  equation. .42  by t h e  poor f i t model  interaction it  the  should  data  fit  of  near the  coefficients  and  for  .52,  the of  equation  while  are  as two  by c o m p a r i n g  The R ' s  be  the  17.7% and  two  models  of  the  additive  1,1  and  it's  model  consequent  i n t e r p r e ta t i o n .  This  concludes  evaluation. application  of  the  A  summary  the  present  hypothesis  testing  interpretation findings  follow  and and  in  model  practical  C h a p t e r 4.  79  CHAPTER 4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION  STUDY SU MMARY This the  study  set  out  to  socio-ecological  conceptualized  a  extent,  spatial  behavior  circle  of  of  the  have  of  effects  existing are  just  found  The  organizational  residential shown  participation is  to  commitments  seen  populations  that  to  and  the  form  location  of  At  the  organizational same  for  same or  a  urban  l o c a t i o n a l arrangement  constrained  the  resident  of  time,  facilitated  opportunities;  everyone  as  we  out.  areas be  not  area,  structure  The s o c i o - s p a t i a l the  degree,  affects  We have  residential  determine  what  residential  spatial  opportunities.  location  although the  urban  urban  in part,  organizational  by  a  organization.  the  causality.  organizational  of  to  a s an o p p o r t u n i t y s t r u c t u r e  in voluntary  residents,  how and  context  memberships certain  explore  a and  opportunity densities  throughout function abilities  a t t r a c t and s u p p o r t  the cf of  voluntary  metropolitan the its  of  area  collective residents  organizations  different have  been  concerns, to  organize,  within  their  80  respective  local  processes of  partly  residential  areas.  depend upon t h e  aggregate  the  residential  population—the  resided  i n an a r e a ,  their  and  economic  resources,  contribute  to  a  opportunity  structure.  However, structure,  the  in  voluntary  more  forward.  densities  addition  but  to  unless  the  those  the  social  changes  opportunities have  organizational  they  from  with  organizational  opportunity  memberships  the  and  in  straight  organizational  areas  do not  act  in  different  individual  in  residents'  urban  have fail that  had  elicit  are  not  skills  in  the  little  or  no  memberships  some  to  present  college  educationally  generally  A t the  higher  of  living  environments, degree that  education  do a p p e a r they  have  to  effect  education.  on  These  participation  predisposed  same t i m e , in  immediate  individuals,  considered  involvement.  levels  of  organizational  organizational  the  all  participation.  environment  opportunities  that  have  educational  no way s i m p l e  residential  produce  Organizational  increasing  in  they  of c h i l d r e n ,  resident  appears of  of  environmental  in combination  characteristics  residential  is  time  voluntary  this  it  opportunity  organizational  rasing  their  affects  In g e n e r a l ,  to,  plus  social  characteristics of  levels  viable  organizations  length  collective  way  turn,  Moreover t h e s e  less  or  lack  useful  in  people  with  opportune  be e n v i r o n m e n t a l y c o n s t r a i n e d  fewer  organizational  to  memberships,  81  when  compared t o  living  in  same  present  an  interaction  residential  of  $ 1 3,000 o r  some  Even  take  much,  if  hand, in  variety  or  one  a wide  most  hand,  densities, larger  with  their  are  less  than  Increases little  or  participation  in no  until  level  of  note that  contrary  to  individuals  do  high mobility, metropolitan  in  very  expected  least  have  high  spatially  levels  of  and f o r  two  individuals  with h i g h  levels  of  a r e a s with  low  metropolitan  in than  residential seeking  area,  just  out  organizations  do not  voluntary organizations.  organizations  at  n o t have  rather  high  exercise  resources—do  living  with  not  organizations.  to  with  or  area,  voluntary  systems—those  income,  at a l l  of  of  and economic  individuals  areas  is  threshold  to  1964) ,  participating in  r e a s o n s . , On t h e  the  the  interesting  individuals  educational  within  resources  produce  organizational  over  activity  opportunity  is  and o p p o r t u n i t y .  (Webber,  choice  those  education  relationship  importance  reaches  advantage  comes t o  extensive  in  especially  of  when i t  but  economic  densities,  income  expectations  freedom  levels  more.  is  generally  relative  education  increase  individual's  It  its  opportunity  significant  environmental  individual's  although  educational  surroundings.  conditional  when  considered,  an  with s i m i l a r  more o p p o r t u n e  The  the  people  participate  On  the  other  similar characteristics,  but  living  opportunity right  at  their  have  a  door-step  considerable and do  not  82  have  to  join  travel  organizations  number  of  again,  it  is  When  only that  it  family  life  little  or  no  of  having  the  not  belong  to  i n the  the  local be  the  increasingly  t y p e s of  organizations  shows  (brownies, they  scouts,  are committed  effect  of  stage  independently while  its  of  them  to  an  or  stages  family  life  residential is  given  the  compared  to  the  cycle  who,  reasons  for  in  a greater  youth-serving  limited  time. cycle  But the  middle stages, look  chance  etc.)  at of  in  which  However,  this  appears  than  this  organizations  opportunity  even l e s s  to  greater  A closer  league sports,  and  a place  community.  numbers., have  has  individuals  as  fewer  Individuals  parents  in  of  in  organizational  than those i n other  larger  be  density  if  when  have  case.  stage  increasingly  residential  only a  effect  education,  their interest  organizations  home,  for  relative  but  that  environment  and l a t e  PTA, l i t t l e  any  given  to  more memberships  in  joining,  people's  Especially,  early  appear t o  s t a g e s do have not  the  locality;  opportunity  cycle,  voluntary  children  does  that  residential  would  in  attached  of  to  increasing  an i n d i v i d u a l ' s  increasing  the  tendency  influenced.  seems in  immediate level  considering  opportunity.  being  the  the  by t h e  was o r g i n a l l y h y p o t h e s i z e d  local  individuals  the  it  that  influenced  with a high  really  effect  children,  increased  but  are  It  appears  provided i n  those  cycle,  about  number  not  actually  middle stages of  concern raise  Thus i t  comes t o  memberships. the  is  amenities  h i g h income  in  far.  that  to  act  structure, of  length  83  of  residence. The l e n g t h  of  time  community a l s o a p p e a r s opportunity of  high  organizations On the  to  structure.  opportunity, as  contrary,  more l i k e l y  Newcomers  way  the  of  longer  are  reside  in  a  residential  operate independently  generally  a  they  people  to  of  t o an a r e a ,  do n o t  seem t o  the  local  even i n  areas  use  getting established individuals  become  live  members  in  voluntary i n an  area.  an a r e a ,  of  a  the  voluntary  organiza tion.  An  individual's  independent density  nor  in  the  local  more t h a n of  their  a  memberships. ,  that  in  individuals'  The  was  diversity.  relate  structure,  Greer  focusing  opportunity related  numbers of  met  structure,  is  Men a r e  opportunity.  This  not  to  women  differentially  able  for  outside  merely  the  cn the  and e x c l u d i n g men a s  regardless say, relate  of  the  a way to  use  expressing husband's  local  area.  influence  of  the  participation  in  well  as  women have  sex  or  density  that  men  however, to  to  women, as  even f o u n d t h a t  organizations,  memberships  differently  community a c t i v i t i e s  (1956)  when  originally  because  associated a c t i v i t i e s  Nevertheless,  do not  notion  individual differences.  often  equal  difference  on l o c a l  relied  an  opportunity  men,  work and c l o s e l y  work  effect  had n e i t h e r  with  opportunity  more  all  found,  women and men would  organizations  local  was  residential  expressing  their  it  conditional  producing  organizational entertained  a  sex,  local  of and  opportunity  84  structure. voluntary  They  might w e l l b e l o n g  organizations,  memberships  limitations  of  the  present  points  out  present  investigation  question  of  types of  enough,  the  organizational  opportunity  where  qualify  is the  certain  At t h i s theoretical correlates ignoring  the  activity  however,  point  of  view,  voluntary  place,  M o r e o v e r , to  and  the  structures asking social area  of  what  urban  urban varied  of  it  type  of  residential  been  refined  incidence  is  to of  types  of  carried  o n , as  may be c o n c l u d e d focusing  in  focus  on  well  the  city  as  the  from  a  individual  this  while  type  of  for  inadequate  describing,  analyzing,  or s p a t i a l l y  areas, they is  that  participation,  make  morphology  consequences  further  on  which  indeed  residential  groups i n h a b i t i n g  i n need  the  refined  what  investigation light  time In  more  certain  further  the  same  the  the  for  context  does  explanation. mapping  the  yet  with  of  the  research.  have  organizational  socio-spatial  takes  number o f  findings.  stage,  of  of  raises  hew many of  structures  shed  point at  asked  nor  kind  to  and  in  deal  When t h i s  present  last  further  opportunities  organizations. it  where;  they  organizational  out,  of  participates  and  place  this  we have n o t  organizations,  the  types  organizations.  analysis  direction  who  different  o r have a d i s p r o p o r t i n a t e  in different  Interestingly  to  to  understanding.  patterned  without  in  have f o r  different  ignore  a  The p r e s e n t  turn,  critical findings  85  point  to  the  increased linkages  fact  that  understanding  more  may  adequate  result  between i n d i v i d u a l s  from  and t h e i r  an  the  basis  about  applied for,  organizational implications planners urban  areas  both  changes  poeples' urban  in  the  this  conseguences  immediate.  activity  systems  must  "levers"  be urban  suggest,  of  by  to  seem t o One  that  be few  exception  "opportunity with s p e c i f i c  with  activity is  structure"  practical  and  regional use  respond  as  to  changes  suggests  on  that  of  in  that  urban  allow  Homes only  system  aspects  of  urban  Jakubs  a couple levers  possibility  or  "opportunity  there  planners to and  of  of  affect (197 1)  exceptions,  planners  manipulating sets"  a  activity  manipulation:  the  activities..  have  how p e o p l e  well  certain  be c a p a b l e  Brown,  learned  u n d e r s t a n d i n g and g e t t i n g  so,  some s o r t  the  residential  might  (1970)  focusing  is  environment. however,  determine  C ha p i n  better  this  have  City  as  been  of  may  urban s t r u c t u r e ,  problem if  what has  s p a t i a l behavior  p l a n n e r s can b e g i n on  view  t r y i n g to  on  EXAMPLE  structures  quite  and how t h e i r  But  use.  the  constantly  systems.  there  are  of  own c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .  handle  the  and  opportunity  that  are  point  focusing  and  environment.  PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS--AN  From  explanations  can the  associated  86  One faced  does  not  with the  opportunity  have  problem of  structure.  to  look  t r y i n g to  a  problem,  culture"  throughout  opportunities  At be  the  the  1974)  draft points  they  the  present of  growth  time  of  planners  a  Regional  G r e a t e r Vancouver  of  are  faced  "decentralizing  providing  cultural  live.  City  cultural is  report  the  the  it,  or  people  find  municipalities  define  Region,  n e a r where  center  population latest  as  far to  manipulate  For example,  R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t and a s s o c i a t e d with  very  of Vancouver coutinues  activity  1  while  now o c c u r i n g i n t h e  on c u l t u r a l  the  major  suburbs.  decentralization  to  As  the  (Fawcett,  out:  As more and more f a m i l i e s move to s u b u r b s they must travel increasingly greater distances to reach a d i v e r s i t y of l e i s u r e activities. The c o s t o f c u l t u r a l commuting includes time, parking, e a t i n g o u t , babys i t t i n g , m i l e a g e , and wear and t e a r on the nervous system. These t h i n g s are p a r t of commuting to work but there they are r a t i o n a l i z e d by t h e n e c e s s i t i e s o f e a r n i n g a wage. When it comes to cultural and r e c r e a t i o n a l p u r s u i t s , t h e s e e x t r a c o s t s and r i s k s combine t o d e f e a t one o f the primary p u r p o s e s : r e l a x a t i o n and e n j o y m e n t . The  problem  capita areas  is  exacerbated  expenditures of  the  by t h e  fact  on c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t i e s  Region e x p e r i e n c i n g  the  most  that  m u n i c i p a l per  are lowest rapid  in  the  residential  growth.  This is easily confirmed by glancing at the uneven organizational t o p o g r a p h y i n t h e M e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a shown i n Figure 3. 1  87  The can  GVRD p r o p o s a l  be  reversed  expansion,"  vehicle  to  with  and  decentralizing  that  growth  the  GVRD  to  " livability" municipal  of  "growth  sharing  communities, integrated It reader  to  cultural generally policy used  defined  should,  and  dealt  of  the  proposed  traditional building  policy  "levers"  buildings  this  the  or  by  plan  stage,  the  for  the  this  initial it  has  "levers"  to  be  t o be  identified  overall  direction  with  The  an  decentralization  yet  planners  facilities.  though,  although  the  and  1974).  for  have  away  residential  of  a  the  Centers,  tone  entail,  In f a c t  Town  (GVRD,  the  entails  conservation,  things  not  municipal  forwarded  compact  plan  report,  does  the  poles,  such a p o l i c y  with i n a n y d e p t h .  an  Regional  at  should  program i s  of  and r e c r e a t i o n  of  effective  population, focusing  t h e s e growth  some  an  the  rather optimistic  i n implementing  or  of  set  decentralization  and  1986:  transportation  the  cultural  opportunities.  Center  forged  to  rather d i f f i c u l t  share  of  trend  and m a i n t a i n o r i n c r e a s e  region  open s p a c e  regional  is  region offers  Town  growth  sharing"  of  program  sub-regional cultural  growth around a d i s p e r s e d finance  the  proposal being  the  unfortunate  " R e g i o n a l Town C e n t e r program f o r  Regional  control  this  vigorous  within  the  planning  "a the  decentralize  Parenthetically, extensive  suggests that  some of  understand report  example: Making s u b - r e g i o n a l c u l t u r a l f o c u s e s o f the R e g i o n a l Town C e n t e r s d o e s n o t mean c r e a t i n g a block of b u i l d i n g s s p e c i f i c a l l y designed  the  more best-  says  for  88  to house a c t i v i t i e s . What i s more i m p o r t a n t i s i n t e g r a t i n g t h e f a c i l i t i e s and a c t i v i t i e s i n such a way that the opportunities are particular to the area and available... B u i l d i n g s do not p a r t i c i p a t e in or create programs, people d o . . . t o o much i s s p e n t on b u i l d i n g s and not enough on a c t i v i t i e s . The r e p o r t g o e s on to zoning"  should  concepts—such suggestion to  be as  developed  traffic  that  terms  These  are i n t e r e s t i n g  they  are  within  the  The  and sewage.  with the  stage f o r  and  activities seem  at  in  the  integration  more  than  itself  many p a r t s of  points the  in the this  first  also  the  recreation.  suggestions little  is  all  development  direction,  resources  local at  as  and  part  cultural  of  any  a "vigorous  a scarcity  of  and level  cultural  p r o g r a m " must  co-ordination, the  for  the  problem i n  activities  we have s e e n t h a t structure  of  activities, their  of  to  co-  place.  collective  fact:  of  a major a s p e c t of  Region i s  opportunity  this  but  receive  But  out,  residential  resources  is  zoning  m u n i c i p a l and r e g i o n a l  order  entail  support  There  co-ordination  strategy.  In  "cultural  with o t h e r  co-ordinators  they  decentralization  ordinate  of  hire cultural co-ordinators  suggestions,  integration  certainly  report  process  report.  recreational would  this  a  to c o i n c i d e  municipalities  work on e g u a l  at  suggest that  its but  depends  the in  residents  to  not a l l a r e a s  disposal.  The r e p o r t  vitality  part  of  a  upon  the  organize  and  have also  the  same  recognizes  89  the idea that suburban communities are composed wholly of a socially and economically mobile middle c l a s s which has chosen its s i t u a t i o n i s l e s s and l e s s t r u e each year. Pockets of relative poverty ( e c o n o m i c , s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l ) have emerged in various suburban communities i n GVRD, some o f i t i n d i g e n o u s and some of i t c r e a t e d b y the s q u e e z e on cheap f a m i l y a c c o m o d a t i o n s in Vancouver. It  would  should  seem,  then,  attempt  deficiencies Sucessful  to within  not  be  with  growth a r e a s to  of  parts  such a its  cultural  dollar  as  has,  a as  enormous  that  municipal are  experiencing  the  many  forming  l a c k of  fastest  objectives  of  the  R e g i o n a l and M u n i c i p a l  a  chronically  definitely the  need  (Frizzell,  small  base  areas  which  of  in  it  is  of  on  region  view  there  of is  a  accomplish  point of  though, they  of  the  to  Thus any d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n  division  of  point  From the  governments,  levels  raised  expenditures  available  1973).  h e l p from o t h e r  complex  the  rapid  though  organizations,  from  both  between  supporting  even  From t h e  resources  would  for  growth  specifically  in  growth.  their  problems  of  capita  voluntary  economic  generate resources.  been  lowest  region.  however,  financially  per  the  politicians.  decentralization;  activities  newly  not  of  policy  "resource"  of  policy,  burden  means yet,  cultural  recognized  given  equalizing  different  without  the  municipalities  chronic  any c u l t u r a l z o n i n g  and m u n i c i p a l p l a n n e r s and  Sharing  regard  part of  deal  implementation  certainly regional  that  can  there  view is  legally  program would  government,  responsibilities  between  but the  90  different program  levels would  when t h e r e  of  government,  be  very  dosen't  articulated associations  difficult  seem  policy  to  of  even a t  the  Economic r e s o u r c e s  are  not  are also  the  "cultural  to  collective  level,  be more what  here the  again,  is  problems as  Take, of  for  their  ordinator"  evidenced  was  to  about  the  different  the  region.  ordinator contacts than  involve  saw  (Frizzel,  their  1973).  k i n d s of  by t h e  the  very  of  the  very  Program.  "animateur" par e x c e l l e n c e ,  at  the  would seem  region.  Eut  GVBD o r  complicating  experience A  with  "program  co-  P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n Program i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m the faced  living  however,  many o f  that  the  the  he  did  result  In  part cohis more  organizations  Many f o u n d him to be a  and a s a  public  in their  more t h a n s i m p l y t h a t .  and  more t h a n a h e a r i n g .  Although  past.  GVRD's r e c e n t  clear,  views,  skills  suggested  with  they  as  There  organizational  recent  run the  role  resources  new or o l d .  been  faced  problems  his  voluntary  s u c h p r o g r a m s by t h e  and r e c e i v e  is  to  w i t h numerous v o l u n t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n s  solicit  received  It  of  Regions  was h i r e d t o  aid  i n many p a r t s  example,  that  of  have  are  Livable  publically  opportunity structure.  implementation  is  and  only  and  finance  clear  and c u l t u r a l " a n i m a t e u r s "  needed  Municipalities,  part  social  a viable  social  the  any  involved—especially  populations,  co-or dinators"  municipal  a  Federal l e v e l  i n many r e s i d e n t i a l  in creating  be  and  financial  lacking  needed  orchestrating  became  social  much more  91  effective enough the  in organizing  anyway  that  the  "co-ordinator"  Vancouver actually  Sun, began  supply.  "The  the  problems  of not  culture the  their  began  in to  an arise  input  GVRD s t r u c t u r e  was  relationship"  then,  that  the  opportunity structure  and t h e  equalizing  of  to  handling.  the  just  As  because t h e  citizens  been  toward  to  true  manipulating  decentralization  opportunity,  are  certaninly  municipal  report  a  to  1974) .  for  a  the  asked  not g e a r e d  "levers"  As t h e  program. to  (Oberfeld,  and  Effective  interview  t h e y had  traditinal levers regional  a r e accustomed  ends.  GVRD d i s c o n t i n u e d  p r o d u c i n g the  would seem,  regional  achieve  explained  governmental-citizen  It  to  planners  admits:  The p r o b l e m t o p u t i t b l u n t l y , has been t h e l a c k of or b e l a t e d r e c o g n i t i o n that c u l t u r a l planning is a specialized area which l e g i t i m a t e l y r e q u i r e d r e s e a r c h and e x p e r t i s e as much as any o t h e r a r e a o f m u n i c i p a l or regional concern.  When i t  comes t o  a sub-regional suggests  discussing  the  possible  cultural decentralization  consequence  policy  the  of  report  that: The proximity of a healthy sub-regional l e v e l of c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t y w i l l l e n d itself to a d i s p e r s a l of the c u l t u r a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s a t a neighborhood l e v e l .  But  it  is  regional  not  immediately  organizational  necessarily  increase  area,  same d e g r e e  the  to  the  present  findings  obvious  that  increasing  opportunity  the  structure  "livability"  for a l l  people  can be g e n e r a l i z e d  any  of  the  anyway. at  all,  subwill  surrounding In f a c t , it  should  if be  92  clear  that  voluntary  cultural  organizations  opportunites for  decentralization  for local  is  rcuch  elites,  as  more  than  i t  relates  likely  equalize  to  to equalize  opportunities  all.  CONCLUSION  In must  conclusion,  begin  to  both  consider  a  how  patterned city.  Only  found  here,  between contains,  namely  and  that  As  occurrence  to  advanced  Robert  by  the  thinks  urban  Ian  that  there  in  central  across  sociolcgists  of  alternative  order  to  environments  (1973) e c h o e d is  must  for sociologists, run  set  no  context  planners  urban  stop  ( 1 9 7 4 : 369)  issue  of  for  been  such  i t  simple  too f r e q u e n t as  i n a debate  contextual  the  behavior  looking  orientations  of  relationship  the  i t is still  Hauser  use  the  what h a s  simple and  better  affect  residents in their  Cullsn  environmental  solutions.  over  of  recently,  tha  linkages  socio-ecologica1  behavior  and  mere c o m p l e t e  individual-environment understand  planners  the  with  analysis.  an one  Farkas Hauser  the: . . . q u e s t i o n i s not whether group c o m p o s i t i o n affects anything. Of c o u r s e i t d o e s . . . t h e i s s u e i s whether t h e r e are net or direct effects of group c o m p o s i t i o n which persist above and beyond those of individual variates...  But contextual forms of  to  centrally  variables  focus  on  the  i s tc necessarily  i n d i v i d u a 1-env  ircntrent  direct restrict  relations.  effects the It  cf  possible i s  quite  possible,  in  environment which  a  fact  quite  relations  particular  specific  behavior  are  additive  pattern  well  cases,  common s e n s e  types  of  alternative stand  in  or  on  to  formulations of  the  more  individual-  of  influences depend  (1965)  has  noted  approximate r e a l i t y  models  The way i n  on  characteristics  considerations  non-additive  need  may  Blalock  seem  many  conditional in nature. factor  o r on b o t h .  models  that  environmental  environmental f a c t o r s , individual,  probable  often as  suggest  alternatives.  individual-environment  investigation.  other of  that  well  a  the while  i n many specific These relations  BIBLIOGRAPHY  A n d e r s o n , T h e o d o r e R. and J a n i c e A. Egeland 1961 " S p a t i a l a s p e c t s of s o c i a l area a n a l y s i s , " A m e r i c a n S o c i o l o g i c a l Review 26:39 2-398 Axelrod, Morris 1956 "Urban structure and social participation," A merican Sociological Review^ 21:13-19 Babchuk, N i c h o l a s and A l a n B o o t h 1969 "Voluntary association memberships: a longitudinal analysis," Am§£i2I£ S o c i o l o g i c a l Reviewj_ 34:31-45 Bell,  W. and B o a t , 1957 " U r b a n n e i g h b o r h o o d s and informal social r e l a t i o n s , " A m e r i c a n J o u r n a l Of S o c i o l o g y , . 62:391-398  Bell,  W. and M . T . F o r c e 1956 "Urban neighborhood types and participation in forman associations," American S o c i o l ogi c a l R e v i e w 2 1 ; 2 5 - 3 4  Bell,  W. and M . t . Force 1957 "Social structure and participation in different types of formal association," S o c i a l Forces.. 34: 3 4 5 - 3 5 0  Bell,  Wendell 1953 "The s o c i a l a r e a s o f the San F r a n c i s c o Bay Region," American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review. 20:39-47  Bell,  Wendell 1969 "Urban neighborhoods and individual b e h a v i o r , " i n P a u l Meadow ( e d . ) , U r b a n i s m ^ yEiSSlz ation And Change^ Comparative P§£5£§2 t i v e S j , Reading: Addison-Wesley Publish ing~Co. Pp. 120-146 x  95  B e r r y , B r i a n J . L . and P h i l l i m H . Rees 1969 "The factorial ecology of A m e r i c a n J o u r n a l Of S o c i o l o g y . , B e s h e r s , James M 1962 Urban S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e , Press  Glencoe:  B l a l o c k , Hubert M . 1965 "Theory building and the interaction," American Review. 30:374-380 B l a l o c k , H u b e r t M. 1972 Social Statistics^ Book Company Blau,  Blau,  P e t e r M. . 1957 "Formal analysis," 63 :58-59  Calcutta," 74 :445-491  New Y o r k :  The F r e e  concept of Sociclogical  McGraw-Hill  organization: dimensions of A m e r i c a n J o u r n a l Of Sociology.  P e t e r M. 1960 "Structural effects," S o c i o l o c j i c a l Review. 25: 170-193  MeilSlil  B l i s h e n , Bernard 1967 "A s o c i o - e c o n o m i c i n d e x o f o c c u p a t i o n s in Canada," C a n a d i a n Review Of S o c i o l o g y And Anthropology,. 41:41-53 Booth. Alan 1972 "Sex and s o c i a l participation," S o c i o l o g i c a l Review^ 37:183-93 Bowlby, Sophia R 1969 "Patterns of change i n the of r e t a i l stores in urban Research Report No. 56 Uni v e r s i t y Boyce, Ronald R. 1969 " R e s i d e n t i a l m o b i l i t y and i t s for urban spatial change," Association Of American  T:22 26  American  accessibility households," Northwestern  implications Proceedings^ Geographers..  I  B r e t o n , Raymond 1964 "Institutional completeness of ethnic communities and t h e p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s o f immigrants," American Journal Of Sociology 70: 193-205~  Brown, L a w a r e n c e , J o h n Holmes and J o h n J a k u b s 1971 "Urban activity systems in a planning c o n t e x t , " EDEft I I P r o c e e d i n g s p p . 102-110 C a m b e l l , E . Q . and C . N . A l e x a n d e r 1965 "Structural effects and r e l a t i o n s , " American J o u r n a l 71:284-289 Chapin F . 1970  interpersonal Of S o c i o l o g y  Stuart J r . "Activity s y s t e m s and urban s t r u c t u r e : a working schema," Journal Of American I n s t i t u t e of P l a n n e r s . . 34 :11-T8  C o l e m a n James S . 1957 Community, Ccnflict^. Corporation  The  Free  Press  a  C o l e m a n James S. 1958 " r e l a t i o n a l a n a l y s i s : the s t u d y of social organizations w i t h s u r v e y m e t h o d s , " Human 2E3^UiSIii°£ji 17:28-36 C o l e m a n , James S . 1966 "Community d i s o r g a n i z a t i o n , " i n Robert K Merton and Robert A Nisbet, (eds.), Contemporary, S o c i a l Problems., Harcourt. Brace And W o r l d , I n c : New Y o r k , p p . 670722 C o l e m a n , James S. 1970 "Properties  of collectiveness," Research And T heory_. And B a c o n pp. 5-10 1  J2..E2§°£i°i.°-9..i. a c  Boston;  Cox,  Alllyn  v  K e v i n R. 1969 "The e n e s i s o f a c q u a i n t a n c e f i e l d spatial structures: a conceptual model and empirical test," in K.R. Cox and R . G . Golledge (eds.). Behavioral P r o b l e m s In Geography a Symposium., Evanston I l l i n o i s : Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y  C u l l e n , Ian 1973 "A h i e r a r c h i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of everday life," Joint Unit for Planning Research, London C u r t i s , James 1971 "Voluntary association j o i n i n g : a crossnational comparative note," American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review.. 36:872-880  D a v i s , James A . , J o e L . S p a e t h and C a r o l y n Huson 1961 "A t e c h n i q u e f o r a n a l y s i n g t h e e f f e c t s of group composition," American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review. 26 : 2 1 5 - 2 2 5 Dogan, M a t t e i and S t e i n R o k k a n , e d s . 1969 Quantitative Ecological A n a l y s i s i n the Social Sciences.. Cambridge: The M, I . T . Press. Duncan, O t i s D, and B e v e r l y Duncan 1955 " R e s i d e n t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n and stratification," American Review^ 60:4 93-5 03 Duvall, Evelyn 1969 Family Lippincott  Develo^ment^  F a r k a u s , George 1974 "Specification residuals, effects," Sociological Research. 2 :333-361  occupational Sociological  Philadelphia:  and contextual Methods And  Fawcett, Brian 1974 "Cultural opportunities in Vanoucver," unpublished draft. Vancouver Regional District Department  Greater Greater Planning  F r i z z e l , Alan 1973 "Social participation and voluntary a s s o c i a t i o n s : the Canadian perspective," R e s e a r c h M o n o g r a p h , Q u e e n ' s R e s e a r c h Team 3 VRD 1974  "Second s e m i n a r and management of Greater Vancouver Regional L i v a b l e R e g i o n Programme  growth," District  G a l t u n g , John 1967 T h e o r y And Methods Of Social Research New Y o r k : C o l u m b i a U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s Cans,  H. J . 1967  3ans, H . J . 1968  The L e v i t t o w n e r s .  New York P a n t h e o n  r  Books  "Urbanism and suburbanism as ways of l i f e , " in R . E . Pahl, (ed.) Readings In Urban Sociology.. O x f o r d : Pergomen P r e s s , ppT ~ 9 5 i r 7 r  3 r e e n , Bryan S . R . 1971 "Social area analysis and structural effects," The Journal Of The British Sociological Association^ 5:2-17 Greer, Scott 1956 "Urbanism r e c o n s i d e r e d : a study of local areas in a American S o c i o l o g i c a l Reyiew t  comparative metropolis," 21: 19-25  Greer, Scott 1958 "Individual participation in mass society," in Roland Young (ed.) , £ £ £ £ 2 1 1 2 .k § § To The S t u d y Of P o l i t ics.. Evanston: Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y Press Greer, Scott 1959 " U r b a n i s m and social structure: a Los Angeles study," i n Marvin Sussman (ed, ) Community. S t r u c t u r e And A n a l y s i s . . New Y o r k : Thomas Y. C r c w e l l and C o . Greer, Scott 1960 "The social structure and process of suburbia," S o c i o l o g i c a l Review.. 25:514-516  political American  Greer, Scott 1962 The Emercjing. Press  The  City..  Glencoe:  Free  Greer, Scott 1962 " D i s p e r s i o n and t h e c u l t u r e o f u r b a n man," in T.E.H. W i l l i a m s , (ed.) Urban S u r v i v a l And Traffic.. Evanston: Northwestern University Press Greer, Scott 1962 "The social structure and political p r o c e s s o f s u b u r b i a : an empirical test," Rural Sociology^ 27:438-459 Greer, Scott 1972 T h e Urban V i e w . Press 2lTl9-25~  London:  Oxford  University  G r e e r , S c o t t and P e t e r O r l e a n s 1962 "The mass society and t h e p a r a p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e , " American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review.. 27: 643-46  Hammer, P h i l i p G . J r . and F . S t u a r t Chapin J r . 1972 "Human time allocation: a case study of W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . " A T e c h n i c a l Monograph. Center F o r Urban And R e g i o n a l S t u d i e s : Chapel H i l l Harper, D.H. 1961 "Some new applications of dichotomous algebra to survey analysis and latent structure analysis." Unpublished Ph.d. Dissertation H a r r i s , C . D . and E . L , O i l m a n 1945 "The nature of cities," Annals of the American Academy o f Political Science.  242 :7-17 Hauser, Robert M . 1970 "Context and consex: a cautionary t a l e , " A m e r i c a n J o u r n a l Of S o c i o l o g y 75:645-664 H a u s e r , R o b e r t M. 1971 Socioeconomic Backgournd And E d u c a t i o n a l £S£Jormancej_ The A r n o l d And C a r o l i n e Rose Monograph S e r i e s I n S o c i o l o g y . H a u s e r , R o b e r t M• 1974 "Contextual Sociological  375  analysis revisited," Methods And R e s e a r c h . 2:365-  Hemmens, George C . 1966 "The structure of urban linkages," An Urban Studies Monograph.. C e n t e r F o r U r b a n And Studies, Chapel H i l l  activity Research Regional  H o d g e , R.W. and D . J . T r e i i o a n 1968 "Social p a r t i c i p a t i o n and s o c i a l s t a t u s , " A m e r i c a n S o c i o l o g i c a l Review.. 33:72 2-740 Hodge, R o b e r t W. and D o n a l s J . Treiman 1968 " S o c i a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n and s o c i a l status," Amer i can S o c i o l o g i c a l Re v i e w.. 33: 72 2-740 H o r t o n , F r a n k E . and D a v i d R. Reynolds 1971 "Effects of urban spatial structure in individual behavior," E c o n o m i c Geography. J a n u a r y : 36-48  Hoyt,  Hoyt,  H. 1933  One Hundred Years Of Land Values In Of Chicago Chicago.. Chicago: University Press  Homer The Structure And 1939 fi®i3i}bor hoods In Washington D.C: Administration  Growth Of R e s i d e n t i a l A me r i c a n Ci tie Federal Housing  H u n t e r , A . A . and A . H . L a t i f 1973 " s t a b i l i t y and change in the ecological structure of Winnipeg: a multi-method approach," The Canadian Review Of S o c i o l o g y And A n t h r c j D o l o g X t 10:308-3 33 Hyman, H e r b e r t H. And C h a r l e s R. Wright 1971 Trends in voluntary association memberships of American adults: r e p l i c a t i o n based cn s e c o n d a r y a n a l y s i s of national . sample surveys," American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review.. 36:191-206 ~ Janowitz, 1967  Morris The Community P r e s s I n An Second Edition, Chicago: Chicago Press  Komarovsky, 1946  La z a r s f e l d 1959  Lazarsfeld, 1955 Lee,  Lee,  Oban Setting.; University Cf  Mirra "The voluntary associations of dwellers," American S o c i o l o g i c a l 1 1 : 686-6 98  urban Review^  P.F.  in methodology," Sociology "Problems Merton ( e d . ) , Glencoe Today^ In R . K . I l l i n o i s : The F r e e P r e s s P . F . and M. Rosenberg The Language Of S o c i a l Free Press  Terence 1963 "The optimum s o c i a l clubs," Terence 1968 "Urban schema,"  (eds.) Research^  Glencoe:  provision and siting of Durham Res.. Rev.. 4%53-61  social-spatial neighborhood: a Human R e l a t i o n s . 21:241-268  Linz,  Juan J . 1969 " E c o l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s and s u r v e y r e s e a r c h , " i n Dogan & Rokkan (eds.), Quantitative l£2i22k£§l Analysis In The Social SciencesT Cambridge:~The M . I . T P r e s s , pp  91-T31  L i t w a k , Eugene 1961 "Voluntary associations and n e i g h b o r h o o d cohesion," American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review.  26: 258-271 Meis,  S.M. 1972  And W . J . Scheu "An i s o m e t r i c mapping o f the e c o l o g i c a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of socioeconomic status in Metropolitan Vancouver," V a n c o u v e r Urban S t u d i e s P r o j e c t : Research Report No. 1. Department Of Anthropology/Sociology, U n i v e r s i t y Of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , V a n c o u v e r  Michelson, 1970  William H. Man And His Urban Environment^ A Sociological h.££I2£h±. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.  Michelson, 1973  W i l l i a m H. "Residential mobility as a deficit compensating p r o c e s s , " paper p r e s e n t e d to the C a n a d i a n S o c i o l o g y and Anthropology A s s o c i a t i o n , Kingston Ontario  Murdie, Robert A. 1969 "Factorial ecology of metropolitan T o r o n t o , 1951- 1961: an e s s a y on the s o c i a l geography of the city," Chicago: University Of C h i c a g o , Department Of G e o g r a p h y R e s e a r c h Paper No. 116 Nohara, Shigeo 1968 "Social context and n e i g h b o u r l i n e s s : the negro in St. Louis," in The New H£fe=2i2^tion_. s. G r e e r , Minar M c E l r a t h and P . Orleans (eds.). New York: St. M a r t i n s P r e s s , Pp. 179-188 Oberfeld, 1974  Harvey "Planners shut you o u t b e c a u s e t h e y f e a r y o u , " V a n c o u v e r Sun Newspaper (Thursday, November 14th) .  Orleans, Peter 1966 "Robert P a r k and s o c i a l a r e a a n a l y s i s : a convergence of traditions in urban s o c i o l o g y , " Urban A f f a i r s Q u a r t e r l y . 1:519 Pahl,  Park,  R . E . , ed. 1968 Readings Pergaman  Robert E. And E r n e s t w. 1925 The C i t y . . Chicago  Patterson, 1974  Reid,  In Urban Press  Sociology.. Burgess  (eds.)  M. "The f a c t o r i a l u r b a n ecology of Greater Vancouver: characteristics of the data base," Ph.d. Dissertation Vancouver: U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia  A. and J . Frideres 1971 " F a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g membership associations in Churchill Research Report No. 5, Center for Settlement U n i v e r s i t y of Manitoba  Robinson, 1950  in  voluntary Manitoba," Series 2, Studies,  W.S. " E c o l o g i c a l c o r r e l a t i o n s and t h e behavior of individuals," American Sociological Review.. 15: 351-357  Robson, B . T . 1969 Urban A n a l y s i s ^ Press Rossi, Peter 1955 Why P e o p l e Move.. Free Press Scaff,  Oxford:  C a m b r i d g e : The  Glencoe,  University  Illinois:  The  A l v i n H. 1952 "The e f f e c t o f commuting on p a r t i c i p a t i o n in voluntary associations," American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review.. 17:215-220  S cheu c h , E r w i n K . 1969 "Social c o n t e x t and i n d i v i d u a l b e h a v i o r , " i n Dogan & Rokkan (eds.), Qua n t i t a t i y e geological Analysis In The Social Sciences. C a m b r i d g e : The M.I.T, Press. Pp7 ~13 3 1 5 5 r  103  S c h n o r e, L e o F . 1958 "Social morphology and human ecology," A m e r i c a n J o u r n a l Of S o c i o l o g j ^ 6 3:6 20-634 Schuessler, 1969  Scott,  Segal  Karl "Covariance analysis in sociological r es e a r c h , " Sociclogical Methodolog In E.F. Borgatta~7ed.),~Pp. 219-244~  John C. 1957 "Membership and p a r t i c i p a t i o n associations," American Review^ 22:315-326  in voluntary Sociological  D a v i d R. and M.W, Meyer 1969 "The social context of political p a r t i s a n s h i p , " i n M. Dogan and S. Rokkan (eds.), Quantitative Ecological Analysis.. C a m b r i d g e : The M . I . T P r e s s  S e i b e r , L a u r e n H. and G. F . Summers 1974 "Locating community boundaries: an integration of theory and empirical technique," Sociological Meth ods And Research.. 2:259-280 S e w e l l , W . H . And J . M . Armer 1966 " N e i g h b o r h o o d c o n t e x t and c o l l e g e plans," A m e r i c a n S o c i o l o g i c a l Review.. 31:159-168 Simmons, James W. 1968 "Changing r e s i d e n c e i n the c i t y , a r e v i e w of i n t r a u r b a n m o b i l i t y , " The G e o g r a p h i c a l Review., 58 :622-651 Sonquist, 1970  John A . Multivariate Model Building^. Institute f o r S o c i a l Research  Stinchcombe, Arthur L . 1968 Constructing S o c i a l Theories.. H a r c o u r t , B r a c e And W c r l , I n c . Tannenbaum, 1963  Ann A r b o r :  New  York:  A r n o l d S. And G e r a l d G . Bachman "Structural versus individual effects," A m e r i c a n J o u r n a l Of S o c i c l c g y ^ . 6 9:585-595  Tomeh, A i d a K . 1964 "Informal residential Sociology  group participation and p a t t e r n s , " A m e r i c a n J o u r n a l Of 70 : 2 8 - 3 5  104  U y e k i , Eugene S. 1964 "Residential distribution stratification," Rmerican Journal Sociology.. 6 9:491-498 Vankonen, 1969  and Of  Tapani "Individual and structural effects in ecological research," in Dogan S Rokkan (eds.), Quantitative Ecological Analysis I i i l!l§. S o c i a l Sciences^ Cambridge: The HTITTT " p r e s s , ppT ~ 5 3 - 6 8  W a l k e r , H e l e n M and J o s e p h Lev 19 53 Statistical Inference. l i n e h a r t S Winston Warren, Ronald L . 1963 The Community i n America Rand M c N a l l y and Company Wayne, J a c k 1972 "The case of Alan Powell Realities.. Stewart  New  York:  Holt,  Chicago,  111:  the  friendless urbanite," in (ed.) , Urban M j t h s and Toronto: M c C l e l l a n d and  Webber, M e l v i n M. 1963 "Order in diversity community propinquity," in Lowdon Wingo Cities And Space,. Baltimore: Hopkins Press  without (ed.), Johns  Webber, M e l v i n M . 1964 "Culture, t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and t h e mile," Papers Of The Regional Association^ 13:59-69  elastic Science  Webber, M e l v i n M. 1964 "The urban place and t h e n o n p l a c e u r b a n realm," in Melvin M. Webber et. al., JJSElo r a t i o n s Into Urban Structure^ Philadelphia Wilkinson, 1970  Kenneth P . "The community as a s o c i a l Forces. 48: 311-322  field,"  Social  W r i g h t , C h a r l e s R. And H e r b e r t H . Hyman 1958 "Voluntary association memberships of American a d u l t s : evidence from national sample surveys," American Sociological Review. 23:284-294  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0100061/manifest

Comment

Related Items